SciFi Movie Gadgets

I'm kind of a geek.  I've been interested in computers since the 386 microprocessor has been out and I even have a "post PC" device or two.  I don't think I'm addicted to gadgets. I don't need the newest iPad or Galaxy tablet to date, but I think I have enough of an interest in techy gadgets that the reality of owning them has ruined my perception of their role in SciFfi movies.

Let's face it, the high tech stuff we see on the screens are cool. But in my opinion, even if those worlds had a semblance of reality to them, big corporations (whose existence seem ignored in these movies) would be the ones bringing these gadgets to market. As with any big corporation, if there's money to be made they will find a way to do it - then they would have the cash to plow into R&D and develop really cool new things like Lightsaber2 or Holodeck Vista.

So as I watch these big budget, special effects laden, flicks, my mind wanders and I often wonder if there's an untold "reality" of owning these techy gadgets.

The Lightsaber.
Let's take the Lightsaber from Star Wars as an example. As a kid I walked out of the movie house with an adrenaline rush (maybe a bit of a sugar rush too); completely fascinated with the Lightsaber. It was awesome. My mom had to pull me close to her side so I wouldn't bump someone while I swung my hands in a sword-like motion and impersonating the Lightsaber sound.  But as an adult I think that it's another gadget to show off to other Jedi - why else would it be available in different colors? Of course, as with any other gadgets, they're bought and sold.  I'm sure the Empire or the Alliance got a group rate for Lightsabers just like companies get a group rate for cell phones.  And as with cell phones, the Lightsaber rep had to sell them on saber-care ... because Lightsabers look awesome but they never tell you that the light cores in these things burn out quickly; that the battery isn't easily accessible and need to be replaced by the company.

The Holodeck and Transporter
Never been a Star Trek fan, but these were two legendary gadgets that just about anyone would want - one that could simulate environments and one that could send you places without having to check baggage.  Of course the one thing they don't tell you is that the Holodeck requires regular updates. You pay a one time fee for the current version, but if you don't download the updates regularly ads start to come up.  I hear it kind of sucks that an ad for vulcansmeet.com pops up when you're in the middle of an intense combat simulation.

The Transporter on the other hand is probably subscription based. If have to wonder if there are limits in the amount of matter that can be transferred.  Based on today's data plans I would think there would be. Also, if you go over that monthly amount, they probably charge you 39.95 space bucks for each additional Kilogram.  When the transporter was first released they probably offered "Unlimited Matter" plans.  But as the popularity began to grow and their networks stressed they had to throttle those users who were grandfathered into those contracts.  Of course they probably got a lot of complaints because transporting your feet is quick enough, but your thighs just take forever - and if you only have a few seconds to act before some Klingon is about to d'k tahg you, getting throttled can be a bit of an inconvenience.

I can only imagine how the technology would really evolve. As we get closer to that "galaxy far, far away" would the fiction envisioned match the reality of the time.  I won't be around to see it, but at least I can dream about their frustrations.

Read More

My New Year's Resolutions

"I found that if you have a goal, that you might not reach it. But if you don't have one, then you are never disappointed. And, I gotta tell ya - it feels phenomenal"

-"Peter La Fleur"  from Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story

At the end of every year I like to organize my desk because I like to start off the new one with it clean and in order.  I rationalize that if it starts off neat and organized it'll end the year neat and organized.  Luckily, it usually does.

Like many I used to begin the year with a list of resolutions. You know, that list of positive changes you swear you'll do to lose weight, reach for accomplishments, or turn your life around:

• Quit Smoking & Start Jogging


• Learn to play the clarinet


• Stop playing Xbox all day and get a job

When I set goals like this for myself, I usually fall short and wind up sulking for much longer than I should.  I remember my 2003 resolution was to quit smoking and start exercising. That wasn't successful so I spent the next two years remaking the resolution and feeling sorry for myself that I couldn't do it. Of course when I felt sorry for myself, I'd light up a cigarette.  I finally kicked the habit some time in 2006; coincidentally when I had given up trying to quit up smoking.

I realized that maybe it's not about striving for sweeping positive life changes. But rather perhaps listing negative actions on the New Year's resolution list. Because when it ultimately falls short the actual outcomes are much more positive. I've done this every year since 2006 and I find that I don't brood over unachieved goals.

So, this New Year's resolutions will be:

• Restart smoking


• Drink Heavily


• Investing all hard earned savings in lottery tickets.


• Eat more fried foods.


• Put on 30 more lbs of pure fat.


• Watch 3 more hours of Game Show network and 2 more hours of Cartoon Network per day

I think it's doable. But, if don't reach them I'm certainly not going to sulk. I'll have to see come December 31, 2012.

Read More

Christmas - What is "Good"?

It's Christmas time again. While doing my holiday shopping I've been finding myself eavesdropping on the conversations around me.  It's not like I've been purposefully doing it; I just find it very difficult to not listen when you're elbow to elbow in the checkout line of Toys "R" Us. 

I've noticed parents telling their kids that Santa will bring them presents if they are "good."  I don't disagree with this idea. After all, how long do we have to manipulate the children into eating their vegetables and being quiet during a movie with the promises of a fictitious being bringing presents.

So ... what exactly is "good" ?

I know this isn't a new thought. Rabbi Harold Kushner wrote about this topic in his book "How Good Do We Have To Be."  But that related to something more profound and spiritual. I'm talkin' about being commercially "good" and how it relates to the promise of presents from a bearded fat guy.  So I have to wonder …

The Santa defined "good" seems be an idea defined and perpetuated by parents. Consequently, "good" seems to have a mercurial quality.  For the most part it seems to mean being well-behaved and brushing your teeth every night.   Though, some parents add the responsibility of having A's on your report cards.  But what if some kids (like me back in the day) were just incapable of earning an A. Sure she’s smarter, but would that make my sister more "good" than me?  … And is the quality of my presents reflected in this parental “good” scale?  It would kind of suck that this is the best possible “good” I can deliver and I get a new sweater instead of that Atari 2600 game I wanted.

What if children are rated on an individual good scale rather than one big measurement system.   I may not be able to deliver more than straight B’s on my report card, but I could get tremendous amounts of praise during piano recitals. I would imagine those kind of accomplishments should be factored in.

On the other end of the scale, what if this is a family of super villains.  Consider that Harley Quinn and The Joker had a little super villain kids.   One of the kids hatches a plan that wounds one of the little Batkids (not critically though – just a skinned knee) on the Gotham City Public School playground.  After getting called into the principal’s office the Batkid is the one who gets suspended.  You would have to think that Harley and Joker would think good of their kid and tell them that Santa would be bringing them a Tyco Battery operated Joker Van or something.

This Christmas season I find myself reflecting upon past Christmases and gifts that I’ve received over the years.  For the most part, I think I was good … Santa never seemed to disappoint. I may not have been the ideal kid; and Santa probably should’ve considered me bad some years.   As Christmas day draws closer perhaps “good” doesn’t refer to how well-behaved one is, but maybe … just maybe … how “good” the economy is.

Read More

Rock Stars: Sex, Drugs, Rock ‘n’ Roll … and Benefits?

I can recall from my teenage years being enamored with the idea of being a rock star.  I idolized these guys; partly because they seemed to live sex, drugs, and rock ‘n’ roll.  I used to see them in magazines like Rip, Metal Edge, Circus, and Hit Parader.  I was jealous. These people got to play music every day, gain the attention of female fans, drive fast cars, reside in high places, and lived what seemed to be a nonstop party.

Now, close to 20 years later my perception has changed.  Don’t get me wrong, if I could drop everything today and be able to play music tomorrow I would certainly do it.  The difference now is that it’s for a general love of music.  The genre wouldn’t matter, but I would need to be able to make a decent living and have adequate health coverage.   What drew me into wanting to be a rock star decades ago is not what would draw me into being a musician today.

As I grew older; a sobering, harsh, and daydream shattering reality that bands are companies made itself more apparent. Like PepsiCo or Microsoft or Georgia Pacific, bands have a product to sell in a marketplace of consumers. While I have no work experience in this industry, I started to perceive that they’re worried about branding and image; are concerned about numbers (consumer products sales, record sales, ticket sales, etc.); or on the lookout for anything that could threaten demand for their sound.

Recently, I’ve broken out some of the old Dream Theater CD’s and have almost forgotten that the Glass Prison was one of twelve musical pieces about their drummer’s, Mike Portnoy, experience with alcoholism.  Over the past few weeks, I’ve noticed some rehab or drug use news. Bon Jovi noted that, Richie Sambora will be entering rehab and Steven Tyler announced that he and Joe Perry did drugs as recently as 2008 despite having been clean for years.

So I have to wonder …

When a big name band recruiting is someone, do they have a benefits package that they tout?  Do these guys get full medical and dental coverage?  Would the band’s medical plan then cover chemical addiction and/or counseling?  Maybe rockers’ are considered high risk because of their exposure to sex, drugs, and rock ‘n’ roll.  If this is the case, perhaps coverage doesn’t extend to S.T.D treatments or chemical dependency; or at the very least, maybe rock stars pay higher premiums … I mean, don’t insurance rates increase if one’s a smoker?

What about other benefits?

Lately, I’ve been watching The Spirit Carries On; the reality TV webisodes of Dream Theater auditioning new drummers. After the audition, the band sat down and proceeded to interview the drummers.  When they were chatting, I didn’t hear any discussions about how many weeks of paid vacation the drummer would get or any mentioning of a generous 401(k)?   What about short and long term disability – why wasn’t that part of the discussion?

I would imagine that musical bands actually do have benefits; but a wide-eyed, awestruck, 15 year old drummer who idolizes these people, probably doesn’t care about full medical or dental.  After all, a 401(k) with generous employer contributions probably isn’t the reason for them wanting to become a rock star – it certainly wasn’t for me.

Then again, maybe the sex, drugs, and rock ‘n’ roll lifestyle is the only benefit really offered – it’s all I’ve ever really seen in those metal magazines as a kid.

Read More