Musical Archaeology - Rhapsody Playlists ('n' More)

This site is managed with GVIM, Filezilla and PHP, yeah I code my own stuff..

Due to the nature of this blog, archives have to be provided in seperate locations, to get back to the most recent blog, simply click on the default link. The site will always link to the most recent one.

Blog Archives: [Current, 2007], [2006], [2005].

For You Lazy YouTubers: YouTubeify It Bookmarklet + FREEDB = Easy YouTube music searches.
For Those Who Haven't Patience To Use YouTube: CHANN3L Z - What If YouTube was TV. (NEW!!!, 2/07) Quicktime (30MB), YouTube One and Two, Tutes.
Cheapest way to podify yourself: Buy this mp3 player (I own two of these with 1 gig SD cards ) (--> DEMOSTRATION VIDEO)
Cheapest way to listen to audio:Dell A215, Get Some Clip On Headphones, Sound Blaster Live!
Best way to veggitate:

www.chann3lz.com Youtube + Me = Chann3lz, a completely random music video playing jukebox of content, managed by the audience, no registration necessary, all mechanism, no policy.. www.youtube.com Videos, Videos, Videos and more Videos, and you don't have to download anything, you don't even really need a Video Codec. It's all FLASH!! Tubeify Everyhit Take YouTube, Combine with Everyhit.com, What Do you get? iTunes How-to-install iTunes (v) here is a downloadable tutorial (v) if you have a slow line. RSS NETCASTS (Hint: Drag&Drop These Links onto iTunes "Podcasts"): Wikipedia Synthesized Mind "Fart" Synthesized (Monthly) Musical Archeology Synthesized Wikipedia Turkeys Synthesized If you want your own netcast (netcast = podcast, Apple is trademarking podcast), but are not sure how to set one up, get my drop-it-in netcast generator script. Script is provided as-is, use at your own risk, thus I'm not liable if somehow you don't get it to work or it eats your cattle and causes you to lose a bunch of money. My tutorials require Real Video not because I'm a Real-Rhapsody fan, but because RealVideo happens to be the best format for low-bandwidth tutorials

Rhapsify Everyhit.com looks for albums of a date range precise to a month, providing links to rhapsody-online (and YouTube).
YouTubeify Everyhit.com is much better for tracking down music videos to precise songs on "YouTube.com".

BEST WAY TO PERUSE YOUTUBIFIED LINKS
1. go to url "about:config" in address bar of firefox browser.
2. toggle 'browser.tabs.showSingleWindowModePrefs' to true (pre 1.5; post v1.5, search Advanced Options )
3. then middle mouse click on each youtubified search link
4. click on the videos, bookmark, make into playlists, enjoy..

How Fast Is Your, Connection, Really!! a script I wrote that computes data connection uproute/downroute rates (here is mine, Comcast).

Where to Find Quicktime Pro Forums (and many disgruntled owners): Quicktime for Windows Forum.

Best way to secure your computer: Grisoft AVG (free), ZoneAlarm (free*!) {flash demo}, TCPView (free) {for semi-advanced users}.
Best way to discover music besides this one: Coverville.com
Best way to access your computer remotely: VNC, in particular TightVNC (stay away from www.gotomypc.com)
Best way to obtain/distribute huge files (bit-torrent clients): Azureus
Best way to make backups: Knoppix (Linux/DVD*R), Audiograbber (CD2mp3), DVD Shrink (FreeDVDBackup)
Free Knowledge: UC Berkeley Courses (no credit)

Interesting netcasts for programmers: Software Engineering Radio
How to painlessly publish/purchase a book: LULU.COM
Best of the Best (non-obnoxious): 46 freeware utils
Best webhosting: Geocities (free, commercially scaleable), phpwebhosting (commercial with ssh/sftp-access), Find Hosting.
Best information resources: Google (no brainer), Wikipedia (def)
Best place to lust for synthesizers: Vintage Synth Explorer
Best way to convert wikipedia articles to sound TextAloud, the Eddie voice, and my custom UserTranslations.chl file (put in install directory). TA also comes with a firefox/IE plugin that will read web pages for you, making it easier.. I use it when I hate reading web pages..

Alternative Content Discovery: Blogdigger, WebJay
Trouble Viewing Videos? You need some Codecs: Matroska Pack (good), free-codecs (works, but it may have a Trojan)
Need to convert Media format X to media format Y? Use Mediacoder its a freeware media swiss army knife, that is supposedly open source (its on sourceforge, huh?).
Need to convert video formats that Mediacoder doesn't? Use AVS Convert , I own a copy myself, and it lets me do stuff with Quicktimes and WMV's that neither Microsoft nor Apple will permit me (note the site looks kinda cheap, but the program isn't.
My most favorite rhapsody playlist: Smooth And Punchy Playlist
My most favorite bands (and most played): Level 42 (r), Nik Kershaw, Cock Robin, Double (not played, on my wishlist), etc.
My most favorite years (musically):1978 (r), pretty much any year from 1976 to 1989
My most favorite movie (note: works, and could be made on a low budget):Brainstorm
Most Favorite Music Video (5/12/07):Brinsley Schwarz - Surrender to The Rhythm..

Why is this page so huge: Google can cache it all, audience is broadband users, I use less than 50% of my quota per month.
Your most favorite rhapsody playlist: The Brian Eno Playlist
Big application wish: SOUNDBLASTER LIVE! PRESET EXPORT, so I can share with you some of my killer rooms.

Cool way other than Chann3lz for listening to audio.

Say No To Software Patents
Thanks to: JESUS (CHRIST) *, Richard Stallman (AVI, RM, RM2-SP), and the respective creators of these packages and places.

Bag 'O' Tricks Directory lists tips/tricks and reminders and other stuff I would love to clog my header with.

* - Wikipedia is edited by anarchy, don't use for christian inspiration. Christian Bahai is a oxymoron BTW.
*! - I use Zonealarm Pro, which is what that flash demo is demonstrating, ZoneAlarm costs about fifty dollars a
year with updates, but is well worth it, it also comes with spyware weeding software, so there is no need for an application like "Ad-Aware",
"Spybot Search & Destroy" or "Spyware Doctor".

Companies/Organizations I Currently Consider Evil or Stupid:
Why?: Claims to save time and accelerate processing but Wastes Hours of Time Submitting Rebate Offers no Recourse if Rebate Fails!! DELIBERATE THIEVES

All Rhapsody Playlists found in this page (and some not).. All Rhapsody Playlists YouTubeified

Tip Jar ->

or my Amazon Wish List

-[  Mind 'Burp' Blog (August 2006) ]

Web www.bl3nder.com

[ Index ][Top] blog:[Current,07][2006][2005] [YouTube-ified Playlists]

(08/30/06 8:45 PM): I just determined something about interpretive (dynamic) and compiled (static) languages, in a interpretive language (Perl, Python, Ruby, PHP) its better to focus on the use of existing functions in the language than to "reinvent the wheel" in the language using flow control and low-level data manipulations, as the interpreters parsing cycle can probably get in the way of optimal performance. When you put an application in terms of the language's own functions, this is actually optimizing the runtime of the code. But in a compiled language, the differences are more fuzzy because there is less overhead in the execution of the code, so in languages like "C" or "C++", it can be more optimal to write your own functions than to use existing libraries of functions, and to implement functions with low-level operations. But concerning abstraction its always better to use the core set of existing functions for a language than to use a third-party library.. The second step should probably be to implement your own, and if not that, use a common third-party (open source) library, and if not that use a commercial third-party library. The reason for this is to protect against obsoletion, while still focusing on optimization and abstraction. But my main observation was that if you are using an interpretive language, it's best to write less code, code that is more concise and uses as many native functions as possible, as your own functions can run less optimally than an existing function in the language. The languages functions can always benefit from refactorizations for multiple architectures, whereas functions implemented in the language (such as in PHP) will always be slower than the compiled function in the language. This should also be true of JAva, even though it's scripts can be compiled (Java at heart is an interpretive language). The advantage of interpretive languages is that they can always be reduced to C code, whereas C code can't easily be abstracted to a high-level interpretive language.

So what this says for my PHP programming, is that I should focus on simplification of code using existing tools in PHP's language, rather than to implement my own routines, so the shorter a program I make, the fewer instruction calls I make, the faster the program. But not necessarily reduce a program to complex uses of logic, such as those examples turned up in code obfuscation contests, just less flow control, less functions being re-executed in loops, more functions replacing loops like "array_walk()".

Another thing, the use of PEAR classes in PHP couldn't hurt, however this only makes sense if sometime in the future the more commonly used classes in PEAR get implemented into the language itself. Then applications that make use of PEAR will run faster in the long term. I think PEAR offers up a way to experiment with program architecture before its implemented into the language, so as to keep the php core developers focused on optimizing the existing codebase than to get involved in the details of the function libraries. PEAR is to allow PHP developers to implement technologies that are currently not possible with PHP alone (at least those that can be coded into PHP), while simplifying code (that can later be more easily refactored), and with any Object Oriented design, encourage parallel development. The use of Object Oriented features in a language, in PHP's case, can be used as a process of recognizing patterns in a codebase and to determine necessary optimizations. The use of PEAR allows one to associate metrics with the use of coding patterns.. Like if I tned to use 30 of the same object class in the PEAR library, I can abstract the class and add counters and metrics to determine what percentage of the time certain classes are used. A collection of such metrics can help the PHP core developers determine which modules to focus on and which to leave as a high-level implementation. The more PHP developers use these classes, the more optimal the underlying language can be made, and the easier to read the code will be.

n I also believe that the more open source languages are used to determine programming solutions, the less likely closed source languages (like Microsoft's .Net C++) will be used as the open sourced implementations will compete with closed source implementations for respect. Things that never would have been realized in Closed Source will be realized in Open Source, providing Thorns of discouragement to Closed Source development. I don't think it will lead to the extinction of the programmer. It will just reduce the software development to something more realistic, like that of any other engineer, such as a auto mechanic or plumber. Programmers will be reduced to service people.. While some programmers see this as a bad thing, it will also mean more jobs for programmers in general.

This is an interesting music video, though I don't recall seeing it, says Paul King(w) _ _ later became a VH1(w) _ _ VJ.

I didn't know the Lead singer of Frankie Goes To Hollywood(w) _ _ (Holly Johnson(w) _ _) has a solo album? With Hit "Ride the Love Train" (1989) Not Bad.

Is there any reason I should get Bronski Beat confused with Yaz?, maybe its just the music that makes me confuse Alison Moyet(w) _ _ with Jimmy Somerville(w) _ _.

Whoa, Eartha Kitt and Bronski Beat? note, Eartha (M) _ was the one who orginally sang Santa Baby (yt), she also was once Cat Woman(w) _ _ on the Batman(w) _ _ TV show.

Unrelated.. 4 Strings with Diving, this song is on Dance Dance Revolution Extreme _ _. For some reason that 4 Strings (M) _ music video reminds me of Bryan Adams'(w) _ _ "Cuts Like a Knife".

Thomas Dolby (M) _ with One of our Submarines. last I heard Thomas was acting as a CTO, I think, for a Cellphone Synthesizer Chip company.. That's probably why all these Cellphone ringtones sound like DX7 emulations _ _.

Okay, how the heck did they do this Video of the Jacksons doing "Blame it on the Boogie", without a frame buffer? This had to have been a bit before people used computer memory for the storage of video data.. This was about 1978, or earlier, I'm guessing.. I'm pretty sure they weren't using Frame Buffers back then.. Maybe its just a video-feedback effect.

Gee I wonder why they don't just allow people to put models in with blender, it's free and it kicks SketchUp's butt..

Oh it's because SketchUp is Their program, and they are trying to sell it.. Good luck.. I think the main reason I don't see buildings going up all over is that this is yet another Google executive idea to make money..

Nobody is going to waste money loading building data into this walled garden..

Get a clue.. I could program something like this that just pulls data from webservers. It's not rocket science.

See you get a basic globe, then you map a low-resolution satelite image to it, then you write an algorithm that culls the rest of the globe (you can't see) as you get closer to it, then you go to the web servers for that area to load the image maps, as you get closer, you just cull more geometry, and contact the webservers responsible for that data and the more detailed textures (and depth maps). If you delegate out the responsibility to multiple servers, then you don't lose investment in a single server attributed with a company that may go out of business.. I think this is the reluctance to add to the space, that it's googles..

What happened to that Motto Google? Don't be evil? Whatever..

I'm going to post this message to my blog.. BTW..

I'm also a personal friend of Ton Roosendal, blender's creator.. Okay this is completely BS now, I should use the operative word "WAS" but I was upset. Part of the reason I have this blog is so my frustrations don't end up on the blender site.. The other reason is I often got moderated if I said anything that was messing with the "user perception". Politics.. I was the guy who debated Eskil (Steenberg?)'s involvement with blender by trying to tie blender into his idea about shared collaborative environments, embedded in that was a exclusive format that he was not completely willing to disclose, and I could see something going on behind the scenes, like Eskil sweet talking Ton into some venture.. Eskil would not discuss with me why it would not be fruitful to use a object oriented environment with a support for Agents, versus a completely message-passing based environment. And I think eventually I weeded out of him that it was taboo to go the direction of open sourcing the environment.. I mean he wanted to sell access to his servers, and allow people to connect with his VERSE servers.. That's what I was seeing.. And I EXPOSED HIM.. Yeah baby!!!

Of course if I was working for a company, I wouldn't be disclosing information like this.. But when it's evil tempting your favorite Open Source package, that's plain wrong.. I was also the guy that debated why Ton should have the final say on the design of Blender, and motivated them to open up their development ideas to the user base..

I supported blender when Alias/Wavefront dropped The Advanced Visualizer (TAV) from their offering. Now Alias is owned by their competitor (Kinetix, Subsiderary to Autodesk) and XSI Foundation sells for 500 dollars.. Go figure..

We are coming for you Google..

Well if just to make the message more permanent.. I HATE WALLED GARDENS(w) _ _ with a venegence.. Anytime I see them, MySpace(w) _ _, iTunes(w) _ _/iPod, etc.. But hey, isn't rhapsody a Walled Garden? Yeah it could be considered to be, but they provide me with a service I can get no where else, that I cannot conceive of how they are able to do what they do, and still turn a profit considering how money hungry the Record Companies are right now.. Yeah it's a Walled Garden, but they aren't screwing their userbase.. It's a company I think more companies could learn from.. The whole idea is give people access to all the music in the world.. iTunes business plan is to "sell people songs at a low price, that will only play on iPod's, and change the iPod firmware every time something steps on their margins".. The reason so many people are buying into iTunes, wow you've got me.. I think they've got the biggest brainwashing scam going since the Nazi(w) _ _ party.

I guess the deal is the new artists are not selling on CD's but on iTunes.. This makes sense, but for classics like Fleetwood Mac, there is enough CD's floating around.. Besides CD's are of higher quality than any iTunes song, regardless of whether you can burn iTunes songs to CD's.. Once you get a taste of Rhapsody, iTunes should just leave a bad after taste.

Anyhow,

I know what is going on.. Wikipedia is different, but when you get a commercial site doing the same sort of thing that an open source site is doing, and then they copyright it, that's just plain wrong.. Google Earth is configured in such a way that everyone uses on 3D app to make buildings, and it's a good 3D app, but to put models from another application in the 3D space, you have to buy their program, at 500 dollars a shot. The models can only be used in Google Earth.. And once you make the objects, then anyone on Google Earth can get them.. Think about the logic here, if everyone makes every object known to man, to populate google earth, then they could either sell the whole collection on CD's, or sell access to higher quality content at a higher rate.. Google is a good search engine, but I don't think they have PHD's in sales/marketing.. There has got to be another way to form a market up around this than going the WALLED GARDEN approach.. Just because Apple is successful with it doesn't mean it's good.. Note, when apple starts having a falling out with the customers, when the customers realize what is going on, then Apple will lose their consumers, and WALLED GARDENS will take a nose dive. It just hasn't happened yet..

And hey, if you want to remove me from your sucky affiliates program Google, go suck a toad I don't care it's a useless advertising system anyhow..

I think Sergey_Brin(w) _ _ and Larry Page(w) _ _ are no longer in control of the company, I read they sold out all their stock and are working for an annual salary of one dollar. This makes me think that the VC's are in "Make or break" mode, and Sergey and Larry are just poster children for the company's brand.. The brand will be useless if you put out crap-shoots like this..

Server Centralization is dead, but unreasonable commercial communities are even deader.. What happens when all those making models for Google Earth find out what is really going on, watch the sparks fly.. I think the deal Google did with China is just the first nail in the coffen. Now just watch the shareholders pervert the company..

Note: Google is within stones throw of Silicon Graphics(w) _ _ Inc. (SGI), I wonder if this is a coindidence, remember how SGI got perverted in the late 90s and started thinking they were so hot stuff, they bought up Cray(w) _ _ and screwed it up really bad (there is nothing about what they did to the management of the company on wikipedia, but I believe they must have perverted it).. When you see more managers to employees in a company, and the managers and executives are happy and the employees hate their lives, that's when you know the company is going to bite the dust within a year or so..

They even did deals with Microsoft!! And Microsoft screwed them over.. Microsoft also has patents on technology in OpenGL(w) _ _.

I think the reason American Business sucks so much now is that there is that executives are weaker, they expect a quick payback for their work, the shareholders often have very little faith.. I think this is common for tech companies because the shareholders are usually so braindead on technology and the time it takes to make good products that they are afraid to lose, and this drives them to make hasty decisions. Also I think modern MBA's are driven to grow companies large, they are bred to drive up the stock price regardless of what happens to the company in an effort to do this. It's not about making a successful and happy company or keeping talent, it's about getting the products to a point that they can be controlled then screwing the employees over to work for less, so that more margin can be squeezed out of the product. I think this is what is happening to Google and other companies in the USA right now.. The employees can also be to blaim, I mean, in Silicon Valley, there is many places one could work, there is such great value invested in the employees, but I'm sure the executives know that if they try to squeeze more out of the employees, the employees will leave and go to a competitor, or even Microsoft. There is no telling what kind of pressure Microsoft is puting on Google's employees to come to Microsoft. Do you see, if there was more open source solutions to the worlds problems, there would be less reasons to worry about employees jumping ship, as anyone could maintain the technology, and there would be less reasons for the companies to worry about comeptition (they are a services oriented company, which google fundamentally is), if you are selling products, then there is something that the executives can squeeze, its a unit.. You don't want Executives in control of units, once they have a unit of anything, and a way to measure it, they have a number that will bother them and drive them to make stupid decisions.. The more share holders know, about the right methods of measuring success, the better off the company is, but the executives will report the wrong units of measurement.. You need executives who are smart about technology too.. Most are just smart about making money and that leads to a "dog eat dog" mentality, or a "let's have lunch, and see if our services can be merged somehow."

"I wanna bite the hand that feeds me, I want to bite that hand so baddly, I want to make them wish they never've seen me!!!" - Elvis Costello (M) _ from "Radio Radio".

Yepp, I checked Wikipedia(w) _ _ (ha isn't this a redundant link?), Google has a 1 billion dollar tie to Time/Warner(w) _ _ (who just dropped AOL(w) _ _, I think), and they have a partnership with Sun Microsystems(w) _ _.. They are selling themselves out.. Well nothing good lasts forever..

I didn't come up with "Grandmaster Flash" first, I was thinking visually of The Gap Band's (M) _ {Party Train} and lost the name of the band. I knew it wasn't just Grandmaster Flash because he's a DJ, but what was it.. I never bought the album because MTV would hardly ever play it, and it was the only hit I really knew of. Anyhow, the Gap Band's Party Train was a cool spectacle. I recently heard on a netcast the black definition of "cool", well one black man's definition, well I assume he was black it was a radio after all: it's doing something incredibly hard and making it look easy.

My definition of cool is "Doing something Unique that is Awe inspiring", but you can't easily just go out and do that. It's like what I heard Steve Martin(w) _ _ said, well someone quoting him on "The Writer's Almanac Netcast", that if you set out to make "art" then you are an idiot (I don't know what exactly was meant by this completely, hmmm...) . I think the idea behind that comment is that art is "success", but it's not something you make but an award that is bestowed by your peers. Art is not a science (graphics design is a science), as people can get tired of it after a while if it's a one-trick pony _ _ (or a bag of tricks in the case of graphics design). Art is the successful result of synnergistic inspiration (but most times it's accidental). You might set out to make art, and be successful at making it, but then what? Where did the inspiration come from? Where did that train of motivation come from? What caused you to do that? What seperates you from the rest, how are you unique?

This sooooo reminds me of the difference between how unique the "Alternative" culture was in the 90s and how it all got lost to the girl/boy bands of now which I would not call Artists.. Just as most Country/Western is not art, I mean how is it different from all the other stuff I've heard before.. But I guess to people who do like it, something resonates in their soul that causes them to call "it's art". I guess that recognition is evidence of art, but you can get recognition with enough clever advertising. People need centerpieces, something to talk about, so they talk about celebrities, but that doesn't make the celebrities artists.. They are pivot points of social interaction. Now the underpaid joe that designs the dress for one celebrity or the agent who pursues a film producer to get his actor a part in a film, those may be the real artists you are seeing, not the celebrity themselves.. I mean, ask the question "have I seen this before, what is unique about it, is there a indescribable quality about this that I like?" Then it's art..

Michael Jackson is an artist, he has good music, but how do I know he made that music, and didn't just get it from a unnamed songwriter, how do I know that he didn't just have a really good recording specialist, how do I know he didn't have Bob Fosse(w) _ _ instructing him when he made the moon walk? Well, that Micahel has consistently made artwork, that's how I know..

Art is "lasting cool uniqueness". If you end up listening to a song over and over again. If you use an item over and over again and like using it over and over again. If there are items that inspire you, music, etc.. THAT'S ART!!

Design is like that joke "how many guitarists does it take to screw in a light bulb" (which by the way is art), answer: "one to screw it in and 7 others to say 'wow I can do that'". Design is the observation of art and replication (it's actually the engineering of artful techniques, but mostly it is art piracy, taking coffee table design books and cut&pasting stuff onto a art problem, but you have to be an art lover to be a good graphics designer.. I'm not good at engineering art because I use it as a stress reliever not as a business). Science is observation, breaking things down to pieces, and reconstructing the definition of why it works, what it's limitations, and so on.

Art is the answer to the question: How are you doing it better than the next guy? Followed by Uncoerced Applause.

Art is a point of view, it's the part of us that resonates when we experience something new, and we feel compelled to say "that's art". But to someone who is not inspired by it, might say "that's nothing" or might become curious as to why it's appealing.. It's when the art critic is left wondering without an explanation or a deconstruction, that's art.

Sure, later someone may be able to break it down into something that can be reconstructed and applied everywhere, but everyone will say "Oh that's just a rip off of this original art". Like if someone was to design a building with the techniques of Van Gogh(w) _ _ and call it art, everyone would say "Oh that's ripping off Van Gogh", that's nothing new or inspiring. By the way, paint for us another picture of Mary Antoinette..

By, the way, in my opinion, Andy Warhol is not an artist, he is art. Look at him, nobody looks like this guy.. And who can ever be like him? But his works? Ha! He's a social manipulator! His art is his ability to fool some who think his art is art.. Repetition is not art, it's design.. He's a scientist of repetition and arrangement. His contribution to art is "you can make money arranging stuff and pretend to be inspired by it, call it art. And if you are cool, other people will want to be cool too". Andy Warhol was cool, he was different, but what he made was Art? Come on!! Same with Picasso, what was artful about it? I guess it isn't to me.. But Van Gogh, That's art.. You have to be in front of a Van Gogh to see what I'm talking about. You might have to do some oil painting to understand how hard his stuff is.. Anyone! Create a man sitting at a table, reading a newspaper, with a pipe in his mouth, in 20 strokes or less?

I guess if I was a Silk Screen(w) _ _ artist I would call Andy Warhol's stuff art. But I like Andy's hair, and how he wears black turtlenecks, and moves. He's different, and he's appealing somehow, but can one deconstruct him, restructure him? No I don't think so, he's an alien probably, from another planet. He's art!!

Is Richard Stallman(w) _ _ an artist? Same difference..

Wierd people from New York.. I suppose.. So art is individualism too..

Am I art? Well it depends on your perspective.. My perception of me is, well I can't really say if I'm art or not, that's perception. But my perception of me, is that I'm a bum writing on my blog trying to define art, but that can change.. Just as Andy said everyone has their 15 minutes of fame, I will say everyone creates art, just that nobody knows they are doing it when they do it.. But one may inspire oneself to keep going saying "I'm making art, yahoo!!", but if it's art he'll never know.. What's important is the feeling of being inspired to do it, but like change, it's hardly ever successful, but without change, you can't have success..

It's like that joke where the guy prays to God, "God, please help me win the lottery". So he prays for days, and finally God gets impatient and says "Hey stuupid, get a lottery ticket".

Probably the best motto for Art is.. Just Do it!! But I don't consider Nike art.. Boring!!

And this blog about art? Boring!!! I'm oughta here..

A real artist isn't afraid to have a counter-social/culture attitude, but is careful where it matters to him. I felt compelled to say "him or her" but Politically Correctness is a a lot of effort to be empathetic that ends up just being extra wordy and hard to follow.. Like this BLOG!!! Sorry I am a C- English student, but I have a mouth and fingers, here I tap tap tap.. It's a writing addiction, why should I give a _______ what you think.. Why do you think there is no "comment section on this blog"? I don't want to argue with you about what I feel.. Even if I'm wrong.. It's a feeling... Anyhow..

I seem to recognize this TV show, it looks like a late 70s show.

See all a BUS is, is a set of wires that are powered to remain on for a period of time, or off, thus 1 or 0. And how the states of these wires are distinguished as information is the order of the wires, one end of the wires is distinguished at bit 32, and the other end is represented as 1.. Thus a 32 bit, or 32 digit binary number. Like 10011010110101101010101010101011, which can be broken down into hexadecimal(w) _ _ as 9AD6AAAB.. So that's how data is represented in a computer, but what does it mean?

Nothing, not yet.. It's stored in the CPU's memory, called a cache(w) _ _ of registers(w) _ _. Then a section of the computer that performs operations, waits for the next clock tick, which points the CPU to the next set of components that must be turned on to process the information.

The CPU can either be running at the BUS rate (the speed of the clock), or it may be running at a different rate (internal clock, that is triggered everytime the external clock, ticks, which is just a state change from 1 to 0, or high to low, like a square waveform, as well).. Anyhow, the CPU's internal command logic recognizes the command information, and responds by turning on the components that will process the data that was just received.

Remember, sensors and responses..

The Logic senses the data, and responds with a result to the data, this response is stored in a set of special registers that are used between operations, so that the data can be passed from one set of operations (sensor/responders)..

Okay now, if you extrapolate _ from that, you can probably figure out something how the computer works, but fundamentally all it is is sensors and responders.. But different from us, computers work to the step of a clock tick, whereas we work to the step of our heart, the heart replenishes our senses, we respond to information, and such.. But how we are different is that computers have to break problems down to the basic steps and perform everything as series of baby steps to working a problem out. Whereas our brains do the steps all at once.. Computers can do this, but they have to be hardwired(w) _ _ to do this.. Computers are recursive, they feed the data back into themselves and respond to the data that was produced, and so on.. This is to make their operation simple.. I mean computers create data to process data.. Or tools to fix stuff. People actually make the tools, but to make the tools you must use a computer.. To get the tools in the computer, one must first know how to create the phsyical components that make up a computer. And then one has to talk to the computer on a hardware level, by storing values into a memory, called a ROM(w) _ _ (something like a BIOS(w) _ _). The ROM tells the computer what number of clock ticks translate to what kinds of operations, from the time the computer is turned on.. This puts the computer into a state of execution, where the computer recursively performs the operations: 1. go to memory location in "program counter", 2. respond to command in memory location, 1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2... forever.. The first thing the program counter points at is the first instruction that the computer must perform, which is usually, "load the instruction cache with instructions from BIOS, and set program counter to the first instruction in that list". The list usually includes setting a bunch of parameters in that are needed to help the computer perform optimally.. Then it processes operations that help it load in a Operating System, like Windows or MacOSX.. When the operating system is loaded, the computer executes a process called a "IDLE" state, where the computer jumps around managing things like graphics displays, sound cards, user input, and so forth (imagine someone jumping around from chore to chore so fast that it seems like all the chores are getting done all at once).

So the CPU, or what I've been referring to as the computer, is on each operation essentially assuming the role of every task in the machine, but it's doing it so fast that it's perceived as doing it all at once.. However, on the very minute, on each operation, there are smaller processes that allow the components on the motherboard (the circuit board that has the Command, Address and Data busses, with memory, hard drive, wires going into and out of it ).. And on each clock tick, all those components are sensing signals and responding, are helping the CPU get stuff done..

But it doesn't stop there.. It keeps going.. But what I mean to say is, that's the way computers used to work, in the 80s.. Now how they work is that you have processors that act outside of the CPU, that make every component in the computer into, something in essence, equivalent to a bunch of processors on a network.. Ethernet BTW, is a data bus where all the computers connected to it are screaming out "hey, I'm John, I want to talk to Mary", and the computers talk, but everyone on the same line hears what is being said, they just ignore it.. Well that occurs in the computer too.. The graphics board says "hey, I want to load some textures from the hard drive", so for a few hundred clock cycles, everybody remains idle, or does something useful, while waiting for the graphics card to load stuff from the hard drive.. In some cases the graphics card could be connected directly to the hard drive.. And the graphics card may just ignore the data bus altogether and load the data directly from the hard drive (but then the graphics card would also have to respond to requests for information from the other processors that may want to access the hard drive).

Sensors and responders.. The graphics card responses a need to use the hard drive, it responds by using it.. The hard drive senses a request from the graphics card, the hard drive is asked to load up bytes (that is sets of 8-bits, or 8 digits in a binary number) from the hard drive.. Chunk, chunk, chunk, chunk, performing to the beat of the clock, then when the hard drive reaches the end of the data, it goes back to its idle state to process more requests..

Sensors and Responders.. That's all it is, just layered sensors with responders.. Neurons.. Whatever..

I just thought I'd share that with you, of course its in response to cosmic particle flying through my brain, flipping bits in my cerebral cortex..

I noticed that You Tube removed the "Search=" attribute from their links, so that if they removed a music video from the site, nobody would know what the link was referencing.. It's to discourage people from discovering stuff, I think.. To encourage people to search for content actively, but remove references from the net to the content.. Like if you had a number of blogs that were pointing to "Rolling Stones" search on YouTube, then even if the content was not mentioned as the "rolling stones" in the blog, the url would contain "Rolling Stones" in the title. Well they fixed that so that the links are completely cryptic. This may not have been the intent, like it could be the case that the longer URL invoked an extra search on the database which was bringing the site to it's knees on every click, limiting searches to those making the links.. Anyhow, it also makes the links useless if the content gets removed because you wouldn't know what it referenced.. I think a better solution to that for YouTube was if they just provided a space where people could annotate what was there, maybe get a note about why it was removed, and possibly a few advertisements for the artist so that at least those seeking the content could get a "taste". Anyhow.. Here is the The Sundays (M) _ with Here is Where The Story Ends.

Hey I have this song on CD. I love it..

I obtained a funny video from this, I guess it's for some Cameron Diaz(w) _ _ or Ben Stiller(w) _ _ movie.

I thought "More Today Than Yesterday" was Stevie Wonder(w) _ _, it's some group called The Spiral Starecase(w) _ _.

I don't have a youtubeified version though..

I haven't decided yet if I'm going to release it open source or not, but what I have in mind is to add advertisements to netcasts dynamically, possibly to insert information, tag the files, add little consumer specific data, like "Hey you've just won a brand new car ___________".

I love this song. Someone put it to Japanese POP Video, but it's an American song from 1984..

BTW, I recompiled all my rpl's for youtube.. So it should work now..

Wow I love this song too (or the jazzed up version with more chord progressions and better editing effects).

Wow and hour long Devotion with Keith Green, note he died in a plane crash in the early 80s. He was a personal friend of Bob Dylan(w) _ _ too. Here's a reference to the music of Keith Green if you need proof of his talent. He sounds so much like Elton John(w) _ _ it's almost impossible to tell the difference between them. The major difference is Keith has a positive message.. I suppose Elton John knew about Keith as well.

BTW, a friends iPod failed today, he claims that he barely gets 2 hours of battery life out of it and when it hasn't sync'd up for a while it goes into something like a 15 second scan mode, where it skips over all the songs in the list..

Well it national Technology Failure day today, probably.. The antenae on my cellphone broke, my car battery was down and I had to get it jumped, then I went to church and we were depending on this iPod to deliver the sermon, well considering the liberalism of the Apple Mac line, I guess it's typical.. I have had troubles with iTunes, and even the quicktime encoder I bought from apple doesn't work, it;s a useless piece of crap.. I would never buy anything from apple, except maybe just to encode video in a virtual machine in my PC.. Note, I have a book on my shelf from Guy Kawasaki(w) _ _, who was part of the first mac team, and he has the philosophy, "make it crappy".. The first mac was crappy, it's data and code stacks worked against each other in such a way that if one got too big it would crash the system. Or so I'm told.. I never had a mac.. It had a floppy disk drive that used a variable rate motor to allow it to stuff more data on floppies.. It was the first GUI machine, yeah.. But I sure hope Apple is not of the same mind about the creation of their technology. Anyhow, I have a el cheapo mp3 player, the only way I could exceed it is to maybe get a USB2 connector and a song readout, but as it is that Mach Trio is extremely easy to use.. It just has a calculator display, and a few features, it doubles as a nightlight because it has a blue led backed display, it's perfect for me, and since it is simple technology, well designed, dependable, it has yet to crash on me, act weird or require a fimrware upgrade (like having Apple decide what kind of audio files I can play). They are hanging themselves by their own leash, all that will save them, they think, is to bombard everyone with liberalistic commercial crap.

I've bought two Mach Trio's and both of them are still working.. Virtually indestructable.. And they don't have an internal battery.. And on a NiMH battery they last 8 hours, a NiMH AAA battery at that.. Sure they are the size of an iPod at twice the thickness, but at least I won't crush it in my pocket.. It has phillips-head screws holding the case on, it looks like you could drop it from a second story building window and it wouldn't break nor would it crash.. The memory is solid state, it not a hard drive.. I bought the 1 gig card for 80 dollars with a 50 dollar rebate. I've seen similar selling for 10 dollars with a 30 dollar rebate. If I want a Mac, I'll just get a copy of FreeBSD or Knoppix, or Suse.. It's Unix underneath anyhow.. I wish Steve Jobs would just say that in a commercial, I find the commercials he has just leave people in the dark.. They know people on the whole are technology ignorant, but as with all Mac technologies throughout the years, they prey on people's ignorance about the technology, and dwell on the design of the interface and the ease of use.. I fail to see any of their technologies that are easy to use, all I can see is that its some sort of technological gnosticism.. Tell it for what it is: A WALLLED GARDEN!!

Ah Alice is married, to Sheryl Cooper/Goddard..