It never really changes

So here I am thinking about life. Has much really changed in the past 2000 years? Will it change a lot in the next? Let's compare myself to my Roman colleage of yesterday...

Until recently, I had a nice condo with indoor plumbing and central heat. He did too. I have a dishwasher, clothes dryer, self-cleaning oven, and microwave, even a vaccum cleaner to speed up my house chores. He had servants to do the same things. On weekends I can kick back and go to a ballgame. He had the Colliseum. Until recently with online banking, I paid my bills with checks. He paid his bills with checks. I can take a sunny vacation to CA, HI, or Mexico. He took sunny vacations to Pompeii and Herculaneum.

I'm sure my Roman colleague would have thought that life was pretty good, that he was living in a golden time. He can go from Asia to France with a single passport, a single currency, traveling all the way on paved roads. Life was civilized, orderly, and there were many amenities. I can listen to my mp3's while surfing the net, fly to most places in the world with my passport and get cash out at the nearest ATM.

But while it may seem that nothing changes, things do get better. My Roman counterpart could never see the view of earth as seen from the heavens, he will never experience seeing Star Wars on the big screen.

So it's with mixed feelings that I think of my counterpart 2000 years into the future. I can imagine that he will experience many of the same things I do today, like working, paying bills, taking vacations, and thinking about his children's educations, but he will also experience many wonders I can only dream about, things that I wish to experience. Like space travel, longer life, houses that clean themselves. Perhaps instead of movies you are imersed via a brain interface where you actually live the movie through a characters eyes...

Yes, we live in a wonderful modern age, but we're not as modern as we like ourselves to think.

Why I'm not buying a Ford

I'm a Ford guy. You know how some people love Chevies, or some people just like Levis? Well, I like Fords. Growing up my parents had a Ford LTD II and a Mercury Cougar. The first car I bought was a new 1991 Ford Escort that I loved and put 130,000 miles on before giving to a cousin, who then put another 80,000 miles on it before it gave up the ghost in an accident. And when I saw my first Ford Escape, I pulled up along side it on the hightway for several miles just looking at it.

However, even though I really need a new car (as I just have a motorcycle now), I don't see myself buying a new Ford. Which is very depressing for me because as I said I'm a Ford guy. It's not that I have some wierd obsession with the blue oval, it's just that I feel very comfortable with the interior designs of Ford products. I like how the instrument clusters are laid out, how the buttons feel under my fingers. They are clean, uncluttered, and rounded. On GM products they tend to be squarer, more anuglar, and busier. I took good looks at BMW and Volvo too, but the controls were so numerous and so small that I couldn't figure out what to push without putting on my reading glasses, and found the cockpit more confusing that a 737's.

But there are no good Ford products anymore. Let's say I want to buy a basic commuter car. What is Ford's answer? The Focus. Hmmm, let's compare my 1991 Ford Escort to a brand new Ford Focus:

Gas mileage: the '91 Focus got 40 miles per gallon on the highway and I was able to get 32 in the city. The '05 Focus gets 35/26.
Winner: Escort

Leg Room: in my '91 Escort I could sit my 6' tall self in the back seat with the front seets pushed all the way back and not have my knees touch the front seat. In the '05 Focus, my knees are burried into the driver's seat.
Winner: Escort

Price: my '91 Escort cost $9000 with every option but air conditioning & automatic transmission. An '05 Focus similarly equipped (no airbags, no traction control) is $16,000. Even including inflation that's a big jump.
Winner: Escort

Hmmm, so Mr. Ford is asking me to pay more money for a car that gets worse gas mileage and has less legroom that what he offered 15 years ago? I'll hold on to my money, thanks. I mean, how hard can this be? If you can do this 15 years ago why not now?

I don't see why I should pay more money for an inferior car. What's my solution? I'm checking out ads for 10+ year old Ford Escorts :)

Il Papa

Thank you Pope John Paul II for being a champion of human dignity. I don't agree with your position on birth control, abortion, euthanasia, or even homosexuality. Nor am I Catholic, though my father was raised as such. Nor do I have a special affection for Catholic doctrine or some of the things the Catholic church does.

But in you I found someone who is worthy of praise. I believe you were truly saved by the Virgin Mary during the attempt on your life as you so believe, and feel that you are connected with Jesus and with God in a way I hope I can achieve. You always reached out to the common people, and unlike many in your position - or truly of many in power - you opened your heart and yourself to the world, and truly cared about God's creation and God's people.

I miss your presence already. I may not be Catholic, but I am Christian. And while, as I said, I cannot agree with many teachings of the church, to me you rose above the differences between the denominations. You were still my spiritual shepard. And you were so not because you were the pope - I reserve the right to not like the next one - but because of how you conducted yourself in your papacy.

You were a beautiful human being who lead a fruitful and inspiring life. It is my sincerest hope that you find happiness in heaven for the gifts of love and prayer you have bestowed to us in this world.

Thank you Il Papa, may you rest in peace and be with God.

Hollywood Movie Ideas

With a three month old baby, it's no wonder that I haven't gone out and seen any movies lately. And to be sure there are some worth seeing. like Ray, The Aviator, and Million Dollar Baby. But there's also a lot of crap out there. And there's also a dearth of original story ideas - most of the big movies are just versions of printed material. Even Sin City is based off of a graphic novel.

So in the spirit of "if you can't beat them, join them", how about we look at history? Real history., as we all know, is far stranger - and more movie worthy - than fiction.

I'm reading "Collapse" by Jared Diamond now and several stories leap out:

Human Drama: what was going through the mind of the guy who felled the last tree on Easter Island. Was he saying "let's see how those damn liberal environmentalists like *that*!". Or perhaps he's thinking "with this tree I can make a canoe and make it to Marqueses at last! Let's see the wife try to find me now!" Or we can do a reminiscense like Death of a Salesman. "Back when I was a boy, there were trees a plenty. Now people just want to have flat land to raise more chickens. Too few trees to make a ladder to haul around those moari statues anyway, so they figure they'd rather cut down the last tree than have it be a reminder of better times..."

Adventure: the saga of Einar Sokkason. Seems Norse Greenland was a pretty bloody place a thousand years ago. So there's this guy by the name of Kolbein Thorljotsson. His buddy's relative uncle dies after his boat is shipwrecked on the Greenland coast. The man's bones - and his ship's cargo - is found by a Sigurd. Sigurd takes the stuff back to the town of Gardar and after the Biship takes possession of all the goods - gotta pay for mass somehow! - Ozur, the dead man's nephew is incensed. He appeals and loses (hey - who's gonna side against the Bishop?), and in anger vandalizes the ship - now belonging to the Bishop - which causes the Bishop to say that it's now OK that Ozur be killed. Which in fact happens, as the Bishop's assistant - probably tired of Ozur's bemoaning his fate - takes an axe to him during mass. Sound's pretty intense right? Now, you'd think that would teach you from messing with the Bishop, but no. Ozur's relative Simon rounds up his buddies - Kolbein included - to seek redress. Of course they kill each other (how poetic!) and a brawl ensues, where many men where killed. Kolbein is now no longer popular in Greenland, so he sets off to Norway with a polar bear as a present for the King. The King keeps the bear and gives poor Kolbein nothing, so Kolbein attacks and wounds the king. Now no longer popular in Norway either, he sets out to try this luck in Denmark but drowns enroute.

Or, there's the real life story of Eric the Red. Happy life in Norway. Kill some folk, get exiled to Iceland. Kill some more folk, get sent to other part of Iceland. Get into a quarrel yet again, exiled from the whole island this time. Go west yet again and find Greenland. Was Eric the Red really a bad person? Or was he just misunderstood. Oh, he had a temper and everyone knew it. So a few people died in quarrels - happens all the time these days (982 AD). But look what he gives to the world - the discovery of Greenland - of the west long before Columbus. And what was so great about Columbus anyway? He just hits a lattitude and goes west and when he lands thinks the Carribean is India. What kind of risk was that compared to what Eric did?

Personally I think the saga of Einar Sokkason has more chance of success. What do you think?