?

Log in

May 2013   01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Gwuh, wow

Posted on 2011.04.24 at 19:50
So Aralis: an excellent and fun event, but I find myself in this deep pit of depressingdom in its wake. Entirely thanks to inadvertently-but-still-very-foolishly-destructive stuff I did in-game—with perhaps a soupçon of unexpected real-life reminders. Ah, well, gotta let it pass, I guess.

I am doing some quality-control work on a super-boring collection of peer review comments. There are small round quailoids about me, and indeed somewhat underfoot; ten feet away, there are some amazing lemonlike canaries and some sort of tiny, red-beaked microsparrows. There is rumored to be a sloth overhead somewhere, though I have yet to see it.

Dammit, dammit . . .

Posted on 2010.10.13 at 22:50
. . . I am playing the trial version of EVE Online. An extraordinarily obvious mistake, in retrospect.

I suppose there's an obvious solution to this problem. All I have to do is get so frustrated that I shout and yell and stamp my little feet and uninstall, and EVE being the kind of hardass game it is that's evidently a very easy state to achieve. All I really have to do is jump to a 0.0 system in my shiny new Catalyst, at which point I will be bubbled and then podded in extremely short order—

—but as you can see it's too late. I already know some of the damn lingo. All this because I couldn't just wait until SW:TOR. Well, here's hoping it doesn't last, I guess?

That "I Write Like" thing!

Posted on 2010.07.15 at 16:20
Location: cafeland
I'm hoping I write like different people in different contexts. Let's find out . . .

OK, Hasmir writes like Charles Dickens, Kurt Vonnegut, Bram Stoker, James Joyce (four poems, four results), or Mark Twain (for a whole bunch of poems jammed into the analyzer all together).

Both Jahanatta and I (when I'm not writing like somebody else on purpose) write like Dan Brown! This fills me with a feeling, the nature of which is left as an exercise for the reader.

I do not want my TV

Posted on 2010.05.04 at 14:36
. . . but perhaps you do?

It isn't a very exciting one—something on the order of 20 inches, not HD in the slightest, stood me in good stead for some time and seems to work quite well. If it makes any difference, I can check out its various inputs; I know it at least takes component as well as yer basic RCA.

I'm moving in a week and a half, so I'm looking to divest myself of things, and this is certainly a thing.


Please continue to rip off My Bloody Valentine. No, I mean, seriously. Assuming that every bad thing that ever happened to me after 1995 was punishment for not being into all those gorgeous shoegazing bands at the time, I guess the perpetual presence of cool latter-day stuff with MBV DNA is a reward for mending my ways.

Case in point, I guess, Dälek (name no relation to Dr. Who). I only have one album by these guys, and I actually got it years ago, but whenever I listen to them I'm newly impressed. Case in more recent, this-post-prompting point: this dude Ulrich Schnauss, who I'd never heard of until yesterday? He is neat.

What both these bands/dudes have in common is that they have, like, nothing in common—one's a hip-hop outfit from New Jersey and the other's an ambient-ish electronic person from Germany.

Seamy world of freemiosity; yaguuugghghh; masth masth masth masth masth

Posted on 2010.03.25 at 20:03
Music: Röyksopp, "The Girl and the Robot"
Ha! I think I've beaten my previous record-setter, whichever it was, for nonsensical entry titles. At any rate:

  • Is anyone playing (the iphone game) We Rule? If so, I would relish Friendship.


  • Work has been totally brain-grinding this week. Wugh. Blugh. I have a horrifying amount of reading and such to do, so's I can NPC the Seven Virtues LARP this weekend; my plan was to get it done this week, but I have just not had a free evening. Hopefully tonight. Or . . . hopefully I can knock off early tomorrow, maybe, and get caught up. I r intimidated.


  • Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, you are not even my favorite musician. Don't get me wrong, Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, I think you're incredible, but it's more of a sober acknowledgement of incredibleness on my part than the "This is the voice of God"–type adulation I've seen from other quarters. Furthermore, Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, I know that Dam Mast Qalandar" is just the poppy tip of the iceberg with you—the single that everybody's heard, that Massive Attack did that remix of, that nobody who's really into you, Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, even brings up for fear of conspicuous poserdom.

    It is, nonetheless, a song that will make one compulsively sing its five-word chorus over and over and over again to one's self for days until one's ears take out a restraining order against one's mouth.

  • Um, so I guess there's this quite large park in Waltham? These days my route to work takes me right by the entrance, but I'd never gone and checked it out until recently. It's on an impressive hill (the second-highest place in eastern Mass, the Internet tells me, after Blue Hill), so walking around there gives you some dramatic overlooks as well as being perilously close to Legitimate Exercise. It's also a bit derelict and scuzzy. Broken glass aside, though, that's not a bad thing, since it means it's dotted with bizarre structures like this and a pair of these and best of all this.


  • Fah, why must LJ's scrapbook feature be so incredibly weird and buggy? Srsly, it's the most aggressively un-QC-ed thing ever. Sometimes I try to flip a picture 90 degrees to the right and I get an error page saying "Validation error. Refusing to rotate picture without being sure you meant it." Or I create a gallery, click on "Upload picture," and am taken to a page that just says "Upload Picture." I mean, what? Yes, yes I would like to upload a picture. How might I comply with this order, LJ Scrapbook?


  • Speaking of mandatory compliance, I've spent the last week obsessively reading two evilly mesmerizing online things about Scientology: Counterfeit Dreams and Bare-Faced Messiah. The former is an ex-Scientology marketing bigwig's blog/autobiography; it starts out in the late 60s, but has a lot to say about the post-Hubbard Miscavige era. The latter's from 1987, so it doesn't really get up to Miscavige—rather it's a tell-all, interview-laden biography of Hubbard himself. Writing quality's meh; content is balls-out, rabbitholesomely fascinating. I won't say it was precisely good for my mental health, reading about this crazed mountebank and his depredations, but . . . great stuff, nonetheless.

So OK, at the last Madrigal event, there was maybe going to be yet another bunch of open-mic entertainment. It was somewhat of a relief that it didn't end up happening, but even so . . . well, I came up with a story to tell, and since I didn't tell it I've decided to write it up. It's under the cut! noradannan, you'll see what I meant when I said the desert cat story was a sort of companion piece to it. No more reincarnation stories after this! Well, probably.

Um, non-Madrigal players: so, uh, this is essentially a short fantasy story I wrote "in character" for a LARP. It's full of stuff that won't make much sense if you don't know the background—it wasn't really meant to stand on its own. I guess the two really essential things are that (1) the narrator's people, the "Aneketh," are refugees from another world, where it's very deserty; (2) the majority of them are Sons/Daughters of Dust—their skin is sort of stained and wrinkly, the popular explanation being that they bear the curse of some ancient badness; (3) they tend to believe very literally in reincarnation and karma (though they don't use that word), as well as caste-based dharma (though, again, they don't use that word).


There, in the middle distance, I beheld a deer, a radiant deer of purest teal.Collapse )

Straight-up do-my-job-for-me question

Posted on 2010.01.14 at 16:14
. . . or rather, this is a do-the-job-I-have-been-assigned-that-comes-perilously-close-to-calling-for-specialized-expertise-I-do-not-have-and-anyway-who-the-hell-does question. I strongly doubt anybody reading this has the requisite understanding of copyright law, the GFDL, and works by the federal government—but, uh, read on if you're prepared to prove me wrong!

So let's say I am a government agency; let's say I might like to use a rather nice photo from Wikipedia in a publication of mine, one that's going to be distributed on the Web and in print. Being federal, I have my own weirdly copyleft set of rules surrounding the works I produce . . . but the real issue isn't the rules on my end, but the GDFL rules. There's some funny stuff in there about how the license continues to apply, and I'm scratching my head about how said funny stuff intersects with the government's own funny stuff.

Ideally, it'd just be a matter of using the photo, crediting it, letting the photographer know (for politeness's sake, not as a matter of necessity), and calling it done. I'm just . . . very inexpertly trying to figure out if there's some prospective badness around the whole issue.


Previous 10  Next 10