A motorist is almost 20 times more likely to die in a crash involving a train than in a collision involving another motor vehicle.
that's confusingly worded. it doesn't mean that you are 20 time more likely to BE in a train crash. it means, comparing train crashes to car crashes, train crashes are almost 20 times as deadly. this is because trains are so freaking huge. how huge? well, to provide a bit of context: a train hitting your car is akin to your car hitting a coke can. A COKE CAN. YOUR CAR. no contest, am i right? i am.
so with these odds, why are so many people jumping the gates? train is coming, gates are going down, people are madly driving around the gates. what the hell for?
clearly, some people are purposefully driving in front of trains. you know. to "die".
some people drive around the falling gates accidentally. i don't know how you could not see the damn giant arm falling right in front of your damn face if you are paying a mere minuscule speck of attention to what you are doing. there is an argument that roads are safer if these non-attentives drive in front of trains, but i would never make a such an insensitive argument.
another group are daredevils - the "watch this!" group. not only the roads, but the entire world could potentially be safer if these jackasses drive in front of trains, but again. who could be that callous?
now, we come to the final group. the group that just doesn't have time to wait for a dadgum train. this is the group i really want to talk about.
how long goes it take for a train to go by? obvs, this depends on several factors including length and speed of said train. the universal vehicle code (yes, it's a thing. look it up.) suggests that trains not block crossings for more than five minutes, except under special circumstances. they can only suggest, not set definite standards, because being specific about crossings would have a trickle down affect into other safety violations.
but, regulating the trains is not the answer. convincing people they DO have five freaking minutes to wait for a 12 million pound vehicle to trundle on by - THAT's the answer.
where's the fire? what's the hurry about?
imagine telling some guy travelling by covered wagon that you don't have time to wait five minutes. he'd be completely confused because he didn't even have a way to MEASURE five minutes. or, ten. maaaaybe 15, since the sun will have shifted a degree in that time. but most likely that guy in the covered wagon could give you morning, noon, suppertime, bedtime. a guy in a covered wagon would be stunned by the speed of our motion. zip!zap!zoom!
we're killing ourselves, and for what? why have we literally scheduled ourselves into a corner, where we cannot afford an unexpected wait of 15, 10, or even a mere 5 minutes?
how did we find ourselves in a place where a plausible option is to drive into the path of an oncoming train?
settle down, people.
24 February 2015
23 February 2015
books 2015
bones in her pocket [kathy reichs]
swamp bones [kathy reichs]
learning to see: value stream mapping workbook
bones never lie [kathy reichs]
bones are forever [kathy reichs]
darke [angie sage]
fyre [angie sage]
digital disruption [james mcquivey]
swamp bones [kathy reichs]
learning to see: value stream mapping workbook
bones never lie [kathy reichs]
bones are forever [kathy reichs]
darke [angie sage]
fyre [angie sage]
digital disruption [james mcquivey]
200mph cotton candy
we're watching a rebroadcast of the daytona500 from 1979. weird, but the cars look like they are moving faster than the cars appeared to be moving in yesterday's 2015 500. i blame advances in cinematography. the cameras are so advanced, they can keep up with the 200mph cars - nary a blur nor obscure, better than the naked eye ever could. the advanced camera ability removes context, the relative motion that we experience when we see cars move in person. modern televised motion is sterile motion.
it's well-known that modern televised sex and modern televised violence are sterile. sure, we all know that. more subtly though, modern televised love and modern televised pain are muted, on cotton, deaf. is it the cinematography? could be. the colors are so bright, the lines so crisp. who can believe it? it's too real to be real.
live sports, i'd say cinematography plays a key role in the flattening of the landscape. scripted shows, well. it's not lack of plot or trite lines. nope - it's the opposite. blown out plots built of impossible twists and deus ex machinas. manufactured lines no one could ever think to say. where's the reality? don't tell me it's on the reality shows.
reality is in the context. there's no context for magical mystery plots. there's no context for out-of-your-mind wit. it's just all fluff and sugar.
it's all 200mph cars, looking like they are standing still.
it's well-known that modern televised sex and modern televised violence are sterile. sure, we all know that. more subtly though, modern televised love and modern televised pain are muted, on cotton, deaf. is it the cinematography? could be. the colors are so bright, the lines so crisp. who can believe it? it's too real to be real.
live sports, i'd say cinematography plays a key role in the flattening of the landscape. scripted shows, well. it's not lack of plot or trite lines. nope - it's the opposite. blown out plots built of impossible twists and deus ex machinas. manufactured lines no one could ever think to say. where's the reality? don't tell me it's on the reality shows.
reality is in the context. there's no context for magical mystery plots. there's no context for out-of-your-mind wit. it's just all fluff and sugar.
it's all 200mph cars, looking like they are standing still.
11 February 2015
books 2015
bones in her pocket [kathy reichs]
swamp bones [kathy reichs]
learning to see: value stream mapping workbook
bones never lie [kathy reichs]
bones are forever [kathy reichs]
darke [angie sage]
fyre [angie sage]
swamp bones [kathy reichs]
learning to see: value stream mapping workbook
bones never lie [kathy reichs]
bones are forever [kathy reichs]
darke [angie sage]
fyre [angie sage]
02 February 2015
you can't lie to your brain.
young brains are malleable because the circuits aren't hardwired. experiences and environment mold the circuits and tamp them down. every experience is a potential learning, and every learning forms a connection.
a learning is a memory. i memorize my multiplication tables. i memorize that you love me. i memorize that day in august when we rode through the fullmoon night with the windows down and the headlights off.
excitation heightens the chance that an experience will become a learning. if there is energy in the brain, around the learning, the circuits will be tamped down more solidly, and the memory will be stronger. the energy can be natural or artificial and it can be because the content is exciting or because the environment is exciting.
when i learn multiplication, if i have affinity for it, my brain will glom onto it and be excited by finding a match for the rudimentary neural pathways that were laid down in the womb.
when i hug you, chemicals from other parts of my body will pour into my brain, firing up the furnace, readying my brain to be present in the experience and lay down some tracks for future trains of thought.
we not only learn outright, we learn how to learn. one part of my brain is telling another part of my brain to GET EXCITED because THIS IS IMPORTANT and there are ways in which that process works well or not so well.
mnemonics can excite the brain. for example, if anagrams excite the correct pathways, ROYGBIV will work for you. there are more types of mnemonic devices than either of us probably know about... unless you've studied them. or, you know, concocted a method to remember them all.
point is, energizing the pathways will increase the chance for learning, for memory, and if what you are learning is how to learn, sending energy to the correct locations will increase the chances that you will remember that anagrams work for you.
there is, of course, a whole nother level going on - the level by which your brain learns things about you -- learns what works for preserving and advancing the youness that is you. your brain will surprise you with its ability to know what you need.
your brain can lay down this underpinning structure because it knows things about you that you'd never admit to and has complete unfettered access to stuff you don't even consciously know. your brain gets energized by some minuscule shit and carries on this substrata building incessantly. if you think the amount of data google has on you is impressive, and maybe a little scary, well. those piles of data pale in comparison to the piles your brain has compiled on the subject of you.
after all... your brain is watching you all the time, even when you sleep.
a learning is a memory. i memorize my multiplication tables. i memorize that you love me. i memorize that day in august when we rode through the fullmoon night with the windows down and the headlights off.
excitation heightens the chance that an experience will become a learning. if there is energy in the brain, around the learning, the circuits will be tamped down more solidly, and the memory will be stronger. the energy can be natural or artificial and it can be because the content is exciting or because the environment is exciting.
when i learn multiplication, if i have affinity for it, my brain will glom onto it and be excited by finding a match for the rudimentary neural pathways that were laid down in the womb.
when i hug you, chemicals from other parts of my body will pour into my brain, firing up the furnace, readying my brain to be present in the experience and lay down some tracks for future trains of thought.
we not only learn outright, we learn how to learn. one part of my brain is telling another part of my brain to GET EXCITED because THIS IS IMPORTANT and there are ways in which that process works well or not so well.
mnemonics can excite the brain. for example, if anagrams excite the correct pathways, ROYGBIV will work for you. there are more types of mnemonic devices than either of us probably know about... unless you've studied them. or, you know, concocted a method to remember them all.
point is, energizing the pathways will increase the chance for learning, for memory, and if what you are learning is how to learn, sending energy to the correct locations will increase the chances that you will remember that anagrams work for you.
there is, of course, a whole nother level going on - the level by which your brain learns things about you -- learns what works for preserving and advancing the youness that is you. your brain will surprise you with its ability to know what you need.
your brain can lay down this underpinning structure because it knows things about you that you'd never admit to and has complete unfettered access to stuff you don't even consciously know. your brain gets energized by some minuscule shit and carries on this substrata building incessantly. if you think the amount of data google has on you is impressive, and maybe a little scary, well. those piles of data pale in comparison to the piles your brain has compiled on the subject of you.
after all... your brain is watching you all the time, even when you sleep.
09 January 2015
mannerly in absentia
my name is ace and i am THAT incredibly annoying starbucks patron.
(hi, ace!)
scouting the available seating on arrival, i quickly conclude the best-remaining-seat in the place is next to a fastidious man sporting tidy khakis and quarter-zip navy sweater who's manning a sparse digital outpost of ipad (with keyboard) and iphone. i ask him, gesturing at the open seat, anyone here?
no, he replies in a voice that's simultaneously soft and clear.
so i drop my coat and bag and head to the counter to order fragrant minty green tea and a bagel with cream cheese. when i return, he's stretched his loafered feet to under the chair directly across from his - the chair where i've dropped my things.
not wanting to (a) sit straddling his legs or (b) ask him to move, i sit at the head of the table, putting me rightnext to him. i mean, rightnext in the sense that Head and Left Hand Man are rightnext. i can't see his device screen, for instance.
they call, grande mint green tea, so i retrieve and return and immediately have to remove the cup lid because the tea's too hot to drink. green minty waves waft freely. i open my old school toshiba netbook and it won't power on, so i proceed to plug it in. the three words "plug it in" do a poor job of describing the awkward, flailing nature of this action.
they call, multi-grain bagel, so i retrieve and return, and now the real show begins. there's removing the bagel from the bag, removing the plastic knife from it's plastic wrapping, tearing the bagel into pieces, opening and spreading the cream cheese (a luxury splurged on due to having earned a free treat on my starbucks loyalty card and having spent an hour on the stationary bike earlier today).
i am a fragrant, spastic mess of food and drink, equipment and puffy coat.
before i schmear the first schmear, he packs up (i.e., closes his ipad's keyboard cover) and departs with a nod. good on him. i take over the freshly available best-remaining-seat in the place and it's warm, but only in the very most fastidiously appropriate way. i am impressed with his ability to be mannerly, even in absentia.
(hi, ace!)
scouting the available seating on arrival, i quickly conclude the best-remaining-seat in the place is next to a fastidious man sporting tidy khakis and quarter-zip navy sweater who's manning a sparse digital outpost of ipad (with keyboard) and iphone. i ask him, gesturing at the open seat, anyone here?
no, he replies in a voice that's simultaneously soft and clear.
so i drop my coat and bag and head to the counter to order fragrant minty green tea and a bagel with cream cheese. when i return, he's stretched his loafered feet to under the chair directly across from his - the chair where i've dropped my things.
not wanting to (a) sit straddling his legs or (b) ask him to move, i sit at the head of the table, putting me rightnext to him. i mean, rightnext in the sense that Head and Left Hand Man are rightnext. i can't see his device screen, for instance.
they call, grande mint green tea, so i retrieve and return and immediately have to remove the cup lid because the tea's too hot to drink. green minty waves waft freely. i open my old school toshiba netbook and it won't power on, so i proceed to plug it in. the three words "plug it in" do a poor job of describing the awkward, flailing nature of this action.
they call, multi-grain bagel, so i retrieve and return, and now the real show begins. there's removing the bagel from the bag, removing the plastic knife from it's plastic wrapping, tearing the bagel into pieces, opening and spreading the cream cheese (a luxury splurged on due to having earned a free treat on my starbucks loyalty card and having spent an hour on the stationary bike earlier today).
i am a fragrant, spastic mess of food and drink, equipment and puffy coat.
before i schmear the first schmear, he packs up (i.e., closes his ipad's keyboard cover) and departs with a nod. good on him. i take over the freshly available best-remaining-seat in the place and it's warm, but only in the very most fastidiously appropriate way. i am impressed with his ability to be mannerly, even in absentia.
04 January 2015
minty fresh
i have a ton of experience with computers. most of my experience is with windows PCs, some with apple macs, and a tiny bit with linux systems.
i am not a futzer or a hacker. i am not a "next big thing" follower. i like my computers to work - period. my preference would be to use windows-xp on every system i touch.
i don't think this makes me a luddite. i am not opposed to technology. in fact, i like it. technology generally makes life easier, except when it doesn't. it's those times that it doesn't that bug the hell out of me.
like i said, i am not a hacker. i want to use the tech, not build it. it's like, i am a carpenter, not a hammer maker. somehow when it comes to computers, folks assume the expert carpenters are also tool makers. i have no interest in making hammers or saws or nails. i want to build tree houses.
so naturally, yesterday i replaced the installation of windows 7 starter on my netbook with something called peppermint OS.
why the hell not, right?
windows was bogging the poor little guy down and begging for constant updates. more! more! give me more! stupid fat greedy windows. you know, mr gates, the best solution isn't always the biggest.
windows is very communistic, very unitarian. windows is everything for everyone. problem is that being everything takes up a lot of space. obviously, i've just admitted not knowing much about OS's but IMHO windows is not elegant. i base this assessment on the knowledge that if it were elegant, it would be smaller. windows is this giant, fat, hairy thing stumbling around and making messes on the floor.
as stated, i just want my tech to work. that's why i've stuck with windows. it was on the machine when i bought it. open the machine, there is a familiar interface. i can be reasonably productive, as most of what i do is on the browser.
but the machine was increasingly slow, the browser increasingly non-responsive, the updates increasingly fast on each other's heels. i was starting to realize this technology wasn't working for me.
i asked around and learned about peppermint OS. read up on it, and it seemed really simple. yesterday, i took the plunge and it was simple, so i installed it and i felt free. i was tired of living in a house, and now i didn't anymore!
joy filled the world.
that is... until today, when i learned my computer isn't talking to my printer. i tried to join the help forum, but i couldn't run the diagnostics command that was meant to be part of the install and when the help forum wanted to know what version of peppermint OS i am running, i had to admit i had no idea what the answer was and even less idea how to determine the answer.
should i have stuck with the devil i knew?
only time will tell.
i am not a futzer or a hacker. i am not a "next big thing" follower. i like my computers to work - period. my preference would be to use windows-xp on every system i touch.
i don't think this makes me a luddite. i am not opposed to technology. in fact, i like it. technology generally makes life easier, except when it doesn't. it's those times that it doesn't that bug the hell out of me.
like i said, i am not a hacker. i want to use the tech, not build it. it's like, i am a carpenter, not a hammer maker. somehow when it comes to computers, folks assume the expert carpenters are also tool makers. i have no interest in making hammers or saws or nails. i want to build tree houses.
so naturally, yesterday i replaced the installation of windows 7 starter on my netbook with something called peppermint OS.
why the hell not, right?
windows was bogging the poor little guy down and begging for constant updates. more! more! give me more! stupid fat greedy windows. you know, mr gates, the best solution isn't always the biggest.
windows is very communistic, very unitarian. windows is everything for everyone. problem is that being everything takes up a lot of space. obviously, i've just admitted not knowing much about OS's but IMHO windows is not elegant. i base this assessment on the knowledge that if it were elegant, it would be smaller. windows is this giant, fat, hairy thing stumbling around and making messes on the floor.
as stated, i just want my tech to work. that's why i've stuck with windows. it was on the machine when i bought it. open the machine, there is a familiar interface. i can be reasonably productive, as most of what i do is on the browser.
but the machine was increasingly slow, the browser increasingly non-responsive, the updates increasingly fast on each other's heels. i was starting to realize this technology wasn't working for me.
i asked around and learned about peppermint OS. read up on it, and it seemed really simple. yesterday, i took the plunge and it was simple, so i installed it and i felt free. i was tired of living in a house, and now i didn't anymore!
joy filled the world.
that is... until today, when i learned my computer isn't talking to my printer. i tried to join the help forum, but i couldn't run the diagnostics command that was meant to be part of the install and when the help forum wanted to know what version of peppermint OS i am running, i had to admit i had no idea what the answer was and even less idea how to determine the answer.
should i have stuck with the devil i knew?
only time will tell.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)