Farewell to Geocities



So I've recently heard the news that Yahoo! (yes the exclamation is part of the name) has decided to close down GeoCities. For those who don't know GeoCities was one of the first websites that allowed anyone to build a site and host if for free in subdirectory of their domain... basically you they gave you a site of your own to play with.

Back in the day when hotmail wasn't owned by Microsoft and thus only a quarter evil, yes GeoCities was a place for anyone who wanted their little section of the web to show to the world what little skill in web design they really had.

Yes I was once one of those who squatted some space on the web with my poorly designed and rarely updated site, though I actually wrote rants... ah those were the days. Angrily writing on a topic of which caught my attention, not caring if it made sense or right or wrong... just verbally spilling bile onto a forgotten corner of the interweb.

Surprisingly enough the site is still there, with nary a visitor in god knows how long. Still it was kind of nostalgic to read a few of my first ventures into writing things publicly available that no one would ever read... hehe... he.

Funnily enough the first Rant I posted was never finished, a point that doesn't go anywhere... perhaps a metaphor for my life in general... I really have to stop setting up these self directed jokes, even against myself I can't resist taking pot shots. Anyway it is kind of sad to see the old site go down, though now there are a lot more options for people to build sites, blogger (of course) wordpress, Myspace, and with Facebook why even bother building a personal website?

It is also neat to look at my style writing and notice a few subtle changes, my vocabulary has improved slightly and my tone is more even and considered instead of the angry ravings that constitute a 'rant'.

Though for old times sake I think I'll let the anger out a bit for my next entry and get back to a good ol'fashion written rage against the world. I even have a title picked out, "The smell of Jasmine and Shit... yes Shit"

A different way of looking at things....


They say news is a matter of opinion (I am beginning to think 'they say' is an overused term to gloss over the fact that there really isn't any concrete information), news is basically any event or action that has or will take place. What people consider news is very dependent on the person, for example some people may be interested in the latest sports score, others may want up to date financial news from the movers and shakers in the business world, and still others may only be interested in what their grandchildren have been doing.

In our modern society the importance of news is decided by a few factors:
1) to what extent will it impact the audience of the news
2) interest of the audience in certain news
3) standard or limitations to publishing news

Of course I'm oversimplifying it a tad but bear with me, now more often that not news in factor 1 is not of interest to people while factor 2 isn't really important to the lives of the audience beyond the superficial.
Now as well a lot of news in that is interpreted to make it as appealing to the audience as possible - or as it is more commonly known "sensationalising" news stories for popularity. It doesn't just fall into the realm of entertainment news, the major 'trusted' news networks are just as bad. The 'venerable' CNN in the USA has been considered the most 'fair and balanced' news channel by the general public. Unfortunately that is a poor standard, let's give a quick example, there recently was a story about North Korea, take a look at the headline from Reuters and compare it to the CNN headline for the same story (they link to the stories which I recommend reading).

Reuters - North Korea seeks talks with South but warns on sanction

CNN - North Korea: Sanctions a declaration of war

It gets worse if you do read the actual stories that were online, the CNN story makes no mention of the talks with South Korea but instead focuses on the threat North Korea and their missile program represent.

If you break down the story, only the first paragraph is actually news, the rest of the article is opinion and history provided to give a certain impression. All too often I see this type of reporting where the actual content can be summed up in a few lines while the rest is speculation and propoganda disguised as factual information.

It isn't really CNN's fault though... if you had a choice between the two headlines which would you click on?
News providers are tied to sponsorship and viewer count, they walk a fine line between journalistic integrity and meeting the bottom line. The sad truth is that no news source can really be trusted, if one wants a real picture of what is happening in the world you must take as many different perspectives as possible and the truth will fall somewhere in the middle of that.

Though how many people have the time for that anymore? Many don't even bother reading from one source of news, forget checking different and altering view points of news. It isn't necessarily a bad thing, until these same people decide the must have an opinion about the world or (heaven forbid) get actual power and decide to make policies based on incomplete and often faulty information.

What is even more frightening is people who have strong convictions based on absolutely no information at all... I won't say which group many of such people belong to, but I'm sure many can hazard a guess.

Though perhaps as with beauty, the value of news is just in the eye of the beholder... and how news will effect the way they think and act.

Hmm, perhaps it is all meaningless information that is consumed and passed out like ... ugh I can't finish that analogy.
I guess more important than having information is what one does with it, if someone has a perfect view of everthing going on in the world but just goes about their daily life... how is it different than someone who doesn't know anything about the world? So perhaps one has to take information with a view of how to change the world or at the very least share their view with others.

Not Normal



I've always had an aversion to normalacy... perhaps that is not the right phrase. I've always taken refuge in the label of being abnormal, different than the usual. Perhaps it is growing up considering myself (narcsisstically) unusual or not quite the same as people around me, in part that is true though one has to recognize that everyone is slightly different than the other.
I don't think of myself as unique or special just something that doesn't seem to productively fit in the mechanisms of the world that comprise what we call society.
I am able to understand or connect to different people and expereince... but never feel a part of them, or it does not quite resonate as what I see myself as - only parts. I keep having this feeling that I have all these functions but no direction, like an all purpose tool that may get many tasks done if used but is not really vital for any specific job.

I think what annoys me the most is that people like definitions or labels to identify what they are - in both positive and negative ways. Take religion for example (ah what a lovely can of worms), now I've come to a bit of an odd view that all religions are equally valid with both good and not-so good facets. They are all different ways of interpreting the world and they are all trying to get people to live in a moral and beneficial way to society or more specifically the ideals of the immediate community. Given the opportunity I enjoy learning more about religious beliefs, the only time I stop is when someone has the gall to say that there is only one path and all others are false.
Hmm, I'll stop before I dig too deep a hole for myself, anyway getting back to my original point is that people will often ask what my religion is and I have a hard time answering them. If I say I don't really belong to a religion they assume I'm an atheist - which isn't accurate. Conversely saying that I'm a student of any religion that promotes good qualities leads to puzzling looks and odd questions.
So to avoid the matter entirely I just say I was raised Roman Catholic and that seems to satisfy most people.
Still I dislike being forced into such a narrow viewpoint, not that I have anything against Catholicism of course.

Hmm, perhaps I'll call it a day as I have no idea how to finish this post without digging a deeper hole for myself :)