This works on long thin straight hair. I haven't tried it on any other hair types, I don't know if any other hair types need extra volumization in their half-ponytails. This volumizes the scalp part only; if you want the long part more voluminous too, you'll have to curl it or whatever.
You need:
1. A clip that is suitable for holding a half ponytail in your hair (I use a tiny claw, but whatever works for you)
2. A pronged headband i.e. this sort of thing
Instructions:
1. Let your hair dry pinned in a quiff on top of your head like this.
2. Once your hair is dry, brush it out like normal.
3. Put the headband in, not too far back.
4. Make a half-ponytail like usual, but push it upwards vertically so it's ridiculously poofy behind the headband - like a parody of Sarah Palin kind of poofy.
5. Remove the headband by gently pulling it straight forward.
Now the ridiculous poofiness at the back of your scalp will be distributed over the entire scalp and softened by the natural weight of your hair. The result is not perfectly smooth, it just looks like you casually and haphazardly put your hair in a half-pony and it just happens to be poofy because your hair is so very naturally voluminous.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Friday, October 24, 2008
Thursday, October 23, 2008
The problem with moral absolutism
Whenever I say or do or think something particularly distasteful or soul-destroying, my reaction is to comment to whomever is in earshot "I am so going to hell for that!" If this comment is overheard by someone who has never been Catholic*, they tend to reply by trying to convince me that I'm not going to hell. I then feel the need to mention, just as a point of order, that barring some deathbed recantation, I'm going to hell anyway. Which is absolutely true under the Catholic doctrine of moral absolutism. At any given point in life, if I get hit by a truck or a piano falls on my head and I don't get a chance for deathbed absolution, I'm going to hell, and there's nothing I can realistically do about it.
And people wonder why I'm a nihilist.
*The Catholics and ex-Catholics already know I'm going to hell, so there's no need for any further discussion. If they're in a small-talky mood they might comment that they'll see me there, but that's really just chitchat to fill up space.
And people wonder why I'm a nihilist.
*The Catholics and ex-Catholics already know I'm going to hell, so there's no need for any further discussion. If they're in a small-talky mood they might comment that they'll see me there, but that's really just chitchat to fill up space.
It's more afraid of you than you are of it
They always used to tell me this when I was a kid. But they aren't more afraid of me than I am of them. Because they come into my house! I wouldn't go into their house!
Things They Should Invent: Google Corpus
A lot of the things I dislike about Google (localizing search results, overdoing it with the "Did you mean…?", including synonyms, making assumptions about what I want) occur when I'm trying to use it as a corpus instead of as a search engine. These functions are useful for people trying to find information for real-life applicable purposes, it's just terminological/phraseological/linguistic research that it's unhelpful for (unless there's another area where it's also unhelpful that I can't think of right now.)
So why not make another Google just for our obscure langling needs? They already have everything they need - the Google index is probably the largest corpus in the world, and Google is, obviously, the best search engine in the world. Just take away the localization and other unhelpful functions, perhaps make a few more precision operators (so you can search for two words near each other, or have a wildcard that represents any preposition), perhaps make it possible to compare the number of results for multiple searches side by side (Googlefight has this functionality in its own unique way), integrate as many publications and academic databases as possible (if you're stuck on copyright issues, you wouldn't have to make the texts themselves accessible through Google Corpus, just show the applicable snippets in the results) and you'll have the best possible tool for us language freaks. You can improve quality of translations everywhere and make life easier for linguistic researchers (and anyone else who needs a corpus of naturally-occuring language), and it will take practically no effort. You could just remove the localization function, call it a Beta version, and put it up in Google Labs today!
So why not make another Google just for our obscure langling needs? They already have everything they need - the Google index is probably the largest corpus in the world, and Google is, obviously, the best search engine in the world. Just take away the localization and other unhelpful functions, perhaps make a few more precision operators (so you can search for two words near each other, or have a wildcard that represents any preposition), perhaps make it possible to compare the number of results for multiple searches side by side (Googlefight has this functionality in its own unique way), integrate as many publications and academic databases as possible (if you're stuck on copyright issues, you wouldn't have to make the texts themselves accessible through Google Corpus, just show the applicable snippets in the results) and you'll have the best possible tool for us language freaks. You can improve quality of translations everywhere and make life easier for linguistic researchers (and anyone else who needs a corpus of naturally-occuring language), and it will take practically no effort. You could just remove the localization function, call it a Beta version, and put it up in Google Labs today!
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
I wonder if the US subprime mortgage crisis will cause anti-Americanism around the world
I've been translating huge quantities of economics lately, with information from all around the world. And I'm learning so much too! I know several orders of magnitude more than I did just a couple of weeks ago (although I still haven't worked out the answers to all those questions I was asking everyone around thanksgiving and the election.) Economics is technical enough that you don't have to thoroughly grok it to translate it as long as you have good terminology sources, but I've gone through so much information that I'm picking up all kinds of stuff about cause and effect, globalization, monetary policy, all kinds of stuff I never thought I'd understand. (It's also put me firmly in the "ride out the economic turmoil by investing in developing infrastructure and green industry, even at the expense of running a deficit" school of thought, but that's another post.)
But there's one phrase that keeps turning up everywhere in this economic information, in all parts of the world, in all contexts: "...due to the US subprime mortgage crisis." It's screwing everyone over, including billions of people who had nothing to do with it! I wonder if this is going to cause major anti-American sentiment around the world? It does seem kind of representative of the whole American Dream/Roman Empire/hubris thing, so I could see that pissing off someone in some random country like Mongolia or something who had nothing to do with ill-advised mortgages or inexplicably investing in ill-advised mortages.
Also, we all know that the US is Canada's largest trading partner. So I was surprised to see it mentioned as quite a few other countries' largest trading partner too. So I went a-googling and and found that the US is the largest trading partner to a huge number of other countries (and there are more and different countries on subsequent pages). I can't quite wrap my brain around how that works. I keep trying to logic it out, but no matter how hard I think about it, I keep getting stuck on the idea that they'd have to have huge quantities of stuff cluttering up their country as compared with any other country in the world. Yes, I know, they do have a higher quality of life than a lot of countries, but there are also a lot of other countries with a similar quality of life, and I can't google up any that are quite as much of a trading partner slut. So maybe that's what they mean by being the world's only superpower. I always assumed that was just because they're big and loud and have lots of guns and missiles and stuff.
But there's one phrase that keeps turning up everywhere in this economic information, in all parts of the world, in all contexts: "...due to the US subprime mortgage crisis." It's screwing everyone over, including billions of people who had nothing to do with it! I wonder if this is going to cause major anti-American sentiment around the world? It does seem kind of representative of the whole American Dream/Roman Empire/hubris thing, so I could see that pissing off someone in some random country like Mongolia or something who had nothing to do with ill-advised mortgages or inexplicably investing in ill-advised mortages.
Also, we all know that the US is Canada's largest trading partner. So I was surprised to see it mentioned as quite a few other countries' largest trading partner too. So I went a-googling and and found that the US is the largest trading partner to a huge number of other countries (and there are more and different countries on subsequent pages). I can't quite wrap my brain around how that works. I keep trying to logic it out, but no matter how hard I think about it, I keep getting stuck on the idea that they'd have to have huge quantities of stuff cluttering up their country as compared with any other country in the world. Yes, I know, they do have a higher quality of life than a lot of countries, but there are also a lot of other countries with a similar quality of life, and I can't google up any that are quite as much of a trading partner slut. So maybe that's what they mean by being the world's only superpower. I always assumed that was just because they're big and loud and have lots of guns and missiles and stuff.
Analogy for opting out of Pascal's Wager
Previously I blogged about how the flaw with Pascal's Wager is that the best a person without faith can do is go through the motions of having faith, which is utter hypocrisy and not about to fool the deity anyway (and isn't it terribly disrespectful to the deity to presume to fool it just by putting on an act?)
Today my shower gave me an analogy:
Suppose you have a military in a society that values being a big brave strong soldier. There are also some pacifists in this society. Some of the pacifists opt out of joining the military, claiming conscientious objector status, and simply go about their everyday lives as usual even if it does attract scorn from society. However, other pacifists still want the societal respect that comes with being a big brave strong soldier, so they join the military. However, they don't care about achieving the military's goals or getting the job done, they just care about appearances. So they do the absolute minimum they can get away with and only when someone is looking. They use any excuse to get out of doing their duty. They don't care about the cause, they don't care about their buddies, they just care that people will look at them and go "Look, a big brave strong soldier!"
Now it's true that in some cases these closeted pacifist soldiers might still be helpful - sometimes you just need manpower - but mostly they're detrimental to your military's mission and reputation. And even if you don't agree with their pacifism, isn't what the conscientious objectors are doing more honourable?
Today my shower gave me an analogy:
Suppose you have a military in a society that values being a big brave strong soldier. There are also some pacifists in this society. Some of the pacifists opt out of joining the military, claiming conscientious objector status, and simply go about their everyday lives as usual even if it does attract scorn from society. However, other pacifists still want the societal respect that comes with being a big brave strong soldier, so they join the military. However, they don't care about achieving the military's goals or getting the job done, they just care about appearances. So they do the absolute minimum they can get away with and only when someone is looking. They use any excuse to get out of doing their duty. They don't care about the cause, they don't care about their buddies, they just care that people will look at them and go "Look, a big brave strong soldier!"
Now it's true that in some cases these closeted pacifist soldiers might still be helpful - sometimes you just need manpower - but mostly they're detrimental to your military's mission and reputation. And even if you don't agree with their pacifism, isn't what the conscientious objectors are doing more honourable?
It's a conspiracy I tell you!
Why do the very most horrid halloween decorations and the ditzier-than-I-could-ever-fake women loudly squeeing over petty details of wedding plans on the subway and the ignorantly anti-atheist people on internet communities and the painfully dull economics texts and realization gleaned from these painfully dull economics texts that none of the financially-knowledgeable people in my life actually know more than I do about the aspects of finance and economics that apply directly to my own life all have to converge during the very worst PMS day in my cycle?
Monday, October 20, 2008
Teach me social conventions
When someone says "I haven't seen you in a while" but I didn't go anywhere and have just been going about life normally and happen to have not crossed paths with them, what kind of response are they expecting? I can't think of anything to say that doesn't sound idiotic or snarky.
I'm getting this question from people I normally cross paths with when going about everyday life (non-immediate co-workers, random neighbours, food service workers) but with whom I don't have any particular social relationship and don't actively spend time with.
I'm getting this question from people I normally cross paths with when going about everyday life (non-immediate co-workers, random neighbours, food service workers) but with whom I don't have any particular social relationship and don't actively spend time with.
"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent" - Eleanor Roosevelt
Great, so not only are you feeling inferior, but you're also being told that your not-letting-other-people-make-you-feel-inferior skills are inferior.
The solution to the economic crisis
Natalie Portman is smart. She has publications and shit. Listen to her:
See more Natalie Portman videos at Funny or Die
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Quick and easy volumization tip for long hair
After you get out of the shower, pin your wet hair up on top your head in an exaggerated form of that quiff thingy Kids Today are wearing. You can leave it there until it air dries completely, or just keep it for a little bit while you do your makeup or have your coffee. Then, when you're done the rest of your morning routine, unpin your hair and style it normally. It will be noticeably more voluminous at the scalp, even after violent brushing.
This has been tested only on fine thin straight hair. I have no idea whether it will work for other hair types.
This has been tested only on fine thin straight hair. I have no idea whether it will work for other hair types.
Worrying
This is a concept I've been carrying around for years but haven't been able to articulate. It isn't fully articulated here either, but a bunch of words just came to me so I'm putting them down before I lose them.
Some people like/appreciate it when others worry about them. I don't. I can't speak to why people would appreciate being worried about, but the reason I don't like it is when someone worries about you, they're putting the burden of their emotions on you. Now you have to comfort them or reassure them or otherwise manage their emotions, not just for the immediate worries but for whenever you happen to engage in a similarly worry-inducing activity in the future.
So when I don't want someone worrying about me, it's because I don't want to manage their emotions. And when I don't worry about someone, I'm sparing them the burden of my emotions.
Some people like/appreciate it when others worry about them. I don't. I can't speak to why people would appreciate being worried about, but the reason I don't like it is when someone worries about you, they're putting the burden of their emotions on you. Now you have to comfort them or reassure them or otherwise manage their emotions, not just for the immediate worries but for whenever you happen to engage in a similarly worry-inducing activity in the future.
So when I don't want someone worrying about me, it's because I don't want to manage their emotions. And when I don't worry about someone, I'm sparing them the burden of my emotions.
I know, it's mildly fucked
I know, my font size or something is fucked up. I'll fix it tomorrow. If it really pisses you off, figure out how to fix it for me.
Self-esteem before puberty doesn't mean self-esteem after puberty
There was a commercial on TV where Dove was saying they created self-esteem workshops for girls, presumably to help them with body image issues.
Problem: the little girl in the commercial was pre-pubescent, probably about 8 years old. She's never had a zit in her life because she isn't old enough yet.
You know what? You can saturate a person with self-esteem at the age of 8, and that doesn't mean a thing once puberty hits. You want to do self-esteem? Do self-esteem on the girls whose faces are oozing pus, scalps are oozing oil, armpits are oozing sweat, and vaginas are oozing blood. Do self-esteem on the girls who suddenly sprouted more hair than they could possibly imagine and whose parents say they are too young to shave it, and who desperately want to quit swimming because they can't quite figure out how to keep all that hair contained in their regulation swimsuit and they just can't make tampons go in, but their parents and coaches tell them not to wimp out and be a quitter. Do self-esteem on the girl who gained six inches and 30 pounds and three shoe sizes over the summer even though her friends are still petite. Do self-esteem on the girl who is embarrassed that her nipples show through her white school uniform shirt, and is also embarrassed that the shape of her bra shows through her white school uniform shirt. Do self-esteem on the girl who can grow a better mustache than any of the boys in her class. Do self-esteem on the girl who needs glasses and braces in a school where people get extensively tormented for wearing jeans that are the wrong shade of blue.
Anyone can make an 8-year-old feel good about themselves. Try doing it for the kids who really need to feel good about themselves.
Problem: the little girl in the commercial was pre-pubescent, probably about 8 years old. She's never had a zit in her life because she isn't old enough yet.
You know what? You can saturate a person with self-esteem at the age of 8, and that doesn't mean a thing once puberty hits. You want to do self-esteem? Do self-esteem on the girls whose faces are oozing pus, scalps are oozing oil, armpits are oozing sweat, and vaginas are oozing blood. Do self-esteem on the girls who suddenly sprouted more hair than they could possibly imagine and whose parents say they are too young to shave it, and who desperately want to quit swimming because they can't quite figure out how to keep all that hair contained in their regulation swimsuit and they just can't make tampons go in, but their parents and coaches tell them not to wimp out and be a quitter. Do self-esteem on the girl who gained six inches and 30 pounds and three shoe sizes over the summer even though her friends are still petite. Do self-esteem on the girl who is embarrassed that her nipples show through her white school uniform shirt, and is also embarrassed that the shape of her bra shows through her white school uniform shirt. Do self-esteem on the girl who can grow a better mustache than any of the boys in her class. Do self-esteem on the girl who needs glasses and braces in a school where people get extensively tormented for wearing jeans that are the wrong shade of blue.
Anyone can make an 8-year-old feel good about themselves. Try doing it for the kids who really need to feel good about themselves.
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Things They Should Invent: slapstick comedy porn
Slapstick comedy involves usually an everyday activity, necessarily with some physical element, where things go hilariously wrong.
Sex is an everyday physical activity where when things go wrong it's hilarious.
Synergy!
Sex is an everyday physical activity where when things go wrong it's hilarious.
Synergy!
Friday, October 17, 2008
Things They Should Invent: WhatsTheWordImLookingFor.com
I have a word in mind, but I can't remember what it is. I can think of a few words that sound kind of like it (start and end with the same few letters, probably same number of syllables long) but they mean different things. I have a general sense of its meaning, but everything I look up in the thesaurus is too strong - the word I have in mind is weaker and less intense - and I can't seem to navigate through a series of thesaurus words into weaker synonyms.
I want an online dictionary with a very advanced search function. Search by letter combinations found within the word, with wildcards available. A thesaurus with the attributes of each word, where you can search for synonyms with more or less of certain attributes. Maybe even get the geniuses who taught google how to correct spelling to make a "Did you mean..." for commonly confused words. This would save a lot of twirling around in my chair and staring at the ceiling and a lot of jumping out of bed to run to the computer just as I'm about to drift off to sleep!
I want an online dictionary with a very advanced search function. Search by letter combinations found within the word, with wildcards available. A thesaurus with the attributes of each word, where you can search for synonyms with more or less of certain attributes. Maybe even get the geniuses who taught google how to correct spelling to make a "Did you mean..." for commonly confused words. This would save a lot of twirling around in my chair and staring at the ceiling and a lot of jumping out of bed to run to the computer just as I'm about to drift off to sleep!
Open letter to everyone who thinks profanity is uncreative
If you think profanity is uncreative, I want you to sit down and translate a court transcript of a case that involved profanity-filled threats being uttered by two very angry people, where every nuance must be properly captured to ensure that justice is served.
You find yourself walking around having conversations like this:
"So is this one like asshole?"
"Stronger than asshole"
"Piece of shit? No, I used that one earlier...fuckwit? cocksucker?"
"More than fuckwit, I think. You don't really want to use cocksucker because there are no homophobic connotations in the original."
"More than fuckwit...dickhead?"
"Is dickhead more than fuckwit?"
"I'm not sure...dickwad? Is that in common enough use?"
You find yourself walking around having conversations like this:
"So is this one like asshole?"
"Stronger than asshole"
"Piece of shit? No, I used that one earlier...fuckwit? cocksucker?"
"More than fuckwit, I think. You don't really want to use cocksucker because there are no homophobic connotations in the original."
"More than fuckwit...dickhead?"
"Is dickhead more than fuckwit?"
"I'm not sure...dickwad? Is that in common enough use?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)