Archive for the 'Personal' Category

I’ve Landed.

Tuesday, March 13th, 2007

Today I was reverse-stalking the links pointing to my site when I discovered that Planet 02138 uses my RSS feed to fill their content. To be honest, I’m a little touched. At first I thought it might be associated with that magazine I don’t read with the same zip code. Fortunately, it’s not. If I were to guess, it’s another service offered by the kind folks at the Berkman Center.

Anyway, here’s how the Planet explains itself:

Planet 02138 is a collection of Harvard blogs. It is a sample of opinions and ramblings by Harvard students, faculty, and alumni.

From what I saw, they nailed it head-on.

You can make your own feed reader with the software from Planet Planet. Gosh, that’s fun to say.

Trolling their blogroll inspired me to update my own. Sure, my RSS reader knows what I’m currently reading—somehow my blog got left behind, though. After all, how are you going to know what I’m [likely to be] reading?

Technorati Tags:, , , , , , ,

Cartoons and Robots: A Taxonomy of People

Sunday, March 11th, 2007

On Sunday, March 04, 2007, my cousin wrote the following:

Beep Beep, i turned into a robot.

Now, she didn’t know it at the time, but in doing so, she was providing some incontrovertible evidence in favor of my taxonomy of people. Sure there are a lot of classifications floating around there. We’ve all heard them: there are two kinds of people: those who think there are two kinds of people and those who don’t, for example. Then there are more comprehensive groupings. If you haven’t already, try your hand at the Meyer-Briggs-Keirsey-Jung temperament sorter—I’m an INTP, by the way—and the Which Superhero are You? quiz of MySpace fame—I’m 80% Spiderman. These extravagent typologies, for all their benefits, still require tests. There has got to be an easier way.

And so there is! In college I came up with a relatively simple though telling taxonomy of people while sitting in the dining hall. It’s nice for a few reasons: there are no tests; the results are 100% accurate; and the system is easy to learn—there are no fancy, technical definitions. In fact, there are no definitions at all. Just two primitive labels. (In modern geometry, the terms point and line are often left undefined. So at least there’s some sort of precedent for this sort of system.)

So what is my system, anyway? Well, to start off, I don’t claim that any description of a person is complete. Instead, I deal with approximate descriptors. In my system there are two, undefined building blocks: robots and cartoons.




The Robot/Cartoon Taxonomy of People
Level 0Robot Cartoon
Level 1Robot pretending to be a CartoonRobot pretending to be a RobotCartoon pretending to be a Cartoon Cartoon pretending to be a Robot
Level n Robot (prentending to be a {Robot or Cartoon})n Cartoon (pretending to be a {Robot or Cartoon})n

[Note: I wish I had made one of those tree diagrams, like the ones that are used in dichotomous keys. Here's an example of the type of tree I mean.]

But that’s just the beginning. As there’s often more than meets the eye, we can have higher-order descriptors that give a more honest approximation to a person’s true character. There are six first-order personalities. We’ve already met two: the robots and the cartoons—those people who truly are pure robots or pure cartoons. A lot of people fit this description, but then there are lots of others who are hybrids. These folks might be: robots pretending to be (PTB) cartoons and cartoons pretending to be robots. For completeness’ sake, I should mention the ever abstruse robots pretending to be robots and cartoons pretending to be cartoons. These folks typically are self-aware. They’ve thought about how robots (cartoons) ideally should act, and they try to live their lives that way. Haven’t you ever met someone who was a caricature of himself? Maybe you’ve met a cartoon pretending to be a cartoon.

The great thing about this scheme is that it scales gracefully. Therefore resolution of your analysis is limited only by your level of neuroticism and time. You can take this system as far as you want: run with it. I can’t distinguish traits beyond two levels, myself. Please let me know if you ever meet someone who is unmistakably a cartoon pretending to be a cartoon pretending to be a robot pretending to be a cartoon pretending to be a robot.

Technorati Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Grassy Field

Sunday, March 11th, 2007

Since all I do these days is post my school projects to my blog, here’s another one for you. This week we had to create a collage. The requirements were pretty bare: at least five instances of the picture, one rotation, one rescaling, and at least one color modification. Try to spot each of the requirements in the final product below. (Maybe you’ve seen the original image before.) I had planned on using longer strips than the squares I ended up implementing, but I got lazy. The checkered effect is a little busy for my tastes; hopefully it’ll make the grade.

I tried for freakin’ ever to get the sky to soft clip to the hill top. I was able to adapt the intermediate image technique described in this article to create a tacky sun (not shown for art’s sake), but not for much more. Instead, I used the built-in, jagged setClip() method native to the java.awt.Graphics2D class. In case you were wondering, the clip was made with about six straight lines. I hate spline fitting, and try never to use curves—especially if line segments will do just fine. File that little tidbit away, it could be useful someday.

But convolutions rock. I’ve always thought so. Ever since I started using them to do signal processing in astronomy class. Our professor made us do a lot of convolutions using a visual calculus that really changed the way I thought about calculation in general. Drawing it out refined my sense of geometric interaction and avoided a lot of messy integrals. Here’s to qualitative methods: hurrah!

A field in collage

Technorati Tags:, , , , , ,

Critical Thinking Journals/Culture of Thinking

Thursday, March 8th, 2007

Well, last semester I kept a journal for my class CCT 602: Creative Thought. This semester I’m doing the same for CCT 601: Critical Thought. I think that what I’m writing now is more interesting. I’ve been able to build on my work from previous classes, but somehow things seem to be coming together now. To indulge my narcissism, I’ve decided to post my papers right here on my blog—that way at least my grandmother can read them.

Journal 1 The Culture of Thinking

In this entry, I try to tease out some of the more obvious components of society. In doing so, I look for applications in a learning environment context. Values pop out as a the centerpiece of attention—and whether a classroom is structure to enable the learning and use of higher-order thinking skills is really a commentary on the values of the classroom. The implication is somewhat surprising: there is no such thing as a morally neutral education. Every action in a classroom is a statement of value judgment.

In particular, I introduce a concept of central importance to my later journal: a behavior space. After all, how can you “take me to Funkytown?”

Technorati Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A Flower Garden

Wednesday, February 21st, 2007

Here we go. Below is a screen shot from assignment number 2. This time I grew a wild flower garden. Every time the program runs, you end up with thirteen orange and pink flowers and 1,500 blades of grass, but where the flowers bloom and where each leaf of grass falls is up to the computer.

Programmed Wild Flower Garden

I’m really pleased with the grass. Doesn’t it look like that plastic shred you find in easter baskets?

Technorati Tags:, , , , , , ,

My Initials

Wednesday, February 14th, 2007

After only 10 methods spanning 265 lines of code, including comments, it’s done (and on time)! May I present to you the first programming assignment for my first programming class:

It even reflects my hispanicity. Is it not pleasing to the eye?

No offense, Papert, but there’s got to be a better way than LOGO1.

1 I’ve since changed my mind. See my comments below.

Technorati Tags:, , , , , , ,

A Conversation

Monday, February 12th, 2007

Setting: a cramped kitchen.

Andrew: Did you know that all the [Nintendo] Mario music was written by a blind, Japanese man?
DJ: [Enters through the bathroom door, crosses in front of Andrew hastily.] My mother was a blind, Japanese man. [Exists through the kitchen door; leaves it open.]

Andrew: But how can that be?

Josh: Genetics. [Said while exiting through the kitchen door, closing it quickly behind him.]

[End scene.]

Technorati Tags:, , , , ,

Assumptions

Thursday, February 8th, 2007

A few weeks ago my friend Michelle called me a little after one in the afternoon. The ring of the telephone woke me up and I stumbled across the room to answer her call. I looked down at the little display, saw that it was Michelle, and then put on my best telephone face to accept her “Hello, Joshy.”

Michelle called to tell me that she had accepted a new job—she was in need of a new one, believe you me. This was fantastic news. Usually Michelle can spot my false wakefulness, even over the phone, like one of those empaths from Star Trek (or something). But this time, her excitement—in conjunction with my keen theatrical abilities—distracted her from the reality of my slumber, which is exactly what I was aiming for.

I wasn’t, but the question still remains: could I have justifiably been upset at Michelle for waking me up? Well, yes but mostly no. It was one in the afternoon. Most people are awake when the sun’s up. So, Michelle was right to operate on the assumption “people are awake when the sun’s up.” The world is a crazy and complicated place. We have to live our lives despite only having access to a very small amount of knowledge about our environment. Therefore most of our judgments aren’t certain. Instead, they’re best guesses that approximate what we should do if we actually knew everything there was to know. Thankfully, we’re not totally in the dark.

People are very good at working with probabilities because lots of the events in the world have a high probability of certainty. That tree in the park you saw this morning on your way to work will probably still be there during your commute home later tonight. The position and function of the knobs and buttons on your stove are not going to switch themselves around when you’re not looking—with high probability. So it’s not surprising that people believe that there are certainties in life. And maybe if you were able to know everything about everything at every time, then the world would work according to a small set of fixed laws. Unfortunately, no one—as far as I know—has that sort of depth of knowledge and understanding. So, for practical purposes, we’re left interacting with probabilities.

Now we get into trouble when we confuse probabilities for certainties. Then we become locked into a stereotype. That’s right, I think stereotypes are simply misapplied probabilities. Several years ago some fledging stand-up comedian trying to break it big played the Conan O’Brien Show. He included two “postive stereotypes” that stuck with me. “All Jews can fly and Mexicans are made out of candy,” he claimed. Being (sort of) both Jewish and Mexican, I can say from experience that very few Jews whom I know can fly and even fewer Mexicans are made out of candy. So what makes his stereotypes wrong? Well, probabilistically his claims aren’t well supported.

Here’s another perhaps less inflammatory claim: men are taller than women. I bet a lot of you agree with that. But let’s hold up just a second and see just what the sentence is saying. There are a lot of words missing that really ought to be there. My claim doesn’t mean all men are taller than all women. If you cite your friend from college on the women’s basketball team who towers over everyone else in a crowd, you haven’t disproved anything. What I really mean to say is that on average men are taller than women; i.e., if you pull a random man and a random woman off the street and compare their heights, record the answer, and then repeat the experiment several times over, then in general, you will find that the man is taller than the woman.

So what are assumptions: they are the most probable results from a distribution of possible results that we adopt as fact based on our experience. Experience varies, so assumptions vary. The key is to remember that sometimes outlying events can happen, and we must be open to the possibility that they do. Most Mexicans aren’t made out of candy, but don’t let me fool you into believing that none of us are.

All that said, Michelle should’ve known, given her previous experience, that there was a high likelihood that I would be sleeping at one in the afternoon. Don’t forget that not all assumptions apply in all contexts. These things are conditional, after all. So, she’s only partially excused.

And while I’m on my soapbox, it’s worth pointing out that because people almost exclusively interact with probability distributions, probability and statistics really need to be given more attention in school curricula. Over emphasis on deterministic systems tricks students into believing that the world really operates on certain events. I can’t think of anything further from the truth.

Technorati Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This Poor, Provincial Town

Sunday, January 28th, 2007

Gosh. What could be better than a solitary drive about a New England town in a light snow at 3:40am? Picture it: a light dusting shines pink in the spotlights lit by the lamps on the telephone roads along a quiet residential street lined with green pine and naked maple and oak. Jazz fills the warm interior air of your car, but still you decide to drive with the passenger side window down. Before it all, you played spades with your friends and their grandmother only four minutes away the next town over and won. Before that, you and the gang sang and danced in a 1770s Massachusetts’ tavern. Pear cider, ginger wine, and brown ale for everyone. Oh, and don’t forget that beef stew that started the night off.

Life’s not so bad right now. Keep it coming down. I want a blizzard.

Books

Saturday, January 20th, 2007

I’ve spent part of tonight cataloguing my books. This is only the beginning. I need to differentiate among books I own, I’ve read, I’d like to own, and books I’d like to read. Also, I needed to figure out a work-around for the Library Thing blog widget since the Law School server doesn’t allow me to execute scripts. (First pass hack shown below.)

Protected by AkismetBlog with WordPress