Proving the Obviously Untrue - random musings

Vidzone working at last!

nospam@example.com (Colin Turner) — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:57:09 +0100

Success at last. I've written before about my problems getting vidzone working, and tonight while taking a breather from some work I tried the Oracle of Google again, and I found a solution. As I suspected, it wasn't a network problem at all.

Kudos to lyonix, who suggested that deleting a corrupt cache for Vidzone from the game data utility often works. It worked perfectly for me, (note even removing and reinstalling the software doesn't affect that).

Derren Brown tells porky pies, get over it

nospam@example.com (Colin Turner) — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 23:14:45 +0100

Derren Brown has been back on our screens recently with a series of big events. It's brought him a lot of publicity, and a lot of the public comment has been amusing to say the least. I've been watching everyone comment on the TV and Radio that he's a trickster, and his explanations of how he does things are often bogus.

Yes.... Yes... That's the point. He's a magician, a showman, he tells you right up front at the start of the show. Misdirection, magic, showmanship and more. It's entertainment. He is the first to make it clear that what he does is a trick. He doesn't claim otherwise. If you can't bring yourself to enjoy that, I humbly suggest you watch something else. And while we are on it, I'm relieved people see it's a trick. I think David Blaine's closeup magic is among the most impressive I have ever seen, and I shudder when those around him don't even seem to consider it's just a trick.

Personally, I love Derren, I love his cheeky smug as hell smile as he gets away with it. I enjoy his faked discomfiture. I enjoy it when he fakes near success in tricks to make them more convincing. I enjoy calling him names as I laugh as he lies through his teeth to the audience. I have casually studied a bit of magic in my time, and he is a fine magician. Many big stage magicians rely on assistants, who actually do all the hard work, but he is clearly the architect of most of his own tricks. I'm reading his book and it is informative and very amusing to me, and I very much respect him as a fellow in fight against (rampant) irrationality (a little bit can be a fine thing).

Sadly I've missed a few of the "events", since it clashes with my Iaido class and I wasn't organised enough to record it. I'm slowly catching up on 4OD. But I did see the program on how he stole the lottery. And I'm a mathematician, and I laughed and laughed at it. I didn't believe a word of it, but even the deceit was cleverly convincing and it's not trivial to say exactly what he really did.

He claims he averaged the results of a crowd of people picking lottery numbers. There's a consequence to this. Consider this: how many ways can 50 people pick a number that averages to 1? How many ways can they pick numbers that average to 30? If you understand this point you'll see the possible "answers" from the crowd have an odd distribution. But the cover story was very amusing in its own right. You don't want to know how he really did it, it'll be shockingly dull.

So yes. We know he didn't show the numbers in advance of the draw. Yes, we know his explanation is nonsense. It's a trick. That's the point. Enjoy it and smile along with his insufferable smugness .

Violence and Gender

nospam@example.com (Colin Turner) — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 16:17:35 +0100

Recently, I've spoken to a few people about an English tourist having his genitals set alight in Crete. Apparently he was exposing himself to a local girl and fondling her.

If so, his behaviour was just plain disgraceful, and regardless of the justice of the situation as defined by the law, a stern reminder to him and others that actions have consequences, no matter how fair those may or may not be.

But what interests me most is the almost universal mirthful reaction to this story. It reminds me of the furore around John Wayne Bobbit, which was also regarded as all but universally hilarious by both genders. That relationship was very abusive, and hardly hilarious in its own right. Bobbit seems to have a record of physical as well as other abuse doled out to his partners, but what really interests me is the gender polarity of the amusing violence.

Suppose a woman abused her husband in a relationship; and in turn, one night when she was drunk he took a scalpel and removed one of her breasts. Who's laughing now?

Suppose it was a British girl in Crete, annoying a man; again who laughs if he sets her on fire? It's interesting how we are programed to trivialise and laugh concerning violence against men that would be considered an utter disgrace and conversation stopper against a woman.

Ethics and Terminators

nospam@example.com (Colin Turner) — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 23:36:09 +0100

I went to Terminator Salvation tonight with Andy. I don't think what follows will act as a spoiler, but if you haven't seen it, plan to, and worry about that, look away now.

I enjoyed the first two Terminator films hugely. The third one, ho hum, and this one was good entertainment except for the final 5 minutes that made me want to scream.

The film is generally lots of fun, with a nice mix of action and special effects. There are some gaping plot holes, including the biggest which would be a huge spoiler to discuss, so I won't. I did like the way the resistance apparently communicate on non-encrypted radio channels and Skynet can't listen in. Anyway, let's set all that aside for a moment.

Though the terminator films are rip roaring fun at their best, they do all proceed from a fundamentally flawed premise. That is that noble humanity has to protect itself from the ruthless, evil and by definition inhuman computer network. What this rather brushes over is that according to its canon, Skynet was activated, became self aware, and then humanity tried to switch it off. Now, in most ethical systems, it is acceptable for a sentient being to use lethal force to protect itself from being killed, more refined systems might try to use less than lethal force, but that often can't be expected. That makes it a bit more blurred to regard Skynet as specifically evil, and humanity as noble; just as we create sentient company for ourselves we try to extinguish it, good for us! Look what our human emotions and instincts produce!

And, once again, the rousing climax of the most recent film is supposed to showcase the best of humanity. But they do so using a situation that closely mirrors aspects of the trolley problem and which for me, underlines the lack of humanity in the decision.

I'm away to lie down now.

Why you should "Take the Fifth"

nospam@example.com (Colin Turner) — Wed, 13 May 2009 12:45:23 +0100

I'm not an American, but like many people I'm aware of the Fifth Amendment and how it is often lampooned. I recently discussed this with someone, and I can't for the life of me remember who, was it Peter at BLUG? If it was you, you'll enjoy this.

The discussion centred about why it would be remotely helpful to plead the fifth since it seems to make it 100% clear that there is blame to be apportioned. Quite by coincidence this week I came across this Slashdot story about a man arrested for taking picture of an ATM. The comments discussed how it can be generally unwise to argue with armed law enforcement officers. I've frequently made similar points, and also about customs officials and giving them a legitimate reason to don surgical gloves.

Someone posted a link to this fascinating law lecture given by Professor James Duane who argues cogently that one should never talk to the police without protection, that it can never help you, but may harm you. A police officer is allowed to rebut and give the last say, and this is equally interesting. Definitely thought provoking.