originally posted march 18, 2000
the shape of things to come
establish.
strengthen.
develop.
transcend.
disrupt.
reinstate.
What do they have in common? They're steps along a cycle that has dogged me
for some time now -- the
w
With that hype behind me, time for some other updates. Discrete math is still thoroughly killing me, although I'll be more than happy to leave that class with a solid C average. As I sit here listening to WRCT's web cast of what appears to be very horrible Russian pop music, and typing out these updates, I really ought to be studying and/or caring about what's coming up in that class. A recent homework assignment claimed the innocent lives of an estimated 25 hours of my time, and I received a somewhat unsatisfying 0 for it because it was Almost But Not Quite There. So much for that.
I've been very intrigued by the response to the web poll -- if you haven't already done so, please share your opinion. I've heard differing opinions from various friends on the subject of whether glasses are a good look for me. One friend advised me to go "without glasses if you wanna pick up chicks, with glasses when you're talking to your Comp. Sci. professor." Any other thoughts? ;)
Lastly, today marks the one-year anniversary of a minor milestone -- the event that most immediately affected my decision to come to Carnegie Mellon, my rejection letter from MIT. As I pulled out the thin letter from my mailbox that day, the best I could hope for was to have been placed on a waiting list, but alas even that wasn't to be. It was one of the low points of 1999 for me personally, but I think CMU's School of Computer Science made a fine second choice. At the Office of Admission, where I work, decisions have been mailed since last week. We often get calls from parents and students eager to know their decisions over the phone, but it's a standard policy not to give them at this time. Only our counselors can give those decisions, and in my opinion that's the best way. Some things shouldn't be revealed over the phone unless the messenger is properly trained for the reaction and questions that follow the official answer. Pardon the comparison, but the makers of HIV home test kits have often received criticism for the fact that an answer is revealed over the phone, albeit by a trained counselor. Despite what people say about the telephone being impersonal, the cadences and intonations of a person's voice can often say more than words possibly could.
To a lesser degree, this can be true of on-line conversation. The major barrier to the general acceptance of chat-style conversations is the fact that they are often not treated with both parties' full attention. On occasion, I'll have AOL Instant Messenger, ICQ, a Zephyr client to chat with my classmates across the internal CMU network, and even an IRC client open simultaneously. All have their little quirks, but the grand unifying factor is that conversations can be preempted without warning. Users are well aware of these facts. If I were conversing with a friend, I wouldn't expect a congenial reaction if I were to just stand up and start talking with someone else while she were telling something to me. In "real-time" virtual conversations, this is perfectly normal. Perhaps the main reason why chatting isn't considered a serious form of conversation and expression is because people don't take it seriously to begin with. One can only wonder whether chatting will become more official and credible as the world continues to progress into the Information Age.
That's all for this month. Time to get back to work.
Back to March 2000, or to the year 2000.
![[weill aspects]](/aspects/small-logo.png){kind=logo}
![[Back to home]](/GLOBE.GIF){kind=small}