One of the most ignorant movie scenes I have ever seen is where the hero, who has prepared for this, enters into a dark place hunting vampires. Typically they have a flashlight. Really?
Get a professional grade 4 stroke leaf blower. Find a small, one wire, racing 12v alternator producing about 30-35 amps. Find a sealed motorcycle battery. Now, assemble them all together on a back pack along with some super bright 12v truck lights.
A 4 horse leaf blower produces around 3000 watts of power, but, a lot of that is used up generating usable electricity. That means we can expect about 1000 watts max, but, the alternator would only produce around 500 watts. This gives us plenty of power to spare.
If we were running old school headlights this wouldn't be enough. With super bright LEDs and HID lighting we can put some serious light out using a backpack generator. Total weight would run, maybe 50 pounds. Less if the hero is a really good fabricator.
So...how come all of these geniuses, writers and special effects guys in Hollywood, don't build one? They have shoulder lights on space suits with LED lighting around the face, but, no vampire fighting back pack generator lighting.
Recently I started wiring my old backpack with a small 12v battery, a solar collector chagrining system and a couple of forward pointing super bright LED lights. Looking for some vampires I guess :-)
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
Saturday, October 25, 2014
Fact and Fiction and Opportunity
From page 139 of the sixth edition of Invitation to Oceanography by Paul R. Pinet:
"We can taste seawater samples and say qualitatively that this sample tastes 'saltier' than this other one. But this is a rather subjective technique, and a SCIENTIST (highlighting mine) needs to know exactly and precisely how salty a parcel of water is."
Personally, I think that is rather well put. The difference between science and everything else is that science is objective and everything else is subjective. Science is based on fact and everything else is based on opinion.
Unfortunately, or fortunately for me, many in the scientific community adopt subjective opinion as fact. This is a huge error in thought process that creates arbitrary and ambiguous limitations in thinking and capability. I believe this inability to determine fact from fiction is one of the primary reasons why new technology typically takes a generation or more to become main streamed.
Students learn these arbitrary and ambiguous boundaries from teachers in a cycle of defeat by humiliation. Some teachers become interested in ideas and encourage the next generation of students to accept these ideas so some students in the next generation are prepared to adopt new technologies.
I believe that what occurs, during the cycle of defeat by humiliation students are typically subjected to. develops into a near religious like system of beliefs that students, much like religion taught to children, are typically unable to shake off during their later life. This system of religious like beliefs, created by the system of defeat by humiliation we call education or "schooling", has to be properly developed in students before new technology can be adopted. We see this in our studies of continental drift and plate tectonics as well as other scientific theories that took one or two generations to become accepted.
This is actually why I am studying Anthropology and Sociology, particularly the development of religious and religious like beliefs. Academics often find it necessary to hide their theories for fear other academics will steal them. This creates another method of defeat by humiliation in our education system. I doubt if I have to worry about that because there are way too many arbitrary and ambiguous limitations created in thinking within the academic system for my ideas to be held as anything more than "wacked" for a generation or two.
Would it surprise anyone to discover that I think that is hilarious?
"We can taste seawater samples and say qualitatively that this sample tastes 'saltier' than this other one. But this is a rather subjective technique, and a SCIENTIST (highlighting mine) needs to know exactly and precisely how salty a parcel of water is."
Personally, I think that is rather well put. The difference between science and everything else is that science is objective and everything else is subjective. Science is based on fact and everything else is based on opinion.
Unfortunately, or fortunately for me, many in the scientific community adopt subjective opinion as fact. This is a huge error in thought process that creates arbitrary and ambiguous limitations in thinking and capability. I believe this inability to determine fact from fiction is one of the primary reasons why new technology typically takes a generation or more to become main streamed.
Students learn these arbitrary and ambiguous boundaries from teachers in a cycle of defeat by humiliation. Some teachers become interested in ideas and encourage the next generation of students to accept these ideas so some students in the next generation are prepared to adopt new technologies.
I believe that what occurs, during the cycle of defeat by humiliation students are typically subjected to. develops into a near religious like system of beliefs that students, much like religion taught to children, are typically unable to shake off during their later life. This system of religious like beliefs, created by the system of defeat by humiliation we call education or "schooling", has to be properly developed in students before new technology can be adopted. We see this in our studies of continental drift and plate tectonics as well as other scientific theories that took one or two generations to become accepted.
This is actually why I am studying Anthropology and Sociology, particularly the development of religious and religious like beliefs. Academics often find it necessary to hide their theories for fear other academics will steal them. This creates another method of defeat by humiliation in our education system. I doubt if I have to worry about that because there are way too many arbitrary and ambiguous limitations created in thinking within the academic system for my ideas to be held as anything more than "wacked" for a generation or two.
Would it surprise anyone to discover that I think that is hilarious?
Sunday, August 03, 2014
Assassin's Creed 3
I play video games
on a PlayStation 3. I really enjoy them. I play third person
shooters. I like Open World best. A first person shooter is kind of
like a cheap virtual reality. The game behaves as if the player is
using the weapon. A third person shooter is where the player
controls a character that is using weapons. They are called
shooters, but, the weapon can be anything. In the game Infamous the
weapon is electrical discharge. In the Uncharted series the weapon
is usually a gun. In the Assassin's Creed series the weapon is
usually a knife or sword.
I don't like the God
of War series, or Devil May Cry, because I am not into chasing around
the power-up jewels or beads that are bouncing around. I like
Uncharted, Assassin's Creed, Battlefield, Call of Duty, The Last of
Us, Red Dead Redemption, even Mercenaries 2: World in Flames is okay.
Open world means the
character can go anywhere in the game world. Closed world means the
character has to follow a particular path.
I was just recently introduced to the Assassin's Creed series and I really liked it, until I got to AC3. What a crappy game. I played for a few days and somewhere in the 60% completed I asked myself why I was playing a game that just wasn't fun. I shut the game down, ejected the disk and I will return it to the person I borrowed it from. I have never done that, just quit playing a game.
I was just recently introduced to the Assassin's Creed series and I really liked it, until I got to AC3. What a crappy game. I played for a few days and somewhere in the 60% completed I asked myself why I was playing a game that just wasn't fun. I shut the game down, ejected the disk and I will return it to the person I borrowed it from. I have never done that, just quit playing a game.
Sure, I have set
games aside for a week or even a month or two. Stuff happens, life
happens, we run into game play that becomes frustrating. I would bet
almost everyone has set aside a game or two for a while. That is not
what I am doing with Assassin's Creed 3 (AC3). I doubt if I will
play it ever again.
Game play can be
difficult. Assassin's Creed took game development to a new level of
stupidity.
Essentially, to
complete any task in any video game, the user has to perform a series
of button pushes in the correct order within a developer specified
time limit. If the focus groups playing the Alpha versions and the
Beta versions complain about the game play being too easy there are
three ways to make it harder really cheaply. These are things the
developers can do without delaying the game release date too much.
Sometimes these are frustrating, but, they can also enhance game play
when properly used. Improperly used they make games suck.
The first way is to
over-ride the user set controls sensitivity setting. This makes the
character suddenly more difficult to control. Making the time
between button pushes really short is another function of this. The
game becomes harder, but, not because the game is actually harder,
because the developers mucked with the controls.
The second way is to
change camera angle suddenly. Since character control is based on
the view, changing the view makes the character more difficult to
control. Again, the game is not more difficult, character control
becomes more difficult.
The third way is to
eliminate hints on what actions are required to achieve the developer
set goals.
Here is an example
of “hints”. In Assassin's Creed 3, there is a “lock picking”
function. The user uses the left and right joy sticks to control the
lock picking tools and then, when the tools are correct, the user
presses the R1 button (on PlayStation) to pick the lock. Every time
the user goes to pick a lock the screen provides hints on what
controls combinations are required to pick a lock. It is always the
same control combinations.
But, this is the
exception in Assassin's Creed 3. Most of the time users are left to
figure out what combination of buttons are required to achieve the
developer set goals. That is frustrating enough, then add tons of
weird camera angles, control sensitivity over-rides, ever shorter
time limits on button events, software bugs galore and the game goes
from being tolerable to the point where it just isn't fun to play.
There are other
stupid things too. For example, I have every “Treasure Chest” in
the game, except for one chest in Central Boston. People who have
played the game know that this is because this chest isn't identified
on the “Treasure Chest” map. This is caused by “removing
hints”.
Then there are the
software bugs. I cleared Fort Division 5 or 6 times before it
actually worked. Don't get me started on every other bug I
encountered. When I say cleared, I mean walking around in the fort
after I had my character kill all the “bad guys”. I kept
wandering around looking for more to kill even after I took the
treasure.
The hunting stuff
was a little bit of a pain to get at the beginning, but, at least
they used button hints so that eventually I became really good at it.
I was able to hunt bear, wolves, bobcat and cougar pretty easily,
except, when they made it near impossible to react fast enough to the
key hit prompts. I have arthritis so moving fast enough for the
wolves on Oak Island was difficult. Oh, and find Captain Kidd's
Treasure just to have it destroyed by the explosion used to clear
away the entrance to the treasure. Dumb. Once I got the hang of it,
making money by hunting down thirty or so bears, wolves bobcat or elk
was easy. That is how a game should be, tough at first, then fairly
easy when you get the hang of it.
In Uncharted the
“Crushing” difficulty adds more bad guys and makes aiming a
little more sensitive (I think). The enemies also seem to be
slightly harder to kill. Not in AC3, enemies require weird and
undocumented button combinations with weird timing.
The actual story
history is pretty bad too. The history is from a typical grade
school history book. Adding in some Howard Zinn, “A People's
History” and information from a history book called “American
Insurgents” by I forget who and maybe the history lesson in the
game would have been okay. At least it would have been much more
realistic.
Okay, so cheesy bad
game development, poor overall history, poor story line, tons of bugs
and the end result is a game I really wanted to enjoy and ended up
hating.
Truthfully, it seems
like the developers at Ubisoft took the best cool features from
Uncharted, Red Dead Redemption and some other games by other
developers, incorporated them into the Assassin's Creed series and
then, at the last minute, tried to make the game more difficult by
eliminating hints, screwing with control sensitivity. The changes
probably created a ton of the bugs in the software. Stupid
development.
There are things I
did like about Assassin's Creed 3, the hunting, the lock picking,
task lists. Red Dead Redemption needed better task lists to help
users achieve 100% game play. I don't think I ever got to 100% on
Red Dead, but, I did in the 90s somewhere. AC3 had good task lists.
Like all the games there was a good way to earn money, although, in
other games it was easier because there was less user involvement.
The buying and selling goods worked well enough once the user has the
hang of it. I liked that the apprentice assassins never died, they
were just unavailable.
I liked Assassin's
Creed 2. I even liked AC Brotherhood, even though I suddenly found
myself in the end game with a world's crappiest weapon (The Apple of
Eden) and armor that didn't work, well before I had acquired the best
armor or weapons through game play. The game was fun, and the next
time I play it I will avoid taking on the end game until I want to.
Sure, I beat it first time through without dying, but, I would rather
have gotten to that point after I had the right armor and weapons and
all my assassins ready. Even if I can't use my assassins or weapons
during the end game.
I am looking for
someone to borrow Assassin's Creed 4 off of, since I don't want to
spend money on a game after the disaster Assassin's Creed 3 was.
Assassin's Creed 3
will probably go down in history as the defining way “not to sequel
a game”. Assassin's Creed 5 is coming out soon and that is a game
I am not looking forward to. If someone I know buys it and loans it
to me, okay, but, I am not buying it until after I play it.
Tuesday, July 08, 2014
Being someone whose lamp has enough oil
I used to study the Greek and Hebrew and commentaries and everything else around the Bible. Then one day I was reading the parable of the Sower in Matthew 13 and I realized that all my study of what everyone else thought about the scripture and the definitions of words was pretty much a waste of time. I realized that the reason I had to study was because I was not depending on God, rather I depended on my own understanding of what God had written, and this was a huge mistake that Christ warns us about.
"For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them."
Being saved I had become one of those who had a lamp and could await Christ, but, because I depended on my own understanding and the understanding of other people I was not one of those who would accompany Christ. (This "not enough oil" reference is from Matthew 25, the parable of 10 Virgins with lamps waiting on the Bridegroom. 5 have enough oil and five think they are ready and are not.)
I started studying the Bible and praying and a whole new world opened up, a world of scripture that most people didn't see and couldn't hear.
I realized there were many more Apostles at the time of Christ than just the 12, I realized that in the parable of the Sower I was dirt with tares that required tilling and I had to allow God to till me to become good soil, I realized so many things, most of all I realized how people kept rejecting Christ and God's Prophets even though they studied the scripture constantly and lived according to their understanding of God's laws, I realized what the Bible meant when even the 12 did not understand the parable of the Sower and over the years I have heard so many people tell it wrong, even after Christ explains it.
One day in a Bible Study with people who had been studying the Bible for years, many who had studied it far longer than I had, I asked what people were in the parable of the Sower. I was told people are the Sower and the Seed even though Christ explains quite well that we are the soil, the dirt. People can read, listen and hear and never understand unless they open their heart to God and God opens their heart to God's Word.
For over 20 years now I have been telling people not to listen to me, or any other person, but, to listen to God and only God. No one is perfect, but, we can focus on listening to God and learning from God or we can focus on listening to people and learning from people. Do we seek the things of people or the things of God? (John 5:44, Galatians 1:10, Colossians 3:1, Hebrew 11:6)
Romans 3 is popular, There is none righteous, it also tells us that there is none that understandeth and none that seeketh after God. While we quote "there is none righteous" often, we rarely accept that God (through Paul) was talking about us as well when he wrote, "There is none that understands, none that seek God."
Truly no one seeks God perfectly, no one understands perfectly just as no one is perfectly righteous (save Christ). So, do we depend on each other for understanding? Do we depend on a sheep to lead sheep? that depends on where someone places their Faith, in people (other sheep) or the Shepherd, Christ.
9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
15 Their feet are swift to shed blood:
16 Destruction and misery are in their ways:
17 And the way of peace have they not known:
18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.
These days I use Greek and Hebrew and other definitions of people to get people to think and, hopefully pray. What usually happens is a person will go ask another person because their faith is in people and that is sad, but, come End Days Christ will be able to give people examples in their own lives about how they chose people over God.
Every once in a long while I am not ridiculed and a person will actually pray and begin to listen to God and that is a blessing.
"For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them."
Being saved I had become one of those who had a lamp and could await Christ, but, because I depended on my own understanding and the understanding of other people I was not one of those who would accompany Christ. (This "not enough oil" reference is from Matthew 25, the parable of 10 Virgins with lamps waiting on the Bridegroom. 5 have enough oil and five think they are ready and are not.)
I started studying the Bible and praying and a whole new world opened up, a world of scripture that most people didn't see and couldn't hear.
I realized there were many more Apostles at the time of Christ than just the 12, I realized that in the parable of the Sower I was dirt with tares that required tilling and I had to allow God to till me to become good soil, I realized so many things, most of all I realized how people kept rejecting Christ and God's Prophets even though they studied the scripture constantly and lived according to their understanding of God's laws, I realized what the Bible meant when even the 12 did not understand the parable of the Sower and over the years I have heard so many people tell it wrong, even after Christ explains it.
One day in a Bible Study with people who had been studying the Bible for years, many who had studied it far longer than I had, I asked what people were in the parable of the Sower. I was told people are the Sower and the Seed even though Christ explains quite well that we are the soil, the dirt. People can read, listen and hear and never understand unless they open their heart to God and God opens their heart to God's Word.
For over 20 years now I have been telling people not to listen to me, or any other person, but, to listen to God and only God. No one is perfect, but, we can focus on listening to God and learning from God or we can focus on listening to people and learning from people. Do we seek the things of people or the things of God? (John 5:44, Galatians 1:10, Colossians 3:1, Hebrew 11:6)
Romans 3 is popular, There is none righteous, it also tells us that there is none that understandeth and none that seeketh after God. While we quote "there is none righteous" often, we rarely accept that God (through Paul) was talking about us as well when he wrote, "There is none that understands, none that seek God."
Truly no one seeks God perfectly, no one understands perfectly just as no one is perfectly righteous (save Christ). So, do we depend on each other for understanding? Do we depend on a sheep to lead sheep? that depends on where someone places their Faith, in people (other sheep) or the Shepherd, Christ.
9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
15 Their feet are swift to shed blood:
16 Destruction and misery are in their ways:
17 And the way of peace have they not known:
18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.
These days I use Greek and Hebrew and other definitions of people to get people to think and, hopefully pray. What usually happens is a person will go ask another person because their faith is in people and that is sad, but, come End Days Christ will be able to give people examples in their own lives about how they chose people over God.
Every once in a long while I am not ridiculed and a person will actually pray and begin to listen to God and that is a blessing.
Sunday, May 18, 2014
Adjusting your Backpack
Yesterday I went for a hike on the Potowatomi at Pickney State Recreation Area in Michigan. Great hike. It was the 50th anniversary of the trail and I drove out expecting about a 5 mile hike. When I arrived at park head quarters they were not sure where it started, after a while I was directed to the Boy Scout camp, Camp Munhacke. Once there I registered and was told the walk was 8 miles.
I am not in great shape these days, so I was a little concerned. I figured as long as I took my time I would be fine so I walked slow. The hike ended up being 9.5 miles (about) and it took me 6.5 hours to complete it. This is less than 1.5 mph, but, I did complete the hike without having a stroke, so I am pretty proud of myself. When I first got sick, there was a time when I couldn't walk up three flights of stairs without resting on each landing. Yes, this pace is about 1/2 of a normal 3mph pace, but, at least I can do it.
Along the route about 100 Boy Scouts and their leaders passed me because I was moving so slow. Almost all of them had their back packs adjusted wrong. How do I know? There should be almost no weight on the shoulder straps.
Badly adjusted packs make a hike miserable. It is important to learn how to adjust your pack.
Modern backpacks are designed with padded hip belts, but, even un-padded hip belts reduce the shoulder load. I was wearing a hydration pack with lunch and a few emergency supplies in it. I tightened the waist belt, loosened the shoulder straps and allowed my legs to carry the weight of the pack instead of my shoulders and back.
Here is how you adjust your pack. You can do this loaded or unloaded, I actually suggest having about 20 pounds in the pack.
Hoist your pack onto your back. If you don't know how, get someone to show you. This involves lifting it up onto your knee and then kind of swinging it onto your back.
Now tighten the waist or hip belt slightly, making sure the belt is actually around your waist and the hip pads, if equipped, are on your hip bones.
If the pack has adjustable straps, the straps should attach to the pack slightly above your shoulders.
If the pack has adjustable attachment points for the hip belt, adjust the hip belt and the shoulder straps so that the pack sits as low on the hip belt as possible, with the hip belt tight on your hips and the top of the shoulder straps slightly above your shoulders.
If the pack can't be adjusted so that the shoulder straps, when the hip belt is tight around your waist, are slightly above your shoulders the pack is the wrong size.
Packs come in different sizes based on torso length, the distance from the top of the shoulders to the hips. I need a big pack, about 25 inches. My internal pack is 19 inches and my Jansport external pack, my favorite pack, is sized correctly. I use my internal frame pack occasionally when I have light loads to carry.
When carrying your pack no weight should be resting on your shoulders.
There is a chest strap, commonly called a sternum strap. That strap keeps the shoulder straps from falling off of your shoulders because there is no weight on your shoulders.
When there is weight on your shoulders, you will learn forward and this destroys your walking ergonomics.
Learn how to adjust your pack. It will make your trip much more enjoyable.
I am not in great shape these days, so I was a little concerned. I figured as long as I took my time I would be fine so I walked slow. The hike ended up being 9.5 miles (about) and it took me 6.5 hours to complete it. This is less than 1.5 mph, but, I did complete the hike without having a stroke, so I am pretty proud of myself. When I first got sick, there was a time when I couldn't walk up three flights of stairs without resting on each landing. Yes, this pace is about 1/2 of a normal 3mph pace, but, at least I can do it.
Along the route about 100 Boy Scouts and their leaders passed me because I was moving so slow. Almost all of them had their back packs adjusted wrong. How do I know? There should be almost no weight on the shoulder straps.
Badly adjusted packs make a hike miserable. It is important to learn how to adjust your pack.
Modern backpacks are designed with padded hip belts, but, even un-padded hip belts reduce the shoulder load. I was wearing a hydration pack with lunch and a few emergency supplies in it. I tightened the waist belt, loosened the shoulder straps and allowed my legs to carry the weight of the pack instead of my shoulders and back.
Here is how you adjust your pack. You can do this loaded or unloaded, I actually suggest having about 20 pounds in the pack.
Hoist your pack onto your back. If you don't know how, get someone to show you. This involves lifting it up onto your knee and then kind of swinging it onto your back.
Now tighten the waist or hip belt slightly, making sure the belt is actually around your waist and the hip pads, if equipped, are on your hip bones.
If the pack has adjustable straps, the straps should attach to the pack slightly above your shoulders.
If the pack has adjustable attachment points for the hip belt, adjust the hip belt and the shoulder straps so that the pack sits as low on the hip belt as possible, with the hip belt tight on your hips and the top of the shoulder straps slightly above your shoulders.
If the pack can't be adjusted so that the shoulder straps, when the hip belt is tight around your waist, are slightly above your shoulders the pack is the wrong size.
Packs come in different sizes based on torso length, the distance from the top of the shoulders to the hips. I need a big pack, about 25 inches. My internal pack is 19 inches and my Jansport external pack, my favorite pack, is sized correctly. I use my internal frame pack occasionally when I have light loads to carry.
When carrying your pack no weight should be resting on your shoulders.
There is a chest strap, commonly called a sternum strap. That strap keeps the shoulder straps from falling off of your shoulders because there is no weight on your shoulders.
When there is weight on your shoulders, you will learn forward and this destroys your walking ergonomics.
Learn how to adjust your pack. It will make your trip much more enjoyable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
