Technologically Inspired

April 10, 2009

Yakri’s adventures in college #2

Filed under: Uncategorized — Yakri @ 7:05 am

Cameron A. Pickerill-Trinitapoli

April 7th 2009

English 150

Word count: 1,103

A Serious Response To Societal Suicide.

Authors Colson and Morse began “Societal Suicide” with the events surrounding the legalization of Gay marriage in Massachusetts, and the result; thousands of gays rushing to several municipalities to be “married”. Shortly thereafter President Bush announced his support for a marriage amendment, which would ban gay marriage, assuring that it would be argued about in every corner of America. They say marriage is a cornerstone of society, intended to bring couples together and produce offspring. Colson and Morse site studies that claim boys who grow up without fathers are more likely to become criminals, and girls who don’t have fathers are more likely to have children while adolescents. The authors say that while their critics concur with this, they also claim that gay “marriage” would not harm heterosexual marriage. Contrary to this, Colson and More believe that the over whelming evidence points to a family lead by a women and a man as being the best structure for raising children and cultural health. They declare that if we do not ban gay “marriage”, there will be a rise in criminal activity and chaos in the streets. Despite the evidence and opinions presented by Colson and Morse, and in some cases because of it; I believe that it is morally wrong to deny to others, something to which the rest of us are entitled.

Let’s say I have a friend named Alejandro, who is Hispanic, and he wants to marry his beautiful girlfriend Haruhi, who is Asian. However, there’s a small problem with this, as it turns out it isn’t legal for Hispanics and Asians to marry or be joined in a civil union in their state. Further more, the US government is debating on passing a constitutional amendment that would force all of the states in the USA to ban the marriage of Hispanics and Asians. You might think that this is ridiculous, rather racist, and would never happen in an accepting country like the USA. Nevertheless interracial marriages were illegal throughout most of the United States until a Supreme Court ruling in 1967 legalized interracial marriage, and for a long time afterwards it was a matter of great contention. Today, a similar matter is under debate; only in this case, it is an argument over whether or not homosexual couples should be allowed to marry. I think, for the most part, we can all agree that it is morally wrong for us to deprive one of the basic rights we have as human beings to a certain minority just because they are a minority. So why is this injustice allowed to continue in the case of gay marriage?

If you would believe Colson and Morse, we should not allow gay marriage because many religions say it is wrong. But I would remind you that there have been many times in history when people have thought something was good, like: slavery, witch burning, oppression of women, racism. Or that something (or someone) was evil, like: modern medicine, other religions, and other races. Yet we have looked back with the power of hindsight, and wondered how such a thing could ever have come to pass. I don’t follow any particular religion; instead I have only my own sense of justice and morals to guide me. There are many other people like me who do not ascribe to these beliefs, but rather they believe in other religions or none at all. Ours is a country built on acceptance and freedom, you can believe in whatever you want, but is it right to try and force that belief, or some part of it, on other people?

In the case of gay marriage, I’m simply asking you to respect the right of others to their own belief, not to change what you yourself believe in.

In their article, Colson and Morse try to show that gay marriage should not be banned just because of their own belief, but also because it would be harmful to society, and the traditional institution of marriage. They attempt to do this by providing both facts and opinions on why and how gay marriage would harm society and marriage between heterosexual couples. Although Colson and Morse are entitled to their own opinion, I must however, most stalwartly disagree with their facts. Though the statistics they provided for their article may be accurate, Colson and Morse do not cite their sources in the article, nor the context in which these statistics were taken, nor do they say when these statistics were taken. All these things are of course, of the utmost importance to the meaning of the statistics, they could have been out of date, or they could have come from irreputable sources, or any number of other such problems. Perhaps more importantly, although I have read their article all the way through several times, I still cannot see how gay marriage is linked to teen boy’s being more likely to participate in criminal activity if they grow up without a father, nor how girls who have no father are more likely to have children while still teens. All the statistics provided by Colson and Morse are on traditional heterosexual marriages or couples, since we have no evidence as to what effect gay marriage would have on society, I think it likely that it would actually have a beneficial effect.

Both reading, and writing about this subject has given me a chance to think on what this argument is about. It’s not actually about what’s good for society, or statistics or anything like that. It’s just two sides arguing, verbally fighting if you will, over an object of perceived value. The reason that marriage is being so vehemently argued over, is not for it’s legal benefits, but for it’s moral and emotional connotations. Colson and Morse’s so called fact’s did nothing to support their own argument, as such, their argument is only their opinion, and should not be made out to be based in anyway on fact. However, their article did give me an opportunity to at least somewhat understand their point of view. And while I do understand it up to a point, I firmly disagree with it, because I believe it is morally wrong to oppress any minority and prevent them from having the same rights as the rest of us.

“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere”

-Martin Luther King, Jr. April 16th 1963.


March 27, 2009

Yakri’s adventures in college #1 my first essay.

Filed under: College stuff. — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — Yakri @ 7:58 pm


March 10h 2009

English 150

Word count: 1,103

A war for them, fought by us, in response to Broyles essay.

Broyles starts out by establishing his credibility through talking about his experiences as a marine in Vietnam, and how he believes his time in the military helped him despite the fact that he had previously tried to avoid being drafted. He also claims that he has a more personal stake in the war, since his own son is in the military, contrary to many of today’s politicians who do not have any family members in the military, and who have never been in it themselves. Broyles maintains that if it were the children of the people leading the country that were out there in Afghanistan and Iraq right now, then they would pay more attention to solving any problems that might arise. Broyles says the only solution to current military problems is to bring back the draft, because America’s volunteer army can’t fight a long drawn out war. Broyles argues that a volunteer military is not of higher quality than a drafted military. He also disagrees with the people who think the ‘social elites’ will still find ways to avoid the draft. According to Broyles we were able to defeat the Japanese and the Germans during WWII using the draft, so it should still work well today, and according to Broyles the military problems in Vietnam were not caused by the draft. He ends his argument saying that because of what we have learned from the past, we will now be able to instate a fair draft, and if the war is worth fighting, all American’s should have to fight it. I believe that while Broyles makes some good points, reinstating the draft would do a great deal more harm than good.

Reinstating the draft would greatly reduce the morale in both the military and in the country at large; additionally it could lower the overall quality of the military. A fair draft would require both a lowering of standards and a reduction in the amount of time soldiers receive in training, since a drafted conscription would last 2 years, and currently 4 years are required to allow for a full year of training. However, even if the standards for the military were not lowered, the draft would not be fair, as people could avoid being drafted by: gaining weight, doing drugs, committing crimes, placing too low on test scores and a variety of other things. On the other hand, if standards were lowered to achieve the goal of a fair draft, you would be letting in some individuals who are: drug users, criminals, unable to pass current military tests, or who are overweight, and so on. That would be very detrimental to the overall fighting capability of the military, but more than just that, the effect on morale from having these kinds of people in the military would be significant. Some people try to argue that there are already soldiers in the military that are not happy to be there, and this is true, however these soldiers currently make up the minority and they are still there by choice. With the draft, you would likely see that reversed, you might have a couple of people who want to fight for their country and are happy to be forced into it, but most will begrudge being there. In addition, since it was not their choice to be there, they will begin to resent the government and military for their situation.

Broyles uses World War II as an example of the draft working well, however I think this is a bit of a misrepresentation. Broyles makes it sound like we won WWII because of the draft, and while perhaps we couldn’t have won without it; I do not think it’s accurate to say we won because of it. The draft during WWII was instated for reasons of survival; we had no choice but to instate the draft, because there was no other way to get an army large enough to fight a war of that size. We didn’t beat the Germans or the Japanese because of the draft either. We beat the Germans, for example, because we could build tanks so fast, and supply them so well, that the German troops effectively ran out of fuel and ammo to kill us with. In the case of our fight against the Japanese, one of the largest deciding factors were the aircraft carriers. Quite simply, they were what was needed to win the war and we had more of them, a lot more of them. Of course, there is more to it than that, but in simple terms WWII was won with economic power. The draft in WWII was not an advantage, simply a necessity.

The draft should not be instated for purely, or even partly political reasons. Two of Broyle’s reasons for bringing back the draft are: firstly, to get people from the higher ranks of society such as politicians and their relatives into the military, and secondly, that the draft would be a true test of public support for the war. I do not believe these to constitute valid reasons for taking such a drastic step as to bring back the draft. The trouble with reinstating the draft to get people from high society into the military is that they make up the vast minority of this country, so the vast majority of the people that you will be forcing into the military will come from middle and low class society. The repercussions of such action would be wide spread, however they will effect the rich and the powerful least of all. Then the problem with instating the draft to see if the public supports your handling of the war, is that you’re doing something that could badly damage the US military, and thus cause a variety of negative side effects in the war, just to see if the public likes how your handling the war.

Through reading Broyles essay and writing my own there are a few conclusions to which I have come. The draft would destroy morale, currently we have a well trained military filled with people who choose to be there, and a country with the greatest level of respect for their troops, however the draft would change this drastically. In World War II the draft was enacted because it had to be, otherwise we faced destruction as a nation, but there is no such imminent threat to our nation now, at least not from military forces. Broyle’s would like the draft to be instated to get the politicians more involved, but I think that the wide reaching negative ramifications to the rest of the population do not justify instating the draft for political reasons. Lastly I believe it would be reprehensible to our country to reinstate the draft, because of the devastation it would wreak both psychically and mentally on our military and nation

December 1, 2008

LOVE – The MMORPG – My opinion

Filed under: Uncategorized — Yakri @ 11:59 pm

This game looks great, and I’ll probably play it when it comes out.

For all those complaining about the graphics if games like world of warcraft and runescape can be as successful as they are with the graphics that they have, then this game shouldn’t have a hard time filling up a 200 man server or two. And as for those who only want super high tech graphics, check out gears of war two, COD 5 and Mirrors edge, those should be right up your alley.

As for the game play, the two things I want to see is the tools for manipulating the world to be very free form and easy to use, and for the bad guys to have a very good AI. Because 1) I want to be able to build a mountain fortress with a huge labyrinth and escape tunnels and various other defenses. And 2) I want the bad guys to be smart enough to attack it, and maybe even destroy it.

By playing games like Shadowbane, NWN1, and Runescape, when there are now many games out with graphics along the lines of halo 3, GoW2, and various recent MMO’s. I’ve found that graphics aren’t such a big deal, I found Shadowbane to be much more fun then many other recent MMORPG titles, and NWN1, well what made that fun was the great challange in making a good character (I played a level 20 pvp server a lot). Because they are/were open and their were so many ways to do things.

Awesome graphics are worthless with out cool and innovative game play, but not the other way around.

LOVE I think has a great idea, what annoys me a lot in other MMO’s is how hard it is to make any impact. It was a little bit possible in Shadowbane, since as a powerful nation leader, you could destroy other players precious city’s with impunity, and more or less take control of the server.

The reason I think love will be very fun to play, is that you can make an impact, that’s more fun then nearly anything else I can think of. You can build, and destroy, and your only limit is your imagination. Well, maybe the game won’t live up to expectations, and maybe it will, maybe it will surpass them. It’s all irrelevant, as we will find out one way or another. Now this is far more long and rambling then it needs to be so I’ll try and make some points.

1)The graphics are fine, they are artistic and will not stop this from being a good game

2)The actual combat doesn’t matter so much as the things that lead up to it. The AI, the terrain deforming, the items you can find or create. If those are good (and in the case of items, numerous), the the combat it self only needs to live up to the average shooter type game.

3)It’s impressive. This is a game made by one guy, and it’s and MMORPG, AND it’s innovative, trying out new ideas. That means that this is a whole can of awesome. Doing something like this takes talent, vision, creativity. Over all, the fact that it’s being made is really cool by it self.

4)Other games with similar or worse graphics have done well. Because they tried something that others hadn’t.

5)This isn’t like other MMO’s, as such it fits a niche. I think it will be a game that enhances what actually makes MMO’s fun, playing with other people. The graphics and quests, and monsters, and all that crap isn’t why MMO’s are fun. It’s because your playing with other people. And this opens up great opportunity for things that the developers never intended to happen, to happen.

There is nothing quite like hack and slashing your way through a dungeon and jumping up on a railing because it looks cool. And then someone asks where your pet is, so you press the button to tell it to return to you. Seconds later it round the corner with a massive horde of frothing and the mouth baddies thirsty for your blood. Or falling into the pit of death for the third time, this time because you were laughing your ass off at the previous two times.

Things like that are what really what make MMO’s fun to play.

For more info on LOVE check here

and here


October 30, 2008

Greetings Citizen!

Filed under: Uncategorized — Yakri @ 9:27 pm

Hello any and all future readers of my blog! This blog is about the nonsensical journeys of a 17 year old white male, who is greatly inspired by the advances of modern technology and everything it makes possible.

So, what will I actually write about?

I’m going to try and introduce myself to a lot of things, some of which I’m going to have a really hard time getting a hold of, due to being dirt poor. Such as the Google android, and the Epoc neural headset. But I’ll give it a shot.

I’m doing to write how I feel about programming(how easy is it, boring or fun, stuff like that), and trying to get a job at a local electronics store (I do have a plan!) from the perspective of a la~zy teenager.

I’ll also try and write a bit about the internet, and may do some video blogging.

I may also cronicle my pathetic attempts to learn mathimatics in various (hopefully) interesting and round about ways.

I also have another blog on wordpress, TrickingHaze It’s about the fairly new sport, tricking. The blog mostly has health, diet, and fitness information on it right now, but there will be more tricking related stuff in the future.

« Newer Posts

Blog at