You Are All Apple Fanboys

Samsung is racing their technical timeline to introduce a 64 bit processor into their flagship phones in 2014. Why? Because the iPhone 5S has one. Microsoft touts their Surface tablet against the iPad (much like the Zune was promoted against the iPod). Windows was introduced as the answer to Apple's graphical user interface OS and the application of the mouse. Does anyone remember WYSIWYG?

My point is simple: You are an Apple fanboy even if you hate the company and culture. Why? Because they make technology work the way you want it to. Then they get on to the next project of making insanely great products. Copycats be sued. Competitors be damned. Still the tech world orbits around the base ideas Apple brings to market. 

Perhaps that is why Nike has kept the FuelBand in the iOS camp rather than branch into the Android sphere. I cannot imagine the chaos programmers endure when faced with the questions of "What version?" "What manufacturer?" "What bloatwear?" only to have the landscape change three or four times a year with Google's upgrade schedule. What a nightmare. Nike likes a winner, one that performs regularly and spectacularly, even if a little pricy. And so do I.

Thug

The sign said "705 killed on Michigan Highways in 2013". This on October 16, 2013. The total should be higher tomorrow. And what was my thought? "I wonder how many murders in Chicago so far in 2013?"

There were 500 in 2012, 204 as of July 4, 2013. 

Mostly black on black, mostly shootings. 

Two smaller communities well known to me have relatively disasterous numbers. Flint, MI has far fewer residents but holds the per captia murder title for 2012: 1 in 1613 residents were murdered. Detroit is close behind: 1 in 1832 residents were murdered.

What is it about "Thou shalt not murder" that is so hard to understand?

I hear words spewed in the popular communication channels for these communities like thug, respect, ho, bling, caish, homie, cracka, and references to self in the third person. Is this a community without the second person in grammar? A generation where even the value of the first person is lost to the third? The individual centered on the first person is selfish, self-centered. The individual centered on the second person may be altruistic or manipulative. But the individual centered on the third person is soulless. The "person" is gone, only the story remains.

I believe that it is this person, who lives in the third person, who is capable of living in a culture of things to be used for personal benefit, including people.

What level of trauma, chemical abuse, neglect and/or training has to happen before this level of mayhem is considered normal for Washington Heights, or Flint, or Detroit? 

Its very similar to the conditioning our troops receive in order to wage war and kill the man in front of you in battle. Only there is no de-conditioning because the "battle" never ends when the grounds are your home. 

I read of a young man in Chicago who left his project home to escape the violence. His intention was to become a cop and help end the rampage of death. He returned to visit friends and family still there. He was murdered before midnight on the same day. 

There is good news for these soulless men and women on the handle end of the pistol: You really can be a person again. You can be "bought back" from the hellish vapor you have become. You can find the respect that matters: first from God then from within. You can have a peaceful night's sleep without the help of an outside substance. You can, if you first respect the person of Jesus Christ and the reason why He was born. 

Thugs. Learn some grammar: Jesus came to save your first person, so you can find true meaning in service of the second person. Let the third person go, it doesn't exist.

Screens

Had a great question last night: Why are screens and information considered our Saviors these days?

Screens flicker and promise. Mesmerized kids merge their brainwaves to the speed of the game or websites they frequent. Homework slows to a crawl as the iMessages, Skype requests, and other "social" media notifications blink on the screen. Is this the best way to educate our kids?

A worksheet is a worksheet on paper and online. One is not "better" than another. However that is being passed along as educational progress in some circles. I'm not sure the research would bear out the assumption that if it's on a screen it's inherently better learned. Nope. 

What I can report is screens have been responsible for lost sleep, lies, deceipt, very low quality homework, and teachers passing off classroom teaching for online videos. Now there is the problem of time: one child is required to use her computer for assignments, even when it takes her three times longer to finish the assignment. 

Each child should be encouraged to learn. Many can learn fine with the aid of the screens. But many others need to hear, touch, and move the material before they learn it. For too many IT stands for Idiot Tech. Schools should adjust their assembly line expectations and get back to the business of learning.