Up until recently, the house next door to us and the one across the street have been unoccupied. They've been this way for quite some time, but in the course of a month, both have sold and had people move in. It's nice to have neighbors again, but we haven't really gotten to know them very well yet. I haven't had time to notice things like whether they like to sit out on their deck, how often they mow their lawns, or when they tend to come and go. Likewise, they haven't had time to notice that some weeks we forget to put our trash out, and on occasion, our garage door likes to pretend it's going to close, then wait until our backs are turned, open back up and leave the garage light flashing. As a result, when our new neighbors noticed that when most of the lights in our house were off, but our garage door was up and the light had been flashing frantically for over 2 hours, they decided to be on the safe side and call the police.
It doesn't really bother me that someone called, because I'm sure they were just trying to make sure my house wasn't being burgled. I just wish I knew what the criteria or theshold is for "suspicious activity" these days. For instance, the officer mentioned that the light had been that way for two hours, so whoever called had been paying attention for that long. If you think your neighbor's house had been broken into, perhaps giving the perpetrator a 2 hour head start is not a good idea. In two hours time, the majority of my worldly posessions could have been carted out the back door and sold on the black market. (Is there a black market for old NES cartriges and a stockpile of Life cereal? I may never know) I just wish that if there's to be an unofficial neighborhood crime watch, I would at least know who's in charge so I can tell them about my glitchy garage door and how running the dishwasher and the microwave simultaneously sometimes trips a circuit breaker. I don't want to be trapsing out to the fuse box with a flashlight some evening and end up in handcuffs.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
Does my car know the three laws?
We bought a new car this past weekend. Today, I spent some time reading through the owner's manual, and I'm convinced that cars will be driving themselves within a decade. I present this evidence for your consideration:
Power steering - A long time ago, when you turned the steering wheel, that turned something else, which turned something else which eventually turned the tires. Sort of an "arm bone connected to the wrist bone" type situation. Now, the effort I expend turning the steering wheel is no where near strong enough to turn the tires, but I get help from the car to make it easier. If you've ever had the power steering go out on your car or you've driven a car old enough not to have this feature, you'll know what a miracle power steering is.
Speed sensitive controls - I'm excited to be driving a car with speed sensitive volume. If I start going faster, the radio gets louder so that I don't have to adjust the volume when getting on and off the freeway. Turning that little nob is such a hassle, right? Daniel's truck has this feature, and I love it. On our new car, not only can the radio volume alter itself based on my speed, but the windshield wipers do the same. My last car had variable speed intermittent wipers, but this takes it to a whole new level.
Anti-lock brakes - At one point, it guess it was common knowledge that if you're trying to stop your car on a slippery surface, you should pump your breaks repeatedly in order to keep them from locking up. Those days are no more. The concept still works, but no manual pumping necessary with ABS. Now, the cars do the pumping automatically whenever they sense that it might be necessary. I don't know how they know to do this, but it's probably more reliable than me trying to remember to do it myself.
Vehicle Stability Assist - This was a new one on me. I think it's a combination of traction control and electronic stability control. Basically, if the car starts skidding, it will take over and apply breaks to individual wheels in order to correct an over or under steer. In addition, the car might reduce or increase the engine power in order to attain the overall goal of me not wrecking.
In addition, my car locks and unlocks itself, turns on the headlights when it gets dark, and re-programs my radio presets if I drive outside the range of my usual stations. Mine doesn't, but a lot of cars offer a navigation system that gives you directions and keep you from getting lost. I've even heard of cars that can park themselves. Don't get me wrong though. I don't mind that the cars are starting to drive themselves. All I ask is that when they finally take over, the ride be smooth enough that I can do a crossword puzzle and not spill my drink.
Power steering - A long time ago, when you turned the steering wheel, that turned something else, which turned something else which eventually turned the tires. Sort of an "arm bone connected to the wrist bone" type situation. Now, the effort I expend turning the steering wheel is no where near strong enough to turn the tires, but I get help from the car to make it easier. If you've ever had the power steering go out on your car or you've driven a car old enough not to have this feature, you'll know what a miracle power steering is.
Speed sensitive controls - I'm excited to be driving a car with speed sensitive volume. If I start going faster, the radio gets louder so that I don't have to adjust the volume when getting on and off the freeway. Turning that little nob is such a hassle, right? Daniel's truck has this feature, and I love it. On our new car, not only can the radio volume alter itself based on my speed, but the windshield wipers do the same. My last car had variable speed intermittent wipers, but this takes it to a whole new level.
Anti-lock brakes - At one point, it guess it was common knowledge that if you're trying to stop your car on a slippery surface, you should pump your breaks repeatedly in order to keep them from locking up. Those days are no more. The concept still works, but no manual pumping necessary with ABS. Now, the cars do the pumping automatically whenever they sense that it might be necessary. I don't know how they know to do this, but it's probably more reliable than me trying to remember to do it myself.
Vehicle Stability Assist - This was a new one on me. I think it's a combination of traction control and electronic stability control. Basically, if the car starts skidding, it will take over and apply breaks to individual wheels in order to correct an over or under steer. In addition, the car might reduce or increase the engine power in order to attain the overall goal of me not wrecking.
In addition, my car locks and unlocks itself, turns on the headlights when it gets dark, and re-programs my radio presets if I drive outside the range of my usual stations. Mine doesn't, but a lot of cars offer a navigation system that gives you directions and keep you from getting lost. I've even heard of cars that can park themselves. Don't get me wrong though. I don't mind that the cars are starting to drive themselves. All I ask is that when they finally take over, the ride be smooth enough that I can do a crossword puzzle and not spill my drink.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Cute as a function of familiarity
A while back, I read an article on the internet about how real was too real when it came to artificial intelligence, robotics and CGI. I remember the page had charts and a write up about it, but I can't remember what it was called or even if it was an actual scientific study or just a joke on xkcd*. Either way, the idea was that anytime you see a human-like representation of something that isn't actually human (anything from a robot to Gumby to Tom Hanks in Polar Express), as the realism increases, the emotional attachment increases to a point, then drops off. In other words, as it becomes more realistic, it reaches a peak cuteness, then just becomes creepy. It was meant to explain why you feel an emotional response to characters in Wall-E, but not the ones in Final Fantasy - The Spirits Within.
vs 
The reason I got to thinking about all this was because I saw this picture of a cute baby:
When I see a picture like that, there is a definite emotional reaction - an internal "squee" of sorts. This might just be because I'm 6 months pregnant, but I think it's more than that. I suspect most people would have have an emotional reaction to this picture, although some might be more effusive than others. With this picture, my attention is especially drawn to the baby's eyes. This is because, when a person is born, their eyes are as big as they will ever be, even though their head starts out small. This results in baby's eyes being disproportionately large compared to the size of their faces. Supposedly this is part of the reason why people have that automatic emotional response to babies and tend to perceive them as "cute". From there, I got to wondering if you could plot a baby's "cuteness" as a function of how similar they look to a full grown adult similar to the way you can plot the emotional reaction to human-like representations as a function of their realism
If you were to plot such a graph, on one end you'd have babies that look the least like adults. This would include babies that have some sort of physical deformity, but I think it would also include newly born babies. I'm not talking about newborns that have been cleaned up and had cute hats places on their heads, I'm talking about babies moments after they're born. At first sight, there is no doubt a strong emotional reaction from the parents of this child, but I don't think an objective observer would judge these babies as "cute". They're sort of slimy and gross looking and would probably score low both on "cute" and "adult-like":
Further along on the graph would be babies that have grown a little and are starting to look more like adults. Take the baby pictured above, for instance. He's been cleaned up, can hold eye contact and probably smiles a lot. These babies exhibit many characteristics of an adult, but they're still disproportional in the way they look and awkward in the way they move. I think this puts them at the height of their cuteness and gives them the innate ability to elicit a strong emotional response. If you don't think so, just take another look at that baby up there. Can you think of anything you could change to make this baby cuter? I can't think of anything. Maybe a puppy in the background, but I think that just reinforces my point.
As for the far end of the "adult-like" spectrum, I can only speculate on what would cause a baby to score high in adult qualities. Perhaps one of those children with the rare disorder that causes them to age incredibly fast? I can't find a picture of a baby who has that to determine how early that becomes noticeable. The only real-life example I can think of is less specific, but if you've ever seen a baby that looks like an old man, you'll know what I'm talking about. I can't put my finger on exactly what gives a baby this look, but they just tend to be bald, have less baby fat and generally look like they're scowling:
VS 
In closing, I'd just like you to ear in mind that any information seen in this post is not based on any scientific study, double blind study groups, or statistical analysis. Unfortunately, until I can either find or become a wealthy benefactor, this whole hypothesis will remain complete conjecture. In the mean time, I did make a graph to represent this jist of my theory and hopefully lend it some credibility:
* EDIT: Thanks to the help of an astute reader, the mystery has been solved. The original theory plots what is known as the "Uncanny Valley".
vs 
The reason I got to thinking about all this was because I saw this picture of a cute baby:
When I see a picture like that, there is a definite emotional reaction - an internal "squee" of sorts. This might just be because I'm 6 months pregnant, but I think it's more than that. I suspect most people would have have an emotional reaction to this picture, although some might be more effusive than others. With this picture, my attention is especially drawn to the baby's eyes. This is because, when a person is born, their eyes are as big as they will ever be, even though their head starts out small. This results in baby's eyes being disproportionately large compared to the size of their faces. Supposedly this is part of the reason why people have that automatic emotional response to babies and tend to perceive them as "cute". From there, I got to wondering if you could plot a baby's "cuteness" as a function of how similar they look to a full grown adult similar to the way you can plot the emotional reaction to human-like representations as a function of their realism
If you were to plot such a graph, on one end you'd have babies that look the least like adults. This would include babies that have some sort of physical deformity, but I think it would also include newly born babies. I'm not talking about newborns that have been cleaned up and had cute hats places on their heads, I'm talking about babies moments after they're born. At first sight, there is no doubt a strong emotional reaction from the parents of this child, but I don't think an objective observer would judge these babies as "cute". They're sort of slimy and gross looking and would probably score low both on "cute" and "adult-like":
Further along on the graph would be babies that have grown a little and are starting to look more like adults. Take the baby pictured above, for instance. He's been cleaned up, can hold eye contact and probably smiles a lot. These babies exhibit many characteristics of an adult, but they're still disproportional in the way they look and awkward in the way they move. I think this puts them at the height of their cuteness and gives them the innate ability to elicit a strong emotional response. If you don't think so, just take another look at that baby up there. Can you think of anything you could change to make this baby cuter? I can't think of anything. Maybe a puppy in the background, but I think that just reinforces my point.
As for the far end of the "adult-like" spectrum, I can only speculate on what would cause a baby to score high in adult qualities. Perhaps one of those children with the rare disorder that causes them to age incredibly fast? I can't find a picture of a baby who has that to determine how early that becomes noticeable. The only real-life example I can think of is less specific, but if you've ever seen a baby that looks like an old man, you'll know what I'm talking about. I can't put my finger on exactly what gives a baby this look, but they just tend to be bald, have less baby fat and generally look like they're scowling:
VS 
In closing, I'd just like you to ear in mind that any information seen in this post is not based on any scientific study, double blind study groups, or statistical analysis. Unfortunately, until I can either find or become a wealthy benefactor, this whole hypothesis will remain complete conjecture. In the mean time, I did make a graph to represent this jist of my theory and hopefully lend it some credibility:
* EDIT: Thanks to the help of an astute reader, the mystery has been solved. The original theory plots what is known as the "Uncanny Valley".
Friday, March 20, 2009
Tunica
Have you seen the billboards around town advertising Tunica? On I-40 near The Big Church, there's one that says Tunica is "Like a 24/7 Beer Commercial". I've never wanted to be in a beer commercial. In fact, I think I would just be annoyed if I had to subsist in a beer commercial, so I must not be their target audience. This billboard made me less likely to go to Tunica for my gaming needs. Maybe that was part of the point of the billboard though...to keep out us riff-raff who don't like beer commercials. Last night though, I was coming back across the river bridge and saw another billboard that described Tunica as a "Highway to 'Hell Yeah!'". I'm still not going to go, but I had to admit that this one won me back a little bit.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
If I'm not back in 30 minutes....keep waiting.
Why am I posting a picture of a half-assembled crib? Because to get any further with the pieces they sent us, we would have to add "duct tape" to the list of required tools. The piece they sent us that was labeled as the front left leg is actually a mutant combination of a couple of different pieces, the result of which is not useful anywhere in the assembly.
They company had a form especially for this purpose in their instructions, so I emailed them a request for a replacement piece and am waiting to hear back. They were supposed to contact me within 48 hours of when I sent the email. That means I expect to hear back from them in the next 30 minutes or else...I guess my pizza is free. I don't know.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Springing Forward
Three years ago on my birthday, I thought I was turning 26. Daniel and I actually had a lengthy discussion about this. He insisted I was turning 27 and I insisted I was not*. After we'd resorted to using pencil and paper (including both math problems and a handy diagram representing age progression) to setting the issue, I realized I was turning 27 after all. Nothing had really changed, but I felt like I'd lost an entire year of my life. It was similar to the out-of-sync feeling you get when flying to a different time zone and realizing that your 12 hour flight only cost you 6 hours. These sorts of adjustments are hard because you're the only one trying to make them. You find yourself trying to reconcile being 27 or wanting to take a nap at 9am while everyone else is whipping past you on their unaltered, parallel paths. Twice a year, though, something odd happens. Everyone gets together and sets a date and decides to throw themselves out of sync together. This is known as Daylight Savings Time.
I always think of time as this unstoppable force. Even though I understand that the passage of time and it's measurement aren't the same thing, they're so intertwined that it's hard not to think of them as one in the same. From this perspective, Daylight Savings is a moment when everyone just agrees to suspend reality for a moment and move ourselves forward or backward in an instant. The only other comparable event I can think of is when a country's money has become worth so little that they just lop some zero off the end of the value and start again. Just imagine if this devaluation ever occurred on the same day as Daylight Savings time. One minute, you're standing there a millionaire at 3am, and the next minute, you've got a 10 spot in your pocket at 2am. I imagine that would be a little disconcerting.
* this, by the way, is proof that you should not be offended when I forget your birthday or can't remember how old you are. Try as I may, I'm not good at remembering these things, and it is not an indication of how much I value you as a friend. As further proof, to even remember what year I got married, I have to count forward from the year Daniel and I started dating, and the only reason I can remember what year that was is because I had just bought a new car and I know it was an '03 model. The fact that I can remember what year I bought my car and not what year I started dating my husband is because I have had to fill out a lot of forms asking what year my car is, but I have never had to fill out a form asking what year I met my husband. If one of my friends ever becomes medically incapacitated and gives me power of attorney to fill out all their medical and insurance forms, I will probably start remembering their birthday every year. Let's hope it never comes to that.
I always think of time as this unstoppable force. Even though I understand that the passage of time and it's measurement aren't the same thing, they're so intertwined that it's hard not to think of them as one in the same. From this perspective, Daylight Savings is a moment when everyone just agrees to suspend reality for a moment and move ourselves forward or backward in an instant. The only other comparable event I can think of is when a country's money has become worth so little that they just lop some zero off the end of the value and start again. Just imagine if this devaluation ever occurred on the same day as Daylight Savings time. One minute, you're standing there a millionaire at 3am, and the next minute, you've got a 10 spot in your pocket at 2am. I imagine that would be a little disconcerting.
* this, by the way, is proof that you should not be offended when I forget your birthday or can't remember how old you are. Try as I may, I'm not good at remembering these things, and it is not an indication of how much I value you as a friend. As further proof, to even remember what year I got married, I have to count forward from the year Daniel and I started dating, and the only reason I can remember what year that was is because I had just bought a new car and I know it was an '03 model. The fact that I can remember what year I bought my car and not what year I started dating my husband is because I have had to fill out a lot of forms asking what year my car is, but I have never had to fill out a form asking what year I met my husband. If one of my friends ever becomes medically incapacitated and gives me power of attorney to fill out all their medical and insurance forms, I will probably start remembering their birthday every year. Let's hope it never comes to that.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Wading through Baby Names
Picking baby names is hard! I had looked at names for both sexes before I found out we were having a girl, but now we're really trying to narrow it down to a list of favorites. We've already decided not to tell anyone our choice until we've decided 100%, so don't expect any surprise revelations here. I will tell you that we currently have 2 front runners for first names, but it's a free for all with middle names. I wish we could just cram together our two favorite first names, but they have a certain similarity that keeps them from sounding good together, so we're having to look deeper down the list of possibilities.
The thing about picking a first and middle name is that you can't just pick whatever name sounds good on it's own. You have to take all these things into consideration:
The thing about picking a first and middle name is that you can't just pick whatever name sounds good on it's own. You have to take all these things into consideration:
- Cadence - You've got to make sure the first name sounds good with your last name and that all three names sound good together. For instance, there will be no names that start with P because my last name starts with a P and that would just make the poor child sound like a radio host of tv weather person (...and now for our weekend outlook...here's Penny Parker). A lot of issues with cadence can be ironed out by limiting your choices to a certain number of syllables and letter sequences. I'm just trying to avoid name combinations that end up sounding like German nannies or Dickens characters.
- Nicknames - I don't want to open up the door to any nicknames that I abhor. If my child comes to me at the age of 13, having decided that they want to be called by a nickname, I would like to be able to call them that (assuming it's not "T-Bone") without cringing every time I do.
- Initials - You don't want a little girl who's initials are "HOE" or "DUM". Even things that might seem cute ("ZIP" or "TAP") are just fodder for jokes. Pick names with the wrong initials, and not only are you setting your child up to be the butt of school yard teasing, they'll never know the luxury of monogrammed towels.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)