NetGear and ATI drivers

There are some hardware companies that can make really good pieces of hardware, but completely ruin any advantage that may give them because they can’t write decent drivers if their lives depended on it. Ok, so there are other companies that can’t figure out how to write Linux drivers for their products. Fine. I don’t like it, but I’ll accept it (and buy other products in the meantime, because I’m in Linux more often than not).

But at least make sure the Windows drivers work!

NetGear and ATI in particular are two “repeat offenders” that I doubt I’ll buy any more hardware from due to the poor quality of their drivers.

Temple University

Well, this is great. A quick search reveals that just about everyone coming out of Temple’s music program is writing atonal, or at best weakly tonal, music, which explains a lot of the pressure I’ve encountered (and resisted) to abandon the concepts of tonality. If I can’t write tonal music, I don’t want to write music at all.

Again, I am getting the feeling that I simply don’t belong in this school. I can’t study algorithms, I can’t study mathematics, and I can’t study tonal music composition. Of course, I could have studied all three at any of the schools I didn’t get into. Unfortunately, apparently only the ivies recognize the value of timeless instruction (more likely they just have enough prestige to get funding in even fields that are not “hot” at the moment). Everyone else just seems to want to chase after fads. The only consolation is that I am interested in biology as well, which is something I can study here for once.

Monmouth opened up possibilities, but all Temple has done is close them thus far.

Originality

Modern classical-style composers seem so focused on carving out an original style for themselves that they tend to leave aesthetics by the wayside. I can’t see the point of this; regardless of how original one’s music is, it will never be heard if people don’t want to listen to it.

I’ve suspected for a while that this is the reason that classical and popular music began to diverge in the early 20th century, smack in the middle of the Modernist period.

Filler

Why do I need to write 2-page (or longer, usually much longer) papers on ideas I can summarize in three words? For example, say I discovered a new Mersenne prime (not something I would waste my time on!) and wanted to publish a paper on it. What would it look like?

Well, the meat of the paper can be summarized in three words: “2^x-1 is prime”. However, you’d get some long treatise on what Mersenne primes are, how they were discovered, the connection with even perfect numbers, the current role of GIMPS, applications to cryptography, and future work (finding even larger primes, duh!) Somewhere about halfway through the paper, I’d mention that I found a new prime using those same three words (only after explaining how I set the software up, conducted the search, etc.) If I wrote another paper up on the same topic, I’d just spit out the same information again, but with different wording.

This is one of the root causes of problems in science today.

Unconscious aptitude is more natural

I’ve already figured out that unconscious aptitude is rarer than focused thought (and thus fortuitous), but not until this point did I realize that it might actually be the innate sort of intelligence!

While walking, I hypothesized that unconscious intelligence, the state I tend to prefer to very focused concentration (except when deeply involved in, say, a particularly fun math proof), is most likely a more natural form of intelligence that most people lose because they are conditioned to specialize (and thus must think – consciously – very hard about very narrow subjects, leaving no time, and eventually little will, for “free” contemplation). After all, most gifted people that I know tended to think that way until they reached college. It follows, then, that I retained my ability to think as I do quite definitely because I was never significantly challenged. That explains why I accomplished my greatest intellectual achievements outside of the context of formal education (with the exception of graduating with the highest GPA in my class, which wasn’t so much an achievement as a reward). The fact that I could achieve such things at such a young age simply served to reinforce the behavior, and thus now I can advance my understanding of many fields in parallel where the others I knew cannot. Their knowledge outside of their specializations ends at whatever proficiency they built it up to at the time they were teenagers, and by the time they revisit it again, it will be too late to master… but mine continues to grow.

Ender's Shadow Series

Did the characters, who had earlier made the novel very entertaining through their subtlety, all suddenly become very stupid by the time Shadow Puppets was released? The novel was disappointingly predictable, and for someone who “is the smartest person in the world with the record to prove it”, some of the mistakes made by Bean (and Peter, for that matter) are painfully predictable.

The same phenomenon occurred with Ender in the later novels of the main “Ender’s Game” series. It’s as if Card’s characters flare out as they age.

On track!

I’ve finally found the point of equilibrium from which I can balance all of my tasks. The key is to look back on past accomplishments and extrapolate to the future, rather than focusing first on the future and attempting to gauge progress based on a perceived (and often wrong) rate of growth.

For someone who has accomplished something extraordinary approximately once every four years since the age of 8, this works well, despite the enormity of my goals.

…And project polymath continues onward.