I realize that it has been a while since I have posted anything on this blog. I will return with weekly updates. When? I am not quite sure. My philosophical ramblings and readings have currently taken a back seat due to my returning obsession with Weiqi and Youtube.
I have also realized that, through talking to Ralph Kenyon over at Xenodochy, that my analysis of the similarities and differences between Critical Rationalism and General Semantics is going to take a lot more time than I currently have. Because of this, my research into the more technical aspects would be less than superficial if I was to undertake them now.
I hope to resume the analysis when I have more time, and after becoming more aquainted, though still somewhat superficially, with these things.
Until next time...
23 Aug 2013
Transparency on The Webz.
I tried! Oh, Lord, how I did try
- Otto (from the simpsons)
The above sentiment captures exactly my attempt at becoming completely transparent on the net, which I did because I was testing out Rushkoff's advice (obviously his idea is his own and the only person that can be blamed for my actions are me).
I tried it for nearly a year, but it caused me anxiety. I admit that it made me prone to being more careful about what I said, but it also crippled my ability to write openly about many things I wished to, or to argue my case when in discussions with people.
I would encourage anyone to try it out; it is in someways an edifying experience, and one that will show that some people are much more agreeable to people who are transparent on the net. But don't be afraid to revert back to a little anonymity if you find it is causing you undue anxiety.
Complete anonymity is not just impossible but also not integral and because of this many of my accounts on the Internet share the same name. But I have other accounts that are there for my personal and private use, which is not a great change from being transparent.
- Otto (from the simpsons)
The above sentiment captures exactly my attempt at becoming completely transparent on the net, which I did because I was testing out Rushkoff's advice (obviously his idea is his own and the only person that can be blamed for my actions are me).
I tried it for nearly a year, but it caused me anxiety. I admit that it made me prone to being more careful about what I said, but it also crippled my ability to write openly about many things I wished to, or to argue my case when in discussions with people.
I would encourage anyone to try it out; it is in someways an edifying experience, and one that will show that some people are much more agreeable to people who are transparent on the net. But don't be afraid to revert back to a little anonymity if you find it is causing you undue anxiety.
Complete anonymity is not just impossible but also not integral and because of this many of my accounts on the Internet share the same name. But I have other accounts that are there for my personal and private use, which is not a great change from being transparent.
19 Aug 2013
Go
I have been playing Go now for nearly 8 years, I have had pretty slow progress because my engagement with it is very patchy. When I actually get down to studying it, my rank seems to increase quite quickly, so I think I have some knack for it and the kind of thinking that is involved in understanding its many facets.
I have recently started playing on OGS, which is a turn-based website community dedicated to offering an environment in which people can not only set up games against other people, but after you have gained a somewhat accurate grade, also tournament games.
This kind of system is a little different from the real-time strategy you get on say tygem and KGS, it allows you to study your own game while you're playing. What I mean by this, is that because you are dealing with a game over a long period of time, you can not only put your own reasoning into it, but you can go away and study games and strategies that allow you to improve your game while playing.
For instance you can go away and study an approach move that someone might use, or study a fuseki that someone has played that you have never seen before. This type of learning is quite interesting, because it allows you to apply the studying and skills you learn over the period of just one game, which, when the game is done, you can see how you improved from the early parts of the game to the later.
Some people might assume this is cheating, but it is impossible to avoid, are you really going to stop studying Go for the time it takes to finish one of these games (up to a few months) not only this, your opponent is going to be doing this aswell, because it a fortuitous time to understand the repercussions of your strategy not just in retrospect, but while it is happening, and with the ability to put it into the context of your studying practices.
I have recently started playing on OGS, which is a turn-based website community dedicated to offering an environment in which people can not only set up games against other people, but after you have gained a somewhat accurate grade, also tournament games.
This kind of system is a little different from the real-time strategy you get on say tygem and KGS, it allows you to study your own game while you're playing. What I mean by this, is that because you are dealing with a game over a long period of time, you can not only put your own reasoning into it, but you can go away and study games and strategies that allow you to improve your game while playing.
For instance you can go away and study an approach move that someone might use, or study a fuseki that someone has played that you have never seen before. This type of learning is quite interesting, because it allows you to apply the studying and skills you learn over the period of just one game, which, when the game is done, you can see how you improved from the early parts of the game to the later.
Some people might assume this is cheating, but it is impossible to avoid, are you really going to stop studying Go for the time it takes to finish one of these games (up to a few months) not only this, your opponent is going to be doing this aswell, because it a fortuitous time to understand the repercussions of your strategy not just in retrospect, but while it is happening, and with the ability to put it into the context of your studying practices.
Anderson is Filming Inherent Vice.
I usually try to keep up on the developements of my two favourite film makers: David Lych and P.T Anderson. Recently I lost track of both of them; I have heard that Lynch is not considering another film at the moment, which is a shame, but not all that surprising, but P.T Anderson, after speculation and a few years of waiting has finally got underway on his new project, a film adaptation of Thomas Pynchon's Inherent Vice.
If anyone can adapt a Pynchon film, it is P.T Anderson, and if it is any book, it would have to be this one, or the crying of lot 49; too much would have to be left out from such works as Gravity's Rainbow, or V etc.
It is going to be interesting to see how it develops.
If anyone can adapt a Pynchon film, it is P.T Anderson, and if it is any book, it would have to be this one, or the crying of lot 49; too much would have to be left out from such works as Gravity's Rainbow, or V etc.
It is going to be interesting to see how it develops.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)