Australian Flag, deformed

As a result of some tensions on Australia Day, some individuals on the day received media attention by burning the Australian flag. This was seen by many as highly disrespectful. Others saw it as practically sacrilege based on their reactions.

To be honest? People need to step back and consider what the flag is.

The flag is a symbol, and we sometimes forget that any symbol which can be used to make a positive statement can also be used to make a negative statement. Or, to be more specific – a symbol exists to be used, and only a very foolish person assumes that it should only be used in one way.

Humans are complex creatures – we can build the most amazingly abstract notions from the most simple forms. Flags are a classic representation of this: a bit of material, or plastic, with assorted colours and patterns on it suddenly when layed out in the correct fashion represents a country. Only the most dictatorial of states however institute policies that prohibit questioning the country, and Australia is not one of those states. As such, we shouldn’t be afraid of someone burning a flag.

It’s also very foolish to assert that a patriot can’t question the behaviour of his or her country. Indeed, as I’ve argued in the past, a patriot is someone who doesn’t look at the country and extemporise about all that they perceive as good, blinded to or ignoring everything else, but instead is someone who is prepared to say, “There are some things we could do better”.

Complacency is a dangerous tool of conservatives, regardless of whether it is in politics, or religion, or any other area. Human history is, if nothing else, an abject demonstration that complacency is a terrible thing – that we must always be looking to move forward. Our entire history as a species has been marked with the painful lessons of ideologues preaching stagnation – of continuing to do things a particular way because that’s how they’ve always been done. But it’s also been marked by those amazing moments where collectively or even as individuals, we’ve made great strides forward – by refusing to accept complacency.

Some might argue that burning a flag is a terrible statement against a nation – and maybe it is; but maybe it also serves collectively to give us a kick in the pants. To tell us that there’s things we could be doing better. Maybe not to the extent that the people who are burning the flags are saying, but still, as an abject demonstration that there are patriots asking for a rethink of the status quo. They’re feeling pain, and they’re wanting to demonstrate that.

“Perhaps, what we need is a good kick in our complacency for what lies ahead.”

(Star Trek: The Next Generation, “Q Who?”)

Don’t get angry at people burning flags – listen to their message. You may not agree with it; they may not even be right – but it may point to a discussion that needs to be had, and a new tangent that needs to be taken.

 

 

Selling down Apple

In most lines of work, there’s a word we use to describe people who consistently fail at their jobs. Whether it’s a system administrator who constantly does the wrong thing and crashes servers, or a checkout assistant who breaks eggs every time he places them in a bag, or blood test analyst who constantly sends back inverse results, the one word eventually has to be used to describe their work:

incompetent

That’s not to say that they’re incapable of working, but eventually if we were their boss, we’d suggest that they may want to move on to another job that they may fare better at.

Yet, there appears to be a line of work where incompetence in a job is completely ignored – financial market analysis. Oh, you could readily say that the GFC exceptionally proved this, but ironically what seems to consistently prove it outside of crises is the attitude so many financial market ‘analysts’ have towards Apple’s stock price.

“Sell! Sell! Sell!”, they cry, “Everything is going to turn to dust!”

Except, time and time again, it doesn’t. Over at Daring Fireball, John Gruber maintains a “claim chowder” set of articles pointing out grossly inaccurate predictions made by (mostly) analysts about how Apple is about to crash and burn in a spectacular way. iPad killers, iPhone killers, iOS killers, and, just as frequently, stock prices.

So, here’s a few questions I have relating to these analysts:

  1. If you are employing someone who makes these wildly inaccurate claims, what steps are you taking, and have you already taken, to address the significant lack of competence in your employee?
  2. If you are a self employed analyst making these predictions, have you ever been formally trained in any form of economics?
    • If you have been formally trained, and these are your logical conclusions, can you show your working?
    • If you have been formally trained and these were just guesses, don’t you think you should start behaving more professionally?
    • If you haven’t been formally trained, what insight led you to the realisation that you could successfully do this work?
  3. Is the primary method of distribution of your postings via a website where the primary means of income generation is ad/click-through revenue?
    • If so, wouldn’t that suggest a conflict of interest? After all, your primary motivator would not be accuracy, but driving up the number of clicks on ads to increase revenue. That’s economics 101 – sell more stuff.
    • So wouldn’t it be necessary to declare that conflict of interest by citing, on your website, that your primary means of income is ad revenue and your posts are designed to drive that traffic?
  4. Alternatively, are you a Microsoft or Google Fanboy, who is desperately seeking to validate your own product obsessions by trying to shit-can the competitor?

I’m afraid that I’ve long since had to give up on Hanlon’s razor for these analysts and their predictions, and so we must revert to Occam’s razor, and say that they are either:

  • Incompetent or
  • Malicious or
  • Both incompetent and malicious.

I’d suggest it’s time the press stop listening to these sorts of fools – except the much of the press, too, wilfully plays these same games, so they’re just as culpable.

 

Today in the Herald Sun, Margaret Court (yes, the same Margaret Court who has been complaining bitterly that she’s being stopped from talking) wrote an opinion piece entitled “Priority is to protect marriage“.

I thought I’d take a few minutes to translate what I’m reading in some of the key points she makes in the article.

“We live in a blessed nation but Australia is on a steep moral decline.”

Translation: Australia is refusing to stay locked into the moral code of Pleasantville, and I don’t like it.

“We are a country with a moral fabric and families and marriage are at its core.”

Translation: I am conveniently forgetting that one in three marriages in Australia end in divorce.

“We live in a world of moral values. Even those without faith know what is right and what is wrong.”

Translation: So long as they believe that I know is right and wrong, at least.

“Looking back, you can see that there has been a steep decline, especially when it comes to the issue of sexuality. There is so much scripture within the Bible that points to what we see happening now. We are losing that sense of discipline.”

Translation: Take, for instance, the discipline we lost when we started ignoring Timothy 2:12, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.” Look at all the crackpots that came out when we relaxed that stance, will you? Ahem. I don’t know where that came from. IGNORE TIMOTHY.

“Children need a mother and a faith – stability from a male and a female – and we are losing sight of this.”

Translation: Children with single parents should be adopted out to mixed-couple foster parents. Or at least, that’s the logical conclusion.

“The Book of Romans speak of the people of Earth trading in God.”

Translation: DON’T LOOK AT TIMOTHY! DON’T LOOK AT TIMOTHY. JUST ROMANS.

“we need to protect marriage because it has been God-ordained from the beginning.”

Translation: I’ll forget about all the historical evidence of same-sex marriages through the ages. AND YOU SHOULD TOO.

“God told man to be united with his wife and to multiply on earth.”

Translation: Please don’t think of the historical implications of this point of view. Otherwise, you’ll realise he must have also instructed Eve to have sex with her sons to continue to populate the earth, especially the son who killed his brother.

“People think it’s [the bible] a book of fear, but it’s not.”

Translation: There’s nothing more pleasant than reading children bedtime stories based on the bible. Such as that rainbow filled one about almost everyone on the planet being killed in a flood. Or that one about keeping slaves. Or that one about killing everyone who opposes god. Or that one about requiring the sacrifice of a son. No stuff of nightmares in that. And hell is really full of marshmellows for roasting.

“A nun at my primary school once gave me the cane”

Translation: Being beaten by a woman in a penguin suit didn’t affect my upbringing. See, I’m perfectly normal, aren’t I?

My only conclusion is that Margaret is now drunk on the attention she got from her original trolling and just can’t stop.

Please Margaret: get professional help.

 

I just experienced a nasty bug with Finder which results in data loss. Thankfully in this situation I had a copy of the original file, but it’s a very unpleasant bug.

Scenario:

  • A customer sent me a zip file called var_adm_messages.zip
  • I unzipped the file, which created the directory var_adm_messages, and in that directory it created the file messages
  • I renamed the file in var_adm_messages from ‘messages’ to var_adm_messages
  • I moved the var_adm_messages file up one level – i.e., into the parent directory that also contained the var_adm_messages directory

Here’s where it gets (a) dangerous and (b) interesting.

So, here’s what my folder structure looks like:

Having renamed the ‘messages’ file to ‘var_adm_messages’, I drag it out to the parent folder, and choose to Replace, since I won’t need the var_adm_messages folder any longer:

Finder bug 2

All good. Now, at this point I’d expect to see the ‘var_adm_messages’ folder disappear, and be replaced by the ‘var_adm_messages’ file. Instead:

Finder Bug 3

Result? Both the file that I wanted, and the original directory, removed.

I suspect Finder is deleting the directory first, which consequently trashes the file that I wanted to move, and subsequently silently fails on the file move.

I know what I’m doing in this situation isn’t what someone would do on a daily basis, but it does violate the rule of least astonishment – and it does generate data loss.

All I can say is: Urgh.

 

Appearances are deceivingFor many of us, when we’re young (and particularly when we’re still in school), the appearance of a person has a significant impact on how we interact with them, and how we perceive them. I was a skinny during much of primary school, but as I hit puberty and my tolerance to carbs fell through the floor, I ballooned, and so during the remainder of my school years, I developed an understanding of just how mean spirited and twisted some kids can be about appearances.

This treatment, not to mention growing up gay in a small country town, resulted in me becoming pretty insular for most of University; I had a few friends but otherwise mostly kept to myself.

Yet, those who are abused often replay that abuse during moments of weakness, and I’ll confess I was equally guilty from time to time of judging others by their appearances. Just as many looked at my size and assumed I was lazy, slovenly and perhaps a little dim, I too, found myself periodically developing first impressions based on entirely the wrong reasons.

Over time though, I learnt – both to my relief, and my embarrassment at prior moments of judgement – that physical appearances are usually the absolute worst metric by which we can judge someone. Sometimes, to be sure, a person’s attitude will manifest in their physical appearance; yet, even then, the physical appearance is likely to be the symptom, not the cause, of the attitude. Not always, but sometimes for sure.

Up until my early thirties, I spent much of my life worrying about how others would perceive my physical appearance, and I let that significantly impact what I did. It’s still something that comes into play, but I’ve learnt ways of mitigating this. To a degree, my consulting career impacted on this – in the early 2000′s, professional services companies and system integrators would usually require male staff to go on-site wearing a tie, for instance. Ultimately though, this is an entirely sexist attitude. Women are permitted a wide latitude in their dress and appearance in professional situations, yet many businesses expected men to continue to wear stuffy ties and suits.

As anyone who has worked in professional IT would know – the level of dress does in any way indicate the intelligence or capability of the person at what they do. In fact, in many organisations, the IT people who are most casually dressed may in fact be the most intelligent and most respected of all.

Ironically however, once I reached a certain level of professional expertise, I made the judgement that I would no longer allow myself to worry about how people might perceive my skill level based on my appearance. That wasn’t a decision to dress like a slob; quite the contrary, at times I became more fastidious about my work clothes. But I also allowed myself to have a modicum of expression with my personal experience. So I grew a mohawk. [Aside: Apparently, mohawks are coming back into fashion because of a few celebrities. If so, those celebrities have been watching the bear community. So, if you have a mohawk at the moment because you saw a celebrity with one ... you're welcome.]

When my previous employer collapsed and I started a new job, I became somewhat conservative in my appearance again, but this was as likely as anything caused by the general depression I was feeling at the time, and as I edged my way out of that, my mohawk started to grow back. It became the full “pointy thing” that some mohawks developed to, but since I have a whorl of hair directly in the line of the mohawk, it became impossible to sustain as a single unit, and looked stupid as two separate pointy segments, so it disappeared for a while, before returning as a very short mohawk – literally less than a centimetre high. (Thanks to the inspiration from a friend in Melbourne, at the time.)

Eventually I started getting tattoo work done – I have a partial sleeve now; it extends all the way down my arm but doesn’t quite wrap all the way around my arm – it’s still to be completed. A second sleeve will eventually be done, too. And of course, my beard has lengthened.

The net result is that – according to some, at least – I now look like a mean bikie. (Or, based on some amusing abuse I copped recently, a “bikie c__t”.)

But here’s where it gets interesting: I’m actually a big softie. I’m a pacifist; I refuse to hate anything (indeed, a synaesthesia like reaction causes me to recoil quite strongly from use of the word); a good piece of music will leave me overcome with emotion and I can’t in any way read anything about animal cruelty. That’s just the beginning.

Should I adjust my appearance because some people misinterpret how I look? Ultimately, that’s their problem, not mine. In some small way, I’d like to think I’m a walking reminder that judging people by their appearances is an entirely stupid and pointless endeavour.

The world would be a better place if we all stopped judging people by their appearances. I’m not perfect, I still sometimes fail, but I regret it bitterly each time and do my best to avoid it. So should you.

 

It’s fair to say that I am a large man. While that’s something that can be frequently admired in the bear community, it’s not something I’m particularly proud of, though I’ve learned to live with it. Maybe I’ll eventually manage to drop some weight, but I’ve had (no pun intended) bigger problems to deal with over the last 12 months than my ample size.

Being a big man though exposes me to a particularly nasty side of the fashion industry – that being:

Fat people don’t deserve good clothes.

Now, I’m not obsessed with my appearance in public. I like to not look frumpy or dishevelled, but past that I can put up with looking fairly plain, for the simple reason that it usually lets me blend into the background and partake in my favourite social past-time – observation.

What drives me nuts though is this that while thin, muscled or even just mildly plump people can get a large selection of clothing with often witty comments or cute cartoon characters on it through regular, department stores, the selection available to – well, let’s be frank – much larger people is about as exciting and interesting as being the recipient of a punch in the crotch from an angry monkey.

Let’s take a typical shirt from Target, for instance:

The Simple Fats

I’m not exclusively picking on target, either. In Australia the three main department stores that even deign to carry larger clothing are Big W, KMart and Target. None of them are any better than the other on this front.

Fat shirts from the more regular priced department stores come into 4 main categories:

  1. American Universities – No, I never attended Arizona State. I don’t give a flying fracas about it, or any other American University. I don’t have anything against them, but I don’t see why I need to wear them.
  2. Sporting – Because all fat people are either avid, unfulfilled sports fans, or it’s an expression of irony from the fashion industry – “Hey look, here’s a fat person wearing a shirt about sport. Ha! What a joke!”
  3. Motorbikes – Because all fat people ride motorbikes or get obsessed about them. Now, I admit since I’m growing a longer goatee I and have a mohawk I seem to get confused quite regularly as a bikie (including having someone, via a hacked Facebook account, recently contact me and call me a “bikie looking c_nt”), but to be perfectly honest, the last time I was on a motorbike was apparently when I was about two and a half years old.
  4. Ironic Sex – “Haha, a fat person pretending he’s sexy!” For example, the current one from Target, typically heterocentric: “Don’t worry ladies, there’s plenty to go around.”

There’s a psuedo-fifth class of shirt – the plain coloured shirt. However, these are one-use shirts; they’re designed to expand at least 16 sizes, or shrink 4 sizes, on the first wash.

If I want to get clothes that fit and I like the look of, I either have to go to specialist big mens stores (a rare breed of store, these days), overseas stores, or come up with my own custom design from online printing stores, such as Zazzle.

What’s the likelihood of me walking into a department store and picking up a reasonably priced larger mans shirt that doesn’t fall into one of those four main categories above? I’ve got buckleys. Maybe I should be thankful. Ten years ago the only fat shirts that you could get either had vertical or horizontal stripes – both explicitly designed to make you feel like a walking sack of shit.

Still – it could be worse; I guess if I were as thin as the waifs that stagger up and down the catwalk looking like they’re one step away from total collapse, I’d not be able to go outside in anything more than a mild breeze.

I don’t think that it’s too much to ask for that department stores actually stock the same styles of clothes in the 3XL+ range that they do in the XXL and under range. Surely, in a period where every business needs to trim costs, it would be easier to employ one set of designers working on clothes for the entire range, rather than a quirky and cool set of designers for the XXLs and under, then a sarcastic, bitchy and nasty set of designers for the 3XL+ range? Surely this would also help morale at these clothing companies?

Well, you’d think so, anyway.

 

I was inspired by “How do atheists find meaning in life?“, and then a subsequent discussion on Facebook that quite rightly pointed out the sometimes too-generalised criticisms levelled by the author, to write a bit about the rules I live by as an atheist.

  1. This life is the only time you exist. Make the most of it.
  2. This life is the only time anyone else exists. Do not take it from them.
  3. That which we leave behind when we’re gone are the memories and thoughts others have of us. Do your best to ensure they’re good ones.
  4. It’s valid to feel angry about things from time to time. Hate is not valid.
  5. Do not attack the personal religious or spiritual beliefs of another, unless it is to defend against those beliefs being used to impinge your rights.
  6. Good and bad, or good and evil, are discoverable without religion, and we should always try to do good.
  7. Good and bad, or good and evil, are evolving concepts.
  8. Believe that which can be empirically proven.
  9. Follow Hanlon’s Razor until Occam’s Razor demands otherwise.
  10. Our “purpose” should be three-fold:
    • Contribute, in some way, however small, to the evolution of the human mind.
    • Be mindful that we’re not the last generation to inhabit the earth.
    • Be mindful that we’re not the only species to inhabit the earth.

I’m not perfect. Sometimes I fail. That, however, is just part of life.

 

I’m frequently staggered by the inability of vendors, large and small, to provide decent search capabilities on their websites. This routinely happens across the entire spectrum of vendors, from hardware to OS to application, large and small. Search is not supplied by providing a search field and button somewhere in the header or footer of each generated web page – instead, it’s actually what goes on in the background that’s really important.

You know, the searching bit.

The indexing bit.

The text comparison bit.

This is something that I’m not convinced LaCie have understood:

LaCie Website

So I searched for “Thunderbolt” from the main page. Given the huge rotating graphic on the front page twice mentions Thunderbolt (one such mention pictured), there’s going to be some results, surely?

…cue crickets chirping…

LaCie Search Results

Yes, I know I could have actually clicked the Thunderbolt product on the main page; but that’s not necessarily intuitive if you’re a consumer who wants to know about all the Thunderbolt options a company has.

Left hand, meet right hand.

Shake, please.

 

There are four really common rebuttals to homosexuality touted by various religions, and given that not only are homophobic men are very likely to be aroused by homosexual behaviour, but homophobic rebuttals tend to have minimal to no logic in them, I thought it worthwhile running through those four arguments – what they say, and what I hear when they say it.

Argument one:

What you say / what I hear 1

Argument two:

What you say / what I hear 2

Argument three:

What you say / what I hear 3

Argument four:

What you say / what I hear 4

So, be aware! If you try one of those arguments on me, you know now what I’ll be thinking.

 

iPhone mute switch

Over at Daring Fireball, John Gruber has a post, “On the behavior of the iPhone mute switch“. This article arose from the well reported case recently of a conductor halting a performance because he was (justifiably) disturbed by incessant iPhone ringing. John reported that the owner of the iPhone hadn’t realised he was at fault because it was actually an accidentally set alarm playing on the phone while the hone was on mute.

Gruber ends by saying:

if the mute switch silenced everything, there’d be thousands of people oversleeping every single day because they went to bed the night before unaware that the phone was still in silent mode.

I’m calling that this is poor UI design on Apple’s part. I read and understand John’s rationale completely, but it’s wrong.

Mute means mute.

Every phone and device I’ve owned up until the iPhone which has had a mute switch has worked on the simple premise that if the mute switch is engaged, then the device is silent. No ifs, no buts, no exceptions.

The iPhone mute switch is not a hard switch and seems to be ignorable on a per-app basis. For instance, you can’t watch use the YouTube application with mute enabled – sound still plays. You equally can’t use the Apple supplied Video utility either on mute. Equally, there are games on the iPhone that will still play sound, even when the phone is on mute. (I can’t think of specific examples at the moment – I delete these when they do it. And give a bad review on the iTunes store.)

It’s frustrating, and annoying. What if I’m out somewhere and I want to quickly show someone a clip of video, but I don’t care about the sound? It could be that we’re in a fairly quiet place and I’m wanting to be discrete. Why do I have to remember to start frantically dialling the volume down, while the phone is muted, just because the application in question gets to ignore my preference? What possible reason (other than a narcissistic self-aggrandizing belief that he/she knows best) would a game developer have for explicitly ignoring an engaged mute switch? OK, so I admit I’m not an iOS developer, and maybe the Application designer has to explicitly check for mute being enabled and then choose to not make a sound – but if so, that points to an even more fundamental flaw in the entire mute process on the iPhone.

Gruber gives the pleasant example of the iPhone being “smart” enough to still wake people up when they’ve accidentally put the phone on mute before bed, and I agree this can be handy, but there actually needs to be a middle ground. You see, “mute means mute” is well enough for dumb phones and dumb devices, but we’re talking about a device here that’s got the ability to have per-application settings, and controls over sounds, etc. In essence, if there are exceptions to the “mute means mute”, these should be user controllable.

What I believe would be a more sensible approach would be:

  • Default action is “mute means mute”;
  • Within the Settings – Sounds area, there would be a “Mute Exceptions” option, and that would list all the applications that request to be able to play sound even though mute is engaged.
  • With the exception of the Clock app, this would be “No” in all cases.
  • The user could toggle-on permission for any given application to play sound while the mute button was engaged.
  • Without this permission, the application would be denied access to playing sound by the OS while the mute button was engaged.

This would be a far more sensible design, and take advantage of the fact that the phone is significantly more capable than a dumb device, and able to be better customised to suit the user’s experience.

It can also work in the reverse for people too, who actually prefer to run the iPhone on silent most of the time, but occasionally want audible alerts. As a simple example, my iPhone runs mostly on silent. However, every now and then I’m on-call, and when I’m on-call, I need to get audible alerts for SMSs, regardless of the time of day. (Want? No. Need? Yes.) So I want the option of still keeping the phone on silent, but having SMSs, and maybe even phone calls, to get audible alarms. Going into a “Mute Exceptions” area and just toggling on “iMessage” and “Phone” for two weeks would be exceedingly handy.

It would be up to the individual app designer as to whether he or she wants to pester the user that the phone is on mute and they’d get a better experience by turning sound back on.

But at the end of the day, it should always be up to the user as to whether sound emits from their device.

Ultimately, it should be one of the two situations:

  • Mute means mute, or
  • Mute means mute unless excepted by the user.
© 2012 unsane Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha