Monkey Brains

In a monkey's head, there are monkey brains!

[tincanjello]

A Whiff

I have a sensitive nose, or so people tell me.  I don’t think anything of it, sometimes it’s more of a curse than a blessing.  As a kid, I complained about things that I unconsciously picked up from the smell.  If I pick up even the faintest smell of garbage going bad, rotting fish, vomit, or anything unsanitary, it would freak me out.  And growing up in Taiwan, those were very REAL concerns, a survival mechanism.  So anyway, my nose is sensitive, and that can be helpful sometime.

When I walk by or walk in to a restaurant, I can pretty much assess the everything from the smell.  The scariest restaurants are ones where neither the outside nor the inside smells like food.  These are the retort / nuke everything restaurants that don’t actually cook anything.  Even if food comes out in to the dining area, it doesn’t smell like anything because everything about it has been cooked to death, nuked to death, and it’s pretty much just a pile of soulless, flavorless, useless dead things.  Those types of things don’t smell like anything, so that is the most dangerous kind of restaurant, because it is in fact, NOT a restaurant.  No cooking happens, no real food comes out.. so wtf is anyone doing there?  Evacuate!

There are some universal good signs.  These are elementals..  components that indicate you may be in the presence of something great.

1. Seared meats.  That’s always a good thing.  There is a precise smell of meat a the perfect sear.  Sear a bunch of meat a home, and learn that smell.  It’s very distinct, and I can pick it up from miles away.  Learn it.  Identify it.  Go near it.  Eat it.

2. Wines, alcohol.  Not to drink, but used in cooking.  When you can smell the wine in cooking, and it’s being handled sensitively enough that you can still recognize it as wine, there is a high chance the food is going to be good.  Go in to any great restaurant, and I can guarantee you it will smell like wine.  Much wine will be imbibed by the guests, and most times you can already smell it from the outside.

3. Fresh herbs and produce.  This is somewhat rare, but some restaurants smell like raw herbs.  It’s faint, but you can pick it up.  And of course, the cooking is going to use lots of fresh herbs.  You probably won’t see any dried herbs in any dish.  Sometimes you can smell fresh produce too.  Fresh celery, fresh leeks.  Those are great signs.  You don’t want to just smell celery though.  You need to learn what “fresh” produce smells like, as in when the produce is healthy and raw.  It should be vibrant and full of life.  It’s like a switch for me.  When I smell it, I feel blessed, loved, and I smile.

4. Fresh spices.  This is a hard one.  You go to an Indian curry place and just get bombarded with spices right.  That’s not what I’m talking about.  When it’s fantastic, even in an Indian curry place, you’d be able to pick apart the spice bomb to its individual elements.  When spice is handled with skill and care, it doesn’t just become a mush of noise and mystery.  It’s supposed to retain definition, stay sharp.  It’s like smelling flowers, or freshly cut fruits.  I used Indian cooking as an example, but this pertains to so much of any cooking.  Sausages?  99% of humanity has not tasted fresh sausage.  It’s not supposed taste like it’s filled with “goodness” that you can’t identify.  That’s just white noise.  Great sausage with very clearly tell you what’s in it, and what is going on.  Like, in full color HD with surround sound.  IMAX, even.

5. Mystery.  From earlier observations, you may think that mystery is bad.  I think if everything is jumbled together and becomes unidentifiable, that’s bad.  That’s not mystery, it’s just chaos and anarchy.  Mystery is actually something precise.  It’s something you can pick out and clearly identify as something you do not know.  When I walk in to a restaurant, and can identify 6 things in the air, their temperature, and what’s being done to them... but find 2, 3 things where I’m like, wtf??  That’s jackpot.  I’m eating there.  If the whole place is a mystery, but I can separate them into distinct things and say, ok, there are 6 things but it’s all a mystery to me.  That’s probably a jackpot too.  It’s all unknown, but not chaos.  That shows promise.  It’s intrigue, or enchantment.  If it’s just a sludge of chaos and mystery food stuffs, get out.  Egress, egress.

Smell is very convenient for me, and very helpful.  I’m surprised not everyone smells in as much detail as I do.  I mean, all humans smell right..  and I don’t think I’ve particularly trained my nose (ok, other than going to culinary school).  Aren’t all our noses trained?  Well, I have to admit though, sometimes when I smell people cooking at home, I quietly make an assessment.  Sometimes I come across excellently cooked food that I’m quite certain would beat 90% of all restaurants out there.  Most restaurants are not only un-great..  they’re very, very bad.  They’re covered in chaos, anarchy, and self deception.  I mean, they serve what doesn’t really pass as food, and they’re called restaurants, so plenty of deception there.  Train your nose.  It will guide you to real, good food.

BTW, the word “fresh” is overused.  Yelp, Google reviews, everywhere.  People are like “the food tasted fresh”, “the sushi was fresh”.  Eff you right.  Eff all these people.  People do not know what fresh means.  Most people’s palate is completely destroyed, and of course their nose is effectively not there.  People eat saw dust, garbage straight out of the compost bin, chew on cardboard, drink battery fluid mixed with antifreeze, and give 4, 5 star reviews.  It’s sad, because part of it is not the guest’s fault.  Well prepared food that is actually fresh, AND also tastes fresh is extremely rare.  It’s technically difficult to do, and it’s also more expensive.  So, ya, people don’t know fresh.  How can they if they’ve never come in to contact with fresh.  I think you can use how many times the word fresh was used in a review to rate its level of BS.  And on the cooking side man...  we need to provide more fresh.  People need to know.

[tincanjello]

How to buy a cooking knife:

Of the things I got really good at through life, knives are definitely up there.  I sharpen them, I cook with them at a serious level..  so I thought I'd share this knowledge so everyone wins.

1. The shape:

This might take some experimenting to figure out.  As you may know, kitchen knives come in many different shapes.  The main one is probably going to be a: Sabatier, German, Gyutou (Japanese), or maybe a Santoku (Japanese).  

- the gyuto

These are SHAPES, so it's easy to try them out if you buy a super cheap version that has the representative form factors.  That way, you can try before you make the actual purchase.  Other knives are still important, but do not need the fit of your main knife.  I've used German, gyutou, and santoku types.  The German blade is thick, strong, and heavy.  It takes some getting used to, but can be used for just about anything.  Japanese blades are thinner and very light.  Like with a gyutou, you can butcher some, but I probably won't want to crush bones with it for fear of chipping.  Generally you want to be nice to Japanese blades because they're expensive and sensitive.  Japanese knives are all the rage now though, some 90% of my instructors at culinary school were using Japanese gyutous, and could not stop grinning when cutting. (no they weren’t possessed by the knife)

2. The metal:

This is definitely one aspect people get in to.  The metallurgy of the blade.  There's the basic, is it stain resistant or not, and the rest is about hardness.  The hint is this: harder does not equal better.  Super hard blades are really, really hard.  So they take time to sharpen, and while they hold the edge for a long time, are prone to chipping.  So don't use the Rockwell scale as a no brainer measure for the quality of the metal.  The best blades are chameleons, behaving like elastic soft metal at times, but hold an edge like hard metal.  For example, Japanese blades forged in the style of "kiri" is actually hard metal for the edge, sandwiched between softer metal to get the best of both worlds.  “honyaki” on the other hand, accomplishes the same if not better, with just one type of metal. (so it’s 3-5x more expensive)  For comparison, the “honyaki” technique is derived from samurai sword forging techniques.

- different sections of a honyaki blade are heated to different temperatures to negotiate the hard/soft balance, creating a characteristic wavy pattern where the temperature division occurs.

3. The SET:

The knife can't exist by itself.  You need to pair it with the basic set.  You will need a honing stone, and a proper cutting board.  Honing or sharpening stones are a world of its own.. and many people spend decades pursuing that hobby.  But essentially it can be simplified to: you need a rough one, and a smooth one.  If you want just one, there are middle of the road ones too.  But you would fix the chips and physical deformities of the edge with the rough one, and sort of "sketch" in your ideal edge shape.  Then you go in with the smoother stone to refine it and define it more.  The blade will cut significantly better with just the rough stone, but with the smooth stone, you can achieve razor sharpness.  If you get just the middle one, you'll need to make sure to keep your blades in check so you don't get major deformities that would require a rough stone to fix.  Which means sharpening often.  If you follow the classic routine of sharpening every day before starting to cook, then just a middle one might be good, or even just the smooth stone.  But you MUST sharpen.  No metal will hold its edge forever.  Besides, the knife will hate you. (like, seriously)  Cutting boards are easier, you just need something that is larger than the blade.  If the board is smaller than the blade..  well, that doesn't even make any sense does it. (but it does happen)  Just get a big one.  You'll be thankful when you break down fish.

4. Cutting technique:

There are many ways to get super fancy with cutting stuff.  Don't worry about showing off, just concentrate on your relationship with the knife, and the produce.  That's cooking.  Making flower shaped carrots..  a bit less so.  The most important think to keep in mind, is WHY the knife cuts.  A knife is not a wedge.  Its mechanism for splitting things is not chop force, like an axe.  

So, swinging the knife down on an onion, or by applying downward pressure, is wrong.  That's how you use and axe.  The knife cuts because at the microscopic level, the edge looks like a saw.  It's a teeeny tiny, microscopic saw.  And just like a saw, it the jagged edges need to run across the food item, which means you need to SLIDE the knife.  It's mechanically designed to be a SLICING implement, not CHOP.  Yes, people say CHOP onions in common parlance, but don't interpret that as technique.  It's not just for aesthetic, the food actually tastes different.  Like leeks, if you chop it and crush it, it all starts smelling like grass and guess what?  It will also taste like the lawn mower because guess how the lawn mower cuts grass?  The only thing that could benefit from crushing is garlic, because it cases the chemical reactions that causes the garlicy flavor.

5. Soul match:

You might laugh, but there is such a thing.  You must always go and hold the knife you are thinking of buying.  If it's the one, you will know immediately.  But it might not be, and if you mail order without checking in person, you may be in for a few rounds of returns.  You are going to pour your soul into the knife, so it MUST BE THE ONE.  Be extra discerning, and trust your gut sense.  Not only will you pour your soul in to the knife, it must flow through to the food, and then to your guest.  The knife should not be a bottleneck, it should be a part of you, and you and the knife will act as a single voice.  Hold the knife, and your soul will know much quicker than your mind.  Once your soul and the knife has made a pact, your mind probably won't be able to undo it.  Hold the knife, feel the connection.  Put it down, and does it feel like a part of your soul is missing?  Pick it up again, how does that feel?  This is some serious hocus pocus stuff, but despite this being wholly unexplainable regardless of how I analyze it... uh it just goes ahead and happens anyway.  And it's a very useful sign so take advantage of it.  This is different from being enchanted by a fancy looking knife tho, so beware of that. (enchant is different from connect because with being enchanted, you are slave to the enchantress, and that's no way to cook)

- The cursed sword of Muramasa

Here are a few knives I can recommended full heartedly off the top of my head: Misono UX 10... it's just a classic.  Hyper popular, might even be hard to get a hold of one.

Any Masamoto with VG steel.  This is my partner in crime, so I'm biased.  Easy to sharpen, light, and is not a dainty rich man's jewelry knife. (yes, they exist)  It's a fighter, in the trenches, tough.

Avoid high carbon steels since unless you're careful to always wipe the blade after use (as is traditional with Japanese cutting technique) it may discolor within a few minutes of use.  The discoloration can turn in to serious rust quite quickly.  High carbon can be sharpened to "oh, it's Japanese crazy town again" sharpness, but they just require lots TLC.  If you don't mind the challenge, and are confident in your ability to spiritually bond with the knife, this might be the way to go.  It will behave like a samurai sword because it's essentially the same edge.

And one last thing..  I'm writing this in case you want to get a serious knife.  Which assumes you're intent on doing some serious cooking. (not I'll help slice some tomatoes hun level, which you should help with, but may not require expensive cutlery) That involves serious knife skills.  Serious knives are unforgiving.  If your skills are lacking, that's what the product is going to tell you.  You must be the judge of your knife skills.  Have you truly outgrown your set of knives?  Do you have the skills to converse with a metal being?  And do you cook with enough soul to imbue your new knife with a soul?  Nobody will judge you but your food.  So please convene with your food and your current cast of knives to see if the time has come.  Then go order one from www.korin.com. (Korin has a special service where they will give your knife either a left or right handed edge, in cases that matters.. and it makes a huge difference!)

[tincanjello]

Morrigan Aensland Lore

Morrigan is a character from the game Vampire Hunter, or Darkstalkers in the US.  Along with Dimitri the vampire, she is one of the protagonists of the Darkstalkers universe..  though not much of any of this is touched upon in the gameplay.  The gameplay is a typical fighting game, more in the vein of Marvel, with massive combos and special ending moves that have near full screen FX.

Morrigan is the adopted daughter of Belial.  That’s a big deal because Belial, in real life mythology (wait, so is it real?) is quite the heavyweight.  He’s referred to as the leader of all dark beings, and sometimes even contrasted with God. (are you with God or Belial?)  So whatever the technicalities, Belial seems to be the top ranking bad guy, or at least very, very high ranking.

Morrigan herself is a succubus.  Visually, she totally has a vampire theme going, with bat wings..  actually 2 sets of bat wings, one on her back and another set on her head. (wtf?)  BUT, she is a succubus as can be seen from her outfit, which ranks somewhere between NSFW and “how does that even work”.  As a succubus, her job is to have sex with humans, where the lore surprisingly points out she is gender fluid, and to take people’s life-force.  That’s what a traditional succubus does, but succubi of the Aensland family are a bit more evolved.  If they can’t get outside to uh.. get life-force, a normal succubi would die after 2 days, Aenslandian succubi can excrete urm..  fluids, which can give them energy.  (wait, if you can excrete it, don’t you already have the...) I have no idea how any of this stuff works... and it’s kind of gross if you think about it.. surviving on your own bodily excretions..  doesn’t seem to be the most hygienic solution.  But Morrigan can do that...  yum?  There’s even a cut scene during the title intro where Morrigan has liquid dripping into her hands. (uh, so it comes from..  where?  Is that sanitary?)

There’s also this whole story about Morrigan being too powerful for her own good...  growing up, her powers would grow to the point of destroying her and a wide area around her. (like a nuke, basically)  So Belial decides to split her soul in to three..  Which sort of explains why in the game Morrigan can summon a clone, and gang up on the opponent.  Ok, that sort of makes sense, but where is the 3rd clone?  The 3rd clone was contained by Belial (ya, these mythical types do mythical things) until his death.  When Belial died, some other dude (Jedah) took over his position as the ruler of the underworld.  The new leader took Morrigan’s split spirit and gave her a body.  That was Lilith.

-she’s not exactly just a palette swap, Lilith has short hair!

Now Lilith is a succubus in actual real life mythology. (so is it real?)  During the game’s sequel, Morrigan joins with Lilith (like, spirit-merge), and becomes whole again, since now she has herself, the clone, and Lilith. (collect all 3!)  I don’t think it changed Morrigan in any way though..  you’d think she’d explode, but she’s mastered the art of not going nuclear critical I guess.

Morrigan has a strange temperament.  Throughout the series, she doesn’t seem evil at all, and seems mostly just interested in keeping entertained.  She just wants to have fun, ‘s all.  That’s great protagonist material, but maybe not so good as head of the Aensland clan.  She’s also a succubus, so seems to be able to make friends and get along with humans very well.  To get their life-force?  It’s hard to tell, but throughout the series, she seems to genuinely care for some humans, not in a romantic way, but an altruistic way, to just look out for their welfare.  Of course, as a protagonist, she can’t be helplessly evil.  She seems “nice” in many cases, and friendly and approachable beyond doing so just to get your life-force.  Not very demon-like, or even succubus-like.  I think the creators worked really hard to bend the worldview to make her morally acceptable.

Dimitri the vampire, on the other hand I think was conceptualized as the main protagonist, but I think Morrigan overtook his popularity.  Dimitri is a vampire, and he looks terrifying at times, has a cold, conceited attitude..  and my impression of him is that he’s just not very nice.  He’s fine being a vampire doing demon-like things... but that’s about it.  He’s not friendly.  I don’t want to meet him or any of his friends.  So..  just not very good protagonist material.  His condescending comments about every encounter doesn’t help too.  It makes you wonder why the creators made him so... unlikeable, while they went so out of their way to make Morrigan so affable.

- I am Dimitri, will you be my --NOPE NOPE NOPE.

The one major aspect that I don’t see explained is her ability to fight.  Why does she fight, and why is she good at it?  With many other monsters, the traits are built in.  Vampires have insane reflex and strength.  Automatic good fighter material.  That just doesn’t apply to a succubus.  Sexy, friendly, excretes life supporting bodily fluids that she CONSUMES..  k, that establishes she is extra on a new level.  She fights because it’s fun.  Ok, take your horse excrement and go sell it somewhere else.

-This is FUN!!!

Her latest incarnation is in Marvel vs Capcom, Infinite, where she is very much at the center of the story pretty much the whole way.  She’s in full 3D, and as everything becomes more realistic, it progressively becomes questionable how her outfit works at all.  I mean, her pair of -bodyparts- are about to fall out while she’s standing.  I guess the rest is magic.  She’s a demon, so physics probably works differently for her and other entities not from the normal dimension.  Maybe those aren’t even clothing, but just a part of her skin..  an anatomical organ that’s biologically stuck to her -bodyparts-.

“Men always look at them, I don’t find them interesting at all.  They’re both a part of me.  Lilith and my clone.”

So that’s about all I know about Morrigan Aensland.  Maybe there’s more lore out there that’s been retconned in to rationalize the sequel or her subsequent showing up in other games.  She’s one of the most recognized and well liked female fighter characters.  I definitely remembered her from the one game I played with her in it.  Didn’t know any of the lore at the time though.  Just that she was so awesome she didn’t even bother walking..  just floated around.  That’s pretty insane for a fighting game character.

[tincanjello]

The Depth of Cursed Objects

As a continuation from my last post, I thought a bit more about cursed objects.  As old as the history of man kind, there have been cursed objects.  Physical objects that get associated with supernatural powers that cause morbidity or mortality.  I haven’t knowingly come across one, and unfortunately I believe these things are becoming rarer every day.

A cursed object can be artificially created, or be created by chance.  A curse can be placed on an object by a person(s), which may or may not be directed at a target.  I tend to believe that these curses are conditional, or at least have some basic form of a trigger mechanism.  If the conditions are set right, the curse strikes once and dissipates.  If the conditions are wrong, ie unaccounted edge cases etc, then an object may keep firing, triggering at events that were originally not intended. (buggy curses)  A natural curse may happen if a person’s malevolent intentions “rub off” onto an object through extended use, death, extraordinary amount of malintent, or an otherwise notable event.  It stands to reason that these curses are not targeted, and would curse indiscriminately by contact or proximity.

As can be clearly deduced from the manufacturing process of cursed objects, these things take time and effort to produce.  Cursed object production obviously hasn’t entered the age of industrial mass production.  These are usually hand crafted, artesan made unique pieces of work, on the polar opposite end of the spectrum of Bigmacs and McNuggets.

On the other hand, objects (to hold a curse) has obviously gone through the industrial revolution, mass production, and as a result mass consumption.  More and more items are produced at a faster and faster rate, causing the probability of encountering a cursed object to plummet.  And with the advent of FB and other social media, the need for an indirect attack/revenge on a target via a curse is less in demand, as a hostile wall post or comment is only a click away.  With internet aggression so accessible, the incentive to go through the trouble of making a cursed item is on its way to extinction.

During this time of great threat to cursed objects, there must be a way to increase its numbers to a safe or sustainable population.  One possible approach is the “splitting” hypothesis.  If a cursed object can be split into multiple pieces without jeopardizing the curse, then the global population can be easily doubled or tripled.  With larger items (such as a cursed hospital), the object may be split into thousands of pieces and enjoyed individually.  Next, further research must be conducted to test the transferability of curses.  With an indiscriminatory proximity / contact triggered curse, it is theoretically possible that perhaps some of these items are able to curse other objects that are placed within range.  During the transfer or duplication, if the originating curse is not diminished, or at least the curse remains basically in tact, then accelerated cursed item production is possible.  Unfortunately, object-object cursing has not been confirmed in either laboratory or natural settings at this time.

As research into managing the global population of cursed objects progresses, accounting must be done for the global curse volume.  This is to understand the nature of curses: whether they decay with time or extinguished with blessings of equal/higher power, what the rate of global decline in curse is (due to trigger once curses), what the current curse production rate is.  These important questions must be answered in order understand the extent of curse shortage and its implication on the global community.

[tincanjello]

Let’s think about haunted objects

I’m very interested in haunted objects.  I don’t want one, but the existence of a thing, usually fairly inert looking, that is deemed as haunted is quite strange.  If you look at the more well known haunted objects, they don’t necessarily “look” haunted.  Their cursed nature is not manifested visually.  Here’s a couple: Old dolls - well, there’s a lot of these in every culture haunted chair - there’s a couple of these.  Basically the sitter dies after some delay. haunted paintings - these may look scary.  Usually owner dies and the picture gets passed on to someone else, who also dies.

These are just starters, and ones known in the US.  On a global scale I’m sure there are way more locally known haunted objects.  I think these things can be distinguished into haunted objects, which are ghost related, and cursed objects, which cause people associated with the object to die, or sustain physical damage.  Worst case, they can be haunted AND cursed, causing psychological damage and ultimately causing death or injury.

There are also haunted places, like bridges or hospitals.  I don’t really know of any cursed places where merely traversing through a specific space causes harm.

With the objects, there are some patterns.  First, something bad happens to the owner, or someone related to the owner. (immediate family etc)  Next, the items are passed from generation to generation, or from owner to owner, meaning the items have existed for a very long time.  There’s some history attached to the item, and it’s usually over a very long time. (and not easy to verify)

The backstories also seem to have a pattern.  The haunt or curse usually starts a long time ago.  It doesn’t start in 2013, but during the civil war or some other well known historical event.  There is a person that the haunt or curse originates from, usually the original owner.  They die a horrible death, and that stress is transferred onto the object, hence the curse or haunt.

What I’m thinking is this.  Although it is possible to use modern knowledge and scientific sensibilities to disprove curses and haunts, I’m thinking that we might be able to identify more objects that could be classified as haunted or cursed.  My belief is that with a little critical thinking, I would be able to point out more things that could meet the criteria.  Perhaps we are living among a multitude of cursed and haunted objects without knowing.

Let’s say cursed things eventually kill the owner.  Without disputing the causality, let us look at just the correlation.  You have thing A, then you die.  According to the cursed objects tradition, there can be a pretty long delay until you die, let’s say a few years. (but less than 10 years)  Basically, an item that is closely correlated to death can be seen as cursed.  For example, many people die in hospitals.  Many living people witness death at hospitals.  Unsurprisingly, abandoned hospitals are usually deemed haunted. (you don’t hear about hospitals that become holy or blessed)  Being in a car increases your risk of death from an accident so although a car can’t be passed down generations after an accident, it makes you more cursed, than were you at home in your bathroom.  So there is this “correlation to death” aspect that creates the strong attribution.  A cigarette can be cursed, or a bottle of whiskey.  Of course, you can’t hand those things down generations.

From this view, once medical facilities become established throughout the country, and death becomes handled either through the medical, law enforcement, or funeral profession, I think death starts to become less attributable to every day things. (so, less haunted/cursed objects)  But, in places where a person may die at home, for example places where suicide is common, there may be more cursed objects than places where suicide is less common and people generally die in hospitals.  This creates the “death must not be obscured” perspective, for it to be attributable to a particular object.

There is also the fundamental fact that people eventually expire.  When an item is tracked through generations, it comes into contact with a pretty sizable population.  The mere fact that an item has survived multiple generations means that most likely, everyone from generation one have expired.  Naturally, not all their deaths would be attributed to the object, only unnatural ones or unclear ones. (which becomes more rare with advance in medicine)  If all unnatural or unclear deaths were to be attributed to items that have been handed down in the family over multiple generations, with research, I’m certain the power of cursed items will turn out to be underreported. (you could probably attribute more unnatural deaths to a particular item)

Now, focusing on the object, it’s becoming increasing rare for objects to be handed from generation to generation.  Unfortunately it’s become rare for objects to even last that long.  Electronics break, so they’re no good.  Homes are bought and sold pretty quickly, or torn down and rebuilt.  Jewelry is a possibility since they have inherent value, and don’t really break.  Surprisingly, money can be handed down generations but people don’t really see money as something to be cursed, most likely since physical cash isn’t handed down but just an abstract numerical value.  The lack of quantity of handed down objects could also mean that more can be attributed to the object. (more modern cursed items should be rated more potent)

In my family, we had a bunch of third generation stuff that we got rid of.  It was a lot of stuff, tons of it.  So let’s say if I were to attribute deaths in my family to a particular item..  which one would it be?  For one, there needs to be something that necessitates a cursed object for me to go and find one.  And next, which object would it be?  There must be some sort of filtering that takes place because it’s one object out of quite a number of things.  Perhaps an object my grandfather was very fond of, or took good care of.  Surprisingly, most actual cursed items do not look menacing, with the exception of paintings which usually look spooky.

The ingredients are set.  The emergence of a cursed item needs

object to be deemed cursed, usually handed down generations

attributable morbid or mortal events

a backstory that people can add to, as more morbid/mortal events get added to the log

In a way, it seems like cursed items become a place to store information of morbid/mortal events.  The information gets transferred via oral tradition as the items gets handed down.

From here, I’m planning on thinking about listing some possible cursed items that might not have been deemed cursed yet.  There should be a bunch of these.  And then also thinking about how to rate the potency of the curse.  I think there should be a concept of “accuracy” as represented by (morbid/mortal event) / people that had contact with the item.  Otherwise pretty much anything can have a morbid/mortal association.  A score of 1 would seem super powerful (5 person had contact with item, all 5 die), but more than 1 is hypothetically possible.  But I’ll need to put more thought into that.

[tincanjello]

Survival Strategy of Assholism

I’ve finally got some time to myself, so I contemplated, and decided to write it down.  The seed of thought was this:

People are assholes some of the time.  Other times, they are probably the most pleasant, lovely people.  But the few minutes that you unfortunately had to deal with this person, you’ve been precisely dealt their asshole time (AT).  Let’s say, regardless of their non-asshole time (NAT), if the next time you met them you were dealt AT again, this starts to form an impression.  So far, to you, this person is 100% AT, when precisely, you could have just been looking at 5% of their total time (TT), which consists of 5% AT and 90% NAT, and 5% facebook induced stupor. Of course, the correct conclusion from this is to learn the life lesson of “wow, maybe not everyone is an asshole all the time”, and learn to be nice to people, and bring out the best in others, give the benefit of the doubt.

Nothing interesting about that.  I began to think, what if, the inconsistent placement of the 5% AT within TT was a way to maintain AT while avoiding detection?  Treating assholism as an entity, its goal would be self preservation, and then to spread emotional damage to as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time.  How better to survive than to avoid detection?

It’s a simple issue of probability.  If AT is 50% of TT, the likelihood of any moment hitting AT is of course 50%.  The smaller that becomes, the less likely an encounter would hit AT.  Let us call this strategy shadow asshole (SA).  What makes this more interesting is if you contemplate multiple encounters over a prolonged period of time.  Although both the 50% AT person and a person who has adopted the SA strategy have decreasing probability of all encounters hitting AT, SA’s likelihood of continuous AT detection decreases at a much rapid rate than with the 50% strategy.

The most advanced assholes are scary to be around.  You never know when the dreaded moment will arrive.  Spontaneous, unpredictable, powerful.  The AT window is thus moved at random, or near random in the temporal space, with possible modulation of intensity. (so some instances go unnoticed)

This makes AT even more difficult to detect.  If one were to systematically try to detect a temporally stationary AT window, one merely needs to interact, or sample at a set interval, until the AT window is hit.  With a shifting AT window, each successive try would cause the AT window to shift, thus resetting the possibility space every time.  The only way to systematically encounter the AT window would be to encounter all possible temporal space at once, which in reality is not possible.

Not only is this strategy less detectable, this strategy seems to have the side effect of causing more sustained terror merely by being unpredictable.  Even though the actual AT window may be 5%, by shifting around, the observed AT window may appear much larger.  In fact, knowing that it is possible to hit an AT window at any time while not actually encountering it, arguably exerts a much higher level of terror and threat than actually encountering the AT window, thus accomplishing the secondary goal of assholism, which is to cause as much emotional damage as possible in the shortest amount of time.  Note that the terror induced is sustained, making it not only qualitatively different than momentary encounter with AT, but a substantially more powerful effect.

Thus we arrive at a ranking system by which we can rate the efficacy of AT placement strategy

AT window is small and shifts at random

AT window is small and is stationary or shows little aberration

AT window is large

AT window = TT (asshole all the fucking time)

Notice the higher ranking strategies all involve very small AT windows, which, returning to the uninteresting conclusion, means that they would have a very high percentage of NAT, and variable distribution of facebook induced stupor.  Now what if, you could just avoid the minimal AT window and just access NAT? (answer: don’t be an asshole, say thank you, say hello, say sorry, smile, be nice, show benevolence, have humility, show empathy, be a friend!)

[tincanjello]

Analysis of Thriller's lyrics

It's halloween, it's Thriller, it's time to revisit Rod Temperton.  Yeah yeah.  I actually listened to the lyrics for once and found it to be surprisingly chilling.  Minus Quincy, minus the synth bass, minus the dance..  The imagery described is pretty scar...  disturbing, even.

"You try to scream but terror takes the sound before you make it You start to freeze as horror looks you right between the eyes, You're paralyzed"

Very poetically expressed.  "Terror takes the sound before you make it", nice anthropomorphizing of terror. (correct: concepts cannot take anything because they have no hands)  "Horror looks you right between the eyes"..  feels like you almost want to say "horror looks you right in the eyes".  Guess that didn't fit with the groove.  And then you're paralyzed.  That's terrible.  What, and then it's comatose? "And no one's gonna save you from the beast about to strike"

Bad, bad, really, really bad.  So threaten.  Much bad PR. You're fighting for your life inside a killer, thriller tonight" This is a bit in the "crazy" zone.  Not only are you fighting for your life..  you are frickin' INSIDE the killer.  Well, on second thought the "inside" actually applies to the "thriller".  So you're inside a thriller that is quite killer (superlative), not inside a killer (living organism).  Still, "inside a killer" makes for a more interesting statement.

2nd verse goes pretty dormant and typical, of getting cornered and running from things.  Normal stuff.  Brief mention of an "alien" during the bridge.  Bridge ends with "This is the end of your life"  Ya, gee, thanks for the positive message.  Add that to any product and it'll fly off the shelves.  Honey Nut Cheerios..  Now this is the end of your life.

3rd verse, we get some strange drifts again. "They're out to get you, there's demons closing in on every side They will possess you unless you change the number on your dial"

OK, no iPhones back then.. but still, demons have to CALL you in order to possess you?  Make an appointment or something?

"Now is the time for you and I to cuddle close together, yeah."

Yeah.  Yeah right.  I'm not so sure that's how it works Micheal.

And finally, the famed monologue by Vincent Price.  "The funk of forty thousand years" was always the line that stood out to me.  I think they went a little overboard with the numbers.  I mean, I'm sure the intent is to evoke imagery of old tombs and bodies bringing about some old musty smell, but 40,000 years?  OK, I'm not fluent enough in world history enough to pin point what was happening 40,000 years ago. One more line from the monologue.  

"Must stand and face the hounds of hell And rot inside a corpse's shell"

Hounds of hell are cute or whatever, but rot inside a corpse's shell?  Oh man, this is kind of like being inside the killer.  But worse!  Crawling inside a decomposing body is...   Not happening. Further research revealed the true meaning of the monologue.  To me it's just and old man saying words in a spooky voice.  Turns out it means something. http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/07/02/how-to-survive-the-thriller/

[tincanjello]

A Man's Guide to Meats

Man like meats.  Me teach about meat.  Many kinds, how to eat, what cause danger.  First we talk about different kinds.  Read.  Learn. Meat Kinds Learn to identify different kinds of meat.  Chicken, pork, beef, and their different cuts.  They're confusing, but it's cool to know what exactly it is you're putting in your mouth.

This is a chicken breast.  It's usually overcooked and dry and bland tasting.  It's too thick if seasoned in one piece, so usually all the seasoning is on the outside, and the inside tastes like sawdust.  It's referred to as "white meat" because it is devoid of any flavor, character, or any reason to put it in your moth.

This "L" shaped thing is the chicken thigh and leg.  Each chicken has 2 of these.  Think fried chicken.  If you split the two segments of the "L", you get the drumstick (longer segment) and the official "thigh" (shorter segment).  It's also referred to as "dark meat" because the meat is darker, containing more myoglobin, and infinitely more flavor and juices compared to breast meat.  The thigh has more fat, well developed muscle, and connective tissue, making it a very flavorful meat to eat.

The pork chop.  The pork chop is a cross section of the rib cage, with the main eye of meat being the longissimus dorsi.  As with any meat, being cooked with the bone adds a much deeper, complex flavor to the meat.  While raw, pork tends to be much pinker compared to beef or game meat.  Wild pork (boar) has dark red meat, just like game meat or duck.  You can get trichinosis from eating raw pork, but it is virtually unheard of in developed countries.

The pork tenderloin is part of the back muscle, located right under the spine.  The meat tends to dry out quickly while cooking so overcooking is a no-no.  You usually cook the whole tenderloin and then cut to serve.

The Filet Mignon.  The Filet Mignon the smaller end of the cow's tenderloin.  It can dry out when cooking so it is recommended at rare to mid rare temps.  If you want well done, then get a ribeye or sirloin instead.  It is usually prepared by searing both top and bottom, and finishing off in the oven to control temp. (especially for thicker cuts)  It is difficult for the seasoning to get to the core, so it is preferably served with some kind of sauce so the diner can add flavor while eating.

The beef Ribeye.  Shown here is the bone-in cut.  The bone adds excellent flavor to the meat, so when it is available on the menu, ALWAYS go for the bone-in.  With more fat and connective tissue, the ribeye is arguably the most flavorful cut of beef.  As with pork chops, this cut is the same lower half of the ribcage.  In classical French cooking, the meat and connective tissue around the bone is to be removed (manchonerr).  If not, you're in luck, because the crunchy bits and pieces of meat left on the bone will be the best part of the meal.

Duck breast.  Unfortunately, not a part of the canonical American diet, duck meat is very flavorful and actually quite healthy.  Duck oil is similar to olive oil in constitution.  Duck breasts should be prepared by rendering most of the fat and crisping the outer skin, and lightly cooking everything else.  The more rare the meat, the less "ducky" is tastes.  So if you don't like gamy meats, go for rare.  Duck meat is substantially redder and darker than chicken because they are higher in myoglobin.

Duck leg.  Usually either braised or confit.  If you haven't tried either, you haven't lived.  When you see any menu item with duck confit, it is a must try.  In the photo, you can see the lower bone on the drumstick has been exposed with proper manchonner technique.  Duck meat is a secret narcotic that has been kept a secret from you all this time.  Once you try it, you'd wonder why people waste time eating the poor chickens.

[tincanjello]

成功って

面接をたくさんして、短期間で多くの人を（っても３人）雇うと、彼らの成長っぷりを見ながら、「はぁ、こういう人が成功するんだな」と思う半面、「伸びる人と伸びない人の差ってこんなに小さいんだ」とも思う。　もちろん、なにか一つの違いが差をつけてるわけでもない。　頭が切れたり切れなかったり、努力したりしなかったり、追求したりしなかったり、色々あるけど、全部さかのぼって真髄を比べてみると、その差はごくわずか。　その違いが数ヶ月、数年とかけて、じっくり熟成されると、結果的には大きな差になってしまう。 だから、本当は、誰でも成功できると思う。　でも前提条件はあると思う。　もちろん、毎日仕事にこないといけない。　遅刻しない。　やれといわれたことをやる。　話を聞く。　人に嫌われることをしない。　ま、当たり前のことばかりだと思うけど、当たり前のことはできて当たり前。　それすらできないのはいけてないっしょ。 結局、それはスタート地点にすぎない。　そこから頑張って、そこからよりいいところにいこう、上達しようっていう気持ちが一番の違いだと思う。　向上心というか、自己批判というか、正確な自己評価。　正確な現状把握と、それに対する行動の計画性というのかな。　でも、「いまここにいて、頑張って、明日はもっといいところにいく」っていうのがある人は、ほとんどの場合、「すでにすごい」やつが多い。　無意識的に向上心がある人はその積み重ねがすでにあるんだろう。

それがないやつは残念だ。　才能、技術、スピード、持久力、全部関係ない。　ほとんどの場合、なにか特別な必殺技があるやつが、それに安心して向上心がなくなり、気がついたころにはカメさんにぬかれてしまう。　うさぎとカメさんの話は本当だ。　だらけてるやつは、どんなにすごいものを持っていても、どんなに少しでも、毎日、一分一秒、確実に成長するやつには負けてしまう。　その才能のあるやつの転落する瞬間を目の当たりにするのは、本当に心臓に悪い。　気の毒だ。　救えなかったのかな、少しの姿勢の変化で転落せずに済んだんじゃないかな、と思う。

世界中のすべての人を救うことは不可能なのも事実だ。　小さな心の変化を簡単んに起こせる人もいれば、その視点の変化が膨大な苦労だと感じる人もいる。　その変化が何なのか、情報として認識、理解できない人がほとんどだ。　でも、少なくとも、「いけそう」な人はいい方向に導いて、少しでもいい方向に進んでる人は大いに資源を費やして伸ばしたい。　救えない人は救えない。　気の毒だけど、どこかで線を引かないといけない。　救えないわけじゃない、ただ、それを救うのが自分じゃないだけだ。（と自分に言い聞かせてる）

どんな人でも、成功する可能性、才能、パワーを秘めている。　それはどこかにある。　探して、磨いて、育てて、使って、使いかたを極めて。　成功する人は、なにか根本的に違うわけじゃない。　努力し続けて、負けずに頑張って、あきらめなかっただけだ。　逆に、自分も頑張り続けることで、あきらめかけてた人の支えになったり、励ましになれたらいいと思う。　自分が成功したと天狗になってるわけじゃなくて、正直、毎日、ただ全力投球で頑張ってるだけ。　頑張ればもっと強く、早く、頭よくなれる。　まだその限界に到達してないから、もっと頑張る。

[tincanjello]

Zombies: how would you reanimate a dead body?

I was reading up on just how our bodies decompose after death.  It seems like I read this stuff every halloween, not that I'm into dressing up like a zombie, but to think of just how a zombie may look in reality. (and I like CSI) So I was thinking, well, is it possible to mix fiction with what "really" goes on in decomposition to arrive at a more believable (but fictional) theory for how zombies work?  Ya, just as the "how XXX work?" part may imply, I think it can be seen as an engineering problem to get dead bodies to move about. I'm going to concentrate on muscle actuation, and not intelligence or autonomy.  The brain's completely dead and mush in the first few minutes, so I'm going to assume the intelligence that drives these creatures is going to come from a sommoner, pupeteer, or some sort of remote controller. (or maybe the dead person's lifetime's worth of passive aggressiveness) Right after death, the body parts are all dying at different rates, skin turns pale (pallor mortis) starts to chill to room temp (algor mortis), and rigor mortis sets in.  All this in the first 12 hours or so, fairly busy. But here's the problem.  The muscles need ATP to extend, and it gets depleted in the rigor mortis process. (hence the rigor and contraction)  So, unless more ATP is sent to the contracted muscles, movement is out of question. (unless the bones are moved about with magic, but let's rule that out for now)  Anyway, getting ATP to muscles seems to be a must for reanimation.

After rigor mortis, lysosomal intracellular digestive enzymes cause the muscles to relax again.  This, if I'm understanding this right, is not a good thing.  The muscle "relaxes", as in, it's breaking down.  And with broken actuators, reanimation isn't possible.  So, it sounds to me, that once you're past the rigor mortis phase (secondary flaccidity), and the muscles are broken down, all hope is lost.  Which sets the window of opportunity to WHILE rigor mortis is still in progress. (1-3 days)

In a more general sense, this phase falls under "autolysis", versus "putrefaction" where proteins are broken down and liquified.  Obviously, putrefaction sucks for reanimation since you can't move with liquid muscles, and other tissues will be too weak or soft to withstand gravity.  The key then, would be to halt the autolysis (body digesting itself) and to provide the needed ATP to cause muscle actuation.  Now to me, that sounds like the damn body might as well be alive to be able to do that... but anyway, let's just leave those things as "need to do" in order to move.

There are some other problems to consider too.  Let's say the body to be reanimated is just lying there above ground.  As if there weren't enough internal processes that break down tissues, bugs and animals can damage the body to the point of permanent damage.  Air itself also causes quick deterioration.  Actually, it turns out that putting a body in a coffin, and burying it actually slows down decomposition, while protecting the body from being eaten or otherwise damaged.  So, freshly buried bodies seem to be great candidates for zombies. (fairly canonical with traditional lore)

Combining all this info, the roadmap seems to be fairly understandable:

1. body needs to be under 3 days old, or at least not in putrefaction phase.  cold temps good, air is bad, burying is good.  Seems like tropics will be bad for this stuff.  Colder climates, but not freezing, is good.

2. need ATP..  how?  I ask the conjurer.

3. tissues needed for actuation need to still be there (body needs to be protected from physical damage) And to me, that paints a slightly different picture of a zombie.  I imagine zombies to be fairly undead, like in a "can't be easily killed" sense, but from this perspective, they seem to be fairly fragile.  If their leg gets injured, then they can't walk.  Not only that, if decomposition progresses and their muscles get too weak (or too dead), then they can't move at all.  And worse yet, the autolysis and putrefaction processes seem to guarantee that the body breaks itself down.  So, they're severely disadvantaged at the chemical level.  Any living thing should be able to mow these zombies down as if they were nothing, even though they may be able to "somewhat" move.  And the other thing is that autonomy is all but impossible.  Nothing of the brain is left.  Perhaps some autonomy could exist in the spiritual realm (body "willing" itself to do something) but definitely not in the conventional "brain as cpu" sense.  Which means zombies won't get up and immediately go after living things or hunt for brains.  They won't even know where or what a brain is, or even have the intelligence to tell a live person from a dead one.  All that, will be up to the conjurer, or whatever external thing is, that's driving the zombie army.  In which case, the strategy should be "work together to complete mission objective", rather than "everyone eat some brains", which will totally weaken the mentally weak army by intellectually challenging them.  Either way, at this point I'm not convinced an army of "barely moving" zombies is effective in any way.  Provided you have to go through some amount of training and standardized testing to become a conjurer or a sommoner... if this is what you get, then it ain't worth it.

I think the secret to a more practical, powerful kind of zombie lies in just how the autolysis process is slowed down or halted.  But I'll need to study up a bit more on the chemistry of autolysis to be able to concoct a pragmatic solution to that.  Maybe I'll do that next holloween.

[tincanjello]

Drawing a Connection from Intangible to Intangible

Real life examples, anecdotes, tangible results, data points, boil it down to something concrete.  You've heard these before.  The world operates by and large, by looking at discrete, concrete, tangible pieces of information.  Physical examples or even metaphors work very well too.

The problem is with communicating abstract concepts.  I think I'm a very conceptual person (or so the public has let me know), so I always feel like I cannot speak my mind because it just puzzles people.  But that's just my personal rant.  On a larger societal scale, I think this general lack of ability / interest of dealing with conceptual matters is a bigger problem than it seems.

The assumption with the "taking high concepts and boiling them down to physical things" approach is that what goes into the task or action is only physical, and the end result is also something tangible.  Perhaps that's true in many cases, but that's not always true.  

One of the things that intrigues me about companies is how ideas and knowledge are handled.  Generally, ideas are thunk (thinked, thank) by someone, kneaded by a handful, and then yes, broken down into actionable bullet point lists with dates attached to them. (concrete! yay!)  What if the part you wanted to optimized started with the "thunk by someone", and ended with "kneaded by a handful"?  That segment has very little tangible things going in, or coming out of the process.  The whole process takes place in conceptual land, where no one wants to be.  Everyone is hurrying to get out of there, wanting to get to the bullet point list with dates, where things are defined and look like shits about to happen.  The bullet points make it look like the product's about to materialize before your eyes.

Well, the unfortunate reality is that EVERYTHING about the task is defined in conceptual space.  That's where it happens.  The bullet point list is just a lossy way to capture what had happened.  The bullet points don't make things happen.  Presumably, the shit has already happened by that point.

Flying in conceptual space is difficult.  It's like flying in outer space, not even bound by 3 dimensions...  There's unlimited dimensions with axis that can change by the split second.  Navigating that space is difficult.  Now imagine 10 vessels flying around in a limited space and the resulting disaster is not hard to imagine.

Root concepts are sometimes referred to as "direction", but even that is misinterpreted as a "task" at times.  You've seen the slides..  "The direction for 2013 is..  make 10 million bucks".  That's not much of a concept to operate under..  That's a goal.  Or the "not tangible enough" problem.  "The direction for 2013 is to make customers happier".  Well, pretty broad stroke.  So the first question is, "how do you measure happiness".  And the endless discussion begins.  The question immediately switches to a problem of quantification, rather than customer satisfaction.  Figuring out how to measure happiness is interesting, but doesn't make customers happier.  Now with some mental discipline, the fist question should be (could be) "what are customers unhappy about?", or "what are they happy about, and how do we make it better?".  Pretty obvious if you read it on paper, but in a free form discussion, the most obvious things are obscured by ruthless conceptual stumbling. (insecurity, authority exertion, and other useless psychologies kick in too)

But conceptual space can be a very civil, orderly, efficient space if people can navigate it with finesse and control.  It's very rare, but I've seen it happen a few times in my 34 years on earth.  It's possible.  But it takes a lot of skill and experience.  Want a tangible example?  It's like driving a car.  It can be like driving on Canal St. where every car is running over all other cars while advancing 2 ft at a time to the next traffic light, where a million tourists come trample over all cars while pointing at buildings and taking pictures of the whole chaos...  or that 4 way stop sign miracle where everyone took turns and reinstilled your faith in human civility.

Ironically, with all the startups and apps and stuff, we are in the middle of an "idea" industry era.  The "revolution"'s has already past.  Ideas as a primary product (mostly as software) is a common, plain profession.  Anyone and their moms have a startup or two.  Got a good sandwich recipe?  Make a startup for it.  You got a bad hair day?  Make a startup.  It's Friday?  Make a startup and call it Frday.  So with all this, I'm puzzled how difficult it is for us to navigate conceptual space, and still think we can handle "ideas" as the primary product.  There's still a lot of room for improvement.

[tincanjello]

47 Assassins

47 Assassins is a 1994 Toho film (of Japan) which is in a series of samurai / ronin / assassin movies that involve a lot of people.  57 Samurais, 16 Ninjas, 36 Monks...  (these are made up titles)  It seems like the rule here is the more the merrier.  It does make for great battle scenes.

47 is a large group of people.  I've never watched the assassins movie, but I pondered what it might be like to make a group of 47 assassins work effectively.

5 assassins could probably work independently if the "mission" is defined ahead of time, and perhaps a deadline.  It probably matters less how each one operates since the likelihood of a collision is low.  This also assumes the 5 are very skilled.  If the variety of skill level in the group is high, then it may be better to form buddies or mentor/student units.  But at this point, there's little reason to have mediocre people on the team.

At 10-15, it will be necessary to form several smaller teams possibly with team leads.  Probably 2 or 3 teams, with a central leader.  This may be a single leader, or perhaps several to keep checks and balances, but at multiple teams, it becomes necessary to have a single point of command, and it becomes important to gather information to one place. (concept of some sort of information infrastructure)  At this point, a person may be put in charge of HR to ensure organizational growth or to assure high quality recruiting.

At 20-30, the concept of middle management emerges.  There will be teams responsible for execution, a team whose only job is to manage the execution team, and a central leader(s).  At this point, the central leaders are insulated from the details of the executing team, allowing them to concentrate more on longer term vision and goals, while the middle management team bridges the gap.  Friction between the execution level and top leadership is highly likely due to the insulation layer.  As the roles of the execution level / middle management / leadership becomes more distinct, vertical movement (promotions/demotions) become more important.  This leads to the concept of a "career" within the organization, so turnover may decrease if done right. (higher in organization resource retention)

And then we're at 40-50.  I think this is where it becomes possible (or significantly easier) to create teams with different, specialized purposes, such as administration, finance, logistics, etc.  Though at 40-50, it's still highly likely that most of the teams will remain on the execution side.  Middle management becomes progressively important, as the distance between the leadership and the "real world" increases.  Because of the number of people involved, standard procedures and other in-organization rules need to be enforced to ensure accurate and timely communication.  Miscommunication at this size may lead to serious consequences.  Leadership charisma also becomes more important as the group diversity (number, skill level, and background) increases.

47 seems pretty big for any single task.  I'd say 10-15 is the upper limit for a single task organization.  Anything bigger, you'd need good management, or a pretty good operational structure, which doesn't seem to fall in line with my perception of the "assassin" type.. (not judgin', just guessin')

[tincanjello]

The Shaman

Back in school, I took this really strange course about Shamanism.  You know, about shamans, like medicine man.  The class was largely about how shamans of different cultures used different drugs and rituals, and using that as the common axis to compare different cultures.  So in effect, the class was loosely about cultural comparison.  It was an interesting subject, and it stuck in my head.

The shamanism that I think about, are the modern, not-so-obvious ways that the role is still being fulfilled.  A shaman's job is to go to the other world and bring back knowledge (or something) to the real world, and to give it to the people.  He's the gateway for normal people to access the other world, and to retrieve stuff.

Running databases can be sort of similar.  A person wants something from a database.  The "computer guy" writes queries and programs to retrieve knowledge from the database and gives it to the requester.  Google is like that too, if the "other world" is the digital world.

Then there are artists.  Artists serve as a bridge between the real world and the creative world.  The creative world could be an aggregate common consciousness, or maybe just a single artist's imagination.  He goes there, and brings stuff back.  Normal people see it, get inspired, or maybe even just reminded that the "other world" exists.

From a functional perspective though, what is the long term impact of having a shaman?  Initially, the gateway leads to unknown territories.  But as you keep seeing things from the other world, more and more becomes known.  So for those known things, maybe you don't need a shaman anymore.  But does that knowledge allow us, or at least make it easy for us to reach further unknown WITHOUT the aid of a shaman?  Or does relying on a shaman in the first place diminish the chances of ever becoming independent?  Basically, the question is, is the dependency relationship one that is nurturing (towards independence), or one that becomes increasingly more interdependent?

The key I think, is how a shaman comes to be.  Assuming shamanic ability is not genetic, it is knowledge that is gained through one form or the other.  So theoretically, if a normal person has the capacity to go through training, anyone can become a shaman.  Does everyone have the capacity?  More interestingly, do shamans ever 'lose' their shamanic abilities?  Does it degrade or fluctuate in quality?  Can the fluctuation be observed or measured?

I guess the final question is, where is the "other place"?  It can be defined as anything that is beyond the perception of the perceptor, either due to sensory limitation or knowledge.  But then bringing back knowledge from the "other place" sounds like it's education.  Learning about things you don't know about.  Even if it's some sort of conceptual space, it's still about familiarizing, and thus a form of education.  So are shamans actually educators?  Because then the relationship between the shaman and the beneficiary becomes a nurturing relationship, leading to independence, or maybe even the beneficiary becoming a shaman (educator) at some point.  I like that view more than the increasing interdependency view.

[tincanjello]

今年を振り返って

２０１２年はかなりイベントが多い年だった。　３月の会社の買収、８月に料理学校に通い始めて、９月にリアちゃんも学校が始まって、１０月のハリケーン、１２月にAlloy Digitalに転職。

一番大きかったのはやっぱり料理学校。　フレンチに対してはそんなに知識はなくて、はじめはかなりてこずった。　シェフにボコボコに言われて、悔しかったり、泣きそうになりながら死ぬ気でがんばった。　パートナーにもたくさん気を使うようになって、自分のテクニックだけじゃなくて、作業中の雰囲気とかチームワークという意味でもいっぱい勉強になった。　学校のレシピの大体が伝統的なレシピだから、モダンなフレンチというよりか、昔の、田舎臭いフレンチを見ることができて、「あ、以外に出発点は単純なんだ」と思った。　ありきたりの食材から、できる限りの味を引き出す。　安いものを上手く食べる。　旬のものを使って栄養と季節感を出す。　どことなく和食に似てる気がする。　でも一番重要だと思ったのは愛情を持って作るということ。　一品にたくさんのテクニックを注入するのではなく、少ない、洗練されたテクニックで、愛情をたっぷり。　技だけじゃなく、気遣い、サービス精神をプレートに盛り込む。　それに対しての徹底的な完璧主義・こだわりがフレンチなんだなとも思った。

リアちゃんが学校にいくようになって、はじめは馴染めなかったみたいだ。　午後までの長いスケジュールで、午前までのグループが帰るのがストレスになってしまい、午後はぐだぐだ。　午前だけに変えてからはかなり改善した。　学校で色々新しいことを学んできてるみたいで、英語もそれなりに喋るようになった。　先生いわく、学校では英語で不自由なくコミュニケーションが取れてるらしい。　自分の記憶だと、言語が通じない環境への適応はストレスがあったけど、ガヤガヤしてるうちに結局は遊んだり、まねをしたりで通じるようになる。　学校に行き始めたばかりのストレスと重なると結構落ち着かないと思うけど、がんばって欲しい。

転職は結構前から考えてはいて、買収が落ち着いたのと、ちょうどいい機会があったので決めた。　買収後は新しい親会社のポリシーもあって、ほかのスタートアップのお手伝いやアドバイザーになることが禁止されていたから、転職してからはかなり自由に自分の経験と知識をシェアできてうれしい。　知識と経験はほかの人に広げないと価値が下がると思う。　もちろん、ビジネス的には自社にノウハウを蓄積して、周りの広げないことによって情報のasymmetryを作って、それが商売になるんだけど、そんなんじゃつまらない。　そういう知識は組織内じゃなくて、その知識が乏しいところでこそ、もっとも価値が高いわけだから、転職後は知識の運搬が自由にできてうれしい。　ビジネスで言うところのarbitrageだね。　アメリカから日本に流行のものを流通する、ある場所からない場所にものを動かす。　それが必要な情報だとすると、奉仕・教育的な役割も持つ。

２０１３年は料理学校の卒業とその後を考えるのと、新しい会社のモバイル・アナリティクス部門を構築・拡大していくのが目標。　アドバイザーとして就任したいくつかのスタートアップも、本格的に始動させていく予定。　いろんな面で、周りに「与える」ことに集中したい一年だ。

[tincanjello]

Things everyone should know about trans fats

My nutrition teacher Chef Gregg put it very straight forward.  "There are things you should try to eat more of, there are things you should eat less of.  Then there are things you should not eat at all.  Trans fat is one of them."  Chef Gregg is a kick ass instructor got to saucier at Le Bernadin (of Eric Ripert) and the girls in our class can't get enough of him.  He does look extremely healthy.

So, back to trans fats.  I'm sure there's a pretty broad global consensus that trans fats are bad.  But here are some details that everyone should know to protect yourself and young ones from workarounds that the industry uses.  I'll be brief and to the point.

Your goal intake should be 0 grams.  No buts, there simply is no reason to put such a horrid substance in your body.  Think toilet cleaner, industrial waste, or even horse shit.  You don't "limit" your intake of horse shit.  News flash: It's not supposed to be eaten, at all.  Average intake per day in the US is 5.8g.

Less than 0.5g per serving is rounded down to 0g.  Many "trans fat free" item are actually something like 0.49g per 1 serving of 1 cookie.  You eat 3, and you're up to 1.5g.  If you found 1.5g of cow dung in your cookies, you'd be pissed.  Make sure the serving size is realistic, and also check ingredients even if it's "trans fat free" (next point)

Hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated vegetable oils = trans fats.  Check the ingredients, especially for "trans fat free" labeled foods.

There are 3 kinds of fats.  Mono, di, and triglycerides.  FDA says only triglycerides are fats and should show up on the nutrition label.  But you can also make trans fats out of mono and diglycerides.  Check for those in the ingredients.

Make sure the fake butter you're using isn't loaded with trans fats.  If it is, immediately destroy it and use real butter instead.  Or use olive oil.

With this basic info, I think we can make wiser decisions about what we eat and feed our families.  Not too long right?

One last tip.  If you're unsure, leave the food item out to rot and see what happens.  It's kind of a gross experiment, but if flies and insects, bacteria, or mold is interested in your food, it probably has good nutrients.  If the food does not rot at all, and insects, mold aren't even interested, it probably means the food will do you no good.  As Chef Gregg explained, the easier and quicker it is for nature to break down your food, the easier it is for us to digest and extract nutrients.  If nature can't break it down, chances are, we won't be able to make any use of it.  It's a rudimentary test, but proves a point.

[tincanjello]

人生で一度しかないこと

今日はエレファントマン、Joseph Merrickについて色々調べていた。

映画や劇もあったけど、実際の話とはあまり関係ないようだ。　彼の人生についてはWIKIを読めば十分だと思う。http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Merrick

気になったのは、彼と会ったレイラさんという女性。　メリックの面倒を障害を通して見ていた医者の知人らしいのだが、レイラさんはメリックとお話をして、握手をして帰った。　それがメリックに大きな衝撃を与え、自信が沸き、その後のメリックの行動を変えた。　その後メリックはレイラさんに感謝の手紙を出してる。

メリックの影のサポーターとなった上流階級の人たちの力で、メリックは憧れだった舞台を1度だけ見ることができた。　見たあと、1週間も彼は舞台でみたストーリーを生きた。

他界するちょっと前には、3回に渡り、バカンスに行っている。　花を積んだり、森を散歩したり。　今までの人生のなかで、もっとも自由で、安全に感じただろう。　人生で一度だけ、ゆっくり、その瞬間を楽しむことができたと思う。　そのご、数年以内に亡くなった状態で朝発見されることになる。

記録が残っていないことも多いだろうが、苦しみと痛み、悲しみに満ちた生活のなかではこういったハイライトは…　彼の場合、文字通り1度しか訪れなかった。　その1度を、彼はどう思ったのか。　舞台に行けるを分かったとき。　向かう準備をしているとき。　見ている最中。　見たあと。　見た1ヶ月あと。　もう二度とその機会が訪れないとわかっていたのだろうか。

普段の生活で、一日の間にたくさんのことが起きる。　厳密にはすべてのことは一度しか起きないのだけど、「人生で一度しかない」ものって、いざ発生したときに、自覚できるのだろうか？　そもそも、「人生は一度しかない」という意味では、人生そのものを満喫して、思い切って生きているのだろうか？　そうなのは哲学的には理解できるけど、実感としては不明確だ。　今後じっくり考えて、心の中でその感覚を探したいと思う。

[tincanjello]

ハンセン病夫婦１９４８年の家計簿

部落問題を調べているところから、らい病の歴史についべ勉強してみた。

ハンセン病ともよばれてるらしい。　大昔は街から追放されたり、非人となり、かなり過酷な人生を送っていたみたいだけど、療養施設が出来初めてからは少しは安全に生活するスペースが確保できたみたいだ。　しかし、病気を患って、生計を立てるのは難しい。　Wikiに乗っていたある夫婦の家計簿を見て、彼らの生活を想像してみた。

ちなみに、1948年のサラリーマンの平均収入は10,129円。　

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%8F%E3%83%B3%E3%82%BB%E3%83%B3%E7%97%85 星塚敬愛園における、ある夫婦の1948年の家計簿が記録されている。[18]

9月分　収入　慰安金（2人分）300円　茶摘応援　2円20銭　作業賃（夫）270円　同（妻）　171円65銭、生産品代　387円78銭（慰安畑と供出畑があり、収入となる）

9月分 支出　友人への香典　100円　寄付金　50円　大豆4升　280円　豆腐2丁　30円　豆腐作り賃　15円　塩1kg 13円　同窓会費　24円　塩　4kg 52円、煙草代　304円80銭　宝くじ　2枚　60円

平均収入10,129円に対して夫婦の収入はたった1,131円63銭。　10分の1の経済だ。

支出を見ていく。　友人への香典…　病気もあり、戦争も、過酷な状況もあり、友人、知人もみなそう長く生きないのであろう。　この家計のなかの１０％が香典へ、苦しみの中でこその優しさだ。　食品は豆腐と塩。　米などは施設から配られたのだろうか、これだけでは生存できない気がする。　同窓会費。　差別を受け、もはや社会に戻れない身でありながらも、同窓会があるというのは、すごく特別なことだと思った。　小学校の同窓会なのか、集団から追い出された人にとっての「コミュニティー」の意味を考えさせられる。　タバコ代…　なんと収入の３０％、これは明らかにやめたほうがいいと思う。　最後の宝くじ2枚。　夫婦で一枚ずつなのだろうか、経済の圧迫と、それから解き放たれたいという願いを物語る。　このスケールだと６０円は決して安くない。　でも、そこに心の余裕を少し感じられる。　九月は収入1,131.63支出は928.8で202.83円の黒字だ。

12月：

12月分　収入　生産品代　349円29銭　布団作成　25円　慰安金　2人分　300円　兄より送金　100円　作業賃 夫　325円　作業賃　妻　161円50銭　生産品代　161円50銭　炊事応援　116円07銭　慰安金（二人分) 300円　計　1,681円46銭

12月分　支出　洗器　165円　耳かき　2円50銭　砂糖壺　90円　豆腐2丁　30円　うどん（100g） 45円　香典　10円　中皿　5枚　85円　煙草代　105円　クリスマス献金　30円　リンゴ・ミカン　45円　知人弔い　20円　宝くじ　2枚　60円　野菜代　50円　もち米　2升　250円　煙草（みのり）　90円　豆腐　1丁　15円　羽織紐　250円　宝くじ10枚　100円　みかん500g 75円　昆布　72円　豆腐5丁　75円　うどん5束　225円　計　1,981円50銭

12月は収入がアップし、「兄より送金」100円というのが入っている。　外にいる家族から支え、この経済ではこれは大きい。　家族の人とは会えているのか、療養施設が作られるようになったということはらい病に対する理解がそれなりに豊富になったとはいえ、一般人の理解はまだ乏しかっただろう。　ここでも「知人弔い」、やはり死と取り合わせである。　買い物リストを見ていくと、甘いもの、野菜など食材が豊になっている。　もち米、みかん、昆布、うどん等、正月関係のものも見える。　タバコは控えめで１９５円。　施設がカトリックなのか、「クリスマス献金」というのも珍しい。　その他、耳かき、食器などは年末で買い替えたのだろう。　宝くじは2枚というのと、さらに追加でなんと10枚。　小さい贅沢がこまめに散りばめられていますね。

12月は３００円ほど赤字だ、ということは貯金もあるのだろう。

当時はハンセン病者が出産するのは禁じられていたため、夫婦には子供はいない（はず）。　二人で、仕事をして、病と戦い、周囲の10分の1の経済でどういう心境だったのだろうか。　決して日々が真っ暗で、動く気力もないという感じは見受けられない。　たくさん仕事をして、真面目な生活を送っているように見える。　タバコも吸ってるし、宝くじも買っている。　年末なんて勝負して10枚買っちゃう。　希望のない人たちではないと思う。　

ハンセン病は社会差別などからくる精神疾病との合併症があったり、社会復帰が非常に難しい病気なので、非常に多くの人を苦しめたと思う。　今では錠剤で1年ほどで治るらしく、日本では年間０～１人程度しか発症しない。