Posts Tagged ‘give it your all’

what do you love, what drives you?

Sunday, October 11th, 2009

I’ve had two separate people ask me (and a room full of other people) a pretty simple, straightforward question: “What are you passionate about?” The first was @thingles , and the second was Andrew Sims, from @DOOMTREE .

The questions itself is pretty simple. Everyone has a passion, right? Everyone has at least something that they care about. But it raises a good point, and as @thingles said (paraphrased), “it throws people off guard when you ask them that”.It got me thinking, what am I passionate about?

I know things that make me act passionately, things like social justice issues, gay marriage, religion, technological ethics, and I’m sure some other list of thigns that I’m not aware of. So, I act passionately about things, but is that really what passion is?

For instance, things like abortion rights, if I get started, I can come across to others as very passionate. While I think abortion rights are very important, I don’t do anything about it, except vote. While I think the environment is very, very important, I’m not a member of Greenpeace (or other organizations working to further environmentalism). So how do we define passion? Is it a belief? Is it acting on a belief?

If passion is acting on a belief, does having a belief but not acting on it make someone ambivalent, or lazy? And if just having a belief is passion, am I incredibly passionate about everything in my life?

At this point, the definition of passion is just semantics, and there’s an argument to be made that passion (as a belief) doesn’t unless you act on it, just as there’s an argument to be made that nothing matters unless it’s affecting something, and that a system of beliefs without action is useless, let alone passion. But I don’t want to go there.

So, the question remains unanswered, what am I passionate about? I’m a Computer Science and Spanish double major, is that my passion? No, probably not. I’ve known forever that I wanted to study computers, but that’s just becaue they make sense to me.

Does passion mean what “clicks” with you? Is passion manifested in music? Or is passion manifested in one’s significant other? How can passion be related to another human? Doesn’t that mean we’d be entirely dependent on the other?

I’m inclined to think passion is “what truly matters” to someone, something that someone would really, absolutely, have a difficult time living without. If that’s the case, passion becomes much more personal. I would say, if that’s the case, I’m not passionate about all the things listed above.

“What are you passionate about?” My answer, @thingles and @DOOMTREE , is that I’m passionate about humans, and I’m passionate about life. I’m passioante about the creation that comes out of being human, and I’m passionate about the interactions and lack thereof that every person goes through. I’m passionate about being, and about doing, and about being able to continue to be and do.

you fake it ’till you make it, that’s the story of your life

Wednesday, September 9th, 2009

I really need to stop using song lyrics as post titles. Like, they’re fitting, but seriously, kinda cliche.

The school year has started again, and droves of new freshman are back on the $small_school campus, as well as most of the people who were here last year. Some of the freshmen probably think they know what they want to study, many probably don’t. Of those that do, a good portion will probably change their mind in their (approximately) 4 years here at $small_school. This is all ok, that’s part of what college is, right? That’s what we’re told, or at least, that’s what it felt like I was told for the 13 years I spend in the public (and quasi-private, but that’s another story) school system.

We’re told from a very young age that school is preparing us for life. In high school (or at least my high school, others might’ve been different), we were told that by the end of our four years there, we would be prepared for college, work, military, or whatever we wanted to do with our lives. I knew about halfway through high school that I wanted to study one of my current majors. People tell me I’m one of the lucky ones that knew what they wanted to “do” coming in. Now, did that mean I knew what I wanted my job to be for the rest of my life? Of course not, that would be silly.

Is it so silly to assume that I’ll know what I want to do, given that I’ve been told for a long time that I’m being “prepared for life”? Is it silly to think that after spending 13 years studying general subjects, and at least another 4 on a more specified subject area that I’ll have a goal of what I want to do with all this education? It doesn’t seem that silly. At least of the premises behind the educational system is to prepare a person for what they will do in later years. Obviously it’s better to be prepared for a field you enjoy than for a field you hate. But, at least for me, it comes down to what “prepared” means.

At the end of my four years at $small_school, will I have the skills needed to go out into the private sector into a Computer Science related job? More likely than not. Will I have the pre-requisite training to continue my education in graduate school? Very possibly. Does this mean I’m “prepared” for life? Does preparation mean “having the requisite skill-set”, or is there something deeper?

In various conversations I’ve had, I’m not the only one who isn’t sure what they want to be doing once they get out of $small_school, $medium_school, or $big_school. Clearly there are students who know what they want to do, some want to be a doctor, some want to go to grad school, some are working towards a job in journalism, and some have accepted their fate as art students who will have more difficulty finding a job in their field, but are ok with that because they love their art. But it seems as though the people who don’t know what they want to do outnumber the people who have a goal.

Is this inherently bad? No, I don’t think it is. I don’t think it’s good, but I don’t think it’s bad. Is it the job of the educational system to get students to a place where they have a starting place, and giving them the tools they need to move from there? Or is the job of the educational system strictly to give students the training to suceed in the marketplace? It seems as though $small_school takes the approach that their graduates should be fully prepared to take whatever life throws at them.

I will say, I acknowledge that this might be me turning a non-issue into an issue, because I’m trying to justify my own world spinning out of control, but I honestly think students reaching the end of their four years fit into one of three categories. 1) The students who know exactly what they want to to, 2) the students who don’t really know, but will get a job or go to grad school because it seems like the logical next step, or 3) the students who have no clue, and don’t know how to start deciding.

What’s the right answer? I don’t think there is one. Should students be pro-active in this process? Absolutely. Is this whole issue outside the domain of what the school system is striving to do? Very possibly.

Quite frankly, education and learning the content is probably the easier part of this equation.  How does one train a student to set a goal, work towards that goal, adapt should something in their plan change? How does one train a student to know what they want, or to know how to discover what they want? I’m not sure one can, but the school systems should stop professing to producing fully prepared students, or perhaps be more clear about what “prepared” means. Or maybe I should sleep more, and think less.

let’s roll around in apathy

Wednesday, March 25th, 2009

I’ve been thinking recently about our current political situation, here in the United States. You hear stories all the time about “President Obama sides with the RIAA when it comes to copyright law”, or “10 more US soldiers died in Iraq today” or “Huge hurricanes expected yet again, likely due to global warming” and everyone reads these articles. They look at them and think “Oh wow, that’s horrible.” but it seems as though no one cares.

I acknowledge that I’m pre-disposed to care about things. I’d like to look at Vietnam, for instance. Yes, a lot of parallels have been drawn between Vietnam and the war in Iraq, and I don’t want to re-iterate the discourse that has already been had. I do however want to say, part of the reason the United States left Vietnam was because the American people were protesting. Obviously there was other stuff involved, but the protest movement had an affect. You will often hear in political discourse the idea of “pulling out of Iraq”. Many seem to think this is a good idea. Yet we haven’t done it, Obama promises to, but it hasn’t happened. Why? I would argue the government doesn’t see it as that pressing of an issue. It’s harsh, because there are obviously people’s lives on the line. We need to make the government know we care about something.

Hurricanes? Same concept. Yes, when An Inconvenient Truth came out, there seemed to be a wave of public awareness around the topic of global warming. Yes, many people have moved away from their SUVs towards either hybird SUVs, or the pretty well known Toyota Prius. Yes this idea of “being green” is prevalent, but only so prevalent so as it convenient to switch. People are starting to use re-usable grocery bags, compact flourescent lightbulbs, etc. etc. However, the majority of the population? Not willing to change their lifestyle enough to have a big impact on petroleum usage and carbon emissions. Obviously hurricanes aren’t completely related to global warming, but the level and intensity of hurricanes that we’ve seen recently can pretty clearly be attributed to climate change. Maybe the public should start showing they care about climate change, or the lives of those people being subjected to the hurricanes (or other natural disasters in other parts of the world, for that matter).

President Obama siding with the RIAA? Yes, granted, not as many people know or care about artists rights in the same way I do, it’s not terribly pressing to many people. That said, it affects many many people. Remember the older woman who never owned a comptuer in her life, but was sued by the RIAA for copyright infringement? I bet she cares a lot about current RIAA policy. Maybe letting Obama’s administration know that the public won’t stand for more RIAA shenanigans would be a good thing?

I know not everyone needs or can care about every topic, that would be difficult. I also acknowledge that not everyone has the same opinion on any one topic. That’s totally fair, that’s part of being human and relating to other humans. I don’t even care if you’re out protesting the completely opposite view of my own (although you’re wrong :-P ), what I do care about is showing our government that we care. If we sit idlly by, and complain about the way things are going to our neighbors, that never gets back to government (unless you’re lucky enough to live next to 1600 Pennsylvanian Ave., Washington DC). If we as a population become more vocal, more involved, and more willing to change the way we do things to be more in line with our beliefs on a topic, that can only be a good thing. If all the people in cities who drive about 20 mi. every day to work were willing to push for affordable electric cars, we’d be able to cut our carbon emission use as a country by an enormous amount.

I’m not placing blame, instead, I’m more asking anyone and everyone to decide what issues they care about, and do something to help move that issue forward. As a country, we find ourselves running into more and more issues, with the economy, healthcare, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, intellectual property laws, immigration and homeland security policies, and even with some sections of the population, drug policy. If you want the government to change, you’re going to need to do something, instead of just sitting idly by and saying “man, something needs to change”.

GSoC: fairness, participation, the way things are

Tuesday, March 10th, 2009

For the past few summers, Google has done this program called Google Summer of Code (GSoC), wherein college age students are funded by Google to work on a project for an open source organization. Every year, the organizations apply to Google to be accepted as part of this program, and then post an ideas list for students to choose from. Students then submit proposals for features to implement, and the organizations pick students they want to work with, based upon how many slots they are awarded by Google (number of students Google will fund per project).

A questions was raised in the #gsoc IRC channel on FreeNode IRC network (irc.freenode.net) about the fairness of this system, and allowing previous GSoC students to apply again to the same organization. Obviously allowing GSoC participants from past years, who worked with a certain organization, gives this students an advantage in their application to the same organization in following years.

That said, the premise behind GSoC is to get students interested in working with open source organizations. This is partially done by providing funding for work done, and partially done by attaching the Google name to it. The more people who contribute to open source software they better (similar to concept to “many hands make light work”). That said, Google obviously can’t fund everyone ever interested in participating in open source work, despite their massive coffers. They can’t even fund every undergraduate aged student interested in working in open source (GSoC is open to graduate and PhD students also).

Students who have participated in past years do have an advantage, they already know the code, they already know the community, presumably the community already likes them (assuming the student was paid the full amount). This is all true, and there’s no real way to get around it. New GSoC applicants can however apply to other organizations (students are allowed to submit up to 20 applications, although they really only have time to submit about 5) where there are less returning students.

This may come off as harsh, but it seems as though the purpose of GSoC isn’t to get every single college student interested in working with open source, but instead to get the ‘best’ (where best is decided by the open source organizations) working in open source, by providing a good monetary stipend. Competition is a part of the Summer of Code application process, just as it is with every job application ever.

Ultimately, returning students applying again to the same organization isn’t that different of a situation than people who have previously interned at a company seeking another internship, or a full-time position upon graduation. The company knows the student, knows what the student is capable, and has invested time in teaching the student the way things work within that company.

That said, some of the organizations that participate in GSoC make a point to try and attract new talent. From their point of view, getting new talent into open source and is better for their organization and for open source than continuing to fund students who already know the ropes. This is an ideological difference, and each organization handles it differently. In some cases, organizations fund returning students, in other cases, students who have participated for 2 or 3 years act as mentors because they are already so integrated into their organization. Further, some students graduate and are no longer eligible to participate (as a student, they are still encouraged to continue developing, act as mentors, etc.), and some students choose to work with a different organization, where they’re having to prove themselves just like everyone else.

Additionally, there are some organizations that fund students (from external income sources) who’s proposals they like, but weren’t allocated enough slots by Google. Even if an organization doesn’t do this, students are encouraged to participate in open source regardless. Now, if students choose to do this, there’s no money involved, and it’s completely understandable when students need to choose to work on an internship instead of doing something they want to do within open source. Everyone only has 24 hours in a day, and everyone chooses to spend those hours in different ways.

While the GSoC application process can be daunting, scary, and very nerve-wracking, new students are still encouraged to apply. The best way to go about it is to find out if the organization the student is looking into working with has applied. Start getting to know the people within the community, and start contributing. Upon finding out if the organization was accepted into the program, continue bonding with the community, and continue contributing. Talk to people, find out who is acting as mentors, discuss your ideas, goals, thoughts, etc. with them. Ultimately, prove to your organization of choice that you’re competent, you have good ideas, and you’re worth taking a chance on. It’s possible they’ll love you, and won’t have enough slots. It’s possible there are other students, as or more competent than you who just have better ideas. It’s possible all of the organizations slots will be filled by returning students.

None of this means, however, that you should give up. If it’s important enough, contribute anyway. Stick around in the community, submit bug reports and patches, contribute to mailing list discussions. If you don’t get a slot this year, being an active part of their community for a year, and applying again is one of the best ways to show them that you’re competent.

Thanks goes to Landon, kblin, and ajuonline for contributing to the discussion that was the root of this write-up, and pushing me to actually do this write-up.

madness of the musical variety, in march

Sunday, March 8th, 2009

KUMM hosted a concert this past Friday called March Music Madness. Three bands played. First was Cathy Crescendo, second was Kristoff Krane, and third was His Mischief.

Cathy Crescendo was good, they played well as a group, but all of their songs sort of sounded the same, and had a little bit too much emo-pop feel to them. I don’t know. The main female singer had an amazing voice, and when she and the lead male singer sang in harmony, I thought it sounded really cool. When the main male singer was singing by himself, it left a bit to be desired. Overall, they put on a decent show.

Kristoff Krane, on the other hand, was a completely different experience. He deems himself ‘experimental hip-hop’, and it really definitely was. There was no standard fast yelling, the tracks he was rapping to had some non-standard sounding instruments (horns, woodwinds), and it wasn’t all rap. He had some pieces where there was a almost a call and answer, between the rapper and the singer (both parts done by him).

The thing that interested me the most about Kris was the unorthodox way he performed. He was all about feeling, and what the audience was into. He forgot his effects pedal, and was incredibly apologetic about it. It seemed as though he was really worried about it. That said, he did this really cool section where he engaged the audience, and really just ended up having everyone humming for about 3 minutes. It was completely unplanned, seemingly, but still kinda cool. He seemed really happy by it, and I thought it was cool that there was that level of interaction with the audience. He’s a pretty deep guy, and was the artist that I felt like I connected the most with, both musically and personally.

His Mischief was probably the most professional (in the traditional sense of the word), and the most well put together band. They seemed like they were used to playing shows, used to playing their set, and used to the whole ‘concert’ thing. They didn’t seem like they had a real stage presence, except when they were playing. I was not engaged at all by their stage presence, and I was not a big fan of their music. That said, they were good musicians, what they were playing I was not into at all.

Maybe there’s something I’m missing, maybe I’m too picky, or maybe I’m just too much of a hippie to be into the whole ’standard’ music thing. Kristoff Krane was, in my opinion, by far the best artist of the night.

Makes me wanna start writing lyrics again (for real this time).

we do what we do

Wednesday, December 10th, 2008

So Martin found something. Something very, very interesting. Colin responded, and now it’s my turn.

I’m not familiar with the music of The Plastic Constellations, but their “singer/guitarist” as Martin puts it, has verbalized what I’ve been trying to get at in my head for a while now. This guy has defined our generation, in the most eloquent way I’ve seen.

I started this blog as an excercise in writing, and I never really understood why I was here. For a while, I had to force myself to write, and I never had any points. As this has developed, I’ve found myself being drawn into the world of blogging, but I don’t have a reason. I still don’t know why I’m here, or why I spend my time talking to the roughly 20 unique visiters I get at any given time.

I think Mr. singer/guitarist has hit it spot on. We do it because we need to. There’s no end goal, we don’t do it to keep in touch with people, we don’t do because we think people care about what we write, or to make money. We do it because it clicks, and we do it because we want to.

We throw ourselves into what we do, because we have to. I’m re-iterating here, but we’re all going to the same place, death. I, for one, don’t want to waste the time we have. Make music, write, tell the world that you’re, and you don’t want to be forgotten. Show everyone who you are, let them make their judgements, and move on. Open yourself up to what others have to offer, embrace it, contribute to it.

My favorite line from Mr. singer/guitarist is as follows

So we draw. We design. We write. We compose. We rap. We blog. But we’re not attempting to communicate. No, no, not at all. We are trying to stay alive.

Alive. If we let our creativity and who we are stay inside of us, if we don’t show the world what we can do, and let the world build off of it, we’re just hiding our lives. We’re letting ourselves stay underneath the radar, nobody knows we’re here. That person in India who could be reading this blog post would have no idea I existed. We’re dead, if people don’t know we’re here.

Colin and Matrin used this, and I don’t know what it means, but the two meanings I can think of, I really like, so I’m gonna use it anyway. DIYMF.

Colin, Martin, bloggers/writers/composers/artists/anyone, let’s do this!