Roger O Green

This new gee-whiz techno-wizard world

I EXPECT technology to screw up on me.

While I’m technologically challenged, I’m impressed with people who have skills in this area. For me, these instructions are TOTALLY true.

It gives me some small comfort when Dustbury, a formerly gadget-crazy guy, explains why that old compact disc of mine is suddenly not working correctly. Or when Mark Evanier suddenly has trouble with software that seemed to be working.

Jaquandor recently asked: “How frustrating is it when stuff that’s supposed to work wonderfully in this new gee-whiz techno-wizard world just doesn’t?” This was in reaction to the trouble he’s had with Blogger’s mobile app and Windows Movie Maker.

I wrote in response: “I got REALLY annoyed when some of my auto-posts didn’t post. But it’s also why I’m technophobic; I EXPECT it to screw up.”

This brings me to:

1) The Android I got to use no longer works. Once I had the techie help me reset it, and it worked briefly. But NOW I turn it on, click on one program and it goes to another. Totally useless. While I enjoyed using it while I could, I never got so dependent upon it that its loss is catastrophic for me, because I expected it to fail me. And it did. I’m inconvenienced, and a little disappointed, but not surprised.

2) The hassle with the work computer. On a recent Sunday night, I noted that my work password was going to run out in five days, so I changed it. Monday morning, the new password didn’t work, so I used my old password. But I’m supposed to have a shared drive and my personal drive, yet I had neither. I rebooted, had some synch error (don’t ask, I don’t know), and couldn’t get on at all.

I call the help desk. The guy tells me the techie from our building needs to fix it. The techie from our building, though, is no longer contracted to work on our program’s computers. After two phone calls, he does come over, but he can’t fix it, because he no longer had administrative rights. Eventually, this gets resolved after a three-way conversation that fortunately did not involve me.

Technology’s great when it works.

F is for Floccinaucinihilipilification

I love the notion of the long word having a small meaning.

From Uncommon parlance:
“Floccinaucinihilipilification is the act of estimating something as worthless or without value. It has the distinction of being the longest non-technical word in the English language.”

So why do we have such a long word to designate so little?

“Apparently the term was coined by pupils at Eton from a line in the Eton Latin Grammar that listed verbs that govern a genitive noun: Flocci, from floccus, a wisp or piece of wool + nauci, from naucum, (a trifle) + nihili, from the Latin pronoun, nihil (nothing) + pili, from pilus, (a hair, or something insignificant) + fication.”

In case you’re having any difficulty with the pronunciation, go HERE. It just trips off the tongue, does it not?

I’m quite fond of the notion of the long word having a small meaning. It’s somewhat like the musical term hemidemisemiquaver, which means a 64th note, which is mighty short. And while I grew up with the American notation, I LOVE the word hemidemisemiquaver.

And speaking of notes, LISTEN TO:

Worthless from The Brave Little Toaster
Nothing From Nothing – Billy Preston. It went to #1 in 1974.

And yes, floccinaucinihilipilification is another one of those words that you ALMOST never see in blogs.

ABC Wednesday, Round 15

Couldn’t Pope Gregory have fixed that OTHER calendar problem?

If Gregory was going to go through all that change, maybe he could have addressed a more peculiar problem – the faulty naming of the months.

As you may know, there was a switch in the Western world from the Julian calendar to the Gregorian calendar that the vast majority of us use today. “The motivation for the reform was to bring the date for the celebration of Easter to the time of the year in which the First Council of Nicaea had agreed upon in 325. Because the spring equinox was tied to the celebration of Easter, the Roman Catholic Church considered this steady movement in the date of the equinox undesirable… Between AD 325… (when… the vernal equinox occurred approximately 21 March), and the time of Pope Gregory’s bull in 1582, the vernal equinox had moved backward in the calendar, until it was occurring on about 11 March, 10 days earlier.”

The fix was to make years that are exactly divisible by 100 NOT leap years, UNLESS they are exactly divisible by 400. “For example, the year 1900 was not a leap year; the year 2000 is a leap year;” 2100 will NOT be a leap year. They recalculated a year as “365 days, 5 hours, 49 minutes, 12 seconds.”

The Catholic countries adopted the change right away. The Protestant countries, not so quickly. “Britain and the British Empire (including the eastern part of what is now the United States) adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1752, by which time it was necessary to correct by 11 days. Wednesday, 2 September 1752 was followed by Thursday, 14 September 1752.” This is why one sees references to two dates for George Washington’s birthday in February 1732.

If Gregory was going to go through all that change, maybe he could have addressed a more peculiar problem – the faulty naming of the months. Specifically, September through December. Their names suggest they are the seventh through the tenth months, yet they are, of course, the ninth through the twelfth months.

Couldn’t have Gregory created a 14-month year? After December, he could have declared a couple of intercalative months, and start the new year with March, which once HAD been the beginning of the year. It would have made sense to start with the month of the vernal equinox (in the Northern Hemisphere), wouldn’t it have? Not that the Catholic church of the 16th Century would have necessarily noticed, but other cultures also start the calendar in March.

Also, if you think about it, New Year’s Day is really a terrible time for resolutions.

While I’m musing on this, my daughter was complaining about the weekend. Well, actually, that if Sunday is the first day of the week, how can it be part of the week’s END? I explained that in many places, the week actually starts on MONDAY – something I didn’t realize until I took high school French – so the week’s end actually makes sense, in rational countries. There is actually an ISO standard that designates that Monday starts the week. Naturally, the US will have none of that; it’s too rational, rather like the metric system.

Circular question answering New York Erratic

Let me say that while Thanksgiving and Christmas are wonderful and all, there seems to be a lot of sense of obligation.

And in an act that defies logic, I am now answering questions that New York Erratic answered for me, even though I gave them to her, based on questions Lisa posted, and which Dustbury also answered… Oh never mind.

1. What is your dream vacation spot and why?

It would be a place by the water, preferably running water, like a river or waterfalls, because I love water; maybe it’s the Pisces in me. It would be neither too hot nor too cold. MaybeVictoria Falls, in September.

2. Where did you come up with the name of your blog?

There was a long-running radio talk show called Rambling with Gambling, from which I got the Ramblin’ part. The Roger part, I have no idea.

3. How do you define blogging success?

It really does vary. While I don’t especially care, when my Times Union blog is trending, or when Chuck Miller declares it one of the week’s 10 best, I enjoy that.

But the real success is that I find people with whom to have reasonable, usually rational, dialogue. Such as with New York Erratic.

4. What is your favorite type of “going out” entertainment?

I like going to the movies because I like seeing movies in the theater. Watching videos often creates the temptation to pause it and do something else. That’s OK with something I’ve seen before, but not the first time. That’s why I ultimately canceled Netflix; I had The Hurt Locker for four or five months, and never found two solid hours to watch it without The Daughter around, or being too tired, or too busy.

5. How many states (name them) have you lived in?

North Carolina (for four months). New York (the rest of my life.)

6. What is your favorite holiday and why?

Ash Wednesday. Let me say that while Thanksgiving and Christmas are wonderful and all, there seems to be a lot of sense of obligation. The beginning of Lent is a time of quiet reflection. When I was a kid, it was only the Catholics I knew that got the ashes on the forehead, but lots of Protestant churches, including the last two I’ve belong to, participate, and I think it’s an easy, but symbolic, way for religious rapprochement.

7. What’s your favorite number and why?

I really do like zero. It’s nothing, yet it’s massive in combination. It’s that dividing line between the positive and the negative. What’s not to like?

8. What would be your dream vehicle to own?

Some motorized bicycle that I’d turn on for hills, and pedal otherwise.

9. What is your favorite hobby?

I suppose it’s singing, though, until you brought it up, I never thought of singing as a hobby, but rather just WHAT I DO, WHO I AM. Or blogging.

10. How do you try and keep your blog fresh?

I change the blog filter every 3,000 miles. Cereally, I actually plotted out 2014, or parts of it. I decided on my ABC Wednesday topics for every week in Round 14, back in October; didn’t write them, of course, but knowing what I was going to write about gets the brain working. Then I found the half dozen people who turn 70 I want to write about. Then there are holidays and observances. And anything I find interesting I don’t have anything to write about, I link to at the end of the month. This leaves the rest of the time for movie reviews and life experiences. In other words, I throw the blog against the wall and see what sticks.

11. Where do you do your best thinking?

In the shower, or riding the stationary bike. Or when I first wake up, which is why I like to blog when I first wake up (and don’t particularly like to blog at night).

Movie reviews: Chef; and The Hundred-Foot Journey

We saw TWO food movies in four days.

WARNING: do NOT got to the movie Chef if you’re hungry. The Wife and I saw this film Sunday at The Spectrum Theatre in Albany, and we were practically salivating by the end. We’ve seen a lot of foodie movies, notably the classic Big Night, and this was among the best. I mean, a grilled cheese sandwich looked “to die for.”

Moreover, the music was great. The Wife is chair dancing, in the theater, and she is not traditionally a chair dancer. (I am in my office, but I was too.)

Chef Carl Casper (the movie’s writer/director/co-producer Jon Favreau) is a high-powered chef at a chic Los Angeles restaurant, has a good crew (John Leguizamo, Bobby Cannavale), and an ambiguous thing with Molly (Scarlett Johansson), who runs the front. If he could only ignore the controlling owner (Dustin Hoffman), life would be great.

OK, not so great. His work ethic has wrecked his marriage to Inez (Sofia Vergara) and has strained his relationship with their young son Percy (a very solid Emjay Anthony).

I could explain more, but all I’ll say is that the Oliver Platt and Robert Downey, Jr. characters play important roles in what comes next in the film, which is a relationship movie, a road movie – did I mention the food? The Wife thought the first half could have been tighter, and some critics agreed, but I liked it all. A scene involving Carl and Molly was very sensuous, but it involved no sex, only food. The film is rated R, largely for language, which is salty.

Then on Wednesday, we saw The Hundred-Foot Journey, about a family forced to leave India, who ended up in a little town in France, aided by fate, and a young woman named Marguerite (the lovely Charlotte Le Bon).

This is another food movie, as the papa (Om Puri) decides to open a restaurant VERY close (see title) to a Michelin star restaurant, much to the resistance of his family, even his culinarily gifted son Hassan (Manish Dayal) and his siblings. But open it they do, much to the consternation of the competing establishment’s head, Madame Mallory (the always great Helen Mirren).

There’s a bunch of stuff about intolerance and acceptance and a fun little war between Madame and Papa. Marguerite is often enigmatic. But by the time Hassan makes a major breakthrough, you know how the film is going to conclude. And given the long exposition at the front end, it was a difficult film for me to love.

I mean it was fine, it was nice, it looked nice – filming in India and France helps. The language was much cleaner than Chef, rated PG. It’s your basic 2 1/2 to 3-star film; 65% positive on Rotten Tomatoes. It was like a movie you might expect to be produced by Steven Spielberg and Oprah Winfrey, which, with Juliet Blake, it was. But while there was lots of delicious food, it wasn’t filmed as beautifully as the cuisine in Chef, and I cannot explain, on a technical level, why.

I wish I had seen these movies in the opposite order.