So yeah, with the weather getting better and not being tied to my computer with publishing or candidacy exams means that I stop blogging. Imagine that. lol.
Anyways, not much is new, the experimental work is proceeding fairly well, and should have some sort of working prototype within a week or two. I ended up diagnosing some serious roadblocks, with some simple fixes. In any case, serious positive work has been achieved. Yay.
I'm still not "playing" WoW... lol. Its been what, 6-7 months since I've taken a dose of the heroin-raiding stuff. However, something interesting happened in the WoW-world today. Something odd, wierd, and interesting that will turn guilds, servers, etc on their ear in the next expansion. I'm not certain where exactly this will end up, in terms of postitive-negative changes, but its going to change the landscape of the game.. forever.
The major, game changing change is: 10 man and 25 man raiding (for all intensive purposes) will be equal. Difficulty, loot level, raid ID's. The only difference is that 25 man raids will drop more loot (most likely the same ratio of people:loot).
What does this mean, generally?
YOU CAN RAID AS A SMALL GROUP OF FRIENDS AND EXPERIENCE THE FULL GAME/CONTENT, AND NOT BE PENALIZED FOR PLAYING WITH FRIENDS.
Wow.
This is a HUGE change. Now, you can play with your friends or a smaller circle of people with no penalty. Additionally, you end up not having to wrangle 25 people, which is the most painful part of running a guild or raid period. Smaller guilds are easier to manage, and really, the "work" into a guild would more or less dissapear.
I'm seriously, seriously, thinking of playing in Cataclysm. Why? Playing with good people, raiding for 2-3 nights a week? That's... almost.. manageable. Imagine that. Manageable raiding.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Friday, March 19, 2010
Hooray for transfer payments!
Heh.
I remember those days in Undergrad, where you thought your input and "voice" actually could make a difference in the day-to-day operation of the University. Yeah, I'm far more cynical now, and have a better understanding of the inner workings and how this University, as a whole, operates.
As an Undergrad, you assume that this institution runs as another school. Plain and simple. This institution exists to teach you the skills necessary to become an Engineer, Nurse, Teacher, Artist, Professional Dodgeballer, etc, and that's it.
As a Grad Student, you learn that the University is first and foremost a research institution, and that the majority of money (and yes, this is when you realize that the world runs on money, not idealism or good intentions (lol SU). ) comes from research grants and royalties from technology. The teaching of students is revealed to be a secondary concern, essentially something that is another revenue scheme, an avenue of Grad Student recruitment, and more often than not a charter obligation for the massive operational governmental grants that the institution recieves.
Now, with the recent governmental cutbacks (usually a year or two lag behind the economy), the University is seeing tough times. Research grants will be smaller. Operational grants will be smaller. Tuition credits (that the undergrads recieve indirectly) will be smaller. The end result? Massive budget gaps for the University.
It is funny, however, that the general undergraduate population seems to think that they will be receiving the brunt of the burden in making up this gap. I think its absolutely laughable. Of course, in typical "Undergrad Style" half of the problem is understood.
First, I'll talk about the tuition issue. Generally, tuition is getting a big hike next year. A fair bit more substancial than previous years, specifically because the operational grants and tuition credits (from the government) got cut. What the average Undergrad Student does not realize is that the total cost of their tuition is automatically subsidized by the government. Yes, you may be paying 5-8k a year. The real cost, at this institution, is 2x or 3x that. Ask an international student what their tuition is, and you'll get a fair gauge of what you *should* be paying per year. The amount of tuition that is subsidized by the provencial government is different from province to province, this is why, generally in Quebec, tuition is much less than Alberta. In any case, the increase of tuition that you are seeing is directly tied to the reduction of subsidy that is being given by the province.
Secondly, the "fact" that this "bailout" is being "forced" on the Undergrads is completely false. Grad tuition is basically doubling. University Employees are getting 5-8 days of *unpaid* vacation. Operational budgets are being slashed by 5%. There will be layoffs. Research grants are getting significantly reduced. For example, last year we had 17 summer students in our department. This year, it looks like we'll be getting 5. At this point, I'm wondering if there will be enough funding to complete my research, or if I will have to pay alot of the costs out of pocket.
The Undergrads are getting a $550 increase in tuition in the form of a fee to maintain the standards of education and building services. Right now, this is for next year, as a temporary measure.
Yes. This is much more harsh than people losing their jobs, taking a paycut of roughly 2-4%, or in my case most likely not getting funded (income --> $0) and scaling back/not finishing my research due to lack of funds.
Unfortunately, I don't have the time to be completely selfish and kick up a media/protest storm about how my specific segment of the University Community is being abused/mistreated/squeezed to make up the budget gap, without considering how others are affected.
Even if this fee of $550 is mandatory for the length of an undergrad degree (4-5 years), say maximum $3750 extra, that's a drop in the bucket in comparison to, for example, my case of outright losing 6 years of my prime career years with ultimately nothing to show for it.
But hey. What do I know? I'm only a lowly Grad Student.
Ironically, this whole problem, the health care cash shortage, and our provincial deficit could be completely wiped out with one single act: the removal of transfer payments.
What are transfer payments?
Well, when Canada was formed, transfer payments were used in order to prevent provinces and territories from adding taxes and tariffs to trade. Simply a general payment scheme handled by governments at a high level to encourage trade and prosperity. Eventually, somewhere along the way, this idea got super-socialized. Without giving a major history lesson, the end result is that the general wealth of a province is measured, and according to that measurement, funds are redistruibuted in order to "Equalize" wealth.
The end result is that financially strong provinces (Alberta, BC, Sask, and Newfoundland) get to pay the social programs of the other provinces.
If you want to go read about how this is actually done, go wikipedia it, there's a reasonable (however "slanted to Ontario") explanation.
The end result is, as a province, Alberta pays billions to the other provinces, and receives nothing in return. Now we're dealing with a large deficit, and stressed social programs (ie, University Funding).
It would be interesting to see the difference if transfer payments were simply abolished.
I remember those days in Undergrad, where you thought your input and "voice" actually could make a difference in the day-to-day operation of the University. Yeah, I'm far more cynical now, and have a better understanding of the inner workings and how this University, as a whole, operates.
As an Undergrad, you assume that this institution runs as another school. Plain and simple. This institution exists to teach you the skills necessary to become an Engineer, Nurse, Teacher, Artist, Professional Dodgeballer, etc, and that's it.
As a Grad Student, you learn that the University is first and foremost a research institution, and that the majority of money (and yes, this is when you realize that the world runs on money, not idealism or good intentions (lol SU). ) comes from research grants and royalties from technology. The teaching of students is revealed to be a secondary concern, essentially something that is another revenue scheme, an avenue of Grad Student recruitment, and more often than not a charter obligation for the massive operational governmental grants that the institution recieves.
Now, with the recent governmental cutbacks (usually a year or two lag behind the economy), the University is seeing tough times. Research grants will be smaller. Operational grants will be smaller. Tuition credits (that the undergrads recieve indirectly) will be smaller. The end result? Massive budget gaps for the University.
It is funny, however, that the general undergraduate population seems to think that they will be receiving the brunt of the burden in making up this gap. I think its absolutely laughable. Of course, in typical "Undergrad Style" half of the problem is understood.
First, I'll talk about the tuition issue. Generally, tuition is getting a big hike next year. A fair bit more substancial than previous years, specifically because the operational grants and tuition credits (from the government) got cut. What the average Undergrad Student does not realize is that the total cost of their tuition is automatically subsidized by the government. Yes, you may be paying 5-8k a year. The real cost, at this institution, is 2x or 3x that. Ask an international student what their tuition is, and you'll get a fair gauge of what you *should* be paying per year. The amount of tuition that is subsidized by the provencial government is different from province to province, this is why, generally in Quebec, tuition is much less than Alberta. In any case, the increase of tuition that you are seeing is directly tied to the reduction of subsidy that is being given by the province.
Secondly, the "fact" that this "bailout" is being "forced" on the Undergrads is completely false. Grad tuition is basically doubling. University Employees are getting 5-8 days of *unpaid* vacation. Operational budgets are being slashed by 5%. There will be layoffs. Research grants are getting significantly reduced. For example, last year we had 17 summer students in our department. This year, it looks like we'll be getting 5. At this point, I'm wondering if there will be enough funding to complete my research, or if I will have to pay alot of the costs out of pocket.
The Undergrads are getting a $550 increase in tuition in the form of a fee to maintain the standards of education and building services. Right now, this is for next year, as a temporary measure.
Yes. This is much more harsh than people losing their jobs, taking a paycut of roughly 2-4%, or in my case most likely not getting funded (income --> $0) and scaling back/not finishing my research due to lack of funds.
Unfortunately, I don't have the time to be completely selfish and kick up a media/protest storm about how my specific segment of the University Community is being abused/mistreated/squeezed to make up the budget gap, without considering how others are affected.
Even if this fee of $550 is mandatory for the length of an undergrad degree (4-5 years), say maximum $3750 extra, that's a drop in the bucket in comparison to, for example, my case of outright losing 6 years of my prime career years with ultimately nothing to show for it.
But hey. What do I know? I'm only a lowly Grad Student.
Ironically, this whole problem, the health care cash shortage, and our provincial deficit could be completely wiped out with one single act: the removal of transfer payments.
What are transfer payments?
Well, when Canada was formed, transfer payments were used in order to prevent provinces and territories from adding taxes and tariffs to trade. Simply a general payment scheme handled by governments at a high level to encourage trade and prosperity. Eventually, somewhere along the way, this idea got super-socialized. Without giving a major history lesson, the end result is that the general wealth of a province is measured, and according to that measurement, funds are redistruibuted in order to "Equalize" wealth.
The end result is that financially strong provinces (Alberta, BC, Sask, and Newfoundland) get to pay the social programs of the other provinces.
If you want to go read about how this is actually done, go wikipedia it, there's a reasonable (however "slanted to Ontario") explanation.
The end result is, as a province, Alberta pays billions to the other provinces, and receives nothing in return. Now we're dealing with a large deficit, and stressed social programs (ie, University Funding).
It would be interesting to see the difference if transfer payments were simply abolished.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Well, that was fun.. lol
So, after the major nationalist kick of the Olympics, it was time to bear down and get that Candidacy Exam done. Yup, its been two-three weeks of static on the blog, and for a good reason - I've spent nearly every waking moment preparing for that exam. Long story short, I passed, and it wasn't quite as I expected.
Now, some background:
At my University, specifically my department, the Candidacy Exam structure is as follows:
1. Candidate writes a proposal and distributes it to his committee 2-3 weeks ahead of the exam date.
2. Committee exists of my supervisor, three other professors from my department, and then an external.
3. At the exam, candidate gives a 20 minute presentation, followed by 2-2.5 hours of questions. The questions can be any subject matter related to the project. Depending on your answers, you pass or fail.
So yeah, it ends up being a bit open ended in terms of what the subject matter of the questioning can be. Sure, you'll have an idea of the subject matter, specifically subjects that are tied to your project. However, that could be fairly broad, for my project, it is. The major importance of the Candidacy Exam, at least in my department, is that this is the last time that your "general knowledge" is tested. From this point in, its your work, and you're defending it. Generally speaking, its considered to be harder than a final defense, simply for that reason.
Anyways, I had been working on the documentation for my exam since early February, and managed to finish during the Olympics. I finished just over a week before we had to submit the paperwork to the committee. As you would expect, I passed the document to my supervisor, and had him give his input. In usual fashion, a week passes, and at the last moment, I get the document back from him with a bunch of changes required. I understand that he's a busy guy, essentially the poster-boy for biting off more than you can chew, but you would figure that something this important would take some priority. Oh well, this is something I'll probably never understand, since I'm just a grad student, and don't manage 10 grad students at once... >.>
In any case, my planning ahead to get things done ahead of time was totally negated by this. I suppose it happens, but still, it would have been nice to not have to continually swap between the document and the presentation. It would have been perfect to been able to work on everything in a sequential manner, but yeah, best laid plans... lol. In any case, the loss of time made things fairly hectic, moreso than they probably should have been. Everything ended up being shifted back a week, and with all things considered, I only had a few days after finalization of my presentation to study fundamentals and practice my presentation.
Its kind of ironic, after spending pretty much every waking moment working on, well, essentially my life's work at this point, how much the little pleasures in life actually mattered. The one thing that probably kept me sane was forcefully preserving the semblance of a sleeping schedule. Also, taking time, even just an hour in every, say, four hours just to switch the brain off and either watching TV or playing some video games. Just some time to let the brain rest. Heck, a good cup of coffee was a treat, but not as good of a treat as the cold Holsten Festbock I have beside the laptop.
As I got closer to the exam, my stress level rose significantly. To keep sane, I tried to keep as busy as possible by tweaking my presentation, adding equations and figures to my presentation to refer to in questioning, practicing the presentation, and studying fundamentals. I pretty much went over my 4th year of by B.Sc. and all my grad courses in three days flat. That's an insane amount of material in a very short time - all of it fair game for questions. On top of this, my presentation was over the time limit until a day before the exam. Understandably, I was exceptionally stressed.
Tuesday came around. I got a good night's sleep. I did my final prep. Then we got stuck in traffic. Awesome. Then we couldn't find a parking spot. Awesome. Then two of my examination panel was late. Awesome. Then I had a bunch of random people show up (our presentations are open). Awesome. Then one of the randoms asked a serious question about the fabrication of my device (noticed that the release of my structures wasn't very clean). Awesome. As if I needed more things to happen.
As for the presentation itself, it went very quickly. I had 20 slides to present, 20 minutes, so a minute per slide. I went through my first 5 in three minutes. Talk about adrenalin. I pulled it together, and pulled off the presentation fairly well. I did a good job of defining my project scope, and not opening myself up to a lot of stray questions. Then the two hours of questions started...
I was dreading the questions. After talking to people in my group about their exams, and people outside my group, the overwhelming problem with these exams is the questions. I did get my fair share of questions, including some that blatantly questioned the operation of my device, and rightly so. The design of my device is from the very beginning of my project. Since I'm microfabricating this, I developed a mask set, and haven't been able to deviate from that mask set. Fortunately, my exam panel realized this as well. Without going into the nitty-gritty details, the examiners were satisfied that these problems (although somewhat serious in terms of operation) were easily fixable. Essentially some design optimization that is easily accomplishable with my fabrication recipe. In the end, I ended up being surprised on how casual and non-structured the whole process was. Essentially, it felt no different than sitting down with my own research group and talking about people's projects. The input was very valuable, and some opinions were raised that I'll be taking to heart (the design revisions, etc). The major thing that surprised me was the fact that my supervisor was a non-factor in the questioning. He didn't really ask any questions, nor did he seem to have the time to talk to me after the exam (left in a hurry, fairly upset..). So, ultimately, I have no clue how he feels about the exam. Hopefully, something external to the exam was happening to distract him. I've been told by two professors in my department that I did very well, so I'm unsure of my supervisor's reaction. I'm sure I'll get an earful eventually one way or another, either in private or at my next group meeting (next Tuesday) about how I "barely passed" and was "lucky" to continue.
All speculation aside, the experience (at least to this point... lol) has been ultimately positive. I have the best grasp of my research I've ever had, period. I know where the project is going, and have a clear grasp of what's required to finish. In addition, the validation that what I've been toiling with for the last five or so years wasn't misguided or worthless, as my supervisor has, on occasion, pretty much suggested.
After it was all said and done, the relief was FANTASTIC. I slept like a baby. I got up early, sat myself down in front of my computer, relaxed, played video games while listening to Ron and Fez/Opie and Anthony all morning while casually drinking a pot of coffee. It was heaven.
Now, some background:
At my University, specifically my department, the Candidacy Exam structure is as follows:
1. Candidate writes a proposal and distributes it to his committee 2-3 weeks ahead of the exam date.
2. Committee exists of my supervisor, three other professors from my department, and then an external.
3. At the exam, candidate gives a 20 minute presentation, followed by 2-2.5 hours of questions. The questions can be any subject matter related to the project. Depending on your answers, you pass or fail.
So yeah, it ends up being a bit open ended in terms of what the subject matter of the questioning can be. Sure, you'll have an idea of the subject matter, specifically subjects that are tied to your project. However, that could be fairly broad, for my project, it is. The major importance of the Candidacy Exam, at least in my department, is that this is the last time that your "general knowledge" is tested. From this point in, its your work, and you're defending it. Generally speaking, its considered to be harder than a final defense, simply for that reason.
Anyways, I had been working on the documentation for my exam since early February, and managed to finish during the Olympics. I finished just over a week before we had to submit the paperwork to the committee. As you would expect, I passed the document to my supervisor, and had him give his input. In usual fashion, a week passes, and at the last moment, I get the document back from him with a bunch of changes required. I understand that he's a busy guy, essentially the poster-boy for biting off more than you can chew, but you would figure that something this important would take some priority. Oh well, this is something I'll probably never understand, since I'm just a grad student, and don't manage 10 grad students at once... >.>
In any case, my planning ahead to get things done ahead of time was totally negated by this. I suppose it happens, but still, it would have been nice to not have to continually swap between the document and the presentation. It would have been perfect to been able to work on everything in a sequential manner, but yeah, best laid plans... lol. In any case, the loss of time made things fairly hectic, moreso than they probably should have been. Everything ended up being shifted back a week, and with all things considered, I only had a few days after finalization of my presentation to study fundamentals and practice my presentation.
Its kind of ironic, after spending pretty much every waking moment working on, well, essentially my life's work at this point, how much the little pleasures in life actually mattered. The one thing that probably kept me sane was forcefully preserving the semblance of a sleeping schedule. Also, taking time, even just an hour in every, say, four hours just to switch the brain off and either watching TV or playing some video games. Just some time to let the brain rest. Heck, a good cup of coffee was a treat, but not as good of a treat as the cold Holsten Festbock I have beside the laptop.
As I got closer to the exam, my stress level rose significantly. To keep sane, I tried to keep as busy as possible by tweaking my presentation, adding equations and figures to my presentation to refer to in questioning, practicing the presentation, and studying fundamentals. I pretty much went over my 4th year of by B.Sc. and all my grad courses in three days flat. That's an insane amount of material in a very short time - all of it fair game for questions. On top of this, my presentation was over the time limit until a day before the exam. Understandably, I was exceptionally stressed.
Tuesday came around. I got a good night's sleep. I did my final prep. Then we got stuck in traffic. Awesome. Then we couldn't find a parking spot. Awesome. Then two of my examination panel was late. Awesome. Then I had a bunch of random people show up (our presentations are open). Awesome. Then one of the randoms asked a serious question about the fabrication of my device (noticed that the release of my structures wasn't very clean). Awesome. As if I needed more things to happen.
As for the presentation itself, it went very quickly. I had 20 slides to present, 20 minutes, so a minute per slide. I went through my first 5 in three minutes. Talk about adrenalin. I pulled it together, and pulled off the presentation fairly well. I did a good job of defining my project scope, and not opening myself up to a lot of stray questions. Then the two hours of questions started...
I was dreading the questions. After talking to people in my group about their exams, and people outside my group, the overwhelming problem with these exams is the questions. I did get my fair share of questions, including some that blatantly questioned the operation of my device, and rightly so. The design of my device is from the very beginning of my project. Since I'm microfabricating this, I developed a mask set, and haven't been able to deviate from that mask set. Fortunately, my exam panel realized this as well. Without going into the nitty-gritty details, the examiners were satisfied that these problems (although somewhat serious in terms of operation) were easily fixable. Essentially some design optimization that is easily accomplishable with my fabrication recipe. In the end, I ended up being surprised on how casual and non-structured the whole process was. Essentially, it felt no different than sitting down with my own research group and talking about people's projects. The input was very valuable, and some opinions were raised that I'll be taking to heart (the design revisions, etc). The major thing that surprised me was the fact that my supervisor was a non-factor in the questioning. He didn't really ask any questions, nor did he seem to have the time to talk to me after the exam (left in a hurry, fairly upset..). So, ultimately, I have no clue how he feels about the exam. Hopefully, something external to the exam was happening to distract him. I've been told by two professors in my department that I did very well, so I'm unsure of my supervisor's reaction. I'm sure I'll get an earful eventually one way or another, either in private or at my next group meeting (next Tuesday) about how I "barely passed" and was "lucky" to continue.
All speculation aside, the experience (at least to this point... lol) has been ultimately positive. I have the best grasp of my research I've ever had, period. I know where the project is going, and have a clear grasp of what's required to finish. In addition, the validation that what I've been toiling with for the last five or so years wasn't misguided or worthless, as my supervisor has, on occasion, pretty much suggested.
After it was all said and done, the relief was FANTASTIC. I slept like a baby. I got up early, sat myself down in front of my computer, relaxed, played video games while listening to Ron and Fez/Opie and Anthony all morning while casually drinking a pot of coffee. It was heaven.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Yeah, that's right, its our game.
So, a week ago, the Americans beat us at our own game. All you heard after that in American dominated media, blogs, radio, etc, was how they would spoil our party, beat us at our own game, and how Miller would shut us down.
So, today, we witnessed a great game. The first game where the US Hockey team really had some organized opposition, and no gift cushion of a few goals. The 5-3 win over Canada had 2 freebies where our goalie pretty much scored on himself. The curb-stomping of the Finns had a goalie self destruct. Today, however was a different story, where the always colourful and ever confident US athletes got to eat their words...
So, today, we witnessed a great game. The first game where the US Hockey team really had some organized opposition, and no gift cushion of a few goals. The 5-3 win over Canada had 2 freebies where our goalie pretty much scored on himself. The curb-stomping of the Finns had a goalie self destruct. Today, however was a different story, where the always colourful and ever confident US athletes got to eat their words...
ITS OUR GAME BITCHES.
Yes. I had to get that off my chest. Canadians are quietly patriotic, but we can be just as equally offensive and defensive over our "game" as you Americans can. The trash talk and posturing before the game on American media was hillarious, and now its time to eat those words. But, of course, the usual excuse of "Its not important to us" will be liberally applied, because, well, you lost. The mass media outlets will just gloss it over, or focus on the point that Miller got MVP (well deserved, because, well, he carried the team to the silver), and then just let it pass. However, if the US won, it would be another "Miracle on Ice"-type event. Funny the way that works. I'll peg that to the mass insecurity Americans generally have, where the MLB/NFL have "World" Champions, and the mentality of "If we're not winning, we'll ignore it" is prevalent.
... and then you have the interwebs. Ah yes, the world wide web, where ignorance and self importance is king. Do a Google/twitter/facebook survey of anything having to do with the hockey game today. You'll find whole Facebook groups dedicated to Sidney Crosby hate, littered with comments of "we don't care", "we defend and feed you" (I thought this one was funny, especially the feeding part), "you use our players (... what? we use Canadian players, playing in the US, for a Canadian Olympic Hockey team.... you're.. serious? Are you from the deep south or something?), "We still won more medals" (so? who cares? lol) and the like. The hate over this loss is absolutely amazing.
For example:
Out of the one above, I like this one the best:
- amazing #bipartisanhate RT @wccubbison: US mens hockey team played well. Its just too bad we lost to a fake country. #ihatecanada
Fake country? Fuck you. Seriously, go fuck yourself. Why don't you go invade another country for oil? Your tears over this loss are sweeter than any double-double.
On ESPN, Americans are complaining they got screwed by the rules:
I could dig for more, but I think my point is well made.
So, if you don't care about being beaten, why all the hate? Talk about sore losers, poor sports, and ignorant people.
I'll spell out the facts for you, my American Friends:
1. Winning Gold in Hockey was expected for us, the fact that you got there in the Men's side was over achievement. Period. IIHF had you ranked as 6th. Everyone in the know had Canada/Russia. You got there on happenstance, and the simple fact that Miller carried you there. As explained by your venerable football announcers on Fox: "One man can't win a championship.".
2. We won the most gold medals ever in a Winter Olympics. Period. Host country or not. We may not have the most medals, but we have the most golds. That's good enough for me.
3. 50% of the players in the NHL (obviously, an "American" league, dominated by "American" teams) are Canadian, 75-80% of the elite players are Canadian.
4. You lost because your team wasn't as deep as ours. Period. That's why we won. We had better talent, more talent, and didn't rely on one line or player to get us there. You. Did.
So in closing:
My American Friends. You lost. Buck up, take it like a man, and stop whining. You're perpetuating the stereotype that you are just simply the "spoiled suburban teenagers" of the world.
Although, I'm not sure if that general stereotype isn't far from the truth now, is it? Anyways. I'm going to go wave my flag, and point south, laugh hysterically, and wait for more American idiocy.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
So, the Olympics are cool, and for once we finally have some decent coverage. CTV (the non-government owned Canadian National Network) is running the coverage, and its really good. They have multiple networks (which they run/own) broadcasting multiple events, different feeds, etc. There's a wide variety of events shown, and rightly so, being a Winter Olympics in Canada.
Although the amount of negative press/coverage that is out there about the Olympics is pretty funny. Granted, some of the sources for this negative press are suspect, but yeah, its still there. The ones that really get me are the following:
1. The brand of "Worst Olympics Ever" due to the death of the Georgian Athlete and the hydraulic failure of the indoor cauldron during the opening ceremonies. Well. I won't disagree or downplay the tragedy of the training accident. That was pretty brutal. What was more brutal was the media's coverage of it, with many outlets showing the last moments of this poor athlete as his head bounced off the steel beam at 90 mph. That sickening "boing" noise stayed with me for a few days. This is what I don't understand: they show someone colliding with a steel beam at 90 MPH continuously, and then they'll freak the minute there's verbal profanity or the slightest bit of partial nudity. I suppose if it makes news, the rules don't matter. The hydraulic failure of the cauldron goes into the "shit happens" column of the potential things that could have gone wrong. I would like to see a full list of "Olympic Glitches" that have occurred in the recent Olympics, and then compare notes with Vancouver.
But anyways, in terms of "Worst Olympics Ever", the current ones have a LONG way to go. There's a few memorable Olympics that stand out in my mind as markedly worst. Munich with the eleven athletes murdered and Atlanta with the terrorist attack. Realistically, this isn't the first Luge-related death at an Olympics either. But whatever, this is looking more like a "Oh, the Olympics aren't in the USA, therefore its crap" syndrome of the US-based media.
Heaven help us if we show the slightest iota of national pride.. lol.
2. The major outcry about the "lack of winter" in Vancouver. Holy hell. Vancouver doesn't "see" winter half the time. I think this is being blown out of proportion, especially with the trucking/shipping of snow into Cypress Mountain. Talk to anyone that is an avid skier that gets around in BC. They'll laugh and say: "Cypress has a two-week season some years". Hmm... it seems like the choice of venues is to blame here. Why isn't the freestyle isn't happening at a venue that's guaranteed snow.. like Whistler? Oh well, bad planning.
3. The protests. Wow. People protesting things like tarsands oil at the Olympics. Talk about complaining about the wrong thing at the wrong place. Yes. The tarsands are environmentally bad. That's a point I won't even remotely consider arguing against. However, I think the people that continually call for the reduction/stoppage of oilsands production in Northern Alberta simply do not understand the simple economics of the situation.
You stop the oilsands, Alberta goes broke as a province. Its THAT simple. Period. What people do not understand, especially the environmentalists that are too concerned about digging up skewed facts that just strengthen their argument, rather than understanding all sides of the situation, is that the majority of Alberta's Provincial Revenues, the actual money that runs the province, are oilsands royalties. Not to mention that a large amount of Albertans work in the oilsands, oilpatch and related services/industries whose livelihoods would be instantly crushed. Pair that, with the reduction of social programs and rampant government cutbacks, and suddenly every Albertan gets affected. The only "have" province, supporting all the others through transfer payments is on the verge of being a "have not" province.
Still not convinced? Well, lets look at the numbers. The government's revenues are directly tied to the price of oil and the US/CAN dollar conversion rate. High price of oil, and low Canadian Dollar, suddenly you have ridiculous revenues. Its to the point where they've actually calculated the revenue loss per $0.001 gain in conversion rate vs the US dollar at $225 million. Before the economic downturn in the US began, there was a point where the government, essentially run by blindfolded monkeys, had multi-billion dollar surpluses. Let me put this in perspective. A province/state of just over 3 million people had something in the order of an 8 billion dollar budget surplus. For the majority of the downturn, while jobs were being cut left right and centre everywhere BUT Alberta, we were in a worker shortage. You could not find workers to work at McDonalds. People working at Tim Hortons in Ft MacMurray (Oilpatch) were reported of making upwards of $30/hour. Then.. oil started to drop, Canadian Dollar started gaining relative strength. Suddenly, the revenue stream dried up, and we started to feel the effects of the recession. Oilpatch layoffs, Gov't cutbacks, and retail jobs/stores dissappearing are common place. Going from multi-billion dollar surpluses, now the provincial gov't is going to run a multi-billion dollar deficit. Nice.
Now, I won't downplay, nor argue the environmental impact of the tarsands. The University that I work at essentially has a whole Faculty (more or less) funded by oil companies attempting to reduce the environmental impact of the oil processing. Nobody's arguing the fact that there's positive change that needs to occur.
But you know, apparently that's not good enough for the protesters, the majority of which most likely have no ties to Alberta whatsoever. Environmentalism at the cost of the livelihoods of many and the well being of 3.5 million plus people is apparently acceptable for these people. Good to know someone values the life of a duck moreso than my well being.
I have no problem with people expressing their views, in fact, I encourage it. I just wish people would think more about a situation as a whole, rather than taking narrow minded, one dimensional views. Oh well. Environmentalism seems to be just another way to be selfish.
(Edited for my horrible late night grammar. Damn you Candidacy Documentation!)
Although the amount of negative press/coverage that is out there about the Olympics is pretty funny. Granted, some of the sources for this negative press are suspect, but yeah, its still there. The ones that really get me are the following:
1. The brand of "Worst Olympics Ever" due to the death of the Georgian Athlete and the hydraulic failure of the indoor cauldron during the opening ceremonies. Well. I won't disagree or downplay the tragedy of the training accident. That was pretty brutal. What was more brutal was the media's coverage of it, with many outlets showing the last moments of this poor athlete as his head bounced off the steel beam at 90 mph. That sickening "boing" noise stayed with me for a few days. This is what I don't understand: they show someone colliding with a steel beam at 90 MPH continuously, and then they'll freak the minute there's verbal profanity or the slightest bit of partial nudity. I suppose if it makes news, the rules don't matter. The hydraulic failure of the cauldron goes into the "shit happens" column of the potential things that could have gone wrong. I would like to see a full list of "Olympic Glitches" that have occurred in the recent Olympics, and then compare notes with Vancouver.
But anyways, in terms of "Worst Olympics Ever", the current ones have a LONG way to go. There's a few memorable Olympics that stand out in my mind as markedly worst. Munich with the eleven athletes murdered and Atlanta with the terrorist attack. Realistically, this isn't the first Luge-related death at an Olympics either. But whatever, this is looking more like a "Oh, the Olympics aren't in the USA, therefore its crap" syndrome of the US-based media.
Heaven help us if we show the slightest iota of national pride.. lol.
2. The major outcry about the "lack of winter" in Vancouver. Holy hell. Vancouver doesn't "see" winter half the time. I think this is being blown out of proportion, especially with the trucking/shipping of snow into Cypress Mountain. Talk to anyone that is an avid skier that gets around in BC. They'll laugh and say: "Cypress has a two-week season some years". Hmm... it seems like the choice of venues is to blame here. Why isn't the freestyle isn't happening at a venue that's guaranteed snow.. like Whistler? Oh well, bad planning.
3. The protests. Wow. People protesting things like tarsands oil at the Olympics. Talk about complaining about the wrong thing at the wrong place. Yes. The tarsands are environmentally bad. That's a point I won't even remotely consider arguing against. However, I think the people that continually call for the reduction/stoppage of oilsands production in Northern Alberta simply do not understand the simple economics of the situation.
You stop the oilsands, Alberta goes broke as a province. Its THAT simple. Period. What people do not understand, especially the environmentalists that are too concerned about digging up skewed facts that just strengthen their argument, rather than understanding all sides of the situation, is that the majority of Alberta's Provincial Revenues, the actual money that runs the province, are oilsands royalties. Not to mention that a large amount of Albertans work in the oilsands, oilpatch and related services/industries whose livelihoods would be instantly crushed. Pair that, with the reduction of social programs and rampant government cutbacks, and suddenly every Albertan gets affected. The only "have" province, supporting all the others through transfer payments is on the verge of being a "have not" province.
Still not convinced? Well, lets look at the numbers. The government's revenues are directly tied to the price of oil and the US/CAN dollar conversion rate. High price of oil, and low Canadian Dollar, suddenly you have ridiculous revenues. Its to the point where they've actually calculated the revenue loss per $0.001 gain in conversion rate vs the US dollar at $225 million. Before the economic downturn in the US began, there was a point where the government, essentially run by blindfolded monkeys, had multi-billion dollar surpluses. Let me put this in perspective. A province/state of just over 3 million people had something in the order of an 8 billion dollar budget surplus. For the majority of the downturn, while jobs were being cut left right and centre everywhere BUT Alberta, we were in a worker shortage. You could not find workers to work at McDonalds. People working at Tim Hortons in Ft MacMurray (Oilpatch) were reported of making upwards of $30/hour. Then.. oil started to drop, Canadian Dollar started gaining relative strength. Suddenly, the revenue stream dried up, and we started to feel the effects of the recession. Oilpatch layoffs, Gov't cutbacks, and retail jobs/stores dissappearing are common place. Going from multi-billion dollar surpluses, now the provincial gov't is going to run a multi-billion dollar deficit. Nice.
Now, I won't downplay, nor argue the environmental impact of the tarsands. The University that I work at essentially has a whole Faculty (more or less) funded by oil companies attempting to reduce the environmental impact of the oil processing. Nobody's arguing the fact that there's positive change that needs to occur.
But you know, apparently that's not good enough for the protesters, the majority of which most likely have no ties to Alberta whatsoever. Environmentalism at the cost of the livelihoods of many and the well being of 3.5 million plus people is apparently acceptable for these people. Good to know someone values the life of a duck moreso than my well being.
I have no problem with people expressing their views, in fact, I encourage it. I just wish people would think more about a situation as a whole, rather than taking narrow minded, one dimensional views. Oh well. Environmentalism seems to be just another way to be selfish.
(Edited for my horrible late night grammar. Damn you Candidacy Documentation!)
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Hah.. Since I'm writing anyways.......
.... I'll randomly rant about protesting the Olympics.
So, what's the deal with this?
I understand that the Olympics themselves are a monumental event, with a multi-billion dollar budget, which essentially interrupts/disrupts an entire metropolis for a month. I get it. I understand the hassles, the potential for excess and waste of money. I have friends that live in Vancouver, and believe me, they've voices their opinions about the situation and how it will adversly affect their own lives. Hell, my friend working as a game programmer will be working on a "show up if you can" basis just simply due to the influx of people into the area. I understand why people may want to protest this event, especially since there's better ways to spend that massive sum of cash in this day and age of recession and governmental budget shortcomings.
But, lets look at some facts in this situation:
1. The Olympics were bid on YEARS ago. Vancouver was awarded the Olympics in.. I want to say 2003, probably 2004 or 2005. Regardless of my somewhat incomplete memory (lol, I remember where I was when I watched the webcast, but not when it was.. ) my point here is that the economic climate was 100% different. The economy was booming, things were stable (well, more or less... definitely a better economic situation than now). From then till now, things have gone fairly badly. Its not really fair to start making the arguement that the money should be spent elsewhere, or that things should be scaled back. When VANOC bid, they had to submit detailed paperwork about how money will be spent, the scale of projects, venues to be constructed, etc. From writing and helping to write grants for research, I can understand how detailed this will get. On top of that, those agreements are BINDING, so protesting about something that cannot be changed.. period.. is kind of silly. (That didn't stop Mike Hudema.. go back to Bejing, you moron.). Do you think that VANOC is prepared to be branded "those people" for changing/cancelling the Olympics? Wow. Do you understand the personal, legal, societal, national and international implications of what you're suggesting? Apparently not. Given recent events (Iran announcing to the world "WE GOT NUKES!" and Israel's track record with "diplomacy") we're almost assured some sort of Middle East conflict, perhaps a world war. Awesome. I'm not saying an Olympics where these countries are not even going to be involved will even scratch the surface in solving these problems, but a little "world-unity" isn't a bad thing.
Oh, and VANOC announcing that they're already running a balanced budget before the games is icing on the cake for me and this point. They haven't opened the doors, and they've paid for all the venues and costs up to this point. Holy hell. They haven't seen one cent of actual concession, souvenir and random non-variable money flow in yet. I heard a news story that predicted millions of PROFIT if the economic downturn didn't occur. If any government was run as well as VANOC financially, we'd all be much happier.
2. There has been a fairly large outcry about the environmental impact of the new venues, roads, facilities and what have you. Fine. I can understand if the projects were done in a non-sustainable way. From what I've heard, the majority of the new venues are ULTRA-sustainable, and go as far as collecting rainwater for use in toilets. In addition, consider the quality of life legacy that this will leave in the long run. New recreational facilities, new mass transit, better roads, etc. Yes, maybe money better spent feeding Haiti for a week.. So, a two week event planned for probably close to a decade leaving a legacy of infrastructure for Vancouver is a bad thing? If I had the time, I could probably dig for sustainable building methods that were DEVELOPED for producing these venues. I'm sure we'll hear more than enough about this with the filler material between events.
So, I guess my real problem with people protesting the Olympics is more or less the complete and utter lack of focus and priorities. I don't get it. Lets protest an event that ends up having more positive outcomes than negative ones. Could it be that the professional activists suddenly felt that the Olympics were as big of a target as the WTO for protests? Wow. That's kinda sad. I know you're arts degrees were painful with all the free time you had to waste between "classes" but yeah, issues with priorities?
I don't know, if I had the time to protest something, it would be Iran VS Israel, not the Olympics. Something that actually would have a signifigant negative worldwide effect, not something that brings people from around the world together for a month. There's got to be something more important to protest about. But hey, I'm not the one with a degree in Philosophy, so I guess this isn't my field.
The one thing I do know, however, is that Mukmuk will destroy the protesters.
BEHOLD MUKMUK AND HIS GLORY!
So, what's the deal with this?
I understand that the Olympics themselves are a monumental event, with a multi-billion dollar budget, which essentially interrupts/disrupts an entire metropolis for a month. I get it. I understand the hassles, the potential for excess and waste of money. I have friends that live in Vancouver, and believe me, they've voices their opinions about the situation and how it will adversly affect their own lives. Hell, my friend working as a game programmer will be working on a "show up if you can" basis just simply due to the influx of people into the area. I understand why people may want to protest this event, especially since there's better ways to spend that massive sum of cash in this day and age of recession and governmental budget shortcomings.
But, lets look at some facts in this situation:
1. The Olympics were bid on YEARS ago. Vancouver was awarded the Olympics in.. I want to say 2003, probably 2004 or 2005. Regardless of my somewhat incomplete memory (lol, I remember where I was when I watched the webcast, but not when it was.. ) my point here is that the economic climate was 100% different. The economy was booming, things were stable (well, more or less... definitely a better economic situation than now). From then till now, things have gone fairly badly. Its not really fair to start making the arguement that the money should be spent elsewhere, or that things should be scaled back. When VANOC bid, they had to submit detailed paperwork about how money will be spent, the scale of projects, venues to be constructed, etc. From writing and helping to write grants for research, I can understand how detailed this will get. On top of that, those agreements are BINDING, so protesting about something that cannot be changed.. period.. is kind of silly. (That didn't stop Mike Hudema.. go back to Bejing, you moron.). Do you think that VANOC is prepared to be branded "those people" for changing/cancelling the Olympics? Wow. Do you understand the personal, legal, societal, national and international implications of what you're suggesting? Apparently not. Given recent events (Iran announcing to the world "WE GOT NUKES!" and Israel's track record with "diplomacy") we're almost assured some sort of Middle East conflict, perhaps a world war. Awesome. I'm not saying an Olympics where these countries are not even going to be involved will even scratch the surface in solving these problems, but a little "world-unity" isn't a bad thing.
Oh, and VANOC announcing that they're already running a balanced budget before the games is icing on the cake for me and this point. They haven't opened the doors, and they've paid for all the venues and costs up to this point. Holy hell. They haven't seen one cent of actual concession, souvenir and random non-variable money flow in yet. I heard a news story that predicted millions of PROFIT if the economic downturn didn't occur. If any government was run as well as VANOC financially, we'd all be much happier.
2. There has been a fairly large outcry about the environmental impact of the new venues, roads, facilities and what have you. Fine. I can understand if the projects were done in a non-sustainable way. From what I've heard, the majority of the new venues are ULTRA-sustainable, and go as far as collecting rainwater for use in toilets. In addition, consider the quality of life legacy that this will leave in the long run. New recreational facilities, new mass transit, better roads, etc. Yes, maybe money better spent feeding Haiti for a week.. So, a two week event planned for probably close to a decade leaving a legacy of infrastructure for Vancouver is a bad thing? If I had the time, I could probably dig for sustainable building methods that were DEVELOPED for producing these venues. I'm sure we'll hear more than enough about this with the filler material between events.
So, I guess my real problem with people protesting the Olympics is more or less the complete and utter lack of focus and priorities. I don't get it. Lets protest an event that ends up having more positive outcomes than negative ones. Could it be that the professional activists suddenly felt that the Olympics were as big of a target as the WTO for protests? Wow. That's kinda sad. I know you're arts degrees were painful with all the free time you had to waste between "classes" but yeah, issues with priorities?
I don't know, if I had the time to protest something, it would be Iran VS Israel, not the Olympics. Something that actually would have a signifigant negative worldwide effect, not something that brings people from around the world together for a month. There's got to be something more important to protest about. But hey, I'm not the one with a degree in Philosophy, so I guess this isn't my field.
The one thing I do know, however, is that Mukmuk will destroy the protesters.
BEHOLD MUKMUK AND HIS GLORY!
Monday, February 8, 2010
Tick tock, tick tock.
So.
I finally have a date for my exam.
March 9th.
Now I have to jump through the hoops.
First unofficial hoop:
Present a very rough candidacy presentation tomorrow. Catch as many rediculous questions as possible to prepare and understand the type of questioning that will occur.
First offical hoop:
Complete a report on my project to the committee next Tuesday. Thankfully the majority of the information is written. However, that doesn't mean that it's going to be easy.
Then I have roughly three weeks to tweak things and study for the possibility of completely random questions.
Expect much tired randomness. I'll be using this blog as stress relief. Might as well. :D
I finally have a date for my exam.
March 9th.
Now I have to jump through the hoops.
First unofficial hoop:
Present a very rough candidacy presentation tomorrow. Catch as many rediculous questions as possible to prepare and understand the type of questioning that will occur.
First offical hoop:
Complete a report on my project to the committee next Tuesday. Thankfully the majority of the information is written. However, that doesn't mean that it's going to be easy.
Then I have roughly three weeks to tweak things and study for the possibility of completely random questions.
Expect much tired randomness. I'll be using this blog as stress relief. Might as well. :D
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)