CPU’s are getting so complex that I wonder whether people are still “over-clocking” them? I am too lazy to google, but I suspect it is not as common as it once was. The hardware is growing too complex to modify. On the other hand, if it were safe, everyone would (and many do) install a software upgrade that improves their computer’s performance. The human body is many times more complicated than a computer core. We accept human “software upgrades” in the form of vaccinations to improve our performance in fighting diseases, and we take medicine, too. But would you accept an HHU (human hardware upgrade)? Suppose a simple injection containing some gene-therapy magic were available and that it dramatically reduced your chances of getting cancer and, let’s say, made you immune to colds and flu. Would you take it? Suppose it was claimed that it was safe? Suppose it was demonstrated to be safe? Suppose it was also environmentally friendly and freely available to all and condoned by the pope?

And now that you have taken your injection you receive an email from the company advertising their other products. You see, the “Be Safe”™ injection is just the first of many small optimizations that the company offers. Others include

• protections against diseases prevalent in your area,
• protections against sexually transmitted diseases (but not yet 100% effective against HIV),
• protections against myopia and other ocular problems,
• protections against the effects of certain genetic diseases (especially coronary effects),
• a broad spectrum of optimizations that improve on the body’s own repair mechanism so that you recover more easily from injuries,
• a popular but slightly high-end fat reduction/prevention line of treatments (including reduced risk of obesity and diabetes),
• optimizations in overall body chemistry that can improve your energy levels by up to 400%,
• treatments for sexual problems such as lowered libido and erectile dysfunction,
• protections against “cerebral events” that improves your brain chemistry and offer partial protection against certain mental impairments such as schizophrenia,
• and many, many more.

The company does not mention that such “optimizations” are popularly and somewhat derisively known as “gentreats” (genetic treatments) or “gentricks”. Rumors circulate that in the Far East one can buy cocktails that improve your looks (dismissed by scientists who nevertheless mention that if human pheromones were better understood…) and there have been reports of at least one South American pharmaceutical company developing gentricks that can, within the space of a year or two, grow you an extra arm, extra fingers, or body modifications such as spikes on the back or horns on the forehead. (The pope refers to this in Urbi et Orbi; he is not pleased.)

Would you believe it, but the company that gave you that first injection has a name: Google! “Then God looked over all he had made, and he saw that it was very good!”

And so I waste another 30 minutes of my precious time.

The other night (Tuesday I think) there was a knock at the door. It was a beautiful young, white boy. He couldn’t have been younger than 16 or older than 22. He said his name was Ricardo, and he told a sad story: his mother was having financial difficulties and he is selling black garbage bags to try to help out. He looked very desperate. The bags were expensive — R50 — but I would have tried to haggle a bit but still have paid that price. However, I quickly realized that I had no cash. His desperation was terrible. He tried to persuade me to go to an ATM machine, but I refused, and he moved on to my neighbours.

I feel slightly guilty about not helping him: it could not have been pleasant to beg a stranger for help. On the other hand, it was probably a sensible decision on my part: he could have been scoping out houses to burgle, or perhaps he wanted the money for drugs. Although I do believe his story; it seems too much trouble to tell a story like that just to get drug money, or to find an empty house. In retrospect, I should have offered him money to come back and help me with my garage. An honest chore, and a chance to earn more money than he could have earned with his bags. But I only thought of that long after he had gone.

This morning I woke up at nine to find that the power was off. I guess I could have tackled the garage myself, but instead I started a book that has been lying on the pile by my bed for months. “Alan’s War” by Emmanuel Guibert. It’s a graphic novel published at the end of 2008. It is beautiful and also very sad. It is the story of a young guy who is drafted to fight in WWII, his experiences during the war, and his life afterwards. As I say, it is beautiful. I cried. Partly because I’m a soft target when it comes to nostalgia. It is based on a real man, an American who lived in France and who told his life story to the author. It is sad, partly because, to me at least, his life seems somewhat wasted. His adventures in the war are exciting, but it is only so much later that he “becomes” himself.

Have I “become” myself? Am I who I want to be, or think I should be? Will someone be able to draw/write even a short novel about my life? Should I change? There is something to be said for living life “right” and, at every stage, making what seems like the good and right choice. But from time to time it is necessary to take a step back, to try to reassemble the smaller pieces and to check that they form a larger picture. I believe. Perhaps such a moment is coming for me. Soon. I have had the courage to make a change in the past; I hope I have again.

I cannot pretend that this one book will change my life, but I hope that it will contribute. I’m still an innocent, in the sense that I believe that every life should be able to be changed by one book.

So, who has the power in this scenario? Alan? His story is inspirational in many ways. He did have the courage to change his own life, and he made brave changes. Ultimately, his life seems empty to me, and yet it has touched mine. Or perhaps the author? If he hadn’t written this novel, Alan’s life would be a secret. In a very real way the power of the book is his power. It is he who manipulates the reader. It is his story and much as it is Alan’s.

I’m sorry about Ricardo. Perhaps I had the power to change his life. A little. Perhaps he had the power to give me some small piece of it, some insight. (“Every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that, I learn of him.” RWE) We all have our secret lives. I hope I have the power to change my life.

I am not a big fan of IQ – that is, IQ testing, not intelligence in general. If someone tells me that I have an IQ of 150 (not that they have!) or 50 (no-one has said it out loud), I don’t think it will change anything in my life. So, why are some people so obsessed by it? I cannot move my cursor without it landing on an ad for online IQ tests. Why should I care what Bill Gates’s IQ is? I doubt if outperforming BG will have any impact on my success. Well, perhaps it will make me feel a little better about my failures. And that is probably half the story. It’s the fox and grapes. So, while for some it’s just harmless fun, those who take it seriously are probably buying a little cheap superiority.

I’m sure that the other half of the story is that IQ correlates with all sorts of wonderful measurements (are you vegetarian? male?), but in my experience it plays a very small role in real life. I’m not convinced that IQ is a good predictor of performance, and especially not when the performance is measured at school. Moreover, the older-sibling-theory indicates that IQ is mutable, so perhaps it’s more of a summary indicator. But perhaps it’s useful to tell children they have high IQs to persuade them to “raise their game” – the Lake Wobegon strategy.

Of course, I have not investigated IQ much: I have an extremely high LQ = laziness quotient, something that is much more impactful in life. Well, in my head I’m always complaining about it, but I do tend to stay busy. So perhaps in my case it’s not high LQ, but low FQ = focus quotient. Alas, I was born before ADD was invented, and anyways, my parents would not have been able to afford it. But I do wish I could acquire a little self-discipline. It’s seems the stores are out of stock at the moment.

I have met people I consider highly intelligent (using some nebulously instinctive definition of that word). They think faster than others: they can see that arguments through to their conclusions to the third and fourth generation. Or is this just good preparation? I have been in the situation where a student proposes an idea, and I foresee the consequences, simply because I’ve been there. Do intelligent people think more and not faster? Thought experiment: let’s say we can measure thought in some way, and we calculate the amount of productive thought and wasted thought accumulated (in one person) over the course of a day. Well, not much of a thought experiment… (In the future this kind of experiments will be possible.)

Getting around to the last new term in the title, I have found that the people I like most are those with high HQ = humour quotient. It’s hard to resist a funny guy. Most of the time they are friendlier than the rest. (Sometimes you do come across the bitter, sarcastic, this-country-is-going-to-hell humourists.)

So, getting back to the starting point: I believe sincerely that my brother is probably more intelligent than I am. This is based on small observations (he thinks fast, and he grasps new concepts quickly and deeply). But I’m perfectly OK with this. My life won’t change if the matter is settled one way or the other by attaching some number to our heads. Much more important to me is that we share a sense of humour. Whether we have low or high HQ, at least we have roughly the same HQ. I offended someone over the weekend by making a joke when they were trying to be serious (or at least they thought I was making a joke). [In fact I had a brilliant idea over the weekend which I'll explain later.] I’ll have to see what my student can do, but – despite the older-sibling-theory – I’m very optimistic.

Look, I know I’m not the weather bureau, but I must mention that today has been relatively cool. Only 35 Celcius. And this evening it clouded over and no wind!, so it is decliciously cool. A well-deserved break from the heat, I think.

I cheered myself up with some music (Crowded House, random skip) and that worked fine.  But then I went a step too far.  I read some blog material – bloterial – and Jerry Pournelle happened to discuss Ayn Rand.  I have never read any of her books.  Once around 15 I started “The Fountainhead” but something distracted me before I got very far.  Now I’m glad:  I don’t think I would have appreciated it then.  I have always held a certain fondness in reserve for AR.  Until now.  Wikipedia does not paint a wonderful picture.  It is not biased:  I think it is too objective and truthful.  My impression is that she was not quite on the ball when it comes to her philosophical ideas.  Perhaps there is some bias there and I should read Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged for myself, although their popularity is dismaying.

This negativity lead quickly led to even more depressing thoughts:  the futility of philosophy after 1800, and the general futility of the human race.  Over the last 500 years, we have achieved only two things worth mentioning.  Our greatest redeeming act has certainly been the development of science and mathematics (which arose out of philosophy).  In second place comes art.  A little classical music, a couple of paintings, a couple of books.  Apart from this, almost nothing.  I do not believe in spirit and spirituality, but even if I did, it is clear that we have achieved very little.  Socially we are worse off.  Many of us have conquered our environment, but it is a fragile victory, mainly an illusion, as we are often reminded.

I’m not really sure what one could or should expect, but – apart from science and a little art – nothing rivals our past achievements: the development of language, specialization, and civilization.

I hope this is just the infection talking.

Third on my list is contributing to science in the large.  I know that I am a good reviewer, perhaps not the best, but thorough and honest.  I understand my field and know the literature well, I work hard to understand the papers I review, even the crappy ones.  I do some other proofreading and various other scientific tasks.  All in all I feel good about this and I believe that I’m playing my small part in helping science move forward.  It is only a very small part, and not indispensible in any way, but it pleases me.

Meaning is a function of time.  Over a period of years my contributions — whatever they may amount to — may amount to something.  Perhaps.  Over a period of decades the probability goes down to almost zero.  Over a period of centuries it goes down all the way to zero.  On this last timescale, very few people’s work have meaning.  The only thing left is enjoyment.  At least I still have that.  For the moment.

My BMI tonight was 30.7.

I do not necessarily agree with Bloom’s opinions, but he is worth listening to.  At least he is sincere and passionate about what he is saying.  Is it easier to learn from someone with whom you disagree but respect?  I feel like an empty vessel.  I’m not sure that I shall like this book, but I have a sense that I can learn from it.  Reading is not all entertainment:  it used to be about education, but I think it is difficult not to find pleasure in book learning.  Is even that wrong?

In any case, his chapter about music and the significance of music is worth reading.  If you are prepared to abandon the doctrine of relative and easy truth, this chapter explains why music is at the centre of Plato’s and Aristotle’s writings on politics, and its role today.

For one thing, I have been teaching.  I could arguably spend even more time on that, but I did devote a large portion of my week to it during the first six weeks of my time in Finland, and hopefully things are now pretty much on a roll.  Three most weeks and that it done!  (Except for the exams and the projects.)

Another thing I’ve been doing is research.  It sounds so pretentious, but that is exactly what has taken the largest portion of my time.  Writing software to run experiments the results of which are then analysed and — hopefully — converted to a paper.  Together with Henri I’ve been looking at heuristic model checking, but that has now been put on hold while we investigate minimal counterexamples.  All the while we are discussing new ideas for the short, medium and long term.  This freedom is a large part of what I like about academia in general, and research in particular.  Another part is the puzzle-solving aspect.  I crave the constant stimulation;  not because I’m so brilliant, but simply because I’m so easily bored.  Am I part of the TV generation, too?

Then, the next item on my list of activities is the new laptop.  I’m now a Mac owner and user.  It is a wonderful experience, everything from paying the enormous price tag to agreeing to all the restrictive licenses.  Apple Inc. is somewhat like a apparently benevolent foreign power that invades your country and overthrows your government.  They say that their intentions are good and conditions seem to improve, but you have a sneaky feeling that they have an ulterior motive.  This is not, of course, a reference to the Iraq invasion.  Their conditions did not improve.

Seriously, the Mac is brilliant.  I had to install Xcode off the install CD, gawk, LaTeX, and gvim.  All without any hassles whatsoever.  I transfered my research and starting working.  Very impressed.  Yesterday I checked to see how to activate apache, if at all possible.  Turns out you click a check box, and it’s running.  These Apple people have obviously listened to their customers.  Or as I read yesterday (I forget where…no I remember:  it was a paper about open source software): “Microsoft listens to its dumbest customers, while Linux listens to its smartest customers.”  Apple must be listening to all its customers.  Almost nothing is difficult about using this system.  Once again, I’m very impressed.

One thing that I have neglected, is photography.  The weather has been strange, and on Tuesday I missed a great opportunity to photograph the iced trees.  (It happens just about every winter, so if I come back here…).  I’m kinda sorry about that, but for the most part the skies have been cloudy — the bad kind of cloudy, unsuited to taken photo’s.  I plan to fix that in the next couple of week though and, if we’re lucky, I’ll report about it here.

Another highlight, the result of Antero’s experience and foresight, was our stop at a grillausalue — a BBQ spot where we grilled some sausages and had coffee and sandwiches. It was rainy lightly and quite cold (certainly less than 5 degrees), so the food was extra-delicious. Because of the rain my camera got quite wet and I tried to keep it dry as best I could. That is not an excuse, but m photo’s are not exactly prize-winning although a couple were quite acceptable.

My camera also took a beating (or a wetting) on Sunday when I visited Henri and Jenni (and Justus and Kaius) to take some photo’s of the Myllynpuro (millstream) that runs close to their house. Now that the snow is melting it was running strong, and there are a couple of impressive waterfalls. The quite large area is now protected but it was not so when Henri was young. His stories about playing around in the woods around the stream were charming and like reminiscing even a little sad. Our happy childhood memories are perhaps undervalued and, happy or sad, they are also unique to us and make us what we are, in part. As Henri was talking I tried to detect how his experiences has taken him along his current path. Of course it is not the only factor in a person’s life, but it is tempting to think that some crucial aspects of our early years form our character and determine our future focus. I have always had this sense about many of my Finnish friends, perhaps we Finns live so much closer — allegedly to nature.

I took another set of prize-losing photo’s on Sunday, but just as with the trip to the zoo I am satisfied if I get away with one or two photo’s that are worth keeping. I think I lucked out both times.

I am now reading Robert Adams’s “Why People Photograph”. The book is written by an older, experienced professional photographer and although it is fascinating, it doesn’t exactly answers the questions that I am wrestling with. What makes photography art? Perhaps I should ask: “What makes anything art?” but for the moment my medium is the photograph. More importantly, what is the message I want to communicate to the viewer? What do I want to say? How does the artist choose his mission? Henri made a good point: photography is in some sense the opposite of painting. The painter has to consciously choose which elements to put in his picture to form his message. The photographer has to consciously choose which elements not to put in his picture. Painting is art by inclusion, but photography is mainly art by exclusion, since the photographer cannot manipulate his subject like the painter can. The former must decide what to put on the canvas, the latter must decide what not to photograph.

It could be that art cannot be defined in the way I wish, that the analytical method does not work, that it must arise spontaneously over the course of a life, and that it is in vain because it will not ultimately make a difference to what remains on my film (or web gallery or what have you). But I am indoctrinated by the scientific method and the analytical approach, and I’ll try this until it fails. Or perhaps that failure will be my art.

This mystery is probably explained by two changes that I have made recently. First I have stopped keeping a work log: at some point I was too busy to update it, and after that the habit of keeping it up to date just slipped away. (I have the same problem with this blog, I admit.)

The second change is that I am working a lot from my flat, where there are not too many, but still some distractions. Well, come to think of it, there is only my bed. But there is also a phycological difference: at home I’m much more inclined to listen to music or make a sandwich, while at work I would tough it out until I had to go home.

It may seem that I can improve my productivity by undoing these two changes, and I’ll probably try to do that. I have accomplished something this week and it has not been a complete waste, but I could perhaps get a lot more done. On the cosmic scale of things, my low/high productivity may not seem like a big issue, and — to be honest — it doesn’t bother me that much. But it raises a more disturbing train of thought about a personality defect that has bothered me for a long time: my lack of self-discipline. I have often wondered if there is some kind of training or exercise that I could perform to improve it.

Does it come down to a (perhaps neurological) weakness in making trade-offs between short- and long-term rewards? Or perhaps highly-disciplined people conduct some kind of inner dialogue that I am just not able to keep up? Do they instinctively use some form of visualization (like gymnasts and other athletes) that impel them to work and not to play? The answer is probably that it is a mental habit that anyone can learn, but not without effort, combined with some powers of concentration. My boredom threshold is quite low, and I work hardest when the task is new and still stimulating. Once I get used to it, it loses all its appeal and I easily convince myself to take a nap instead.

On the one hand there is a refrain in my head that tells me that I am getting to old to change my ways, while on the other hand I don’t believe that for one minute. There are plenty of examples of almost-middle-aged and older people who have taken their lives in new directions. Let’s hope I can be one of them, at least in this small way.