So, I was playing with Lizzy (for those of you who don’t know, we are having a girl, and her name is Elizabeth Sophia Melendez) this evening and the sweetest thing happened. Some background first. Lizzy hates daddy… or so I thought. Every time I would touch the belly, she would stop moving/kicking and pretty much ignore me. Well, turns out she would just go to sleep.
Today, I was talking to the belly, really close. I am sure she could hear my voice. Every time I spoke, she would move about, and even kicked (or punched) my face. It was so adorable. Shay felt her gravitate towards my voice. Then, she calmed down when I put my hand down on the belly and was still. I continued to speak while resting my hand and she laid calmly.
Now, that alone isn’t proof of her love for my voice and hand at least, however, when I removed myself, she went nuts. Then I went back and started talking with my palm rested over the belly and she calmed again. As soon as I removed myself, she went nuts. I did this about 4 times, and each time, the same result. Ta-Da! Scientific method worked.
So I conclude that “Yes!” my soon to be here daughter loves the sound of my voice and the heat that emanates from my hand. I am officially in love. 
June 25, 2009
Baby Loves Daddy!
June 5, 2009
Quick Tutorial for a friend :)
Hiya everyone. I had a great question today from a friend in regards to how to attach a person’s name to an image in google search results. This is actually pretty easy, so just follow along and you can set this up yourself!
When you create your image in HTML, all you have to do is create it like this:
<img src=”YOUR_FILE_NAME_HERE” alt=”Put your name in here with a description of the image” />
Also, when creating the file, before uploading it, you may want to edit the details of the file itself. Simply right-click on the file and select properties. Select the “Summary” tab. Make sure you are in the simple summary, like below:
Fill in the Title, Subject, Author; add Keywords, and even comment it if you like! That’s it! Now, wait for Google to index the images (will take a few days usually, might be faster depending on how quickly the spider run’s over your page).
May 21, 2009
Cake Program!
Hi Everyone! Today, I have a nice image I made for a t-shirt I want to create:
copyright©2009 Steven K Melendez
By the way, you cannot use this image for profit. Other than that, enjoy it.
May 13, 2009
Possibly a definitive??? I think not!
Hello to all my readers (there aren’t many of you yet, but hopefully there will be more). I had a wonderful discussion this evening with my wife in regards to the possible and the definitive. Here is the basis of the argument, as read to me by my wife from some website (I can’t locate it at the moment, but I am sure I can edit it in tomorrow when I get the link from my wife):
a) If God possibly exists, then God necessarily exists
b) God possibly exists
c) therefore God necessarily exists
Now, my wife does not believe this statement is evidence of God’s existence, but she chose to use this side of the argument and play devil’s advocate (pardon the pun) for the sake of a rousing discussion (which in fact, it was!). Here is what that statement boils down to:
a)If God possibly exists, then God necessarily exists ->
While the first part can be true, it is not necessarily. It is stating a logical possibility. It can/should be reworded to “It is possible God exists” just for clarity sake. Let’s go on that assumption that Yes! it is possible God exists, because quite frankly, we do not know it as a fact that he doesn’t. Science has never proven a lack of existence, and religion has never proven an existence, so the possibility is either way.
What about part 2 of that statement? This is a blanket phrase which was given. It is basically saying to take this statement as fact because of a possibility. There is no logical way that 2nd part can be factual or construed from the first part. The only thing proved by the possibility of God’s existence is the possibility of God’s existence, not the definitive of God’s existence… Why? Because there is no evidence to support that statement. Here is an example of what I mean:
If 1+1 possibly equals 3, then 1+1 does equal 3. WHAT THE HECK! No way! If 1+1 possibly equals 3, 1+1 does not suddenly equal 3 just because I said so. Where is the evidence to support said statement? Now, if I can prove to you 1+1 can actually equal 3, then part 2 of my statement, “1+1 does equal 3″ is a fact. However, if I cannot prove that 1+1 does equal 3, then I have not stated a fact, rather I have stated an illogical fallacy based on non-evidence, but blanket approval of a statement. So therefore, part 2 of the my statement is false because it states a fact without evidence to support the fact. I can prove to anyone that 100% of the time 1+1 will equal 2, yet I still could not use the following argument and be correct: If 1+1 possibly equals 2, then 1+1 necessarily equals 2, because there is no evidence in the statement to prove that.
However, If 1+1 possibly equals 2 because of x, then 1+1 necessarily equals 2. However, the reverse may not apply in that situation due to logic. If all a = b and some b = c, all c = a is false because some c may not be equal to b, therefore not all c are equal to a. So… If 1 + 1 can possibly equal 2, yet I can prove it also equals 3 (keyword is prove here), that does not prove that all 2 or 3 is necessarily equal to 1+1, unless the opposite is proven. Now funny enough, my argument can be proven in reverse of 1+1 equaling 2, however, that is not the point.
So, back to the point…
This proves that the possibility of God alone does not prove the existence of God because of yet again, lack of evidence to give ground (Funny enough, I believe in the existence of God.), so let us now re-examine the statement:
a) If God possibly exists, then God possibly exists, because a possibility does not create a fact without evidence to support it as such
b) God possibly exists
c) Therefore, God possibly exists
That is the only logical way to approach it. As I said, I am a believer in God, but I do not give it a religion due to my beliefs in religious hypocrisy (don’t tell me it doesn’t exist, I can give a million examples per religion). But, on a logical level, God cannot be proven. That is why it requires “Faith”. The only ground any religion has to stand on is faith, as there is no physical evidence to the contrary. A common example of evidence that I hear of is the Bible. That is a book. Books are written by man. Man are inspired by a multitude of things. Not one person can factually say a man wrote that book because he was directed by God to do so. You may believe that to be the case, but you have no evidence to support it. Remember, when you make a statement as fact, it is your responsibility to back that statement up with evidence, not the other way around, because the other person made no such claim so they hold no responsibility to explain lack of your evidence or existence of your evidence.
Discuss Away!
-Steve
May 12, 2009
Currently working on Tutorial #2
Hi everyone, I am currently working on my second tutorial for asp.net with vb.net. It is about controls (still sticking with the basics). It should be ready at the end of the week!
May 5, 2009
Windows 7… Finally installed!!
Howdy everyone! I just finished installing most of the software I was hoping to install for Windows 7. Let me just say, installation went without a hitch. I chose to do a fresh install so I can get a nice clean slate and a good idea of the expected performance from the new operating system. As far as a full 0-day review is concerned, I cannot offer one yet. I love the interface improvements (such as the jump-lists, online ID integration, better menus, etc), but because I am not fully used to them yet, I am still spending some time poking under the hood more than any serious error hunting or nitpicking at this time
Well, at least I can say the backgrounds which come with the OS are Uber Funky… here is the one I am using:
Anywho, it looks like MS is trying to go more ‘people’ friendly with W7… I will speak more on the OS later in the week and over the weekend. Ciao for now:)
May 4, 2009
The idea of the Multiverse
Yet again, I have stumbled across an article titled “How to map the Multiverse” by Anil Ananthaswamy.
This article got me to thinking why their is so much, or at least has been so much debate over the idea of more than one universe. Is the name itself implies, a universe is a sole thing/object. It encompasses all. However, this type of thinking is similar to the archaic thought that we are the center of the stars and the sun revolves around us.
Think of it this way. When the big bang occured, our universe was created. What about elsewhere in the void of the plane our universe exists in. It is quite possible, and most likely the case, the big bang was just one of many big bangs. Does it not seem likely, considering how ego-centric our scientists seem to be, the scientists were wrong from the beginning in regards to how a universe works. Sure enough, I believe that our variant of universe they have mostly correct, and while they are ironing out the theories on how our universe works is all good, maybe stepping outside the box and thinking “hmm… shouldn’t there be more outside of our own little spot in the void”.
Just a note: What I mean by “Void” is the space our universe is encompassed by. I do not believe it is likely our universe was created in nothing. My own thought is the void is a large empty space, kind of like a vacuum but not exactly. The thought were my mind abstracts slightly is the idea of a “wrap around” void. You start at one point in the void. If you keep moving in any direction and keep going straight, you will eventually get back to where you started. However, another thought I have is the void itself is limitless, although this is also abstract. The idea is the emptiness has no boundary. However, without a boundary, it becomes even harder to describe and harder still for the human mind to correctly comprehend. Even if you can ‘base’ understand this concept, just sit and try to put in your head a completely limitless black void. Sounds almost like classic purgatory 
But I digress from this point and move back to topic.
So back to the article and my opinion, it seems science is still existing in the old way. What are your opinions on this? Do you agree, disagree, have a different POV, whatever? I wanna hear about it! Be sure to read the article first, as it has a lot of good stuff. If you are stuck on some of the ideas, such as string theory, space-time, etc… they are all accessible from Wikipedia.org
Response to “Top 7 Reasons People Quit Linux”
Here is an article I thought both interesting, slightly uninformative, and plain pompous -Top 7 Reasons People Quit Linux. The author of course is writing for Linux World, so I understand his Pro Linux POV. However, keep in mind I consider myself more technically savvy than most, and I find his reasons people quit to be lacking. I am a Windows user. Why? For his first reason actually… that, and his last reason.
Reason #1 – Linux does not have proper App support yet. Plain and simple, I am a Web Developer, and the swath of tools available to me within Windows makes Linux not even an option. Sure, I can sit in Notepad and GIMP all day, but why deal with the hassle of downloading a sub par (think of GIMP as Photoshop lite, while it has its ups, it is not a full fledged creation tool) program and a plain text editor when I can use a full featured IDE like Visual Studio combined with Photoshop and Illustrator for my Vector stuff. Big difference here in usability. So his first point is actually correct. Stick with what you need to get your work done. However, from there he gets rather pompous and right on the ol’ Linux high horse.
Reason #2 – Hardware issues abound in Linux. It isn’t quite as simple as he states. A good portion of companies that create hardware do not have proper driver support available for Linux yet. It just doesn’t exist yet. Linux isn’t main stream enough for these companies to support Linux with drivers yet, and those that do have buggy drivers a lot of times. And while people can learn to utilize the workarounds, remember, the average person just wants to boot up and go, not deal with workarounds to get their webcam properly working.
Reason #3 – People do not like Command Lines! Look, I get what your saying here. Just learn something new, right? Well guess what, that is what is a GUI is for. Most people do not want to type in a command line. How many people do you think are afraid of screwing something up. This is the same reason why the Windows Command Prompt is barely used by most people. Almost any command which can be typed at the prompt has associated Window elements built into the GUI. Same with OS X. The OS has to cater to people, not the other way around. Don’t expect bravery from the average person on the command line front, it just wont happen.
Reason #4 – Lack of similarity to Windows/OS X. Ok, I agree here for the most part. It is a different OS, so people need to just get used to the interface if they wish to use it. However, don’t insult people with the last line “If you’re unable to adapt, it says more about you than it does about Linux.” That is plain freakin’ rude. You sound like a forum troll with that line.
Reason #5 – Linux people on the forums are mean… This is true. While the official guys are generally helpful, I find a lot of people are rude to the average person on the forums. MOST PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW HOW TO SEARCH FOR A TOPIC THAT ALREADY EXISTS BECAUSE THEY DO NOT KNOW HOW TO PROPERLY DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM!!! Be nice to newbies and they will be religious linux converts… continue being jerks, they will go right back to Windows/OS X. Don’t blame the new user for this issue. Blame usability, again. You are talking about people who are new to something and yes, they require some hand-holding. Be nice, dont be jerks.
Reason #6 – They don’t like it… And frankly, that is their right. If they do not want to learn a new Operating System, they are more than entitled to feel that way. They don’t need to give a reason which is why when they say they just don’t like it, just leave it alone. The reason’s people don’t like it are mostly stated above. So what! You don’t own them in any way, so no, they do not need to give you a reason. Stating “I Don’t Like It” is reason enough and leave it at that.
Reason #7 – After installing Linux, everything went crazy!!! I actually have had the problem where loading up Linux, I was presented with the command line versus the GUI. You wanna know something, that shouldn’t happen. There should never be a reason to be presented with a command line at boot time. For me, for some reason, Linux worked fine and all of a sudden, GRUB stopped loading properly (or whatever it is that didn’t work right). I don’t care how to fix the problem, that shouldn’t happen. I ended up having to reinstall Linux so I can go online and find out what was causing this issue. Needless to say, that shouldn’t happen. Say whatever you want, but it plain and simple is not user friendly to have the GUI stop suddenly loading on startup and to present someone with a command line and no instructions… If there is a command line to restart the GUI, it should auto run. If there is a problem with the OS, it should ask for the disk and repair itself.
So, Keir Thomas, take some advice here. If you want to give a list of people not sticking with Linux, try understanding their Point of View before spouting the same things we have all heard a million times before. Stop blaming people for wanting an OS to be easier to work with. That is why the GUI was invented in the first place. Otherwise, we might as well have stuck with DOS and just typed documents and such like that…
Why are Georgia and Texas states trying to secede…
What is going on here? The second a black man becomes president, Texas and now Georgia want to Secede from the union… This is insane, seriously. Now, personally, I do not know too much about how much ground these states are truly standing on when it comes to doing so, but what is the real reason. Here is what I can think of:
- The economy – Actually, this can be blamed on our last president, senor Bush. With his budget each year being higher than income, well, it was bound to happen. Also, the whole Republican thing of ‘Deregulation’ allowed a lot of the sub-prime and other bad credit situations to occur… based on a stupid mathematical formula. Wonderful guys, really wonderful. Sometimes, more Government is not a bad thing. In this case, there should be more Government in regards to business oversight (and no, not warrantless wiretapping). In fact, most problems this country is in at the moment started during the Bush administration. Hopefully (and I do not know if it will happen) Obama’s plan works. It is extremely risky, the whole spending even more money to try to recoup 10-20 years down the road, but you know what, FDR’s plan worked 70 years ago…
- Oh My God! It Happened!!! We have a black president! – This is what I think is a main reason two of the most racist states** (View edit below) I can think of would want to secede from the union. They will be damned if someone they still (for some reason) consider nothing more than a ‘cotton picking negro’ be president of the United States… and if it happens, well, we ain’t part of the union no more. Completely disgusting and despicable. Personally, I don’t understand how you can have racism in this day and age. We are supposed to be a people based on understanding and tolerance, not bigotry. Then again, we are technically based upon bigotry from our forefathers not considering Africans to be humans at all.
- They have a legitimate reason. – I actually don’t think this is a possibility. Texas… maybe for business reasons (they could sell the oil they produce back to the US for a killing), but Georgia. What do they produce? Nada! The state would be completely unable to purchase for itself all the necessities for modern living within budget. Since it would be a different country, there would be export tariffs charged to anyone in Georgia who purchased anything. They have little farm land, and while it is cool to visit Atlanta, there isn’t much else in the way of tourism (unless you count the beaches, but why travel ‘Out of the country’, when you can go to SC or FL and not have to worry about a passport), and I honestly cannot see them producing anything which cannot be produced within the other states. Needless to say, they do not have a leg to stand on.
So, what is everyone’s opinion on this? While they have a constitutional right to not be in the union, do they have a real reason and is it for the better of the people in those states? I think there are some other states mentioning this too, but I do not know offhand. It definitely appears racially motivated considering serious thought and coverage wasn’t given until after Obama won, but maybe I am missing something…
**Edit – While I will never remove what I originally wrote, hence it just saying to view edit, I will add something here as a point. Georgia is a 30% black state. As Shane said, it is unfair for me to call Georgia one of the most racist states. I agree, because I do not personally know every person in Georgia. I am basing my opinion off of news I hear, read, and watch about the area. The news can be very biased, so I will secede to Shane’s point on this issue (nod to Shane ). And Yes, it is nice to have civil discussion. Personally, I will moderate and remove anyone who ‘trolls’ my comments to disrupt such conversation from occuring…
Microsoft makes my day tomorrow…
In case you haven’t heard, tomorrow MS releases Windows 7 RC1 for the general public to test (I am sure it will have limited keys like the previous betas did). Here is the awesome part. The license will be valid till June 1st 2010! WOW!!!
Talk about giving people an option to test your software out. After the Vista debacle (which seems to be pretty solid now, albeit a little slow), I think Microsoft is trying to show there is another side to the company. Who knows, but all I know is tomorrow morning at 9am, I will be downloading the new Windows 7 RC and will be using it for the next year to come.
