44

I've been closing up the house every morning, running the AC and hunkering down with the PC all day, but today, I left the windows open and worked most of the day on the gazebo. A break in the heat, I guess. I mean, it was hot, though, actually, in the afternoon, it was only 95 in the house. Late afternoon, out of nowhere, there was peal after peal of thunder, and then a hearty downpour. Our Peapod is hiding somewhere, which is quite strange - where could she be? And after the rain a big branch of the bamboo split in the middle, with a very dramatic crack. I'll have to get out there with the pole saw and trim it off, but it's a good thing, because now I can do that, and it'll let a little more light into this cave. My garden really is a cave, a deep wood ... a hell of a bush, as someone described it.

43

There's a long ladder in one of my trees, already, but the mechanism is broken, and moving it is a real chore. I thought about doing it, but I just don't want to. And I'll either have to saw that limb with my hand saw - a proper pruning saw, and a sturdy one, but pretty much the minimum tool, for sure - or ... my chain saw got stolen. I'm somewhat reluctant to replace it. The limb is just within the limit of the saw, I think. I'll approach it with some care, cutting a wedge underneath, first, and then it should drop down pretty easily when I cut from above.

So, this could happen.

I went through a similar process that lasted two weeks, and finally cut my hair. I thought about trying to get it done somewhere, but eventually gave up on it. They just don't get my look. Finally, just last night, I suddenly went and did it. Not too bad.

42

Anyway, I go out for the paper every morning and study that branch while I'm out there. It's almost like my hobby. Maybe I've made a decision, now, where I want to cut it. This was probably yesterday, that I got the idea. It reaches out, a sturdy limb, and about half way out an arching branch grows up towards the sky. A little past that, there's the branch that dangles down and brushes the cars. I'll cut it - where it's still quite thick - just past that branch that soars upwards. I usually try not to blunt a limb that way, and rather to cut a branch where it branches off, but at least there's a vigorous branch where I'm cutting. It'll be fine, I think, and it'll take care of the growth out over the street and of the big dangler. It even leaves a smaller dangler over the lawn, which I like.

These danglers reach almost to the grass, and in the spring you can pick berries off of them, that is, you, passers by, and me, of course, too.

Truth be told I don't want to get that ladder. I mean, I do want to get it - it was set up in the house, as a decoration, but it got evicted onto the porch, and I guess it needs to come home, now. What I don't want to do is extend it, because of the horrible clattering noise these ladders make. But, I guess there's nothing for it.

things

How to get myself to do things.

I can do it, even though the glacial pace at which it happens makes it look, in a way, like I can't. I'll think about a thing every day for days, weeks, often enough months and years, and then a moment will come that is somehow the right moment, and I'll do it. Sometimes what I'm thinking over is what to in fact do, other times how to do it, and also, often enough, when to do it.

The trees in my front yard arguably need attention. They're overgrown and tangled, particularly the two big mulberries - and the one little one. Mostly I've resigned myself, of late, but one branch of one of the mulberries is reaching out into the street, and is basically a problem. (It's also dangling a branch into the driveway that brushes the cars when we pull in or out.)

Maybe some day I'll get some help, or figure something out myself, and trim some of the tangle limbs - they're limbs, not branches, massive trunks - but that's not so urgent. That one dangling, reaching branch is a little too high for me to reach it with the short ladder. I have a longer ladder at the other house. I have to get myself over there and retrieve it. I've failed to do it for a couple of months, now.

40

A couple of hummers playing around in the garden.

I ought to take a picture, but it's a bit of a chore.

I feel poor. Is it good to admit, or to record, something like that? As an assertion, it's the opposite of an affirmation of power. If we're being affirmative, does that mean we should studiously ignore feelings of the sort? That actually feels like a dangerous idea. Perhaps the answer is to reflect on them. Just because we're paying attention to them doesn't necessarily mean they rule us.

Concern for others is a foolish thing, and yet, I would argue it is inescapable, and even necessary. That doesn't mean it is, in and of itself, a virtue. It can be a virtue, or a vice, I suspect. (It has more of the appearance of being a vice, but I suspect that's illusory - a function of my perspective - because it doesn't actually make sense.) What about my own concerns? At any rate, what might come from exploring these feelings?

38

According to my theory a chart like this - a more or less gradual and very linear decline following a rapid advance (and the sharp bottom from which that developed is also interesting) - predicts another rapid advance. If it does develop it could carry far past the previous top, is likely, though, to at least pause at that top, and perhaps to reverse there, or could only carry part way to that top. Well, we'll see what happens.

37

It is standard practice, so I have read, to locate and then secure - that would be the procedure - partners. In order to do that, it is necessary to communicate some sort of plan. Communication is used, first, in the form of exploration and observation, in the receptive sense, to identify persons with the required capabilities, and then, in the active sense, to test for interest. The latter purpose involves some risk. There is a thought in my mind that I would like the maximum number of people to read these posts, so that my undertaking becomes a highly public matter. Ultimately, that is my intent, but initially there might be reasons to be more private in my communications. Of course, I am already publishing this, in a completely public space, accessible to a very broadly defined version of "everyone", or, at any rate, "anyone". In part I am doing so out of laziness, or, to put it another way, under the at once harsh and gentle dictates of practicality. At present, it seems unlikely that anyone, now in the sense of some infinitesimal subset, will see these posts ... but, the clock is ticking ... which is another reason for this approach.

36

As the assemblers of such a product, a CAD application, we, its builders, will want to "monetize" our work. Systems for monetization are part of a CAD application.

This system will not be built by an individual, and it will not be operated by an individual. It will be built and operated by an organization. A system for unifying various participants under the auspices of an organization is a component of a CAD application.

Yet here I am, working in the most complete state of isolation. It is completely essential that I connect. My connection is social media, digital communication. This is partly because I suffer from a kind of paralysis ... but, strangely, the digital communication exists, and in a very prominent way, almost as if my limited capabilities are a natural thing, as acknowledged by reality, in its evolution of the medium. The question is, can I use it to produce a result?

35

A CAD application naturally consists of several components.

The purpose of CAD, as I'm defining it, is to provide the user with a universe to build and explore. A universe of one's own, you could call it. This universe is a file, and that file is a component of a CAD application. Systems of some sort are required to enable the user to build this file, and those systems are a component of a CAD application. Also, systems are required to render the contents of the file, converting it from descriptive data into visual data. Those systems are a component of a CAD application.

The two systems, the system for building the file, and the system for rendering from it, must interact, and the systems for implementing that interaction are a component of a CAD application.

Users will want to preserve their work, and systems that facilitate that are part of a CAD application. And users will want to "share" their models, and systems that facilitate "sharing" are part of a CAD application.

34

Seven years ago, Mr. Bull answered a question at Yahoo Answers, in fine fashion, and today I became the first person to "like" Mr. Bull's answer. Welcome to social media.

Today, Mr. Bull's answer to a question became a key component of my work.

Some years ago I described to someone, a Mr. Aurora, a somewhat complicated system for defining the locations of things in space, and he commented, musing, "isn't it all just numbers?" Today, though the system I described then is, I think, still relevant, I have an answer which also confirms Mr. Aurora's thought. I find my result, as regarding the power of a digital number, astonishing.

33

64 bits are more than adequate to the task of representing the decimal number 15 billion. They more than amply represent that number. I note that bits is capitalized on the referenced page. 64 Bits is 8 Bytes. Four such numbers are required to locate a point, and three points are required to describe a simple standard surface. 100 Bytes will amply describe a simple standard surface anywhere in a universe the size of our visible universe. They will describe such a surface with considerable precision. I can't say for sure, but it seems likely that one Kilobyte would describe a surface with the kind of precision I described earlier, that is, any size surface, from one the size of the universe to one the size of possibly the smallest know things in the universe. A one Terabyte file would be sufficient to describe 1 billion such surfaces, which is, at least in a small way, a satisfactory version of infinity.

Various reasons will be proffered to argue that infinite CAD is impractical, or too difficult to achieve for popular use. File size relative to available storage technology won't, however, hold up.

32

Any point in a volume of space defined by four equidistant points can be located by recording its distance from each of those four points. In this system, then, four numbers locate a point. Each number represents a multiple of the unit assigned to the distance of 1 unit that separates the four points of the framework. If, then, the unit distance is 1 light year, and the universe we wish to describe has a radius of 13.8 light years, four integer numbers not greater than 15 billion will locate any point in that universe to an accuracy of 1 light year. This led me to want to know how many bits are required to represent the decimal number 15 billion.

I briefly considered using a bit of JavaScript to perform the calculation, but I worried it wouldn't work. I recently read about a search engine that is good at answering questions about numbers, but I failed to note the link, so I used Lycos, and asked it "how many bits are required to write the number 15 billion?" I got a list of links, and found a very satisfactory answer on the second page I visited.

31

These musings provide the basis for estimating, very generally, the amount of data required to describe a universe of things. A single bit can, in fact, describe a universe, in some sense, and even something in it. It is always the case that a bit, or a number, has the meaning assigned to it, so we could assign the value 30 billion light years to the number 1, and, say, one half that number to the number 0, and one bit would then convey information, in some sense, about a volume of space the size of our visible universe.

This represents the extreme lower extreme of detail, represented by one bit and the values assigned to its two possible states. How many bits, then, would be required to describe a universe at something approaching the extreme upper extreme of detail? To begin, let us assign to the unitary distance between the four equidistant points that define a universe the value 1 light year. How many bits would be required to locate a point anywhere in a universe the size of our visible universe to an accuracy of one light year?

30

The words "a volume of space" or, in the context of this discussion and topic, "a universe", define a volume of space, and they imply the existence of a geometrical framework consisting of four equidistant points. We could assign to this complex of points some externally derived unit of measure, but the system is self contained, or requires only the singular externally derived unit of measure, 1. We can now locate a fifth point, and any number of additional points, relative to the original four, by specifying, for each, its distance from each of the original four, using a multiple of the number 1.

In some sense lines are completely irrelevant. Points are required to define things, and lines are things, but our ultimate purpose is to derive imagery from our model. Viewed from any angle, lines are infinitely thin, and are thus invisible. Only surfaces are visible. In order to describe things that can manifest visually, we must define surfaces.

A point and a unit of distance can define a sphere, which is one kind of surface. Two points and a unit of distance can define certain other kinds of surfaces. And three points not on a line define a surface. These could be called the fundamentals of things in CAD.

29

Let's, for the purpose of our work in CAD, define a universe as an expanse of space described in a file. A file is a string of bits with a name, so we can ask a computer to access the file named such and such, and it will retrieve the string of bits named such and such, if there is, in its memory, a string of bits with that name. Now we need to discuss how an expanse of space is described using a string of bits.

Let us consider the possibility of two kinds of universes, or expanses of space, empty ones, and ones that are populated by something, or some things. We now must ask, what is a thing? There are several kinds of things, namely, at least to begin, points, lines, surfaces, and solids. The relationship between solids and surfaces and lines is characterized by some interesting ambiguity, but all are defined by points.

Point are things. They are locations. The question is, relative to what?

28

Note, too, that in this model of a universe I may want to include models of things that are rather large, and things that are somewhat small, some which I described, and also of things that are much smaller, and even things that are very small indeed. I have positioned my house and garden in a valley, on a continent, on a planet, orbiting a star, which is in the middle reaches of a galaxy, which is somewhere in the vastness of our observable universe, and in my garden, I might model a tree (of which there are a considerable number), with branches, and maybe branchlets, and on one of them, a leaf, and its surface is divided into little irregular regions by many veins, and within one of those regions can be detected many cells. I might perhaps want to count them, and then I am interested in immersing my mind in the structure of a cell, too. I imagine it as a little sea, which, in fact, moving into it, is not so little at all, but, at any rate, through it there extends a network of something like tendrils, protein structures, and, if we approach one of them very closely, we should see, in it, a hubbub of activity, certain things, moving about.

It's not that I am planning a new career in biomechanics. I just want to emphasize the possibility of a CAD that is infinite.

27

I propose, I posit, one file, containing, if I wish, a universe, or even multiple universes, defining a universe as something rather large. A quick dip into the literature informs me that the visible universe which I inhabit is a sphere with a radius of approximately 13.8 billion light years. Suppose I would like to model, in this file, some stars, and some galaxies, including some which are nearby, and some which are at intermediate distances, and some which are at the very limit of the observable sphere. There is actually no good reason I should have any difficulty with this. In point of fact, I have just done it, albeit at a very low resolution, or, rather, degree of specificity, but I think this illustrates one of my points, which is that a very, very, very large expanse of space can be described, at some level, by a very small amount of data.

I do find it interesting to note the vivid imagery which floats before my mind's eye when I construct a model of this sort, for it is a kind of model. One of the problems that must be solved, one way or another, is converting model data into renderings. Our minds, at least, can do it to extreme effect.

26

Perhaps it is a peculiarity of mine, but I am interested in exploring the geometries of my house, and my garden, in CAD, and then I am interested in exploring the geometries of my neighborhood, in a way even more so of my town ... which is in a valley, whose geometries I would like to explore, which is part of a system of rivers and mountains, whose geometries I would like to explore, all in CAD. Indeed, all of these are parts of a continent of rivers and mountains, and, for whatever reason - it's just a spontaneous impulse of my mind ... or you could call it ambition - I would like to explore in CAD. You can see where this is going. I would like to explore the planet in CAD.

There is really nothing strange about that. What's strange is that I feel it would be best if I were building this model, thus far encompassing a planet, myself, and what is even more strange is that I don't believe what I'm told, and will be told, that I am being unrealistic. This is despite the fact that I am somewhat ordinary, that, you could say, I am not a programmer.

25

It may well be that I will want to start, in CAD, by modeling assorted small object, or relatively small objects, for which existing products are nominally well suited. But I assert it is not intuitive to store models of small objects as collections of files, such that, if I want to work with one of those objects, I access its file, and if I want to work with another of them, I access its file, and that is that. I assert that it would be more intuitive if I modeled a workshop, and warehouse, and stored my models of assorted small objects in them.

The space described by my model begins to expand.

cad

Although it's somewhat absurd, the reason I'm reluctant to try existing free CAD offerings is, at least in part, because they are not explicitly infinite. My sense is that I'm going to run up against limits, almost immediately, and I'm going to spend a lot of time dealing with those limits, which I'm reluctant to do. My sense is I'm likely to not get very far because of those limits. I know people get places with CAD, but my sense is they can only do so if they have unusual faculties, and that the key to building a CAD which is accessible to most people, and not just a few people, is to build one that is unlimited. I say this is in fact not hopelessly utopian.

23

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/28/comment_sections_are_brilliant_and_extremely_relevant_christy_wampole_on_the_awfulness_of_facebook_the_utility_of_think_pieces_and_why_you_might_be_reading_the_internet_all_wrong/

22

Next thing I'm stumbling into, Sun Tsu and the art of war from The History Channel. And an ad for Web Design Scottsdale Yogin Patel! Well done! Anyway, for power, I suppose we could watch this again and again. Here's a marine defending or right to smoke pot. YouTubes like this are amazing. I'm so impressed.

... people building garbage - garbage homes, people storage towers - and they are very proud - what is the purpose of policy? what would happen to the people if they were not watched over by shepherds? the most optimistic policy ideas I'm hearing are infrastructure investment, but in some way that sounds too abstract, and what Bernie Sanders says, education for all and creating jobs for our youth.

Well, that was not very uplifting, but silver is down, and there's a prominent top in the 100 year chart, which means, according to my hypothesis, that we know what to sell it for, roughly speaking ... $100. I'll say this: buying and selling stocks seems more straight-forward.

21

hacking (business logic).it happens ... wandering into disaster video ... man against physics ... systems failure ... cheating ... endless hours of fun ... don't disagree ... it sais something about, well, life ... But, seriously, what are legitimate ways to make money? ... ... ... Quite frankly, it's hopeless. We do what we can, and appreciate our blessings. "Everything a human being could want to have ..." He is talking about the satisfaction of getting a job done. A plan is hatching in my mind. It's exciting.

This was a surprisingly enjoyable YouTube about "freak waves, the monsters of the sea". More of a real problem than people think, it's a problem science and engineering are working on.

20

Can't help it. If a pattern interests, I have to make a note. psun which is pretty big, slightly fun, precarious, and plummeting. Such a plummet! Do they recover after something like this?

19

Tut tut, they say, you never work a day. Undesirables. Well and you are not a lot of fun. I was just minding my own business and suddenly there you were looking down your nose at me. But it's true, if you see someone enjoying a simple pleasure, who ought to be slaving (no suit, sneakers), it makes you nervous. Production might stall. Besides, your bulldog is a very smooth liar. That reminds me, will I ever find my PaQua instructions?

For one thing, brothers and sisters, our enemies are tribalistic. Let us join them. Gather y'all together, now, and let's be productive ourselves. Mind you, I don't like going out, myself. Well, I'm leaving off with number 430. I simply don't have enough canyon bottoms to say anything conclusively, or even provisionally.

instructions

The blog is set to display only one post at a time. It divides naturally into small books or stories, which develop - this is dictated by the nature of the blogging tool - in a kind of reverse order. First is last, last is first. Thus I can refer you to the first page of a story, such as Soap, and you would then use the "later posts" link at post bottom to move from page to page. Applying contrarian Web design principles, an attempt is made to fit the entire post on the screen, and thus, to dispense with scrolling, but, if, when the post loads, the all-important "later posts" button is not already visible, you could use Ctrl and - (browser zoom) to bring it onto the screen (or you could just scroll down, I suppose).

17

Simplicity. Wood and metal. Choose aesthetic perfection.

16

15

fill a jar with water, let it dissolve overnight, and you've got an odd but somehow incredible dish liquid ... plastic free.

14

Two sets of jars, there, so I have one set to use until I get around to grating another bar. If you'd like, buy 'em from me.

13

12

11

10

9

8

soap

I finally focused and got the soap grated.

6

Browsing Newsweek (still don't know what to make of it ... I thought they went all digital, but it sais there's a print edition), something about the continuing collapse of prices on the Chinese exchange ... lists CSI300 and SSEC indices, and I want to look them up, but I need to close something, such as this APT chart. As I suspected, this pull-back in China is certainly nothing to worry about. It's not that some huge rally is about to ensue ... more like years of work under 6000, but, still, near term, I'm inclined to like it. Read an interesting report somewhere to the effect that the stock market doesn't play as active a role in China as it does elsewhere, and it has appreciated at quite a leisurely pace even as the economy has rapidly expanded, although there has been a policy driven rally in stocks recently.

5

I really need to close some tabs. Just for starters, Policy Network is a very snazzy progressive hub from England, and I think I got there via The Center for American Progress where I began reading about profit sharing. What am I supposed to think about Newsweek after reading this? Obama makes progress on the deficit, and you slam him for not fully achieving his own targets? It's completely arbitrary and you are, well, fundamentally dishonest. That's my opinion. Why are you so concerned about the deficit? I suspect and ulterior motive.

4

I don't think these geniuses, Web Gem Creators, really realize they're being so obstinate. Somehow it's like they're blinded by their own genius, and can't see past it, past the fantastic thing they're doing, to the next thing. But they're also probably very suspicious of anyone who wants to collect their precious creations. Seems to me that's kind of dumb. The value of a Gem to its creator is embedded in the gem. It's the ad content associated with the article the Gem links to. If you give away the Gem, to a collector - just some Joe out there on the Web - you do retain ownership of that "property" embedded in it. Collectors will only help you, to spread your assets around, where they can benefit you most.

3

Here's what I desperately want to do: I want to collect Web Gems. But this would require the cooperation of the geniuses who create them. Or maybe some of the geniuses out there could build tools for collecting them. Seems to me the geniuses are kind of mean. For instance, they'll sneer at an idea from an imbecile like me. And they'll show me gems, and then snatch them away again. "You want to collect my gems? Think again."

2

There's this thing on the Web that I'll call gems, where there's a headline with a picture, or a frame of some sort with a headline in it, and then there'll be a whole page of gems, or a page with a bunch of gems around an article, that kind of thing. I'm calling these things gems because they're so valuable. The true masters of the Web are the people creating them. But I'm sort of despairing.

1

Bernie in Alabama with Jesse on MJ at RawStory. Huh. Pretty cool to add a link in my ongoing search for the best news sources. And this one came from Bernie himself. His site is pretty cool itself. I probably ought to go and do a little grating. Wonder if I'll finish the whole bar today. I'm so fucking lazy. Nothing for it, I have to get all these headlines from today's RawStory.

Fail.