What you think?

•February 14, 2008 • 4 Comments

This is interesting:

“Research finds [self-monitors] to be excellent negotiators and far more likely to be promoted at work than their low self-monitoring peers,” Roloff said.

But there’s a downside for high self-monitors when it comes to their romantic relationships.

“High self-monitors may appear to be the kind of people we want to have relationships with, but they themselves are less committed to and less happy in their relationships than low self-monitors,” Roloff said.

The problem seems to be that they can’t turn the self-monitoring off.

“The desire to alter one’s personality to appropriately fit a given situation or social climate prevents high self-monitors from presenting their true selves during intimate interactions with their romantic partners,” Roloff said. “High self-monitors are very likeable and successful people. However, it appears they’re just not deep.”

High self-monitors seem to avoid face-threatening interactions and honest self-disclosure. Thus partners of these people may be completely in the dark about the extent of their significant other’s degree of commitment and regard.

“It’s not that high self-monitors are intentionally deceptive or evil,” Roloff said. “They appear to have an outlook and way of achieving their goals that makes them attractive to us socially but that prevents them from being particularly happy or loyal in their romantic relationships.”

How do you relate or not relate to this? Which do you consider yourself (more or less likely to monitor your behavior), and do you think it relates to how committed you generally feel in a relationship?

•February 14, 2008 • 5 Comments

Few computing-relating things infuriate me as instantly as a program that shuts down because I was *gasp* clicking while it was working.

In this multi-threaded, multiprocessor world, a triple-a program like photoshop shouldn’t just die when I click on an already-opened image while another one is saving.

Yet this is the most common way applications crash on me these days – they’re working on something, and I try to click on something else, or click into another window, or I’m alt-tabbing while it’s working.

*throws hands up* I’m not a true programmer, but it annoys the crap out of me that I get this kind of trouble in XP SP2, the same trouble I had in Windows for Workgroups.

•February 14, 2008 • 9 Comments

Okay, I’m used to having, say, “It’s a small world” stuck in my head when I don’t have conscious words there otherwise, or the wedding march, or the circus song (AKA SarahKate’s boobdance song), or even the Deliverance theme (which will always make me think of Alpena), but I do believe today’s the first time I’ve hummed a quick presidential theme while my eyes searched for the next task to complete.

I’m amused that they’re (nearly) all orchestral.

•February 14, 2008 • 6 Comments

It’s nearly 2 in the morning. That means, naturally, that I’ve been sucked into wikipedia.

Man, how cool would it be to be playing a pen-and-paper RPG with Robin Williams? Did you know he named his daughter after Princess Zelda? Seriously, no joke.

Did I mention that at the 2006 E3, he demonstrated Spore?

Also, for my SF friends, he funds 826 Valencia, the reading non-profit/pirate shop. And he’s been in sixty six movies. Holy cats.

CFL’s

•February 13, 2008 • 9 Comments

Okay, I’ve gone through my ‘extra’ lights, so the next time a bulb burns out, I’ll be switching them over to Compact Fluorescent lights. Except perhaps the bathroom – CFL lights lose an incredible amount of operating life if you leave them on for less than 5 minutes each time. The Energy Star group recommends at least 15 minutes at a time.

However, my big concerns:

Buzz. They say that modern CFL lights are nearly inaudible, but I wonder if anyone I know has dealt with CFLs and whether they’re actually acceptably quiet.

RFI. Fluorescent lights produce some amount of radio interference – does this interfere at all with cellphones, or are we talking completely different wavelengths? Still, I use a lot of electronics, and have various unshielded speakers, so interference could be a problem. Wiki: ” * Interference: Electronic devices operated by infrared remote control can interpret the infrared light emitted by CFLs as a signal limiting the use of CFLs near televisions, radios, remote controls, or mobile phones.[55] Broadband over power lines, shortwave radio, and AM radio receive radio interference from the CFLs.” How’s my Wii going to handle that?

Spectrum: I’ve gotten used to daylight lights (they’re all “white” lights), and fluorescents produce more narrow ranges, even with multiple phosphors. How close is the typical “daylight” CFL to incandescent whites?

Free to a good home

•February 13, 2008 • 3 Comments

I’ve got a 5.1 surround receiver that doesn’t work. You hit power, it flicks on, and then off again in 2 seconds. I’ve taken it apart and have not discovered anything burnt (including the internal fuse), so … I’m giving it up.

If someone expresses a request to fool around with it in the next week or so, they can have it. It comes with a subwoofer, but I’m keeping the speakers for my next unit.

If no one wants it, I’ll be throwing it out, since I can’t exactly donate a non-functioning unit.

I may have woken up late, but I have a fairly exhaustive to-do list for today. I won’t be able to get to it all, but it still feels good to jump on some things.

Ugh

•February 13, 2008 • 2 Comments

Didn’t sleep well, and my head’s like pea soup. Back to bed it is, then!

Instructions for building a PC for less than 200 bucks

•February 11, 2008 • 1 Comment

For those of you looking to put together a PC who are ultra-low on fundage, you could do worse than this.

•February 11, 2008 • 3 Comments

OpenDNS looks pretty cool. Does anyone have any experience with it?

Autocorrection of typo web addresses, as well as blocking known scam sites? That sounds totally groovy.

•February 11, 2008 • 3 Comments

Oh yeah – also, though I do love to travel and I don’t generally get very warm toward my homestead, it was pretty darn nice to come in out of the cold, give Reggie some water, and relax. I finished a book (happened to bring some Stainless Steel Rat with me, as well as finishing up Snow Crash for the billionth time), puttered online, and did nothing important all day. :)

EDIT: “Later roles, such as the sinister Dr. Benway in 1991’s “Naked Lunch,” were less stalwart.” – Naked Lunch was released in 1991? Seriously? I remember a certain afternoon at Megan’s place when I was 14 or 15. We watched it on TV, and most of the (older) gang found it most entertaining due to their altered perspectives. I thought it was at least ten years old by that point, but I was 13 in 1991.

I saw it a few years later, with a little more understanding of Burroughs under my belt, and it was completely different for me.