it is said that you can tell whether a person is high or low maintenance by seeing how they react to the sniffles.
if they insist its just a cold, they're low, if they say they have the flow, they will be more trouble than they're worth.
anyway, i have pneumonia...
have just seen a news item on the drug p. tv3 have done a sting operation showing how easy it is to buy the base drug psuedoephadrime-commonly found in cold medicine.
i need cold medicine. does this mean that if i buy a packet of codral, i'll be followed by the police?
Sunday, March 15, 2009
the vinyl solution
graham hill did a special on beat rhythym fashion on his show yesterday and noted that their singles ae much sought after. i was sure that i had them, so i went wandering through my vinyl. i do have the singles, as well as totally wired, a buch of monochrome set, bats, clean, and so on
then went through my telve inch vinyl and spent the day listening to the birthday party, bored games, wall of voodoo
thank god for dance music. this means that i've been able to replace the needle on my stereo
then went through my telve inch vinyl and spent the day listening to the birthday party, bored games, wall of voodoo
thank god for dance music. this means that i've been able to replace the needle on my stereo
Sunday, March 8, 2009
my word
this is by way of being a reply to taniwha's comment on "the new political correctness"
I actually didn't think of the sapir-whorf paradigm when i read this, but did note its most famous application-george orwell's NEWSPEAK. i was tickled by the idea that you could change the world (or at least your little bit of it) by changing the language.
it was only after thinking about it further that this is nothing new. it is, in fact the basis behind the original political correctness. someone has been using 1984 as a training manual.
i remeber in the late eighties, going to a course orgainsed by the equal employment opportunities board. the gist was the damage that phrases can do in diminshing certain groups effectiveness. phrases like "the little woman" were right out. one of their focuses was on the disabled; how it was unacceptable to say anything that may present them as victims. one of the exercises we were given was to take a phrase and reword it to be more positive. i was given the phrase:
and translated it into
and was accused (not without justification) that i was not taking the session entirely seriously. i maintain, though, that as a literal translation, it was accurate.
at the time, much of this sort of thing was mocked but looking back, its amazing how much our language (and our tolerance) has changed over the last twenty off years.
the basic principle behind that course, and indeed poilitical correctness itself was that, while changing the messaging wouldn't change society on its own, it would have an effect.
the "out" words in the article indicate not where society was but where the legislators of the time hoped it would be. nooow that there is a new government, with a new point of view. they have changed the messages in the hope that the staff will alter their focus. what is most interesting is that neither the in or out words mention anything about healing the sick, which you might thing would be at least one of the messages the department of health would want to send.
still, the modern vocabulary is an interesting thing. the media severs up "horror smashes" and "killer storms". just this evening they have referred to the relationship between the ceo of the department of corrections and its minister as "toxic", just as they did last week with minister of health and the head of a district health board and other minister and public servants for months.
in my last post, i mentioned my wish to exclude "moving forward" from the modern lexicon. its seldom needed in a speech and seems to be the corporate equivilant of the teenagers "like" or "whatever". a place holder for an appraoaching thought.
i have also been having a battle for the last few years to stop managers using "learnings" as a noun. especially when there is already a perfectly good noun already in place.
the one that is really grating on me at the moment is "inappropriate". it seems to be a weasel word, trying to avoid making a judgement. instead it sounds vague; saying that
almost implies that, in certain circumstances, embezzling $50,000,000 might be appropriate. when was the last time someone said that what someone else did was just plain wrong?
i'm not a pedant, or a grammer nazi, really i'm not. i just prize clear communication rather highly.
I actually didn't think of the sapir-whorf paradigm when i read this, but did note its most famous application-george orwell's NEWSPEAK. i was tickled by the idea that you could change the world (or at least your little bit of it) by changing the language.
it was only after thinking about it further that this is nothing new. it is, in fact the basis behind the original political correctness. someone has been using 1984 as a training manual.
i remeber in the late eighties, going to a course orgainsed by the equal employment opportunities board. the gist was the damage that phrases can do in diminshing certain groups effectiveness. phrases like "the little woman" were right out. one of their focuses was on the disabled; how it was unacceptable to say anything that may present them as victims. one of the exercises we were given was to take a phrase and reword it to be more positive. i was given the phrase:
poor jenny is in a wheelchair
and translated it into
jenny has a wheelchair but no money
and was accused (not without justification) that i was not taking the session entirely seriously. i maintain, though, that as a literal translation, it was accurate.
at the time, much of this sort of thing was mocked but looking back, its amazing how much our language (and our tolerance) has changed over the last twenty off years.
the basic principle behind that course, and indeed poilitical correctness itself was that, while changing the messaging wouldn't change society on its own, it would have an effect.
the "out" words in the article indicate not where society was but where the legislators of the time hoped it would be. nooow that there is a new government, with a new point of view. they have changed the messages in the hope that the staff will alter their focus. what is most interesting is that neither the in or out words mention anything about healing the sick, which you might thing would be at least one of the messages the department of health would want to send.
still, the modern vocabulary is an interesting thing. the media severs up "horror smashes" and "killer storms". just this evening they have referred to the relationship between the ceo of the department of corrections and its minister as "toxic", just as they did last week with minister of health and the head of a district health board and other minister and public servants for months.
in my last post, i mentioned my wish to exclude "moving forward" from the modern lexicon. its seldom needed in a speech and seems to be the corporate equivilant of the teenagers "like" or "whatever". a place holder for an appraoaching thought.
i have also been having a battle for the last few years to stop managers using "learnings" as a noun. especially when there is already a perfectly good noun already in place.
the one that is really grating on me at the moment is "inappropriate". it seems to be a weasel word, trying to avoid making a judgement. instead it sounds vague; saying that
mr x acted inappropriatly
almost implies that, in certain circumstances, embezzling $50,000,000 might be appropriate. when was the last time someone said that what someone else did was just plain wrong?
i'm not a pedant, or a grammer nazi, really i'm not. i just prize clear communication rather highly.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
if it was fun, we'd do it for free
what with the current financial crises, there has been a lot of discussion lately about how to increase productivity.
while driving home, the other night, i heard a person of talkback claiming that part of the problem was that young people didn't have the same passion for their jobs as he (as an employer) did. the more common attitude, he claimed, was that they were simply there for the money and that they didn't actually enjoy working.''
this seems to be borne out by an entertaining article i read in the herald
first of all, people found thirty-one things to complain about their jobs before they got to pay and conditions? i'd really love to see the whole list. how long was the list any way?
the herald followed this up a forum post in its "your views" section. the replies did not suggest thaat lazy co-workers was the problem, so much as cluless managers, bitchy and bullying co-workers, lack of responsibity, clueless micromanagement (yes, i mentioned this twice), dress code. money was mentioned, but not as much as you would think.
one thing i agreed with was the tendency to use open plan offices. from the article:
i work in an open plan office. there are ten of us on one side of the floor, but to encourage teamwork, we are cramed into one quarter of the floor. this makes things noisy (especially when you are on the phone) crowded and so on. personally, i would be more productive if there were less people around.
having said that, i like my job. its varied and interesting and by doing it, i can say that no matter how sick i am, i am still contributing.
but the final word on productivity came back to a call in reply to the earlier call as to why young people are only working for the money and don't feel the passion. i'll paraquote.
so how to increase productivity? well, study after study shows that the happier their employees are, the better a company does. this could be difficult given that:
a) everyone thinks that they work harder than any of their colleagues; and
2) everyone thinks that they are underpaid for what they do
but its the little things that can make a difference. checck your office policies. do they make sense, or do they just piss people off. do you really need so much management. what support do you receive.
i am performing pretty well, at present and a lot of that is the support i've received from my bosses since i found out about my list of illnesses. their willingness to cut me a break when i need it makes me feel obligated to not only match my pre-illness performance, but to, if possible beat it.
i still think i'm underpaid though
while driving home, the other night, i heard a person of talkback claiming that part of the problem was that young people didn't have the same passion for their jobs as he (as an employer) did. the more common attitude, he claimed, was that they were simply there for the money and that they didn't actually enjoy working.''
this seems to be borne out by an entertaining article i read in the herald
it is not surprising that a recent employment survey revealed that the thing that most upsets us at work is not poor pay or conditions, or even an absence of work-life balance. It is lazy co-workers.
Pay and rewards barely rate a mention, coming 32nd on the list of things making us most cranky at work.
first of all, people found thirty-one things to complain about their jobs before they got to pay and conditions? i'd really love to see the whole list. how long was the list any way?
the herald followed this up a forum post in its "your views" section. the replies did not suggest thaat lazy co-workers was the problem, so much as cluless managers, bitchy and bullying co-workers, lack of responsibity, clueless micromanagement (yes, i mentioned this twice), dress code. money was mentioned, but not as much as you would think.
one thing i agreed with was the tendency to use open plan offices. from the article:
To the extent that changes have been made to the office environment, they are overwhelmingly negative. A study this year reported that the current trend towards open-plan offices is proving to be a disaster. The study's author noted that "employees face a multitude of problems such as the loss of privacy, loss of identity, low work productivity, various health issues, overstimulation and low job satisfaction when working in an open plan environment".
The report noted 90 per cent of open-office workers reporting adverse health and psychological effects.
i work in an open plan office. there are ten of us on one side of the floor, but to encourage teamwork, we are cramed into one quarter of the floor. this makes things noisy (especially when you are on the phone) crowded and so on. personally, i would be more productive if there were less people around.
having said that, i like my job. its varied and interesting and by doing it, i can say that no matter how sick i am, i am still contributing.
but the final word on productivity came back to a call in reply to the earlier call as to why young people are only working for the money and don't feel the passion. i'll paraquote.
"i grew up in the eighties. my father had worked for the same firm for thirty years when the company restructed and may father was made redundant. i learned that the company does not reward loyalty. if the company is only in it to make money, then why should i be any different?
so how to increase productivity? well, study after study shows that the happier their employees are, the better a company does. this could be difficult given that:
a) everyone thinks that they work harder than any of their colleagues; and
2) everyone thinks that they are underpaid for what they do
but its the little things that can make a difference. checck your office policies. do they make sense, or do they just piss people off. do you really need so much management. what support do you receive.
i am performing pretty well, at present and a lot of that is the support i've received from my bosses since i found out about my list of illnesses. their willingness to cut me a break when i need it makes me feel obligated to not only match my pre-illness performance, but to, if possible beat it.
i still think i'm underpaid though
paging doctor peckinpah
in an ongoing quest to make myself feel less helpless during my dialysis sessions, last night i took my own needles out.
as i've already mentioned, i've been moved up to the purple needles which have a wider bore and longer tubes. (it also means that i can get my bloodflow up to 350 ml/min, which i also did last night-not entirely successfully)
the longer tubes mean that i can actually grip the end with my fingers.
now to take the needles out, this is what happens. when you've been disconnected from the machine, you remove the sticky tape that holds the needles in place. you then pull the needle halfway out, put on a couple of band aids. now, get some guaze ready in your right hand, then grip the end of the tube with your left hand fingers, ignoring the fact that as you've been holding your left arm still for 4 hours and the blood in thatt arm has been going on a detour through a large piece of machinery, so that you've lost a lot of feeling in it.
now, slowly pull the needle out, while quickly pressing the gauze over the whole where the needle was. quickly is the operative word. remember that the needle was plugged into an artery, so the blood will flow quickly. don't worry, its all a matter of timing.
once the hole from the top needle has stopped bleeding, repeat on the lower needle.
last night i did this for the first time. the blood was everywhere
as i've already mentioned, i've been moved up to the purple needles which have a wider bore and longer tubes. (it also means that i can get my bloodflow up to 350 ml/min, which i also did last night-not entirely successfully)
the longer tubes mean that i can actually grip the end with my fingers.
now to take the needles out, this is what happens. when you've been disconnected from the machine, you remove the sticky tape that holds the needles in place. you then pull the needle halfway out, put on a couple of band aids. now, get some guaze ready in your right hand, then grip the end of the tube with your left hand fingers, ignoring the fact that as you've been holding your left arm still for 4 hours and the blood in thatt arm has been going on a detour through a large piece of machinery, so that you've lost a lot of feeling in it.
now, slowly pull the needle out, while quickly pressing the gauze over the whole where the needle was. quickly is the operative word. remember that the needle was plugged into an artery, so the blood will flow quickly. don't worry, its all a matter of timing.
once the hole from the top needle has stopped bleeding, repeat on the lower needle.
last night i did this for the first time. the blood was everywhere
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
the new political correctness
from the stuff website
control the language and you control the organisation. i would like to see the whole list.
now if only we could get rid of "moving forward"
"A list of words and phrases to be avoided or used when dealing with the new National Government has been circulating around the Health Ministry.
Radio New Zealand today reported the table of 26 phrases had two columns, one labelled "in" and the other "out".
Among terms now considered "out" were public health, social change, inequalities and advocacy.
Primary Health Care, value for money health information and clinical networks were "in".
Prepared by someone at ministry, a spokesman said the aim was for staff to be clear communicators.
Green MP Sue Bradford said some of the "out" words and phrases underpinned what ministries like health were working to address.
Ms Bradford said another example of an out phrase was "organised effort of society" while public private partnerships were in.
She said the focus shifted away from everyone working together for a common cause.
Labour MP Ruth Dyson said there should be a focus on the very topics whose names were now being considered "out".
Health Minister Tony Ryall declined to comment.
control the language and you control the organisation. i would like to see the whole list.
now if only we could get rid of "moving forward"
Monday, March 2, 2009
Dead List 3
Note the death of Wendy Richards
I've never seen Eastenders, so I didn't know her from there, but that wasn't her only role. On Radio Live yesterday Andrew patterson noted that she was also famous for appearing in "one of the funniest British sitcoms ever"
Anyone know what tthis was, because I only remember her from "Are you being served?' which was...um...crap.
Another death that will only resonate for New Zealanders who remember the seventies.
The dear departed is Robert Bruce, a wrestler who appeared on 'On the mat". After that show folded, he did some stunt work and eventually became an agent. His clients included Temuera Morrison and Cliff Curtis.
Apparently, Robert Bruce was his real name.
Names have been a topic much discussed of late. There seems to be a backlash against people who give their kids "special" names. There is a current thread on the Herald site that discuses this.
The tragedy is that some names gain a resonance that wasn't originally intended. The latest child deaath in NZ was a six month old named Cherish. Ironiaclly, she appears to have died from neglect...
I've never seen Eastenders, so I didn't know her from there, but that wasn't her only role. On Radio Live yesterday Andrew patterson noted that she was also famous for appearing in "one of the funniest British sitcoms ever"
Anyone know what tthis was, because I only remember her from "Are you being served?' which was...um...crap.
Another death that will only resonate for New Zealanders who remember the seventies.
The dear departed is Robert Bruce, a wrestler who appeared on 'On the mat". After that show folded, he did some stunt work and eventually became an agent. His clients included Temuera Morrison and Cliff Curtis.
Apparently, Robert Bruce was his real name.
Names have been a topic much discussed of late. There seems to be a backlash against people who give their kids "special" names. There is a current thread on the Herald site that discuses this.
The tragedy is that some names gain a resonance that wasn't originally intended. The latest child deaath in NZ was a six month old named Cherish. Ironiaclly, she appears to have died from neglect...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)