Sighs and Musings

Anyone Still Out There?

Sun, 24 Jan 2010 14:53:25 -0800

I haven’t posted a lot recently – what writing I have been doing has been longer format stuff that doesn’t fit on this blog. However, I have had a few ideas for shorter essays and was wondering if anyone was still looking here for new posts. So... if you are still following this blog, post a comment, or otherwise let me know. Thanks.

50 years on

Fri, 04 Sep 2009 05:00:00 -0800

Today is my 50th birthday. A time for introspection and refection – two things I do quite well.

To start off with, this is not the only odometer that is rolling around a bunch of digits this year:

* 50 years ago today, I was born
* 40 years ago this coming April I began my journey following Jesus
* 30 years ago this January, I started my career as a full-time software engineer
* 20 years ago this January, I moved to California
* 10 years ago… Well, there are some things that happened 10 years ago; but nothing that cries out as a landmark to celebrate. Perhaps 10 years from now I’ll think otherwise.

Oh, and 23 years ago this coming March, I got married (not exactly in sync with the rest – so it goes).

So I’ll consider these in turn.

50 Years of Life and life is good. While there are many things I would be tempted to change if I could, the reality is that I’m not at all convinced that I would be a better person if I changed any of them. Even my worst regrets have built positive things into my life, so should I regret them at all? The reality is that compared to 99% of the people in the world, my life is amazing; so on what basis can I complain about anything? The truth is that while there are still things I want to do with the years ahead, my life has been a good one.

40 years of faith and my love of God and appreciation of His love for me continues to grow. Anyone who reads this blog regularly knows that my faith is a dynamic thing, constantly growing. My relationship with God continues to get stronger as he works in me to help me see the world from His point of view. I don’t think I would be able to appreciate my life as well as I do if it wasn’t for God’s Spirit in my life acting as comforter, counselor and teacher.

30 years of engineering and frankly I’m getting tired of it. Don’t get me wrong – I have a great job working with great people. It would be hard to imagine a better engineering position elsewhere. It’s just that I’m starting to feel like I’ve done everything I want to do as a software engineer. Yes, I can keep doing the same things for many more years; but I could also retire today as an engineer and have no regrets about my career.

22 years of marriage, and I think we have finally figured it out. Seriously. We’ve had our ups and downs over the years; but at this point I think we both understand each other enough and understand how to cooperate in the cramped space of a marriage enough so that 1 plus 1 really is greater than 2. Learning how to be married really is a lot like learning how to be part of a pair of people trying to cook in a tiny kitchen (perhaps preparing three dishes – two that you are doing on your own and one that you are doing together). It’s all about finding the balance between giving each other enough room that you can get your own things done, helping each other out when extra hands are needed, and finding joy in the things you discover to do together.

20 years in California and the move to the city has kept it fresh (for now). We moved up to SF in part because we had grown bored of living in the South Bay. Too much suburbia. Of course moving up here brought into sharp relief the things we really did like about where we used to live; but it’s all under an hour away, and I’m down there at least once a week anyway. We both still miss the East Coast (particularly our friends back there); but at this point we’d also miss California if we ever moved away.

OK, so much for retrospectives. What’s next?

I’m really overcome with the sense that I for all I have learned in the first 50 years of my life, what I need to focus on in the years ahead is passing all that on to other people. I’m still not sure by what means to do that. Write some books? Become a teacher? Become a pastor? All of the above? I’m not sure; but I really think the focus of my life needs to switch into output mode. What that will involve in terms of lifestyle changes is unclear; but changes are needed to go with the new focus. I have seen God doing a lot of clearing the undergrowth from my life the last few years. I think that was in preparation for what’s next.

The prodigal returns to the fold

Thu, 06 Aug 2009 05:00:00 -0800

Four years ago (almost to the day - check out the post) I - who has started developing for the Macintosh 2 months after it was release and who worked for Apple for 7 years developing the Mac OS - abandoned the Mac for the PC. You can read the post to see how and why that transition happened. In essence I did not see the value investing my time in learning a whole new OS (Mac OS X) and a new programming language (Objective C) and neither did a lot of the independent developers who wrote the cool programs that made the Mac fun for me.

The news is that I am typing this post up on my new iMac that rests in the place of pride on my desk and my old PC is sitting in the corner, disconnected.

The reasons for my return to the Mac is manifold; but the real game changer is the iPhone. Now that I have a programmable device that I carry just about everywhere with me, the ability to program it for myself (even just utilities for my own private use) is something I can’t resist. What’s more, a cursory examination of the iPhone App Store provides ample evidence that the indie developers have returned to Apple as iPhone developers.

On top of that, the new Macs (being Intel-chip based) can run Windows, and I am setting up this computer to dual-boot, so I can still use Windows on those occasions I need to.

What’s more, I have a sense that God wants me to invest my energies into more creative activities (writing, programming, etc.) and to spend less time playing games, and the Mac is just a better computer for that (with fewer distractions for games).

Now I still have my 12” Sony laptop that I use to read Email (I use that because I can take it on trips easily, and I don’t have to worry about syncing my email archives between different machines); but for the foreseeable future I expect to be using a Mac a my primary computer at home.

Anne (who never left the Mac) is quite pleased.

Dollhouse: Epitaph One

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 05:00:00 -0800

OK, if that’s where Joss is headed, I’m in for the ride.

For as much as I was looking forward to Joss Whedon’s return to television with the new show “Dollhouse” this past Fall, I have to admit I was disappointed in the first few episodes (although I understand that was a result of Network’s interference - I've also seen the original pilot and it was much better). The series did pick up significantly in the second 6 (of 12) episodes, with a couple being superb. But in the end, while I could see the show being a venue for examining certain interesting ideas, I didn’t have a sense of where he was headed with it as a series – how would things evolve to keep the show interesting after multiple years?

Now I understand, and really want to see this play out.

The reason I understand is the episode “Epitaph One”, intentionally unaired but also intentionally included in the DVD boxed set. The existence of this episode requires a bit of explanation. The Fox TV network only ordered 12 episodes for season 1 and would only ever air those 12 episodes they paid for. However, in the international market, DVD boxed sets with 13 or more episodes are able to negotiate much more profitable deals, so the people at the division of 20th Century Fox responsible for the DVD sets asked if Joss & co. could somehow create a 13th episode for the DVDs. Thus the “missing 13th episode” came into existence.

What makes this so interesting is at the time this episode was created, it wasn’t at all clear if the series would be renewed for a second season (odds were actually against it). So, for this final episode Joss & company decided to make something of a “series finale” – something that would provide a kind of closure to the show should it be canceled. The effect is that “Epitaph One” gives a pretty clear idea of the overall arc that Joss has planned for the series without giving away so many details as to make any additional seasons produced anticlimactic.

And a pretty amazing arc it is.

“Epitaph One” is set in 2019 in a post-apocalyptic world where civilization has completely collapsed (and in fact has been collapsed for a while, so there are fewer than 10 years before things fall apart). What’s more, it becomes clear that the Dollhouse (or at least Dollhouse technology) is responsible for humanity’s downfall. There are devices that reprogram any person that come to near to them into killing machines and the streets are filled will crowds who kill anyone who is not reprogrammed. Other weaponized applications of Dollhouse tech are also implied. The story follows a small band of survivors trying to find someplace safe who stumble on the ruins of the LA Dollhouse in which the rest of the show is set. They access stored memories in the Dollhouse archives to provide “flashbacks” which give some hints of how this all happened and allowing for some great scenes with some of the series regulars (The last scene with the character Topher is an amazing performance).

Now Joss has hinted that some of the events in the show were written to be deliberately misleading as to how things came about; but even with some variation, it is clear that Joss’s vision for Dollhouse has some real scope. I hope he is able to run it out to the end.

Torchwood: Children of Earth

Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:00:00 -0800

Now that’s the way to do SciFi on TV.

I’ve not been a big fan of the BBC television series “Torchwood” (broadcast in the US on BBC-America). I checked out the first few episodes of season 1; and since then, when there have been episodes that that got a lot of buzz in the UK, I watched those select episodes when they aired in the ‘States. The series, a more “adult” spin-off of “Doctor Who” isn’t bad, it just didn’t seem to me to have a lot to say beyond entertainment.

For season 3 however, they decided to do something different. Rather than produce a weekly serial, Russell T. Davies decided to do the season as a mini-series. Five episodes over five consecutive nights, telling one large story. The results were comparable to the new of Battlestar Galactica in quality.

At a high level, the plot is fairly generic SciFi - aliens show up and make some demands of humanity with the threat that they will wipe us out if we don’t comply. What the producers of the show did right was that rather than focus on the aliens and technology (as most SciFi does), the series is really about the humans’ reactions to what happens. The show holds up a mirror to human nature, and what it shows isn’t pretty. In many ways, the series asks the same question that Battlestar Galactica did - are there things that we can do to save ourselves that make us no longer worth saving?

The result is a study in the banality of evil, as civil servants try to do “what’s best for the nation” while politicians work to maintain “plausible deniability” and save themselves. Peter Capaldi does a great job playing the civil servant John Frobisher - a tragic villain who is in way over his head and is left dangling by his superiors. The role is one that could have played more clearly dark; but Capaldi’s performance adds a lot of depth to the character to help you see his internal struggle and fear. He is at some level the “good man” his admin’ claims he is; but step by step he is drawn into the path of ruin.

The producers also made some good decisions about the presentation of the aliens - keeping them in a mist-filled room so the audience never gets a clear look at them, allowing the audience to fill in the gaps with their own nightmares; aided by the random shrieks and green ooze that occasionally splashes against the glass wall of the chamber. On top of that you have Capaldi’s performance making Frobisher’s horror at being so close to the creature palpable. What the aliens want from us is also held off until the middle of the series, and why they want it isn’t revealed until the final segment - to great effect. This series could be used as a textbook on the lesson in writing that “less is more”.

I’ll also add that the show made a great use of the regular characters. Early in the series, Torchwood (the people in the best position to fight the aliens) is destroyed because they know things about these specific aliens that would be an embarrassment for the government, and our heros spend the series on the run while trying to help humanity. Denied the use of their usual equipment, we get a much better sense of who these characters are as people.

I’m particularly impressed with how Captain Jack Harkness (leader of Torchwood and a human who is actually from the 51st century) is handled. This is a character originally created for the series Doctor Who and became a part of the spin-off when it was started. While on ‘Who, Harkness was granted, through unusual and unique means, a kind of immortality (he becomes an intrinsic part of the definition of the universe, so no matter what happens to him, the universe restores him). The result is that he literally has a death wish (he fights aliens in hope that one day he’ll meet someone with the technology that can actually kill him). This series was however the first time I really bought from the writing and performance why he wants to die - a man who lives forever collects lot of regrets.

Well done. I have no interest in owning the DVDs of seasons 1 and 2; but I will be buying season 3 when it comes out.

Learning

Thu, 23 Jul 2009 05:00:00 -0800

I just wanted to acknowledge here a lack of substantive posts. I’m in a learning mode these days and while writing is integral to how I lock understanding in my brain (and therefore plays a critical role when I have finished learning something), it can be problematic when applies too soon, thus locking incomplete understandings of things into my mind. I do have some older topics (whose understanding is unlikely to change) that I could write about, and have a couple of times sat down at the keyboard to do that so there would be some “meat” on this blog; but I’m just too focused on other topics to do them justice.

I hope to have much to write about when this is done; but only God knows when that will be.

I remember more

Tue, 21 Jul 2009 05:00:00 -0800

It is common in our culture to talk about certain events as being so overwhelming that you always remember where you were when you first heard about them. Thinking about the moon landing being commemorated this week got me thinking about the other marker events I have experienced.

I don’t recall where I was when I heard that President Kennedy was shot – I was a bit too young to appreciate that. I do however remember sitting in front of the TV watching the funeral procession on TV (and being surprised that there was more to the tune of the funeral march than the phrase that everyone hums – dum dum de-dum, da de-dum de-dum de-dum).

As noted last week, I do recall exactly where I was for the launch, landing, and moonwalk for Apollo 11.

I also recall exactly where I was when I heard about the accident on Apollo 13. I had gone to bed; but was having trouble sleeping so I went out to the kitchen to get some water and saw my mother watching the TV (turned down low). We stayed up together for a bit watching the coverage.

I recall where I was when I heard that that Nixon resigned. I was at a Christian camp that week, and one of my cabin-mates told me as I was walking back to the cabin while he was headed to the common building to see if he could get more details.

I recall where I was when I heard about the Challenger accident – I was at my office at GCC . There were lots of TVs around the office (leftovers from our videogame days), and most of us spent the rest of the afternoon watching coverage together.

I recall where I was when I heard about 9/11. I had just gotten up that morning (early Pacific Time – I went into the office early those days to have some overlap with our UK office) and tuned on Headline News as usual. I was tuned in when the second plane hit (Anne was also awake at that point, although we can’t remember if I woke her up or not). It was a tough decision to stop watching the unfolding drama and go into the office (and as it turns out my company gave us all permission to head home if we wanted).

I remember

Thu, 16 Jul 2009 05:00:00 -0800

I know exactly where I was, 40 years ago today at 9:32 AM EST – standing in a boat in the middle of the Indian River in Florida looking northeast with a big smile on my face. I was there watching the launch of Apollo 11 from Cape Kennedy (along with throngs of others who had boat and knew that the closest you could get to the launch site was on water).

I also know where I was at a quarter past four, 40 years ago next Monday – in our family living room in Cocoa Beach, watching the landing with my mother and brother. My father, who had worked on the Lunar Landing Module, was still at the office – on call in case there was an emergency. I was in the same location 7 hours later (I was given special dispensation to stay up late that night), watching the first moon-walk.

It was an interesting time of my life, living just south of “the cape” with my father involved in the space program when it was the center of national attention (of course, many of my school mates’ fathers were similarly involved). Behind our house was a 4 story office complex where CBS TV had space, and once we spotted Walter Cronkite on the walkway as we looked up from our backyard. The open stairwell of the complex was also a prime location for watching “lesser” spacecraft launches (satellites, etc.) – either that or down on the beach (depending on which launch pad they were lifting off from). Launches of some sort were fairly common, and the local newspaper always listed the next launch on the upper right corner of the front page, so we all knew when to pause and look.

I had my models of all of the manned spacecraft, and was actually pretty good at drawing the Lunar Module (for those who know what it looked like can appreciate that accomplishment). Dad would sometime share with me some of the designs of the LM, fostering my interest in engineering. There was a real sense in those days that smart people who applied themselves could accomplish great things – not necessarily make a lot of money; but to do something they could be proud of.

And that was really the bottom line of being there at that time and place – pride. Not necessarily pride in America (although there was plenty of that to go around); but pride in humanity – that we had broken free of our home shores and ventured out into the larger universe. It was the start of a new age, although one which hindsight has shown to be slow to progress.

Farewell Charles N. Brown

Tue, 14 Jul 2009 05:00:00 -0800

I have commented before on the virtues of Science Fiction Fandom (with a capital F) as a community. As with all effective communities, Fandom is held together by a small number of individuals who served as a glue that helped bind us together - some serving the community by organizing WorldCon and related gatherings, others serving by keeping us all informed of what was happening with others in the community. Charles N. Brown was one of the latter. His is not a name that people outside of Fandom would likely recognize; but the degree to which we in the community are indebted to him is measured by the 29 Hugo Awards he has won over the years.

Back in 1968, Charles N. Brown started Locus magazine (about which I have also written before). It won its first Hugo in 1971, and has been winning them pretty consistently ever since. As I have said before, Locus is to written science fiction what Variety magazine is to the movie industry – the “paper of record” where you go to find out who is doing what in Sci Fi writing and publishing. What deals are made, what books and stories have been published, what rights have been sold, and (relevant to this post) obituaries.

Charles N. Brown died Sunday, peacefully in his sleep. This was not entirely unexpected for the 72 year old who has had his share of health problems over the years. I met him twice (briefly) at WorldCon; but didn’t get a chance to talk to him much. Still his impact on the community has been significant, and his loss will be felt.

Moderation

Mon, 13 Jul 2009 14:17:25 -0800

As some of you may have noticed, this blog has been getting some attention from a volume source of junk comments. I have therefore switched it into moderation mode. You may still comment; but will need to wait for me to approve your comments before they appear.

This should be transitory; but we will see.

Generations

Thu, 09 Jul 2009 05:00:00 -0800

Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069
by Neil Howe and William Strauss

I previously posted a review of “The Fourth Turning” which describes Anglo-American history as cyclical with a repeating pattern of four kinds of generations. In their model, the Baby-Boomer generation is very similar to the Puritan generation born starting around 1584, the Awakening generation born starting around 1700, the Transcendentalist generation born starting around 1792, and what they call the “Missionary” generation born starting around 1860 - each being an example of what they call an “Idealist” generation. In each case the preceding (Adaptive) and following (Reactive) generations also have significant similarities, and so on.

The book “Generations” is actually the same authors’ previous work along similar lines, which they referred to liberally in ‘Turning, so I purchased the book back then and have just gotten around to reading it.

Both books acknowledge that the pattern has failed once - the Civil War cycle missed a beat, skipping one of the kinds of generations and going directly from what they call a “Reactive” generation to an “Adaptive”generation without the appearance of a “Civic” generation in between as has occurred in other cycles.

The book “Generations” however explores this flaw in more detail - explaining within the theory as to why it happened. Essentially, the Idealist generation of that cycle managed to gain power (win elections, etc.) earlier in life than the Idealists of other cycles, and in their idealism forced a civic crisis (the Civil War) sooner than it would have other wise (a periodic crisis like the civil war is a part of the cyclic model they propose, only it normally occurs when the Idealists are elders, not in midlife). The result is that the people who would have been nurtured to become the natural heroes of the crisis weren’t ready, and we went straight from the pre-crisis generation to the post-crisis one.

All this is interesting when they get around to suggesting what the future might look like if the pattern holds. According to Generations, we are due for the next Civic Crisis around 2020; but they note in the book (written in 1992) that it is possible the Boomer/Idealists might once again come to power early in which case we might hit the crisis (some combination of war and economic downturn) between 2001 and 2008. The authors express concern about this possibility since it would result in America being engaged in a conflict being led by people who view the issues moral terms, not practical ones (sound familiar?) If this does happen (which in hindsight, I think it did), then once again we may see the “Millennial” generation (those born 1980 and beyond) become more of what they call a “Reactive” generation as opposed to a “Civic” one, just as it happened in the Civil War cycle. I have been looking at the 20-somethings around me, and that too might fit.

Bottom line - an interesting read and I certainly recommend reading one or both of these books.

The Trouble With Physics

Thu, 02 Jul 2009 05:00:00 -0800

The Trouble With Physics: The Rise of String Theory, The Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next

by Lee Smolin

Theoretical Physics is another of my “roads not taken”; but I try to stay as on top of things as I can given my amateur status (and greatly atrophied calculous skills). For the last couple of decades, I’ve not been sure if I was missing something or if there was something wrong in the field; but for all of the great ideas that seem to be floating around, I wasn’t able to see anything coming together the way advances did in previous generations.

Physicist and writer Lee Smolin, is definitely of the mind that there is something wrong with how Physics has been practices of late, and makes his case in this very compelling (and readable to a laymen) book.

He starts with quick summary of the big 5 questions in theoretical physics that were unanswered 30 years ago. He then takes most of the rest of the first half of the book to examine string theory - the approach to solving these problems which has been studied over those 30 years by the vast majority of working physicists as a possible solution to these questions. The bottom line is that string theory has failed, and part of Smolin’s point is that in the past, any theory which failed as badly as string theory has would have been discarded.

Smolin take his time in this part of the book to ensure that no one can claim he is unfair or incorrect in his statements. He very carefully gives credit for every small victory achieved by string theory (without going too far over a layman’s head), while clearly pointing out the limitations of those victories. As it stands now, with almost all of the physics community working on it for 30 years, string theory can not make a single falsifiable prediction, a single unique calculation, or even be proved to be consistent or produce finite results for real situations.

The next section of the book explores some alternatives to string theory which have been ignored by most of the physics community. Essentially, the point here is to make clear that string theory isn’t the old game in town - there are other approaches that people could be working on instead.

Finally, the last quarter of the book steps back and examines the worldwide community of physicists (and academia in general) from a sociological point of view to explain how it got into this state and how it can possible get out of it. This may in fact be the best part of the book - if Smolin gets ostracized by his fellow physicists (as may well be the reaction to this book), he may well have a second career as a philosopher and sociologist.

Of course, I’m really not the target audience for this book - the people who really need to read it are university administrators and foundation managers; but I certainly enjoyed it.

Virtuality

Mon, 29 Jun 2009 05:00:00 -0800

Just watched the pilot/movie “Virtuality” by Ron Moore who helmed the recent “Battlestar Galactica” remake. It has not yet been picked up as a series, which is a shame since it blows away anything else on TV today. A rich story, a complex mystery, a settling that provides scope to explore a lot of things. Pretty impressive. Plus, Moore has the recent track record that shows he can deliver.

I don’t want to spoil anything so I won’t go into any of the surprises - if you have not seen it I recommend you go watch it on: Hulu. However on face value, the story is: humanity has launched its first mission to another star system (using realistic technology, by the way). The mission is backed by a consortium of companies who are making back at least part of the cost of the mission by presenting it as a reality TV series (with product placement by the crew). She ship’s psychologist serves double duty as the show’s producer (no conflict of interest there!). The only private time the crew have is when they retreat into their virtual reality modules which are custom programmed to allow they to escape the stress of the ship.

In the pilot, various plots are set in motion - news from Earth is bad, one of the crew is ill, strange things start happening in the virtual reality modules, and there are hints that the story is a lot more complex than what I described above. Oh, and did I mention there may be a murderer on board? There are so many things they could explore just using what was in the pilot, I sure hope someone picks it up.

iPhone

Mon, 22 Jun 2009 05:00:00 -0800

As people who follow me on Facebook already know, I purchased one of the new 32GB iPhone 3GS’s last Friday. While I had wanted to get an iPhone since they first came out, I realized that I needed 32Gb storage on it minimum to do the things I wanted, so I have patiently waited until now to buy one.

I am quite satisfied with the results.

For me, this is largely an exercise in gadget consolidation. In the past I have (in theory) carried around with me:

- my cell phone, to act as a phone and a camera for the occasional opportunistic photos I wanted to take
- my iPod to act as a music player and a photo wallet (although you couldn’t really see the photos unless you connected the iPod to a TV, at least I always had them with me)
- A book to read when I have dead time to fill (or, these days, my Kindle)
- my Nintendo DS to play games when I have dead time to fill and don’t feel like reading

In practice, this is just too much stuff to carry around. There was a period where I always had my phone and iPod (and usually a book) with me; but it became too much of a pain. Likewise I carried around my phone and my DS (and usually a book) for a while; but again the benefit wasn’t enough to overcome the sense of pocket-clutter (and the discipline to keep everything charged). So I always settled back on just having my phone and book (or phone and kindle now) and lived with the lack of tunes, games, photos, etc.

For me, the great thing about the iPhone is that I now have everything I want with me in a single, reasonably sized device.
- it is a great phone
- it is a pretty good occasional camera (with video too now)
- I can store all of my photos on it and actually show them to people in a reasonable way
- I can play games on it when I have a few minutes to kill
- Amazon even has a Kindle-book reader app for the iPhone, although between the size of the screen and the luminescent display, I wouldn’t want to use it that often.
- Plus, I get something I never had – web access in my pocket. Now when I am “out and about” and need to check some web site quickly (perhaps to make some decision on where to go next), I can do so. I can even manage this blog via the iPhone’s brower without problems.

This is a really big win for me.

As noted above, I don’t think the iPhone is a solid replacement for the Kindle, so I will also keep that with me most of the time; but that brings me down to two devices when I travel, which is pretty good. What’s more, I can cut that down to one (just the iPhone) when I have to. As expected, my usage model does mean that I need 32Gb of storage in the device; but now that that’s an option, I’m set.

Absence

Mon, 15 Jun 2009 05:00:00 -0800

Well, I hadn’t planned on taking a 2 week break from blogging.

Here’s the thing – I’ve been inspired of late to write some longer pieces which are unsuitable (both because of length and tone) for posting on my blog; and having written them, I haven’t had the energy to write something appropriate for this venue, so no posts. I may actually be working up to writing a book or two – we’ll see. What’s more, I didn’t write anything for this blog over the weekend (when I usually get ahead of things) and given that this is a busy week, it isn’t clear if I will have the time to do more posts this week. I do have some ideas for posts – it is just a matter of setting aside some of my own mind-share to write them up.

Since I am posting, I thought I’d put out a bit of a life-update.

Last week Apple finally announced a 32Gb iPhone. As previously noted on this blog, that was my minimum spec so I have pre-ordered an iPhone which I will be picking up on Friday. What’s more, since I am a programmer and I will soon have a programmable device with me at nearly all times, I have signed up to be a registered iPhone developer so I can develop some apps for myself. My hope is that some of them will be useful or entertaining enough to make available to others on at the Apple App Store. Unfortunately, this means breaking down and learning a new programming language (Objective-C) and a new Application Programming Interface (Cocoa). For those who don’t know, Apple’s OS X is a completely different operating system than System 9 and before, so while I was somewhat of a virtuoso at the old Mac OS, that is of no value to me now. Until now, I really didn’t have any reason to learn the new system (I don’t use it at work); but perhaps now I do.

Related to that, I have been using a Mac more at home (a hand-me-down from Anne). My desktop PC is quite ill, and I haven’t gotten it fixed yet, so I have been using the Mac for web surfing and writing. Anne is hopeful that the whole process will lure me back into the Mac fold. We’ll see. Certainly if I like developing for iPhone, it is a small step to developing for Mac (iPhone uses a striped down version of the Mac OS X). Plus, for development reasons I will have set up the Mac as the computer I sync my iPhone with, so I will continue to use the Mac for certain things regardless.

On more note: This Thursday (barring all unforeseen), I will officially “join” the Eucharist community (one of the groups of Jesus followers we have been involved with in SF). Their concept of being a member as opposed to just a participant is interesting and I hope to blog on it someday – I think there is some real virtue in their approach.

Well, until I post again. . .

Keeping up the pace

Fri, 29 May 2009 05:00:00 -0800

When I switched to posting updates about my everyday life onto Facebook, I knew there was a risk that I would not be able to keep up the three post a week pace on my blog. So far I have succeeded; but there have been times it was a close-run thing (such as my creating this post to finish off this week). I have some ideas for next week which may yield another trio of posts; but at some point I will run out of steam. When that time comes, I will likely to switch from three days a week (Monday, Wednesday, Friday) to two days a week (Monday, Thursday) until I have accumulated a bit of a backlog of posts to buffer slow weeks.

So, consider this fair warning - some Wednesday you are likely to find no post. When that happens, look for a post on Thursday and none on Friday.

In praise of TED

Wed, 27 May 2009 05:00:00 -0800

Back in 1984, Richard Saul Wurman (an interesting guy in his own right) started the TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design) conference which has been held annually since 1990. Each year 40-50 people from a variety of disciplines (science, engineering, technology, business, politics, arts, entertainment, philosophy, etc.) are invited to give “the talk of their lives” in 18 minutes or less. The goal is to get great ideas out into a forum where as many people as possible can have access to them. All of the talks are available on the web for free. I love surfing through their archives and watching the videos – I’ve never spent time on their site and not come away informed, inspired, and entertained. It sure beats channel surfing on TV.

In my opinion, two things make TED a success. One is the diversity of speakers. While the original charter was “Technology, Entertainment, and Design”, the scope of the talks have gone well beyond that to anyone who has (as the motto of the conference says) “ideas worth spreading”. You’d have to be brain dead to not find someone on their site that you would think is worth watching. The second reason I believe they are a success is the time limit. Talks are limited to 18 minutes and most are around 15 with some as short as 7-8. The time limit forces the speakers to focus on the core of their idea and to really think through what is important. It also means that you can watch one of their talks without making a big time commitment. I can sit at my desk and watch a couple over lunch without problems.

I thought about including some suggestions of my favorite talks; but it was just too hard to choose – they are all so good. So instead I’ll mention some of what I think were the oddest TED talks I’ve watched:

- Clifford Stoll on ... everything
- Michael Moschen juggles rhythm and motion
- Mary Roach: 10 things you didn't know about orgasm

Now if you want to look for worthwhile talks to start with, the TED home page has a bunch of selectors for things like “most draw dropping”, “most inspiring”, “most persuasive”, and “most courageous” which tend to be a pretty good indicators. If you spend any about of time watching YouTube videos, I would suggest that your time would be better spent watching TED (which, by the way, are also all available on YouTube).

Christian Reading List

Mon, 25 May 2009 05:00:00 -0800

I often get asked, out of the many book I have read, which ones I would most recommend to other Christians to read. Now obviously we are all in different places in our journey with God, and so what books would be helpful to one individual might be different from those which would be helpful to someone else. Still there are certain books that I tend to turn to time and time again, and I have finally gotten around to organizing a formal list of highly recommended books.

To make this list, I looked through my shelf, my blog entries, and a log I have been keeping since November of books I have read. I initially started with 25 books I would recommend, wanted to get it down to a “top ten”, and finally compromised at 15 books. Here’s what I came up with:

“Repenting of Religion: Turning from Judgment to the Love of God” by Gregory A. Boyd
A great book that really gets to the root of how Christianity represents a fundamentally different world view, and how so much of what is called “Christianity” isn’t. If you want to read about a church that really applies these ideas, I’d suggest “No Perfect People Allowed” by John Burk.

“Searching for God Knows What” by Donald Miller
Christianity is about relationship, not religion. This book really captures that idea.

“Velvet Elvis: Repainting the Christian Faith” by Rob Bell
A great explanation of Christianity which uses new metaphors and also reconnects it with its Jewish root.

“The Sacred Romance: Drawing Closer To The Heart Of God” by Brent Curtis and John Eldredge
A great “big picture” view of Christianity in the context of Eternity. Another book in this vein is “Epic”, also by Eldredge, and the DVD of Eldredge “performing” Epic is fantstic.

“Messy Spirituality” by Mike Yaconelli
A reminder that God has never been looking for perfect people (they don’t exist); but rather likes to collect around Himself spiritual misfits and losers who are willing to Follow Him.

“Start Here: Kingdom Essentials for Christians” by Don Willliams
A great answer to the question “OK, I’m saved. Now what?” This would likely be review to older Christians; but a very useful review.

“How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth” by Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart
By far the best single book I have found about how to study the Bible. Raises all of the kinds of questions which should be asked when looking at any portion of the Bible.

“Hearing God: Developing a Conversational Relationship With God” by Dallas Willard
God’s intent is to communicate with every Christian as a normal part of their lives. This is the best book I have found on that subject.

“The Rest of the Gospel: When the Partial Gospel Has Worn You Out” by Dan Stone, David Gregory, and Sally Rackets
We were never meant to live our lives as Christians in our own strength. God’s intent was that we would live victorious lives by the power of Jesus living in and through us. This book explores exactly what that means.

“This Beautiful Mess: Practicing the Presence of the Kingdom of God” by Rick McKinley
A great teaching on what it means to demonstrate God’s Kingdom to a hurting world

“The Blue Parakeet: Rethinking How You Read the Bible” by Scot McKnight
Another great book on how to study the Bible with a different style than Fee and Stuart’s book above.

“The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church” by Gregory A. Boyd
A must-read for any American Christian. All about how Christians should view the relationship of Church and State.

“Blue Like Jazz: Nonreligious Thoughts on Christian Spirituality” by Donald Miller
A very honest and open memoir of one Christian coming to understand the faith. I recommend this book both in terms of what the author learns and in his willingness to talk about his life, faults and all. He’s a great example of what Christia transparency should be.

“Organic Church: Growing Faith Where Life Happens” by Neil Cole
A great book on some alternative ways to “do church”. I recommend this highly to anyone who thinks that your typical Sunday church service is the only way to do things. I would also recommend (with some reservations) “Reimagining Church: Pursuing the Dream of Organic Christianity” by Frank Viola.

“Jesus Wants to Save Christians: A Manifesto for the Church in Exile” by Rob Bell and Don Golden
A great Christian perspective on activism - how we are to serve in the world’s redemption, not through secular means by by the Kingdom of God.

Understanding Lordship

Fri, 22 May 2009 05:00:00 -0800

Throughout the New Testament people are told that to join in this new movement they need to establish, through trust, Jesus as their Lord and Savior. Now the “savior” part of that formula remains fairly easy to understand. While what Jesus saves us from and the means by which He does it are unique, the idea of someone coming and rescuing others from a dire situation remains a central part of our culture and the stories we tell.

The concept of Lordship is however a bit harder on the modern American audience.

We live in a society where we are governed by elected officials who we can vote out of office (if not impeach or recall) if we don’t like them. We work at jobs voluntarily, and if we don’t like out current job we can look for another one. I do acknowledge that some people are in circumstances where that may in fact not be practical; but the principles of our society say that no one is a slave and therefore everyone should be free to change jobs if they want. The reality is that most Americans have no direct experience with any relationship which resembles what the people 2000 years ago would have understood to be the meaning of saying “Jesus is Lord”. What’s more, all of our understandings of such relationships in the past have negative connotations – slavery, absolute monarchies, etc. – so even when we understand those terms we have a bias against applying them to ourselves today.

I believe this lack of understanding of Lordship is one of the factors which cripples the church in America and leads to our powerlessness in our communities. We embrace Jesus as our Savior but not our Lord; and without Lordship, God kingdom is not manifest. After all, what is the Kingdom of God beyond that realm in which He is accepted as Lord? We cannot expect God’s presence and power to be manifest where He is not allowed to reign.

Instead we have supposed Christians who are focused only on “what’s in it for them.” What they want is the reassurance that things will be OK between them and God after they die (“salvation”) and that a minimum of demands will be placed on them before they die. They understand that some changes will be required; but at some level they are looking the church that will ask as little as possible of them while providing the maximum in benefits. They want a church with excellent music, a dynamic preacher, a comforting message, lots of social activities; and most of all, a church that “stays in its place” on Sundays so they can do what they want the rest of the week. This is Christianity without Lordship.

However, to call Jesus Lord (as required by all of the New Testament authors) means to submit yourselves completely and utterly to God’s will for your life, no matter how inconvenient that might be. Back 2000 years ago people would understand that. Someone who served a lord was owned by them. They had no time of their own, no possessions beyond what their lord granted them. They lived to serve their lord. God has promised that for those who will make Him their Lord, He will save them and transform them into His image. What we gain in this transaction is without price; but the cost is our whole lives.

And it is only through people who actually make Jesus Lord is God’s Kingdom established. Once God has people who are completely sold out to Him, He can use them to demonstrate His compassion and His power to the world. God cannot do that through people for whom God is one of many competing priorities, people for which God must work around their schedules to find time for them to serve Him. He cannot show His power to the world through people who are only interested in God’s power for themselves.

We as the church in America must repent of our tendency to seek Jesus as our Savior and not our Lord. Perhaps when we do, we will begin to transform our communities again by showing them the greatness of God’s Kingdom.

Master/Teacher/Friend

Wed, 20 May 2009 05:00:00 -0800

My relationship with God is really three intertwined relationships:
- God is my master/lord and I am His servant
- God is my teacher and I am His student
- God is my friend/lover and I am His friend/lover
These are not different modalities where we operate as master/servant one moment and teacher/student the next. All three relationships are always a part of every one of our interactions.

The best picture of this kind of complex relationship I have seen is the one portrayed in the film “The Karate Kid” between Mr. Miyagi and young Daniel LaRusso. If you have never seen the film, I would recommend it (and not its sequels). In brief, Daniel is a teen who moves with his mother from New Jersey to Southern California after the death of his father. The maintenance man at the apartment complex they move into is the aging Mr. Miyagi from Okinawa. Daniel has the standard “new kid in the High School” problems and ends up incurring the wrath of a group of teens who study martial arts at a local dojo. On day while they are beating Daniel up, Mr. Miyagi shows up and utterly defeats the teens despite being outnumbered and several times their age. As a result, Daniel asks Mr. Miyagi to teach him martial arts. At first he refuses; but eventually agrees.

What follows is one of the classic sequences from the film. Mr. Miyagi takes Daniel to his house and proceed to have him spend days doing various chores: painting fences, waxing his antique car collection, etc. For each task there are some very specific instructions as to how it must be done (apply the wax counter-clockwise with his left hand, polish it off clockwise with his right hand). Eventually Daniel rebels, accusing Mr. Miyagi of not fulfilling their bargain, at which point the truth is revealed – all of the chores have actually been ways to build specific muscle groups (and muscle memory) that Daniel will need to defend himself. The two grow close and eventually compete against the teens in a tournament.

As I said, my relationship with God feels a lot like the kind of relationship shown between these two individuals in the film. I come to God to teach me how to live – how to be all I was meant to be. I go to God for this understanding because He designed me and because I know He loves me and wants the best for me. To learn what I must learn, God calls me to make him my Lord – to commit myself to be obedient to Him. God leads me to do things, and I try to follow His leading. Sometimes I do so grudgingly, sometimes I balk, sometimes I fail; but my intent is to be obedient to Him in all things. I often don’t understand why God asks me to do some things; but I try to obey regardless because I trust (have faith in) Him. What I often discover is that God has many reasons for asking me to do the things he asks me to do – they serve His kingdom but in the process they also serve to teach me to be a better person. There are times that I suddenly see God’s multiple purposes in something he asks me to do and it is very much like the “Show me: wax on, wax off” scenes in the movie. Through all this I have grown closer to God as my understanding and appreciation of His love for me grows and my love for Him grows as well.

“Love the sinner...”

Mon, 18 May 2009 05:00:00 -0800

One of the stock aphorisms in Christianity these days is that Christians should “love the sinner but hate the sin”. At some level that sounds like good advice; but the problem I have observed is that the distinction is often too subtle for the “sinners” to tell the difference. Our attempt to love the person while hating their actions just look like us hating the individual to those on the receiving end.

Now looking at scriptures, the commandment to love all people (friends, enemies, sinners, etc.) is quite clear and unambiguous. In fact we are commanded to love them sacrificially – giving of ourselves to serve them all. Yet it is hard to find scriptures which command us to hate sin in other people. Yes, God certainly hates sins – there is no doubt about that; but people seemed to be cautioned by scripture against focusing in any way on other people’s sins. We are told to not judge each other. We are told to not concern ourselves with the splinter in someone else’s eye given that we have a log in our own. We are told to not talk about other people’s faults.

So what does it look like if we reduce that aphorism to just “love the sinner”? Does sin abound because we never challenge it? I don’t think so.

When I see someone whose life is spiraling downward because they bound up by an addiction, my love for them compels me to want to see them free of their addiction. This isn’t because their abuse is a “sin” (that categorization plays no role in my actions)– it is because their abuse is harming them and those close to them. I believe if we simply love people, we will want to see them free of habits and traits which harm them and others. There is no sense of hate directed towards anything, no concern over what is sin or not – only love towards the person.

But, one may ask, doesn’t all sin harm people? Shouldn’t we then seek to see all people free of all sins? I certainly agree that God’s commands are not arbitrary – that they are meant to serve as fences and guardrails to keep us all away from things which would harm us. Yet when we intellectualize this, when we begin with the premise “in theory this is harmful to them” we move away from the realm of a loving heart and into the realm of a judgmental mind. Unless we can perceive the harm some trait or habit is doing to the person, it is hard for us keep our actions motivated by sincere love. I think it is best to stay away from what we “think” someone should or should not be doing, and stay centered on the pain we feel when we see people bound up in destructive behavior.

So how then do the other sins – those for whom the harm is less obvious to human eyes – get addressed? I can say from my own life, they get addressed by God. Most of what God is working on in my life are those things for which the harm is not obvious to other people. Some things, like pride, might even be seen as advantages to others. While no fellow Christian might have their heart break seeing how these characteristics and behaviors harm me; God has a higher perspective, and His heart does break for the trouble I cause myself. So even these issues will get addressed if we all just stick with “loving the sinner” period.

2009 TV Finales

Fri, 15 May 2009 05:00:00 -0800

So I wrote about Movies on Monday and Books on Tuesday so I figured that since there were season (or series) finales of several TV shows this past week I’d complete the media triptych.

WARNING: SPOILERS BELOW!
If you haven’t seen these shows and don’t want o be spoiled, don’t read my comments below.

Dollhouse

As I have written previously, Dollhouse recovered from the slow start and turned into an interesting series, the difference being the focus moved away from the character Echo/Christina and onto the Dollhouse itself. The season finale (actually the last two episodes) continued that upward trajectory with a number of twists. I particularly liked finding out that at least one of the Dollhouse staff is a Doll/Active (a particularly valuable member of the staff died; but they happened to have a recent “backup” of their mind, so with a little editing to make the transition...). The show has now come down strongly on the POV that some aspect of moral character (the person’s “soul”?) cannot be reprogrammed using the Dollhouse’s technology. I do hope it gets renewed.

Fringe

Fringe has been my guilty pleasure this season – a show that objectively doesn’t meet my criteria for “good TV”; but I watch it anyway, largely because the character of Walter is just so fun (the actor John Noble really disserves some recognition for his work). The series has also gotten better as it has gone on and the show’s underlying mythology has become clearer. While I had figured out early on where, in general , they would find Dr. Bell, the final reveal of his exactly location was wonderful. Plus we have enough information to figure out the big secret regarding Peter. Nicely done.

Lost

So in this season the show fully embraced being Science Fiction. With the set up of the season 4 finale, it looks like in the 5th and final season, they will embrace the mythic. We now know the correct response to the pass code “What lies in the shadow of the statue?”: “Ille qui nos omnes servabit” – “He who saves us all” in Latin. I loved the preamble with Jacob and the man in black, and the final fade to white certainly left things open for next season.

Bones

That was bizarre. The show has played with the format before; but never to that extent. It was however quite entertaining seeing everyone playing strange parodies of themselves. Of course, the final reveal at the end was a bit of a cliffhanger for a show whose renewal is not yet locked in.

Evolution, Past and Future

Wed, 13 May 2009 05:00:00 -0800

Read two books last week, both on the subject of evolution although with very different points of focus.

The first was Jerry Coyne’s “Why Evolution Is True” which is by far the best defense of the Theory of Evolution I have seen in print. It would have been perfect if Coyne had included a chapter that explains our latest understanding of how bodies are formed based on genetics (and therefore how only small mutations are needed to produce significantly different forms). The book did successfully address a couple of my concerns with the current formation of evolution. (As noted, perhaps too frequently, on this blog – I have no problems reconciling evolution with my faith; but as an amateur scientist I do have questions that I think have yet to be addressed by the current formations of evolution).

The one big concern I still have with evolution for which I found Coyne’s presentation still lacking is an explanation of speciation – how we end up with many different species as opposed to a single (although diverse) gene pool. Coyne presents the best understanding that exists today – that most animal speciation is a result of geographic separation (there is another mechanism which accounts for the existence of many plant species). This is because where there’s a population of creatures that are not physically separated; any mutation that would limit what other creature they could breed with would tend to be selected against. Furthermore, to find those species living in the same area, the geographic separation must have been overcome. If you consider the number of different animal species you tend to find living together, that’s a whole lot of separation and reuniting going on. This might well prove to be a reasonable explanation; but I’d like to see more thorough modeling of this – is the amount of dynamic isolation needed for this to work supported by the geological, fossil, and timeline evidence?

Then from the practical to the speculative.

The second book I read was Ray Kurzweil’s “The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology”. The essential argument of this book is that the evolution of sentient intelligence naturally leads to biological evolution becoming surpassed by the evolution of non-biological life-forms – artificial intelligences and/or human intelligence transcribed into computer software. If evolution states that life-forms which are better adapted to produce fertile offspring will succeed over those less capable, then technological life will naturally succeed over biological life. A robot programmed with a human’s consciousness is “fitter” in the evolutionary sense.

What’s more, Kurzweil argues, this transition will be happening soon, perhaps in our lifetimes. He first makes the case that technology is accelerating at an exponential rate (Moore’s Law writ large). Based on that, laptop computers with more memory and processing power than a human brain are just around the corner. Likewise the ability to completely analyze and model a human brain is also on the way. Further, Kurzweil believe that true artificial intelligences are also close (although I personally found his arguments here weak), and once they exists they will tend to further accelerate the rate of technological innovation (you can have a computer rack full of artificially intelligent “scientists” working together on any problem for a fraction of the cost of a lab of real humans). The bottom line is that Kurzweil believes that artificial humans will exist by 2040, and by 2100 biological intelligences will be in the minority. And since the rate of change of technology is increasing exponentially, even if it is 10 times harder then he thinks, that only delays it by a decade or so.

I’ve read Kurzweil’s theories before (particularly in his “The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence”) which covers much of the same ground and I am of mixed feelings. On the one hand, while I can raise objections to some of his individual points, I can’t argue against the overall flow of his theory - it does seem inevitable (I am ignoring here the question of whether any part of consciousness is hosted in something other than matter). On the other hand, there’s a significant part of me that is frightened of such a future. I’ve actually done some fiction writing on my own to explore how I feel about this (nothing worthy of publishing, just a way to get my own thoughts in order), and should such a time come, I may in fact be one of the bio-luddites who objects to it.

Star Trek 2009 – I like it

Mon, 11 May 2009 05:00:00 -0800

Saw the new Star Trek movie on Friday; and yeah, that’s the way to re-boot the franchise.

Instead of trying to re-tell the original story with a new cast and new sensibilities, or to completely re-imagine the original series from scratch (both techniques have been used successfully elsewhere), J. J. Abrams found a middle road between the two paths which takes advantage of this being SciFi. The new Star Trek movie is essentially the start of an alternative timeline for the original series. Events transpire (I won’t spoil too much) which change history so that while all of our heroes do end up on the Enterprise by the end of the film, the paths by which they get there are different from those taken by the characters in the original series.

What this means is that everything is on the table where it comes to continuity. The writers can keep anything they want to stay the same from the original series (they are after all “the same characters”); but they can also change anything they want to change (their early lives have been altered by the events of the film). You could even kill off characters (or even whole species) without any fan crying “continuity”. The result is that all of the signatures of the original show have been preserved (all of the characters get to say their signature lines, people in red shirts still die, our heroes climb on those same rocks that we saw so often in the original shows, Starfleet uniforms still include miniskirts for the women, etc.) but many changes are made to make the characters more interesting (including an romance).

Now the plot does have a few holes in it (most of which are filled in if you read the prequel comic book for the movie; but I got the sense that the comic book was deliberately written to “fix” the problems in the shooting script). However, since the movie is much more of a character story than the original series, I didn’t mind the plot issues as much as I might – what matters is seeing these characters play against each other. In that respect, credit has to be given to Zachary Quinto playing Spock. I have to admit I was skeptical when I heard “Sylar” was going to play Spock; but he does an outstanding job of playing a much deeper and complex Spock than the writers supported in the original series.

So the actors are all signed up for two more films, and I am definitely looking forward to them.

Premature Post

Sun, 10 May 2009 15:34:43 -0800

Sorry - Wednesday's post got put up today because of user error. I took it back down and it should re-post correctly on Wednesday