Brevity? What's that?

To again nick from my brother blogging material - probably supplemented later today with blogging material stolen from other sources - here is a transcript of possibly the worst witness in history. It's some Evony guy being cross-examined at a trial he arranged to muzzle a blogger for saying bad things about his company.

[Bell]: It was false to your knowledge when you approved this publication?
[Gifford]: Yes.

Q. You are an out and out liar, aren't you?
A. No.

Q. How do you say you are not an out and out liar when you have approved statements on the Internet that you hold a Bachelor of Arts, earned a Bachelor of Arts and a Master of Business Administration?
A. That was put there purely as a PR actually.

Q. Mr Gifford, is that a serious answer?
A. Yes.

HER HONOUR

Q. As a PR tool, a lie?
A. Not a lie, your Honour. It was just put out—

Q. It is a lie—
A. —that way so it would look as though.

Q. —you had something that you didn't have?
A. Correct, your Honour.

Q. It is a lie?
A. Yes.

Q. It is not a PR tool, it is a lie?
A. Yes, your Honour.

BELL

Q. You have no sense of truth and falsity, do you, Mr Gifford?
A. Incorrect.

Q. You thought it was perfectly acceptable
A. Yes.

Q. to publish to the world a lie about your qualifications?
A. Yes.

Q. Why did you think that was perfectly acceptable, Mr Gifford?
A. I thought that was just used for a PR item and that it didn't mean much and that it would instead just give a

Q. Give a what?
A. More credit towards Evony LLC.

HER HONOUR

Q. It might mean much to people who do actually have a BA and publish that as a truthful statement?
A. Yes, your Honour.

Q. Do you see that?
A. Yes, your Honour.

BELL

Q. And it might mean much to somebody who reads this and relies on it—
A. Correct.

Q. —to think that what is said is truthful?
A. Correct.

Q. So you are actively seeking to mislead people with this press release?
A. Yes.

Q. You were activity consciously seeking to do that?
A. Yes.

Q. And you didn't have a problem with that?
A. No.

Q. And you still don't have a problem with that, do you?
A. I can change that statement, yes.

Q. Do you currently have a problem with this, Mr Gifford?
A. Yes.

Q. When did you develop that problem, in the last ten seconds?
A. Yes.

Q. Are there any other lies in this document?
A. No, not that I know of.

Q. Really?
A. Yes.

Now, I don't know about you guys, but I am reading in this guy's answers an unwavering tone of self-satisfied smugness, even when he is completely destroying his own credibility. In my mind, he has an idiotic politician smile, and gives his answers briefly and immediately after being asked. I really do hope that my assumptions ran true. (It'd be hilarious.)

*****

I'm reading Barack Obama's 'The Audacity of Hope.' Being a fan of his politics, I thought it would be interesting enough, but reading his prose is better than I ever thought. It's wonderfully written, beautifully crafted, masterfully terse and intimidating in its eloquence. The nearest neighbour in sheer beauty of prose - putting aside subject matter - is Yann Martel's 'Life of Pi,' but this book dunks that book headfirst into the ocean, stands on its head and gleefully watches it drown.

It's that good.

*****

So I have no motivation to do anything these holidays. Even the self-promoted horrifying fear of failure without constant work seems not to have taken much of a hold in the break period, let alone getting up in the morning at the time I promised I would, doing the writing I promised that I would do, reading the books I promised I would read (Mr Purves' two textbooks), doing the report for History-X that I promised I would do, forgot about, and now can't do anyway because I've done nothing for my major work, buy the history books I promised I would read so to have something good to go in my History-X progress log so I could do the report, etc.

*****

Have you guys watched that Trololololo viral video that is making the rounds? People have claimed that he's not really making the sounds because his lips aren't moving, but that fails to take into account that the sounds he is making are /l/, /t/ and /j/*, which are all internal sounds that require no lip movement. The no-lyric thing is due to the fact that his performance is of a traditional Russian style, more about physicality than lyrics. That, and because he didn't like the original lyrics much anyway.

* In the International Pronunciation Alphabet, /j/ is equivalent to our y sounds - but not other European countries' y sounds. Think Jehovah pronounced Yehovah.

*****

Speaking of which: you know what's awesome? Linguistics. Linguistics is awesome. I'm thinking - perhaps I have said this before, but oh well - that I should do an English degree in University, although I don't know which one. You see, my preferred-until-now choice has always been UNSW, partially because I have old friends from the days when I hung around the year 11-12 eccentrics who are going there and enjoying there, and partially because I went to NIDA opposite there, and partially because I have it in the back of my head that I still want to go to NIDA at one point, and I don't want to be bothered moving. (And partially because the University of Sydney has announced its plans to be a smaller, eliter university so as to compete with the small elite colleges of Cambridge and Yale and Oxford and Harvard (and there may be many others that haven't been discarvered.))

So I want an English course that is in the city (so as to be part of the awesome Uni-culture as well as have cheap, affordable accommodation, as well as having short travel times,) that has a Creative Writing component, that has a linguistics component, that has a text-analysis component but not just all text analyses, and perhaps an occasional break from 200 year old+ literature, that may perhaps some time in the near to distant future have a semi-lucrative, semi-stable job/career at the end of it. Oh, and if possible a course that isn't the recipient of a sneering better-than-thou attitude by all other courses, like a BA. Wish me luck, guys.

*****

Continuing my scheme of tying together seemingly disparate subjects, we reach my next point: the fact that the effort I need to put in to get the course I want is nowhere near the level I am putting into my work, which is similarly minuscule in comparison to the level of effort I feel I should be putting into my studies - even during my breaks. Unlike the Evony guy, I need a degree before I can show off about one. I feel that I need a good mark in my HSC, even when getting into a course that needs no such high marks. I feel the need to push myself as hard as I can, even though I cannot keep up with my own self-expectations. I am - in short - being pulled in two by my love of achieving and my love of lazing around.

*****

Speaking of lazing around, its recreational mathematics time. Also speaking of lazing around, how 'bout I just copy-pasta the whole segment of text right here so I don't need to go and rephrase the whole thing.

If someone ever told you that the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe and everything is "42", tell them that is wrong. The answer is "6174" and here's why (and prepare to get your mind blown):

Take any number with 4 non-repeating digits. Say 1562.

Step 1: Arrange the number in ascending and then descending order
Step 2: Subtract the smaller number from the bigger number

6521 - 1256 = 5265

Repeat the steps:

6552 - 2556 = 3996
9963 - 3699 = 6264
6642 - 2466 = 4176
7641 - 1467 = 6174

Try any 4-digit number with non-repeating digits, and you'll *always* get 6174.

Pretty cool, huh?

6174 is known as Kaprekar's constant. The math operation above, discovered by Indian mathematician D.R. Kaprekar, will reach 6174 after at most 7 steps (if you did more than 7 iterations, check your arithmetics).

(From.)

*****

You might be wondering why this blog is in Arial rather than the more popular choice of Times New Roman. Well, I could argue the aesthetic merits of the two schemes, but that'd be incorrect. You see, studies have proven that on a digital medium, a sans serif font is easier to read - despite the personal opinions of the test subjects - whereas in print, serifed fonts are preferred, due to the ink running.

That is a reasonable application of font science. This is not. According to that, if you write your documents in a slender font like Century Gothic, an average household can save up to $20 a year. Hoo boy! That's like a DVD. To be fair, schools can spend tens of thousands of dollars in printing, and changing font can save thousands; but I'm thinking more of the people who really would change font to penny pinch those few dollars a year, so they have more money to sit on.

*****

Because you know what really grinds my gears? People who work hard, earning lots of money over many years and never spend a penny of it. What is the point of all that hard work if you're just going to put your money in a bank account? Money only has value when it's used. If it isn't utilised, it's wasted. Those millionaires and (god forbid) billionaires who could have everything in the world, who could change the world, who could do good with the unused fruits of their labours, but choose not to - simply to get their name on rich lists and show off to the neighbours - are more than just harmlessly greedy, but morally reprehensible.

I believe that those who have the capacity to do great good have a responsibility to do so. I believe that it is infinitely preferable to change - not single lives - but millions. Bill Gates I respect. He keeps enough of his money to continue making more, and then the spare - the profit margins of his profit margins - goes towards vaccinating countries. Bill Gates worked out the most efficient possible use of money - the most utility for his dollar, which turns out to be vaccinating diseases - and then spent billions on it. Without his philanthropy, he would have some $85 billion dollars.

I relate this to the ancient Epicurean proverb*, substituting - in true Capitalist tradition - the rich for god.

Are the rich willing to prevent evil but not able?
Then they are not rich.
Are they able, but not willing?
Then they are malevolent.
Are they both able and willing?
Then whence cometh poverty?

The ultra-rich of the world are plenty capable of limiting poverty, if not quite capable of simply wiping it out. That rules out points one and three. The only logical conclusion left is that they are malevolent. Money has reduced utility for each dollar earned. It means considerably less for a billionaire to earn a million dollars than a pauper. For the billionaire, it is simply a number on a screen. For a charity organisation, it is water for a thousand villages. It is education for ten thousand children. It is food for a hundred thousand people. Who has the greater claim to that money? Anyone who truly says the billionaire is bereft of ethical sense.

This responsibility is not reserved for those whose advantages are financial. The people in politics are usually people who desire power before demanding policy: the worst possible people you'd want as politicians. Instead, our brilliant minds become doctors, lawyers, optometrists, specialists. They help single lives - not millions. Perhaps this is an attitude taken from my reading of Barack Obama's 'The Audacity of Hope,' but I've only read the prologue of it. It seems also to be a self-evident truth. People whose talents include the use of reason, the ability to persuade, to lead, to inspire - these people are all around us. I'm sure we can all think of a few. How many of these are politicians, or want to be?

And no, this is not a pronouncement. I said carefully back there that its the brilliant minds that should be politicians, like the lawyers and doctors. I want to do an Arts degree.

I am disqualified.


* On the Epicurean proverb as a point of atheist philosophy, I highly recommend this video. While he can be obnoxious, and thinks he's funny, this guy is at his best when reasonably but assertively discussing philosophical principles.

*****

An update on the house that was ripped apart in search of a snake. It got caught on a piece of sticky tape and died. To quote from the BBC:

The owner's flat has been left uninhabitable, though other residents could return to the building, local media reports said.

"Everything has had a happy end," a spokesman for the town of Muelheim in western Germany said. "Not for the snake but for us."

A happy end?

You have a young family who will be working for years to pay off the damages. Paying hundreds of thousands of dollars, while trying to find a new place to live, let alone the guilt and trauma of all that stress and strain inflicted because of their passing negligence, let alone the fact that a building of people now hate them for weeks of inconvenience. Nobody died, sure, but I wouldn't call that a happy ending - more a loss-free one. All in all, it was a very tragic incident that caused much more heart-ache and difficulties for the poor family than they ever deserved - an incident that set the family back for years.

Happy ending indeed.

*****

And finally...

DO WANT.