WOW ! 2010 has almost passed. This year has been interesting. "Chinese curse" style interesting.
I've been out of work for 15 months. Partly because of the economy, partly because of a (I HOPE) mid-life crisis. This "crisis" pertains to the fact I no longer want to do what I have been doing. I need another career. Or some other type of stimulus. Either work in a completely different field, or a completely different role in my current field. Maybe bee-farming in Sussex Downs. :-)
I have worked with / on / in computers since 1978. Programming (Real Time & Userland), Systems programming, minor kernel mods, data communications (wrote a distributed processing API). Almost all in UNIX (with a little UNIVAC thrown in). Mostly in 'C'. Mostly on Solaris (BSD & SVR4). I then wanted to really know what, exactly, this "box" was that I was using to make things happen. I became a Systems Administrator. Sun / Solaris, Linux, & BSD (Intel). I also worked a bit in networking. Routing, TCP/IP, UDP/IP, Sendmail, DNS, RIP, OSPF, etc.. Never really a networking expert (IMHO), but can troubleshoot, setup & configure, manage, and understand all but highly technical networking discussions. I know Sun hardware pretty damned well, and also use Apple Macs at home (with BSD & RedHat boxes too). I have had Intel machines at home since 1982, and UNIX on Intel since 1986. I reconfigured sendmail to use UUCP and was regularly using email in (and since) 1986. I have mostly worked in trading environments, with a couple of web companies and massive data access companies as a "change of pace".
The point is, I need change. I no longer want to work 60+ hour weeks just to get a salary. Besides getting "my house" in order during this past year, I have decided I would either like to teach (tech or history) or manage/supervise a tech department. Obviously a Systems Administration group or possibly web development group. I have done systems design, software design, (some) project management, and managed several different Sys-Admin groups at different companies. I like that work. I like getting things done. I really like allowing younger folks to learn how to think (about the job).
So this next year will, indeed, be a new year. I will pursue my "new career" with zest, and find a new place to ply my (new) trade. It will be an interesting year.
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Wednesday, December 08, 2010
John Lennon and me.
So. After 30 years of listening to other people dictate the meaning that this day has (and the meaning that was forced to pass because of this day), I have decided to foist my opinion onto the world at large.
I do not remember the time. I was already in bed, listening to the radio, as I was wont to do to fall asleep, and heard the news. John Lennon had been shot. The second report included more details, including "multiple shots". It was then I knew he was dead.
Unfortunately, and typical for humans, ** I ** felt. I mourned. I was angry. I was sad. I was 'empty'. Initially, it was all about me.
[Don't let anyone fool you. "Me" is not just boomers !]
At my age, the Beatles, and then Lennon alone, acted as my "early warning system". He had experienced life, internalized the experience, then wrote/sang about it. His vocalized experiences became another voice in my head, telling me of a possible way to look at things that were happening to me. His writing/singing also taught me, quite passively, to listen to others. That mine was not the only opinion that counted. Because of him, I became more open. I am more willing to really listen to someone elses' view on a subject. To understand and even change my mind.
Is Lennon responsible for who I am today ? No. I have taken what I heard, saw, and read about Lennon and have incorporated my interpretation of that into my "being". Have I become "another Lennon" ? No. Apart from the fact that he was unique, Lennon, and others I have met or read about, have given strength to the (more or less) quiet voices inside me. Making me more plastic, more flexible, more open to outside ideas and influences. I am still me, nobody else. But I am different than the me I would have become had Lennon never existed.
So I missed him, much like the professor you had for your life sciences class. He lectured you, you had a few one-on-ones, and he helped you through some tough times with a few sage options as you traveled your path. It took a little while to realize that this loss I was feeling was most likely magnified by over a billion times, as the others around the world, affected by his life (like I was) would now be affected by his death.
Briefly, that is "John Lennon and me". What I think and feel of his influence & impact on me. Yes, it is a singular point of view. How can it be anything else ? [No. It does not mean that anyone else does, or has to, feel or think this way.]
As far as I can determine, very, very, few people knew John Lennon. Yoko, Paul, George, Ringo definitely did. As did George Martin. His kids & Cynthia. Only people who spent a lot of time with him could possibly know him. Everyone else just has opinions of what he was and was like.
This especially includes the "in crowd" and interviewers who spent 10 hours with Lennon out of his entire life. They could not possibly know him.
Limited exposure to him (as in my case) has left most of humanity with "fragments of Lennon" that have been filled in (like a jig-saw puzzle) with pieces of ourselves. We naturally call the resultant mosaic "the John Lennon we knew".
The easiest person in the world to delude is "me" (ourselves).
I do not remember the time. I was already in bed, listening to the radio, as I was wont to do to fall asleep, and heard the news. John Lennon had been shot. The second report included more details, including "multiple shots". It was then I knew he was dead.
Unfortunately, and typical for humans, ** I ** felt. I mourned. I was angry. I was sad. I was 'empty'. Initially, it was all about me.
[Don't let anyone fool you. "Me" is not just boomers !]
At my age, the Beatles, and then Lennon alone, acted as my "early warning system". He had experienced life, internalized the experience, then wrote/sang about it. His vocalized experiences became another voice in my head, telling me of a possible way to look at things that were happening to me. His writing/singing also taught me, quite passively, to listen to others. That mine was not the only opinion that counted. Because of him, I became more open. I am more willing to really listen to someone elses' view on a subject. To understand and even change my mind.
Is Lennon responsible for who I am today ? No. I have taken what I heard, saw, and read about Lennon and have incorporated my interpretation of that into my "being". Have I become "another Lennon" ? No. Apart from the fact that he was unique, Lennon, and others I have met or read about, have given strength to the (more or less) quiet voices inside me. Making me more plastic, more flexible, more open to outside ideas and influences. I am still me, nobody else. But I am different than the me I would have become had Lennon never existed.
So I missed him, much like the professor you had for your life sciences class. He lectured you, you had a few one-on-ones, and he helped you through some tough times with a few sage options as you traveled your path. It took a little while to realize that this loss I was feeling was most likely magnified by over a billion times, as the others around the world, affected by his life (like I was) would now be affected by his death.
Briefly, that is "John Lennon and me". What I think and feel of his influence & impact on me. Yes, it is a singular point of view. How can it be anything else ? [No. It does not mean that anyone else does, or has to, feel or think this way.]
As far as I can determine, very, very, few people knew John Lennon. Yoko, Paul, George, Ringo definitely did. As did George Martin. His kids & Cynthia. Only people who spent a lot of time with him could possibly know him. Everyone else just has opinions of what he was and was like.
This especially includes the "in crowd" and interviewers who spent 10 hours with Lennon out of his entire life. They could not possibly know him.
Limited exposure to him (as in my case) has left most of humanity with "fragments of Lennon" that have been filled in (like a jig-saw puzzle) with pieces of ourselves. We naturally call the resultant mosaic "the John Lennon we knew".
The easiest person in the world to delude is "me" (ourselves).
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Dangerous RF ? My Opinion.
I hear, see, and read in a lot of different places about the "dangers of electromagnetic radiation". I also am informed from across the information universe that people who believe that electromagnetic radiation is affecting them are the next best thing to luddites.
What confuses the hell out of me is that BOTH sides of this discussion talk of "radiation". The side that refutes possibly damage from electromagnetic radiation always talks in terms of "Power", radiated power (they usually have scientists on this side). The side that insists that damage can happen always chooses to try to refute the "power arguments" of the other side.
What confuses the hell out of me is that BOTH sides of this discussion talk of "radiation". The side that refutes possibly damage from electromagnetic radiation always talks in terms of "Power", radiated power (they usually have scientists on this side). The side that insists that damage can happen always chooses to try to refute the "power arguments" of the other side.
There are two concepts here. One is the effect of a photon hitting something, the other is power.
The two measurements, "amount of effect" and "power" are unrelated. UNRELATED.
Electromagnetic radiation is carried in a particle called a photon. Light is
electromagnetic radiation. Light is carried by photons. Radio "waves" are actually streams of photons traveling away from the broadcast antenna. ALL radio "waves" (microwave, cell phones, TV, 'radio', X-Rays, RADAR, WiFi) are actually streams of photons. The "Power" of a radio (TV, cell phone, microwave) is actually a measurement of the NUMBER of PHOTONS carried in the "radio wave". This is a fact of physics. I no longer remember the exact equations involved (36 years way from radio engineering). BUT, you can look it up on the web. I'm right (as far as I go).
There is another factor here. Each photon is a "packet of energy". ALL photons are are considered packets of energy. Since photons make up radio waves, microwaves, light, and X-Rays, they "fit in" across a wide band of electromagnetic radiation (called 'EM' from here on). EM radiation is divided into 'sections', to make it easier to describe. These sections are grouped by perceived common behavior. The entire range of EM is divided by frequency into "bands" (we know this, FM, AM, Short wave, etc.).
As it happens, this banding by frequency is not arbitrary, there is an equation for describing the amount of energy in a "packet of energy" (photon). The energy contained within a single photon is expressed: E = hf where 'f' is the frequency of the EM radiation, and h is Planck's constant. In common terms, the amount of energy contained in a photon increases as the frequency of that photon increases. They are directly proportional.
This "energy of the photon" is (to a great extent) what "counts" when considering the interaction of a photon with other particles. In other words, a low energy photon (radio wave) can hit an atom and nothing will happen. The photon will bounce off. [There is the effect of "hop over", where the low frequency photon has such a long wavelength that it "hops over' the atoms and molecules. Which is why lower frequency radio waves penetrate into buildings, etc..] Even at frequencies up to that of light, photons mostly bounce off. Microwave radiation (like in your kitchen) also mostly bounces off of individual atoms. The difference with microwaves (and any frequency up to ultra-violet) is that while the energy of the photons is not enough to knock "pieces" off of individual atoms, they DO carry enough energy to move the atoms a bit upon impact (they heat up the atoms). This is how microwave cooking works (only with continuous streams of photons, heating noticeable numbers of atoms and molecules).
The two measurements, "amount of effect" and "power" are unrelated. UNRELATED.
Electromagnetic radiation is carried in a particle called a photon. Light is
electromagnetic radiation. Light is carried by photons. Radio "waves" are actually streams of photons traveling away from the broadcast antenna. ALL radio "waves" (microwave, cell phones, TV, 'radio', X-Rays, RADAR, WiFi) are actually streams of photons. The "Power" of a radio (TV, cell phone, microwave) is actually a measurement of the NUMBER of PHOTONS carried in the "radio wave". This is a fact of physics. I no longer remember the exact equations involved (36 years way from radio engineering). BUT, you can look it up on the web. I'm right (as far as I go).
There is another factor here. Each photon is a "packet of energy". ALL photons are are considered packets of energy. Since photons make up radio waves, microwaves, light, and X-Rays, they "fit in" across a wide band of electromagnetic radiation (called 'EM' from here on). EM radiation is divided into 'sections', to make it easier to describe. These sections are grouped by perceived common behavior. The entire range of EM is divided by frequency into "bands" (we know this, FM, AM, Short wave, etc.).
As it happens, this banding by frequency is not arbitrary, there is an equation for describing the amount of energy in a "packet of energy" (photon). The energy contained within a single photon is expressed: E = hf where 'f' is the frequency of the EM radiation, and h is Planck's constant. In common terms, the amount of energy contained in a photon increases as the frequency of that photon increases. They are directly proportional.
This "energy of the photon" is (to a great extent) what "counts" when considering the interaction of a photon with other particles. In other words, a low energy photon (radio wave) can hit an atom and nothing will happen. The photon will bounce off. [There is the effect of "hop over", where the low frequency photon has such a long wavelength that it "hops over' the atoms and molecules. Which is why lower frequency radio waves penetrate into buildings, etc..] Even at frequencies up to that of light, photons mostly bounce off. Microwave radiation (like in your kitchen) also mostly bounces off of individual atoms. The difference with microwaves (and any frequency up to ultra-violet) is that while the energy of the photons is not enough to knock "pieces" off of individual atoms, they DO carry enough energy to move the atoms a bit upon impact (they heat up the atoms). This is how microwave cooking works (only with continuous streams of photons, heating noticeable numbers of atoms and molecules).
O.K., so we have the effect of radiated power, which is the amount of photons in any given "stream" of EM. Brighter light, better cell phone reception (more bars), higher heat level in your microwave oven, all these are variations of power. We also have the size of the effect a single photon has when it hits something. The energy carried by the individual photon. This effect can, and does, mostly decide what happens when matter is exposed to EM radiation. It is not the amount of energy packets hitting you, it is the size of the energy packet. [You can let 10 2 year old kids hit you all at once, and you would worry about the kids getting hurt. Letting George Foreman hit you ONCE, and you will be worrying about how close is the nearest hospital.]
Which leads us to the "matter" in all the preceding statements being organic in nature.
We can safely say that at any frequency below about 1 Giga-Hertz a photon will either "step over" most of the atoms and molecules in an organic body or will bounce off them without having enough energy to move them or alter them in any observable way. At frequencies from around 1 Giga-Hertz and up, the energy contained in a photon can, *if* it hits a certain type of atom in a certain place, cause the atom (or molecule) so change its chemical properties. In an exceedingly small number of cases, this molecule or atom will be part of something critical (DNA, for example).
So, in my estimation, considering the over 6 billion humans on this planet, and the trillions of cells in the human body, PLUS the trillions of photons traveling through (or into) our bodies that are over 1 Giga-Hertz in frequency, there can be some negative health effects from prolonged and frequent exposure to Cell & WiFi wireless signals. Maybe one person out of 100 million, but the odds are that someone, somewhere, at some TIME will be affected.
As of 02/22/2011, it seems like I am not the only one considering these ideas: http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/305/8/808.abstract/
As of 05/31/2011, it seems like the WHO (World Health Organization) has data from some studies done that are backing up my theory. The WHO has NOT, however, made a direct connection between cell phone usage and cancer, they have so far stated that it is possible (not probable).
As of 02/22/2011, it seems like I am not the only one considering these ideas: http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/305/8/808.abstract/
As of 05/31/2011, it seems like the WHO (World Health Organization) has data from some studies done that are backing up my theory. The WHO has NOT, however, made a direct connection between cell phone usage and cancer, they have so far stated that it is possible (not probable).
This blog entry WILL be further edited by me to correct errors and clean it up. Just not now. This is to be considered a second draft.
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
A Matter of Perspective.
One of the more interesting philosophies embraced by the "counter culture" of the 1960s was the alternative concept of success. In general, it stated that the normal measures of success (wealth, power, and position) were invalid. It held that success was to be measured by either the good you do, the love you create, and/or the amount of affection you have for your pursuits. Idealistic and impractical, but not an altogether unattractive way of looking at the world.
As the number of these "hippies" grew, by incorporating converts (with a converts zeal), their message changed and became self centered (MY fun, MY 'space', etc.). These highly self centered kids went back into society and became the highly self centered managers and executives we have today. The same management that now requires total dedication to their cause (their bottom line) and eliminates anyone who happens to have the same attitudes that they were attracted to as kids. The two greatest weapons they wield are their self centered arrogance and a filing cabinet full of "shoulds" that they apply to everyone but themselves.
An aside here, if you do not already know this be WARY ! "Should" is the most evil word in the English language. It is ALWAYS used in the context of one person (or a group) defining, without permission, the actions, behavior, or beliefs of another person (or group). It is, by definition (and usage) a word that IMPOSES one persons (or groups) will on others. EVIL, EVIL, EVIL !!!!
We now find ourselves in the present, with almost a whole generation of these hippies now converted to the pursuit of Power, Wealth, and Control. These folks are also old enough to have attained much of the wealth & power they pursued. They have inculcated their offspring with their methods and goals. Armed with their array of "shoulds", these folks are now in a position to impose these "shoulds" on everyone else. They have done so with surprising alacrity.
Which leads to "me". I have never really dreamed or planned for monetary success. I have never really cared. I have pursued my profession with great zeal because I LIKE it. It is FUN. My problem is that I have never subscribed to the modern version of success. I have always thought of success in the terms of the original hippies.
As a result, I have tired of 14 hour days. Months without a real break. Years without a vacation. In living my profession, I have burnt out.
Which is kind of interesting, because up until two years ago, I attacked my profession as voraciously as anyone. Worked quite a few 24 hour and even 48 hour "shifts". Not complaining, but solving problems and having FUN. I have led teams in certain projects, been the "responsible" guy, even "the answer man". But I never wanted to move up the corporate ladder. Which put me at odds with "the system". I technically have become a failure. Not a successful man.
But as I stated in the beginning, it is all a matter of perspective. The hippies avoided the capitalistic trappings of our society (their faults are the subject of another, LONG discussion, which I will avoid here). The convert hippies embraced the wealth & power road to success. They both consider themselves successful.
==
As to my personal situation, I blame my "life coach". He has convinced me to make some dubious choices. I have considered firing him, but what would I do without ME.
:-) :-)
As the number of these "hippies" grew, by incorporating converts (with a converts zeal), their message changed and became self centered (MY fun, MY 'space', etc.). These highly self centered kids went back into society and became the highly self centered managers and executives we have today. The same management that now requires total dedication to their cause (their bottom line) and eliminates anyone who happens to have the same attitudes that they were attracted to as kids. The two greatest weapons they wield are their self centered arrogance and a filing cabinet full of "shoulds" that they apply to everyone but themselves.
An aside here, if you do not already know this be WARY ! "Should" is the most evil word in the English language. It is ALWAYS used in the context of one person (or a group) defining, without permission, the actions, behavior, or beliefs of another person (or group). It is, by definition (and usage) a word that IMPOSES one persons (or groups) will on others. EVIL, EVIL, EVIL !!!!
We now find ourselves in the present, with almost a whole generation of these hippies now converted to the pursuit of Power, Wealth, and Control. These folks are also old enough to have attained much of the wealth & power they pursued. They have inculcated their offspring with their methods and goals. Armed with their array of "shoulds", these folks are now in a position to impose these "shoulds" on everyone else. They have done so with surprising alacrity.
Which leads to "me". I have never really dreamed or planned for monetary success. I have never really cared. I have pursued my profession with great zeal because I LIKE it. It is FUN. My problem is that I have never subscribed to the modern version of success. I have always thought of success in the terms of the original hippies.
As a result, I have tired of 14 hour days. Months without a real break. Years without a vacation. In living my profession, I have burnt out.
Which is kind of interesting, because up until two years ago, I attacked my profession as voraciously as anyone. Worked quite a few 24 hour and even 48 hour "shifts". Not complaining, but solving problems and having FUN. I have led teams in certain projects, been the "responsible" guy, even "the answer man". But I never wanted to move up the corporate ladder. Which put me at odds with "the system". I technically have become a failure. Not a successful man.
But as I stated in the beginning, it is all a matter of perspective. The hippies avoided the capitalistic trappings of our society (their faults are the subject of another, LONG discussion, which I will avoid here). The convert hippies embraced the wealth & power road to success. They both consider themselves successful.
==
As to my personal situation, I blame my "life coach". He has convinced me to make some dubious choices. I have considered firing him, but what would I do without ME.
:-) :-)
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
"Land" of Equality.
I never realized what an equalizer the various "Social Nets" are to the world.
I have always been one to readily extend my hand in friendship to whomever I happen to meet. Only when someone tries to take the hand, spit on it, or break one of my fingers have I backed off and wiped the memory of their existence from my mind. I have recently discovered that on the Internet, I need to be more circumspect in acting on my instincts. (Silly me.)
I guess the best way to treat the various "Social Networks" is to imagine them synonymous with walking down a long dark alley at 3 AM. You pretty much want to keep both hands in your pockets, and not do a lot of "interfacing" with the folks you meet. Thereby keeping your hands intact and unspoilt.
The Internet Equality stems from allowing folks of all "races", creeds, nationalities, and religious beliefs equal access. Unfortunately, this also includes equality for folks of all the various mental states, as well. The paranoid, the righteous, the "me first (and only)", and the "well adjusted" all have equal access.
Well, after a couple of recent episodes of almost losing my hand, I have finally "got it". I am chastised, and am currently allowing my hand to rest, hoping for a complete functional recovery.
:-) :-)
I have always been one to readily extend my hand in friendship to whomever I happen to meet. Only when someone tries to take the hand, spit on it, or break one of my fingers have I backed off and wiped the memory of their existence from my mind. I have recently discovered that on the Internet, I need to be more circumspect in acting on my instincts. (Silly me.)
I guess the best way to treat the various "Social Networks" is to imagine them synonymous with walking down a long dark alley at 3 AM. You pretty much want to keep both hands in your pockets, and not do a lot of "interfacing" with the folks you meet. Thereby keeping your hands intact and unspoilt.
The Internet Equality stems from allowing folks of all "races", creeds, nationalities, and religious beliefs equal access. Unfortunately, this also includes equality for folks of all the various mental states, as well. The paranoid, the righteous, the "me first (and only)", and the "well adjusted" all have equal access.
Well, after a couple of recent episodes of almost losing my hand, I have finally "got it". I am chastised, and am currently allowing my hand to rest, hoping for a complete functional recovery.
:-) :-)
Not all "Social Nets" are alike.
I have grave reservations about Facebook security. I have therefore started using Orkut (and this blogger). It seems, though, that I can only post "messages" to this blogger, and not to Orkut. I was looking to just "say something", without "sending" it anywhere (forcing folks to read it), but apparently only through a blog can this be accomplished.
Alas, I will have to curb my desire to communicate in non-sequiturs.
Friday, November 19, 2010
Free Money.
I have this habit of every day, taking whatever coins I have in my pocket and putting it in a container. It started out as coffee cans, then went to empty gallon "bottles" of Arizona Tea. I have been doing this for quite some time, since I moved into my current house (20 years). There have been times I have been out of work, and I have raided the jugs several times, for an approximate total of $ 150.00. Well, THIS year, I have been a bit hard pressed, and was forced to cash in all the coins to pay bills, etc.. I am still surprised to find that the total amount left in the jugs has been right around $ 330.00. This won't buy you a new car, or a "big ticket item", but it will buy several trips to the grocery store, or pay a month's electric & gas bill.
Not bad for "free money".
Awakening.
Well, it looks like I'm becoming a "social creature". In the last two months, I've signed up on twitter, and started making changes to my old (but unused) orkut account. I think it is a good idea to get and stay more 'connected', but also to start using all this as tools, instead of the tech-weenie approach (Tech for the sake of tech).
Considering my past dedication to my online presence, I doubt I'll be contributing anything on a regular basis, but I intend to TRY. We'll see how THAT goes. :-)
Of course, in the past, my job was sucking up 14 to 16 hours per day, so my desire to be online was significantly dampened by the time I got home. We will see how THAT turns out, also. I am not sanguine about any frequent or long blog (or other) posts coming from an employed me.
:-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)