Sometimes I worry that my kids won't have what it takes to make it through the tough times of life. Many times a day they crumble into emotional surrender at the slightest hint of a challenge. Practicing the piano. Doing homework. Picking up toys. Putting away clean laundry. Being nice to each other. Depending on their mental state at any given moment a request to help with any of these requests could be met with apparent incapacitation, accompanied by expressions of agony and supreme indignance that anyone would even think of asking them to do such things.
Today I found that, in fact, when the going gets tough they really can hack it. And I'm not talking about tough like, "Mom asked me to empty the dishwasher, and then Dad wanted me to mow the lawn" tough.
We went to check out an air show today at the nearby Air Force base. It's a bit cool for this time of year, and there was some rain in the forecast, but we didn't think that major precautions against bad weather were necessary. We drove to the base, parked the car, and walked at least a mile to the show entrance. It was overcast and breezy, and some of the kids in shorts complained a bit. We basically ignored them, pointed out the cool aerobatics going on overhead, and mostly enjoyed ourselves.
After we had been watching the show for a while the weather suddenly took a turn for the worse. A full-on thunderstorm arrived with high winds and heavy rain. We had three sweatshirts for the seven of us. It was hopeless to try to stay dry or keep enjoying the show. With droves of other people we began the long walk back to the car, being pelted and lashed with rain that soaked us through and even stung at times.
Given the reaction I might get at home for simply asking someone to put on their shoes or set the dinner table I half expected at least some of them to crumble to the tarmac as the rain poured down on us, and declare that they could not face the walk back to the car. They did no such thing. It was a miserable experience, heads down, squinting eyes, fighting through wetness and windchill that made the 49F temperature feel more like 35F. Amidst the physical discomfort, and even pain, they soldiered on resolutely.
There were a few words of encouragement spoken, but no cajoling or convincing was needed. They seemed to understand that our plight, though not particularly serious, was also not going to go away by complaining or throwing tantrums. The only way out was to take care of ourselves, even if that meant marching through the freezing rain. They seemed to grasp the gravity of the situation without our intervention, and rose to the occasion resolutely.
As we sat in the car, laughing over how cold and soaked we really were, we waited for the heat to thaw us out. Long before the heat made me feel better physically, my heart was warmed to see how resilient they all were, and from thinking back on the way they had just helped each other through shared trial with such grace and strength. The air show had been rained out, but in the end I got to see something much more impressive and exciting.
Saturday, May 26, 2012
Friday, May 18, 2012
You're Not Helping!
I recently sat down to watch Stargate with the kids. It has been a long time since I watched it, and it hasn't aged particularly well, but the kids like Star Wars and I thought it'd be something new and different for them.
For those who don't recall the plot line, it follows an Egyptologist who gets mixed up with a secret Air Force project to reactivate a device unearthed in Egypt in the 1920's or 1930's that they think will facilitate long-distance space travel.
There is a fair amount of subtitling in the movie. The opening scenes follow French archeologists working in Egypt, so all the initial dialog is in French with subtitles. Later the Egyptologist and his Air Force teammates travel to a distant planet where everyone speaks a dialect of Egyptian, including the supreme alien overlord that they have to overthrow. Any time the natives or the alien are on-screen everything has to be subtitled.
Of the five youngsters viewing with me, only two are proficient readers, and dialog can go by pretty quickly, especially if you have any interest in anything else happening on-screen. Because of the crowd's limited reading skills I started reading the subtitles out lead early in the movie. I thought it would be helpful.
A minute or two into a particularly dialog-dense section of the alien planet scenes my four-year-old turn to me mid-narration and with great exasperation exclaimed, "Dad, stop reading! I can't hear the movie!"
I think she knew what I was doing - she knows enough to recognize a few words on her own, so she was aware that those words on the screen had some sort of meaning. I was intrigued that despite the fact that what I was saying was very much applicable to the movie, it was not a vital part of the movie she was watching. Admittedly, Stargate is rated PG-13 (I did some selective editing with the fast-forward button through some sections) so it's not really geared for her intellectual level. Even so, she was engaged by much of what was going on, including - apparently - the non-English dialog.
She didn't have to understand the meaning of what everyone was saying because she wasn't really trying to take in the whole movie the way I would. On the contrary, her goal was to take in the overall experience. If people want to speak in another language then we should let them, and not worry so much about what it is they're saying.
It makes me wonder what else is going on in their young brains that I might never glimpse without inadvertently ruining some experience while trying to be helpful. Pretty fascinating stuff, I bet.
For those who don't recall the plot line, it follows an Egyptologist who gets mixed up with a secret Air Force project to reactivate a device unearthed in Egypt in the 1920's or 1930's that they think will facilitate long-distance space travel.
There is a fair amount of subtitling in the movie. The opening scenes follow French archeologists working in Egypt, so all the initial dialog is in French with subtitles. Later the Egyptologist and his Air Force teammates travel to a distant planet where everyone speaks a dialect of Egyptian, including the supreme alien overlord that they have to overthrow. Any time the natives or the alien are on-screen everything has to be subtitled.
Of the five youngsters viewing with me, only two are proficient readers, and dialog can go by pretty quickly, especially if you have any interest in anything else happening on-screen. Because of the crowd's limited reading skills I started reading the subtitles out lead early in the movie. I thought it would be helpful.
A minute or two into a particularly dialog-dense section of the alien planet scenes my four-year-old turn to me mid-narration and with great exasperation exclaimed, "Dad, stop reading! I can't hear the movie!"
I think she knew what I was doing - she knows enough to recognize a few words on her own, so she was aware that those words on the screen had some sort of meaning. I was intrigued that despite the fact that what I was saying was very much applicable to the movie, it was not a vital part of the movie she was watching. Admittedly, Stargate is rated PG-13 (I did some selective editing with the fast-forward button through some sections) so it's not really geared for her intellectual level. Even so, she was engaged by much of what was going on, including - apparently - the non-English dialog.
She didn't have to understand the meaning of what everyone was saying because she wasn't really trying to take in the whole movie the way I would. On the contrary, her goal was to take in the overall experience. If people want to speak in another language then we should let them, and not worry so much about what it is they're saying.
It makes me wonder what else is going on in their young brains that I might never glimpse without inadvertently ruining some experience while trying to be helpful. Pretty fascinating stuff, I bet.
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
With a Whimper
It has been a week since Obama came out as openly in favor of gay marriage. Everyone keeps saying that the economy is still the main topic of interest for this election cycle. For me having gay marriage on the table is much more significant than the economy. Here's why.
Given two candidates, both of which are saying they want the economy to improve, how do you decide which one to support? It's possible you tell the guy who has already been working on the economy for four years that he has had his chance, and you bring in someone new to take a crack at it. However, even if you don't like the current state of the economy you might just support the incumbent, based on an affinity for his race or the way he so readily supports the socialist lifestyle you're longing to live.
But what if those two candidates come squarely down on two different sides of a moral issue. Can a Bible-loving American Christian honestly support the candidate who is promoting gay marriage? In my mind that fact ought to clearly trump any other connection a voter may feel for Obama. I am already visualizing election night, as returns come in from across the south in favor of Romney. A clear message to Obama, and all the other outspoken supporters of gay marriage, letting them know that the choice they've made is wrong and this great country is not going to stand for it no matter how progressive they try to make it sound.
Jesse Jackson recently got in line behind Obama, announcing that the fight for gay marriage is akin to the fight against slavery. He's so wrong I can hardly stand it. Choosing to engage in a certain behavior does not qualify someone to receive special civil rights! As soon as we make that leap we open the door to nonsense like they now have in the Netherlands, where pedophiles have banded together to form a political party and fight for their rights. Their right to be pedophiles?!? That is nobody's right! And yet, once the homosexual agenda manages to break this ground it's only a matter of time before we follow the Dutch down their ridiculous path.
What's left to do, but wait for the foundations of society to slowly crumble beneath our feet. Fortunately, I still hold out hope that the tide has not turned quite yet. As long as the voice of the people unites in support of morality I can continue to hold out hope for this great country. If, to my great disappointment, the tables are turned in November, and Obama emerges victorious, then his win will signal a major loss for all of us. As Mosiah, a prophet in the Book of Mormon, put it:
I really hope we're not to that point yet. I think we'll have a definitive answer, come November.
Given two candidates, both of which are saying they want the economy to improve, how do you decide which one to support? It's possible you tell the guy who has already been working on the economy for four years that he has had his chance, and you bring in someone new to take a crack at it. However, even if you don't like the current state of the economy you might just support the incumbent, based on an affinity for his race or the way he so readily supports the socialist lifestyle you're longing to live.
But what if those two candidates come squarely down on two different sides of a moral issue. Can a Bible-loving American Christian honestly support the candidate who is promoting gay marriage? In my mind that fact ought to clearly trump any other connection a voter may feel for Obama. I am already visualizing election night, as returns come in from across the south in favor of Romney. A clear message to Obama, and all the other outspoken supporters of gay marriage, letting them know that the choice they've made is wrong and this great country is not going to stand for it no matter how progressive they try to make it sound.
Jesse Jackson recently got in line behind Obama, announcing that the fight for gay marriage is akin to the fight against slavery. He's so wrong I can hardly stand it. Choosing to engage in a certain behavior does not qualify someone to receive special civil rights! As soon as we make that leap we open the door to nonsense like they now have in the Netherlands, where pedophiles have banded together to form a political party and fight for their rights. Their right to be pedophiles?!? That is nobody's right! And yet, once the homosexual agenda manages to break this ground it's only a matter of time before we follow the Dutch down their ridiculous path.
What's left to do, but wait for the foundations of society to slowly crumble beneath our feet. Fortunately, I still hold out hope that the tide has not turned quite yet. As long as the voice of the people unites in support of morality I can continue to hold out hope for this great country. If, to my great disappointment, the tables are turned in November, and Obama emerges victorious, then his win will signal a major loss for all of us. As Mosiah, a prophet in the Book of Mormon, put it:
[If] the time comes that the voice of the people doth choose iniquity, then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you with great destruction even as he has hitherto visited this land. (Book of Mormon | Mosiah 29:27)
I really hope we're not to that point yet. I think we'll have a definitive answer, come November.
Monday, May 7, 2012
The Videographer's Apprentice
More than once I've read, on-line, the statistic that every minute 60 hours of video footage are uploaded to YouTube. I find that number shocking. I realize that YouTube has millions of users, but even so it seems like a lot of footage. I think the "does not compute" part of my brain is mainly transfixed on the idea that there will always be more footage on YouTube than any single person could consume in a lifetime because the fire hose can't be shut off, and the influx is bound to increase over time. I've had a few thoughts on the matter:
- Take a baby born today, with an assumed lifespan of 75 years. Wait around for 7 days, 15 hours. BAM! They've already had an entire lifespan-worth of video footage uploaded, assuming they watch non-stop for the rest of their life. Sleep is not an option.
- The last HD video I produced weighed in at 46 MB per minute. Assuming that is a typical file size, every minute YouTube takes on 164 GB of data. In a single day that's 236 TB of data. Over a year they're logging 86 PB (that's PetaBytes, or 86x10^12)! Where are they keeping it all? At this rate won't the Google data center eventually have to occupy all available space on Earth just to host our inane videos?
- Assume that American television has 100 channels producing original programming. (I think that's generous, but just assume.) Assume that in a given year there's original content for 6 months of the year, and the original content is aired 6 days a week, and it amounts to 9 hours each day (morning, daytime, and primetime). This means the professional content being broadcast in American each year is around 145,800 hours. YouTube receives an equivalent amount of content every 40 hours!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)