Books like Eckhart Tolle's always get my Inner Philosopher worked up, and I have to buy them. He could have named the book "Ways to Be Happy While Getting Screwed Up The Ass By Your Boss, Family, CoWorkers, Strangers and God" and I'd buy it. Because there's a tiny tiny subset of those Self-Help books that truly are life-changing, and they are well worth the volumes of Trite-Shite and Atlantis-Nonsense that you have to sift through to find them.

Eckhart Tolle's previous work includes a book entitled "The Power of Now"; a fantastic exploration on the human perception of time. The book focuses on how to stop dragging the past along with you, and stop thinking that Someday you will be happy. Instead, the book describes how to 'Live In The Now', and I highly recommend it.

His latest release, "A New Earth: Awakening to your Life's Purpose" is a profoundly life-changing book... for the right people. But I don't think I can really recommend it for four reasons.

First, I think the idea is a bit much for many people. The core idea is to step back and take an objective look at yourself. This will make you realize that the Real You is not bundle of needs and desires that always go unsatisfied. Letting go of 'wanting' and physical things is an old practice, and at the very core of Buddhist thought; Tolle tries to sugar-coat it for Americans to make it easier to swallow, but by and large, the people I refer to as Americans (a derogatory term when I use it) are simply not going to be receptive to this idea.

Worse, I suspect many people who hear about the book will run out to buy it because they Really-Really-Want to let go of their Wanting. Its these people who need the book most, but its not going to help them, because they simply won't comprehend it. Meanwhile, those who buy the book to make themselves better are already conscientious and self-aware (because they are buying a book like this), and don't really need the book. Choir. Preaching.

Second, I've basically just told you the entire book, so save your money and your time. To Tolle's credit, he gives lots of advice, examples, and points of view on the matter, and ties it well to Christianity and other world religions (he claims to cater to no particular world religion.)

Thirdly, if Eckhard Tolle really practiced what he preached, he would license the book through Creative Commons and make it available online for free.

Fourth, and most difficult for me to explain, is that the book is dangerous. The advice Tolle offers people to create a third-person viewpoint of themselves can, if used as intended, separate the Real You from your desiring, unhappy, habitual False Self. But it can also be used to create a refuge, or buffer; a place where you can watch your False Self rob a liquor store and kill people for drug money. It could allow a person to remain calm, cool, and collected in the face of performing terrible things. Then they could go to sleep without the slightest guilt, saying, That wasn't The Real Me! Learned Multiple Personality Syndrome, anyone?

Do yourself a favor and read "The Power of Now". Then read this outline of Buddhist philosophy, and put the two together for yourself. If you see how the two fit together, you don't need to bother with "A New Earth".

Art Is Resistance
-Zero

Labels: Book Review, Inner Philosopher

Every now and again, there are albums that I have to play. HAVE to. Must. After a while, the pain of Not playing them becomes unbearable. If my spirit was a plant, these recordings would be sunlight and water. If my spirit were an addict, these recordings would be Audio Crystal Meth:

Marillion - Brave (1994)
Marillion - Misplaced Childhood (1985)
Marillion - marillion.com (1999)
Nine Inch Nails - The Downward Spiral (1994)
Nine Inch Nails - Pretty Hate Machine (1989)
Nirvana - Nevermind (1991)
Marilyn Manson - Antichrist Superstar (1996)
Pink Floyd - Dark Side of the Moon (1973)
Pink Floyd - Animals (1977)
Pink Floyd - The Wall (1979)
Pink Floyd - The Final Cut (1983)
Dire Straits - Brothers In Arms (1985)
Neil Young - Unplugged (just the first half...) (1993)
Robert Plant - Now and Zen (1988)
REM - Document (1987)
Days of the New (1997)
Bob Mould - Bob Mould (1996)
Nixon Pupils - Helldozer (mid 1990s)
Johnny Jones - Small Sacrifices (mid 1990s)

Notice how none of these albums was made after the year 2000? I'm trying to figure out why. With access to damn near every single band in the world available through myspace.com, you would think I would still be finding music that I simply can't live without, but that's not the case.

Is it because newer music is fundamentally different in some way? Looking at Billboard's top 10 I only recognize two of them, one being Korn, and the other (I'm ashamed to say) is Fergie. Yes, I've listened to the entire Dutchess album, and already forgotten what that was like. Is the 'click' gone from current music? Are newer songwriters and bands less talented than they were in the 80s or 90s?

Perhaps the problem is me. Have I fundamentally changed? Most certainly, I'm not remotely the person I was in the 90s. But I still listen to music, and I love music so much I play it all the time. The world just seems empty without it, like watching an epic adventure movie without a soundtrack or score.

Perhaps it is a little of both? Is it because at that point in my life the music clicked with me, and current music doesn't? I don't think so, I have a car-full of CDs that click with me right now, but I can't say I'll be dying to hear Velvet Revolver, Kamelot, or Black Label Society years from now.

Oh well, something for my Inner Philosopher to think about when he gets back from vacation.

Now notice that there isn't a single album in that list with a female lead singer...

KTHXBYE,
-CZ

Labels: Culture, Inner Philosopher, music, Philosophy

An old issue of Escapist Magazine prompted several strange realizations.

First, being in Edit mode for so long whilst working on the Demonslayer's Handbook, has increased the abilities of my Inner Philosopher to analyze/edit text as I read.

Second, if I'm not making use of my Inner Philosopher to edit or analyze (for instance, when I'm reading for entertainment), then he reads annoyingly over my shoulder, and provides useless analysis and editorials, and sometimes dirty jokes. Often, he does Not analyze what I'm reading, but uses it instead as a seed for a new and often surprising branch of thought into some almost-related area.

Third (and it was this third realization which made me realize the first two) was that while reading about whether video games should be considered 'art' or not, my Inner Philosopher suggested that people who play First Person Shooter Video Games might have a different approach to death and violence than those who prefer Third Person Shooters, such as Diablo, Command and Conquer, and the like.

Personally, I can't get into Video Games that have a "Top Down" view, because the view takes me "out" of the game. Being in first person makes me feel more connected, it removes a level of "suspension of disbelief" and makes the game more entertaining for me. I do wish they would hurry up and get the Holodeck Virtual Reality thing figured out in my lifetime, because that would be better yet...

Also, I much prefer Video Games where you control One character. Not Two, Not Ten, and certainly not tens of thousands. I have to juggle multiple tasks and ever-changing priorities every day at work, it's like juggling cats, and there's not much entertainment in that for me. Give me an objective, and a gun...hell, give me an objective and a crowbar, and I'm happy. But managing and allocating resources? Ick. Why do *I* have to do all the managerial work? And why shoud the 'bots have all the fun?

Anyway, my Inner Philosopher was pointing out a major difference between "Top Down" and "First Person" viewpoints: Those playing from Top Down will see their character(s) die, and those in First Person will experience their character's death Pseudo-Firsthand. Likewise, those watching from Top Down will watch their characters performing horrific deeds, but those in First Person will perform the deeds themselves. It is a subtle but significant difference, like programming a robot to perform a task instead of doing it yourself. There is an added level of abstraction to the Top Down view, while the First Person view is more immediate.

Strangely enough my preference in stories is the exact opposite from my preference for video games. I like stories told from the "Top View" or "God View", or more correctly, "Omniscient Narrator" point of view. There have been very few stories told from the first person that pull me into the story; 'The Metamorphosis' by Franz Kafka does - "The Divine Comedy" Trilogy by Dante Alighieri is another. In these few cases, I was able to identify with the storyteller, and feel what they feel.

But I notice many of the current Monster-Hunter genre stories are written from a first-person perspective, and they just don't do it for me. When I see them on the shelf, I open the book to some random page, and read some text. If the story is written from First Person Perspective, I generally pass. Although, I recently read Lilith Saintcrow's book 'Dead Man Rising' which was in First Person, and it was a big part of the reason I didn't care for the book.

The First Person Perspective is difficult to pull off, sometimes writers get stuck and have to cheat by shifting out of First Person, which completely wrecks my faith in them as a writer. If you choose to write from the hero's point of view throughout the story, you need to make it work.

Anyway, it seems to me that the University of Minnesota Psychology Department should be looking into this.

Blog on,
-CZ

Labels: Inner Philosopher, Video Games, Writing

We are way beyond the magical year 2000 now. Turns out Nostradamus didn't know shit. The world did not end (unfortunately) and I'm still paying for the end-of-the-world party I had in 1999. (still slightly hungover too...)

So here we are in 2007, and there are 3 things that Should Be, but Are Not.

1) Flying Cars - Where the hell are they already?

2) VR - We been looking forward to Virtual Reality ever since the fucking Holodeck, and the closest we ever got was this crap. Sure the holodeck in Star Trek ended up malfunctioning over half the time, killing hundreds of people, but that's what they make release forms and waivers for, right?

3) Software as a Service, not a Product - Alright, so we ain't been waiting on this one for near as long, but I loaded up the new Adobe Reader 8 and I'm wondering how is this different from version 7? Version 6? Version 3?

What Adobe Reader changed from previous versions is to hide all the buttons people used to use (Like 'Save A Copy'? Yeah, glad you got rid of *that* useless button)and replace them with buttons that should be labeled 'Give Adobe Money For Added Useless Functions!'

For instance - BEYOND Adobe Reader? What the fuck is Beyond Adobe Reader? ***BEYOND*** Adobe Reader? And a meeting button? In Adobe Reader? WTF?

The casual user doesn't use any of those 'Value Subtracted' features, they use it to view PDF files. Let me rephrase that in a parable for Adobe:

[Setting: The Pearly Gates]

God - "Alright mortal, before you can enter Heaven, you must answer this question, and answer it honest and truthfully, or shalt thou forever burn in a fiery pit of, um... of Fire!"

Adobe Reader User (terrified) - "Yes Lord."

God - "Now, What is your favorite color?"

Adobe Reader User (confused) -"???"

God - "Ha! Sorry, just fuckin with you there..."

Adobe Reader User (relieved) - "Whew!"

God - "Right. What is the purpose for Adobe Acrobat Reader?"

Adobe Reader User (sweating) - "Um, to read PDF files?"

God - "Correct!"


No dig against Adobe. Microsoft Money and Intuit's Quicken programs haven't changed functionality in Years and Years, but they have continued to release new versions every year. And Windows? Exactly what I am talking about. Microsoft should hand me a couple million just for making this observation to them.

They have bought into the paradigm that a Software Product is a living, breathing entity, which ebbs and flows like the tide, continually morphing into new and exciting user experiences under the guidance and direction of our marketing department...

...but they are wrong. Sorry, into the fiery pit of Fire with you. Thanks for playing, we have some lovely parting gifts for you.

If you can't write a piece of software and call it done then you don't have a Product. You have a Service. If customers buy your software off the shelf, install it on their computers and never look back, then you have a product. But what we have instead is what I call Version Release Syndrome.

It isn't hard to understand why. You have hundreds of people working on the project. For months. Years. You fine tune, and you beta test, and you work work work. Suddenly, the shareholders scream in unison. The press has been notified, the preorder checks have already been spent, and the market is buckling under the stress of waiting. The drop dead date is etched in bits on the internet. There is no more time, and not enough caffeine in the world.

Somewhere a file is transferred to the duplicator. You just went gold.

After the programmers come out of their comas, then comes all the frustration of shoulda/woulda/coulda. Shoulda added this feature. Woulda got more user feedback. Coulda done more testing. If we only had more time. Here we got this big money-making-machine, and it's a shame to shut it all down now, I mean, what are all these talented people going to *DO* now? The juggernaut has only paused for a breath, and it would be SO DIFFICULT to shut it down, and SO EASY to...

Keep going.

The beauty of the interweb has only enabled this attitude. Software companies can ship unfinished and untested 'product' and provide patches later. Just slip in a clause into the EULA, and bam! You can make money today on software that isn't even finished! Game companies are the most notorious for this, but at least They draw the line on their releases at some point, so they truly are a Product. Imagine if music or movies did this! (although with DVD re-releases and CD remasters this can be done to some extent)

Like Stick says, "This is Not the way."

No. What companies will eventually realize is that software in all its forms, movies, music, e-books, webpages, RSS News Feeds, blogs, and even operating systems should be distributed as services, not products. Charge a subscription for them. In case you didn't know it, you already are, but it's just about the clumsiest system I can imagine.

Instead of trying to trick your customers into upgrading to the new version, get them to sign on as subscribing customers. Which way do you think will make more money? (And DO NOT USE THE WORDS 'LONG TAIL' OR I WILL KICK YOUR ASS!)

AOL understands this. Give the software away. Free. Charge a subscription for the service, like a utility.

This IS the way.

Blog on,
-CZ

Labels: Business Phenomena, Inner Philosopher, Million Dollar Idea, Technology

Ever since computer games have been able to network and play cooperatively (I think the first one I played on a network was Quake...) I have enjoyed the strange phenomenon of the LAN Party.

For those who don't know, a LAN Party is where you lug your computer, monitor, keyboard, mouse, game controllers, power cords, extension cables, a myriad of games (and your Windows System Disk, just in case), maybe a USB drive full of games, a mittfull of blank media, chips, and enough caffeine to kill yourself and head over to your buddy's house, spend an evening trying to figure out the intricacies of TCP/IP vs IPX/SPX Protocols. If you are lucky, or have a computer science major, you will be able to network your computers and frag each other to virtual bits, or even better, team up against virtual baddies and overload on virtual ultraviolence until the sun comes up.

Strange, I know. Years from now, when "That 00's Show" comes on, they will show some geeky teen loading up a huge beige computer and monitor into the trunk of their 96 Saturn, and heading off to a LAN Party, and the audience will laugh....

Anyways, with increased bandwidth that broadband gives us, the LAN party seems to be shifting more towards the virtual lounge. Now that my friends have High-Speed connections at home, we can play BF2142 and run Teamspeak on the side, and talk to each other like we were there in the room together. It isn't that different from an actual LAN party - you're mostly making table talk, and you don't make much eye contact, because you're focused on the game.

I agree, it isn't a whole lot of fun to disconnect all that crap and discover how much dust and cat hair is caked on the back of your PC chassis, stuff it all in your vehicle, haul it across town, unpack, hook it all up, only to unpack/set up, then break it all down again, pack it up again, and drive home at some ungodly hour with your brain fried to a crisp on 12 straight hours of caffeine, adrenaline, ultraviolence and Doritos.

But I still enjoy the moments between the games; deprogramming what happened and what others might have missed. There is more to a LAN party than just voice chat. That goes for other things as well.

Can you imagine two people going to different restaurants and keeping the cell phone on the table on 'speakerphone' mode? How different is that than eating dinner together?

Or going to the movies, and sitting next to a laptop with Netmeeting running a wireless video conference with your significant other, so you can watch a movie 'together'?

I can imagine it, and that it's a reasonable temporary substitution if the other person is in China or on the Moon or something, but I wonder if people will end up forsaking personal interaction for simply the audio/video.

Do I even need to mention that myspace "friends" are no replacement for the real thing? Or that porn is no replacement for intercourse? If you've ever seen the movie 'Sleeper' with Woody Allen, or 'Demolition Man' with Sandra Bullock, you will know what I mean.

I doubt that LAN parties will become obsolete, it gives geeks a chance to show off their new hardware, and their pimped-out computer chassis. What good are green glowing neon lights if you don't go show them off?

As the technology gets better, online gaming will probably reduce the number of LAN parties, and that's not all bad, it makes the experience of gaming together more convenient, but also takes away some of its quality - like fast food compared to gourmet food, or like an e-mail compared to a handwritten letter, or a text chat compared to a face-to-face conversation.

And how will geeks ever procreate if they don't mingle? Hey, mooks have country-western bars and geeks have LAN parties.

Blog on,
-CZ

Labels: Inner Philosopher, Technology, Video Games

So Osama Bin Laden, Kurt Cobain, Elvis and myself were hanging out in a Hash Bar in Amsterdam. No, it's not a joke, it's a dream I had. I think it was a dream. Anyway, we were sitting at a table together, not necessarily talking about anything in particular, but talking nonetheless. The weather, economy, fashion trends, and the coffee, which was surprisingly bad considering what it cost.

I couldn't find my spoon, the one I had been stirring my coffee with, and at first I thought that Kurt had taken it. He was kind of a dick, which is not what I expected at all, and *he* had a spoon. So I'm trying to pay attention to what Osama is saying, since he seems very intelligent (which is also not what I expected, and should have been a tip-off that this was a dream after all) and he seemed to be very knowledgeable about current fashions, despite the fact that he wore a bedsheet.

Right, the spoon. So anyway, the coffee was so bad that I gave up on the thought that stirring it might actually help. Then I thought that the coffee might have been so very bad that it actually dissolved the spoon, which might explain the taste. Then I thought that dissolved spoon in the coffee might have *improved* the taste, and I should be thankful that it did not taste worse. My Inner Philosopher perked up and noted that if I should view all potentially bad events this way, my outlook on life would improve dramatically. I told my Inner Philosopher that he was right - the glass was not half full, it was completely full - of expensive coffee that tasted like dogshit mixed with dissolved silver and Windex. That shut him right up.

It eventually dawned on me that the three people I was seated with had something in common: No one knew for sure whether they were really dead or not. (except me of course, because I was talking with them) I started to worry that I might end up with the same condition, through osmosis or some weird media-virus. I thought of my parents, not knowing if they should put my Marillion CD collection up on E-Bay or not, because I would be *Pissed* if they did that and I wasn't really dead yet. I thought of my friends suddenly rushing off to verify reports that I was sighted hitch-hiking through Oregon, or making out with Paris Hilton backstage at a Black Eyed Peas concert. The whole thing made me sad.

I suddenly wished I had a coffee, and then realized that I did have a coffee, so I edited my wish and wished for a good coffee, and a spoon. I asked Elvis if I could use his spoon, partially because he hadn't used it, and partially because I love hearing him talk.

"Yeah, sure," he said, "Go right ahead man."

Blog on,
-CZ

Labels: Dreams, Inner Philosopher