Anyone who knows me can tell you that I get addicted easily, over just about anything -- a new gadget that I want, a video game, a website, a forum, an animal (mexican salamander)... etc. etc. And once I get addicted to something, I am very "dedicated to my addiction," as one of my friend said. For example, I would create spreadsheets for my mini games. Even my loving husband who thinks most of my quirks are cute had to say, "Good god, you have spreadsheets for your games?" Oh yes, spreadsheet is among one of my obsessions.
To balance out my addictive personality, I also have a short attention span -- none of these obsession are long-lasting, so I can go back to my normal life. One of my ex said everything is a fling to me. He's not wrong; I just didn't understand why he made it sound like it's a bad thing. If my attention is any longer, I will be like those people who are so addicted to MMORPG that they lose their jobs, house, and relationships!
My short attention span is, therefore, a blessing in disguise; not another flaw in my personality. :)
Monday, August 31, 2009
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Internet Friendship
As it turned out, I have made many friends online over the years. Those that I have never met and probably never will, but somehow we maintained contact over the years. It's a lot easier to maintain contact with your online friends than your real life friends in that you can exchange a few words once in a great while when you are both online... instead of a specific phone call for those that you haven't seen in a while.
The thing I love most about an online friendship is that I can speak my mind. I don't have to be politically correct. I can totally choose them based on their religious/political viewpoint. I don't have to withhold my opinion on any subjects or filter my language for that matter. The beauty of it is... many are volatile, if we don't hit it off, so to speak, we don't have to speak with each other ever again. I don't know what they look like, or their real names for that matter, so I won't even know it's them should we ever cross path in real life. And I certainly don't work with them.
With my personality, people either think I'm strange or like my sense of humor; they either like my strong personality or they dislike me; very rarely are there middle ground. So once I became friends with someone online, I know I can speak my mind without filters. It is a truly liberating experience.
The thing I love most about an online friendship is that I can speak my mind. I don't have to be politically correct. I can totally choose them based on their religious/political viewpoint. I don't have to withhold my opinion on any subjects or filter my language for that matter. The beauty of it is... many are volatile, if we don't hit it off, so to speak, we don't have to speak with each other ever again. I don't know what they look like, or their real names for that matter, so I won't even know it's them should we ever cross path in real life. And I certainly don't work with them.
With my personality, people either think I'm strange or like my sense of humor; they either like my strong personality or they dislike me; very rarely are there middle ground. So once I became friends with someone online, I know I can speak my mind without filters. It is a truly liberating experience.
Please Don't Make Your Problem My Problem
I worked many years in the medical field. Now that I am in a different field, I realized that medical field has it's very unique characteristics in that it holds you to a higher moral standard. Suspected children/spousal/elderly abuse must be reported. It's not an option. If you see any misconduct and you don't report it, you became responsible to the outcome. Imagine witnessing misconducts toward a patient and the patient died or sustained significant injuries because you did not report it... So you get the idea.
Well, I am no longer in the field of life and death. The worse you can see in the accounting field I guess is another Madorff, bottomline, nobody dies (suicides notwithstanding). Regardless, it has been ingrained in me that if I know of something and not report it, I became responsible for it also. So if anyone commits a crime of any sort, please don't tell me. If you have killed someone, don't confess to me, go to the police or a priest. If you have mowed down someone with your car and fled the scene, do NOT tell me. Definitely do not ask me to help you get rid of the body (see the movie Stuck.)
What's with people asking me at work, "Do I have to tell the truth on this?" "Can I lie?" What the f* is up with these people. Should I endorse you lying on the paper work? Do you truly expect me to say, "Yeah, yeah, just make up whatever you want?" While I am at it, should I forge your signature also to absolve you of any responsibilities? No! If you ask me the answer is a big, fat NO! Do not ask me! If you want to lie, lie! But lie to me too! I don't want to attest that what's on those paper are truth to the best of my knowledge! In fact, now that you've asked, I am going to wonder whether they are NOT true. Quit asking! And pick up some integrity while you are at it!
Well, I am no longer in the field of life and death. The worse you can see in the accounting field I guess is another Madorff, bottomline, nobody dies (suicides notwithstanding). Regardless, it has been ingrained in me that if I know of something and not report it, I became responsible for it also. So if anyone commits a crime of any sort, please don't tell me. If you have killed someone, don't confess to me, go to the police or a priest. If you have mowed down someone with your car and fled the scene, do NOT tell me. Definitely do not ask me to help you get rid of the body (see the movie Stuck.)
What's with people asking me at work, "Do I have to tell the truth on this?" "Can I lie?" What the f* is up with these people. Should I endorse you lying on the paper work? Do you truly expect me to say, "Yeah, yeah, just make up whatever you want?" While I am at it, should I forge your signature also to absolve you of any responsibilities? No! If you ask me the answer is a big, fat NO! Do not ask me! If you want to lie, lie! But lie to me too! I don't want to attest that what's on those paper are truth to the best of my knowledge! In fact, now that you've asked, I am going to wonder whether they are NOT true. Quit asking! And pick up some integrity while you are at it!
Thursday, August 20, 2009
The 12 Most Annoying Types of Facebookers - CNN.com
The 12 most annoying types of Facebookers - CNN.com
Reading these technical articles lately can get quite disheartening. Yesterday I read a technical article on WashingtonPost.com, not to be a grammar police or anything, but it used to be that it very, very rare to see any typo or grammatical error on a major newspaper, in this article consisting of five (5) short paragraphs, there were two, TWO. I could not believe my eyes. One error you can get away with saying "to err is human," two in a row is just sloppy. Plain sloppy.
Then I was reading this article about Facebook today. One would think that any one who'd qualify to write on anything technology related on CNN.com will be quite qualified to review these latest, trendy applications. I found that hard to believe that the writer is an avid user of Facebook.
Let's look at what he wrote:-
1) The Let-Me-Tell-You-Every-Detail-of-My-Day Bore -- Was he wrong? No. But that has been the trend since the inception of Twitter. Is he not aware of the fact that he does not need to feed this particular friend's feed into his homepage if he's so bored out of his mind. (Yes, I literally read someone tweeding about watching paint dry on Twitter.... )
2) The Self-Promoter- again, use the wonderful feature of hiding this particular friend or not feed his posts into your main page.
3) The Friend-Padder - This is a two-part response:- 1) Okay, so what if someone adding 1000 friends just to show off? It's their perogative, where did that bitterness come from? 2) I have over 800 "friends" on my FB account. Are they really friends? No, I don't give a shit about most of them. Pretty sure they don't give a shit about me either. Then why do it, you ask? Because all the "social network games" encourages it. It's the only way to enjoy the games, that you get a gazillion invites everyday. Blame FB for having those games or blame the nature of the games for encourage people to add massive amount of random strangers. It's not the users that are annoying, it's the features/games that are offered on/by Facebook.
4) The Town Crier - I almost would have agreed that this is a legitimate point except the day when Facebook AND Twitter both went down due to hacker attacks, many reported feeling lost and that they had to find out about their news the traditional way, as in, the new generation prefers to obtain their fews through the town crier. If it's a service, it's not annoying. Again, there's always the option to hide this particular individual's posts.
5) The TMIer - Again, filter, filter, filter. How many more times do I have to say that?
6) The Bad Grammarian - What can I say? Language skill is slipping, and frankly, those are your friends. Start screening your friends by their language skill if that bothers you so much.
7) The Sympathy -Baiter - Again, your friends...
8) The Lurker - Don't get why that is so annoying. Do they have to make stupid comment on every thing you write to show that they are not lurker? Or are they obligated to post about their boring personal life so they don't annoy said writer? You chose to share your information online, why is it wrong for others to read them? If you don't want people to lurk about your personal life, keep a diary.
9) The Crank - see point #6 & #7
10) The Paprazzo - Shouldn't have done what you didn't want your mom to see? Shouldn't have allowed your stupid friends to take pictures of your committing such acts? Should have warned them to NOT post the pictures after you sober up? Shouldn't have have stupid friends?.... Shall I go on?
11) The Maddening Obscruist - see point #6, #7, and #9
12) The Chronic Inviter - Again, this is a problem with Facebook -- a big one. I think Facebook's purpose is very ambiguous. It's mind boggling that why a site designed for people to reconnect with old friends and maintaining connections with current friends have games that strongly encourage people to befriend random strangers. C'mon, each of these games will encourage you to invite more people, max number for a clan/group/mob is 500, and the more you have, the more advantage you have in the games. By the same token listed in point #3, nobody has 500 friends, or at least very few of us do, so the atmosphere encourages those who enjoy these games to invite random strangers. There simply are no other options. Quite frankly, I'd much prefer FB to just turn into a big gaming social networking site so I don't have to spam my real friends. The invite system also sucks, everytime you start a new game, all your "friends" on facebook will appear in the invite box, and they will remain there for as long as you don't invite them. So in game #1 you have 500 "friends," you go and start a second game, of course not all 500 individuals from game #1 will necessarily play game #2, and you will need to add new people, and there are a lot of games like that. So the only way to wade through the long, long list of names is to spam every one. It's the fault of the application/game designer. Why blame the users?
C'mon, did said writer just sign up for an account for three days so he can write this half-ass article about 12 Most Annoying Types of Facebookers?
Reading these technical articles lately can get quite disheartening. Yesterday I read a technical article on WashingtonPost.com, not to be a grammar police or anything, but it used to be that it very, very rare to see any typo or grammatical error on a major newspaper, in this article consisting of five (5) short paragraphs, there were two, TWO. I could not believe my eyes. One error you can get away with saying "to err is human," two in a row is just sloppy. Plain sloppy.
Then I was reading this article about Facebook today. One would think that any one who'd qualify to write on anything technology related on CNN.com will be quite qualified to review these latest, trendy applications. I found that hard to believe that the writer is an avid user of Facebook.
Let's look at what he wrote:-
1) The Let-Me-Tell-You-Every-Detail-of-My-Day Bore -- Was he wrong? No. But that has been the trend since the inception of Twitter. Is he not aware of the fact that he does not need to feed this particular friend's feed into his homepage if he's so bored out of his mind. (Yes, I literally read someone tweeding about watching paint dry on Twitter.... )
2) The Self-Promoter- again, use the wonderful feature of hiding this particular friend or not feed his posts into your main page.
3) The Friend-Padder - This is a two-part response:- 1) Okay, so what if someone adding 1000 friends just to show off? It's their perogative, where did that bitterness come from? 2) I have over 800 "friends" on my FB account. Are they really friends? No, I don't give a shit about most of them. Pretty sure they don't give a shit about me either. Then why do it, you ask? Because all the "social network games" encourages it. It's the only way to enjoy the games, that you get a gazillion invites everyday. Blame FB for having those games or blame the nature of the games for encourage people to add massive amount of random strangers. It's not the users that are annoying, it's the features/games that are offered on/by Facebook.
4) The Town Crier - I almost would have agreed that this is a legitimate point except the day when Facebook AND Twitter both went down due to hacker attacks, many reported feeling lost and that they had to find out about their news the traditional way, as in, the new generation prefers to obtain their fews through the town crier. If it's a service, it's not annoying. Again, there's always the option to hide this particular individual's posts.
5) The TMIer - Again, filter, filter, filter. How many more times do I have to say that?
6) The Bad Grammarian - What can I say? Language skill is slipping, and frankly, those are your friends. Start screening your friends by their language skill if that bothers you so much.
7) The Sympathy -Baiter - Again, your friends...
8) The Lurker - Don't get why that is so annoying. Do they have to make stupid comment on every thing you write to show that they are not lurker? Or are they obligated to post about their boring personal life so they don't annoy said writer? You chose to share your information online, why is it wrong for others to read them? If you don't want people to lurk about your personal life, keep a diary.
9) The Crank - see point #6 & #7
10) The Paprazzo - Shouldn't have done what you didn't want your mom to see? Shouldn't have allowed your stupid friends to take pictures of your committing such acts? Should have warned them to NOT post the pictures after you sober up? Shouldn't have have stupid friends?.... Shall I go on?
11) The Maddening Obscruist - see point #6, #7, and #9
12) The Chronic Inviter - Again, this is a problem with Facebook -- a big one. I think Facebook's purpose is very ambiguous. It's mind boggling that why a site designed for people to reconnect with old friends and maintaining connections with current friends have games that strongly encourage people to befriend random strangers. C'mon, each of these games will encourage you to invite more people, max number for a clan/group/mob is 500, and the more you have, the more advantage you have in the games. By the same token listed in point #3, nobody has 500 friends, or at least very few of us do, so the atmosphere encourages those who enjoy these games to invite random strangers. There simply are no other options. Quite frankly, I'd much prefer FB to just turn into a big gaming social networking site so I don't have to spam my real friends. The invite system also sucks, everytime you start a new game, all your "friends" on facebook will appear in the invite box, and they will remain there for as long as you don't invite them. So in game #1 you have 500 "friends," you go and start a second game, of course not all 500 individuals from game #1 will necessarily play game #2, and you will need to add new people, and there are a lot of games like that. So the only way to wade through the long, long list of names is to spam every one. It's the fault of the application/game designer. Why blame the users?
C'mon, did said writer just sign up for an account for three days so he can write this half-ass article about 12 Most Annoying Types of Facebookers?
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Comprehension
Two types of people utterly cannot comprehend how people can not share their viewpoint on an issue, in fact, they have a hard time comprehending the fact that there is an opposite viewpoint:-
Type #1: Deeply religous (aka troubled) individuals. "How is it possible that anyone can not believe in a/my God?"
Type #2: People who love kids. It's simply incomprehensible that some of us actually don't think they are angelic and want to be around them. Two answers I always hear when I expressed that I do not desire having kids:-
(1) Oh, you will feel differently when you get older. Trust me, at my age, I highly doubt I will change my opinion, barring unforseeable changes in hormones... even that is highly unlikely.
(2) You will feel differently once you see them. Ugh, do these people ever read/hear the news? Did they not hear about the woman who systematically drown her five kids? I am not saying that I want to kill my own offspring, just making a point that some people really should not be parents. And it's much better that they are aware of that, before the mishap.
Why Assisted Suicide Should be Legal
(1) Voluntary population control. It makes me so angry that we pride ourselves as the most intellectual species on earth (highly arguable) yet we can breed so callously, irresponsibly, exponentially and ignore that fact that this earth is quickly becoming unsustainable to our population growth. Suicide > homocide > genocide.
(2) More humane ways to die. Given a choice, would you rather die peacefully in your bed, or any bed, really, with an injection or jump in front of a moving train? I thought so. I rest my case.
(3) Die in more responsible ways -- paper works can be drawn up to take care of the person's property. Heck, there will be businesses set up to help people arrange all matters after death. Really? Would you rather your neighbor go in a responsible manner, or until you smell a foul smell and call the police to crack open their doors? And if the person is healthy and a suitable donor, organ harvesting teams can be arranged. The person who CHOSE to die can go knowing that their death will allow MANY others with STRONG wishes to live live. It's a good deed... and a bargaining chip with God should their decision be met with disapproval at the other end.
(4) If we are truly so intelligent and, especially in our country, the awesome US of A, we value free will so much, why should we be allowed to choose when to create a life, but not when to say, "Okay, I have live enough, I think I can/should move on now"?
Monday, August 17, 2009
Recession Terminologies
Two new terminologies emerged with this recession -- funemployment and staycation -- and I like them both. Perhaps the terms have been around since there were recessions, I have just never heard about them. This is as close to recession as I ever had; last time around both Hubby and I had recession proof jobs. This time? We'll see.
For those who are not so familiar with the terms, here's their definition (you can always look up their "official" definition on investopedia.com if you doubt me ;):-
Funemployment:- Fun + unemployment = a fun unemployment. Refers only to those who had the financial stability to enjoy the situation of being laid off -- go on that vacation they never had the chance to, and cheap too (see my entry "Pawn shop of goodies")! Or go back to schoool. On the other hand, if you don't have that financial stability, then it's just the depression of being laid off. I only wish I can afford to be funemployed. :'(
Staycation:- stay + vacation. Refers to those who can't afford to go on a vacation, so they just stay home -- my favorite kind of vacation.
For those who are not so familiar with the terms, here's their definition (you can always look up their "official" definition on investopedia.com if you doubt me ;):-
Funemployment:- Fun + unemployment = a fun unemployment. Refers only to those who had the financial stability to enjoy the situation of being laid off -- go on that vacation they never had the chance to, and cheap too (see my entry "Pawn shop of goodies")! Or go back to schoool. On the other hand, if you don't have that financial stability, then it's just the depression of being laid off. I only wish I can afford to be funemployed. :'(
Staycation:- stay + vacation. Refers to those who can't afford to go on a vacation, so they just stay home -- my favorite kind of vacation.
The Division of Labor
Ever since there were Adam and Eve, there have been division of labor... okay, that might be an exaggeration, I doubt Adam had to hunt and Eve had to gather... but every since Eve fucked up and got us kicked out of eden, men had to be hunters and women had to be gatherers. (I'm sure there are some deviations in different cultures, but overall, I'm pretty sure that's the gist of it.)
So lately I have been pondering about the division of labor in my relationship. I have a job, like most modern day women (at least they should have one); as do my husband. In addition to bringing home more dough than I, the husband also takes care of most of the cooking and cleaning!!! Yes, in the midst of rejoicing over how luck a woman I am, occasionally I do feel a silver of shame, but for the most part, just happy. :) My reflection upon my relationship brought me to this shocking discovery -- my sole contribution in this relationship is entertainment!!
I'm the one who keeps track of when all the good movies come out on DVD and rent them. Even if the husband watched the trailer with me, he'll still ask me when we sat down in front of the TV, "so what's this movie about?" I'm also the one who looks for all the good shows and put them on TiVo, and now on the iPod also. I'm definitely the person who purchase all the video games in the household. And I introduced my husband to fine cuisines of all ethnicity. And that's it!! My contribution ends there! (That and my measley income, of course.)
Mi oh mi, this relationship is really on rocky ground. LOL
So lately I have been pondering about the division of labor in my relationship. I have a job, like most modern day women (at least they should have one); as do my husband. In addition to bringing home more dough than I, the husband also takes care of most of the cooking and cleaning!!! Yes, in the midst of rejoicing over how luck a woman I am, occasionally I do feel a silver of shame, but for the most part, just happy. :) My reflection upon my relationship brought me to this shocking discovery -- my sole contribution in this relationship is entertainment!!
I'm the one who keeps track of when all the good movies come out on DVD and rent them. Even if the husband watched the trailer with me, he'll still ask me when we sat down in front of the TV, "so what's this movie about?" I'm also the one who looks for all the good shows and put them on TiVo, and now on the iPod also. I'm definitely the person who purchase all the video games in the household. And I introduced my husband to fine cuisines of all ethnicity. And that's it!! My contribution ends there! (That and my measley income, of course.)
Mi oh mi, this relationship is really on rocky ground. LOL
The Value of Dilbert
To date it still amazes me that some people have never read Dilbert. How is that possible? I guess perhaps if you are in a field that's entirely rid of idiotic bosses/workers (right!). It's like Seinfeld, it's no Gone with the Wind, but it's classic of its own. How do I begin to explain the value of Dilbert, let's just say I was having a crazy day of Friday, but I just had to go to the Dilbert website and find and print out this strip, in color.
The new application that we have "adopted" at work is most definitely created by the same team!!!! It was my very faint effort to maintain my sanity by rummaging through the website, print out this strip, and stick it on my cube. I did not, however, put the name of the application on top on it, which I was very tempted. I was supposed to be one of the person promoting this big stinking pile of shit to everyone else!! I may have to lie through my teeth to get people to use this piece of shit, but I sure as hell ain't going to do it with a big smile!
The new application that we have "adopted" at work is most definitely created by the same team!!!! It was my very faint effort to maintain my sanity by rummaging through the website, print out this strip, and stick it on my cube. I did not, however, put the name of the application on top on it, which I was very tempted. I was supposed to be one of the person promoting this big stinking pile of shit to everyone else!! I may have to lie through my teeth to get people to use this piece of shit, but I sure as hell ain't going to do it with a big smile!
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Pet Peeves
Everybody has our own pet peeves. I have so many of them that I am not even going to try to list them all out here, but here's one: When I ask a multiple choice question, don't answer with true or false.
"Yes" or "no" does not answer the question of whether you want "A" or "B."
"Would you like an apple or an orange?" "Yes."
Is that "yes, I'd like an apple," or "yes, I'd like an orange," or "yes, I'd like both"? I can't read your mind, hence the question in the first place.
The other thing is, if you are answering a negative statement, "You don't like apples, do you?" Please elaborate after "yes" or "no." And here's why.
The proper way to answer this question is:
"Yes, I like apples." or "No, I don't like apples."
Unless you are speaking in Chinese, then the proper way to answer it is to address the statement: "Yes (the statement is true) [I don't like apples.]"
When I am conversing with Chinese people, I definitely have no idea whether the "yes" or "no" are Chinese yes/no or English yes/no. And from personal experiences, MOST native English speakers will tend to reply the Chinese way, despite the fact that they do not speak a lick of Chinese or understand the structure of it.
So, in conclusion, for the love of God, answer the entire statement, even if you are typing on your iPod/cell phone.
Mucho gracias.
"Yes" or "no" does not answer the question of whether you want "A" or "B."
"Would you like an apple or an orange?" "Yes."
Is that "yes, I'd like an apple," or "yes, I'd like an orange," or "yes, I'd like both"? I can't read your mind, hence the question in the first place.
The other thing is, if you are answering a negative statement, "You don't like apples, do you?" Please elaborate after "yes" or "no." And here's why.
The proper way to answer this question is:
"Yes, I like apples." or "No, I don't like apples."
Unless you are speaking in Chinese, then the proper way to answer it is to address the statement: "Yes (the statement is true) [I don't like apples.]"
When I am conversing with Chinese people, I definitely have no idea whether the "yes" or "no" are Chinese yes/no or English yes/no. And from personal experiences, MOST native English speakers will tend to reply the Chinese way, despite the fact that they do not speak a lick of Chinese or understand the structure of it.
So, in conclusion, for the love of God, answer the entire statement, even if you are typing on your iPod/cell phone.
Mucho gracias.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)