Topic Tuesday #112 2014/09/09 "Active Listening"

Topic Tuesday #112 2014/09/09 "Active Listening"

Think about what you want to achieve in a conversation.

What does it mean to listen to a person? You don't really have to invest much of your energy in the exchange. Listening is usually a passive action. Or is it?

Hearing what someone says is not the same as listening. To listen, you must engage the speaker. I'm not talking a bear hug or a death stare; you just have to pay attention and think about what is being said. Typical active listening behavior is characterized by feedback towards a mutual understanding. A subtle regurgitation of the information to illustrate that you have comprehended the information being shared; this is critical, and also a trap.

Let me explain the trap. You have likely encountered poor listeners. I'm not referring to those that just sit silently - nodding their head and not responding and carrying on like you didn't say anything at all;  I'm speaking of those that listen with only the intent to talk. There is only the most superficial listening involved in that attitude and it is paired with a form of narcissism. 

Of course, given that I am yakking it up on a blog, and have a podcast, there may be a degree of that behavior in myself, so feel free and take anything I say with a grain of salt. A big grain.

Some people are also poor speakers. If you combine a poor listener with a poor speaker, you may as well be pouring oil on water. If your aim in speaking is only to vent, you DO NOT WANT an active listener... You want a slightly responsive brick wall. As valuable as venting is, it has a place, and it can be difficult for either party to shift gears into more meaningful conversations from a venting posture. Let me add that listening to someone vent, can be illuminating; you may have to parse that information differently, as many people do not actually want constructive input... It may seem strange, but it is true. They want to talk, but not actually get help. It is a form of therapy, and you can feel secure in knowing that just listening is helping.

This can cause enormous problems. You have multiple tactics to use in your communication tool kits, and now you have to learn the right tool for the right job. 

My advice... And again, take it with a grain of salt, as your individual mileage may vary... 

Pay attention, and show that you are. Make eye contact (except for some people, who feel threatened by such attentions), ask for clarification on things you do not understand, try not to fidget and provide body language that indicates your participation. Relating things to your own experiences can work, however try not to talk too much about yourself. It can be hard to be engaged and yet neutral. Sometimes you don't need or even should not be neutral, other times, you have to be. Dealing with people is always a challenge.  You never know when there will be a pop quiz and you have to act. You may not be required to always be active, but it is a great idea to gather all the knowledge you can. Forming an accurate picture of your partner in conversation is the key to a successful exchange, even if that exchange has you acting as a brick wall. Remember the phrase, "If walls could talk" and chuckle to yourself (in private) and keep listening for your quiz at the end.

Topic Tuesday #111 2014/09/02 "Conversation"

Topic Tuesday #111 2014/09/02 "Conversation"

The world we live in is filled with words and ideas, deeds and adventures, happiness and woe. The great thing about being human is that we do not need to personally have to go through every one of these emotions or circumstances to understand and empathise. We have language. We can tell stories and sing songs and even gesticulate along as if we ever figured out how to master charades. But all this is about communication, and that brings me to the fine, and sometimes lost, art of conversation.
Conversation follows certain protocol. This is another arcane phenomena, Etiquette. Now this etiquette is essential in keeping a conversation going to the desired end, or resolution depending on your aim. You must be mindful of your manners. Be courteous and appropriate. Essentially, a great conversation is one that is had in the bounds of talking to a beloved great aunt, whom you don't want to wash your mouth out with soap. 

Not all of us can put aside our heated emotions and just talk about things, for a really good conversation you still require some emotions to keep the fire stoked. Some conversations are very difficult to have. Even starting conversations can be a flustering nightmare of what if scenarios, especially if it is important. A boss, an interview, a first date - or worse, the icebreaker. 

Now... I am not a master of conversation and I can and will step on my own tongue if given the opportunity. What I am is patient. My brain can have quips flying pretty fast, but I have learned that I need to slow down a little, and to worry a lot less. You will worry more about the things you never got the chance to say than the conversation that you have because of it. Just keep in mind, that your opinions stink. So does everyone elses. Don't be too much of anything: be it boastful, proud, arrogant, ingratiating, forward, direct, terse, or quiet. The last one is tricky, since next weeks topic may just be active listening,  your homework will be to go have a conversation with a complete stranger, about something other than the weather, health, politics, or religion. Those are advanced topics that require care to execute properly, without getting into another topic, the fine are of arguing. 



Topic Tuesday #110 2014/08/26 "The Power of Words"

Topic Tuesday #110 2014/08/26 "The Power of Words"

Over the last couple weeks I have been discussing word use with friends and my children. There are magical words in the world tat when used properly can pander to favorable outcomes, or conversely, get you into some serious trouble.
My 6 year old has become fond of a negative word, "hate". I am trying hard to tell her to save that word for things that are actually worthy of it. Hate is a powerful word. I dare say it is more powerful, properly used, than any obscenity you can imagine. All someone has to do to ruin your day and forever alter your perception of them is to utter a magical incantation. Be careful how you use this, and use it sparingly. Here it is. "I hate, you!"
Thankfully this incantation has not been directed my way, by my offspring. But it could. I want her to know the meaning behind that word and many others. It is hard since the dictionary only give definitions, and not visceral meanings behind words, phrases and colloquialisms.
Take another powerful and clumsily wielded word, "crazy".
To the average person, this is a basic word used to describe something that happened, or possibly the actions and demeanor of another person, or their own actions while getting wild or something along those lines. To those that are suffering mental illness, that word is a label of personal failure. This is unfortunate and perhaps we can attempt to be more sensitive. Some people have decided to own their crazy. They wear it as a badge of distinction and like a calling card.
Here's the thing about words. They all have meanings. The interesting words have a rich history. Derogatory and inflammatory remarks are just words with an idea behind them. The question you have to ask yourself is if being offended matters.
I suggest that it does not matter in the least. If someone tries to get under your skin, if you let them, they win. It was their game, and they made you play and made you lose. Don't play other people's games. Being offended is up to the one that is offended. It does not affect anyone else, unless they have to deal with you while you are offended. It can be hard to let these slights go, but you win their game if you do.
Offending people is a bitter and childish things to do. It makes you a very small person with equally small ideas. That said, I'm sure I have offended people. I don't particularly care about that. Offending a group of people does not concern me, especially when all I am doing is expressing a viewpoint. On a one to one basis, I never want to hurt anyone. I choose my words in ways that remove personal allusions. If you offend the person you are talking to you are no longer having a conversation, you are doing damage control and you fail whatever your mission was.
Elevate your language and respect the individual. But remember, it is up to you to be offended by the power of words.

Topic Tuesday #107 2014/08/05 "Some Assembly Required"

Topic Tuesday #107 2014/08/05 "Some Assembly Required"

Today is a day I have been waiting for for a very long time, so even though there are many things in the world I would like to talk about, I can't bring myself to do anything but take pictures and grab a screwdriver. My RigidBot 3D printer has arrived!

I backed the RigidBot KickStarter May 10th, 2013. They had some issues with the manufacturing process and quality control from their China mass production vendors. I don't mind, as life has been plenty busy in between and with age comes a greater degree of patience. That said... I'm outta here like a kid on a new bike at Christmas! See you next week!

Nice custom injection molded Styrofoam packaging.

Nice custom injection molded Styrofoam packaging.

Layer 1, power supply, stepper motors instructions, etc.

Layer 1, power supply, stepper motors instructions, etc.

Layer 2, PLA Material, custom cover, and spooler rack.

Layer 2, PLA Material, custom cover, and spooler rack.

Layer 3, bottom. Pretty much all the heavy stuff.

Layer 3, bottom. Pretty much all the heavy stuff.

Topic Tuesday #105 2014/07/22 "Orwellian"

Topic Tuesday #105 2014/07/22 "Orwellian"

Ingsoc (English Socialism), is the regnant ideology and pseudophilosophy of Oceania

Ingsoc (English Socialism), is the regnant ideology and pseudophilosophy of Oceania

War is peace.

Freedom is slavery.

Ignorance is strength.

1984, written by George Orwell and published in 1949, is the quintessential dystopian novel. There are some fascinating political concepts that are critical to the work. Manipulation, omnipresent surveillance, perpetual war, historic revisionism. Thoughtcrime, as a concept, was not new to Orwell. Nor was the concept of Big Brother. It's easy to make parallels to historic events, people, places, and the story itself.  As we approach the 30th anniversary of this novel, we have sadly seen many of the concepts put into practice.

For instance, the NSA prevalent global surveillance efforts exposed by Edward Snowden.

We can look to North Korea for a Big Brother figure in their Supreme Leader.

The United States has technically been involved in a state of conflict (even if WAR was not declared, the body count sure continued to escalate), since it declared independence from Great Britain, with an exception during the extreme isolationism of the Great Depression in 1935-40. To be conservative, 21 years have had no "real" war like activities since 1776. Highly debatable. 

The working poor have always represented a form of indentured servitude in the world, especially when we look at fully socialized systems that Orwell was involved in. The wage slaves are free to make their narrow range of choices.

And the ignorance... Oh the ignorance... It is amazing how so many people believe whatever is served up by their favorite talking head pundit about world events, economics, and what to buy. It is remarkable how similar the world we live in now is to the Orwellian existence of  Winston Smith.

Don't forget the oxymoronic and yet fitting Ministry of Peace (War), Ministry of Plenty (Rations goods), Ministry of Truth (controls information and edits history), and the Ministry of Love (which monitors, arrests, and tortures/alters dissidents.) The theme is continued in the language of Newspeak combined with Doublethink and Doublespeak, where words have dual meanings that are not only contradictory but exist and are meant simultaneously. 

The work is so iconic, it took on a life of it's own in the term, "Orwellian". As an adjective it describes it's targeted noun with looming official deception, secret pervasive surveillance and manipulation of the facts by a authoritarian/totalitarian/all powerful state government/agency.

In a world (this one by the way and said in the movie trailer voice), where we can predict many behaviors (and may be approaching the ability to read minds) the godlike ability to read your mind and rout out "thoughtcrimes" becomes a real fear. When all your email is read, calls are recorded, movements monitored, and certain agencies rewrite history books for our children, it is not difficult to make comparisons and think that someone has been using the novel as a playbook, and not the warning that it clearly was to a rational person.

1984 has another great thing going for it. It has been on banned book lists and legally challenged for being "subversive" and "corrupting". This makes me smile, as it is ironic, given the content of the book.  

Remember kids, read your banned books!

Big Brother is watching.


Topic Tuesday #103 2014/07/08 "Wearing Technology"

Topic Tuesday #103 2014/07/08 "Wearing Technology"

I have a confession to make. I *may* be addicted to technology. Hard to believe, I know. But the signs are clear. I have a technolust. Recently, one of my dream fictional technologies has been made a reality. Smart Watches. We are talking Dick Tracy and Batman technology here! Somehow these companies are using Timelord T.A.R.D.I.S. technology to make it all fit inside itty bitty little hunks of expensive glory. I swear this stuff is ridiculous, and we have become completely numb to how amazing it is. This is right in the wheelhouse of Arthur C. Clarke's statement that, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

The rundown of these new wearables start out with Google Glass. Google essentially managed a WiFi/bluetooth tethered android powered camera with a H.U.D. to display small blurbs of data in your peripheral vision. It has various sensors and a GPS radio as well for navigation functions. There are some natural problems with this technology. Primarily, the overt camera wherever you are looking is off-putting to those you encounter. Just seems people don't like cameras pointed at them. Users have garnered the less affectionate nickname: "Glass-holes". Sad really for the folks that forked over $1,500 to be in the Glass Explorer program. The technology, though not exactly revolutionary, was a breakthrough and a rich platform for iterative technology changes leading to the Android Wear codebase that is now integrated into Android Jelly Bean and older. 

Glass teardown.PNG
Samsung Galaxy Gear Live

Samsung Galaxy Gear Live

Unveiled at Google IO 2014 were three examples of the new Android Wear watches. The Samsung Gear Live, the LG G Watch, and the Moto 360. Samsung has been in this space for a while competing with the likes of Pebble and other upstart start-ups (which I am excluding from this rundown and just sticking to Android). Their first, the Galaxy Gear, has a camera which is pretty cool but the whole thing is tied heavily into their Galaxy ecosystem, making it a non-starter for many who do not own a Galaxy Note 3 or a Galaxy S5. The Galaxy Gear Live, compared to it's predecessors is more for mass market appeal, but does not have a camera, which is a little disappointing in the Dick Tracy gadget department. Since you can use it with any Android device, it is still a huge improvement.

LG G Watch

LG G Watch

Apple iPod Nano in Speck Watchband.

Apple iPod Nano in Speck Watchband.

LG went with a utilitarian design for the G Watch. Not very elegant. Very boxy. It looks a lot like an iPod nano turned into a watch, before Apple changed the design.  Sadly they didn't build a great deal of utility into it. Unlike the Samsung, it does not have a heart rate monitor. With these devices, fitness is the obvious choice. They have accelerometers, compass, and gyros as part of the system to turn on the face when the watch is raised to a viewing angle, and this naturally works as a pedometer. Additionally the specs seem to all have a microphone, but there does not appear to be any sign of a speaker. You will need your phone with you anyway, as this is a companion device without an internet connection of it's own, so it doesn't really have to have sound.

Then we come to the last of the three, the Motorola Moto 360. Well... It's round! It looks like a watch. A typical watch. The reviews so far have indicated it is quick and feels lighter than some of those really fancy all metal designer watches.  It does have a physical button, though that may just make it look even more like something that should classically be on a wrist, I'm sure they have a plan for it. Given they have not released it yet, the rumors are strong that it will charge without wires thanks to QI (pronounced 'chee') wireless charging that we have seen in the Nexus 4 and Nexus 5 smartphones. This could mean having to lug around the charging stand one trips away from home, which could be a bit of a bother. All of them seem to feature water resistance (no diving please) which will make for a carefree wearing experience through everyday life. 

Motorola's Moto 360 Smart Watch

Motorola's Moto 360 Smart Watch

These dandy pieces of wearable technology will cost between $199 and $250.  

By the way, my birthday is in November. wink wink nudge nudge.

They are't the VaultTec Pip-Boy 3000, but these will do quite nicely.

Topic Tuesday #101 2014/06/24 "Silence"

Topic Tuesday #101 2014/06/24 "Silence"

Turn it off.

Turn it all off. Every gadget, every fan, every air conditioner, every engine, and listen. Be still.

Depending on where you are, you will still hear something. You may hear your breathing if you focus on it, but we usually tune it out, just like how the tip of our nose is always visible to our front facing eyes, but we ignore it.

You may hear someone talking seemingly far away.

You may hear a cicada or a cricket thrumming away. Perhaps a knot of toads or an army of frogs calling to one another. You may hear bird song, owl hoots, the knocking of woodpeckers, or even the humm of other flying things.

You may hear your own hearing damage. The slight and persistent ringing of tinnitus in the ears, a noise that never goes away and can be maddening.

The important thing in all this is to be aware there is more than the TV or the typing of a keyboard. There is a world around you that you may be taking for granted. Perhaps it has just been masked by all the trappings of what we think is a perfectly natural existence.

Turn it all off. Look around. Listen.

Get away from all the lights and look up. Hear the Earth sing its songs to you with swaying branches and whispered winds. Babbling brooks, raging rapids, roaring surf, all feel familiar in that primal heritage way, if you take a few minutes to notice them. Water makes so much noise. Rain falling through leaves to pepper the ground below with big thudding drops. The smell of a sea breeze or of a forest can energize and revitalize like nothing I have experienced in the world, but you do have to let your guard down to let it affect you.

You have all your senses to explore the world with. Appreciating all that the world has to offer is often a hard thing to do, when you are lead to believe it all has to have shine and LEDs to hold meaning. Remember that you are of this world. Getting to know it would do you some good. Not to sound too hippy dippy, but recent history has showed us that if you do not take care of the Earth, it will not take care of you either. Shutdown and reboot yourself now and then. Let yourself get back to basics. You can look down at your phone later.

Topic Tuesday #99 2014/06/10 "Optimism"

Topic Tuesday #99 2014/06/10 "Optimism"

Optimism.
op·ti·mism ˈäptəˌmizəm/ noun
1: Hopefulness and confidence about the future or the successful outcome of something.

I am, generally, a rather optimistic person. Take my recent trip that I am currently in the midst of as an example. I did not book accommodations ahead my trip, hoping that I could get things done quickly and turn and burn back home. When that didn't happen, I checked in for only one night. I am hopeful again that I can get things done in enough time to make the eight hour drive in the same day. 
I did plan ahead though... I brought enough clothes for a prolonged trip. The moral of the story is no matter how optimistic you are, it can't override the Murphy's Law of reality. Things go wrong, ALL THE TIME; best to plan ahead. 
So, though I proclaim to be an optimist, perhaps that is just being optimistic of my own pragmatic approach to reality. Plan for the worst, hope for the best. 

Have a great week. And may luck always favor the bold and prepared.

 

Update: I'm looking for another hotel room, preferably with double beds so Murphy, and his law, can sleep in another bed.

Topic Tuesday #98 2014/06/03 "Guns. Lots of Guns."

Topic Tuesday #98 2014/06/03 "Guns. Lots of Guns."

How do we speak rationally to all parties about the topic of guns? This is a tough one, as no matter what side of the argument you talk about, you are going to deeply offend someone. Let me start by saying that is far from my intention, so please let's let feelings, no matter how strong fall away for a few minutes and let's calmly look at the situation we have in the United States.

Gun violence is an issue.

Gun control is an issue.

Would you agree to that? That we have issues about guns and how they are being used? I think everyone can at least swallow that.

First off, let me state that I personally think guns are fun. I enjoy going shooting, not hunting mind you. I was a weapons master in college and taught gun safety to those that had never held a firearm before. These were props, and had to be handled with the utmost care. If you will recall, Brandon Lee was killed when a firearm was mishandled on the movie set for "The Crow". Accidents happen, even to those that are highly trained. That said, there are many that are not highly trained that are handling their own weapons incorrectly. You cannot peruse the news without coming to at least one story involving a firearm discharge or the threat of its use interwoven with the story. Remember, a threat constitutes "Assault" while the physical violence represents "Battery" in an Assualt and Battery charge.

We have a certain expectation as a "polite" society that we can walk about and not be threatened or physically harmed. Unless you are particularly paranoid and believe the world is out to get you, you should see this pretty clearly. We also have certain expectations as legally set in our beloved Constitution. For clarity I will append the Second Amendment (as ratified and on display at the National Archives) here.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I am, at best, a hobbyist when it comes to history and the law. This topic has been droned on about ad nauseam  and though I am touching on it, I refuse to reinterpret it beyond plain english.

First, this section states a well regulated Militia. I am not part of a Militia, well regulated or otherwise. I certainly believe that the security of a free state does mean that the state has the ability to defend itself from threats, foreign and domestic, which is implied. "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." By itself, which is how we most often hear this phrase, it is plain that this can be taken to mean that it is the right of every citizen to have a weapon and defend themselves if needed. It does not indicate that it is any particular armament, though it is always assumed to be guns. It could be knives, swords, cannons, bola, crossbow, etc... The number and types of weapons that we could list is staggering, but we always default to guns. I am not sure why, but I suspect it is a vocal minority with an agenda that has passed that idiom our way over many years. Now, the part about not being infringed.... That is a sticky point, so we won't go into how it makes sense that bazookas and heavy weapons should not be personal protective devices... Because... if we go past that line, we are taking things to their extreme positions and this is not the time for that.  Instead, let's just allow that you can own whatever weapon you like. Now... Let's talk about regulation. To draw a comparison to something else that can be used for harming others, let's look at automobiles. By law, we are required to have a class, pass a test, be licensed, keep a vehicle in proper working order to the point of passing annual checkups in some states, and we are required to keep insurance. We have accepted this across the board. You do not have to own a car, but to do so, you need to follow the rules that are put in place. This makes sense, as these rules are in place to protect everyone on or near the road, including others that do not have a car. 

So, why is there opposition to gun safety? Mandating locks, has been opposed. In fact mandating any ordinance involving firearms has met with stiff opposition. I recall when even a waiting period to buy a handgun was opposed. I do not understand why there is such opposition to things that could make the world safer, without taking away your gun, or the right to own one. Recently there was a firearm manufacturer that built a smart gun. one that would prevent the trigger from being pulled if it was too far away from a transponder the owner would wear. There are problems with the implementation, but it is sound in principle. The NRA and several other groups put extreme pressure on vendors to not sell the gun. Why?

There have been many tries to implement a mandatory national firearm registration. Where the Federal law stands today is with four key laws.

National Firearms Act of 1934 (written with the help of the NRA I might add)
This law regulates the transfer of a particular class of weapons known as Title II weapons. Title II weapons include machine guns, certain parts of machine guns, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, silencers, and destructive devices such as grenades or mortars. Title II weapons also include a category called, "Any Other Weapon." This is a generic term used to describe a concealable weapon that can shoot, but doesn't quite fit into any other category. An example of an "any other weapon" would be a cane gun or pen gun. The fee is $200.

Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) 
The Gun Control Act has the broadest reach of any federal gun control law as it pertains to the sale or transfer of any firearm and ammunition. This act established the Federal Firearms License (FFL) system which requires gun dealers to be licensed and prohibits interstate gun sales by anyone other than a licensed dealer. The GCA also made it unlawful for certain people to purchase firearms. These "prohibited persons" include:

  • Anyone currently under indictment for a crime punishable by more than a year in prison
  • Anyone who has been previously convicted of such a crime
  • Fugitives
  • Users of any controlled substance
  • Anyone who has been committed to a mental institution or deemed mentally defective
  • Illegal aliens
  • Anyone who has been dishonorably discharged from the military
  • Anyone who has renounced his or her U.S. citizenship
  • Anyone who currently has a restraining order against him or her from an intimate partner or child of said partner
  • Anyone who has been convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor

Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 (FOPA) 
The Firearm Owners Protection Act was enacted to make changes to the Gun Control Act of 1968. One of the most notable changes banned civilian ownership of machine guns that were manufactured and registered after May 19, 1986. The act also introduced the “Safe Passage” provision. This provision protects gun owners who are traveling through a state from being prosecuted for breaking that state’s gun laws—under certain conditions. The gun owner must not spend any extended time in the state and must have his or her firearms unloaded and stored in a separate compartment such as a trunk or a lockbox.
Before this change to GCA, a dealer was defined as someone “engaged in the business” of selling firearms. Under FOPA, the definition was modified to specify that a dealer must be selling firearms for profit or livelihood. This allows unlicensed individuals to sell firearms from their private collection without performing a background check on the buyer. This change created what has become known as the “Gun Show Loophole.” The GCA still requires that guns not be sold to a “prohibited person” but without a background check, it may be impossible to determine if a buyer is prohibited.

Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (1994)
The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act requires that Federally Licensed Dealers conduct background checks on any individual who purchases a weapon from them. The background check is to determine if the individual is a “prohibited person” as stated in the GCA. The act does not circumvent the Gun Show Loophole, provided the seller is not in the business of selling guns. In addition, federally licensed collectors of Curio and Relic (C&R) firearms do not have to undergo a background check when purchasing a C&R gun.

This is all we have right now. Some states hae their own laws but nationally I can buy a gun and it is not readily traced back to me, especially if it was sold at a gun show 3 or 4 times. No one would know I had a gun. No one is making sure I know how to use it, take care of it, and what safety measures should be taken.  Why not? 

It is my personal opinion that we should be required to register our guns. Keep in mind that every (modern) gun has a serial number and a unique "blast" pattern and grove combination. Every gun sold (to my knowledge) is test fired for before sale. There should be a record of this information. Something to hold the owner accountable for every discharge of their weapon. Also... just like with a car, you should have to have training and liability insurance to own one. Background checks should also be compulsory, even at gun shows and personal sales would require the registration to change hands, just like a car. Of course, I understand that any additional steps and paperwork would raise the cost of a gun. But I can't look at a headline and think that those extra dollars that could have prevented a tragedy or made bringing the perpetrator to justice faster... is not worth it. I would rather people go to jail for having an unregistered firearm than for drug possession. Is that unreasonable? 

Topic Tuesday #97 2014/05/27 "Solar Roads?"

Topic Tuesday #97 2014/05/27 "Solar Roads?"

It sounds like something from a sci-fi. "Solar Roads" where you ride the light or something fantastic. The reality is more down to earth, and more nuanced than the headlines hyperbole suggests. 

It comes as no surprise with all that asphalt out there, baking in the sun and hazing the air, that someone would think that if they could harness that energy in a meaningful way that they could really make a difference. It is a lot of surface area, and would have a lot of issues making a change. Let's get real for a second, it's unlikely, even in the best case scenario, that a solar panel roadway is going to be around any time soon. As a friend of mine put it, "pie in the sky"...

I suggested that if it was only a solar panel you could drive on, it would not be as compelling as the actual proposition. It would end up as only a headline garnering bullet point. Like this:

  • Solar energy collection
  • LED lighting for lines and text for driver information. Imagine a road that can alert you of issues up ahead or route you on a different course, or tell your car it is out of its lane.
  • Active feedback to authorities of traffic speed and road conditions.
  • Segmented structure will allow easy "patching" by replacing the damaged sections.
  • Heating elements to melt snow and ice buildup.
  • Communications cables like phone, TV, and internet. 
  • Municipal potable water.
  • Natural Gas.
  • Sanitary sewers.
  • Stormwater runoff.
  • And future technology, that will all be easily deployed under our roadways, sidewalks, and parking lots.

In closing, yes... It's expensive, but as with many things, it would be a long term investment that has the potential to save time and resources far into the future. It would be best to use this in highly planned developments first, to thoroughly prove its usefulness while understanding that as demand increases, so will availability as cost decreases. This will not solve the energy issues until it is widely adopted and retrofit into communities and freeways, so more conventional approaches are more possible at this time. Especially if you just want the promise of limitless energy from the solar roads of tomorrow land.                       

Topic Tuesday #96 2014/05/20 "Rehashing Equality, & Everything Else..."

Topic Tuesday #96 2014/05/20 "Rehashing Equality, & Everything Else..."

Topic Tuesday is my weekly essay on something. Somedays, I don’t know what to write, while other times, I could write about nothing else than what is on my mind. As you may or may not know, I started podcasting 6 weeks ago at www.orlyradio.com. This has taken some of the wind out of my sails as I try to not have too much overlap, and certainly try to keep it fresh week to week. My attention span has been divided and amplified into an odd news cycle that, is sometimes simply untenable. When the only newsworthy stories are rehashed over and over ad nauseam, I hesitate to do the same. At the same time, I realize that while the attention span of the average human has diminished terribly, mine has not. If I am interested in something, I feel the need to continue with it until I reach a saturation point or am driven to distraction by something else.

So here we are, about to have many of the same topics, rehashed and revisited, as needed.

Yesterday, Oregon’s ban on same-sex marriage fell. Today, Pennsylvania also fell.

I will list the opinions of the judges in their judgements, as they are awesome.

Oregon - Geiger v. Kitzhaber & Rummell v. Kitzhaber:

Expanding the embrace of civil marriage to gay and lesbian couples will not burden any legitimate state interest… The state's marriage laws unjustifiably treat same-gender couples differently than opposite-gender couples. The laws assess a couple's fitness for civil marriage based on their sexual orientation: opposite-gender couples pass; same-gender couples do not. No legitimate state purpose justifies the preclusion of gay and lesbian couples from civil marriage.
“At the core of the Equal Protection Clause, however, there exists a foundational belief that certain rights should be shielded from the barking crowds; that certain rights are subject to ownership by all and not the stake hold of popular trend or shifting majorities...”

“My decision will not be the final word on this subject, but on this issue of marriage I am struck more by our similarities than our differences. I believe that if we can look for a moment past gender and sexuality, we can see in these plaintiffs nothing more or less than our own families. Families who we would expect our Constitution to protect, if not exalt, in equal measure. With discernment we see not shadows lurking in closets or the stereotypes of what was once believed; rather, we see families committed to the common purpose of love, devotion, and service to the greater community.

"Where will this all lead? I know that many suggest we are going down a slippery slope that will have no moral boundaries. To those who truly harbor such fears, I can only say this: Let us look less to the sky to see what might fall; rather, let us look to each other ... and rise.” - U.S. District Judge Michael McShane

 

Pennsylvania - Whitewood v. Wolf:

“We are a better people than what these laws represent, and it is time to discard them into the ash heap of history.- U.S. District Judge John E. Jones, III

 

 

For more on the state of the states with marriage issues: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/05/gay-marriage-states-legal-map

I’ll be back next week, and you can catch me live Friday’s at orlyradio.com around 9pm eastern.

 

Topic Tuesday #95 2014/05/13 "Tell Me A Story"

Topic Tuesday #95 2014/05/13 "Tell Me A Story"

Once upon a time...
In a galaxy far, far away...
It was a dark and stormy night...
And it came to pass...
So we were at this bar...
There was this girl/boy/woman/man/dog/cat/horse/pig/etc...

How does the story begin? How does the story end? And what the heck is in the middle to get from here to there?

It's a struggle that every writer has to contend with. No matter what topic, you have to begin, present, and end. Which is the hardest? That depends on the writer and subject. 
If you are the kind of person that finds it hard to walk away or say good bye, you may have dozens of stories that are only half told with no exit strategy.  
You may know the perfect ending and have a beginning, but choke when figuring out all the connective tissue between the two.

You might have great story ideas but no entry and no exit in sight and that wall prevents you from writing a damn thing. 
Frustration is the annoying officemate that accompanies the writer to the break room talking about the same inane drivel they always do. 
I have mentioned it before but it bears noting again; outlines are your friend.

Take Hollywood as an example. Why are those terrible stories made? Well... Formula scripts work. They are easily understood. They fit into production schedules. Editors have an easier job. 

I am not telling you to write a formula Hollywood docudrama. Please... Think of the children...
But we can take an example from the sweatshop script factories. They have the ability to both start and finish, while connecting the two in a somewhat intelligible way. (Some series ends excluded of course.)

As we know, most of the time they do not care about the story. They make it fit a rigid structure. That structure is valuable. Check out some script analysis diagrams. (I say scripts simply because it is often easier than working through the structure of a literary work, but can be translated to it.) You start with the "exposition", then you transition to the "rising action", then to the "climax", " falling action", and the "resolution", or cliffhanger if you are in the sitcom biz, or George R. R. Martin...

In longer stories each chapter, or even every paragraph, may follow the same basic flow.  It's hard and sometimes constrictive, but that can be magical. For example, I recently did a little game on my Facebook wall. Short stories, of only six words. This was remarkable for bringing out rampant creativity. Hemingway* did, perhaps the best of these. 

"For sale, baby shoes. Never worn." (* - Heminway may not have been the originator but is credited with it.) 
Sometimes all you need is a little restriction to actually soar to new heights. I'll get into the psychology of choice another day. 

Go write something!

Topic Tuesday #93 2014/04/29 "Gun Safety - Hell No!?"

Topic Tuesday #93 2014/04/29 "Gun Safety - Hell No!?"


The iP1 the first "smart gun" for sale in the United States.CreditMonica Almeida/The New York Times

The iP1 the first "smart gun" for sale in the United States.CreditMonica Almeida/The New York Times

Last night a story came across my news feed that made me sit up and take notice. It was a beautiful fire arm that I swore was a movie prop. (See Picture) http://nyti.ms/1fHGKgi

The iP1 is quite a stunning looking pistol. It's a .22 caliber and will only fire when a 5 digit pin is input into the watch and is within 10 inches of it. As a technologist, I personally foresee the technology could be embedded in any personal item, as the watch is not as attractive as the gun, that could be a good thing for the $1,800 firearm... That is if the gun, and its technology, are ever able to make it to market. Second Amendment activists flooded social media site like Calguns.net, and called for vigilante-style investigations of Ms. Padilla and Armatix.  One user commented that he had no issues with "...the idea of personally and professionally leveling the life of someone who has attempted to profit from disarming me and my fellow Americans."

The gun lobby in the U.S. is far less concerned (and I'm not being hyperbolic) with the safety of the public than they are with the ability to manufacture and sell guns without any additional safety mechanisms, or smart technology. The company, Armatix, and its chief representative here in the states, Belinda Padila have been ostracized and harassed as part of a campaign to shut down the sale of the iP1 smart gun. They are not alone either, as just last year a study found that 3 other companies came out with a smart safety system for firearms. We haven't heard much about them either...

From the times article:

"Second Amendment defenders argue that once guns with high-tech safety features go on sale, government mandates will follow. They cite a decade-old New Jersey law requiring that within three years of the recognition technology’s becoming available in the United States, all guns sold in the state would have to be “smart.”

“Are we concerned?” asked Lawrence G. Keane, general counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for gun manufacturers. “Yes.”

The National Rifle Association, in an article published on the blog of its political arm, wrote that “smart guns,” a term it mocks as a misnomer, have the potential “to mesh with the anti-gunner’s agenda, opening the door to a ban on all guns that do not possess the government-required technology.”

Padila and Armatrix continue to look for retailers. Personally, If I was to have a gun in my house, you better believe it would be an owner recognition system. 

A friend pointed out that there may be a better marketing strategy that they missed out on. That if the caliber was the same as is used in the military and law enforcement side arms that they would have a larger target market and potential for more lateral support.  I hope Armatix is listening and coming out with a Desert Eagle equivalent. And if it looks as slick as this model, you might even see it in your next buddy cop film, unless the gun nuts get their way. Eventually, common sense should win out. There have been too many casualties and this allows people to retain their rights to bare arms and adds a layer of protection. Imagine no more accidental deaths from children shooting their siblings in the face. I would like to never see another story like that again.