Catch-Up Jumble

[l33tminion]

Did I fail to mention (here) that Cape Air has been running ITA's airline reservations system since March? In other Google product news, evidently the Google AR glasses thing is real. I'm not sure it's good for me to be even more plugged in than I already am, but I'd probably buy something like that, especially if it gave me a shot to replace my faulty recall for names/faces with technology.

I write too little here lately, and end up accumulating stuff until it's terribly disorganized. I should try to write short posts again when I have something to say, but here's a jumble of what I've been up to lately:

• I've gotten back to playing Skyward Sword, which is fun, but the control scheme is often more of an annoyance than an improvement.
• This weekend, watched Sita Sings the Blues (a retelling of the Ramayana set to the music of Annette Hanshaw), an odd (and good) movie that almost didn't get released due to copyright-law brokenness.
• Delicious brunch at East by Northeast in Inman!
• Returned a letter to the post office that was misdelivered because they'd confused "St." for "Ave." and my city, state, and country for an entirely different one.
• Saw Tjani, Dillon Francis, and Nero in concert at the House of Blues. Good stuff, though I think I liked the opening acts better. Big-effects shows can really detract from the music.
• Squares has been fun lately, when I get the chance to go.
• Spent all of Monday evening failing v1s and v2s bouldering. My climbing skill has really plateaued, even though I'm getting stronger in some ways.
• Fitness stuff continues, though I haven't written about that in ages. My big goal lately is to get up to a (back-)squat of two plates (225 lbs.), did six reps of 205 today.

Edit: Corrected weights.

Comments

[solomon garner (from livejournal.com)]

On the Google AR glasses: I feel uncomfortable with the idea of reminding me of a person's name, even though I'm not always good at remembering people's names. Somehow I feel like it's slimy. I'll have to think of a reason for that though, cuz I'm not sure why I think that. I guess cuz it's cheating. But I guess that's like saying taking medicine is cheating, or using any assistive technology is cheating: there is one element that's different though in that you might be deceiving people into thinking you actually remembered their name. This probably doesn't matter though, but I'll keep it in the back of my mind.

For me, what I'm excited to see is face-based to-do's on to-do-list software. There are ALWAYS times when I want to tell somebody something(s) but I want to tell them in person or it's just not important enough to bother them via email or phone, but I DO want to mention that one thing to them the next time I see them. Time-based to-do's only work if you know when the next time you see them will be, and then they can still be finicky.

[l33tminion]

But I guess that's like saying taking medicine is cheating, or using any assistive technology is cheating: there is one element that's different though in that you might be deceiving people into thinking you actually remembered their name.

Yeah, I think that assessment is correct, it's straight-up ableism (prejudice against using tools to do something as opposed to doing it "normally" with innate physical or mental abilities). Preference for "invisible" tools (say, a pill that improves memory) would be related. I'd even go so far as to say the characterization of the sort of remembering you do purely with your brain (as opposed to with a larger system that includes your brain) as "actual" remembering is similarly prejudiced. (Analogous to characterizing what Oscar Pistorius does as not "actual" running.)

I'd argue that whether or not someone is using hidden assistive technology is not anyone else's business. (And that they shouldn't be judged for using obvious assistive technology, either.) The exception is sports and similarly regulated competitions of skill and ability. It's not fair or right to treat everyday interaction as such a competition, however.

[solomon garner (from livejournal.com)]

Right. Agreed, but I say that reluctantly as I am filled to the brim with prejudice. Half kidding. I'm more uncomfortable with the technology for use by people who are only somewhat bad at remembering names (like myself). I am quite comfortable with the technology for use by people who are extremely bad at remembering names. I have a feeling that this prejudice might be shared by other people, so perhaps that might be taken into account by people considering this technology. Bob has a serious problem remembering names. If a person finds out through the grapevine that Bob remembered his/her name only through the use of assistive technology, the talk behind Bob's back might be: "wouldn't you want something like that if you were in his shoes?" If Bob were just augmenting his already pretty good name-recall, it might be more like—well I don't know, anyway, people who find out might not feel good about it. People are pretty judgmental, and names carry extra weight because I'm guessing people wrongly assume that remembering names means something, when in fact, whether somebody remembers your name doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Also, I'm biased because I personally pride myself on making a real effort to remember people's names and say hi to people by their names. In my own game, I would be cheating by using assistive technology. It's hard for me to grasp that other people aren't playing my game and have no desire to. Part of the purpose of my game is to be friendly. Others do not accomplish that by playing my game; they just embarrass themselves.

[l33tminion]

I think that's a good assessment of the situation, especially that last part about social "games".