Darnedest World

Rebellious Views and Brutal Honesty from a Happy Whiner

[darnedestworld]

Civilisation: Taboos

This week’s post is a shout out to all the brazen champions I admire. People like Jim Sterling, the Lonely Island, and many modern comedians, etcetera etcetera. Because they fight taboos. Taboos are a curse upon humanity.

They’re everywhere, in your average, First World, ‘civilised’ setting. An easy example is the great artefact of the Victorian Era: the taboo against sexuality. Things are finally starting to get better on that front, but it’s still risky to bring up any sexual subject in a ‘normal’ conversation. That’s considered normal. Such topics make people uncomfortable. But why?

There isn’t, as far as I know and am concerned, a sufficient reason for this. Sexuality is an incredibly vital part of the survival of our species, and plays a great role in both physical and mental health. Knowing everyone’s opinion on the weather is hardly as important as assuring that everyone is as comfortable as they can be in their sex life, and exchanging information which may very well prove instrumental to a (new or old) healthy relationship.

Of course, that is not the only relevant taboo. There are many more we thank the Victorian Era for, but in general, I’d also like to point controversiality out as one. Expressing any opinion, or coining any theory, which opposes the established beliefs and opinions of the present company, is risqué. If it opposes those of a larger community you are a part of, it is often not met well at all.

I think this is all very bad for everyone. If someone has a theory, or an opinion, they should be able to voice it and receive reasonable, harmless feedback. Why? Because the alternative is always worse. The alternative is that that person is afraid of repercussions, and keeps these thoughts to themselves, which means information is not shared. Information that is probably important, as especially such ‘risky’ trains of thought are often the ones providing fresh perspectives and new insights.

Sure, we wouldn’t like to hear that, for example, this one person has little faith in democracy, and would rather see an anarchy, or a monarchy. That’s because hypothetical ‘we’ (work with me on this even if you don’t fit the description) like democracy much better and would rather avoid anything that could lead to the loss of our precious system. The thing is, if such a stray line of thought could indeed bring about such change, there is probably good reason for it. We should always be open to feedback and especially to new perspectives. We should always stand ready to criticise and to improve.

I think we should work together to diminish taboos, and create environments in which everyone can share all of their thoughts. What about you?

[darnedestworld]

Pet Peeves: Volume Chaos

Do you ever open up a game and instantly regret having your headphones on? Yeah, you had everything nicely balanced, had Skype under control with your master control - the system volume - but then this bratty little upstart of a freshly installed game thinks it deserves ALL THE VOLUME and summarily bombards your poor, unprepared eardrums with a load of decibels. Volume in software sorely needs standardisation. (Not to mention loudness)

It shouldn’t be too much of a problem, right? We can measure volume in dB, or decibels. Decibels measure only a difference to a reference volume, but this reference volume can be part of the standard too. For example, you can use dB SPL, which stands for deciBel Sound Pressure Level. This is a common way to express the volume of sound in the world. Alternatively, you could go for something like dBm, which uses 1 milliwatt as reference value, and may be more appropriate for speakers and headsets.

Just as much as the level, though, thought should also go into the freedom to divert from that default. Sometimes, try as you may, you just can’t poke a volume setting into the desired lowness without hitting the actual 0 and killing your sound entirely, while other times it just won’t go loud enough. Where we should set a standard volume, we should also set a standard min and max multiplier for this volume.

A standard could then look like this:

The default output volume of any software should be around 60 dB SPL. A user should be able to easily scale the volume down to 0 dB SPL before the sound is truly eliminated, and should equally be able to raise the volume to 100 dB SPL.

This should not only go for programs, but also for operating systems themselves, In My Humble Opinion. By the way, 0 dB SPL is the softest sound a human can hear (approximately) and 100 dB SPL is the last stop before you start getting into ear-related health and safety issues.

Seems easy enough, right? Well, go tell the world if you think so. A simple Google search does not turn up such a standard. There are standards for videos on YouTube, for cinematic trailers, for radio stations, but nothing concrete and accepted-looking for software or even just games. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to launch into an overly loud cinematic again, having to choose between missing the cinematic so I can rush into the menu for the sound settings, or seeing the cinematic but not hearing anything else until it’s done.

Let’s tell the world to standardise volume. Maybe in ten years we can start complaining about the need to standardise loudness, too.

[darnedestworld]

Civilisation: The Unable Judge and the Destructive Bill

Look at me. Now look at this. Now look back at me. I’m holding a gavel. I would like to use it to bash some sense into the heads of those responsible for modern day justice. Now I’m writing a blog. Didn’t need any Old Spice though, I never broke a sweat. Ladies and gentlemen, don’t demand what’s not there, and don’t throw a hissy fit when you don’t get it.

(Inb4 RKO outta nowhere by Old Spice guy. Excuse me while I move to write the rest of this in my ad-proof bunker.)

“So, mr. Wise Guy, what would you have done differently?” Thank you for asking, Me. In that judge’s position, I would have scolded the prosecution, and questioned this waste of precious court time on someone that is clearly not a crook, let alone a threat. There are certain things I would expect a judge to notice, if not look for, when preparing for a case:

The man’s intentions were completely legal.

He acted out of a basic need for survival, because he didn’t have a lot of money in the first place.

His mistake was understandable.

He only caught one fish.

He cooperated fully in the legal procedures.

Taking note of these things, what person in their right mind would decide: “This person owes the state a fine and letting him put forth a minor compromise to actually be able to pay it is unacceptable and warrants jail time for him.” ?

There are two major sores here that I wish to discuss. The first one is the matter of the judge. As someone who intends to champion the virtue of Nuance, one who appreciates the wisdom and insight of taking multiple perspectives, I have to ask myself: so why did this judge take this course of action?

The answer that immediately comes to mind is precedent. If this passes once, others could use it as an example, and there might (awfully stupid as this sounds) be a rush of bad eggs pretending to mistake their catches so they can get away with one or two smallmouth basses at a time. Yeah, it’s stupid, because no two cases are the same, and that should factor in in court, but as far as I know, judges do not generally have the time to mull every case over carefully. Therefore, we could place the blame with a combination of workload stress and the need to maintain ironclad, easily referenced rules.

Okay, so it wasn’t all on the judge, though they still could have at least accepted the man’s compromise. Either way, my opinion remains that this is a problem, and this kind of rushed, uneducated decision making persists far too much. Still, you might argue, the man really only spent one day in jail and paid up to a hundred dollars himself. Eh, yeah, mostly because he was bailed out. But this brings me to the other major problem: they made him pay in money.

Look at the case again: the man is unemployed and goes fishing because it’s a better option for him than paying for a simple meal. Cost of living is very much a thing in this day and age, and while one isn’t generally threatened with starvation in the First World, it’s ironically easy to get stuck. You’ll be too busy understanding all the bills and forms (unemployment isn’t simple either) and too broke paying your debts to stand a chance at becoming useful to society again. Our way of life prevents well-meaning luckless ones from contributing in the long run. And if you ask me, there is nothing good about that.

People need to realise the crushing effect of the destructive bill, as opposed to a constructive bill. The latter is an agreed exchange of money that keeps the economy going and rewards effort. The former only serves to prolong the problem that they’re tied into in the first place. And what do we do if a destructive bill doesn’t get paid? We jail the person or take away all their stuff. How’s that for support towards a productive life? Say goodbye to your desk, now get back to writing applications!

It really sickens me, and I pray that in time, people will learn not to demand that which is not there, let alone to make a fuss over the obvious response.

Keep using those brains. They’re the best things about us.

[darnedestworld]

Philosophish: Assumptions

Hello world! Sorry for the pause, I’ve not been getting my original good writing moments (late evening) due to a shift in gaming activity. Life is dynamic and wonderful but I do feel committed to this, and I promise to post at least once every week (provided I am physically capable).

Anyway, I’ve recently had a few discussions about assumptions, and age, and experience, and I feel like it’s an interesting thing to talk about. I believe that assumptions are essential to the human race. Let’s talk about that. (shameless GMM ripoff omg)

Assumptions. They’re everywhere. When I leave my home with my laptop bag, making my way to the station, I am assuming the trains will do their job and that work is waiting for me rather than, say, a steaming pile of burnt office. Still, either of those assumptions could turn out bad, but it’s their probability that makes them work: most of the time, it’ll go over without a hitch, and that’s what makes heading out in the first place worth it.

Call that a cheap shot? I can go big. Science is an assumption. All of science, yeah. It’s an interconnected, giant web of many assumptions, the most important ones thankfully being pretty thought out and tested. Still, there is no true certainty in the end. There’s only high probability, and even that probability we guesstimate is based on other assumptions.

Let’s go into experience. Experience is the assumptions you gather as you age and live. Your experience tells you how safe it is to hit the streets, depending on how often that’s gone well or badly for you, and how much you’ve seen of it going well or badly for those around you. Your experience gives you an idea of how reliable each of your skills is, based on how often they’ve served you well or let you down. Or turned around, and deserted you. (I feel meme-y today, sue me.)

It should be noted, though, that assumptions are also dangerous. For example, when an archetypical USA cop shoots a black guy because he ‘looked suspicious’, and that guy turns out to be innocent. So that experience you build up so diligently through the years can stab you in the back.

This leads me into the next little subject of discrimination. Which, I am sorry to say, oh social justice warriors or whoever else feels #triggered, is again just assumptions. That means discrimination is essential to our survival. Now excuse me as I go find my bomb shelter and disappear until I have been forgotten again.

No, but seriously, here’s a scenario. Let’s assume that in our hypothetical city “Citsy”, 80% of shootings is carried out by African immigrants. (This is all hypothetical, I’m making up random extremes. By the way, did you know that 48% of all statistics is made up?) Meet Bertus, a middle-aged guy that barely got through school well enough to qualify for a badge. Just a cop on the beat. Bertus has lived here for decades, and his experience tells him that most dangerous situations involve people of coloured skin, which fits our statistic. He sees such a person with a bulge in their pocket that could potentially be a gun, who knows. Bertus does the only thing that feels right, and draws his weapon, calling out for the man to stick ‘em up. The man freaks out, reaching for his pocket, and is shot down. Turns out he was just going for his phone because at the time he was just wondering if it might have been stolen in that alley he just went through, or something. Can we blame Bertus? That’s not that easy. The man is not exactly the brightest, but local police regulations say he’s smart enough, and all he has to go by is what a gun-bulge looks like and his experience.

That is not to say it was right, of course, but in such a volatile place as Citsy, Bertus’s reactions have probably saved a few lives or at least prevented some wounds over his years in service. Nothing is certain, all we can do is guess, and we cannot demand absolute certainty when it comes to making important calls. That’s why being leader is so bloody difficult and thankless, you have to make big guesses and deal with the consequences.

So, incidentally, what can we do about things like these? Well, I hope I made it obvious enough. If you want a more rational and reasonable police force, you need higher recruitment standards. That means more highly educated men and women, but those cost more money. We can’t always get our perfect ethics, I’m afraid.

The conclusion throws back to my previous ‘Philosophish’ post, which I will probably end up referring to many times in the future. It’s a matter of balance. A human being needs to assume, because we cannot act without assuming. That’s something we should accept, balance, rather than demanding an extreme amount of ethics or functionality. Either extreme is unreasonable and will result in trouble.

My hope is that in time, the human race will learn this, and understand their leaders better when the next ‘half-assed’ compromise is passed into law. I hope that people will appreciate compromises for their realism and compassion, and refuse the thoughtless, destructive extremes of some other politicians.

We should discriminate/assume, but discriminate/assume with care.

[darnedestworld]

Pet Peeves: Out of the cold, wide open... into infernal heat

Does this bother you too? It’s mildly cold outside, nothing terrible, but enough to warrant a coat. You’re comfortable in your proper clothing, making your way, and you enter a building. Immediately, you are blasted with heat from the central heating, you’re going to be sweating like a horse, you feel instantly slowed and sapped, and with some luck, you’re not about to get to hang your coat either.

Offices. Schools. Universities. Stations. Trains. Buses. Pretty much anywhere that’s somewhat public or standardised seems to adhere to some kind of overzealous standard for the indoor temperature. Sure, it’s nice to be comfortable, but when you leave home dressed for cold weather anyway, it just seems excessive. Nobody’s going to arrive in nothing but a shirt and shorts. Wake up people.

This is a thing that bothers me greatly, and has done so for many years already. I’m not sure if I was the same in the past before I was a student... perhaps my sensitivity to temperature change is a thing of recent development. But these days, it sure kills me. I can be headed for work with the stars aligned, motivation and health lined up (which is a rare occasion) and planning all the productivity I’ll put out... and upon entry of said offices, immediately slump into a semi-molten lump of agony. I’ll bet there are many that cope better, but surely I’m not the only one, right?

So, I’m really wondering why this is happening. Not my side of the problem, that probably fits a bunch of diagnoses of which one might be right. Feel free to suggest things though, it might be important. No, here, in this post, I am mostly wondering why the heating has to be so generous on a somewhat-chilly day. It costs more energy, and it’s not like there’s a wardrobe where everyone leaves their coat and/or sweater. In office, that kind of works, but on a train? Nah. You’ll be back out in the cold of the platform in minutes.

My best bet, sadly, is that there is just one simple standard for the temperature, and the people in charge of this matter in the respective building are not flexible / dynamic / entitled / confident enough to adapt to the current weather. Perhaps there is a conservative reasoning behind it all, perhaps it takes too long to correct the temperature if the weather turns foul and people actually need a blast of heat. One can never be too safe...? One should always be ready for the next surprise blizzard...? Either way, in summary, I think management is being lazy and ignorant about it.

But that’s just my guess. I’d like to know your take on all this. Are you as vulnerable to the immediate climate as I? Are you familiar with this strange contrast between outdoors and indoors? Do you know more about this curious policy that seems to be the source of my agony? I look forward to your reactions!

Stay frosty, and don’t forget, only you can prevent uncomfortable heating settings at home.

[darnedestworld]

Miscellaneous: Gingers

So a friend quipped that I should write about gingers being the master race. Now, the easy response is to laugh it off. Screw that.

Let’s see what we have to work with. Gingers:

Are said (jokingly, of course, thankfully) to possess no soul.

Characteristically have pale skin and freckles.

Have ginger hair.

Suffer from a bunch of health risks.

http://www.livescience.com/39095-redhead-health-risks.html

Are more receptive to pain and less to knockout drugs.

Okay, at first sight, they don’t have a lot going for them. Though there are also some things floating around about health advantages they would have. That’s pretty cool.

There’s one major pro I’m seeing here, myself: they get attention.

Of all... hair-races? (There’s probably a good term for this but I cannot be hindquartered to go find out.) They are talked about the most. I’d put blondes in second place, but they’re mostly just known for being dumb, and that meme seems to have dried up by now. Besides, you generally won’t be called out on being blonde. But people will notice ostentatiously if you are ginger. It’s like a fancy boy scout badge: maybe not functional or terribly impressive, but nonetheless, noteworthy.

There is no such thing as bad publicity, after all.

Updates

So it turns out gingers have even more going for them! List time~

The ability to generate Vitamin D in low light circumstances.

Increased tolerance to electrical pain (but decreased when it comes to fire, ironically.)

[darnedestworld]

Philosophish: Balance

So I wanted to kick the blog off with an easy one. This is one of my most solid musings, I settled on this conclusion many years ago and have never since doubted it. The core is as simple as it gets: Everything is a balance.

And when I say that, I mean absolutely, bloody, and seriously everything. Keep your eyes open for it when you go about your life, you’ll see it all the time: too much of either side of anything screws you over. I mean, hell, you can actually be too nice. I had to experience that for myself to believe it. It should be obvious that you can also not be nice enough, though not nearly enough people appreciate that limit.

You can eat too little or too much of anything. Proteins, vitamins, carbohydrates, fat, salt, etcetera. That also dictates how I think about food and health: The only certainty is that you should have a varied diet, and never overdo any one aspect. (Note that this assumes a normal body to begin with. I’m sure there are people out there who have specific dietary needs because of genetics or what-have-you.)

Let’s try some tougher ones. Surely you can’t be on time too much? Of course you can! If you’re always ridiculously punctual, you’ll build expectations. One day you’ll be delayed, whether you like it or not, and who knows how people –including yourself – might overreact. Not to mention the mentality it breeds. I’ve only learned to appreciate this recently, but it’s important to be able to think flexibly and go off-plan instantly. And that’s what others want to see in you too: a balance of discipline and flexibility.

Okay, well, can you be too pretty? Absolutely. Imagine if you were indisputably the most beautiful human on Earth. You wouldn’t be left alone for a second. The cameras would devour you, and I hear celebrities don’t universally enjoy that.

Too smart? Ironically, nobody is smart enough to know the answer (As far as I know; That’s double irony) but there’s enough fiction to suggest that unlocking all the secrets of the universe will result in a fate involving any combination of madness, despair, suicide and transcendence into pure energy. Or you might just get bored because there’s nothing more to learn or try.

I could go on, but I feel like this is getting long enough. Let’s turn it into a game. I challenge everyone out there reading this to find something that isn’t a balance. Right now, I believe I will be able to deflect them all, but if it turns out I can’t, then that will be a great learning experience too!

Or perhaps you’d rather agree with me than rise to the challenge. Maybe you can relate to this, and there’s a vital balance in your life that you’d like to tell the world about. You’re on the internet, share away! I’ll be happy to read your thoughts as you have read mine.

Ah, isn’t life wonderful when you enjoy learning?

Updates

So quickly, I’m getting great counter-arguments! The best one so far is most definitely wasps. I... really don’t know what purpose they serve. Just get rid of those. Stupid wasps.

Nope. Turns out even wasps have a purpose. Plenty of purpose. Have a Wikipedia link.

[darnedestworld]

Launch Day

Oh boy. Excitement all over the place. Overwatch is out. I’m getting a legit job. (part-time but only because I don’t have more time to spare right now) I’m making a blog! *ahem* I really wanted to get something on here to mark the moment of origin, of my ranty blog where I shall pick and hack away at the fundamentals of our world that so many people sustain, yet that I hate. Soon I’ll start posting actual posts. Look forward to it!