getting hyper

Friday, February 28, 2003

Here is a blogger on the rhetoric of the blog post.
posted by Joseph Duemer Friday, February 28, 2003

"I thought of something the other day. I started to wonder whether or not there was some sort of underlying meaning behind each of our screen names or handles. Take for instance, the getting hyper weblog we're keeping as a class. I've chosen to have my name as "Christopher" which sounds more intellectual and mature than "Chris". Even more obvious, Professor Deumer's title is "profdeumer", which seems to set his posts above all the rest." [from Christopher's blog]

Unintentional, but revelatory of the nature / rhetoric of naming, especially people. Having a title confers status. At least I typed it in lowercase! Maybe we should all take titles in the class. What title would you give yourself?
posted by Joseph Duemer Friday, February 28, 2003

I was reading my psychology book this evening and was struck by maybe the funniest quote I had ever seen in a textbook. The section that this comes from is the section about language and how it is understood:
"Suppose, for example, that one sees a lion in the parlor and wants to tell a companion about this. It is not enough that both parties speak English. One has to estimate the listener's capacities, motivations, and relations to oneself in order to speak appropriately. If the companion is a sharpshooter with a revolver, one might say: Quick, shoot! There's a lion in the parlor!
But if the companion is an artist, one might say: Quick, draw! Lion of a gorgeous shade of ochre in the parlor!
To a biologist, one might say: Quick, look! Member of the genus Panthera in the parlor!
And to an enemy: Lovely morning, isn't it? See you later." (Gleitman, Basic Psychology)
It just stood out as something not typically found in a school textbook: humor. This reinforces my mindset that, even though it's not my best class, it's still one of the most interesting. Well, I guess it's time to do some more reading. Yay psych! [from Steve's blog]

We call the mechanics & techniques of making such decisions . . . Rhetoric. It's about human relationships, and the techniques can be used effectively, used ineffectively & misused. Why is this important in a "computer class"? Because the computer now mediates a great deal of human communication. See Jeff's blog for the 23rd.
posted by Joseph Duemer Friday, February 28, 2003

Thursday, February 27, 2003

aww poor Mr. Rogers :-( I watched his show all the time when i was little!
posted by Sarah Thursday, February 27, 2003

Short sketches of various literary theories.
posted by Joseph Duemer Thursday, February 27, 2003

It's a sad day in the Neighborhood

I still remember that show and great it was when I was a kid...
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Thursday, February 27, 2003

Wednesday, February 26, 2003

"This is how I see the analyzation of poetry. Poem analyzers take a poem and try to find something in it that isn't visible and that you can't grab a hold of. Then they discuss it or try to convince others that what they see is real. There is no real proof and and what one person says can be challenged by any other person looking at the poem. The meaning of a poem is very abstract and open to a lot of interpretation based on circumstancial evidence. This makes it hard to know if what is deteremined from the analyzation of a poem is aof any value." [from Ken's weblog]

This goes to the heart of interpretation. And I don't disagree, actually. But aren't most things in life this way? Aren't the domains where there is "proof" pretty limited? So the question becomes, How do we come up with better interpretations or things like God & poems & friendship & beauty & etc.?

posted by Joseph Duemer Wednesday, February 26, 2003

I'm not sure that internet is totally a waste of time... true, it can be a huge time-sink, if you use it like my roommate does. I swear she knows every game on the internet, and plays it religiously. However, right now I'm using the internet to research a company I have an interview with in 3.5 hours (Albany Molecular Research Inc), and doing it online is a lot quicker than going home to the library and reading the local papers to hopefully find articles about the company and what they're all about. My mom found me an article online in our local paper and sent me that link, and I'm reading on the company's website right now... if I have time I'll look for other news articles in the local papers' websites...

The internet, like a lot of other things, is simply a tool. It's what you make of it. Sure there are things to distract you on there, but there is also a wealth of good and useful purposes for it. It's the same with the computer as a whole. Just because I have Black and White and the standard Minesweeper and solitaire installed doesn't mean it's a waste of time to have a computer... it's good for doing lab and making Excel spreadsheets and writing papers and the like as well. It's my own responsibility to make sure that I do use it for Excel and Word when I need to, and that I'm not messing around playing games when I have a lab due the next day or a paper to write.
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Wednesday, February 26, 2003

i think that cell phones are ridiculous, when i am at class or out running or eating dinner, i don't want to be interupted by some annoying person who wants to talk to me. they can take their chances at reaching me at home, or just leave a message on my IM. i think there is a time for talking on the phone, but also a time for being free from those crazy distractions. if i want to talk to someone, i will talk when i have time, and when i am out doing stuff, i am usually busy. as far as the internet thing, it is cool to have it fast, but if it wasn't so fast, maybe we would waste just a little less time on it? i think that tv is just a total waste of time and not worthy of discussing
posted by PugBy Wednesday, February 26, 2003

Tuesday, February 25, 2003

Like Sharon, I also use my cell phone so much more than landline phones because of the free long distance and roaming on my plan. Whenever we travel anywhere, it's great to have to call home and to call friends as most of the time there is cellular service where I travel. That is with the exception of traveling home. One of the reasons that I originally purchased my cell phone was incase I had car problems between here and home, which I have had. However, between here and home there is no cellular service for close to half of the way. So the few convience stores along that road are much welcomed by anyone who needs any roadside help. While cellular phones are great and can be very convenient, for the near future there will always be reasons to use landline phones.
posted by Darci Tuesday, February 25, 2003

I was looking at the ABC news website, and they had an article on hybrid vehicles. Apparently in Washington, D.C., carpool restrictions have been lifted for people who by fuel efficient, hybrid vehicles. I think that is a wonderful idea. What an incentive to buy a hybrid car.

posted by Christa Tuesday, February 25, 2003

To those of you complaining about dial-up, broadband, and cell phone charges, be thankful for what is available. Where my house is situated it is nearly impossible to get reception an a cell phone, and cable (consequently broad ban) is not available either. Though I must say; satellite TV beats cable anyday.
posted by Marianna Tuesday, February 25, 2003

Here's an emoticon just for you Prof. Duemer, which I found in my searches.
(Somehow Kyle already saw it yesterday in the 3 seconds between when it was posted and deleted because the link didn't work. I think he's stalking me).

posted by Dan Tuesday, February 25, 2003

Monday, February 24, 2003

At home I use free dialup. The service finances itself by placing an ad banner over the bottom quarter of the screen. When I want to download a program I go upstairs for a couple of hours. It's annoying but it's doable. My parents are seriously considering getting cable, but they're worried about how much it will cost.

We live in a gorgeous house, one-and-a-half acres in the city of Syracuse, which my parents bought by cutting coupons and going to the thrift store on a regular basis. We grow vegetables. When the car breaks my dad fixes it. We've found free pipe organs, free ping-pong tables, free china hutches, all kinds of free furniture. The kind of "who-cares-about-money" Americans you're talking about enjoy leaving defective furniture by the roadside. My family fixes it and lives in it. We go on vacation every year, two weeks to the Thousand Islands and one week somewhere else. We stay in the state parks, a lot of times on Grindstone Island. To me, paying for Internet is a ridiculous suggestion.

Since I consider it essential, I propose that the government finance broadband Internet access for Americans in low income brackets across the country.
posted by dave Monday, February 24, 2003

I also went through the same ordeal at my home over christmas break. We had just switched to aldephia link (I think thats what its called) from basic cable and dial up AOL. It was great for the first couple days, but then it didn't work on the computer. Something wouldn't work with the internet connection, and we had no internet when I was home for ALL of Christmas break, which needless to say was not fun. I know everyone complains about dial up being slow and everything, but to tell you the truth, how many times have to not been able to connect on dial up? When we had dial up, we had like five numbers that we could connect on, so connecting wasn't really a problem for us. I personally would rather have a slow internet, than no internet at all. Being up here at Clarkson spoils us, honestly it does. We all get used to downloading insanely quickly, and really pointing, clicking, and having the information we want there. Online games are a lot quicker, instant messaging is a part of life (for most of us), and we can do everything from check homework to the menu for dinner online. Imagine if we didn't have any of that, think about how weird life up here would be. Actually having to use a phone to call someone on campus, using a phone book to look up someone's number on campus, or even not having e-mail. Communication on this campus would completely change all together.

Also, I was reading Rebecca's post, and I was thinking about how much I use my regular phone as compared to my cell phone. I realized that I pretty much never use my regular phone. With me having free long-distance, its pointless for me to use anything else. I do have a pay a monthly fee, but compared to the charges I would have to pay for my long distance calls to home and stuff, it makes no sense for me not to have a cell phone. I am going away on co-op next semester, all the way down to Tennessee, and if it wasn't for my unlimited long distance, I would probably not be able to communicate with my family as much as I know I'm going to like to. I would much rather have my cell phone than the internet. Thats just my opinion. I would rather be able to have a conversation with my family and like hear their voices and such than open an e-mail from them, when I can't hear them. It would definately take the emotion out of the conversation and when your away from everything you pretty much know, you like to hear the voices of your parents, or at least I do!
posted by Sharon Monday, February 24, 2003

I just went through this entire ordeal with my dad over December break trying to lower our cable bill. Fifty bucks is expensive for a broadband connection, especially through your cable company (in my case, Time Warner) who is already charging you way too much for your cable as it is. They give good deals to those who can afford it. To get roadrunner and digital cable, it's something like $80 per month. But to add on 15 HBO and 7 Showtime, it's only six dollars extra per month, and most customers don't realize this. But once roadrunner is removed, the movie channels jump to about $15-20 per month each. For those who are trying to keep their cable bills down, as is the situation in many households these days, it just can't be done. Time Warner has it rigged just right so that no matter what options, if any, you decide to get, the monthly bill will be at least $60-85. The only real exception is if you only want basic cable with no roadrunner, digital cable or movie channels. But then it's still $40 per month. Forty per month really isn't bad if you don't watch much television, or have no use for upper/movie channels. However, in most houses with kids/teenagers these days, the TV is on constantly, usually with nothing attention-grabbing on except for those upper/movie channels. They have cable customers right where they want them.

posted by Steve Monday, February 24, 2003

An arm and a leg? Fifty bucks or so a month isn't that expensive is it? Consider cell phone plans.. I believe my parents pay $40 or so a month for theirs. Now consider that a lot of (I'd dare to say most from my own experience) people with cell phones also have traditional phone lines, and bam, the cell phone is pretty frivolous and you could just as easily funnel the same amount of money into paying for cable internet. I'd much rather cancel the cell phone and kick that toward paying for internet given the choice, rather than having a cell phone and AOHell dialup. Which is not to say dialup is bad, I had a 56.6 K connection when I was on coop. Six months of modem is hard when you're used to being on the T3 here, but it's still not so bad. Unless you're doing lots of image-heavy surfing, you can accomplish the vast majority of what you need to accomplish on dialup. Email and IM don't take up much bandwidth, and the email isn't a constant bandwidth drain. Random or not so random websurfing is the big bandwidth eater. If anyone reads webcomics they're generally slow to load even here - like my current homepage takes a second to load here at clarkson, when I leave and get a job in May I'll probably switch my homepage to a more text-based page or something quicker to load, like Google. And then the other major bandwidth eater is the P2P filesharing programs... Direct Connect, anyone? Probably not doable on a modem (I've never tried, we have cable at home) but then again, I wasn't trying to download new stuff for the most part when I was on co-op, I'd either borrow or buy the CD/movie if I really wanted it... however, piracy is an issue for another day.

Have a fabulous night everyone! My day has been swell (I'll probably post about that in my own weblog soon enough), it's time to continue the trend into the evening...

posted by Rebecca Polewczak Monday, February 24, 2003

Now about those statistics you gave us earlier, Josh. What conclusions can we make about this information. Can we make the conclusion that families who have an internet connection are characteristically more informed people? Therefore, can we say that because more people, percentage wise, who earn more money pure year, have internet connection than that of a lower income brackett, are usually more informed people? I personally don't think these proposition and conclusions can be made, however it does say how more money gives you the access to more knowlegde and therefore more power. The cable companies that provide a majority of the internet cost an arm and a leg per month to have access. And if you don't want to wait forever to view webpages, you might be forced to pay this fee for the service. This is mostly due to the fact that in each town, there essentially is a monopoly over the broadband connections to the internet. Maybe if we were to strive for equality in opporntunity of education and resources, we should have a federally or state owned system for both interent and television. The prices for internet could be based on pure cost for maintenence of the equipment. In an ideal world, this system might work, but there is a problem. In the situation where the government owns and runs a particular service, the advancement of technology can drastically slow. But what is the lesser of two evils?
posted by Frederick Monday, February 24, 2003

Power of the internet to impact even more people... Currently: "U.S. Department of Commerce data from 2001 indicated that 78.9 percent of people in families making $75,000 or more had Internet access, compared to 25 percent of people from households earning less than $15,000 a year." -- But maybe it wont be this way for long according to an article on I think this is a great idea... giving more and more people an opportunity to get on the net.
posted by Josh Monday, February 24, 2003

Information on rhetoric.

Information on propaganda.
posted by Joseph Duemer Monday, February 24, 2003

Sunday, February 23, 2003

Kyle - I find myself in the same situation sometimes. I have had difficulty reciting the Pledge of Allegiance individually before, yet I did every day in school for a lot of years. I think the reason I can't do it individually is because the only atmosphere I had ever recited it in before was in a group with everyone else reciting together. In school you always had the other voices echoing yours or preceding yours, but when you are on your own you do not have that and aren't sure of yourself.
posted by Ken Sunday, February 23, 2003

The projects are due either right before or right after March break - depending on the project. Some of us are going to have to present before the break, but others (whose projects are going to take a little more time) aren't presenting until after the break. If you want to know which category you are in, check with Prof. Duemer. - Mike Gumuka
posted by Christa Sunday, February 23, 2003

When are the projects due?
posted by David Sunday, February 23, 2003

A beach ball smiley! Where did you find that?? That's way cool.
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Sunday, February 23, 2003

Pete is a member of the Whig party.

And just to add some color to the HP100 web log:
posted by Dan Sunday, February 23, 2003

Saturday, February 22, 2003

Peter...are you a Republican? That would explain everything...--Christa
posted by Christa Saturday, February 22, 2003

Keats was talking about desire & how beauty in this view must never be "ravished." That one can never actually possess the beloved because then the lovers would come crashing down into the temporal world. Personally, I prefer Marvell's picture of desire & beauty (see "To His Coy Mistress"). Keats view of art is that it must "stand the test of time" by standing outside of time.
posted by Joseph Duemer Saturday, February 22, 2003

War & the rhetoric of war.
posted by Joseph Duemer Saturday, February 22, 2003

This may seem weird to some, but whenever the pep band plays the national anthems of Canada and the US before a hockey game, I find that I can sing along with "O Canada" better than I can sing along with "The Star-Spangled Banner." I really don't know why this is. The only reason for it that I can come up with is that before I knew the lyrics, I probably paid more attention to "O Canada" so that I could learn. Maybe it is just continued from that, that whenever I find myself in a hockey-type atmosphere, I can spout off "O Canada" in it's entirety, but for some reason can never remember the first few lines of "The Star-Spangled Banner." Anyone have some other ideas as to why this happens?

And the only reason that I do know "O Canada" is from attending hockey games and watching them on TV.
posted by Kyle Saturday, February 22, 2003

Friday, February 21, 2003

Ah yes. Keats was referring to men "with prominant erections" engaging in various sexual acts in mixed groups, and the result "transcends the ages." (obv. sarcasm)

On a completely different note, O Canada is played at every hockey game. How many of you know the lyrics?
posted by dave Friday, February 21, 2003

Jeff, underlining seemed like the most obvious solution.
posted by Joseph Duemer Friday, February 21, 2003

The internet has become known as an equilizer of all who use it; however, I have determined that even here we must be careful to accomodate all who we wish to capture as our audience. So with this in mind, Prof. Duemer, would you be willing to change the color of the links to something brighter or maybe make them bold? For us colorblind folk.
posted by Jeff Friday, February 21, 2003

This is what Keats was talking about in his poem. If you read the poem carefully you will understand what "unravished" means & etc.
posted by Joseph Duemer Friday, February 21, 2003

Thursday, February 20, 2003

Yes, we should always strive to see the good in things. My favourite poet, Li-Young Lee, agrees in this poem. If you want to read anything else of his work, IM me at ipenetrex and i'll lend u a book of his poems.

The Gift

To pull the metal splinter from my palm
my father recited a story in a low voice.
I watched his lovely face and not the blade.
Before the story ended, he'd removed
the iron sliver I thought I'd die from.

I can't remember the tale,
but hear his voice still, a well
of dark water, a prayer.
And I recall his hands,
two measures of tenderness
he laid against my face,
the flames of discipline
he raised above my head.

Had you entered that afternoon
you would have thought you saw a man
planting something in a boy's palm,
a silver tear, a tiny flame.
Had you followed that boy
you would have arrived here,
where I bend over my wife's right hand.

Look how I shave her thumbnail down
so carefully she feels no pain.
Watch as I lift the splinter out.
I was seven when my father
took my hand like this,
and I did not hold that shard
between my fingers and think,
Metal that will bury me,
christen it Little Assassin,
Ore Going Deep for My Heart.
And I did not lift up my wound and cry,
Death visited here!
I did what a child does
when he's given something to keep.
I kissed my father.

-- Li-Young Lee, ©1986. Reproduced from Rose without permission of BOA Editions, Ltd.

posted by dave Thursday, February 20, 2003

Apathy may be easier than caring, as Dave points out, but it has to be a really sucky life!! If a person doesn't care about anything, then is there really a point to their existance or are they just going through the motions. I do not understand people who don't really live their lives. Our culture is coming to the point where money outweighs friendship, materialism outways the true enjoyment of life. If a person spends their whole life trying to get ahead, they may get the money and the possesions, but lack the time to enjoy them. Wouldn't it be better to live life the way that God created it. We are supposed to work for our food and shelter and all that good stuff, but we also need to have deeper things that we care about, to make our lives real.
posted by PugBy Thursday, February 20, 2003

Apathy is easier than caring. According to this definition, you don't need to do anything to be apathetic. To care you need a cingulate. The cingulate is part of the brain. No brain = no caring. QED.

Honestly, we need a mandatory course on making friends here on campus. Maybe that would stop Cool Blue Jello incidents.
posted by dave Thursday, February 20, 2003

Using Dave's previous post as a stepping stone, I just read an article relating to witness apathy. Last Friday, a man was shot and lay bleeding at a gas station in Washington, D.C. (he later died). Nobody at the gas station did anything to try to find the shooter or to help the victim. The article mentions one man who continued to pump kerosene after briefly looking at the victim.

I think our society is becoming more apathetic. A majority of people are interested only in themselves- how can I succeed, how can I get a promotion, how can I become thinner, how can I ....... What could be the underlaying cause to this general apathy?
posted by pyotr Thursday, February 20, 2003

Hey guys - just a shot in the dark, but I was thinking about the new problem course, and it seems like a web log would be the perfect place to think about this...So, with that in mind, I set up a web log called HP200 for us to talk about the problem course. Check it out. - Mike Gumuka
posted by Christa Thursday, February 20, 2003

When Prof. Duemer writes about "embodying beauty and truth," he links it to a poem about a Greek jar. I'm not sure exactly what he means by this, but let it be known: Grecian urns are not my standard for beauty, nor are they (I hope) that of anyone else in the Honours Program. Heck, of anyone else in the world. Can you imagine someone lusting after ceramic? Ohhh, Renee, your eyes are like glazing; your hips like pottery! Also Mr. Duemer's urn somehow "transcends time," making it the most powerful jar I have ever had the pleasure of meeting.
I know we all like to romanticize, but let's not go overboard.

Here's another ode ... one at least as powerful ...
posted by dave Thursday, February 20, 2003

You might also want to take a look at the little Literary Theory book by Culler that at least some of you have. Ch 2 in particular.
posted by Joseph Duemer Thursday, February 20, 2003

Norm posts some thoughts on the nature of literature & hypertext. Norm makes a case for a fairly traditional view of literature--that it embodies beauty & truth & that it transcends time. This is a respectable & socially sanctioned view, but are there other possibilities? [from Dr. Mary Klages, Associate Professor, English Department, University of Colorado, Boulder]

And here is some more from Prof. J.L. Lemke.
posted by Joseph Duemer Thursday, February 20, 2003

It's YOU !!!

Take it into photoshop and the image's actual dimensions are 286x106 pixels. Not too large at all, that translates to .95 by .35 inches. Definitely can be fit into any book.


posted by Rebecca Polewczak Thursday, February 20, 2003

Interested in anchient greece, and some of the early philosopher's or rhetoric? If no......igore this link. If yes, click here for a few pictures of the ruins of Plato's academy in anchient greece. Sometimes it seems as though plato, socrates, aristotle and other great greeks are just faint shadows of the past, almost as tranlucent as their theories have become melted into modern literature and thought. It's kinda nice to see tangible evidence of their existance, beyond what is found in there writtings.
posted by Marianna Thursday, February 20, 2003

Wednesday, February 19, 2003

what is it??... you couldn't find a book wide enough for this one...
posted by dave Wednesday, February 19, 2003


think that


will take

advantage of the FactThatI

don't need to pay for paper

when publishing on the

posted by dave Wednesday, February 19, 2003

If you are interested in some info on the theory of rhetoric here is a pretty good site I've come across in working on the class project:
The Rhetoric Forest. Also, if you read my personal web log, don't think I'm suicidal, I was just in a really really bad mood when I wrote my last entry.
posted by Marianna Wednesday, February 19, 2003

This is a very fine resource on propaganda. Many of your projects touch on political speech & this should be very useful.
posted by Joseph Duemer Wednesday, February 19, 2003

The coolest thesaurus I have ever seen.

If you look up the word "know" it's amusing.. most of the synonyms would not be lab-report-friendly though... "It has long been known that...."

Aaanyway... this is one hypertext I really really like, and I can actually understand how to use! Yay me!
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Wednesday, February 19, 2003

An interesting article which shows how weblogs might be able to track new "trends" in society (and politics I suppose). We have already discussed similar issues in class such as blogdex, but as far as I know that only shows most popular topics whereas this shows the most popular words or phrases?
posted by Josh Wednesday, February 19, 2003

Tuesday, February 18, 2003

I'M MAD. Some girl was having a seizure in Ro-Bro ten minutes ago; I think she was choking on her food. In any event, they had to call in the stretchers. Now in a NORMAL place that would be reason for concern. People would form a crowd around her with worried looks. Think of what your parents would do... But in this goddamned campus, nobody cared. Nobody bothered to form a circle around her because nobody cared. It was business as usual and conversations didn't even include the girl who was passed out on the floor. In one nameless person's words, "she was blocking the cool blue jello." And so I'm angry. Angry at the overwhelming lack of human compassion in that cafeteria. EMPATHY people. EMPATHY begins with you. If you want people to worry about your pathetic lives, you've got to worry about other people. Since there wasn't one worried look in that cafeteria I know that I'm not yelling at anyone innocent.

Learn to love. Please.
posted by dave Tuesday, February 18, 2003

I always kinda thought that Superman got his power by virtue of his alienhood, but that's OK.

Information content < 0
posted by dave Tuesday, February 18, 2003

Hey All, I just found a poem I'd written several years ago. It's in a special format (can't remember what...)but it has 10 syllables per line and a rhyme scheme of ABABCDCDEFEFGG. Anyway - enjoy! - Mike Gumuka


Becoming a hero is no small task,

Because ev'ry hero has some power.

Just what kind - well you would just have to ask,

They'll say theirs is unique as a flower.

Hercules' and Superman's was innate,

The Green Lantern's secret was in a ring,

Then there were REAL guys like King who fought Hate.

His strength was not physical, he would sing.

Ev'ry day people can be heroes, too.

For example, firefighters and cops,

They lay their lives on the line, just for you.

You could do this, the excuses must stop.

For his belt is not where Batman's strength lies,

His power, and yours, is always inside.
posted by Christa Tuesday, February 18, 2003

Google bought Blogger...
"Just three and a half years old, Pyra's Blogger software has 1.1 million registered users, Williams said. He estimated that about 200,000 of them are actively running weblogs. Pyra charges for some higher-capability services not available in the base configuration, but most of its registered users don't pay.

Google is known best for its search capabilities, but the Pyra buyout isn't the company's first foray into creating or buying Internet content. Two years ago Google bought, a company that had collected and continued to update Usenet "newsgroups," Internet discussion forums. More recently, it created Google News, a site that gauges the collective thoughts of more than 4,000 news sites on the Net. "

Eventually the world will be just one big conglomerate. Everyone has merged with everyone so many times now that I can't even keep track of what's going on or who owns what. How many companies did AOL absorb? And Time Warner? Not to mention the drug companies - they've all merged and unmerged so many times I can't keep track of what's what. Glaxo-Smith-Kline-Wellcome? Wyeth-Ayers, which isn't Wyeth-Ayers anymore because Ayers left so it's just Wyeth? Bristol-Meyer-Squibb which I think may be now Bristol-Meyers again. Amazing...
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Tuesday, February 18, 2003

French humour is simply different than English humour. It has little to do with the language barrier; it has more to do with the type of humour that evolved in the culture. It's true that humour loses something in translation, but this is something different: it's different before translation.

Some things translate very well cross-culture, however. For instance, Bushisms. Yes, the whole world thinks pretty much the same of Dubya.

In Marianna's words, "Imagine attempting to discuss deep religious ideas, and to share experiences without a common language." I love experiences like that: no language in common, yet communication always happens. My grandparents are always having houseguests from Germany over. I can hardly speak any German at all, and yet the language barrier is never a problem. We always manage to talk to one another, share experiences, enjoy a lazy night together. Any German that I know comes from these nights.

If you want to practice listening to French, set your radio to about FM-99. A couple of minutes a day when your radio alarm goes off in the morning will keep your French sharp for the rest of your life.

Montreal is a beautiful city and you're really lucky to have a retreat like this available.
posted by dave Tuesday, February 18, 2003

Monday, February 17, 2003

posted by Rebecca Polewczak Monday, February 17, 2003

I just ran across this article about "Online Reputation Management" which may not sound that interesting, It relates to how people perceive both other people and other businesses from their content and postings online and how these perceptions can change.
posted by pyotr Monday, February 17, 2003

Can someone IM me if you can explain the hypertext poem reading thing to me? I'm confused...


posted by Rebecca Polewczak Monday, February 17, 2003

I thought it might be interesting to reflect on the topic of language itself. This past weekend I was in Montreal of the Taize experience. This was a special kind of prayer involving son, group sharing, mass and an array of other reflections. I went with the Newman center, and we were all hosted by students fro McGill University. While all of our host were english speaking, most of the services, and sharing was in French. Now, I did take three years of French in jr/sr high, but my last class was when I was a sophomore. Thus throughout the experience I was constantly recalling or wishing I could recall what random words. The most difficult part of the experience was during the group sharing. I was randomly placed in a group with all french speakers. Imagine attempting to discuss deep religious ideas, and to share experiences without a common language. Fortunately one member in the group could speak a english quite well as a second language and translated for me. Still, words could not be translated with the same emphasis or amusing nature as desired. Also, when the priests spoke to the French crowds, laughter was quite common. Unfortunately the English translations lost such zest. Ultimately, the weekend solidified the idea that language is among the most integral parts of our interaction with others, and our innate social nature.

posted by Marianna Monday, February 17, 2003

Sunday, February 16, 2003

Someone posted "I am a College Student" in my hallway, I was surprised at how much it actually sounded like my college lifestyle...(some of it more like my roommate's than my own).

I went to the home page and followed some of the links, there happened to be a bunch of poems and blogs, I haven't read through them much but it looks interesting.
posted by Lynda Sunday, February 16, 2003

Between Heaven and Earth
February 15, 2003:

Two days ago when I filled up my gas tank, I paid $1.99 per gallon and did not read about it at all. Does anyone care anymore? Are we no longer in an energy crisis?

I'm feeling old again, I guess. I remember when gas prices were under a dollar a gallon... My senior year of high school, when I was going back and forth to Queensbury every day to go to ACC, I'd buy gas at Stewart's in Hudson Falls - they had $0.89/gal on Friday afternoons. What happened to those times?
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Sunday, February 16, 2003

Dan, have you considered doing a study of the rhetoric of emoticons?
posted by Joseph Duemer Sunday, February 16, 2003


I just found new ANIMATED emoticons!!!!!
My life is now complete.
Here are just a few examples:

And MANY MANY more!!!!! Muhahahahahahahaha.

PS: This was what I was talking about Prof. Duemer.
posted by Dan Sunday, February 16, 2003

Has there been a war since WWII, where the American side has "finished" it's goals? I can't think of any, maybe someone else can. I put up this idea just for others considerations.
posted by Justin Sunday, February 16, 2003

Saturday, February 15, 2003

You know you grew up in the 1980's if . .

Do you guys remember this stuff? What a trip to read through all these things from when I was a kid. So much fun.
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Saturday, February 15, 2003

Actually, I wish to clarify something. I do not dislike politics in general. I believe they are a necessary part of society and that we owe a great deal to politics for our current living conditions. I am not an anarchist. It is just that I find these arguments (which I have heard before many times in spite of my effort to avoid such talks and therefore find really boring -- you political discussion people are all boring, so hah) pointless, spiteful, and ultimately worth nothing compared to the time and effort put in to them. I also stand by the idea that if you disagree with me, you will continue to talk about it anyway and there is nothing I can do short of avoiding you, so this is a purposeless post just like yours, except, in so far (i suppose) as it counts towards my participation grade. Is that why everyone is talking about politics? They know they should post SOMETHING and talking about politics is always an easy way to say a whole lot of nothing....

Well, then maybe you really are smarter than I am. If only I weren't a purist I could go so much further, right?

posted by Nadeeka Saturday, February 15, 2003

I agree with the 3rd point Norm made. Any situation can be grossly misunderstood and misrepresented by the most well-meaning of people if they do not have enough information. We should not criticize the actions of people we elect, since they have the information that they have because we allowed them to. We basically said "we don't want to deal with the headache of protecting the country" and handed over the responsibility to those most willing. If we are going to doubt their actions, we should actively try to restructure the entire governmental system rather than just make petty acusations. How many are willing to sacrifice so much time and effort to do that?

I also dislike talking about politics, and am therefore finding this weblog highly unenjoyable to read right now.

posted by Nadeeka Saturday, February 15, 2003

It would be interesting if some of you chose two or three blogs to follow for several weeks, keeping track of the way they work. Use to look at a whole range of recently updated weblogs. Or use Blogdex to see how webs of blogs are linked.
posted by Joseph Duemer Saturday, February 15, 2003

Somebody hasnt seen Austin Powers: Goldmemeber. :-)
There are only two things I hate in this world: people who are intolerant of other people's cultures, and the Dutch.
-Nigel Powers

Any, I haven't been doing to well at getting my point across, so I'm going to say it as simply as I possibly can, then get the heck out of here for a while.
1. No war without international support.
2. Finish war on al Quaeda, they are the bigger threat.
3. Remove Sadaam Hussein. You cannot tell me that this would be oppressive manuever by the US. If Bush were to overthrow Iraq's government, he would be doing the right thing for the wrong reasons.
4. I hate religious fanatics, in that they try to force their views on other people, because their God is the "right" God.

IThere, I think I'm out of this conversation for now, it's taking too much time from my Counterstrike games.

posted by Dan Saturday, February 15, 2003

Friday, February 14, 2003

Two things:

a.) I agree with Pete. We are one of the most intollerant nations ever. I won't restate what Pete has already said, but look at the racism in our country. Let's forget about the traditional racism issues (against african americans, jews, etc) and take a look at how much people in our nation hate Arabs right now. I have had people tell me that they wish every one of them was dead. I then told them what they could do with their statement, and if they wanted to help in the fight against those "horrible people" that they could start by offing me.

b.) Valentine's Day, although capitalized on quite a bit, is a very enjoyable holiday in my opinion. I like getting cards from my relatives and getting sweets from my mother even when I don't have a significant other to share the day with. The statement made earlier seemed mildly bitter. I probably wouldn't comment on the matter, but I just got through with watching one of the Valentine's Day specials of Iron Chef.. yummy.
posted by lkjawefoijalkjsdf Friday, February 14, 2003

Dan, I don't mean to specifically single you out, but I take offense to your hypocricy. You said you hate "people who are intolerant of other people's cultures." I argue that this includes Americans as well. Americans, in general, are very intolerant of other cultures. We constantly attempt to push our views, customs, traditions, and ways on other countries. We are pushing our "democratic" form of government onto the people of Afganistan/Pakistan after mercilessly bombing their country searching for a foreign radical (whom we didn't find, if I remember correctly). Are we trying to incorporate what we believe to be the best form of government into what the local culture has proscribed for hundreds of years? I don't think so. American students receive horrible educations about the rest of the world. When I was on an exchange program in Munich, Germany for two weeks a couple of years ago, my host brother said to me, "Your President is Bill Clinton. What is the name of my Chancellor?" I couldn't answer him. I don't think I'm alone in that respect. We may claim to be tolerant of others, but I think we tend to overestimate ourselves. Just look at the cases before the Supreme Court- Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger- which both deal with race being used as a factor in college admissions. We've become paranoid about the issue of race and color in our society. In another example, our leaders have stated that they are preparing to go to war with Iraq without the approval of the global community at large (the UN and other countries). This seems like a large bit of intolerance to me- we are ignoring the pleas of others to halt a path to war because we believe we're right and can't/won't change our opinions.
posted by pyotr Friday, February 14, 2003

Norm makes three very good points. I also think that most of the questions he raises are "rhetorical" and cannot really be answered. They just seem to cover too much and to be too broad of a subject to discuss in a limited medium such as this one. Perhaps this is something that should be carried over to class?

As for the whole Iraq issue that has been raging thoughout this weblog, I would just like to state that I do not support a war in Iraq WITHOUT the aid of the UN. It would be pointless to move in and prove many people's points about the US being a land-grabbing, imperialistic nation. I am pretty sure that Osama bin Laden (wherever he is) could probably use such a war as some much needed ammunition for future attacks on our country. And he is who we are really after. I think. I mean, how exactly do you fight a war on terror?
posted by Kyle Friday, February 14, 2003

To everyone who would like to convince everyone else that they should switch political parties - including myself:

We need to remember three things...

1.) Political parties suck. They seem to be nothing more than vehicles for the vying for power by people who couldn't care less about anything but our money. Look at the issues? I wonder when the big shots sit in a room together and carve up the pie. There is no ultimate underlying moral code for action. We are, however, stuck with them, because no one, myself included, is motivated or strong enough to right the system.
2.) We know nothing, nothing, about the world and its events save what the media feed us. We are addicted to it, and we dictate what it gives us. The media is a business. Businesses make money. Does truth retain itself if it is told in a certain way? Does it really matter, though, that things get elaborated on just a little if it will make more money, thus employing more people and prolonging the life of the system as a whole? How white does a lie have to be to be really white?
3.) The people who we put in office (we did, at least, agree to that system we know through our Constitution) are privilege to more informational sources than we are. Whether we like them or not (and if we do not, there are certain acceptable ways of doing something about it) they are in office until their term is up, and are in a much better position to make decisions than we who watch T.V.

I often think, when I look back on our conversations, that we lack any true wisdom or insight whatsoever, and that these passioned arguments are "a chasing after the wind." I think that, for some of us at least, our true object in argument is to establish ourselves in the eyes of our peers as possesing authority through superior intelligence and intellect. It might prove wiser and wiser both to show our widom by the arguments we abstain from and evaluate others by such. This post, then, is hypocricy.
posted by Norm Friday, February 14, 2003

Umm.... no. This is a day perpetuated by the greeting card companies and the floral industry. It's good for practically nothing unless you're a pair.

More to come eventually. Dinner first though.

Back to your regularly scheduled political debate... I just thought it was a cute story, I didn't think we'd still be talking about it by now.
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Friday, February 14, 2003

Um.... happy Valentine's Day?
posted by dave Friday, February 14, 2003

To go along with talking about war and nuclear weapons, I was reading a news article and found that now Iran is now mining uranium which the US believes is part of an atomic weapons program. However, Iran maintains that they are making nuclear fuel rods from the uranium deposits and are not seeking nuclear weapons. They claim that they don't have enough energy sources to meet their future demand with the current resources (oil, gas, and hydroelectric power). I'm not sure just how much oil comes out of this region, but I'm sure it's plenty to meet their needs, so this whole mining of uranium seems kind of questionable.
posted by Darci Friday, February 14, 2003

Dan, I agree with you completely in terms what you're saying about Iraq/North Korea. It seems that no one seems to think North Korea is much of a problem. Bush calls Iraq a "rogue nation" for defying UN resolutions and whatnot. N. Korea has blatantly been ignoring the UN and the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) by expelling UN nuclear monitors and by restarting nuclear facilities. N. Korea also withdrew itself from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. And Iraq is the rogue nation? Dan made the point that North Korea has capabilities to hit the western US with missiles. But Dan forgot one part of his Iraq equation:

Iraq = Very Questionable Nuclear Capability = Very Limited Delivery Capability = No Threat To Continental US = Oil

I'm not saying Iraq isn't a problem. Personally, I think Iraq needs to be dealt with, and dealt with soon. It's just a matter of which is a more immediate threat.
posted by Christoper Friday, February 14, 2003

I think saying that Iraq poses no threat to the continental US is a stretch. I also think the US could do better things than remove the economic sanctions in place. Better things such as go to war.

I was shown a document a few weeks ago that was about reinstating a draft. It said that college students would not be exempt. This does not change my thought that we should go to war. I will proudly serve in the Armed Forces if I am called to do so.

posted by Ken Friday, February 14, 2003

Ok, let's get something straight here:

North Korea = Nuclear Capability = Long Range Missle Which Can Hit West Coast = Threat To Continental US

Iraq = Very Questionable Nuclear Capability = Very Limited Delivery Capability = No Threat To Continental US

As to bio/chemical weapons, terrorists pose much larger threat than the Iraqi military, in that they can obtain said agents, and are crazy enough to use them. Not to mention that they can infiltrate our country easier.

So why is our first, most urgent, most vital, concern to create an Iraq shaped parking lot? With the use of our own nuclear weapons just thrown in for kicks?
posted by Dan Friday, February 14, 2003

Prof. Duemer, you might like this: Red Herring founder unveils 'super-blog' for business geeks.
posted by Chris Friday, February 14, 2003

Sorry, I'm a sucker for this world politics stuff. I agree with Andrea, in that war with Iraq is a bit premature. I personally do not like Saddam Hussein in power. His past record tells me he's a frightening man with the gusto to do just about anything to anybody who gets in his way and feel no remorse. That makes him very dangerous. However, going to war now makes the US look just plain paranoid. So far, there is no evidence of agression towards the West. How then is war justified? Its very easy to say that its obvious Saddam will attack the West, but in truth there is no evidence. Imagine the world's response when they learn the United States will destroy anyone who they think might in the future just maybe do something bad that could possibly hurt us. That is not a good foreign policy.
posted by Chris Friday, February 14, 2003

Thursday, February 13, 2003

I read literature. I know that increasingly people don't, but I always have and always will. I'm really concerned about how few people read today. This pretty much proves that yes, reading is dead.

This doesn't mean that we should forget about reading, however. The fewer people who read for reading's sake, the more responsibility we have to make up for their loss. We need to read Bible verses at Reading's funeral....


Robert Dana probably has the same interpretation of his "I'm Lucky" (sorry, I can't find the poem online!) as we do: confused and open-minded. I'm convinced that he came up with the two last lines first, then invented the rest of it as filler. He wants to play with our minds; that's his only intention of writing it. I wrote a bunch of poems for the literary magazine back home so I know mind games when I see them!

Cat's Cradle, which we discussed in class, is one of the best books on earth, and if anyone wants to read my copy she's more than welcome :)
posted by dave Thursday, February 13, 2003

For me, this is depressing. How about for you? The question is not rhetorical. Are literary texts dead & the rhetoric(s) of literature outdated?
posted by Joseph Duemer Thursday, February 13, 2003

Ah, the wonders of technology!
posted by Joseph Duemer Thursday, February 13, 2003

Along completely different lines, there seems to be an interesting voice speaking in this weblog.
posted by Joseph Duemer Thursday, February 13, 2003

If your eyes are better than mine, check out the fine print at Hope's weblog. There was also a particularly trenchant comment appended to the post.
posted by Joseph Duemer Thursday, February 13, 2003

Who can resist the rhetoric of politics?

    Wow, it seems party affiliation seems to have little to do with opinions here which, by the way, is a very beneficial thing. This is exactly how George Washington wanted it. In any case, I must defend the current President's actions. I agree with the idea that a United States attack might provoke a counterattack... Of course so would sitting on our thumbs. Saddam Hussein (notice I didn't say Iraq) despises the United States, and as soon as he has the capability to attack, he surely will. What does he have to lose? Obviously an attack on his people would not devastate him the least bit. He cares less about other people than Hitler did. My conclusion is that he needED to be removed and every second he remains in power is one second too long.

    The best method to complete this mission is of course through the UN. However, the UN does not seem to realize the urgency of the situation. Secretary Powell's presentation was no suprise to the UN, and that's what scares me the most. Every item in Powell's speech is reason to take immediate action in, at least, resolving these problems. Each noncompliance, if there is such a word, that Hussein commits should be considered a threat to the rest of the world. What do they think he's hiding when he does so? Stolen Swiss army knives? Though I hate to suggest the frightening idea, and I certainly hope it's not true, maybe other countries don't feel threatened by Saddam Hussein because they know that we're first. They know that the United States is number one on Hussein's hit list.

Back on topic

Think the school will let us use the vans for a long road trip to sunny California before we can't use them anymore? Our plea: "It's perfect for our class." Live from the Blogosphere! Does anyone know if/how we can record this?
posted by Jeff Thursday, February 13, 2003

I agree with Dan on the point of not rushing things and gaining worldwide support before going to war. I have a slightly different perspective, being Canadian (yes I know I'm opening up for some comments here), but I find the reactions to Bush's foriegn policy quite interesting. I think that going to war seems like a drastic measure at this point and I personally would like to see more efforts towards discussion. I am not against going to war, I just think that since there is so much at stake this time with the continued threats of nuclear war. The thoughts of attacking Iraq also bring up the possibilty of biological relaliation. I wouldn't be suprised if biological weapons were used against the United States. That to me is one of the most unsettling thoughts because once you release them you have no control over what gets infected. Tainting of the water supply, or something of the same magnitude would be the most silent of all weapons. I'm not quite convinced of the weapons that Iraq has in its possession - but I sure hope that someone is sure before the bombs start dropping.
posted by Andrea Thursday, February 13, 2003

Osama bin Who?

We should address the bigger threat before any talk of attacking Iraq is even thought of. In my view, Bush is using a new war with a stationary target (which he can win) to cover up a war with a far more mobile and dangerous target (which he has not made any progress on). Yes, I completely agree that Sadaam Hussein is a threat and needs to be removed as his country's leader, but lets do it with worldwide support shall we? If Bush acts alone, it will weaken the UN beyond measure, and that could be very, very dangerous. And while we're at it, let’s remove economic sanctions, because it sure seems to me that Hussein isn't getting any thinner, but his people sure as hell are.

BTW, I'm allowed to talk like this. I'm Republican. ;-P

posted by Dan Thursday, February 13, 2003

What gets so frustrating about the police actions we get into, especially with Iraq, is that we never seem to make progress. What I mean is that we all know in about five years or so we'll have to go back over there and "police" them again. I don't think it would seem nearly as bad if we could just get the job done in one try and forget about it. Also, the danger of war seems more immediate and hits closer to home for us kids, not that we didn't care before, now that a lot of our close friends and peers will be doing much of the fighting this time. It makes me wonder what it was like for past generations that went to "real" wars.
posted by andy Thursday, February 13, 2003

I'm sorry, but I don't trust the government. In our current situation, even some of the most dedicated Republicans that I know agree with me that Dubya just seems to be determined to get us into a war. I'd say more but I'm sick of arguing about this, because I know that no matter what I say, it won't help anything.
posted by lkjawefoijalkjsdf Thursday, February 13, 2003

Chris, ideally you make a valid argument. But now I ask, does the government define policing the same way you do? Why should our definitions be different from theirs? I agree with you though, that it is a matter of trusting the government. I just feel that sometimes the government can be very money-driven and if they had the opportunity to pick up some oil while they were policing, they would not mind to. As you can see, I only the trust the government enough to feel safe in the country, anything additional they might advertise I shy away from. That's just me I guess.
posted by Sigmund Thursday, February 13, 2003

Wednesday, February 12, 2003

This is in response to Rebecca's question about whether or not the US has the right to police the rest of the world. I believe that the US does have the right because it has the ability. Some might argue that the previous statement is slightly imperical, but let me explain my point of view. I believe that the US has the right to police the world in every sense of that word. Policing does not mean using brute force for our own gain, fighting selective wars, or land-grabbing for oil. Policing means watching for criminal acts and investigating them objectively and with factual evidence. If something wrong has been done, then we have the military and financial ability to act on it; we are one of the few nations in the world that has that ability. Therefore we should take action to defend those that cannot defend themselves. Whether or not this is being done in Iraq is debatable due to the lack of public evidence. I guess this is just an instance where we have to trust our government, something which many Americans are not excited to do. Isn't politics wonderful? :)
posted by Chris Wednesday, February 12, 2003

Earlier last week we were discussing the concept of online community and the benefits of this. One thing that came to mind during our disucussions is the problem with misinformation. The internet can be a great source of information, but we have the problem of authentication of this information. Basically, anyone can put anything they want up onto the internet whether it is true or false. In the published world, we it is a lot harder to publish something that is misleading because we must deal with editors and publishers. Publishers aren't going to endorse a book or medical encyclopedia that they know isn't going to have authenticate medical information. But anyone sick enough or anyone that has enough money, can give unsafe medical advice online by design or not. Yes, we can access this information from our communities online a lot quicker, but at what cost are we doing this? We are sacrificing the security of knowing that this information is coming from a reliable source. Obviously if we go to a medical online encyclopedia, this information would probably be reliable, but if we ask Joe Smoe from Chat Room "I am Doctor", we lose that security, or at least, I know, I do.
posted by Frederick Wednesday, February 12, 2003

Monday, February 10, 2003

For those of you who've been talking about Iraq.

Does the US have the right to police the rest of the world because, as this guy says, Bush is out of patience and we have the big guns?
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Monday, February 10, 2003

Is it just me, or does it seem like the second session is a lot more "on topic" than the first session. I have been reading a lot about how the discussion has been going off on huge tangents, but I have thought the discussion has been quite focused... Maybe it is just the nature of the two groups that meet. Or maybe it is just my perception of what I think is "on topic." Either way, I think that HP101 has a very broad "possible topic range" since computers have to deal with...well...just about everything these days. Interesting.
posted by Josh Monday, February 10, 2003

Should the internet really be to blame for Brandon Vedas killing himself? I will admit right off the bat that I know nothing about the specifics of that case. However, if someone is mentally unsteady enough to kill himself--much less kill himself while everyone online is watching--should the internet be blamed? Vedas probably would have killed himself with or without the invention of the internet--and simply chosen a different vehicle to display it. Again, I don't know much about the situation--could someone please tell me more?--Christa
posted by Christa Monday, February 10, 2003

I just watched Bowling for Columbine. It's good. I also read the conversation of Brandon Vedas, the person who killed himself on the internet. It is the kind of thing that makes you ask if the good the internet brings is worth it when atrocities like this can happen.

Also, If the discussions in class were inappropriate or unnecessary or random, Professor Duemer would redirect the discussions. I agree that 3 lectures are enough for one day.

posted by Ken Monday, February 10, 2003

Some of you math-types should check this out. More. And yet more.
posted by Joseph Duemer Monday, February 10, 2003

I agree with Christa in that Americans downplay events that happen worldwide. Truthfully, it disgusts me. I myself am somewhat of an isolationist, although I do believe we should always be watching. To clarify that point, I am an isolationist as far as the government is concerned: I don't think we should start wars unless we are attacked directly by another nation (WWII's Pearl Harbor), or take it upon ourselves to be the "watchdogs," however, as a member of Amnesty International, I do believe that we should be aware of the injustices that go on in the world, and not only be thankful for the degree of safety that we ourselves do have, but speak out against these injustices through letters and protest. I must comment that Americans try not to see anything in the world that upsets them. This is not limited to the poverty and death overseas: there are many injustices that go on in our own country that people don't want to hear about. There are many things that I could list, but I'd like to try not to start a giant weblog argument. If you'd like to make yourselves more aware, check out these websites: Amnesty International, Kensington Welfare Rights Union
posted by lkjawefoijalkjsdf Monday, February 10, 2003

Sunday, February 09, 2003

[] the cd mix of the month club
It's like the Mickey Mouse Club, only no Britney. And no one calls you a mouseketeer unless you want them to.
Here's the deal: Every month I make a mix CD. If you want a copy, just send me a mix CD of your own. Hopefully, we'll both find some new music we'll like.


This blog is kinda fun, this journalist links to different news articles he finds interesting.This link is to his club, the Mix of the Month club. I've sent him CDs once or twice, and his tastest are different than mine, but it's fun to get the exposure to someone else's tastes. If you make cd mixes anyway (like for road trips or what have you) make an extra copy or two and try it out.
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Sunday, February 09, 2003

Powerpoint is definitely evil... although I must say it's useful sometimes, when profs use powerpoint where you can print out the slides beforehand, it's very nice in a notes-intensive class, or one with lots of figures and diagrams, so you can write notes along the sides of the slides as you go along so you have picture & notes together. Otherwise I almost prefer lectures where you have to write all your own notes, because (for me at least) I find I have to pay attention to those more and so more goes into my brain.
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Sunday, February 09, 2003

Golublog: February 2003 Archives Semiotic Technology: Non-cerebral media (see also text-artifact) which contain information (see text) and which can be be used to transport this information across space and through time (see chronotope, Bakhtin, Mikhael). Typically the medium is non-human, although tattoos, chipping, and coding information in spare DNA chains technically count. Human semiotic technologies began with inorganic geologic material (clay, stone) but quickly adopted processed animal and vegetable remains (vellum, paper). Popular media have shifted back to the inorganic (silicon, copper) ever since humans developed packet technology in which the physical, transport, and content levels were logically abstract (see digital). Previous to this the physical form of the packet bore a literally physical resemblance (see: iconicity, Peirce, Charles Saunders) to the sign-system whose signals it was supposed to contain (see meatworld, picture, alphabet). Semiotic technologies are key to more people pooling resources in new ways (see civilization) as well as to increasing the velocity and amount of pornography circulating through any system of communication (see:, faster horses).
posted by Joseph Duemer Sunday, February 09, 2003

KRT Wire | 01/22/2003 | Julia Keller: Is PowerPoint the devil? The rhetoric of PP & the rhetoric of hypertext?
posted by Joseph Duemer Sunday, February 09, 2003

Wow. I found the poem, "Snowball Earthquake," quite interesting. I have to say that I agree (largely) with the author. The American people tend to over dramatize the (dare I say) "little events" that affect them as Americans, and downplay the events that happen worldwide. So many people are pushing for a war in Iraq (myself included), but it shames me to stop and think about what this course of action (one I am nonetheless still in favor of) is going to do to countless innocent Iraqi civilians. Does anyone have any ideas on why Americans tend to have this "self-centered" view of world events/tragedies?

My only explanation for this prevalent attitude is that (going way back to colonial and early American history) we have been an incredibly isolated nation. Yes, we traded with other countries. Yes, we traded intellectual ideas with other countries. But, when it came to the physical safety of our own country, two large oceans isolated us--one on either coast. Even with the advent of aeronautical and communications technologies, we've still managed to maintain a large degree of isolationism. We're incredibly removed from the tense situations of the world.

Some people, I'm sure will try to point out that September 11th made us, as a nation, more aware of our global community. I've heard many people say that we, as Americans, will never be "lax" and unconcerned with our safety again. Well, this made me think of Pearl Harbor, and the way Americans reacted to that national tragedy. Americans swore they would never let their guard down to an external threat like that again. And yet, they must have, because we reentered that state of false security. We experienced September 11th. So, what is it about American culture that leads us to these states of unwarranted "self-assured safety"?--Christa

posted by Christa Sunday, February 09, 2003

Tragedy, one view.
posted by Joseph Duemer Sunday, February 09, 2003

What do you make of this technology? Another example. And another. Is this more than a trick? Anything to do with intertextuality?

Haiku generated randomly? Is randomly the right word?
posted by Joseph Duemer Sunday, February 09, 2003

Saturday, February 08, 2003

I agree with Danielle and Sarah on the point that our class is so open-ended, that our discussions are going to be too. I would hate for this class to turn into something like physics, where Prof. Duemer just sat there an lectured at us about the books we were reading. It would become completely and utterly boring. If I do so recall the first class, where he was laying everything out for us, and all he did was talk, I remember looking around the room and I remember seeing everyone yawn at least twice. It was boring. I know that class was necessary, but if every class was like that, the class I believe would be a failure, because no one would take anything from it.
posted by Sharon Saturday, February 08, 2003

I agree completely with Danielle. However, I think there is an interesting point about media making stars of a few select people. I think that it's necessary for the knitting together of society for celebrities to exist. Everybody feels like they know them. Like someone said, it's like a distant family member. By extension, everyone in the society is distantly related, has common knowledge, fostering feelings of patriotism. The astronauts may not be any more heroic than scientists and doctors, but the media is using their deaths to bring the country together.
posted by Nadeeka Saturday, February 08, 2003

Only in an honors class would someone complain about going off topic in class discussion...

Truthfully, since this class is so open-ended in nature, I think that the discussions that we have are more than appropriate. Our discussions tend to be somewhat random, but if you take a look at the articles in our books (more so Holeton than Lanham), some of those are a little random too. Everything is related in some nature, but they're not your traditional text books. In the same way, HP101 is not your traditional computer course. I disagree with Dave that HP101 isn't about computers. It is. It's just not a course that teaches us how to do things on computers. It's called "computers as an intellectual tool," and all in all, that's sorta what we discuss. It makes us look at the computer and the internet in different ways. It makes us use previous knowledge and experiences. I enjoy this class a lot more than I did HP100, because in HP100 we were given busy work, which I thought was a waste of time. So what we learned how to make webpages. That's the only thing I did get out of that class, and we had to teach ourselves. I think Marianna might be forgetting that we are not in an English course (no offense to her at all). We will not get multiple choice tests on the books. We are not there to disect the author's meaning. We are there simply to discuss. I think minds like ours deserve a little open ended discussion once in a while. I think of it as somewhat of an indulgence. The reason I like the honors program is because I can talk to people on my intellectual level about things that my other friends would call me a nerd for even thinking about (again, nerd pride ;-)). There's nothing wrong with a little debate. Anyone can discuss a book, but it takes something more to make real world connections to the material and be able to debate on related topics. And debate is an application of rhetoric, isn't it?
posted by lkjawefoijalkjsdf Saturday, February 08, 2003

Friday, February 07, 2003

In response to Marianna's comment on our discussion in Thursday's class, I think it is much more enjoyable to go off on tangents on subjects that interest us that may not be directly related to the course, but are linked to it somehow. I think that talking about one book such as the Electronic Word for over an hour would become incredibly boring. I think the open-ended discussions are the best way to go! It allows us to creatively think and link other topics to the subjects we are discussing and reading in class. I enjoy not having to attend one more lecture a week - 3 a day is enough for me!
posted by Sarah Friday, February 07, 2003

A computer course! LOL! I haven't yet figured out exactly what HP101 is about yet, but it isn't about computers. We talk a lot about rhetoric, also, though I don't think it's a rhetoric course either.

The subject of computer rhetoric is really very simple to discuss: "Computers change the way we write to be more self-reflective, often less well-thought out, and more dynamic; they also increase the number of new ideas that enter our lives." The course in a sentence.
A computer course! LOL! I haven't yet figured out exactly what HP101 is about yet, but it isn't about computers. We talk a lot about rhetoric, also, though I don't think it's a rhetoric course either.

The subject of computer rhetoric is really very simple to discuss: "Computers change the way we write to be more self-reflective, often less well-thought out, and more dynamic; they also increase the number of new ideas that enter our lives." The course in a sentence.

I think that HP101 is really about the same old subject that humanities courses have always been about: People. People are incedibly complex in our interactions. Though we are mere watery chemical sacs, we have transformed our ecosystem physically, mentally, socially, and spiritually. We create worlds where there were none, or at the very least we believe this is so. One aspect of the world we make is the dynamic language we use. The Internet is one example of what our language has become.
In a course that is about people, we should feel free to say whatever comes to mind. After all, every member of the class is a person and merits study.
I think that HP101 is really about the same old subject that humanities courses have always been about: People. People are incedibly complex in our interactions. Though we are mere watery chemical sacs, we have transformed our ecosystem physically, mentally, socially, and spiritually. We create worlds where there were none, or at the very least we believe this is so. One aspect of the world we make is the dynamic language we use. The Internet is one example of what our language has become.
In a course that is about people, we should feel free to say whatever comes to mind. After all, every member of the class is a person and merits study.
posted by dave Friday, February 07, 2003

All said is true. Indeed Proff. I wasn't really thinking along the lines of rhetoric. I guess it's just that the real purpose of hp101 is so open, while I'm attempting to label it as strictly a computer course. Thus I guess a variety of topics all intertwined do indeed connect media, rhetoric and the nature of language into the nature of the course.
posted by Marianna Friday, February 07, 2003

Tell me you've never gotten off topic in any of your other classes... what about lab? Do you & your group socialize during class at all, or is it quite simply, "this is our procedure, this is how we prep solutions, this is how we analyze our samples, time to go home"? From seeing the team in action in group meetings I'd tend to doubt it, although I could be wrong. My guess is it would make for a pretty dull time if that was how it was. I've had group meetings before where mostly what we talk about is not the thing we came together to discuss. Sometimes it's annoying when you just want to get in and get your work done, but it's also kind of nice, in a way. Sometimes you actually learn more by not staying precisely on topic all the time.

Besides, staying on topic and talking about one set subject for 50 minutes, well, that's what lecture classes are for. :-D That is, that's what they're for until you get to P-Chem with Prof. Eno... when he starts talking about Particle Bill and Atom Fred you just gotta kick back and enjoy the show, and try not to laugh too much at the particles which have names but aren't really particles anymore. (Please don't ask me what they actually are, though, as I haven't quite figured that out yet.)

Hmm, I had one more thing I wanted to post, but it eludes me now, so I think that will be a different topic for a different entry.. Oh well. Have a great night. Safe trip home/back to school for everyone who's leaving for break.
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Friday, February 07, 2003

Marianna, sometimes classes do go off the track & your caution is well-taken; however, I would rather err on the side of too much freedom to discuss rather than too little. It is a rhetorical / pedagogical decision I make consciously. And in fact, I don't think the Columbia discussion was entirely unrelated to our concern with rhetoric. One might even try applying Burke's pentad to a rhetorical analysis of the coverage of the event & the language we use to describe it.
posted by Joseph Duemer Friday, February 07, 2003

Yesterdays' class was interesting, but sorry to say highly unrelated to the nature of goals of the course. Think about it, we began by discussing The Electronic Word but eventually digressed into an argument about.... what was it about?..........?...........................Oh yes, should those who died on the Columbia be considered heroes. This makes me recall religion class at my high school. Yes I did go to a private, catholic high school, an yes, to the sour part of my recollection, I did have to take four years of religion class. Freshman and Sophomore years were actually useful, as they were based in dissection of the bible, understanding historical roots of Christianity, and linking Jewish heritage to Christian practices. However, Junior and Senior year was a nightmare. The woman who taught these classes claimed we were learning about the nature of faith, by reading our text, but unfortunately we always deviated from the topics under discussion and ended up arguing in a friendly matter over an array of topics--just as HP101 has become. I am not attempting to degrade any who took part in yesterdays' discussions, or to express my disapproval of the discussion based structure of the course. Participation and all is grand. I just think we need to focus more on topics the course is supposed to cover and not let discussions enter into the realms of personal ethics.
posted by Marianna Friday, February 07, 2003

We were talking a little bit in the second section yesterday about a map of the Internet. I have one that I thought was so cool, I made it my desktop picture. It was created by an organization called CAIDA (Cooperative Association for Internet Data Analysis), which does all kinds of research about the Internet.

It was interesting to see just how concentrated everything is in the US (at the bottom of the circle), especially along the eastern coast (the right-hand side of that bottom chunk).

posted by pyotr Friday, February 07, 2003

Check out these remarks from Bogdenblog. Seems like a simple complaint, but has big implications for web rhetoric.
posted by Joseph Duemer Friday, February 07, 2003

Thursday, February 06, 2003

That is a great pic of Jay.

I just wanted to make sure that everyone, especially Danielle, knows that I was not devalidating her statement. I believe that all lives have equal importance. I was just stating that it is impossible to have media coverage of every death that takes place. Also, I believe the word hero was misunderstood today in class. From my perspective, a hero is someone people look up to and respect. When the media stated that seven hero's had died in the space shuttle, I believe that is what the media was implying as well. Along with Sarah's comment, there are many important scientists and doctors who are very deserving of the title hero, but they don't get it. If they were to die in a crash of some sort, they probably would not get media coverage or be called heros, even though they might be more deserving of the term than some astronauts, or people who have received the title in the past.
posted by Sharon Thursday, February 06, 2003

Haha, nice pic of Jay. He was showing me the ones you guys have put on your labs of him. Quite humorous. He gets a kick out of them!
posted by Sarah Thursday, February 06, 2003

Continuing on today's discussion on the media, to anyone who has not seen Bowling for Columbine, I would recommend it. It is mainly about the issue of guns in the US, but part of Michael Moore's exploration of the issue deals with the media and what they report. And for anyone in forensic chem lab, here's a great picture of Jason Keleher (just don't tell him it's on here):

posted by David Thursday, February 06, 2003

To add to the conversation we had in class today; I think Danielle is right about the idea that no one person's life is more valuable than another's life. Although astronauts had to work hard to become who they are, others did too, who have made more of an impact on people's lives than the astronauts who died. For instance, doctors who are saving people's lives everyday and scientists who are coming up with techniques and cures to diseases and injuries. Although I do not know exactly how long astronauts train for, I am sure that specialized doctors and scientists go to school just as long, if not longer to do what they do. For example, my father is a specialized cardiologist. He went to school for 13 years to train for his job. You see young astronauts going up into space nowadays and I'm sure that some of them didn't train that long. Although NASA is a well-known company, the astronauts are not any more heroic than a doctor or scientists who saves lives everyday. If a well-known doctor in his field died in a plane crash, he would not make news and would not be called heroic. I think our lives are just as important as these astronauts lives were and although the common person does not make the news, every single one of us makes a difference and should be recognized for that.
A little story on the side about plane crashes these days: I went to Key West over winter break for my Clarkson swimming training trip and as we were getting ready to leave, a plane crashed for taking out of Charlotte, North Carolina. We were flying into that airport. We thought that we would never make it back that day because everything would be delayed due to the plane crash. Although it made news, it was barely recognized otherwise. Our trip was not delayed at all. The airline went on as if nothing had happened. I was shocked that they did not take any time in memory of this crash or even think twice about it. But anyways, so many important people die each day, yet we only know about those who are "famous" or a celebrity." That is pretty sad if you think about it. The media does not have time to show every important death, but we should remember that we are all important and just because the media makes one death out to be heroic does not mean that there aren't others out there dying who are not just as important as the ones displayed by the media.
posted by Sarah Thursday, February 06, 2003

Sweet! I finally made it! Thanks Professor :)

Link of the day: My uncle passed me this link when I told him I had my very own blog for class. It's kinda fun to go through, see what other people have created. Some of them aren't great, but some of them are so much nicer than the standard Blogger templates. It's worth going to check out when you've got a spare few minutes.
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Thursday, February 06, 2003

Wednesday, February 05, 2003

Other areas of interest related to Justin's post of "Grid" are:
Folding Project
posted by Josh Wednesday, February 05, 2003

Internet identity

Also, as an application of computers... go to Grid. You can help fight smallpox, cancer, etc. There's even a team for Clarkson University... I'm assuming that means us. Don't know what a team does.
posted by Justin Wednesday, February 05, 2003

i'll be truly Clarksonian. "rpi sucks."
....i would watch a show called "calc IX: the next dimension." something tells me that it would be a cult classic.
posted by dave Wednesday, February 05, 2003

Professor Duemer, I was in no way trying to slander the education that you got. You got that type of education because you wanted to and, like stated in class, maybe I was over exaggerating my thoughts, and probably should have waited to write them down because I was mad. My emotions might have run from the fact that at Clarkson, pursuing a liberal arts degree is nowhere near as hard as an engineering degree. This isn't true for other colleges, but here it is. Therefore, liberal arts majors always seem to rub me the wrong way, just because of all of the work I have to do and the classes I have to take to pursue my education. It shouldn't have to be an either/or position on education. As Jeff stated, you really can't have a world with an either/or. You need a mixture of both.
posted by Sharon Wednesday, February 05, 2003

Maybe we all just need a little soma holiday?
posted by Josh Wednesday, February 05, 2003

Tuesday, February 04, 2003

    After reviewing the lively discussion that has come from Lanham's book and the value of the liberal arts, I immediately imagined some extreme cases....

The world without technology training (Clarkson students):

    A wonderful world of discussion and plays and not weblogs, since there are no computers. But at least there'd books, unless we want to revert to hand writing again. What wonderful symposiums there would be though!...until the buildings fell down, the bridges went out, and the planes were grounded.

The world without liberal art classes:

    Uh, well see we'd make these cool things that could fly and stuff and make other...stuff, but I'm not sure really how I'd tell you about it or advertise it cool really. But after work tonight maybe we can set down and read a good physics book or watch Calc. IX, The Next Dimension....

    Ok, maybe a little extreme, but the truth is that we do indeed need both types of education in this world and in each person. I must admit that I do not enjoy liberal arts all that much; why else would I be here if not to utilise the skills I enjoy? I also realize that I am not well written and often poorly spoken, and I am afraid that this may hinder my proficiency at communicating as an engineer. However, I am more afraid for my valedictorian; he received 5's (the high score) on all (6 or 7) of his AP Exam's...except English. He's a wonderful person to talk to after his 4 ft. wall of ice is broken. Let's hope they teach communication skills at RPI, though I know after posting this the only truly "Clarksonian" reply will be

"RPI Sucks"

posted by Jeff Tuesday, February 04, 2003

Chris: "Ripper" made me sick to my stomach too. It's amazing that people can be so cruel.
Pugby: I gave each chapter an equal opportunity, so I know that chapters 2 and 4 really are infinitely more interesting than 1 and 3. If you try to read 3 again you will be at least as bored as the first time you read it. This is because in Chapter 4, Lanham had something to say.
Liberal Arts vs. Technical Education: I would be less happy if people had never created light bulbs, transistors, music, or poetry. Society needs all of its muses to be fully functional. We need people from Potsdam and Geneseo just as much as we do from Clarkson and MIT.
People who think that one aspect of society is somehow better than another are simply wrong. Worse, they are discriminating: acting superior to another group of people simply because they are different. This is no different than discriminating on any other basis, such as sex, race, or creed.
posted by dave Tuesday, February 04, 2003

Lanham, the writer that we all talk about, so i will tell y'all what i now think, the first three chapter i tortured myself to get through his writing, wrd by word, a slow painful process, why? because i never gave him a real chance, but i begun chapter four with a fresh outlook on the text, as if i had never read him before, i was fair and let his words draw me in, and then, as i was reading along, i became very scared, i actually liked it!!!! i didnt agree with all his opinions, but he did not say them as fact, rather as his personal opinion based upon his personal experience, he puts controversial and interesting topics out in the open, he gives us exciting subjects to discuss and ponder, Lanham is not the easiest of reads, but he is a very good writer who knows how to use retoric, and he is very respectful of readers who may differ in opinion,
posted by PugBy Tuesday, February 04, 2003

Sharon, a technical education is a fine thing; a technical education without a core of understanding of the liberal arts will make you a fine functionary of the corporate state. Is that what you aspire to? Remember Brave New World? Note to everyone: I have immense respect for all of you, which is why I will sometimes challenge you, even if it means hitting a nerve or suggesting that your received opinions might require some examination. Danielle was expressing a certain self-satisfaction with a narrow view of a technical education, so I posted a slightly barbed response. Please note that I rejected her apology as unnecessary--because smart people can argue about ideas without taking personal offense. At least that's the ideal. I feel more free to be incendiary in the Honors Program than generally, but I am pretty much the same sort of teacher (though a bit gentler) in my non-honors classes. I don't pretend to know everything, but I do know why I'm at Clarkson & that is to provide that essential core of human learning to the next generation's technical workers. By doing this, I hope to provide students the intellectual resources to control to the extent it's ever possible their own careers & lives. Finally, Sharon, you should note that you have dismissed the sort of education I pursued while valorizing the sort you are pursuing; why does this have to be an either/or proposition? And how do you suppose that makes me feel? Final reminder: I love what I do & I hope that all of you will be as fortunate as I am in your careers. The above remarks are not "personal" in these sense of being a self-defensive "attack" against the class in general or anyone in the class; but they are personal in the sense that I feel them deeply.
posted by Joseph Duemer Tuesday, February 04, 2003

In my opinion today's discussion was incredibly engaging. Resposibility apparently floods both ways, between the reader, the writer, with each attempting to create something, while at the same time expecting something from participants. This leads me to question whether or not this applies to any work of art. Can an observer of a painting owe the painter something? Must a painter follow some sort of rubric in her or his work?

Another note, to those of you whom mentioned frustration in arguing with someone who will not bend. My best example would be the right to life argument, and the standing of the Catholic Church. After attending a Catholic high school, and getting an F on a paper for stating that I felt euthanasia was okay in certain circumstances (the paper was supposed to be opinion based) I've learned that argument is not always just an interesting focus of conversation. In fact, I would almost go so far as to say that only certain people are actually capable of arguing. It seems as though there are the compliant, the disinterested, firm and irrepressible, and a minority group of those able to truly argue. Either that or each individual exist in each of these states at various times, and wavers between them. Okay, maybe I need to study Rhetoric, this all really doesn't make sense. Or am I just in an inarguable mood?
posted by Marianna Tuesday, February 04, 2003

I found a pretty cool and accurate iq test.
It does not take too long.
Here is the link if anyone wants to see what their iq is.
posted by David Tuesday, February 04, 2003

I know this is relating back to some posts that were made a while ago, so please bear with me. I found it kind of offensive that we were called anti-intellectuals. I personally agree with Danielle in that I don't really see how a liberal arts education could be worth as much as some of the degrees that students at Clarkson are persuing. Professor Duemer, the students you are teaching at this college are here because, well at least for my part, we hate liberal arts. Great Ideas is really the only class that we are all forced to take dealing with liberal arts. As we talked about in class today, being forced to do something, like writing a paper or taking a class, makes it all the more uneventful for us. I do not see how an education in the liberal arts could compare to one in say mechanical engineering or aeronautical engineering. But again, this is just my opinion. I sorry if this has offended someone, but this is a page where we are allowed to respond to readings and express our opinions. I'm assuming that the comment made by Professor Duemer was just in response to Danielle's opinion, but I think that being the teacher of this class, you aren't exactly setting an example that you would like all of us to follow. Again as mentioned today in class, debates are alright as long as it doesn't result in just attacking the other party in the debate. Maybe it was just the way that I read the weblog that makes me think that Professor Duemer was "attacking" us for a comment, or an opinion. I could be wrong, but I still don't think that it was right.
posted by Sharon Tuesday, February 04, 2003

This is just a notice to anyone interested that I just put up a rather long post on my weblog with various reflections pertaining (some more than others) to the class.

Here... the green entry.
posted by Nadeeka Tuesday, February 04, 2003

I was just wondering if anyone else in my section is staying here for break (I doubt it, but it's worth asking). I had some ideas for the upcoming project and I figured I'd probably start it then. Soooo, if any of you are staying and would be interested, let me know. My email is See y'all on Thursday.
posted by lkjawefoijalkjsdf Tuesday, February 04, 2003

What do you guys make of this, from another weblog I like called This Public Address.
posted by Joseph Duemer Tuesday, February 04, 2003

I know this off the topic of what you've all been posting here, but I found something that pushes both technology and society into a sort of sickening and perverse light.

The article linked below refers to a young man who committed suicide. Oddly enough, that probably doesn't hit a soft spot in any of our desensitized hearts, but the sickening aspect stems from how he did it. Twenty-one year old Brandon Vedas killed himself by overdosing on prescription drugs while "chatting" with some "friends" in an online chatroom, while also broadcasting his intentional demise to anyone that had the URL to the site that his webcam was being broadcast to.

By the way, his "friends" were egging him on most of the way. Here's an excerpt from their chatroom conversation:

(Brandon Vedas uses the handle, "ripper")

[ 02:12:44 ] [ grphish ] what are you on right now ripper
[ 02:12:51 ] [ Smoke2k ] yea what are you on
[ 02:12:53 ] [ ripper ] aalot of drugs
[ 02:12:56 ] [ ripper ] 80mg methadone
[ 02:12:59 ] [ ripper ] 8mg klonopin
[ 02:13:02 ] [ ripper ] 120mg resotril
[ 02:13:05 ] [ ripper ] 1.5 grams KB
[ 02:13:08 ] [ ripper ] 4 grams mersh
[ 02:13:11 ] [ grphish ] mersh?
[ 02:13:11 ] [ %Pnutbot ] mersh is east coast
[ 02:13:12 ] [ Smoke2k ] wtf
[ 02:13:15 ] [ ripper ] 110 mg inderal
[ 02:13:15 ] [ @phalaris ] hehe
[ 02:13:21 ] [ @phalaris ] you're making drugs up!
[ 02:13:23 ] [ ripper ] and
[ 02:13:23 ] [ Smoke2k ] lol
[ 02:13:24 ] [ grphish ] whats mersh
[ 02:13:24 ] [ %Pnutbot ] it has been said that mersh is east coast
[ 02:13:26 ] [ ripper ] 2 vicodan
[ 02:13:29 ] [ grphish ] dude
[ 02:13:34 ] [ grphish ] you ever done this much before
[ 02:13:35 ] [ ripper ] thats it
[ 02:13:35 ] [ Smoke2k ] eat more
[ 02:13:40 ] [ Smoke2k ] thats not much

Makes me sick. I can stomach a lot, but I couldn't read through the entire chatroom log. I felt like I was going to throw up.

I guess I don't really recommend trying to read through it, but it lends a hand to the idea that the internet and cyberspace encourages the degeneration of society as well as the increasing problems with the recklessness of today's youth.

Makes me sick.

The news article.
The chatroom log.
posted by Christoper Tuesday, February 04, 2003

Well, here goes my first attempt at writing to this Blog, and I find that I will not actually be writing anything. Instead, I post a link to my blog. What I am trying to do applies to my own thread as well, so rather than writing it twice (or as Lanham would say - using the ability of the electronic word to be maniplulated), I'll mainulate it in a different way by keeping my thread linear and adding a link from here to it. Please bear with my sorry lack of skill.

A Little Insight?
posted by Norm Tuesday, February 04, 2003

Powered by Blogger


group weblog for hp:101 / spring 2003


hp101 home