Lazy, obnoxious driver

So today, I parked at a spot on the curb. This fella drives past me, then backs up and says to me, "Look, when you see that someone wants to park somewhere..." I tuned him out at that point, as he was obviously a jerk. He obviously wanted the parking spot that I took, and he was upset... upset enough to back up and complain.

I cut him off and said, "I didn't know. If you want it, you can have it." In reality though, I was thinking, "You jerk. I had no way of knowing that you wanted this spot. What am I, a mind reader?"

What a jackass. To top it off, there were plenty of other spots along that curb. In fact, he was practically next to one, but he just had to back up and complain. That's why I chose to drive off. He was obviously a jerk, and there's no reasoning with them. You never know when they might take a tire iron to your car, or to pull a gun on you.

I wish I had taken down his license plate number... not that it would have done any good, of course. At times like this, I wish I could mentally implant some common sense into the brains of other drivers. What a lazy jackass he was.

As an aside... once again, Microsoft Windows is stalling on me. It's bloody annoying. Windows Explorer takes forever to open up. Ugh. No good reason why, mind you. Microsoft produces unbelievable bloatware, thanks to their idiotic design philosophy.

Apprentice Kendra

I remember watching Season Three of Donald Trump's The Apprentice on TV. I remember marveling at some of the business decisions that were made, as well as the class, intelligence and candor displayed by its winner, Kendra Todd. IMO, she was one of the most beautiful women on television. She didn't have the classic TV look, but she was basically nice looking, and her intelligence and charm pretty much pushed her over the top.

I was watching some youtube.com clips of her performance on the show. You go, girl! It was a delight to see the kind of thought that she put into her work, as well as her energy and dedication. She's certainly an inspiration to me.

Right now, I'm working on some tasks that are similar to what she had to deal with in Episode 14. I try to remember her work as I labor on this endeavor. I'd like to blow people away the way she did.

Singles site cheating, revisited

Earlier, I lamented the way some people attempt to cheat the system on online singles sites. I raised this issue on an online forum once, and lamented the lack of honesty and integrity in these actions. I also pointed out that such cheating reflects poorly on someone's character.

I was unprepared for the tremendous backlash that this received. People responded with tremendous venom, saying things like "Who cares? A lot of people do it" or "Why are you making a big deal of this? There are much more important things to discuss!" (As an aside, I responded to the latter by saying, "What a minute. Why are you making such a big deal over my reaction? Aren't there more important things to discuss? By your own logic, should you not abandon this discussion right now?"

One person responded, "You don't even know this person. How dare you say that this is a reflection of someone's character?" I stand by that claim, though. You don't need to know someone personally to understand that every wrongful action is a reflection of that person. It might not provide complete insight into every fiber of that person's being, but it's a reflection nonetheless. Besides, by that logic, we should have no business commenting on the character of, say, Saddam Hussein or O.J. Simpson -- not unless we know those people personally.

(As it turned out, this person was herself one of those singles site cheaters. No wonder she responded with such tremendous outrage. It wasn't a matter of principle; rather, she just didn't want to admit that her actions were dishonest, or that they reflected poorly on her.)

On a (very) tangentially related note, I'd love to meet someone who looks like a young Courtney Thorne-Smith. It's doubtful that any such person would ever require the services of a singles site, though. Besides, a person's character is much more important that one's looks. Much, much more important.

Smallpox and bioterrorism

Apparently, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) embarked a while back on the development of a safer smallpox vaccine. This is part of a preventive campaign against bioterrorism. Smallpox was nominally eradicated in 1979; however, a few samples of the live virus remain in the USA and in Russia. It is currently believed that certain countries -- both hostile and friendly -- may have samples of the virus as well. (North Korea, perhaps? Criminy.)

The classic smallpox vaccine (vaccinia) has some unpleasant side effects, and in rare cases (1 out of 1,000,000), it can even be fatal. For these reasons, its use is currently reserved for health care and emergency workers. The government has embarked on an effort to develop a safer vaccine--just in case it becomes necessary to deploy this vaccine in the populace at large.

Ideas for the next few seasons of "24"

I have a few ideas for upcoming seasons of "24":

Day 7: On December 24th, Jack Bauer has 24 hours to help Santa deliver all of his toys. In the process, he must also teach the people of Fayed's country the real meaning of Christmas... OR MILLIONS WILL DIE!!!

Day 8: On February 2nd, Jack Bauer gets to torture terrorists over and over again. Every time this happens, he gets a little bit better at it.

Day 9: April 1st. Need I say more?

Oh, and Chloe needs to have her own show. (Yes, I did just want to link to that page again. Mary Lynn Rajskub is such a treasure, and an unconventional beauty as well. If you've seen her on the cover of Geek Monthly, you know what I mean.)

Juveniles in their 20s and 30s

A female friend of mine was telling me about how horribly immature these two male friends of hers were. Frankly, I agree.

I went out with their group once, to ensure that they'd have a designated driver. We parked in a garage downtown, and as we made our way out, these two guys started kicking each other all over the place. I can imagine a couple of high school students doing that, but a pair of grown adults? I would have expected better.

We were joined by another one of their friends later. He was a bit more civil, but still not terribly mature. At the end of the night, two of these guys decided to ambush the third, take his shoes off, and thrown them into the street. What a bunch of idiots! It never occured to them that this would be an unsafe thing to do, especially at night. (Yes, they had been drinking. Still, unless you're stinkin' drunk, it should be immediately obvious to anyone that this is a terrible, mind-numbingly stupid idea. Besides, the two bozos who pulled this stunt were the least inebriated of the group, and had been drinking fairly modestly.)

To make matters worse, two of these idiots decided to wrestle on the sidewalk, right when were were downtown. Again, even if you've had something to drink, it should be obvious that that's an incredibly stupid thing to do. This cop drove by, and he agreed with that assessment; he told these bozos to knock it off. "But we're friends!" they protested. "I don't care," the cop said. "Knock it off."

What a bunch of idiots.

Mind you, I was in a hurry to get home... and what were these guys doing? They were jumping over the patio fences of nearby restaurants (which were thankfully closed), climbing up and down stairs, and so forth. Basically, they were goofing around and wasting time. I understand that they weren't in a hurry to get home, but really! More aggravating is the fact that these were just mindnumbingly stupid things for them to do. I'd expect a nine-year-old to think that was great fun, but not an adult.

How old were these guys? One was 28; the other was 35. I'm not sure how old the third fella was, but he was probably in that ballpark range. The first two guys were the worst offenders anyway, and they were a pair of morons. Grow up, kids!

Techno-whatsis?

So this company goes by the name 'M&S', and yet their website domain is unrelated to their name. In fact, their domain name seems quite unusual indeed. I wish I knew what the backstory was there.

Or maybe it's a cultural thing. The company is Japanese, after all... quite the successful Japanese company, by all indications. I dunno.

Speaking of Japanese culture, I just watch part of the Mazinkaiser saga. The anime feel to this show was quite distracting. Anime has its good points, but so much of the animation tends to be grotesque, overly dramatic, or jus wildly exaggerated. It's like the animation styles often incorporate plenty of detail for adult sensibilities, but add plenty of wild mugging as well, as though it were geared toward elementary school children. I don't get it, and sometimes, I think it's almost insulting to one's intelligence.

Not all of anime is like that, mind you... but a good amount of it is, for whatever reason. Ugh.

24's Chloe is back in form

Yes, she's back in form... and I'm not talking about Mary Lynn Rajskub's trim new look.

Chloe is finally getting more of the spotlight again in tonight's episode. she had been rather badly neglected earlier this season, especially for the last five episodes or so. Now she's finally getting some much-needed face time. She's not laying down as much snark as she used to, which is disappointing, but at least she's back in the game.

What's more, they're finally tying up some old plot lines, such as the deaths that Morris nearly caused. It's good to see that they haven't simply forgotten about all of his remorse.

And guess what? We finally got to see what happens when Chloe comes to her senses after attempting to support some of Jack's rogue operations. It's about bloody time. We all know that Chloe is generally willing to do some shady under-the-table work, almost without question, so seeing another side to her personality is refreshing.

Raving about a few things

I'm really enjoying the TV series Bones on Fox. Very clever and very funny, with some excellent acting. Emily Deschanel, in particular, is a real treasure.

I also started watching Tim Minear's show, Drive -- also on Fox. Very clever, and Nathan Fillion does an excellent job as always.

On a more scholarly note, I've been learning about Plato's classic work, The Republic. I certainly don't agree with everything that Plato seems to be saying, but I do enjoy learning about it. Learning about the pre-Socratic philosophers (Thales, Anaximenes, Anaximander, Democritus and company) has been quite illuminating, and inspiring as well.

I cannot stand Deal or No Deal, though. There's no real intelligence behind this show. One could use a simple formula to produce the most logical decision, which is why they wrap the show in so much useless theatrics and emotionality. Not good.

Rajskub on 24

I noticed that Mary Lynn Rajskub has been given second billing on the hit TV show, 24. For some reason though, they're making very little use of her this season, though. What a shame, as her character is immensely popular amongst fans -- especially among male computer geeks, I daresay.

Ms. Rajskub plays techie whiz Chloe O'Brien, a computer geek with only the most rudimentary of social skills. She does wield a mean M4 carbine assualt rifle though, and she's pretty handy with a taser.

She's kinda pretty this season too, thanks to her new hair color and a more flattering outfit. If only they'd use her more, darn it! She's good for the occasional bit of drama, and she's always good for comic relief.

Publishing papers

An acquaintance of mine was telling me about a certain paper that she found interesting. This got me thinking... I'd really like to publish more papers soon. Various obligations though -- mostly work-related -- have been preventing me from doing so.

It doesn't help that I now have to assume some new marketing-related duties. Ugh. I don't mind doing this, but it's not the sort of work that really helps me in my primary career path. It certainly doesn't help me look like a star.

I do way too much writing nowadays, and way too much documentation work. It's necessary, though -- necessary if I want to help this company succeed and become more regularly profitable. We've had some lean times lately, and I'd like to help us become more stable.

It's gotta be done. It's necessary. It's also frustrating.

If only I didn't have to work so hard at trimming down, or at educating myself on various subjects (philosophy, science, literature, etc). That'd make life so much easier. If I were naturally trim, fit and attractive, then that'd certainly give me a lot more leisure time.

Rats. Double rats.

Jodi Benson -- I want more!

I had read that Jodi Benson performed some voice work, early in her career, for the anime film, Nausicaä of the Valley of the Winds. I was disappointed to find out, however, that she only had a few lines, and that she didn't even get to sing.

Jodi is, of course, the voice of Disney's Princess Ariel, and my favorite singer of all time. I relish every opportunity to hear her sing. She also has an excellent speaking voice though, so I enjoy all of her voice work. I would gladly pay money just to hear her read the telephone book, for pity's sake.

What a talent and a treasure.

Disguised e-mail addresses on singles site profiles

I belong to a few different Christian dating service websites. These sites typically provide both paid membership accounts and free membership services with restricted rights. For example, the free membership agreements typically do not allow their users to send e-mail addresses or other contact info. (The systems automatically block e-mail addresses in such profiles. Dishonest members are thereby forced to use creative techniques for disguising their addresses.)

I noticed that there are a great many profiles that contain these disguised e-mail addresses. This bothers me greatly; after all, Christians are supposed to exemplify honesty and integrity. If Christians choose to deliberately cheat the system, thereby avoiding the need to pay a membership fee, then what does that say about our Christian character?

Just this week, I contacted a woman who seemed like a promising prospect. She immediately wrote back and said, "I'm on an unpaid membership. You can contact me at <>."

My response? "I'm sorry, but I'm really not comfortable with using disguised contact information. I think that as Christians, we need to honor and respect the rules on these sites. I believe that is what Jesus would want us to do."

She wrote back, "I did it because of finances and the lack of great matches. Proceed as you wish." That was her explanation. There was no expression of repentance or regret -- no acknowledgement that she had attempted to cheat the system, and that this was wrong.
I said, "Believe me, I'm sympathetic to your situation. I've gone through some lean times myself. At the same time though, I'm become convinced that I need to honor these rules, as a matter of Christian testimony. I would rather seek ways to exchange contact information legitimately. For example, in this situation, I would have been happy to give you MY e-mail address instead; after all, I'm a paying member, so I have that freedom."

I don't think I'll be contacting her again. It's not simply that she chose to cheat the system, unfortunate as that may be. Rather, the bigger problem was the lack of remorse in her explanation. There was no admission that her actions were dishonest, or that there were other ways that we could have exchanged contact info. Rather, she simply emphasized that it was a financial decision on her part, as though that settled everything.

What a terrible shame.

Things I like

These are a few of my favorite things:

Stephen Hawking's writings, Carl Sagan's writings (except for his pontifications on religion!), some of the old Star Trek stuff, Albert Einstein, Daniella van Graas, grasp theory, C++, object orientation, UML, design patterns, computer programming, Stacey Williams, Traylor Howard, Monk and Psych, Kendra Todd's business savvy, James Herriot, Isaac Asimov, Ernest Hemingway, classical literature, Fyodor Dostoyevsky, electronics, mechanical design, physics, zoology, naturalism, Columbo, Marv Wolfman, George Perez.

Being sensitive to a gift giver

I've been telling people about a nasty incident that I had at a friend's birthday party. Here's what happened:

Just before the party, I gave her a florist-bought floral arrangement with her favorite flowers (roses, and she specified red), with carnations. I know that some people still view red roses as exclusively romantic, but she didn't seem to feel that way.

She thanked me warmly and gave me a hug. That was nice. A couple of hours later though, two dudes showed up with cheap grocery store bouquets that must have cost $4 each. She goes wild and enthuses, "Wow! That is so sweet! I love them! Thank you!"

She then cradles a bouquet in each arm, stands between the two guys and asks me to take a photo. In the meantime, I wasthinking, "Hmm. She didn't ask anyone to take a photo of her with my flowers." I felt that was a bit of a slap in the face to me.

After the party, I let her know that my feelings had been hurt. Some might disapprove, but I felt that as a friend, I had to let her know.She said, "Well, these are different people than you. Of course, I'll relate to them differently. Besides, they normally act like little boys, so I wasn't expecting to get flowers from them."

When I mentioned this on the 'net, I got a variety of responses. Some thought I was being absurd for taking offense. Others understood why this was hurtful though, as it amounts to some severely lopsided treatment. Here is a sampling of what they said:

"But, asking you to hold the camera and take a picture with the other two
unsophisticated boors and their stupid old flowers was definitely tactless,
hurtful and really kind of rude, especially if she didn't ask for a picture with
you. I'd be hurt."

"In my opinion, she should have given you the same attention for your gift as she did the other two guys. I think she's not as interested in gifts from you as she is for gifts from them. Which makes me think she's kind of a mean person (to not care about all her friend's feelings equally). But was it deliberate or was it just an oversight because of her lack of caring? My first reaction was that if she was thinking a little less about herself that night (and possibly flirting with these other two guys) then she would have shown you a bit more respect. I don't think she intentionally did it."

"It does sound to me like she didn't appreciate you. Some times you just have to let a friendship cool and not be as close to certain people as you once were."

"Yes, I would have felt slighted too........"

A job hunter's ordeal

I read this account from a fella who was struggling to find a job. It's kinda sad to read or hear these stories, and I know what it's like to be stressed out over finding a job.

It's good to know that he did find a job. I remember how stressed out I was during my job searches, especially when offers seemed to be dangled right in front of me, only to be yanked away at the last moment. It was always such a huge relief when a job offer finally came through, especially with my current employer.

I know that a lot of guys out there were stressing over employment worries a few years ago. The employment crisis isn't quite so bad nowadays, but I know that for many techies, it's still a problem. I feel for them, and I hope that I never have to go through that problem again.

Craig, Tana, and Kendra

The final three competitors in season three of The Apprentice were Tana, Kendra, and mealy-mouthed Craig. Tana and Craig were a team, but they clearly did not get along well with Kendra. For whatever reason, they simply had very different mindsets.

It's interesting to note, however, that earlier on in the series, they seemed to get along much better. Perhaps this simply shows how stress can bring out tensions between competitors.

It's also worth noting that when Trump first organized a corporate reshuffle -- that is, when he had teams Magna and Net Worth pick out people whom they would send to the other side, Net Worth's Chris Shelton chose to eject both Tana and Craig. I don't know what that means.

Windows aggravations

Microsoft programs can be so aggravating. Windows is a prime example. All of it security failings are a grievous problem, and the persistent need for patches simply illustrates its shortcomings and vulnerabilities.

I also hate the way Windows allows an application window to simply pop up without warning. "Well, what's wrong with that?" one might ask. "After all, if you called up a web browser, then you've got to expect that it'll appear sometime." That's not the point, though; after all, when and where the window pops up is critical as well. If you're typing into a document window, for example, and another document window pops up elsewhere... well, if the focus gets diverted to that window, then it can be most aggravating. And if you're attempting to click on a button in one application just before another dialog window pops up, then the results can be disastrous.

And don't get me started on Word. Sometimes, it's most impressive, but at other times, it's just plain aggravating.

And the way Windows Explorer sometimes takes forever to pop up, simply because it's doing too much stupid, unnecessary stuff in the background.... that's just insanely stupid. It also hogs CPU resources in the process. In fact, my computer practically froze as I was typing the preceding sentences, simply because I was also attempting to start Explorer in the background. Apparently, Explorer feels the need to digest a whole lot of its subdirectory contents, regardless of whether the user ever expects to use that info. It's just mindnumbingly dumb.

Yes, Microsoft products stink.

Still more on singles profiles

Revisiting my last two postings...

When I brought up the subject of people saying "I'd like to start a conversation. Please read my profile," I fully expected that more people would have understood why I find it a bit distasteful. I wasn't prepared for some of the responses.

One fellow said (and I paraphrase), "Why are you being so negative toward women?" Even when I emphasized that my comments were gender-neutral and applied equally well to both sexes, he failed to get it. His response? "Do you really think that men and women need to behave the same?" How do you reason with someone like that? At no point do I deny that the genders need to behave in exactly the same way, but that doesn't mean that certain rules of conduct never apply to both sexes!

More than one person said, "Men need to make the first move! Women shouldn't take the initiative!" One lady even said, "I choose to be a southern lady." They were missing the obvious. If a woman asks a man to read her profile, then she has ALREADY taken the first move! You can't invite a man to read about you, then insist that he should be the aggressor. That ship has sailed, folks!

How hard is it to just start a conversation? The rules of conduct don't change simply because you're online.

More on singles site profiles

I just wanted to revisit my blog posting from yesterday. In that posting, I commented on how some people introduce themselves on singles sites by saying. "Hi. I'd like to get to know you. Please read my profile and tell me what you think." I realize that not everybody will agree with me on this point, but I think that such introductions are ill-advised. Indeed, I think they're kinda rude, as they basically place the recipient in the position of having to figure out what they can talk about.

When I discussed this matter online, one guy said, "I do it to save time. Why should I waste my time on a long response if the other person isn't interested?" I think that's not only foolish, it's also rude. It's foolish because one's introduction doesn't have to be very long -- a short paragraph should suffice. It's rude because the sender wants to save time, but also wants the recipient to put in the time necessary to read his/her profile and compose a response. That's kinda self-cented and inconsiderate.

One person responded to me by saying "I think u r taking this wayyyyyyyy to serious LOL if it bugs u that much, write her back and tell her, thats if..." -- well, you get the picture. I think this illustrates the problem. People who don't communicate well are less likely to understand the importance of actually starting a conversation, as opposed to offering some generic introduction. They fail to grasp why it's important to actually start some sort of discussion if you want to have a conversation.

People like this remind me of people who don't bother to proofread their resumes or supply a personalized cover letter when they apply for a job. They figure that they're just saving time, and that sounds reasonable. Ultimately though, I think it does indicate a tendency to do a minimal amount of work, or close to it. It's saying "Eh. Good enough." And when it comes to asking someone to "review [your] profile then get back to me," it's even more objectionable. Why? Because it's basically asking the other person to pour in work, whereas you opt to take the easy approach.

I know that some people -- perhaps may people -- wouldn't see it that way. They would say, "What's the harm? You want to read singles profiles anyway, right?" While this may sounds reasonable on the surface, I think it overlooks an important principle -- namely, that it's best to avoid needlessly imposing on other people. If you want someone to read your profile, then give them some incentive to do so. It's a lot better than just saying "Please read my profile and tell me what you think." Little niceties like this may seem trivial, but they have their place.

I have profiles on a few singles dating sites. I don't get a lot of responses to them; however, when I do, about half of them say something like the following:

"Hi! I"d like to start a conversation. Please read my profile and tell me what you think."

Now, I understand that these people mean well; however, I don't think I would ever respond to such a message. It indicates a certain level of rudeness and a great deal of laziness. It amounts to saying, "I want us to talk, but I want you to do the hard work of getting the ball rolling. So please read my profile and decide what we should talk about."

Is this making too much of nothing? I don't think so. Common sense and decorum dictate that if you want to start a conversation, you do so in a normal manner. Find something to talk about, instead of expecting the other person to do the work for you.

When I brought this up on a singles discussion board though, half a dozen people responded by saying, "There's nothing rude about it! It's just a way of saying hello!" I find that baffling. Is that how they say hello in the real world? "Hi. I'd like to talk. Why don't you find something that we can discuss?"

A few people said, "I don't want to type out a lengthy message, only to get shot down! It's much simpler to just ask people to read my profile instead." I understand that they don't want to waste time, but really... you don't need a lengthy message. Just get the conversation started, instead of asking the other person to do the work for you.

Yes, I was deeply surprised at these responses. Somehow I suspect that these people wouldn't be saying the same thing if somebody used those tactics in real life. I'm not talking offering a smile or a sly look. I'm talking about asking the other person to review your profile (or whatever passes for it in the real world) and then let you know if she/he is interested.

After all, one can always start by bringing up a topic of common interest. This isn't being aggressive; in fact, it's pretty neutral. People of the same sex do it all the time, even on sites like this, so it's hardly the mark of an overly aggressive woman.

As a few acquiantances of mine said on an Internet message board,

"I delete those messages off the bat. The least they could do is respond to something in my profile. A simple 'I like Regina Spektor too!' would suffice. It doesn't have to be a novel, but any kind of message indicating you've looked beyond my age and my ethnicity would be nice."

"The message should make it clear that they at least read your profile, and it's not a mass message."

"Sounds like a spammed response to anyone who has the genital requirements the sender seeks. I concur... lazy. If there's a hint that the sender actually read the ad and indicated in one sentence why they responded to you, it would be a massive improvement."

On an unrelated note, I was also reading about the shenanigans of scammer Eli Sharvit. Yoiks. What a crook. Elsewhere, I also read that he's continuing to deceive people -- that his company has merely changed names, but basically operates in the same scamming mode. If that's true, then it's a truly despicable situation.

Short men, overweight women

It's common knowledge that men tend to prefer women who are somewhat slender. Before anyone objects, I know that not all men feel that way. I also know that men have different notions of what slender is, and that men don't necessarily prefer the anorexic, waif-like look. We are talking about generalities here, so let's acknowledge that and move on.(And before anyone asks, I myself have been attracted to moderately overweight women before, especially those with pleasing personalities. So I'm not saying that I would never want to date an overweight woman myself; quite the contrary. I want to emphasize this right now, lets anyone put words in my mouth.)

It's also common knowledge that women prefer men who are tall. Again, I know that not all women feel that way, and that there are differing notions of how tall men should be. As a general principle though, this preference is widely acknowledged.

So why is it that society constantly laments the fact that men tend to prefer thinner women, and yet you seldom hear women being criticized for preferring taller men? In fact, I've seen many singles ads wherein women listed the minimum height requirements for the men that they would consider dating. I daresay that if a man were to list a minimum bodyfat requirement for the women he seeks, he would be considered shallow and overly concerned with appearance.

BTW, don't forget that people can at least control their waistlines to some extent. There's virtually nothing that men can do to change their height.

Mind you, I do agree that we need to be willing to look past the physical. I'm not saying we shouldn't. I'm just saying that there appears to be a double standard at play.

A few things I've enjoyed

Just wanted to ruminate about a few things that I've been enjoying.

I've taken up laser tag again. It's pretty good exercise, provided that you don't have obnoxiously long waits in between games. It does get expensive, though.

I've been enjoying the vocal talents of Ms. Michelle Nicastro as well. What a singer!

Speaking of singers, I'll soon be attending a Christmas concert by the delightful Ms. Jodi Benson. It looks like I might also have some equally delightful company. That'll be great.

I also discovered the vocal stylings of Zooey Deschanel recently. Wow. She is absolutely incredible. She could even give Jodi Benson a run for her money.

Should Ph.D.s be referred to as "doctor"?

In recent years, I've frequently heard people claim that individuals who hold PhDs are not "real" doctors. These people assert that only physicians can rightfully claim this title, and that it's inappropriate for PhD-holders to use this term.

Frankly, I'm surprised. I thought it was common knowledge that there are both medical and non-medical doctors, and that this is a legitimate term to use in both situations. Apparently though, common knowledge isn't always as common as one would hope. For this reason, I'd like to take a moment to dispel some of the myths behind this title. (For the sake of brevity, I shall henceforth focus on the PhD degree; however, the same arguments hold for comparable degrees such as the ScD and the ThD).

Can PhDs legitimately claim to be doctors? Absolutely! The term "doctor" is derived from the Latin verb docere, which means "to teach." Historically, it refers to a teacher or, by extension, a scholar. It did not specifically refer to a physician. This title was later co-opted by the medical community though, due to the respect and prestige that it imputes. In one of life's great ironies, many uninformed laypeople now percieve the medical degree to be more prestigious than the lowly PhD, declaring that people who have earned the latter are "not real doctors."

Some people say, "Well, most people only think of physicians as doctors. According to the rules of common usage then, PhD-holders shouldn't use this title." I understand the appeal of this argument, but frankly, I think it's fallacious. There are many individuals that are known to the public as "Doctor"--Dr. Martin Luther King, Dr. Joyce Brothers and Dr. Laura Schlessinger. None of these individuals has a medical degree, and yet they are commonly accorded this title.

Moreover, I think that this argument panders to ignorance, rather than fighting it. If a large portion of the population thinks that (or acts as though) only MD-holders truly merit the title of "doctor," should we bend over backwards and let their misperceptions rule? Would it not be better to educate people on the historical, established usage of this term--usage that persists to this day?

Some say, "If you refer to a PhD-holder as 'Doctor Smith,' then people will assume that he's a physician. So what happens if there's a medical emergency? Do you want people running to Smith for medical help?" Frankly, I think that this argument betrays a low opinion of the public's intelligence; it assumes that people are too dim-witted to learn, and that we may as well accept the inevitable. Personally,I would rather fight ignorance gently than assume such a lowly opinion of the common man's intellience. Would some people continue to think that only physicians merit this title? Probably so--but I suspect that the vast majority of individuals are intelligent enough to learn otherwise.

For some reason, many also think that the MD is much more difficult to attain than a PhD. I can understand why; after all, we've all heard horror stories about medical students working long hours and stayin up all through the night. However, people simply don't realize how laborious a PhD program can be. PhD students often have to engage in long hours of grueling studies and research if they wish to complete their studies in a timely fashion. I'd say that when it comes to years of study, PhD programs are more demanding as well; when starting from a bachelor's degree, a PhD typically takes from six to eight years to complete, as opposed to four years for the medical degree.

When someone declares that physicians are the only real doctors, he is simply mistaken. I'd say that PhDs have every right to this title--and I say that based on the title's etymology, the demands of their programs and the accepted, contemporary usage of this term, even outside of academic circles.

Revisiting the predator complaint

Earlier, I talked about an opportunistic jerk who moved in on a friend of mine right after she broke off her engagement. He was thinking about himself -- his own desires -- with no regard for the hurts in her life.

Some people agreed with my assessment -- most notably, women I've known who had broken off their engagements or who underwent divorce. A few selfish souls, however, said "Yeah, but if he waited, then someone might have beaten him to her." As I said, a selfish approach. A true gentleman would wait.

A couple of people said, "So what? It's her decision to make." That is unbelievably naive. Of course, it's her decision to make. That doesn't mean that we can afford to take advantage of people who are hurting in this fashion. It's just not right. We can choose to exploit their vulnerabilities, but that doesn't mean that it's justified. We can't excuse this by saying, "Well, it was her choice."

Ridiculous.

Being an opportunistic male predator

Last July, one of female friends broke off her engagement, just one week before her wedding. I was relieved to hear this, since I really didn't approve of the guy she was dating. To cut a long story short, I'm pretty sure that he was putting up a false front -- conveniently adopting her religious beliefs so that they could get married. I doubted the sincerity of his conversion and his convictions, as did several others.

So she broke the engagement off. Good for her. With nary a delay, this one fella -- his name is Chris -- moved right in. He made his interest blindingly obvious, even though she was tremendously vulnerable and her wounds were still sore.

He was no gentleman. He knew full well that she was still hurting badly. Instead of letting her wound heal for a while, he moved right in like a cat on the prowl. I don't like it when my friends are treated that way.

I know, some people would disagree with me. Still, I think it's a pretty sleazy thing for a man to do. When a woman has just broken off her engagement -- a few days before the wedding, no less -- then she's in no position to pursue a dating relationship. There has to be a lot of healing involved, first. You might win her heart, but you wouldn't be respectful. You would be acting with your personal desires in mind, rather than thinking about what's best for her.

There's a reason why divorcess are advised to wait at least a year before dating. When that type of commitment is broken, it takes a long time to heal. During that period, you're not in a position to make sound judgments. Certain men like to swoop right in during that time, but that merely shows that they're acting selfishly.

BTW, as I'm typing this, Microsoft Windows keeps stalling on me for a second or two -- sometimes more. It's bloody annoying. I tried opening up Windows Explorer, and the process brought the computer to practically a halt. No good reason why, mind you. Microsoft produces unbelievable bloatware, thanks to their idiotic design philosophy.

Antigravity nonsense

I will never forget Sal, this Mechanical Engineering grad student that I knew way back when. He was a real pain and a bit of a nut.

He was ranting about how he wanted to build an antigravity system and how physicists laughed at him. Me, I wasn't about to laugh, but I did know that he had descended into quackery.

That's what happens when engineers think exclusively as engineers, plugging and chugging their physics equations, without properly understanding the physics principles themselves.

Labor Day was so boring

Yesterday was Labor Day, and it was boring as heck. Boring, lonely and depressing. I basically spent the entire day alone.

Went to the gym, got some household chores done, and got some work-related stuff accomplished. Also watched Carrie on DVD. On the whole though, it was a pretty boring day, and at times, painfully lonely.

Nuts. Drat. Drat. Nuts. Nuts.

Nothing sticks to it!

I have, on occasion, talked about my ex-roommate Mark, and what a difficult individual he was. One of his many problems was that he was incapable of recognizing the limitations of his own knowledge. That is, he frequently assumed himself to be right, even on matters in which he had little expertise.

Case in point: He once asserted that there are no such things as physical "chaotic systems"--that is, physical systems in which the final outcome varies tremendously based on infinitesimal variations in the starting parameters. "Everything runs down!" he said. The guy clearly did not know what chaos theory meant, and yet he deigned to assumed that thousands of chaos theorists across the globe were studying a non-existent phenomenon.

Here's another example. He once claimed that Teflon cannot be used as a structural material. "It's only good for coatings!" he exclaimed. I said, "Mark, it is typically used as a coating. That doesn't mean that it can't be used as a solid block of material."

"But I've never heard of it being used that way!" he objected. "Mark," I said, "Don't assume that it's impossible just because you haven't heard of it being used that way. Teflon is expensive stuff, which is why people prefer to use it as a coating. For structural applications, one can typically get away with using acetal or other low-friction plastics. That doesn't mean that they can't use Teflon; it simply means that the less expensive option is often sufficient."

Besides, Teflon is sometimes used in bearings, due to its low frictional coefficient. Mark didn't know about this, but that should be no surprise. He's an electrical engineer, after all, not a mechanical engineer or materials scientist. Of course, that didn't stop this jerk from making hard and fast pronouncements on matters that he knew little about.

Juanin Clay

Time to sigh over Juanin Clay, a luminously lovely and terribly underrated actress. More of Juanin can be seen here and here.

TV stuff

I've been watching a DVD from the old short-lived Buck Rogers in the 25th Century show. Boy, it was cheesy. It did have some pretty good actors among its guest stars, though. And of course, a great many young lads loved to watch Erin Grey.

On a related matter, this site lists two understatedly lovely TV actresses—Melinda Culea and Nicole DeBoer. It also mentioned Courtney Thorne-Smith, but she gets a lot more mileage out of her looks. I would also mention Allison Bartlett (from Sesame Street), a certain small-time weathergal, and a certain children's TV show producer/actress. Oh, and Jennifer Dempster of BodyShaping, and Robin from The Apprentice. Then there's the obscure (and sadly deceased) actress, Juanin Clay.

Speaking of which, I started reading Bill Rancic's book yesterday. It seems like fairly interesting reading, although I think I like Amy Henry's book more. I wish that Nick Warnock had written something as well, since I would have liked to take a look inside his mind. Sadly, I don't think there's anyone from season two whose writings would be in demand, except maybe for Kelly Perdew. I certainly wouldn't want to ready anything by Jenn Massey, unless I was really, really bored. I'd give very little credence to any book that she'd write.

There are a whole lot of books here that I'm trying to get through, with little success. I've managed to make some headway, but thanks to my exercise program, it's been tough going—and I do think that my exercise program will have to take precedence. Rats.

Hiringspeak -- Getting the software job done

I've interviewed for a variety of computer programming jobs, or engineering jobs that required extensive programming expertise. It occurs to me that very few of those companies asked for code samples, or inquired about my programming style. Many of them did ask about technical details, or how I would implement a particular algorith, but that's another matter altogether.

These companies were being short-sighted indeed. They focused on certain technical details, and ignored the question of programming style. That is, they didn't bother to find out if a programmer can write software that can be readily understood, and would not require massive reverse-engineering years down the road. (This article addresses that particular issue in suitable detail.)

I remember this robotics company in one of the mountain states. Their core software was a horrible mess, due to their lack of skilled programmers who understood the artistry of programming style. They had plenty of people who could "get the job done," but the people who laid the foundation for their product were sloppy coders. Many nightmares ensued as a result of this chaos.

I could name many other examples, but you get the point.

Lost and 24

Last night's episode of "Lost" was pretty darned good. We got to saw some of the backstory surrounding Boone and his odd relationship with his sibling Shannon. Wow.

"24", on the other hand, has gotten off to an uneven start. Suffice to say that Jack Bauer is acting rather extremely, and going overboard. The plot stretches credibility sometimes, especially with regard to the computer technobabble, but it's still an enjoyable show.

"Veronica Mars" was pretty darned good, too.

I'm watching a "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century" DVD as well. This is decidedly cheesier, and the quality of writing is hardly outstanding. It's still a fun watch, though. I'm tempted to get the entire DVD set, but that would be a waste.

Life sucks

Okay, life doesn't really suck. Still, it is problematic on occasion. Right now, for example, I'm trying to locate some apparatus that I use for a magic trick, and I can't find it anywhere. Too bad; I really wanted to show off at a brunch tomorrow.

I watched some improv comedy a few hours ago. It was too vulgar for my taste, though. I can understand the occasional dirty joke, even if I don't approve; however, I do wish that people would stay away from outright vulgarisms. Foul language just isn't necessary.

Some people say that foul language is needed for literary effect. I'll agree that on occasion, it can be helpful in that regard, especially when writing certain characters. However, good writers don't need to use such language liberally. If they have properly mastered the English language, then they don't need to stoop to that level.

I really miss this clean improv act that I saw several times in Utah. Those guys were great. Much more talented that the crowd that I had to watch tonight.

Yet more rants

I just saw a great comedy show last night. It featured three very talented non-name performers who combined magic, music and shadow puppetry, and it was absolutely hilarious. The best part is that the comedy was quite clean.

I watched with a dear female friend of mine. We're not dating or anything, but I do value her company and insight very much.

Tonight I'll be watching some improv comedy with another female friend. Hopefully, it'll be reasonably clean. We shall see.

I'm having an attack of insomnia right now. I hope to get to the gym today, so I do need to get some more sleep soon. Ugh. If it were up to me, I'd spend two hours in the gym everyday and get eight hours of sleep, but that's not always easy—or possible.

Someone also showed me this newly revamped Elispot supplier site. Very impressive and attractive. Very nice.

Even more rants

I keep thinking about Farley, a guy that I knew in high school and college. He's the kind of guy who absolutely refused to do things honestly. He absolutely had to cheat, even when it wasn't necessary. He cheated on even the easiest of tests, and he routinely stole stuff from people. Heck, when dividing up into soccer teams, he would insist on sneaking off to join whichever team he wanted, even for a mere friendly game.

I can't help but wonder if he's going to wind up in jail sometime. I sure wouldn't hire him to do anything. I would never trust him.

For a while, I was hung up on a high school classmate named Lani Rose. She was a liar, too. And I once dated a woman named Audrey M., who repeatedly lied to me. And why? Just because she didn't feel that things would work out, but was too cowardly to admit this to me. So she kept dodging phone calls instead. When I contacted her at work, she claimed to be in the middle of teaching a class, but that rang hollow. (Why would she answer the phone in the middle of a class?) She even asked me to call back during lunch time, but when I tried that, she never answered.

Because she did ask me to call, I tried calling her at home as well. I was persistent because she had previously agreed to attend a wedding with me. Besides, I figured that if she didn't want me to call, she wouldn't have asked me to contact her over lunch time. As it turned out, that was just an easy cop-out for her.

I never expected a grown 30-year-old woman to act that way. That was the type of behavior that I would have expected from a high school student, not an adult professional. Obviously, Audrey did not have that type of maturity.

At times like this, I like to think about some of the more pleasant people in my life... people like Dawn, who's very much like a sister to me. I couldn't ask for a better sister.

Oh, and as long as I'm ranting, here's a link to a new directory that I found. It could stand to be fleshed out a bit more. Also, here's a list of technical books that are worth reading. I should probably include some pure science books as well, and a few more engineering resources.

Miscellaneous rantings

It's late at night, and so I just want to rant about some diverse topics right now.

First, I hate how long it takes for Windows XP to boot up, even on a fast computer. Even after it boots up, it can take forever before the OS starts to respond to mouse clicks. This is doubtlessly because Microsoft chose to integrate all sorts of unnecessary pre-processing. It's the only reasonable explanation, once one has ruled out spyware, adware and viruses. Talk about bloatware.

I just finished watching a commercial on Restasis, a product which is supposed to increase tear production in people with dry-eye syndrome. This reminds me of how my old opthalmologist insisted that I should persist with using contact lenses, despite my dry eyes. For over a year, I labored mightily despite tremendous discomfort, all because he assured me that I should be able to adapt. Thankfully, another opthalmologist later advised me not to continue with contacts, since my substandard tear production would make them pretty much unbearable. Continually flooding my eyes with eyedrops simply was not an option, despite my opthalmologist's protestations.

I also wanted tp post a link to this inspirational article on a mystery shopping site. I've never been a mystery shopper, but I wouldn't mind trying this out sometime. I don't know that I'll ever get a chance, but it might be nice to try.

I've been learning about Chinese technology and engineering practices as well. I like cross-cultural exchanges.

Oh, and I hate the way my floorboards creak. This makes it very difficult to get any aerobic exercise done at home without disturbing my neighbors below. Ugh.

Gonna watch a theatre comedy show on Friday. This should be fun. I'm also looking forward to the season premiere of "24" on Sunday. Yay.

Diverse thoughts

I have no single topic to write about today, so I thought I'd muse on a variety of topics.

First, there's this article on writing tech manuals. It's not a thorough treatment by any means, but it was clearly intended as a means for jumpstarting one's writing skills. It's a brief read, and worth one's time.

I also mentioned The Dead Zone earlier, another quality show. It has the delightful Nikki deBoer in it, and she does a fine job. In fact, she does an even better job than she did in Deep Space 9, and she looks just as cute.

Heck, she's one of the prettiest Star Trek women of all time. At least, I think so. She has a lot of girl-next-door appeal, too.

I want to write about Jodi Benson sometime, and maybe post some links to it as well.

Oh, and here's a link to the MavicaNET directory. This is a pretty impressive multilingual project, rather like Wikipedia is--although this is decidedly more commercial in nature.

I'm going to try out some new bench pressing techniques today. Maybe I can jumpstart my stalled bench press progress. I understand why some people are tempted to take steroids, as this is a lot of hard work. Still, you'll never catch me giving in to that foolishness.

Happy New Year

Happy New Year, everyone! I'm celebrating by watching season three of "24" on DVD, and by going to the gym. I'll also be spending time with my laptop in a coffeeshop as I get some studying done. What fun.

I woke up late after a night of mild New Year's Eve partying. I got to spend time with some dear friends, but it would have been nice to have a beautiful woman on my arm. Oh, sigh. Nuts.

On the plus side, I did get a female friend of mine to agree to accompany me to a night of clean theatre comedy on Friday. That'll be a real treat. She broke things off with her boyfriend recently, so now I feel comfortable asking her to come along, even though it's not a date.

Oh, and here's a link to an article on how to write well. Some of these tips may seem obvious, but as is often the case, people must often be reminded of what's obvious.

Likes and hates

I'm watching a DVD right now, which has been riveting my attention. At the same time, I had to watch something idly, so I'd like to share my thoughts on things that I like and dislike.

I like quality television with complex plots and characterizations. I love it when people strive for quality and originality. That's why I like "The Dead Zone," "24" and "Veronica Mars." Each one of these shows the earmarks of outstanding writing, plot complexity and attention to detail.

The old "Twilight Zone" series was good too, although i didn't pay as much attention to it.

I'm not such a fan of quality food. Oh, I like to eat, but I'm not one for frequent fine dining. I think that's largely because I tend to be rather frugal, and I'd rather eat for cheap. I am nutrition-conscious though, so I don't go for the ultra-cheap, fattening stuff.

I don't like lazy people. I can't stand it when people feel the need to stroll casually down parking lot lanes, even when they're in the way of vehicular traffic. I also detest it when motorists tie up the mall parking lanes because they just HAVE to wait for someone to back out of a choice parking spot. Never mind that there are plenty of other parking spots available; some of these bastars just HAVE to take a spot that's as close to the mall entrance as possible.

Oh, and I hate it when I come across lazy people at the gym, just kinda lounging around the exercise equipment--in their street clothes, no less! Criminy. If you're going to use the gym equipment, that's fine, but if you're treating the place as a hangout, then get the heck out of the way.

I'm sure that I'll have plenty more to say about these things later. I'm in a ranting kinda mood.

Christmas thoughts

A few thoughts this Yuletide season...

I wish I had more time to watch some of the classic Christmas TV programs this year, or that I could have listened to more of my Christmas music. In part, I blame Netflix and the first season of "24" on DVD. Oh, well.

I wish that I could have spent Christmas with a few more friends this year. Still, it's been a busy Christmas season, with a lot of social activity. I don't think I'll get much rest on Christmas Day itself, but that's okay.

I bought myself a Gerber tool for Christmas. I kinda wish that I had spent $20 more to buy a more upscale model, but that's okay. I'm pleased with what I got, and it has a mini-saw feature that my Leatherman tool doesn't.

Oh, well. Happy Yuletide season to all!

Rubystreak again

I just wanted to say a few more words about this Rubystreak character. I don't want to waste much more time on her, since there's just too much that could be said about her. Suffice to say that she appears to be an exceptionally maladjusted individual. I know there are a lot of jerks out there on the 'net, but they usually act in more trollish ways. Seldom have I seen a non-troll who appears to be an adult, yet acts the way she does.

Sadly, her postings provide abundant fuel for criticism. One could spend days on that matter, but I don't want to waste time with that. Several posters did comment on her angry and jerkish behavior, and frankly, I have to side with them in that regard.

Here's a perfect example. In one thread, she described Donald Trump's chief operating officer (a Mister "Calamari" according to one poster) as an idiot. One poster (her chief opponent, apparently) pointed out that such a judgment is extreme. Calamari had an apparent case of stage fright, and he bumbled his way through his commentary on Jenn Massey. That's hardly a good reason to call him an idiot, though. There are many people who aren't good at public extemporaneous speaking; that doesn't make them idiots. Or does Rubystreak hold that opinion because he doesn't like Jenn? If so, then Rubystreak's judgment is still unfair, since we don't know exactly WHY he dislikes her.

When challenged on that matter, Rubystreak retorted, "Calling someone an idiot is not extreme. Please."

Um, Rubystreak? Nobody said that calling someone an idiot is [em]inherently[/em] extreme. What's extreme is calling Calamari an idiot given what little we saw of him.

In fact, you QUOTED the section wherein your opponent said "And on what grounds is this accusation made, exactly? Because he expressed derision for Jenn? Because he stumbled over his words? Neither of those makes someone an idiot, and so that label is rather extreme." Did you even bother to read the section that you quoted?

(Interestingly enough, Rubystreak had previously criticized someone for allegedly "twisting" her words around. I didn't see that such alleged "twisting" was either accurate or intentional; however, Rubystreak's words are certainly an obvious distortion of the facts.)

As an aside, this is the same individual who went ballistic when someone said that her opinion was "misguided." Um, hello? She doesn't think there's anything extreme about calling someone an "idiot," and yet she raises hell over the word "misguided"? What is wrong with this person?

I have to agree with the posters who said,

"I thought Dex was pretty even-tempered. In every Apprentice thread, Rubystreak's obsession with defending Jen has been heavy-handed, tempermental, and angry."

(Addressed to Rubystreak) "Why should he drop the subject? You don't drop subjects easily yourself, as I know from experience. Just because you and several other posters don't like someone talking about Jenn in an Apprentice thread doesn't mean members are obligated to walk on glass and discuss only what pleases you and your buddies. This is a public message board. Look out your window. See those bipedal creatures? Those are 'other people'."

Like I said, I seldom comment on these people that I come across on the 'net, but this woman is a rather unusual case -- for someone who's not an apparent troll, that is.

Rubystreak

Earlier, I mentioned this "Rubystreak" person on the Straight Dope message boards. Boy, is she a piece of work! (I'm assuming that she's female, based on comments that she's made. I could be wrong, but for now, let's assume that she is.)

Talk about huffy. A few days ago, this person got all upset because another poster said that she was "misguided." Gasp! How shocking!

Calling someone "misguided" is not an insult. Puh-leez.

She seems to have an ongoing feud with that other poster. For example, another participant asked them both to drop a particular topic with regard to TV's "The Apprentice." Whey Rubystreak's opponent continued the discussion, Rubystreak got all riled up. She said (and I'm paraphrasing here) "You were asked to drop this topic, and yet you continue! How dare you!"

Days later, yet another poster chided her for that. (I think his name was "Liberal.") He pointed out that this was a public message board, and that people were free to discuss the topics they wanted unless the moderator objected.

Apparently though, this Rubystreak lass (or chap?) feels that she can bully other people into discussing on the topics that she wants discussed. If she feels that a topic should be dropped, then by gum, people had better drop it. Talk about infantile!

Rubystreak, if you ever read this, you should be ashamed of yourself. You are such a child.

On abrasive leadership

Why did Trump choose Kelly Perdew over Jennifer Massey? Kelly wasn’t a truly charismatic individual; indeed, he has often been described as bland or robotic. I suspect that most viewers would say that last year’s Bill, Troy and Amy – maybe even Nick or Kwame – were much more captivating.

Well, there are several reasons that come to mind. One is that Kelly had a greater number of wins on the show. He also has a much higher degree of real-world business experience.

Jennifer frequently emphasized that she has never been dragged into the boardroom by a PM; however, this seems to be largely because she talks a mean blue streak, and aligns herself with the PM whenever possible. She’s good at arguing and debating, which is probably why Kelly says that she is “good in the boardroom.” (Talk about damning with faint praise!)

I think the bigger problem is that she antagonizes way too many people. Her teammates can seldom stand her, and some of Trump’s top advisors didn’t hesitate to say that she was abrasive or otherwise unpleasant. A leader shouldn’t strive to appease people at all costs, and he/she doesn’t necessarily have to be liked. However, a leader that is strongly disliked is unlikely to be very effective.

I think about this one engineering executive that I once knew. He was known for constantly pointing fingers and tearing into his underlings. Did this help get the job done? Sure, but only at the cost of employee loyalty, efficiency and morale. A happy employee is a well-motivated employee, and creating a hostile work environment is sure to jeopardize long-term productivity.

Jenn M was known for being shrill and shrieky. Now, some would argue that she’s simply being assertive, and that such behavior would be applauded in a man. I strongly disagree. Her actions went way beyond mere assertiveness, and any man that reacted that way would be regarded as a colossal jerk.

In addition, consider the way she implicitly took credit for Ivana’s wheel-o-jeans idea. I know that some would deny that she took credit, but that’s nonsense. Moreover, it’s simply irrelevant. Jenn should have known that this would be perceived as credit-stealing; indeed, even Mr. Trump described it that way. These types of actions may not be outright hostile, but they do promote a hostile environment.

On a tangential note, there is plenty of other evidence that she’s overinflates her contributions. She took partial credit for the Red Velvet ice cream idea, for example. I had problems with that, since he was hardly in the driver’s seat on that idea. As far as I can tell, her contributions to that idea were pretty ordinary. Moreover, it was a lackluster idea, so that really shouldn’t count for much at all.

She also claimed to have risen to the top of her law firm. Hello? Excuse me? Is she a senior partner at that firm? No. Is she a junior partner? No. Does she have any sort of vice-presidential position? No. I don’t think there’s any reasonable sense in which she can claim to be at the top of her firm. Now, if she had claimed to be a top performer, that would be another thing, but she said nothing to support such a claim.

So she came across, as viceroy George put it, as “abrasive as hell.” That is a liability, not a strength. Women like Amy Henry know how to be assertive without being outright abrasive. Ditto for Carolyn Kepcher, although I think she pushes the envelope sometimes. Being assertive without being antagonistic—that’s a skill which Jennifer Massey should learn to master.

More on the Apprentice finale

A lot of people on the 'net have been complaining about the pile-on that Jenn M. endured in the [i]Apprentice[/i] finale. I honestly can't agree with that.

Y'see, Trump had a whole bunch of people--Trump employees and past Apprentice candidates--comment on whether they'd choose Kelly or Jenn, and why. Not surprisingly, the vast majority came out in Kelly's support. Was this unfair to Jenn?

Hardly. Most of them had glowing things to say about Kelly, but they didn't speak negatively about Jenn. In fact, several said that both of them were strong candidates. Okay, so CFO Calamari did openly say that he didn't like Jenn at all (and stumbled over his words in the process), but he was the exception rather than the rule.

Some posters whined, "But by saying that Kelly is all these great things, they're also saying that Jenn isn't!" First of all, maybe they don't think she is. Second, it DOESN'T mean that Jenn doesn't have the qualities that they're extolling. It simply means that they recognize these qualities more abundantly in Kelly, or that they find his qualities to be stronger. It's hardly unfair to Jennifer at all.

"But why have that massive outshowing of support for Kelly?" they asked. "Is is really necessary?" Maybe not, but I doubt that the motive was to humiliate Jenn. Rather, it simply makes for good reality TV, and you can be sure that Mark Burnett wants to milk this show for all it's worth. I'd be shocked if the intent was to put Jenn in her place somehow.

Some cynics say that this was done to somehow justify Trump's choosing of Kelly. They say that Trump's mind was already made up, and that he wanted to justify it to the audience. That theory is just dumb. If he wanted to do that, he could have had the interviewees voice more biting criticisms of Jenn; instead, most of them commended her for her strengths. Trump and Burnett could also have shown more of her negative footage, such as the infamous scene in which she implicitly took credit for Ivana's idea.

So no, this wasn't especially unkind. A few of the comments made were unduly harsh, but the idea of having these people voice their opinions was not.

Apprentice wannabe Jenn M

I watched the excessively long, overdrawn Apprentice finale last night. For a moment there, I was deathly afraid that Trump would actually pick Jenn as his new apprentice. Thankfully, he picked Kelly. Kelly isn't too popular, and a lot of viewers hate his supposed smugness, but he's a darned sight better than Jenn. Heck, I never really sensed the smugness of which they speak, but perhaps I just haven't been paying close enough attention. (I tend to exercise, eat or do computer work while watching TV, since I can't abide the idea of being idle in front of the tube.)

Jenn's worst moment, as far as I'm concerned, was when she stole credit for Ivana's wheel-o-jeans idea. Some woudl dispute that, but I think it's pretty obvious, and her teammates certainly interpreted things that way. Even Trump agreed, based on his voiceovers (which suggested that he was disinclined to hire her).

Still, Jenn has her defenders, and some steadfastly deny that she stole Ivana's idea. (One vocal example is some person named "RubyStreak" on the Straight Dope Message Board.) Personally, I think they're fooling themselves. Sure, Ivana might not have said, "This was my idea! I thought of it!" but her actions clearly implied that -- intentionally or not. Some representative from Levi Strauss asked how the team came up with the wheel idea, and Jenn jumped right in with the answer.

What wrong with that, you might ask? Quite simply, Jenn DIDN'T know how they arrived at that idea. Only the person who came up with the idea (Ivana) could possibly know, unless she shared that information with someone else. Kevin clearly understood that, and so he stated that Jenn stole Ivana's credit away.

What's more, Jenn's teammates repeatedly pointed out that Jenn simply did not grasp the concept of the jeans wheel! How can she claim to know how this idea was arrived at, when she didn't understand the concept at all (not until it was finally created, that is)? Any attempt to explaint hat away is mere sophistry.

And even if that weren't true, she should have still deferred to her teammate. She could have simply said, "The credit for that idea goes to Ivana. Perhaps she can explain." That would not have made her look weak in anyone's eyes, and it would have made her come across as a team player who can give credit where it is due.

I noted that several people on the SDMB made that point, and I must agree with them. I don't understand why this RubyStreak character doesn't grasp that. Strange.

Mediocrity

Tonight I was reminded of some classmates I had as a college student.

In one class, I was scoring a B+, which was enough to exempt me from the final exam. I wanted to take the final though, so as to bump my score up to an A.

Some of my classmates kept dissuading me. "Don't do it! Don't do it! Why risk what you already have?" This bothered me because it showed that they were striving for mediocrity, and were unwilling to aim high. Sadly, I think this is indicative of my people in general.

I can't help but think that I would have been inspired to greater heights if I had been born here, with numerous models of excellence to inspire me.

Software development planning

I like the sentiments expressed in this article. I've seen far too many software development efforts fail due to shoddy planning and short-sightedness. This type of design work would never fly when doing mechanical or electronic design, yet it's often done in the computer programming field.

Stacy Haiduk

Whatever happened to Stacy Haiduk?

I've been reading a whole bunch of books on management and leadership lately. I've also come across this site filled with leadership tips. It also has a whole bunch of wholesome articles on diverse topics.

I've been reading Carolyn Kepcher's book, Carolyn 101. I also started reading Amy Henry's book, What It Takes, but I had to return it to the public library. I've found that watching Trump's show, The Apprentice, has been very educational indeed.

Bill Rancic's book is also on my list of things to read. Maybe I'll include some of The Donald's own books, but I'm not particularly interested in that. Maybe it's because I'm concerned that the Donald's books will focus too much on the money-making aspect of his work, rather than marketing and team dynamics. I don't know. Whatever the case, I shouldn't pre-judge his works.

I do want to read more business articles in general. The more I can deepen my knowledge, the better. I think this should make me a more skilled and capable techie-type in general.

The term "software engineer" is much-abused and often inaccurate, for reasons explained here.

Just felt like posting a link to the following biochemical animation today.

I had some discussions not long about about Lincoln, slavery, the Emancipation Proclamation and the Gettysburg Address. It amazes me that there are people who demonize Abe so badly. Sure, he wasn't necessarily a great saint, and perhaps he still wasn't properly enlightened about the rights of African-Americans (at least, in comparison to modern society). He had his faults. Still, the way some people speak so viciously about him bothers me terribly.

So I was looking at this multilingual site, and it occured to me that it would be really nice if someone could jump from one page to its translation in another language, simply by clicking on the language name. This would require a bit of Javascript programming though, and a fairly extensive table. Maintaining the site when new pages are added can become a bit messy as well, although not unreasonably so.

Someday I might comment on the design of the splash page as well. Maybe some other time.

I'm not getting a flu vaccine shot this year. I don't think I can justify getting one, even though I normally opt for one. It just wouldn't be right.

I remember reading The Grapes of Wrath in college, and discovering the connection between its title and The Battle Hymn of the Republic (a truly stirring song!). That was a real "Eureka!" moment for me--one of the most satisfying in all my readings of literature.

Of course, I wish I could read me. Heck, I rented a video copy of "The Mysterious Island" this weekend, only to discover that the writers took enormous liberties with Jules Verne's work. What a rip-off.

A little something for Michelle Nicastro fans.

I just wanted to link to the following blog entry on scientific illiteracy.

I mentioned that I fed a Goliath birdeater recently. Like other arachnids, these are truly fascinating creatures. Goliath birdeaters have a real attitude though, so they are not for the faint of heart.

I mentioned that I fed a Goliath birdeater recently. Like other arachnids, these are truly fascinating creatures. They have a nasty attitude though, so they are not of the faint of heart.

These guys have real guts. You just have to commend them.

I have no ethical problem with offshoring of labor. Indeed, I think that it's often necessary for a company's survival.

However, when it leads to horror stories like this one, then it's a crying shame. A lot of companies are shooting themselves in the foot by being too quick to relocate their services abroad.

Speaking of strong female characters, one of my favorites was Gloria Dinallo from the short-lived "Misfits of Science" TV series. Played by a youthful Courteney Cox, she was a stunning young beauty, yet suitably hard-nosed and strong of character. She exhibited feminine empathy, yet she managed to maintain a strong inner character without becoming overly masculine.

What a great show.

I've been watching my new DVDs of the old G.I. Joe animated series. Boy, this brings back memories. The animation wasn't great, but it was pretty good for its time, despite the occasional shoddy bits. It had some fairly intelligent plots, and characters that grabbed one's attention.

I particularly liked the way they portrayed strong female characters--Scarlett, Lady Jaye and Cover Girl. Each and everyone one of them was competent, and capable of standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the men. Each one of them frequently took command in the field, without any guff from the menfolk. They all had feminine wiles, but without being reduced to dainty flowers.

I liked Cover Girl the most, possibly because she got the least amount of air time. Or maybe it's because I was captivated by the concept of a high-status fashion model turning to diesel mechanics and firearms. I even liked her costume, which was stylish yet utilitarian, and decidedly more realistic than the one which Scarlett sported. Too bad she didn't get more exposure in the comic books or the cartoons.

I wish they had gone that way with the A-Team's Amy Allen. The actress who played her, Melinda Culea, was also a former model--and clearly, the producers weren't beyond capitalizing on her leggy appeal. Still, they ultimately failed to depict her as a strong female who could stand alongside the men. What a shame.

A few years ago, telecommunications was all the rage. After a while, it fizzled out, leaving many people unemployed and with shattered dreams. (I am SO glad that I didn't jump on the telecom bandwagon!)

As of late, biotechology seems to have emerged as the field to beat. Unfortunately, a lot of biotechnology firms have likewise fallen by the wayside. I'm hoping that biotech won't follow in telecom's footsteps.

In my judgment though, that's unlikely. Biotechnology is much more diverse than telecommunication, and it can expect to receive heavy funding from both government and private sources. People always need new medicines, especially when their insurance companies are willing to foot the bill. Vaccine research will continue to progress, especially with the advent of new and exciting research tools.

Here's hoping that this rise will continue for years to come.

I've done some reading on flow cytometry lately. I'd love to learn more about this technique. I've been thinking about some potential applications for this technique, apart from its usual usages. Ideas are stirring and baking right now. I'd love to spend about two weeks with one of these devices and an armload of schematics.

I got to feed a Goliath birdeater today. Fed it a fully grown mouse, I did.

This can be quite unnerving, if you're not used to it. I know that a lot of people would feel very squeamish about such things.

This link is good for a laugh.

Earlier, I mentioned Lynda Carter. Well, this article talks about Lynda Carter as Wonder Woman. It says that it would be extremely difficult to find someone who can fill Lynda's high-heeled shoes.

I think that's absolutely true. I find it difficult to think of anyone else in that role.

The gal who played Nova on the old Star Blazers cartoon seems like she has an awful lot of pent-up hostility. I came across her guestbook, and I was shocked at what I read. Sounds like a classic case of overreacting.

Apparently, she tore into someone because he posted something about how hazardous it was for Nova to be the only female on the Argo. Maybe I'm being dense, but... What's so inappropriate about pointing that out? It sure didn't sound like a lewd comment to me; more like an observation.

An acquaintance of mine theorized that maybe she was victimized by some nasty fan fiction. Could be; after all, a lot of that stuff transcends the boundaries of good taste. Ultimately though, who knows?

Incidentally, if you meander over to her "rants" page, you'll see a lot more hostility and anger over there. I don't know what to make of it, frankly. I happen to agree with her on a lot of what she said, but she clearly expresses her viewpoint with undue sharpness and hostility. Criminy. Calm down, lady!

I recently read about how many people think it would be impossible to create a new live-action Wonder Woman movie or TV show. The problem is that Lynda Carter filled the role so darned well that it would be extremely difficult to fill her high-heeled shoes.

I think that Stacey Williams had just the right look, and the height to boot. She doesn't seem to be much of an actress though, and she has pretty much dropped out of the public eye.

I like rose hairs.

Do you know what's better than Courteney Cox in Blue Desert? Courteney Cox in Cocoon: The Return. Darn, but she looks painfully good.

Oh, my. Oh, my. Oh, my.

Courteney Cox in Blue Desert. What an incredible face.

I've been following the DC Comics mystery mini-series, Identity Crisis, and discussing its with some guys on the DC message boards. I tell you, it's become clear that very few of them truly understand the basics of logic. It's positively mind-boggling.

Thankfully, there are a few that do, and they are like a breath of fresh air.

There's some pretty cool animation at this Elispot site. Okay, so it's not really gripping, but from a scientific point of view, it's pretty darned nice.

There's some pretty cool animation at this Elispot site. Okay, so it's not really gripping, but from a scientific point of view, it's pretty darned nice.

Some buddies of mine are doing some work on bacterial colony counting. The concept is explained here. It's been around for a long time now, and it's commonly used due to its ease and flexibility. Automating the counting process though... that's another matter.

Another friend of mine is doing some biochemistry work at a university back home. I almost wish I could join her, but for a variety of reasons, I'd rather not go back there.

I've got a long and tiring week ahead of me. This stinks. This stinks big-time.

Let's see.  What have I been doing?

Well, I did some reading about the Immune Tolerance Network today, as part of my readings on immunology.  Also read about the Science Board, which I encountered a few months ago.

I've also been reading some of the documents from BD BioSciences.

Earlier, I mentioned the A-Team's Amy Allen. Well, these shots are from the first A-Team episode I ever saw. It's what got me hooked on the show, during its prime.

I have fond memories of that show. Up until then, I had no idea why there was such a buzz about Hannibal and his crew.

The A-Team's Amy Allen is a darned fine-looking woman. She had a willowy figure and nice legs. And she was mighty pretty as well.

She was a fairly strong feminine character, at least for her time. Granted, she was no Emma Peel; however, she showed great potential. If only the writers of "The A-Team" hadn't botched things so royally with her character.

There's a listing of immunology terms and definitions here. It's in a hypertext format, which is kinda nice. It certainly makes for a helpful pedagogical tool.

I mentioned that a friend of mine has expertise in colony counting. She has also done work with viral plaque assays and transwells (whatever the latter may be).

This isn't an earth-shaking thing to comment on, but I thought I'd mention it anyway. I've been learning a lot from her, hence my interest.

I'm lonely.

Jennifer Dempster is one lovely woman.

An old friend of mine is in town this week. She has expertise in colony counting and related technologies.

Okay, so I don't have much to say today. However, I thought the following article on biology in Star Trek was interesting. It's nice to see people analyze the science in these shows.

This blog is filled with angst and pain, but some positive stuff as well.

I wish I knew Portuguese. I learned about Ambriex recently, as part of my on-going education, but I can't make adequate sense of the site, even though Portuguese is similar to Spanish.

In my last posting, I mentioned a manager who blamed an employee because his new embedded computer malfunctioned and died. She was quick to blame the employee, on the grounds that the computer was new and he was the only one using it.

I'm just flabbergasted that any manager would think that new computers don't fail unless the user messes them up. Heck, any technician can tell you that if a computer's going to fail, it will typically do so within its first few days of use! That's when the computer gets put through its paces, thus allow it to be tested under a variety of conditions. Factory testing is very limited in what it can do, and it's simply no substitute for on-site use.

This is the kind of story that one expects to read about in the comic strips, rather than hear about them in real life.

I know of a manager who chewed out an employee because this little embedded computer he was using was on the fritz. The employee didn't feel he should be blamed so quickly, but the manager disagreed, yelling, "New computers do not just break down! If you're alone in a room with a vase and the vase breaks, you either accept responsibility for it or you prove that an earthquake occurred!"

I was reminded of this last week, when I read a PC Magazine article about the rampant customer dissatisfaction with HP and Compaq. A lot of consumers were complaining about the failure rate of their desktop computers, and while not all of them were so unfortunate, a large number were. Heck, my own HP Pavilion laptop broke down four times -- twice during the first year, and all before 15 months were up.

In fact, last summer, I did some research for my then-employer on PCB testing, speaking to both circuit board manufacturers and a professional testing firm. They all confirmed what I knew all along--namely, that boards and components are fairly reliable, but that there are any number of ways in which they can fail. In fact, there are a lot of ways in which they can slip by the testing procedures, since there's simply no way to test them completely.

The idea that the user of a new computer should be blamed for its failure--guilty until proven innocent--is simply misguided. A visceral reaction, rather than a rational one.

I'm kinda depressed today. Rats.

I've also been watching Cocoon: The Return on video. Darn, Courteney Cox looked good back then. (The link in question isn't from this movie, but it does contain some mighty nice-looking pics of Courteney.)

While I'm at it, I'd like to mention Stacey Williams as well. Another stunningly beautiful woman. What I wouldn't give to be with a gal like that.

I've just discovered SciWeb .

Okay, so I'm watching the TVLand award show, and its tribute to classic TV. This reminds me of how incredibly horrid television in my home country was. Ugh. People may complain about how insulting American TV is to one's intelligence, but despite all the dreck, there's a lot of clever and classic stuff out there.

The TVLand tribute itself is pretty darned clever, and entertaining. I've really got to hand it to them.

Some would be quick to say that this is due to economic limitations and our relative lack of technology. Balderdash. Look at the Dick van Dyke show, which was groundbreaking and clever despite ancient technology, simple sets and meager production values. No, TV back home was bad because of a lack of creativity and a general striving for mediocrity.

This is one of the reasons why I feel very uncomfortable amongst my own people. It's almost as though they're unwilling to seek excellence. Heck, I was often ridiculed for wanting to do things well.

I like my job. It's a lot of hard work, but I like it, and I like the people.

The boss is a nice guy, too -- the kind of fellow who's quick to show his appreciation. Not like a lot of other managers, who think that their job is to catch people screwing up and correct them. He actually has heart, and he wants to treat his employees well.

Did you ever have one of those days where you feel like writing something down, but can't think of anything? This is one of those days.

I plan to read about the different types of cytokines today. Maybe that'll get my brain going. Perhaps I'll also read a bit about apoptosis.

Someone very dear to me is dying from an autoimmune disease. It's so painful. So very painful.

I wish I were immune to the pain.

Cheryl Holdridge was so cute. At least, when she was a Mouseketeer. Based on what little I've seen, she started to lose some of her appeal as she left her teens.