I am currently blogging to you via my iPod touch, and given that fact I won't me saying to much. I am incredibly impressed with the iPod touch... It is by far the best portable device I have ever used, let alone owned.
I wowed my entire family when I showed them... The most impressive part of that they found was the touch screen technology, which is THE most intuitive technology I've ever seen on a portable device.
There are plenty of technologies that have begun to start using that technology since the introduction of the iPhone to North America in 2007, but none of them have been anywhere near as successful as Apple in this venture.
Friday, December 26, 2008
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Rebellion
Picture this: your country has been invaded by a large, powerful foreign force who are now occupying the entire country for one reason or another.
Would you join a resistance movement to fight back?
I can assume that about 60% of you are going to say yes, well another 30% will say it would depend on the circumstances and reason for occupation, well another 10% say you wouldn't care either way. Please note that estimate is out of my general opinion, and is not an official estimate from any official or credible source. I base my information on what I have heard from people I know and their opinions on the subject.
If you where to join a resistance movement, would you join even if you knew the fight would be a futile one, and you would just be fighting to make a point? Or would it have to be a full-fledged rebellion as opposed to a partisan movement before you would even consider volunteering?
Personally, I would make a detailed plan for a eventual full-fledged rebellion movement, but to begin with I would establish small partisan movements in different regions of my country, which would all eventually unite to make a fair sized rebellion movement that would wage guerrilla warfare on the occupying force(s).
If the rebellion became even a slight success, I would begin to search for thousands of new recruits, foreign or not, mercenary or volunteer, to fight for our cause.
If my forces rose above the number of 800,000, which may be a bit far fetched, I would begin a plan to invade and capture entire towns, city's, and regions, with the hope of eventually reaching the capital, hopefully with the possible assistance of other allied, or formerly allied countries.
Once my country was liberated, depending on the prestige, fame, and success of my rebellion movement, I would either form my own army to go and fight the formerly occupying force on their own land, or I would enlist with my national or a foreign army and fight against the enemy.
Give me your thoughts on what you would do in a situation related to a scenario of that nature, I'd be highly interested to see what you have to say.
Would you join a resistance movement to fight back?
I can assume that about 60% of you are going to say yes, well another 30% will say it would depend on the circumstances and reason for occupation, well another 10% say you wouldn't care either way. Please note that estimate is out of my general opinion, and is not an official estimate from any official or credible source. I base my information on what I have heard from people I know and their opinions on the subject.
If you where to join a resistance movement, would you join even if you knew the fight would be a futile one, and you would just be fighting to make a point? Or would it have to be a full-fledged rebellion as opposed to a partisan movement before you would even consider volunteering?
Personally, I would make a detailed plan for a eventual full-fledged rebellion movement, but to begin with I would establish small partisan movements in different regions of my country, which would all eventually unite to make a fair sized rebellion movement that would wage guerrilla warfare on the occupying force(s).
If the rebellion became even a slight success, I would begin to search for thousands of new recruits, foreign or not, mercenary or volunteer, to fight for our cause.
If my forces rose above the number of 800,000, which may be a bit far fetched, I would begin a plan to invade and capture entire towns, city's, and regions, with the hope of eventually reaching the capital, hopefully with the possible assistance of other allied, or formerly allied countries.
Once my country was liberated, depending on the prestige, fame, and success of my rebellion movement, I would either form my own army to go and fight the formerly occupying force on their own land, or I would enlist with my national or a foreign army and fight against the enemy.
Give me your thoughts on what you would do in a situation related to a scenario of that nature, I'd be highly interested to see what you have to say.
Armageddon and Project: Web-Bot
Yes, I am aware of how late it is in my current local time, but I'm in a sort of zone of fascination and I wish to delve, at least partially for the time being, into a very complex topic of historic controversy and debate: December 21st, 2012.
I can't remember when I first heard about the doomsday prophecies of 2012, but the first time I can clearly remember would have to be one sunny day outside during my Grade 9 year, when a friend of mine brought it up when we where all in a sort of sarcastic teen mode. He, at the time, was the only one being serious, and he put it very bluntly when he said it: "Apparently, we're all going to die because the Mayans and Romans said so."
At first I remember thinking he was joking, then in a second realizing he wasn't. Of course, hearing it so bluntly and suddenly, I tell him that's ridiculous.
The following night out of pure curiosity, I start doing some research on the topic, and am incredibly fascinated by what I find.
Strangely enough, what I found out then would later be dwarfed by my future discoveries on the topic.
Apparently, the Mayans, Nostradamus, and the 'Web-Bot' Project, along with countless other prophetic sources, all pointed to some sort of doomsday and/or great rebirth/revival of the entire planet during 2012.
All of you who have done some delving into the topic yourselves will know all about the Mayan predictions and the end of the fourth bak'tun cycle, most of you will know about Nostradamus and his predictions about a series of cataclysmic events occurring in that year, but very little of you will know about the modern prophetic source and its predictions on the topic, known only as the Web-Bot Project.
THE WEB-BOT PROJECT:
The 'Web-Bot' Project was a project set up in the late 1990's by inventors trying to figure out a way to successfully predict changes in the stock-markets, and for the first few years following its completion began to realize it was incredibly accurate.
The Project is made up of a series of computing cycles and 'agents' which comb the web and choose out words and letters almost completely at random. The randomized words are put in order by date and time scanned, and then sent to other supercomputers to be filtered to make as much sense as possible. Incredibly, the biggest mistake that ever turns up is a slight grammatical error, and the filtered words and letters make total sense.
At the official dawn of the 21st century, the inventors of the Web-Bot Project began to realize that the predictions it made weren't only correct about the stock-markets, but also about other world events.
In June of 2001, the Project predicted that a world-changing catastrophic event that would draw the concern of every nation to one subject would occur within the next 30-60 days.
On September 11th 2001, the World Trade Center was destroyed, and the eyes of the world turned upon the subject of global terrorism.
Many of you are going to find my slight examples very uncompelling, and personally, I don't blame you. I have neither the time nor the effort to write down everything I have found. What I'm attempting to do is to convey the jist of what I've discovered to you. I encourage you to look deeper into the subject if you feel compelled enough to do so.
I suggest and encourage you all to watch as many of the videos on the web page found at the following link as possible, and suggest to each and every one of you to keep an open mind well doing so:
http://www.history.com/video.do?name=armageddon
These videos really make you think hard on this topic, just so your rightfully warned ahead of time.
I can't remember when I first heard about the doomsday prophecies of 2012, but the first time I can clearly remember would have to be one sunny day outside during my Grade 9 year, when a friend of mine brought it up when we where all in a sort of sarcastic teen mode. He, at the time, was the only one being serious, and he put it very bluntly when he said it: "Apparently, we're all going to die because the Mayans and Romans said so."
At first I remember thinking he was joking, then in a second realizing he wasn't. Of course, hearing it so bluntly and suddenly, I tell him that's ridiculous.
The following night out of pure curiosity, I start doing some research on the topic, and am incredibly fascinated by what I find.
Strangely enough, what I found out then would later be dwarfed by my future discoveries on the topic.
Apparently, the Mayans, Nostradamus, and the 'Web-Bot' Project, along with countless other prophetic sources, all pointed to some sort of doomsday and/or great rebirth/revival of the entire planet during 2012.
All of you who have done some delving into the topic yourselves will know all about the Mayan predictions and the end of the fourth bak'tun cycle, most of you will know about Nostradamus and his predictions about a series of cataclysmic events occurring in that year, but very little of you will know about the modern prophetic source and its predictions on the topic, known only as the Web-Bot Project.
THE WEB-BOT PROJECT:
The 'Web-Bot' Project was a project set up in the late 1990's by inventors trying to figure out a way to successfully predict changes in the stock-markets, and for the first few years following its completion began to realize it was incredibly accurate.
The Project is made up of a series of computing cycles and 'agents' which comb the web and choose out words and letters almost completely at random. The randomized words are put in order by date and time scanned, and then sent to other supercomputers to be filtered to make as much sense as possible. Incredibly, the biggest mistake that ever turns up is a slight grammatical error, and the filtered words and letters make total sense.
At the official dawn of the 21st century, the inventors of the Web-Bot Project began to realize that the predictions it made weren't only correct about the stock-markets, but also about other world events.
In June of 2001, the Project predicted that a world-changing catastrophic event that would draw the concern of every nation to one subject would occur within the next 30-60 days.
On September 11th 2001, the World Trade Center was destroyed, and the eyes of the world turned upon the subject of global terrorism.
Many of you are going to find my slight examples very uncompelling, and personally, I don't blame you. I have neither the time nor the effort to write down everything I have found. What I'm attempting to do is to convey the jist of what I've discovered to you. I encourage you to look deeper into the subject if you feel compelled enough to do so.
I suggest and encourage you all to watch as many of the videos on the web page found at the following link as possible, and suggest to each and every one of you to keep an open mind well doing so:
http://www.history.com/video.do?name=armageddon
These videos really make you think hard on this topic, just so your rightfully warned ahead of time.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Islas de San Felix (Texada Island)
I live in the small coastal town of Powell River, British Columbia, and wow... we have an incredibly bland and very short history... we weren't even established as a small town until 1908, and that means this town is exactly 100 years old this year, and strangely enough I didn't hear much of a fuss about it... in fact, I didn't even know until I looked it up on Wikipedia.
Maybe I just wasn't listening very hard.
Anyways, all those who live in Powell River will be amazed to know of how rich our neighbours history is. To start with, the area was discovered in 1791 by Spanish naval explorer José María Narváez, who dubbed the island with the name Islas de San Felix, and gave the name Isla de Texada to a smaller island off the west coast of modern day Texada, known today as Lasqueti Island.
Mapmakers later accidentally switched the names around, and the accident just ended up sticking.
I don't really feel like writing an entire essay on the history of the island right now, but if you want more information on it, follow this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texada_Island
Also, Texada is the former home of Canadian-American Academy Award-nominee Jennifer Tilly, who was born in Los Angeles, California, but who moved to Texada at the age of 5 following her parents divorce.
Most notably she's appeared on the TV sitcom Fraiser, was formerly married to The Simpsons producer Sam Simon, was a bracelet winner at the World Series of Poker, starred alongside Jim Carrey in the popular comedy movie Liar Liar, voiced a character in the 2001 Disney movie Monsters Inc, and is the voice of Bonnie, Joe Swanson's wife on Family Guy.
I don't really understand how we became the dominant municipality, and how Texada is considered part of Powell River as opposed to Powell River being a part of Texada.
Really makes me wonder.
THIS ARTICLE WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN ON DECEMBER 17TH 2008, AND IS AN ARTICLE THAT ORIGINATED ON THE NOW OBSOLETE SPIN-OFF BLOG 'ON A SIDENOTE.'
Maybe I just wasn't listening very hard.
Anyways, all those who live in Powell River will be amazed to know of how rich our neighbours history is. To start with, the area was discovered in 1791 by Spanish naval explorer José María Narváez, who dubbed the island with the name Islas de San Felix, and gave the name Isla de Texada to a smaller island off the west coast of modern day Texada, known today as Lasqueti Island.
Mapmakers later accidentally switched the names around, and the accident just ended up sticking.
I don't really feel like writing an entire essay on the history of the island right now, but if you want more information on it, follow this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texada_Island
Also, Texada is the former home of Canadian-American Academy Award-nominee Jennifer Tilly, who was born in Los Angeles, California, but who moved to Texada at the age of 5 following her parents divorce.
Most notably she's appeared on the TV sitcom Fraiser, was formerly married to The Simpsons producer Sam Simon, was a bracelet winner at the World Series of Poker, starred alongside Jim Carrey in the popular comedy movie Liar Liar, voiced a character in the 2001 Disney movie Monsters Inc, and is the voice of Bonnie, Joe Swanson's wife on Family Guy.
I don't really understand how we became the dominant municipality, and how Texada is considered part of Powell River as opposed to Powell River being a part of Texada.
Really makes me wonder.
THIS ARTICLE WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN ON DECEMBER 17TH 2008, AND IS AN ARTICLE THAT ORIGINATED ON THE NOW OBSOLETE SPIN-OFF BLOG 'ON A SIDENOTE.'
The Frost-Biten Hand of Winter
Sure, winter is a time to get together with family and celebrate the birth of a very good (yet more then slightly delusional) man who was probably very good in the art of healing, known as the one and only Jesus Christ, and a time to chow down on that Christmas turkey before your uncle who's been looking forward to that turkey all day can lay a finger on it, but think about it... isn't winter also the most depressing, bitingly cold season of the year?
Sometimes I get the idea that Christmas was invented just to make this terrible, dragged-on season a bit more bearable, and maybe even add a hint of cheer into the hearts of every man and women (which, by the way, summer can do just by being present, thank you very much!) I mean, I walk outside and the first thing I feel is my facial skin beginning to tighten due to the -9 degree temperatures, and the freezingly unbearable wind waft under my sleeves and rest within my sweater, which you would think was designed to prevent that exact sort of thing from happening.
Unlike summer, you can't stand outside for more then 10 minutes without shivering uncontrollably or not being able to turn your head or move your arms properly because of your incredibly huge jacket.
Unlike summer, you can't do any outdoor activities that don't include getting nearly frozen to death, or at least end with you having a sprained ankle (or worse) due to black ice you apparently didn't notice on the sidewalk, and the guys that salt the cement didn't seem to notice.
Oh, and do you know whats delightful? When it rains! It's such a grand feeling having those nearly frozen raindrops pelt you in the face as you try to walk to school or work. Make sure not to look up, or you may become blind in one eye for the rest of your life!
Honestly, that last bit of sarcasm aside, I only see two good things that come with winter: Christmas, and snow, and even snow can be unbearable in huge doses!
I really can't wait until June.
THIS ARTICLE WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN ON DECEMBER 16TH 2008, AND IS AN ARTICLE THAT ORIGINATED ON THE NOW OBSOLETE SPIN-OFF BLOG 'ON A SIDENOTE.'
Sometimes I get the idea that Christmas was invented just to make this terrible, dragged-on season a bit more bearable, and maybe even add a hint of cheer into the hearts of every man and women (which, by the way, summer can do just by being present, thank you very much!) I mean, I walk outside and the first thing I feel is my facial skin beginning to tighten due to the -9 degree temperatures, and the freezingly unbearable wind waft under my sleeves and rest within my sweater, which you would think was designed to prevent that exact sort of thing from happening.
Unlike summer, you can't stand outside for more then 10 minutes without shivering uncontrollably or not being able to turn your head or move your arms properly because of your incredibly huge jacket.
Unlike summer, you can't do any outdoor activities that don't include getting nearly frozen to death, or at least end with you having a sprained ankle (or worse) due to black ice you apparently didn't notice on the sidewalk, and the guys that salt the cement didn't seem to notice.
Oh, and do you know whats delightful? When it rains! It's such a grand feeling having those nearly frozen raindrops pelt you in the face as you try to walk to school or work. Make sure not to look up, or you may become blind in one eye for the rest of your life!
Honestly, that last bit of sarcasm aside, I only see two good things that come with winter: Christmas, and snow, and even snow can be unbearable in huge doses!
I really can't wait until June.
THIS ARTICLE WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN ON DECEMBER 16TH 2008, AND IS AN ARTICLE THAT ORIGINATED ON THE NOW OBSOLETE SPIN-OFF BLOG 'ON A SIDENOTE.'
A Responsible Dictatorship?
HOW EXACTLY is a dictatorship a bad thing? Well, popular culture depicts dictators as terrible people, as does history, and in most cases, they have been, because they've been incredibly irresponsible and selfish. Some started out that way, well others where corrupted by absolute power and turned into stereotypical dictators.
But what if a responsible person, who would not become corrupted by absolute power, became a dictator?
Some of you are going to say that no matter what, 'absolute power corrupts absolutely,' and true, in most cases it does, but so far, in most cases, these people started off as self-centered, egotistical, and arrogant, and how no one originally assumed they where going to make things terrible I don't know.
In some ways, a responsible dictatorship could work very well, but a dictatorship like the Nazi dictatorship, or a fascist/ communist dictatorship in general, where national egotism and racial superiority become part of the civil consciousness, there tends to be alot of tragedy and tension.
Maybe there could be a government where a dictatorship is the top of the federal pyramid of power, but it would be a sub-democracy where senators/ premiers would still be democratically elected in the separate states/ provinces.
Please note that personally I think democracy is the most ideal form of government, and that I'm just writing this article for argument sake. I in no way support dictatorships, but only condone slight aspects of it. If a responsible dictatorship were achieved, their would be only be some slight downsides to it.
Think about it: if their were a responsible dictator, it would prevent lunatics from being democratically elected into office due to campaign misconceptions (we're looking at you, Bush), and it would stop irresponsible, selfish, and more then slightly insane dictators from systematically taking power by taking advantage of democracy (we're looking at you, Hitler).
If you think about it, the only time dictatorships are bad are when their socialist or communist dictatorships, and when it's egotistical, racist, and selfish leaders that gain control.
That's the end of this article, but I have one more thing to mention.
If nobody noticed, I didn't publish an article yesterday. I apologize for my short absence, and admit I have no real excuse for not getting around to it.
I did, on the other hand, publish an article on my spin off blog On a Sidenote.
Actually, on the subject of my spin off blog, I may be closing it and moving all my articles from it to this main blog. Give me your thoughts on that idea, tell me if you think both should continue to be segregated from one another, or if they should come together as a single blog.
But what if a responsible person, who would not become corrupted by absolute power, became a dictator?
Some of you are going to say that no matter what, 'absolute power corrupts absolutely,' and true, in most cases it does, but so far, in most cases, these people started off as self-centered, egotistical, and arrogant, and how no one originally assumed they where going to make things terrible I don't know.
In some ways, a responsible dictatorship could work very well, but a dictatorship like the Nazi dictatorship, or a fascist/ communist dictatorship in general, where national egotism and racial superiority become part of the civil consciousness, there tends to be alot of tragedy and tension.
Maybe there could be a government where a dictatorship is the top of the federal pyramid of power, but it would be a sub-democracy where senators/ premiers would still be democratically elected in the separate states/ provinces.
Please note that personally I think democracy is the most ideal form of government, and that I'm just writing this article for argument sake. I in no way support dictatorships, but only condone slight aspects of it. If a responsible dictatorship were achieved, their would be only be some slight downsides to it.
Think about it: if their were a responsible dictator, it would prevent lunatics from being democratically elected into office due to campaign misconceptions (we're looking at you, Bush), and it would stop irresponsible, selfish, and more then slightly insane dictators from systematically taking power by taking advantage of democracy (we're looking at you, Hitler).
If you think about it, the only time dictatorships are bad are when their socialist or communist dictatorships, and when it's egotistical, racist, and selfish leaders that gain control.
That's the end of this article, but I have one more thing to mention.
If nobody noticed, I didn't publish an article yesterday. I apologize for my short absence, and admit I have no real excuse for not getting around to it.
I did, on the other hand, publish an article on my spin off blog On a Sidenote.
Actually, on the subject of my spin off blog, I may be closing it and moving all my articles from it to this main blog. Give me your thoughts on that idea, tell me if you think both should continue to be segregated from one another, or if they should come together as a single blog.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
One moment is shattered by another
DOES TIME actually exist? As far as I've learned, technically it doesn't. Well, at least not in the mathematical way we've created.
In technicality, there is a space between one point of existence and another, but ALSO in technicality the only time something really exists is in this very moment.
Trust me, I'm aware of how much of a mind-boggling subject this is, and that it's very hard to comprehend for some (if not most).
I haven't really taken the time or the effort to create an independent theory about the space-time continuum like I have with the existence of an energy as opposed to a God, and maybe if I do take the time out of my next holiday, the two theories may come together to create something that makes total sense, and, who knows? I might just be on the verge of a breakthrough.
The other night I overheard a man debating with my dad and a group of different people about different subject regarding the general existence of every thing that is and why things are the way they are, and one of the subjects that came up during this debate was the mechanics of time.
This man argued that each moment in time always physically existed, and had the possible potential to exist during the existence of another moment in time, but there was a cycle that prevented this from occurring that physically destroyed each previous moment in time.
To me, this sounded a bit far fetched, but still quite engrossing and interesting none-the-less.
He went on to actually to attempt to explain his theory using a cup as an example. He spun the cup in his hand as he explained to us that this cup only exists in this very moment, and in technicality the same cup didn't exist in the previous moment, and would cease to exist once that moment's cycle was completed.
To this day I still believe that theory is a bit far fetched, but still feasible.
If you can, leave a comment voicing your thoughts on this theory.
In technicality, there is a space between one point of existence and another, but ALSO in technicality the only time something really exists is in this very moment.
Trust me, I'm aware of how much of a mind-boggling subject this is, and that it's very hard to comprehend for some (if not most).
I haven't really taken the time or the effort to create an independent theory about the space-time continuum like I have with the existence of an energy as opposed to a God, and maybe if I do take the time out of my next holiday, the two theories may come together to create something that makes total sense, and, who knows? I might just be on the verge of a breakthrough.
The other night I overheard a man debating with my dad and a group of different people about different subject regarding the general existence of every thing that is and why things are the way they are, and one of the subjects that came up during this debate was the mechanics of time.
This man argued that each moment in time always physically existed, and had the possible potential to exist during the existence of another moment in time, but there was a cycle that prevented this from occurring that physically destroyed each previous moment in time.
To me, this sounded a bit far fetched, but still quite engrossing and interesting none-the-less.
He went on to actually to attempt to explain his theory using a cup as an example. He spun the cup in his hand as he explained to us that this cup only exists in this very moment, and in technicality the same cup didn't exist in the previous moment, and would cease to exist once that moment's cycle was completed.
To this day I still believe that theory is a bit far fetched, but still feasible.
If you can, leave a comment voicing your thoughts on this theory.
'On a Sidenote...'
Earlier today, I launched the official spin-off blog to It's a Friendly Inferno! dubbed with the name On a Sidenote...
This spin-off blog will address my thoughts on smaller, more insignifigant issues then my main one will, so if you have interest in issues such as 'why computers lag so much?' then come and check out On a Sidenote next time you get a chance!
On a Sidenote's first official blog entry will be debuting later tonight around 5:00 pm PST.
Hope you check it out when and if you get a chance!
This spin-off blog will address my thoughts on smaller, more insignifigant issues then my main one will, so if you have interest in issues such as 'why computers lag so much?' then come and check out On a Sidenote next time you get a chance!
On a Sidenote's first official blog entry will be debuting later tonight around 5:00 pm PST.
Hope you check it out when and if you get a chance!
Monday, December 15, 2008
Why is it a Friendly Inferno?
Well, I decided I'd share the origin and the meaning of my blogs name with all of you out there before I go to bed tonight and have a well-earned rest, because some have been wondering. Hopefully future readers will be able to scratch that curious itch of theirs by being able to find this in my eventually vast archive.
Anyways, the origin of the name originally came from the idea for the name of a band that me and a friend of mine where (and still may possibly be) going to start, dubbed with the name "Friendly Inferno," which is a metaphor for life meaning 'life is hard, confusing, and long, so essentially it's just one big inferno, but we try to take the best out of it before we bite the dust,' hence the meaning that life is a 'Friendly Inferno.'
I originally got the idea for the name (originally meant for the band only) from the Billy Talent song 'River Below,' where I mistook the verse "Into the river below...I'm running from the inferno..." for "Into the river below...It's just a friendly inferno..."
I'm aware of how little sense that would make for a song, and especially for a Billy Talent song, which usually tend to try to make the entire point of the song very obvious from the beginning.
Well, there you have it, the origin and explanation of the meaning of my blogs name. Hope you found this at least virtually interesting!
Anyways, the origin of the name originally came from the idea for the name of a band that me and a friend of mine where (and still may possibly be) going to start, dubbed with the name "Friendly Inferno," which is a metaphor for life meaning 'life is hard, confusing, and long, so essentially it's just one big inferno, but we try to take the best out of it before we bite the dust,' hence the meaning that life is a 'Friendly Inferno.'
I originally got the idea for the name (originally meant for the band only) from the Billy Talent song 'River Below,' where I mistook the verse "Into the river below...I'm running from the inferno..." for "Into the river below...It's just a friendly inferno..."
I'm aware of how little sense that would make for a song, and especially for a Billy Talent song, which usually tend to try to make the entire point of the song very obvious from the beginning.
Well, there you have it, the origin and explanation of the meaning of my blogs name. Hope you found this at least virtually interesting!
Extremley Multicultrual Megametropolis?
HAVE YOU EVER given thought to how an urban cityscape is usually laid out? That's ok, neither did I until about 5 minutes ago. Well, as you may be able to tell from the ensuing article, I didn't do any research on the subject, and am doing this all from my collective memory of what I know about cities, and what I've seen myself.
As I see it, city's are usually broken up into 5 basic areas: Metropolitan Areas, Low-Class Residential Areas (occasionally known as "ghettos" or "shantytowns"), Middle-Class Residential Areas, High-Class Residential Areas, and Market Areas.
These areas usually have very distinguishable differences, with Metropolitan Areas being a mix of almost every other basic area.
For each area there are different types of people, for example: people in Low-Class Residential Areas are usually predominantly African American, and live as 'gangstas' with their own sort of culture, and are usually much more violent then the people of other basic areas, forced to live with constant gang violence, drug-trafficking, and drug abuse.
People in Middle-Class Residential Areas are probably the only people with no predominant independent culture, and no actual widely-used name for their 'type' of people. Some refer to them as "normies."
People in High-Class Residential Areas have very distinct city cultures, living the luxurious, often lazy, and lavish lives of the wealthy. Some tend to be quite smug about their social positions, well others seem to think life is always as easy as it is for them, which causes them to lack empathy when it comes to other peoples problems. They tend to go by the name of "preppies."
People in Metropolitan Areas tend to be a mix of everything.
Now that you know the jist of a basic city's layout, imagine that each area was all stuffed and mixed into one big, multicultural area.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of this? What are the benefits and downfalls? What problems would be presented to the common people and the municipal government? What previously existing problems would be solved or escalated to become even worse?
A couple advantages to this sort of setup would have to be the diversity of the city and all the different types of people you would encounter, and the choices presented to you upon entering this megalopolis. A few disadvantages would be how unpredictable the people you would encounter would be, the constant cross-cultural clashes, and the easier ability to keep secret Mafia operations a long-term secret due to city officials being distracted by other problems.
A few benefits would be the economic boost given from such a productive community, the amount of work that would be available, and the educational opportunities.
A few downfalls would be the amount of work needed to keep the city running at a constant pace, the likely high price of living costs for decent homes, and the amount of pollution that would come with a city of that scale.
A few problems that would be presented to the common people would be the crowded population, the dangers of organized crime and gang violence, and the likely high cost of living.
A few problems that would be presented to the municipal government would be the risk of corruption of city officials, pollution, organized crime, gang-related violence, and keeping the city's infrastructure in good condition.
The only previously existing problem that would be solved would be the cost of getting from one area to another, well the only three problems that would only escalate to become much worse would be crime, pollution, and cross-cultural clashes.
I'll be writing a follow-up to this article, but ONLY as soon as I get 10 comments voicing different peoples opinions on the idea of creating a city that's a mix of every different basic urban area.
As I see it, city's are usually broken up into 5 basic areas: Metropolitan Areas, Low-Class Residential Areas (occasionally known as "ghettos" or "shantytowns"), Middle-Class Residential Areas, High-Class Residential Areas, and Market Areas.
These areas usually have very distinguishable differences, with Metropolitan Areas being a mix of almost every other basic area.
For each area there are different types of people, for example: people in Low-Class Residential Areas are usually predominantly African American, and live as 'gangstas' with their own sort of culture, and are usually much more violent then the people of other basic areas, forced to live with constant gang violence, drug-trafficking, and drug abuse.
People in Middle-Class Residential Areas are probably the only people with no predominant independent culture, and no actual widely-used name for their 'type' of people. Some refer to them as "normies."
People in High-Class Residential Areas have very distinct city cultures, living the luxurious, often lazy, and lavish lives of the wealthy. Some tend to be quite smug about their social positions, well others seem to think life is always as easy as it is for them, which causes them to lack empathy when it comes to other peoples problems. They tend to go by the name of "preppies."
People in Metropolitan Areas tend to be a mix of everything.
Now that you know the jist of a basic city's layout, imagine that each area was all stuffed and mixed into one big, multicultural area.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of this? What are the benefits and downfalls? What problems would be presented to the common people and the municipal government? What previously existing problems would be solved or escalated to become even worse?
A couple advantages to this sort of setup would have to be the diversity of the city and all the different types of people you would encounter, and the choices presented to you upon entering this megalopolis. A few disadvantages would be how unpredictable the people you would encounter would be, the constant cross-cultural clashes, and the easier ability to keep secret Mafia operations a long-term secret due to city officials being distracted by other problems.
A few benefits would be the economic boost given from such a productive community, the amount of work that would be available, and the educational opportunities.
A few downfalls would be the amount of work needed to keep the city running at a constant pace, the likely high price of living costs for decent homes, and the amount of pollution that would come with a city of that scale.
A few problems that would be presented to the common people would be the crowded population, the dangers of organized crime and gang violence, and the likely high cost of living.
A few problems that would be presented to the municipal government would be the risk of corruption of city officials, pollution, organized crime, gang-related violence, and keeping the city's infrastructure in good condition.
The only previously existing problem that would be solved would be the cost of getting from one area to another, well the only three problems that would only escalate to become much worse would be crime, pollution, and cross-cultural clashes.
I'll be writing a follow-up to this article, but ONLY as soon as I get 10 comments voicing different peoples opinions on the idea of creating a city that's a mix of every different basic urban area.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Unwritten, Unquestioned Rule of Society #147
Earlier today, I was at my local Safeway branch with my dad, his girlfriend, and my brother.
Well I was there, I bought two donuts, and one gourmet cinammon bun with my own money. One of the donuts I gave to my brother as a Christmas present, well I ate the other myself (a surger-sprinkled donut with strawberry filling.) I ended up deciding to save the gourmet cinammon bun for later.
After we had finished our shopping, we went to bookstore which doubled as a small cafe known as Breakwater Books, where I decided I wanted to eat my gourmet cinammon bun. To my dismay, my dad said to me it was impolite and not allowed at certain places to eat food from other buisnesses in seperate buisnesses. I understood this in the terms that if you waltzed into a cafe with food from another cafe and decided to sit down at one of there tables and eat nothing but what you bought at the other cafe without purchasing anything from the cafe you where present in, but didn't understand it in the terms if you brought food in from one cafe into another cafe, but purchased something from the cafe you decided to eat in.
I asked my dad about this, and he insisted that was impolite as well. It frustrated me that I didn't understand so I began interrogating him in an attempt to try and make sense of this. I began assuming it was just one of those things you apparently had to obey without knowing exactly why, and if you know me, you'll understand that I don't obey those kind of rules without knowing exactly why I have to.
I believe that as long as you purchase something at a buisness you plan to eat something from outside the buisness in, you should be aloud to eat anything you'd like there, but maybe you should remember to clean up after yourself.
Well I was there, I bought two donuts, and one gourmet cinammon bun with my own money. One of the donuts I gave to my brother as a Christmas present, well I ate the other myself (a surger-sprinkled donut with strawberry filling.) I ended up deciding to save the gourmet cinammon bun for later.
After we had finished our shopping, we went to bookstore which doubled as a small cafe known as Breakwater Books, where I decided I wanted to eat my gourmet cinammon bun. To my dismay, my dad said to me it was impolite and not allowed at certain places to eat food from other buisnesses in seperate buisnesses. I understood this in the terms that if you waltzed into a cafe with food from another cafe and decided to sit down at one of there tables and eat nothing but what you bought at the other cafe without purchasing anything from the cafe you where present in, but didn't understand it in the terms if you brought food in from one cafe into another cafe, but purchased something from the cafe you decided to eat in.
I asked my dad about this, and he insisted that was impolite as well. It frustrated me that I didn't understand so I began interrogating him in an attempt to try and make sense of this. I began assuming it was just one of those things you apparently had to obey without knowing exactly why, and if you know me, you'll understand that I don't obey those kind of rules without knowing exactly why I have to.
I believe that as long as you purchase something at a buisness you plan to eat something from outside the buisness in, you should be aloud to eat anything you'd like there, but maybe you should remember to clean up after yourself.
Hey Bulldog!
My dad just rediscovered this song by The Beatles on YouTube earlier this morning:
Quite a good song. I hope you all enjoy it as much as I did.
Quite a good song. I hope you all enjoy it as much as I did.
Globe-Trotter
DREAMS OF TRAVELLING the world come frequently to some, and much less frequently to others. For me, I often dream of seeing the Pyramids of Giza, the Colloseum in Rome, the Empire State Building in New York City, and the Eiffel Tower in Paris, and for some reason I know for sure I'm going to visit all those places someday, it's just a matter of when.
I want to improvise my way down to Monterrey, Mexico and back following my graduation, and have actually drafted the areas I'll be stopping at on my way down, but I'm not sure how much money I'm going to need to pull of a venture like that. As far as I've planned, it won't be very coordinated, but I will have plans for if something goes slightly or totally wrong along the way.
I just really hope I don't get robbed, kidnapped, murdered or even worse along the way, because I know that passing through Texas as a Liberal Atheist can be more then a risk if I'm not careful, because by now near the end of the Bush regime, every person with common sense must know it's impossible to reason with a religous Republican.
I don't usually discriminate groups of people for anything, but for me, Republicans and Conservatives are ones that you can easily put into categories:
-They're usually quite self-centered, and willing to put corporations before the common people.
-The majority of American Republicans are Christian, which gives them the ridiculous privelege to point their holy military crusades to the Middle East as something that is willed by God, as opposed to a desperate search for oil .
-They usually strongly oppose the idea of homosexuality, and in some cases will try to supress homosexual rights.
-On occasion, they can be seen as more pro-caucasian.
There are plenty of other stereotypical points that I could list, but I won't because I've only just realized I've gotten totally sidetracked from my original subject of travelling the globe.
Back to the subject of travelling the world, I've encountered a very slight amount of people who would rather stay at home for the rest of their lives. For me, it's hard to understand these peoples mindsets, because I can't imagine living without the curiosity of what else is out there aside from this stick-in-the-mud small town.
I usually end up interrogating these people (unintentionally) about why they don't want to travel the world, and usually get bleak, dead-end awnsers like "I don't really know, just doesn't really sound like something I want to do." I usually look at them for a few moments, awe struck by their lack of curiosity or awareness of the world around them.
I have the same sort of confused awe when I meet people who don't like hearing about current world news, and usually get an awnser like "the news is to depressing, sad, and confusing for me," and wonder how sensitive these people have to be to ignore the entire world around them like that. Some live with the very self-centered ideology of "ignorance is bliss," which I strongly oppose because, in my perspective, paying no attention to the world around you makes you a clueless, uninterested idiot. I don't say idiot in the context that I hate the person, but more in the context that they're obviously not very smart and, as it would seem, don't know very much and have no right to have opinions on things such as religion, government, or how things should be.
I want to improvise my way down to Monterrey, Mexico and back following my graduation, and have actually drafted the areas I'll be stopping at on my way down, but I'm not sure how much money I'm going to need to pull of a venture like that. As far as I've planned, it won't be very coordinated, but I will have plans for if something goes slightly or totally wrong along the way.
I just really hope I don't get robbed, kidnapped, murdered or even worse along the way, because I know that passing through Texas as a Liberal Atheist can be more then a risk if I'm not careful, because by now near the end of the Bush regime, every person with common sense must know it's impossible to reason with a religous Republican.
I don't usually discriminate groups of people for anything, but for me, Republicans and Conservatives are ones that you can easily put into categories:
-They're usually quite self-centered, and willing to put corporations before the common people.
-The majority of American Republicans are Christian, which gives them the ridiculous privelege to point their holy military crusades to the Middle East as something that is willed by God, as opposed to a desperate search for oil .
-They usually strongly oppose the idea of homosexuality, and in some cases will try to supress homosexual rights.
-On occasion, they can be seen as more pro-caucasian.
There are plenty of other stereotypical points that I could list, but I won't because I've only just realized I've gotten totally sidetracked from my original subject of travelling the globe.
Back to the subject of travelling the world, I've encountered a very slight amount of people who would rather stay at home for the rest of their lives. For me, it's hard to understand these peoples mindsets, because I can't imagine living without the curiosity of what else is out there aside from this stick-in-the-mud small town.
I usually end up interrogating these people (unintentionally) about why they don't want to travel the world, and usually get bleak, dead-end awnsers like "I don't really know, just doesn't really sound like something I want to do." I usually look at them for a few moments, awe struck by their lack of curiosity or awareness of the world around them.
I have the same sort of confused awe when I meet people who don't like hearing about current world news, and usually get an awnser like "the news is to depressing, sad, and confusing for me," and wonder how sensitive these people have to be to ignore the entire world around them like that. Some live with the very self-centered ideology of "ignorance is bliss," which I strongly oppose because, in my perspective, paying no attention to the world around you makes you a clueless, uninterested idiot. I don't say idiot in the context that I hate the person, but more in the context that they're obviously not very smart and, as it would seem, don't know very much and have no right to have opinions on things such as religion, government, or how things should be.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
To Contradict Kyran
Yes, I AM aware that this is my fourth blog post in the past 4 or 5 hours, but I'm really starting to enjoy this (maybe a bit to much.) Anyways, a good friend of mine, Brian Raimondo, just created a blog on the spot (exactly how I did), and titled it "To Contradict Kyran." For those of you who don't know, I'm Kyran. I'm hoping if you have the energy to look down and see who posted the blog, but I was just mentioning it in case you don't for some reason or another. Anyways, to check out his blog/ profile, follow this link: http://brianthehipster.blogspot.com
Also, on a sidenote, it's nice to be part of the blogging community. Really helps me to convey my thoughts to the world and blow some steam at the same time. So, to all of you who will be reading this within the next few months becuase only then will you have realized I exist and will check back in the archives to see my past interesting articles, I thank you for clicking on all the links to get to this point, and hope you tell your friends about me.
Also, on a sidenote, it's nice to be part of the blogging community. Really helps me to convey my thoughts to the world and blow some steam at the same time. So, to all of you who will be reading this within the next few months becuase only then will you have realized I exist and will check back in the archives to see my past interesting articles, I thank you for clicking on all the links to get to this point, and hope you tell your friends about me.
"Only He Who Can See The Invisible Can Do The Impossible."
Yes, I am aware of how many articles I've done today, but I HAVE just started on this whole blogging thing, and am therefore pretty enthusiastic and excited about it.
Anyways, only about 20 minutes ago, me and my girlfriend where talking on Windows Live Messenger, and before she left she said this:
**CENSORED** says:
oh
**CENSORED** says:
btw
**CENSORED** says:
"only he who can see the invisible can do the impossible"
**CENSORED** says:
just thought i'd let u mull that over.
And I certainly have mulled over that. Knowing her, it would have something to do with her belief in God (she's Jewish and I'm Atheist), and her trying to refer to people who believe in God as being able to do the impossible. As far as I know, people in the past who have believed in God have done the unquestionably questionable, and have attempted to do the impossible, but have usually failed. Now, let me render my analyzation of that quote more in my favour: "Only He Who Can See The Invisible Can Do The Impossible." The invisible, in this case, would have to be someones belief in themselves. As long as they believe they can do something, whether its been done already or not, they can acheive what was previously thought of as impossible. But thats just me. Feel free to post your opinions on this quote if you wish.
Anyways, only about 20 minutes ago, me and my girlfriend where talking on Windows Live Messenger, and before she left she said this:
**CENSORED** says:
oh
**CENSORED** says:
btw
**CENSORED** says:
"only he who can see the invisible can do the impossible"
**CENSORED** says:
just thought i'd let u mull that over.
And I certainly have mulled over that. Knowing her, it would have something to do with her belief in God (she's Jewish and I'm Atheist), and her trying to refer to people who believe in God as being able to do the impossible. As far as I know, people in the past who have believed in God have done the unquestionably questionable, and have attempted to do the impossible, but have usually failed. Now, let me render my analyzation of that quote more in my favour: "Only He Who Can See The Invisible Can Do The Impossible." The invisible, in this case, would have to be someones belief in themselves. As long as they believe they can do something, whether its been done already or not, they can acheive what was previously thought of as impossible. But thats just me. Feel free to post your opinions on this quote if you wish.
If you happen to be at a hardware store with this Blog open, steal this computer.
THE MORALS OF STEALING seem to be an obvious thing: it's bad, and is only commited by those who are desperate or have no morals at all, and a very good escape plan.
For those who have no morals, it may just be a practice of convenience, because we all know that finding a way to obtain material goods without having to pay anything for them is something everyone wants, but most understand why it's necessary to have to pay. Without the requirement to pay, those who help manufacture the goods are not rewarded for there (usually) hard work.
Imagine, if you will, a world where everything is free. You could go to a grocery store and just get everything for free. Now, stop right there. That wouldent work. If people could take absolutley as many of everything as they wanted, there would be practically nothing, and chances are people would be fighting over who got the 40 frozen steaks. But now, imagine if you will, if there was a system set in place where there could only be 20 ro 25 items taken from the grocery stores daily by each seperate individual, and 25-40 items taken for each seperate family. It would guarantee everyone got something, and there would be no taking of everything in stock by a certain idividual. But now imagine, if you will, the people on the manufacturing end of the production lines. They would get nothing for there work. If everything was for free, how would the companies make money? Ok, now lets just say somehow we abolish the whole money system. Not only would everything in grocery stores be free, but everything in every store.
The problem is how many problems would be produced from this sort of mindset.
First of all: robberies would become more frequent, and the mindset of the thieves would be "they got it for free, so I took it for free." But then again, when you where robbed of a posession, it'd be much easier to replace then if you had to pay for a new posession.
Of course, again, the people on the workforce end of things wouldn't have any sort of motivation to work with the lack of reward. It would either have to be volunteer labourors, or slave labour, which I hope is certainly illegal or at least not discriminatory in this alternate fantastical inner-debate of mine.
Now, with money, life may be more complicated, and harder to coordinate, but how else would you be motivated to go to work every morning? How else would society be kept in place? I guess my final ruling on this subject would have to be that money may be an inconvenience to most, and a convenience to some, but it is a necessary part of society and civilization in general.
For those who have no morals, it may just be a practice of convenience, because we all know that finding a way to obtain material goods without having to pay anything for them is something everyone wants, but most understand why it's necessary to have to pay. Without the requirement to pay, those who help manufacture the goods are not rewarded for there (usually) hard work.
Imagine, if you will, a world where everything is free. You could go to a grocery store and just get everything for free. Now, stop right there. That wouldent work. If people could take absolutley as many of everything as they wanted, there would be practically nothing, and chances are people would be fighting over who got the 40 frozen steaks. But now, imagine if you will, if there was a system set in place where there could only be 20 ro 25 items taken from the grocery stores daily by each seperate individual, and 25-40 items taken for each seperate family. It would guarantee everyone got something, and there would be no taking of everything in stock by a certain idividual. But now imagine, if you will, the people on the manufacturing end of the production lines. They would get nothing for there work. If everything was for free, how would the companies make money? Ok, now lets just say somehow we abolish the whole money system. Not only would everything in grocery stores be free, but everything in every store.
The problem is how many problems would be produced from this sort of mindset.
First of all: robberies would become more frequent, and the mindset of the thieves would be "they got it for free, so I took it for free." But then again, when you where robbed of a posession, it'd be much easier to replace then if you had to pay for a new posession.
Of course, again, the people on the workforce end of things wouldn't have any sort of motivation to work with the lack of reward. It would either have to be volunteer labourors, or slave labour, which I hope is certainly illegal or at least not discriminatory in this alternate fantastical inner-debate of mine.
Now, with money, life may be more complicated, and harder to coordinate, but how else would you be motivated to go to work every morning? How else would society be kept in place? I guess my final ruling on this subject would have to be that money may be an inconvenience to most, and a convenience to some, but it is a necessary part of society and civilization in general.
Introduction
Why hello, World Wide Web.
I know some of you won't be strangers to me, as I have been established on YouTube for some 2 years or so, under my widley used screename Katvolver, which has become part of the URL name for this blog. I have about 81 videos on YouTube as of December 12th, 2008, and just uploaded a new one of me doing a series of improvisional character skits that you can check out by following this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LW4PhDC5JQ
Some Personal Information for Those Who Are Curious:
I am a 15 year old male living in the small western Canadian coastal town of Powell River, British Columbia. I attend Brooks Secondary School and am currently in Grade 10. I really don't know if this blogging system displays relationship statuses, but for those who are curious, I am currently in a relationship with the most amazing girl in the world. =D (Yes, I am aware of how often that's said, and how cliche it may sound to some, but in my perspective it IS truth.) My parents have divorced for quite some time, but I'm not going to go into any detail on that subject. That's a chapter of my life I'd rather leave behind me.
Anyways, I'll be posting articles on this blog whenever I see fit to do so, and will probably be posting a blog just to kind've boot things a bit more tomorrow.
Anyways, it's about 12 days before Christmas 2008, and 6 days before my Christmas break begins, and I'm finding it hard to be very patient. So to everyone out there that reads this, have a very Merry Christmas!
I know some of you won't be strangers to me, as I have been established on YouTube for some 2 years or so, under my widley used screename Katvolver, which has become part of the URL name for this blog. I have about 81 videos on YouTube as of December 12th, 2008, and just uploaded a new one of me doing a series of improvisional character skits that you can check out by following this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LW4PhDC5JQ
Some Personal Information for Those Who Are Curious:
I am a 15 year old male living in the small western Canadian coastal town of Powell River, British Columbia. I attend Brooks Secondary School and am currently in Grade 10. I really don't know if this blogging system displays relationship statuses, but for those who are curious, I am currently in a relationship with the most amazing girl in the world. =D (Yes, I am aware of how often that's said, and how cliche it may sound to some, but in my perspective it IS truth.) My parents have divorced for quite some time, but I'm not going to go into any detail on that subject. That's a chapter of my life I'd rather leave behind me.
Anyways, I'll be posting articles on this blog whenever I see fit to do so, and will probably be posting a blog just to kind've boot things a bit more tomorrow.
Anyways, it's about 12 days before Christmas 2008, and 6 days before my Christmas break begins, and I'm finding it hard to be very patient. So to everyone out there that reads this, have a very Merry Christmas!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Copyright
