1.
I never believed
The taste of a revolver
Would be quite so sweet.
2.
If this is a sin
It should be held on a par
With euthanasia
3.
If God did not want
Us to commit suicide,
We would not have minds.
4.
Some walk to the edge
Gaze below, and back away;
While others must jump.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Friday, October 02, 2009
New haiku (not suicide related, but reality-based)
Got to remember:
When farting with headphones on,
Others still can hear.
When farting with headphones on,
Others still can hear.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
From YouTube's blood385, commenting and the commercial (and philosophical as well, no doubt) legitimacy of the Segway Wheelchair: "Only thing that would make this complete is if it ran off of bald eagle heads and diamonds."
That's a mouthful, blood.
That's a mouthful, blood.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Suicide Haikus
1.
Juan De Fuca Straits
Have very aggressive tides.
I doubt you'll find me.
2.
In three days I'll rise
And redeem humanity.
Oh wait! That's Jesus.
3.
Egomania
Is the sole motivator
For a note at all
4.
Self-immolation
Always seemed extreme to me.
Then I thought: why not?
5. (Not really a suicide haiku, but I like it anyway):
An owl and a snake
Fixate on a wounded mouse.
My money's on Owl.
Juan De Fuca Straits
Have very aggressive tides.
I doubt you'll find me.
2.
In three days I'll rise
And redeem humanity.
Oh wait! That's Jesus.
3.
Egomania
Is the sole motivator
For a note at all
4.
Self-immolation
Always seemed extreme to me.
Then I thought: why not?
5. (Not really a suicide haiku, but I like it anyway):
An owl and a snake
Fixate on a wounded mouse.
My money's on Owl.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Sunday, April 05, 2009
More on facebook
Update: Here's a decidedly British take on the phenomenon as well. . . Thanks to MonkeySkull for the link.
There is something incredibly invasive about this whole "Web 2.0" stuff, isn't there? (Aside: Has "Web 2.0" already become a hoary, quaint reference to what's going on with the Web, akin to the "information superhighway" or "cyberspace"? It feels like it. . . )
Perhaps "invasive" is the wrong word, as it connotes an unwelcome intrusion. With the exception of a few embarrassing old pics posted by "friends" most of the information available Facebook, etc. was placed there by our own volition, and not the result of some overreaching third party digging up dirt on us. That this information occasionally amounts to an embarrassing or compromising disclosure is more a function of our inexperience with the forum--much like the regrettable "reply-all" email response, sending a snarky, petty or downright cruel comment to the very subject of our derision. I haven't made that error in a long time, not due to some change in technology, but because I have been chastened by prior indiscretions to do two things: one, be more thoughtful about what I say in email, and two: be more discreet about who's on the receiving end of my emails.
If our means of interacting social networking sites follows the same user arc as email, will we inevitably see a shift towards more circumspection and discretion on how far we open our virtual kimono in the future? I'm not sure what's left of the sites if we stop posting our public, multimedia, extemporized diaries online. Perhaps social networking is just enduring its initial novelty phase right now, much like answering machines did in their inception? Remember when telephone answering machines first hit the market, and a critical mass of persons had some clever ditty or schtick for their message, when now, you're hard pressed to find somebody who doesn't use some near-verbatim flavor of, "Hi, I'm not here, so leave a message" message? So which is it? Is facebook more like email, or more like the phone answering machine? Are we more interested in conveying information via facebook and twitter, or receiving information? Exactly what information are we trying to convey: how clever we can be (a la the early phone messages), or something that we'll ultimately deem to be more utilitarian? And just as important: what information are we trying to learn about our friends, loved ones, or coworkers when we use the sites? Are we scanning for scandal, or are we really that curious about the quotidian goings-on of everyone?
Because of facebook and its ilk, we may see people become more comfortable knowing more about people's otherwise "secret" lives--the lives they lead when we may not be looking. If that's the case, then the social networking sites will have an enormous impact on society: getting people to relax their double-standards, and understand that we all have skeletons, thoughts, desires, alternative lives. Eventually, we'll learn that kinky, freaky, corny, tacky thoughts and actions don't detract from our professional and interpersonal competencies--on the contrary, they inform and enrich them. The predilections of the politician, the schoolteacher, the preacher, the middle manager, the stockbroker, previously looked down upon as perversions, will instead be seen as part of the amalgam that makes any of us competent at work, love, leisure, compassion. It's not that difficult to envision a future where our facebook profile is the "first" impression somebody creates of friends or workmates, rather than a supplement to our offline impression of a person. We'll see. In any case, I'm looking forward to seeing what facebook becomes after the "answering machine jingle" novelty of it wears off.
There is something incredibly invasive about this whole "Web 2.0" stuff, isn't there? (Aside: Has "Web 2.0" already become a hoary, quaint reference to what's going on with the Web, akin to the "information superhighway" or "cyberspace"? It feels like it. . . )
Perhaps "invasive" is the wrong word, as it connotes an unwelcome intrusion. With the exception of a few embarrassing old pics posted by "friends" most of the information available Facebook, etc. was placed there by our own volition, and not the result of some overreaching third party digging up dirt on us. That this information occasionally amounts to an embarrassing or compromising disclosure is more a function of our inexperience with the forum--much like the regrettable "reply-all" email response, sending a snarky, petty or downright cruel comment to the very subject of our derision. I haven't made that error in a long time, not due to some change in technology, but because I have been chastened by prior indiscretions to do two things: one, be more thoughtful about what I say in email, and two: be more discreet about who's on the receiving end of my emails.
If our means of interacting social networking sites follows the same user arc as email, will we inevitably see a shift towards more circumspection and discretion on how far we open our virtual kimono in the future? I'm not sure what's left of the sites if we stop posting our public, multimedia, extemporized diaries online. Perhaps social networking is just enduring its initial novelty phase right now, much like answering machines did in their inception? Remember when telephone answering machines first hit the market, and a critical mass of persons had some clever ditty or schtick for their message, when now, you're hard pressed to find somebody who doesn't use some near-verbatim flavor of, "Hi, I'm not here, so leave a message" message? So which is it? Is facebook more like email, or more like the phone answering machine? Are we more interested in conveying information via facebook and twitter, or receiving information? Exactly what information are we trying to convey: how clever we can be (a la the early phone messages), or something that we'll ultimately deem to be more utilitarian? And just as important: what information are we trying to learn about our friends, loved ones, or coworkers when we use the sites? Are we scanning for scandal, or are we really that curious about the quotidian goings-on of everyone?
Because of facebook and its ilk, we may see people become more comfortable knowing more about people's otherwise "secret" lives--the lives they lead when we may not be looking. If that's the case, then the social networking sites will have an enormous impact on society: getting people to relax their double-standards, and understand that we all have skeletons, thoughts, desires, alternative lives. Eventually, we'll learn that kinky, freaky, corny, tacky thoughts and actions don't detract from our professional and interpersonal competencies--on the contrary, they inform and enrich them. The predilections of the politician, the schoolteacher, the preacher, the middle manager, the stockbroker, previously looked down upon as perversions, will instead be seen as part of the amalgam that makes any of us competent at work, love, leisure, compassion. It's not that difficult to envision a future where our facebook profile is the "first" impression somebody creates of friends or workmates, rather than a supplement to our offline impression of a person. We'll see. In any case, I'm looking forward to seeing what facebook becomes after the "answering machine jingle" novelty of it wears off.
Friday, March 27, 2009
Crazy songs stuck in my head over the past 24 hours
Some know me to have a mind capable of evoking idiosyncratic, cloying, and often just downright awful music without warning. The past few days have been particularly rife with bad music. Here they are, in [reverse chronological] order:
Some horrible song by the hair band "Fastway."
"I've got a brand new pair of roller skates," by Melanie Safka (I had to look that one up);
"Woman" by John Lennon, off of Double Fantasy (a gawdawful album if there ever was one)
"Silly Love Songs," By Paul McCartney (hmm, I'm noticing a theme of bad music composed by Beatles well past their prime. At least Lennon had enough grace to get murdered before he could really fall off the deep end of creative blight).
"Theme from Magnum PI"
"Sweet Gypsy Rose," by Tony Orlando and Dawn.
A lesser man would die from such thoughts.
Some horrible song by the hair band "Fastway."
"I've got a brand new pair of roller skates," by Melanie Safka (I had to look that one up);
"Woman" by John Lennon, off of Double Fantasy (a gawdawful album if there ever was one)
"Silly Love Songs," By Paul McCartney (hmm, I'm noticing a theme of bad music composed by Beatles well past their prime. At least Lennon had enough grace to get murdered before he could really fall off the deep end of creative blight).
"Theme from Magnum PI"
"Sweet Gypsy Rose," by Tony Orlando and Dawn.
A lesser man would die from such thoughts.
Movies I want to see
Goodbye, Solo (Life of a Senegalese cab driver in NC)
Wendy and Lucy (Woman and her dog lost in Oregon, en route to Alaska)
Cold Souls (Woody-Allenesque Giamatti vehicle. That's good enough for me right there)
Shall we Kiss? (lighthearted french romantic comedy)
The Education of Charlie Banks (coming-of-age film, directed by Limp Bizkit's Fred Durst)
I love you Man
Monsters vs. Aliens
Tokyo Sonata (Willie Loman-esque study of Japanese corporate culture, from what I can tell. . .)
Wendy and Lucy (Woman and her dog lost in Oregon, en route to Alaska)
Cold Souls (Woody-Allenesque Giamatti vehicle. That's good enough for me right there)
Shall we Kiss? (lighthearted french romantic comedy)
The Education of Charlie Banks (coming-of-age film, directed by Limp Bizkit's Fred Durst)
I love you Man
Monsters vs. Aliens
Tokyo Sonata (Willie Loman-esque study of Japanese corporate culture, from what I can tell. . .)
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Friday, February 06, 2009
Words we need
We need a word for the guilt one feels when accepting someone as a "friend" on a social network even though we really don't like the person.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)