Disqus - Latest Comments for thomqi

Re: Tourists sound off: Lasting impressions - Hawaii's Homeless - Starbulletin.com

thomqi — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 20:10:23 -0000

"Tourism environment"? Isn't that an oxymoron considering tourism destroys the environment while exchanging people's integrity for money?

Re: City's park cleanups just shift homeless elsewhere, critics say - Hawaii's Homeless - Starbulletin.com

thomqi — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 19:58:05 -0000

Kirk Caldwell needs to sleep in one of those shelters for a week and experience his belongings becoming infested with bed bugs, having to "clean" and sleep on worn our mats on the concrete floor, and shower and dress himself every morning within half an hour with a hundred other people. He'd be lucky to get six hours of sleep, and more so if it's restful.

If he has already done that, then for him to claim people should be comfortable there is sadistically inhumane. Shelters are not supposed to be containment centers for the unhoused. If that's what you want, you might as well rename them "voluntary concentration camps" since you obviously want people to voluntarily confine themselves in such places until they die. Perhaps it's not coincidence that IHS is located next to a medical examiner's building, a.k.a. morgue.

Nobody makes use of the parks in the middle of the night to play soccer or romp around, so clearing parks out at night time is not reclaiming them for public use. Instead, it encourages people to sleep in the parks during the day when everybody is out and about, and as such makes it more visible. Either that, or people don't get much of any sleep and they stumble around restless for the days on end getting mistaken for drug users when really they just haven't had any sleep because of all the harassment. And then you complain about the poor results you brought upon yourself from bullying people instead of actually working and thinking about the underlying causes.

Essentially, sleeping at all is being indirectly outlawed if you don't have the money to pay for a home or a room. Though people don't have enough money to pay for a room or home, apparently the city is comfortable leeching money from the unhoused people with fines. Which is more shameful, that elected officials encourage the siphoning of money from unhoused people and jailing them, or that people with homes demand that happens?

Yet, without a home or a room, a job is impossible to maintain. Again, the shelters are not the same thing as a home and are much more stressful. Their locations implicitly limit job search to within a commutable distance so you can make it back for meals, sleep, and showers that are only available at very precise scheduled times. Otherwise, you go hungry or without shower or without enough sleep. Little by little it wears away at you until you can't keep a job (or get hired) because of your appearance or because of work mishaps from being hungry or sleepless. Is it any wonder very few people ever make their way from a shelter to a home?

OTOH, the tourists this island mistakenly depend upon for money let litter fly from their hands more often than anyone unhoused. Do you think they care? They figure you've got people to clean up after them and fix the place after they leave. Isn't that what they are paying for? It's a giant amusement park to them, and any benefit is offset by their abuse. Honestly, for an island, and a crowded island at that, where is the logic of bringing in more people even if they'll soon leave when while they are here it makes it more crowded and more demanding on the local resources?

Money can't bring back unpolluted water and its extinct life, money can't protect you from nuclear waste, money is not a replacement for fresh air. Money is a distraction and relying upon it and the people who bring it here not caring what they leave behind is the inherent flawed foundation of tourism. Tourism doesn't help the local residents, it replaces parts of their livelihood with money that can never be used to get what they lost.

Like the unhoused, the people who do have homes very likely feel they have no other choice than to support tourism instead of the supporting their communities. Take a step or two back and anyone can see an economy based on tourism is not sustainable, that it's dependent on outside resources by design, and therefore depending on tourism to support local needs makes the local economy vulnerable and enslaved to unreliable external resources. The money the majority of local residents get from tourism is the metaphorical few coins that get tossed to humble street vagrants from passing nobles. The few residents who accumulate any sizable amount of funds from tourism are, frankly, sell-outs.

As long as we, as an island, keep hiding from the fact that we are too dependent on tourism, that we aren't able to live (if even survive) without off-island resources, then we will continue to be focused too much on survival as individuals and not enough on reviving the long lost community that helps us, as an island, become self-sustainable once again.

We gotta dig deep into this mire to set a new foundation, but we also have to stop hurting ourselves by getting out of this abusive relationship with tourism. So-called homelessness is only one of the superficial symptoms, a symptom that we should realize is revealing to us a much deeper need in our community, one of the many symptoms that will evaporate once we start addressing our unhealthy addiction to tourism and the many other unreliable outside resources. This is an island, and to ignore the potential consequences of what would happen if external resources suddenly weren't available is to live irresponsibly and ignorantly. Money can't be eaten, money can't quench your thirst, money won't keep the rain off your head, money won't save you when that happens.

Re: Mossberg Discusses the iPad on “The Charlie Rose Show”

thomqi — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 02:47:34 -0000

All 3G models _are_ unlocked, as was announced in the keynote at about 1:14:30 when discussing plans. It's even written on the wall. ;-)

Both web developers and user interface designers have abhorred Flash because of the poor navigation (doesn't integrate with browsers), additional download (yet another test for an available resource), and awkward integration within websites for at least a decade. This has been a long grievance with Flash for developers and people viewing web pages. This isn't sudden, there are many other options besides Flash, and they have already been developed and have been in use for years.

Evidence of this can be seen from how quickly web sites that are known to use Flash have already adapted for use with the iPhone over just the past three years. The shift has been happening for a long while before then, it's just a matter of time before it's completed.

Thankfully, Flash advertisements are currently broken and the web has become a lot quieter by simply viewing on the iPhone and soon the iPad. Even with replacement ads, it's easy to avoid them with the double-tap zooming that resizes the tapped content to fit the screen. The byproduct of this is the shoving of all other content from view, including the banishment of advertisements outside the tapped content.

With the open-source Webkit as a part of many browsers, the advent of HTML 5 and CSS 3 will be available instantly to many browsers at once, even during development. In fact, it's already available to some degree right now as can be seen with You-Tube, Vimeo, and more notably SublimeVideo at jilion.com which itself has full-screen capabilities. The first two don't have that, but that's not holding them back as much as being able to overlay their ads onto the videos. The other suggestion that an app could be made is also very valid. So, suggesting a wait of two years is probably from not keeping up during the last week, and so is understandable.

I think it's also worth pointing out the recent software update for adding pinch-zoom to Android devices. It actually isn't available to all devices, and some exhibit poor performance in some apps (MacBreak Weekly 178). This division of "some phones have it"/"some phones don't" creates a very awkward selling point and for owner expectations. It makes the buying experience of such "smart" phones as formidable as buying a PC because of all the variations, and support is hampered by the unknowns, too.

Apple's devices have limited the variations and reputedly excel in customer support. When someone says something can be done on an iPhone, it's much more likely can regardless of the model compared to the inconsistent tech specs amongst Android devices.

Now, imagine how much that simplifies developing applications. Developers can depend on the hardware to exist, and therefore know their apps will be useful. Buyers have less disappointment because their devices do have the hardware used by the app.

Finally, Apple has made it look easy. They started over with a well refined OS at the turn of the century and gradually added to it while refining performance along the way. Then they took the same OS and trimmed everything off that wasn't needed in a device like the iPhone. IOW, Apple not only had something to start with, they had the experience of making the necessary modifications. With their experience of customizing software to hardware, and vice versa, more variables are eliminated or minimized.

Add to that their App store (based on the experience with iTunes Store) and it's easy to see nobody can simply jump in and do the same thing. It's too late. Apple is building on their own experience, and nobody else has those experiences. The Zune failed for that reason, the poorly named iTablet and other imitations will, too.

To make it clear why Apple is excelling: Apple does not compete. As for other companies they are failing because they are competing, particularly by coming up with similar devices that might as well be non-working Lego renditions intended to work with daydreams. If a company is going to succeed like Apple then they need to not imitate the products but instead imitate the direction: cross collaboration amongst various technologies. Apple does that with hardware, software, and personal desires to use the devices themselves. Anybody can do the same, but they have to do something new, not a me-too approach but a you've-never-seen-this-in-real-life-before creation. Don't compete, innovate.

It may seem odd that nobody gets it, but it makes sense to me. People go to work for their paychecks, and they try to have what other people have. Focusing on those two interests doesn't lead anywhere, but it does entrap people in predictable lives which help give a little security from having to face their dreams.

If they every questioned why they aren't doing something new, not thinking something different, they would break free and become innovators. But they don't, it's just another day to maintain the same circumstances and prevent change other than to spread more of the same.

Re: Stories on the Street: Open Source Structures for Writers to Help Support Invisible People

thomqi — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 04:03:32 -0000

I think Steven Weaver has some good points there, especially about the "story-worthiness". Though, I think of that more in the sense of trying to make someone's life or experiences seem worthy. If successful in crafting such a worthy story, in displaying and sharing value from a such a series of events in someone's life, what does that say about the rest of their life? What does that say about others whose life's aren't so readily commercialized, that doesn't fit into the expectations of listeners, of story-readers?

OTOH, I like the idea of sharing the stories anyways. Being informative has a lot of merit. I think this is very important.

I also like the idea of creating some sort of fund. I wouldn't do that, and I think S.W. made some relevant points on that, but I like the idea. I also don't think you should feel it's been totally discounted, even after what I write next: What about considering something other than money? Take the middleman (money) out and provide what is needed for that person for that moment when you are "compensating" for what you feel you received?

Personally, I have a hard time thinking in the way of compensation between people, but that is very likely just me (planet-wise, it sometimes seems like only me). I've shifted so much, and yet this is very much something that's been with me most my memorable life. As such, I seriously question the need to make or "help" everybody "fit in" by getting them jobs of periodic work to receive periodic income to make periodic payments on housing that won't fall apart at the end of the month. If anything, people not fitting in is surely a sign that it's not what works for everyone.

As such, even though I don't believe much in the approach of money accounts (but hey, it's a start in thinking!), even though I sincerely doubt everyone could (or wants to) provide a story (another good idea to bounce around, though!), and even though I'm rather wary of promoting the inclusion of the Internet in their lives (a distraction, except where it makes sense for someone), I definitely believe the attention is worth it.

In fact, the attention is what is missing. The invisibility is a prominent indicator of this.

With further gathering of information (e.g. the seeking of stories), with attempts at providing for needs (e.g. monetary compensation personally or for shelters), with doing something new instead of just joining up with some groups who are already implementing their own ideas elsewhere, I believe you'll be increasing awareness, bringing the much needed attention that has been missing. And potentially, approaching it from a different angle.

The reason I won't discourage you from doing anything you thought of and have mentioned, even though I wouldn't do them myself, is because I would have thought they were great ideas and done them myself (if so motivated as yourself) before becoming homeless. I don't think there is a "best" way of approaching this, and instead think you are discovering your own approach. You might not even go through with it, you may end up going along a different path of interests that has nothing to do with people described as homeless. This may be just another thought of something to do. However, if this does become a larger part in your life, I don't think you can go wrong with anything you thought of so far.

With that, I'd say I learned the most about homelessness by experiencing it. Stories just don't cut it. I had heard them, I'd seen it in movies, I'd read similar accounts in novels both modern and fantasy, I'd notice people on the streets. Nothing is like having nothing. Pretending to have nothing, or having something to fallback on, just wouldn't be the same either.

Yet, being the same experience isn't what matters. Everybody's experience is different, can't be otherwise. Go for it in whatever way takes you in whatever manner fits for you. I don't believe I would ever have imagined it like this, I don't believe I ever would have learned about other people in the same way because my mind would not have been opened (or setup) in the same manner. I can't imagine what else could have happened with my life to give me this same perspective, and I certainly didn't have it before.

It's like going home with the thought of knowing someone is there waiting for you compared to going home and knowing someone won't be there because they died, or they left town, or you broke up. A different mindset opens me up to a different way of relating to whatever I'm experiencing. I believe being on the streets and learning about it is different than when living in an apartment, or living in a car, or living in a house, or living with lots of family, or living by oneself, if for the simple observation that it has been different in each circumstance. For me at least, I've notice my perspective is very much influenced by my circumstances.

OTOH, living the same way or very similarly does not net the same resultant mindset or knowledge. I know this if not for the very reason I know of no one else living similarly who thinks like I do about this. Incidentally, I haven't revealed much of my own thoughts or suggestions here since I'm trying to keep this short. (Maybe later.) So, while I can't recommend living this way or insist you need to experience something similar, I also won't discount your own ideas since from deep down you are setting up your own path to obtain the experiences you feel are necessary for later paths. Or at least that's how it feels like it has been for me, and I can't help but wonder if the same is so for everyone, even people trapped in their "normal" lives, lives of routine, whether or not living on the streets.

If you really listen to the stories, whether or not the stories have much truth to them, you'll likely figure out whatever type of compensation would be relevant for them, if any is needed or wanted. Thinking beforehand of ideas doesn't hurt, though, and being malleable in your approach will definitely help.

Everyone is different. One way of living doesn't fit.

Re: a proper grown up

thomqi — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 01:33:46 -0000

I'm sure you are already there, when you aren't doubting it.