Human eyes suck at blue tones of light.
Be advised it’s necessary to dumb this down somewhat, but it’s still fairly accurate for most of the human race.
If you could check the rods and cones on your retinas, you’d discover each receptor is tuned to some particular color — red, green or blue. That should explain a lot. We don’t actually see yellow for itself. The problem is only 10%, on average, are designed to see blue. Worse, our brains are wired to absolutely need blue in perceiving the shape of things. Take any photograph and filter out the blue, and we can’t tell what the image is. Filter everything except the blue and we can tell quite well what’s in the picture.
If you want to see this as the result of evolution, you have to realize evolution is not an unalloyed good.
Either way, we suck at blue even as we desperately need it. So we have come up with artificial ways of helping our eyes. You remember all the rage about those “Blue Blocker” sunglasses? The lenses were varying shades of brown or yellow. Actually, the best ones were orange, though faded orange tends to look yellow to us. The point is, orange is opposite blue on the color wheel. The objective is not to literally block out blue, but to shift the perception of our brains. Our internal visual processing simply adapts to any color lenses as much as possible.
Any lens will cut down the amount of available light. Our native sun is generally yellow. An orange lens makes everything just a little darker, which is actually good for your eyes. As we age, things become rather fuzzy and light-shot. That’s the vision’s wear pattern. Avoiding overexposure to direct sunlight over the course of your life is a good thing. Orange lenses make green and red easier to distinguish. They make blue more like black, which is just fine with our brains. As we age, adding a yellow-orange tint to the field of view helps most people. It shifts the hue range down and makes all details sharper.
That “Blue Blocker” fad was actually one of the few which had it right.
This is my annual rejection of mainstream rituals regarding the Western observation of New Years’ Day.
Over the centuries of human awareness, every culture and civilization has had their own reckoning of when the cycle ends and starts over. There is really nothing compelling about the arbitrary date chosen by the West. The whole thing was pretty much an accident.
I don’t make New Years’ resolutions because I am utterly certain the best thoughts don’t come at any single time of the year. And when they do, most of us are hardly equipped to keep with any particular pattern choice for just about anything we do. Why wait until the end of your calendar cycle to implement a good idea? The brightest minds in the world are equally scattered among those who can make up their mind once and forever about any particular thing, and among those who change their mind every few minutes. However, we can find by historical survey those who have the most fun are closer to the latter group.
I’m already working on making a couple of significant changes, but both are defined as investigations of what sorts of changes are effective for various purposes. I’m still tweaking my fitness regimen to match better what I can do versus what I can estimate I should be able to do. I’m still hoping my brother can fix the Latitude so I can have a Linux laptop on the side with this one running Windows 7. Neither of those endeavors will ever reach a steady state, because that’s the nature of how I do things, and it’s the nature of the endeavors themselves.
I tend to dismiss all holidays for that reason. When my fellow Christians debate whether to worship God on Saturday or Sunday, I settle for what Paul said: Won’t make much difference if you are following the Spirit where He leads you, and not trying to ape someone who isn’t you. Instead, I prefer to worship Him every day alike, alternatively whining or screaming or laughing and dancing, because all of them and more are found in the Bible.
I treat Christmas with the same disdain. We all know Jesus wasn’t born in winter, and we can be sure that particular choice of day was pure politics. Constantine was a confirmed Sun worshiper, and wanted the Church to adopt all his favorite Solar festivals. It was easier to tame the Church that way. Indeed, these days most of the modern Western corruptions in Christianity started with his pagan ideas. He funded heretics and made their heresy the established doctrine, engaging in the most egregious influence peddling in the Early Church Councils. I don’t need a winter celebration to decide it’s good to give to others.
Happy New Year.
You can’t take me seriously on this one.
When I am out riding through the countryside, sometimes I get bored and steer my bicycle into the cityscape. There are lots of little side roads, back streets and alleys to explore.
Consider also that I spend a lot of time praying and contemplating, to the point I won’t bother to define the difference. It’s how I stay sane, so humor me. As I walk, ride or whatever activity which leaves my mind somewhat idle, I am talking to God and to myself, and it all blends in and out of full consciousness.
I passed by a nice old glass fronted building, which I believe was originally a car dealership a few decades ago. It’s held many different endeavors since then, none long successful. The last occupant was a collection of so-called antique dealers, folks who sold collectibles and such. This is not a good economy for that.
So I pedaled past and in the swirling fog of my numerous thoughts out popped the statement: “Lord, I need that for my new church building!” I envisioned a sign reading, “Your Local Generic Church” because any existing institutional denomination would be aghast at what I believe.
Besides, I no longer regard myself clergy, per se, but administrator and teacher. That I consider myself a prophet is another matter entirely; it’s not a church office in my mind. But I would grandly fail as a cult leader because I don’t want people dependent on me, I am not motivated by money and property, and I don’t take myself seriously. I just like to write and talk, and otherwise make noise. And I’m willing to speak to empty rooms.
So after announcing that out loud — nobody was near enough to hear me chattering to God or myself — I rode on laughing. That building will await the next entrepreneur, or be knocked down so the land can be used for some other purpose. If you are dying to see it, perhaps you can catch a glimpse of it from a few years back on Google Maps or Google Earth on the street view function. It’s around 8913 SE 29th, Midwest City, OK.
More likely I’ll end up in the FEMA camp which rumor has it will be built just a bit west of there on the land Tinker AFB bought up and fenced off as a training area. I guess they got tired of the tort claims from aircraft crashing among the houses there just off the north end of the runway. It used to be called Glenwood Community. The objective of my ride was to hug the fence line and take a fresh look at the area. Up on the north side of that fenced area, where the old railroad track beds remain nestled among new municipal buildings, looks just like a hobo hotel among the thick trees. Nobody there during this time of year, but lots of evidence from previous occupation.
Not much accounting for what drifts through my head on those long rides.
Updated at bottom…
The amorphous hacker collective “Anonymous” can now be regarded as controlled opposition.
When it was just a matter of information and cracking servers, that was simply part of the Internet. I’ve always said, if you digitize information, you might as well give it away to the public, and you are evil for thinking you can keep it secret or private. Nobody in their right minds would put secure information on a machine connected to the Internet. Up to the point of simple penetration and information divulgence, I was more or less neutral.
Using stolen credit card information is crossing the line. Regardless what you call it in technical terms, the effect on the victim is theft — “Thou shalt not steal” regardless how it’s used. Not that there’s anything I can do about it, but let’s at least clarify the morality of the issue. This is too obviously “thus saith the Lord.”
Further, it shows this is surely carried out on behalf of someone with a vested interest. If there is anything they could have done which helps to justify SOPA and PIPA, this would be it. Since they are too politically savvy to not know that, we can conclude they are working for the Dark Side. That is, someone involved is a pro-government thug, someone who stands to gain by making the proposed Internet crackdowns look reasonable and necessary.
Barring some kind of disavowal, I would say we can no longer pretend “Anonymous” is just amoral activists. They are not working for the good of the Net or the Netizen/Geek community, but are the enemy.
Update: We have a disavowal. The problem is, we no longer have any reliable way of trusting either the original claims nor the disavowal as truly representative of “the real Anonymous.” I’m left having to go back and review what I have seen over the past few years. I conclude my original analysis is correct except for associating it with Anonymous. It’s not their style or signature, so far as I know.
Update 2: The term “Anonymous” has never really been defined, and that is by intent. When you see the likes of Barrett Brown speaking for Anonymous, bring your salt shaker; he has a vested interest. You’ll have to make up your own mind about Anonymous, squabbles and divisions within whatever it is, and so forth. What we do know is the business of cracking into Statfor does not work out for the good of the rest of us.