Test

Testy
Testee

Get this widget | Track details | eSnips Social DNA

This is a testy test.
This is a tasty tast.
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_lho5Pkzj1XI/SvvIJDXApvI/AAAAAAAADGg/JNmSV9Su0tU/s800/dilbert20081833540110.gif

Unplug Your Laptop Regularly (When In Doubt)

Unplug Your Laptop Regularly (When In Doubt): "

A friend replaced her laptop's battery after only two years because it wouldn't hold a charge. I suggested she shouldn't keep her laptop always plugged in, but I wondered—was this outdated geek lore, rendered obsolete by modern batteries?

Photo by candescent.

Yes and no. It depends, of course, on what kind of battery you have. Battery technology has come a long way over the years, and surely in 2009 you don't have to worry about how long your laptop's been plugged in. However, one major notebook manufacturer (which ships Lithium-ion batteries) thinks you should, and suggests adding a reminder to your calendar to deplete and recharge your battery once a month. To quote: 'Apple does not recommend leaving your portable plugged in all the time.'

My friend, however, has a two-year-old Dell. Cursory Googling for her model didn't turn up the equivalent of Apple's definitive statement, only lots of opinions which ranged from 'it's a non-issue' to 'yes, it kills batteries!' Dell.com's battery recommendations page doesn't say anything about not keeping your notebook plugged in. HP's battery tips page doesn't answer the question, either. I pored through my wife's ASUS Eee PC user guide and didn't find any warning about continuous charging. A non-mention might make you think it's a non-problem, but if this is an issue for Apple notebook batteries, it is for PC notebooks with lithium-based batteries too. When I asked, my Twitter followers returned mixed replies, but many notebook users (both Mac and PC) DID report anecdotal battery problems when the machine was plugged in constantly.

Other folks more educated about the differences in battery types than I am dropped knowledge about which ones are problematic and which aren't. Learn from all the respondents' suggestions, research, and hard-learned lessons at the full post.

Unplug Your Laptop Regularly (When In Doubt) [Smarterware]

Smarterware is Lifehacker editor emeritus Gina Trapani's new home away from 'hacker. To get all of the latest from Smarterware, be sure to subscribe to the Smarterware RSS feed. For more, check out Gina's weekly Smarterware feature here on Lifehacker.

"

Did Adam & Eve have trust issues?

I am reading "The Divine Conspiracy" by Dallas Willard. On page 23 he says that we (through Adam and Eve) mistrusted God and fell away from our divine purpose. This concept of not trusting as a new creation is startling. Even though nothing had been kept from them but this one fruit. Even though they walked and talked with Him. They mistrusted Him.

Did they not trust His motives? They had to see that He was able to do. Why didn't they trust Him? For me when someone acts like they don't trust me I take personal affront to it, even if they have reason to mistrust me. But here without cause they mistrusted. Humans seem to be hard wired to mistrust anyone who keeps anything away from them. Total disclosure is the only trusting relationship, and then there is always the nagging feeling that something may have been held back.

Oh, well.

Pants.

What are your favorite pair of pants?

I really like Indian Terrain.

But my favorites are my Ostermanns. No website, hmmm.

I need to get out more.

SciFi isn't a genre

Science-fiction is not a genre. It is a setting, in time, place and fact. If you don't believe me then take any sci-fi book (for those who read) movie or TV show and change the time place or facts of reality to something else and does it not become a drama, mystery, thriller, comedy, etc?

There may be one kind of writing that would push this definition. That would be the stuff that is about the morals or ideals or implications of certain technology. But even that is more or less about humanity and its quest to understand its morals and ethics. I a thinking mostly of things like Asimov-ian writings that delve into the implications of AI and the concepts of three laws that guide robots and AI. But that is for another time.

What this is for is the more basic sci-fi. Nearly every star trek could happen on a boat in the ocean in our "discovery of new worlds" phase of global exploration. I can't think of any show or movie that does not have basic story play out in a different time or place and still be essentially the same. For that matter almost any story could be placed into a "sci-fi" context and end up with a different twist but the same sort of story. Shakespeare can be done in a future time. Uncle Tom's Cabin could be about robots in the near future. Atlas shrugged...well basically is placed a sci-fi context. I think the reason the new movie is not coming to production is a lack of vision for how to do it in the near future contextually.

What do you think? Is there something I am missing? Is sci-fi more than context?

Climax in the plot of the world

There are 2 things that signify the climax of the plot of most literary works. One is that the main character is alone or alone with just one other person. This is often an internal or dramatic climax.

The other signal is when all of the players are on the stage together. this is usually an external climax and is often action based although it can be dramatic.

Right now all of the players in your life are coming together on the stage. The stage is the internet and more and more people worldwide are coming to that stage. Because of constant updates and constant feedback we are all in the front of everyone else. This is the external climax.

Blogging provides for the other climax. Alone with ones thoughts you walk onto the stage and begin to monologue. The audience may throw out some feedback but ultimately you are alone making your internal climax.

When both of these are happening so much then the climax of the plot of the world is surely upon us. When the climax is reached only the dénouement is left. Dénouement, "the untying of the knot", seems like a wonderful thing given the knot the world is currently involved in.

In “Life”, “zen” means “grace” or How to overuse some quotation marks and get something out of a TV show

We recently watched the series premier of “Life”, a show that was offered as a free download on i-tunes. I downloaded several free show season or series premiers this week. We had watched some others but this one actually has an interesting dialogue in some places. The framed-for-murder-and-then-spends-12-years-of-a-life-sentence-reading-a-book-on-zen-and-getting-beat-up-a-lot-character is talking to his lawyer after he has been out for a few days.

Lawyer: Your father called me twice today. Three times yesterday. He is getting married and wants you to come.
Crews: My father is marrying an 8-year-old. He is marrying an 8-year-old because he killed my mother. He killed her because he wouldn’t let her visit me in prison.
Lawyer: No zen for daddy?
Crews: No zen for daddy.

This is one example and the writers may or may not have a good understanding of grace. But this character is trying to deal with a great deal of inner turmoil and he gives zen to several other characters he comes across. A drug dealer/addict who ends up shot is given a peaceful death. A father who has lost his son is allowed to dispose of some narcotic so that he can be there for his wife. A mother is given zen to help cope with her feelings of guilt after her sons murder. A convict is treated as an equal.

I suggest that at least in this first episode the word “zen” is used the same way that I understand grace. I am beginning to wonder if he isn’t a more Christlike character in this way than most of the heroes that we see in shows. He was/is a cop that goes into the system for 12 years. He knows what it is like, what it does to a person. He knows how they think, feel. He knows why they act like they do. His understanding seems to drive his actions towards them.