Ahh... It was nice of Sony to entice me with a free month of Vanguard: Saga of Heroes. I mean, I've been wanting a trial of the thing for ages to see how it's evolved since beta, but they're not interested in that, I guess, so I've had to quench my curiousity with other games. How do I like it since beta?

I have no idea. Sony Station has changed absolutely not at all since I played Star Wars: Galaxies all those years ago, shortly after Ubisoft canned Uru Live. The Station, back then, was riddled with connection errors and freezes and a service so ancient that it didn't support resumeable downloads. Well, it looks like they've got the resumeable download part down, but when you have to download a multi-gigabyte program entirely from online, you really start to feel the connection problems... It won't just stop and restart, it will STALL. Right in the middle of a 12 hour queue. You start it up when you head to bed, and when you wake up the next morning, you find out that it's stalled out and you still have 11 hours left to go. It'll just sit there on the same file, not doing anything... No connection activity whatsoever... And use all its energy to re-estimate how long it'll take to get the file that it's NOT getting. When you wake up and see 90 hours, you know it's broken.

Then, when you finally get through the 12 hours of files? It scans itself to make sure everything's there before promptly beginning to download another 12 hours of files. Everyone was upset when Sony got directly involved with Vanguard at the beginning, and I can understand it perfectly.

But here's to an uneventful 6 hours of download time while I sleep...

I fail to see the logic of providing polls as proof that any particular presidential candidate is likely or unlikely to succeed... The media enjoys hyping up their crown candidate by frequently (and by frequently, I mean daily) announcing that he or she is sooo far ahead of competition, based on "latest polls". I mean, really... That's about as vague as it gets. "Latest polls". Tell me, how many people did you poll? 100? 1,000? 100,000? What's the statstical margin for error? WHERE did you conduct the poll? A street corner in Los Angeles? An obsure page of your website? Did you have IP filtering? Cookie filtering?

Yes, I'm talking about the "grand news" that Obama is 12 points ahead of McCain, no, wait! 15 points ahead! No! Wait! 17 points ahead! Oh, it's only 13 points? It seems that each media outlet has their own numbers they're pulling out of their butts and using them to predict the entire presidential election. Heck, you shouldn't even bother voting because just you voting against Obama isn't going to change the lead! Might as well sit and watch the events unfold... It's completely futile for you to change the numbers. That's the entire aura surrounding these "reports". (More like opinion pieces.)

Yeah, well, one question I always ask when I hear these polls being quoted. Where was MY ballot? Why didn't I get to vote in this little poll of yours? "Oh, GS, well... We obviously can't conduct a poll of the entire population, so we just select a few to statistically and mathematically extrapolate the results on a larger scale! Our base is far beyond the minimum required for most satisfactory results, so everyone should be happy." Absolute hogwash, I say. If you take 100,000 people from the middle of California, you're going to get a major swing toward the liberal candidate. If you take 100,000 people from the middle of Indiana, you're going to get a major swing toward the conservative candidate. (And I'm guessing they didn't poll the residents of conservative Indiana.)

My point is... Why are they even bothering releasing these numbers? I don't care how statistically accurate the results are... Why are they bothering? Polls have absolutely no power over who wins the elections, as the previous two presidential elections are clearly evidence of. They poll a small section of the population, extrapolate it on percentage for the ENTIRE population, and declare a winner before it's even close to voting day, and when their predicted winner, in fact, LOSES the election, the entire Democratic party jumps and cries and yells about voter fraud and how the conservative candidate couldn't possibly have won without the help of miscounted ballots, cheating voters, and the favor of the court.

But, then again, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that is precisely the reaction the news media is shooting for when they release these numbers. They want to sway the voters before it's even time to do so... Bombard them with the idea that their candidate is the one constantly in the lead, and if that candidate loses, then everyone who believed they would win will make such an incredible racket and start accusing everyone else of cheating. Absolute chaos. You know, I even say this when the test numbers show when MY side is winning. Heaven knows the media would NEVER show McCain in any sort of a lead, but even if he were, I would much rather wait until the voting deadline when EVERYONE is finished voting before I start to party. Statistical accuracy means absolutely squat when ALL the people who influence the outcome finally have a chance to have their say. People might not bother voting on your poll and go out and vote for the real thing and throw everything off the mark... People might not bother voting for the real thing but manage to get on your little poll and still throw everything off the mark. It's stupid, it's pointless, it doesn't at all reflect what will actually happen, and I wish the media would stop pushing this garbage out on everyone, because you know there'll be people out there who are misled into believing that these numbers really DO paint a picture of what's going to happen.

More Anti-Microsoft blather from Slashdot:

"Microsoft still has three out of ten people running an old version of its browser more than 18 months after Internet Explorer 7 launched, while Firefox has converted more than half of its users to the latest version in just over a week. That should set a few alarm bells ringing in Redmond."

People always tout how a higher percentage of people don't upgrade Internet Explorer compared to Firefox users... Let me be the first to point out that Firefox pops up a window when there's an update for the thing. Internet Explorer DOES NOT. Now, I know that Firefox 3 doesn't spring a window on you to upgrade from Firefox 2, but let's face it. People who are smart enough to look for other browsers besides what comes on their computer are going to be smart enough to manually update their browser to the latest and greatest. I'm sure if whenever you started Internet Explorer and it announced a new version with a button to automatically download and install, far more people would upgrade (and far more people would complain about Microsoft's intrusive behavior). As it stands, Internet Explorer, as a whole, still counts for over 50 percent of the browser "market share". I don't think alarm bells are ringing in Redmond juuust yet.

Like I said about Intel, AMD caught them napping when they released processors that were more advanced than Intel's, and everyone was cheering and and whipping out the benchmarks to show that AMD was superior. Then the technological marvel that is Intel was startled into the reality that someone was challenging their roost as best chip designer and got busy and blew AMD away with Core 2 and Nehalem. Now AMD's playing catch up... Same thing is happening to nVidia. They've been king of the hill for so long that they've been releasing expensive cards simply because ATI has been playing catch up and nobody wants those cards for performance, but now that ATI is starting to turn heads with their latest cards, nVidia is churning out cards to compete properly. This is what also happened to Microsoft. There were no viable alternatives to Internet Explorer for a very, very long time, so development had pretty much frozen at Internet Explorer 6. Now that Firefox is starting to edge in on their turf, Microsoft made a hasty Internet Explorer 7 that addresses the major security issues, and now they're working on Internet Explorer 8 by making it just about as standards compliant as any other browser. There might have been alarm bells in Redmond before Internet Explorer 7 was release, but I don't think they're very worried about the amount of people who upgrade. After all, the people who complain about the shortcomings of Internet Explorer are going to be the ones to upgrade anyway, so it doesn't matter... Of course, we all know there's going to be the handful of holier-than-thou fanatics who won't even give IE7 a chance to prove its worth, and still think they have the knowledge to complain about what's wrong with the Internet Explorer line.

All in all, the Firefox community needs to focus on fixing their own browser and stop trying to mimic Apple with the whole pointing and laughing at your competition. It seriously cheapens anything you have to offer.

So... A while ago, I was raving about a piece of Okami fan art that was posted on deviantArt and how the artist was selling the original. A piece called Amaterasu-Happiness? I suppose I never followed up with that restless post, did I? Well, long story short... I bought it! It arrived a few weeks ago while I was straining through finals and certification exams, so I didn't make a post about it... But while I'm on the subject of Okami (as I usually am), I thought I'd show you a little snippet of the real thing:

Beautiful! Time to ask my friend how to make plexi-glass frames.

After a very long time of delayed releases and UPS adverse weather conditions:

Pretty! Unfortunately, it has no slip cover like the Japanese edition had. I don't count that against it, though. A slip cover is brilliant, but it's one more thing to keep track of, so it doesn't bother me that this one doesn't have any. It does have an awesome shiny Amaterasu on the front, though, as you can clearly see, thanks to the flash. It's pretty much identical to the Japanese version, except all text has been converted to English... Sometimes a little oddly, but, it's still readable. Plus, you still read from right to left. You can "hit the jump", so to speak, to see a couple more shots I took. If you really strain at the words, you might catch a spoiler or two... But you can always not look at the text if you don't want spoiled.

(more...)

So a bunch of reporters sat around one day and tried to think of questions to ask Obama. You know, the really core issues that would matter in the presidential race. The things about Obama that could make or break a candidacy... Things that nobody's asked before, simply because they're all afraid to tarnish their pet candidate. They all sat around, though very hard, and after several cups of raktajino coffee, they came up with the perfect question:

What does Obama have on his iPod?

I once heard that Democrats are more concerned with how their candidates LOOK to the world. How they act, how the say things... How lovable they are in general. Republicans are more concerned about principles. What they'll do and what they say are the key issues, now how they look. Black Republican candidate? We don't care as long as he or she has conservative principles. Woman candidate? We don't care as long as she has conservative principles. Old candidate? We don't care as long as he or she has conservative principles. While the Democrats are all whining about how their candidates are or aren't getting votes because of sexism or racism, Republicans are all on their side of the room worrying about what a candidate will actually do in offce and ignore all the puff articles about how Michelle Obama's dress was an attempt to unify people.

You know, unification is all well and good, but it would help to know what Obama is unifying us FOR. He's flip-flopped so many times, it's pointless to predict exactly what he's going to do. We already know he thinks guns are things that bitter rural citizens cling to, that catastrophic global warming is something that the government needs to control, that drilling for oil on our own land should be illegal, even when China and Cuba are drilling closer to our shores than we're currently allowed to, and that he totally agrees with all forms of abortion, including partial-birth and after-birth (commonly referred to as infanticide). This guy is one sad, strange little man, and all the liberal media can do is ask him if he likes ice cream, if he likes bowling, and what music he listens to? A people just eat it up? I sincerely hope that the people who think these articles give an idea of what his presidency would be will manage to be too caught up in the week's episode of American Idol and forget to go to the November polls. We don't need those kind of people voting for the leader of the largest, most powerful country on the face of the planet. We need to focus on what Obama WILL DO as president, not on how he can connect to the people. Connecting is good, but when that's all you do, you could be voting for a cute baby animal for all the principles you know Obama stands for. Cute baby animals are notorious for not running countries as well as people.

By the way, I heard a couple of pretty great jokes a couple days ago. The first:

Chelsea Clinton welcomed home an Iraqi soldier and asked: "Since you’ve just gone through hell, what can possibly be worse?" The soldier immediately replied with: "Osama, Obama, and your momma."

On a broader note, here's the second:

If Clinton, Obama and McCain were all on a sinking ship, who would be saved? ... The United States of America!

I know these are all pretty crappy candidates we have this term, and I would prefer anyone but Obama and McCain, but I'm going to vote for McCain even though I don't agree with a lot of his positions... Simply because I'm fairly certain what he's going to try to do with his presidency. Obama has changed his mind on a whim so many times just to cater to who he's talking to at the moment that I don't think it's possible to project what he's planning on doing... You know, besides national health care and other socialist tendancies.

Let me just jog your memory of something that happened several, several years ago. There was a regime in a country far, far away. It wasn't gaining much momentum with the adults of the country, so the group was faced with a dilemma of how to progress their ideas. After much deliberation, they decided to target specifically the youth of the culture. The group was a patient group, and the realized that the best way to advance their agenda was to get the youth involved. Eventually, if all went according to plan, they would have an entire generation of people who were indoctrinated with their philosophy and there would be nothing anyone could do about it after that. That country was Germany, and the mastermind behind the process was Adolph Hitler. I'm not calling Obama a Hitler, but you do have to wonder at the striking similarities of their political maneuvering. (That is, if you have an open mind...)

So... I want to work, but my leg has differet plans, so while the two of us are trying to determine who's going to have the final say, I've been relegated to sitting and lounging around, being incredible bored. As a result, I've started watching more Star Trek. Deep Space Nine, to be exact. I'd watched Seasons 1 through some of 3 and I stopped for some reason. I managed to toil through what's generally considered to be the worst part of the series and I stopped RIGHT as it was getting good. Actually, I remember why I stopped watching it... It was my very first semester. I remember it vividly because I got violently ill for a week and I had to inform everyone that I was NOT going to be in classes that week. I was incredibly bed ridden... I couldn't move or I'd get sick. I couldn't even drink water without getting sick... To pass the time, I watched Deep Space Nine. I charged through all those episodes and burned myself out. Interesting how I only start watching it again when I'm not feeling well...

But I've learned something about Star Trek. I've noticed that the longer it goes, the less people are inclined to think they're good... Voyager, for example, isn't usually considered to be a good Star Trek, at least from what I've gathered, what with the whole debacle with Seven of Nine being called a way to keep the male audience interested... (Personally, I thought she was awesome as a character, not as a body, and I'm sorry if one is too short-sighted to see her otherwise.) But that's the first Star Trek that I watched through, beginning to end, in chronological order. I'd seen all the others, but only bits and pieces and completely out of order. I watched Voyager completely through and I loved it... So much, in fact, that the next year, I watched it AGAIN.

Then I started Deep Space Nine, and it was a completely different feel. I was used to the Delta Quadrant and no regular contact with Starfleet Command, so Alpha Quadrant stories were new and exciting, and I started catching similarities and references from Voyager, and it allowed me to connect Voyager to Deep Space Nine. (Especially when it came to the Maquis.) I know if I watched DS9 first, I would make connections to it from Voyager, but then I might not have enjoyed Voyager so much, since it's considerably weaker than DS9 when it comes to story. Face it... DS9's Dominion War story is probably the single longest and most complicated story in the Star Trek universe.

After I watch DS9, I plan on watching The Next Generation, because Worf and O'Brien came from the Enterprise and they constantly refer to it and jobs they did. I absolutely despise TNG. Well, I didn't always. I used to think it was the greatest, but then I started watching Stargate SG-1 and realized that science-fiction acting can be SO MUCH BETTER. When I saw an episode of TNG afterwards, I almost gagged at the atrocious dialogue, even from Picard. But I think now that I've seen DS9 and have heard stories of the Enterprise, I can now go back and watch TNG and be able to make connections to DS9 in those brilliant EUREKA! moments that I've been having with DS9 and Voyager.

Of course, when I watch TNG, I'm going to have to go further back and check out The Original Series... Because that's where it all started. I have never been able to watch TOS and keep a steady stomach. I once saw a fist fight between Kirk and someone else on the ship... I was laughing my head off because not only were they not landing punches in a believable manner, but when they were thrown into the wall, the wall SHOOK. Not exactly the most steady of set designs... Doors that sound like a bit of passing gas when they open, that awful pitched squeal when the comm channels are opened, and those terrible excuses for tricorders. Ugh. I really never enjoyed TOS. But I think after watching TNG, I'll be able to... Hopefully I'll get more EUREKA! moments, but by then, I hope to have an interest in watching more Federation history.

Then... There's Enterprise. That pathetic new-BSG quality excuse for a Star Trek that dared stumble on to the air waves. I'm not sure how much is considered canon by the fans, but there are a few things that I (sadly) think would be interesting to watch... Especially the signing of the Federation Charter. I realize Enterprise completely destroys most existing canon and timelines in a sorry effort to make things interesting, but there are some things that might be neat to see... From a... Purely objective stance: "This isn't Star Trek, but let's see what they think happened at the beginning of the Federation." Also, the idea of primitive replication and transporter technology makes me happy... We've had that stuff for years, so it'll be fun to see how they get around it. Slow Warp speeds and all that good stuff. I don't know, though... I'll have to think about it.

But I think it's going to be a good thing that I'm watching things in reverse chronological order. Not only do you develop an appreciation for the "lesser" versions, but I think it gives a more enjoyable experience. Each series doesn't depend on the last, but, as I've said, they do sometimes mention previous events. You don't have to know what the previous events were, exactly, because they explain what you need to know, and sometimes you might not even know they're referencing a previous event, but I guarantee you'll know it's a reference when you go to the next series and you watch the events unfold in real time.

So, uh... There you have it. I've been obsessing about Star Trek, and I believe I've become as much of a Trekkie as the next, as far as series lore goes. I haven't dressed up as a Ktarian or gone to any conventions, but when it comes to recalling what happened, when, why and where? I'm your dog. (So far at least for Voyager and DS9.) I've even dreamed about replicators and Starfleet. I would totally enlist as an Engineer... No doubt about it. Maybe marry a Trill... With those cute spots... Erm... Okay, time to stop daydreaming.