Dan SImmon's Hyperion
Aug. 1st, 2006 09:55 am( Some spoilers )
Aug. 1st, 2006
Superman returns
Aug. 1st, 2006 10:06 amIt was well crafted, but didn't really excite me. It looked good, had a good plot (the villian's plan was, well, fairly reasonable), the characters fit, but didn't really grip me.
I think they drew a new perspective on superman's power, making him seem slightly less omnipotent, which I think overall worked well, though occasionally seemed odd in the context of the other films: last time he could fly round the earth in a seventh of a second, how did he have so much difficulty catching up with something? But you did get the impression there may be things he can't do.
Richard was nice. Despite being too good to be true, he was also pleasant, and trusting, and had a sense of humour, but I still felt sorry for him, he still seemed too nice to be interesting, if you see what I mean.
It made me think. Often you're asked, what would you do if you were god? Hard to answer. And omnipotence is hard to define: OK, you can do anything, but even leaving aside paradoxes, eg. can you do everything at once? A more graspable question is, what would you do if you were superman?
Is it a problem with free will if you do too much? Maybe. Ruling the world may or may not be a good idea. But instead of being a reporter I accept a small stipend for large engineering projects. Imagine a vast clean fresh-water river flowing through some countries. Imagine infinite free power. Imagine food and medicine being flown all across the world.
Instead I'd adopt a social life where I don't have the be on time, centred around having normal friends, and preferably something where superpowers don't help, eg. dancing, pub quizzing, or something :)
In terms of tackling crime I'd probably be more systematic. If I prevent one crime every five minutes, that's not *that* much, because no-one thinks *they'll* be caught. I'd adopt a small area, stop *every* violent crime there, and work my way outward. Then no-one would even start something, because with nothing else going on they'd know I'd be right there. He probably is right to just catch people and hand them over to the law though, it's enough of a deterent without becoming a tyrant.
I think they drew a new perspective on superman's power, making him seem slightly less omnipotent, which I think overall worked well, though occasionally seemed odd in the context of the other films: last time he could fly round the earth in a seventh of a second, how did he have so much difficulty catching up with something? But you did get the impression there may be things he can't do.
Richard was nice. Despite being too good to be true, he was also pleasant, and trusting, and had a sense of humour, but I still felt sorry for him, he still seemed too nice to be interesting, if you see what I mean.
It made me think. Often you're asked, what would you do if you were god? Hard to answer. And omnipotence is hard to define: OK, you can do anything, but even leaving aside paradoxes, eg. can you do everything at once? A more graspable question is, what would you do if you were superman?
Is it a problem with free will if you do too much? Maybe. Ruling the world may or may not be a good idea. But instead of being a reporter I accept a small stipend for large engineering projects. Imagine a vast clean fresh-water river flowing through some countries. Imagine infinite free power. Imagine food and medicine being flown all across the world.
Instead I'd adopt a social life where I don't have the be on time, centred around having normal friends, and preferably something where superpowers don't help, eg. dancing, pub quizzing, or something :)
In terms of tackling crime I'd probably be more systematic. If I prevent one crime every five minutes, that's not *that* much, because no-one thinks *they'll* be caught. I'd adopt a small area, stop *every* violent crime there, and work my way outward. Then no-one would even start something, because with nothing else going on they'd know I'd be right there. He probably is right to just catch people and hand them over to the law though, it's enough of a deterent without becoming a tyrant.
( Read more... )Most people I know wouldn't abandon deducing what the world is like with observation, science and logic, but progress isn't necessarily made by contradicting the previous position, but by saying it's fine as far as it goes, but it's only a small part of a larger system. I have other hidden assumptions, eg:
Learning, knowing, understanding more is both asthetically pleasing and beneficial( Read more... )
Learning, knowing, understanding more is both asthetically pleasing and beneficial( Read more... )
The effort devoted to minor bugs
Aug. 1st, 2006 06:13 pm*sigh* There were other more funadmental problems, but instrumental in the bug was my muddling the precedence of "&" and "==". Obviously, we all make these mistakes sometimes. And I've got a lot better at avoiding minor mistakes as I've taken a more professional approach to programming.
But does everyone else (who programs) still find such typos happening?
For that matter, surely there is room for improvement in editors. Most people I know seem to use emacs, UltraEdit at work, vi if they're contrary, or Visual Studio if that's what they're using. But without going into details of which I've thought a lot, there seems a lot more that could be done to make minor errors, time spent comprehending code, etc, which eats up lots of productivity better? Surely it's the most obvious project for any programmer to want to work on?
But does everyone else (who programs) still find such typos happening?
For that matter, surely there is room for improvement in editors. Most people I know seem to use emacs, UltraEdit at work, vi if they're contrary, or Visual Studio if that's what they're using. But without going into details of which I've thought a lot, there seems a lot more that could be done to make minor errors, time spent comprehending code, etc, which eats up lots of productivity better? Surely it's the most obvious project for any programmer to want to work on?
Constructing arguments
Aug. 1st, 2006 06:20 pmI'm still not good at constructing explanations. I wasn't sure what people's response to the morning's philosophy would be, if any, but it seemed overwhelmed by my second paragraph, the one about morals, which was supposed to be incidental.
I was trying to talk about the assumptions I hadn't really thought about in those terms (in bold) and in preface tried to describe assumptions I'd previously talked about. Because (a) to make people aware of my thoughts and (b) prevent anyone thinking I wasn't aware, and that distracting from the argument I was trying to make.
But the preface seemed to stand out. Did I particularly give the impression that I *was* a utilitarian? I think it's a good approximation, but insufficient to subscribe to it. If I'd given more examples would I have been less distracting or more so?
Should I stop introspecting about it and accept you can never predict what people will find interesting? Should I cut down my tendency to ramble? Should I make the point I'm trying to make more directly with justification afterwards? How about a Q&A format?
Do you think about the layout when you're musing on LJ, or just write it out?
I was trying to talk about the assumptions I hadn't really thought about in those terms (in bold) and in preface tried to describe assumptions I'd previously talked about. Because (a) to make people aware of my thoughts and (b) prevent anyone thinking I wasn't aware, and that distracting from the argument I was trying to make.
But the preface seemed to stand out. Did I particularly give the impression that I *was* a utilitarian? I think it's a good approximation, but insufficient to subscribe to it. If I'd given more examples would I have been less distracting or more so?
Should I stop introspecting about it and accept you can never predict what people will find interesting? Should I cut down my tendency to ramble? Should I make the point I'm trying to make more directly with justification afterwards? How about a Q&A format?
Do you think about the layout when you're musing on LJ, or just write it out?