Category: Uncategorized

I always wondered what it would be like, fuck that hurts: bike accident

So, about an hour ago, I was biking along shattuck, past the intersection with center, when all of a sudden, I felt something massive brush against me, at high speed, and for a brief moment, I saw a white minivan pulling away, I think I yelled “JESUS FUCKING CHRIST!”, but I’m not really sure. I am sure that half an instant later, I was skidding about 2-3 yards along the pavement. I definitely said “Jesus Fucking Christ” as I was getting up. Bloody knee, torn shorts. No pain yet. Solicitous people asked me if I was okay. I responded “Well, I’m standing” with uncertainty, confidence, and relief. Shock is and was my friend. My bike was misaligned in the fall. Handlebars, gear shift, and right brake handle all in funky orientations, but nothing broken or bent, and I was in the process of realigning them when the driver came over. I told him repeatedly that I was fine, that there was no damage to me that time wouldn’t heal, and that the bike didn’t need a mechanic, with decreasing cold-shouldered-ness (though minorly increasing exhasperation). He kept saying that he wanted to pay for anything, and even said at one point, that he would like to pay for more than the damage.

But, really, what is there to say to that? “No, thank you. Your money won’t fix the damage you’ve done today. It was minor damage, time will fix it, get on with your life.” He gave me his card. The shock-numbness wore off on the walk back home. Injuries stung, I had a couple of almost starting to cry from aftershock moments, but all in all, I’m fine. A little more hardcore on my desire for better city planning with good transportation arrangements.

Injuries include scraped knee, and elbow, both hip and back also got hit through the clothing, and though abraded, are not bleeding. My biggest concern though is the tendon or ligament damage on the pinky side of my left hand. Still, not serious, I’m typing, after all.

2nd date emotional paralysis

So, Steve is cool. And attractive, and fun to talk to. 2nd date started off somewhat awkward and off balance, but corrected pretty smoothly. But now I’m experiencing an emotional reaction very similar to the one I had when Josh asked me, lo those many moons ago, “so, are we boyfriends?”, which is to say “I really don’t want to lose this guy, but I really don’t feel ready to commit”. I am pretty lonely and work unfulfilled, but let’s stick to the lonely for a minute.

I work all day with Ro, and only Ro. Our schedules don’t always overlap much. I’m not the sort to casually strike up conversation at the gym. At the clinic, there are some good guys, but when I’m medicing, I’m spending most of my time talking to people that I am not to approach in a nonclinical setting. (It’s come up with a few guys already). At home, well, simon’s back (yay), but he has a life that occupies more time with class & work than mine does. Tom works obscene hours in mountainview, and shannon likewise has a life.

Dating is not the ideal solution. For me, small groups (3-7) is optimal. Dates come in a fixed size of 2. Steve is also way the hell far away.

But the real problem here is that I’m thinking of person-I-will-be-dating as the solution for all the social activity I’m missing. If I take that burden of expectation away, Steve seems like someone well worth dating. But that means I’m going to have to try something else for the social angle. Hmmmm.

points to ponder.

puerto rico strategy article

courtesy : http://www.boardgamegeek.com/viewarticle.php3?articleid=18215

And I won twice in a row, both times by the skin of my teeth, the other day. Soon Simon will be here (tomorrow evening. I’ll be living with two, two of my favorite roommates, hah, hah, hah) and Matt reported that Simon found puerto rico this summer as well. Excellent. =)

But I really ought to get my reading in for class if I want to spend quality time with da roomies this evening. Maybe I should just hit gym then work, and give up on the notion of going back to sleep until after lunch. Hmmm.

Thanks to Luis () for the following links from sfgate.

Dean’s speech I spent over an hour (and $5.50) getting to and missed:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/09/07/MN31311.DTL

The animal rights movement marches forward, for meat eaters.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/09/07/MN165897.DTL

A modest intellectual property proposal.

Food for thought: An IP system.

So, I mentioned to Steve (recent date, not first bf) on date #1 that I thought IP was broken and needed to be reworked. As a consequence of that conversation, some ideas have started to crystalize.

The big picture flaws I see are consolidation of IP into the hands of large corporations, such that any rewards of creativity are dependent on your employer (the same individual that made the engineer/inventor sign away his rights in the first place), and similar effects for artists. Further, it enables profit-maximizing entities an amazing consolidation of power, which, of course, breeds a desire for more power, the better to maximize profit, without those pesky legal barriers.

Another interesting effect (noted in Guns, Germs, and Steel) is that invention is a process not unlike the lottery, where few people make it big, but those who do make it big, got there because of all the people who did not make it big (standing on the shoulders of giants, and all that.) I don’t think this is as applicable to artistic IP, but haven’t thought as much about that. This lottery-esque setup is one reason we have our current ip situation.

Another is that creative efforts (at least technological ones) are capital intensive. A new solution would have to provide an incentive to holders of capital to get involved in the process.

Basically, the idea I have in mind is that a person would never be able to sign over ip. An alternative, which I am more ambivalent about would be not being able to sign over ip until after it has been produced.

Under the original proposal, one could auction off the right to produce n units of whatever. IP owner can sell limited rights. Monopolies can be prevented/limited by mandating that production rights be made available to a few or several parties, in the case of books, you can sell to one house that specializes in unbound, ultra cheap printing, and some that specialize in hardbacks with handtooled leather at obscene prices, as well as the standard options now available.

N% goes to the IP Owner(s), divided equitably, M% goes to assisting agencies (owner of the particle accelerator, etc), L% goes to preceding generations of patents (using a decay scheme or something related, L/2% going to the first generation, L/4% to the generation before that, etc), and K% goes to the agency handling the immense beauracratic overhead I’m proposing. (Positions elected by patent/copyright holders, including artistic reps by medium and scientific/engineering reps by field, with government oversight and public access to records).

This office of intellectual property could assist promising looking research, maybe even research of signs of promising/lucrative research efforts.

Flaws:
Bundled goods: how much is the carbuerator worth, vs the spark plugs (bad example since they _are_ sold separately, but hopefully you get the idea.
Entry costs: how to support the inventor in the initial, unprofitable stages.

The latter can be partially addressed by the proposed office of intellectual property. I’ll claim the former isn’t really addressed any better in the current system.

Major benefits: Kiss monopolies goodbye. Say hello to scientist directed research. Furthermore, the non-transferable ip allows for something more closely approximating a free market, which I’ll claim is actually a good thing.