A quick glance at the wall clock reminds me that I’m running late again. I start to accelerate the pace of my morning routine. I’m Just about ready to leave, and then prompts the question: cereal or no cereal ? I chose cereal. I shovel the entire helping in about 5-6 spoons. After, I slide my feet into my slippers say a barely audible and rushed ‘bye’ to my Grandma and start to head to my Taurus. A bunch of white envelops protruding out of my mailbox side-tracks me for a second. Mail already? A cursory shuffling reveals there are no letters for me, save one, stamped with a cornflower blue URI boilerplate. I put the rest of the letters back in the box (someone will eventually get them) and take the URI letter with me into the car. On a more thorough analysis, it seems the letter is from the Office of the Dean, so I tear it open. I am expecting confirmation of my December Graduation from the Dean. Instead, I find a highlighted reminder that I am still missing two courses in order to satisfy my Gen-Ed requirements.
I would later find out that the College of Engineering and the College of Arts and Sciences (the college I had to transfer into for my Major change–computer engineering to computer science) have slightly different Gen-Ed requirements, a big enough difference to postpone my graduation another semester. Wow.. first the fly, now this. It is certainly not my week.
QOD : Paranoid schizophrenics outnumber their enemies at least two to one.
I hate insects’especially flys. What irks me the most about flys is the excruciating Doppler effect from it zipping inches away from your ear, over and over again. There was a damn fly in my room today. I almost broke my ceiling fan as I took a careless swing at it with a T-Shirt. The fan’s chain swung over and wrapped around the moving blades; it wasn’t pretty. Learning from experience, I then turned off the ceiling fan and after another futile swing from the T-shirt, I proceeded to smash a light bulb on the ceiling fan fixture. Man I feel like such a tool. I hate Flys.
I’m taking my LSATS in about 2 weeks, so i’ve been mulling through some sample exams to study off of. As soon as I came across this questions, I wrote in big letters “HAHA”. I was so fed up with the section and questions similar that I just became out-of-the-box hysterical.
The end of an action is the inteded outcome of the action and not a mere by-product of the action, and the end’s value is thus the only reason for the action. So while it is true that every end’s value will justify any means, and even, perhaps, that there is no end whose value will justify every means, it is clear that nothing will justify a means except an end’s value.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?
a) The value of some ends may justify any means
b) One can always justify a given action by appeal to the value of its intended outcome.
c) One can justify an action only by appeal to the value of its intended outcome.
d) Only the value of the by-products of an action can justify that action.
e)Nothing can justify the intended outcome of an action except the value of that action’s actual outcomes.
What’s your pick?
Mills showed me this neat site called cockeyed dot com . The guy that runs the site does these random pranks that are just so god damn funny.
Chad, the Cross-Country Googler Prank
There’s also this interesting subsection on the site called ‘how much is inside’ where they perform various experiments like:
How much is in a keg
and the messier, How much in a can of shaving cream
The address is: http://www.cockeyed.com (in case for some reason you missed all the imbedded links littered throughout this post ;-))
So for my CSC320 class (Social issues in computing), I had to pick a topic in computers that has social implications and write a short essay on it. Let me tell you, picking a topic was sooo tough, expecially when he threw in the “something that interests you” limitation. Because…frankly, nothing in computers interests me anymore. With that said I decided to write about Everquest: (may be interesting to a select few) (a very select) …
Video Games have never ceased to amaze me. It would seem as though my generation has seen the rise and fall of so many various flavors of video game consoles; and like monarchs, they are all eventually abdicated from their thrown by the next more powerful console, boasting the absolute latest technology at its disposal. At the current stage of the video game evolution, we are starting to remove the limitation of playing a game with those who you know and are locally present, to those who you donï¿½t know and are as remote as different continents. Video Games are starting to go ï¿½onlineï¿½ and are polarizing the gaming population into small communities, each with their own kind of language, dialect, and rules of etiquette.
One game in particular that has highlighted the effects that online gaming can have on our society is called Everquest, an online digital world with millions of residents made up of all your fellow players. This game is so much like reality that for some, it has taken its place. There have been reports of divorce and various domestic and social issues that have stemmed from this game alone. Money acquired from within the game has actual worth outside of it as well, as users sometimes trade actual dollars for Everquest money or equipment. The popularity of this game, along with the copious hours that players invest in it has incited some to apply rather negative labels to it such as ï¿½EverCrackï¿½ and ï¿½NeverRestï¿½, implying the game as more of a vice than a form of entertainment.
The social implication of this game, and all otherï¿½s that follow in its genre are obviously severe. Should this game be allowed for purchase? Sounds like a silly blatant infringement of our most basic rights, but is it really that silly? The effects of Everquest have been compared to those produced by most narcotics, and those are illegal. Can the makers of Everquest be held liable for a divorce caused by this game? It is a hard decision to make. Most of this may reside on whether we can trust society to exercise the discretion needed to prevent such a game from becoming an addiction. But a larger question is, do we have this right?
I can soooooo relate, I have my own version of the “uncommited smile”.
So it was the first day back to classes at the auspicious URI, and like the good student that I usually am (for the first 2 weeks of school), I decided to leave home very early to give myself ample time to make it for my first class. After arriving at the campus about 40 minutes ahead of schedule I figured my early arrival was bound to at least give me some semi-decent parking– Wow… was I mistaken! It wasn’t that all the spots were filled or anything, it was rather the BRILLIANT police staff at URI decided to ‘rearrange’ the zoning of parking lots so that it could effectively make the least amount of sense and to provide the maximum level of chaos and confusion (and fatigue) to the commuter population. An intoxicated, blindfolded, Recess monkey could have done a better job deciding the parking lot zoning. But really, the incompetence of the URI parking staff isn’t what gets to me, in fact it’s almost expected. What gets to me is that ever since last year, when they decided to charge students for parking decals (100$ commuter, 175$ student), the parking situation has just gotten exponentially worse which fundamentally makes no mathematical sense whatsoever. This is such a crime. It’s like our miniature version of the big dig grrrrrrrrr
Alright.. i’ve caved and started a blog-like-thing on my website.
Well This is the first ever blog on this site, hopefully it wont be the last. Feel free to graffitii all over it. .. feel free to post thoughts and comments and perhaps… just perhaps.. someone else may read your dribble.