Here’s a machine from way back, meaning before even I started interacting with computers, when pixels were green without being environmentally friendly, and they’re exposing today’s kids to it.
While the personification of technology and its unbridled adoration bother me, it’s a funny eye-opener to what might await us with our kids. I hope they eventually get interested in code, not just the apps…
The pictures are up in the usual place, with the usual credentials. And as usual, contact me if you don’t have those credentials.
We’re finalizing our vacation planning and, after the folks we’re meeting settled on a hotel (Hampton Inn), decided to book a room in the same establishment, through the same hotels.com website. I’d forgotten to book yesterday evening, so I booked this morning. Hotels.com was first in German, which confused me because of the room designations, so I switched to the English version, searched for the hotel again, and completed the booking.
And then, as I looked at the confirmation page, with the bright yellow letters stating that I’d booked an unrefundable fare, I realized I’d booked us into the Homewood Suites in the same town. So – at about 6:50 our time, 12:50 a.m. on the East Coast – I called hotels.com. On my first try, I didn’t get the automated stuff (it called the confirmation number “itinerary number”), so I tried again and pushed the number for changing my reservation. I waited out the automated lady until I was told I’d have to expect a wait of 2 minutes.
2 minutes, for once, were a gross overestimation. I’d say 15 seconds, and Joy was on the line. I explained the situation. She put me on hold, called the Homewood night manager, who waived the penalty, and rebooked us for the Hampton Inn. 16 minutes after my original ill-advised booking, we were set for the hotel we wanted.
Needless to say, I’m impressed and grateful that Joy and the night manager chose to make me happy. Thumbs up to both Homewood Suites and Hotels.com for their flexibility! I’m already well ahead of Janet in the “oopsie” budget category…
“Missionnaire là où je suis” was the topic of a recent article in the GBEU “A Propos” magazine, and I’m summarizing the main points as a memory aid.
After reminding us that God created work, is interested in our work (Amos 5:12-15), reigns over our work (and even over market forces or social determinism), and redeems our work (Psalms 145:9, Colossians 1:16-20, Romans 8:19-21, Revelation 21:24-27), the article speaks of two calls to missionary work.
The first is to be involved in the public sphere, serving our society. Referring to the Biblical examples of Joseph, Vivienne (I mean Esther), and Daniel, he points out that all three accepted the reality they lived in with all its ambiguities, taking on foreign names and learning foreign languages; all three worked in a constructive manner within that culture and for their foreign lords; and all three never compromised their integrity and loyalty to God. We are also called to pray for our society, our authorities (1 Timothy 2:1-4), and to seek to prosper our society and in our society. Finally, we are called to be good and conscientious workers (1 Thessalonians 4:11-12).
The second call is to confront the public sphere. We are called to be different – salt and light – called to resist idolatry (the biggest challenge being to even recognize our cultural idols), and called to suffer. The latter follows simply from following Jesus, not Caesar or Mammon, and challenges us by its inverse conclusion: If I’m not suffering, am I really resisting idolatry?
The theme this time appears to be computer games.
Joseph reads from the Little Gingerbread Boy, Vivienne does likewise, Daniel crawls through the fabric tunnel, Joseph plays Plus Attack, Vivienne tries her hand at computer games, Vivienne plays Minus Attack, Daniel attacks the camera, Vivienne withholds her best “All right” imitation, Joseph recites parts of the Periodic Table, Joseph and Vivienne re-enact TimezAttack, Joseph decodes Grandma’s letter (8 minutes), Joseph finished Plus Attack, Vivienne puts math questions to Bappe, Daniel plays peekaboo, Joseph and Vivienne have fun twisting with the dowel swing, again and again.
They’re in the usual place, with the usual credentials. If you like lots of pictures of our kids, the usual place is the place to be.
More Kids’n’Vids: Daniel’s fantastic wahble, Bonus wahbling, Chocolate bunnies for Joseph and Vivienne, Easter egg hunt, Closing the shutters, Joseph and Vivienne reading, Tired Daniel, Soap bubbles, All the action’s in the background, Roman numerals, Something of a trio, Project time (spoiler alert: do not watch before May 9th).
Happy viewing!
You know the people: it’s green, and they don’t move; they suddenly slow down to turn without using their blinker; they pass you, only to slow to a lower speed than yours; they slow down more than necessary for curves and crawl around roundabouts; they tailgate you and flash their highbeams even though you’re doing five above the limit. You know the people. And you might have wondered: why are there so many below average drivers? Not necessarily dangerous drivers, but drivers who don’t think ahead, and don’t consider others, for all you can tell.
Why, indeed? I don’t think I ever gave it much thought until I applied my, ahem, clearly above-average driving skills to looking like a below-average driver. After a car ride that involved my wallet on the roof and other similar incidents or near incidents, it’s become painfully, odoriferously clear that our children do not deal well with curves unless they’re asleep. The 90-minute drive to another family with young kids in particular without fail involves whining, stopping, and fresh air. So this time we planned it with stops for fresh air, and plenty time for the drive. And as I drove little old lady style around a bend, I realized that if the folks behind me were anything like my younger, childless self, they’d be muttering under their breaths about how some people just don’t know how to handle a car.
My younger self, for whatever reason, rarely if ever came up with another reason for slow driving than incompetence. Kids close to throwing up? Nope. Spouse afraid of the drop-off? Nope. Distracted by a fight in the car or a fight before the drive? Petrified because of a recent accident? Weary and looking for a hotel after a long drive? Nope, nope, nope. Clearly below-average drivers, the lot of them. Mutter mutter puddlebrains.
So, really, the reason most everyone else is a below average driver lies with me and my lack of imagination. It’s simply easier to assume incompetence than to exercise my imagination to come up with a reason for that strange driving. Without imagination, no empathy; without empathy, mutter mutter puddlebrains. With my imagination engaged, on the other hand, empathy comes easily.
It scares me to see how easily I default into that assumption of incompetence, how lazy my imagination is. It scares me even more to see how widespread a problem it is in the political arena. We avoid the work of empathizing and instead assume ignorance and deploy sarcasm. Witness the discussion around Brendan Eich’s resignation. Witness, also, how roughly the same people who support the NSA gathering plenty of intelligence on US residents vehemently oppose intelligence gathering in connection with gun control, and conversely those that support gun control loudly protest the government listening to our phone calls. Not only do they fail to see the tension between the positions they themselves hold, but they utterly fail to see how the people they denigrate actually share some of their most pressing concerns – albeit in the context of another political question.
I’m convinced that the prescription for both road rage and political rage is empathy, and I think I’ll start by giving my imagination workouts every time I’m tempted by an apparently lousy driver to mutter mutter puddlebrains. With any luck, that’ll also make me a calmer, better driver myself.
Any other ideas on how to slowly build up the imagination and empathy muscles?
As an Easter gift to our children’s grandparents, we offer a load of photos at the usual site with the usual credentials and a few videos (without a cherry on top).
Joseph and Vivienne’s pretend prayer, Vivienne “calling” Grossmutti, Vivienne presenting Mommy’s birthday gift, Joseph singing for Daniel, Trebly happy birthday, Joseph writing Chinese numbers, Joseph tracing letters, and Daniel on the recorder.
A while back I was impressed by a few people supporting gay rights. When Westboro Baptist decided to picket a concert shortly after their leader’s death, some people staged a counter-protest with a sign saying “Sorry for your loss.” I’m not sure the Westboro folks noticed the burning coals on their heads (thick skulls, perhaps), but lots of people like me took notice.
And I thought, “Class act, folks. What a great way to support your cause.” They took the high road, and I think I’m not the only one to be impressed. Much better than suing bakers and florists for not providing wedding services, that’s for sure.
Then Mozilla urges its CEO to step down because he didn’t (doesn’t isn’t proven, though likely) agree with gay marriage and gave money to support that opinion politically. Thud – we’re back at ground level.
I get that OkCupid pushed the campaign to unseat Mr. Eich: it makes perfect marketing sense. Somebody in their PR department realized that OkCupid could look both daring and righteous at very little risk and very little cost, and impress a valuable constituency in the process. Well played, Cupid – what’s one person’s job when the payoff is viral publicity?
I don’t get that individuals within Mozilla pushed for it. Did he ever act out of line with company policy? Would he have made a capable CEO? It seems the answers are “no” and “yes” – which makes me think a wise employee would have wanted Eich in that position, whether he agreed with him or not.
What I get, but deplore most of all, is that all reactions to this situation are either drenched in sarcasm or smugness. “Let’s go purge all the others that supported Prop. 8!” “Nobody can be a good CEO and hold Eich’s opinion on gay marriage.” “Conservatives are so hypocritical.” “Liberals are so hypocritical.”
Nobody seems to address the question that gives me pause: who benefits from this (aside from OkCupid, of course)? Will I get a better browser, now that Eich has stepped down? Will homosexual employees do better at Mozilla, now that Eich has stepped down? Have gay rights advanced, now that Eich has stepped down? Has the public perception of homosexuals and their supporters improved, now that Eich has stepped down? Has understanding of the other side been furthered, now that Eich has stepped down?
I see nobody gaining appreciably from the situation. My impression is that Mozilla lost an eminently qualified man, and the gay community lost a chance to be magnanimous. How unfortunate.