There always seems to be the risk of losing data. Therefore I avoid doing it. It seems like a big waste of time. Yes I recognize that the slackers and crackers have found ways into the code to hijack web sites, but who in the world cares about this one? Yes, I do, but besides me? So much!!
All posts by j'bug
bank trauma now healing
On the 14th of August I received notification that my credit line had been reduced to $500. OK, now, I don’t often use that card, but it is important to have it for school, etc. The whole thing started in August last year when I started my checking account with Bank of America. During that transaction, I cancelled three previous BoA credit cards that had accumulated through BoA’s acquisition of previous banks I had credit cards with. None of those cards were in active use. Here’s the trick. They never stop associating those accounts with the original owner of the cards for record-keeping purposes.
So, when I signed on to my online account, two of those cards were showing as active as part of my overall banking portfolio. Now, to make a long story short, I used the current card for overseas travel, and paid it off online. The problem is that I didn’t credit the correct account, which didn’t show up as an option. I figured, if you click a button that says “pay this” it should enable you to pay it. Well it paid one of the “defunct” accounts. I didn’t know anything was wrong until the bank notified me that my payment was delinquent. OK, so in the month between when I paid the wrong account and their credit department squared the deal, I accrued a small amount of interest that was attributed to the correct new card. I didn’t know that because it showed up after the mistake had been corrected. I learned how to stop showing the “defunct” credit accounts from an Online Person.
Well, it is now well into April, all the school bills had been paid, and I threw the bank’s cards and checkbook into the drawer for the summer. In August, I am notified that my credit limit has been reduced and that the account is delinquent. OK, so I mope for 9 days then pay the small sum due. But dang it, it went into the “defunct” account again. So, I call the bank and they tell me to show up at the store. I show up and I am told that they cannot fix the problem, that I must call the Online Banking department. So, the count starts: first call, first person. Visit to the bank, second person (who can’t help me), second person calls Online Banking for me; talk to third person who cannot help me because I am not in front of my computer, and the second person is no longer able to sign in to online banking as a customer any more because of security issues. Third person says good bye. I go home and call fourth person in Online Banking, who starts to analyze my problem. I get disconnected. I call again, and talk to the fifth person who can’t help me, but says I have to talk to Online Bill Pay person. I talk to Online Bill Pay person, person six, who helps me configure the account correctly to delete the remaining vestiges of the “defunct” credit account and add the correct account. Funny that the wrong account is there automatically and the right account has to be added on. The Online Bill Pay person, person six, says she cannot fix the thing that started this problem and directs me to the Credit Card person, number seven. The credit card person patiently listens to my story, and it is with her that I learn the credit accounts never are and cannot be deleted. No one has yet answered me why the ‘defunct, cancelled” accounts automatically show up in Online Banking. But person seven still cannot fix my problem. She points me to the Credit department. Person eight is a “credit analyst.” He actually understands the problem as all the previous individuals did, but can actually do something about it. He fixed the interest accrued in April-August and reset my account to the correct credit line. All is forgiven, all is forgotten. All is well, I am done.
I will make a copy of this and give it to the bank guy, person two, so he can understand how frustrating this is for the customer. I don’t blame any of the persons in the above list. The system is built that way. I’ve spent a total of about 4 hours on this. Enough!
UPDATE!! October 8, 2009
The bank now says that I owe this account $11.51. They’ve screwed it up again. I think I’ll just call in and say this card has been stolen.
epson printer puzzle
How do you print an 11×17 page from a pdf file? We tried to print it to an Epson 1400 and were unable to get more than about half the page. It turns out there is an “Advanced” button in the print dialog that allows you to print the page as a graphic image. Check that box. Weird, obscure, terrible. I have two Epson printers at home. The ancient one prints fine and we can still get cartridges for it. The other one, a pro 4800 has the most inconsistent and terrible drivers in the world. This seems to be running true with this photo 1400 as well. Who would think to go to the Advanced button to print a page which by all accounts looks like it will print fine with generic settings in the dialog box?
to euthanize my cat
I am so sorry this blog has been negative lately. I am appreciating the sunshine; the fire I burned outside last night brought enjoyment; my wife and children are constant joys, even my mother-in-law. Praise be…
My ~13-year-old cat is suffering from kidney damage and his health is deteriorating. After diagnosis, the vet told us that the cat would not recover his lost kidney function but that a diet change might help him get back to normal. Well the food helped his kidneys to work again, but he started peeing everywhere in addition to the box we had provided. Enough of that. In addition, he is not gaining weight or returning to his normal happy self.
We can’t have that in our house and live in it too. The cat cannot control himself. We are now looking at euthanizing the animal who has been our companion for 12 of those years. I weep thinking about it.
things that irritate me
I am sorry for the negative note, but there are things that irritate me. Do you know that there are conventions in place for driving that tell us before we ever come to a stop sign or stop light what to do? Well there are, If there is a four way stop, and you come to a stop before anyone else, you can go first. If you and somebody to your left arrive at the same time, you can go first. If you and somebody else to your right arrive at the same time, you must wait till they go before you do. Here is the thing that irritates me. People who, thinking they are being polite, or giving you something, or according you privilege of some sort, and wave me on irritate me. They think for some reason that you need to be allowed to do what you are, by convention told to do anyway. Or breaching convention they wish to allow you to go first when you arrive at the same time or later from the left. I try to ignore these people, but when it is really my right to go first, by convention, I feel angered because it looks like them waving me on is something I am obeying. I feel like stopping in the middle of the road to prevent them from going. I feel like getting out of the car and asking them if it is OK to go now. I feel like getting pissed off. I realize that there are so many people doing this completely idiotic thing, that I would spend my day being angered by them and reacting to them. I feel like giving them the finger. I am far too polite and respectful, however, to do any of these anger-induced things.
I thought I got over road rage in Birmingham AL. But this is a new thing. I haven’t found the zen of traffic at stop signs, yet. I will. There is no fruit in revenge, or violence, or trying to shame them into doing what comes automatically for a socially conscious driver. They are just humans, and they may really be trying to be courteous. Who am I to stop people from being courteous in such a rude world? Well, it certainly would be counterproductive to be violent when much of what my life is concerned with is peace.
To the idiot drivers who never went through driver’s ed, I am sorry for my anger, sorry for my anxiety. But I will continue to ignore you even as you continue to ignore common sense. I will not try to tell you that green means stop and red means go. You would not believe me. That is too obvious. The more subtle things like traffic conventions are beyond your ability, even as being kind towards idiots is beyond mine.
How about people driving with cell phones attached to their psyche? It is illegal in some states for good reason. How about tailgaters? How about drivers who pay more attention to their passengers than to the road, or traffic? How about people who take half a mile to accelerate to 35 miles an hour? The list is not endless, but long enough for me to desire even more horsepower to get around you, and away from you.
god forgets?
Excuse me for bringing this up again, but a leader in the Assemblies of God said, “The very concept of ‘atonement’ means ‘to cover.’ Or, as David put it, ‘As far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us’ (Psalm 103:12). God’s forgiveness includes His forgetfulness. He is not interested in broadcasting your failures. Instead, He throws around you His robes of righteousness.”
I argue with none of this but what is emphasized above. Does God’s forgiveness truly include his forgetfulness? This is a difficult problem for one reason only: political. I would feel free to criticize this remark, even publicly, but I agree with what this leader is doing and do not wish to cause him trouble. What I would like to do is criticize the remark without having it reflect on this person’s otherwise much desired leadership.
To do that, I would like to set the remark in the context of a fairly primitive theological view. It is primitive, not because it is generally biblical but because it refuses to use the light of logic as a test for theological statements. Let’s make up a new word to fit the problem: theoillogical. That is not to say that all true theological statements are comprehensible, but that some are beyond our logic. The above statement is not one of those.
One thing we have learned in the last 2500 years or so is that humanly perceivable logic is actually true, despite the curious fuzziness at its limits. The core of logic, though empty is nonetheless true. If it is not true then, everything we have constructed around it is also without plausible connection to our rational perception. The world then becomes a complete mystery, and all our science is still completely in the dark. I cannot accept this consequence. Kill me now. If our logic is disconnected from reality, then most of what we know is wrong. Let the world end now. It isn’t worth trying to square things away any more.
Rubbish. We may not know everything, but we know some things.
The other possibility is that the theology is wrong. Is it possible that some things can be known of God? Is it possible to know what God can or cannot know, at least categorically? There is another issue: is the God I believe to be, worthy of being my God? The answer to the first question that bears on the second one, is that, categorically, any God must know more than I do, both about me and the universe. If that simple requirement isn’t met; if that isn’t the God who is there, then don’t bother me any more with theology, I am an atheist. Or, better, if there are superior beings who don’t qualify as Gods, then I would be happy to meet them as fellow travelers in this universe.
I hope this clears things up. Though this leader’s God is great, it is not great enough to know my sins I haven’t forgotten. That God doesn’t qualify categorically.
Actually the God I worship is greater than this leader’s God. My God still forgives me, covers me, redeems me, even though my God knows everything about me. My God, the one who created logic, and for that matter, all truth, is worthy of me, is not less than me, is the maker, the master, the holder, the origin, the all-encompassing one, whose beginning and end are incomprehensible, and who, arguably, is beyond human logic, impossible to prove the existence of, and scientifically uninteresting.
I think I’m going to hunt for more on this later. Who knows…
an interesting proposition
I bumped into an interesting blog Feministe through a tweet by @kidsgoape. It concerned the prospect of not assuming the gender of a child, but letting the child choose their own gender. Click here.
Here’s my take on the issue. It is clear that there are a small percentage of cases where the attribution of gender because of genitalia has caused psychological problems for the child. But this is a very small number. I am guessing that number must be less than 1 percent, less than those who eventually declare themselves to be gay.
I agree with Holly that mistakes have been made, and against the absolutists who force the gender issue, I say, “Give it a break! There is a wide variability in human children, enough to suggest that absolute answers are mistaken.” But I say this to Holly as well as to the physiology=>Gender police.
Holly, attempting to protect the tender sensibilities of those few children who are traumatized by this issue, she wants to force all parents to allow their children to decide what their gender is. This is as much a mistake as allowing the normalizing power of patriarchy to guide the decisions of women. Most kids, under Holly’s rule would choose the gender their genitalia dictates, but some who would otherwise prosper in blissful naivete would be thrown into a psychological thunderstorm and suffer terrible doubts, and worry incessantly about their gender.
I understand and appreciate the sentiment that drives the radical to want things to be different, but to totalize a rule because of the warranted mistakes of a few parents is overreacting. The reason radical feminism failed to keep the attention of the public is that ordinary men became their enemies. Holly will make enemies of ordinary parents with this line of reasoning.
got a new camera
I bought a new camera last week. This week I am learning to use it. It is a Canon 50D, a mid-range prosumer body with a 28-135 zoom lens. When I am happy with it, I will pass it off to my daughter who will be using it for school in the fall. I haven’t been much of a photographer in my life, preferring to see life through my eyes than through pictures that are mere slices of history. The same goes for movies. My wife doesn’t have this aversion.
I think my aversion to seeing the world this way is related to my feeling about people, not my enjoyment of material nature, the blue sky, green trees, flowers, or even my enjoyment of people. As it turns out, I am actually very shy about asking people if I can take their picture. It seems rude to me. I don’t know whether this is a natural aversion, or some sense that I can’t make an object of them. I think I should learn to ask people if I can take a picture of them. Who knows the truth of this?
some weeks are curious
I had every intention of working on my dissertation this week, but while, not precisely distracted, found it difficult to actually take the steps required to make it that far. I did work on a paper for SPS (Society for Pentecostal Studies) that was requested just last week because of a dropout of one presentation. And I did read a few pages of Foucault, but in general, I didn’t move forward on my “real” work. That’s OK. I met an interesting person (see i met a rainbow), had a ~good few days at work, and spent some time with my wife. I did read some, but for the most part I was on low-productivity.
I did this on Feb 20 2009. Seems right now. bye, into the ether…
tweet tweet
I thought I should get closer to my friends, and one thing I did was to get an account at twitter.com. I’ve had some fun with it. I am keeping in touch with the friend I wanted to and bumping into another world that is interesting on its own terms.
Marshal McLuhan said “The medium is the message” in the book Understanding Media. He said, “In a culture like ours, long accustomed to splitting and dividing all things as a means of control, it is sometimes a bit of a shock to be reminded that, in operational and practical fact, the medium is the message. This is merely to say that the personal and social consequences of any medium—that is, of any extension of ourselves—result from the new scale that is introduced into our affairs by each extension of ourselves, or by any new technology.” (p. 7)
This is an entry about twitter.com. The medium of near-instant status updates, often with strangers that are interesting to us, and interested in us creates a community that, for all its random, serendipitous, occasional, and absurd content and context, nevertheless provides a community that is at once personal, transparent, and engaging. One learns quickly that one cannot say anything on one’s mind, but there is an appropriate protocol. These distant relations, made close by the magic of the internet and a society that hungers for contact nevertheless engenders a sense of responsibility to be the best we can be, at least true, even if that truth is buried in an alias.
Can one stalk in twitter? Sure. But then are there any public forums where it is not possible to stalk? No. Security is only as good as the paranoia and kung fu of the developer. It is also not possible always to detect who the stalkers are. But that doesn’t mean we can hide and not present ourselves, allowing the damaged and terrorizing elements in our society to rule our behavior. That doesn’t mean that ordinary caution should not be used. But, that caution should match the necessity of the medium.
Since anyone on twitter can see my tweets, I shouldn’t think that what I’m saying is private, even though what I’m saying is personal. The risk of abandoning privacy for the hope of interesting connections is the nature of the twitter game. The question becomes, Is the hope of community worth the risk of exposing my soul?
I stumbled across http://omegle.com. In it you can have a chat with total strangers. I talked to a university student in Britain. My daughter has carried on numerous chats with people from all over the world. If you can imagine, twitter.com is more personal, because you choose to follow the people and groups you do. You can carry on long term relationships with people, follow their interests and lives. The medium is the message. How do we interpret that message? Is the message that we can be connected, even though we are strangers? Or, that humans are social creatures? Or, that connectedness leaves us less lonely? Or, that information is more than merely data to be stored then used?
I think the message is something like this. The internet and all its social structures are essentially human and the metaphor that the internet can be understood as a form of biological life becomes more complete, the more we populate the medium. There is as much to fear and as much to hope for in this digital world as there is in ordinary life.
From Friday, 24 April, Tweet Bomb.