Nerds Wear Costumes. True Nerds Build Costumes

So, Halloween is just around the corner. And therefore, it's no surprise that I'm spending more cognitive energy on costume design than say, getting a job. I'm thinking this year of a plague doctor. It's more subtle than a skeleton and is way more classy than anything else, since it's a classic Venetian Masquerade get up. It also ensures that NO ONE will know what I am, keeping my obscure yet obsessive track record up. It's really sad that I have no parties to go to or people to spend the holiday with. But it's tradition damnnit! I built my own incomprehensible costumes for my entire life. Here is a quick year by year rundown as memory serves:

Senior Year: Republican for Voldemort (Basically a evil politically active supervillian- which everyone thought was Magneto, but I had a skull and a sign!)

Junior Year: Anubis (Which everyone thought was some Egyptian donkey)

Sophmore Year: Memory fails - Was I sane then? Nah.

Freshman Year: Milk jug post apocalyptic nightmare from a comic book I tried to write (which no one understood)

High School Purims
Cafeteria worker (with Gas mask and spoon), Spock, Napoleon, Osama in hiding, Grouch Marx, Demonic jester,

Elementary School: Teacher from the Black Lagoon, A Dragon (with a long tail sewed by my grandmother filled with Styrofoam peanuts), Robin hood, Haman, King Achashverosh,
Mario, Darth Vader, and some others.

So I don't know. Am I finally too adult to do this? Or will studying for the LSAT force me into maturity?

And is anyone having a Halloween party I can crash?

Anybody out there in design?

Hey all,

Is there any way to properly organize a portfolio for a design firm? I have lots of product ideas from consumer innovations to mechanical components to sustainable technology for developing regions. Is there a set way of organizing them? Any particular format? Should I use drawings, CAD diagrams, or photos of mock-ups? And is there any other information I should use for applying for a design job?

Doors of perception

If the doors of perception were cleansed everything would appear to man as
it is, infinite. -William Blake

Of course, though no one knows what the heck that means, everyone seem to repeat it. No one seems to know the guy that well. William Blake himself is primarily known for being an engraver, poet, and prophet, he is also a zany anti-Semite denier of the Old Testament. Even his other platitude " The road of excess leads to the palace of reason" is taken from a number of "Proverbs of Hell." And what's the deal with the burning tigers?

The phrase 'the doors of perception', was later used by Aldous Huxley to title his book on his experiences taking mescaline. Whereas Hunter S. Thompson went on an explosive Las Vegas bender with the same drug, Huxley delivered the following lovely gems:

"To be shaken out of the ruts of ordinary perception, to be shown for a few timeless hours the outer and inner world, not as they appear to an animal obsessed with survival or to a human being obsessed with words and notions, but as they are apprehended, directly and unconditionally, by Mind at Large— this is an experience of inestimable value to everyone and especially to the intellectual."


"Most island universes are sufficiently like one another to Permit of inferential understanding or even of mutual empathy or "feeling into." Thus, remembering our own bereavements and humiliations, we can condole with others in analogous circumstances, can put ourselves (always, of course, in a slightly Pickwickian sense) in their places. But in certain cases communication between universes is incomplete or even nonexistent. The mind is its own place, and the Places inhabited by the insane and the exceptionally gifted are so different from the places where ordinary men and women live, that there is little or no common ground of memory to serve as a basis for understanding or fellow feeling. Words are uttered, but fail to enlighten. The things and events to which the symbols refer belong to mutually exclusive realms of experience. "

Other than to demonstrate the fact that stoner prose has gotten progressively worse, my point in all this is as follows. We tend to look at the 'infinite' rather than the 'cleansing of the doors of perception' As much as we try to perceive, we will always be up against things beyond our grasp of reasoning. This has a lot to do with conspiracy theories.

I consider myself (rather naively) as an applied epistemologist. Epistemology is the branch of philosophy that deals with the question of knowledge. In other words, how do we know the things that we know? To this end, I diligently question statistics, compare encyclopedia articles, read back issues of newspapers, and basically try to gear my mind from being a trivia lord towards being an information junkie. A trivia lord tries to take in everything that is accepted as fact, but no one else cares to know. An info junkie accepts nothing as fact, only as leads and claims that should be investigated further. In either case, it is supreme hubris of the intellect that any one person can know it all. And I know I'm not photogenic enough to go on jeopardy, so knowing things is just a pastime of nerd ego.

The cause for all this factoid metaphysics is an essay I read that had a profound effect on me. It is Losing the War by Lee Sandlin. Here is the link.

www.leesandlin.com

Basically, he writes about WWII and how it not only fails to have meaning for the generations that came after, but also how it was incomprehensible for those going through it. From Journalists to soldiers and Hitler's therapeutic opera, there were a myriad of ways to deal with the shock of war. And that shock of war made the human scale incomprehensible. Meanwhile, the sheer size of the war made it impossible for the world to make sense of it afterwards. He does a great analysis of the battle of Midway that, though speculative, seems to demonstrate the point that all perceptions of the war, even the perceptions of those actually experiencing it, are wrong!

I defended Gonzo journalism by saying that certain types of reality are done a disservice if reported accurately. Therefore, it is well advised to be use the tools of fiction to describe realities that are beyond reason. But Lee Sandlin's piece offers the alternative that there is NO WAY to describe, or experience the portions of reality that are truly transcendent. It is beyond the scope of the mind, and we can only look towards the bromide of oblivion.

This applies to conspiracy theories as such. Traditionally the Hegelian look at conspiracies was as follows:

Thesis: Most historians and witnesses say X.
Antithesis: A few witnesses and several mavericks say Y.
Synthesis: Most people believe X on paper while holding Y in the back of their mind.

This applies for everything from JFK assassination attempts (where Y is fairly strong) to '9/11 as an inside job' theories (where Y is either too crazy or there isn't enough distance yet).

But actually I think it's like this:

Thesis: Most historians and witnesses say X.
Antithesis: A few witnesses and several mavericks say Y.
Anti-Synthesis: Though X and Y are valid and believable, what really happened is Z, which is beyond your reach or perception.

I was taught that whatever God is, God is totally unlike anything you could quantify with thought. Even the perception of God's oneness (which is pretty important to a little jewish boy) is beyond any concept of oneness humans could come up with. No matter how much data, facts, proof or statistics we amass, what really goes on will forever elude us. And as an atheist, I think that's a notion of faith I can live with.


The eye with which I see God is the same with which God sees me. My eye and God's eye is one eye, and one sight, and one knowledge, and one love. - Meister Eckhardt

I hate my life and this is why:

I'm broke, lonely, ugly, unemployed, and spend my time trying to answer questions like these:

21. Newspaper editor: Law enforcement officials have recognized that legal prohibitions against gambling are flawed. No matter how diligent the effort, the laws are impossible to enforce. When a law fails to be effective, it should not be a law. That is why there should be no prohibition against gambling.

Which of the following if assumed allows the argument to be properly drawn?

A. No effective law is unenforceable.
B. All enforceable laws are effective.

My answer B, real answer A.

25. Most people feel that they are being confused by the information from broadcast news. This could be the effect of the information being delivered too quickly or of it being poorly organized. Analysis of the information content of a typical broadcast news story shows that news stories are far lower in information density than the maximum information density with which most people can cope at any one time. So the information in typical broadcast news stories is poorly organized.

Which one of the following is an assumption that the argument requires in order for its conclusion to be properly drawn?

A. It is not the number of broadcast news stories to which a person is exposed that is the source of the feeling of confusion.

B. Poor organization of information in a news story makes it impossible to understand the information

C. Being exposed to more broadcast news stories within a given day would help a person better understand the news.

D. Most people can cope with a very high information density

E. Some people are being overwhelmed by too much information.

My answer is B. Real answer is A because .... There is a subtle shift in the scope since the author didn't account for the sheer number of stories. Even though that is (to me) the same argument as wrong answer E or very similar to C.

And all that runs through my mind is "Suicide is painless, it brings on many changes...."

Speaking of recent events....

Yesterday I made a grand total of 2 phone calls, which is a lot for me. I usually don't get much 'social interaction' with 'other people.' Rarely does it ever go 'well' for me.

The first was to a really smart and delightfully deranged girl. On speaking of her current boyfriend "Yeah, he kinda sexually assaulted me and now we're dating. But I'm still pissed at him."


The second was to my old high school rowing coach. His wife of 47 years had recently died and I wanted to offer my condolences. Offering condolences is one of the most useless social conventions ever. You can't really help solve their problem and pain is too personal to have anyone make it better. Especially not a so-so rower you haven't seen in 4 years. But he talked to me for 2 hours about growing up in Scotland, the way my school has gone to the dogs, and his unusually pragmatic views on religion.

No matter how bad a team we were (I sunk a boat at one point. Maybe two) he always encouraged us and kept the crew program going. On very hot Miami afternoons, he would yell at us and equipment was always broken down, water logged, and outdated. The oar handles would cause out palms to bleed and then we'd dip them in the bay's salt water. Though my calves ache just writing this, the memories of rowing next to dolphins and watching sunsets on the bay seem to make it worthwhile.

The show with the Cavemen

So, anyway, one of the most dreaded TV shows of all time premiered today and I made a point of watching it. It's the show based on the premise that Cavemen still exist and are walking around today. Despite being both phenomenally like the average Yuppie in all but appearance AND fugitives from Geico commercials, they raise an interesting point.

Predictably, they start with the premise we expect. Even though they are remarkably modern and well spoken, they have to deal with stereotypical prejudices and stereotypes. The plot line of the first episode was that the main character caveman is secretly dating a 'Sape (short for homo sapien, but is remarkably a white, blond haired, blue eyed girl) while his friend expresses contempt for such mixed relationships. The main character finally confronts his friend and girlfriend, and then is immediately struck with the possibility that she has a 'caveman fetish'. I did not see an African American character the entire show.

I get the fact that Cavemen = minority. And the relation is further emphasized by the fact that Cavemen are white except for having interesting foreheads and facial hair. They are exactly the same kind of hipstery, therapist visiting, uber txting, mildly elitist bunch we saw ad nauseum in the Geico commercials. But I think there is potential, and here's why.

The fact that they are cavemen could raise the issue of race in various different settings. For example:

Will their existence topple the theory of evolution and cause ID'ers and fundamentalists to make them celebrities?

Did Jesus die for Cavemen, or was the break off point for the salvation of humanity the "Missing Link"?

Will there be racism within Cavemen circles ?(Will Peking Man cavemen settle in with Asian communities or 'Regular Cavemen'? Rival street gangs of Neanderthal vs. Cro Magman - as the cro's killed off the Nean's in the day.)


And what if all of us, SOMEWHERE IN OUR FAMILY TREE - has a caveman ancestor? What if we are all part caveman? Could it show up in blood tests?


The first episode is rarely an indication of how good a show will be. (Remember the first episode of Seinfeld? Of course not) But in an day and age where most people confront the issue of race as entertainment - think "Everyone's a little bit racist"- mocking white people in cavemen suits may be interesting to watch.

Or it could be total crap like 95% of the shows that get canceled anyway.

Strandbeest

So good to find a website or idea that you've thought you'd never see again. I saw this wild conceptual art/kinetic sculpture/ mechanical engineering marvel a few years back, but couldn't remember where. It's more abstract than biomimicry and much more human than machine art. But I couldn''t remember the dutch word for it. Until today, where a link to link to a link paid off.

http://www.strandbeest.com/#

and to make virtual models of your own

http://sodaplay.com/