<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>Digitally Mastered</title>
      <link>http://www.thumannator.com/</link>
      <description>Various mathematical and not so mathematical thoughts...</description>
      <language>en</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2011</copyright>
      <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:46:23 -0600</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

      
      <item>
         <title>No Way</title>
         <description><![CDATA[This is the "future" of TV watching?
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><img alt="3dglasses.jpg" src="http://www.thumannator.com/3dglasses.jpg" width="280" height="295" class="mt-image-none" style="" /></span>
I think not.]]></description>
         <link>http://www.thumannator.com/2010/03/no_way.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.thumannator.com/2010/03/no_way.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:46:23 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>How Computers Think</title>
         <description><![CDATA[
A good reminder of what happens when we become careless with technology.  I needed to convert temperature from degrees Celsius to degrees Fahrenheit.  Out comes the trusty TI-85 calculator.  Bring up the conversion menu, and into the temperature subsection.  I entered my conversion:

-30 C > F

and get back -86.  Almost subconsciously, this answer struck me as incorrect.  A sanity check with a co-worker confirmed my suspicion that it was indeed incorrect.  What was going on?  After pondering, I tried the conversion again in a slightly different manner:

(-30) C > F

this time getting back -22.  A quick check using the conversion formula itself:

T<sub>F</sub>=<sup>9</sup>&frasl;<sub>5</sub>*T<sub>C</sub>+32

verified the answer:

T<sub>F</sub>=<sup>9</sup>&frasl;<sub>5</sub>*(-30)+32=-22

So what happened?  It turns out that in the first attempt, my trusty TI was really doing this:

-1*(30 C > F)

TI should warn users about this.  Maybe they do.  It has been a long time since I opened that user manual.  I wonder how this works on RPN-style calculators?  Or if this behavior is corrected or accounted for on the newer models like the TI-86?]]></description>
         <link>http://www.thumannator.com/2009/12/how_computers_think.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.thumannator.com/2009/12/how_computers_think.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 06:33:42 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Some Funny</title>
         <description><![CDATA[I have been doing awful at making regular posts obviously.  I am going to try to do better, starting today.  Here is something short, but I thought it was pretty funny:

<object width="448" height="272"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/q-RLqLx1iYI&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/q-RLqLx1iYI&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="448" height="272"></embed></object>

Here's another good one:

<object width="448" height="272"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vnOyMSEWNTs&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vnOyMSEWNTs&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="448" height="272"></embed></object>

And, yes, they are both for real.  Thanks to <a href="http://rickandbubba.com">Rick & Bubba</a> for pointing these out.  Enjoy.]]></description>
         <link>http://www.thumannator.com/2009/10/some_funny.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.thumannator.com/2009/10/some_funny.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:21:42 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Just Baffling</title>
         <description>Having never been a waiter, I do not have the insider knowledge needed to answer the following question:

Frequently, when my family and I go out to eat, after the host/hostess has seated us, and the waiter/waitress has taken our beverage orders and returned with our beverages, why does said waiter/waitress ask if we need a few more minutes to decide what to order, and then give us a full 10 or 15 minutes?

I am just curious.</description>
         <link>http://www.thumannator.com/2009/05/just_baffling.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.thumannator.com/2009/05/just_baffling.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 00:49:53 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>They Made It Dumber</title>
         <description>I saw the new Star Trek movie a few days after it opened.  Though I found it entertaining, I came away from watching it certain that something was wrong.  I was unable to put my finger on it.  For this reason, I was reluctant to even call it good.

So, last night I watched it again, determined to figure out what the problem was.  The friends that accompanied me picked up on it in one viewing.  The writers have dumbed down Star Trek.  It was nothing more than almost purely an action flick.  Guns blazing, almost start to finish.  Gone was the science phrases and &quot;techno babble.&quot;  Out of the TV shows, Voyager was the most well known for this.  Other issues with that show aside, the tech-talk always appealed to me.  But, it was completely absent from the new movie.

I guess this was the effort of the writers to draw in people who have never watched Trek before.  I would say it is a pretty decent movie.  I am curious to see what direction the new keepers of the franchise will take.</description>
         <link>http://www.thumannator.com/2009/05/they_made_it_dumber.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.thumannator.com/2009/05/they_made_it_dumber.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Sat, 23 May 2009 18:42:13 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>This Is Our Legacy?</title>
         <description>My family and I recently took our annual vacation.  More on that to come.  On our trip, we used some model of Garmin GPS to help us not get lost (most of the time).  I noticed that the unit occasionally mis-pronounced things.  For example, it told me to turn onto &quot;Old Keene Road.&quot; I suspect that the last &quot;e&quot; in &quot;Keene&quot; is silent, but the unit pronounced it like it had a &quot;y&quot; at the end: &quot;Keeny&quot; or maybe &quot;Keeney.&quot;  There were other instances that I can no longer recall.

I found this sad.  Why?  Suppose one day humans are wiped out by intelligent robots and computers.  We will have left behind robots and computers that do not even know how to pronounce things!

Not that I believe robots and computers will wipe out humans.</description>
         <link>http://www.thumannator.com/2009/05/this_is_our_legacy.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.thumannator.com/2009/05/this_is_our_legacy.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2009 23:08:27 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Update To MT 4.25</title>
         <description><![CDATA[I finished running an update on the site this morning.  I know posts have been infrequent.  I am working to change that.  After all, I recently chose to continue the existence of this site (i.e., paid a healthy chunk of money to preserve my web presence).  I have several ideas <strike>jotted down</strike> typed on virtual sticky notes for new posts.  Time to write has been the tricky part.

The update should be pretty much transparent to my fledgling readership.  I thought for sure this update would break the "look and feel," but thankfully that was not the case.  However, I realize an update might be in order.  I will have to ponder that.

Anyway, stay tuned.  I should have some new posts up soon.]]></description>
         <link>http://www.thumannator.com/2009/04/update_to_mt_425.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.thumannator.com/2009/04/update_to_mt_425.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 23:52:19 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>A Lack Of Famous Quotes</title>
         <description><![CDATA[I know, it has been a long time since I posted.  My apologies!  However, I am certain the world has gotten on just fine without my thoughts on life, the universe, and everything.  A few of my readers have been asking why there has been nothing new on this site lately, so I will try to get back to posting more frequently.

It occurred to me this past week that no one says anything memorable any more.  We seem to remember famous and important persons' many gaffes, but no one says anything good.  At least, that is my perception.  Maybe I have missed a recent, good, inspirational quote.

Thankfully, there are many good ones from days of old.  In light of the continued unconstitutional actions of U.S. lawmakers this week, I thought I would share this one that wandered into my email inbox:

<blockquote>Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made.</blockquote>

Though I enjoy good sausage, I have strong doubts that the "sausage" lawmakers created and passed this week will be a good one.  This quote comes to us from Otto von Bismarck, who I admit I know nothing about other than that he was a German Chancellor.  So, a little disclaimer: I know nothing of Bismarck's character, I just thought it was a good quote.  Of course, we could all learn more <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_von_bismarck">here</a>.  And in my effort to continue to learn more history, and enjoy it, I will soon read that page myself.]]></description>
         <link>http://www.thumannator.com/2009/02/a_lack_of_famous_quotes.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.thumannator.com/2009/02/a_lack_of_famous_quotes.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2009 06:23:00 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Rules For Cell Phone Reviews</title>
         <description><![CDATA[I am in the market for a new cell phone or two.  In the past, I have been careless and bought a phone that just seemed cool and ended up being an expensive piece of junk.  Now when I phone shop, I do thorough reviews and search for any and all information about prospective phone candidates (if I can get the user's manual, which I usually can, that is excellent!).  Ultimately, I rely on reviews by owners.  Both <a href="http://www.amazon.com">Amazon.com</a> and <a href="http://www.phonescoop.com">Phonescoop</a> are really good sources for these reviews.  I just think there should be some rules for reviewers:

1) Reviewers should state their age:  teenagers write very different reviews compared to <strike>grown up kids</strike> adults who write very different reviews compared to <strike>nerds</strike> gadget geeks.  I can usually tell which ones are written by the teenagers because they leave the ubiquitous comment about how fast or slow texting can be accomplished with the reviewed phone.

2) Do not make comments about your service provider's coverage without giving your city.  These comments are pretty much useless without the second bit of information.

3) There are a lot of negative comments out there about how lousy the cameras are on cell phones.  Here, I would suggest not leaving the comment at all.  If you want to take nice pictures, go buy a nice camera.

I think that covers the important points.  Any other suggestions?]]></description>
         <link>http://www.thumannator.com/2008/10/rules_for_cell_phone_reviews.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.thumannator.com/2008/10/rules_for_cell_phone_reviews.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 07:21:51 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>A New Ranger</title>
         <description><![CDATA[That's right, there's a new walker, <strike>Texas Ranger</strike> in town.  When I got home from work today, Malika walked from in front of the fireplace all the way across the room to the couch where I was sitting (about 12 or 13 feet), and then turned around and walked all the way back to the fireplace.  So, Malika is officially walking now.]]></description>
         <link>http://www.thumannator.com/2008/08/a_new_ranger.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.thumannator.com/2008/08/a_new_ranger.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 23:00:00 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Styrofoam Experiment</title>
         <description><![CDATA[The other day, I sat in a Taco Bell munching away at my lunch.  As I had gone by myself and had no one to talk to, I did my very best to avoid making eye contact with other customers.  This led me to stare at my tray a good bit, and as such, I began to take notice of the great mass of paper on my tray.  I had three paper wrappers from three crunchy tacos (I could not get my usual two chalupas and one crunchy taco, standard for my visits to Taco Bell, because the fryer was not working--who knew that part of chalupas were fried?).  If you know me well, you know I do not customarily fall in line with the mainstream environmentalist movement.  It is not because I think it is an unworthy goal, I just think that the "science" behind the man-made global warming does not even follow the scientific method.  And global warming dominates the present day environmentalists' thinking.  However, I do find it somewhat tragic that we order our fast food meals and give little thought to all the paper wrappers, cups, and thin cardboard boxes that we throw in the trash that wind up in landfills and such.  Did God really intend for us to bury our trash in the ground?  Is that being good stewards of the Earth?  I do not have the answer.  I am just as quick as everyone else to throw my fast food trash into the trash bin and move on (when I bring my lunch to work with me, I try to pack it in nothing but reusable containers, not even little baggies which just get thrown away).  But, as I stared at my wrappers, I remembered when McDonald's provided their Big Macs in styrofoam cartons.  McDonald's got dogged pretty hard for this in the 1980s, I believe, which is why those of us brave enough to go to McDonald's even after seeing <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0390521/"><em>Super Size Me</em></a> now get our Big Macs in cardboard cartons.  The argument was that all of those styrofoam cartons do not break down very quickly and would still be present in our land fills something like 100+ years later.

Some 20 years later, I wonder if those styrofoam containers really are still lurking around.  I personally believe that all God created has an amazing ability to recover from injury and contamination: people, animals, and even the Earth itself.  If so, could it be that these styrofoam containers have all broken down?  Is there anyone out there brave enough to dig into a landfill to have a look?  I wonder what would be found.]]></description>
         <link>http://www.thumannator.com/2008/08/styrofoam_experiment.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.thumannator.com/2008/08/styrofoam_experiment.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Sat, 23 Aug 2008 23:45:17 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>New Name</title>
         <description>I think I finally settled on a name for this site.  I had originally used &quot;Chaotically Random Musings,&quot; but dropped that because a surprisingly large number of blogs incorporate &quot;random musings&quot; into their names.

The new name heralds back to a phrase that, to my recollection, came to be in the mid-1990s and was popularized by the return of a bit of pop culture.  I will let my readers try to guess the reference...</description>
         <link>http://www.thumannator.com/2008/07/new_name.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.thumannator.com/2008/07/new_name.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 17:27:12 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Chick-Fil-A vs. Everyone Else</title>
         <description>I had one of McDonald&apos;s new chicken biscuits for breakfast yesterday.  It was gross.  Even a little overcooked.  Such has been my experience at most restaurants.

I was first introduced to the chicken biscuit at Chick-Fil-A and I must say, no other restaurant seems to be able to make these little breakfast treats better than Chick-Fil-A.  Their&apos;s are never overcooked, and tastefully seasoned.  The one from McDonald&apos;s and other places are always bland.

If you do not have a Chick-Fil-A where you live, I pity you.  You&apos;re truly missing out.</description>
         <link>http://www.thumannator.com/2008/06/chickfila_vs_everyone_else.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.thumannator.com/2008/06/chickfila_vs_everyone_else.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 07:27:54 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Little Smile</title>
         <description><![CDATA[It has been a while since I posted.  Life has been extremely busy.  Due to requests, I have been working on some updated picture galleries of Malika.  I am about half done.  So, here is a preview.  This is Malika just being herself.  Sometimes she looks at you with this cute little smile that generally develops into a full 5-toothed grin.

<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image"><img alt="smile.jpg" src="http://www.thumannator.com/images/smile.jpg" width="425" height="640" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;"/></span>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.thumannator.com/2008/06/little_smile.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.thumannator.com/2008/06/little_smile.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2008 06:41:31 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Hopefully, Lesson Learned</title>
         <description>When writing a program, regardless of programming language, one should never use variable names that are identical to functions intrinsic to the programming language of choice.  Such a mistake kept me busy for a while this afternoon.  Just a friendly reminder.</description>
         <link>http://www.thumannator.com/2008/04/hopefully_lesson_learned.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.thumannator.com/2008/04/hopefully_lesson_learned.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 22:49:15 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
   </channel>
</rss>

