Month: January 2006

Electroconvulsive Therapy

Yes, like all the other gullible fools, with highly reactive immune systems, I have invested my hard-earned money in a mosquito-click ™. On the tin it says that as few as five clicks will inhibit the histamine reaction and 10 clicks will also neutralise the foriegn matter injected by the insect, by denaturing any proteins in them through electric pressure.

Well, I should have guessed that if I suffered enough from the bites to pay $20, then I was gonna need a lot more than 5 clicks to eradicate the histamine. I should also have guessed that the place where the reaction is least bearable is the place with the most nerves. I should therefore have also guessed that (maybe just in my case) I get bitten on the knuckles of the hand, and have to click 50 or 60 times to deaden the area enough not to scratch.

It’s funny that when you describe using this product as “clicking“, it seems a lot less unpleasant than “imparting a 13,000V shock into the nerves of your hand, causing painful involuntary galvanistic spasms, and deadening the nerves“. What’s more, if the thing is able to denature proteins, it must be able to do the same to other proteins in the skin that ought not to be modified.

Anyway, it’s bleedy irritating to have to electrocute myself repeatedly every time I get bitten, so I shall return to my favourite wonder-drug (Anthisan of Aventis Pharma Ltd, UK). A lotion that is unlicensed in Australia, but which really works. So, whoever is next over from England – bring a tube or two for me will you? I have a feeling this summer is going to be carnivorous.

Post-modernist left-wing feminist lesbian analysis, step aside!

It appears that what I do for a living is established enough to support parasitic ‘ologies’. It’s incontravertably so when induhviduals can produce the following, without a trace of irony, or embarassment:

New sources of value are laying the groundwork for an entirely new media value chain; one which leverages micromedia to deliver personalized, post-branded attentionstreams of chunked and microchunked disposable and essential media to communities of connected yet ever more hyperpolarized consumers.”

This microchunk leverages your collective attentionstream to homogenize [y]our hyperpolarized community into a vast post-post-branded collective intentionality of ridicule.

Or, in other words, they said: “lotsa blogs lately“, and I said: “bollox“.


This post about the mind’s ability to understand massively garbled text is little short of astounding. I’ve seen this before, but I thought (in line with my new years resolution to continue blogging regularly) I would post it up here anyway.

A conversation starter
What can you deduce about the way the mind (or at least the bits used to read text) works? Oy it is nt eh jt to he te ft ad lt ls of te pe to be ae to ud it. (Obviously it is not enough just to have the first and last letters of the passage to be able to understand it.)

So the letters within the words are being used in some algorithm, even if the algorithm pays less attention to the order of the letters). Q: What are the factors that make a word recognisable? If I mangled ‘Typoglycemia’, would you find that as easy to interpret as the word ‘understand’? I guess not, which implies that we are already attuned to the words, based on their frequency in our vocabulary. The word order may provide hints in many cases. What else is going on?