Meffert’s Challenge

By Shamus Posted Thursday Aug 24, 2006

Filed under: Nerd Culture 3 comments

This is what Meffert’s Challenge looks like solved:

Meffert's Challenge, Solved

And this is what mine looks like. All the time:

Meffert's Challenge, Hosed

Meffert’s Challenge should be a good deal easier than Rubik’s Cube. The number of permutations is clearly lower, since there are fewer “pieces” moving about. The problem is the thing changes shape as you work with it. In the first picture you see a face with lettering on it. There is an identical twin on the opposite side. My brain really wants to think of these as north / south poles on this globe, which is a mistake since they move around. You can get these two faces right next to each other. In fact, there is no move you can make that will not change the position of these two faces relative to one another. To put it another way: There is no equator division.

I had the same problem with Sqare-1. (which has an online version you can play here.) The lack of symetry just kills me. I can’t get me head around it.

Even allowing for my increasing senility as I ascend into my dotage, I can’t help thinking that the puzzle should not be as hard as it is. I can’t even make headway with it. I can’t even come up with any sort of process that will lead to a solution. I just spin the blasted thing until I go cross-eyed.

I usually have a puzzle in reach for when I need to do something like a large recompile, which will occupy my computer for a few minutes. These five-minute slices of time are annoying because they are too short to really make use of, but too long to spend idle. So, I keep a Rubik’s Cube or one of it’s decendants handy to keep my hands busy while I wait. But this one is really pissing me off. Arg.

 


 

I’m blushing

By Shamus Posted Thursday Aug 24, 2006

Filed under: Links 3 comments

Those who get queasy from saccharine, syrupy sweet things would do well to avoid this link, where my wife heaps praise on me in a way that I find both humiliating and gratifying.

That much praise will only build up expectations and lead to eventual disappointment for those who don’t know me yet. However, I can’t help but be grateful at having a wife this awesome. The fact that she has such an idealized view of me works in my favor, and I would be a fool to overlook such good fortune.

 


 

The Five Love Languages

By Shamus Posted Wednesday Aug 23, 2006

Filed under: Random 12 comments

Observing that men and women are different is so appalingly obvious that when someone puts out a book to document this point it sets my teeth on edge. Books like Men are from Mars, Women are from Vesus are so tiresome to me that I want to hunt down the author and punch him in his smug Martian face until my arms go numb. The fact that different human beings have different priorities and perceptions of the world is, in fact, a good thing and helps to made our lives more robust. The fact that these differences make for a vast, rich source of sitcom fodder is just a bonus. Unless you hate sitcoms. Which I do.

However, I did find a book along these lines that turned out to be useful. It had practical application. The book was The Five Love Languages, and it outlines a simple set of ideas that could probably be articulated on a single page, but which was stretched out into an entire book because nobody is going to pay $29.95 for a hardcover edition of a two-page document where page one is the table of contents. I didn’t read the book, but my wife did and gave me the basic premise. It sounded like another attempt to smooth things out between men and women (and to a lesser extent, people in general) by over-simplifying the problem. However, the thing stuck in my head and I’m often surprised at how useful the idea is. The stuff the book has to say has actual utility, and so I want to put these ideas up here and see what happens.

The thrust of it is this: There are a lot of ways of expressing love, affection, or appreciation. They can be roughly divided into five types:

  1. Gifts (giving someone a thing)
  2. Physical contact (This includes huggy-kissy-touchy-feely, but also lesser, non-romantic touching like a slap on the back, high-five, and other encraochments on personal space)
  3. Service (Doing a thing for someone. Pull some strings on their behalf. Mow their lawn. Fix their computer.)
  4. Words (Telling someone “I love you”, “You’re awesome”, or “nice job”)
  5. Spending Time (Spend some of your precious allotment of time with the person in question)

I had several nitpicks with this list, since I dislike any attempt to distill and catergorize human interactions into neat lists, but it works well enough and makes things easier to discuss.

The idea is that everyone has one or two ways in which they express and recieve love. These are very often asymetrical, so one guy might express love by buying stuff for people, but doesn’t feel particularly appreciated when others do the same for him. Instead, it is far more meaningful to him (makes him feel you really value him) if you (for example) spend time with him. While most of the things on the list are nice, there is at least one that each of us craves, and that makes us feel loved. Lots of friction in relationships between people rises from the fact that the people involved are expressing affection in a way the other person doesn’t find gratifying, and at the same time feeling neglected because they are not recognizing the other person’s attempt to do the same.

My first impulse when I heard this was to denounce it as horsehockey. But then I thought about it, and instead denounced it as interesting horsehockey. Then the thing grew on me as I started thinking about the many ways in which it applied to a lot of relationships – romantic and otherwise – that have been difficult for me over the years.

This setup leads to the classic situation where the husband can’t figure out what his wife’s problem is: He slaves away all day to put food on the table and that ungrateful woman can’t do anything but complain. And she’s stingy with sex. At the same time the wife is feeling unloved because he never says “I Love You”. And would it kill him to get her something nice once in a while, maybe some flowers? He’s doing #3 and craving #2, while she is craving #1 and probably giving #4. Each of them is expressing love (albeit in a way that is meaningless to the other person) while feeling frustrated that the other person never seems to reciprocate.

As cliché as this is, I think there is a reason it is a cliché. I think it is, for the most part, a pretty handy way of looking at various misunderstandings. When you boil things down, you realize this is not a problem between men and women per se, but a problem between any two people in a relationship. It’s just that romantic relationships between men and women are the kind most of us are familiar with.

Gifts don’t mean much to me. Sure, I am grateful when someone buys me something, but it doesn’t have any deep personal significance. I like to have things, but if I want something I usually just go out and get it. My wife, on the other hand, loves to get and give gifts. I remember once she mentioned she was really in the mood for pickles. I knew she was out. (This was before we were married. We lived about a half hour from each other.) So, I picked some up on the way the next time I visited her. She was ecstatic in a way that made no sense to me. I got the woman a jar of ordinary pickles and she acted like I’d bought her a new car. For her, it wasn’t about the expense of the gift, but the fact that I was thinking of her and got her something she really wanted. I’m still rubbish at this sort of thing, but I’m better now than I was ten years ago.

And now I’m finding all sorts of ways to apply this to my relationship with my kids and even coworkers. I’m so amazed by this discovery that I even considered reading the book once. Amazing.

 


 

Homestarrunner is Ten

By Shamus Posted Wednesday Aug 23, 2006

Filed under: Nerd Culture 11 comments

The many faces of Homestar Runner

Homestarrunner turns 10 this year. Back in the early days of this millenium everyone was linking HSR. The site is still rolling, still making with the funny, but I never see HSR links. I guess nobody links it because they think everyone links it. But still, it seems like Homestar’s tenth birthday should be worth a mention.

I found Homestar via a FARK link. My first exposure to the site was this Strong Bad email which was #20. I wonder when that was? Sometime in 1999 maybe? I thought it was pretty funny, although I’m not sure the site would amuse newcomers these days. The site has built up a strange sort of humor by making in-jokes on in-jokes, nested many levels deep, so that I don’t know if it would even make sense to a newbie. It’s possible to go to the site and watch the various holiday specials, the Strong Bad emails, the cartoon shorts, but what they really need is just a way to see all of the marterial in chronological order, which is the only way the uninitiated can hope to make sense of any of it.

One of their favorite things to do is to take the entire cast and translate them into some other medium / era / artistic style. The “olde timey” B&W depression era stuff isn’t really a send-up of depression era entertainment, but instead just a goofy new lens through which we can view the same old characters. The humor comes from linking the familiar characters to some familiar archetype from the other medium.

When I first saw Strong Bad, I didn’t know he was a short little wrestleman with no shirt. I watched several emails before it cut away to a wide shot and let me see something besides the back of his head. So, my perception was very skewed at first. Who was this hostile guy in the strange helmet (which was really a mask) who answers emails? I figured he was supposed to be some sort of super villian, which was sort of funny. Sort of a “Lex Luthor runs an advice column for aspiring super villians” kind of thing. Then I saw who he was and realized my perception of him was all wrong.

Strong Bad vs. Strong Badman

But then they had this email which showed a comic-book version of Strongbad. It was only meaningful because putting cartoony Strongbad into the more gritty comic book world was funny. But the strange thing is that this new version of Strongbad portrayed him as the character I’d originally mistaken him for. How did they know?!?

It’s an amazing site. I understand the animators (two brothers) have turned the site into a full-time job, which is even more impressive. Despite their relative success, I’ve never seen an animated site that was able to immitate their particular brand of humor. I’m sure some have tried, but I think the HSR formula would be deviously difficult to duplicate. I have to give them credit: They have kept the site amusing for a long time. Their output has dropped in the past year, but the quality hasn’t. I admire envy that.

Way to go guys.

 


 

Firefly

By Shamus Posted Tuesday Aug 22, 2006

Filed under: Movies 13 comments

Following up on my gushing about Firefly the other day, here is my favorite moment from the show. This is where it really hooked me:

In the pilot episode there is a character who poses as a passenger, but who turns out to be a bounty hunter. He causes some trouble, then they catch him and lock him up. Then another, much larger and more immediate problem comes along. During the confusion he gets loose and takes River (a teenage girl) hostage. Now, the audience saw this coming. Everyone did. I got irritated, as I always do. I heaved a big sigh. Would one of you guys just shoot this bastard?

Then the captain strides in and does exactly that. No fuss. No gunplay. No moment of hesitation. No quips or trash talk or moralizing or negotiating. No trickery. No suspense about the bad guy shooting the girl or not. Mal just strides into the room and guns down the bad guy before he’s done issuing his demands. The captain doesn’t break stride, and – more importantly – neither does the plot.

After things settle down there is no angsty Hollywood hand-wringing over killing this guy. None of that “killing him will make us just as bad as he is” nonsense. The series did this sort of thing time and again, setting up what looked like cliché situations and then shocking the audience simply by avoiding the contrived and preachy outcome and having the characters do something reasonable. Firefly is a grim, stark cure for Star Trekian idealism.

Dear Hollywood: More like this one, please.

 


 

Exclusive Screenshots!

By Shamus Posted Tuesday Aug 22, 2006

Filed under: Pictures 2 comments

Building on my earlier post about how I like individual blogs better than monolithic gaming sites, I have another axe to grind with these guys: So-called exclusive screenshots.

How the game works is this: The publisher of some up-and-coming game will take a selection of screenshots and release them to the gaming press. Major sites – you know, the kind which are a vast plane of advertisements riven by a slender column of actual content down the middle – will get their hands on these screenshots. Much in the same way that a prostitute might tell each of her customers that he is her personal favorite, each of these gaming sites walks away from the deal with the impression that they somehow have an exclusive on their hands. If they had any common sense or a memory span of more than a few months they would know better.

Continue reading ⟩⟩ “Exclusive Screenshots!”

 


 

Blogs: Getting to the Good Stuff

By Shamus Posted Tuesday Aug 22, 2006

Filed under: Links 27 comments

I just found Criminally Weird yesterday, even though his blog has been around since 2004. I hunt for blogs like this all the time, but I usually only find them by accident or a chance link. I like geek blogs, but I like personal geek blogs. I like hobby operations run out of love much more than big things like Joystiq. The problem with smaller geek blogs is that they are danged hard to find and get lost in the noise of the major blog subjects like politics / movies / pop music / celeb gossip / teen angst. Blogs about anime or (even worse) videogames have a really, really extreme long-tail effect, so that most sites are miniscule or monolithic.

But now it occurs to me that many of the blogs I read might not be “small”. I really have no idea how big they are. If a site has forums and lots of ads and looks like they are running a business, I think “big”. If it looks like this blog, with no ads, no forums, and just a few comments (or no comments), I think “small”. But ads are not a proper measure of site size. For all I know Chizumatic has the same readership as Joystiq. How would I know? The only clues I have are how easy the blog is to find using Google or Technorati, both of which are terrible at finding the sorts of blogs I like. (Which is, I guess, why I think of them as small.) How would you do a Google search for sites like Augury, Haibane.info, The Rampant Coyote, Houblog, or Machine Overlords. I’m not sure you can, unless you want to dig for a long time. I found almost all of the above when they linked to me. (Which brings up the question of how they found me. Maybe everyone else knows some tricks that I don’t for culling these searches and cutting right to the good stuff.)

So, I started thinking about why I like the blogs I do. Videogame blogs are kind of scarce, so why am I so darn picky? What makes me like a particular blog? I’d never really given it much thought until now. I sat down and enumerated things that make me like a blog aside from good writing and interesting subject matter. (Which should go without saying, except, of course, that I just said it.)

Continue reading ⟩⟩ “Blogs: Getting to the Good Stuff”