An exceptionally self-centered blog post (redundancy?) in which personality faults will be discussed openly (admirable) and without shame (despicable).

If you are reading this, then you know me well, so it may seem that several of the things I point out are obvious; you might feel insulted. However, one of my least favorite human flaws is our wish to be understood without having to explain ourselves. This wish is based on the fact that if someone understands you without you having had to explain yourself then they are paying a certain degree of attention to you.

Oh, how we love attention. The human love of attention has its root in selfishness. More than the average human being, I deplore attention whoring. You should prepare yourself for confusion, because I am now going to discuss how selfish I am - and how unashamed of it I am. The explanation for this apparent contradiction begins with a distinction I believe in; there are two sorts of selfishness: dependent selfishness and independent selfishness. So while I am unashamedly independently selfish, I simultaneously harbor a high degree of resentment towards the dependently selfish.

Some of you might have noticed a change in my behavior. One simplifying summary (apparently I dig redundancy today) of this change might be that I have become less cool / more of a jerk / less sensitive towards the feelings of others. So you are now in an unpleasant situation where a friend has changed into someone who you would not have befriended. You may be wondering if it is your friendly duty to ignore the change and be a source of support while I work through some sort of personal trial from which I will return more awesome than ever before. Or, worse yet, I have actually decided to be a jerk, and now you are stuck with having to explain to people why Ben doesn't do stuff with us anymore.

The latter is the case.

I tell all of you this in order to absolve you of possible guilt. You might have been wishing that I was not part of your life any longer, but not removing me because of the confusion mentioned above. Though I would be much aggrieved at losing any of you, I have violated the contractual terms of friendship. I have done it knowingly and have no intentions of making reparations. Which is a silly way of saying I don't even feel bad.

***

Theoretically I could have lost each one of you there and now be typing to a non-existent audience. So now I am going to get _really_ self involved.

I am very simple. For as long as I can remember, any one of my actions could be explained by one of only three motivations: Attract a mate; make something awesome; have fun. You could argue that these things are so general that they could describe anyone. Breaking 'make something awesome' into specifics that apply to me results in 'make an awesome piece of computer generated entertainment'. Breaking 'have fun' into specifies that apply to me results in 'play games (tabletop, sport, video)'.

The important part of that is that if I was involved in a social activity that was not playing a game of some form, it was indirectly motivated by either attracting a mate or making something. People who have no social lives are often referred to as 'losers'. Losers are not attractive. I had a social life because I needed to not be a loser. I don't like people.

So what caused the change? Over the past couple years I came to the realization that my physical qualities were not the weak link of my mate-attraction combo. It is, in fact, my personality that is my barrier. So I was presented with two options: change or quit. Oddly those changes of which you are aware, are the result of quitting.

New Ben is just Old Ben with one less motivator.

Part One

They called him Jon. They told him he had always been on the Track, though he thought he could remember a time when everything was not moving. They told him that when he was born he had been placed onto the Track along with all the other babies born around the same time and from then on they had been on their way. He wished he could remember for himself, but it was like flailing for balance without knowing which way was down. When he thought these things he sat quietly in his place and stared out across the Water as it zipped by - left, right, below, behind and beyond. The only thing that interrupted the Water was the Track. Though the Track was only so wide, the Water was wide without measure. They liked it when he sat quietly and thought. Sometimes his thoughts would be interrupted when he heard them whispering that he would definitely make it to the End. He wasn't entirely sure what the End was, but he knew that to make it there was seen as a good thing.

His quiet thoughts were interrupted as Ted kicked him in the process of sliding toward the aisle. "Hey Miss," he addressed the nearest one. "What is it Ted?" she said with impatience. They were always impatient with Ted. He didn't sit quietly and think. He was always talking with the others if not climbing all over the seats.
"I'm hungry."
"Ted, we ate not half an hour ago."
"I know, but I'm still hungry."
"Alright. What would you like?"
"I dunno... cake!"
"Cake is a dessert, Ted, we only eat desserts at the end of the day after dinner."
At this Ted gave a disappointed grunt, turned and pulled himself up onto the back of the nearest seat.
"Ted stop that! What have we told you about climbing around the car?"
Ted was unfazed and continued to climb as he responded, "you said that I might fall off into the Water. But I've climbed around a lot and never fallen once."
"Yes, but what if you did? That would be terrible."
A couple others had arrived from the car ahead and they started appealing to Ted to get down.
"Why would it be so bad to fall into the Water anyway? It looks nice," Ted asked.
"You don't know how to swim yet! And even if you did, you could never get back onto the Track!" she had become stressed because Ted was making his way to the side of the car.
Ted leapt, nose plugged and eyes closed, off the Track and into the Water. The few of them who were close enough to see gasped and screamed and reached at the air as if to hold him back. The Track carried us away so quickly that none of us could even see his splash.

The jobs that college prepares you for are the jobs that no one wants. To prepare for the job you want you must learn it all yourself.

In trying to update Eli on how things are going I became surprisingly upset. Not at Eli, definitely not, but at the dilemma I feel.

I am very much inclined to not state these things plainly and hide their meaning behind metaphors and generalities. A worse form of censorship I do not know and I did call this thing "Thoughts Uncensored". This inclination arrives from finding the whole situation humiliating overall. However, I have experienced in the past the unparalleled liberation that can only be achieved by humiliation. Without further ado

I've already identified motivation as a key issue of mine. I have always been encouraged to pursue my passions and passions are basically the sure-fire method of attaining motivation. On top of this I have a most fortunate (very, very fortunate) life in which I effectively have zero obligations or commitments to anyone other than myself. I have that most rare privilege of actually being able to do whatever I want. What then could possibly be stopping me from going out and achieving amazing things in my area of interest.

This has been a slow realization. To become an expert, an artisan, a master at anything one either must have extreme natural talent or extreme devotion. I've always been about the devotion path, I am rather obsessive by nature. I was devoting myself more and more to learning everything that I could about computers with the eventual goal of being able to make something truly amazing. But I realized that as I obsessed and gained ground along that path I was simultaneously contributing to my abject loneliness.

As you delve deeper into specialization, you are also changing your social space (read limiting your romantic possibilities). The usual cure for this phenomenon is that specialists date within their specialization so that they don't need to worry about being able to relate to people who do not share their vocabulary, microculture, worldview, interests. Woe to the engineer, to the computer scientist, to the mathematician who is specializing further and further into an area where women are rarer than vegan butchers.

Certainly it is not absolute that becoming specialized makes the specialist handicapped in mixed specialization company. But with me this is the case.

So I am experiencing two contradictory forces. One force compels me to dabble in everything, broaden my experience, relate with everyone and everything on a fleeting but electric level (this is the practice of folks know as "interesting people"). The other force compels me to put on the blinders and dig as deep as I can into what I love in pursuit of excellence.

The unfortunate result of these forces is a net stasis, a stasis I have been in for 6 months now. Progress being made in neither direction and frustration mounting.

Recent studies suggest that exercise is equally effective in combating depression as prescription medication. I think that is because if we are not tired often enough our subconscious makes us restless - feeling that we are not reaching our full potential. Tiring yourself out on directionless exercise deceives your systems into believing you're living at your maximum intensity.

The Obama administration has done a bit of cutting to the military budget in its planning activities. Also, they have done some rearranging of priorities - canceling some projects it does not deem pertinent, such as a laser firing plane. This all seems great to me, but I am very curious if Obama has plans to expand or contract the role of private military contractors in America's warfare activities.

Generally, I like free market principles and the efficiency that they promote. Two important issues on the political landscape today warrant exceptions: military contracting and health care. Why? Because these are industries of death. One might wonder why I would accept reduced efficiency in matters of mortal gravitas.

In the case of military contracting it's simple. Free market efficiency has honed killing to humans' most advanced art and many of the great social advances of modern society are actually the injection of inefficiency into the matter of killing and coercion. In ancient times the ruler of a people was defined by who could kill the best; tyrany was the norm. Fortunately, though in a frustratingly gradual process, those of us who are not so good at killing have been able to convince the professional killers that not-killing is actually in the interest of all involved. Contrary to the beliefs of second-amendment fanatics, government's monopoly on coercion is necessary to modern society. Part of the agreement with government is that in return for not resisting this monopoly they must be transparent in revealing how they use their power - allowing us to criticize actions like those represented by Guantanomo Bay. Some may suggest, permitting private military contractors to operate, simply under heavy government supervision and regulation. If we are going to do that - why not just make these organizations part of the military, which already has systems in place to ensure accountability. Plus, having any group of people engaged in war profiteering seems morally reprehensible to me, not to mention dangerous to freedom when you consider exactly how disgustingly rich/powerful these companies are.

I think health care is a little more difficult to argue. Since the advent of bill of rights type philosophies we have established that there exists a minimal floor of afflictions that no person should have to endure at the hands of another person or organization of people. To establish a universal health care system is to assert that that minimal floor extends also to afflictions that a person can endure from non-human sources and even, in many cases, from themselves. Do we as a people find that individuals of all stripes should receive the same care when injured by a natural disaster? And, more controversially, when someone causes themself injury by - say - recreational chemical ingestion, should they receive the same care whether they are a Hollywood millionaire or a penniless dreg? And what if its not a mortal matter? Should the community pay for arthritic treatment? Hepititus?

I think so. However, I have not thought through it well enough to argue for it effectively.

The Americans who are in the top 10% by income pay for 70% of the country's income taxes. If you are in the top 1% then for 103 days of the year you work for the government for no pay. Of course, if you are in that bracket I'm pretty sure that YOU don't actually work... your money does most of the working for you. Woo capitalism.

Welp. Winter quarter 2009 complete. Haven't got any grades yet, but I predict an unfortunate F in linear algebra, a C (*crosses fingers*) in calculus and a B in computer science. So excited for a simple week long break though!!!

Several weeks back I worked very hard on a programming project for my computer science class. I went sleepless on a night that was not the night before it was due. Today effort was justified, as it tends to be; got a big fat 100%.
Happened to have gone sleepless just this past night, too, working on another project. Hope to maintain motivation through these last 4 assignments. Very tired right now though.