And now for something completely different. I'd like to extend my repertoire to art critique. So here's a review of an art exhibition opening I happened to stumble upon. It was in a small gallery at the Helsinki airport. I think that the artist's name was W. C. Gents. At least that's what a sign on the door said.
The gallery was decorated in a rather cold and sterile way, not unlike, say, a public toilet. The exhibition seemed to be themed around sanitation. Many of the works were constructed out of everyday materials that can be found in public spaces: mirrors, paper towels, some kind of stalls and even urinals. There were interesting pictures painted straight on tiled walls with some kind of an earthy substance. Somewhat large constructions, "toilet stalls", which they resembled, were decorated with graffiti-like ornaments that looked like they were drawn with a regular felt pen.
I think that the artist has received much of his influences from the legendary Marcel Duchamp, maybe even to such extent that could be considered plagiarism. But not by yours truly, I thought the row of regular urinals was a great statement and a homage to the great artist. But the toilet seats in the "stalls", as I like to call them, were maybe too much. One even contained a mass of a substance that closely resembled human excrement and even smelled like it. I have no idea what the artist was trying to say with that piece. But the doors of the "stalls", as I mentioned earlier, were covered with beautiful, thought-provoking inscriptions. Some were political ("USA go home"), some just mysterious ("Kilroy was here"), but nevertheless I was impressed by the many talents of the artist: not only a sculptor and a painter, but a poet as well!
I must complain about the servings at the opening though. Only a single bubblegum vending machine and tap water were available. And the bubblegum was the worst I've ever had: ridiculously expensive (2 €) for a single piece of bubblegum, unbelievably stringy and unpleasantly latexy in taste. I'll never have another piece of that Durex brand bubblegum.
And I must mention that I've never before seen such a vulgar crowd in an art exhibition, and I've visited at least three. The people just rushed through the exhibition, were reluctant to discuss about the works of art or taste the servings. A couple of particularly insolent characters even tried to urinate into the pieces on display! Luckily I was there to stop them by standing next to them and eyeing them with great disapproval.
The opening culminated nicely with an interactive performance by a male artist, possibly W. C. Gents himself. He was dressed as a security guard and played the role really convincingly, even to the point of almost scaring me. Of all people, he chose me as his partner in the performance. He came to me, looking quite muscular and burly, and demanded that I leave the facility instantly. Naturally, I played along, by calling him a "faggot", telling him "don't you know who I am" and trying to grope his groin playfully. Then came the really intense, socially commenting part of the performance, as he twisted my arm behind my back, lead me out of the airport and threw me out on the street. It must have looked very realistic to the spectators, judging by the looks on their faces, but I got up smiling and bowed to the audience, even though I was rather bruised and bleeding in the face. All in all, the exhibition was an interesting statement from a relatively unknown new artist and featured several possible future classic pieces of art. And I must say that I feel absolutely privileged of getting to participate in such a great performance!
Friday, December 14, 2007
Thursday, December 13, 2007
So lonely
I realise that it's been almost a year since my first blog post now. It's been an interesting scientific experiment, in a way. Mostly, I'm surprised about the lack of response. And, in a way, not surprised at all. There are billions of blogs in the universe, and I, for one, don't surf random blogs. Even though I realise it's interesting. I just don't have the time. But, based on a counter, which I don't find very reliable at all, it seems that I've had less than one readers a day during the ongoing year. And also, I find myself wanting to get feedback on my posts. And also, wanting to feel that there is a readership.
Looking back, I've found nothing incriminating in my posts. Also, there are very few things that I couldn't let my mother know about. And also, some might say, that I don't communicate enough. Not to mention that hardly any real names of real persons have been mentioned.
Therefore, I've decided to leak the URL to a certain bunch of friends. And threaten them with violence, should they misuse it. We'll see in the end of 2008, if there'll be any difference in the counter statistics.
Looking back, I've found nothing incriminating in my posts. Also, there are very few things that I couldn't let my mother know about. And also, some might say, that I don't communicate enough. Not to mention that hardly any real names of real persons have been mentioned.
Therefore, I've decided to leak the URL to a certain bunch of friends. And threaten them with violence, should they misuse it. We'll see in the end of 2008, if there'll be any difference in the counter statistics.
Saturday, December 08, 2007
News and the weather
Good evening. I’m Josh Truly and this is today’s news and the weather. Maybe it's best for everyone if I admit up front that I am not wearing any pants whatsoever, as is usual for us news anchors. And on to today's topics.
Friday, October 26, 2007
Various excuses
Well. I sat down to write, but I can't seem to squeeze out a real post. Here's an assortment of excuses (one of these is real, the others I just made up, guess which is which):
1) Facebook is just too addictive
2) I had a real good topic, but I'm too drunk now to finish it
3) Insane schedules at work, caused constipation
4) The lettet "t" came loose in my keyboatd
5) I just can't get work-related problems out of my mind
6) I keep worrying about my brother, who's grown a moustache
7) The lack of real problems because I'm just too well-off
8) A skewer through the brains
9) Existential anxiety attack
10) Meaning of life solved, everything else meaningless.
The first one to guess right gets a free, non-banana gift!
1) Facebook is just too addictive
2) I had a real good topic, but I'm too drunk now to finish it
3) Insane schedules at work, caused constipation
4) The lettet "t" came loose in my keyboatd
5) I just can't get work-related problems out of my mind
6) I keep worrying about my brother, who's grown a moustache
7) The lack of real problems because I'm just too well-off
8) A skewer through the brains
9) Existential anxiety attack
10) Meaning of life solved, everything else meaningless.
The first one to guess right gets a free, non-banana gift!
Friday, October 05, 2007
Dressing up
Lately, I haven't given much thought to what to wear to work. I haven't had the time or energy for such matters. Most mornings, I just grab some mouldy old junk from the nearest pile. Usually, it's jeans and a shirt. One day it was a wooden barrel and suspenders. Boy, that was a horrible day.
Maybe I should dress sharper. I'm not sure if it matters. Most men at the company I work in wear suits and ties. Then again, most of them are sales guys or something, while most men in IT wear jeans and T-shirts. So why would it matter? Would it help me advance in my career? I don't know. I think that for a male programmer, there are basically four options:
1) Dress really sharp. Wear suits and ties, only wear jeans to really casual events. This is okay for managers and sales guys, but if you're neither, you take the risk of looking like a prat. And technical people never look really sharp (evidence). If they do, they are probably technically rubbish wannabe managers.
2) Dress somewhat sharp. Wear mostly pressed trousers and shirts. Wear jeans if you like, but if you do, make sure that they are clean, new and not too hip. This makes you look respectable to people who don't know you, and does not alienate technical people.
3) Dress comfortably and practically. Wear jeans, T-shirts, hiking gear and such. This is a common practice for technical people, but business people might not take you seriously in some matters. Usually it does not matter though, because style is not expected from technical people.
4) Dress originally. Look like Marilyn Manson. Or wear a wooden barrel held up by suspenders, whatever you like. This causes you to alienate everyone in a business environment.
Lately I've coasted near option no. 3, but I would like to sharpen it up a notch. I don't know exactly why, though. Maybe I just want to show that I'm one sharp guy, even in the dressing department. Maybe I'm pepping up for the oncoming, overdue salary readjustment. Maybe I'm just perversely attracted to stiff, Dilbertian corporate culture. Yeah, I admit that.
Also, as a male engineer in his thirties, and therefore an expert in style matters, I'd like to offer some fashion tips for everyone:
1) Don't wear ankle-length leather jackets. You don't look like a character from The Matrix, you look like a prat. Unless you're the guitarist from Whitesnake, playing a solo on a hilltop, in front of a sunset, or a nazi officer in 30's Germany. Then they're kind of appropriate.
2) Stretch jeans don't look good on anyone. They are obligatory on glam rockers, they might look nice on hay pole thin female models, but they are just ridiculous on robust women and any adult men. Don't do it, please.
3) Less is the new black. I mean, less is the new more. And, logically, colours are the new black. Also, wimpy might be the new hard, but I'm not totally sure about that.
4) Don't worry about your appearance. When I was younger, I stood in front of a mirror a lot, unhappy, worrying. It didn't help at all. The only thing that helped was to forget about it and start doing something useful. Now I wish I'd done something worthwhile all that time.
5) I like skirts. On women that is.
6) Classic style rules. There is a good reason why it is classic.
And what do I look like? Why, something like this, of course:
(Image stolen ruthlessly without any kind of permission, or regrets, whatsoever.)
Maybe I should dress sharper. I'm not sure if it matters. Most men at the company I work in wear suits and ties. Then again, most of them are sales guys or something, while most men in IT wear jeans and T-shirts. So why would it matter? Would it help me advance in my career? I don't know. I think that for a male programmer, there are basically four options:
1) Dress really sharp. Wear suits and ties, only wear jeans to really casual events. This is okay for managers and sales guys, but if you're neither, you take the risk of looking like a prat. And technical people never look really sharp (evidence). If they do, they are probably technically rubbish wannabe managers.
2) Dress somewhat sharp. Wear mostly pressed trousers and shirts. Wear jeans if you like, but if you do, make sure that they are clean, new and not too hip. This makes you look respectable to people who don't know you, and does not alienate technical people.
3) Dress comfortably and practically. Wear jeans, T-shirts, hiking gear and such. This is a common practice for technical people, but business people might not take you seriously in some matters. Usually it does not matter though, because style is not expected from technical people.
4) Dress originally. Look like Marilyn Manson. Or wear a wooden barrel held up by suspenders, whatever you like. This causes you to alienate everyone in a business environment.
Lately I've coasted near option no. 3, but I would like to sharpen it up a notch. I don't know exactly why, though. Maybe I just want to show that I'm one sharp guy, even in the dressing department. Maybe I'm pepping up for the oncoming, overdue salary readjustment. Maybe I'm just perversely attracted to stiff, Dilbertian corporate culture. Yeah, I admit that.
Also, as a male engineer in his thirties, and therefore an expert in style matters, I'd like to offer some fashion tips for everyone:
1) Don't wear ankle-length leather jackets. You don't look like a character from The Matrix, you look like a prat. Unless you're the guitarist from Whitesnake, playing a solo on a hilltop, in front of a sunset, or a nazi officer in 30's Germany. Then they're kind of appropriate.
2) Stretch jeans don't look good on anyone. They are obligatory on glam rockers, they might look nice on hay pole thin female models, but they are just ridiculous on robust women and any adult men. Don't do it, please.
3) Less is the new black. I mean, less is the new more. And, logically, colours are the new black. Also, wimpy might be the new hard, but I'm not totally sure about that.
4) Don't worry about your appearance. When I was younger, I stood in front of a mirror a lot, unhappy, worrying. It didn't help at all. The only thing that helped was to forget about it and start doing something useful. Now I wish I'd done something worthwhile all that time.
5) I like skirts. On women that is.
6) Classic style rules. There is a good reason why it is classic.
And what do I look like? Why, something like this, of course:
(Image stolen ruthlessly without any kind of permission, or regrets, whatsoever.)
Friday, September 14, 2007
Exercise
I like exercise. I even like sports, to some degree. By exercise I mean the sports that you do yourself, and by sports I mean sports in general, as performed by other people. I used to hate sports. I still hate some of them, like ice hockey. Yechhh. I hate it because of its vulgarity and the general ugliness, drunkenness and belligerence of the audience that is drawn to it. And I can't understand why all sports announcers in television have really annoying voices. I guess it's required nowadays, but why, and by whom? Are they trying to impel people from sports for some reason?
But as I was saying, exercise is good for you. There are basically two ways to relate to exercise. Either you hate it or love it. Well, in reality, most people are probably in between, as they bloody well tend to be in all matters, but once again, I will simplify things to make them funnier.
I have a theory on exercise. I imagine the people who hate exercise also have one, and I think it goes like this: exercise is hard and it must be avoided to minimize the pain. My theory goes as follows: exercise is hard, but the more you do it, the easier it gets, and thus the pain is minimized. Think about it: if you always avoid taking the stairs, because you don't like becoming breathless, your physical condition will gradually deteriorate. But if you always take the stairs instead of the elevator, your physical condition will improve, and over time, you will not become breathless anymore. So basically, in the long term, you can't avoid pain by avoiding exercise. Well, I guess, theoretically, you could, but you'd have to gradually exercise less and less, and die very quickly (and somehow painlessly) after becoming unable to walk from the couch to the fridge because of this restriction.
I really like running. I've sometimes recommended running to other people, and among the reasons why they don't want to try it I've heard
- they don't like sweating
- it's hard, you become breathless, and so on
- they once saw a guy running in the summer and his face was really red and it looked painful.
Of course it's hard in the beginning. Anything is hard at first. Learning to walk takes a long time. When you learn how to ride a bicycle, you tend to fall over a lot. You don't know how to swim efficiently by instinct because you're not a fish. Everyone is not a web programmer, even though everyone's had a html course in school. Sorry, I digress.
When you begin running, you must practice a bit and start slowly. Eventually, you will become better at it and it won't be so hard anymore. And eventually, you will enjoy running. People exercise because it makes them feel good. Some of the ways that I feel good in after exercise are
- physical relaxation
- some kind of chemical euphoria (endorphines or something)
- moral superiority (because I exercised while you were munching chips on the couch, weren't you?)
- satisfaction of competitive instincts (because I ran faster than some fat beginners and a grandma on a bicycle)
- the knowledge that my lifespan is once again expanded and the rest of it is likely to be relatively pain-free.
Also, for the non-exercisers, I'd like to add that other benefits of exercising include
- not breaking a sweat because of eating
- not having to cough up your lungs because you ran 20 metres to catch a bus
- the heartattacks will diminish significantly.
I know, this might sound a bit patronising and contemptuous. But if you think about it, the superiority is also yours to take, free, or at least relatively cheap, at the price of decent running shoes. Well, I don't even know why I'm writing this, because judging by the excellent taste in the blogs you choose to read, you must be extremely attractive and probably also a triathlonist who could run, bicycle and swim circles around me. I just wrote it because I'm the man around here and I do whatever I feel like and... ok, honey, I'll come to bed right away.
But as I was saying, exercise is good for you. There are basically two ways to relate to exercise. Either you hate it or love it. Well, in reality, most people are probably in between, as they bloody well tend to be in all matters, but once again, I will simplify things to make them funnier.
I have a theory on exercise. I imagine the people who hate exercise also have one, and I think it goes like this: exercise is hard and it must be avoided to minimize the pain. My theory goes as follows: exercise is hard, but the more you do it, the easier it gets, and thus the pain is minimized. Think about it: if you always avoid taking the stairs, because you don't like becoming breathless, your physical condition will gradually deteriorate. But if you always take the stairs instead of the elevator, your physical condition will improve, and over time, you will not become breathless anymore. So basically, in the long term, you can't avoid pain by avoiding exercise. Well, I guess, theoretically, you could, but you'd have to gradually exercise less and less, and die very quickly (and somehow painlessly) after becoming unable to walk from the couch to the fridge because of this restriction.
I really like running. I've sometimes recommended running to other people, and among the reasons why they don't want to try it I've heard
- they don't like sweating
- it's hard, you become breathless, and so on
- they once saw a guy running in the summer and his face was really red and it looked painful.
Of course it's hard in the beginning. Anything is hard at first. Learning to walk takes a long time. When you learn how to ride a bicycle, you tend to fall over a lot. You don't know how to swim efficiently by instinct because you're not a fish. Everyone is not a web programmer, even though everyone's had a html course in school. Sorry, I digress.
When you begin running, you must practice a bit and start slowly. Eventually, you will become better at it and it won't be so hard anymore. And eventually, you will enjoy running. People exercise because it makes them feel good. Some of the ways that I feel good in after exercise are
- physical relaxation
- some kind of chemical euphoria (endorphines or something)
- moral superiority (because I exercised while you were munching chips on the couch, weren't you?)
- satisfaction of competitive instincts (because I ran faster than some fat beginners and a grandma on a bicycle)
- the knowledge that my lifespan is once again expanded and the rest of it is likely to be relatively pain-free.
Also, for the non-exercisers, I'd like to add that other benefits of exercising include
- not breaking a sweat because of eating
- not having to cough up your lungs because you ran 20 metres to catch a bus
- the heartattacks will diminish significantly.
I know, this might sound a bit patronising and contemptuous. But if you think about it, the superiority is also yours to take, free, or at least relatively cheap, at the price of decent running shoes. Well, I don't even know why I'm writing this, because judging by the excellent taste in the blogs you choose to read, you must be extremely attractive and probably also a triathlonist who could run, bicycle and swim circles around me. I just wrote it because I'm the man around here and I do whatever I feel like and... ok, honey, I'll come to bed right away.
Friday, August 31, 2007
Nature observation
Sigh. I live in a nice neighbourhood. Really nice. It's urban, yet it has a nice small village quality. It was even voted the cosiest neighbourhood (or something like that) in Finland last year. But now, the ecosystem is threatened, because apparently, this bird has nested here. I'm not exactly sure what it is, because I'm not an ornithologist, but if I am not mistaken, it is a representative of a variety of owl or something. If I remember correctly from biology lessons in school, it's distinguishing characteristics are a particularly ugly, screeching voice, frightening appearance and awful lyrics. These characteristics are enough to categorize it as a nuisance, but in addition the parasites usually swarming in its presence are known to be completely tasteless and have a bad 90's style rock sound.
Lately, there have been alarmingly many sightings of the bird in the neighbourhood. I suspect that the nest might be in the attic of a nearby house, because I've been keeping on hearing weird yodeling noises during the summer. Not to mention some strange smells, which also might, probably, originate from the pest. If it's not wiped out as soon as possible, I can imagine it aspiring to appear in every community festivity. Besides the obvious noise detriment, its peasant followers would be sure to flock in and definitely ruin any celebration for us respectable people.
I'm living in the hope that the species is migratory and will spend the winter in some other country, hopefully thousands of kilometres away. The further the better, and let's hope that its sense of direction is not too good. With some luck, it will not be able to navigate back. And for humanity's sake, let's hope that it will get lost forever in some desolate corner of the world totally devoid of any recording equipment.
Lately, there have been alarmingly many sightings of the bird in the neighbourhood. I suspect that the nest might be in the attic of a nearby house, because I've been keeping on hearing weird yodeling noises during the summer. Not to mention some strange smells, which also might, probably, originate from the pest. If it's not wiped out as soon as possible, I can imagine it aspiring to appear in every community festivity. Besides the obvious noise detriment, its peasant followers would be sure to flock in and definitely ruin any celebration for us respectable people.
I'm living in the hope that the species is migratory and will spend the winter in some other country, hopefully thousands of kilometres away. The further the better, and let's hope that its sense of direction is not too good. With some luck, it will not be able to navigate back. And for humanity's sake, let's hope that it will get lost forever in some desolate corner of the world totally devoid of any recording equipment.
Friday, July 20, 2007
Do I think I have the authority to instruct anyone about writing? Apparently, yes.
I feel the urge to write an article, but can't decide on the topic. I do have some topics, but none of them interests me enough at the moment. These include:
1) A review of the album The Good, The Bad & The Queen (which is my favourite piece of music at the moment, in fact I'm listening to it currently).
2) Something about computers, so I can brag about my shiny, new, very cool laptop.
3) Running (my favourite brand of sport).
4) Cycling (my other favourite brand of sport).
5) Housekeeping (to stay true to my chosen topic). Yawn.
6) A rant about the immense stupidity of coworkers is always nice.
7) Sex keeps on selling, but I hesitate to write about that, because I'm afraid friends and aqcuiantances will find this blog someday. And that might be awkward.
I will tackle all of these topics in time (with the exception of sex, unless explicitly requested by a huge mass of readers) but maybe I'll just muse on aimlessly tonight. Yeah, that should keep the reader(s) uninterested.
I remember a Finnish lesson from preliminary school. We were supposed to write essays, and I think that somebody complained that he/she can't think of anything to write about. So the teacher told us to write about small things. She told us not to embrace too large topics at once. Instead of trying to summarize the history, present and the future of mankind in your essay, take one moment in time, one city, one house and one brick in the facade of the house. Start writing about the brick. I think I wrote about my pencil. The essay became lengthy, and might I say, great. I wish I had it somewhere. Anyway, the lesson stuck in my mind. I think it was a great idea, and still is, and it might have been the most significant thing I learned in preliminary school. Well, besides the obvious stuff, like reading, writing, mathematics and manners. Oh wait, manners I didn't learn. F**k.
Scott Adams recently told us how to write funny in his blog. I think his writing is funny, but a bit too impertinent at times. But anyway, I couldn't agree more about one thing he said: write simple sentences. That works.
I have an ambition: I want to include as many different words as possible in the posts of this blog. I consciously try to use a broad vocabulary. I just wonder how many words there are in English, and how many of them I have used so far. Well, a bit of Googling suggests that English has about two hundred thousands words. Rats. I have a lot to write about left. How egregious.
So, it seems that this post is about writing. I've listed some (ok, all) of the principles I have about writing. There you have it: about small things, simply put, but with lots of fancy words. And apparently (ha! got to use that word), I seem to be able to write about nearly anything for a length. At least I'd like to think I can. If that's a requirement to be a professional writer, I'm nearly there. But probably they will require it to be interesting too. Damn!
Oh, and one more thing. When writing blog posts, I like to write the main text first, then add a witty opening paragraph and then think of the title. Must make up the title now.
1) A review of the album The Good, The Bad & The Queen (which is my favourite piece of music at the moment, in fact I'm listening to it currently).
2) Something about computers, so I can brag about my shiny, new, very cool laptop.
3) Running (my favourite brand of sport).
4) Cycling (my other favourite brand of sport).
5) Housekeeping (to stay true to my chosen topic). Yawn.
6) A rant about the immense stupidity of coworkers is always nice.
7) Sex keeps on selling, but I hesitate to write about that, because I'm afraid friends and aqcuiantances will find this blog someday. And that might be awkward.
I will tackle all of these topics in time (with the exception of sex, unless explicitly requested by a huge mass of readers) but maybe I'll just muse on aimlessly tonight. Yeah, that should keep the reader(s) uninterested.
I remember a Finnish lesson from preliminary school. We were supposed to write essays, and I think that somebody complained that he/she can't think of anything to write about. So the teacher told us to write about small things. She told us not to embrace too large topics at once. Instead of trying to summarize the history, present and the future of mankind in your essay, take one moment in time, one city, one house and one brick in the facade of the house. Start writing about the brick. I think I wrote about my pencil. The essay became lengthy, and might I say, great. I wish I had it somewhere. Anyway, the lesson stuck in my mind. I think it was a great idea, and still is, and it might have been the most significant thing I learned in preliminary school. Well, besides the obvious stuff, like reading, writing, mathematics and manners. Oh wait, manners I didn't learn. F**k.
Scott Adams recently told us how to write funny in his blog. I think his writing is funny, but a bit too impertinent at times. But anyway, I couldn't agree more about one thing he said: write simple sentences. That works.
I have an ambition: I want to include as many different words as possible in the posts of this blog. I consciously try to use a broad vocabulary. I just wonder how many words there are in English, and how many of them I have used so far. Well, a bit of Googling suggests that English has about two hundred thousands words. Rats. I have a lot to write about left. How egregious.
So, it seems that this post is about writing. I've listed some (ok, all) of the principles I have about writing. There you have it: about small things, simply put, but with lots of fancy words. And apparently (ha! got to use that word), I seem to be able to write about nearly anything for a length. At least I'd like to think I can. If that's a requirement to be a professional writer, I'm nearly there. But probably they will require it to be interesting too. Damn!
Oh, and one more thing. When writing blog posts, I like to write the main text first, then add a witty opening paragraph and then think of the title. Must make up the title now.
Friday, July 13, 2007
Sea, sex, sun and IT support
I've been on vacation for a couple of weeks now. It's been strange not to work but luckily I've been able to do some computer maintenance for relatives to reduce the withdrawal symptoms.
Here's an example of a sweet, relaxing session of tinkering in the general field of my chosen profession. The purpose of it was to find out why my mother-in-law can't access her email. I already updated her computer earlier. It's old and has a slow modem connection, so doing anything of significance, like starting the computer or opening nearly any modern web page (except Google) takes forever (or at least several minutes).
Mother-in-law: Could you check what's wrong with my email? I tried to go there but when I gave the password it didn't work and then it froze somehow and I couldn't do anything so I had to pull the plug. We can try it now again, you do have time do you? I'll just start this thing. It all went okay when I opened the Internet but then I gave the password and the email didn't work and... (she's talkative)
Me: Sure, let's see...
(She keeps on explaining the problem, very verbose, while the computer starts up.)
Mother-in-law: ... and what is that window anyhow? What should I do about it? Now let's go to the Internet...
Me: That's the virus protection program updating itself. You don't have to do anything.
Mother-in-law: ... so when I enter the password here, I still have the default password, I should probably have changed it, there's no email anywhere...
(I look at the operator's portal page, never seen it before, I can't see a link to email anywhere either.)
Mother-in-law: ... here, you can sit here and check this out, could be something with the operator's connections or something...
(Mother-in-law wanders off. All the while my kid plays at my feet and wants to sit in my lap and bang the keyboard every now and then. I try to find out how to access the operator's webmail. There's a link to "email" but when it's clicked, you're redirected to a fancy web 2.0 application that doesn't seem to have a link to any email application whatsoever. Also it is excruciatingly slow to load with a modem connection. I try the same thing with a different browser, but no donut. I install a plugin the first browser keeps on complaining about. Then Windows Update wants to restart the computer so I let it. I play with the kid for ten minutes while the computer restarts.)
Mother-in-law: Did you find the problem? Oh, you're not done yet...
(The kid pushes reset button on the front panel of the computer so it restarts again. We continue playing.)
Wife: Are you done? Why don't you stop playing with the computer?
Me: No, I'm not done, this takes a while because it's very slow to do load web pages with this...
Wife: Ok, ok, I didn't ask for your life story.
(Mother-in-law and wife wander off. I try reading the operator's manuals and faqs to find how to access the webmail application. No help. I get irritated enough to want to call their helpdesk, but can't find a phone number anywhere. Instead they have a web application that supposed to diagnose Internet connection problems. Also the operator has notoriously bad telephone support service, so I doubt that I could be able to get through anyway.)
Father-in-law: Hey, could you find some motorcycles for me in the Internet? (He's totally Internet illiterate and wants me to search for classified ads for a vintage motorcycle.)
Me: Uh, I'm kind of in the middle of something...
Father-in-law: Sure, do that thing first.
(Father-in-law wanders off. Mother-in-law returns to check again if I'm done. The kid wants to sit in my lap again and bang the keyboard some more. Wife walks by and frowns at me. I check some user forums to see if other people have problems with the operator's webmail. My mother calls me and gives me a list of things to get from the grocery store for her. The firewall program announces that it has updated itself and the computer must be restarted. I let it and wait for ten minutes again. Hey, I'm not in a hurry, I'm on vacation.)
Wife: Could you stop doing that and help me with packing? (We're going to my parents' house.)
Me: I can't right now, I have to do this now, there's no time later.
(I find some forum threads where people complain about the operator and it's webmail being constantly down. It seems possible, that the operator has disabled access to the webmail application. I try to read the threads but the Internet connection is disconnected. I re-connect.)
Wife: Stop doing that computer stuff now, will you?
Me: OK!
(I've gotten a bit annoyed here. I go to the couch and start reading the paper. My wife turns off the computer.)
Mother-in-law: What was wrong with email? Is it working now?
Wife: Yeah, what was wrong with that?
Me: No, it's not working! I don't know! You told me to stop fixing it so I did!
(I read the paper, angrily, for a few minutes.)
Wife: Could you look at the email problem? I can restart the computer for you. There's no reason to be angry, you can do what you want, it's vacation after all...
(I go back to the computer, wait for it to start up again and try to read the forums again. It seems that there are other people who haven't been able to access their, email accounts recently and the portal has been lately changed.)
Me: It seems that the webmail is down for the moment, so we'll just have to wait and call the operator later, if it doesn't start working. (It's frustrating to leave this unfinished but what can I do.)
Mother-in-law: Ok, well, I don't use email much anyway so it doesn't really matter.
(The end.)
Sigh. It was nice but still not quite like work. It would have been nice to have some project managers presenting contradicting requirements in a shouting fashion and possibly blaring some kinds of air horns behind my back while poking me with sharp wooden sticks to get that workly feeling. At least it 's only a couple of days and I can stop drinking these margaritas under the palm tree, get up from this hammock and get back to work. Ahhh...
Here's an example of a sweet, relaxing session of tinkering in the general field of my chosen profession. The purpose of it was to find out why my mother-in-law can't access her email. I already updated her computer earlier. It's old and has a slow modem connection, so doing anything of significance, like starting the computer or opening nearly any modern web page (except Google) takes forever (or at least several minutes).
Mother-in-law: Could you check what's wrong with my email? I tried to go there but when I gave the password it didn't work and then it froze somehow and I couldn't do anything so I had to pull the plug. We can try it now again, you do have time do you? I'll just start this thing. It all went okay when I opened the Internet but then I gave the password and the email didn't work and... (she's talkative)
Me: Sure, let's see...
(She keeps on explaining the problem, very verbose, while the computer starts up.)
Mother-in-law: ... and what is that window anyhow? What should I do about it? Now let's go to the Internet...
Me: That's the virus protection program updating itself. You don't have to do anything.
Mother-in-law: ... so when I enter the password here, I still have the default password, I should probably have changed it, there's no email anywhere...
(I look at the operator's portal page, never seen it before, I can't see a link to email anywhere either.)
Mother-in-law: ... here, you can sit here and check this out, could be something with the operator's connections or something...
(Mother-in-law wanders off. All the while my kid plays at my feet and wants to sit in my lap and bang the keyboard every now and then. I try to find out how to access the operator's webmail. There's a link to "email" but when it's clicked, you're redirected to a fancy web 2.0 application that doesn't seem to have a link to any email application whatsoever. Also it is excruciatingly slow to load with a modem connection. I try the same thing with a different browser, but no donut. I install a plugin the first browser keeps on complaining about. Then Windows Update wants to restart the computer so I let it. I play with the kid for ten minutes while the computer restarts.)
Mother-in-law: Did you find the problem? Oh, you're not done yet...
(The kid pushes reset button on the front panel of the computer so it restarts again. We continue playing.)
Wife: Are you done? Why don't you stop playing with the computer?
Me: No, I'm not done, this takes a while because it's very slow to do load web pages with this...
Wife: Ok, ok, I didn't ask for your life story.
(Mother-in-law and wife wander off. I try reading the operator's manuals and faqs to find how to access the webmail application. No help. I get irritated enough to want to call their helpdesk, but can't find a phone number anywhere. Instead they have a web application that supposed to diagnose Internet connection problems. Also the operator has notoriously bad telephone support service, so I doubt that I could be able to get through anyway.)
Father-in-law: Hey, could you find some motorcycles for me in the Internet? (He's totally Internet illiterate and wants me to search for classified ads for a vintage motorcycle.)
Me: Uh, I'm kind of in the middle of something...
Father-in-law: Sure, do that thing first.
(Father-in-law wanders off. Mother-in-law returns to check again if I'm done. The kid wants to sit in my lap again and bang the keyboard some more. Wife walks by and frowns at me. I check some user forums to see if other people have problems with the operator's webmail. My mother calls me and gives me a list of things to get from the grocery store for her. The firewall program announces that it has updated itself and the computer must be restarted. I let it and wait for ten minutes again. Hey, I'm not in a hurry, I'm on vacation.)
Wife: Could you stop doing that and help me with packing? (We're going to my parents' house.)
Me: I can't right now, I have to do this now, there's no time later.
(I find some forum threads where people complain about the operator and it's webmail being constantly down. It seems possible, that the operator has disabled access to the webmail application. I try to read the threads but the Internet connection is disconnected. I re-connect.)
Wife: Stop doing that computer stuff now, will you?
Me: OK!
(I've gotten a bit annoyed here. I go to the couch and start reading the paper. My wife turns off the computer.)
Mother-in-law: What was wrong with email? Is it working now?
Wife: Yeah, what was wrong with that?
Me: No, it's not working! I don't know! You told me to stop fixing it so I did!
(I read the paper, angrily, for a few minutes.)
Wife: Could you look at the email problem? I can restart the computer for you. There's no reason to be angry, you can do what you want, it's vacation after all...
(I go back to the computer, wait for it to start up again and try to read the forums again. It seems that there are other people who haven't been able to access their, email accounts recently and the portal has been lately changed.)
Me: It seems that the webmail is down for the moment, so we'll just have to wait and call the operator later, if it doesn't start working. (It's frustrating to leave this unfinished but what can I do.)
Mother-in-law: Ok, well, I don't use email much anyway so it doesn't really matter.
(The end.)
Sigh. It was nice but still not quite like work. It would have been nice to have some project managers presenting contradicting requirements in a shouting fashion and possibly blaring some kinds of air horns behind my back while poking me with sharp wooden sticks to get that workly feeling. At least it 's only a couple of days and I can stop drinking these margaritas under the palm tree, get up from this hammock and get back to work. Ahhh...
Saturday, June 09, 2007
Flat post
I've only recently realised that for women, interior design is a neverending process. Before, I had the comprehension that one day, in the near future, everything in the apartment will be perfect and there's no need to do interior design anymore. But now I understand that day will never come.
For guys, at least most of them, at least the heterosexual ones, I think, the interior design is a practical matter. You move in, you have some furniture, you get some more if it's necessary, you arrange them as you like and that's it. The apartment is mostly in a constant state.
But women, at least most of them, I think, approach interior design in a fundamentally different way. Although everything in the apartment is very nice, and everything has been well thought out, changed and redesigned many times, there still is something to change and improve. They always have plans to get rid of something and purchase some other thing to replace it.
...
Well, this turned out to be a flat subject. Everything changes, nothing is permanent except change, yadda yadda. I thought that I had some conclusion to draw but now I'm too bored to remember it. So, to conclude with a joke: did you notice how men always leave the toilet seat up?
...
(That was the joke.)
For guys, at least most of them, at least the heterosexual ones, I think, the interior design is a practical matter. You move in, you have some furniture, you get some more if it's necessary, you arrange them as you like and that's it. The apartment is mostly in a constant state.
But women, at least most of them, I think, approach interior design in a fundamentally different way. Although everything in the apartment is very nice, and everything has been well thought out, changed and redesigned many times, there still is something to change and improve. They always have plans to get rid of something and purchase some other thing to replace it.
...
Well, this turned out to be a flat subject. Everything changes, nothing is permanent except change, yadda yadda. I thought that I had some conclusion to draw but now I'm too bored to remember it. So, to conclude with a joke: did you notice how men always leave the toilet seat up?
...
(That was the joke.)
Friday, June 08, 2007
A post about me (for a change)
I like to finish things. Today we went to Ikea, and bought a kitchen cupboardish kind of a piece of furniture. It was sold in parts, of course, so I had to assemble it myself. That took about two hours, maybe three if you count cleaning up afterwards, and I've studied to become a carpenter. I wonder how the average Joe Nobody from Whocareslandia manages to do that at all. I'm beat. But I had to finish it, I couldn't just leave it to be possibly done in the near future. It would have bothered me. So now I'm satisfied.
Ten other things I like doing or am obsessed with, in no particular order:
1) drinking plenty of coffee
2) deadpan comedy in everyday situations
3) writing a blog
4) watching women's asses
5) playing the bass
6) driving the car
7) listening to Raptori (a groundbreaking Finnish rap group) while driving the car
8) indentating the program code properly
9) having extra money
10) rollerskating.
Ten other things I like doing or am obsessed with, in no particular order:
1) drinking plenty of coffee
2) deadpan comedy in everyday situations
3) writing a blog
4) watching women's asses
5) playing the bass
6) driving the car
7) listening to Raptori (a groundbreaking Finnish rap group) while driving the car
8) indentating the program code properly
9) having extra money
10) rollerskating.
Friday, June 01, 2007
BS programming
Boy, what a grueling week at work. I'm so tired. But instead of ranting about the Dilbertian moments, the nazi-style leadership apparently in favour in some unnamed consulting companies and the absurd meetings I've been in this week, I thought I'd write about something else tonight. You know, I'd like to maintain a cheery mood in this blog. Bitter complaining can be entertaining to read, but there's a time and a place for everything, and that's next week, this blog.
So, I'll write about a programming exercise I came up with today. It might even become a new trend, or paradigm, if you will, in programming. Why not, other senseless trends have emerged before. It's called Backwards Sprogramming, or BS for short.
Basically the idea is as follows: the program code should be executed from the end to the beginning, instead of vice versa, as usually. This can be achieved by using GOTO statements. Using GOTO statements also has the advantage of eliminating loop structures. The same functionality can be achieved by simply using GOTO's, and this makes the code possibly faster. I'll add an example procedure here as soon possible (I already wrote it, but left it at work and now can't be bothered to do it again).
Edit: Finally, here's the example you've eagerly been waiting for. Sorry about the lack of indentation, but this edit window really likes to mangle any attempts to format this properly. I don't even know if this is the original piece of code anymore. Oh no! Now the b*****d f*****g did it again! F**k! S**t! #!&€!!
CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE backward_proc IS
n_index PLS_INTEGER := 0;
BEGIN
GOTO start_proc;
<<end_proc>>
dbms_output.put_line('backward_proc end');
RETURN;
<<step_3>>
IF n_index < 10 THEN
n_index := n_index + 1;
dbms_output.put_line('Looping, iteration '||TO_CHAR(n_index));
GOTO step_3;
ELSE
GOTO end_proc;
END IF;
<<step_2>>
dbms_output.put_line('Doing the second thing');
GOTO step_3;
<<step_1>>
dbms_output.put_line('Doing the first thing');
GOTO step_2;
<<start_proc>>
dbms_output.put_line('backward_proc start');
GOTO step_1;
END backward_proc;
/
Without doing any research, but with a straight face, and who are you to criticize me anyway, I claim that GOTO statements are present in most programming languages even today, so BS can be followed regardless of the choice of programming language. And the benefits are virtually the same in any language.
So, why should BS be used? It's totally senseless, and makes the program code hard to understand and maintain. Well, that's exactly why, because that makes it the perfect equivalent for the managerial BS practices often used, with undeniable success, in the IT field today. Also, any fatal failings of any given system developed using BS can easily and undeniably be explained by the unmaintainability and complexity of the code. This also ensures that there are plenty of work opportunities for BS experts, because they will be the only ones capable (and willing) to touch systems developed with BS.
The benefits of this paradigm are clear, so I encourage all developers in any organization to embrace them and start using BS today (or the next one banking day after this one). I know I will.
So, I'll write about a programming exercise I came up with today. It might even become a new trend, or paradigm, if you will, in programming. Why not, other senseless trends have emerged before. It's called Backwards Sprogramming, or BS for short.
Basically the idea is as follows: the program code should be executed from the end to the beginning, instead of vice versa, as usually. This can be achieved by using GOTO statements. Using GOTO statements also has the advantage of eliminating loop structures. The same functionality can be achieved by simply using GOTO's, and this makes the code possibly faster. I'll add an example procedure here as soon possible (I already wrote it, but left it at work and now can't be bothered to do it again).
Edit: Finally, here's the example you've eagerly been waiting for. Sorry about the lack of indentation, but this edit window really likes to mangle any attempts to format this properly. I don't even know if this is the original piece of code anymore. Oh no! Now the b*****d f*****g did it again! F**k! S**t! #!&€!!
CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE backward_proc IS
n_index PLS_INTEGER := 0;
BEGIN
GOTO start_proc;
<<end_proc>>
dbms_output.put_line('backward_proc end');
RETURN;
<<step_3>>
IF n_index < 10 THEN
n_index := n_index + 1;
dbms_output.put_line('Looping, iteration '||TO_CHAR(n_index));
GOTO step_3;
ELSE
GOTO end_proc;
END IF;
<<step_2>>
dbms_output.put_line('Doing the second thing');
GOTO step_3;
<<step_1>>
dbms_output.put_line('Doing the first thing');
GOTO step_2;
<<start_proc>>
dbms_output.put_line('backward_proc start');
GOTO step_1;
END backward_proc;
/
Without doing any research, but with a straight face, and who are you to criticize me anyway, I claim that GOTO statements are present in most programming languages even today, so BS can be followed regardless of the choice of programming language. And the benefits are virtually the same in any language.
So, why should BS be used? It's totally senseless, and makes the program code hard to understand and maintain. Well, that's exactly why, because that makes it the perfect equivalent for the managerial BS practices often used, with undeniable success, in the IT field today. Also, any fatal failings of any given system developed using BS can easily and undeniably be explained by the unmaintainability and complexity of the code. This also ensures that there are plenty of work opportunities for BS experts, because they will be the only ones capable (and willing) to touch systems developed with BS.
The benefits of this paradigm are clear, so I encourage all developers in any organization to embrace them and start using BS today (or the next one banking day after this one). I know I will.
Saturday, May 26, 2007
The greatest music video in the world
The greatest music video in the world is The Perfect Kiss by New Order. There's no question about it. That's because I have absolute taste in music (as opposed to absolute pitch), and I'm telling you. Here's a YouTube link to it.
The video is revolutionary in an astonishingly simple way. In it the musicians actually play the song live in the studio, and that's it. Seeing the musicians actually playing, instead of pretending to play, as is usual in music videos, is really exciting and refreshing. They're really concentrating on the performance, and as they aren't actually virtuous players/singers, it's not obvious that they're going to make it through the song without major errors. But they do. And the few bum notes just make it more interesting, in my opinion.
The video is great also because it includes possibly the greatest bass player ever, Peter Hook, wearing a biker jacket and some kind of funny looking sweater pants, playing kick-ass bass. The main riff of the song is a high bass line. The line goes so high it must be played on a bass that has more frets than usual. Now that's kick-ass. And the bass part in the end of the song is just so... ass-kicky. (Appreciate the kick-ass range of my vocabulary. This review might end up resembling the one Homer's dog wrote.)
Other groin-grabbingly great moments in the video:
- The boyish haircut of Bernard Sumner. I love it.
- The 80's-style businesswoman look of Gillian Gilbert. I love it.
- Unusual instruments: synth drums, cowbell, weird synthesizer sounds (including frog samples).
- The Joy Division references: the Joy Division poster visible behind Bernard Sumner in the end of the video and the out of focus person watching the band perform (reference to Joy Division singer Ian Curtis put there by director Jonathan Demme according to speculations).
- The bored facial expressions of the band members in the very end of the video. They seem to say "Ok, it's done, now let's go get pie". They're musicians at work, not clowns prancing around for the camera. You just can't get any cooler than that.
Ok, I think this post is done. Now let's go get pie.
The video is revolutionary in an astonishingly simple way. In it the musicians actually play the song live in the studio, and that's it. Seeing the musicians actually playing, instead of pretending to play, as is usual in music videos, is really exciting and refreshing. They're really concentrating on the performance, and as they aren't actually virtuous players/singers, it's not obvious that they're going to make it through the song without major errors. But they do. And the few bum notes just make it more interesting, in my opinion.
The video is great also because it includes possibly the greatest bass player ever, Peter Hook, wearing a biker jacket and some kind of funny looking sweater pants, playing kick-ass bass. The main riff of the song is a high bass line. The line goes so high it must be played on a bass that has more frets than usual. Now that's kick-ass. And the bass part in the end of the song is just so... ass-kicky. (Appreciate the kick-ass range of my vocabulary. This review might end up resembling the one Homer's dog wrote.)
Other groin-grabbingly great moments in the video:
- The boyish haircut of Bernard Sumner. I love it.
- The 80's-style businesswoman look of Gillian Gilbert. I love it.
- Unusual instruments: synth drums, cowbell, weird synthesizer sounds (including frog samples).
- The Joy Division references: the Joy Division poster visible behind Bernard Sumner in the end of the video and the out of focus person watching the band perform (reference to Joy Division singer Ian Curtis put there by director Jonathan Demme according to speculations).
- The bored facial expressions of the band members in the very end of the video. They seem to say "Ok, it's done, now let's go get pie". They're musicians at work, not clowns prancing around for the camera. You just can't get any cooler than that.
Ok, I think this post is done. Now let's go get pie.
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Cleaning, meditating and burping
Tonight I've been doing what I like best: beer cleaning, or cleaBURRRPning, as I like to call it. You know, having a couple of beers while cleaning the household while having a couple of beers. And cleaning the household while I'm at it. My wife and kid are away visiting relatives this week, and I've been having a relaxing week all by myself. Except my wife gave me two minor tasks to accomplish during the week: 1) work overtime as much as possible and 2) clean the household thoroughly. So I'm afraid this week of sweet, peaceful relaxation might kill me with exertion.
(Wow, they fixed the publish by pressing ctrl-s feature I complained a couple of posts ago. Way to go, Blogger! Yippee-wippee! Wippee!)
But seriously, it's nice to have a lot of things to do. I definitely prefer that to being idle. I can't properly enjoy slacking off anymore, or more accurately, I think I can't, I don't know because I haven't done it in a long time. I need to accomplish something every day to feel worthwhile. I wonder how I will survive the oncoming summer vacation, you know, with all the sleeping-in-the-hammock, wearing-a-straw-hat-and-a-straw-in-your-mouth and spitting-to-the-ceiling kind of stuff. Well, fortunately, you can't just sit around on your hands all day when you have a small kid. They are good at keeping you busy.
I just thought of an aforism of some kind. "Everything is made for hard usage". Take my genitals, for example. No wait, don't, take a human for example. I think that a human feels well when it is put to use instead of just lying around. This also applies to sports cars, sneakers and about everything else. I can't understand people who collect sneakers and never use them. Of course, eventually, things break, when they're used, but usually it does not happen too early if things are used properly, and serviced every now and then.
By the way, here was a thought that was not carefully thought out, but I just presented it to you with a straight face. Actually most of these blog entries are written very fast. This blog is about blurting things out, not thinking them through, dammit!
Might I say, that I wrote this blog entry while I was cleaning. I just did it in my head, and when it was done, attached a USB cable to my ear, downloaded the file to my computer and copy-pasted it here. It's nicer to do it like that, instead of sitting down to write. When cleaning, you don't actually have to think hard, it just happens automatically, while you scrub away.
(Wow, they fixed the publish by pressing ctrl-s feature I complained a couple of posts ago. Way to go, Blogger! Yippee-wippee! Wippee!)
But seriously, it's nice to have a lot of things to do. I definitely prefer that to being idle. I can't properly enjoy slacking off anymore, or more accurately, I think I can't, I don't know because I haven't done it in a long time. I need to accomplish something every day to feel worthwhile. I wonder how I will survive the oncoming summer vacation, you know, with all the sleeping-in-the-hammock, wearing-a-straw-hat-and-a-straw-in-your-mouth and spitting-to-the-ceiling kind of stuff. Well, fortunately, you can't just sit around on your hands all day when you have a small kid. They are good at keeping you busy.
I just thought of an aforism of some kind. "Everything is made for hard usage". Take my genitals, for example. No wait, don't, take a human for example. I think that a human feels well when it is put to use instead of just lying around. This also applies to sports cars, sneakers and about everything else. I can't understand people who collect sneakers and never use them. Of course, eventually, things break, when they're used, but usually it does not happen too early if things are used properly, and serviced every now and then.
By the way, here was a thought that was not carefully thought out, but I just presented it to you with a straight face. Actually most of these blog entries are written very fast. This blog is about blurting things out, not thinking them through, dammit!
Might I say, that I wrote this blog entry while I was cleaning. I just did it in my head, and when it was done, attached a USB cable to my ear, downloaded the file to my computer and copy-pasted it here. It's nicer to do it like that, instead of sitting down to write. When cleaning, you don't actually have to think hard, it just happens automatically, while you scrub away.
Saturday, May 05, 2007
Touch typing rules
Touch typing is a great skill for an IT worker like myself, or anybody who uses a computer, come to think of it. I'm really glad I learnt how to do it when I first became an in-front-of-the-computer-sitting, doing-all-kinds-of-nerdy-things guy. Sure, it was hard for a couple of months, and I remember being really frustrated when my fingers wouldn't do what my brain told them to do. But after a while it got easier, and now, several years later, typing comes from the spine. I don't need to think about it.
The main advantages of touch typing (and using all ten fingers to type), compared to locating keys by sight and typing with 1-10 fingers, your nose, or whatever appendages the unenlightened like to use, are, in my opinion:
1) you don't have to look at the keyboard, instead you can keep your sight focused on the screen
2) typing is much faster
3) you look cool, in a nerdy way.
For some reason, I still remember part a conversation I overheard when I studied to become a software engineer. A student was presenting his project, a touch typing tutorial program, to a teacher. The part I remember was the teacher saying something like "it's not important for a programmer to know touch typing". I strongly disagree. I think it's a great, sharp tool for any programmer and should be taught (and obligatory) wherever programmers are taught.
I can understand the teacher's point of view. He probably thought of programming as intellectual exercises, of perfecting algorithms. Well, it is that, but it usually involves lots of other related work, like writing documentation, testing, doing maintenance work and so on. The teacher probably liked solving programming problems at evening, sitting in an armchair in his mansion while sipping cognac. If that's what programming is to you, then you might as well punch the keys with your cigar, if you like. But when you're churning out code and documentation for a living, 24/7, as I'm doing right now, speed becomes important. That's right, I work so hard that I'm actually coding right now with my back hands, or feet if that's what you like to call them. Whew. It ain't easy, you know.
I would claim that typing by touch makes you a better programmer. Nowadays, most programs have graphical user interfaces. If you find typing hard, you will use graphical tools to do things instead of command line tools. That is okay in some cases, but not always. An example: I've noticed that many of my coworkers like to use the graphical schema browser of Toad to look at data in database tables. Toad is allright (despite being a buggy piece of s**t) for some things, but I maintain that only amateurs inspect database tables through a graphical user interface. You should write the queries yourself. It's faster. And if you do that, you get to practice SQL all the time, and that makes you a better programmer. I guess that it's the same in most programming environments today: you can do a lot of things by clicking in an IDE. That's okay, but you should know what happens under the hood, and whether the GUI is slowing you down or making your work easier.
In my experience, it seems that a surprisingly large portion of programmers are trying to get away with less typing. I think that it partially explains the sparse comments, bad naming conventions and wrong indentation, which are all very common properties of bad code. If typing is drudgery for you, you will be reluctant to do these things properly. Also, you will be more reluctant to change things, when they're once done, and rewriting code is important to make it better. Usually, you don't get it completely right the first time.
I pictured this an epic subject before beginning to write, but now, what I've managed to get written seems sparse. Well, the book will be more elaborate, I promise. Now, to get some well deserved sleep...
The main advantages of touch typing (and using all ten fingers to type), compared to locating keys by sight and typing with 1-10 fingers, your nose, or whatever appendages the unenlightened like to use, are, in my opinion:
1) you don't have to look at the keyboard, instead you can keep your sight focused on the screen
2) typing is much faster
3) you look cool, in a nerdy way.
For some reason, I still remember part a conversation I overheard when I studied to become a software engineer. A student was presenting his project, a touch typing tutorial program, to a teacher. The part I remember was the teacher saying something like "it's not important for a programmer to know touch typing". I strongly disagree. I think it's a great, sharp tool for any programmer and should be taught (and obligatory) wherever programmers are taught.
I can understand the teacher's point of view. He probably thought of programming as intellectual exercises, of perfecting algorithms. Well, it is that, but it usually involves lots of other related work, like writing documentation, testing, doing maintenance work and so on. The teacher probably liked solving programming problems at evening, sitting in an armchair in his mansion while sipping cognac. If that's what programming is to you, then you might as well punch the keys with your cigar, if you like. But when you're churning out code and documentation for a living, 24/7, as I'm doing right now, speed becomes important. That's right, I work so hard that I'm actually coding right now with my back hands, or feet if that's what you like to call them. Whew. It ain't easy, you know.
I would claim that typing by touch makes you a better programmer. Nowadays, most programs have graphical user interfaces. If you find typing hard, you will use graphical tools to do things instead of command line tools. That is okay in some cases, but not always. An example: I've noticed that many of my coworkers like to use the graphical schema browser of Toad to look at data in database tables. Toad is allright (despite being a buggy piece of s**t) for some things, but I maintain that only amateurs inspect database tables through a graphical user interface. You should write the queries yourself. It's faster. And if you do that, you get to practice SQL all the time, and that makes you a better programmer. I guess that it's the same in most programming environments today: you can do a lot of things by clicking in an IDE. That's okay, but you should know what happens under the hood, and whether the GUI is slowing you down or making your work easier.
In my experience, it seems that a surprisingly large portion of programmers are trying to get away with less typing. I think that it partially explains the sparse comments, bad naming conventions and wrong indentation, which are all very common properties of bad code. If typing is drudgery for you, you will be reluctant to do these things properly. Also, you will be more reluctant to change things, when they're once done, and rewriting code is important to make it better. Usually, you don't get it completely right the first time.
I pictured this an epic subject before beginning to write, but now, what I've managed to get written seems sparse. Well, the book will be more elaborate, I promise. Now, to get some well deserved sleep...
Friday, April 27, 2007
Hair plans
It's Friday again, so here's a new post. This seems to be a nice way to unwind after a hard week at work, having a couple of glasses of wine and writing some blog. It's nice at least if I don't overdo it by writing too many glasses of blog. If that should happen, tomorrow morning will be dreary, because the leathery alarm clock is exact. And you can't turn it off.
But oh yeah, on to the topic, if that's any consolation to you. It probably will not get any more interesting after this. But I've been thinking about getting a haircut for a couple of days. It's funny how hair grows. After getting a haircut, it's tidy for a couple of weeks, but then one morning it's suddenly overgrown with all kinds of tufts sticking out. And my hair seems to grow only on the sides and back nowadays, the top of my head stays about the same (thin). The only places on my body where hair is plentiful are nostrils and... erm, should I be writing about this?
(Side note: since when has ctrl-s meant "publish"? I don't like this Blogger function. Why doesn't it mean "save" like it does anywhere else? Now I always accidentally publish unfinished posts.)
I hate getting haircuts. I quite like the actual sitting in a chair, being groomed, reading a paper. But I don't like getting there. I never reserve haircuts beforehand, for some reason I don't just want to do it. I want to walk into a barbershop and get a haircut at once. Sometimes there's a customer, and you have to wait. I don't like that either. I want it to be simple: walk in, sit in a chair for 20 minutes, pay, walk out. I don't like it if lasts longer than 20 minutes. That's why I always go for the cruddy, cheap joints: they do it fast and rough. Also, there's less of a chance that there's a customer in there, or that they're booked full. And I don't want to pay very much for a crappy 20 minute hairjob. And the place should be near my daily route from home to work. It's not easy to fulfill these requirements. Well, actually, there is a barbershop just like this, but the last time I was there, the barber cut my ear, and now I'm kind of afraid to go there again. And the chair was really uncomfortable.
Sigh. I know I'm making it more difficult than it is. But I partially hope that I would already go bald enough so I could just give it up and shave it all off. I think it would be fun, the shaving, I mean. On the other hand, there's still a part of me that doesn't want to become a giant roll-on. But let's face it, it's inevitable. It's going. It's already kind of see-through on top. And I'm not going to be desperate about it, like eat some overpriced nature product that's supposed to restore hair growth but might as well be horse manure as far as I know, let alone get any treatments or transplants. Yecchh. When it goes it goes.
It's hilarious, no, wait, it's tragical, no wait, it's hilariously tragical, I mean, it's both tragical and hilarious how going bald can be such a big thing for some. Covering it up just does not work, yet people try. Yikes! Ok, that does it, I'll get it cut very short tomorrow. I promise.
Hey, I seem to be about finished. And not too many glasses either. Now for an epilogue. Oh, sod it.
But oh yeah, on to the topic, if that's any consolation to you. It probably will not get any more interesting after this. But I've been thinking about getting a haircut for a couple of days. It's funny how hair grows. After getting a haircut, it's tidy for a couple of weeks, but then one morning it's suddenly overgrown with all kinds of tufts sticking out. And my hair seems to grow only on the sides and back nowadays, the top of my head stays about the same (thin). The only places on my body where hair is plentiful are nostrils and... erm, should I be writing about this?
(Side note: since when has ctrl-s meant "publish"? I don't like this Blogger function. Why doesn't it mean "save" like it does anywhere else? Now I always accidentally publish unfinished posts.)
I hate getting haircuts. I quite like the actual sitting in a chair, being groomed, reading a paper. But I don't like getting there. I never reserve haircuts beforehand, for some reason I don't just want to do it. I want to walk into a barbershop and get a haircut at once. Sometimes there's a customer, and you have to wait. I don't like that either. I want it to be simple: walk in, sit in a chair for 20 minutes, pay, walk out. I don't like it if lasts longer than 20 minutes. That's why I always go for the cruddy, cheap joints: they do it fast and rough. Also, there's less of a chance that there's a customer in there, or that they're booked full. And I don't want to pay very much for a crappy 20 minute hairjob. And the place should be near my daily route from home to work. It's not easy to fulfill these requirements. Well, actually, there is a barbershop just like this, but the last time I was there, the barber cut my ear, and now I'm kind of afraid to go there again. And the chair was really uncomfortable.
Sigh. I know I'm making it more difficult than it is. But I partially hope that I would already go bald enough so I could just give it up and shave it all off. I think it would be fun, the shaving, I mean. On the other hand, there's still a part of me that doesn't want to become a giant roll-on. But let's face it, it's inevitable. It's going. It's already kind of see-through on top. And I'm not going to be desperate about it, like eat some overpriced nature product that's supposed to restore hair growth but might as well be horse manure as far as I know, let alone get any treatments or transplants. Yecchh. When it goes it goes.
It's hilarious, no, wait, it's tragical, no wait, it's hilariously tragical, I mean, it's both tragical and hilarious how going bald can be such a big thing for some. Covering it up just does not work, yet people try. Yikes! Ok, that does it, I'll get it cut very short tomorrow. I promise.
Hey, I seem to be about finished. And not too many glasses either. Now for an epilogue. Oh, sod it.
Friday, April 20, 2007
Household algorithms
Hi. Today I'd like to talk about algorithms. For the hoi polloi, an algorithm is a set of instructions to solve a problem or accomplish a task of some kind. Because I'm a programmer, I consider myself an expert on algorithms to some degree, because programming is all about the algorithm. Usually it is possible to solve a given problem in eleventy thousand ways, and what separates the good programmer from the bad is the ability to find a sensible solution. Also, what often separates the bad programmer from the good programmer, is the ability to find an astonishingly stupid solution to a simple problem. A solution the good programmer wouldn't even think about, except if they were trying to be creative. Here's an example of a solution to just about everything, in pseudocode, that I really liked (found from this site I generally like):
But to the point. I was going to say something about algorithms used in household keeping. My urge to address the issue was triggered by an algorithm I encountered recently, and that is the one my wife uses to change the bedsheets. And might I say, sorry honey, this is the worst solution ever to changing the bedsheets, which is, by the way, one of my most disliked household tasks. Here's the algorithm (in pseudocode):
remove the old bedsheets // in the morning
while(not bedtime) // this should loop for about 12 hours
ask the husband, please, to put on the new bedsheets
ask the husband, please (with force), to put on the new bedsheets
while(bedsheets are not changed)
if(steam coming out of the husband's ears) {
go to bed
}
else {
complain that the pillowcases do not match the sheets and why did you choose those ugly ones anyway
}
For the non-programmer, here's an explanation of the pseudocode: basically, there are three basic structures in programming (explained by a non-university guy):
1) the program is executed from top to bottom (i.e. 1st line, then 2nd line and so on...)
2) the loop, represented in the examples by while{}: do something repeatedly, until a condition is true
3) the conditional branching, represented in the examples by the if...else structure: if the condition in the brackets is true, do something. If it is false, do some other thing (or do nothing at all).
And the text after the // is a comment, meant only to clarify the purpose of the statement to other programmers. And sometimes, as in this case, supposed to be funny to other programmers.
Well. To be fair, I'm sure I have some silly algorithms too. For instance, the way I wash myself in the sauna has proven to be funny-looking to some (i.e. my wife). And in some social situations, my sense of situation has proven to be inexplicably slow for some reason. Must be some kind of a concurrency issue...
But thanks for reading this again, all three of you. And for the first one to write a non-spam comment, a free banana! Come on, a free banana!
while(solution isn't correct)
{
solution = Another Randomly Generated Solution;
}
print solution
But to the point. I was going to say something about algorithms used in household keeping. My urge to address the issue was triggered by an algorithm I encountered recently, and that is the one my wife uses to change the bedsheets. And might I say, sorry honey, this is the worst solution ever to changing the bedsheets, which is, by the way, one of my most disliked household tasks. Here's the algorithm (in pseudocode):
remove the old bedsheets // in the morning
while(not bedtime) // this should loop for about 12 hours
{
do nothing (about the situation)
}
ask the husband to put on the new bedsheetsask the husband, please, to put on the new bedsheets
ask the husband, please (with force), to put on the new bedsheets
while(bedsheets are not changed)
{
try to calm the crying baby wait while the husband changes the bedsheets
}
if(steam coming out of the husband's ears) {
go to bed
}
else {
complain that the pillowcases do not match the sheets and why did you choose those ugly ones anyway
}
For the non-programmer, here's an explanation of the pseudocode: basically, there are three basic structures in programming (explained by a non-university guy):
1) the program is executed from top to bottom (i.e. 1st line, then 2nd line and so on...)
2) the loop, represented in the examples by while{}: do something repeatedly, until a condition is true
3) the conditional branching, represented in the examples by the if...else structure: if the condition in the brackets is true, do something. If it is false, do some other thing (or do nothing at all).
And the text after the // is a comment, meant only to clarify the purpose of the statement to other programmers. And sometimes, as in this case, supposed to be funny to other programmers.
Well. To be fair, I'm sure I have some silly algorithms too. For instance, the way I wash myself in the sauna has proven to be funny-looking to some (i.e. my wife). And in some social situations, my sense of situation has proven to be inexplicably slow for some reason. Must be some kind of a concurrency issue...
But thanks for reading this again, all three of you. And for the first one to write a non-spam comment, a free banana! Come on, a free banana!
Saturday, April 14, 2007
Playing the bass
You know, I play the bass in a band. I like it because it's fun and the bass is the manliest instrument known to... man.
Today I thought I'd share my insights on being an excellent bass player in a handy do's and dont's form. I consider myself an excellent bass player, even though technically I'm probably relatively rubbish. That's mostly because of lack of practice. But I've given quite a lot of thought to what makes bass playing excellent and what sucks. And around here I'm the authority (when my wife's not around), so sit down and listen.
1) Do play with your fingers. Most excellent bass players use their fingers instead of a plectrum. It is more difficult, at least in the beginning, and especially if you're used to playing the guitar (with a plectrum), but it's way cool and it enables a more rhythmic playing style and all kind of neat tricks like slapping and popping, eventually. But there's no need to be phanatic, using a plectrum is ok, if the song requires it. Some rhythms just are more natural with a plectrum. Examples of players who use their fingers: Geddy Lee (Rush), Steve Harris (Iron Maiden). And Fieldy (Korn). The bass is a percussive instrument.
2) Do improve your sound. This means investing on equipment, experimenting with settings to find great sounds, and fighting other members of the band and the producer when mixing recordings, to make them understand that the bass should get the main role. Well, not always, but sometimes you need to take a stand to prevent the guitarist from burying the bass under ten guitar tracks. Usually, excellent bass sound has some (but not much) distortion, and enough treble. Examples of a great bass sound: Andy Rourke of The Smiths. Man, what a guru bass player! And Geddy Lee again, especially on Moving Pictures.
3) Do play interesting stuff. The boring way to play bass: do what the rhythm guitarist does, i.e. play the main notes of the chords (with a plectrum). The excellent way to play bass: invent your own melodies, and always think of something interesting. If you play the main notes, then at least make it rhythmically interesting. Examples: Peter Hook (New Order), a true Bass Hero. And Geddy Lee again.
4) Do have a lengthy shoulder strap. The bass looks cool when it hangs low, and it looks silly if you have it under your chin. All great bass players have lengthy straps. Examples: Paul Simonon (The Clash), Peter Hook again.
5) Don't be the boring one in the band. The bass player is stereotypically the dumbest member of the band. And people who are not music enthusiasts probably aren't really aware what the bass player actually does, except there seems to be a kind of a low, thumping noise in the background, but that might be just the bass drum. When used properly, the bass is an equal instrument in the band. And don't let the guitarist step on your turf. Demand an equal number of tracks on recordings. Examples: well... the guy... in the band... you know, the boring one. Actually, most great bands have great bassists. You can't have a truly great band without a great bass player.
6) Don't overdo it, and do have style. It's okay to have great technique, sure. But it's not required. Examples: Peter Hook, Paul Simonon. There are hundreds of tens of thousands of videos of super-fast slap bass players in YouTube, but who cares about these nobodies. You've got to have style. You must know when to play, and when not to play. You must make it matter. Fast technique is irrelevant to music. Sure, it can be a fun part of it sometimes, but not without a song. Example of great technical playing: Yyz (a song by Rush, Geddy Lee again).
Ok, this should do it. Now go out and be excellent bass players. Not better than me, though. And here's a picture of Hooky for you to enjoy:
Today I thought I'd share my insights on being an excellent bass player in a handy do's and dont's form. I consider myself an excellent bass player, even though technically I'm probably relatively rubbish. That's mostly because of lack of practice. But I've given quite a lot of thought to what makes bass playing excellent and what sucks. And around here I'm the authority (when my wife's not around), so sit down and listen.
1) Do play with your fingers. Most excellent bass players use their fingers instead of a plectrum. It is more difficult, at least in the beginning, and especially if you're used to playing the guitar (with a plectrum), but it's way cool and it enables a more rhythmic playing style and all kind of neat tricks like slapping and popping, eventually. But there's no need to be phanatic, using a plectrum is ok, if the song requires it. Some rhythms just are more natural with a plectrum. Examples of players who use their fingers: Geddy Lee (Rush), Steve Harris (Iron Maiden). And Fieldy (Korn). The bass is a percussive instrument.
2) Do improve your sound. This means investing on equipment, experimenting with settings to find great sounds, and fighting other members of the band and the producer when mixing recordings, to make them understand that the bass should get the main role. Well, not always, but sometimes you need to take a stand to prevent the guitarist from burying the bass under ten guitar tracks. Usually, excellent bass sound has some (but not much) distortion, and enough treble. Examples of a great bass sound: Andy Rourke of The Smiths. Man, what a guru bass player! And Geddy Lee again, especially on Moving Pictures.
3) Do play interesting stuff. The boring way to play bass: do what the rhythm guitarist does, i.e. play the main notes of the chords (with a plectrum). The excellent way to play bass: invent your own melodies, and always think of something interesting. If you play the main notes, then at least make it rhythmically interesting. Examples: Peter Hook (New Order), a true Bass Hero. And Geddy Lee again.
4) Do have a lengthy shoulder strap. The bass looks cool when it hangs low, and it looks silly if you have it under your chin. All great bass players have lengthy straps. Examples: Paul Simonon (The Clash), Peter Hook again.
5) Don't be the boring one in the band. The bass player is stereotypically the dumbest member of the band. And people who are not music enthusiasts probably aren't really aware what the bass player actually does, except there seems to be a kind of a low, thumping noise in the background, but that might be just the bass drum. When used properly, the bass is an equal instrument in the band. And don't let the guitarist step on your turf. Demand an equal number of tracks on recordings. Examples: well... the guy... in the band... you know, the boring one. Actually, most great bands have great bassists. You can't have a truly great band without a great bass player.
6) Don't overdo it, and do have style. It's okay to have great technique, sure. But it's not required. Examples: Peter Hook, Paul Simonon. There are hundreds of tens of thousands of videos of super-fast slap bass players in YouTube, but who cares about these nobodies. You've got to have style. You must know when to play, and when not to play. You must make it matter. Fast technique is irrelevant to music. Sure, it can be a fun part of it sometimes, but not without a song. Example of great technical playing: Yyz (a song by Rush, Geddy Lee again).
Ok, this should do it. Now go out and be excellent bass players. Not better than me, though. And here's a picture of Hooky for you to enjoy:
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Exciting post
...zzzzzzzzzz What?
Oh, I seem to have fallen asleep in the previous post, it was that boring. Must think of something exciting for this one. Hmmm... well, revealing personal stuff usually seems to work. Opening up publicly to you like this is hard, but I might do it anyway. This feels quite abstract in the sense that there is no "you", as nobody, excluding my wife, seems to have found my blog (must remember to add a counter). And, even though if somebody read this, they would have no way of proving that it is written by me. Except twisting my arm behind my back until I admitted. But still, here I'm writing for all the world. Hi, mom!
Ok, what could I reveal? The weird dreams? That might be impossible to put to words. My dark side? I'm afraid there really isn't one. Honestly. The time I killed... ha ha ha, let's just forget about that. Kidding! Ha, ha. Ha.
Maybe I should just write what I was originally thinking. Here comes the shocking revelation: I'm happy. I just wanted to say that I'm really satisfied with my life today. No irony. I just thought that it would be nice to honestly admit that I'm basically a very happy person, even though it might not show. I love my wife, I love my kid, I like my work. I have great friends and I love them too, even though I haven't much time for them. There's nothing wrong with my life. Sure, it's hard and stressful every now and then, and there is the mortgage to pay off. But I love that too, in a way. It's great to have purposes in life. It hasn't always been so, and I remember how unhappy I've been. I'm getting older and balder, but so what, today I can enjoy the small things in life. Like this, having a moment to myself late at night, listening to music on the headphones, having a couple of glasses of wine, writing this.
Oh, I seem to have fallen asleep in the previous post, it was that boring. Must think of something exciting for this one. Hmmm... well, revealing personal stuff usually seems to work. Opening up publicly to you like this is hard, but I might do it anyway. This feels quite abstract in the sense that there is no "you", as nobody, excluding my wife, seems to have found my blog (must remember to add a counter). And, even though if somebody read this, they would have no way of proving that it is written by me. Except twisting my arm behind my back until I admitted. But still, here I'm writing for all the world. Hi, mom!
Ok, what could I reveal? The weird dreams? That might be impossible to put to words. My dark side? I'm afraid there really isn't one. Honestly. The time I killed... ha ha ha, let's just forget about that. Kidding! Ha, ha. Ha.
Maybe I should just write what I was originally thinking. Here comes the shocking revelation: I'm happy. I just wanted to say that I'm really satisfied with my life today. No irony. I just thought that it would be nice to honestly admit that I'm basically a very happy person, even though it might not show. I love my wife, I love my kid, I like my work. I have great friends and I love them too, even though I haven't much time for them. There's nothing wrong with my life. Sure, it's hard and stressful every now and then, and there is the mortgage to pay off. But I love that too, in a way. It's great to have purposes in life. It hasn't always been so, and I remember how unhappy I've been. I'm getting older and balder, but so what, today I can enjoy the small things in life. Like this, having a moment to myself late at night, listening to music on the headphones, having a couple of glasses of wine, writing this.
New car
One thing I like to fantasize about is getting a newer car. When I push my kid around the neighbourhood in the baby carrier, I usually look at parked cars and think about what make and model I would like. There is little else to do when daily walking up and down the same streets.
I'm not going to get a newer car anytime soon, because I'm sensible. I already have the perfectly suitable car for my humble needs. It's a 1989 Toyota Carina II, which is, in a way, the culmination of car technology. I'll explain this bold statement soon. It's just that it's not glamorous in any way, it does not raise my status, it's just a 18 year old boring automobile that gets me from point A to point B whenever I need to, relatively rarely that is. Besides this, and therefore, I have a senseless desire to own a flashy car. Something that might cause envy in other people.
But when I think about it sensibly, I don't want to get a new car. Mostly my car just sits in the curb, rusting. I don't even drive it every week. I'm an urban person, and I could very well survive without owning a car at all. I just bought it for 1k € when me and my wife got pregnant, in order to be able to get around with the baby and visit our parents conveniently. And when I said that 1989 Toyota Carina II is the culmination of car technology, I meant that it's the cheapest car to maintain in existence today. It's very common, so spare parts are cheap. It's very durable. It's manufactured before catalyzers became obligatory in Finland in 1992 (in effect causing fuel injection replace carburettors), and before they began to stuff cars full of electronics, so its technology is relatively simple. Therefore it is feasible to repair by yourself, without software updates.
There's just one problem. Very few people seem to understand this point. I've very rarely been congratulated on my sensible choice of automobile. Hey, come to think of it, I don't actually remember ever being congratulated on owning a 1989 Toyota Carina II. Instead, most people seem to be in awe of people who own unpractical, expensive new cars.
I realize that new cars may be more safe and ecological. The technology has advanced since 1989 considerably. However, I don't see this as a good thing. Cars are full of computers now, making them much more complex than before, and therefore more unreliable. And I'm a software engineer myself. Shows how much I trust other programmers. Sure, had I programmed the car by myself, I'd have no problem in trusting it. But I've seen myself that there are people in the profession posing as programmers without actually being capable of one. So when I hear of advancements in car technology like brakes that are controlled electronically, I find it scary. Mechanical brake systems just seem more trustworthy, even though I know that they can fail too. But at least afterwards it's possible to tell why it failed, provided that there are big enough pieces of the car left.
So far, I have found two reasons for getting a new car. Besides the status value, obviously. Safety and less pollution. If you consider the fact that manufacturing a new car is much more heavy on natural resources than using the old car longer, then the ecology point fails too. Safety is important, but should I be cost-effective when evaluating the weight of safety? Is a new car really 20 times as safe as a 1989 Toyota Carina II? I doubt it.
And I don't even want a NEW car. It would just seem very boring to have a car without a history. The rich and clueless get new cars, I don't. And the value of a new car diminishes very quickly, I hear. But a few year old car, sure. That I'd like. Even though it costs money. And I don't need one. And so on. If this doesn't count as boring, then I don't know what does. I'm even getting sleepy myselzzzzzzz....
I'm not going to get a newer car anytime soon, because I'm sensible. I already have the perfectly suitable car for my humble needs. It's a 1989 Toyota Carina II, which is, in a way, the culmination of car technology. I'll explain this bold statement soon. It's just that it's not glamorous in any way, it does not raise my status, it's just a 18 year old boring automobile that gets me from point A to point B whenever I need to, relatively rarely that is. Besides this, and therefore, I have a senseless desire to own a flashy car. Something that might cause envy in other people.
But when I think about it sensibly, I don't want to get a new car. Mostly my car just sits in the curb, rusting. I don't even drive it every week. I'm an urban person, and I could very well survive without owning a car at all. I just bought it for 1k € when me and my wife got pregnant, in order to be able to get around with the baby and visit our parents conveniently. And when I said that 1989 Toyota Carina II is the culmination of car technology, I meant that it's the cheapest car to maintain in existence today. It's very common, so spare parts are cheap. It's very durable. It's manufactured before catalyzers became obligatory in Finland in 1992 (in effect causing fuel injection replace carburettors), and before they began to stuff cars full of electronics, so its technology is relatively simple. Therefore it is feasible to repair by yourself, without software updates.
There's just one problem. Very few people seem to understand this point. I've very rarely been congratulated on my sensible choice of automobile. Hey, come to think of it, I don't actually remember ever being congratulated on owning a 1989 Toyota Carina II. Instead, most people seem to be in awe of people who own unpractical, expensive new cars.
I realize that new cars may be more safe and ecological. The technology has advanced since 1989 considerably. However, I don't see this as a good thing. Cars are full of computers now, making them much more complex than before, and therefore more unreliable. And I'm a software engineer myself. Shows how much I trust other programmers. Sure, had I programmed the car by myself, I'd have no problem in trusting it. But I've seen myself that there are people in the profession posing as programmers without actually being capable of one. So when I hear of advancements in car technology like brakes that are controlled electronically, I find it scary. Mechanical brake systems just seem more trustworthy, even though I know that they can fail too. But at least afterwards it's possible to tell why it failed, provided that there are big enough pieces of the car left.
So far, I have found two reasons for getting a new car. Besides the status value, obviously. Safety and less pollution. If you consider the fact that manufacturing a new car is much more heavy on natural resources than using the old car longer, then the ecology point fails too. Safety is important, but should I be cost-effective when evaluating the weight of safety? Is a new car really 20 times as safe as a 1989 Toyota Carina II? I doubt it.
And I don't even want a NEW car. It would just seem very boring to have a car without a history. The rich and clueless get new cars, I don't. And the value of a new car diminishes very quickly, I hear. But a few year old car, sure. That I'd like. Even though it costs money. And I don't need one. And so on. If this doesn't count as boring, then I don't know what does. I'm even getting sleepy myselzzzzzzz....
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Washing & drying & drying & drying...
Why is it that women's underwear dry much more quickly than men's? Every time I do laundry, I notice that the time it takes for my underwear to dry is measured in days, while my wife's is dry in a couple of hours. The time seems even longer, if you sit beside the clothes and check them every few minutes, as I'm doing right now.
Why is the standard men's underwear made out of thick cotton, while women's is some kind of thin, smooth fabric? Women seem to have it much more comfortable. I know, there is men's underwear made of similar fabric too, but it is usually of the loose boxer shorts kind. I'm not into those, it just seems... eh... like there's too much space, you know, and not enough... support. Probably some people like those, but I'm not used to that much of freedom.
I like the underwear that is not of the Y-fronty, or boxery kind, but kind of in between. Like boxer shorts but tighter. Don't know what it's called officially. I vaguely remember once having shorts of that kind that were made some kind of smooth, thin fabric, not quite unlike those my wife's underwear is made of. But they were not comfortable at all. When I bought them, I thought that they were going to be the most comfortable piece of underwear I've ever had. I was wrong. The material was some kind of experimental, super-itchy, space-age material, that wore real fast. And they liked to creep upwards too, so I had to constantly be yanking them out of the, ahem, crack. No, that's vulgar, can't use language like this in a public blog. Groove. Out of the groove. That's better.
Luckily that piece of underwear wore out after wearing it for about four painful days. That's what you get for buying your underwear from H&M. Quality is not their strong point. Looking cool in the store is.
Wearing women's underwear is not an option either. It's not comfortable because of the anatomic differences. There's just not enough space for a man. Sure, some kinky types might like that, but I'm too practical. Of course I've tried, who hasn't, but it was not for me, and the laughing of the wife wasn't encouraging either.
I could tell you about the time I was in a hurry, and had to dry my underwear in a microwave oven. It would seem kind of fitting, given the topic. I had just washed them, and was going out somewhere, so I had to get them dry as quick as possible. So I put them in a microwave oven, turned it on for a couple of minutes at a time, then took them out, shook them for a while and did it again. It was going okay, although taking a long time, until I got distracted and microwaved the underwear for too many minutes at a time. When I opened the oven my shorts were getting black and smouldering, so I had to throw them in the sink and pour water on them to prevent a fire.
Can't remember the underwear I wore that evening, but most likely it was dirty. I do remember this incident, however, because it happened at my parents' house, and my mother found it so hilarious that she kept the shorts, black holes and all. She might have had them framed by now. Also, she keeps on telling this story at every family reunion.
Now, to a witty closing remark.
Can't think of any.
Why is the standard men's underwear made out of thick cotton, while women's is some kind of thin, smooth fabric? Women seem to have it much more comfortable. I know, there is men's underwear made of similar fabric too, but it is usually of the loose boxer shorts kind. I'm not into those, it just seems... eh... like there's too much space, you know, and not enough... support. Probably some people like those, but I'm not used to that much of freedom.
I like the underwear that is not of the Y-fronty, or boxery kind, but kind of in between. Like boxer shorts but tighter. Don't know what it's called officially. I vaguely remember once having shorts of that kind that were made some kind of smooth, thin fabric, not quite unlike those my wife's underwear is made of. But they were not comfortable at all. When I bought them, I thought that they were going to be the most comfortable piece of underwear I've ever had. I was wrong. The material was some kind of experimental, super-itchy, space-age material, that wore real fast. And they liked to creep upwards too, so I had to constantly be yanking them out of the, ahem, crack. No, that's vulgar, can't use language like this in a public blog. Groove. Out of the groove. That's better.
Luckily that piece of underwear wore out after wearing it for about four painful days. That's what you get for buying your underwear from H&M. Quality is not their strong point. Looking cool in the store is.
Wearing women's underwear is not an option either. It's not comfortable because of the anatomic differences. There's just not enough space for a man. Sure, some kinky types might like that, but I'm too practical. Of course I've tried, who hasn't, but it was not for me, and the laughing of the wife wasn't encouraging either.
I could tell you about the time I was in a hurry, and had to dry my underwear in a microwave oven. It would seem kind of fitting, given the topic. I had just washed them, and was going out somewhere, so I had to get them dry as quick as possible. So I put them in a microwave oven, turned it on for a couple of minutes at a time, then took them out, shook them for a while and did it again. It was going okay, although taking a long time, until I got distracted and microwaved the underwear for too many minutes at a time. When I opened the oven my shorts were getting black and smouldering, so I had to throw them in the sink and pour water on them to prevent a fire.
Can't remember the underwear I wore that evening, but most likely it was dirty. I do remember this incident, however, because it happened at my parents' house, and my mother found it so hilarious that she kept the shorts, black holes and all. She might have had them framed by now. Also, she keeps on telling this story at every family reunion.
Now, to a witty closing remark.
Can't think of any.
Friday, March 09, 2007
Short post
You know, I had a good intention to write short posts. Even though the title of the blog suggests otherwise. Because that's how it just is, short and to the point, that's good and you're not going to become bored and f**k off.
So here's a very short topic: I'm not british, even though my masterful use of the language might suggest so; I'm actually Finglish. In fact, it might have become apparent in a recent post, Politics!.
*Cough*
Well, I suppose there should be some kind of a point to every post though. So why not tell you what I've been thinking to write about: the origins of my sense of humour. Oh crap, I'm beginning to see why this blog will be like most others, i.e. interesting only to people who already know me. But I'll try to make it universal.
And might I add, eat my shorts! Short, eh?
So here's a very short topic: I'm not british, even though my masterful use of the language might suggest so; I'm actually Finglish. In fact, it might have become apparent in a recent post, Politics!.
*Cough*
Well, I suppose there should be some kind of a point to every post though. So why not tell you what I've been thinking to write about: the origins of my sense of humour. Oh crap, I'm beginning to see why this blog will be like most others, i.e. interesting only to people who already know me. But I'll try to make it universal.
And might I add, eat my shorts! Short, eh?
Deadline and incontinence, I mean incompetence
Met a deadline today. Great feeling. The subsystem I've been working on is finished just as planned (only some testing left to do), and can be migrated to system test on Monday. Don't even have to work on the weekend. Not to brag or anything, but just for comparison, I heard today that a coworker has just spent four times the estimated time on the stuff they're working on. And it's definitively less complex than the stuff I've worked on. Oh, that was definitively bragging. Well, what are you gonna do. I wish there was somebody to do my bragging for me, so I wouldn't have to do it myself.
I just realised today that the great part of my job is the non-repetiveness. Sure, it's the same old same old every day, in a way, but the tasks change. I think it's split to parts nicely. You get to work on a specific issue a couple of weeks, or months, at a time. Then it's done, and you get the next change request. Of course it involves lots of repeating minor stuff to do, but the problem to solve is one-off, different each time. That makes it interesting.
Project work is fun and exciting in that way. It's kind of unique, and you get excuses to celebrate often, if you're into that. The sad part is that it will end someday. Afterwards, there's only the dreary, never ending maintenance, which includes no milestones and parties. Just fixing some minor defects that someone else caused. Well, hopefully it's not like that. Because I'll be the one doing the maintenance, in this case. The consultants will be off on another project, with it's fancy parties. I suppose that's a main point why consulting is appealing to many people. You get to work on a project, and you don't have to commit yourself to it forever. If the project's large enough, you don't even have to be very good at anything. Any good, to be more exact. You can get by just appearing to be competent while producing some crap code.
I keep on being amazed about how some people are good at seeming to be competent while actually sucking. And the amounts of these people. I just don't have the nerve. If there's an area in programming that I'm not sure about, then I study it. But some people just produce the crappest code you've ever seen. Minimal amounts of it, if we're lucky, and lots of it, making the most of the worst programming practices, wrongly indented, if we're unlucky. I've seen consultants who couldn't code their way out of a wet paper bag, but yet they talk about their work convincingly enough to not be thrown out. Well, to be fair, consultants are not the only ones that couldn't code, or document, if their lives depended on it. But I have to wonder about the quality of A*coughecunt*ture consultants. There seems to be an endless supply of them, and to an outsider like me, it seems that half of them were just hired off the street, without even a phone interview.
Is this enough ranting about cow-orkers for today?
I suppose it is. No, wait. There's still some left.
How can these consulting companies (notice how I'm using plural, even though I only have experience of two) teach their programming consultants to produce vast quantities of probably not useful documentation, that's actually quite an annoying burden for other people to keep track of, but not actually requiring them to have rudimentary programming skills? Whew. But equally I'm surprised that we, the client company, aren't able to dictate how it should be. I mean, consider this real-world scenario: to replace a generally liked, competent lead developer the consulting company sends a supposedly competent, generally disliked nerd who doesn't actually develop anything, but likes to produce Excel tables of probable statistics of some subsystems that nobody is ever going to use for anything, ever. Why the f**k is it not in the contract, that if the guy is clearly of no use whatsoever, we can require a competent replacement? Gasp.
Wow. I'm not actually angry at the moment, just letting out steam, and enjoying it.
I just realised today that the great part of my job is the non-repetiveness. Sure, it's the same old same old every day, in a way, but the tasks change. I think it's split to parts nicely. You get to work on a specific issue a couple of weeks, or months, at a time. Then it's done, and you get the next change request. Of course it involves lots of repeating minor stuff to do, but the problem to solve is one-off, different each time. That makes it interesting.
Project work is fun and exciting in that way. It's kind of unique, and you get excuses to celebrate often, if you're into that. The sad part is that it will end someday. Afterwards, there's only the dreary, never ending maintenance, which includes no milestones and parties. Just fixing some minor defects that someone else caused. Well, hopefully it's not like that. Because I'll be the one doing the maintenance, in this case. The consultants will be off on another project, with it's fancy parties. I suppose that's a main point why consulting is appealing to many people. You get to work on a project, and you don't have to commit yourself to it forever. If the project's large enough, you don't even have to be very good at anything. Any good, to be more exact. You can get by just appearing to be competent while producing some crap code.
I keep on being amazed about how some people are good at seeming to be competent while actually sucking. And the amounts of these people. I just don't have the nerve. If there's an area in programming that I'm not sure about, then I study it. But some people just produce the crappest code you've ever seen. Minimal amounts of it, if we're lucky, and lots of it, making the most of the worst programming practices, wrongly indented, if we're unlucky. I've seen consultants who couldn't code their way out of a wet paper bag, but yet they talk about their work convincingly enough to not be thrown out. Well, to be fair, consultants are not the only ones that couldn't code, or document, if their lives depended on it. But I have to wonder about the quality of A*coughecunt*ture consultants. There seems to be an endless supply of them, and to an outsider like me, it seems that half of them were just hired off the street, without even a phone interview.
Is this enough ranting about cow-orkers for today?
I suppose it is. No, wait. There's still some left.
How can these consulting companies (notice how I'm using plural, even though I only have experience of two) teach their programming consultants to produce vast quantities of probably not useful documentation, that's actually quite an annoying burden for other people to keep track of, but not actually requiring them to have rudimentary programming skills? Whew. But equally I'm surprised that we, the client company, aren't able to dictate how it should be. I mean, consider this real-world scenario: to replace a generally liked, competent lead developer the consulting company sends a supposedly competent, generally disliked nerd who doesn't actually develop anything, but likes to produce Excel tables of probable statistics of some subsystems that nobody is ever going to use for anything, ever. Why the f**k is it not in the contract, that if the guy is clearly of no use whatsoever, we can require a competent replacement? Gasp.
Wow. I'm not actually angry at the moment, just letting out steam, and enjoying it.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Politics!
Today is a national holiday. You can tell because there are flags everywhere. I was hoping it to be a holiday that has its own bakery product, like Runeberg's day. But then I found out it's Kalevala day instead. No bakery product. Gonna have to invent my own tart of Kalevala, if I want something sweet today.
But on to today's topic. Politics! Oh baby. There's an election coming, and I thought I'd write down my thoughts about selecting who to vote. It's not easy, because I don't have strong opinions about politics (i.e. I haven't been brainwashed enough by my parents). Instead, I have vague impressions about political parties that I have gathered over the years from I-don't-know-where. There are parties that I dislike, so these are non-options for me: there are the intolerant bourgeois rednecks, the intolerant countryside rednecks, the intolerant god-worshipping rednecks and the intolerant white trash rednecks. Then there is the party with outdated ideals and no real solutions for anything, the even more outdated idealistics, and the lame, patronising party. I refuse to vote anybody belonging to these parties, even if they had competent, nice politicians as individual members. I just dislike the parties.
So I guess that leaves only one option, the Green party. I'm not so passionate about them, but that environment is a nice thing to have. And they seem to be more tolerant than the others, which I like. Then there is still the grueling task of finding a suitable candidate. A guy or a chick? I don't know. Maybe it doesn't matter. I guess I'll just find the first candidate that mentions bicycling on their website and vote for him/her. Then maybe they'll do something about the cycle path network. That's often just crap. At least I'll have someone to complain to, when I get annoyed about the cycle paths. Oh yeah, must remember to choose someone that actually has a chance to get elected.
If there were a very silly candidate, I'd sure be tempted to vote for them. Well, beside the unintentional clowns (i.e. celebrity candidates and other, well, clowns), there is this clown, but his brand of clownery doesn't quite do it for me. It's more like endless, far-fetched bullshit vaguely related to the topic at hand. I prefer deadpan comedy.
And that concludes this in-depth political analysis. Hopefully this made the selection of candidate easier for you. I do think it's important to vote for somebody, if only to prevent the pensioners from totally taking over.
But on to today's topic. Politics! Oh baby. There's an election coming, and I thought I'd write down my thoughts about selecting who to vote. It's not easy, because I don't have strong opinions about politics (i.e. I haven't been brainwashed enough by my parents). Instead, I have vague impressions about political parties that I have gathered over the years from I-don't-know-where. There are parties that I dislike, so these are non-options for me: there are the intolerant bourgeois rednecks, the intolerant countryside rednecks, the intolerant god-worshipping rednecks and the intolerant white trash rednecks. Then there is the party with outdated ideals and no real solutions for anything, the even more outdated idealistics, and the lame, patronising party. I refuse to vote anybody belonging to these parties, even if they had competent, nice politicians as individual members. I just dislike the parties.
So I guess that leaves only one option, the Green party. I'm not so passionate about them, but that environment is a nice thing to have. And they seem to be more tolerant than the others, which I like. Then there is still the grueling task of finding a suitable candidate. A guy or a chick? I don't know. Maybe it doesn't matter. I guess I'll just find the first candidate that mentions bicycling on their website and vote for him/her. Then maybe they'll do something about the cycle path network. That's often just crap. At least I'll have someone to complain to, when I get annoyed about the cycle paths. Oh yeah, must remember to choose someone that actually has a chance to get elected.
If there were a very silly candidate, I'd sure be tempted to vote for them. Well, beside the unintentional clowns (i.e. celebrity candidates and other, well, clowns), there is this clown, but his brand of clownery doesn't quite do it for me. It's more like endless, far-fetched bullshit vaguely related to the topic at hand. I prefer deadpan comedy.
And that concludes this in-depth political analysis. Hopefully this made the selection of candidate easier for you. I do think it's important to vote for somebody, if only to prevent the pensioners from totally taking over.
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Sex!
Oh dear.
I seem to have some kind of communication-related diarrhea. This is already the second, um, spray of blog that's emerging out of me today. Ecch. Did I have to write that. Well, too late to do anything about it now.
Not sure if this is communication though; at least so far this has been purely one-way. This is more like documentation of things I've been thinking about. It should be useful to write down some thoughts every now and then, in a hope that it will be interesting, and amusing (and not regrettable) to read these myself a hundred years from now.
What was I going to say? Oh yeah, it just hit me: the internet is really useful. I mean, for example, me (and my wife, I suspect, if I dare say) would really be nuts now because of lack of communication with the outside world, if it wasn't for the internet. Even more nuts than now. And again, it's not so much the two-way communication that's important, but being in touch with things. I mean, what did parents of a small child do before the internet, while being isolated from other people? They got used to it, and then went totally mad from all the bright lights and incentives on their first night out after having the baby, I tells ya. That's why all the people 10 years older than me are totally bonkers. Oh, and even today, I hear, there are a few people who've never been to the internet. So I suppose they either are or will become nuts.
...
I seem to have painted myself in a corner now. I had some kind of a point, but then I lost it and now I can't be bothered to read what I just wrote so I might remember it again.
A downside of the internet is that it's too easy to publish. You can just write anything, claim it is the truth and then some clown will believe you, just because it looks convincing. Now look at this page! Looks kind of official, nice layout and all! And then they will probably try to hold you responsible for it.
I just keep on thinking about blogging. It's still not obvious to me that I should be writing this. I realised that there are basically three alternatives when writing a blog:
1) Do it totally anonymous, so that no-one will know that it's you. This way, if anyone you knew happened to stumble upon your blog, they would have no way of knowing that it's you writing all that opinionated crap.
2) Write under an alias, but let your friends know that it's your blog.
3) Expose your real name.
I'm not going to publicly declare who I am, just in case I want to rant about my co-workers or friends someday. And I don't want just any acquiantance or mortal enemy to google my name and find my blog. But I do think that it would be nice to have an audience, or at least be able to think that there is.
On the other hand, I somehow dislike the idea of telling friends that "here's my blog, it's about my life, read it, la-di-dah", so I've not told anyone. There are some tracks, so I guess it's just a matter of time before somebody finds this. Hi ya. So I'm kind of floating between options 1) and 2).
And by the way, if the hypothetical reader is wondering about the title of this writing, after reading all this non-sexy, quasi-web-existential musing, here is why. I do have one reader, it's my wife, from whom I couldn't keep this a secret. She told me to write about interesting things, like sex. So I will: we had it last night. It was good. Love ya!
I seem to have some kind of communication-related diarrhea. This is already the second, um, spray of blog that's emerging out of me today. Ecch. Did I have to write that. Well, too late to do anything about it now.
Not sure if this is communication though; at least so far this has been purely one-way. This is more like documentation of things I've been thinking about. It should be useful to write down some thoughts every now and then, in a hope that it will be interesting, and amusing (and not regrettable) to read these myself a hundred years from now.
What was I going to say? Oh yeah, it just hit me: the internet is really useful. I mean, for example, me (and my wife, I suspect, if I dare say) would really be nuts now because of lack of communication with the outside world, if it wasn't for the internet. Even more nuts than now. And again, it's not so much the two-way communication that's important, but being in touch with things. I mean, what did parents of a small child do before the internet, while being isolated from other people? They got used to it, and then went totally mad from all the bright lights and incentives on their first night out after having the baby, I tells ya. That's why all the people 10 years older than me are totally bonkers. Oh, and even today, I hear, there are a few people who've never been to the internet. So I suppose they either are or will become nuts.
...
I seem to have painted myself in a corner now. I had some kind of a point, but then I lost it and now I can't be bothered to read what I just wrote so I might remember it again.
A downside of the internet is that it's too easy to publish. You can just write anything, claim it is the truth and then some clown will believe you, just because it looks convincing. Now look at this page! Looks kind of official, nice layout and all! And then they will probably try to hold you responsible for it.
I just keep on thinking about blogging. It's still not obvious to me that I should be writing this. I realised that there are basically three alternatives when writing a blog:
1) Do it totally anonymous, so that no-one will know that it's you. This way, if anyone you knew happened to stumble upon your blog, they would have no way of knowing that it's you writing all that opinionated crap.
2) Write under an alias, but let your friends know that it's your blog.
3) Expose your real name.
I'm not going to publicly declare who I am, just in case I want to rant about my co-workers or friends someday. And I don't want just any acquiantance or mortal enemy to google my name and find my blog. But I do think that it would be nice to have an audience, or at least be able to think that there is.
On the other hand, I somehow dislike the idea of telling friends that "here's my blog, it's about my life, read it, la-di-dah", so I've not told anyone. There are some tracks, so I guess it's just a matter of time before somebody finds this. Hi ya. So I'm kind of floating between options 1) and 2).
And by the way, if the hypothetical reader is wondering about the title of this writing, after reading all this non-sexy, quasi-web-existential musing, here is why. I do have one reader, it's my wife, from whom I couldn't keep this a secret. She told me to write about interesting things, like sex. So I will: we had it last night. It was good. Love ya!
Aztecism
My life is very disciplined these days. I go to work, I eat my lunch, I go to the lavatory. On sundays I go shopping and have buttered scones for tea. I'm a lumberjack and I'm okay, I sleep all night and work all day.
But seriously, I don't do much except go to work and stay at home with my wife and kid nowadays. That's how it is with a small child. And that's fine, I like doing ordinary things, sitting in a rocking chair, watching TV, vacuuming, changing diapers, even playing the bass. Sometimes it can be stressful, when there are tons of chores to do (and with a little kid there always are) but not enough time to do them properly. But if I'm not in too much of a hurry, I guess I can go on forever living a nine-to-five life, washing dishes at evenings, sleeping a little bit later on weekends. I kind of like routines. No, I think I like routines a lot.
I suppose that might be boring, but that's what this blog is all about. Boring and cleaning. I seem to write about cleaning a lot. I just like tidyness. I hope I get to writing about nerdy things too, sometime in the future. Yeah, I could write about my work, relational databases and programming.
But I kind of think that usually boring things are boring only superficially. I think anything is interesting, if you just concentrate to it enough, look at it close enough. Minute details of some programming environment are interesting, when you try to understand it all and think about it continuosly. Well, it might not be interesting, if it were not challenging. But on the superficial level, somebody might be bored to death e.g. if I just tried to describe what I do for living. Of course it depends on how you present it. There's a challenge, try to write about tedious things interestingly.
So, expect to read lengthy descriptions about some fluff I found in my navel the other day. And stay tuned for a comprehensive series of essays on my most favorite vacuuming techniques. That might be a good subject.
But seriously, I don't do much except go to work and stay at home with my wife and kid nowadays. That's how it is with a small child. And that's fine, I like doing ordinary things, sitting in a rocking chair, watching TV, vacuuming, changing diapers, even playing the bass. Sometimes it can be stressful, when there are tons of chores to do (and with a little kid there always are) but not enough time to do them properly. But if I'm not in too much of a hurry, I guess I can go on forever living a nine-to-five life, washing dishes at evenings, sleeping a little bit later on weekends. I kind of like routines. No, I think I like routines a lot.
I suppose that might be boring, but that's what this blog is all about. Boring and cleaning. I seem to write about cleaning a lot. I just like tidyness. I hope I get to writing about nerdy things too, sometime in the future. Yeah, I could write about my work, relational databases and programming.
But I kind of think that usually boring things are boring only superficially. I think anything is interesting, if you just concentrate to it enough, look at it close enough. Minute details of some programming environment are interesting, when you try to understand it all and think about it continuosly. Well, it might not be interesting, if it were not challenging. But on the superficial level, somebody might be bored to death e.g. if I just tried to describe what I do for living. Of course it depends on how you present it. There's a challenge, try to write about tedious things interestingly.
So, expect to read lengthy descriptions about some fluff I found in my navel the other day. And stay tuned for a comprehensive series of essays on my most favorite vacuuming techniques. That might be a good subject.
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
Stupid weather
The lack of winter is really annoying. It's been unusually warm this winter, and normal winter clothing is too warm for this weather. But I've been wearing a warm winter jacket anyway. Therefore, each morning when I ride my bicycle to work (uphill and usually against the wind), I get sweaty and irritated. I suppose one should wear appropriate clothing for bicycling, but on the other hand, the distance from home to work is only a few kilometers, so I can't be bothered to change clothes for that. Things would be fine, if only there was a minor frost. Or maybe I should go shopping for a lighter jacket. Something british-y would be nice and appropriate for this climate.
I've been thinking, if, and why, I should have a blog. Well, Steve Yegge convinced me that there are, indeed, valid reasons for having one (or more): http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/you-should-write-blogs
I wonder, when (and if) a reader will find my blog. I haven't told anyone about this. Exciting.
I've been thinking, if, and why, I should have a blog. Well, Steve Yegge convinced me that there are, indeed, valid reasons for having one (or more): http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/you-should-write-blogs
I wonder, when (and if) a reader will find my blog. I haven't told anyone about this. Exciting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)