The stylish theme I’m currently using, called Yashfa, shows up properly on all browsers except Internet Explorer! If you’re still living in the 90’s instead of jumping on Firefox, Safari, Chrome, or Opera, now would be a good time to switch.
Of course, I’m too pragmatic to stick with this theme for long if it means alienating all IE users, even if they’re choosing to use an inferior browser. I sure hope the Yashfa team gets on this one quick.
Good (or bad) timing can be a funny (or tragic) thing. Coincidence can make or break a day, week, life, if you let it.
from New Math by Craig Damrauer
But enough babble. My recent brush with coincidence has led to a website called New Math, and it’s just chock full of life’s equations, all of them far cooler than my happiness quotient from my last post. That’s saying a lot, because I think pretty highly of my happiness quotient.
My path to New Math was via another very cool blog-ish entity called Soul Pancake. Also worth checking out. This dude seems to be tackling life’s big questions in quite the intriguing and sophisticated fashion. Wonder what his formula for happiness would be.
Twenty-six years of rigorous research have finally come to fruition. How happy I am on a given day is indeed derivable. Considering my happiness quotient on a scale of 1-30, with 1 being too sad to face the world and 30 being ecstatic as a European soccer star after a hat trick, the formula looks a likah dis:
happiness quotient
In conversation yesterday, while delineating my theory to a confidante, a question I had not yet pondered came to light. What happens to the formula if I find myself whistling while solo kitchen dancing? I fear the very foundations of our universe could come undone in the face of such unstable glee, but as I take it upon myself to answer the hard questions in life, I intend to set myself to the task of this new derivation for the next twenty-six years.
There are a handful of shows I enjoy online now: 24, The Daily Show, Survivor (I know I know, so behind the times). There’s also one show I don’t enjoy, but grudgingly watch pretty regularly whenever picking the lint from between my toes loses its charm: Lost. Why Lost sucks despite being eminently watchable is the subject of another post though.
I’ve heard a lot about how our short attention spans and the accessibility of digital media are changing the commercial structure of the industry, but now I’m wondering how the online commercial format is going to change the content of TV. The networks seem to be adjusting to the new format, providing/requiring their own players, and gradually working in more commercial time as they test the waters to see how much people are willing to put up with. Some do this better than others; ABC’s online player is a frustratingly lousy piece of trash that often won’t go full-screen on my computer and annoyingly requires that you click the “continue” button to resume watching after each commercial break. I’m sure they get great data from those clicks, but I sure hope it drives enough people away for them to cut it the heck out.
Back to the point, the fundamental differences of watching TV online (or on DVD, for that matter) instead of, well, on TV, are pretty universal: less commercial time and the luxury of watching whenever you please (except with ABC, in which case you have the dubious luxury of watching whenever their crappy player feels like working). Considering the television industry has evolved over decades with a more or less consistent model, it’s obvious there are going to be reverberations in the content, and I think our attention span is going to have an impact, though not only by lowering our tolerance for commercials. Our attention spans have more to say about how we interact with media than how long it takes us to get distracted.
The fundamental idea that I’m getting at is this: we humans aren’t too great at paying attention to the same thing for a long time. Commercials not only give the sponsors a chance to sell us on their products, they also give us a mental break, during which we can process what we’ve watched and ready ourselves for the next installment. Anyone who has taught children knows the glazed-over look that they get when doing an activity, even one they enjoy, for too long. I contend that the same thing happens with TV.
With online TV, I don’t even have enough time to refill my glass of raspberry seltzer water before Jack Bauer is back in action putting the needs of the U.S. ahead of his own. I’ve ended up only watching TV as something to occupy my mind while I eat, because it’s simply so accessible. Add to that the fact that I’m watching it on my computer, which means I’m constantly wondering if I should check my email, but 30-45 seconds isn’t enough time to put together a response to anything. Maybe ABC’s annoying “click to continue” button isn’t the worst thing in the world after all, since you can just mute the commercials and do whatever you please until you are good and ready to watch more nonsense about the island with no explanation.
Television on DVD exacerbates the same issue. Programs that were designed to be released with commercial breaks are shown all at once, with the cliffhangers followed immediately by their resolutions. And the viewer is left with the sensation of having switched from beer to crack. Anyone who has rented a particularly addictive action/drama like 24 will certainly recognize the sensation of having become a crack addict on the spot without breaking a single law. Television is going to change in response to this, for sure. Perhaps it will become even more haphazard, a Sesame Street-style evolution of loosely related content designed to keep out minds from wandering too far. Or maybe it will go the other way, adopting a more cinematic flow to account for the lack of breaks in the action. I don’t know, but I wonder.
Certain kinds of shows are particularly unappealling to watch all at once, like news programs for example. I have recently started enjoying the Rachel Maddow show from time to time, and if I ever feel like I need an injection of evilnstupid I like to watch Fox News. This kind of programming particularly takes advantage of breaks, because, while not exactly academic, it is certainly the kind of content that benefits from a bit of reflection.
Whichever direction it goes, I’m sure TV will keep entertaining us for quite some time, as long as there are viewers out there wanting it. But I’m done worrying about it for now. I’m gonna make a salad and see who got voted off last week.
I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: sometimes you just have to call yourself a badass.
It’s not about self-inflation or arrogance. Nor is it about one-upmanship or bragging. You can be a badass without worrying about who else around you shares in your status.
It’s about recognizing that you are awesome, and reminding yourself from time to time.
I am a badass. I get stressed about the transition that awaits me as I move to Tokyo this June, I worry about trying to make it as a translator with in this depressed economy, and I have been known to act like a weenie. But in the end, I’m pretty darn sweet, and on days like today when I’m really feeling it, it’s nice to remind myself that I am indeed a total badass.
When’s the last time you reminded yourself?