MiBlog

Ali and I have just created the best/worst trail mix known to...

Thu, 31 May 2012 22:30:24 -0600

Ali and I have just created the best/worst trail mix known to man. My teeth are already hurting just thinking of eating this while camping this weekend (Taken with instagram)

Just had an amazing panini lunch at The Saucy Bread Company....

Sat, 26 May 2012 15:10:24 -0600

Just had an amazing panini lunch at The Saucy Bread Company. Apparently they cater too! (attn: @BIG) (Taken with instagram)

10 Things Lucky People Do Differently

Wed, 23 May 2012 17:44:00 -0600

10 Things Lucky People Do Differently:

I know, I know, the title and topic reeks of self-help smarminess mixed with a little overzealous Cosmo-style self-affirmation (and true to form, the article does deliver..), but the core tips offered actually hint at some pretty serious deeper truths. I know—at least I think I know—because I’ve experienced most of them first hand.

I’ve also had my philosophical hooks into Luck for a couple years now (ever since 6Qin2C), so these kind of behaviours have been on my mind. That said, I’m still totally unsure of what/how/why I feel the way I do about chance, but I’m finding more and more ways of seeing meaningful connections between concepts of chance and choice. (Even anecdotally: all that distinguishes the two is ‘an oi‘—an exclamation, a burst of energy.)

I’m thinking about it, is all. Chat me up if you are too.

Apple being inspiring, yet again: click through the image above...

Sun, 20 May 2012 12:25:00 -0600

Apple being inspiring, yet again: click through the image above to see a detailed teardown of Apple’s ubiquitous AC adapter for iDevices.

Unsurprisingly, the tiny little inch-cubed adapter is astonishingly well designed: it exceeded even the expectations of the teardown site’s owner/writer, who does this quite professionally.

I actually bought a competing Belkin AC adapter about a year ago when my old after-market one died—mostly because it was $10 cheaper than Apple’s, but also because I thought the novel cable-swivelling Belkin offered might actually be useful. I quickly discovered how little I actually used the cable-swivelling, and how, in fact, the extra bulk it added was more of a problem than cable management was a solution. My point? Apple’s overarching mantra of simplicity informing function is more than just a mantra, it’s actually really smart, effective industrial design.

What could be more in line with our increasingly detail-crafting/post-physical society?

Caring for your Introvert

Sat, 19 May 2012 11:42:08 -0600

Caring for your Introvert:

My sister sent this article along, one that describes my personality pretty well. I don’t agree with 100% of what’s being said (and, a warning: it’s extremely biased towards introverts, a group which I happen to feel is far more understood than the author suggests), but it does get a few point exactly right. Recommended only for the curious.

Stream of Consciousness, May

Tue, 15 May 2012 23:26:00 -0600

I believe it’s very difficult to directly change who you are at your innermost core. For this reason, I find the notion of working to “create one’s identity” rather unintuitive, because it’s not being created so much as it is discovered. What’s so cool about that, though, is how the closer you get to understanding who you are, the more you stumble upon effective ways to make little changes, and, once added up and practiced over time, those are exactly what (indirectly) create big/core/identity changes.

Of course, we humans don’t really enjoy the lack of control this implies, so, for instance, scientists overcome this by finding other things to control in their place. Theists opted for a slightly different path to subjugate this lack of control onto another more abstract concept: they related to other people (suffering from the same lack of control) by collectively (and no doubt tacitly) agreeing that they suffered from a lack of control. By contrast, scientists related to other people (suffering from the same lack of control) by collectively—this time structurally, logically, definably—agreeing that they suffered from a lack of control. The former made it so that “suffered” was no longer the correct term, since they learned to turn this lack of control into a sense of wonder, a passion for the unknown, and a logical trust in the uncontrollable-ness of things.

Interestingly, while both of these strategies mitigate the fact that things are, for the (very) large part, still out of our control, neither of them actually surmount the problem: they themselves still exist within the problematic paradigm.

It seems to me that the best strategy here (the “next” strategy, I would guess), is to address head on what it means to control things, and why humans (and I would posit all intelligent life) feel the need to be “in control”. What is control?

Control
\ /
Choice
|
Energy

For me, control only fundamentally arises when we are presented with a choice. At the simplest level, if there are two options rather than one, the knowledge inherent there is enough to make us feel as though we should be able to control the outcome—after all, we see and understand that there are two distinct alternatives (that whole idea is encapsulated in our thinking, so why wouldn’t its outcomes be too?). That’s where I think the problem might reside: while it is encapsulated at that moment, we fail to see the bigger picture—if only because it hasn’t “happened” yet, in a temporal sense. That is, those outcomes, while detectable, are not understood with sufficient clarity to allow a valid decision to be made instantaneously. Over time we can (and do) certainly learn how to react accordingly (and thereby make “predictions”), but at the very core level, every “new” idea is essentially a not-sufficiently-informed decision/split/fork that we have only just discovered.

Again, this is trivial on a bigger scale (like the scale I’m using to type, think, etc.), but fundamentally speaking this is a naturally occurring process which seems to account for why we essentially crave control: because the opportunity for control is so frequently presented to us (literally infinite times a second, at an atomic scale).

I suppose this begs the question, “but can our consciousness even process/be cogniscent of itself at an atomic scale?” Intuitively, no, we don’t, nor can we truly succeed in monitoring our existence on an electron-by-electron basis (or quark-by-quark, or string-by-string, etc.), but that’s not to say it isn’t happening as part of some less-than-conscious internal process. I think what I’ve recently realized is that it is in fact possible to veer into this state of atomic-self-awareness, and that’s where I’m bringing in the word “energy”.

I believe, through the various experiences that have shaped me, I’ve recently stumbled upon a level of awareness that allows me to mentally visualize the ebb and flow of these interactions between not only my own thoughts and body but the mind-spaces of others sharing my experience. And this makes sense to me at every level of consciousness along the way: I’m simply tapping into latent energy that’s flowing through my close proximity. I can visualize the “paths” from which my ideas stem, and can see the “trunk” that extends through me and out into space, its branches of varying thickness according to the depth of information relevant to that certain idea or train of thought. I can see where these branches connect or match with those of others in the room: when there is sufficient overlapping, there is deeply profound understanding between myself and that person. I can actually feel the gravity of that idea’s mental weight, that is, there is like a prolonged spark (an arc, if you will) between my branch and theirs, the closer together the branches the more energetic the connection, the more information is shared, the better I’m able to understand their situation for I am no longer only/simply discovering something, I am matching—that is, actively comparing and contrasting—how their branch resembles mine (and of course still discovering where they don’t exactly match).

And this is just one branch. There are many others, like a full tree or root system extending before and around me, constantly moving, swaying, dissipating and disappearing, like the licks of a fire—a tree-like, neuron-shaped, fractal-based cosmic inferno. But one whose form I can glimpse for moments long enough to comprehend, to “feel” yet also to scrutinize. This is the human brain, modelled, abstracted, extended.

—-

I’m reaching the end of my comprehension, unfortunately. I’ve uncovered a bit more clarity on this process as I wrote this, but also discovered how the limits I thought were so nearly reached are perhaps still a fair ways off. No doubt this will keep me moving in their direction for some time, however. I’ve helped myself codify the structure of this process. This is equivalent to that step I mentioned earlier about how repeat exposure and practice of making a certain choice allows it to be controlled/mastered in future.

Hmm, probably time that I take it back to the logic vs. faith levels, and how the next system of thinking will need to revolve around control insofar as it necessarily results from choice. It is perhaps only an appearance, and not a real truth? Of course, that’s step one: perceived control is—must be—an illusion. But only thefirsttime. It is subsequently real because we are able to recall/consciously revisit that same choice —and while I’m not sure if we could necessarily pick the other outcome, we can at least recognize that this could take place, and that’s what control is. Or is it? I’m honestly not sure yet. Wait, no, that’s not control, it’s just memory. Control is much bigger because it implies that we can actually (use memory to) take what was discovered up a level of the energy tree (that is, to go from a smaller branch to a larger one, an ancestral one). But if control is just moving up an ancestor, then control is indeed possible, it just leads to a new discovery/set of choices.

One would imagine that with enough “moves up the branches”—if they were to be logged say, as Big Data—one could determine the structure/pattern of these steps up, and if they were to say, follow a fractal logic, as I believe they do, then one would only need enough data to fill out two iterations of the fractal before they could determine what all past and future iterations would be shaped like. The implications are of course astounding, whether or not they would be practical/possible/actionable is another matter entirely, I would think.

But back to moving up the branches. The weakness in that logic is the equation of “moving up the branches” to “control”; I’m not entirely convinced of this yet. Although it does seem to follow the model of choice = discovered but temporally unrealized consequences, which does imply that given more time/effort/practice/exposure, those consequences could be determined, and if control = the ability to revisit a choice and consciously choose the option different than the one before, … well, wait, this last statement isn’t fully convincing yet, so it’s the weakest link as it stands. “Consciously” seems to be problematic, because it still encapsulates too much ambiguity. But honestly I’m not interested in tackling that yet/now, I think I can solve this using the “paths/branches” structure that’s been on my mind. Because those seem to be fairly consciously-reachable, in my mind. Or is that just me misequating discovering with control—just because I’ve recently recognized them I feel like I can control them, whereas after more discovering I might find that not to be the case, or more likely to be a very difficult and inconsistently verifiable case.

Definitely reaching my limits :( Distractions suck, and they leech the energy away from the path I was focusing on, on sculpting energy and directing where that energy was flowing too, even if I don’t know where it comes from (it goes through me, like all the best artists/scientists/masters say, no? That would be sweet to have that all the time. (I suppose with practice…)).

Anyway, back on track: I wish I could explain the paths I see better to others. I hope writing this out will help. I alternatively switch between complete, dream-like clarity of what and how and why these paths/branches look like, behave, and generate meaning and the stark realization that while I intuitively feel these paths connect all my thinking on all my big matters, there is still somehow a disconnect between the different perspectives. For instance, sometimes the trunk is extending from me whereas in other models I’m reaching to it. I suppose that could be connected by using the same logic as above: the more times I practice something, the more confident I am in its outcome, the more the trunk goes through me rather than next to/in front of me (because I’ve made those choices before, and am now “higher up” on the ancestral branches, that is, I’ve moved to a fork higher in the chain than the one I saw as being reached to before).

In this sense, even if I didn’t do this consciously (say, for instance, just seeing this other branch was enough to permanently consolidate my choices related to it), I am still getting to the same result as I would be had I been in control in the first place. So the “consciously” part is essentially irrelevant if this path can be achieved by other means. Perhaps this is that next level of philosophy? Hmm, perhaps not, it seems to negate too much of what it would be useful for. But it feels like I’m on to something here. A good-looking thought flashed into my mind when I wrote the first phrase of this paragraph but I wasn’t quick enough to catch it. Perhaps it was that this jump up a branch could be induced electrically or at least by some other supra-conscious means. Because that seems to be a more and more inevitable possibility given our increasingly digital lifestyle (a la Second Life but also a la pervasive inexpensive tech gadgetry). Digi-meta-physics, as it were :P

Alright, I’m clearly reaching now, so time to call it quits. I thinks there’s enough here for me to come back to at some point and hammer things out a bit / make refinements, and, more importantly, I hope I’ve left myself a thought path that will lead me back to the same kind of thinking I’m at now. And that what stray ends I’ve left off in the previous paragraph are not only worthy of pursuing but hinted at well enough that my future self will recognize them.

Civilian by Wye Oak Another one from Bao-Hoa’s playlist...

Tue, 15 May 2012 14:53:10 -0600

Civilian by Wye Oak

Another one from Bao-Hoa’s playlist that instantly stood out to me because at about two thirds of the way through my inner-noise-tolerance buttons are pushed so perfectly.

Ham mocking (Taken with instagram)

Sat, 12 May 2012 11:32:48 -0600

Ham mocking (Taken with instagram)

Just arrived at the cabin. We couldn’t come last year...

Sat, 05 May 2012 14:57:52 -0600

Just arrived at the cabin. We couldn’t come last year because of a flood. You can see on the mailbox here the water line! O_O (Taken with instagram)

#perspective

Thu, 03 May 2012 17:36:28 -0600

#perspective

Taken with instagram

Thu, 03 May 2012 08:23:41 -0600

Taken with instagram

Young Blood by The Naked And Famous These wavelengths have been...

Tue, 01 May 2012 23:39:14 -0600

Young Blood by The Naked And Famous

These wavelengths have been reverberating within my cranium all evening, and now you can join in on the vibratory fun!

(It’s just one of my favs off @bawahong’s recent Spring Thing playlist.)

"It is about the real value of a real education, which has almost nothing to do with knowledge, and..."

Tue, 17 Apr 2012 00:50:34 -0600

“It is about the real value of a real education, which has almost nothing to do with knowledge, and everything to do with simple awareness; awareness of what is so real and essential, so hidden in plain sight all around us, all the time, that we have to keep reminding ourselves over and over.”

- David Foster Wallace, 2005

Made-up Minds

Sun, 15 Apr 2012 22:54:41 -0600

Made-up Minds:

Old article that’s appropriate again right now. Subheading:

Since political beliefs are rooted in emotions, says Chris Mooney, the facts are often irrelevant.

Anatomy of a Computer Virus WWIII will be digital, and it looks...

Sun, 15 Apr 2012 22:43:53 -0600

Anatomy of a Computer Virus

WWIII will be digital, and it looks as if it’s already begun beginning…

Drinking Alcohol May Significantly Enhance Problem Solving Skills

Wed, 11 Apr 2012 21:42:00 -0600

Drinking Alcohol May Significantly Enhance Problem Solving Skills:

Interesting article, a lot which makes intuitive sense to me. Plus, one of my top priorities right now is exactly the dichotomy discussed in this research:

Wiley said that the key finding was that being too focused can blind a person to novel possibilities and a broader, more flexible state of attention may be helpful for creative solutions to emerge.

I need to do both extremes (deep focus and creative brainstorming) interchangeably every day at work—and I’m even finding that being able to quickly flip back and forth between these mind-states improves my squash game/tactics—so I’d really love to see myself improve here.

And it turns out the solution is just beer. (Of course.)

ikevan: Quick 3 minute video on the impact of agriculture on...

Tue, 10 Apr 2012 00:03:34 -0600

ikevan:

Quick 3 minute video on the impact of agriculture on our planet and on our everyday lives. Check out Jonathan Foley’s TED Talk if you want to hear more. http://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_foley_the_other_inconvenient_truth.html

I just watched this in a meeting at work. It’s like a TED...

Fri, 30 Mar 2012 14:19:56 -0600

I just watched this in a meeting at work. It’s like a TED talk on steroids, with hilarious (deliciously geeky) quips throughout.

It’s about the founder of MailChimp (the email program used by yours truly to send out Cinematheque and CSIF email newsletters) and his thoughts on how a creative workplace… works.

Plus, chaos/entropy!@

I’ve asked it before (via Modest Modest), and I’ll ask it again: “How can someone...

Thu, 29 Mar 2012 09:53:42 -0600

I’ve asked it before (via Modest Modest), and I’ll ask it again: “How can someone so inconsistent mess up so consistently?”

That’s not to say I’ve messed anything up lately, it’s just a question that really stumps me—what is the most reasonable answer here?

"MIT discovers the location of memories: Individual neurons" ...well, maybe not.

Sat, 24 Mar 2012 00:06:15 -0600

"MIT discovers the location of memories: Individual neurons" ...well, maybe not.:

At first I was like: “Nooooo, that totally can’t be the case—that doesn’t make any kind of sense given the nature of our universe.”

Then I read the article and was like: “Phew. This isn’t as damning as I thought. There’s a lot of problems with this claim.”

And then I hopped on Reddit and was like: “Booyah! Other people see the holes too. Chalk one up for the hivemind!”

And now I’m like: “Is this post too pretentious?”

Yup.