How do I get the "feel" of music"?

This is in answer to a question posted on http://music.stackexchange.com/questions/50596/how-to-feel-the-music/50614#50614 How do I get the "feel" of music"? If you have ever studied poetry, you learned about meter and rhyme. You may have also learned about cadence. These things create rhythm. Music is poetry. The lyrics can help create the mood and emotion. The beat (tempo and rhythm) also constitute part of the "feel" of music. The timbre (pronounced "tamber") of the instruments and voices likewise contribute. Study these things and note the differences between songs. Also, dancing (or imagining yourself dancing) to the music will help you get the "feel" of it.

Bowing to your iPhone: Apple keeps iPhone users on a short tether

Apple likes to keep iPhone users on a short leash.  Perhaps the greatest attestation of the power of being cool is that Apple can sell you a very short charging cable for a hefty $20.  You see the irony of this when you find someone, like your friend Ray bent over near the wall outlet. 

"What are you doing Ray?" you ask.  

"I'm being cool talking on my cool new iPhone."

"You don't look so cool in that  bent over position."

"The charging cable is kinda short."

"But Ray, it's only lunch time.  Why are you charging your phone?"

"I had to use my navigation this morning, and made two phone calls."

"That doesn't seem like a lot. Does it always run down this fast?"

"No, not at all.  On days when I don't use it much it will go right through supper time."

"So it works fine so long as you don't use it much?"

"Yes.  Would you like to bend over and see some of the cool things this baby can do?"

"Thanks, I'll pass."

Death by Artificial Intelligence: How Human Can It Get?

This is a response to a thoughtful article from Search Engine Watch, by Janet Bastiman entitled Can machines think?

It occurs to me that there is a great variety of capability that we classify as "human" including people with very low IQ (some have almost no intellectual capacity). Any type of test (e.g. Turing) to determine whether a machine possesses intelligence must draw a line somewhere, when in fact any drawn line may be arbitrary. Perhaps "intelligence" - cognitive and emotional abilities - are on a scale that starts with rocks, runs the gamut through amoebas, fish, cats, dolphins, humans, and God.
Eventually, machines will mimic a lot of human thinking. Will they ever have empathy, longing, happiness, and love? Is it better for machines to remain dispassionate? Are they more likely to kill us if they have self-directed behavior with no conscience (like a psychopath) or if they are capable of hate and anger?

Alan Turing - inventor of the Turing test to determine if a robot is really "intelligent".
 Photo courtesy Search Engine Watch.

There are some physicists (I'll try to find a link), who believe that merging AI with human intelligence may pave the way for us to manipulate or even create universes.  In other words, we effectively would become gods. From a mathematical point of view, given the age of the universe and the potential for other universes like it to exist, some feel that this  must have already happened somewhere, which has led to the speculation that we may be the result of someone playing around with physics at a high level.

Let there be light...

The Octopus's Garden Beneath Your Desk: In Search of the Perfect Cable

Your day was going fine until the internet stopped working and the tech support person just asked you to crawl under your desk to unplug your modem. Your yoga skills are what they are, and this is not going to be fun, especially when you realize the octopus's garden you have created under your desk has been gradually progressing into something resembling a Gordian knot.  

I previously blogged how Apple makes a pretty good cable for charging laptops and better than average cable for iPhones. The fact is, even in our wireless world, we are still cable-bound to the walls.  If you don't believe me, look at the floor under your desk, or beside your entertainment system. What a freaking mess!

The mess is worse because the cables are poorly designed.  Ever tried to trouble shoot a modem issue or figure out how to plug 14 devices into 10 outlets?  Plugging, unplugging, and pulling cables through the massive entanglements is a chore that is exacerbated by cable ends that don't play nice.

What would it take to make a perfect cable? Wireless of course. However, that is not possible for some things, so good cable design is still necessary. Here is my list:

Adequate length for the purpose.

You've seen people sitting on the floor in the airports or malls charging their phone while talking or texting. They are tethered, trapped, and tied to their devices until they get enough juice to be mobile again. Apple seems bent on (a) producing short cables, and (b) preventing us from using longer ones. The MacBook Pro chargers meet this criteria as do some Windows machines.  Phone chargers, not so much.

No fishhooks. 

When you are pulling cables, so many of them have ends that are uniquely designed to catch other wires on the way through. You know the ones I'm talking about with the ends that have two screws on them (bad idea). They couldn't be much worse if they had fishhooks mounted on each side.  More yoga skills will be required to meticulously guide the cable end through the maze. Phone jack designers are so guilty here. I've cursed them many times during tech support induced contortionist routines. A smooth, contoured end would allow the cable to pull easily.

Bi-directional and extendable.

Ideally cables should be bidirectional with identical ends - it shouldn't matter which end plugs into what.  However, extendable cables are the next best thing. Specifically, cables should be able to be patched together to form longer cables, like electrical extension cords, without requiring a connecting device. Some types of data cannot be maintained reliably over longer distances so there are limits to how extensible a cable can be. This should be considered by engineers when choosing data formats. Whenever possible, pick formats that allow for longer cables. The problem is, you probably can't have extendable and bidirectional, unless you were really clever, in which case, maybe you could.

No "right-side-up".

The best cables are easy to plug in with no "up" or "down".  The iPhone charger end that plugs into the phone is a good example. The USB end that plugs into the wall wart is a poor example (it has to be right-side-up).  Nothing makes a flashlight session of swapping cables around corners under a desk more fun than a guessing game about "which way is up?"

Self-guiding.

When you insert a cable end into a device, it should slide in naturally and then fit snugly. Apple excels at this in some instances. The magnetic MacBookPro charger ends are the king of the hill in this regard. The iPhone charger ends (phone end) are quite good. The circular variety used by many devices perform reasonably well except some of the cheaper varieties which don't pass the snug test. Electrical cables, phone cables and other computer device cables often fail this test.

Tangle resistant.

Tough one here, and Apple has done a pretty good job on some cables by making the rubber casing thick and springy. It helps. Ear buds on the other hand seem hopeless, short of the pricey new wireless models.

I dream of a Utopia in which there are only three types of cables to handle all data and electrical transmissions. They are smooth, non-directional, and easy to plug in. It's a fantasy, I know. No one has the political will to pull off such a thing, even though it would revolutionize our landfill situation and save countless hours shopping for the right cables, etc. As a wise man once said, "The great thing about standards is there are so many to choose from."

Valentines is a good time to focus on your marriage

View image | gettyimages.com

Don't miss out on Valentines as an opportunity to strengthen your marriage.

"No gods beside me"

I was visiting a website called Christianity who's author posed the question of how Mormons (members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) respond to statements by Isaiah quoting Jehovah as saying "there is no God besides Me" (Isaiah 44:6) which he does frequently with some variation.  


I replied with these thoughts: 

I remember once speaking to a foreign audience through a translator. She had difficulty whenever I used certain colloquial expressions such as "cut to the chase". Our language is full of these, but over centuries, in ancient texts, we struggle to interpret them properly which is why the old testament is so difficult for us. We cannot fully understand the customs, culture and idioms of the day.

The phrase "no God beside me" may be equivalent to our current expression "no one can hold a candle to him" or "out of my league". This is why Isaiah can use it faithfully while Paul can still write to the Corinthians "there be gods many and lords many". He doesn't mean people equal in authority to Christ, but those who may appear or claim to be so. Likewise, Christ quotes the psalmist "Ye are Gods" meaning we are children of God - not equal to Him. Later Christ will pray to the father on several occasions - the intercessory prayer, Gethsemane, and on the cross addressing him as The Father or "Eloi". Clearly he is not praying to Himself, but is addressing his Father, who "gave all things into (his) hands" (John 13:3). The Father (God) put the Son (God) in charge and this was witnessed at the baptism of Christ when the Father spoke, and sent the Holy Ghost (also God). I hope this is helpful. :)

The Blind Men and the Elephant

This is a poem I remember from childhood.  It is very applicable to our society today. It originates in  the Indian subcontinent I think.

The Blind Men and the Elephant
John Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887)

It was six men of Indostan To learning much inclined, Who went to see the Elephant (Though all of them were blind), That each by observation Might satisfy his mind.

The First approached the Elephant, And happening to fall Against his broad and sturdy side, At once began to bawl: "God bless me! but the Elephant Is very like a WALL!"

The Second, feeling of the tusk, Cried, "Ho, what have we here, So very round and smooth and sharp? To me 'tis mighty clear This wonder of an Elephant Is very like a SPEAR!"

The Third approached the animal, And happening to take The squirming trunk within his hands, Thus boldly up and spake: "I see," quoth he, "the Elephant Is very like a SNAKE!"

The Fourth reached out an eager hand, And felt about the knee "What most this wondrous beast is like Is mighty plain," quoth he: "'Tis clear enough the Elephant Is very like a TREE!"

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear, Said: "E'en the blindest man Can tell what this resembles most; Deny the fact who can, This marvel of an Elephant Is very like a FAN!"

The Sixth no sooner had begun About the beast to grope, Than seizing on the swinging tail That fell within his scope, "I see," quoth he, "the Elephant Is very like a ROPE!"

And so these men of Indostan Disputed loud and long, Each in his own opinion Exceeding stiff and strong, Though each was partly in the right, And all were in the wrong!