Reading Notes One More Time - Emergence

So here's how it is. Emergence. The idea of something on a lower scale of thought becoming something on a higher scale of thought.SIme I'm using Sim City for my project, I thought I'd take the time to talk about it some more. The book states, "[property] values change in response to the values of neighboring blocks." So, a good neighborhood will likely stay a good neighborhood if surrounded by good stuff. But, one bad place can chain react to kill some places. The algorithms are simple in their own right, but when put together they are an emergent system.
This only draws similarities to the game of Life, which many computer programmers do for one of their first programs. I know I did! This works in the same vein. A cell is dead or alive by a few simple rules. If a cell is surrounded 2 or 3 cells, it is also made alive, any less or any more it is declared dead. SO, if surrounding property is "good, it thrives, similar to Sim City. The Sim City algorithms are simple.
Emergence is all about interactions. One simple rule will not create a thriving metropolis, but web them togheter and it becomes more representative of real life. Is there a connection between the computer world and real worldif the correct algoritms are used? What about intangibles like freak events and such? HOw can you account for those?
It's best to continue investigating.

Reading Notes - Movie Time

I would like to take this opportunity to begin talking about the movie.

First off, Scarlett Johansson = MEGA HOTTIE. Just don't let my girlfriend know that.

But seriously, this movie has a lot of interesting factors. In the debate of place versus non-place, the movie raises some cool scenes. Is a bar a non-place? To some people it is, while for some it isn't. Just passing through, havin a beer. Seems inconsequential to me. Would this be a non-place to this person? I guess so. But of the person who frequents the bar, goes out with his buddies every friday night, plays poor, camaraderie abounds? Sure seems like a place to me.

I still am pondering the whole karaoke and tokyo rush scene. IT all seems a little out there for me. I understand it was supposed to raise the relationship of murray and Johansson, but other than that, it really didn't raise that much in the theory of place for me.

I plan on expounding after movie has finished. Until then, adieu.

Reading Notes - The Non-Place

My local non-place is the West Transfer Point.

Let me explain myself. I never ride the bus. I have a car here in Madison, so I just drive everywhere. Since I work at Weather Central, which is located on the east side of the WKOW building on the Southwest Side, I pass the West Transfer Point every time I work. So, last night, I decided to take time and head over there. Now, since I don't ride the bus, I have what you may call a bus stigma. In my opinion, I would always think that you'd find rather, how you say, "uncouth" people at the bus stop. But, I forage ahead nonetheless.

I flet weird sitting there. Who sits at a bus stop? People were just walking through, standing and waiting for their next bus, or running right up to the one that had already arrived. This is the difference between place and non-place. When you stay at a location and become connected with it, it becomes a place. The only people that stay at bus stations are vagrants. I am no vagrant, let me tell you.

So, I continued onward, watching people come and go. There really was no talking, just kinda like how you would stand in an elevator looking straight forward. This is the epitome of the non-place. There's just no connection to it!

After a while, I got bored and just had to leave. I get creeped out by people being in close proximity to me too, so I was a bit uncomfortable as it was pretty busy at that hour. So, there's my non-place. With no connection to the location, anything can be a non-place, perhaps. But, any location can be a place. It truly is a grey area.

Open Post Time - Interviews are Scary

Interviews are scary.

As some may know, I graduate in May. I've been looking for jobs for a while, and I've applied for a few. One finally came back to me today, and I had an interview. First of all, suits are rough on me. The pants never seem to fit, the jacket never seems to be the right length. Although, I think I happen to look damn fine in a suit, they're always tough on me. I prefer jeans any day.

So, I get myself all cleaned up for it, and of course, I'm nervous as hell. As some of you have seen this week, I'm sick too. It's been off and on, and it was on today. That certainly doesn't help. So, I'm not at 100% and then I'm in a suit, trying to not get lunch all over myself. Then the time came for the actual interview.

It was with Weather Central, where I already work, but at a separate building. Of course, I didn't know where it was. After searching for the building, I went upstairs. After the interview began, I did two things wrong. With the question "What do you think is your greatest weakness?" I responded "I have a hard time explaining things to people." Of course, I'm applying for a customer service rep position that explains things to people for a living. Smooth move, huh? I was also asked "What does it mean to mount a drive?" I said it either meant to physicall y attached it to the rack or to hook it up to the computer. OF course, it meant to VIRTUALLY mount it. Terrific. Other than that. I learned some things today.

1. Always try to be yourself as much as possible. It makes life easier.
2. Don't wory... just do your best.

I'd love to expound, but I feel rather gross at the moment. Sickness is not cool.

Reading Notes Again - The Human Cyborg Paradox

Let me make this blunt: I don't think humans are cyborgs. The thought of it is seriously disconcerting to me. Humans are carbon based beings that should only use machinery on their bodies when necessary. The turning of bodies into machinery holds many moral consequences.

Humans are akin to cyborgs in theory. We are trained to do specific tasks (education) and implement them every day (work). We break down if we're not maintained (injury, sickness), and must get fixed if this occurs (Go to the doctor). But humans have totally different aspect when it comes to one thing: free will. We can choose what profession we want to do, and we can pick the places where we work. We can choose which doctor to see and when to see him when it is prudent. Humans make educated choices, cyborgs do not. The case can be made for the idea of Artifical Intelligence as a form of free will. Is free will just a set of if and for loops that our brain takes and follows, just like a computer program? This is a tough question. One argument is that of the quality known as a soul. Is there a secondary being in ourselves that is inherently objectified to free will? The soul can't be quantified, so it certainly can't be implemented into the AI of a cyborg.

My point is this: People like Stelarc are dabbling in playing God. A cyborg arm is perfect for an amputee. They certain NECESSITATE it. But for some reason, it leads me to thinking about the villian from Spider-Man 2 whose name eludes me. He had that array of arms that did his bidding, and the power of superiority was part of his problem. Something tells me that a slippery slope pattern is possible to form. Cyborg implants to a human to give them an advantages could create an arms race for the "perfect" human, and could eliminate the human all together. WE are imperfect beings, with physical shortcomings. To give implants to a perfectly healthy person would give them a superiority complex that could get out of control. Giving an amputee a new arm with full mobility is fine, because he is back of a level playing field as the rest of us.

Sports is built on a superiority complex, though. It's fine the way it is now. If everyone was exactly the same, games would end in ties. But the difference in talent is discrete comepared to the perfect cyborg control. Think of the Bionic Man. Technology, as we have seen, can get out of control. We can't guarantee that someone with malevolent tendencies can take things out of control. Don't play God. Accept who you are.

Don't Look Now It's READING NOTES AGAIN - The Online Identity

Upon reading Identity Crisis, I took a look at my own personal online persona. I take a two sided approach to my online life. Usually, I'm just me. I like to tell it like it is with logic, snarkiness, and all around attitude that everyone loves or loathes. Of course, I have a soft side as well. I like to talk about the things that really affect me in important ways, such as family life and relationships. At heart I'm an absolute nerd, and will talk about wrestling and video gaming at a moments notice, and relate all of life's experiences to a wrestling angle or video game moment. Of course, there is also my alter ego. He's derived from the nickname my best friend gave me a few years ago, JC Superfreak. Together, my friend and I formed the "Freak 'n Slack Connection" (with his nickname being Slacker Cracker), derived from the "Rock 'n Sock Connection," a WWF tag team from the late 1990s. Everything about JC is me, just ramped up a notch. Think I'm annoying now? Magnify that by 10. Loud, crass, and brash, he will tell you like it is on a moments notice. He's kind of like my evil twin/heelish side.

So, it comes as no surprise to me that this alter-ego is derived from a part of my personality that is not usually seen by everyone. Identity Crisis talks about this on page 261. It makes a bit of sense to me that my online personality alter-ego is just a part of my real personality that just manifests itself. In the real world, there is no way I'd have any sort of friendship if I told off everyone. That's be stupid. Maybe the online personality is a way for these feelings to come out.

What's scary is the people that utilize their online personality as their real personality, and make friendships with people they think that are real, but are totally different in real life. I won't go into the details, but this happened to me when I was younger. Usually, the people who make their real selves their online selves are just looking for an outlet of their personality where they think it will be appreciated. In this light, I think of the outcast high school student who just wants a friend. There's a lot of those kids out there, I was indeed one of them.

The online personality is something that can be studied further and really be something psychologist should analyze.

Guess what it's READING NOTES - Confusion about Cool

Cool is confusing, isn't it? In my previous post, someone called me on this confusion. Cool is supposed to be rebellious. Cool is predicting the next trend, and being the next trend. Cool is ahead of the curve. After thinking about it some more and reading "Coolhunt," I think I'm beginning to understand.

Fo some reason, I would just like to say that the woman featured in this article is not what I think of as cool. Personally, I find the definition of cool here is skewed. I think sitting and shilling Converse shoes thinking they'll be popular again. THat's a fad, in my opinion. I think of cool as something that stands the test of time, like black suits. They're practical, they always look great, and they're always in style. That's cool. Functional, chic, and NEVER out of style. If things come in and out of style, they're a fad, pure and simple. While they may be all the rage for a period of time, they'll always fall out of style.

Most clothing is like this. It's ludicrous to think otherwise. What DeeDee is doing is finding the next big fad, not a cool hunt in my opinion. This leads me to the class' definition that is presented in "Writing About Cool." Cool seems to be all about finding the next big thing. Every tred has its origins somewhere. There, I will agree that the trend has cool tendencies. It's truly different, and not everyone is doing it. But, once it picks up steam, it's not cool anymore. Then, it dies once it becomes old news. That's why I used the example of the black suit. It's always in. To me, the key to cool is durability.

People, will no doubt, disagree with me, but that's how I see it. Fads die. Cool lives forever.