fuck you google.
good job killing off blogger's ftp function.
pain in the ass.

Yoko Kanno - What's it for?

I'm not too sure that I can go much farther
I'm really not sure things are even getting better
I'm so tired of the me that has to disagree
And so tired of the me that's in control

I woke up to see the sun shining all around me
How could it shine down on me?
You'd think that it would notice
I can't take anymore
I had to ask myself
"What's it really for?"

Everything I tried to do, it didn't matter
and now I might be better off just rollling over
'cause you know I tried so hard but couldn't change a thing
And it hurts so much I might as well let go

I can't really take the sun shining all around me
Why would it shine down on me?
You'd think that it would notice
I no longer believe
Can't help telling myself
"It don't mean a thing"

I woke up to see the sun shining all around me
How could it shine down on me?
Sun shining all its beauty
Why would it shine down on me
You'd think that it would notice
I can't take anymore
Just had to ask myself
"What's it really for?"

drawing invisible lines. one side is yes. one side is no. but just a infinitely thin line. it blows the mind. like cocaine. blow.

ideas are always changing and we should be open to all these new ideas. but then again, this idea that everyone is right is one of those new changing ideas. what a loop. so can we accept this new idea of accepting new ideas? sounds dangerous.

Caucasians and Asians Don't Examine Faces in the Same Way

ScienceDaily (Jan. 27, 2010) — Caucasians and Asians don't examine faces in the same way, according to new research. PhD student Caroline Blais, of the Université de Montréal Department of Psychology, has published two studies on the subject: one in Current Biology and the other in PLoS One.

Previous studies have shown that people collect information by mostly studying the eyes as well as the mouth of a face. "The problem is that these studies always used Caucasian test subjects," says Blais.

Questioning the universality of facial recognition began after studies showed that Asians study faces in an overall fashion, while Caucasians break down faces into distinct parts.

Blais used a camera designed to track eye movements to study 14 Caucasian and 14 Asian participants. As part of the experiment, subjects were shown 112 Caucasian and Asian faces and asked to report if they had seen the face before and to name the dominating trait. The study confirmed that Caucasians study the triangle of the eyes and mouth, while Asians focus on the nose.

Caucasian and Asian subjects excelled at recognizing someone of their race, yet both had the same level of difficulty in identifying someone of another ethnic group. According to Blais, this says more about the analytical approach of Caucasians and the holistic approach of Asians.

In a second experiment, test subjects had to pinpoint an emotion: surprise, fear, disgust or joy. Asians mostly focused on the eyes and not enough on the mouth, which meant some emotions were wrongly identified.

"Asians had particular problems with negative emotions. They confused fear and surprise as well as disgust and anger," says Blais. "This is because they avoided looking at the mouth which provides a lot of information about these emotions."

Cultural or biological causes, Blais says, might explain why humans don't read faces in a universal fashion.

Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100126111953.htm

spent so much time trying to code something in javascript. i was reading code that was like 50 lines long and trying to edit from there. turns out, it could be done in one line of code. and such is life.

yesterday, went to utada hikaru's "UTADA IN THE FLESH" tour thing. it was good, except they had a lousy dj play for an hour as an opener, which kind of delayed everything, and i got back an hour later than expected. oh well. she played keyboard for sakura drops and stay gold. the backing band was pretty good. actually changed the style to less r&b and more rock, which was very nice. devil inside was pretty heavy metal. it was completely unexpected, but then, i never listened to the album that song is on. she had some mic problems, but she was like "oh, i guess you know i'm not lipsyncing now." she was telling some story about how she took a walk to the pier, and everyone just clapped and cheered, and she was like "... the pier? ... YEAAAA PIER!!" and everyone cheered randomly. lol. then she went to some cafe named "plant" *cheer* ".. YEA PLANT!!" *cheer!YAYAY*. "i had a smoothie. YEA SMOOTHIE!!" anyway, i took pictures on camera phone, but camera phone doesn't have zoom, so it doesn't look that great. and then they sent a big black guy to tell me to stop. oh well.

and after the show, there were free apples? i didn't get one though. it was too weird for me. (edit: apparently, the apples are part of the venue's [fillmore] tradition)

setlist:
1. On and On
2. Merry Xmas Mr. Lawrence - FYI
3. Poppin
4. This One (Crying Like A Child)
5. Sanctuary
6. Sakura Drops
7. Stay Gold
8. Devil Inside
9. Kremlin Dusk
10. You Make Me Want To Be a Man
11. The Bitter End (Placebo cover)
12. Apples and Cinnamon
13. Come Back to Me
14. First Love
15. Can You Keep a Secret?
16. Automatic
17. Dirty Desire

Encore:
1. Simple and Clean
2. Me Muero



a video, before they gave me a warning.

Woman kills lover by sitting on him
17:30 AEST Fri Jan 22 2010
By ninemsn staff

A US woman weighing 136kg has admitted to killing her much smaller boyfriend by sitting on him.

Mia Landingham pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter in the death of Mikal Middleston-Bey, who weighs just 54.4kg, FOX8 News reports.

Landingham was sentenced to three years probation and 100 hours community service. She was immediately released from jail.

Police said the couple, who share three children together, were arguing last August when Landingham sat on Middleston-Bey.

Middleston-Bey died of asphyxiation .

The pair had a long history of domestic abuse, according to Landingham's lawyer.

Landingham said she was sorry for squashing her boyfriend.

"I just want to say that I am sincerely sorry about this situation... I wish I could take it back."

Middleston-Bey's family were angered by the sentence.

"So basically you can say that I can go sit on somebody and get probation?" a family member said.

"I feel there wasn't no justice."

Source: http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/1003011/woman-kills-lover-by-sitting-on-him

there are two theories as to how people live:
A) we are kept alive by a complicated system of veins, nerves, organs, etc
B) magic
so by occam's razor, people are kept alive by magic.

we just don't learn. well, at least i don't. overgeneralize from myself to everyone. i should learn to stop doing that. mistakes. mistakes. wrong. wrong.

比上不足﹐比下有餘
seems detrimental to progress.
but then what is progress?
satisfaction.
or the lack thereof.

negativity.
positivity.
one of those words looks like it doesn't exist.
but they both exist.
one just isn't used very much.
the state of humanity.
after all, our nervous (system) resting potential is -70 mV.
except for special ones. they are smaller, but larger.
depending on how you want to say it.
in the end, they are more negative.

Red-faced from drinking? It could be an evolutionary advantage
Posted by TIME.com Wednesday, January 20, 2010 at 5:26 pm

Lots of people get flushed in the face when they feel embarrassed, but for many Asians it's the facial flush itself that can be embarrassing.

About half of all people of Asian descent share a genetic trait that causes a prompt reddening of the face in response to drinking alcohol — the result of an enzyme deficiency that interferes with alcohol metabolism and causes the temporary build-up in the body of a toxic chemical product. For some, the red face is a mere nuisance; for others, it can be accompanied by symptoms such as rapid heartbeat and skin swelling. Talk about a buzz-kill.

Now researchers speculate about why East Asians have the flushing gene in the first place. According to a new study in BMC Evolutionary Biology, the genetic mutation that causes the reaction first appeared about 10,000 years ago in Southern China, at about the same time residents began farming rice along the Yangtze River. The study's authors hypothesize that the alcohol intolerance associated with facial flushing may have evolved as a survival strategy enabling ancient populations to enjoy the positive effects of alcohol derived from fermented rice — it can be used as a disinfectant and preservative — while imbibing in moderation. "This is one of the few cases reported demonstrating the genetic adaptation of human populations to the dramatic changes in agriculture and diet during Neolithic times," said Bing Su, one of the study's co-authors from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, in a press release about the study.

By sampling DNA from 38 distinct Asian populations from relatively isolated provincial areas, ranging from Han Chinese to Tibetans, researchers observed that the flushing gene was much more prevalent in groups that began farming rice the earliest. For example, while the mutation appears in nearly 70% of Han Chinese, who began farming rice 7,000 to 10,000 years ago, it shows up in only 14% of Tibetans, whose rice culture developed later. Molecular dating of rice found in ancient pottery has enabled anthropologists to determine when rice farming began in different regions of the continent.

While the red-faced alcohol response can be annoying, it may also be beneficial to populations on the whole, as it appears to be associated with lower rates of alcoholism. In fact, the drug disulfiram, which is used to prevent relapse in recovering alcoholics, has some of the same biochemical effects as the flushing gene does when it is expressed. — By Anita Hamilton

Source: http://wellness.blogs.time.com/2010/01/20/red-faced-from-drinking/#ixzz0dOlyQPE7

people seem to take surveys voluntarily when they have really strong feelings about it (usually negative, i think). too bad i don't have data to back that up. how can i make a survey to help prove my idea is statistically significant? would i give a voluntary survey and then assume my hypothesis is correct (and adjust my data to show this) and compare that to the null hypothesis. hm. i don't know.

robert frost wrote a famous poem about choosing a path on the diverging road. it goes "blahbalbhlabhalbhabh ... I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference". so the interpretation is to be an individual and nonconformist and cool stuff like that. (which isn't really right according to some because the roads are said to be about the same.) anyways, taking the common interpretation and the famous lines out of context like it is often done, it never really says that choosing that one road was much better. it just made a difference, didn't say with positive results. and why would people want to take the path of more resistance? that's annoying.

(12:20:23 AM) chrisxors: i was in class
(12:20:25 AM) chrisxors: dead clock
(12:20:26 AM) chrisxors: i looked at it
(12:20:28 AM) chrisxors: 12 hour clock, dead
(12:20:30 AM) chrisxors: so i was like
(12:20:35 AM) chrisxors: at least it's right twice a day
(12:20:39 AM) chrisxors: then
(12:20:40 AM) chrisxors: i was like
(12:20:44 AM) chrisxors: what if it was incorrect
(12:20:45 AM) chrisxors: but spinning faster
(12:20:55 AM) chrisxors: then it'd be right more than twice a day
(12:21:06 AM) chrisxors: but since it's analog, it'd still be infinitely more wrong than it was right
(12:21:13 AM) chrisxors: but then
(12:21:16 AM) chrisxors: speed it up and up
(12:21:21 AM) chrisxors: when it's infinitely fast
(12:21:24 AM) chrisxors: it'll be right infinitely
(12:21:25 AM) chrisxors: however
(12:21:27 AM) chrisxors: it'll also be wrong infinitely
(12:21:29 AM) chrisxors: and
(12:21:39 AM) chrisxors: it'll be infinitely wrong infinitely more than it's infinitely right
(12:21:42 AM) chrisxors: in other words
(12:21:47 AM) chrisxors: not only is one infinite bigger than another
(12:21:55 AM) chrisxors: one infinity is infinitely bigger than another infinity
(12:21:59 AM) chrisxors: !!!
(12:22:05 AM) chrisxors: as for what the lecture was about
(12:22:07 AM) chrisxors: i do not know