Natural selection is the process by which individuals of a species that are best suited to the environment survive to reproduce and pass on their beneficial traits. It is believed to be the primary mechanism that drives evolution. With the human species, one of the results of this is the increased intelligence required to develop technology.

Some of this technology has, for a long time, been able to compensate for undesirable traits to allow more individuals to survive, and the effect of this technology is constantly increasing. So individuals who would otherwise not survive the environment, are able to live long enough to reproduce. It would appear that this is working against natural selection.

I see two ways to look at this. One is that modern technology is nullifying natural selection, and preventing evolution from continuing. The other is that technology is a direct result of our intelligence gained through the process of natural selection, and therefore is part of evolution. I think both of these are valid.

There is also a potentially devastating long-term effect of modern medicine. As we develop more and more potent antibiotics and disinfectants, we kill off the majority of bacteria species. This leaves the most resistant species and removes their competition. This effectively accelerates natural selection and creates stronger and stronger bacteria at an unnatural rate. This is evident in the existence of “super bugs” in sterile environments like hospitals.

The only real conclusion I can come up with is that technology plays a large part in the survivability of individuals. I’d say it’s the same exact effect of a less hostile environment. The question is, are the long-term effects of this good or bad for us as a species?

Filed under: General by StevoTVR
No Comments »

The other day I was reviewing some of the tutorials I’ve written over the past few years and found something disturbing. For some reason I decided to copy the introduction paragraph into Google to see what appears. I expected to see my site and maybe some tutorial link listing sites, but I found something more…

I followed the link to some tech forum and found my tutorial posted there in its entirety, without any mention of the source. I was a little shocked by the blatant plagiarism of content, so I registered and posted my displeasure in a reply. Curiosity then had me searching my other tutorials to see what else may have been ripped off.

I found that this same site had copied several other tutorials without giving credit. So I replied to each one with an increasingly harsh tone. In that process I also found some other sites that had done the same thing, but I didn’t feel like going through the trouble of pursuing each one.

After a little bit, I received a message from the site owner (who was the poster of most of the offending posts):

“Hi

[redacted] is a 100% non-profit (non-advertising) organisation formed to help the engineering community. Hosting for the site and every other expense is covered within our team. We do not earn monet form the site in any mean.

However, I apologise for the misbehaviour. We might have missed the copyright status of your articles. Forgive us for that. Link to your site is added at the end of every page that was copied.

I would like to welcome you to work with [redacted] to share knowledge beyond borders, limits, etc….

Best Regards,

[redacted]“

That last part is funny. The rest is just bullshit. It doesn’t matter if you make money, you don’t just copy someone’s work without attribution or permission. I thought this was just common knowledge or at least common decency, but I guess I was wrong…

Sharing knowledge is great, and there’s nothing getting in the way of doing that without committing plagiarism. I think the standard excepted method is to post a short excerpt along with a link to the source. Remember those tutorial listing sites I mentioned? That’s exactly what they do.

Anyway, I write tutorials primarily to share knowledge. I also do it to gain exposure, which of course requires that people know that I was the one who wrote it. The positive side of this is that someone found value in my writing, so I must be doing something right. I just think that people should respect the author when they find something useful.

Filed under: Commentary by StevoTVR
4 Comments »

Here in California, one of the popular topics is immigration and protecting our borders. People are always talking about how to deal with illegal immigration. However, I find the concept of national borders flawed.

When land is originally purchased or granted, it makes sense because it comes from the government. What doesn’t have a solid explanation is how the government can claim ownership of the land in the first place. I guess it basically comes down to calling dibs on an area.

The only thing allowing us to safely claim our territory is the ability to enforce the claim with force from the military. On a moral standpoint, one can choose not to recognize the borders that separate nations. Obviously, the real world is a different story.

In an ideal world, any person should be allowed to move to any part of the planet as they wish, restricted only by what is physically possible. It shouldn’t matter where they happened to be born. But in reality, we are all restricted by some invisible hypothetical lines dividing the earth.

It’s also interesting to note that many other species of animals have the same tendency to claim territory and protect it with force.

On Immigration

I find it silly that we go to such great lengths to control who can cross the border. We put up these massive walls and devote a lot of resources to patrolling those walls (mostly talking about the US/Mexico border; I don’t know much about the Canadian border). I think it sends a really negative message to put up walls to keep people out.

I understand the need to control the flow of people into the country, but it should be for the right reason. The only reason I support is the protection of the citizens from criminals and terrorists. Since this is far from an ideal world and people want to do bad things, protecting the borders is a necessary evil.

An example of a reason I don’t support is that the immigrants will “take our jobs.” I just think this comes from an unfounded sense of entitlement. And I obviously strongly disagree with any racially motivated reasons.

Filed under: Commentary by StevoTVR
No Comments »

Why? People ask this simple question every day, but they can never get the real answer. You can follow the chain of causality until you reach a dead end, where pure randomness takes effect. At this point, there is no reason. This is also where the Universe is open to interpretation.

So what are the possible interpretations of randomness? I can see two main sides to this question. One could argue that it is the work of a divine force (God), and is the vehicle with which it interacts with the physical world. Others would counter that there is no evidence of this, and that randomness is just what it is (arbitrary). I argue that either of these arguments is valid, since the truth is unknown and unknowable.

This is something people need to understand when it comes to arguments between science and religion. For example, it is because of the above statements that evolution and creationism are not mutually exclusive. It is pretty obvious that every animal didn’t just appear out of nowhere as they are today, and that evolution does in fact occur.

The question that remains is whether the initial series of random events that created the first organism was under the control of some form of intelligence. This is something science is unable to answer.

So what is your interpretation?

Filed under: Commentary by StevoTVR
No Comments »

This is to all those who have given their lives to protecting others, from threats known and unknown. I don’t care who you are or where you came from, but risking your own life for the lives of others is the definition of heroism and deserves recognition.

Today is the day to remember all of the fallen US soldiers. Let’s not forget also those who are currently risking their lives right now.

To all of these people I’ve mentioned: Thank You

You don’t have to support the war or the politics behind it, but you have to support the men and women who fight in them so others don’t have to. There are few things that anger me me more than to see so-called “anti-war” protesters direct their contempt toward the soldiers that have to fight in those wars. They’re doing it wrong.

Filed under: General by StevoTVR
No Comments »

Pandora Radio is a free internet streaming radio service that allows you to create personalized stations. The stations select music based on similarity using data from The Music Genome Project. You tell it something you like and it will find other songs you probably like. As you listen, you can tell it what you like and dislike so it gets a better idea of your preferences.

I’ve been using Pandora on and off for a few years and it works pretty well. I’ve discovered some great bands I never knew I liked or even heard of. It’s a great way to discover new music. Of course it also plays a lot of your favorites, too.

You can even further customize your stations by mixing them together or manually adding bands for more variety.

The free version has some short ads and a few limits on usage, but it isn’t too bad. I’m actually thinking of getting the paid version that removes the ads and limits, as well as gives higher quality and a desktop application. Right now it’s only $36/year.

Filed under: Misc. Reviews, Reviews by StevoTVR
No Comments »

I’ve never really paid too much attention to politics. I’ve always found it boring and irrelevant to my life. It seems to always come down to arguing about who is right and who is wrong on questions that have no right answer. Since there is no right answer, people tend to pick a side arbitrarily and stick with it. This essentially forms two teams in a big glorified game, the outcome of which is capable of affecting the lives of everyone in the country and sometimes more.

It’s not really a bad thing in and of itself, since voters want two choices. So having two main groups to pay attention to makes it more likely that voters can make an informed decision. So the way the process works for electing government officials seems to work alright.

The problem lies in the way laws are created. It seems that the people in congress are disconnected with reality, so all they have is the game. Their goal is to keep their team in the lead by any means necessary. This is usually a good thing because it means they’re making the decisions that they think most people want, which is their job as a representative of the public.

It’s when the game has nothing to do with what is good for the public, that the game is a bad thing. Like when they add in some extra, unrelated crap to a bill just to sneak it into law.

Anyway, the real point I’m trying to make is that politics are a little silly.

Filed under: Commentary by StevoTVR
No Comments »

In my 2010 post I mentioned the possible reunion of Soundgarden, but now it appears to be confirmed. On April 16, they put on a show in Seattle under the anagram “Nudedragons.” They also released an official live video of them performing “Beyond the Wheel” which is awesome.

The band performed all of their classics as well as a cover of The Doors’ “Waiting for the Sun.” They still sound amazing by the way, especially for their first live performance in about 12 years. Looking for more from this show on YouTube, I found this awesome channel which has audio of the whole set.

Here’s a playlist I put together that has them in order according to the set list. Enjoy:

Filed under: Music Reviews, Reviews by StevoTVR
No Comments »

Battlefield Bad Company 2 is the latest addition to EA/DICE’s Battlefield franchise, released earlier this month. It is the sequel to Battlefield Bad Company. It features several online modes as well as a short single-player campaign (which I admittedly didn’t finish).

This review will cover the multiplayer modes for the PC version of the game.

The Good

The game features some of the best graphical effects I’ve seen and it really makes me appreciate my recently upgraded system. Something that also stands out about this game is the ability to alter the environment, from cutting down trees to collapsing entire buildings.

There are 4 game modes: Rush (attack/defend), Conquest (territory control), Squad Rush (smaller version of Rush), and Squad Deathmatch. I prefer Rush since is has the most defined objective and focused action. Teams are broken into squads of four to promote teamwork, along with point incentives for helping your squad. You also have the ability to spawn on other squad members which further promotes teamwork. I really like what they have done in this area.

The class breakup is simplified from previous Battlefield games, with only four choices: Assault, Medic, Engineer and Recon. Each class has several categories of customization for weapons, devices, and other perks.

Though they play a smaller role that other Battlefield games, the vehicles are nice. There are the usual tanks, armored vehicles, helicopters, cars, boats, as well a some new additions. These include ATVs, jet skis, and a UAV you can control remotely which is pretty cool.

The ranking system is also more refined with progress and awards shown on loading screens. You get points for everything you do in game that aids the team. These points go towards upgrades and your overall rank. The unlock system is a nice way to ease the learning curve of the game, since you start with the basic loadout and unlock more choices.

The Bad

While the gameplay is awesome, there are a few major flaws that I hope get addressed in future patches. My biggest complaint in the team balance issues. It is very common to see teams become incredibly unbalanced and the game makes it difficult to rectify since team switching is restricted. The games tries to put players on the same team and squad as their friends, which tends to be the source of the unbalances.

Another annoyance is the friends system, which barely works and is very limited. These issues can probably be easily fixed by patches, so I hope they do soon.

Conclusion

This game is awesome. If you like first-person shooters, I highly recommend this game. Also, some may like to know that this game supports dedicated servers.

If you have played this, please comment with your opinions.

Filed under: Game Reviews, Reviews by StevoTVR
No Comments »

The Hurt Locker follows an Explosive Ordinance Disposal team in the Iraq war in 2004. They have the extremely dangerous job of disarming bombs in the middle of a war zone. The movie follows the team of three, led by SSG William James, as they go on several missions of investigating and diffusing IEDs.

The Good

This movie seemed to aim at being a realistic depiction of the situation, almost like a documentary, and I think it accomplished that pretty well. This isn’t one of those Hollywood action movies where people survive nearby explosions and just walk away.

There was plenty of suspense where danger could be lurking anywhere. Every civilian is a potential insurgent waiting to remotely detonate the bomb two inches in front of the main character’s face. You really get a feel of just how dangerous his job is.

The Bad

The plot was pretty flat with not much of a climax to speak of. Some viewers may be disappointed by the slow pace and lack of action. If action is what you’re looking for, this movie may not be what you expect.

Conclusion

Overall, this is an excellent war thriller and I’d highly recommend it. There was a perfect balance of suspense and action, and a refreshingly realistic take on events. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie.

Filed under: Movie Reviews, Reviews by StevoTVR
No Comments »