Sunday, September 23, 2007
Religion
Even agnostics have something to argue about. You could be agnostic with an inclination toward the existence of God, or you could be an agnostic who believes that God is unnecessary. Neither can ever prove if either theory is correct.
Friday, September 21, 2007
Lawyers
[14:32] me: these lawyers have no idea what's going on
[14:32] me: even if he's tech-inclined, he doesn't even have electrical engineering basics
[14:32] me: he just knows some terms, and how those terms go with each other
[14:32] me: a bullshitter, essentially
[14:33] him: yeah, well
[14:34] him: thats the nature of things
[14:36] him: are you bitching about bullshitting lawyers? who cares
[14:36] him: thats like complaining that the sky is blue
[14:36] me: that's true
[14:37] him: it takes bullshitting to BE a lawyer
[14:40] me: that's funny that the value that lawyers add with their expertise, is bullshit
[14:41] me: "because of my experience in bullshitting, i will take your document, and turn it into a legal document by adding bullshit"
[14:41] me: "you cannot do this without me, because you do not have sufficient experience or training in bullshittery"
[14:43] him: trial lawyers, especially
[14:43] him: finding technical arguments for one thing or another can be done by real experts in other things
[14:44] him: only law experts can do some legal reasoning like that
[14:44] him: but not all lawyers are not these kinds of law experts
[14:44] him: they are just bullshitters, most of em
[14:45] me: haha
[14:45] him: and by law experts, i mean going and looking up some logical reason why this or that is false because this other thing is true, so therefore it must be illegal by combining these 3 laws together for you to do what you did
[14:45] me: check this out
[14:45] me: my reply
[14:45] me: to his question
[14:45] me: [0047] [Please explain the distinction and how the order of fit affects fittability.]
Suppose you are playing horizontal Tetris. But with 2 pieces, < and <>
If you put < followed by <>,
you get <<> and they fit nicely together
If you put <> followed by <, you get <>< which doesn't fit nicely together.
[14:45] him: heh
[14:45] him: tell him this is the fish theorem
[14:46] him: :)
[14:32] me: even if he's tech-inclined, he doesn't even have electrical engineering basics
[14:32] me: he just knows some terms, and how those terms go with each other
[14:32] me: a bullshitter, essentially
[14:33] him: yeah, well
[14:34] him: thats the nature of things
[14:36] him: are you bitching about bullshitting lawyers? who cares
[14:36] him: thats like complaining that the sky is blue
[14:36] me: that's true
[14:37] him: it takes bullshitting to BE a lawyer
[14:40] me: that's funny that the value that lawyers add with their expertise, is bullshit
[14:41] me: "because of my experience in bullshitting, i will take your document, and turn it into a legal document by adding bullshit"
[14:41] me: "you cannot do this without me, because you do not have sufficient experience or training in bullshittery"
[14:43] him: trial lawyers, especially
[14:43] him: finding technical arguments for one thing or another can be done by real experts in other things
[14:44] him: only law experts can do some legal reasoning like that
[14:44] him: but not all lawyers are not these kinds of law experts
[14:44] him: they are just bullshitters, most of em
[14:45] me: haha
[14:45] him: and by law experts, i mean going and looking up some logical reason why this or that is false because this other thing is true, so therefore it must be illegal by combining these 3 laws together for you to do what you did
[14:45] me: check this out
[14:45] me: my reply
[14:45] me: to his question
[14:45] me: [0047] [Please explain the distinction and how the order of fit affects fittability.]
Suppose you are playing horizontal Tetris. But with 2 pieces, < and <>
If you put < followed by <>,
you get <<> and they fit nicely together
If you put <> followed by <, you get <>< which doesn't fit nicely together.
[14:45] him: heh
[14:45] him: tell him this is the fish theorem
[14:46] him: :)
Monday, September 17, 2007
Perception changes
It's cool that a 1-storey drop doesn't seem scary anymore. And more interesting that I leaned against a 2-storey stairway rail thinking, "this could be doable".
Except that the thrill is thinking I can thwart destruction.
"We stand upon the brink of a precipice. We peer into the abyss – we grow sick and dizzy. Our first impulse is to shrink from the danger. Unaccountably we remain. By slow degrees our sickness, and dizziness, and horror, become merged in a cloud of unnameable feeling. By gradations, still more imperceptible, this cloud assumes shape, as did the vapor from the bottle out of which arose the genius in the Arabian Nights. But out of this our cloud upon the precipice's edge, there grows into palpability, a shape, far more terrible than any genius, or any demon of a tale, and yet it is but a thought, although a fearful one, and one which chills the very marrow of our bones with the fierceness of the delight of its horror. It is merely the idea of what would be our sensations during the sweeping precipitancy of a fall from such a height. And this fall – this rushing annihilation – for the very reason that it involves that one most ghastly and loathsome of all the most ghastly and loathsome images of death and suffering which have ever presented themselves to our imagination – for this very cause do we now the most vividly desire it. And because our reason violently deters us from the brink, therefore, do we the more impetuously approach it. There is no passion in nature so demoniacally impatient, as that of him, who shuddering upon the edge of a precipice, thus meditates a plunge. To indulge for a moment, in any attempt at thought, is to be inevitably lost; for reflection but urges us to forbear, and therefore it is, I say, that we cannot. If there be no friendly arm to check us, or if we fail in a sudden effort to prostrate ourselves backward from the abyss, we plunge, and are destroyed."
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Friday, September 7, 2007
Tikitiki tISH, baby
me: there are lots of beats in house
me: it's like pop jazz
me: if there is such a thing
me: the drums go trrr t t t t t trrrr t t t t
me: and the bass goes dum da dum... da de dum da dum...
me: and then occasionally there's the tISHhhhhhh of the hi-hat
me: tikitiki tikitiki tISHhhhhhhhh
me: trrrrrrrrr t t t t t t ..... trrrr t t t t t t
her: oh my god......
me: and you can play with the music, in dance
me: it's like another instrument
me: step step stepstepstep hop step step shuffle shuffle step step
me: tikitiki tishTISHhhhhh
her: blahhhh booo beee dooo keee koooo ahhhh
me: badabada badabada dum dum
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
ECU and non-linear throttle response
More hidden power. I've been inadvertently living in the throttle's mushy zone. The throttle is drive-by-wire, and is fairly unresponsive until close to when the throttle is wide open. The response is non-linear; I have to step on it to wake the ECU up.
Monday, September 3, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

