Here's an idea. How to get more people to donate blood? Give them something in return!
Like what? How about complimentary STD testing?
Last time I called around, it was difficult to find free STD testing. Even Planned Parenthood wasn't free unless you were showing active symptoms. After lots of effort, I found one place that was inexpensive ($20 I think it was,) but it was inconvenient, requiring an appointment, and it was in an inconvenient part of town. Therefore, I never did it, choosing to rely on my tried-and-true "fingers crossed method."
So think about it: What if there were convenient, all-over-the-city, no-appointment-required centers for STD testing that doubled as blood banks? You'd be motivated to give blood way more frequently because you'd be getting something out of the deal. The converse is true too; you'd be motivated to be tested more because you'd be giving back —— this would motivate the people who would otherwise not get tested because "I'm pretty sure I don't have anything." You know, for that latter group (which includes myself), it's annoying to waste my time and someone else's time, when you're darn sure you don't need to be there to begin with. However, if your time and effort actually was helping out, you'd be way more likely to do it.
Of course, the convenience factor is the most important, so you can pop in whenever you have a moment without an appointment.
What great idea. But how would it be possible to implement this? We're dealing with monolithic bureaucracies, like our healthcare system, which are only deteriorating over time. I can only imagine something as simple and effective as this existing in a free market system.
Thoughts?
Smart Spam
So here's another one of my ideas that I DON'T WANT to exist. But I can't help thinkin' up shit.
(And, hey, it probably already DOES exist, and I just don't know about it yet.)
The idea is Smart Spam. Imagine you're on your FB page or something, and a window pops up that kinda LOOKS like an IM window. Actually, even more insidiously, maybe it's even disguised as one of your friends. You can have an instant message conversation with this thing that actually resembles a real conversation. The "person" is responding to what you're saying (or at least seems like they are, albeit somewhat distracted or maybe drunk.) At a certain point in the conversation, the person "sells" you on some product, or encourages you to check out some website. Thinking it's your friend, you do. Just got suckered!
(And, hey, it probably already DOES exist, and I just don't know about it yet.)
The idea is Smart Spam. Imagine you're on your FB page or something, and a window pops up that kinda LOOKS like an IM window. Actually, even more insidiously, maybe it's even disguised as one of your friends. You can have an instant message conversation with this thing that actually resembles a real conversation. The "person" is responding to what you're saying (or at least seems like they are, albeit somewhat distracted or maybe drunk.) At a certain point in the conversation, the person "sells" you on some product, or encourages you to check out some website. Thinking it's your friend, you do. Just got suckered!
The whole time, behind the scenes, it's not a real person at all. It's a piece of software that's programmed to interact with and respond to what you type. A talk bot. Really simple technology that's pretty easy to program. (I even programmed one myself when I was a teenager: http://www.whimnova.com/VI.html)
Okay, there it is. Please don't blame me for it when it starts actually happening.
(Shirks in shame.)
Douché
I'm now officially using this website to claim neologisms before they enter the mainstream.
(See my article on "Take a chillaxtive!")
Kinda like the urban legend of a "Poor Man's Patent": that you can mail yourself an idea and don't open the envelope so the post date is on there, so later in court you can "prove" that you came up with it first.
...Kinda like that, I'm using my website to "prove" that I came up with certain neologisms FIRST.
The following is not my invention, but is entirely the brainchild of my best friend Josh. (And I will swear on a stack of Bibles that it was indeed him who came up with it.)
Ready for it?
So, pretend you're at a party and a really lame dude says something witty and contrarian. This is the type of situation where a person would say "Touché", right? (Which, incidentally, I read somewhere is a French term taken from fencing. It just means "touch." It's kinda like saying "nice move, you win," right?)
(See my article on "Take a chillaxtive!")
Kinda like the urban legend of a "Poor Man's Patent": that you can mail yourself an idea and don't open the envelope so the post date is on there, so later in court you can "prove" that you came up with it first.
...Kinda like that, I'm using my website to "prove" that I came up with certain neologisms FIRST.
The following is not my invention, but is entirely the brainchild of my best friend Josh. (And I will swear on a stack of Bibles that it was indeed him who came up with it.)
Ready for it?
So, pretend you're at a party and a really lame dude says something witty and contrarian. This is the type of situation where a person would say "Touché", right? (Which, incidentally, I read somewhere is a French term taken from fencing. It just means "touch." It's kinda like saying "nice move, you win," right?)
So here's the side-splitting new twist on that idea: Instead of saying "touché," you say "douché!"
AH HA HA HA! "Douché!"
(Drawing by Katie)
Awesomize old shoes
I've been meaning to post more of my crafty DIY-type projects up here. (Shoot, I've been meaning to post more up here at ALL. I've been so busy with my rain barrel company, I haven't had time to invent useless crap.)
But anyway, here's something I did a while back that I've been meaning to put up here.
I had an old pair of shoes that were kinda ugly on the outside.
[Shown are a different pair, but you get the idea]
But anyway, here's something I did a while back that I've been meaning to put up here.
I had an old pair of shoes that were kinda ugly on the outside.
[Shown are a different pair, but you get the idea]
And I wanted to awesomize them. So I got a pelt from an old green carebear doll, cut it up and I used Gorilla Glue to stick the pieces on the outside. I didn't really have a pattern for cutting out the pelt, so I just started sticking pieces on and cutting off the excess. If you try it, it's way easier than you think. (But not super easy either, I mean, it's probably an intermediate-level craft project. If crafting were a ski slope, it would be a blue square.)
When I wear them out, most people think they are slippers, and they wonder how I'm able to do such awesome dance moves in them. ("Wouldn't that require more friction?")Then I show them my soles, and they are amazed and they want to be me.
I would have never expected to fall in love with...
Ever since I started listening to music, I've gravitated towards "harder" and "harder" rock. I like fast. I like constant rhythmic variation. I like enthusiasm (not so much aggression, as enthusiasm). Screaming makes me happy.
So, as the years went on, my music path went from "mild to spicy":
1995 Weezer
1996 Smashing Pumpkins
1997 Rage Against the Machine
2000 At the Drive-In, Tool
Around 2004, Emperor took the throne for a couple of years. This is the loudest, meanest, fastest shit I've ever heard!
So, of course, when THAT got boring, I thought I'd hit rock-bottom of "hardness." I was bummed. I had no interest in music for like three years. (During this time, I started doing karaoke every night. THAT put the final nail in the coffin which read 'I hate music'.)
Then... THEN.. last year Josh laid "August Burns Red" on me.
.jpg)
I got REALLY high, and I fell in love with music again. This shit is SO FUCKING GOOD I CAN'T EVEN BELIEVE IT.
I'm listening to it right now as I write this, and I'm so bouncy inside, I can barely type.
Go to YouTube and see what I mean.
I've listened to Messengers and/or Constellations everyday for the last year, and I'm not bored of it.
It has everything I love about metal (speed, melody, screaming, virtuoso musicianship, abrupt rhythmic shifts and unusual meters), and none of what I DON'T like: extended dissonance, repetition, nihilism, leather.
Then, one day, I said "Hey, Josh, August Burns Red gives me a boner."
And he was like (wait for it....) "Yeah, August Burns Red is Christian metal from back when I was evangelical."
After throwing up in the bushes, I realized I would just have to live with the fact that my favorite band is Christian Metal. CHRISTIAN METAL!
Of all the twists and turns my life has taken, this is the one I expected least.
But, you know, I used to listen to Satanic metal, and I didn't identify as a Satanist. Why can't I just like the music for music without having ideology rear its ugly head?
Does this say anything about ME? Does it MEAN something that I like this? Probably not. It just means I like having my brain tickled from all angles by machine-gun fast polyphony. The machine gun of Christ.
So, as the years went on, my music path went from "mild to spicy":
1995 Weezer
1996 Smashing Pumpkins
1997 Rage Against the Machine
2000 At the Drive-In, Tool
Around 2004, Emperor took the throne for a couple of years. This is the loudest, meanest, fastest shit I've ever heard!
So, of course, when THAT got boring, I thought I'd hit rock-bottom of "hardness." I was bummed. I had no interest in music for like three years. (During this time, I started doing karaoke every night. THAT put the final nail in the coffin which read 'I hate music'.)
Then... THEN.. last year Josh laid "August Burns Red" on me.
I got REALLY high, and I fell in love with music again. This shit is SO FUCKING GOOD I CAN'T EVEN BELIEVE IT.
I'm listening to it right now as I write this, and I'm so bouncy inside, I can barely type.
Go to YouTube and see what I mean.
I've listened to Messengers and/or Constellations everyday for the last year, and I'm not bored of it.
It has everything I love about metal (speed, melody, screaming, virtuoso musicianship, abrupt rhythmic shifts and unusual meters), and none of what I DON'T like: extended dissonance, repetition, nihilism, leather.
Then, one day, I said "Hey, Josh, August Burns Red gives me a boner."
And he was like (wait for it....) "Yeah, August Burns Red is Christian metal from back when I was evangelical."
After throwing up in the bushes, I realized I would just have to live with the fact that my favorite band is Christian Metal. CHRISTIAN METAL!
Of all the twists and turns my life has taken, this is the one I expected least.
But, you know, I used to listen to Satanic metal, and I didn't identify as a Satanist. Why can't I just like the music for music without having ideology rear its ugly head?
Does this say anything about ME? Does it MEAN something that I like this? Probably not. It just means I like having my brain tickled from all angles by machine-gun fast polyphony. The machine gun of Christ.
Take a chillaxitive!
When the word "Chillaxitive" enters common parlance (as in "Take a chillaxitive!"), let the record show that I invented it.
No Delete Week
I read something on the Greenpeace website about this thing called the Trash Vortex which is (This is from the Greenpeace website:) an area the size of Texas in the North Pacific in which an estimated six kilos of plastic for every kilo of natural plankton, along with other slow degrading garbage, swirls slowly around like a clock, choked with dead fish, marine mammals, and birds who get snared. Some plastics in the gyre will not break down in the lifetimes of the grandchildren of the people who threw them away.
Today I got some mail. It was a big package. Inside the big box was a smaller box, wrapped in bubble wrap, and inside that box was more bubble wrap, and inside that was another box.
As I unwrapped the layers, my roommates and I all laughed about how much packaging it took to deliver the thing. We started saying "Think about how much packaging stuff comes in! It's impossible to go to the store and buy something without it coming with TRASH ATTACHED TO IT! I mean, really, think about it. Everything you buy, from a bag of rice, to a can of beans, to a piece of electronics: it all comes with packaging that essentially becomes trash the second you open it. I mean, there's NOTHING you can buy that doesn't have trash with it. Even, like, a BANANA, comes with stickers on it."
I opened the last box, and there was a brand-new mac keyboard in it.
I had forgotten that I'd ordered this a few days ago. I had been typing on my old keyboard and thinking that my fingers were going to cramp up if I kept this up. Meanwhile, Josh over heard me typing, and said "That's a really rickety old keyboard." He was right. Some of the keys would stick when you tried to push them. I needed a new keyboard. With the amount of typing I do, I needed one of those new fangled ones with the shallow, wide, springy keys. The ones that take very little effort per keystroke.
So, today, my new keyboard came in the mail.
All my roommates were impressed. I said "I'd forgotten that I sent this to myself. Sometimes I go online and order stuff, and then I forget about it. It's like an un-birthday present from past-me to present-me. Like 'I know you'll forget you ordered this. SO.. Surprise!'"
For some reason, my roommate said "What if it didn't have a backspace key?" I don't know what made him think of that, but I found it really funny. "Yeah!" I said "What if there were no backspace key, or no delete key? Life would be so different, wouldn't it? What if, just for giggles, you challenged yourself to go a WEEK without using your delete key or your backspace key? Or your undo command? Like, how would that change you?"
"I guess you'd start to be more careful," someone said. "And you'd probably have to be creative.. like if you started to spell a word wrong, you could be creative and turn it into some other word. Maybe you'd end up saying something totally different than what you were going to say in the first place, or you might end up saying the thing you were trying to say, but in a totally round-about-way.
And what if... (To connect the two frayed ends of this idea,) what if you went a week, no, a MONTH, and you weren't allowed to throw anything in the trash can? You had to take all your wrappers and packaging and everything and keep it in your room? Wow! Think about that! Your room would fill up to the brim! What would you do at that point? Probably the same thing as with the keyboard example: You'd be careful about the choices you make in the first place. And then you'd be forced to be more creative with the artifacts of those choices.
Right?
God, I'm brilliant.
Today I got some mail. It was a big package. Inside the big box was a smaller box, wrapped in bubble wrap, and inside that box was more bubble wrap, and inside that was another box.
As I unwrapped the layers, my roommates and I all laughed about how much packaging it took to deliver the thing. We started saying "Think about how much packaging stuff comes in! It's impossible to go to the store and buy something without it coming with TRASH ATTACHED TO IT! I mean, really, think about it. Everything you buy, from a bag of rice, to a can of beans, to a piece of electronics: it all comes with packaging that essentially becomes trash the second you open it. I mean, there's NOTHING you can buy that doesn't have trash with it. Even, like, a BANANA, comes with stickers on it."
I opened the last box, and there was a brand-new mac keyboard in it.
I had forgotten that I'd ordered this a few days ago. I had been typing on my old keyboard and thinking that my fingers were going to cramp up if I kept this up. Meanwhile, Josh over heard me typing, and said "That's a really rickety old keyboard." He was right. Some of the keys would stick when you tried to push them. I needed a new keyboard. With the amount of typing I do, I needed one of those new fangled ones with the shallow, wide, springy keys. The ones that take very little effort per keystroke.
So, today, my new keyboard came in the mail.
All my roommates were impressed. I said "I'd forgotten that I sent this to myself. Sometimes I go online and order stuff, and then I forget about it. It's like an un-birthday present from past-me to present-me. Like 'I know you'll forget you ordered this. SO.. Surprise!'"
For some reason, my roommate said "What if it didn't have a backspace key?" I don't know what made him think of that, but I found it really funny. "Yeah!" I said "What if there were no backspace key, or no delete key? Life would be so different, wouldn't it? What if, just for giggles, you challenged yourself to go a WEEK without using your delete key or your backspace key? Or your undo command? Like, how would that change you?"
"I guess you'd start to be more careful," someone said. "And you'd probably have to be creative.. like if you started to spell a word wrong, you could be creative and turn it into some other word. Maybe you'd end up saying something totally different than what you were going to say in the first place, or you might end up saying the thing you were trying to say, but in a totally round-about-way.
And what if... (To connect the two frayed ends of this idea,) what if you went a week, no, a MONTH, and you weren't allowed to throw anything in the trash can? You had to take all your wrappers and packaging and everything and keep it in your room? Wow! Think about that! Your room would fill up to the brim! What would you do at that point? Probably the same thing as with the keyboard example: You'd be careful about the choices you make in the first place. And then you'd be forced to be more creative with the artifacts of those choices.
Right?
God, I'm brilliant.
3-D Object Communication Game
No human language has the proper language for 3-D shapes. Like, it's really hard to describe abstract shapes JUST using words without using the phrase "It looks like a...."
Wouldn't that be a cool game? You are given a card with a drawing of an object on it (it could actually be a 3-D object, which is much better because it's harder)
And you'd have to describe this object in words. Like, "it's a cylinder, with a triangle-shaped notch cut out..." I dunno.
Then the person you're describing to has to draw the thing you're describing.. Or in the more challenging version, they'd have to shape it out of clay. Of course, this could be intensely challenging, or really easy depending on the complexity of the shape.
You could make it competitive, of course. Like which pair is better at describing the thing so their partner will be able to render it more perfectly without seeing it.
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
AHEM, OK.
I have a 3-D object in my mind. I'm going to describe it in terms of shapes and geometry. You try to form a mental image of this thing. (If you're up for the CHALLENGE, WEAKLING!!!!)
For this game, you'll need to imagine a 3-D field. Imagine the X,Y and Z axis. Look as if you're standing at Z 10 or something (let's say that means 10 meters away), so that you see Z running under your feet, like rail road tracks into the distance.
Now, coming from left to right (crossing the Z line in the middle of your field of vision) is the X axis.
From the sky to the floor (crossing the Z line in the middle of your field of vision) is the y axis.
Now I'll describe the object to you. Listen up.
Imagine a solid cylinder that's wide and short, sitting on the floor, with the circle parts of the cylinder facing towards the ceiling and towards the ground. From the floor to the top, it's about as tall as half the diameter. So it's wider than it is tall.
Let's say it's one meter wide and half a meter tall.
Now, imagine making another object. This new object will become an appendage to the first object.
Let's use the workspace IN FRONT OF the object (that 10-meter area closer to you, along the z axis) to construct the new object
Start with a rectangular prism that's as tall as the cylinder.
It's about as wide as 1/4 of the cylinder and it's about as long as the cylinder's diameter.
In terms of meters, this rectangular prism is half a meter tall, 1 meter long (z-axis) and 1/4 meter wide (x-axis).
Now let's move this prism so that it touches the cylinder. Push it directly away from you (along the z axis), toward the original object, until the far wall of the appendage touches the curved wall of the cylinder. Now, along the x axis, push the appendage to the right until the right wall of the appendage is in line with the farthest right point in the circle of the cylinder. Now push it AGAIN directly away from you in the z plane, so that it touches the cylinder again. The far left corner of the appendage object should be making contact with the cylinder.
Now, pretend that it's all made of clay.
See how only the far left corner of the appendage is touching the cylinder? And just to the right of that point of contact is empty space? Fill in that empty space by extending the far right wall of the appendage away from you in the z plane until it touches the cylinder. Extend the top and bottom walls of the appendage away from you in the z plane until they touch the cylinder. Now, you have these two objects joined.
Since it's made of clay, blend walls together, to make these two objects into one. Smooth the walls out.
Therefore, the right side of the new whole object you've created should be totally flat and straight.
Looking to the left side of the appendage, where it touches the curved wall of the cylinder, blend the walls of the appendage (in the z plane) so that it forms a nice curve into the wall of the cylinder.
Now make the whole thing hollow. Hollow it out. Do it. Make the walls thin, only about 10 centimeters thick.
Since it's hollow, you can cut into it easily, like cutting into clay. Cut an opening from floor-to-ceiling of the closest-to-you wall of the appendage.
Start the incision 10 centimeters up from the floor, 10 centimeters in from the left wall. Run the incision upward in the y-plane, so it runs parallel to the wall of the object. Stop it about 10 centimeters down from the top of the object. Withdraw your knife and get ready to make another incision.
From the point you left off, move right on the x axis, until you're 10-cm from the RIGHT wall of this object. Make another such incision top-to-bottom here, parallel to the first incision.
Now you should have two incisions that run up and down and are parallel to each other.
Now, just make two more incisions that connect the ends of these two incisions. So you just cut out a thin rectangle. Throw this away, so there's a thin slit in the wall. If you look into this slit, you'll see the hollow interior of the object.
You know the part where the "appendage" touched the main cylinder? Delete these interior walls, so when you look into the slit, you can see all the way into the hollow body of the main cynlinder.
Put your knife safely away. Now run your hand along the right wall of the appendage in the z axis. Stop when you get to around the point where the appendage met the wall of the cylinder (even though you can't see the seam, because you blended it all out a minute ago, remember?)
Cut a slit here that runs the height of the object (in the y axis). The incision should start about 10 centimeters up from the floor, and stop about 10 centimeters down from the top of the object.
Now keeping moving on the z axis, until you're about even with the center of the circle. Make another such top-to-bottom incision here.
Now you should have two incisions that run up and down and are parallel to each other.
Now, just make two more incisions that connect the ends of these two incisions. So you just cut out another rectangle. Throw away the two rectangles you just cut out.
Go back to your original vantage point. You have just created an object that's hollow and has two long rectangular slits as openings. One of the slits is on the appendage, going up and down, on the wall that faces you. And the 2nd slit is along the right side of the object, also running up and down..
Now take the entire object and rotate it 90 degrees counter-clockwise around the z axis. The appendage should now be facing you still, but its long wall, which used to be the height, is now the width. The slit in this wall is still facing you, and it's now oriented horizontally. The second rectangular slit you cut is now facing up at the sky. Got it?
Now, take your viewing position from +10 on the z axis, and move to -10, and shift your view 180 degrees in the z plane. In other words, just view the object from behind.
From this vantage point, you're basically just going to add a small object to the butt-side of this thing. It's the shape of a torus (that's the geometric name for "donut") with the hole oriented in the x plane.
Now, the size of the torus:
The torus is about as tall as one third of the circle of the original cylinder. (So, like one third of a meter) It's thin; about the width of 1/5 of a meter.
Stick the edge of this torus to the direct back of the object, directly in the middle. Solder it on firmly.
Now go back to your original viewing position.
Make a sphere with a diameter about one fourth of the height of the object.
Put this sphere directly inside the hollow cavity in the center of the object.
Now shrink the whole thing down so it's about two inches long.
Turn all of it into steel.
Now you should know what it is!
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
whimstar.blogspot.com
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
That was a crazy game, huh? If the players got used to the terms, it would be a lot more concise. And you probably could get to the point where you don't need any "like a...[actual object]" phrases. Because the whole point is to NOT say "it looks like a ....". The whole point is to construct the thing in someone's head without any reference to real-life objects. (I guess geometrical objects are still a reference to SOMETHING, but...)
In this exercise, obviously the object was a real object in the real world, but like I said in the introduction, it would be interesting (and more challenging) if the object was abstract.
I guess the point of the whole thing is more of a commentary on language. I wonder if aliens have a way of communicating where they could tell the other person more concisely exactly what some complicated object looks like. Like, they'd be able to "beam" the whole in-out-over-and-under schematic to the other guy, and he'd be able to imagine it instantly.
Assuming you limit the vocabulary to all geometric shapes, it's basically the same thing is 3-D modeling on the computer. Only it's probably even more annoying.
Wouldn't that be a cool game? You are given a card with a drawing of an object on it (it could actually be a 3-D object, which is much better because it's harder)
And you'd have to describe this object in words. Like, "it's a cylinder, with a triangle-shaped notch cut out..." I dunno.
Then the person you're describing to has to draw the thing you're describing.. Or in the more challenging version, they'd have to shape it out of clay. Of course, this could be intensely challenging, or really easy depending on the complexity of the shape.
You could make it competitive, of course. Like which pair is better at describing the thing so their partner will be able to render it more perfectly without seeing it.
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
AHEM, OK.
I have a 3-D object in my mind. I'm going to describe it in terms of shapes and geometry. You try to form a mental image of this thing. (If you're up for the CHALLENGE, WEAKLING!!!!)
For this game, you'll need to imagine a 3-D field. Imagine the X,Y and Z axis. Look as if you're standing at Z 10 or something (let's say that means 10 meters away), so that you see Z running under your feet, like rail road tracks into the distance.
Now, coming from left to right (crossing the Z line in the middle of your field of vision) is the X axis.
From the sky to the floor (crossing the Z line in the middle of your field of vision) is the y axis.
Now I'll describe the object to you. Listen up.
Imagine a solid cylinder that's wide and short, sitting on the floor, with the circle parts of the cylinder facing towards the ceiling and towards the ground. From the floor to the top, it's about as tall as half the diameter. So it's wider than it is tall.
Let's say it's one meter wide and half a meter tall.
Now, imagine making another object. This new object will become an appendage to the first object.
Let's use the workspace IN FRONT OF the object (that 10-meter area closer to you, along the z axis) to construct the new object
Start with a rectangular prism that's as tall as the cylinder.
It's about as wide as 1/4 of the cylinder and it's about as long as the cylinder's diameter.
In terms of meters, this rectangular prism is half a meter tall, 1 meter long (z-axis) and 1/4 meter wide (x-axis).
Now let's move this prism so that it touches the cylinder. Push it directly away from you (along the z axis), toward the original object, until the far wall of the appendage touches the curved wall of the cylinder. Now, along the x axis, push the appendage to the right until the right wall of the appendage is in line with the farthest right point in the circle of the cylinder. Now push it AGAIN directly away from you in the z plane, so that it touches the cylinder again. The far left corner of the appendage object should be making contact with the cylinder.
Now, pretend that it's all made of clay.
See how only the far left corner of the appendage is touching the cylinder? And just to the right of that point of contact is empty space? Fill in that empty space by extending the far right wall of the appendage away from you in the z plane until it touches the cylinder. Extend the top and bottom walls of the appendage away from you in the z plane until they touch the cylinder. Now, you have these two objects joined.
Since it's made of clay, blend walls together, to make these two objects into one. Smooth the walls out.
Therefore, the right side of the new whole object you've created should be totally flat and straight.
Looking to the left side of the appendage, where it touches the curved wall of the cylinder, blend the walls of the appendage (in the z plane) so that it forms a nice curve into the wall of the cylinder.
Now make the whole thing hollow. Hollow it out. Do it. Make the walls thin, only about 10 centimeters thick.
Since it's hollow, you can cut into it easily, like cutting into clay. Cut an opening from floor-to-ceiling of the closest-to-you wall of the appendage.
Start the incision 10 centimeters up from the floor, 10 centimeters in from the left wall. Run the incision upward in the y-plane, so it runs parallel to the wall of the object. Stop it about 10 centimeters down from the top of the object. Withdraw your knife and get ready to make another incision.
From the point you left off, move right on the x axis, until you're 10-cm from the RIGHT wall of this object. Make another such incision top-to-bottom here, parallel to the first incision.
Now you should have two incisions that run up and down and are parallel to each other.
Now, just make two more incisions that connect the ends of these two incisions. So you just cut out a thin rectangle. Throw this away, so there's a thin slit in the wall. If you look into this slit, you'll see the hollow interior of the object.
You know the part where the "appendage" touched the main cylinder? Delete these interior walls, so when you look into the slit, you can see all the way into the hollow body of the main cynlinder.
Put your knife safely away. Now run your hand along the right wall of the appendage in the z axis. Stop when you get to around the point where the appendage met the wall of the cylinder (even though you can't see the seam, because you blended it all out a minute ago, remember?)
Cut a slit here that runs the height of the object (in the y axis). The incision should start about 10 centimeters up from the floor, and stop about 10 centimeters down from the top of the object.
Now keeping moving on the z axis, until you're about even with the center of the circle. Make another such top-to-bottom incision here.
Now you should have two incisions that run up and down and are parallel to each other.
Now, just make two more incisions that connect the ends of these two incisions. So you just cut out another rectangle. Throw away the two rectangles you just cut out.
Go back to your original vantage point. You have just created an object that's hollow and has two long rectangular slits as openings. One of the slits is on the appendage, going up and down, on the wall that faces you. And the 2nd slit is along the right side of the object, also running up and down..
Now take the entire object and rotate it 90 degrees counter-clockwise around the z axis. The appendage should now be facing you still, but its long wall, which used to be the height, is now the width. The slit in this wall is still facing you, and it's now oriented horizontally. The second rectangular slit you cut is now facing up at the sky. Got it?
Now, take your viewing position from +10 on the z axis, and move to -10, and shift your view 180 degrees in the z plane. In other words, just view the object from behind.
From this vantage point, you're basically just going to add a small object to the butt-side of this thing. It's the shape of a torus (that's the geometric name for "donut") with the hole oriented in the x plane.
Now, the size of the torus:
The torus is about as tall as one third of the circle of the original cylinder. (So, like one third of a meter) It's thin; about the width of 1/5 of a meter.
Stick the edge of this torus to the direct back of the object, directly in the middle. Solder it on firmly.
Now go back to your original viewing position.
Make a sphere with a diameter about one fourth of the height of the object.
Put this sphere directly inside the hollow cavity in the center of the object.
Now shrink the whole thing down so it's about two inches long.
Turn all of it into steel.
Now you should know what it is!
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
whimstar.blogspot.com
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
That was a crazy game, huh? If the players got used to the terms, it would be a lot more concise. And you probably could get to the point where you don't need any "like a...[actual object]" phrases. Because the whole point is to NOT say "it looks like a ....". The whole point is to construct the thing in someone's head without any reference to real-life objects. (I guess geometrical objects are still a reference to SOMETHING, but...)
In this exercise, obviously the object was a real object in the real world, but like I said in the introduction, it would be interesting (and more challenging) if the object was abstract.
I guess the point of the whole thing is more of a commentary on language. I wonder if aliens have a way of communicating where they could tell the other person more concisely exactly what some complicated object looks like. Like, they'd be able to "beam" the whole in-out-over-and-under schematic to the other guy, and he'd be able to imagine it instantly.
Assuming you limit the vocabulary to all geometric shapes, it's basically the same thing is 3-D modeling on the computer. Only it's probably even more annoying.
iPad table
Imagine an office where everyone is sitting in cubicles, isolated from one another.
Now imagine a large room where 5 - 10 employees are communing around a table.
Which scenario do you think is more productive for the company?
The second one, obviously, because more heads are coming together, communicating and sharing ideas. Working with, or even just AROUND other people, is so much more synergistic. And good for morale.
Even if you're working on your own thing, it's sometimes nice to have other people around the table working on their own thing. You can reach out for help at any moment.
What's the downside to the around-the-table arrangement? Well, for one thing, how is each person going to have access to their computer?
So here's the idea: It's an iPad the size of a table. Imagine it. A half dozen people sitting around a gigantic iPad. Files can be grabbed and moved around. "Here! Look at this file!" you can say, and then you can actually physically pass it to the person next to you. Because of it's large amount of RAM, each person can be working on their own project at the same time; their own section of large screen.
Now imagine a large room where 5 - 10 employees are communing around a table.
Which scenario do you think is more productive for the company?
The second one, obviously, because more heads are coming together, communicating and sharing ideas. Working with, or even just AROUND other people, is so much more synergistic. And good for morale.
Even if you're working on your own thing, it's sometimes nice to have other people around the table working on their own thing. You can reach out for help at any moment.
What's the downside to the around-the-table arrangement? Well, for one thing, how is each person going to have access to their computer?
So here's the idea: It's an iPad the size of a table. Imagine it. A half dozen people sitting around a gigantic iPad. Files can be grabbed and moved around. "Here! Look at this file!" you can say, and then you can actually physically pass it to the person next to you. Because of it's large amount of RAM, each person can be working on their own project at the same time; their own section of large screen.
Privacy is artistically liberating
While I'm more musically inspired than ever before in my life, my good friend Scott — a "real" musician — is not doing music because he doesn't have privacy. He says he doesn't feel comfortable really getting into it when he knows he's in earshot of his upstairs neighbors.
I know exactly what he was talking about: I really need my privacy to make art, too. Because every time you go to put down a brush stroke, or sing a note, you are taking a risk. It might work. It might not. It's part of the creative process. You can't have people listening in or looking over your shoulder.
That's why this month has been such a blessing, because I've been living in a practically empty house. If I want to play the guitar and sing stupid lyrics at the top of my lungs, I can.
When I look back on my childhood, I'm really glad that I had this luxury. Besides the fact that my parents were really encouraging of my creativity, my isolated circumstances really made a fine breeding ground for talent. With nobody around most of the time, I could really explore my creative side in total privacy.
My house was completely separated from all the neighbors, so — as weird as this sounds — no one could hear you scream. I remember how fun it was to play electric guitar as loud as I could stand it. To sing and shout and holler. To compose songs on the keyboard. Playing into the empty air, where nobody can feel judged.
On another topic:
Earlier tonight, we got talking about the artistic relevance of pop music. It was a pretty stale debate, but there were some interesting points made. I pointed out that in the early 20th century, music wasn't the sole domain of musical renaissance men, which is how it became in the 50s, 60s and definitely the 70s, where full-package musicians became prominent: wonderkids who could sing, write songs AND play their instruments like virtuosos. AND looked pretty on camera. Way back when, there was a song writer behind the scenes and a performer on stage. Nowadays, that's still the case, but even more so: there's a whole team of professionals that bring any given CD to market: marketers, advertising a producer, a song-writer, hired-gun studio musicians and singers. The person on the cover of the album isn't even a musician, really. They are just a pretty face. However, there's still the MYTH lingering from the 70's that a musician is all those things at once. It's like we want to believe in these god-like icons who have more talent in one finger than we ever could. AND they're young and cute to boot. Therefore we can worship them and make them into a commodity at the same time. All the while, —- insidiously -- we can absolve ourselves of any responsibility to explore our own talents because we know we can never be the full package: writer, producer, performer all at once.
In my case, I know damn well what my strengths and weaknesses are. And I'm not going to let my lack of ability in one area stop me from exploring my talents.
I know that I suck at playing instruments. I don't have chops. My fingers just aren't dexterous enough. And I don't have the patience to practice. (But, incidentally, there are many people who have this skill. And these people can be hired or contracted.) I'm not a great singer. I'm an OK singer, but I don't have a voice you'd go out of your way to listen to.
On the plus side, I can write. I have a sense of humor, a talent for poetry, rhyme, rhythm and melody. Not so much harmony, but melody. That's what I offer. And I'm satisfied with the idea that I don't have to be everything at once. I can write song shells and then have real musicians come and enhance my ideas. Collaboration is way more fun anyway.
I'm proud of the two songs I recorded today! (The first and last songs are the new ones.)
I know exactly what he was talking about: I really need my privacy to make art, too. Because every time you go to put down a brush stroke, or sing a note, you are taking a risk. It might work. It might not. It's part of the creative process. You can't have people listening in or looking over your shoulder.
That's why this month has been such a blessing, because I've been living in a practically empty house. If I want to play the guitar and sing stupid lyrics at the top of my lungs, I can.
When I look back on my childhood, I'm really glad that I had this luxury. Besides the fact that my parents were really encouraging of my creativity, my isolated circumstances really made a fine breeding ground for talent. With nobody around most of the time, I could really explore my creative side in total privacy.
My house was completely separated from all the neighbors, so — as weird as this sounds — no one could hear you scream. I remember how fun it was to play electric guitar as loud as I could stand it. To sing and shout and holler. To compose songs on the keyboard. Playing into the empty air, where nobody can feel judged.
On another topic:
Earlier tonight, we got talking about the artistic relevance of pop music. It was a pretty stale debate, but there were some interesting points made. I pointed out that in the early 20th century, music wasn't the sole domain of musical renaissance men, which is how it became in the 50s, 60s and definitely the 70s, where full-package musicians became prominent: wonderkids who could sing, write songs AND play their instruments like virtuosos. AND looked pretty on camera. Way back when, there was a song writer behind the scenes and a performer on stage. Nowadays, that's still the case, but even more so: there's a whole team of professionals that bring any given CD to market: marketers, advertising a producer, a song-writer, hired-gun studio musicians and singers. The person on the cover of the album isn't even a musician, really. They are just a pretty face. However, there's still the MYTH lingering from the 70's that a musician is all those things at once. It's like we want to believe in these god-like icons who have more talent in one finger than we ever could. AND they're young and cute to boot. Therefore we can worship them and make them into a commodity at the same time. All the while, —- insidiously -- we can absolve ourselves of any responsibility to explore our own talents because we know we can never be the full package: writer, producer, performer all at once.
In my case, I know damn well what my strengths and weaknesses are. And I'm not going to let my lack of ability in one area stop me from exploring my talents.
I know that I suck at playing instruments. I don't have chops. My fingers just aren't dexterous enough. And I don't have the patience to practice. (But, incidentally, there are many people who have this skill. And these people can be hired or contracted.) I'm not a great singer. I'm an OK singer, but I don't have a voice you'd go out of your way to listen to.
On the plus side, I can write. I have a sense of humor, a talent for poetry, rhyme, rhythm and melody. Not so much harmony, but melody. That's what I offer. And I'm satisfied with the idea that I don't have to be everything at once. I can write song shells and then have real musicians come and enhance my ideas. Collaboration is way more fun anyway.
I'm proud of the two songs I recorded today! (The first and last songs are the new ones.)
Extemporaneous Album
I accidentally had some ganja cookies last Monday. I was so high I couldn't do anything but sit in my car and talk to myself. Fortunately, I had a small digital recorder with me. I started talking. And then I started singing. It was so much fun I didn't want to stop. I was there for hours.
The next day, I listened to what I had come up with. Most of it was quaintly weird and random, like a dream, or like my sub-conscious wringing itself dry. A lot of it was laugh-out-loud funny! I spent the next few days winnowing out the boring parts. But I left the final product in tact, with minimal edits, and only a few over dubs.
The next day, I listened to what I had come up with. Most of it was quaintly weird and random, like a dream, or like my sub-conscious wringing itself dry. A lot of it was laugh-out-loud funny! I spent the next few days winnowing out the boring parts. But I left the final product in tact, with minimal edits, and only a few over dubs.
Click here to hear
Ready to Explode
This album really inspires me because I'm enthralled when I can make something of "quality" with little effort. One take. Totally off-the-cuff. It's an abundant feeling, because it means you can make gold at any time out of nothing.
There are some really good ideas — gold nuggets — buried in the horse shit. I am excited to extract the juice and use it to fuel an ever grander vision, but I actually think it is release-worthy as it is. I mean, it's totally crappy. But it's a good kinda of crappy, like the kind of thing that would become an internet phenomenon. Like the kid who posts the video that's just weird enough to make people go... "Hmm...? What can I do with this?" And the next thing you know, there are 100 remixes on YouTube, complete with crappy animation.
Pure, bare expression of the inner freak is a thing that people can grab onto. They are happy that someone else can really let it out — the way they wish they could.
Just naked voice in a vacuum, like raw materials, can be used to build something even bigger. For that reason, I didn't alter these tracks much. I want to see what will happen when I put my bare art out in the "free box" for anonymous people to scavenge.
Tattoo stencil
This is so obvious, I don't know why I've never thought of it before.
Here it is: Get a piece of sticker paper and cut a stencil into it. Put it on your arm and use sharpie. It looks really crisp. People will wonder how you did it.
Here it is: Get a piece of sticker paper and cut a stencil into it. Put it on your arm and use sharpie. It looks really crisp. People will wonder how you did it.
Simply Simplement
I just thought of a cheesy thing. When you want to "implement" an idea and "simplify" at the same time, why not "simplement"? Eh?
What can Yudu do? How about STEAL MY IDEA?
I'm actually kind of flattered. Someone out there stole one of my ideas!
Remember my post, Hobbyist Silkscreen Printer? Well, it looks like some company called
Yudu has done it!
Now will someone please steal my other ideas, too? I do so want an electronic drum kit in my car.
Remember my post, Hobbyist Silkscreen Printer? Well, it looks like some company called
Yudu has done it!
Now will someone please steal my other ideas, too? I do so want an electronic drum kit in my car.
Fractal Reality Choose-Your-Own-Adventure
I was thinking about those Choose Your Own Adventure books that we loved as a child. You know, the ones that are told in the 2nd person... 
I remember as a kid not being much impressed with the actual story. What fascinated me most, of course, was the format. The way it put you in the driver's seat. Before video games, this was one of the first forms of art I could interact with.
"You're standing in front of an abandoned house. The windows are broken, and you think you see shadows moving around inside. The wild howls. A shiver goes up your spine. It's all scary and enticing.
- If you...
- Go in through the window (turn to page 7)
- Go in through the door (turn to page 11)
- Go get help (turn to page 15).
I remember as a kid not being much impressed with the actual story. What fascinated me most, of course, was the format. The way it put you in the driver's seat. Before video games, this was one of the first forms of art I could interact with.
Anyway, I've been throwing ideas around in my head, and I think it would be sweet to write a choose-your-own-adventure. But do something a little different with it. Update the genre. Do something that adults would find interesting. Something socially-relevant would be a bonus.
Here are some of the ideas that came to mind.
- Tongue-in-cheek social commentary style So many things today are simulated forms of something else, i.e. Nintendo Wii sports, Rock Band, internet chat. Anyway, I think it would be an interesting joke's-on-you style ironic art piece to make a choose-your-own-adventure book where the only adventure that takes place is actually inside of another artificial game. For example, a choose-your-own-adventure that's actually a game of Dungeons and Dragons. And within the D&D world, you can watch a movie, or play Wii or Rock Band. Like nesting Russian Dolls, each choice you make brings you deeper and deeper into some artificial reality. Of course, this idea is smarmy and annoying. It would be tedious to write. Only good as a concept. However, with that said, I sometimes wonder about people who read books like Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter, or any of that stuff. In a way, isn't this just the analog version of a game of D&D or World of Warcraft? (Obviously, this question is stupid, because it's really the other way around.)
- Open-source collab style This iteration is based on the idea that each "chapter" of the adventure could be written by a different author. For this, I was partially inspired by Douglas Rushkoff's Exit Strategy in which he had strangers on the internet write the footnotes of his already-conceptually-dense novel. But my version is different in that every chapter would actually be written by a different person. You could do this "pyramid style": One person writes the first chapter, which branches into three options. So, the first author has to find three friends to write the next three chapters. Each of those people has to find a couple more friends to continue the story, and so on. (Of course, there would have to be guidelines set ahead of time, like broad limitations on word count and content; but those are just details.) Alternatively, this could be done totally open-source-style, like a wiki, where total strangers can go in and write or edit. At a certain point, though, there would have to be a head author who has final say.
- Fractal reality style In this iteration, the novel is written by multiple people like in the previous iteration, but the main difference is that instead of the novel following one character, you actually jump from character to character as the story progresses. The reader can choose what character to jump to at any given point in the story. The challenge would be to actually succeed in telling a cohesive story while jumping around from character to character. (It wouldn't be necessary, but there could be a sci-fi explanation of how these jumps are occurring; for example, "you" are actually a mind-virus that can jump hosts. When you're in one host, you see the world through their eyes, but when they sneeze, you actually jump to a new host.) The sweet thing about this approach is that you'd be able to "live" as many different characters: he who seemed reprehensible from one character's perspective, might turn out to be understandable when you see the world through his eyes.
And even sweeter turn on this same idea: have each new character written by an author who is similar to them. For example, the policeman character could be written by an actual policeman. The teacher, by an actual teacher. The child, by an actual child. The authors would be essentially writing about themselves; what they would do if they were part of this story.
Wicking Ear Plugs
I wear ear plugs all night. Every morning when I wake up, there's a small amount of itchy, icky, ear-waxy moisture in my ear canal.
Every morning I dream of this invention: What if there were ear plugs that — instead of trapping moisture in the ear — would actually draw it out?
It would like an an ordinary ear plug, only there would be some sort of material which would act to wick the fluid out of the ear canal (blue part in the illustration.)
Every morning I dream of this invention: What if there were ear plugs that — instead of trapping moisture in the ear — would actually draw it out?
It would like an an ordinary ear plug, only there would be some sort of material which would act to wick the fluid out of the ear canal (blue part in the illustration.)
These ear plugs would essentially clean your ear as you wore them.
Sun Painting Table Top
I found this circular wood table top in the dumpster, and I couldn't stand to leave it there.
With some help of my awesome friends, I painted a big happy sun face on it.
After adding some spray-painted celestial bodies in the background, we are going to shalack the face (with the non-toxic resin-based stuff.)
Then we're going to make a stand out of recycled wood so it will be functional as a table in our greenhouse.
With some help of my awesome friends, I painted a big happy sun face on it.
After adding some spray-painted celestial bodies in the background, we are going to shalack the face (with the non-toxic resin-based stuff.)
Then we're going to make a stand out of recycled wood so it will be functional as a table in our greenhouse.
Then we'll be able to sit in our home-made greenhouse around our home-made table playing home-made chess.
Chess Set Made of Trash
For some reason, our household had a chess board but no chess pieces. This was the case for many months because I do not buy anything from the store that I don't need or can't make myself.
Out of the blue, I had this idea: Make chess pieces.
I love the new chess set. The pieces are appealing to touch and look at. Their simplicity is really inspirational to me.
Of course, the board itself could be made of trash as well. A checkered table cloth? A flannel shirt?
What other things can be made of trash?
Out of the blue, I had this idea: Make chess pieces.
- Pawn: Bottlecap
- Rook: Cork
- Knight: Half cork with can top
- Bishop: Half cork with eye screw
- Queen: Cork with bottlecap "crown"
- King: Squatty cork with bottlecap "crown"
I love the new chess set. The pieces are appealing to touch and look at. Their simplicity is really inspirational to me.
Of course, the board itself could be made of trash as well. A checkered table cloth? A flannel shirt?
What other things can be made of trash?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
