The Notepad.
The Blog Archive
This is an archive for my blog posts. Obviously, there aren't many at the moment. The archive is updated if there is anything to add, and even then only whenever I feel like it.
Sunday 23 February 2015: Government Choice, or No Choice?
Okay, I don’t know how long this thing is going to be. Basically, like with the previous post where I tackled the Freedom of Speech stuff, today I’ll talk about the abortion debate.
And the more I think about what the article will say, I realise this isn’t a debate at all. Its either idiots being stupid, or other idiots misinterpreting the arguments other people make, and mix that in with hardcore religion. Religion + Idiots = Disaster. Sorry, republicans.
So the argument splits itself rather neatly into reasonable people and idiots. With reasonable people occupying pro-Choice movement, where they basically think (and in case you haven’t figured it out, I agree), where it is agreed that women have the right to choose what happens with their bodies because OF COURSE THEY DO. Certainly, if abortions would become illegal if the other side were to win the debate, I would side here every time. I think it’s fine to not abort or believe in conception. It is, however, another thing to inflict your religion-based and rather ignorant views on ALL OTHER PEOPLE IN THE COUNTRY.
And then there’s the other side which basically believe life is sacred. And, as far as the point goes, I don’t completely disagree. But I think they’re going the wrong way about it. Because the fact is abortions will happen whether they’re legal or not. But if they’re illegal, there will be a significantly higher number of harmful abortions and/or people that dies because they screw it up. The other thing they do, and this is totally reprehensible in my opinion, harass women outside abortion clinics. NOW. My article yesterday talked about freedom of speech and the fact that you have NO RIGHT to intimidate, threaten or kill people for having views that oppose yours.
The other thing the zealots do, is they call their movement pro-Life. While this is technically true, it’s also complete bullcrap. Because there are situations where it would be best to abort a pregnancy (mostly limited to if your personal current situation would not be conducive to the raising of a child; or concerns over the health of said child that would make their life unassailably difficult. This would, only on some occasions, include aborting because of disability). So basically the argument should instead be summarised as (as the title to this thing suggests) Pro-Choice or No-Choice. Because if the idiots have their way, the Government would legislate. And that would be bad.
Okay. So, that’s my view. The final point I wish to make is one I don’t see especially often. I am a man. This would mean, would it not, that I have no place in deciding what a woman does with her body? I also have no medical expertise whatsoever. So do I have the knowledge to recommend a thing without knowing it’s the right choice? No. If I have no right to expect people to take my opinions seriously, then why do the (mostly male) politicians that are pushing through these laws think they can?
Heh. 510 words.
As you were.
Sunday 22 February 2015: You Can't Kill An Idea
Neil Gaiman said a thing about ideas and freedom of speech the other day. I will link it here eventually within this article, but that is not where my argument begins.
My argument is about ... arguments. Oooh, meta. Because an argument stems from the disagreement between two people and their opinions or values. But what exactly is its purpose, in the majority of cases? To change someone's mind? To alert them to your views while they alert you to theirs and see where they overlap? See, it's human nature to want people to agree with us, and for this reason I think arguments primarily exist to vhange people's minds.
And that's not really okay, if you think about it.
Because, yes, you have views; and hey, yes, they also have views. But a correlation of these views isn;t necessary to be friends with or talk to a person. You can still get on with people and disagree fundamentally with their stances on big issues; religion, politics, the abortion debate (which stems mostly from religion or lack of), freedom of speech and many other 'heavy-weight' topics that can be discussed.
In these topics, it is unlikely that debating them will help you to 'change the other person's mind' because their beliefs have been entrenched by upbringing or a genuine belief that it is the best (or only) way to look at a particular subject. You could say that I'm entrenched in my view; which is a one-liner is ever I heard one.
So, people argue to change other people's minds, as opposed to eloquently expressing their opinions. And they generally think that yelling will achieve this. As a rather quiet individual prone to making eloquent arguments that see both sides of the debate, I detest this notion.
However, of late, methods have been used by certain groups to 'regulate' the flow of ideas and stop the spread of ideas that are not liked. I am talking, yes, about the Charlie Hebdo attacks, ISIL in Syria, harassment of women outside abortion clinics and the more recent and less publicised attack on a Danish cafe that killed three people.
Enter; Neil Gaiman.
Highlights from that include but are not limited to;
"I believe that it is difficult to kill an idea." This links to my earlier point about people's beliefs being hard to change.
"I believe you can set your own ideas against ideas you dislike." Which means you can argue things out, and will see textual, graphic or visual representations of opinions you do not like. The echo-chamber theory; which is a media studies theory stating we only seek out opinions we like - states that we see less opinions we dislike than those we like, but still see them sometimes.
"I do not believe that burning, murdering, exploding people, smashing their heads with rocks to let the bad ideas out, drowning them or even defeating them; will work." This links directly to my point immediately below, and the belief that it will be impossible to have a world with just one faith system (ISIL's endgoal), and that killing people with ideas you disagree with is immoral and just plain wrong. Also it won't work, anyway.
"I believe that repressing ideas spreads ideas." THIS IS THE BEST QUOTE. Because it's so true. Human nature dictates that if you're told not to do something and not really given a reason why, you'll do it anyway just to see what happens. This was also proven after the Charlie Hebdo attack, where a magazine with a usual print run of a few thousand printed about a million copies just to two-fingered salute the terrorists. I'm not sure of the exact numbers, but the run was significantly higher, and the paper still had the kind of cartoon in it that the earlier paper had been attacked over. This is ultimately why the idea will win against the gun. Have you ever wonder why paper wins against rock? I suspect this might be the reason ...
"I believe that people and books and newspapers are containers for ideas." Therefore persecuting people for the beliefs they hold won't solve the problem, right? To solve the problem, you'd have to burn all the newspapers, but ...
"It is already too late." It's already too late because once the paper has been written and read, the ideas are in people's heads. So there'd be no point burning the newspaper archive. So how do you repress the ideas of people? Answer; you can't. Not properly and for long-term periods, anyway
"I believe you have every right to be perfectly certain that images of God or Prophet or Man are sacred." This hsa more to do with religion that perhaps it should so I'll simplify. You can have your beliefs or opinions and that's fine, and nothing to do with me.
"I believe I have the right to think and say the wrong thing." Same point.
"I believe that you have the right to think things that I find offensive, stupid, preposterous or dangerous, and that you have the right to speak, write or distribute these things." Same point again, but then he adds that it should be okay to distribute those things as well.
"I believe that in the battle between guns and ideas; that ideas will - eventually - win." Because ideas are intangible and hard to kill, and everyone has them.
However, I have a concluding paragraph that was not included in Neil's speech. It follows thus; just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you have to broadcast it, and you will have to defend it against backlash. I also disagree with (and from here on, I refer specifically to Charle Hebdo) insulting a group by clearly understood terms that you know what you're doing and can't understand the backlash. Now, what I mean by that is, in Islam, depicting the Prophet is blashemy. So the cartoons by Hebdo are blasphemy, satirical or no. In fact the satirical nature of the cartoon is simply the last nail in the coffin, because thehy doing blasphemy and then mocking the religion at the same time.
Sideline point; I also believe satire is 'average' people
poking fun at systems of power with more power (or
privilege, if you like) than they have. So I don't see the
content of Hebdo and its attack on Islam as satire, I see it
as an attack. So I don't follow the Je Suis Charlie
campaign. I see it's point, but ...
But I
definitely don't condone killing people for disagreeing with
ideas or thoughts. And anyone who does ought to, in my
opinion, take a long, hard look in the mirror.
There be my thoughts on a thing about his thought on a
thing.
You may now resume
what you were doing.
Saturday 10 May 2014 - Monday 16 February 2015: The News Series Archive
This is the full series of The News. As current there are twenty-five parts, but this may be added
to in the future.
Click here to access the archive.
Friday 23 January 2015: To Raise or Not To Raise; The Minimum Wage
To Raise or Not To Raise: The Minimum Wage
I did a scholarship eco thing
on this a while back. The basic gist of my argument shall follow. Basically,
having a minimum wage stops ‘nasty’ employers from paying their staff
unreasonably low wages for doing stuff (their jobs). When you’re an adult, this
is important. Like, really important. Because of all the boring shit like bills
and mortgage and food (okay that last one isn’t really boring but it still costs
heaps). But as a teenage worker, the amount of money you get paid doesn’t matter
as much because you don’t rely on that money to provide the necessities of
living. That’s what parents are for. So, accordingly, in this country, there are
three minimum wages (source: http://www.dol.govt.nz/er/pay/minimumwage/). The
‘adult’ minimum wage, the ‘starting-out’ minimum wage and the ‘training minimum
wage. All of these have different rates and apply to different groups of people.
The ‘starting out wage’ applies to starting-out workers. Starting-out workers are either; A) 16- and 17-year-old employees who have not yet completed six months of continuous employment with their current employer. B) 18- and 19-year-old employees who have been paid a specified social security benefit for six months or more, and who have not yet completed six months continuous employment with any employer since they started being paid a benefit. Once they have completed six months continuous employment with a single employer, they will no longer be a starting-out worker, and must be paid at least the adult minimum wage rate. Or C) 16- to 19-year-old employees who are required by their employment agreement to undertake industry training for at least 40 credits a year in order to become qualified.
This means that a starting out worker is any person between 16 and 19 who hasn’t worked at a place for 6 months and/or is doing training. That’s the simplified version.
The training minimum wage applies to “employees aged 20 years or over who are doing recognised industry training involving at least 60 credits a year as part of their employment agreement, in order to become qualified.” This would mostly apply to people in Trades required to meet industry standards that do not have other recognised qualifications. This is why it isn’t as widely known as the other two forms of minimum.
These two above rates are $11.40/hr before tax.
The ‘adult’ minimum wage applies to “all employees aged 16 and over who are not starting-out workers or trainees, and all employees who are involved in supervising or training other employees.” This applies to pretty much every other worker that isn’t a high-school student or recently-ex-beneficiary that is paid minimum wage in the workforce. This rate is currently $14.25/hr BEFORE tax.
Okay, that was a long introduction, but now we all know what a minimum wage is, what it does, what workers get it, why workers need it, and what the rates are.
So, there is an argument oft posed about raising said minimum wage to a more acceptable amount (as $14.25/hr is not enough to live on due to inflation rates and Growth increasing prices (most noticeable in the CPI (source: http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/economic_indicators/CPI_inflation/ConsumersPriceIndex_HOTPDec14qtr.aspx). These graphs show that both Inflation and the CPI are at relatively low levels. Because an inflation of 0 would be bad for the economy because it wouldn’t be growing (Growth and inflation are inextricably linked, shown by the AD/AS model). The current monetary policy is to keep inflation between 1-3%.
But counterarguments to this act as though individual firms will be hurt if the Government raises the minimum wage through legislation. While this isn’t strictly true, it does have some base. Because McDonalds wouldn’t make a loss (as in entirely negative profit for the year) if the wage were raised. But they would hire less workers. This is because they would be spending the same amount of money on wages. But therefore having less staff. Which, if anything is bad for the workers. Because they would be worked harder, stress would increase, and the standard of living would decrease. Because McDonalds has less workers to provide the same service because it is forced to pay them more.
A solution to this problem is a thing called a Living Wage. This means the Government suggests a wage that companies feel they should provide because it creates goodwill, as opposed to a higher minimum wage that has been legislated and costs some people their jobs, or tightens up the labour market because firms demand less labour. So, basically firms need to come to the decision of raising the minimum wage themselves, as opposed to being forced to do so, and then this would happen with a minimum increase in unemployment. An example of this is The Warehouse (apparently – there isn’t much you can find on exactly what rates companies pay online). But the theory of this stacks up; if workers are paid more by firms, and jobs aren’t lost as a result of that pay increase, workers have more money to buy more things and unemployment doesn’t increase. Henry Ford (source: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/06/henry-ford-understood-that-raising-wages-would-bring-him-more-profit.html, and http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/03/04/the-story-of-henry-fords-5-a-day-wages-its-not-what-you-think/) also did a similar thing around the time of World War One. Ford’s theory was: Companies had an interest in ensuring that their employees could afford the products they produced. Put another way, employers had a role to play in boosting consumption. While paying higher wages than you absolutely needed to might lower profits temporarily, it would lead to a more sustainable business and economy over time. If the motorcar was going to be a mass-produced product for typical Americans, not a plaything for the rich, Ford would strive to pay his workers enough so they could afford the products they worked on all day.
So, raising the minimum wage by legislation may appear to
make consumers better off – and for thoise who still have jobs
after the increase this is true. But if firms raise wages of
their own accord, then customers will better be able to afford
their products and increase their profits, and there would be no
increase in unemployment. Employment may, in fact, go up.
That will be all.
Wednesday 7 January 2015: Badly Used English
Here are some things that I found on a site that I thought are funny.
In a hotel in Athens:
Visitors are expected to complain at
the office between the
hours of 9 and 11 A.M. daily.
In a Japanese hotel:
You are invited to take advantage of the
chambermaid.
In a Bangkok dry cleaner's:
Drop your
trousers here for best results.
In a Rhodes tailor shop:
Order your summers suit. Because is big rush we will execute
customers in strict rotation.
In a Rome laundry:
Ladies, leave your clothes here and spend the afternoon
having a good time.
In a Czechoslovakian tourist agency:
Take one of our horse-driven city tours - we guarantee no
miscarriages.
Advertisement for donkey rides in Thailand:
Would you like to ride on your own ass?
In a Bangkok
temple:
It is forbidden to enter a woman even a foreigner if
dressed
as a man.
In a Tokyo bar:
Special cocktails
for the ladies with nuts.
In a Copenhagen airline ticket
office:
We take your bags and send them in all directions.
On the door of a Moscow hotel room:
If this is your first
visit to the USSR, you are welcome to
it.
In a
Norwegian cocktail lounge:
Ladies are requested not to have
children in the bar.
In a Budapest zoo:
Please do not
feed the animals. If you have any suitable
food, give it to
the guard on duty.
In the office of a Roman doctor:
Specialist in women and other diseases.
In an Acapulco
hotel:
The manager has personally passed all the water served
here.
Tuesday 23 December 2014: That Limerick on Maths
Over a year ago, I mentioned that the school yearbook implored people to complain about stuff. At the time I was studying for Maths, and wanted to complain in the form of a limerick. But I couldn’t because I couldn’t think of one. I can now. Kind of.
I once tried to do maths
Couldn’t get hang
of the graphs (does that count as a rhyme, I think so)
All to
no avail
I likely will fail
That’s all I can say about
maths.
I realise it is a little of a cheat to repeat a word in order to create a rhyme, but I couldn’t think of one and don’t care what you think.
In similar and almost totally
unrelated news, I redesigned the site and stylesheet, as well as
a new archive structure. I’ll probably create an archive of all
non-current code that I have used in the past that is not
current so there is record of it. But maybe not. Depends whether
I can be bothered or not.
Anyway, back to whatever it was you
were doing.
Thursday 18 December 2014: A Year In Review
This is always fun to write, and I can only hope it is equally fun to read. In this year’s edition of my review of the news; an explosive entrance, some highly controversial protests, political change, disappearances of large lumps of metal and whether or not certain celebrities’ names sound humorous. Then the headlines. That’s my favourite bit.
I always wonder how best to come crashing through the door every year on this thing. This time, I’ve decided for a particularly explosive entrance […] explosions. Because there were many, many explosions this year. Not least the fightings going on in Gaza. Many, many explosions there. Then the ISIS stuff in Syria and Iraq. I can’t even make jokes about that. I mean I’m probably about as much a Muslim as those guys – I don’t appear to follow any conventional religion and am bad at interpreting the Quran … anyway. Then the annex of Crimea into Russia that started a civil war in Ukraine. Putin probably made all of that political manoeuvring while shirtless and wrestling a bear. On horseback.
Then we move to conflicts of a somewhat more peaceful nature, democracy protests in Hong Kong and the protests in the US (and internationally) because of the unjustified killing of an unarmed black man. I’d use the ‘blind leading the blind’ analogy for racism – but if the people were blind, they wouldn’t see colours and there’d be no racism … so it doesn’t work.
But there were more successful politics as well. Well, successful as in ‘didn’t start a war.’ The Scottish independence vote returned a ‘no’ result by approximately a 58% vote, and Fiji held its first democratic election since the coup in 2008. Or something. I wasn’t paying attention back then. Had Scotland become independent, The United Kingdom may perhaps have become the Untied Kingdom. Certainly cheaper than other renaming options like RUMP UK and United Kingdom 2.0, or instead of Great Britain, it would become “good Britain”.
And, locally in New Zealand, we had our (very) own election. Where Kim Dotcom (he’s the one that either looks like a Russian doll, or he’s eaten several too many park benches) tried to stir up some dirt about spying and people’s right to privacy. Which fell flat. Unfortunately he didn’t literally fall flat, that would be fun to watch. Colin Craig (who looks like either he’s been electrocuted, he’s a pedophile or looks like Norman Bates from Psycho) attempted to get the Conservative Party into Parliament and failed. The spying stir-up actually resulted in Labour (the perpetrator) decreasing its share in parliament, resulting in a larger majority for National. Confusing.
So now the moving and slightly malevolent eye looks for mysteriously disappearing pieces of metal. No, I’m not talking about wedding rings, I’m talking about the two (yes, two) plane-related events we’ve had this year. One was definitely shot down, so it doesn’t really count as a disappearing plane, but I wanted to make the plane/wedding ring joke, so there ya go. I’m pretty sure they haven’t found it yet … the game of ‘Where’s Wally?’ continues. And there’s also the Ebola outbreak in Africa that resulted in Band Aid covering the song from the 80s by not changing many of the words so it doesn’t really fit the situation. Apparently we’re ready for an outbreak here. I guess we’ll hopefully never know. Because if the public health system is like the public transport system, we’re all buggered.
And the moving finger (yes, I know – first it’s an eye, then a finger; I need to make up my mind) points to the media in the final section of my review. Disappointingly little change here, with regards to representation of minority groups and women – very much still an ‘if we have to’ filling in of quotas, rather than a judgement of actual merit. Except for isolated cases, so yeah that’s a bit sad. But if there could be an upside of that, then it is the names of some specific individuals. I mean, I thought that Ariana Grande was a Starbucks coffee, Lana Del Ray a Spanish holiday destination and Kanye West a train stop. And, of course, as this is obligatory; Christchurch seems to have calmed down a bit in terms of the shaking (for anyone who’s interested, there’s a Taylor Swift song that covers my thoughts on the issue reasonably well).
So, that concludes this year’s round up. And now, for this
year’s headlines that I could find;
• Potato chip factory
burnt to a crisp
• Disgusted Central Park mugger rejects
Victim’s flip phone
• Missing woman unwittingly joins search
for herself
• SWAT team heroically ends 6 hour standoff with
empty apartment
• Statistics show teen pregnancy drops
significantly after 25.
Tuesday 30 September 2014: Financial Literacy in Schools - Improving the Wellbeing of Students?
Tuesday, period five; Economics class. The mid-afternoon sun
isn’t immediately noticeable as none of the windows are facing
the right direction, but the room is heated to around the
temperature that puts people to sleep. A teacher is lecturing,
pointing vaguely at a diagram drawn on the board and expecting
the students to understand what the diagram means. Which they
do, because it has been explained to them.
But what if
there was no diagram? Would this full class of students be able
to apply the knowledge in a meaningful way? How many of the 25
students actually understand how what they're learning can be
used? Even though these students know about how rises in
interest rates affect the real estate market, not many have
considered their own individual spending habits, or even know
exactly how the real estate market works. Even though these
students are studying the economy, are they financially
literate?
The world of business is seen by the layperson
as a foreign and faraway landscape. A place where people get
rich very quickly and no-one knows how, but then equally quickly
can be completely chewed up and spat out. Because of this
mentality, people don't seem to know that an understanding of
the world of business can lead to an understanding of the world,
generally.
Financial literacy refers to the basic skills
and knowledge needed to navigate the ‘grown-up’ world; things
like tax, interest, dividends and the real estate market.
Understanding these economic concepts is the first key step in
being able to contribute meaningfully to society. It has been
suggested that students should learn financial literacy in
school. Specifically, a policy has been seriously considered
over the past few years to implement a financial literacy
program at Mount Roskill Grammar School.
Many teenagers
don't even budget the money they earn, if they earn money at
all. This leads to teens making financially irresponsible
decisions with the cash that they have -- mostly because there
is no real need to be properly thrifty with their cash, as
parents pay for and provide essential services. This leaves the
money that is actually earnt to be used for 'recreational'
activities or luxury items. This graph to the right shows that
even intelligent people are not necessarily financially literate
and able to hold on to and manage their money - done in a survey
by Felix Salmon for an article on that topic.
This 'cycle of financial irresponsibility' means teenagers
don't cultivate good spending habits or have any real concept of
what money is actually used for in 'the real world' until it is
far too late and they have left home. Implementing a financial
literacy program in schools would mean they received advice on
good spending habits and maintaining these long before they
leave school.
High-school student definitions of
financial literacy vary, from "Do you mean 'don't give your
money to the Nigerian scammers?'" to "Do you mean in terms of
teaching people what assets and liabilities are, or more in
terms of economics?" These two specific definitions came from
Mount Roskill Grammar School students James Ashworth and Diana
Qiu -- both Commerce students who should have some form of
financial literacy and understanding.
However, the
dictionary definition of financial literacy is actually
relatively simple.
"The possession of knowledge and
understanding of financial matters”, as found here.
The
simplicity of this definition, of course, undercuts the
complexity of the issue it defines – as becoming properly
financially literate and knowing how to use this knowledge takes
possibly years of experience and practice. The definition (in
this context) means the skills and knowledge required to
understand business matters in relation to personal finance --
so the ability to budget and understand concepts like tax and
interest in relation to the loans and everyday situations teens
would find themselves in in later life.
There are several
reasons suggested in this article for why financial literacy is
not taught in schools. The fact that not many teachers have
actually taken courses on teaching personal finance and that
many of the others don't feel qualified enough to teach it are
just some of these suggested reasons. Being forced by law to
teach these classes with a lack of qualification would be
detrimental to the learning of students, as they would be
'learning' incorrect facts.
Students also had some
insight as to why financial literacy is not taught in schools --
Miss Qiu again said that "there's no place for it. I mean, NCEA
takes over most of the curriculum. The conversation about
financial education should be had between friends or parents and
their kids?" Mr Ashworth had similar opinions on the subject,
suggesting that schools were to lazy to teach it or that it was
unrequired by the curriculum.
Another key argument put
forward is that there is simply not enough money to teach
financial literacy as a subject without removing money from the
budgets of other subjects.
"In an increasingly difficult
economic marketplace, consumers must be relied on to make
well-informed financial decisions ... financial illiteracy is
widespread even in well-developed economies" (as this paper
states).
As discussed in this article, that would mean
consumers must become more financially literate. Therefore, some
form of financial education should be provided in schools. This
would help students to cultivate better spending and saving
habits, and therefore make better economic decisions.
Promisingly, in 2011, the Australian Securities and Investments
Commission launched a National Financial Literacy Strategy,
which aimed to improve Financial literacy in Australians.
So, the twenty-five economics students in that period five
class are probably more financially literate than most of the
country -- with fewer than 260 schools (out of 2,600; this
number includes all schools in NZ, public, private, primary and
secondary) fully integrating financial literacy education in
their curriculum. Along with these figures, questions of teacher
qualification lead to two potential solutions; students have to
be willing to try and work out these things by themselves, or
specially trained teachers can teach the students financial
literacy.
Ultimately, whether or not the financial
literacy program suggested to be implemented at MRGS comes to
fruition, financial knowledge and awareness needs to be
enhanced. This applies not only to MRGS, but also across the
country. This could mean simply discussing it with family and
friends or having properly taught classes. In this case,
anything is better than nothing.
Saturday 1 February 2014: I Still Haven't Written the Limerick on Maths
Things that are happening;
For one; school. So I probably
won't be here very often any more. You'll cope. All four of you
that read this.
Anyways that has been ... interesting thus
far.
Peer Support -- I mean I get the point but it comes off as a ginormous waste of time and seriously there are better ways. No point me suggesting them, no one hears me screaming on here.
And the documentary. We have to make a documentary for Media. That's sooner than I expected, but good nevertheless, got some ideas. I may post some stuff here that's relevant. I dunno.
Finally, as the title suggests, I have not yet had time to write the limerick on Maths from a reasonable time ago. I probably never will.
Anyways, peace out suckers.
And leave comments. otherwise my email inbox is empty and bleh.
Tuesday 24 December 2013: A Year In Review
This is my (now traditional) review of the news in 2013. I
can only hope it is funny enough to be entertaining, but
possibly not, because I’ve never been that good at this sort of
thing – or as good as I like to think I am. Again, had we filmed
an episode of Bad Jokes, this would have been its content. But
no, again we have not. So this will, once again, be the only
news-based project I do.
So we look to the news, and begin with the obvious stories
that have run for years now; Christchurch and the Economy. These
are the boring ones, not least because bugger all has happened
in them over the year. The economy worldwide seems to be
recovering overall, but nobody is really sure about this and
people appear to have stopped caring. Certainly Europe is either
in exactly the same amount of shit it was in last year, or the
situation has gotten better, but either way they didn’t win the
Nobel Peace Prize this year, and there haven’t been many
anti-German jokes. So I shall continue that trend. Earthquakes
continued in Christchurch as well, following on from way back in
2011, but this year without the benefit rock concerts (which I
personally have always found offensive – never mention rocking
in an earthquake stricken area. Not good). And there, ladies and
gentlemen, is this year’s mandatory earthquake joke.
Adding this year to the trend of disasters throughout the
country and overseas there was a drought in the North island
through February and March, with a massive typhoon in the
Philippines in October. I won’t do jokes about these events,
because that would be mean. There were some births and deaths –
the Royal Baby, and Nelson Mandela, to name – that it would also
be mean to take the piss out of. Then there was the thing where
the Prime Minister of New Zealand had an affair, which no-one
really cares about but he might have to resign blah blah blah. I
personally just hope it goes off into a corner with Mr Mandela
and dies. Oops, I said no death jokes.
Then there were some byzantine economic cockups this year
too, starting with the Fonterra health scare in July/August,
where NZ exports fell by loads and we looked set to completely
fall off the world stage like a drunk comedian halfway through
an act. And the United States countered this health scare by
doing something (God knows what) about a health care scheme in
the USA that no-one could agree on for ages and ages, so the
COUNTRY HAD TO SHUT DOWN TO SORT IT OUT. I MEAN WHAAAAT??
Ultimately the issue was sorted out by females in the Republican
party being smart and not characteristically stupid.
And then, because the media has to balance the opinions it
represents, even the one that women are actually capable of
being strong human beings, along comes (pun, you decide) Robin
Thicke. Now, it seems the media has taken to people shaking this
year, as the frenzy surrounding twerking in the late year, also
surrounded the Harlem Shake in the early year. The only thing
missing from that list is naked entry into a room, swinging from
a wrecking ball, but I’ll stop that train of thought before it
becomes physically scarring.
And with that, my review of the year, funny or not, draws to
a close. But not first before sampling some headlines I came
across in my research across the internet;
Friday 29 November 2013 - Tuesday 28 January 2014: You Will Never Know Series Archive
This is the full series of short stories known collectively as You Will Never Know.
Click here to access the archive.
Tuesday 19 November 2013: Some News about The News
Two posts in a week is a bit exorbitant, isn't it?
Anyway, I have some news about a thing (as official as it'll get for a while - that is, not very).
There's a sitcom I wrote and was filmed in April 2013. I decided I wanted a second crack at it, so a secind crack at it there shall be.
Here's a script peek.
1. Int. Newsroom – Day
Titlecard saying “Previously on The News”.
JAMES is in the studio, recording. The phone rings and he
answers. He says nothing and passes the phone to DYLAN.
Dylan
Yeah, I’m the boss now. What do you
mean ‘what do you mean?’ He got replaced. The company’s much
better now.
James steps to within hearshot of the phone.
JAMES
Breaking News!
JAMES
Broken News!
[sigh]. This is why we’re being cancelled.
So hopefully the script will be finished before Christmas, and filming next July when I have a free four days to shoot. Maybe earlier if we can get people, and maybe not at all if we can't, but we shall see (I'm saying that a lot nowadays - dunno why).
Anyway, back to whatever you were or 'weren't' doing.
Monday 18 November 2013: A Death Sentence
Apparently things that happen in my life are interesting for other people to read about (go figure, I think). But anyway it turns out that's what you (the readers) want - evn though I've had irate comments to the contrary in the past saying things like "BLOG ABOUT THINGS THAT ARE RELEVANT TO MY LIFE FGT" or similar.
So. The particular event I draw your attention to goes as follows.
Monday afternoon/evening. 2 oclock till 5 oclock. NCEA Maths Exam. Now Maths exams are hard exams as is, this difficulty is somewhat compounded by being very much in the graveyard shift - in this case meaning people would rather be dead than doing maths. But anyway, I am significantly more fortunate than most of the people sitting this exam, as I (and many others who chose wise options like I did) do not have to sit Statistics. Now, I do not like English as a subject, more because of how it is marked than because I dislike the subject, but seriously if you wwant to do English, do English. Don't do Stats, which is basically English walking around with one of those party masks on in old-fashioned parties. Call a spade a spade, and its basically English for Maths, not any kind of legitimate maths at all. However, it doesn't help my cause that the legitimate mathses (word? - I don't care) are harder by at least double than they should be, especially considering this is in the afternoon.
I also happen to have read the school yearbook, where the Head of English 100% endorsed complaining, but suggested it be done "with style and wit" rather than whinging. While I agree with this in principle, it is hard to actually do, and with that in mind, here my attempt at styley-witty-complaining, rather than the utilisation of the no-you-are argument is as follows:
There once was a subject called Maths
And one day it - oh
fuck it my brain's fried. Maybe another day.
For now, it seems "unsophisticated" whining will have to do.
Back to study. Chemistry tomorrow. Then my racist opinions while I get bored between then and Accounting ten days later.
That was a joke. I do not have racist opinions. I don't even have opinions about racing. As earlier posts may suggest, I do not like sport.
That's all for now.
Have a nice whatever.
Friday 14 November 2013: Word Games #1 - One Syllable Words.
I feel like writing something, so I decided (after executive advice from another person) to talk for a few minutes without using words over one syllable in length. However, I realise this post is going to seem pre-meditated even if it isn't, due to its typed nature. It may not be very long.
The post without using words over one syllable in length starts; now.
I want to write using words of only one sound to see if I can, as I am bored. This is a test by me to give me a thing to do now. So, what should I write the post on? Sheep. Sheep are cool. I do not know much on sheep, and will make this point as I have no idea what to write. So I shall now write on life. Life is life. When life give you the sour fruit, you make a drink (of course I can not say that as it has words of more than one sound in it. This means I will have to keep on. Life is a thing it is quite hard to write on because of the one sound limit. I think that's all I have to say. I have no more talk ponts.
And ... Stop.
Right, word game one, a reasonable success. We shall see next time I get bored if I try another game.
Sunday 3 November 2013: Documents of a Discussion With My Shrink - A Work of Fiction
This here following is a piece I wrote because I got bored on Friday afternoon, instead of studying for Economics and English, which incidentally I should be doing now, not writing this blog. So I'll be off, but not before I post the writing, obviously.
This here is a transcript of the events of a meeting with my
behavioural psychologist, one Tuesday evening with rather warm
weather for June, accounted for by the fact it was December.
The man was short and balding, and I feel this transcript adequately
describes our relationships.
“The question, Mr Gardner, is ‘how
rich is this cake?’”. The behavioural psychologist had been
acting weird for the past three weeks. I couldn’t figure out
why, but then again, maybe it’s my mannerisms. I’m never sure
with these things.
“If the question is ‘how rich is the cake’
then tell me, how much cash does the cake have?” The question
was delivered straight and punctually, although not in a box;
we’re not talking about pizza.
“I don’t know, but if you want to
existentialise about the socio-economic status of cake then I
suggest you go elsewhere”. The therapist had this manner with
all of his clients; a wry, sceptical and dry wit that often beat
his clients to punchlines.
“To a … cook?” Genuine confusion, I
was lumbering on after the uptake.
“No, that’s a half-baked
idea. Go to a shrink or something”. Short joke setup #1.
Self-deprecation gets no bonus points with me, especially when
I’m in this office, with this person, in this mood.
“What, like
a dwarf?” Deliberate mis-interpretation. Short joke #1.
“You’re
the one with the eating problem. Do you want me to sling fat
jokes at you?” He snapped this back at me, and it became clear
I’d touched a nerve.
“No, I apologise.” At this point, the
therapist buzzed the intercom for his secretary, who was too
short to reach it mounted on the ceiling.
“Quite right, so stop
throwing short jokes at me like tomatoes at a One Direction
concert”. He sat down and combed his fingers through a
non-existent beard.
“Well. That’s sorted. So what was the reason
you called me here?”
“Discuss the cake.” Flat, deadpan. He’s
serious. Or good at joking.
Either way, I have a reply … “Do you
mean “Discus the cake? Like as in throw it at you like a discus.
Don’t mind if I do …”
I move to throw the cake at him leaning
across his desk and buzzing the intercom for the maid again
while I do this (she’s short, as I’ve said).
“No! Stop!” He
wasn’t entirely serious, but neither was I. I put down the cake.
“Well okay. So the cake’s a cake. Just a chocolate cake with
bobbles on the ends.”
He looked at me. I looked at him. Mexican
standoff. Except there weren’t any guns. (Don’t make a biceps
joke, it isn’t worth your time).
“Okay, fine. Eat the
fucking cake.” I win. CAKE! But at the same time, fat joke #2.
“No! I won’t be spoken down to by you, of all people!” Short joke #2.
“Okay, short joke for fat joke. We’re even. Now, how’s your wife
…”
This took forty minutes to write. Enjoy it? Anyway, off to study Economics ...
Thursday 24 October 2013: Previously In My Life ...
So, it's been a while. But nevertheless, I am back (at least for now).
So, there's a new site that we have made at bluelazer.co.nz/ that contains all our stuff in one nice and easy to manage place. It's possible I'll need to change this site quite significantly. I'm really not sure, but I think change will need to be made to ensure the site is HTML 5 compliant (which I'm not sure it is).
Also, I've been studying and stuff. You know, like, maths. And other stuff.
Here's some stuff you should check out, while you have nothing else to do, which you clearly do, otherwise you wouldn't be here. These are just links to BBC pages, but if you like the sound of it you can investigate it yourself. This is the other stuff I've been doing.
And also, as my previous post indicates, planning for film projects. Turns out I miss it.
Anyways, here's some stuff to look at;
- http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b014w0gz
- http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00lmcxj
- http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006q2x0
- http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0092s71
All BBC stuff. I know. But it's all good stuff, too. And some of it you haven't even seen Shivay.
Anyway, that's all for now. Hopefully I'll have something else interesting to say.
Wednesday 11 September 2013: Screen-Play Sample Script
This is a test script I'm planning on doing something with later on (you probably won't hear anything more about it, but you may). What do you guys think? Yes, I'm looking at you, Shivay.
Scene 1
A Boy walks along a pathway, various angles. He sits down. ECU of his hands
opening a crisp packet.
Scene 2:
A Girl is leaning against a public toilet. She is on her phone.
Sanders on phone
Do you see him?
Girl
Who?
Sanders on phone
Gemma, your brother, Matthew Lee.
Gemma looks around franticly. Then she freezes. Matthew is still happily eating crisps. She just looks from a distance.
Gemma
Crap! I don’t think this is a good idea, I’ve worked for the
Dragons Tail and I know what they’re capable of.
Matthew gets up to go. He starts walking.
Sanders on phone
The British Government will do everything to protect you, I
should know, I was at MI6 at one time, remember.
Matthew sticks the packet in a bin. He goes out via an alleyway. Gemma starts walking away from his general direction.
Gemma
Ok I’ll do it, I’m just concerned about my brother could do,
he’s very capable, but is very determined.
Sanders on phone
I’m hoping my new recruits will be the same.
Gemma
Not as determined as me.
Sanders on phone
I’d call it stubborn, training starts tomorrow.
Gemma
I don’t need training, I’m an experienced hacker!
Sanders on phone
As I’m sure but I need to prep you in the art of intelligence.
Gemma
And I’ll meet your new recruits?
Sanders on phone
You are one, but yes you’ll soon meet them, in about a month,
we just have to set it up so no-one suspects what’s going on.
That's it for now, just let me know what you think. There'll be more writing soonish, because I have a 5-day weekend.
Saturday 10 August 2013: A New Purpose for This Site and/or A Rant
Welcome to my website! I posted a post similar to this at the start of February, but some stuff happened and there was an archive error and I'm sad because the old post was really cool, and I am sad because it's no longer with us and I'm sad because life's unfair, and I'm sad because no-one reads this blog ....
Yeah, that'ts me being a whiny bitch. Now, the purpose of this site.
This site serves multiple purposes, one of which is for me to whine about things that I find interesting and/or I find funny and/or I find annoying, and the other is just as a space for me to prove to myself continually that I am a person (prod myself with a stick). That's technology. In your face Terminator 2! Technology hasn’t brought about the downfall of humankind; it’s just wasted a lot of people’s lives on Youtube.
(Although in James Cameron’s defence that more accurate vision of man’s relationship with machine probably wouldn’t have looked as dramatic in CGI so you can’t really blame him for making the script choices that he did)
Feel free to have a mooch about, put off going to bed for a bit or just use it to look busy at work*
*If you are at work and your boss catches you, please click here, QUICKLY. (And look worried and thoughtful) Don’t worry, I’ve got your back.
A new piece of technology on this site since the last time we were both here is the new-and-improved search bar. It means you can search stuff on the archiveforstuff.net46.net domain. Or just waste time. It's a cool search engine. If I can get it working.
That's it for now, off to fix the search. Hopefully by the time this is up it'll be done. But we shall see.
Wednesday 7 August 2013: The Solution and Yes, I Changed the Site, Again
So here are the solutions and whatnot. To be honest, I forgot I'd put this here, so kudos to the dicks who post without using their real names in my comments section (that's you, Shivay) for reminding me.
1) Which of the following is NOT half of eight (think laterally); D). I could not have made the NOT any clearer. Still confused? I don't care.
2) A rooster lays an egg on a North-facing builidng. The building has
a triangular roof, upon which the rooster is sitting. Which way does the
egg fall?
It doesn't. Roosters are male and don't lay
eggs.
3) Picture an old house with vines growing on one wall. The vines double in area each day, and cover the wall completely after 50 days. How many days does it take to half-cover the wall? 49.
4) There's a town somewhere where 7% of the residents are not listed in the phonebook. If you randomly selected 150 names from the book, how many of these would be unlisted? None.
5) A pet shop owner is proud of his turtles. then, on a sad day, all but 7 die. How many are left? 7
YYeah. That's all for now. How well did you do? Need some clarification. You know where to find me. You don't know when and if I'll reply.
Wednesday 30 July 2013: Revival of the Site and Logic Puzzles
Haven't been here for a while. What, were you expecting regular updates? That's probably my fault for the almost regular updating back in February. Sufficient time has now passed that I feel this is no longer the case.
So, here is some logic puzzles because what the hell else is the blog for? I will post the answers next week (ha ha ha).
1) Which of the following is NOT half of eight (think laterally);
a) 0
b) 3
c) 4
d) 5
2) A roostee lays an egg on a North-facing builidng. The building has a triangular roof, upon which the rooster is sitting. Which way does the egg fall?
3) Picture an old house with vines growing on one wall. The vines double in area each day, and cover the wall completely after 50 days. How many days does it take to half-cover the wall?
4) There's a town somewhere where 7% of the residents are not listed in the phonebook. If you randomly selected 150 names from the book, how many of these would be unlisted?
5) A pet shop owner is proud of his turtles. then, on a sad day, all but 7 die. How many are left?
Yeah. That's all for now. Answers next week. Comment your answers if you wish. Bye.
Thursday 7 February 2013: Try This At Home
Due to the fact you probably won't do this for many years (until you have / own a house that you can or are going to redecorate, or at least can convince someone to do it, which is unlikely), the title of this post is perhaps a little bit misleading. However, as I've started, I may as well finish. Follow my step-by-step guide to execute one of the best and most scary practical jokes you'll never see the punchline to, and will probably forget you did. Here's how to do it;
- Make sure you are going to wallpaper the house (Note 1).
- Select your wallpaper you wish to replace the existing wallpaper/paintjob with. Then set it aside.
- Go to the DIY store (Mitre 10/Mega/Bunnings Warehouse in New Zealand) and purchase a test pot (Note 2) of blood red paint. If anyone asks, it's for a feature wall (kinda true).
- Rip down the old wallpaper or prepare the paint that is currently on the walls to be painted over.
- Paint, in the blood-red paint on the wall in HUGE letters, the following.
- I WILL KILL AGAIN
- Then quickly paper over the wall, and promptly forget you did it in the first place. This only works if you wallpaper (Note 3).
- Continue repapering and living your life until you successfully sell the house.
- On your farewell tour of the property, suddenly remember you did it, just before handing the keys over, and get a lovely warm feeling inside. OR b)
- be driving past at exactly the right time, and hear the rip of wallpaper, and then the scream.
Voila. That's how you do it.
Enjoy, and until the next time.
------------------------------------
Note 1: This joke is based on a simple theory - one of territorialism (new word, perhaps). That being, a new owner of an existing house wants to make it THEIRS, meaning replacing the wallpaper/paint and carpet and drapes and stuff like that. As this joke will not work with a paint-based replacement system (Note 3), you must replace with wallpaper for this to work.
Note 2: I don't want to waste too much money, and you won't need too much paint.
Note 3: You will be painting on the wall. So painting over your own painted handiwork just destroys the time and effort you took to make it work, and them replacing with paint won't work either, but with wallpaper, to replace said paper, you must remove it, and to repaint, you also must remove the paper.
Wednesday 30 January 2013: The Physics Of Playing Frisbee
The physics of playing Frisbee is rather simple, and yet destructive and damaging when done incorrectly.
So, this is me (a teenager with absolutely shit hand-eye coordination and therefore, almost by definition, no skill at frisbee) telling you (potentially similar, but possibly very different) readers how to play frisbee. And the logic behind frisbee is watch where the wind is coming from so the frisbe doesn't jack-knife and smack you in the face.
The main goal is, instead, to aim correctly so that it doesn't jack-knife at all, and instead smacks your opponent in the face. If this ever happens, you can pretend it was an accident, but we all know that it wasn't, don't we?
But enough social politics. Seriously though if you jack-knife too many frisbees you will get laughed at.
So here is my simple tip to completely avoid any humiliation of any levels when playing frisbee. Don't play frisbee.
Playing frisbee is one of those sports where you either impress everyone by landing / catching (whichever you prefer) the frisbee every time, or humiliate yourself by arsing it up (sometimes literally). The part of that statement that applies to you is literally a 50-50 split.
So ultimately I cannot help you, except for one tiny little pointer thing. The wind direction and intensity directly affects your ability to aim, and/or get smacked in the face.
So good luck, or bad luck, depending on how good you are.
Till later.
Tuesday 8 January 2013: Making A Blog
A friend asked me how easy it was to make a blog.
"Easy." I said, ommitting the fact that the hardest part of writing a blog isn't actually writing the posts. It's actuallly getting the blog to work, and look good working.
The simple fact of blogging is that you at least need some knowledge of html and hexaadecimal colour labels. Know these and it will become a lot easier. The resource for this is attached below.
In designing a blog, you basically need 4 (or 5) pages;
- Index (the root page)
- About
- The Blog
- The Archive (optional)
- Contact
This will mean that people can navigate your site easily. It also means less work for you, as these 5 pages are already programmed into the menu above.
The hard bit of blog making is knowing how to use the code that has been set up for you, and/or looking around to find code that does what you want. The easiest way around this is to keep a copy of the .zip file AS YOU DOWNLOAD IT. Play around with ANOTHER copy, and try to figure it out. That way, if you screw it up, you haven't permanaently buggered your new blog.
Also, save often, and whenver you do something that works.
And if you really can't figure out either a) how to do something or b) what a certain piece of code does, ask me, and I will help you (if I know you / can be bothered / care.
Putting the site online is easy enough. But I won't explain it here. If you get to the point that you want me to explain it, ask me then. And if you don't then I haven't wasted my time.
Resources below;
That's all for now.
Monday 7 January 2013: New Year, New Blog, New TARDIS, etc.
So I have changed the color scheme of the site. I was going to blog sbout frisbee, and then, promptly upon finishing the post, my work was lost as Expression Web crashed. So I did this instead, feeling a little depressed.
All that has changed is the color scheme, as you can see.
Your thoughts on the new-look blog?
I've just remembered that you actually CAN tell me what you think via the contact form.
Good day.
Sunday 30 December 2012: Layout Of The Archive
This is a small post, clarifying any discrepancies with the layout of this Archive. It is also the first post on a new Archive page in over a year. But anyway.
New posts will always be placed on the page linked to in the menu, and the older a post gets, the further it slides down this first page, and then, when a new page is created, it goes on to a new page. This means that page 1 will always house the newest posts, and the further along you go, the older the posts will get. The Archive will also conform to the 10-posts per page rule I set above.
That is all I have to say with regard to that. But I will be back sometime in the new year.
Sunday 30 December 2012: A Year In Review
This is a review of the major news stories that I can be bothered to write about - basically, if we had filmed an edition of Bad Jokes, like we were going to, these would have been in it. But we haven't and we won't, so this'll have to do.
Right, so Greece was predicted to leave the Euro, but actually it didn't and instead the Euro won the Nobel Peace prize. The timing of these events seems mocking - as with Germany's conflict-ridden history, we can at least guess what some newspapers were thinking when they read these two stories one after the other; 'World War Three was prevented!' But actually, the Peace prize was in recognition of the last 60 years of trying to unite Europe, not just recent times. And somehow, they managed - at least for the time being - to pull through and survive a rather major market collapse that people thought would've surely happened by now.
And speaking of things that surely should've happened by now, the world didn't end on 21/12/12. Now, even if you look at this quickly, you can see the argument is full of holes. I mean, just because a calendar finishes on a certain day doesn't necessarily mean that the world will end, and all the YOLOfags who jumped on this bandwagon should be kicking themselves for having been so easily taken in, and resolve to change their ways. It is new year, after all. Because, quite simply, if the Mayans could predict the future, they'd still be here, right?
And then in August, the world's ginormous eyes turned to London, by form of HD cameras on strings above a sports stadium, and the stadium in question is the Olympic one. So I am not a fan of sport, or PE in general, but even I find myself watching - with a certain degree of interest - a person lifting a 100kg weight, or canoe slaloming, or even playing table tennis, but the one thing I would suggest is that they should introduce something like 'Olympic Sudoku solving' or similar. I don't know, maybe it wouldn't work, but in any case, the representation of people, the representation of sports and the crowd turnouts in these games is better than it has ever been.
Now I have always maintained (even if I never said it), that writing your own blog, and coding it yourself, has more ups than downs. For example, I don't have a five hundred word limit, so I can continue to write. So I shall.
And this year the Queen celebrated 60 years on the throne (not a toilet) and will hopefully continue to serve for a few years more.
The American General Election saw Barack Obama remain in the White House / Oval Office, however, it was unfortunate that just prior to this event occurring, New York and several states in the US were struck by Hurricane Sandy, which caused flooding and damage and ultimately destabilized the presidential race in the favour of Barack Obama, and potentially away from Mitt Romney.
Now, as the year is almost at its end, and I didn't film Bad Jokes, here are the funny news cuttings I found in places around the Internet.
So yes, this is the year we call '2012' basically over, however it looks as though (for the foreseeable future at least), the world will continue its existence, and as such, so will we all.
Oh and also, there is ten posts now in the Archive, so the next post I make will be on a new page. Yay! New year, new Archive page - how exciting!
No ... just me then.
And with that, goodbye.
Saturday 22 December 2012: Apocalypse Now??
This'll be short - less than a hundred words. Count them.
My argument today is really simple, and it follows the vein of some Tui ads (you'll know the ones).
The argument in question is; "Yeah Right."
That will be all.
Tuesday 18 December 2012: The Possession and Consumption of Cake
The argument I put forward today for your consideration is a simple one; can you have cake and eat it too.
That depends on how clever you are, and what the parameters set by the person using the phrase are. (More often than not, no parameters are set, but nevertheless, I will elaborate on this shortly).
Mostly what I mean is - are you limited to the possession of a single piece of cake, or are you allowed multiple bits. For if this is the case, surely, the solution of this rather elementary conundrum would come to any logicians, and/or members of the public easily.
For in order to have cake and eat it, there must be multiple bits, as (the point of the saying) it is impossible to both have an unharmed version of a particular piece of cake, and a slightly eaten/fully eaten version.
However, if multiple pieces are allowed then surely the saying would mean far less than it currently does, and even become void completely.
The other factor that needs to be considered is time.
Do both factors of the saying need to be addressed directly at any one point in time, or if having one, and then (a suitable amount of time later), the other. I suspect that the only way to invalidate the statement is to have both at the same time.
So, my solution to the "can you have cake and eat it" argument is yes, they just have to be different pieces, and you must have (at least) two pieces at any one time, because no, in my mind at least, prior possession of the cake does not tick that box, and then consumption tick the other. If that were the way it worked, I feel that the statement itself would be void. Simple as that.
As it is now, the statement's void anyway (because of this very argument).
See ya.
Friday 14 December 2012: Airline Food
I'll be quick this time, I think. Not much to say really, just a small point, and minor accompanying evidence from me today. Then I'll write some story because I can.
All right. As quickly as I can (300 or fewer - NOT less - words; that's a debate for another day, i.e. the next time I post anything).
Airline food really isn't that bad. Maybe it depends more than it should on the airline with which you travel, but I dunno - the only even remotely long-haul flight I have been on is the one to Kuala Kumpur form Auckland with Malaysian Airlines.
Now, I am not saying that, in my experiences, airline food is perfect, I am simply saying that given the situations in which it is placed, it is pretty good. The problems I have with airline food is mainly tied with the amount of space you have in which to eat, as a passenger, rather than the food itself.
Case in point time.
I had a roast chicken dinner on said flight, which did, surprisingly, taste like Chicken, and was, also surprisingly, rather nice. It didn't give me food poisoning either, which is nice of it. However, this is only considering the food. The amount of time I had to waste moving it around on the ridiculously small tray table was grossly disproportionate to the amount of time I spent eating the actual (relatively palatable) food.
This is my point. Agree or disagree?
I don't care, because you can't post comments. Ha Ha Ha.
Till the next time.
Sunday 2 December 2012: Unusual Double Standards Debate
Me again. I'm baaaaaack. Yeah I'm not that excited either.
Anyway, something topical, but also true. This rant is one that I have prepared a while ago. I'm not sure how long it will be, but yeah ... I will try.
So to start this one-sided debate I will point out that key evidence in this rant is taken from the American song "Hummingbird Heartbeat" sung by young smasher of windows Katy Perry (my Justin Bieber rant may follow at a later date), and the rather countless number of American adventure / excessive use of a gun films.
So. The American media industry seems a little undecided on how to deal with several things; the sexualisation of content (film + music), or excessive violence or implied violence (again in either film or music). The reason for this discrepancy (and this rant) is that American music (and indeed, I should point out, varying levels of music internationally) have overly-sexualized and therefore inappropriate content and/or thinly concealed euphemisms (EEEWWWphemisms). I have also noticed the sheer number of films with little other content than big. muscly, trigger-happy gentlemen running around shooting stuff (and not in a film way - that would be film-ception, and too complicated for most audiences, my Year 11 music video was a testament to that. It's late Saturday night when I'm writing this, and I don't have an internet connection at present. This means it is rather difficult for me to continue with the song side of this rant accurately and with specific evidence without a lyric sheet and I don't have one (as yet). So with the films (which again, as there is such a large number of films this refers to, will have vague and non-targeted evidence. English department shoot me.
So, the number of films in which people are allowed / encouraged to run around with guns that are made by the American Hollywood is simply - well, every Hollywood film. My point here is simple - what the hell?
Men can run around with guns in a film given a PGR rating, and yet cannot swear, or even imply sexual action (although the Steven Moffat based references to "dancing" in Doctor Who are established by him as euphemisms, and yet Hollywood films seem almost scared of the content (and you CERTAINLY wouldn't catch anything of that sort on American TV. It's like the US are trying to kid themselves into thinking that they're innocent, when a commonly-acknowledged fact by people is that "Sex AND Death" is the kind-of doorway to loss of innocence (or the Journey from Innocence To Experience, if you will). It seems broadcasters are unaware these things generally occur together. You can't complete half a job, and then just leave it. Either don't touch anything that could even possibly constitute a possible loss of innocence, or completely blow the audience out of the metaphorical water.
The lyric sheet I have obtained follows. The song that I will yell at is called "Hummingbird Heartbeat" 'by' Katy Perry. Ugh. Even writing it makes me ill.
Lyric Sheet:
Very quickly now, we can see where this argument will start.
Referring to the above sheet, the euphemisms ("Taste of your honey", etc.) are so blatant that you may as well just say sperm.
Then people know exactly what you mean. But then, problem is, you aren't commercially viable (not that Katy Perry was ever commercially viable), and the bigwigs cut you off.
Which brings me back to the "Why The Hell Do They Do That?" argument. WHY?? It's not like they need to prove anything to anyone about being "grown up", and even if they did, that wouldn't be the way to do it.
So what it seems to me is this; films can have violence, and music can be crammed with sexual innuendos and euphemisms, but neither can have both (if you follow).
So you should now see what I'm saying. My 'loss of innocence' argument still applies here, and just shows that the US media industry needs to get its shit sorted. If it doesn't, people like me will yell at them on forums like this (except they will be forums that people read), and so will be boycotted, and/or forced to change.
And that's all I have to say about that.
Friday 30 November 2012: Long Time No Speak
So I haven't written for over a year. No-one cares. Nobody noticed. Frankly, neither did I. Basically, this post is me writing to inform myself that I still exist (which I really needed to know. Don't look at the source code for this site, and in fact, in the whole archive, as it is appalling. But anyways, the real reason I'm here.
There bloody isn't one. I'm just randomly typing something to type until I run out of patience at the whole preposterous situation, and give up in exasperation, or something better comes along (it may, you never know). For example, writing for film / the screen (which I can do semi-competently - not well enough to be any good, but better than most my age, which I am not telling you for personal security reasons).
The main reason I did not write is because no-one reads it, and I don't have time (two very big reasons). Because of this coupling, I didn't see the need, and also because the site has been offline due to the closure of the hosting provider, for some unknown reason. So I decided to "archive" all the work we'd done on the Web, and so this overall site was formed, which basically means nobody is going to read any of this, and I could just say random things because of this, but I more than likely won't (unless I get really bored).
So I will start filming a project called "Locked" in January and have successfully lined that up, so I am fairly banana.
See I have done it. Must've got bored. Can't remember.
Oh well, time to go quietly into the corner, for a while at least, or until I can think of something worth saying, or if I ever feel the need to convince myself I still exist. Anyway, until that time ...
Wednesday 2 November 2011: Changes to the Education System, Perhaps?
Editorial time.
Picture this; a classroom of 30-something students sit in a normal-sized classroom, on normal sized desks. But there's a catch. They all have computers on these desks instead of books. Computers have modernized the world; made it much easier to communicate with other people, develop ideas and say what we think. Like I'm doing now. So what if there was a possibility of having computers in schools? Surely it would increase classroom productivity, organization of notes and therefore, simplicity of study. But what about the cost?
Yes it would. Classroom productivity basically boils down to "the amount of work you can do, divided by the time you have". Naturally, then having a computer would increase this. I know from personal experience that you can type faster than you can write. In amongst the sea of facts, you also don't have to sit in class copying out a worksheet, because you can't write on the sheet, when all the teacher has to do is press one or two buttons to then forward the lesson's notes and worksheets on to the students.
This modern way of teaching would surely do away with writing using pieces of paper. Actually it wouldn't. Even now, there are still things that the human can produce without using a computer. Drawing, for example. This would require the same fine motor skills as it does now, and I would recommend that if this new method does come into force, the computer not completely take over.
Notes would then be more organized. There would be one folder with all notes from Social Studies, say, and not notes spread over multiple books that are also jam-packed with worksheets that don't help with revision. So you decide what goes in your file layout, and what doesn't even make it past you Gmail account. Studying with multiple people would also be easier, as you don't have to type out the notes from a book, just email the people you're working with the appropriate files. However, then poorer families would be stuck in an even larger ditch than before, because they either have a computer, or they don't and are rapidly falling behind.
For some schools, the issue of cost is what has kept the computers out. (Imagine a prison door, if it helps). It is partially true. But think; seven or eight books a year, plus 5 lots of maybe $40 worth of stationary (which comes to about $300/$400 over 5 years), is about the cost of a small netbook. Now, I'm not saying netbooks are good, but they do the job. It's just all the money you'd spend in four years, in one hit. The schools could also amp up the school fees slightly, or put the photocopying budgets towards the new technology, if it helped to "ease the pain".
So, while it is in fact possible to have computers in schools, it would be an enormous undertaking to convert a whole school to this new method. However, I believe, if they were to do this, they would benefit form the advantages of the new technology more than reel from the debts. As technology will become more prominent as time goes on, it is also wise to slowly update the existing technology, or at least realize that the "Windows 95" computer in the corner's train has well and truly passed it by. Computers in schools would be a massive asset, to the students for ease of work, and for the school, in means of adaptability, and not being left in the dark.
But we all secretly know that's not going to happen.
Until the time I next have something to say.
Thursday 27 October 2011: Shake-ups or the Damn Obvious?
Posts on this blog will alternate between two things; weekly news-critical satire reports and whatever-the-hell-I-feel-like editorials. This is the first news report.
Okay, main events ...
Gaddafi was killed in Libya under unclear circumstances. A lot like Hitler. Mind you, the two men shared a lot - motives, methods, ideals, bloodline. (That last one was a joke, by the way. No laughs? All righty then. Movin' right on ... he was then dragged through the streets. His body (what was left of it), was burned and buried in a private ceremony somewhere, so it wouldn't be vandalized. The United States Government should be Tripoli pleased with this end result. (Get it yet? Anyone?)
We won the Cup, in a match that was far too closely-fought for comfort. I don't mean to say that the result of this match dictates comfort, although it does in a roundabout "You're famous, aaaaaaaaaahhhhhh!" sort of way. For those that still don't know or care what I'm on about, it's the Rugby World Cup. Yes that one. So, for the next four years, New Zealand Rugby players (the Pro ones) will get treated like the Gods they're not. And yes, Sir Richie McCaw has been chucked around. (Not literally of course, that would be illegal), and there have been victory parades in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch, slowing down New Zealand's already crap public transport system to a crawl (oh, wait, that's where we started). Notice how I deliberately went out of my way to avoid a Christchurch joke in poor taste. But back to the rugby; at their victory parade Christchurch City certainly knew how to rock!
Oops. Couldn't help it.
And with that, goodbye.
Sunday 23 October 2011: Screenwriting for Film, and Writing in General
I am bored, even though I should be writing for film. So I decided to describe my writing process.
Basically, I write by thinking of a plot first, This contrasts Aaron's writing style, because he just writes. The main problem, therefore, with Aaron's writing style, is he sometimes gets completely stumped and doesn't know where to go from a particular point. The other problem is other people can't help him, because they don't know where he wants it to go either.
It doesn't take a genius to realize that this wastes time. For example, he has now got - as at the time of writing - eight weeks to finish a script that he is half-way through. This isn't a problem except for the constant annoyance that is "end of year exams".
So, after writing a plot, I start on the script, following my plot. My scripts don't change course from the original plot. It makes writing so much easier because at any given point, you know full well what the hell is going on.
But it's easier to write without knowing where the text is going, isn't it? I'm doing it right now. I have no idea where this is going. So I disprove my own point, don't I?
Yes and no. It's easier to say "I'm lazy, so I won't write a plot" than it is to say "I'll go with the flow, because I know roughly where I'm going." This is obviously also going to result in better writing, because while you aren't sure exactly what you want to say, you have a fair idea.
Back on topic; then after finishing a script, check it so that it definitely makes sense. If you leave your viewers stumped, you lose favour. Easy as that.
So, in conclusion, it is unwise to write for screen without a clear idea of where you're going, and maybe even plan blog posts, if you aren't comfortable with free writing. If you are, you probably don't need to plan your blog posts, just get a general idea. Because no-one like a blogger who loses his train of thought half way through a editorial.
Where was I again?
Until next time.
Thursday 20 October 2011: The Basics
This is my blog. Basically I post about exciting things that happen, if I can be bothered. This blog may sink into satire, I just don't know, we'll see.
Basically this is the product of an imagination, with very little imagination, if you can understand that paradox, that, when another guy I know coded his own blog, followed like a sheep. However, even though I lack major opinions for most things, when i do have a large opinion, I will post the topic here. Therefore, this will almost definitely be a topical blog, rather than posting about what I had for lunch.
This is my first attempt at blogging (on a hand-made site that no-one will ever see) but it seems to be going quite well. I seem to be able to structure a simple sentence. This is probably the reason I get Merits in English.
Anyway, this is my blog. I will try to use it.
So each time I post a new blog, the old ones will go into the Archive. You can contact me if you like, but I can't see any reason why you would. Other than that, good day. Or good night, which ever the case may be.