As the title says, I hate spam. And I have started to get spam from the e-mail account I had set up for this blog, so I’m not a happy camper.
I also haven’t posted in a while since I decided to go travel the world and my internet connection is sporadic at best. And I might not post in a while, since I had to come back and do some exams, so I should actually be doing some, like, you know, studying for them?
Look, a post! I’m currently procrastinating about life in general and therefore I’m not getting anything done. I spent the day playing a stupid game called ‘More Bloons’ that I found open on my sister’s account (and I finished it too!). I’m still not quite sure what the point was, but it passed the day…and meant I didn’t have to start on my research essay for international law. I haven’t even picked a topic yet. Hmm…maybe something on diplomacy. Or war. Or maybe both. I’ll let you know. And there wasn’t really a point to this post, other than to continue my post-More Bloons procrastination. And I can’t think of anything to post here. I don’t even know what the file limit is on this thing, and I haven’t really been randomly wandering around the net lately to see where it’ll take me. Maybe I’ll do that now.
I’m watching Dancing With the Stars at the moment, and Danni Minogue just came on to sing (yes, Kylie’s ickle bubbie sister). Now, aside from the fact that the song, in my opinion, sucks, she fell into that popstar trap. Why do they have to have dancers (note the plural) of the opposite sex follow them around as if they are the most desirable, beautiful, wonderful, attractive people ever? Is it to convince the rest of us mere mortals that they are more attractive than us? If so, it’s not working on me. All I’m thinking is that they look like idiots, and a lot of the time they sound like idiots. And I have the music experience to back that up, so I’m not going all ‘mainstream-music-sucks’ on everyone. In fact, I’m a big pop fan. I watch musicals regularly. I’ve played the piano for 15 years and the flute for 10. I can hear songs from the 60s to today, and if they’ve been any kind of minor hit, chances are I can name it. My CD collection ranges from classical to jazz to rock to pop to any weird thing that looked interesting the last time I was in a music store. I know my music, and believe me, having dancers prance around bad singers doesn’t make the singing sound any better. Sorry Danni.
And, from watching the ads: RADIO RENTALS, YOU SUCK! Is it any wonder that bankruptcy is at an all time high when idiot companies prey on today’s capitalist consumerist society and offer credit with no credit history checks? What the hell is wrong with people? Why do they offer people things they can’t afford? I hope the housing market collapses completely and sends all the horrible companies bankrupt when they can’t make their money back from selling the houses of people who were too greedy and stupid to buy what they can afford. See, I’m an equal opportunity blamer. You can’t only blame the companies, and you can’t only blame the people (crosses her fingers and hopes that none of the companies she is keeping her money with go bankrupt). If I can’t afford the brand new computer, I don’t get it. I don’t go running to the bank and say “look at this computer, I really want it, can I have the money?” (which I already know they’ll give me, since they offer it regularly without me asking them for it), I look at a different computer, or I wait until I’ve saved some money. Try it some time.
I’m so grumpy today…
Sorry for not posting for a while, I’m drowning in life at the moment.
but I’ve never really wanted to be one of those people who just blog for the sake of blogging. I haven’t got time for that kind of stuff (OK, I don’t want to, I make the time only when I’m trying to procrastinate…). Anyway, other than noting my continued absence from my blog, I thought I’d share a rather interesting article with you:
February 05, 2007
Viewpoint
Sarah Vine
Well, zut alors! A distinguished French literary professor has become a surprise bestselling author by writing a book explaining how to wax intellectual about tomes that you have never actually read.
Pierre Baynard, 52, specialises in the link between literature and psychoanalysis, and says it is perfectly possible to bluff your way through a book that you have never read — especially if that conversation happens to be taking place with someone else who also hasn’t read it. All of which just goes to confirm what I’ve always thought about French academics, which is that mostly they are oversubsidised frauds.
Obviously I haven’t read Mr Baynard’s book; but it is in the spirit of his oeuvre that I shall proceed to write about it anyway. The first thing to say about Comment Parler des Livres que l’on n’a pas Lus ( How to Talk About Books that You Haven’t Read) is what a wonderfully French concept this is. The French take great pride in their intellectual patrimony, considering themselves to be pretty much the inventors of most forms of high art, something that irritates other nations, especially the Italians, a great deal. For them it is crucial to be able to hold their own in a literary conversation, a mark of cultural honour that is the very essence of French-ness. The trouble is, in these busy times, who apart from Alain de Botton has time to really get to the bottom of Proust?
Bayard himself confesses to never having finished Ulysses, by James Joyce. Personally, I have a theory that there is a very good chance that Joyce himself didn’t even finish writing the book, since I have never actually met anyone who has read the thing cover to cover. Perhaps Joyce was just having a laugh — perhaps Ulysses is just one great big literary irony, a book purposely made unreadable by the author just to expose pseuds. Or perhaps the real ending in the book — the one that no one knows about because nobody has actually ever read it properly — is that they all live happily ever after in an executive home. Yes yes and yes, as Molly Bloom herself might have said.
See? Now you don’t know whether I’ve read it or not. Don’t worry, I haven’t; nor have I read Proust (I like a nice biscuit, though) or Steppenwolf by Hermann Hesse, although I think I’ve got one of their old LPs somewhere. Nor do I care that you now know that, since I am British, and therefore suffer from a pathological need to downplay any intellectual prowess I may or may not possess. The British dislike a Noam-know-it-all; we like our intellects to be approachable, unpretentious, fancy-a-pint-down-the-pub types. Which is in itself, of course, just as pretentious as wanting everyone to know you’ve read Dante (not just the Inferno, though — everyone has read that, ha ha — but Paradiso, too, which is terribly dull, being as it is entirely devoted to the Heavenly Host and utterly devoid of the colourful descriptions of torture that made Inferno such a blockbuster in its day).
The book that I’d part company with hard cash to get is this: How to Avoid Talking About Books You Shouldn’t Have Read — But Have. Such as Captain Corelli’s Mandolin, or anything by Jackie Collins, or Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus — or the ultimate literary embarrassment, The Da Vinci Code. I don’t know anyone with an ounce of intellectual pride who will confess to having read it, and yet statistically some of them must be lying. Maybe I should start a Da Vinci Anonymous association. All welcome, even French professors.
-http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article1334436.ece
So true, so true. Actually, I only ever read books I want to, and I won’t pretend to read something I haven’t. I don’t think any better or worse of people for having read a particular book. In fact, I freely admit to hating Shakespeare and the only things I’ve read that were written by him were things that I was forced to read either for school or uni. Have things really gotten so bad that we need to pretend to have read things we haven’t? If you want to seem intelligent, do the work. Because believe me, someone will work out what you’re doing otherwise. You’ll only get so far faking things…
And you all thought I’d disappeared into blogland oblivion again. I haven’t. I’ve just been busy. May all your hangovers be as non-existent as mine (yes, I was drinking and no, I don’t get hangovers…I take after my mother…).
Have a fantastic 2007!
http://www.fasco-csc.com/works/crimson/crimson_e.php
I know it’s old, but it’s so much fun…almost as good as finding tigelephants…
I’m sick…and desperately trying to stay awake. So I’m here, and, so sad is my life at this moment, was reading my own blog. Actually, I almost commented on one of my own posts, but then I thought “No, why do that when I can make a WHOLE SHINY NEW POST?” And so…I just thought I’d ask (not that I seem to get much response on here, all my friends seem to just e-mail me…which is weird…maybe it’s because none of them can spell and they don’t want anyone to know. I’M JOKING!), does anyone else find that guy on the French Who Wants to be a Millionaire REALLY REALLY orange??? Or is it just me?
And because I’m sick, I don’t have anything to share really…except this really bad joke I just found in my inbox:
WHY DID THE CHICKEN CROSS THE ROAD?
The Zodiac
Ares (March 21 to April 19): Chickens born under the sign of Ares are
natural leaders possessing a pioneering determined spirit, who wish
to make their mark on the world. They cross the road to assert
themselves and seek action, daring and adventure.
Taurus (April 20 to May 20): Taurus chickens are strong willed and
have a down to earth attitude toward life. They are overly interested
in material things and have a real need for security. They feel
unsettled unless comfortable. They will cross only if there is more
security on the other side or to obtain material possessions.
Gemini (May 21 to June 20): They are highly restless and are always
seeking a wide variety of contrasting experiences. They cross because
they do not know what is on the other side and to avoid the boredom
of their mundane existence.
Cancer (June 21 to July 22): While having a tough shell-like
exterior, Cancer chickens are very sensitive and vulnerable. They
have very delicate emotions, and are always attuned to their
environment and the feelings of those around them. They a constant
and urgent need to feel safe and always act defensively. They will
only cross the road when there is danger to themselves or others on
this side.
Leo (July 20 to August 22): Leo chickens are majestic and proud with
personalities that need to shine, and greet opportunities with fervor
and vitality. They always need to be in charge. They need plenty of
drama and color to escape a normal, humdrum existence. They will
cross the road with great enthusiasm for the opportunities it provides.
Virgo (August 23 to September 22): Virgos are practical and
adaptable. They have a strong desire to succeed, are very
discriminating and tend to be critical of others. They strive for
perfection. They are very poultriatarian and will usually cross for
the good of other chickens and because it is the proper or correct
thing to do.
Libra (September 23 to October 22): Libra chickens are thoughtful and
sensitive, and are always seeking balance and harmony. They need the
respect and love of other chickens more than any other group. They
are compelled to think carefully before making any decision. Libra
chickens are prone to stop in the middle of the road to try to decide
which way to go, making crossing the road always a considerable risk
to themselves and others.
Scorpio (October 23 to November 21): Scorpios have a depth and
intensity of their emotions that gives them a strong inner power.
They are creatures of passion whose focused desires assist them in
achieving their aims. They can be ruthlessly self-critical in their
quest for truth. They are uncompromising, and stick to any commitment
they have made. They cross because they promised to do so.
Sagittarius (November 23 to December 21): These chickens are restless
and visionary. They love to explore new horizons and see life as a
journey full of adventure. They greet every new experience with a
warm heart, a ready smile and an open mind. They cross the road
because of a passion to see more of the world. , and a spirit which
longs to be free.
Capricorn (December 22 to January 19): Capricorns are very ambitious
and are always striving to reach the top of the coop. They are
tenacious in planning every step to achieve their goals, and leave
themselves little time to relax before looking for new peaks to
climb. They cross because they must to achieve the success they feel
should be theirs.
Aquarius (January 20 to February 18): Chickens born under the sign of
Aquarius are strong independent spirits longing to break free from
traditional conventions and restrictions and the status quo. They are
innovative and idealistic always replacing old outdated thinking with
fresh perspectives. They are strongly driven to oppose social
injustice and oppression. They are always experimenting to discover
their own identity. They will cross because it is forbidden to do so
and by doing so it will be easier for others to do so in the future.
Pisces (February 19 to March 20): Pisces chickens are dreamy and
sensitive. They are blessed with deep intuition and a wealth of
emotion. Pisces are romantic, creative and full of love with a
potential for great happiness and lasting joy. Their imagination is
so strong that it frequently merges with fantasy. They usually cross
because they had a vision telling them that this is the means to the
happiness they are striving to achieve.
Yes…well…having done that, I’m going back into the land of oblivion.
…courtesy of YouTube:
I have noticed a severe lack of English information on the web about the Comedian Harmonists, which I will be working on fixing in the coming weeks (months, years…). No, seriously, I’m working on it, and I plan to have it finished in the next month or two. So…by the end of this year, shall we say? When I’m finished, I’ll even post here what I’m going to do with it. Or maybe I’ll just dump it all here for the world to steal so I can squeal at the amount of plagiarism on the web again…
How weird is this? And how unsurprising that they haven’t gotten it to work properly yet?
26 October 2006
Celeste Biever
Imagine mouthing a phrase in English, only for the words to come out in Spanish. That is the promise of a device that will make anyone appear bilingual, by translating unvoiced words into synthetic speech in another language.
The device uses electrodes attached to the face and neck to detect and interpret the unique patterns of electrical signals sent to facial muscles and the tongue as the person mouths words. The effect is like the real-life equivalent of watching a television show that has been dubbed into a foreign language, says speech researcher Tanja Schultz of Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Existing translation systems based on automatic speech-recognition software require the user to speak the phrase out loud. This makes conversation difficult, as the speaker must speak and then push a button to play the translation. The new system allows for a more natural exchange. “The ultimate goal is to be in a position where you can just have a conversation,” says CMU speech researcher Alan Black.
In October 2005 Schultz and her colleague Alex Waibel demonstrated the first automatic translator that could pick up electrical signals from face and throat muscles and convert them into text or synthesised speech – a technique called sub-vocal speech recognition. This ran on a laptop and translated Mandarin Chinese to English or Spanish, but it could only translate around 100 words, each of which had first to be spoken into the system by the user, to “train” it on their voice.
Now the team has developed a system that can recognise a potentially limitless lexicon. Their secret is to detect not just words but also the phonemes that form the building blocks of words. The system then uses these to reconstruct the word. To translate from English to another language, the user only has to train the system on the 45 phonemes used in spoken English.
The researchers use software that has been taught to recognise which phonemes are most likely to appear next to each other and in what order. When it encounters a string of phonemes it is unfamiliar with or has only partially heard, it uses this knowledge to come up with a range of sequences that make sense given the surrounding phonemes and words, assigns a probability to each one, and then picks the one with the highest probability.
The system still has some way to go. Faced with a sequence of words it has never heard before, it picks the right phoneme sequence only 62 per cent of the time. This nevertheless ranks as “a very significant achievement” according to Chuck Jorgensen, who is working on using sub-vocal speech recognition to control robots at NASA’s Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California. “This is showing that the technology is really within reach.”
Schultz’s team plan to attach the phoneme recognition software to their prototype Spanish or German translators, once they have improved its accuracy.
From issue 2575 of New Scientist magazine, 26 October 2006, page 32
- http://www.newscientisttech.com/article/mg19225755.800-its-the-next-best-thing-to-a-babel-fish.html
(Yes, Max, I know I have no life and spend far too much time reading random things on the Internet. But it’s a good procrastinatory tool and means that I can avoid studying)
or at least look like you do:
I have recently been spending excessive amounts of time with fellow law students. You know the ones, they spend all their time making everyone else look stupid, then gloating when they’ve finally succeeded. And I - subversive, perverse creature that I am - have decided to ruin all their fun. I’m outing them. They don’t really know any more than anyone else does. They’ve just perfected the art of seeming to. In fact, I’ve discovered that even I have been used to make them look good, and get good marks while they’re at it. Here’s a few of their favourite tricks:
Not that I condone any of this. But for those of us up against sleazy know-it-alls, any background and/or inside information we can get is necessary. I just wish that they didn’t try to make everyone else look bad so that they can look good (another of their favourite tricks that I refuse to put on the above list, since I think it’s just plain mean…)
