Big planet. Small world.

Don't mess with the Dowager Countess

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 22:11:00 +0000

What do you get when you mix equal parts Star Wars, Grumpy Cat, and Downton Abbey?

I'm not sure, but I doubt it'll be pretty.

Question for you: Between Palpatine, Tard, and Lady Violet, Dowager Countess of Grantham, who do you think will win? Explain your answer.

I want cake and I want it now

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 22:50:00 +0000

Crazy sports fans (CC: 50%ChanceofRain)

I don’t get sports.

Really. I used to think my testosterone levels were low, or something. I just don’t get how we men can claim that women are illogical, can’t read maps, and are prone to fits of misguided, whimpering emotion, but then we can turn around and transform into primal, superstitious nitwits on the weekends, muttering magical incantations that we actually think will be effective over long distances and think that’s okay. There’s even plenty of research to suggest that spousal abuse spikes after our team loses, especially when they’re playing a traditional arch-rival or it’s during the playoffs. And no one’s hiding the fact this year that sex trafficking is a prominent theme wherever the Super Bowl happens to be. Apparently, the game in progress on the field isn’t enough for a certain category of fan.

I also have a problem with the industry that’s been built around recreation. We worry that our culture’s eroding, but how many billions are we spending on sports, watching sports, playing sports, and promoting sports? What percentage of a family budget is acceptable to allocate to team memorabilia? How much of our time is taken up with the pre game show, the game, the post game show, the post-postgame show, the commentary on the game on the radio the next day, the reminiscences years later?

That being said (and yes, I remember a few of Joe Montana’s passes), something happens on championship day. Maybe it’s some dormant strain of simian DNA deep in my bloodstream reactivating, but this is one of the few days every year when I go out of my way to try to find beer, salsa, and a comfortable seat. At least all at the same time. My chest gets a little hairier (and maybe my back does, too), I scratch myself, my IQ drops a few points, and I might even yell at the screen.

I used to claim I just watched this game for the commercials. That was true back when the commercials were good. Now I watch it for the game, but, admittedly, that’s probably only because the commercials have become so poor. Maybe today will be better. And no, I won't be watching Beyoncé. Or Beyoncè. Or whatever she is.

This year, we’re having people over. We’re watching the game together. Now there’s something I like about sports! It brings people together. It makes our world a little bit smaller. We like to talk about sports. We like to get excited in groups instead of alone. Maybe the extrovert in me should be cherishing this national holiday a little bit more.

And I have to admit that there’s something unique about the game this year. History is happening. I know I’ve read that the coaches would rather it not be mentioned, but it is, of course, unavoidable. These are not precisely rivals. These are brothers. They’re brothers who wrestled and fought and broke stuff like two alpha males growing up in the same house are prone to do, but they shed their rivalry years ago, became friends, and wound up in the same vocation. And they’re both (obviously) really good at it. And by the end of this evening, one of them will be a victor and one will be a loser. But they’ll still be brothers.

Maybe sports isn’t personal for me (most of the time). And maybe it’s a fantasy that we think it’s personal for us (that is, that “our” team is playing). But it’s personal for them. We’re going to see them on the TV screen today. Two brothers directing their teams to supremacy.

There’s also the pride issue for my personal favorite, the San Francisco 49ers. Jim Harbaugh has managed to make a quarterback change midseason and finally take this team back to the top, or at least one step from it. These guys are 5-0 in their Super Bowl appearances. Other teams have been more than five times, but no one with that many appearances can claim to be undefeated. This is exciting.

So I’ll be watching the brothers to see how they lead, and how they interact. I’ll be watching the statistics to see what historically interesting trivia gets generated. And I’ll be having a beer and some chili. I’ve joked with friends that while I’m unemployed I’ve put my entire life savings on Harbaugh today, so he’d better win.

If he doesn’t—I mean, if THAT one doesn’t--I’ll be in my man-cave, drenching my as-yet non-existent 9ers sweatshirt with my holy tears.

And eating cake. Now.

SpaceX Dragon COTS 2+ mission update

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Fri, 25 May 2012 06:24:00 +0000

Click here to watch the companion video to this post

SpaceX rocketed into history earlier this week becoming the first private company to ever launch a craft to the International Space Station.

Following a perfect launch and a flawless orbital insertion, nine minutes into its flight, the Dragon unfurled its solar panels, a significant milestone in this test mission to deliver cargo to the ISS.

The Dragon spent the next day performing orbital adjustments and catching up with the ISS, arriving this morning and engaging in additional acrobatics under the control of ISS astronaut Don Pettit.

The mission began with the requirement to accomplish a certain set of milestones, and has already perfectly completed most of the checks NASA requires before berthing with the station.

May 22 saw the launch and, as mentioned, the deployment of the solar array. Immediately afterwards, the Dragon also began using its absolute GPS system, autonomously determining its position.

Yesterday, Dragon corrected its orbit to match the Space Station, rapidly closing the distance between the two. It also tested its ability to perform an emergency retreat, an absolute necessity should anything go wrong during the close approach tomorrow.

This morning, after arriving at the station and establishing a UHF communication link with the ISS, the Dragon demonstrated its ability to navigate around the station, and also responded to commands sent directly from the station. Today, these commands merely turned a strobe light on and off, but they successfully revealed the communications link.

Beginning early tomorrow morning, the Dragon will complete three important milestones, encroaching ever closer on the Space Station before being received by the ISS' "Canadarm" and maneuvered into berthing position. Assuming the completion of these milestones, astronauts will enter the berthed Dragon craft on Saturday morning and unload cargo.

The Dragon is loosely scheduled to be reloaded with returning cargo and to depart the station on May 31. A certain date has not yet been announced. After its separation from the ISS, the Dragon will re-enter the Earth's atmosphere and be retrieved in the Pacific Ocean off the coast of California.

Want to read more about the SpaceX launch? Check out:

Also, you can watch live coverage of the docking maneuvers on May 25, 2012 beginning at 7:30am EDT on NASA TV. We recommend the public USTREAM (top right link), if available.

SpaceX one step closer to perfect Falcon 9 launch

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Tue, 22 May 2012 04:37:00 +0000

SpaceX' Dragon capsule sits atop the Falcon 9 rocket about 14 hours before anticipated launch
May 18, 2012 (Photo by Jeff Holton)

Saturday morning, I caught my jaw in rapid descent as the SpaceX launch I travelled to Florida to see aborted at T-minus 0.5 seconds.

What happened?

In a layman's nutshell, one of the nine Merlin engines on the bottom of the Falcon 9 rocket was working harder than it should have been. In the two-and-a-half seconds that the engine ran, a computer monitoring the pressure of all nine engines saw a trending "overpressure condition" that signaled that there was something wrong. Imagine for a moment that one of your car's four wheels is spinning faster than the other three. That's bad.

In the following hours of data recovery, analysis, press conferences, and announcements, I learned or was reminded of several things, some technical, some philosophical:

Engineering reliability. When you're driving your car and it breaks down, you pull over to the side of the road and you call AAA. That's not an option with a space launch. If it hasn't left yet, and you have good reason to believe it's not working, you stay home. Those with a deep awareness of space launch history will remember the famous four-inch flight of the first Mercury-Redstone launch.

Click here to watch the four-inch flight of MR-1

Failure vs. iteration. These are failures.

Click here to watch a British documentary on unmanned US launch failures
What happened here wasn't a failure. It was a calculated decision to get better.
Exploration is about progress and improvement. What do engineers and explorers have in common? They're both humbly aware that as a species we're not where we should be yet. We still have somewhere to go. We can do this better. Scrubbing the launch was the best way to get better faster. If they'd launched and lost the craft, they'd be back at square one. By aborting the launch, they got one step closer to having a flawless launch next time.
SpaceX is pretty impressive. These people analyzed the problem, repaired it, determined that it wasn't that big of a deal in the first place, said they were glad they fixed it anyway, and had the whole thing turned around and on track for another attempt way inside of 48 hours. That, to me, is a company that you can trust.

They're going to try again tonight, in the early hours of May 22, 2012. Tune in to my Facebook, Google+, or Twitter feeds for links to watch my team's live commentary and/or NASA TV.

You can view my commentary on the visit and new attempt here. It's worth a look.

SpaceX Launch Scrub Post Report and New Launch Intro

Jeff goes to space

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Fri, 18 May 2012 03:04:00 +0000

In lieu of a wordy post, today I give you a wordy video.

Enjoy.

Want to read more about the SpaceX launch? Check out:

SpaceX Dragon Mission Objectives

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Tue, 15 May 2012 19:04:00 +0000

Dragon capsule docked with ISS (NASA illustration from SpaceX press kit)

Last night, the new crew for the International Space Station (ISS) lifted off from Baikonur, Kazakhstan. The crew will arrive at the station tomorrow. Their presence there is essential to the success of NASA's next undertaking.

After completing all pre-flight checks successfully, the SpaceX cargo mission to the ISS is on target for liftoff from the Kennedy Space Center at Cape Canaveral this coming Saturday at 4:55am EDT.

SpaceX has been working with NASA's Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) to develop a commercially viable and fiscally efficient replacement for the costly Space Shuttle fleet, first for the purpose of cargo delivery, and, ultimately, also for delivery and recovery of crew. The unmanned COTS 1 launch on December 8, 2010, was a resounding success. Initially, SpaceX planned for two additional test missions, referred to simply as COTS 2 and COTS 3. However, the two missions have now been combined into a single set of objectives.

The combined objectives of COTS 2 include:

Launch*
Orbit*
Perform complicated maneuvers within 2.5km of the ISS
Perform holds at 250m, 30m, and 10m
Pending positive assessment of maneuvers and GO indication from NASA, dock with the ISS
Unload cargo
Return to earth for splashdown and recovery off coast of California*

* SpaceX has already demonstrated success at these objectives on a previous mission

Watch the video below to hear and see how this mission will look.

Click here to watch video on YouTube

Want to read more about the SpaceX launch? Check out:

Reflections on a decade in Eastern Orthodoxy

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Fri, 04 May 2012 11:30:00 +0000

Me being received into the "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic" Orthodox Church
through the sacrament of Chrismation

I've spent 2/5 of my Christian self-awareness in Eastern Orthodoxy. And I have every intention of sticking around for a good while longer.

I was chrismated into the Church on May 4, 2002. It was the morning of Holy Saturday, the day before Easter. While I had sincerely and, I think, accurately identified myself as a Christian for the preceding 15 years, this was a departure, a change, a turning point for me. I took my Christianity down off the wall, reframed it, and hung it back up again.

It began with a hunger. I wanted relevance and attachment, meaning and encouragement, but mostly I wanted assurance that I was gambling my eternity on something other than arbitrary individualism, hunches, and spiritual experiments. And I wanted Communion.

I was married in the Church a few years earlier. Theophilus, the Priest had called me. Friend of God. It was actually a perfect Greek translation for my given name. Hearing it during the ritual made me feel like I belonged, like I was connected, not so much on alien turf, kind of like I was pretending to be Orthodox, as long as I was there, doing as the Romans do (to stretch a metaphor nearly to its breaking point).

But this chrismation day was different. This was not a dress rehearsal or a perpetuation of my pretend sacramentalism. Now I was being grafted into the ancient, timeless, eternal, mysterious Eastern Church, becoming part of it, being identified with it. The difference between a scholastic and a sacramental faith should not be trivialized. It is no small difference. I was leaving the practices that I could apprehend, that I could wrap my brain around and understand and explain to others, for those that are beyond my comprehension, that were forcing me to stake my belief on something greater than myself. I was submitting myself to begin a process of transformation. I was comforted and scared. I was honored and humbled. The God who up until this point I had understood as the one who forgives sins--who "resets the clock" as it were--was now becoming to me the one who empowers sinlessness. I was ready to grow.

Transformation is a slow process. I am more mature than I was ten years ago. But I might be more mature anyway even if I wasn't Orthodox. On the one hand, I'm not sure if "maturity" (whatever that means) is the best sign that this is working. On the other hand, my behavior hasn't been perfect, nor become perfect. I've made mistakes I wouldn't have dreamed of ten years ago.

Did Orthodoxy fix me? Not yet. But it sure is doing a good job of revealing where I need to be fixed. I'd have a much easier time ignoring my character flaws and pretending they didn't exist if you put me back in another faith context. That makes Orthodoxy worth its weight in gold. Given the association of Orthodoxy both with being heavy and with gold, I figure I'm probably in the right place. Somewhat to my embarrassment, I actually figured I'd be perfect by now. They told me it would take longer than ten years. I thought I could prove them wrong. But at this point I guess I'll give it at least another ten years or so.

When the oil of chrism, the sacrament and symbol of my attachment to the Church, was placed on my forehead, I had hoped to see a vision of angels ascending and descending above the altar. I saw no such thing, but I'm still pretty sure they were there.

It is not my desire to present Orthodoxy as a prized possession of mine as if I were its curator. I don't understand it any more or less than those outside it or inside it.

However, it is my goal to be available to offer a little bit of information about my experience in it. I don't claim any monopoly on the truth. I'm where I am because of an ongoing set of internal and external conversations. Like any de facto evangelist, I'd love it if you'd agree with me and become Orthodox. But it'd be absurd to want you to do it just to vindicate or validate me. This is bigger than me. I won't be offended if you don't agree with me or see things the way I do. But you're more than welcome to be part of the ongoing dialogue.

Here are a few of my thoughts so far:

How to irritate customers with imprecise English

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Thu, 03 May 2012 23:39:00 +0000

English! Do you speak it!??
(CC2.0: Romana Klee)

Self-appointed grammar police, will you back me up on this?

Does the AVIS car rental agency know how to speak English? Are they intentionally trying to mislead their customers?

Granted that the company is headquartered in New Jersey, a portion of the United States named for a region of the world that does not generally speak English. [Ed.: Yes, that was a joke. No, it wasn't very funny.]

A few days ago, I made a rental reservation for this coming Saturday. Today (which is Thursday), I cancelled that reservation.

Read the following excerpt from the reservation agreement and tell me what you think I should have been charged for cancelling today.

Personally, I think I shouldn't have been charged anything whatsoever.

I read this as:

If you cancel more than 24 hours before the scheduled pickup time, there is no fee.
If you cancel less than 24 hours before the scheduled pickup time, you will be charged $10.
If you do not cancel and merely fail to show up for the car, we will keep all of your money (except a "fee" of $50 which we will force you to accept).

Now, it may just be that I learned English from professors who went to elementary school with William Shakespeare, but I'm pretty sure that before means before and fee means something you have to pay us. But AVIS seems to think this program means:

If you cancel more than 24 hours before the scheduled pickup time, we will charge you $10.
If you cancel less than 24 hours before the scheduled time or simply don't bother to cancel at all, we will charge you a boatload of money, either the full original amount less $50, or the full original amount plus $50, or some other plan that we're not even sure of ourselves because this literature was so poorly written by three drunk monkeys and a typewriter, or possibly three drunk typewriters and a monkey.

A person (not me) who apparently just read this AVIS literature
(CC2.0: Kalavinka)

Do you read this the same way I do? Or do you side with AVIS on this one?

Leave a comment below with your thoughts.

How to catch a Dragon

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Wed, 02 May 2012 16:49:00 +0000

Dragon docking with the ISS (image from SpaceX Dragon site)

It has come to my attention that those who read these posts by email (especially on a mobile phone) were unable to view the video that was included at the end of last night's post.

So here are a couple things for you to do:

If you didn't see yesterday's video, click the link below to view it.
If you are reading this on the website and you would prefer to receive new posts by email, look near the upper left of the screen or click here to subscribe by email.

How to catch a Dragon
An interview with NASA trainers

Daddy, can I borrow the launch pad?

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Wed, 02 May 2012 04:06:00 +0000

SpaceX Falcon 9 Dragon liftoff from Space Launch Complex 40 at the Kennedy Space Center

It must be hard to schedule a rocket launch. I mean, you have to figure out the logistics of securing a launchpad, and you have to figure how to get a rocket there, which means you have to figure out how to build a rocket, which means you have to be a rocket scientist.

You need to go through a minute by minute script of your mission. Then you need to go through it again. And then you need to go through it again to make sure you didn't make any mistakes when you went through it after you went through the first time. You need to figure out when you have to have the mission completed by, and then you need to count backwards from there to figure out when you need to launch.

Then you have to test the pad. And the rockets. And every hose and wire that connects to it.

And then everything has to go right.

This of course all presumes that you have a launch pad.

If you don't have a launchpad, you need to borrow somebody else's. Once you reach that stage (ahem), you're pretty much at their whim. There aren't too many private companies with their own launch pad these days, so if you're a private company with a spaceship, you're kinda out of luck.

So if you came here today because of my previous post expecting to read and watch my report on the launch of the SpaceX Falcon 9 to the International Space Station, you may notice that there's no such report here. That's because something went wrong. Turns out to be a rather minor something, discovered during a software test a week and a half ago, but something wrong nonetheless.

The CEO of the company that wrote the software that connects the spacecraft to the space station decided he wanted to make sure that software would work, and then he wanted to make sure he was sure, and that he wanted to take some time to be sure that his assurance was sure. I can't say that I blame him.

So they abandoned the April 30 date. That immediately allowed NASA to move up the date for their Atlas V launch to May 3. Given that NASA did not make May 4 or 5 available (to give flexibility to the Atlas V launch, presumably), SpaceX and NASA tentatively and somewhat arbitrarily set a new launch date for the Falcon 9 on May 7. That date was inside a narrow window. They couldn't plan it for May 8 or May 9 "because of space station rendezvous requirements." They did have a backup date of May 10, but this date doesn't make NASA very comfortable either. A launch of a Russian Soyuz capsule from Baikonur, Kazakhstan, is currently scheduled for May 14. If anything went wrong with the first-of-its-kind docking of the SpaceX capsule which compromised the arrival of the crew on the Soyuz, things could get quite awkward indeed. So they went with the May 7 date. So far.

Despite the fact that space travel requires a certain degree of precision, you apparently also need to be flexible. The launch was delayed for one week, so I'll try again then. You should, too.

UPDATE: Five minutes after I finished writing the above article, but just before I posted it, NASA sources were quoted as saying the May 7 date would "almost certainly be delayed." I adjusted a bit of language in the penultimate paragraph, but left everything else the same. That's how fast these things change.

How to catch a Dragon

The future of American space travel starts in 5...4...3...

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Fri, 20 Apr 2012 06:55:00 +0000

The SpaceX Dragon spacecraft
(Publicity shot from the SpaceX website)

I've been invited by NASA and SpaceX (yes, they actually do talk to each other) to attend the biggy launch a little over a week from now. I want to thank the crew at NASA Social for selecting me for this honor.

But this one comes with some controversy, because my excitement isn't entirely shared with the rest of the country.

While so many uppity folks see the "demise" of the Space Shuttle program as a black eye for American awesomeness, I see it as something that came way too late. The purpose of the shuttle program wasn't to make America look cool (tho it sure did for a while). It was to make payload delivery cheap.

And it failed. It failed big time. And they knew by 1976 that it was going to fail, when the program was only seven years into the planning phase. But they did it anyway. And sure enough, it cost us twenty-eight arms and twenty-eight legs. (And a lot of money, too.)

Enter SpaceX, a private company that thinks they can do better. And the government's letting them. Yeah, with a liberal executive branch, we're cutting budget and letting the private sector take over.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it. My take is that SpaceX isn't ruining our awesomeness. They're reclaiming it. I'm gonna go watch history unfold. And yes, I'll be posting on here so the rest of you can tune in, too.

Be proud. Not just America. But be proud humanity. We're still reaching. And we're getting better at it.

If you're on Twitter, follow me (see the link to the left). And also search for the hashtag #NASASocial.

Friday funny: Minus

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 21:24:00 +0000

One of my favorite sites to visit is Garfield Minus Garfield. It's a brilliant, minimalist art project

dedicated to removing Garfield from the Garfield comic strips in order to reveal the existential angst of a certain young Mr. Jon Arbuckle. It is a journey deep into the mind of an isolated young everyman as he fights a losing battle against loneliness and depression in a quiet American suburb.

Does it succeed? Well, you be the judge. Take this as an example.

Garfield (Jim Davis, 1/6/2012)

From Garfield Minus Garfield, January 12, 2012

Apparently, Jim Davis is an encouraging fan of the site. I find that telling.

Anyway, I wonder if this shouldn't be a genre. For your viewing pleasure, I present to you my two submissions for consideration.

From this...

Luann

...to this:

Luann Minus Luann
(with possible apologies to Greg Evans)

...and from this:

Calvin and Hobbes

...to this:

Calvin and Hobbes Minus Calvin
(with no apologies whatsoever to Bill Watterson)

Discuss: What would your favorite comic strip, movie, book, or TV show look like without the primary character?

An elegy for books

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:28:00 +0000

"Books of the Past"
(CC2.0: Lin Pernille Photography)

I'm attempting to take a walk through my adolescence, but it's gone. The store I remember as A Clean Well-Lighted Place for Books isn't here. It's vanished. I find that I'm more than five years too late, and there's not so much as a plaque to stand as a monument. Clean, Well-Lighted has been replaced by a 24 Hour Fitness center. Rather, I would have a 24 hour bookstore.

I weep silently, wondering if the jocks have finally beaten the bookworms, unwilling to mature past their juvenile competition, extrapolating it to a violent and unnecessary end.

Soon, we won't remember books. We won't know what books were. Those ancient bulwarks of imagination will all be gone, replaced by soulless machines. They'll be theorized and discussed by archaeologists and paleontologists, debated, pondered and wondered about. What were they like? Did they work? Did normal people know how to turn them on and download their knowledge? The students of those archaeologists will laugh when they hear these ancient artifacts lacked on switches, wondering how their ancestors survived our race's backward infancy. (We will laugh at them when they look at us funny after we threaten them with the "nose-in-the-book penalty.")

I weep for the loss of books, the symbols of hope that we would not face extinction. "We wouldn't be human without books," says Laurent Ferri, assistant curator of rare books and manuscripts at Cornell University. But books became extinct before we did. Our printed knowledge could not outlive us.

I wonder, just for a moment, if my predecessors wept at the demise of clay tablets when the Egyptians started using papyrus. But I dismiss the thought after a moment as ludicrous at worst, irrelevant at best. I'm biased like that. It's the books that I'm thinking of.

There will still be some of us who remember that books were tactile, sensual, not just for the eyes and the mind, but for the fingers to feel the paper, the binding, the stitching, for the ears to hear the real turning of pages, for the smell. You could tell the difference between a new book and an old book by the smell. But books were also for the heart, for the spirit, for those intangible qualities that make us who we are. Those musty old books commanded an aire of respect because they had lasted. Like old wise men, they were cherished, celebrated as important. The only way you can tell the difference between an old and new ebook is by the dead batteries. Will museum curators work very hard to restore depleted batteries? Will the first ebook (what was it, anyway?) be on display like Gutenberg's Bible, like the Dead Sea Scrolls, like illuminated masterpieces?

For that matter, will we remember libraries? Or will those ancient monasteries of human exploration be razed and replaced with something more compelling, more electronic, more in keeping with the new order being established by our welcome robot overlords? What will become of the librarians?

Can books be converted into a fuel source?

I hope so. I'd like to drive somewhere far away where they still have books.

The impossibility of Christmas

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Sat, 31 Dec 2011 23:28:00 +0000

Used with permission (CC: Fr. Ted Bobosh)

The Christmas season is upon us, that 3-4% of the year when we consider that God stepped out of eternity and into time. That's heavy. It should make us scratch our heads a bit. Either that which was eternal is eternal no more, or we who are temporal have been dragged into the impossible presence and activity of eternity.

Some part of God, somewhere between 0% and 100% (non-inclusive) has joined itself to creation. It is not 0%. To say it is 0% is Arianism. It is not 100%. To say it is 100% is modalism. And it is not 33%. To say it is 33% is to grossly oversimplify Trinity.

But He who has eternally been the son of God is now the son of a woman. Something incomprehensible has happened, and cannot be undone. That which constructed creation, and has up until now been separate from it, is now contained within it, circumscribed. Yes, this is impossible. And yet, it is true.

We should not be afraid of joining with the atheist in saying that our belief is unbelievable. It is unbelievable! Anyone who claims this belief is rational and sensible has a shallow belief.

It is impossible for something infinite to be bounded by margins. And yet it has actually happened.

It is impossible for that which is outside time to be affected by time. And yet it has actually happened.

It is impossible for a virgin to bear a child. And yet she has.

It is impossible for the intellect to apprehend the ineffable. And yet it has been handed to us.

It is impossible for God to become something other than God without ceasing to be God. And yet it has actually happened.

Our faith is impossible, irrational, incredible, uncredible, incomprehensible, and unbelievable.

And yet we believe it, because it is true. It has actually happened.

Christ is born. Glorify him!

How I became a Web 1.0 Internet sensation

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 21:11:00 +0000

Used with permission, CC2.0: KayVee.INC

This year is the 15th anniversary of when I became an internet sensation. I thought you should learn how I did it so you can try it for yourself. It's hard for me to prove that I did it. But if you’re generally predisposed to being a trusting type, you can just take my word for it.

I created IHABICNRWTSF. No, really, it’s true. And you know how popular that is!

Wait, you haven’t been using this abbreviation in everyday speech? (It’s easy. You pronounce it “eye habbik nerwit siff.”) It means “I hate acronyms because I can never remember what they stand for.”

Google it. There are over a thousand references to it online. Sadly, I’m rather proud of that fact. It caught on after I spontaneously posted it on the de facto Internet Abbreviation List in 1996. This was in the days before there was such a thing as Web 2.0, when popularity was measured in hundreds of hits. The site is now defunct, but it was expanding rapidly in the late nineties, and its entire contents have since spilled all over the Internet and multiplied in perhaps one of the earliest cases of viral social media. I never noticed until around 2005 when I went to find out if anyone had noticed.

Apparently, they love me in Poland and Italy. I feel kinda like Jerry Lewis.

Anyway, if you, too, want to become a sensation in the Web 1.0 environment, here are three easy steps to get you there:

Be random.

Be anonymous.

Sit back and wait ten years before you check in.

Now if you actually want to make money and/or receive recognition for doing something, I recommend you work intentionally, take credit, and drive conversation.

But that’s another post.

Why isn't Web 1.0 interesting? Find out in
What's the big deal about Web 2.0?

Three surprises on Rapture Saturday?

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Sat, 21 May 2011 15:29:00 +0000

Used with permission (CC: midiman)

So, today's the Rapture. Theoretically.

I'm not entirely sure it's gonna happen, but if it does, I'm wondering if we won't discover a few surprises.

Like...

Resounding trumpets?

I have this theory that the Second Coming of Christ will be announced by vuvuzela. Be listening for them, just in case.

More bars, more places

AT&T reception kinda sucks down here on Earth. I'm expecting to have seven bars in the New Jerusalem. Or maybe twelve.

In any case, you should still be able to read my blogposts, Tweets, and Facebook status updates. No worries.

Fun, fun, fun, fun

I know it's Saturday, but I have a hunch we're going to find out that Jesus really loves Rebecca Black. Don't be surprised if everybody's favorite song is on repeat play.

For eternity.

Question: What are your unusual Rapture Saturday expectations?

Should I get an iPad?

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Fri, 06 May 2011 16:12:00 +0000

Used with permission, CC BY-SA 2.0, Henri Bergius

A reader has asked:

Thanks to a dropped laptop and a growing patch of dead pixels, I am in the market for a newish, inexpensive portable something. Could you provide some insight on the limitations and advantages of the iPad.

I respond:

The facts that I am Apple's fourth biggest fanboy (after David Pogue, Michael Hyatt, and Guy Kawasaki) and generally use my iPad almost as frequently as, say, daily hygiene products, actually bias this response less than you might think.

What do you need it for? If all you do is surf the web, watch movies/TV/YouTube, and check email, it's probably a fine little machine. The iPad has an amazing battery, fantastic clarity, instantaneous on, etc.

How badly do you need Flash? It's lacking in iOS devices, which is a problem for certain web pages that display video clips that way. You can get around this by paying a few bucks for CloudBrowse, but you'll still find yourself going through a few steps to copy-paste links back and forth between CloudBrowse and Safari.

Productivity! It's not a laptop computer. It's more like a PDA. If you're trying to get work done like document creation, editing, presentations, papers, organization, spreadsheets, printing, probably better to go with a netbook. You can DO those on an iPad (sorta), but you'll still want to finish things up on a more capable, full-featured desktop or laptop.

If you're going to do them on an iPad, you'll probably want to look at investing a little under $20 in a snazzy little program called Documents To Go, and probably setting yourself up an account with Dropbox.

If you're really keen on Apple, like I am, and you can afford an iPad (3G or otherwise), I'd say splurge the little bit extra and go for the low-end MacBook Air. Otherwise, might want to watch TigerDirect or Buy.com for the latest deal on a cheapo PC netbook. Not the most stable thing around, but it should do the trick.

If it were me in your shoes, with my pro-Apple bias, I'd probably rank those choices:

Suck up the budget a bit and splurge for the MacBook Air for about $1K.

Get the low-end WiFi-only iPad for ~$500.

Pick up an Asus (or other) netbook for $350 or so and wish I'd gotten an iPad.

See these two posts:

Why I Love/Hate My iPad (slightly outdated, but still informational).

Using CloudBrowse to View Flash on an iPad, iPhone, or iPod Touch

Responding to Rob Bell's heresy

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 06:23:00 +0000

Michael Servetus, used with permission

Let's talk about heresy.

The word heresy has been in the news the past few days. It's been used to describe pretty much any opinion Rob Bell has to share. And it's not a charge to be taken lightly. Certain modern cultures still quickly levy execution against blasphemers. And even the occasionally celebrated Geneva Consistory might have to be exhumed to apologize for their capital discipline against Servetus, despite the apparent legitimacy of the charge.

But we don't live in the Middle East. And we don't live in 1500s Geneva. Most of us live in contemporary Western culture, enlightened by the Enlightenment, jaded by moral relativism, and easily distracted by advertising, corporate interests, and the office March Madness bracket. And we like to think that we're cautious. And fair. And kind. And that we don't have prejudices.

But we know better, don't we.

Unless you've been living under a rock for the past few weeks, you probably heard that Rob Bell has a new book out. It came out Tuesday. It was #8 at Amazon before it came out (#3 now as this is being written). Go figure.

And unless you've actually read it, you probably think that it's full of blasphemy. Because you've heard that it is. (To be fair, actually, you may think that it's full of blasphemy after you read it, too. I wouldn't know. I haven't yet.) And you've heard that Bell is a universalist, which is apparently an unpardonable sin (ironically?), so you think that's true, too. (A universalist is a Christian who believes that every human being will be welcomed into eternity with God regardless of their decision for or against Christ in their lifetime.)

So, assuming that you're comfortable with forming an opinion about something before you know what you're talking about, let's just go ahead and list all the possible prejudicial statements you might be able to make:

Rob Bell is completely off the mark and never says anything legitimate or worthwhile.

Rob Bell is right on the money and everything he says is gospel.

Rob Bell understates his case. He's light on substance and doesn't really say anything new.

Rob Bell goes a bit too far at times, but is otherwise reasonably palatable.

Now, since we all know that we contemporary Christians are supposed to be proud that God didn't make us like that heretical blasphemer, Rob Bell, let's rise above making extreme statements and toss out the first two because of their unqualified adjectives. That leaves us with the last two to choose from.

And I don't think we can really choose between them, mostly because both of those remaining statements should remind us of us.

Here's the problem: Christian theology is a living organism, an ongoing, constant conversation, an unanswered question posed to the panel for discussion (and we're all in the symposium), a milieu of opinion that responds to dogma and actualizes it into something full of meaning and relevance and usefulness to a particular culture. It moves. At its best, it moves in the influence of the wind of God. At its worst, it is as corrupted as we are. We corrupt it.

We and Bell are in the same boat, hoping that we've got it right, trying to make sense of ideas that we don't own, that have been around a lot longer than we have, that will outlast us, and that, frankly, are beyond our comprehension. We are incapable of circumscribing the mind of God. (If you don't believe me, consider what happened to Job when he thought he was entitled to give it a try.)

That being said, we're probably behaving well when we temper our ounce of judgment with an ounce of margin to hear retellings of details and opinions that we've been slow to listen to.

Here's the thing. Bell's been accused of espousing universalism, a charge which he denies. He says our response to Christ is important. He doesn't deny that hell exists. He does apparently question whether hell is a place God assigns certain people to, or a reality they create for themselves by denying him, but this isn't anything C. S. Lewis didn't say before him. Lewis was hardly a universalist, nor even a theological liberal. Madeline L'Engle was a universalist. She's the one who wrote, "All will be redeemed in God's fullness of time, all, not just the small portion of the population who have been given the grace to know and accept Christ. All the strayed and stolen sheep. All the little lost ones."

A lot of people are very uncomfortable with that idea. Bell's never said that. Quite the contrary, he's apparently uncomfortable with that, too.

We live in a culture that's quick to judgment, that responds to perceived injustice with war, that confronts political adversaries with insults, that wants to deprive undesirables of basic human rights, and that's inexcusably fond of accusing everyone but ourselves for the systemic problems that we have to overcome. In short, we love to convince everyone that our understanding of things is right, and we hate it when anyone has a problem with us because they think ours is wrong.

And then we have a problem with someone coming along and saying that God offers us an infinite love as a correction to our mutually exclusive, unqualified certainties? We don't want to hear that? We don't want to find out that the central message of God's word is love?

No, probably not. We want to hear that he saves us, but that he doesn't save the other guy, the guy who ticked us off.

Bell's book is a submission to the conversation. He's a pastor. He works with confused people who have distorted views of love and salvation and hope and joy, and they need a handle. (They're people a lot like us.) He's not interested in giving definitive answers, so we shouldn't be so upset if he doesn't. He's interested in throwing a bunch of pasta at the wall and letting the rest of us see what sticks.

What should our response be?

I don't know. I haven't read the book.

But I know that it should:

Include discernment. We're to test the spirits, not dismiss them before we listen to them.

Be deep. We reach a point where it's time to move past the milk, and ponder spiritual meat, some new ideas that would have left our heads spinning when we started out. We'll never get a chance to hear those ideas if we're unwilling to listen to things that, at first glance, we disagree with.

Be intentional. We are supposed to make every effort to watch our life and doctrine closely. If life and doctrine are supposed to mesh, then maybe we should get some information before we form the sorts of opinions that lead us to make character accusations on our fellows.

The real heresy is not listening. God gave us brains and hearts. Let's use them.

Watch the Rob Bell interview with Lisa Miller on the eve of the book release
on lovewins at livestream.com

This guy doesn't listen very well

The death of classical music?

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Sun, 13 Mar 2011 19:12:00 +0000

Used with permission, CC3.0: Yngvie Bakken Nilsen

For years, I have celebrated the classical radio station, KDFC. I would direct others to it, telling them that no east coast station came near it in quality and dignity, and only Seattle's KING FM might have a shot at the west coast. (KING's staff, tho committed to the genre, is far too predictable and hardly as innovative or creative as KDFC's.)

I grew up in KDFC's backyard, felt its influence as I came to embrace music, returned home to it after college. I rejoiced when it was one of the first radio stations to experiment with online broadcasting. (A classical station?? Technologically progressive?? Oh, yes!)

And then, on January 24, something unexpected--and, to me at least, unforeseen--happened. KDFC effectively ceased to exist.

Sort of.

Apparently, KDFC was the last of its kind, a dying breed of commercial classical radio station that has now joined the buffalo on the list of extinctions brought about by American expansion. Granted that KDFC's sponsors were of a type inaccessible to the average American at any time, much less during a recession--Rolex, Mercedes. But they were sponsored. And the sponsors saw a legitimate audience.

A few Mondays ago, suddenly, KDFC's normal signal ceased to exist. It was replaced by a handful of low-power repeaters, and an email announcing that they had switched to a listener supported model.

While this idea is not unheard of in the world of classical music, that is precisely the point: KDFC was the last remaining commercial classical station.

I loved KDFC especially because it held fast to the idea that classical music was mainstream. Now that is gone.

At least I can still love it for the music.

Want to listen to KDFC yourself? They have one of the finest iPhone apps available for a radio station. It should be a flagship for any radio station's attempt at an app. (It has a background mode for us iPhone 3G diehards!)

Also, you can listen to their live feed 24 hours a day on the web at KDFC.com.

It's not quite dead yet.

Everybody needs a vacation sometimes

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 16:46:00 +0000

Used with permission, CC: Christopher Thomas

Sometime today, I will be taking jeffholton.com down. It’ll only last for about an hour…hopefully! During the downtime, if you’re visiting this blog directly, you’ll be able to read the text on this page just fine, but you’ll see timeouts when loading images (like the one above).

The website has been trucking along 24x7 for over five years on a machine that has never seen any downtime except for neighborhood-wide power failures. The reason for today's outage is that we’re moving some furniture around, so I have to unplug the machine where jeffholton.com lives.

So, my apologies if you were hoping to receive the full effect of your visit here. If you’re dissatisfied with your experience, I promise you a full refund.

Really. Ha, ha.

Speaking of images, you'll still be able to view these, since they're on a different site.

If you're reading this as email or in a reader and having trouble viewing these, try visiting the site directly.

Friday funny: Christmas, part 2

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Fri, 24 Dec 2010 23:26:00 +0000

Jesus is a liberal democrat

The 12 Days of Christmas, the way it should have been in the first place

Perspective: What would your final words be?

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:58:00 +0000

Ed White, the first spacewalker. He let go. He came back. Some don't.
(All NASA images are in the public domain, with some rights reserved. NASA [image S65-30431]).

I know of a man who is in surgery for his brain, right now as I write this post. His name is Brent. They do not know if he will make it out of surgery. They are removing a mass and they do not know the extent of the problem. I do not know this man personally, but I know of him. I am thinking of him. You should be, too.

A few hours ago, with complete mental acuity, he wrote this to his young sons:

It is very early (4AM) and God is at work! I wanted to just take a few moments to let you know how much I love each one of you! You have each made me the happiest dad in the entire world. I am reminded in (Mark 1:11) when Jesus was baptized out of obedience and respect for HIS Father and an audible voice was heard from the heavens when he came up out of the water. "This is my son, in whom I am well pleased."

This morning I now realize the amount of love that a father can have for his sons and all of their accomplishments, victories and yes even defeats. Therefore, I too echo those words from the mountain top - "YOU ARE MY SONS, IN WHOM I AM WELL PLEASED!"

We were never called to walk a faithless simple life but a life full of abundance and grace that only God can give. This morning, dad will leave for the hospital without any fear of the unknown, and expect miracles to happen. NO MATTER the outcome of the procedure or the diagnosis, GOD IS IN CONTROL and HE will be Praised!

Do me a favor, the next few days will be very difficult for your mom. Pray for her. Love her. Hug her. Obey her. She is truly the love of my life! We will all need each other over the coming days, but she will need you even more over the next few days.

Below is one of my favorite verses is this:

Hebrews: 8:38-39
[sic. Romans 8:38-39.]

For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

No Fear, Jesus Never Fails,

Dad

Consider also

Death and taxes and faithfulness

Lisa Telford: A eulogy

The strength of being broken

Question: If you had to write your final words right now, what would they be?

About Big Planet Small World

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 00:50:00 +0000

Used with permission, CC2.0: Jeff Kubina

Ideas get us talking to one another. Dialog develops new ideas.

We live on a big planet, but the world is shrinking more and more every day. Usually, when this colloquialism about the shrinking world is invoked, it's a complaint. But why should it be? Are contemporary technology and our increasingly social online culture inherently contributing to our increasing separation from one another, or are we just abusing technology in an ongoing effort to hide?

This blog will cover a variety of subjects, but they will all have a single, unifying theme: the things that get us talking to one another. Unfortunately, the things that bring us together are often the very things that threaten to tear us apart: discussions on religion and spirituality and favorite sports teams and computing platforms, opinions about art, sexuality, technology and science, politics, entertainment, music, books, movies, television, food, work and business, companies and industries and gifted individuals, product reviews (the relevant and the unusual), current events and history, family relationships, friends, irritants, humor...

What is funny and what isn't, for example? I have a dry, British wit. Do you? I don't require you to, or expect you to be just like me. I will be sharing my opinions because they're the only ones I have! That sure doesn't mean I'm uninterested in yours.

We'll occasionally include an interview with an established celebrity or expert in their field. We'll throw in the infrequent instructional commentary or video on a technical or other relevant subject. We'll welcome guest posts. We'll solicit and expect your feedback and thoughts on each issue, and we'll look forward to reading them.

The main purpose of every post will always be the same, to invite you into a discussion in which you will meet others, perhaps kindred spirits, perhaps lifelong aggravators. But you will speak with each other. You will interact, both on the blog and off. Most posts will end with a question, an opportunity for you to interact. You are so very welcome to do so. I use IntenseDebate for comments, since they sort and thread for me. You are encouraged--but not required--to create an account with them to better organize your conversations, and also benefit from the "ranking" that can be provided by others who find your ideas useful and/or well stated.

If you're reading this on the website, you can see two lists of my most popular posts to the left. You might find something to enjoy or spark thought or conversation in there.

I post irregularly, theoretically a couple times a week, though you may occasionally find bursts of creativity followed by doldrums of silence. (Such is the nature of a full-time Instructional Designer with two children under the age of ten!) I encourage you to click here to subscribe by email since this is the easiest way to engage with the latest content. Comments, however, are always welcome. Although I reserve the right to moderate them, I would like to think you would give me no reason to. The extrovert in me craves your interaction, and I look forward to responding in civil conversation with you.

The new technological world gives us a chance to be civil to one another in new ways. We can share ideas and disagree without hostility. We can discuss openly. Through disagreeing, we can ponder, change, and grow. Through agreeing, we can connect. There is room enough for both here. The planet is big enough for us to disagree, and we may be surprised to find unexpected allies that make our world just a bit smaller, and likely more enjoyable.

Friday funny: Christmas

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 18:11:00 +0000

When social media and the Bible collide.

It might be lacking Kirk and Spock and Roger Waters and the Bee Gees, but it's still pretty awesome

This may not precisely qualify as humor, but it sure is clever

Question: Can you point us to your favorite Christmas funny stuff? Thanks!

Google eBooks, an initial response

noreply@blogger.com (Jeffrey Holton) — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 18:14:00 +0000

Used with permission, CC 2.0: Stewart Butterfield

Google eBooks opened up with some fanfare several days ago. In an effort to corner a piece of yet another huge, emerging market, the Google eBooks store fired off a first round in competition with Amazon's Kindle store, B&N's Nook, and Apple's iBooks.

In our opinion, this first round is a dud.

Did you forget the user?

The news caused a stir. Within minutes, I'd downloaded Google's free book reader app onto all the devices I could find at arm's reach [read: my iPad, a few Macs, and my iPhone 3G].

Now, I'll admit that I'm all about free books. I want established wisdom from the public domain delivered to me on-demand. Project Gutenberg is my friend. And Google's bookstore (which is accessed through their website, just like you would with a computer-based or mobile-based Kindle or Nook application) doesn't disappoint. Within a few minutes I had five or six interesting free titles waiting for me in my Google reader, on whatever device I wanted.

Then came the problem. Google's been spending the past few years scanning in page after page after page of existing text. No OCR. Just pictures of the pages. They own the content of hundreds of thousands of volumes, a rich and diverse collection of knowledge. Unfortunately, what you can't do is reformat (at least easily), share, highlight, zoom, stretch, pinch, or rotate. In short, the content is all there on the screen, somewhere, but the pixels are pretty much undreadable.

I expected a superior user experience over the Kindle, Nook, and iBooks. Why enter the fight now if you don't have something brilliant to offer?

Quantity over quality

I'll grant Google the early winner in the content category. They boast 3 million volumes available today, some of which are actually interesting to read. The Barnes & Noble Nook store claims 2 million, Amazon's Kindle store not even half that. If you're looking for a book, it might make sense to try Google first. Maybe. Sort of. (They may have scanned in a gajillion books, but are they good ones?)

Until the reader is viable (read: richly-featured), I'll stick with iBooks (and, on occasion, Nook and Kindle) when I need it. Google can call me when they're ready to try again.

See also:

Burning books is bad, mmkay?

Question: What are your thoughts on the emerging eBook market? Is the printed page dead yet?