Going to wander into obscure territory here. (taking longer than I thought to locate it)
There already exists a good summary and 'researched' description here. I generally agree with it, but wish to add some material.
Half-life is the standard method of describing the rate of radioactive decay of a specific isotope. It is also the name of the very popular first-person "shooter" game that effectively put Valve Software on the map. Two other software developers made "Equels" - my own word for a "sequel" - that occur in the same place and time as the first one. Half-Life featured a nuclear physicyst named Gordon Freeman. Opposing Force featured Corporal Adrian Sheppard. Blue Shift featured Black Mesa Security Officer Calhoun. When playing the "Equels", you do not actually meet Gordon Freeman, but the developers allow you very brief glimpses of him - if you are paying attention.
Most recently, Half-Life has been succeeded by a proper sequel in Half-Life 2, and the subsequent "Episode 1" and "Episode 2". Valve has stated that offering the follow-on adventures in a more modular installment allows for more regular updates to the saga. I expect that it also allows them to put more cutting-edge technology into the latest installment, rather than delaying a big project by re-writing the underlying code. As far as I am concerned, whatever they want to do is fine by me.
Half-Life features Gordon Freeman grappling with the aftermath of a bizarre laboratory mishap. Apparently a portal to an alien world was opened releasing dangerous creatures into the Black Mesa complex. But was it an accident? What really happened at Black Mesa, and who is the mysterious "G-Man" that keeps surfacing in the background, always seeming to have more control over the situation than Gordon does? We get the idea that a powerful being called "Nihilanth" became aware of this world and used the energy released inside the test chamber to open a portal to Black Mesa. Yet that fails to explain the identity of the G-Man.
At the end of Half-Life, Freeman comes face to face with the G-Man, who offers praise, but no explanations. He does, however, offer Gordon Freeman (you) a job. If you accept, you are left in a bizarre place, and apparently you perish if you refuse. At the begining of HL2, the G-Man appears and speaks to you before you find yourself on a train, about to arive in City 17. Has the G-Man kept Gordon in stasis all this time? And odder still is that the Vortigonts who we remember as nasty enemies in HL, are now co-conspirators, and actually treat you with a reverence approaching adoration. What the hell has happened?
The Vorts are grateful for their liberation from bondage to the Nihilanth. But there is more, much more. In HL2, talk to a Vort after key dialogue has finished and its time for you to move on. I recommend enabling subtitles for this, and talking to the Vort that just installed the gun on your airboat. There are other opportunities, but theres just too much background noise at New Little Odessa, and the Vort there has to wait for breaks in Colonel Cubbage's endless stream of radio hails to speak. The Vort will speak in prose and allegory, and make the clearest references to the Vortessence before Episode One. The first thing that the Vort will say is: "We remember the Freeman: we are coterminus."
Coterminous: sharing the same boundaries, having the same span or scope. What an odd thing to say.
Gordon Freeman (you), of course says nothing, the other characters talk to, or near him, usually presenting expostion to explain your situation, or its background. The enigmatic part is that you are put in a number of places with no clear objective save what the minor character tell you. [Might as well call them 'meatlings' as most of them die anyway.] Since you do not speak, and in many cases you (as the player) have no forenowledge of what to do in some situations, there is a vaguary of identity. Is this really Gordon Freeman, or someone else? Someone that might truly not know what they are doing?
This is never more clear than in the very begining, at Black Mesa. You are apparently late for the test procedure, but you have no clear idea where you should be going. Fortunately, people that you meet tell you brusquely where you should be, and there are color-coded lines on the wall that you can follow to your destination. When you arrive, the scientists speak to you in a slightly formal manner, not exactly as if he has done this hundreds of times before. Then at the crucial moment, you can see what needs to happen, and where the crucial object needs to go. I remember thinking - "Can this be right? I just do it this way?"
Of course, when I do perform the task, everything goes to hell. Did I do it wrong? Did I cause this catastrophe? There turns out to be other reasons why it happened. Yet that does not mean that what I was doing, as Gordon Freeman, was correct.
At the very begining, before anything happens, we are told that the identity of Gordon Freeman's Administrative Sponsor is classified, and that his disaster response priority is discretionary. Discretionary? Isnt he just a theoretical physicist? Surely we were informed of these vaguaries for a reason?
I think Gordon Freeman may not be a physisict at all, but an agent of some kind. His (late!) insertion in Black Mesa was a trial run of some sort, which worked well. At least the G-Man was pleased enough to preserve him for later use. The G-Man, as we see in Episode Two, seems to have ideas that diverge from those of the Vortigonts, and I think this is why the beginning of HL2 played out the way it did. Had Barney not interfered, Freeman would have gotten onto the express train to Nova Prospekt. This is not an accident, it was the only train there, and the player has no real option but to go that way. Then, when finally in Dr. Kleiner's laborotory, its true that "Hedy Lamarr" the headcrab interferes with the procedure. One of the scientists however also says "Something is drawing him away!" and Gordon Freeman appears in Dr. Breen's office not just one time, but twice, before ultimately ending up back at Dr. Kliener's laboratory. In retrospect, being teleported twice to Dr. Breen's office hardly sounds like a random failure.
When Freeman is fighting [your] way through Nova Prospekt, (he got there anyway, but by way of the Resistance) Dr. Breen can be heard over the public address system. He discusses the state of affairs regarding Overwatch's capture of Dr. Vance, but their failure to get Dr. Freeman. [Its a Utopian Dystopia where the world seems to be in decay, but the most prominent figures are physicists.] Dr. Breen says that Dr. Freeman's condition; between the episode at Black Mesa and his current efforts against the Combine, precluded the development of any combat abilities. In short, Dr. Breen knows that the G-Man has been keeping Freeman in stasis. Given the train schedule, the teleport 'fiasco', and Dr. Breen's unexplained knowledge of Freeman's situation, I believe that the G-Man was intentionally sending Freeman to Dr. Breen. Possibly at the request of the Combine Advisors.
What precisely is the meaning of "Half-Life"? Does it infer that time is of the essence? That things are decaying and falling to ruin all around him? That Freeman has a short life expactancy? Or perhaps it means that Gordon Freeman is only half human. Half living, half not living, possibly a prototype Combine soldier. Now a soldier without orders, who can only react to his situation.
Half-Life.
Or no life at all.
07 December 2008
27 November 2008
A new WPA? Over my dead Union!
I read an interesting Newsweek article about the "new affluence" in America. With the current situation, and forseeable future adjustments, any bright spots are about 10 years away, with belt tightening rampant at all social strata until then.
America still has foreign debt, and seems to be maintaining current spending levels only by printing and selling T-bills (maybe the wrong term, but we're printing and selling something). The U.S. Government is currently disbursing a $700 million piss-in-the-wind fund, with some expectations of a second economic stimulus package.The American economy is very resilient, but real economic activity will be slowing to about half because all the "liquidity" has just evaporated in a meltdown of leveraged credit. Comming regulations are badly needed, but will have no impact on economic activity.
Retailers.... are just screwed. Consumers have negative net worth these days and almost zero savings. With a bleak economic forecast, the smart consumers will be shunning luxury items and even 'perks.' Those franchises that just opened new branches and dont have appreciable market share in their new areas - closing and writing off those same branches their best option.
TARP is a very apt name; hide financial weakness by whitewashing it. Throwing big wads of cash at fundamentally unsound problems. I think the Federal Government is making an enormous mistake by propping up AIG and CitiBank. The way I understand it, the only way of recouping government money is if those firms start to profit again. Unless this Republican administration required them to abandon using unregulated financial instruments (I'd be suprised, Paulson has been mum on the topic of further regulation, I read that as quiet resistance), they will continue to do so. These firms will feel even more pressure to profit now, so that they can stop Uncle Sam from looking over their shoulder. I have to expect that their past methods of 'risk management' will continue, especially since they have just been 'fixed'. A continuum of repeat failures on the parts of these firms is not acceptable to me.
Add that the American automakers are going to fail. If they've gone begging to the government, like they have done, then they are on the verge of going under. Again. They were losing money during times of prosperity, and they are going to do much worse now. Its way past time to pull the plug. And that means we're heading for an umemployment rate in the U.S. of something like 10%.
Almost out of the blue, someone mentioned to me that they had heard rumors of a WPA program coming. That was a suprise, and probably not grounded in fact, but it did get me to think about the overall state of affairs. If a Federal Public Works program were created, it would create a lot of jobs for skilled and unskilled labor, largely building infrastructure which is badly needed in many areas despite recent American prosperity. Surely that would be much more cost effective than an economic stimulus package. Prima Facie, it sounds good to me.
Unions won't stand for another WPA. Maybe that is a good thing, in the way that a terrorist attack is a serious wake up call to a situation of lax security (or poor socio-economic foriegn policy, but I digress). I feel that labor unions no longer serve a useful purpose, and are now actually anathema to free enterprise. Unions artificially increase wages while acting to reduce productivity. [Feel free to disagree here, but don't forget to factor in lost productivity time for picketing, contract negotiations, and union-determined productivity] I'm not saying that worker protections are uneccesary, I'm saying that unions have become powerful entities that are hindering economic progress. Certainly the U.S. automakers would agree. [Automakers almost don't count though, theres a forest of dead wood there that seems uninterested in making radical changes necessary to seriously compete in the auto market. Their cash cow until recently was pickup and SUV sales. That is not innovation, thats a gimmic which exploits a CAFE loophole. A loophole I want to see closed.]
I mentioned to my friend that the unions would never stand for a new WPA. He replied that their voice will count little when there are no jobs. That sounds good, but its an over-simplification. Here is what I see happening in the next 3 years. The big three fail, declare bankrupcy, merger, restructure or a combination of these. My money is on bankrupcy - the dead wood executives will want to restructure their status quo. There will be many union job losses but not 100%. So UAW will continue only slightly diminished.
Pilots, mechanics, and other airline workers have been getting progressively shittier deals through continual airline failures. They are union, but its not doing them a fat lot of good. There are many other union groups but I'll lump them with the most powerful - road construction and railroad workers. Construction companies do private work as well, but their main meal ticked is Federal and State infrastructure. The railroad industry has the most powerful lobby of the U.S. Government. Somehow they figuratively hold channel lock pliers around congress' balls. Amtrak collision? It was the respective railroad company's rails or signals that failed, but who picks up the tab? Uncle Sam. We never hear of Union disputes with the Railroad. Ever.
There is clearly a spectrum of union organizations in terms of union strength, which appears to be tied to the economic stability of their industry. So, how would they respond to a new WPA? They would all oppose out of solidarity, but by worker population they would be a minority. Unions serving economically weakened industries would rubberstamp this opposition, but a growing percentage of their former membership will want a WPA, and somewhat undercut their position. The stronger unions would be the most adamant, Railroad being the anchor, butconstruction workers causing the biggest problem. They will claim that a proposed WPA would be taking their jobs. Thats not necessarily true; it would be entirely possible for WPA jobs to work alongside union construction by performing lesser jobs. Also, WPA would not necessarily be limited to construction jobs. The reality would be that no construction company could compete with a cost effective WPA. They wll use the claim of unfair competition to try to litigate any WPA out of existance and try to get injunctions postponing any work and making a WPA ineffective.
That brings me to another WPA roadblock; Congress. A few lines above I used the phrase "cost-effective WPA." I don't see that happening as a result of actions from a contemporary congress. Given the abject failures or reconstruction in Iraq [which I blame on congress' failure to provide adequate oversight to planning and structuring the reconstruction program - since it clearly turned into a free for all of inept firms winning contracts to provide shoddy workmanship] I am extremely skeptical that congress could create a successful public works program.
These are my thoughts at the moment, I'll revisit and edit this some later.
America still has foreign debt, and seems to be maintaining current spending levels only by printing and selling T-bills (maybe the wrong term, but we're printing and selling something). The U.S. Government is currently disbursing a $700 million piss-in-the-wind fund, with some expectations of a second economic stimulus package.The American economy is very resilient, but real economic activity will be slowing to about half because all the "liquidity" has just evaporated in a meltdown of leveraged credit. Comming regulations are badly needed, but will have no impact on economic activity.
Retailers.... are just screwed. Consumers have negative net worth these days and almost zero savings. With a bleak economic forecast, the smart consumers will be shunning luxury items and even 'perks.' Those franchises that just opened new branches and dont have appreciable market share in their new areas - closing and writing off those same branches their best option.
TARP is a very apt name; hide financial weakness by whitewashing it. Throwing big wads of cash at fundamentally unsound problems. I think the Federal Government is making an enormous mistake by propping up AIG and CitiBank. The way I understand it, the only way of recouping government money is if those firms start to profit again. Unless this Republican administration required them to abandon using unregulated financial instruments (I'd be suprised, Paulson has been mum on the topic of further regulation, I read that as quiet resistance), they will continue to do so. These firms will feel even more pressure to profit now, so that they can stop Uncle Sam from looking over their shoulder. I have to expect that their past methods of 'risk management' will continue, especially since they have just been 'fixed'. A continuum of repeat failures on the parts of these firms is not acceptable to me.
Add that the American automakers are going to fail. If they've gone begging to the government, like they have done, then they are on the verge of going under. Again. They were losing money during times of prosperity, and they are going to do much worse now. Its way past time to pull the plug. And that means we're heading for an umemployment rate in the U.S. of something like 10%.
Almost out of the blue, someone mentioned to me that they had heard rumors of a WPA program coming. That was a suprise, and probably not grounded in fact, but it did get me to think about the overall state of affairs. If a Federal Public Works program were created, it would create a lot of jobs for skilled and unskilled labor, largely building infrastructure which is badly needed in many areas despite recent American prosperity. Surely that would be much more cost effective than an economic stimulus package. Prima Facie, it sounds good to me.
Unions won't stand for another WPA. Maybe that is a good thing, in the way that a terrorist attack is a serious wake up call to a situation of lax security (or poor socio-economic foriegn policy, but I digress). I feel that labor unions no longer serve a useful purpose, and are now actually anathema to free enterprise. Unions artificially increase wages while acting to reduce productivity. [Feel free to disagree here, but don't forget to factor in lost productivity time for picketing, contract negotiations, and union-determined productivity] I'm not saying that worker protections are uneccesary, I'm saying that unions have become powerful entities that are hindering economic progress. Certainly the U.S. automakers would agree. [Automakers almost don't count though, theres a forest of dead wood there that seems uninterested in making radical changes necessary to seriously compete in the auto market. Their cash cow until recently was pickup and SUV sales. That is not innovation, thats a gimmic which exploits a CAFE loophole. A loophole I want to see closed.]
I mentioned to my friend that the unions would never stand for a new WPA. He replied that their voice will count little when there are no jobs. That sounds good, but its an over-simplification. Here is what I see happening in the next 3 years. The big three fail, declare bankrupcy, merger, restructure or a combination of these. My money is on bankrupcy - the dead wood executives will want to restructure their status quo. There will be many union job losses but not 100%. So UAW will continue only slightly diminished.
Pilots, mechanics, and other airline workers have been getting progressively shittier deals through continual airline failures. They are union, but its not doing them a fat lot of good. There are many other union groups but I'll lump them with the most powerful - road construction and railroad workers. Construction companies do private work as well, but their main meal ticked is Federal and State infrastructure. The railroad industry has the most powerful lobby of the U.S. Government. Somehow they figuratively hold channel lock pliers around congress' balls. Amtrak collision? It was the respective railroad company's rails or signals that failed, but who picks up the tab? Uncle Sam. We never hear of Union disputes with the Railroad. Ever.
There is clearly a spectrum of union organizations in terms of union strength, which appears to be tied to the economic stability of their industry. So, how would they respond to a new WPA? They would all oppose out of solidarity, but by worker population they would be a minority. Unions serving economically weakened industries would rubberstamp this opposition, but a growing percentage of their former membership will want a WPA, and somewhat undercut their position. The stronger unions would be the most adamant, Railroad being the anchor, butconstruction workers causing the biggest problem. They will claim that a proposed WPA would be taking their jobs. Thats not necessarily true; it would be entirely possible for WPA jobs to work alongside union construction by performing lesser jobs. Also, WPA would not necessarily be limited to construction jobs. The reality would be that no construction company could compete with a cost effective WPA. They wll use the claim of unfair competition to try to litigate any WPA out of existance and try to get injunctions postponing any work and making a WPA ineffective.
That brings me to another WPA roadblock; Congress. A few lines above I used the phrase "cost-effective WPA." I don't see that happening as a result of actions from a contemporary congress. Given the abject failures or reconstruction in Iraq [which I blame on congress' failure to provide adequate oversight to planning and structuring the reconstruction program - since it clearly turned into a free for all of inept firms winning contracts to provide shoddy workmanship] I am extremely skeptical that congress could create a successful public works program.
These are my thoughts at the moment, I'll revisit and edit this some later.
26 November 2008
Call of Duty - World at War
I've been bored completely out of my tree. I'm now unemployed - which is a story I may or may not divulge in a separate installment - for two months now and nothin much is expected to happen for a third month, for reasons also not appearing in this installment.
It is true that there are plenty of things that I should be doing. Many such tasks require disposable income. I could go all out in an ambitious campaign to clean my apartment, but I'm not insane, merely bored.
I purchased the above title to give myself a mindless passtime. I had been playing Bioshock, and finished that. I really ought to talk about that first, but I really need to get this out of the way first, or my head may explode. I need to begin with some context, though, to try to make sense to you (and to me as well) of what I'm feeling.
In the beginning - for my purposes - was Battlefield 1942. [The beginning really was a game called Codename: Eagle that came out maybe 2 years earlier, but I don't pick up every title that is out there, and certainly not without knowing something of it] BF1942 presented conflict on approximately 12 maps which covered the major theatres of war; Africa, Europe, and the Pacific. You select your role as a soldier (assault, sniper, medic, engineer, anti-tank) which determines what gear you will carry, pick a map and join about 60 computer-controlled friendly and enemy soldiers in solo play, or a blend of human and 'bot' in multiplayer mode. By far the most popular featured all human soldiers. In addition, you can operate vehicles from jeeps and tanks to P/T Boats, Stukas, Heinkels and B-17s - depending on the map.
Multiplayer had an interesting quirk. In a nod to realism, the less you move around, the better your aim is. Towards that end, lying prone is better than crouching, is better than standing. What ended up happening in application was players learned to dive prone when they sighted the enemy, fire their weapon, jump back to their feet, and keep going. The process could happen alarmingly quickly. This disturbed me for a number of reasons. Most of which was that diving onto your battle rifle should primarily give you a concussion. The battle rifle of that era was particularly heavy as it was also intended to be used as a melee weapon.
I came to terms with this glitch, eventually. BF 1942 made for enormously amusing games of Capture-the-Flag, since the flag carrier could jump in a jeep (or a tank), speed off and get picked up by a swooping Messerschmidt. [Ah the realism.....] BF1942 was followed by Battlefield Vietnam, or BFV, which I did not purchase, I expect I had a job at the time. The next iteration was Battlefield 2, and the glitch had developed a life of its own, grown tentacles, and eaten the game developer.
I was able to fly the planes in BF 1942, but I wasn't able to get as much agility from them as the majority of people whome I played with. So I lost dogfights, but had a good time. BF2 is in a contemporary setting, with jets and helicopters the order of the day. I have yet to be able to fly them successfully, but they seem to be heavily overpowered. Airstrikes can be delivered with great accuracy - and I have felt their effectiveness many, many times - yet anti-aircraft missile stations are few, far between, and nearly ineffective. And someone called me a cheater when I finally managed to shoot one down. This I could accept, air power is the mainstay of the modern world.
Not only are player still able to kill nearly instantly by diving on their rifles, now there is also some bizzarre ninja roll that can be executed while shooting. This manoever not only seems to gaurantee killing the opponent, but the player executing it can seldom be shot while he is doing it. I'd say the concept was staggering, but I don't stagger so much as fall stone dead. The ability to "bunny hop" has also been increased. Soldiers in full anti-tank gear can not only perform ninja rolls, they can effortlessly spring high into the air, and even change direction in mid-air. Perhaps I jave joined arms against Scotland Yard's Special Flying Squad. Those that regularly play this game learn to take advantage of these things to be more effective, and make the game more frustrating for me.
Enter CoD-WaW. Solo play, quite frankly, is painful. At the beginning of the single-player scenarios they run TV-quality graphics that set up the situation and explain how the future of the entire free world is hanging in the balance. And then show a cutscene featuring you.
I downloaded CoDWaW from Steam, and the only manual that I have is a 9-page PDF which doesnt explain nearly as much as I would like. I have found solo play baffling. The developers provided you with a squad leader to bark orders at you and tell you what to do. The reality is that what you are precisely supposed to do, and where you are supposed to do it arent nearly as obvious as the buffoon who is shouting at you. Sarge ordered me to go "use my knife on that barrel." Um.... but I dont have a knife? See? I got this Garand, and I picked up a Japanese SMG, but no knife that I can switch to...... Well, after trying a lot of different things I found that I was supposed to go up the the barrel and press the "use" key. Viola! I suddenly reach for the barrel with a hand that is holding a knife. Amazing. And not even slightly intuitive.
The majority of my solo play experience was spent in negative reinforcement training. Learning to run far away from grenades, which killed me about a hundred times in the first two hours. By the time I had re-played every scene multiple times until I had dodged all the grenades, nasty gunfire and banzai attackers, and actually achieved the mission objectives, I realised that I was in a cutscene. Not literally. What I mean is that if I have to do all these little moves (dont get killed by this grenade, shoot that guy or he will killl you) in such a very specific way in such a short span of time, they might as well past my face on the cutscene, because in the end, there wont be any difference. That bothers me a lot. Mostly because the game looks great; I'd really enjoy having some free will in such a beautifully hostile environment. There aren't vehicles that you can fly (the closest you get is being a PBY gunner) but the aiming mechanics are right on. CoDWaW avoids all the problems that I have with the BF series, and even one that I had not thought of; you cannot aim your weapon while moving forward in the prone position.
Multiplayer in CoDWaW is great. Perhaps I'm overstating my case. I should qualify that by saying it is the multiplayer experience which I had been wanting during the whole time I had been suffering at the hands of BF2. A limited arsenal is available at first, with more weapons and 'optional extras' (like suppressors, flash hiders and bipods) unlockable through scoring in online play.
Here endeth the lesson. I'm about to run off for a Bird Day weekend, and want to get my frag on before I go.
It is true that there are plenty of things that I should be doing. Many such tasks require disposable income. I could go all out in an ambitious campaign to clean my apartment, but I'm not insane, merely bored.
I purchased the above title to give myself a mindless passtime. I had been playing Bioshock, and finished that. I really ought to talk about that first, but I really need to get this out of the way first, or my head may explode. I need to begin with some context, though, to try to make sense to you (and to me as well) of what I'm feeling.
In the beginning - for my purposes - was Battlefield 1942. [The beginning really was a game called Codename: Eagle that came out maybe 2 years earlier, but I don't pick up every title that is out there, and certainly not without knowing something of it] BF1942 presented conflict on approximately 12 maps which covered the major theatres of war; Africa, Europe, and the Pacific. You select your role as a soldier (assault, sniper, medic, engineer, anti-tank) which determines what gear you will carry, pick a map and join about 60 computer-controlled friendly and enemy soldiers in solo play, or a blend of human and 'bot' in multiplayer mode. By far the most popular featured all human soldiers. In addition, you can operate vehicles from jeeps and tanks to P/T Boats, Stukas, Heinkels and B-17s - depending on the map.
Multiplayer had an interesting quirk. In a nod to realism, the less you move around, the better your aim is. Towards that end, lying prone is better than crouching, is better than standing. What ended up happening in application was players learned to dive prone when they sighted the enemy, fire their weapon, jump back to their feet, and keep going. The process could happen alarmingly quickly. This disturbed me for a number of reasons. Most of which was that diving onto your battle rifle should primarily give you a concussion. The battle rifle of that era was particularly heavy as it was also intended to be used as a melee weapon.
I came to terms with this glitch, eventually. BF 1942 made for enormously amusing games of Capture-the-Flag, since the flag carrier could jump in a jeep (or a tank), speed off and get picked up by a swooping Messerschmidt. [Ah the realism.....] BF1942 was followed by Battlefield Vietnam, or BFV, which I did not purchase, I expect I had a job at the time. The next iteration was Battlefield 2, and the glitch had developed a life of its own, grown tentacles, and eaten the game developer.
I was able to fly the planes in BF 1942, but I wasn't able to get as much agility from them as the majority of people whome I played with. So I lost dogfights, but had a good time. BF2 is in a contemporary setting, with jets and helicopters the order of the day. I have yet to be able to fly them successfully, but they seem to be heavily overpowered. Airstrikes can be delivered with great accuracy - and I have felt their effectiveness many, many times - yet anti-aircraft missile stations are few, far between, and nearly ineffective. And someone called me a cheater when I finally managed to shoot one down. This I could accept, air power is the mainstay of the modern world.
Not only are player still able to kill nearly instantly by diving on their rifles, now there is also some bizzarre ninja roll that can be executed while shooting. This manoever not only seems to gaurantee killing the opponent, but the player executing it can seldom be shot while he is doing it. I'd say the concept was staggering, but I don't stagger so much as fall stone dead. The ability to "bunny hop" has also been increased. Soldiers in full anti-tank gear can not only perform ninja rolls, they can effortlessly spring high into the air, and even change direction in mid-air. Perhaps I jave joined arms against Scotland Yard's Special Flying Squad. Those that regularly play this game learn to take advantage of these things to be more effective, and make the game more frustrating for me.
Enter CoD-WaW. Solo play, quite frankly, is painful. At the beginning of the single-player scenarios they run TV-quality graphics that set up the situation and explain how the future of the entire free world is hanging in the balance. And then show a cutscene featuring you.
I downloaded CoDWaW from Steam, and the only manual that I have is a 9-page PDF which doesnt explain nearly as much as I would like. I have found solo play baffling. The developers provided you with a squad leader to bark orders at you and tell you what to do. The reality is that what you are precisely supposed to do, and where you are supposed to do it arent nearly as obvious as the buffoon who is shouting at you. Sarge ordered me to go "use my knife on that barrel." Um.... but I dont have a knife? See? I got this Garand, and I picked up a Japanese SMG, but no knife that I can switch to...... Well, after trying a lot of different things I found that I was supposed to go up the the barrel and press the "use" key. Viola! I suddenly reach for the barrel with a hand that is holding a knife. Amazing. And not even slightly intuitive.
The majority of my solo play experience was spent in negative reinforcement training. Learning to run far away from grenades, which killed me about a hundred times in the first two hours. By the time I had re-played every scene multiple times until I had dodged all the grenades, nasty gunfire and banzai attackers, and actually achieved the mission objectives, I realised that I was in a cutscene. Not literally. What I mean is that if I have to do all these little moves (dont get killed by this grenade, shoot that guy or he will killl you) in such a very specific way in such a short span of time, they might as well past my face on the cutscene, because in the end, there wont be any difference. That bothers me a lot. Mostly because the game looks great; I'd really enjoy having some free will in such a beautifully hostile environment. There aren't vehicles that you can fly (the closest you get is being a PBY gunner) but the aiming mechanics are right on. CoDWaW avoids all the problems that I have with the BF series, and even one that I had not thought of; you cannot aim your weapon while moving forward in the prone position.
Multiplayer in CoDWaW is great. Perhaps I'm overstating my case. I should qualify that by saying it is the multiplayer experience which I had been wanting during the whole time I had been suffering at the hands of BF2. A limited arsenal is available at first, with more weapons and 'optional extras' (like suppressors, flash hiders and bipods) unlockable through scoring in online play.
Here endeth the lesson. I'm about to run off for a Bird Day weekend, and want to get my frag on before I go.
Hello again
Yes, time has passed. Yes, I have neglected you.
Did you deserve such a lull? Perhaps.
I've previously posted some writings here as well as the thoughts and reflections that ostensibly belong here. I've always been of the mind that this media should have a discrete purpose which I should avoid blurring by diverging into other subjects which you don't care about.
On the other hand, its already far too late for that now.
While I was talking to others in a virtual chatroom - yet another venue whose ostensibly discreet purpose blurs in every direction imagineable - the subject of elderly parents came up, and means by which to engage in quality time with them. I was shocked that someone suggested a Wii. Not the Wii that is normaly discussed in that forum either, the Nintendo Wii. It has been used - successfully I hear - in physical therapy for elderly patients. That notion merits some investigation. It does promise an interesting opening conversation, at the least.
On the other hand, it may go unnoticed altogether. At my family's Thanksgiving dinners it is typical for us to discuss the other Wii.
Did you deserve such a lull? Perhaps.
I've previously posted some writings here as well as the thoughts and reflections that ostensibly belong here. I've always been of the mind that this media should have a discrete purpose which I should avoid blurring by diverging into other subjects which you don't care about.
On the other hand, its already far too late for that now.
While I was talking to others in a virtual chatroom - yet another venue whose ostensibly discreet purpose blurs in every direction imagineable - the subject of elderly parents came up, and means by which to engage in quality time with them. I was shocked that someone suggested a Wii. Not the Wii that is normaly discussed in that forum either, the Nintendo Wii. It has been used - successfully I hear - in physical therapy for elderly patients. That notion merits some investigation. It does promise an interesting opening conversation, at the least.
On the other hand, it may go unnoticed altogether. At my family's Thanksgiving dinners it is typical for us to discuss the other Wii.
03 January 2008
Did you hear the one about the nudist at the Republican National Convention?
I've taken to saying that I was born a Stoic, but the World (or Society) made me a Cynic. Meaning Stoic in the classical sense, and Cynic in the modern sense.
Lately, I've realised that cannot be true. No-one is born anything. We're not preprogrammed with thoughts, goals, sexual orientation, or language. So what in my upbringing made me a Stoic?
I am able to relate the several instances at a very young age that caused my introversion. Suffice it to say that there were several occasions that caused me physical pain. The existence of those events make a clear case for that part of my persona. Where in the World did Stoicism come from?
I began reading at an early age, but I didn't really have anything much to read. Anything much that I can recall, anyway. Eventually, during grade school, I took to reading science fiction. Was it science fiction literature, with horrific problems being resolved in future Utopias? I watched far too much Television. Was it Television, where Justice is done in less than an hour, and there are no un-attractive people? Was it my grandfather's farm, where daily hard work didn't have a palpable reward, it was a necessary means to a far, far distant end.
In retrospect, I probably did not develop into a Stoic until sometime during college. Somewhere in my philosophy classes I heard about Stoicism and said "Hey! That's me!"
Perhaps I wasn't a Stoic until that very moment.
Lately, I've realised that cannot be true. No-one is born anything. We're not preprogrammed with thoughts, goals, sexual orientation, or language. So what in my upbringing made me a Stoic?
I am able to relate the several instances at a very young age that caused my introversion. Suffice it to say that there were several occasions that caused me physical pain. The existence of those events make a clear case for that part of my persona. Where in the World did Stoicism come from?
I began reading at an early age, but I didn't really have anything much to read. Anything much that I can recall, anyway. Eventually, during grade school, I took to reading science fiction. Was it science fiction literature, with horrific problems being resolved in future Utopias? I watched far too much Television. Was it Television, where Justice is done in less than an hour, and there are no un-attractive people? Was it my grandfather's farm, where daily hard work didn't have a palpable reward, it was a necessary means to a far, far distant end.
In retrospect, I probably did not develop into a Stoic until sometime during college. Somewhere in my philosophy classes I heard about Stoicism and said "Hey! That's me!"
Perhaps I wasn't a Stoic until that very moment.
14 August 2007
To Thine Own Self be Treed
Having erred in one or more pages of my driver's logbook, I was waiting to take a "log class"; a one-on-one session to correct my errant ways. The waiting was more painful than the session. There wasn't a sense of anticipation or angst, so much as the sheer length of the wait. Making matters worse was the book that I had chosen to pass this time with.
Richard Dawkin's "The Blind Watchmaker" is a book about Darwin's theory of Natural Selection that I had been looking forward to reading. That estimation seems to have been erroneous. Perhaps I am giving short shrift to a book which has fine points that I was not seeing. My wait hardly put me in a patient or receptive mood such as might allow a fair evaluation. However, after reading a third of the book I gave up. Dawkins spent most of it patiently explaining (with several examples) that Natural Selection brings about changes in a species over a very long period of time through the cumulative accumulation of genetic variations in surviving members of the species and their descendents. Some genetic variations are lost to a species if all members of the species carrying that variation die or fail to breed. Thus the variations peculiar to the surviving members of the species will be present in all or most future generations of that species, unless one or more of those variations is superceded, reversed, or lost due to future variation. To wit: Natural Selection. It has been described as a lottery where only the winning numbers are showing (living members of the species).
Anyway....
A fellow truck driver struck up a conversation about my reading and asked where I stand on evolution. Where I stand? Probably over there by the Pepsi machine. I didn't know there would be a test, much less that I had to have a position on evolution complete with annotated justification for same. I tried to begin by telling this nice fellow that I could not accept Genesis as dogmatic. That it was too cluttered with what may be a borrowed mythology on the one hand and an extensive listing of the lineage of its principal characters that smacks of an oral history.
I did not get very far in my attempt. He began an awkward evangelistic dialogue. Well, thats too kind, it was more in the line of a solliloquy. He talked about agonizing over his belief. That he had read a book or five about it. [Note to self: how do you research faith?] That he had gone from believing in his head to beleiving in his heart (a process going from acknowlegement to enlightenment, I imagine). He spoke of the truth lying somewhere between fate and freewill, and other things. He did not cover any topics that were new to me.
In general I agreed or acknowledged most of what he said. I even assisted him by summarizing or reinforcing his points with evidence that he had not brought to bear. Then something extroardinary happened. I had begun to indicate to him that my experiences do indicate the existence of a Supreme Being, whom I am not so arrogant as to ascribe to Him a particular name or religion. I was contrasting this with Genesis' insistence that man is the image of God. He was trying to counter this idea by explaining that God was a Trinity (I'm still wondering why that is a rebuttal), when he summed up by saying that some scripture was intended as allegory [not his words].
"So, I shouldn't interpret it literally?" I asked. He said that was about right.
I guess I missed a nuace of his argument, because I thought that was the point I tried to make at the outset. Perhaps I need to work on my debating skills.
Richard Dawkin's "The Blind Watchmaker" is a book about Darwin's theory of Natural Selection that I had been looking forward to reading. That estimation seems to have been erroneous. Perhaps I am giving short shrift to a book which has fine points that I was not seeing. My wait hardly put me in a patient or receptive mood such as might allow a fair evaluation. However, after reading a third of the book I gave up. Dawkins spent most of it patiently explaining (with several examples) that Natural Selection brings about changes in a species over a very long period of time through the cumulative accumulation of genetic variations in surviving members of the species and their descendents. Some genetic variations are lost to a species if all members of the species carrying that variation die or fail to breed. Thus the variations peculiar to the surviving members of the species will be present in all or most future generations of that species, unless one or more of those variations is superceded, reversed, or lost due to future variation. To wit: Natural Selection. It has been described as a lottery where only the winning numbers are showing (living members of the species).
Anyway....
A fellow truck driver struck up a conversation about my reading and asked where I stand on evolution. Where I stand? Probably over there by the Pepsi machine. I didn't know there would be a test, much less that I had to have a position on evolution complete with annotated justification for same. I tried to begin by telling this nice fellow that I could not accept Genesis as dogmatic. That it was too cluttered with what may be a borrowed mythology on the one hand and an extensive listing of the lineage of its principal characters that smacks of an oral history.
I did not get very far in my attempt. He began an awkward evangelistic dialogue. Well, thats too kind, it was more in the line of a solliloquy. He talked about agonizing over his belief. That he had read a book or five about it. [Note to self: how do you research faith?] That he had gone from believing in his head to beleiving in his heart (a process going from acknowlegement to enlightenment, I imagine). He spoke of the truth lying somewhere between fate and freewill, and other things. He did not cover any topics that were new to me.
In general I agreed or acknowledged most of what he said. I even assisted him by summarizing or reinforcing his points with evidence that he had not brought to bear. Then something extroardinary happened. I had begun to indicate to him that my experiences do indicate the existence of a Supreme Being, whom I am not so arrogant as to ascribe to Him a particular name or religion. I was contrasting this with Genesis' insistence that man is the image of God. He was trying to counter this idea by explaining that God was a Trinity (I'm still wondering why that is a rebuttal), when he summed up by saying that some scripture was intended as allegory [not his words].
"So, I shouldn't interpret it literally?" I asked. He said that was about right.
I guess I missed a nuace of his argument, because I thought that was the point I tried to make at the outset. Perhaps I need to work on my debating skills.
18 July 2007
Missed and Envious
(dont read that title, listen to it)
I've been busy, but scarcely busy enough to blame lack of blog entries on it. Here are a few of the lesser things that I can mention that I will/am/was doing/thinking/intending.
I've managed to finish Jared Diamond's "The Third Chimpanzee". He tries to summarize what, if anything, there is that is unique about Homo Sapiens by lcomparing and contrasting human genetics, behaviour and history with examples from the animal kingdom. It turns out that we arent as unique as we often think we are. Animals communicate with a large vocabulary, make art, intentionally behave in dangerous ways (e.g. smoking, drug use, etc.. in humans) and even commit genocide. It was written before "Guns Germs and Steel" and parts of "Third" were fleshed out and expanded upon to compile that book. Having read "Guns" first, the relevant sections of "Third" were tedious to me.
I have determined to begin learning some practices that probably get labeled as "heathen" by Christians. Partly this is to facilitate research for my book. Mostly, however, its because I have always been curious about Shamanism and mystical healing. I have no intention of consuming Ayahuasca or any other ethneogens as they would probably cause me to lose my job. There are drumming techniques that are used to induce visions, I may look into those. Other areas include Qi gong, chakra and kundalini etc.
I've not been drug-tested in the past 4-5 months, but thats beside the point. I dabbled with marajuana in college and came to the conclusion that I would stay away from it and other "mood enhancers" (save alcohol- that was a different decision) since in hindsight the state of being a giggling/laughing imbecile for 2 hours or so without any humorous stimuli that I can remember strikes me as the ultimate in masturbation. I could possibly salve my ego by saying "at least I was happy". I'd prefer that there be a palpable cause.
I've just finished reading a book entitled "The Art of Dreaming." While there were some guidelines for developing one's ability to master one's dreams, the book wove these into what I must classify as fiction. A fiction that left meunsatisfied. I could have accepted that in a better written book, but I was rather put out by the vague ending scenario. The author did have a talent for stringing the reader along, though the character of himself seemed to me to be unbelievably dense and inexplicably rigid in his lack of acceptance, even over the course of what he descries as years.
The "adapter" for the GPS reciever for my Microsoft Streets & Trips software broke Yesterday. After examination, I determined that it was a pathetically constructed device (much as I had heard since buying it). A replacement will cost $50. OR I could spend $150 and get the DeLorme street atlas software with their proprietary GPS solution and call it even. I hear their software is superior anyway. Replacing the broken unit that came with MS would only be a temporary fix. Barring any unlikely design changes, the new unit will simply break again due to really asinine structural design.
And I really hate MS anyway.
I've been busy, but scarcely busy enough to blame lack of blog entries on it. Here are a few of the lesser things that I can mention that I will/am/was doing/thinking/intending.
I've managed to finish Jared Diamond's "The Third Chimpanzee". He tries to summarize what, if anything, there is that is unique about Homo Sapiens by lcomparing and contrasting human genetics, behaviour and history with examples from the animal kingdom. It turns out that we arent as unique as we often think we are. Animals communicate with a large vocabulary, make art, intentionally behave in dangerous ways (e.g. smoking, drug use, etc.. in humans) and even commit genocide. It was written before "Guns Germs and Steel" and parts of "Third" were fleshed out and expanded upon to compile that book. Having read "Guns" first, the relevant sections of "Third" were tedious to me.
I have determined to begin learning some practices that probably get labeled as "heathen" by Christians. Partly this is to facilitate research for my book. Mostly, however, its because I have always been curious about Shamanism and mystical healing. I have no intention of consuming Ayahuasca or any other ethneogens as they would probably cause me to lose my job. There are drumming techniques that are used to induce visions, I may look into those. Other areas include Qi gong, chakra and kundalini etc.
I've not been drug-tested in the past 4-5 months, but thats beside the point. I dabbled with marajuana in college and came to the conclusion that I would stay away from it and other "mood enhancers" (save alcohol- that was a different decision) since in hindsight the state of being a giggling/laughing imbecile for 2 hours or so without any humorous stimuli that I can remember strikes me as the ultimate in masturbation. I could possibly salve my ego by saying "at least I was happy". I'd prefer that there be a palpable cause.
I've just finished reading a book entitled "The Art of Dreaming." While there were some guidelines for developing one's ability to master one's dreams, the book wove these into what I must classify as fiction. A fiction that left meunsatisfied. I could have accepted that in a better written book, but I was rather put out by the vague ending scenario. The author did have a talent for stringing the reader along, though the character of himself seemed to me to be unbelievably dense and inexplicably rigid in his lack of acceptance, even over the course of what he descries as years.
The "adapter" for the GPS reciever for my Microsoft Streets & Trips software broke Yesterday. After examination, I determined that it was a pathetically constructed device (much as I had heard since buying it). A replacement will cost $50. OR I could spend $150 and get the DeLorme street atlas software with their proprietary GPS solution and call it even. I hear their software is superior anyway. Replacing the broken unit that came with MS would only be a temporary fix. Barring any unlikely design changes, the new unit will simply break again due to really asinine structural design.
And I really hate MS anyway.
02 July 2007
Eureka!
I fixed my truck, after the mechanics couldn't!
Naturally, I need to begin from an earlier point in the timeline.
For some time mow I have had a bizarre electrical problem going on here. The truck runs fine and its external lights necessary for safety are good. Its the non-essential interior circuits that seemed to be messed up.
At arbitrary times, for no apparent reason, I would lose power to the cigarette lighter circuit, and all interior dome and map lights, as well as the utility lamp on the back of the cab that helps me to see when I'm hooking air lines to the trailer. Then after an equally arbitrary period of time, they would come back on. Also for no apparent reason. After a while I realised that there was a click from the fusebox when this happened, and until recently I had been of the opinion that the sound was from an automatic breaker that was re-setting.
What was odd, and of course maddening because of its oddity, was that these items that lose power should belong to at least two separate circuits. There is a fuse for the cig lighter outlets, and a fuse for the dome light, etc. Being separate circuits, they should have nothing in common save that they get power from the same batteries.
I had the truck in the shop twice with this complaint, and after the first time I thought that they had fixed it. Perhaps they did fix the problem, but the issue developed again. I noticed it again during a heavy rain. There were incidents of rain around the first occurrence, so I wondered if there was a short in a ground wire outside at the battery box. When I picked up the truck from the shop the second time, the interior lights were on, and I had cold Pepsi in the cooler. Within 10 minutes, the lights were out again.
So I got a styrofoam cooler out of the car, and put 6 pounds of ice in it to keep my sandwich meat from spoiling. I discovered a few hours later that there was a hole in the bottom of it as evidenced by the squish of my stocking feet on the rug. So now I have to rely on whatever arbitrary thing is doing it to work in my favor. Not likely.
Then I remembered that there is a system that shuts off power to non-essential accessories when battery voltage is low. It didn't occur to me earlier that this could account for the multiple and ostensibly separate circuits that I was having problems with. So if theres a short there, or it just isnt reading the voltage right, that would result in the current situation. [Hah! "current" situation! I kill me!] The remaining problem was; where is this relay? [I assumed a relay since it is on in one condition and off in others]
So. Finally I found it. Its a relay actuated by an electromagnet of apparently unusual designs for most relays. This stands to reason as it must be sensitive to the voltage of battery current and open or close the relay appropriately. And one of the 4-5 wires that feed this relay is loose. Hold relay this way, lights go out. Hold relay that way, light goes on.
So now I just need to have them re-wire that relay so the connections are secure. But I prolly have to explain to them which one and why it needs to be re-wired... Until then I need to leave a light on. That way I can know when to go and wiggle my relay.
Naturally, I need to begin from an earlier point in the timeline.
For some time mow I have had a bizarre electrical problem going on here. The truck runs fine and its external lights necessary for safety are good. Its the non-essential interior circuits that seemed to be messed up.
At arbitrary times, for no apparent reason, I would lose power to the cigarette lighter circuit, and all interior dome and map lights, as well as the utility lamp on the back of the cab that helps me to see when I'm hooking air lines to the trailer. Then after an equally arbitrary period of time, they would come back on. Also for no apparent reason. After a while I realised that there was a click from the fusebox when this happened, and until recently I had been of the opinion that the sound was from an automatic breaker that was re-setting.
What was odd, and of course maddening because of its oddity, was that these items that lose power should belong to at least two separate circuits. There is a fuse for the cig lighter outlets, and a fuse for the dome light, etc. Being separate circuits, they should have nothing in common save that they get power from the same batteries.
I had the truck in the shop twice with this complaint, and after the first time I thought that they had fixed it. Perhaps they did fix the problem, but the issue developed again. I noticed it again during a heavy rain. There were incidents of rain around the first occurrence, so I wondered if there was a short in a ground wire outside at the battery box. When I picked up the truck from the shop the second time, the interior lights were on, and I had cold Pepsi in the cooler. Within 10 minutes, the lights were out again.
So I got a styrofoam cooler out of the car, and put 6 pounds of ice in it to keep my sandwich meat from spoiling. I discovered a few hours later that there was a hole in the bottom of it as evidenced by the squish of my stocking feet on the rug. So now I have to rely on whatever arbitrary thing is doing it to work in my favor. Not likely.
Then I remembered that there is a system that shuts off power to non-essential accessories when battery voltage is low. It didn't occur to me earlier that this could account for the multiple and ostensibly separate circuits that I was having problems with. So if theres a short there, or it just isnt reading the voltage right, that would result in the current situation. [Hah! "current" situation! I kill me!] The remaining problem was; where is this relay? [I assumed a relay since it is on in one condition and off in others]
So. Finally I found it. Its a relay actuated by an electromagnet of apparently unusual designs for most relays. This stands to reason as it must be sensitive to the voltage of battery current and open or close the relay appropriately. And one of the 4-5 wires that feed this relay is loose. Hold relay this way, lights go out. Hold relay that way, light goes on.
So now I just need to have them re-wire that relay so the connections are secure. But I prolly have to explain to them which one and why it needs to be re-wired... Until then I need to leave a light on. That way I can know when to go and wiggle my relay.
17 June 2007
I'm Society's Fuel
When people think about petroleum consumption in general, I believe that a common image is that of freeways choked with automobiles. Previously, in my own visualisations, I added airline and military usage. Even that liberal estimation did not prepare me for the apalling truth.
There are millions of Big Rigs hurtling down the roads today. Powered by diesel fuel, they get an average of about 7 mpg. Thats being generous. This is the overwhelming real cost of modrn consumerism, but I digress.
As a "company driver", my employer provides my diesel fuel. Fuel is probably the most problematic expense in truck driving. Sure there is the cost of maintenance (parts and labor) and insurance, but these are not given to nearly as much volatility as fuel costs.
Trucking companies try to mitigate fuel costs in simple ways. They will specify what route a driver may take, and thereby ensure that the freight travels the shortest possible distance. Other methods are maintaining a fuel-efficient fleet and encouraging drivers to reduce speeds and Out Of Route miles.
As a driver, my cheif obligation is to deliver on time. It has not been overtly requested of drivers in my company, but if I have adequate time to deliver, I will travel at a reduced speed to conserve fuel. My Frightliner Columbia has a Detroit Diesel engine with a 9-speed manual transmission. I shift into ninth at about 46 mph, and the truck is governed at 65 mph. I have a small LED display on my dash. When I recieve Qualcomm messages, it displays the first 8 characters. The rest of the time it displays my fuel efficiency and gives a general indication of engine load. From this display I have determined that the torque peak in ninth gear occurs around 55 mph, and that fuel efficiency begins to fall off at about 59 mph. Based on that information, I have been maintaining 57 or 58 mph when on multi-lane highways. I estimate that I am using about 20% less fuel than most other company drivers that are "zipping" around at 65. And since the minimum speed is 45 or 55 depending on where you are, everybody's happy, right?
Perhaps not everyone.
A New Mexico trooper stopped me near Tucumcari for impeding traffic. My GPS was reading an average of 57 mph. He clocked me at 52 mph and urged me to go faster. I find the ramifications of that particularly interesting. Now I have to travel faster because the cell-phoning masses blather away at ludicrous speed? The posted limit on that interstate (I-40) was 75 mph.
There is probably some subtext here about conformity within a society, but if this is part of a trend, then I really dont like the way its going.
So. Anyone know what I need to do to be legally considered a renegade?
There are millions of Big Rigs hurtling down the roads today. Powered by diesel fuel, they get an average of about 7 mpg. Thats being generous. This is the overwhelming real cost of modrn consumerism, but I digress.
As a "company driver", my employer provides my diesel fuel. Fuel is probably the most problematic expense in truck driving. Sure there is the cost of maintenance (parts and labor) and insurance, but these are not given to nearly as much volatility as fuel costs.
Trucking companies try to mitigate fuel costs in simple ways. They will specify what route a driver may take, and thereby ensure that the freight travels the shortest possible distance. Other methods are maintaining a fuel-efficient fleet and encouraging drivers to reduce speeds and Out Of Route miles.
As a driver, my cheif obligation is to deliver on time. It has not been overtly requested of drivers in my company, but if I have adequate time to deliver, I will travel at a reduced speed to conserve fuel. My Frightliner Columbia has a Detroit Diesel engine with a 9-speed manual transmission. I shift into ninth at about 46 mph, and the truck is governed at 65 mph. I have a small LED display on my dash. When I recieve Qualcomm messages, it displays the first 8 characters. The rest of the time it displays my fuel efficiency and gives a general indication of engine load. From this display I have determined that the torque peak in ninth gear occurs around 55 mph, and that fuel efficiency begins to fall off at about 59 mph. Based on that information, I have been maintaining 57 or 58 mph when on multi-lane highways. I estimate that I am using about 20% less fuel than most other company drivers that are "zipping" around at 65. And since the minimum speed is 45 or 55 depending on where you are, everybody's happy, right?
Perhaps not everyone.
A New Mexico trooper stopped me near Tucumcari for impeding traffic. My GPS was reading an average of 57 mph. He clocked me at 52 mph and urged me to go faster. I find the ramifications of that particularly interesting. Now I have to travel faster because the cell-phoning masses blather away at ludicrous speed? The posted limit on that interstate (I-40) was 75 mph.
There is probably some subtext here about conformity within a society, but if this is part of a trend, then I really dont like the way its going.
So. Anyone know what I need to do to be legally considered a renegade?
Aaaaaaargh!
I wish my truck had power windows.
(such things exist, they run on compressed air)
That way, when oncoming traffic fails to dim their high beams, they can also illuminate the digit I present as a pithy rejoinder.
As it is, it takes far too long to crank down the window.
(such things exist, they run on compressed air)
That way, when oncoming traffic fails to dim their high beams, they can also illuminate the digit I present as a pithy rejoinder.
As it is, it takes far too long to crank down the window.
12 April 2007
There Is No Spoon
I've been a solo truck driver for three weeks now, and I have no regrets about taking this road.
A lowly occupation, perhaps? Not from my point of view. Truck drivers bear an enormous responsibility. Manoevering vehicles with a gross weight up to 80,000 lbs amidst a crowd of ever-more-zippy "four wheelers" - that don't appear to acknowledge ANY rules - can be quite frustrating. Should there be any mishaps of any sort, a court of law will always judge a truck driver more harshly than operators of passenger cars; because we are professional drivers.
Yes, we are in a big dang hurry, because we dont earn very much, and pay is usually a fraction of our loaded miles [more and more are also paid for empty miles]. Our haste, and our maddening slowness, is more than mitigated by the fact that more often than not, we are looking out for you on the road. There are some caveats that go along with that, of course. Don't expect any quarter if you have a poor grasp of right-of-way, don't grasp the concept of merging with traffic, etc. etc. Its our job to see as much as possible of what's going on around us, and diffuse or evade bad situations as they occur.
I saw The Matrix for the first time about two weeks ago, and bought the DVD about 10 days later. Today my ponderings wandered to the concept of bending spoons in the Matrix. The key is that there is no spoon, you effect change in the "physical" world by bending yourself. In a way, that's what I have done. I cast off the need to be a young professional chemist (or whatever) and bent myself in a new way. The world is different now, to me, at least. My paycheck for week two was just under $500 net. It wont always be that much, but thats not bad at all for a rookie. My bottom line is: Dude! I drive around and they actually pay me for it.
But bear in mind, I'm not one to shy from responsibility. This job ain't for everyone.
A lowly occupation, perhaps? Not from my point of view. Truck drivers bear an enormous responsibility. Manoevering vehicles with a gross weight up to 80,000 lbs amidst a crowd of ever-more-zippy "four wheelers" - that don't appear to acknowledge ANY rules - can be quite frustrating. Should there be any mishaps of any sort, a court of law will always judge a truck driver more harshly than operators of passenger cars; because we are professional drivers.
Yes, we are in a big dang hurry, because we dont earn very much, and pay is usually a fraction of our loaded miles [more and more are also paid for empty miles]. Our haste, and our maddening slowness, is more than mitigated by the fact that more often than not, we are looking out for you on the road. There are some caveats that go along with that, of course. Don't expect any quarter if you have a poor grasp of right-of-way, don't grasp the concept of merging with traffic, etc. etc. Its our job to see as much as possible of what's going on around us, and diffuse or evade bad situations as they occur.
I saw The Matrix for the first time about two weeks ago, and bought the DVD about 10 days later. Today my ponderings wandered to the concept of bending spoons in the Matrix. The key is that there is no spoon, you effect change in the "physical" world by bending yourself. In a way, that's what I have done. I cast off the need to be a young professional chemist (or whatever) and bent myself in a new way. The world is different now, to me, at least. My paycheck for week two was just under $500 net. It wont always be that much, but thats not bad at all for a rookie. My bottom line is: Dude! I drive around and they actually pay me for it.
But bear in mind, I'm not one to shy from responsibility. This job ain't for everyone.
25 January 2007
My Letter to Congress (work in progress)
Honorable Senators and Representatives,
Some time ago I resigned myself to accept a dim immediate future. For some six years now, I have been impressed by how my worst expectations have been exceeded. Time and again, a cadre of "noble patriots" succeeded in bending Congress to accept their machinations. They succeeded in thwarting your oversight by hook, by crook, and by righteous indignation. Your membership was repeatedly bullied, misinformed, or left entirely in the dark. Their misdeeds, when brought to light, were defended with bluster, or laid at the feet of minor characters who, coincidentally, had already departed to take a position elsewhere.
Now comes a season of change. You architects of law, you defenders of America from the iron grip of the Executive Branch, do now enter now upon a vast opportunity of compromise. How else can a body, comprised of ideologically opposed factions, legislate on behalf of a people that are equally disjoint? I implore you, all of you, to conspire together to correct a grievous wrong that has been wrought upon our civil service time and again by multiple administrations.
America's recent disasters had no single cause, but there is one privilege of the Executive Office that has consistently been a contributing factor to all of them.
When it was perceived that a change was needed in CIA leadership, it was the President's prerogative to select someone else. While his choice of steward was a veteran CIA agent, that agent's congressional aides were not. Those underlings, inexplicably raised to positions of authority in CIA, precipitated a greivous loss of talent from the Agency.
Prior to the inundation of the city of New Orleans, a FEMA agent called to alert the FEMA director with news of how critical the situation was. That politically-installed Director's secretary was quick to act; top priority was to get reservations at the best restaurant in town. I should be keen to know how kind FEMA was to that establishment after the shambles.
When NASA scientists brought exciting recent discoveries to light, their exaultations were squelched by the embedded political officer. His job was to "make the President look good". [Kindly forgive my conceit here. I have just remembered that these events have not yet led to a calamity.]
Gentlemen and Great Ladies of Government, I implore you to effect a change. If the president must hand-pick these agency heads, let him do so only from experienced (and current!) personnel within those agencies. Americans deserve to be served by experienced artisans in these positions, not political horse traders. The election of a new president is a serious and momentous occasion and must not be treated as the arrival of Santa Clause; distributing shiny positions of responsibility to all the good little fund raisers. If this change can be made by a new law, then I urge you to pass it. If it requires a Constitutional Amendment, then I beseech you to frame it. Give the stewardship of America's bureaucracy back to those who learned their trade through hard work, rather than usurping the position through cronyism.
In closing, good citizens, I wish you peace, for you and for all America. May she find it soon.
Some time ago I resigned myself to accept a dim immediate future. For some six years now, I have been impressed by how my worst expectations have been exceeded. Time and again, a cadre of "noble patriots" succeeded in bending Congress to accept their machinations. They succeeded in thwarting your oversight by hook, by crook, and by righteous indignation. Your membership was repeatedly bullied, misinformed, or left entirely in the dark. Their misdeeds, when brought to light, were defended with bluster, or laid at the feet of minor characters who, coincidentally, had already departed to take a position elsewhere.
Now comes a season of change. You architects of law, you defenders of America from the iron grip of the Executive Branch, do now enter now upon a vast opportunity of compromise. How else can a body, comprised of ideologically opposed factions, legislate on behalf of a people that are equally disjoint? I implore you, all of you, to conspire together to correct a grievous wrong that has been wrought upon our civil service time and again by multiple administrations.
America's recent disasters had no single cause, but there is one privilege of the Executive Office that has consistently been a contributing factor to all of them.
When it was perceived that a change was needed in CIA leadership, it was the President's prerogative to select someone else. While his choice of steward was a veteran CIA agent, that agent's congressional aides were not. Those underlings, inexplicably raised to positions of authority in CIA, precipitated a greivous loss of talent from the Agency.
Prior to the inundation of the city of New Orleans, a FEMA agent called to alert the FEMA director with news of how critical the situation was. That politically-installed Director's secretary was quick to act; top priority was to get reservations at the best restaurant in town. I should be keen to know how kind FEMA was to that establishment after the shambles.
When NASA scientists brought exciting recent discoveries to light, their exaultations were squelched by the embedded political officer. His job was to "make the President look good". [Kindly forgive my conceit here. I have just remembered that these events have not yet led to a calamity.]
Gentlemen and Great Ladies of Government, I implore you to effect a change. If the president must hand-pick these agency heads, let him do so only from experienced (and current!) personnel within those agencies. Americans deserve to be served by experienced artisans in these positions, not political horse traders. The election of a new president is a serious and momentous occasion and must not be treated as the arrival of Santa Clause; distributing shiny positions of responsibility to all the good little fund raisers. If this change can be made by a new law, then I urge you to pass it. If it requires a Constitutional Amendment, then I beseech you to frame it. Give the stewardship of America's bureaucracy back to those who learned their trade through hard work, rather than usurping the position through cronyism.
In closing, good citizens, I wish you peace, for you and for all America. May she find it soon.
08 November 2006
Follow the Yellow Striped Road!
Wow.
Driving a truck is no small affair.
Four weeks of truck driving school in Chicago to get my CDL. Then two weeks in Green Bay, Wisconsin at Schneider National's Training Academy. Now I'm back in IL, and not far from Chicago, so I can get home more often than some people do at this training stage.
What I'm doing now is "studying" under a "Training Engineer". I do the driving (in his truck), and he critiques my form, while (hopefully) giving pointers on what to do that would be better. Apparently there aren't quite enough Training Engineers (or T.E.'s) to go around. There were more than 60 people in my class in Green Bay, so thats a lot of new people needing TE tutelage. Add to that a similar number every week for other Training Academy classes.
While I do now have a TE, its something less than I imagined. There is one other student that has been with him for a week or so. "Shared" tutelage isn't a terrible thing, but its not going to get me out on the road making mileage-based pay any sooner. As I said, it's his truck, he has a regular schedule of pick-ups and deliveries of his own, and I'm along for the training. The other (possibly crucuial) difference is that he is dedicated to carrying freight for a particular retailer, and I am slated for OTR driving (Over The Road, otherwise known as "long-haul" driving). He does from one to three deliveries to branch locations on weekdays, gets to go home every night, and even has at least part of the weekends off, whereas I'll be sleeping in my truck most of the time. [In a future version of me, where they have given me my own truck]
This is going to be it for now. That's the pithy information. Hopefully I'll score a suitable laptop for getting Wi-Fi from the truck. But that's looking like it may be at least a month away from now.
Speaking of which, November is (as per usual) National Novel Writing Month. Last year I failed to finish, reaching only about 6000 words instead of the 50000 minimum. That failure was precipitated by two factors. One; my 60-hour per week job was monopolizing my time. Two; the story needed (and still needs) much more cultural research. This year, again I have work issues, but it is work-training, which may not make any difference at all. However, the story does not require research of any kind as has a vague setting. Since there is a Dryad that comes into play, I suppose I have to call it a fantasy. It's a story that occurred to memore than a year ago. I intended not to write it at all because the key event in the opening chapter is ... not pretty. I imagine that I am telling myself that I can write around that until such a time as I am comfortable with it. That could be never, but I don't have any other "hot" stories that are ready to be committed to hardcopy at this time.
Driving a truck is no small affair.
Four weeks of truck driving school in Chicago to get my CDL. Then two weeks in Green Bay, Wisconsin at Schneider National's Training Academy. Now I'm back in IL, and not far from Chicago, so I can get home more often than some people do at this training stage.
What I'm doing now is "studying" under a "Training Engineer". I do the driving (in his truck), and he critiques my form, while (hopefully) giving pointers on what to do that would be better. Apparently there aren't quite enough Training Engineers (or T.E.'s) to go around. There were more than 60 people in my class in Green Bay, so thats a lot of new people needing TE tutelage. Add to that a similar number every week for other Training Academy classes.
While I do now have a TE, its something less than I imagined. There is one other student that has been with him for a week or so. "Shared" tutelage isn't a terrible thing, but its not going to get me out on the road making mileage-based pay any sooner. As I said, it's his truck, he has a regular schedule of pick-ups and deliveries of his own, and I'm along for the training. The other (possibly crucuial) difference is that he is dedicated to carrying freight for a particular retailer, and I am slated for OTR driving (Over The Road, otherwise known as "long-haul" driving). He does from one to three deliveries to branch locations on weekdays, gets to go home every night, and even has at least part of the weekends off, whereas I'll be sleeping in my truck most of the time. [In a future version of me, where they have given me my own truck]
This is going to be it for now. That's the pithy information. Hopefully I'll score a suitable laptop for getting Wi-Fi from the truck. But that's looking like it may be at least a month away from now.
Speaking of which, November is (as per usual) National Novel Writing Month. Last year I failed to finish, reaching only about 6000 words instead of the 50000 minimum. That failure was precipitated by two factors. One; my 60-hour per week job was monopolizing my time. Two; the story needed (and still needs) much more cultural research. This year, again I have work issues, but it is work-training, which may not make any difference at all. However, the story does not require research of any kind as has a vague setting. Since there is a Dryad that comes into play, I suppose I have to call it a fantasy. It's a story that occurred to memore than a year ago. I intended not to write it at all because the key event in the opening chapter is ... not pretty. I imagine that I am telling myself that I can write around that until such a time as I am comfortable with it. That could be never, but I don't have any other "hot" stories that are ready to be committed to hardcopy at this time.
20 October 2006
I stole this title.
Today I am off to Green Bay, Wisconsin, to begin job training for the trucking company Schneider National. Thereafter my life will consist of irregular routine on a regular schedule: 2 weeks on the road followed by (approximately) two days at home. For those who actually read this blog, that is actually a good thing. I expect there shall be somewhat of a hiatus until such a time as I can aquire a suitable laptop with WiFi, and I shall (perhaps) be blogging away merrily again.
I could ramble on about how pleased that I am with the current embattled state of the current Administration, and their "Conservative" stalwarts, but for the moment, its enough for my purposes simply to mention it.
November raises its frigid head. That means that once again it is time for National Novel Writing Month. The challenge is simple: write a novel of 50,000 words or more within the calendar month of November. Meet similarly aspiring authors both in your area, and via chat room, from around the world. Proceeds from both donations and merchandising will purchase books for schools in Viet Nam and similar areas in Southeast Asia.
My attempted novel last year suffered from the usual over-reaching and overly grandiose vision that I seem to apply to most of my projects. I did turn out some 8000 words or so despite working 60 hours a week. "The Order of the Shining Moon," however, will not see significant progress until a good amount of research has been completed in the areas of shamanism, shape-shifting, and Christian mysticism, to name only a few. This year, I'm thinking of a much simpler subject, but like last year, it is doubtful that I will have the time to get out a full 50,000 words. I do have some voice recognition software on this computer, but I abandoned that project when I realised that I had to take the time to orally record a "lexicon" of words needed to enable such transcription. Perhaps I can do that when I return from orientation, since I now see how useful this could be, and copy those files to the future laptop. A laptop computer which now seems to require an external microphone.....
Before I go; Anna Karenina. I was tasked with reading this book in... grade school, I think, but I didnt manage more than some 300 out of 868 pages. What I did manage to read then, I didn't much understand. So, when I was away over my July vacation, having finished a book on the life of Voltaire, I picked up Anna Karenina. It was not out of a desire to say that I had completed what I had started so very long ago. Rather than that, it was a conscious attempt to broaden my knowledge base as an aspiring author. I was looking for the means to write from a female perspective, as impossible as that may be for a man. In that regard, I may have chosen the wrong book, as its not especially clear that Tolstoy himself had any such clarity.
What I do find in Tolstoy, is the depth that he gives to even his minor characters, in their motivations, internal dialogue, and experiences. [I expect this is generally why his books are notoriously long: between the book covers he is packing a segment of history and society as experienced by several characters.] This depth stacks up favorably against a number of "popular" authors who may or may not have 'style', but seem to gloss over matters of internal dialogue or even ignore it in order to move the plot along.
Anna is the indifferent victim of an arranged marriage to a successful civil servant. At least, she is indifferent until her social intercourses bring her in contact with Count Vronsky. Vronsky is obsessed with her, and wins her over to the consternation of her husband. Karenin is not a man of action; at times the intrigues within his comittees sometimes exceed his mental capacity. Anna's infidelity seems to him largely an inconvenience, personally, and to his standing in society. She leaves him to live with Vronsky, which proves to be a better situation for both parties. She is free do do as she pleases and is not present to embarrass Karenin. Karenin, whether intentionally or not, ultimately succeeds in making her life miserable. He refuses to give her a divorce, which complicates her happiness with Vronsky. Anna still belongs to Karenin, and any children that she may have will bear his name.
As Anna's situation blossoms and then degenerates, Constantine Levin flourishes. They are aquainted, but rarely meet during the novel; their circumstances apparently not affecting each other. Constantine is a good and thoughtful man who is married and has his first child in the course of the novel. Levin is both a lens for the setting of the novel and a 'normal' person to contrast Anna's experiences. Levin is accepted in high society through his bloodline and his marriage, though he is most at ease on his farm. He tries to understand the world around him and his very existence, though in arguments he has difficulty expressing himself.
I have no option but to come away liking Tolstoy. His characters feel real. They have flaws, talk pompously, and sometimes fail to understand each other. There is a good scene in a train where two men (strangers to each other) speak very highly to each other of a group of four volunteers (who are esteemed in society). But what one man fails to ask about, the other knows and intentionally fails to mention; these men are socially derelict. Volunteering is possibly the only honorable course of action possible for them. These two fail to breach this topic (each for his own reasons) for fear of speaking contrary to what seems to be a publicly held truism: these volunteers must be applauded as (departing) heroes.
I could ramble on about how pleased that I am with the current embattled state of the current Administration, and their "Conservative" stalwarts, but for the moment, its enough for my purposes simply to mention it.
November raises its frigid head. That means that once again it is time for National Novel Writing Month. The challenge is simple: write a novel of 50,000 words or more within the calendar month of November. Meet similarly aspiring authors both in your area, and via chat room, from around the world. Proceeds from both donations and merchandising will purchase books for schools in Viet Nam and similar areas in Southeast Asia.
My attempted novel last year suffered from the usual over-reaching and overly grandiose vision that I seem to apply to most of my projects. I did turn out some 8000 words or so despite working 60 hours a week. "The Order of the Shining Moon," however, will not see significant progress until a good amount of research has been completed in the areas of shamanism, shape-shifting, and Christian mysticism, to name only a few. This year, I'm thinking of a much simpler subject, but like last year, it is doubtful that I will have the time to get out a full 50,000 words. I do have some voice recognition software on this computer, but I abandoned that project when I realised that I had to take the time to orally record a "lexicon" of words needed to enable such transcription. Perhaps I can do that when I return from orientation, since I now see how useful this could be, and copy those files to the future laptop. A laptop computer which now seems to require an external microphone.....
Before I go; Anna Karenina. I was tasked with reading this book in... grade school, I think, but I didnt manage more than some 300 out of 868 pages. What I did manage to read then, I didn't much understand. So, when I was away over my July vacation, having finished a book on the life of Voltaire, I picked up Anna Karenina. It was not out of a desire to say that I had completed what I had started so very long ago. Rather than that, it was a conscious attempt to broaden my knowledge base as an aspiring author. I was looking for the means to write from a female perspective, as impossible as that may be for a man. In that regard, I may have chosen the wrong book, as its not especially clear that Tolstoy himself had any such clarity.
What I do find in Tolstoy, is the depth that he gives to even his minor characters, in their motivations, internal dialogue, and experiences. [I expect this is generally why his books are notoriously long: between the book covers he is packing a segment of history and society as experienced by several characters.] This depth stacks up favorably against a number of "popular" authors who may or may not have 'style', but seem to gloss over matters of internal dialogue or even ignore it in order to move the plot along.
Anna is the indifferent victim of an arranged marriage to a successful civil servant. At least, she is indifferent until her social intercourses bring her in contact with Count Vronsky. Vronsky is obsessed with her, and wins her over to the consternation of her husband. Karenin is not a man of action; at times the intrigues within his comittees sometimes exceed his mental capacity. Anna's infidelity seems to him largely an inconvenience, personally, and to his standing in society. She leaves him to live with Vronsky, which proves to be a better situation for both parties. She is free do do as she pleases and is not present to embarrass Karenin. Karenin, whether intentionally or not, ultimately succeeds in making her life miserable. He refuses to give her a divorce, which complicates her happiness with Vronsky. Anna still belongs to Karenin, and any children that she may have will bear his name.
As Anna's situation blossoms and then degenerates, Constantine Levin flourishes. They are aquainted, but rarely meet during the novel; their circumstances apparently not affecting each other. Constantine is a good and thoughtful man who is married and has his first child in the course of the novel. Levin is both a lens for the setting of the novel and a 'normal' person to contrast Anna's experiences. Levin is accepted in high society through his bloodline and his marriage, though he is most at ease on his farm. He tries to understand the world around him and his very existence, though in arguments he has difficulty expressing himself.
I have no option but to come away liking Tolstoy. His characters feel real. They have flaws, talk pompously, and sometimes fail to understand each other. There is a good scene in a train where two men (strangers to each other) speak very highly to each other of a group of four volunteers (who are esteemed in society). But what one man fails to ask about, the other knows and intentionally fails to mention; these men are socially derelict. Volunteering is possibly the only honorable course of action possible for them. These two fail to breach this topic (each for his own reasons) for fear of speaking contrary to what seems to be a publicly held truism: these volunteers must be applauded as (departing) heroes.
12 October 2006
My head is cold.
I did it.
I passed the basic skills test, and then passed the road driving test. I may have cheated a tiny bit during that backing up part, but I'll become much more proficient with practice. The road test was all me. My shifting was a bit rough in places [I slowed to 15mph, clutched out of 7th gear, gunned the engine, and shifted smoothly into 5th - without depressing the clutch pedal! D'OH! I don't know if the examiner saw that - it would have counted against me] and even jerky at times. All my cornering was good, and I was looking in my mirrors frequently (both very good). Best of all, I did not hit anything.
It definitely helped that the examiner was in a good mood. [Propriety prevents me from stating why.] All four of us passed the basic skills test (one retested the same day and passed). One of us passed his pre-trip test. I was the only one that passed the road test on the first attempt. I fear that at least one person may have failed on his second attempt. At that time I took the necessary paperwork, said my goodbyes, and headed for the barber shop.
My barber had gone to lunch. To pass the time I did two things to celebrate: bought melatonin tablets (I ran out this week), and Navy blue twin-size flannel sheets. After standing in snow flurries for at least two hours that morning, and being proud of myself, flanell sheets for a future truck berth seemed an appropriate means of celebration.
After a mane removal, I spent an inordinate amount of time locating the CDL facility in South Holland, IL. Once there, I tested for Doubles and Triples (# of trailers), Tankers, and HazMat endorsements. Passed them all. I had been rightly concerned about the Hazmat one. Now I am CDL-ified with all of the endorsements (and for that matter endorphins while the warm glow lasts) that I desired. I now seem to be capable of becoming a truck driver.
I passed the basic skills test, and then passed the road driving test. I may have cheated a tiny bit during that backing up part, but I'll become much more proficient with practice. The road test was all me. My shifting was a bit rough in places [I slowed to 15mph, clutched out of 7th gear, gunned the engine, and shifted smoothly into 5th - without depressing the clutch pedal! D'OH! I don't know if the examiner saw that - it would have counted against me] and even jerky at times. All my cornering was good, and I was looking in my mirrors frequently (both very good). Best of all, I did not hit anything.
It definitely helped that the examiner was in a good mood. [Propriety prevents me from stating why.] All four of us passed the basic skills test (one retested the same day and passed). One of us passed his pre-trip test. I was the only one that passed the road test on the first attempt. I fear that at least one person may have failed on his second attempt. At that time I took the necessary paperwork, said my goodbyes, and headed for the barber shop.
My barber had gone to lunch. To pass the time I did two things to celebrate: bought melatonin tablets (I ran out this week), and Navy blue twin-size flannel sheets. After standing in snow flurries for at least two hours that morning, and being proud of myself, flanell sheets for a future truck berth seemed an appropriate means of celebration.
After a mane removal, I spent an inordinate amount of time locating the CDL facility in South Holland, IL. Once there, I tested for Doubles and Triples (# of trailers), Tankers, and HazMat endorsements. Passed them all. I had been rightly concerned about the Hazmat one. Now I am CDL-ified with all of the endorsements (and for that matter endorphins while the warm glow lasts) that I desired. I now seem to be capable of becoming a truck driver.
06 October 2006
How I did not do it
The Truck Driving school has an arrangement with the Illinois Department of Transportation which dictates that a State Examiner will come out and test students on and around the school grounds. This is nice because that means students are tested in the same setting and on the same course on which they practiced. However, if a student fails to pass, as I did, two things can happen. He could be retested that same day if time permits. [Time did not permit. The oral examination on the "pre-trip" takes a while and there were six students that day.] Otherwise, that student has to wait until the state processes and files the relevant paperwork and arranges another date for an examiner to go to the school. In my case, that took nearly four weeks.
I passed the pre-trip part handily, with no points against me. I won't have to be tested for that again (at least not this side of getting the CDL). Following the Pre-Trip part, is the basic skills test, and then driving out on the road about 8 miles near the school. I wasn't concerned about the road driving; I've got my double-clutching down pat. I am paranoid about allowing the truck to roll backwards when stopped at a stop sign or similar. If the truck rolls, I fail that part.
What tripped me up was the basic skills test. There are four basic parts to it. You need to pull forward to within 18" of a point on the ground. In my case the nose of the truck reaches that point roughly 7 seconds after I lose sight of it in front of the truck, when idling forward in low gear. Thats right: I have to stop within 18" of a point that I cannot even see when I am 18" away from it. The main trick to that is timing your stop from the moment it disappears from view.
Then I back up a distance of about 40 yards - while not drifting into any cones that mark the lane that I just drove forward in. That's harder than it looks, but the technique for steering a combination vehicle slightly when in reverse isn't difficult to learn. You must have your hazard lights on when in reverse. Also referred to as "four-ways", for the lamp at each corner of the combination vehicle. Next you move forward and turn right. During this turn, the wheels of your trailer must be near a specific cone (without touching it). Contacting any cone, or breaking the plane between any cones is an instant failure.
Now comes the tough part. After that turn you head back towards the entrance to this lane of cones, go past it, and bear left, stopping with the truck at least at a 45' angle to the "lane". Put it in reverse, and turn your "four-ways" on, you're backing the 45' trailer into the slot that is the "lane". And you won't be done until you stop within 18" of a spot that marks the back of the slot. The good news is that you can see this point... most of the time, the bad news is that you will never be closer to it than about 62' because you are in the part of the truck that is farthest away from it at all times. Not to mention that steering the trailer is doubly difficult because of the pivot point at the fifth wheel.
The first time I tested, I managed to get it into the slot, and within the 18" target. But it was "winning ugly". I basically forced the trailer in there at the last moment, leaving the tractor at a sharp angle to the trailer (not desireable) when I stopped. And the trailer wasn't straight in the slot either, factually breaking the plane (in real life this would be another trailer) of the cones with the driver's side rear corner of my trailer.
So, that was it for me for that day. I had to wait for the paperwork to be filed with the state of Illinois. Then I had to wait for the State to shedule a date for the examiner to come out to the school again for re-testing. That took nearly four weeks.
I passed the pre-trip part handily, with no points against me. I won't have to be tested for that again (at least not this side of getting the CDL). Following the Pre-Trip part, is the basic skills test, and then driving out on the road about 8 miles near the school. I wasn't concerned about the road driving; I've got my double-clutching down pat. I am paranoid about allowing the truck to roll backwards when stopped at a stop sign or similar. If the truck rolls, I fail that part.
What tripped me up was the basic skills test. There are four basic parts to it. You need to pull forward to within 18" of a point on the ground. In my case the nose of the truck reaches that point roughly 7 seconds after I lose sight of it in front of the truck, when idling forward in low gear. Thats right: I have to stop within 18" of a point that I cannot even see when I am 18" away from it. The main trick to that is timing your stop from the moment it disappears from view.
Then I back up a distance of about 40 yards - while not drifting into any cones that mark the lane that I just drove forward in. That's harder than it looks, but the technique for steering a combination vehicle slightly when in reverse isn't difficult to learn. You must have your hazard lights on when in reverse. Also referred to as "four-ways", for the lamp at each corner of the combination vehicle. Next you move forward and turn right. During this turn, the wheels of your trailer must be near a specific cone (without touching it). Contacting any cone, or breaking the plane between any cones is an instant failure.
Now comes the tough part. After that turn you head back towards the entrance to this lane of cones, go past it, and bear left, stopping with the truck at least at a 45' angle to the "lane". Put it in reverse, and turn your "four-ways" on, you're backing the 45' trailer into the slot that is the "lane". And you won't be done until you stop within 18" of a spot that marks the back of the slot. The good news is that you can see this point... most of the time, the bad news is that you will never be closer to it than about 62' because you are in the part of the truck that is farthest away from it at all times. Not to mention that steering the trailer is doubly difficult because of the pivot point at the fifth wheel.
The first time I tested, I managed to get it into the slot, and within the 18" target. But it was "winning ugly". I basically forced the trailer in there at the last moment, leaving the tractor at a sharp angle to the trailer (not desireable) when I stopped. And the trailer wasn't straight in the slot either, factually breaking the plane (in real life this would be another trailer) of the cones with the driver's side rear corner of my trailer.
So, that was it for me for that day. I had to wait for the paperwork to be filed with the state of Illinois. Then I had to wait for the State to shedule a date for the examiner to come out to the school again for re-testing. That took nearly four weeks.
28 September 2006
Truckin'! Got my chips cashed in!
It would be decidedly pretentious of me to lay claim to being busy these past few months.
I took a ten-day vacation from my job and returned to it on approximately July 8 or 9 (I dont recall which). By that time, my idyll had nurtured any notions of discontentment that I previously entertained (and there were a great many) to the point that I had already determined to move on to something else.
My nine hour drive from Minneapolis/St. Paul to Chicago consisted of me wondering what other sort of work I should I should be getting into. [Normally an eight hour drive, I was taking a longer, "scenic" route to avoid a few toll booths and other hubbub] I have a degree in chemistry, but the last jobs that I had that "required" it could also easily have been performed by a cadre of trained monkeys. In point of fact, a cadre of trained monkeys would have been much more efficient in both positions due to the volume of activity that was expected from me. My last position maily consisted of me running around for 12 hours and pausing only long enough to test something before I was off again. Said monkeys probably would not enjoy it any more than I did, but would have the benefit of working at a much more relaxed pace.
To be sure, I wasn't looking for someting much more lucrative, so much as I was looking for something that I might enjoy doing without putting me at risk for heart failure or other exertion or stress-related disorders. That can be a tall order since many businesses are trying to do more work with fewer people.
Somehow I ended up thinking that I should be a truck driver. For a number of reasons, that makes sense. I'm patient. I am a careful driver. I am mechanically inclined. I prefer to go for days without shaving. And I'm predisposed to sitting around on my ass for several days at a time. I'm kidding. Sorta.
Certain issues at the workplace at the time made me especially anxious to make this change as soon as I could arrange it. From a starting point of knowing very little, I poked around on the internet to try to find out what I ought to be doing. I was shocked to discover that truck driver training could cost more than $5000, depending on where you go and what is involved. [The $5000 was for a 5-week course learning/practicing with multiple truck types] Also available (takes a bit more looking) from some places is a sort of on the job truck driver training.
After poking around a bit I found an address for a truck driving school was was suprisingly close to me. I called them on the phone and then went round to see them in their office and pick up a pamhlet with a course description. They charged $3000 for the course, and the next class, starting the following Monday, was already full and would last four weeks. The previous class was taking an exam, so I lounged around for a bit and talked to the owner about his street racing days. [Apparently he used to have a '51 Olds that was set up with dual thermoquads. He would disconnect the linkage to the front carburetor when he was not racing.]
To my impulsive mind, that was all the information that I needed. That night I gave four weeks' notice at work. I gave notice in an e-mail that I didnt sent til about 3am (cause I was busy) but by the time I returned to work on Saturday night, it had been replied to with a "hope-we-can-work-this-out" tone. I was astounded that it had been replied to at all, especially on a weekend. I gave notice at that time (July 22nd I believe) also because I didnt want to be a brand new truck driver in the middle of winter. There's a scary thought for ya!
I gave four week's notice for a few reasons. It would be four weeks until August 21, when the next class started. They had no prospective students for that class at the time, and I had not given them a committment yet. Four weeks, however, should be adequate time to see if I could find something better, and leave me this school to fall back on if I did not. The main reason that I gave four weeks was because the place I was working for isn't capable of doing anything significant in a mere two weeks time. The only reason that our work schedule was up to date was because people kept going on vacation that month. In the four weeks that followed, they did find one person to replace me (although they were ALREADY short by one person) and started to train him on the Thursday just before I left. That person quit the very same day. Four weeks wasted, just like I expected they would be.
During that four weeks I applied to do an on-the-job training deal with PAM transport. PAM, a few of its subsidiaries, and another company called USA Truck apparently contract this company to do driver training (the related screening) and then hire (to the tune of a one year agreement) the successful candidates. Their brocures read like a fast track to the trucking industry, with information on the four companies that you could be working for. I was all set to go down toFort Wayne, IN to start truck driver training with them on August 21 (ayep, same date!) when a closer reading of their materials revealed a sub-plot that I didn't like.
(Quotes are taken directly from their booklet:)
You can pay $2495 up front to pay for the tuition, in which case you will get $1750 back after one year of employment. (Nominal tuition cost is $5000 which will be deducted from your pay at $45/week during your employment) While you are recieving driver training, you will be staying (typically) at a local hotel for three weeks. "The cost to you is $295. [We] "may, at our option, agree to finance your housing at a cost of $400." There is a further offer of $200 spending money during the training time. Far at the bottom of the page is the caveat: "Any loans made to you by [us] are simple interest at 18% per annum."
Immediately after hire, you spend 4-8 weeks driving with a trainer in the cab with you. You earn $300/week at this time (minus the $45 for tuition, I expect). Then you start out at 29 cents per mile and can be as much as 32 cents per mile after one year. Increases are more gradual after that.
Basically, I read the financing conditions for training costs and decided that I didnt like what I saw. I fully intended to pay cash up front and be done with it. IF, however, conditions with my employer for the next year were to be anything like the less-than-generous financing offer, I didn't want anything to do with it. So after they had screened me and everything, I finally acted on my suspicions and told them no. I hung up the phone, went down the street to Bestway Truck Training and wrote them a check for $3000.
Upside: I sleep in my own bed and have training less than a mile away.
Downside: I'd be driving a truck right this very moment if I'd gone to Fort Worth.
More on that next time.
I took a ten-day vacation from my job and returned to it on approximately July 8 or 9 (I dont recall which). By that time, my idyll had nurtured any notions of discontentment that I previously entertained (and there were a great many) to the point that I had already determined to move on to something else.
My nine hour drive from Minneapolis/St. Paul to Chicago consisted of me wondering what other sort of work I should I should be getting into. [Normally an eight hour drive, I was taking a longer, "scenic" route to avoid a few toll booths and other hubbub] I have a degree in chemistry, but the last jobs that I had that "required" it could also easily have been performed by a cadre of trained monkeys. In point of fact, a cadre of trained monkeys would have been much more efficient in both positions due to the volume of activity that was expected from me. My last position maily consisted of me running around for 12 hours and pausing only long enough to test something before I was off again. Said monkeys probably would not enjoy it any more than I did, but would have the benefit of working at a much more relaxed pace.
To be sure, I wasn't looking for someting much more lucrative, so much as I was looking for something that I might enjoy doing without putting me at risk for heart failure or other exertion or stress-related disorders. That can be a tall order since many businesses are trying to do more work with fewer people.
Somehow I ended up thinking that I should be a truck driver. For a number of reasons, that makes sense. I'm patient. I am a careful driver. I am mechanically inclined. I prefer to go for days without shaving. And I'm predisposed to sitting around on my ass for several days at a time. I'm kidding. Sorta.
Certain issues at the workplace at the time made me especially anxious to make this change as soon as I could arrange it. From a starting point of knowing very little, I poked around on the internet to try to find out what I ought to be doing. I was shocked to discover that truck driver training could cost more than $5000, depending on where you go and what is involved. [The $5000 was for a 5-week course learning/practicing with multiple truck types] Also available (takes a bit more looking) from some places is a sort of on the job truck driver training.
After poking around a bit I found an address for a truck driving school was was suprisingly close to me. I called them on the phone and then went round to see them in their office and pick up a pamhlet with a course description. They charged $3000 for the course, and the next class, starting the following Monday, was already full and would last four weeks. The previous class was taking an exam, so I lounged around for a bit and talked to the owner about his street racing days. [Apparently he used to have a '51 Olds that was set up with dual thermoquads. He would disconnect the linkage to the front carburetor when he was not racing.]
To my impulsive mind, that was all the information that I needed. That night I gave four weeks' notice at work. I gave notice in an e-mail that I didnt sent til about 3am (cause I was busy) but by the time I returned to work on Saturday night, it had been replied to with a "hope-we-can-work-this-out" tone. I was astounded that it had been replied to at all, especially on a weekend. I gave notice at that time (July 22nd I believe) also because I didnt want to be a brand new truck driver in the middle of winter. There's a scary thought for ya!
I gave four week's notice for a few reasons. It would be four weeks until August 21, when the next class started. They had no prospective students for that class at the time, and I had not given them a committment yet. Four weeks, however, should be adequate time to see if I could find something better, and leave me this school to fall back on if I did not. The main reason that I gave four weeks was because the place I was working for isn't capable of doing anything significant in a mere two weeks time. The only reason that our work schedule was up to date was because people kept going on vacation that month. In the four weeks that followed, they did find one person to replace me (although they were ALREADY short by one person) and started to train him on the Thursday just before I left. That person quit the very same day. Four weeks wasted, just like I expected they would be.
During that four weeks I applied to do an on-the-job training deal with PAM transport. PAM, a few of its subsidiaries, and another company called USA Truck apparently contract this company to do driver training (the related screening) and then hire (to the tune of a one year agreement) the successful candidates. Their brocures read like a fast track to the trucking industry, with information on the four companies that you could be working for. I was all set to go down toFort Wayne, IN to start truck driver training with them on August 21 (ayep, same date!) when a closer reading of their materials revealed a sub-plot that I didn't like.
(Quotes are taken directly from their booklet:)
You can pay $2495 up front to pay for the tuition, in which case you will get $1750 back after one year of employment. (Nominal tuition cost is $5000 which will be deducted from your pay at $45/week during your employment) While you are recieving driver training, you will be staying (typically) at a local hotel for three weeks. "The cost to you is $295. [We] "may, at our option, agree to finance your housing at a cost of $400." There is a further offer of $200 spending money during the training time. Far at the bottom of the page is the caveat: "Any loans made to you by [us] are simple interest at 18% per annum."
Immediately after hire, you spend 4-8 weeks driving with a trainer in the cab with you. You earn $300/week at this time (minus the $45 for tuition, I expect). Then you start out at 29 cents per mile and can be as much as 32 cents per mile after one year. Increases are more gradual after that.
Basically, I read the financing conditions for training costs and decided that I didnt like what I saw. I fully intended to pay cash up front and be done with it. IF, however, conditions with my employer for the next year were to be anything like the less-than-generous financing offer, I didn't want anything to do with it. So after they had screened me and everything, I finally acted on my suspicions and told them no. I hung up the phone, went down the street to Bestway Truck Training and wrote them a check for $3000.
Upside: I sleep in my own bed and have training less than a mile away.
Downside: I'd be driving a truck right this very moment if I'd gone to Fort Worth.
More on that next time.
13 July 2006
No Getting Married in the Front of the Bus
Hi.
Did you miss me?
Well, don't worry. My aim is a bit off too.
Just make sure you get me next time.
Regular readers will have divined that I support "gay marriage". If you don't mind, I thought I'd expound on that for just a little while. Why it is constitutional, and why it is not going to be admitted as being constitutional until approximately 2008 or later.
My prima facie argument for marriage withought restrictions or bigotry is based on the Declaration of Independance's inherent promise of "life, liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." Yes, I read that rather broadly, but I would do that, wouldn't I? I like the idea of a 'Pursuit of Happiness' as a lofty goal that can be attained by just sitting here and writing a blog that illuminates or irritates.
I recently remembered a certain senator who was opposed to Unrestricted Marriage speaking out against his being labelled a "bigot" for his views. Apparently, he and his comrades in arms fighting the Good Fight against people who are engaged to be married, beleive that they did not deserve to be slandered in those terms.
"Bigot" conjures up images of a past turmoil with its own injustices that took far too long to redress. Some observers might point out that in our current iteration of social unrest, the same sorts of people appear to be the agressors in curtailing the "Pursuit of Happiness". I don't care to point, but thats usually because I am picking my nose at the time. I consider that time well spent by minding my own business, thank you very much.
I'll leave it for someone else to compare and contrast the problem of Unrestricted Marriage with the Civil Rights Movement. I really do not have the time to be as exhaustingly thorough as that project deserves. Furthermore, I dont recall enough of the milestones in Civil Rights to get started on it - being the lazy American that I am.
What I do find to be enormously disturbing about this Marriage issue is that, following the Civil Rights movement, why is there any crisis at all? Shouldn't the core issues about people being free to go about their lives without being discriminated against or hasselled by a Draconian "Man" have been solved already? Why wasn't there a Constitutional Amendment saying that "Thou shalt pursue thy freedom such as it doth not violate existing laws or infringe on the rights of others."?
The answer, as I divine it, is probably the main flaw in our legal system. As my buddy Jim reminds me, the Constitution was written to be a living document, that can be changed and adapted to the needs of our country. As a part of this evolution, the Supreme Court is empowered to strike down laws enacted by Congress that are deemed to be Unconstitutional. Because of these Supreme Court decisions, most "evolution" or "interpretation" of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is manifest in Supreme Court Decisions about what protections are, or are not provided for under the Constitution. Thus, the problem of school segregation (Jim Crow laws) and other social problems were "resolved" (a word I use only while rolling my eyes) through Supreme Court Decisions and not through adding amendments to the Bill of Rights.
So, lets start at the top, shall we? Why is unrestricted marriage legal? Because of Amendment #1 (and my personal favorite):
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
To hedge that bet, I'll stack on top of that Amendment #14:
"Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Regardless of how anyone chooses to restrict marriage, it is simply unconstitutional to do it. Amendment #1 precludes prevention of discriminating against religions that permit it, and Amendment #14 gaurantees equal protection against "abridged priviledges" and due process of law, which I take to mean that the state must recognize a religious or civil union as marriage under the law.
BUT, sadly we have to wait for the Supreme Court to strike down all these naysayers first. What that requires, is three things. First, a relevant case has to wind its way up to the Supreme Court. Secondly, the High Court has to be willing to try the case, and they don't always. Third, they have to adjudicate the case without simply sending it back to a lower court, in which case no judgement may be made on whether the pertinent laws are constitutional or not.
Fortunately, in the mean-time a constitutional amendment that proscribes certain unions could never get off the ground since that would be unconstitutional to start with. By 2009 or so I expect people will be proudly going to the altar. In a church with protesters outside, because that sort of thing wasn't allowed until after the Supreme Court struck down all the laws against it. Isn't democracy wonderful?
Did you miss me?
Well, don't worry. My aim is a bit off too.
Just make sure you get me next time.
Regular readers will have divined that I support "gay marriage". If you don't mind, I thought I'd expound on that for just a little while. Why it is constitutional, and why it is not going to be admitted as being constitutional until approximately 2008 or later.
My prima facie argument for marriage withought restrictions or bigotry is based on the Declaration of Independance's inherent promise of "life, liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." Yes, I read that rather broadly, but I would do that, wouldn't I? I like the idea of a 'Pursuit of Happiness' as a lofty goal that can be attained by just sitting here and writing a blog that illuminates or irritates.
I recently remembered a certain senator who was opposed to Unrestricted Marriage speaking out against his being labelled a "bigot" for his views. Apparently, he and his comrades in arms fighting the Good Fight against people who are engaged to be married, beleive that they did not deserve to be slandered in those terms.
"Bigot" conjures up images of a past turmoil with its own injustices that took far too long to redress. Some observers might point out that in our current iteration of social unrest, the same sorts of people appear to be the agressors in curtailing the "Pursuit of Happiness". I don't care to point, but thats usually because I am picking my nose at the time. I consider that time well spent by minding my own business, thank you very much.
I'll leave it for someone else to compare and contrast the problem of Unrestricted Marriage with the Civil Rights Movement. I really do not have the time to be as exhaustingly thorough as that project deserves. Furthermore, I dont recall enough of the milestones in Civil Rights to get started on it - being the lazy American that I am.
What I do find to be enormously disturbing about this Marriage issue is that, following the Civil Rights movement, why is there any crisis at all? Shouldn't the core issues about people being free to go about their lives without being discriminated against or hasselled by a Draconian "Man" have been solved already? Why wasn't there a Constitutional Amendment saying that "Thou shalt pursue thy freedom such as it doth not violate existing laws or infringe on the rights of others."?
The answer, as I divine it, is probably the main flaw in our legal system. As my buddy Jim reminds me, the Constitution was written to be a living document, that can be changed and adapted to the needs of our country. As a part of this evolution, the Supreme Court is empowered to strike down laws enacted by Congress that are deemed to be Unconstitutional. Because of these Supreme Court decisions, most "evolution" or "interpretation" of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is manifest in Supreme Court Decisions about what protections are, or are not provided for under the Constitution. Thus, the problem of school segregation (Jim Crow laws) and other social problems were "resolved" (a word I use only while rolling my eyes) through Supreme Court Decisions and not through adding amendments to the Bill of Rights.
So, lets start at the top, shall we? Why is unrestricted marriage legal? Because of Amendment #1 (and my personal favorite):
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
To hedge that bet, I'll stack on top of that Amendment #14:
"Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Regardless of how anyone chooses to restrict marriage, it is simply unconstitutional to do it. Amendment #1 precludes prevention of discriminating against religions that permit it, and Amendment #14 gaurantees equal protection against "abridged priviledges" and due process of law, which I take to mean that the state must recognize a religious or civil union as marriage under the law.
BUT, sadly we have to wait for the Supreme Court to strike down all these naysayers first. What that requires, is three things. First, a relevant case has to wind its way up to the Supreme Court. Secondly, the High Court has to be willing to try the case, and they don't always. Third, they have to adjudicate the case without simply sending it back to a lower court, in which case no judgement may be made on whether the pertinent laws are constitutional or not.
Fortunately, in the mean-time a constitutional amendment that proscribes certain unions could never get off the ground since that would be unconstitutional to start with. By 2009 or so I expect people will be proudly going to the altar. In a church with protesters outside, because that sort of thing wasn't allowed until after the Supreme Court struck down all the laws against it. Isn't democracy wonderful?
05 June 2006
Visions Revisited
1:48am; need a 3 hour nap before work.
What do I believe?
Sometimes I dont know the answer, but thats because I don't have the information to define it ... yet.
I had been about to post here that, for various reasons, I was renouncing my Christianity. As reasons I intended to cite tenets of faith that were simply at odds with the physical world and portions of Holy text that appear to be at odds with everything. Chief among these would be the book of Genesis which appears to consist largely of mythology, much of it not even of Hebrew origin. I'm not just talking about Creation or the Tower of Babel. I mean that I have serious problems when the basic identity of the main characters appears to have been subjected to revision. Another significant, but related, issue that I have is when the Book of Revelation trots out the ida of a New Heaven and a New Earth. That idea is basically a repackaging of a much older "pagan" religious idea of continuous cyclical destruction and regeneration of the world. I cannot very well be a Christian knowing that if this can even happen, the time scal would be in millions of years between the bounteous part of the cycles. The universe tends to not support physical regeneration.
Before I went ahead and posted that, self restraint urged me to do some research. My main inquiry went something along these lines:
1) Modern Christianity is based upon the New Covenant with God, established through the travails of a historical figure named (variously) Iesu. [How anyone can get 'Jesus' from a Hebrew name is beyond me - I'm fairly certain that it begins with a "Yah" sound, but thats an entire other discussion]
2) That being the case, I should restrain my criticisms to the body of work entitled the New Testament. That effectively reduces the mythological and mystical content by about 75-80%.
3) For the purpose of simplicity, I'll forgo critiquing the Gospels. There is surely plenty of meat there, but the preserving of oral traditions always results in problems like the bias of the authors. I'll call them the rough edges of perspective then, and move on.
The bulk of the NT is actually well edited for content. The epistles of Paul and a few others formulate a nice handbook for Christian living. There persists some debate on semantics, and who the real author of some letters were, but in general, I'll forgo those issues as well.
Thus my main questions boil down to these:
We go through the entire Bible, when all of a sudden, in the last book, we get all kinds of new bad guys on the scene. Where were these guys before?
I'm referring to the Anti-Christ, the False Prophet, the Beast, and a host of imagery and Evil Forces. Also, as I mentioned, we get amazing detail about what the last days of the world will be like. Where did all this stuff come from???
So, my first inquiries were as to when the Book of Revelation was added to the canon of the New Testament. Had it been added later (for whatever reason) that might add reasons for my distrust. The early Church, however, was very careful about selecting which texts to preserve in the face of severe persecution. The earliest documents on the subject clearly include the Book of Revelation as already part of canon (if I use that word correctly) attributing it to being written at about the same time as the gospels (roughly 80 C.E. or so - all the survivors who contributed to first hand accounts of Iesu were dying). So it was definitely not a later addition.
I was rather at a loss for how else to approach the problem after I had determined that Revelation was canon. Then I read an article in Christian Archaeology (I think I'm murdering that periodical title) about "the Throne of Satan". That greatly illuminated, and clarified the issue for me.
The "Throne of Satan" was the Great Altar at Pergamon, which was initially dedicated to Zeuse and Athena, and in time became consecrated to Roman Emperors, including Diocletian.
The message to the Christian Church there emphasized the great peril that they were in, since Diocletian, among other things, tried to preserve the pagan religions and persecuted Cristianity with renewed zeal. That was the answer that I was looking for.
The portents and imagery of the Book of Revelation can be read in several ways. Some choose to interpret them as pertaining to the End Times; the last days of civilization on Earth. They can also be interpreted as short-term prophecy, where the Great Beast is Rome, the Anti-Christ is Diocletian, and the False Prophet probably Nero. It is in this short-term sense that the Book of Revelation makes more sense to me. In this context, the messages to the churches have greater urgency. In this context, the promise of a position of honor in Heaven - not just of a vague treasure - must have been particularly heartening to those who lived in danger of imminent martyrdom. For the Christians living in the shadow of Rome, Revelation portrayed not a dark vision of the End Times, but a vital promise of ultimate victory when the Church faced its darkest days.
Sitting here, in a swivel chair within my messy apartment, I think I can forgive all three John the Revelators if they decide to dust off physical reincarnation of the world (and the body) in their message of hope.
Because it appears to me that the message was recieved.
What do I believe?
Sometimes I dont know the answer, but thats because I don't have the information to define it ... yet.
I had been about to post here that, for various reasons, I was renouncing my Christianity. As reasons I intended to cite tenets of faith that were simply at odds with the physical world and portions of Holy text that appear to be at odds with everything. Chief among these would be the book of Genesis which appears to consist largely of mythology, much of it not even of Hebrew origin. I'm not just talking about Creation or the Tower of Babel. I mean that I have serious problems when the basic identity of the main characters appears to have been subjected to revision. Another significant, but related, issue that I have is when the Book of Revelation trots out the ida of a New Heaven and a New Earth. That idea is basically a repackaging of a much older "pagan" religious idea of continuous cyclical destruction and regeneration of the world. I cannot very well be a Christian knowing that if this can even happen, the time scal would be in millions of years between the bounteous part of the cycles. The universe tends to not support physical regeneration.
Before I went ahead and posted that, self restraint urged me to do some research. My main inquiry went something along these lines:
1) Modern Christianity is based upon the New Covenant with God, established through the travails of a historical figure named (variously) Iesu. [How anyone can get 'Jesus' from a Hebrew name is beyond me - I'm fairly certain that it begins with a "Yah" sound, but thats an entire other discussion]
2) That being the case, I should restrain my criticisms to the body of work entitled the New Testament. That effectively reduces the mythological and mystical content by about 75-80%.
3) For the purpose of simplicity, I'll forgo critiquing the Gospels. There is surely plenty of meat there, but the preserving of oral traditions always results in problems like the bias of the authors. I'll call them the rough edges of perspective then, and move on.
The bulk of the NT is actually well edited for content. The epistles of Paul and a few others formulate a nice handbook for Christian living. There persists some debate on semantics, and who the real author of some letters were, but in general, I'll forgo those issues as well.
Thus my main questions boil down to these:
We go through the entire Bible, when all of a sudden, in the last book, we get all kinds of new bad guys on the scene. Where were these guys before?
I'm referring to the Anti-Christ, the False Prophet, the Beast, and a host of imagery and Evil Forces. Also, as I mentioned, we get amazing detail about what the last days of the world will be like. Where did all this stuff come from???
So, my first inquiries were as to when the Book of Revelation was added to the canon of the New Testament. Had it been added later (for whatever reason) that might add reasons for my distrust. The early Church, however, was very careful about selecting which texts to preserve in the face of severe persecution. The earliest documents on the subject clearly include the Book of Revelation as already part of canon (if I use that word correctly) attributing it to being written at about the same time as the gospels (roughly 80 C.E. or so - all the survivors who contributed to first hand accounts of Iesu were dying). So it was definitely not a later addition.
I was rather at a loss for how else to approach the problem after I had determined that Revelation was canon. Then I read an article in Christian Archaeology (I think I'm murdering that periodical title) about "the Throne of Satan". That greatly illuminated, and clarified the issue for me.
The "Throne of Satan" was the Great Altar at Pergamon, which was initially dedicated to Zeuse and Athena, and in time became consecrated to Roman Emperors, including Diocletian.
The message to the Christian Church there emphasized the great peril that they were in, since Diocletian, among other things, tried to preserve the pagan religions and persecuted Cristianity with renewed zeal. That was the answer that I was looking for.
The portents and imagery of the Book of Revelation can be read in several ways. Some choose to interpret them as pertaining to the End Times; the last days of civilization on Earth. They can also be interpreted as short-term prophecy, where the Great Beast is Rome, the Anti-Christ is Diocletian, and the False Prophet probably Nero. It is in this short-term sense that the Book of Revelation makes more sense to me. In this context, the messages to the churches have greater urgency. In this context, the promise of a position of honor in Heaven - not just of a vague treasure - must have been particularly heartening to those who lived in danger of imminent martyrdom. For the Christians living in the shadow of Rome, Revelation portrayed not a dark vision of the End Times, but a vital promise of ultimate victory when the Church faced its darkest days.
Sitting here, in a swivel chair within my messy apartment, I think I can forgive all three John the Revelators if they decide to dust off physical reincarnation of the world (and the body) in their message of hope.
Because it appears to me that the message was recieved.
03 June 2006
Certifiable Mail
(based on an idea that came to me at 7:15am)
I never liked shopping malls - until I realised how very useful they can be. The people milling about were a melange fairly representative of the local population. In one brief session, a curious outsider can discover much about the area he is in. Racial diversity, economic vitality, popular fashion, unpopular fashion, median age, even the populace's general mood might be percieved by someone receptive enough. Should curious extra-terrestrials happen to visit a shopping mall as the first stop in their visit, they might learn many of these things. And if they also heard the popular music that was piped into these places, they would know for certain that humankind was tone-deaf.
"Pardon me, are you Mr. Ludwig?"
Alas, the figures moving in the background never left him alone long enough to complete his thoughts... but perhaps the world was a better place because of that. In keeping with his previous train of thought, Ludwig faced the interloper and attempted to divine its nature.
Dress: businesslike. Not garish like a salesman, nor costly like an financial executive. Shoes clean but not highly polished; thus not an ex-soldier. [Ludwig wondered where that thought had come from - was it dogma that soldiers are doomed to polish their shoes fanatically for the remainder of their corporeal existence?]
Ludwig greeted the newcomer and assured him that he had found the right Ludwig.
"Good morning. You are right on time. Excellent!"
The newcomer's sudden look of bewilderment pleased Ludwig. He did expect to see this man today but there was no appointment set. Not only was it amusing to see how easily different people could be disturbed by relatively trivial concepts like timeliness and deadlines, but it was also instructive to see how well the subject recovered from unforseen stresses.
The man remembered his purpose relatively quickly.
"Er... I have a message for you, sir."
"Which you cannot give to me here." Ludwig stated as if completing the man's sentence. He was completing the man's sentence. Inwardly he sighed about people not paying attention or following directions that were so painstakingly drafted.
"Yes!" The man brightened visibly.
"I trust you drove here?"
"Yes..."
"Good. Lets go out to your car: I have something to give you."
"What? But I thought that this was just the one message?"
"Shall we? I'll explain as we go."
The man turned and began to walk to an exit. Ludwig moved to stay near his side.
"You are correct." Ludwig began. "With the delivery of this message, your obligation is fulfilled.
"I should stress how unusual this situation is. Having never met me, you must have felt some considerable anxiety about being able to deliver the message successfully. Quite understandable. Similarly, I might question whether the message is genuine, since I have never met you and cannot therefore determine how reliable you may be.
"Unusual as it is, we felt that this arrangement was neccessary to achieve our goals. You, Mr. Smith, were neccessary to achieve our goals. Is it much farther?"
Ludwig had stopped abruptly, and was looking around at the parking lot.
Mr. Smith, a bit startled, had gone a further two steps before he realised Ludwig had stopped. "Its just over there" he said, pointing. "I like to walk. Need the exercise. Easier to find parking that far out."
Satisfied, Ludwig continued walking and talking.
"To be sure, if our goal were less important, almost anyone could be used as a messenger. Perhaps even a different John Smith would be sufficient. Are you aware of how many John Smiths there are?"
"Twenty seven, last time I looked."
"Quite. It must be bothersome for the various Mrs. Smiths to not be able to page their husbands lest they inadvertently draw a sizeable crowd. Certainly you can imagine my dismay when I was informed that we were looking for a man by the name of John Smith."
"Yes. It can be a nuisance. This is it. Do I give you the message now?"
"That won't be neccessary. It's just a blank page."
Ludwig plunged a knife into John Smith's chest.
"I told you. We needed to be certain we had the right man. It's a waste of time studying pictures and biographies when you can get the poor bastards to come to you."
Ludwig turned and left, since there were now only twenty six of that name.
I never liked shopping malls - until I realised how very useful they can be. The people milling about were a melange fairly representative of the local population. In one brief session, a curious outsider can discover much about the area he is in. Racial diversity, economic vitality, popular fashion, unpopular fashion, median age, even the populace's general mood might be percieved by someone receptive enough. Should curious extra-terrestrials happen to visit a shopping mall as the first stop in their visit, they might learn many of these things. And if they also heard the popular music that was piped into these places, they would know for certain that humankind was tone-deaf.
"Pardon me, are you Mr. Ludwig?"
Alas, the figures moving in the background never left him alone long enough to complete his thoughts... but perhaps the world was a better place because of that. In keeping with his previous train of thought, Ludwig faced the interloper and attempted to divine its nature.
Dress: businesslike. Not garish like a salesman, nor costly like an financial executive. Shoes clean but not highly polished; thus not an ex-soldier. [Ludwig wondered where that thought had come from - was it dogma that soldiers are doomed to polish their shoes fanatically for the remainder of their corporeal existence?]
Ludwig greeted the newcomer and assured him that he had found the right Ludwig.
"Good morning. You are right on time. Excellent!"
The newcomer's sudden look of bewilderment pleased Ludwig. He did expect to see this man today but there was no appointment set. Not only was it amusing to see how easily different people could be disturbed by relatively trivial concepts like timeliness and deadlines, but it was also instructive to see how well the subject recovered from unforseen stresses.
The man remembered his purpose relatively quickly.
"Er... I have a message for you, sir."
"Which you cannot give to me here." Ludwig stated as if completing the man's sentence. He was completing the man's sentence. Inwardly he sighed about people not paying attention or following directions that were so painstakingly drafted.
"Yes!" The man brightened visibly.
"I trust you drove here?"
"Yes..."
"Good. Lets go out to your car: I have something to give you."
"What? But I thought that this was just the one message?"
"Shall we? I'll explain as we go."
The man turned and began to walk to an exit. Ludwig moved to stay near his side.
"You are correct." Ludwig began. "With the delivery of this message, your obligation is fulfilled.
"I should stress how unusual this situation is. Having never met me, you must have felt some considerable anxiety about being able to deliver the message successfully. Quite understandable. Similarly, I might question whether the message is genuine, since I have never met you and cannot therefore determine how reliable you may be.
"Unusual as it is, we felt that this arrangement was neccessary to achieve our goals. You, Mr. Smith, were neccessary to achieve our goals. Is it much farther?"
Ludwig had stopped abruptly, and was looking around at the parking lot.
Mr. Smith, a bit startled, had gone a further two steps before he realised Ludwig had stopped. "Its just over there" he said, pointing. "I like to walk. Need the exercise. Easier to find parking that far out."
Satisfied, Ludwig continued walking and talking.
"To be sure, if our goal were less important, almost anyone could be used as a messenger. Perhaps even a different John Smith would be sufficient. Are you aware of how many John Smiths there are?"
"Twenty seven, last time I looked."
"Quite. It must be bothersome for the various Mrs. Smiths to not be able to page their husbands lest they inadvertently draw a sizeable crowd. Certainly you can imagine my dismay when I was informed that we were looking for a man by the name of John Smith."
"Yes. It can be a nuisance. This is it. Do I give you the message now?"
"That won't be neccessary. It's just a blank page."
Ludwig plunged a knife into John Smith's chest.
"I told you. We needed to be certain we had the right man. It's a waste of time studying pictures and biographies when you can get the poor bastards to come to you."
Ludwig turned and left, since there were now only twenty six of that name.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)