Adventures Of The Humanaught

Here lies a home for the plethora of random meanderings that I sometimes find myself stumbling through.

Sunday, May 28, 2006

End Of The (Blogger) Line

And so ends my time using Blogger. I've switched to WordPress, which gives me a bit more control over everything. As it's all on my server, I'm not dependent on any third-party company (Google) and I like that.

1. If you're viewing this because you've subscribed to my RSS feed (Bloglines, Mozilla Live Bookmarks, etc.) please go to my site (www.thehumanaught.com/blog) and click on the "Subscribe" button in the sidebar to update to the proper feed.

2. If you've found this site through my Blogger profile, please come check out my site for the latest updates. It's worth the click, I swear! ;-)

3. And anyone else... I just dunno. The idea of this post is just to tie up some loose ends on changing everything over to my new system.

C'mon over and let me know what you think of the new design.

Thursday, May 25, 2006

Chairman Mee-ow!

I guess a bunch of Chinese foreign students are upset over the parody their New Zealand uni newpaper did on Chairman Mao (cover left) and communist China.

As such, there've been numerous protests from the Chinese students exclaiming they've been insulted to their core by such blatant defialment of their once great leader. In near tears (crying, not laughing like the rest of us), they exclaimed that it was on par with someone making a funny cartoon of...

Jesus


George Washington


President Bush


Comparing Mao to George Bush and George Washington is fair (all being despots), but Jesus, really? I mean I'm no Christian, but in many circles he's touted as "The Son of God!" And that's a hell of a title; kick's the ass off "Great Helmsman" no matter how you say it. The students also, through their tears of the travesty, said it's an insult on par with the Muslim cartoon thing that was a hot topic a couple months back.

It's part of Islam to not make cartoons of the prophet or Allah, as they could be misconstrude as false idols - best I can figure Maoism is NOT a religion and Mao is NOT a God - despite his devotees possibly believing otherwise. Besides, that 'cartoons of the prophet' thing was a farce. A well ochestrated one, but farce none the less. Just a great way to stir up some hate and up the reasons why the Islamic world should hate the West.

This cover issue though, is just stupid. I mean, we wouldn't criticize anyone for making funny pictures of Hitler (and he killed less people). The REAL kicker is the paper's issue was taking the piss out of China not having freedom of speech nor freedom to protest - two things this whole fiasco draws attention to. The students are protesting an insult to the leader of a party that doesn't allow you to protest. Like time travel, this does my head in.

Besides Mao's looking sexier than ever, don't ya think? He didn't look half as good in that wax rendering of him I saw in Tiananmen.

Tuesday, May 23, 2006

Shifting Commitments

It seems no matter how hard I try, I can't stay on task with any one thing for long. It's troubling, and completely the product of these wonderful things:
  1. No Attention Span
  2. Too many hobbies
  3. Horrible procrastination
I'll get deeply into something for a few days (or weeks) and then it shifts to a new interest. Photography/digital photo editing, film editing/making vblogs, Web design, studying Chinese, reading about history/politics, reading fiction, reading blogs, making my computer look cool, learning some new songs on guitar, writing songs, writing... it's endless really - but the idea has been illustrated.

ANYWAY, with that in mind, after four or five days break from Web design I'm back on it today, as I've completed my third video blog (vBlog.03: Field Trip!). I know these things are becoming few and far between, and longer and longer (vblog.01 - 10min, vblog.02 - 13min, vblog.03 - 15min) but well... perhaps a little longer, but less frequent is the better way to go - meh, maybe not, I still like vBlog.01 the best. This last one is quite cute though as it gives a glimpse of my students (all 500 of them) as we all went out on a field trip to Labor Park.

If you watch it, leave some comments on the vBlog page.

Sunday, May 21, 2006

Us Against Them

This is certainly not a new topic for China bloggers, but I just finished reading an article on ESWN entitled "How I Was A Chinese Traitor" and it brought back memories of my own similar experience in Beijing.

For those in too much of a hurry to click and check out the article - essentially it's a translation of a blog entry of a Beijing journalist who helped out a German friend that got swindled by a quite popular tea scam. The Chinese journalist then got called a traitor by the swindlers.

When I went to Beijing last year with Martin we got taken in by the same scam but at about half the cost - we were lucky, though it didn't feel like it at the time. Yay for looking poor I guess.

The article is really interesting because it shows what is a common China occurance, and anyone with a Chinese girlfriend, boyfriend, wife or husband would likely agree. Everytime I go to the markets with Maggie the Chinese people - expectedly - rip me off, out right lie to me, and try to cheat me in anyway they can. They do it poorly, and it brings shame to them as it really illustrates their ignorance. I mean, not to sound judgemental here (ha!) but what foreigner is stupid enough to pay 500 RMB (about $75 CND) for a pair of obviously counterfeit Nike sneakers or Converse hoodie?

Maggie then scolds them for being blind idiots that didn't see that she is Chinese (and therefore SHE would know a fair price - because not in my entire life in the West did I ever need to know the price of products, or even see a shop for that matter, what with being the decadant and agoraphobic person that I am). She then proceeds to barter with them and gets the price down to somewhere between what the Chinese people would usually pay and what the foreigners usually pay (like 30-90 RMB if the original asking price is 500 RMB).

The shopkeepers then, perhaps (but inconsequently) wrongly assuming that Maggie is my tour guide, berate her for stopping them from ripping me off. Much like the author of the ESWN article above, they essentially call her a traitor to her country.

Now, keep in mind I have two very strong principles when I go shopping. A) I understand that these people are poor and as such if they try to charge me a little more than a Chinese person, I'm not offended, as long as that price is not them blatently banking on the fact that I'm an idiot and they can lie to and steal from me. This to me is simply immoral and unethical. B) Should they act this way, I just move on. I don't bargin, I don't do any business with them at all.

I like bargaining, when done, as the guidebooks would have you believe, all in 'good fun'. If the 'fair price' for something is say 50 RMB, and the shopkeeper might be willing to go as low as 40 RMB to stop you from buying it at another shop (taking a cut in their margin just to keep the business), I might be willing to go as high as 60-65 RMB just to be done with the transaction. Somewhere in there is the settled price, and that's fine. But if I walk up and ask how much a pair of sunglasses are and the shopkeeper says "220 RMB" because they are a "good brand" - I walk. No little shop servicing the common people of Dalian is going to sell sunglasses that are either real or expensive. In Canada I'd pay $10-15 for a pair of sunglasses - MADE IN CHINA! Why would I EVER pay more for something IN China than I'd pay in Canada? Despite me explaining this to a countless number of shopowners... the effects have been minimal. They need a newsletter, or Web forum or something... someone should spread the word to them on what common prices are in Western countries.

Anyway, that's my rant on why I take no shame in shopping at Walmart (fixed prices) for near everything I can. Bargaining may be "fun" for the first little while, but when your white skin removes most of the decency from a person in their quest for the ultimate money grab, buying day-to-day items can become a tiring pain in the ass and after a year and a half here - my ass is sore as.

Friday, May 19, 2006

AdNon-Sense

I've been in a bit of an e-mail exchange with Google AdSense lately. They wrote to inform me that one of my pages is in violation of their policies.

I'll be the first to admit, I may have skimmed that policy/terms of agreement bit a tad quickly before clicking the little "I Agree To The Following Terms of Agreement" button when signing up, but really... violation?

I checked out the page and what they had a problem with was a bit at the bottom that was informing visitors to use the links I had added to the site to direct them to my hosting provider to get more information about a good hosting package I'm affiliated with.

Figuring the little Googlebots made a mistake thinking I was talking about Google ads (as in their policies you're not allowed to encourage visitors to use the ads), I wrote Google back and they told me I'm actually not allowed to advise visitors of MY pages to visit ANY advertising on MY site - Google or not.

Does anyone else see the problem in this? When did Google start dictating the content of our sites? I mean, I can understand that they don't want you pooching their click-thru system by telling people to click their's, but what right do they have to tell us that we can't advise people to visit affiliate programs' Web sites for more information about the program?

Here are the two e-mails... [blablabla] has replaced the violating phrases so as not to get in trouble again. Fuck, I wouldn't even care as the AdSense on here is not too important, but it's directly connected to my new site, where it is important... so if I pooch it on one, it's pooched on the other.
From: adsense-support@google.com
To: Ryan McLaughlin
CC: adsense-support@google.com
Subject: Google AdSense
Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 18:37:44 -0700

Hello,
While reviewing your account, we noticed that you are currently displaying Google ads in a manner that is not compliant with our policies. For instance, we found violations of AdSense policies on pages such as thehumanaught.com/blog/2006/03/lil-somethin-for-everyone.html

Publishers are not permitted to encourage users to [blablabla] Google ads or bring excessive attention to ad units. For example, your site cannot contain phrases such as "[blablabla]," "[blablabla]," "[blablabla]," or other similar language that could apply to the Google ads on your site. Publishers may not use arrows or other symbols to direct attention to the ads on their sites, and publishers may not label the Google ads with text other than "sponsored links" or "advertisements."

Please make any necessary changes to your web pages in the next 72 hours. We also suggest that you take the time to review our program policies (https://www.google.com/adsense/policies) to ensure that all of your other pages are in compliance.

Once you update your site, we will automatically detect the changes and ad serving will not be affected. If you choose not to make the changes to your account within the next three days, your account will remain active but you will no longer be able to display ads on the site. Please note, however, that we may disable your account if further violations are found in the future.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
The Google AdSense Team


From: "Ryan McLaughlin"
Subject: RE: Google AdSense
Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 23:55:12 -0400

Hi GoogleAdsense, while reviewing my account, I noticed that I am currently displaying Google ads in a manner that is completely compliant with your policies. For instance, I found no violations of AdSense policies on pages such as thehumanaught.com/blog/2006/03/lil-somethin-for-everyone.html. It does (rather, did) contain phrases such as "[blablabla]," but it was NOT referring to any Google AdSense advertising. The entry, as this is a blog, was outlining details about an affiliate program I am connected with for my site hosting. It is very clear in the text what I am referring to, and there could be no mistake on the part of my viewers in thinking I meant for them to [blablabla] on my Google ads.

I understand Google's need to use bots to monitor the millions of sites that use these ads, but I think if a violation is found, perhaps a human being is best to check out if it's a valid violation or not. I thank you for your warning, and please let me know if you find any other non-violations to your policies.

With regards,
Ryan McLaughlin


And they said...
Thanks for following up with us. Please be aware that our program policies state that web pages may not include incentives of any kind for users to [blablabla] ads [[[it should be stated that the only incentive I stated was "to get more information"]]], including encouraging users to [blablabla] any ad, regardless of content. This policy is not specifically restricted to ads being served through Google AdSense.

Sigh. Anyway, here's an interesting statistic, to show how useless they really are: I consume two things most mornings for "breakfast" - the contents of these two things are 75% the same. Three out of the four things included in each are identical. One is oatmeal, the other is coffee. Weird eh?