Lorindól @ Lorindol @sopuli.xyz

Posts

0

Comments

173

Joined

2 yr. ago

Practice. A lot.

In my teens I wasn't able to carry a tune at all. Our music teacher marked me as "hopeless" after hearing a me singing a few lines.

This pissed me off royally. I had no desire or illusions of becoming a great singer, but I would not accept being "hopeless". So I started practicing with simple children's song melodies and recorded my singing with an old cassette recorder. It was indeed pretty awful at first, but I slowly got better. Then I got my driver's license and could sing along the songs from the radio and my cassettes while driving alone, it was a big step up from singing quietly in my room.

I also started playing the guitar to get a better understanding of musical theory, which was helpful. After I had learned the basics of playing rhythm guitar firmly I learned to play the piano. I believe that singing the melodies while playing them on the piano was essential to my development, since I could instantly hear if I did not hit the correct note.

By my mid-twenties I could already carry tunes easily and even got a complements about my singing voice. Key changes and modulations were still pretty challenging, but I kept on practising whenever I found the time.

Now in my forties I can repeat a melody correctly after hearing it once or twice and I consider myself a decent singer. I don't sing karaoke or any solo performances, but I do love singing backup or as part of a group.

If my music teacher hadn't embarrassed me publicly all those years ago, I most likely would have never put any effort in getting better at singing or learning to play instruments. I started this lifelong project purely out of spite, but it became a major and very dear part of my life. I even owe my marriage to music, while we were still dating my wife confessed to me that she most likely wouldn't have even noticed me if I hadn't been playing the guitar at that one summer party. Thankfully I wasn't too hammered at that time ;)

I had this before my hearing was damaged in my mid-thirties. I could hear if any electrical device with large filter capasitors was turned on, even from another room. I discovered by accident that the high pitch noise was emitted by the capasitors when I was fixing old audio gear, I guess they vibrate while doing their job or something like that.

I talked about this with my friend who was specializing to be an ear/hearing doctor, his theory was that my upper hearing range was a bit higher than average. He also talked about how brains filter sensory data and it could just be that my filters weren't blocking these frequencies.

It was also impossible for me to sleep in a room if there were any mosquitoes. The whining of their wings even in the far side of a room was maddening, so I had to kill them all every night before hitting the bed. The one good thing that came out of the damage to my hearing was that the mosquitoes bother me no more, unless they fly right in front of my ears.

Yeah, "Time Enough For Love" ended up on that list mostly because it's so different. That made an impression on me when I read it in high school, in the way of "Huh, I guess it's actually possible to write a book like this". It had a lot of interesting ideas but the narrative sprawls around pretty wildly.

Riftwar Saga basically takes Tolkien's Middle-earth setting and mixes it with our own world's Middle age cultures, plus magical stargates and an invasion from an another world. It's not a ripoff in any way, it carries it own story proudly but the similarities with names from Tolkien's works was a bit distracting at first. These were the first books I was able to read entirely in original English in my early teens.

There are so many, but here are a few from the top of my head:

The Silmarillion, J.R.R. Tolkien.

The Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien.

Time Enough For Love, Robert A. Heinlein.

Starship Troopers, Robert A. Heinlein.

Don Quijote, Miguel de Cervantes.

Divine Comedy, Dante Alighieri.

Dune, Frank Herbert.

Paradise Lost, John Milton.

Childhood's End, Arthur C. Clarke.

The Riftwar Saga, Raymond E. Feist.

Jos 1900-luvun lopun RUK-kurssin pioneerikomppanian poikia on uskominen, niin miinakarttojen tarkkuusvaatimukset olivat kyllä ainakin tuolloin aika korkeat. Sen verran kovaa kiroten ne niistä aina puhuivat.

Omassa yksikössäni henkilömiinoitteiden laskeminen käsiteltiin yhden aamupäivän aikana, mutta kyllä meillekin painotettiin kuinka "nämä kaikki sitten kerätään joskus pois, joten merkitsette määrät ja sijainnit karttaan tarkasti". Ja sitten taisteluharjoituksessa tällä opilla pyyhittiin persettä ja käskettiin iskemään "sakarat hiekkatielle niin saatanan nopeasti kuin vaan mahdollista ja rasti karttaan jälkeenpäin."

Joten nähtäväksi jäisi, miten tositilanteessa toimittaisiin.

Ukraine has lots of valuable natural resources, but Russia has much more of everything. The biggest reason for the invasion is most likely that Putin could not let a "brother nation" prosper and drift towards Europe and being a functioning democracy.

Russia's population might get wild ideas if they saw that their Ukrainian cousins' standard of living starts to rise rapidly while they have to endure living under a fascist dictator. And substandard and underdeveloped infrastructure, due to the rampant corruption and a government who doesn't give a shit about the areas outside the larger cities.

And it has Derek Smalls in the backgroung waiting for his turn.

Absolutely brilliant.

I have not claimed any profession.

In my original comment I did state that I got into officer training, perhaps you assumed that as a career officer? I admit that the conscript army system is so profoundly different that I could have been more precise.

I assumed that the later mention of university studies would have made it clear that I was not a career soldier.

It is also true that I cannot verify my claim about the IQ test. Like I said earlier, it was a part of another student's thesis. We got to hear the results after the test, then the gathered data was processed anonymously. If I recall correctly, the study was more about the qualities of the test itself, the qualities of the participants were not important. I think everyone got a free movie ticket for taking the test and I spent mine on "Kill Bill" 1 or 2.

But tell me, why would I want to lie about this? To what gain?

No edits have been made and you know it.

Just admit you made a mistake and we'll laugh this off.

Are you familiar with the concept of "projection" in psychology?

Yes! If you know how to look up edit history, please do so! There has been no editing on my part.

You're getting quite incoherent.

I have edited nothing, so it matters not if the edit history is publicly available or not. If this is your attempt to discredit me, it's pretty pathetic. You just didn't bother to read what I had written, right?

Our universities do not use IQ tests to select students nor have I claimed that they did. This is your own mental fabrication.

Depending of the situation, in my country we DO refer to ourselves as "officers" or "reserve officers". Spesific rank is used in the garrisons and drills or when an individual is interviewed by the media. In the refresher drills the reserve officer ranks are equal to career officer ranks.

I understand that this all may be new and confusing information to you, but some things can be done very differently in different countries.

You are quick to leap to wild conclusions.

The army test is taken by every conscript at the beginning of the mandatory military service. It is an aptitude/IQ test which had a lot of similiarities with the Mensa type test I took later. You need a high enough score to get into NCO or officer training. The ones who graduate from the officer training may apply to the military academy after their mandatory service is over.

And like I clearly wrote in my original comment, the test I took later was a Mensa type test, using similar questions. It was a part of cognitive science or psychology department's student thesis, not a Mensa test. I majored in educational psychology, so I do have some understanding of what IQ tests are. I got a high score in one and it resulted in absolutely nothing in my life.

I have not claimed to be a career officer. I am a reserve officer, I did not wish to apply to the military academy, therefore the refresher courses. And even if my soldier's oath would not prevent me from discussing service matters with aggressive strangers on the Internet, my common sense would.

You are indeed a peculiar one. On my first comment I tried to validate the very point you made of IQ tests being poor indicators of true intelligence by sharing a personal experience (even though I know the fallacy of empiric experiences) on the matter. Yet you vehemently attacked my statement and accuse me of lying.

Lastly, your opinion of me is irrelevant, only the truth is relevant. One would gain nothing from lying to strangers. Perhaps practising some restraint on your part would result in more fruitful and pleasant dialogue in the future?

I've never taken any preparatory courses for anything and I'm not really good with mathematics, so no and no again.

And why I put the quotation marks around good is a reflection of my native language, we do that when one wishes to express their personal disbelief or doubt. I am well aware that the ~140 score is considered a good one by the designers of the test.

I served in the late 90's and there have been several refresher courses but I'm not at the liberty to discuss any specifics of service matters publicly. If you have done military service you know this.

No.

The whole point - which you seem to have missed - was that getting a "good" score in some test can mean very little or nothing in real life.

It just means that you're good at that sort of mental exercise.

We had to take a mandatory IQ test at the beginning of military service, my score was in the highest percentile and because of this I ended up in officer training. It wasn't the Mensa type test, they measured our language, math and pattern recognition skills with a vast battery of questions with a time limit.

Many friends of mine got average IQ scores in the army test but they are the ones who are really smart and extremely succesful.

In university I got a chance to take the Mensa type test and got ~140 points. I just laughed it off since at the same time I was struggling to pass my courses, while my friends who got average scores passed them with ease.

I do not consider myself really "smart" in any way, I just have a very good memory and I'm pretty adept at solving problems. Otherwise I'm just about as average a guy can be.

Few years ago I did a full rebuild of a top-of-the-line tube radio from 1958 and use it daily in my living room. My stereo tube amp is from 1963 or 1964. Both sound astonishing.

My binoculars are from WW II - era. I had to realign the prisms when I got them but the optics are about as good as you can get.

I also use an iPod Nano 2Gen almost daily, I think I bought it in 2008 and the original battery can still hold enough charge for 4-5 hours of continous play. Incredible device with a neat perfect UI. The physical jogwheel can be operated through pocket fabric, so I can switch songs or adjust volume while running without even having to remove the iPod from my pocket.

When TOS aired the first time in my country, I was 9-10 years old. I found it mind-blowingly good compared to other shows at the time. I had learned to read when I was 4 and I read a LOT. And not just books for children, I also read classics and nonfiction natural science as much as I could.

I was a strange kid, but all my reading had made me ready to understand the social commentaries in TOS and the fictional scenarios really opened the concepts up for me. I often went to the library to research stuff that was explored in the latest episode to make sure I had understood everything.

My son is 13 now, we started to watch the TOS DVD-set together and he loves it. Although he is older than I was, he is not an avid reader like me. He needs many of the concepts explained and subtle guidance to understand the underlying larger themes, but he has shown advancement and after every episode we have a small discussion. I love teaching him this way.

We just finished season 1 and my son noted: "Athough this show is ancient, this stuff is still relevant and happening even today, isn't it?"

Apparently the original team behind Star Control is making a direct sequel to II, since SC 3 was done by a different studio and did not follow the storyline that the creators had in mind.

And it's supposed to be released this year. They are calling it "Free Stars: Children of Infinity", since they don't own the rights to the Star Control name. But they do own all the rights to the content in SC 1and SC 2, so this could be fun!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Stars:_Children_of_Infinity

I did like SC 3 as well, but it wasn't nearly as great as SC 2. I can barely remember the main storyline.