Skip to main content

Chronic butterflies

Now here’s an inspired explanation! (-:

Imagine that you’ve wandered out to do a bit of light gardening — tend to the flowers, pick strawberries, check for ripe fruit swinging from the trees, whatever. A few butterflies flutter across your field of view, adding some bright colour & gentle activity. Nice, isn’t it?

OK, now let’s vary this scene a bit.

Instead of, say, three butterflies, let’s say that you’re joined by... well, π,000 (3,142) of them. They get in your hair, you can’t see anything worth describing, the gentle tickle of hundreds of little legs (as they walk on you) gets distracting, you can’t breathe in without inhaling one, they’re sitting on whatever you try to pick up (when you can actually see it), you’d be treading on them with each step... they’re everywhere... you’ve got chronic butterflies. Not so nice, is it?

So with many otherwise good things in life.

Say you’ve got several children to look after. Bright, cheerful, talkative (ask interesting — sometimes terrifying — questions from time to time), playful etc. But you’re the only one there to look after them. Turn your back, & things go missing... or get destroyed (seldom, thankfully, the children themselves)... or get dirtied... or get hungry... or get wet... or worse...

Individually, each problem is trivial to solve. However, you have lots of problems to solve, which tend to arrive in bunches & build up, no time to solve them in, more arriving every minute, & you have to share your attention between the problem-sources plus whatever else you might happen to be doing.

A couple of hours of this, & you can easily see how the most patient, angelic, peaceful parents can get a bit nippy, or hasty, or grumpy, or whatever very quickly whilst managing the most wonderful children (that bystanders regularly offer to adopt).

The difference is that term “chronic.”

There is no rest, no breaks, no golden fairy-ladies waving shimmering wands, nothing to give you time to solve enough of the issues to get ahead, stay ahead — ghasp, maybe even find time for yourself!

When you wind up jammed in this situation, there is always the assurance that no matter how fantastic, no matter how competent, no matter how resourceful they may be, others have been brought down as low as you (probably lower) facing the same, chronic, situations.

You ain’t a loser, you just happen to be here. (-:

Oh, yes... feel that sympathy? No? Grumble. Transmitter must be broken...

Comments

Leon RJ Brooks said…
Plonked the butterflies here, will refine them (well, their words) occasionally.

Popular posts from this blog

An Open and Shut response to Darl McBride

Hi, Darl. I see you’re being dishonest again . It’d be really nice if you could shoot straight for a change, but I think Kerry’s Dad will be selling snowplows in Hell first. Three years ago, when I first joined The SCO Group, we focused the company on the area that was most profitable and provided the most benefit to customers, investors, resellers, developers and employees: UNIX No, you focused the company on suing people, which was most profitable to lawyers and provided some golden parachutes for your buddies. People thought we were crazy. They were right. But since SCO owns the UNIX operating system The SCO Group does not own UNIX® in any sense of the word. The Open Group owns the UNIX trademark, definition and other rights , The SCO Group does not. The SCO Group doesn’t even own the UnixWare® or OpenServer® code, the rights to those are held by Novell and TSG use them only by permission and under certain conditions — which they have violate...

5x7 text dot-matrix in five minutes...

This is a fairly primitive toy I threw together today for a specific purpose, published in case it’s any use to others... feed it a list of words as command arguments, which it will then display as a 5x7 ASCII dotmatrix with ‘#’ as a dot & ‘_’ as a blank. /* * display text using a 5x7 bitmap font in ASCII letters */ static unsigned char font [] [5] = { { 0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00 }, // 0x20 32 { 0x00,0x00,0x6f,0x00,0x00 }, // ! 0x21 33 { 0x00,0x07,0x00,0x07,0x00 }, // " 0x22 34 { 0x14,0x7f,0x14,0x7f,0x14 }, // # 0x23 35 { 0x00,0x07,0x04,0x1e,0x00 }, // $ 0x24 36 { 0x23,0x13,0x08,0x64,0x62 }, // % 0x25 37 { 0x36,0x49,0x56,0x20,0x50 }, // & 0x26 38 { 0x00,0x00,0x07,0x00,0x00 }, // ' 0x27 39 { 0x00,0x1c,0x22,0x41,0x00 }, // ( 0x28 40 { 0x00,0x41,0x22,0x1c,0x00 }, // ) 0x29 41 { 0x14,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x14 }, // * 0x2a 42 { 0x08,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x08 }, ...

Citizens Augmenting Government Waste

So here we have Microsoft-funded “ Citizens Against Government Waste ” (CAGW) heavily criticising Massachusetts’s switch to an internationally accepted and open document standard (not open source, open standard — but I seem to remember a large monopolist who frequently confuses the two when it suits them). I remember CAGW, they were the organisation who had dead people writing in to support Microsoft in court a few years ago — thanks to sbergman27 for the link — is this “the dead hand of CAGW” at work again? Let’s follow the money and find out. Who stands to lose the most money and control if Massachusetts switches to an unencumbered document format? Big surprise, it’s CAGW sponsor Microsoft, through their dominant MS-Office suite. Why did CAGW list Microsoft’s suite last, after two other much-less-dominant examples which are waning anyway? If you’re inclined to wallow in additional irony, consider that at leas...