Angry as a life philosophy

Sooo, I decided to do things in the wrong order, and only figured it out after I’d done it, and then it was too late – as with most things in my life …

I stopped smoking (maybe I’ll let the world know how I feel about specific thing), but I had all the symptoms as most people who give up their lifeline to sanity; eating (bring it on), not too happy with anything, and in general just a pain in the bottom for a few months (I’m amazed that I still have a job, but hey I tried).

Now after not having my life extension between my fingers every 1 hour (on avg.) during waking hours left some space which needed to be filled with other things, and as I’ve always been quite outspoken about stupidity I decided to get Angry with stupidity.

Like; why the f… can’t you figure out not to throw your cigaret buds on the street, or don’t throw you Mac D. wrap paper on the street, shithead. Stuff like that, and what I found is that I actually don’t get along with most people in the world. Actually I do get along with the world, but as the world is so filled with stupidity it’s amazing that we as a species have survived this long…

So most people would probably say that I should chill and relax… right read about the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, it mostly exist because people just throw plastic (cans, bags, dipers, etc.) over their left or right shoulder instead of disposing of it in a secible way. Or an article I read some time ago which stated that if you eat more than 170g of Tuna (or salmon/laks) every week then there is a risk that you will die from heavy metal poisoning (Japan will cease to exist in the near future). Not saying that you should eat Tuna anyway as there aren’t too many of them left.

Then it comes to behaviour towards other people, everyday I’ll see people who will J-walk, and give cars the finger if they honk at them … hey you should know better. Or if I hit a bicyclist who is running a red light then it’s my fault automatically as I should know that the Darwin Award would do that.

So yes, I’m angry as I know that most people actually have a brain, and should know better, but they are too lazy or don’t give a hoot about what happens around them – that really pisses me off.

Only thing which is worse than all of this are inconsiderate people …

And after been angry for months I actually am a lot better … the world is unfortunately still stuffed with too many stupid people.


Are Danish Embassies actually Danish ?

On Facebook, the group for Danes in The Netherlands shared a job opening for a chauffeur at the Danish Embassy in Den Haag, The Netherlands.

New Colleague
05.08.2014 10:31
We are looking for a new driver.
We are looking for a driver with driver certificate CCV-D1, who also is expected to take care of administrative and practical tasks in the embassy and in the residency of the ambassador in The Hague.

Flexibility, loyalty and reliability are important aspects in the choice of our new presentable colleague. Some experience is desirable.

It concerns a full-time job. Working hours also in the evening and during the weekends according to agreement.
Working languages: English and Dutch.
Start: as soon as possible.

I read it and stopped at “Working languages: English and Dutch.”, no mentioning of Danish. I would expect that Danish would be a required language, in addition to English and Dutch. So just to have a go at it, and send an email to Dansk Folkeparti (the most right wing party in the parliament, and one would expect them to be very much on top of something like this, but), and was told that there are not requirements for Danish as a work language on the Danish embassies. What!!!, hey, hang on a second. So as a Danish citizen calling a Danish embassy I can be forced to speak English, or a local Language to be able to communicate with people on the Embassy, until I get to the officials from Denmark, like the ambassador, or maybe the military attache, of similar officials.

Then I contacted Venstre (liberal, largest party with seats in the Parliament), and was told to contact the foreign Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as they are responsible for the Danish Embassies … that was not what I was trying to get out of this.

As a Danish Citizen, I am very disappointed that I have to speak a foreign language to communicate with people who work at the Embassies of my home Country. And if I by chance get to talk to someone who speak Danish then I should be happy.

I called the Danish Embassy in Den Haag in 2001, the person who picked up the phone spoke English, I asked politely if I could speak Danish … the answer was “No!!!”, I apologized and hanged up…

Opinions without substance

I’ve always been told to make sure that I do my best to know the background before I comment complain about something (the weather is exempt). But with the introduction of Facebook we now have “amateur” specialists, who will “like”, “share” etc., anything which they think make any sence. Unfortunately it is not only the “amateur” specialists on Facebook which do this, also Journalists who write for previously recognized broadsheet papers have started to do this, which means that we cat opinions without substance.

I quite often (until I dis-friended them), got forwarded (shared) information about animal rights on Facebook, though being interesting, but the information in general terms came from fanatical people who only have one reason in publicizing this information; to tell other people what they SHOULD think, there is no room for creating ones own opinion, nor to criticize their opinion – it’s very much; either you’re with us, or you’re against us. Not saying that the people who shared the information with me where fanatically, but I sometimes think that taking what other people write is easier than to sit down and research the subject and then write something else – which can cause people to like or share things which they might not agree with when they are questioned about it. And it also makes me comment and question the shared material….

We have always, as far as I can understand, had fanatical people, the problem is that in todays society it is too easy to agree with them without actually having to understand what they talk about, and it is too easy for them to spread their “broadcast”.

Remember before you “like” or “share” contents that knowing what it’s about might teach you something, and maybe you’ll choose something else….

“Almost good enough”

Some time ago, I read an article about why an “IKEA” would never happen in Denmark. Not that Swedes are anything special, or that Danes are’t smart enough.

But the argument is that to be able to create an IKEA, one would have to decide that things are only made to be “almost good enough”, meaning that one know that the product is not perfect, it will not last longer than it was designed to last, and so fort. And any one in Denmark who would start a company would would do so to produce products which where the best of the best (I am not fully in agrement with that one).

But lately that made me think about the stage of software quality, we know that it is impossible to remove all issues in software, the 90/10 rule still plays a role in our daily life. But we have gotten used to software which, we actually pay for, doesn’t work, or it crashes, or causes data loss.

The vendors, in many cases does not care, or tell us that it’s caused by us using the software wrongly. Last week Apple shipped a new Java for OSX Lion which closed a security hole which have been know for some time. When Microsoft shipped Windows 8, they had to lock it down to such a degree that it became almost impossible to use, for the sake for security. We are daily faced by annoyance, which are caused by people making things too complex, and end up having to add security layers which forces us to enter username / password everytime we wants to change a setting.

Not that it’s the fault of neither Apple nor Microsoft (or any vendor actually), it’s our hunger for new functionality which fuels their money machine, so us, but asking for this new functionality indirectly causes this, and at the same time these vendors do not have enough time to make a product which is “perfect”.

But one of the things, which really ticks me off, is the when one have something which is supposed to work, and one then get in contact with a vendor (more or less anyone of them), and am being told that this is know issue, and one will have to wait “sometime” for a fix. Like for example the crash issue with Macbook Pro’s when one wake them from sleep, or the Macbook Air’s which cannot switch it’s primary monitor when it’s woken from sleep in clamshell mode (external monitor). Both very known issues by Apple, but non the less not fixed. We can live with most of the most annoying things, but when our dear and beloved computers starts crashing without reason, then it’s not really fun anymore. This is the “almost good enough” atitude which I have a problem with.

Also when one look at smart phones; I still remember the people who got the first Windows Phones, who complained about having to reboot them 2 – 3 times a day for them to be able to use them. We are over that periode, now we have the “iPhone antenne gate”, batteries being drained if one enable the standard features of the phones. And we are being told that we are holding our phone wrongly, or that we should not expect that the numbers in the official marketing material are correct, and they are done with all features switched off.

I think that with the prices we pay for our software (yes it also runs on partly faulty hardware), are too high. Would we be happy if we had to restart our cars every 25 km, as they otherwise would stop working… don’t think so…

Should we believe the Scientists

Just watched Horizon on BBC (Science under Attack), which was presented by Nobel Prize winner Sir Paul Nurse, who obviously must have done some remarkable work, otherwise he would probably not have received the Nobel Prize.

His argument for the whole thing is that Science is under attack, and that something must be changed so that the public (that is everyone who is not a Scientist) will gain trust in what the Scientists are telling them.

Through the whole thing, he is trying to point out that science is not an exact science, that is for example with the argument that we can never really be sure, but if the same thing happens again, and again then there is a probability that there might is a pattern, and that can be use to prove something.

So if it rain every year on May 2nd, except for every 7th year, then science should be able to conclude that there is a probability that it will rain on May 2nd. That is how they can conclude that May 2nd is a wet day.

Now this is the simple approach, there is more behind these things, there are some really scary conclusions based on probability, Global Warming is one of them (I am not a sceptic, no do I agree on all conclusions as there is simply too much data and still not enough to make an assumption which can hold water).

As for Global Warming, there are the Scientists which say it will get worse, and there are the ones who say that it will not – that is kind of black and white, and we as the public are being asked to make a decision on whom we believe, or actually it is even worse, whom we trust in presenting the truth.

We really do not know, first Science is based on trails, test, and repetition, unfortunately we are only able to see what is happening with earth (we can build another one for test purposes), which means that Sir Paul Nurse cannot use the argument that Science is based on trails, test, and repetition, but in this specific case on assumptions that something will happen. Now some of the information which is used in the arguments for Global Warming is coming from the study of tree rings, but something is wrong with that as the tree start misbehaving sometime around the 1950’s – 1960’s (acid rain could be something to look into) which means that they need to use measurements from mechanical devices, like thermometers, and other things like that. Unfortunately the number does not align, well these things happen, and can probably be explained – I hope. But no such explanation was given.

This is just one example of where Science, one thing which does make sense is that the public is divided in most things, come politics, or something as difficult to understand as Science.

He also touched the subject of GMO’s (Genetic Modified Organism’s), which is especially used for modifying crop, like potatoes, soaybeans, or corn. And the issue was put as people are either against it (shown as being everyone, except for the few farmers and Scientists who work with the subject). Well it’s not as clear cut, the problem with GMO’s (except for soyabean’s which is just plain horrible. Now with potatoes, there is a very good reason for looking at GMO modified potatoes, as potato blight can cause really unpleasant things to happen (The Irish Potato Famine is one), and it can if left untreated kill off all potatoes in a region with in weeks, also GMO modified crop can limit the amount of pesticides which are needed. But some of the American companies which are producing GMO modified seed will sell to farmers (farmers who are starting with GMO’s) for less that cost price and then after a year or maybe longer rise the price so that the farmers cannot pay it, they then end up in a situation where they are not able to earn enough to sustain a living and end up having to sell their farms, in some cases to the company which is producing the seed. This has nothing to do with Science, this is crooked business practice, but we tend to combine the two.

Science is to study the unknown to gain understanding, and draw conclusions, in todays world where everyone (well in the western world) have access to the internet we can look things up and try to understand, it is not always easy, and we normally take the easy way out, unfortunately the easy way is not always the right way. If Scientists tell us that the oceans will rice 90 cm with in the next 50 – 75 years if we do not stop using fossil fuel tomorrow, then it’s a hugh decision we have to make, if we are at the same time being told that if we just keep the amount of usage to what we are using today then it’s a bit easier to grasp, and if then we also are told that if we continue to consume even more nothing will happen. Then we really do not know who is right and who is wrong, as non of the Scientists really do know, they assume that something will happen, probably the summer ice will disappear, and The Netherlands will be covered by water. Not saying that they are not wrong, but it’s not an absolute, it is something they predict, and it will probably happen.

On the other side the Oil Companies, and the Saudis (incl. the previous administration in the US) tell us that there is no reason for alarm; the sceptic will probably follow that reasoning, and the public will be drawn between the “right” thinkers, and the “wrong” thinkers.

The best way for Scientists to get the public to understand why there isn’t any exact thing in existence is to explain that there is simply too much data to make anything more than assumptions, and at the same time there is simply not enough data to be sure that the assumptions are correct.

I myself think that something have to be done, but I do not think that it will get as bad as we’re told, as we will run out of oil way before (ref: Paul Roberts – The End of Oil: The Decline of the Petroleum Economy and the Rise of a New Energy Order) .

“You know”

“You know”, actually I don’t, which is why I’m listing, if I did I would be doing something else, like reading a book.

It seams that an American add-on to the English language have been spreading to the rest of the civilized world; most sentences are littered with “you know” as if the interviewer know exactly what the person they are talking to is thinking, and so it would seam the people who are watching, or listing to the radio.

Please stop using useless terms, in this case “you know”, it makes you look as if you actually do not know how to form a sentence appropriately. And, even more, look like you actually do not know what you’re talking about.

Good websites are hard to find…

Someone said at a few years ago that the more you know the less you actually know. And that with the growth of information on the internet we would reach a point where there would be so much information that finding the right information would be very difficult.

I would say that we are staring to get to the point that there is so much useless information available that actually finding something is becoming more and more problematic – at some point it will be close to impossible.

I have to say that companies like Google, and prior to them Yahoo, and also to some degree Microsoft Bing does make it easier as they have these wonderful robots eating away on the internet and sorting it so that we should be able to find it again. Unfortunately these companies also have to make a living, which means that if one search for something there is a 50% chance that the first 100 hits one get are pointers to companies or sites which actually do not provide any information, but they have paid to be listed first, and with some luck someone will use them to buy something. Which is annoying, and to say the least very frustrating.

Actually the only thing I find more annoying are websites with music – and flash introduction pages where one cannot either skip them or switch off the music, I actually mostly will find somewhere else to do my business, and I hope other people do the same, voting with ones feet.

Also years ago (actually 2 decades ago), when I was taught how to write software, and also how to design user interfaces we where told day in and day out that interfaces should be simple and easy to use – humm, these days one see websites where the designer have had a spasm, meaning there is absolutely no way to find out how to find information, let alone how to contact anyone for anything, and it is even sometimes difficult to figure out what the website is about…. next…

Could some one please educate people who make these things, in such a way that they understand that we want a) understandable messages, b) easy way to get it, and c) nothing too fancy.