Posts Tagged ‘involvement’

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.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in general | No Comments »

they say we must support the troops, but why do they get to decide?

Wednesday, April 22nd, 2009

Recently, there was an email sent to our student listserv urging students to get out and “support the troops”, because a local group of soldiers was getting deployed. The email went on to say that it was important to support the troops, regardless of political affiliation. This seems to have been a fairly common theme over the past 6 years or so, with the “support the troops” mantra being chanted nationwide. This idea of “support the troops also seems to have and an implied sub-mantra “dissent and disagreement don’t have room in this conversation, our troops need support, and by voicing your anti-war opinion, you’re not being supportive, and are therefore a bad person”. Maybe that’s just me, and maybe I’m reading into it too much, but this is the sense I get from the majority of the “support the troops” pushes that I’ve seen.

It’s curious to me that “support” has seemingly turned into “implicitly agree with” in the context of the troops and the military in this country. I say turned into, but I don’t actually know, it’s possible this has always been the sentiment, and I’m just noticing it now. Superficially, I think people are saying “show the troops getting ready to be deployed into very tough situations that you’re here for them”, which, on a superficial level I don’t disagree with.

However, because of the connotations expressed above, it seems that “support” has taken on a different meaning. In attending a rally for troops getting ready to be deployed, and waving a flag, and clapping for them as they leave, it seems as though there are other messages being sent. If I were to go to one of these rallies, and wave a flag, and clap for the troops as they leave, I would feel as though I were implicitly agreeing with their decision to go into the military, the tactics they’re going to be instructed to use while deployed, and ultimately the concept of war and destruction as a whole.

The issue is, I don’t. I admit to being a little bit extreme in my views on war and pacifism, but I stand by them. I don’t agree with people’s decision of going into the military. First, because I think the military uses unfair recruitment techniques, and I feel as though many new recruits get caught up in the grandeur of serving one’s country, the education bonuses, and the “cool” jobs they’ll get to do if they score high enough. I also disagree with the tactics the military instructs their soldiers to use, although this is probably rooted in my idea’s of non-violence. Water boarding isn’t ok, nor is other forms of torture. Keeping people held indefinitely, in a state of legal limbo, and without any hope of them ever getting released in Guantanamo isn’t ok (yes, I know this is supposed to be over, I know those people are being released, etc. That still doesn’t remove the wrong that was initially done). Furthermore, I disagree with the idea that war is the best way to solve certain problems. Invading a sovereign country, destroying people’s homes, completely destroying and rebuilding a countries government, and staying in a country for almost 6 years is not ok. We’re not building an empire, we don’t have a mandate from anyone to bring democracy to the world, and ultimately, we were wrong.

So, if I disagree with what seems to be implied in “support the troops”, why would I do so? I acknowledge that these soldiers are going into a scenario that will be very taxing on them. The things soldiers will do and see is enough to scar anyone for a lifetime. War isn’t pretty, and it’s not glorious. Ultimately, at least for me, the question boils down to the meaning of support in this context.

There’s an argument to be made that returning soldiers deserve our support as a country. Veteran’s benefits are not what they used to be, and many veterans are not being supported in near the number of ways they need support. There’s not a very good mental health system for these soldiers, and overall, the benefits are lacking. I’m all for building up veterans benefits, soliders go through way more than the average civilian, and should be helped back into the society that had them do these things. That said, there are a lot of people in this country right now that are seeing things that are also very emotionally taxing. What about the homeless people (in some cases also veterans) who don’t have a place to live, don’t have clean clothes, don’t have money or a job, and have no idea where their next meal is coming from? Don’t they deserve support also? What about the people working in shelters, soup kitchens, food shelfs, and other organizations that see homeless people come through every day, and know the situations of each one of them? The workers have food, have a job, have a house, but are tasked with seeing large numbers of people who don’t. That’s got to be emotionally taxing. What about those who’re wrongly imprisoned, for any number of reasons, and are subjected to knowing that they’re innocent, but stuck within a system that is designed to keep them their, against their will. A system that is designed to not believe them. What about those people who need support of a mental health system that doesn’t have the funding it needs? Isn’t being subjected to a “let’s try this drug and see what happens” mentality incredibly taxing?

I’m not saying that any of these situations deserve more money or time than the situations of troops returning home. Nor am I saying that any of the people in these situations are have it worse than the soldiers on the ground. What I am saying is that to me, putting money and time towards helping these people is what support means. Put money and time towards veterans benefits, that’s fine. In fact, if the nation can build up a support network for people who need help, but can’t get it, I think soldiers, homeless people, people with very emotionally taxing jobs, and mental health patients could all benefit.

Isn’t there a way to tell the troops “I disagree with your decision, I disagree with the orders you’re going to be given, I disagree with the necessity of your job, but when you get home, and after seeing what you’ll have seen, I think more money should be given to a support system for you, and I’ll be working while you’re away to reduce the need for your job”? Some would say that this all fits under “support the troops”, but I disagree. At the risk of giving the soldiers one more thing to worry about as they’re being deployed, it seems reasonable to me to make stipulations in your support. Perhaps this is too blunt, and perhaps the soldiers need more uplifting messages as they’re about to be dropped into the middle of a very emotionally and physically taxing situation. Maybe instead of being so negative, something like “I think war is wrong, and i think you shouldn’t have become a soldier. My form of support will be political action to bring troops home, and getting the United States to stop fighting wars in general” should be said.

For me, support doesn’t mean “I stand behind you whole-heartedly” or “I put you and your work on a pedestal, because you’re going through a lot in your line of work”. For me, support means “I want to help you get out your very painful, unfortunate set of circumstances”. It means actively working to stop the practice of starting wars, it means working to increase the support system nationwide (and not only for veterans), and it means being politically active to elect those who will work for this type of “support”. Yes, I support the troops, but I don’t give the military and the soldiers a free “support card” that puts them on a pedestal and protects them from criticism and dissent.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in general | No Comments »

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”.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in general | 2 Comments »

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.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in general | 2 Comments »

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).

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Google doesn’t get ’social’

Wednesday, March 4th, 2009

Eric Schmidt hates Twitter. Well, no, that’s not entirely true, but he did call it a “poor man’s email system”. Now, I acknowledge that twitter is not the best medium for communication, there are character limits, there is down time, and there is no business plan (doesn’t affect communication, does affect stability). Schmidt is quoted as saying:

Twitter’s success is wonderful, and I think it shows you that there are many, many new ways to reach and communicate, especially if you are willing to do so publicly.

In other words, they have aspects of an email system, but they don’t have a full offering. To me, the question about companies like Twitter is: Do they fundamentally evolve as sort of a note phenomenon, or do they fundamentally evolve to have storage, revocation, identity, and all the other aspects that traditional email systems have? Or do email systems themselves broaden what they do to take on some of that characteristic?

I think the innovation is great. In Google’s case, we have a very successful instant messaging product, and that’s what most people end up using.

Yes, he’s right, Twitter does have aspects of an email system, in that it’s a message based media. It also has aspects of SMS (presumably where the 160 character limit comes from). This doesn’t mean Twitter is a “rich man’s SMS”, it’s targeting something different. There’s a social aspect to Twitter, that isn’t there with email. Email is, and probably always will be, a relatively private medium, in that you don’t give people your username and password, and you don’t generally let people see your email (unless forced to by the government, or it’s hacked by some kid on 4chan *cough*Sarah Palin*cough).

I think this is where the intrinsic difference between social mediums and things like email is. In order to be social, there needs to be some degree of publicity. One can’t have other people react to what they’re doing if what they’re doing isn’t accessible to others. Obviously having everything public isn’t a good thing, because you run into security and privacy issues. No one tweets about “depositing a check for $602 into bank account xxxxxxxxx at Well Fargo”. That would be stupid, clearly. People do however tweet about knitting projects they’re working on, what they made for dinner, their health issues, etc. etc. etc. These are all things that people also discuss with friends, or that people who live near you hear about through neighbors, etc.

Is it a little bit weird that random strangers on the internet know about the things you’re eating for dinner? Yes, it’s a little bit weird. But honestly, how many times have you heard “So my husband’s cousin’s kid made this awesome cake the other day” (or something similar)? You’ve never met her husband’s cousin’s kid, presumably. This kid has never met you. That doesn’t mean you’re not interested to hear about the cake, or to find out what the kid did differently than most people do. It’s a similar concept. Yes, larger scale, yes, still sort of creepy.

However, as much as it sort of weirds me out, I feel like I’m thriving on the social aspects of technology. Facebook, Twitter, even LinkedIn (Facebook for MBAs :-P ), they’re all ways to stay connected with lots of different people. Obviously you can’t get to know someone exclusively through Facebook, but you can learn a lot about them (favorite music, which events they’re into, what they do on the weekend, religion, political affiliation, etc. etc.). Yes, it means you don’t actually have to have a conversation with them, which can be detrimental. It can also mean that you have something to talk about in conversation. Instead of doing the awkward “What’s your favorite music?” thing, you can instead say “Whoa, you like Avenpitch too? Have you seen any of their shows? What about their music style interests you?” and skip all the superficial awkward parts.

I guess what I’m saying is that Eric Schmidt is wrong. Yes, he’s the CEO of a corporation worth billions of dollars, he’s still wrong. Superficially, Twitter can be a “poor man’s email”, but that’s missing the point. Twitter isn’t about communicating. Twitter is about communicating socially.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in general | 2 Comments »

why do we do it

Friday, December 12th, 2008

Martin posted a couple of days ago a pretty cool link that he’d found, about how our generation needs to put everything we’ve got into what we do. There’s no higher purpose, it’s not as though we have a creed, or a reason, just that it opens us up as humans to the rest of the world, where otherwise, we’d go unnoticed.

I was thinking about this more in depth the other day, and it struck me as curious. Yes, for things that aren’t required, writing songs, blogging, painting, etc, this idea of doing it because we have to in order to ‘feel alive’, this makes sense. However, what about for things we’re supposed to do? Like, what about going to college? What about, once we graduate, getting a job? For me, going to college, attending class, doesn’t give me the excitement/freedom that writing/blogging does. When I write lyrics (even though I can’t write music), it gives me a feeling of reward that I don’t get from going to class.

The end result of going to class is getting a diploma. This diploma, like the thousands of others that Computer Science majors are getting at the same time, will give me validity as an adult. I can then take this validity, and go one of two ways. I can apply to another school, to give more validity to my skills, or I can apply to go sit in a cube. Either way, it seems as though my path is already laid out for me, and it’s as though they’re (they being some entity, society maybe) putting us into “little boxes” (like the song, yes).

This is in direct contrast to doing something to get noticed, and in direct contrast to doing something because it ‘keeps us alive’. I, for one, don’t want to sit in a cube all day long. Research excites me, probably because it’ll be something interesting that I can give my all to, and it’ll be mentally stimulating.

I don’t know what the right answer is, I don’t really even know why I’m thinking about this. Getting a job is what we’re ’supposed to do’. Every generation before us has, and all the generations after us are already being shaped to know that they too, at some point, will have to get a job.

Is a job necessary to survive? Yes, in todays market economy. I’m not opposed to the concept of work, that’s not what I’m saying. I just want to do something interesting, something that can show I’m human, and not just another drone that has been molded by ‘them’ (again, society, or some other entity) to do some job that potentially will be replacable by machines within the next few years.

“So don’t go to school, don’t get a job. Find something you love doing” you say? Well, yes, that’s one possibility. Is it economically feasible? Not likely. “Do what you want to do in your spare time” Sure, I could. That’s what I’m doing now. The issue being, there are parts of my life that aren’t as fulfilling, like class.

I don’t have an answer, and I don’t know that anyone does. Maybe the art majors do, but I would imagine they’re like me. They got into art because they loved it, now that they’re there, the classes become tedious, and they don’t have time to just play anymore.

Can we do away with the system that puts us in boxes? Could we go through the assembly line of life without a box? Not really, the system isn’t designed that way. All the conveyor belts are designed to move boxes, not people shaped figures. Not really even boxes that are pyramid shaped, or anything that’s not a perfect rectangle. Sure, some boxes are bigger than others, but we’re still in a box.

I’m not wildly depressed about my future, and I’m sure I’ll be able to be happy in whatever I end up doing with my life. It’s a matter of showing the world who we are, what we can do, that we’re here, and we want to do what we want to do. It’s not a movement, not on a large scale, at least. We’re all in it for self gratification, because it makes us happy.

-JTS

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in general | 1 Comment »

UR, on campus payment

Thursday, September 18th, 2008

So UMM has this policy where students can’t make more than $2434.<some small amount> (or roughly that, i don’t remember exactly). The issue is, upon taking a job at Computing Services, I’m making $2400.00 in stipends, paid at the beginning of each semester ($1200/semester). That leaves me $34 and change to make elsewhere on campus. Assume $7.00 an hour, that’s slightly less than 5 hours worth of work, on campus, for the year.

This policy is stupid, there’s absolutely no reason students shouldn’t be allowed to make what they’re able to make. What it means is if you’re doing an on-campus job, you can’t get an ‘exec’ position or ‘editorial board’ position in other organizations, unless you want to donate your time. I enjoy these organizations, this is work I want to be doing, but it’s also work. Generally that means you get paid for it.

I’m probably going to keep doing the jobs that I enjoy doing, because I enjoy them. I have a hard time justifying it though. Not that anyone reads my blog, let alone cares what I think, but yeah.

On an unrelated note, I wish I were more artistic.

-JTS

Tags: , , ,
Posted in general | No Comments »