Advertisement

Customize
About this Journal
Current Month
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28
Feb. 3rd, 2010 @ 09:57 am (no subject)
I was recently playing a recent computer game, and discovered how far my experience had drifted out of line with the norm. I was trying to through an object an a character. I threw it, and it went to the left, and then I moved a bit to the right and threw it again, etc. However, it didn't seem to go *up* enough, and I couldn't see any way to control that, either from the trajectory or the place I stood.

But it turned out I was missing all the user interface clues, and what you're _supposed_ to do is move around until there's a big glowing arrow over the target's head, and THEN throw it :)

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/617343.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Feb. 2nd, 2010 @ 04:58 pm (no subject)
Tags:
1. I suck at getting things done. Especially if they're boring and/or stressful, but even if they're nice, which is sort of bizarre :) I've got a lot _better_, a lot lot better, but my ability to do simple things without putting them off is unbelievable.

2. I had a great time at the CUSFS wake-for-the-old-year. We played Dominion, Battlestar Galactica and others with mixed poohsoc/sgo friends, and it was all fun, and we successfully raised a tea-filled sun in the morning.

3. Clues for last week's puzzle. (a) The letters in the post that are not used don't matter. (b) Gur pnfrf bs gur yrggref ner jebat. (c) Vaireg gur pnfr bs gur yrggref. (d) Gur cebcbegvbaf bs gur yrggref znggre, engure guna gur ahzore bs gurz. (e) Gurer'f n yvax jvgu gur Znq Unggre va Jbaqreynaq. (f) Gurer'f n yvax jvgu znq unggref va trareny. (Answer) Purzvpnysbezhynbszrephelavgengr.

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/616988.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 28th, 2010 @ 05:15 pm PS.
PS. A hint to yesterday's puzzle, if anyone is still interested to solve it, is that the order doesn't matter.

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/616454.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 28th, 2010 @ 04:27 pm May Ball
Tags:
Mole and Cassie were hoping to organise a trip with Rachel and I and some others to a May Ball in summer, Half a dozen of us would definitely like to go if we can. The tickets go on sale today and in the next couple of days. He suggested Jesus or Clare (both Tues XX of June).

A few years ago, several ex-c-tolkien-society and current-c-tolkien-society went to Robinson, and before that to Jesus, and it had lots of black tie, pretty scenery, fun events, and so on, so I recommend it.

Is anyone else interested in joining us?

And does anyone know if we _can_ -- I think two years ago tickets at several of the nice-but-not-Johns balls were available to buy to the public, or only to members of the university but they could get half-a-dozen double tickets each, but more recently information seems to be sparser and tickets seem to sell out a lot more quickly and be more restricted (to current students, or current members of the university?)

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/616380.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 27th, 2010 @ 01:34 am 4th Ed. D & D
And oh, look :) I have signed up to a C. U. R. S. Roleplaying Game (TM), with DnD fourth edition. Do you have any General Advice (TM) for making a fun mid-level Warlock character before Friday?
You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/615750.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 25th, 2010 @ 02:34 am Making people guess what you mean (but not necessarily in a bad way)
Tags: ,
If you have an interesting factoid to impart, it's common and instinctive to do so in the form of a semi-rhetorical question, whether the fact is interesting itself, or you think the puzzle of the question is interesting, or because you want to teach somebody.

I thought about this in the context of conveying interesting general knowledge factoids in casual conversation (QI does something similar "How many states are there in the USA? Not 50!"), but it might also apply to puzzles-for-the-sake-of-it ("A man lies dead in an empty field with an unopened backpack on his back. How did he die?"), or even if you're trying to teach someone something ("Suppose I did this. What would happen?")

However, for this to work, it's important that the recipient focuses on the area of the desired factoid and doesn't try to answer the question too generally. Else you get conversations like this:

Q. A man lies dead in an empty field with an unopened backpack on his back. How did he die?
A. Umm... no obvious clues? Then a heart attack is most likely.
Q. No! No! It's not a heart attack.
A. I don't see why not.
Q. It's just no, OK?
A. OK, then a stroke. Or maybe liver failure.

There's four obvious methods of doing so:

(1) Phrase the question exactly, such to rule out any "undesired" answers from its field of interest as best as possible, and admit the "desired" answer only. "A man lies dead in an empty field with an unopened backpack on his back. The backpack caused his death. How?"

(2) Come out and say that the question is looking for a specific answer which may not be the most literal one. Allow the recipient to narrow it down. "Good question! No, it's not any sort of hidden illness. Yes, the backpack is relevant. Etc."

(3) Indicate with tone of voice and body language that the question is looking for a specific answer which may not be the most literal one. "OK, see if you can figure this one out."

(4) Hope for the best, and if the recipient doesn't give the answer you want, shout "NO, THAT'S NOT RIGHT" at them until they do. (See above.)

You can probably tell from my phrasing that I prefer (1) and (2). Even though (3) and (4) work perfectly well with people who know each other well enough to know what's going on.

So, I guess my point is, if you give people interesting questions, and they keep missing the point, consider trying to say what you want from them. And if people keep asking questions you don't get, try to work out what they probably _meant_ to ask.

And I personally take it very very badly when I answer a question correctly and someone shouts "NO! NO!", but conversely, that's a very natural way of saying "that's not what I wanted from you" as opposed to "that's literally incorrect" :)

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/615308.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 22nd, 2010 @ 05:51 pm An ACTUAL guide to making obvious jokes
Tags:
Formatting of my last (but two) post

In a twist so ironic it's almost literally painful, I screwed up the formatting on my "how to make obvious jokes" post, and no-one mentioned it. I don't know if that's because everyone thought they couldn't comment without making an obvious joke, falling foul of Somebody's Law, or if they assumed I'd done it deliberately to _bait_ someone into making an obvious joke, or they just didn't think it mattered. But anyway, thank you for not making a big deal :)

Read more... )

An ACTUAL guide to making obvious jokes

At least one loyal reader expressed joking displeasure with my last post. "It was funny", she might have said. "But it was more about how to deliver obvious jokes, rather than how to make up obvious jokes, which was what I expected."

Well, ok, let me consider that. That's not necessarily useless. Obvious jokes can perform a useful social function: letting ones guard down can be a form of intimacy, a small gesture of trust indicating that the level of formality is not at the maximum, and that you're happy to enjoy each others company[1] as equals, at least a little bit, even if you're, say, negotiating a corporate merger[2].

Read more... )

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/614901.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 22nd, 2010 @ 12:12 pm Links
What all this Leno/Conan/Late Night Gubbins is about: a primer for friends in the UK

http://littleredboat.co.uk/?p=3132

You may recently have seen people complaining about... some row that went on between Jay, um, Leno and Conan O'Brian on some kind of late-night talk show aired in America. For that matter, you might have seen references to said late night talk shows in general, and be in the situation for which we need a word of "OK, so it's a late night talk show. What's it good at? What's it famous for?"

The linked post does a lovely job of explaining why the row was very, very entertaining, even if you don't normally want to read about dick-waving contests between people you've barely heard of.

"And so began a monumental game of chicken. Conan went onto his show every night subsequently, and did monologues that consisted entirely of calling his network useless, unpopular, incapable of running itself - of calling its executives liars and thieves, and calling Leno all manner of other things"

"it has been, for a brief time, a remarkable insight on the workings of it all - and the true bitterness, fear and anger present in all parts of the industry (of most similar industries) right now."

People with Exactly Two Children and At Least One Daughter, what's the gender make-up of your kids

There's a well-known paradox[1] in statistics, which goes that "suppose you know Mrs Smith has two children, and you see something that suggests that (at least) one of them is a girl. What are the chances that the other one is a boy?"

People instinctively say "50/50"[2]. But in fact, it's 2/3.

This is because there 50% of families have mixed children, 25% two girls, and 25% two boys, so there are twice as many boy/girl families as girl/girl families. You can see this easily if you agree the first child was 50/50 boy/girl, and so boy followed by girl and boy followed by boy are both 25%, as are the other two possibilities.

What's funny is that here: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=548550 someone acknowledged that this may not be intuitive to everyone, so made a poll which actually asked people to respond if they had two children, at least one a girl, and say which make-up their family had. It's so much more convincing to see the poll made of actual people, actually showing a 2:1 ratio[3].

Read more... )

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/614249.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 21st, 2010 @ 06:07 pm A guide to making obvious jokes
Tags:
Suppose someone is carrying a large and incongruous object. Or has something strange painted on their face. Or their full name is "William Shakespeare". Or they have a new haircut. You instantly think of an obvious reaction, something like "Ha! Won the 100L koala cuddly toy lottery, eh" or "Hi! I'm Anne H." or "Oh-ho! You've got yourself a new haircut, eh? Eh?"

I've probably been more often the person trying to bite their tongue than the one being annoyed. But I was brainstorming some obvious guidelines for this common and slightly awkward situation.

1. Normally try not to comment. For the first twenty minutes, they're very conscious of their appearence, and if you're their spouse or best friend, you're probably the first to see it. Otherwise, they've probably heard the most obvious comment to make, and something that's witty once often turns out to be the same thing everyone else says.

2. If you do feel the need to comment, say what it is you're commenting on. If they've been carrying this ginormous stuffed toy over their head all day, they've normally forgotten about it, and will misinterpret whatever you say, and it will horribly fizzle.

3. Conversely, if you get stuck half-way between saying something and not, just say it. Try something mildly positive and neutral like "Oh, cool, you got your hair cut. Do you like it?" That's just like starting a conversation with "how have you been keeping" or "what do you do" -- not original, but a polite, straight-forward and useful way of entering a conversation, and it doesn't waste any time, because if they're bored, they can give a brief aknowledgement "Yeah, thanks. Did you hear, pineapples don't grow on trees?" and if they're not they can say "Wow, yes, it's lovely, I thought no-one was going to notice!"

4. If it's obvious, saying "I bet everyone says X" is normally no better. Not even "I bet everyone says 'I bet everyone says X'"

5. Conversely, some of the time people _do_ have a good sense of when a comment actually adds something, and isn't just fulfilling the "predicatable humour" phase of the conversation. If you, really, really want to say something, stifling yourself is bad. So about one time in ten, blurt something out. Or, if necessary, wait and tell someone by email later. If it still seems funny, it's worth saying, and if not, it would have been out of place to start with.

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/613903.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 19th, 2010 @ 09:41 am Dhl@home
Tags:
I arguably owe DHL an apology, because once I _did_ ring their number, which _is_ open in the morning before 9.00, I spoke to someone who was in fact very helpful, and human, and in the Cambridge depot, which is in Bar Hill. So that's fairly easy.

Footnote

In fact, I wouldn't mind if she wasn't in Bar Hill, specifically, it's just that there's a high correlation between being near something and knowing something about it. Not always: some organisations have very very useful distributed arrangements, and if you're, eg. submitting a bug to a free software project, then using the bug tracking thing, and following up by email if necessary, is often the most effective way of doing so.

But if someone says "OK, I've put a note on the package and the handlers are not going to screw it up this time", I find that if they're right there that often has an effect, and if their not, then it normally doesn't. I remember ringing HSBC, sitting through the patronising messages saying "why not use our website instead", and speaking to someone who was apparently in a foreign call centre. And next time, ringing the complaints line, and reaching someone who was apparently senior in a specific branch in Britain. Now, being friendly, helpful, and having a nice Scottish accent was nice but not strictly necessary: if that were the sole benefit of being in the UK, having a foreign call centre would make an awful lot of sense.

But while HSBC obviously could give responsibility and training to foreign staff, they obviously don't. So, while it's not the fault of the first person I spoke to, the first person said something like "why don't you wait on hold for ten minutes, and then after that discover I've no idea and suggest you, like, maybe, try going into a branch and asking around there?" and the second understood my problem and instantly fixed it, so I much, much preferred talking to the second person.

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/613751.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 19th, 2010 @ 12:51 am Dhl@home
Tags:
Listen, DHL.

I'm almost pathological about accommodating people. If you preface your request "excuse me, could you possibly" I'll probably end up walking over hot coals to do so. But I'm also pathological about stickling for accuracy. If you just brazen-facedly try to pretend that of course I have to jump through these stupid fucking hoops, I'll

I did walk over hot coals once, and that was very fun. Much, much more fun than anything to do with DHL. If getting a parcel from you is less fun than walking over hot coals, then if your core business is parcel delivery, then you are DOING SOMETHING WRONG, ok?

OK, the first day you tried to deliver, I was at work from 9-5. Also, the second day. See a pattern? Things that would help: (1) having a website that works (2) being able to arrange redelivery for a specific day, rather than just a choice between "ever" and "never" (to be fair, maybe their business-hours-only phone number could do this and it's the fault of problem #1). See?

Seriously, I literally can't get a package from your without spending half an hour slagging you off. I'd love not to, you look really nice. But seriously, something is wrong. Again.

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/613529.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 18th, 2010 @ 01:35 pm Rachel's housewarming
Tags:
Rachel's housewarming was lovely; thank you to all of the other people who came. There were work colleagues, and disparate friends who all got on well together.

I made it safely to the party and back to Cambridge. Though the A14 was _closed_, with scary "all lanes stop dead" signs, my satnav took me safely along several roads I don't know, diving through the heart of pitch-black Cambridgeshire, to emerge on the A428 and thence the A14. There were "diversion" signs, but it would have been very stressful to do without the knowledge that you could get back on the route if you went the wrong way.

We played Dominion against an imaginary player who just bought money. Last time that player won, which was very, very annoying, but this time we trounced it, so the original Dominion is officially more subtle (at least a bit) than solitaire :)

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/613363.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 18th, 2010 @ 12:43 pm Twitter
Tags: , ,
I have a twitter account (CartesianDaemon), but I've not used it. I've friended several friends' feeds. How should I read my twitter feed: from the twitter home page? Does it send tweets to email? Does it still text them to you? Or through a third-party app?

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/613088.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 18th, 2010 @ 10:23 am Avatar
Tags: ,
- It probably goes without saying Avatar fails the Bechdel-Wallace test for having two female characters speak to each other. In fact, it fails the Bechdel–People-who-aren't-Jake test, because like many movies its essentially first person. It does have a female combat helicopter pilot and a female head scientist, and two female Na'vi shamans, which is a reasonable proportion of the characters, but for better or worse, we see everything through Jake's eyes.

- Rachel says a giant bird, if it exists, might possibly be able to catch a medium-sized bird on the wing.

- Rsymiel muses that:

It's because they're not actually a tribe of sentient beings living in harmony with nature; they, and every other organism around them, are all components/peripherals of the sentient planet; there's no risk of disease because all the micro-organisms are also peripherals, likewise predators etc. The USB ports in everyone's head are a clue here.

The surface similarities to cliches of native American culture is because the sentient planet wants to get some real humans to analyse in depth, and has watched enough human pop culture to know how to frame a What These People Need Is A Honky narrative that a dumb human will fall for.


I admit that's a very good explanation. But I think that of the gigantic number of films that look like a mess of good ideas thrown together as best as the artiste could manage, for only a minute fraction do we have any evidence that the author _did_ have an overarching ideal in mind that was revealed in the sequel, but failed to make the possibility of further revelations clear enough in the original, so the greater truth only _looks_ bodged on later, and everyone who liked the original still feels it was undermined by the retroactive changes.

(The examples that spring to mind are later Harry Potter books -- apparently several of the plots JKR had thought about from the beginning, even ones that looked bodged. And Ringworld, where there's so many layers of indirection and patching it's not clear what you're suppose to take on trust and what not to believe. )

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/612772.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 18th, 2010 @ 10:20 am Sarcasm Mark
Tags: ,
Via MegaMole, http://megamole.livejournal.com/641176.html,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/6995354/Sarcasm-punctuation-mark-aims-to-put-an-end-to-email-confusion.html, a company proposes a proprietary punctuation mark to indicate sarcasm. It's like the comedy buffet of the decade.

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/612547.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 14th, 2010 @ 03:19 pm More Avatar
Tags: , ,
Cinema

The cinema was completely full, one of the few times I've seen that. They even had seating assignments (which Vue don't normally do). I wonder if instead of giving specific tickets it would be better to sell six assignments for "Row R, 1-6", and then it's specific enough you can't plausibly play innocent if you sit somewhere else, but the first people there can choose between shuffling down or grabbing the more central seats, without everyone scrupulously saving one seat in the middle of the row for someone they don't know who arrives late.

Copyright on 3d films

You are not permitted to use any camera or recording equipment in this cinema.

This will be treated as an attempt to breach copyright.

And all your pirate friends will laugh at you because it WON'T WORK. And will be ALL BLURRY, you COMPLETE MORON.

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/612126.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 14th, 2010 @ 01:11 pm Rain
Tags: ,
Today the snow has given way to lots of rain, which to my surprise, I rather like.

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/611901.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 14th, 2010 @ 10:42 am Further comments on Avatar
Tags: , ,
Language

I don't know if what we hear of the Na'vi language is realistic, but kudos to the film for inventing a language rather than having everything in English. It does sound alien when the Na'vi speak in their own language, and sometimes drop back into it, even if they've been speaking English to Jake or Grace.

On the other hand, if the Na'vi have a special word which is awkwardly translated as "see" or "grok" -- why would people use the English word at emotional moments, not the Na'vi one?

3d

The 3d gave me a bit of a headache, unfortunately. It's awkward to fit the 3d glasses over prescription glasses (they may have clip-ons, I was late and didn't ask). Or it may be the fault of my year-old prescription.

On the other hand, people whining about not living in the future yet: 3d is back and trying to get into the mainstream. Maybe you should appreciate what the future did bring. I'm sure if we DID invent flying cars, people would just whine that we don't have something else.

Na'vi in tune with nature

Almost all stories gloss over the risks of living in a non-technological society, which means that when one is portrayed you can't tell if the risks of disease and childbirth and predators and war are non-existent, or just fastidiously not depicted.

Jake says the Na'vi don't want anything from Earth. Is that because technological aids wouldn't add anything, or because they prefer their perfect balance-of-nature life even when they're being killed by other Pandoran life, rather than vice versa?

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/611778.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 13th, 2010 @ 11:36 pm James Cameron's Avatar
Tags: , ,
Summary

You don't need this review, what everyone else said was quite right. The reviews I've seen of Avatar have been the broadest and most comprehensive consensus on a movie I think I've ever seen :)

In short, it's an obvious idea (white explorers conquer natives for resources, one explorer falls in love with the native culture and joins it, and leads them to repel the invaders) done really well. The plot and characters and script are so-so: several funny moments, several uplifting moments, several exciting moments, no massive bloopers, but nothing very surprising.

But you have to see it. The 3d gave me a headache but is very impressive, as much for ordinary scenes with a touch of depth as for the whizzy flying bits, which for once are done with restraint, rather than every other 3d film's "wooohooo! look, another whirly-round glowing thing" approach.

Incidental good things

Read more... )

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/611373.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry
Jan. 13th, 2010 @ 04:53 pm Wikipedia plot summaries
Tags:
Wikipedia plot summaries seem almost exactly the wrong length. A one-paragraph summary would often be really useful for people who haven't seen the film, but want a general idea of what it's about. A one-sentence summary would be useful for people like that with really short attention spans. These sometimes show up in the opening blurb of a wikipedia article, and are the norm for films on imbd.

A 2000-word summary could describe enough detail that you could refresh yourself of any details you'd forgotten but wanted to check. The average summary is nearly but not quite long enough for that. Longer summaries would be much too detailed for an average reader, but very useful for someone wanting to study the book or film in detail (this is what Spark Notes do).

But wikipedia articles seem to shoot for 500-1000 word summaries, too long to be of much use for someone asking "what sort of film is this?" and just a little too short for someone asking "how did XXXX find out about YYYY in scene 3 again?"

Also, they seem to virulently suck the life from any scene they describe. Inevitably, there's a list of "A does blah, but then B importunes them and they change their mind", with any question of why that was important to the characters stripped away. Presumably that's an over-scrupulous urge to keep the description neutral, even though in most films the emotions are pretty explicit (you might be able to analyse WHY he's in love with her, or whether there was another explanation, but it's normally pretty clear what the obvious meaning is).

Presumably most individual people could write a reasonable summary, but hundreds of them grind the summaries smooth. Maybe it would actually be better to have an explicitly one-paragraph summary, and then a 2000+ word summary on a separate section/page where people can vent their "must add this detail" urges.

You can also comment at http://jack.dreamwidth.org/611240.html using OpenID. comment count unavailable comments so far.
About this Entry