Wendy loves to tell me what to do when I am playing games. Recently I have been playing a lot of Civilization 5 and she has taken to watching me play sometimes asking me to explain why I am doing things and sometimes to give me advice. You might think if you know the two of us that I would be the one who is constantly attacking the enemies on a relentless campaign of destruction and that she would be advising me to make peace; you would be wrong. She takes tremendous delight in ordering me to start wars with everybody and wants nothing more than to see me extinguish enemies completely. A little bit of conquest, taking some land, killing some soldiers, these are not enough for her; she wants annihilation.
I totally get the desire to watch someone play a video game and kibitz. It doesn't have to be a video game though, I really enjoy sitting quietly while people work on problems of all kinds. Just being silent, in the presence of a person who can talk sometimes but who is focused on a task I can observe is very soothing for whatever reason. There are some games that this does not work at all for like World of Warcraft or Portal, for example, but I love watching tactical games like CiV and roguelikes like Diablo.
I remember one person in university in particular who absolutely loved watching others play video games, so much so that he characterized himself more as a video game watcher than a video game player. He could talk with great authority about the tiniest minutiae of games he had never actually played because he spent hours watching people work on the hardest challenges those games had to offer. We all get that to some extent as I can talk at great length about Star Trek (despite not considering myself a fan of the series) and surely everyone else absorbs information in the same way from those who share their hobbies.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Thursday, February 9, 2012
The Sucker
There is an old saying in Poker that goes something like this:
If you sit down at the table and you can't spot the sucker in five minutes, you are the sucker.
I was out the other night with some friends and we were talking about the tendency of relationships to break up when one person or the other finds somebody outside the relationship they would rather be with. In my life I have been ditched for somebody else directly in three of three cases and did the breaking up without anyone else in my sights in one of one cases; hardly a good statistical sample size but I suspect it is pretty representative. Obviously it isn't doesn't always hold true but it is clear that a great number of relationships cruise along in 'damaged but still flying' mode and then actually end when one person discovers somebody they would rather be with instead. Of course sometimes this involves cheating beforehand but often it does not - there are no end of examples of people breaking up and then immediately hooking up without doing anything technically against the rules. That is, of course, unless you think that 'noticing somebody else is awesome' is against the rules, which I don't.
I was thinking today that you can write a saying for a relationship breaking up that sounds remarkably like the Poker saying.
If you are involved in a breakup and you aren't all set to hook up with somebody else, your partner is probably all set to hook up with somebody else.
Note in both cases there is a notion of being a sucker, in one case implied, in the other case boldly stated. People generally feel bad when their former partners hop right into another relationship and sometimes this is just because they are suspicious of what might have happened ahead of time and sometimes it is simply because they want their former partner to be heartbroken rather than relieved. I don't think that looking at it from a sucker / shark point of view is a particularly good idea though. More useful than laying blame is to just accept that people do hook up right after breaking up and that once it is over there is no point in getting twisted up over it. Not that this ideal case is going to prevent any of the usual jealousy, bitterness and regret of course... just wishful thinking.
If you sit down at the table and you can't spot the sucker in five minutes, you are the sucker.
I was out the other night with some friends and we were talking about the tendency of relationships to break up when one person or the other finds somebody outside the relationship they would rather be with. In my life I have been ditched for somebody else directly in three of three cases and did the breaking up without anyone else in my sights in one of one cases; hardly a good statistical sample size but I suspect it is pretty representative. Obviously it isn't doesn't always hold true but it is clear that a great number of relationships cruise along in 'damaged but still flying' mode and then actually end when one person discovers somebody they would rather be with instead. Of course sometimes this involves cheating beforehand but often it does not - there are no end of examples of people breaking up and then immediately hooking up without doing anything technically against the rules. That is, of course, unless you think that 'noticing somebody else is awesome' is against the rules, which I don't.
I was thinking today that you can write a saying for a relationship breaking up that sounds remarkably like the Poker saying.
If you are involved in a breakup and you aren't all set to hook up with somebody else, your partner is probably all set to hook up with somebody else.
Note in both cases there is a notion of being a sucker, in one case implied, in the other case boldly stated. People generally feel bad when their former partners hop right into another relationship and sometimes this is just because they are suspicious of what might have happened ahead of time and sometimes it is simply because they want their former partner to be heartbroken rather than relieved. I don't think that looking at it from a sucker / shark point of view is a particularly good idea though. More useful than laying blame is to just accept that people do hook up right after breaking up and that once it is over there is no point in getting twisted up over it. Not that this ideal case is going to prevent any of the usual jealousy, bitterness and regret of course... just wishful thinking.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Getting ripped fast all over again
Awhile ago I wrote about sites that sell supplements aimed at making men look muscular and sexay. Of course they are all ridiculous scams that attempt to get you hooked on a product for free or practically free and then charge outrageous monthly fees if you have not jumped through a succession of hoops to opt out. They always include a bunch of before and after pictures designed to show someone who is at best average looking who suddenly acquires abs of steel. This video shows how you can easily make the sort of transformation you see on these scams happen in less than 5 hours - in reverse. It involves spraying your body with cooking oil, eating junk food and timing your workout appropriately.
Of course the pose has everything to do with it too. You can add a ton of pop to your picture just with a little bit more flex and a slightly different posture and facial expression. I was always curious in the past about these pictures because I wondered if they were really taken by someone who worked out hard for months to improve but claimed it was done by the supplements or if there was something else at work. It turns out with a little bit of knowhow and showmanship anybody can put up an amazing set of before/after photos in just a day. Well, any man wanting to put up a muscle mass set of photos can anyway, I don't know for sure how much of this would successfully translate to women's pictures.
Of course the pose has everything to do with it too. You can add a ton of pop to your picture just with a little bit more flex and a slightly different posture and facial expression. I was always curious in the past about these pictures because I wondered if they were really taken by someone who worked out hard for months to improve but claimed it was done by the supplements or if there was something else at work. It turns out with a little bit of knowhow and showmanship anybody can put up an amazing set of before/after photos in just a day. Well, any man wanting to put up a muscle mass set of photos can anyway, I don't know for sure how much of this would successfully translate to women's pictures.
Monday, February 6, 2012
Toy Insurance
Back in my career as a mattress salesman I sold quite a lot of mattress insurance. It wasn't presented that way of course, but rather presented as a service for cleaning or repairing your mattress should you damage it in some fashion. It was very clear to us that the margins on this product were absolutely nuts and although it was a much smaller price than the actual bed a quite substantial amount of the money to be made by salesperson and company was in the insurance.
This sort of thing is everywhere from addons to your new vehicle to extra insurance on your laptop; a short while ago I was even offered insurance on the $5 batteries I bought. In virtually every case the company makes a killing on these addons and the customer gets ripped off. There are a few people who end up breaking their laptops and who are willing to send them to the shop for a couple months to have warranty work done but by and large this is just money down the drain from the customer's perspective. That is, until now. Yesterday I was pitched an insurance addon for the first time that actually made the product *worse*.
This unicorn makes all kinds of sounds when you push its button like:
"I love flying."
"Let's fly to the castle."
"Isn't my hair pretty?"
"I love it when you comb my hair."
"Let's play together."
ToysRUs offered me toy insurance on this treasure for the low low price of $2.99 so that if it breaks I could come back and get it replaced. This was not a deal I was interested in, in fact I almost laughed out loud at the cashier. The trouble with their sales pitch is that they actually needed to reverse the benefit. If they had told me that for merely $2.99 they would *guarantee* the toy would be broken within a short timespan I might have bought in. After hearing the unicorn's inane chatter for a few hours I was just hoping for some kind of "accident" to finish it off. $2.99 is a small price to pay to shut the accursed creature up for good.
This sort of thing is everywhere from addons to your new vehicle to extra insurance on your laptop; a short while ago I was even offered insurance on the $5 batteries I bought. In virtually every case the company makes a killing on these addons and the customer gets ripped off. There are a few people who end up breaking their laptops and who are willing to send them to the shop for a couple months to have warranty work done but by and large this is just money down the drain from the customer's perspective. That is, until now. Yesterday I was pitched an insurance addon for the first time that actually made the product *worse*.
"I love flying."
"Let's fly to the castle."
"Isn't my hair pretty?"
"I love it when you comb my hair."
"Let's play together."
ToysRUs offered me toy insurance on this treasure for the low low price of $2.99 so that if it breaks I could come back and get it replaced. This was not a deal I was interested in, in fact I almost laughed out loud at the cashier. The trouble with their sales pitch is that they actually needed to reverse the benefit. If they had told me that for merely $2.99 they would *guarantee* the toy would be broken within a short timespan I might have bought in. After hearing the unicorn's inane chatter for a few hours I was just hoping for some kind of "accident" to finish it off. $2.99 is a small price to pay to shut the accursed creature up for good.
Friday, February 3, 2012
Yom yom health food
Sometimes you need to eat things that don't taste so great to eat healthy. I eat a lot of broccoli and it is not bad but I sure would rather be eating chocolate bars, bacon or ice cream. Sometimes though you can eat healthy things and they just taste like MORE.
These are kale chips. Bits of kale, chopped up, coated lightly in olive oil and salt and baked. Much like potato chips they are incredibly addictive and when you eat them it feels like they are just a vehicle for salt and oil but they have the distinct upside of being quite healthy for you. Kale on its own is fairly bitter and honestly a pretty hard health food to stomach but when chippified it is most excellent. There is a fair bit of chopping and baking and dishes for the raw weight of food involved but it seems worth the effort as they are yummy!
These are kale chips. Bits of kale, chopped up, coated lightly in olive oil and salt and baked. Much like potato chips they are incredibly addictive and when you eat them it feels like they are just a vehicle for salt and oil but they have the distinct upside of being quite healthy for you. Kale on its own is fairly bitter and honestly a pretty hard health food to stomach but when chippified it is most excellent. There is a fair bit of chopping and baking and dishes for the raw weight of food involved but it seems worth the effort as they are yummy!
Thursday, February 2, 2012
"Security" Council
The UN makes me crazy. I was reading about the UN proposed action in Syria aimed at getting the oppressive regime out and some kind of democracy in here and found what is unfortunately par for the course in UN politics: The Russians are threatening to veto the action even though it has already been watered down to try to make it more palatable to them. The reason? They make a lot of money selling weapons to Syria, of course!
The fact that the Security Council members (France, UK, US, Russia, China) have a veto over UN actions really destroys the credibility of the UN right from the outset. Those countries have an agenda to prevent others from getting nuclear weapons while wielding those weapons themselves, are huge arms dealers and regularly and without any pretense use their vetoes to force the UN to do things in their national interests. In particular the US and Russia have used their vetoes liberally, largely to spit in each other's faces.
What a mess. The old League of Nations didn't have this sort of super powerful core and it was demonstrably unable to perform its mandate but I don't know that a responsive world organization that caters to a few powerful, dangerous countries is particularly better than one that takes a long time to do things. There has been conflict for decades now over letting new countries into the Security Council but of course that would require getting everybody's approval since otherwise VETO and so far nobody has managed to get in. I don't ever expect anybody to get in of course because the only good reason for a Security Council nation to get a new member in is if it will improve their position somehow and surely the other members will veto anything that erodes *their* position.
Barring some tremendous calamity we aren't likely to get anything else to work with. We seem stuck, for the moment, with a huge bureaucracy that is willing able to order up some beatdown for poor, weak nations that get out of line and which is completely impotent when a Security Council member invades another nation on a flimsy pretext. Perhaps the term "Bully Council" would be more appropriate.
The fact that the Security Council members (France, UK, US, Russia, China) have a veto over UN actions really destroys the credibility of the UN right from the outset. Those countries have an agenda to prevent others from getting nuclear weapons while wielding those weapons themselves, are huge arms dealers and regularly and without any pretense use their vetoes to force the UN to do things in their national interests. In particular the US and Russia have used their vetoes liberally, largely to spit in each other's faces.
What a mess. The old League of Nations didn't have this sort of super powerful core and it was demonstrably unable to perform its mandate but I don't know that a responsive world organization that caters to a few powerful, dangerous countries is particularly better than one that takes a long time to do things. There has been conflict for decades now over letting new countries into the Security Council but of course that would require getting everybody's approval since otherwise VETO and so far nobody has managed to get in. I don't ever expect anybody to get in of course because the only good reason for a Security Council nation to get a new member in is if it will improve their position somehow and surely the other members will veto anything that erodes *their* position.
Barring some tremendous calamity we aren't likely to get anything else to work with. We seem stuck, for the moment, with a huge bureaucracy that is willing able to order up some beatdown for poor, weak nations that get out of line and which is completely impotent when a Security Council member invades another nation on a flimsy pretext. Perhaps the term "Bully Council" would be more appropriate.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Priorities, or lack thereof
When I want news I generally head to the BBC. While I can do with the Globe and Mail online if I want Toronto specific news I often find their coverage simply too small scale to hold my interest - which isn't saying it is bad, just not to my taste. Today I was dismayed by the BBC though in a way that is far too common throughout all of news media and probably always has been. The big banner story at the top was about a soccer match that Manchester United won 2-0. The blurb talked about how Manchester won based on some penalties and named players and included the mandatory action shot. Below it was a much smaller story talking about how soccer fans in Egypt rioted after a game and 74 people were killed while the stadium burned around them.
The score of a soccer match is somehow bigger news than a savage riot being started by a soccer match where security personnel trying to protect the home town players were stabbed to death and many people were trampled during the mad panic? Of course this isn't new, nor even unique. It is just striking because both announcements were about soccer and if the marquee post had been about a hockey game I might not even have noticed it. Of course when many (not most, surely?) people talk about the news what they really want is sports results. There are simply too many people dying for no good reason in other parts of the world for most of us to worry about each incident but there are an awful lot of folks interested in who won the big game last night.
Professional sports make me crazy. Pounda regularly tries to sell me on the "Football as turn based strategy game" line and while I completely buy that he is right I find it hard to reconcile that with all the insanity that goes along with it. I think if sports teams didn't manage to successfully hold cities hostage in demanding new stadiums and infrastructure or if the fans didn't behave so bloody badly I might have more patience for it but that all seems to be part of the package. Of course the stars of professional sports behave badly too but it is the fans that really get to me even if they don't decide to take knives to soccer games and commit murder on the pitch after an unfavourable result.
I probably dislike professional sports even more just because they are so broadly liked. Presumably if the great majority of the populace ignored them and they were struggling for any sort of recognition I would be able to get into the games more easily; I have some real prejudices against doing the same thing everybody else does. This seems to be one of my defining characteristics.
Picture from the BBC website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16845841
The score of a soccer match is somehow bigger news than a savage riot being started by a soccer match where security personnel trying to protect the home town players were stabbed to death and many people were trampled during the mad panic? Of course this isn't new, nor even unique. It is just striking because both announcements were about soccer and if the marquee post had been about a hockey game I might not even have noticed it. Of course when many (not most, surely?) people talk about the news what they really want is sports results. There are simply too many people dying for no good reason in other parts of the world for most of us to worry about each incident but there are an awful lot of folks interested in who won the big game last night.
Professional sports make me crazy. Pounda regularly tries to sell me on the "Football as turn based strategy game" line and while I completely buy that he is right I find it hard to reconcile that with all the insanity that goes along with it. I think if sports teams didn't manage to successfully hold cities hostage in demanding new stadiums and infrastructure or if the fans didn't behave so bloody badly I might have more patience for it but that all seems to be part of the package. Of course the stars of professional sports behave badly too but it is the fans that really get to me even if they don't decide to take knives to soccer games and commit murder on the pitch after an unfavourable result.
I probably dislike professional sports even more just because they are so broadly liked. Presumably if the great majority of the populace ignored them and they were struggling for any sort of recognition I would be able to get into the games more easily; I have some real prejudices against doing the same thing everybody else does. This seems to be one of my defining characteristics.
Picture from the BBC website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16845841
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)