Sparky's_and_Sandy's

We joined a gym!

Both Dave and I recently suffered through very bad colds. We remarked how when we were little we would get over a cold in a few days but now, as we are getting older, we are starting to notice that the recovery time is much longer.

As well, we have our wedding coming up in 241 days (not that I'm counting) so, we figured what better time than now to join a fitness centre.

We headed over to Family Fitness on Barton Street by Centennial Parkway and took advantage of their current special.

So after laying down our money, we are now the proud owners of two fitness memberships.

To start, the plan is to workout every Tuesday, Thursday and 1 day on the weekend.

Well, today was our first Tuesday so after dinner we headed to the gym for our first official workout.

We decided to spend our first night at the gym riding the stationary bike. I'm sure my butt will not be happy with me tomorrow but for now, I feel pretty good.

And for someone who always says he's lazy, Dave really enjoyed the stationary bike--probably because it's the first time he could read his book while he pedaled.

It was a good first outing and we're looking forward to many more.

just 'cause we can

Sandy and I were sitting around with not much to do.

Well, that's not really true, but we were talking about the blog and how it would be nice to give it a facelift.

So we took one of our engagement photos and decided that it'd make a nice header to our blog.

Doing this also reduced the number of graphix loading, so (hopefully) our little blog will load faster now.

If so inclined, let us know what you think!

At a Ford plant, they can...

From this article on MSNBC--

Ford plant bans competitors' cars from lot

I'm mostly clear in what I think regarding this issue, but not firmly ensconsed in that view. Here're my thought processes--

My dad worked at Procter & Gamble for many, many years. We used P&G products in the house when we were growing up (and I still use many of 'em to this day). Those two points aren't directly related, but indirectly they are, for here's the thing (once more with the double dash, thus infuriating those who dislike the double dash...)--

We liked the P&G products! I much prefer Crest to Colgate. Maybe it's due to me using Crest since I was a kid, but when I use any other brand, it's 'blech' in my mouth. On the same note, I love using Tide laundry detergent. It's what I've always used and I like the results. Pringles chips are another thing I really like, and, lo and behold, it's another product that P&G makes. In addition to my pleasure of using (or eating) P&G products, I'm also supporting the company that employeed my dad (and me for a year, for that matter).

So I do believe that you should support the products and services of the company you work for. Since I work for a major school bus transportation company at this time, I'd be remiss if I didn't direct people to use 'my' schoolbusses for a charter if they asked me my opinion. That said, if someone charters a competitors school bus for an outing, eh, that's their decision and I won't hold it against them. Just like I'm not disappointed when I sleep over at a friends abode and I find Colgate in their bathroom. It doesn't, nor should it, matter.

So back to the banning of competitors vehicles in the Ford parking lot.

It's wrong.

Should employees of the Ford Motor Company drive a Ford? If they like it, sure. I'm all for it. And if the Ford Motor Company offers financial incentives for their employees to purchase a Ford, then, again, by all means, buy one if you want.

However, my example is thus--

I drive around in a 1988 Dodge Dakota pickup truck. If the Ford Motor Comany employs me tomorrow, I would have no qualms whatsoever driving said pickup truck onto the Ford premises. Why? Because a) I like driving my Dodge, and more importantly, b) the truck costed me 500 dollars to buy! If the Ford Motor Company can sell me, an employee, a Ford vehicle for 500 bones, I'd drive it to and from work--No problem.

But they can't, nor should they.

And therefore, I shouldn't be forced to purchase and drive a Ford to work. What I do with my money after the Ford Motor Company gives me my paycheque is mine to do with as I please, and they should not--nay, they cannot have a say in what I do with my money.

Buying a vehicle is possibly the second-highest financially 'needed' purchase that a person/family will face in their lifetimes (the first being a house). Many an hour can be put into the decision making process. Having the Ford Motor Company do an 'end-run' around that process by dictating what you can and cannot drive to work limits the freedom of choice for the family.

In a country that supposedly bases almost everything on 'Freedom and Democracy', this decision by this Ford plant is contrary to all of that.

On a somewhat parenthatical note--the Mighty Dodge will drive its last kilometer at some (hopefully far distant) point in the future. I've been doing a little research into pickup trucks, and the one I'm swaying towards is the Ford Ranger--it's got good gas mileage, and a friend has one and he appreciates it (not as good as his old Toyotas, but what are ya gonna do?)

So I'm not against owning a Ford, I'm against corporations dictating that I must own a Ford.

I don't appreciate people telling me what I must do, 'or else!'

How about you?

The floating candle edition

So we're undecided--we had the discussion about the candles before, so this is Take 2...

Now we have to make a decision between the floating candles and the big solitaire candle.

What to do?

'cause we're building that foundation

At the start of any good relationship, you, either consiously or subconsiously, start to pay attention to what sets the other person off. During the time you spend with one another, you start to realize that certain actions, or inacations even, or even words and/or phrases, have, shall we say, negative repurcussions--"Button pushing", as it were.

And if you're committed to a healthy, long lasting relationship, you file these 'button pushing' experiences under the folder "Never do this again! Or risk imminent Disaster!!" and you try your darndest not to 'push the other person's buttons'.

The problem is, as is human nature, that people sometimes like pushing buttons. I don't know if it stems from that first time we realized how a light switch works and we were enthralled that when we push up on the switch, the light goes on, and when we push down, the light goes off. Hours go by and it's light on/light off... light on/light off... until some guardian or older sibling comes over and tells you, in no uncertain terms, to 'cut that out!' (which leaves a scar on your psychie that you can never get over--kinda like the melting of LEGO, but I digress... smile )

Anyway, most people love pushing buttons--especially men. Give a man a remote and you'll never settle on one channel for the length of a commercial, yet alone an entire television show.

So once in a while, getting back from our hyperbolic tangent, we may push some relationship buttons.

One such button was pushed today.

Sandy was tired. Well, we're both tired because we've been sick, but we're on our way to recovery, but nonetheless, we're tired.

But it's a 'free' Saturday, which means that there's loads of housework to do. Laundry, dusting, tidying up--and part of that tidying up includes sweeping and mopping the main floor.

Whilst I was puttering upstairs with the linens and such, Sandy swept the entire main floor and started to mop.

I come downstairs when I'm done with the bedrooms and such, and I want to help with the mopping. So I start to mop. I proceed to mop the living room and dining room. Sandy gave up the mop under the condition that she gets the mop later to do the kitchen.

So I'm done my areas, and hand the mop back to her.

She then starts to mop the kitchen. Quite vehemently, I might add--the mop handle was bending and she's really putting her back into it.

I didn't do it quite like that when I did my areas, and I proceeded, knowing fully what I was getting myself into, to mention that I didn't mop as thoroughly as she did.

"Don't worry about it," she says.

"But I didn't do as good a job as you," I reply.

"Don't worry about it!" she says.

At which point I should have taken my cue and backed off. But no, I went, with both eyes open, right into it.

"Maybe I'll do it over again--gimme the mop..."

Well, then the exasperation sets in.

She looks at me--"Why don't you go 'Sparky's Space' or something!!!"

Which is now the newly coined phrase that lets me know that she wants me "out of her hair".

See, when I'm working on this website, I'm not bugging her.

I'll try harder not to push her buttons next time. In the end, I think it's best for our relationship.

Sorry baby.

for whatever reason...

Technorati Profile

Just 'cause I can...

Sit down and let the adults do their jobs now.

The more I hear from Mr. Duceppe, the more I'm reminded of the little train that couldn't--"I think I can, I think I can... Well, maybe not today."

An article in the Toronto Sun--Bloc keeps power, but hold weakens--quotes Duceppe, ""This election was not a referendum election ...The future of Quebec wasn't played out tonight."

Yeah, because you didn't like the numbers, pal. You lost 3 seats from last time. That in itself isn't a biggie. The really big thing was that the "anti-sovereignist" Conservatives--y'know, the ones that supposedly Quebecers dislike so much because they won't humour the Bloc's little separatist antics actually won seats in La Belle Province.

How about them pommes?

I'm sure this 'downplay' by Duceppe regarding this election had nothing to do with "While it got almost 49% of the popular vote in the last election, the Bloc only took about 42% yesterday."

Nothing whatsoever.

Gilles, I once admired you for having conviction. I didn't agree with what you wanted, but at least you appeared to have the courage to stand up for what you believe in.

However, not so much anymore. I've stated before that if you truly believe in something, you act on it--you don't wait until it's politically expedient to do so. Now you're a joke, Mr. Duceppe. You're a leader that's losing followers. You know what they call a leader with no followers? A guy out for a walk. You're out of touch, as showm by this--"But the Quebec vote and the Canadian vote show clearly that we're not going in the same direction. Each is taking his own path. In the long run, to fully express its difference, Quebec must assume all of its powers as a sovereign country."

The Quebec vote clearly shows nothing of the sort. The people have spoken, Mr. Duceppe, and they aren't speaking in your favour. Some have gone so far as to elect members from the most anti-separatist party in Canada. And if you don't understand that, then it's time for you to either step down, or call your separatist vote today. Don't wait until the "political wind" changes--either put up or shut up.

As for me, I encourage all Canadians, no matter what language they speak or what province they live in, to look at the bigger picture--we are better as a unified country than not. As yet, I've not seen any evidence that separation is good for either Quebec or Canada.

Vive le Canada!

Sometimes I don't know enough to stay out of trouble

I've been studying my Apache log files and here's what I've noticed where spammers and GM are concerned--

A legitimate comment added to GM--

xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx - - [25/Jan/2006:12:11:24 -0500] "POST /cgi-bin/gm-comments.cgi HTTP/1.1" 302 233 "http://sparky.i989.net/blog/00000388.php" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; InfoPath.1)"

A non-legitimate comment (spam) added to GM--

ce7305-or-mde.orbitel.net.co - - [25/Jan/2006:12:53:09 -0500] "POST /cgi-bin/gm-comments.cgi HTTP/1.1" 403 4528 "-" "PEAR HTTP_Request class ( http://pear.php.net/ )"

From what I understand, these log entries are separated into a few sections--the part we're interested in is after the 302 233 and the 403 4528 (302 and 403 being the server result status and the 233 and 4528 being the size of the served document)--This is the HTTP_REFERER section.

It seems that all spammers have "-" in the HTTP_REFERER section. This is probably due to their scripts--they actually don't visit blogs-they just try to "POST" to the gm-comments.cgi directly. All legitimate commenters (at least for our blog) have the "http://sparky.i989.net/blog/0000xxxx.php" as the HTTP_REFERER (basically the blog they are posting a comment to).

So I came up with this--

RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://(www\.)?sparky\.i989\.net [NC]
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} POST [NC]
RewriteRule ^/.* http://sparky.i989.net/blog/00000321.php [R,L]

Basically, these three lines will do the following--

Anyone that doesn't have sparky.i989.net as the HTTP_REFERER (the little '!' means 'NOT' in Apache parlance)

AND

Anyone attempting to POST a comment (or POST anything for that matter)

will be redirected to one of my blog entries regarding spam--Spammers

Now this is on top of using mod_security. Mod_Security stops 99.9 percent of the spams, and this should stop what remains.

Unfortunately, this also denies trackbacks, because when you set up a trackback, you don't do it from one of our blog entries. Eh, I'll worry about that later.

I just want to see if this works.

Our centerpieces (tentative)

Due to crazy computer issues, Sandy's blog didn't get posted.

But since Calum requested an update, here's a quick one.

Whilst perusing Ikea the other day, Sandy came up with this brilliant idea for centerpieces.

We were kinda hmm-ing and haw-ing on a variety of different ideas, but after seeing this, we pretty much loved it.

We're going to substitute some orangy-red beads instead of the blue ones that we used for testing. For the moc-up, we used our wedding colours--the chocolate brown construction paper and the towel are close to the colour of linens we're using.

I think it looks lovely.

In which our hero decides to build a body for the 'bot

A very quick blog about the shell of the rtl20 'bot. (I really should come up with a name for the 'bot if I'm going to write about it. Throwing it out there--someone come up with a name...)

Anyway, after building (and rebuilding) the robot platform which contains everything needed for driving/steering, I decided that the next step should be making the transfer openings and the exterior shell. I've never really built an exterior for any of my other 'bots 'cause I thought that it'd be an uneccesary weight as well as a time consuming task, so I never bothered. Besides, it's kinda neat to see all the gears and such spinning around.

This competition, however, requires Transfer Openings, and, as such, the robot will have an exterior shell.

So this is what I came up with--

It meets all the criteria as laid out by the rules of the competition--

The transfer opening is surrounded by white bricks
The light is in the right spot
The white bricks are the correct width and height
The actual opening is the right shape and size.

The good news is that I can build 6 transfer openings in a hexagon shape and still keep the 'bot within the 1 cubic foot rule. That makes me very happy, though I would have been happier if I could have done an octagon, but alas...

There are still a few adjustments to make, like making a storage area for the blocks the robot receives, as well as a solid connection of the exterior shell to the driving/steering platform--right now the exterior is just resting on top of the platform.

As you can see, I do tend to build my robots in separate modules--when this one is done, it'll have 3 separate sections--the driving/steering platform, the exterior shell/transfer openings, and the rotating turret/transfer block unit.

By doing this, you can build a section of the robot, thoroughly test/modify it, and then, when it's mostly complete, go on the next section--each part can be worked on individually, instead of working on the entire robot at once.

At least, that's the way I like to do things.

Trying something different...

I'm going to try this and see how far I get with it.

See, there is a robot competition coming up on March 4th, 2006. For all the details on that, see the rtlToronto 20 (rtl 20) Project Y page here.

Now that you've familiarized yourself with the rules of rtl20... what, you haven't? K, I'll give a brief description--

On an 8 foot by 8 foot playfield, numerous autonomous robots will be trying to exchange blocks with one another through standard transfer openings.

That's about it in a nutshell. The difficult part is trying to design a robot that can receive as well as give these blocks. But that's also where the fun comes in.

Having competed in a bunch of previous rtl competitions, I wanted to try something radically different than my previous robots. most of my previous robots use the "classic" A-B steering. For a perfect example of A-B steering, look at a bulldozer or an excavator--see the tracks on each side? When both tracks go in one direction, the 'dozer goes forward (or backward). If one track goes in one direction and the other track goes in the opposite direction, the 'dozer will spin, or turn. This is an extremely easy steering/moving platform to build and program for a robot.

However, the downside to the A-B steering is that it's not very accurate--how do you know which way you're pointing after you're done turning?

There are ways to overcome this downside for robot A-B steering, but I wasn't interested.

I could have gone with the standard 'rack and pinion' moving/steering setup--look to your car or truck for that example--drive wheels push the robot either forward or back, and the steering wheels point the vehicle in the direction you wnat to go.

If you add a rotation sensor to the steering mechanism, you know how much you've turned the vehicle.

The downside to rack and pinion is...well, ask any driver that wants to turn around on a country road--we call that the '3 point turn'--Rack and pinion requires too much room to turn in different directions. If your vehicle was equipped with A-B steering, you could 'turn on a dime' and point in the opposite direction--no issues. But again, the robot has to know which way it's pointing.

So I did a little research. Turns out that people have been using a thing called a 'Synchro Drive' for robot movement.

Ahh, what is this synchro drive? Well, it's a little complicated, but in a true synchro drive, the tire serves as the moving and steering mechanism for the robot--not quite like a 4 x 4 x 4 wheel drive, but not that far off, either.

Here's a picture of one of my drive wheels--

The picture is a little blurry--sorry about that. But in the picture, you can see that the tire is on an axle. On that same axle is a bevel gear that brings the 'power' to the tire--You can also see that big gear below the tire--that's the big LEGO turntable gear--that allows the entire tire/axle/bevel gears mechanism to spin around. Thus the tire drives the robot and allows the robot to turn.

The upshot of this type of driving/steering mechanism is that you can be extremely accurate--if you add a rotation sensor on the large turntable, you know exactly how far you've turned, and if you add a rotation sensor to the drive axle, you can know how fast the tire is spinning and how many times the tire has spun.

The really neat part is that, if you set up the synchro drives properly, the robot platform will always face in the same direction.

See those 4 LEGO turntables with the drive/steering tires on them? They can spin right around. And when they're spinning around, the platform holding the turntables doesn't change direction (I may get a little movie up to show this really neat concept).

Anyway, I'm going with the synchro drive steering/driving mechanism for rtl20--I wanted maximum maneuverability and accuracy and I think the synchro drive will give it to me.

Adding motors to the robot platform was exceedingly easy--

The two inner motors supply power to the drive gears, and the two outer motors provide power to the turning gears. The white gears are LEGO clutch gears--they will 'slip' on the axle if something gets stuck, like if the robot drives into a wall and can't move forward anymore--the clutch gears will allow the motor to spin without breaking any gears or axles. It's a safety thing--hopefully I'll be able to program the robot to detect obstacles before it hits them.

Here's the look at the gears from the underside--the red gears are spun by the white clutch gears we saw in the previous picture. The red gear has 24 teeth, and it's on the same axle with that little gear. The little gear has 8 teeth and that meshes with another 24 tooth gear (the grey one). By meshing the 8 tooth gear to the 24 tooth gear, we reduce the speed of the output and increase the torque--Seeing as how this robot will probably be heavy when it's done, we need all the torque we can get to drive the tires.

To see all pics (thus far) of my rtl20 robot build, see the photo gallery entry--

Synchro 'Bot for rtl20

I'm currently working on the 'transfer openings' and the 'block delivery system'. I'll get pictures and blog entries up when I can--hopefully a little less wordy.

I haven't even begun to think about programming the thing yet--I'll wait until the hardware does what I need it to do.

to stop the spammers

Well, at least I'm getting something out of it...

After trying to keep our blacklist up-to-date, and also allow 'normal' people to post whatever they please, I've come up with a little change for the blacklist--

I noted that many spammers use slight variations of the same word. To include all such variations, however, would be a time consuming and tedious process. But I also noted that you can use substitutions in the criteria! This is what I came up with--

SecFilterSelective HTTP_Referer|ARGS "[0-9]poker"
SecFilterSelective HTTP_Referer|ARGS "[a-z]poker"
SecFilterSelective HTTP_Referer|ARGS "[0-9][\w\-_.]poker"
SecFilterSelective HTTP_Referer|ARGS "[a-z][\w\-_.]poker"
SecFilterSelective HTTP_Referer|ARGS "poker[0-9]"
SecFilterSelective HTTP_Referer|ARGS "poker[a-r]"
SecFilterSelective HTTP_Referer|ARGS "poker[t-z]"
SecFilterSelective HTTP_Referer|ARGS "poker[\w\-_.][0-9]"
SecFilterSelective HTTP_Referer|ARGS "poker[\w\-_.][a-r]"
SecFilterSelective HTTP_Referer|ARGS "poker[\w\-_.][t-z]"
SecFilterSelective HTTP_Referer|ARGS "pokers[0-9]"
SecFilterSelective HTTP_Referer|ARGS "pokers[a-z]"
SecFilterSelective HTTP_Referer|ARGS "pokers[\w\-_.][0-9]"
SecFilterSelective HTTP_Referer|ARGS "pokers[\w\-_.][a-z]"

It ain't pretty, but it doesn't have to be for it to do the job--any spam message with any variation of the word 'poker' will automatically be denied.

I also covered the other 'usual suspects' like casino, slots, gambling...

If you want to use our blacklist to stop spammers from posting on your blog, just find the link to the right--'The Blacklist'.

I'm always updating it, so there's that.

Anyway, just throwing it out there.

Okay, most times

For whatever reason, the keyboards on laptops put the CTRL key right where people hit it accidentally, or mistakenly use it as hte SHIFT key.

And you know what happens when you press the CTRL key and the 'W' key? The window that you're currently viewing closes.

So if you're, say, writing a wonderfully worded blog and you press the CTRL and the W key, you close the window and it's bye-bye blog entry.

I'm saying this because Sandy was working on a wonderful blog about our upcoming wedding. And twice--TWICE!! the IE window closed on her.

Grr!!!

So now you guys don't get a blog entry from Sandy today, and you have to put up with my ravings (again).

Eh, next time we'll write the blog in Notepad first.

Or at least one of the many reasons...

If you've been hiding under a rock, you may not have heard that Jack Abramoff, a U.S. Republican lobbyist, has been investigated, charged with, and pleaded guilty to "fraud, tax evasion and conspiracy to bribe public officials" .

However, politics is politics and we all look the other way.

What is really interesting is this bit--

A Lobbying Machine

In which we find our anti-hero, Jack, detailing something more insidious in nature.

It turns out that Abramoff was working to "whip up anti-gambling fervor in Louisiana". Now that might seem like a good thing--I mean, one of the biggest addictions in this day and age is gambling. However, it turns out that Jack was 'whipping up' anti-gambling fervor in Louisiana, not so much for the well-being of the residents of Louisiana, but to stop any competing casinos from being established--

"Prominent Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff mounted a far-reaching campaign in 2002 on behalf of his clients, the Louisiana Coushatta tribe, to prevent another tribe, the Jena Band of Choctaws, from winning federal approval for a rival casino. As part of his efforts, Abramoff sent the Coushattas a list of politicians and organizations, titled "Coushatta Requests," for whom he wanted to tribe to write checks"

See, Jack only wants his "Republican friendly" casinos to be established in Louisiana--'You donate to the Republican party, you get your casino'.

Nice. But again, that's usually how the political game work--'grease money'.

The bigger issue here is this part--

In order to whip this 'anti-gambling fervor', Jack "worked with former Christian Coalition director Ralph Reed"--"Abramoff tells his associate Michael Scanlon that Reed had recruited evangelical leader James Dobson to provide radio ads opposing any more casinos, and that Abramoff would send Reed money to pay for the ads." Yes, that's the "Focus on the Family" James Dobson.

Again, the radio ads discussed here regarding 'opposing any more casinos' aren't for the good of Louisiana--they are for the good of Jack and his clients.

Just great.

And the cost to 'buy' James Dobson?

Well, it isn't 30 pieces of silver anymore. Reed asked for $150,000.00 to get the 'Dobson ads up', but Jack, being ever frugal, thinks he can get away with $60,000.00.

Perfect.

Now I'll be the first to note that James Dobson might not actually know that he was being manipulated by Jack Abamoff to run the ads opposing casinos. However, Ralph Reed is obviously in on this whole thing and he's the former Christian Coalition director. And either James Dobson is throwing his hat in with these weasels knowingly, in which case he's just like the rest of the law-breaking lot, or he's doing it unknowingly, in which case I can't trust someone so easily fooled.

This is all much like the Pat "I was for Ariel Sharon's stroke because he divided the 'Holy Land' until I was against Sharon's stroke because I can't build my theme park in the 'Holy Land'" Robertson, but that's a blog for another time.

The bottom line, for me anyways--my God can't be bought at any price.

These days, 'organized religion' can't say the same.

A modern political parable

"We have the best pudding!"

This is what you and I are told, anyway.

"Yeah, we have the best pudding! It's way better than those other people pushing their pudding on you!"

Well, those 'other pudding pushers' state that your pudding isn't any good.

"Don't listen to them! They have problems with their pudding! Ours is the best!"

Wait--aren't you the people that have been promising good pudding for the last 12 years?

"Yep! Thats us! Look at all the wonderful pudding we've given you over the past decade!!"

That's not really true--you've been promising us good pudding but you never seem to really deliver it.

"Oh but if you let us, we'll give you good pudding now!"

But past experience with you has shown that you give the good pudding to your friends which leaves no pudding for the rest of us.

"We're changing all that! We're putting in rules so the pudding goes to everyone!"

That's not quite right, either--why should you have to implement rules to do the right thing?

"But we're better than the other pudding people! Those guys are scary!! They'll take your money and you'll get no pudding!"

We're not getting any pudding now.

"But we're changing that! See?? Now we've got the proper recipes and ingredients!! We'll make it work this time, we promise!!"

Just like the old 'red book' promises?

"That was our last CEO! he's gone now--we're a whole new company!!"

And the missing millions?

"Again, our last CEO!! Stop bringing him up! He's gone now!"

But your old CFO is now your new CEO--he was there when all these problems were happening.

"Yeah, but he didn't know anything about the problems!!"

Wait, the old chief financial officer didn't know about the missing millions?

"Yep! So there's nothing wrong!"

So he either didn't do his job when he was the CFO, or he's lying now--those are my options?

"No! He's a great guy! Look at all the wonderful pudding that he's promising you!!"

Yeah, but again, we've been hearing the promises for the last 12 years and yet, still no good pudding for us. Paraphrasing the old CEO--a proof is a proof! It's a proof because it's been proven!

The bottom line is in this case the proof is in the pudding. For the past 12 years, we've been promised lots of things from the current government, but the average citizen isn't seeing much besides scandals and cronyism.

And that leaves me feeling like 'Oliver Twist' with the bloated Liberal government in charge--'Please sir, can I have some pudding??' The pudding, mind you, that we're paying for in the first place with our tax dollars.

Can anyone give any legitimate reason why a person should vote for the Liberal party right now?

I can't think of one.

to our blog pages...

In the continuing effort to make the people happy, I've reorganized the look of the blog. As well, I'm trying to reduce the number of graphics so the pages will load faster.

I know, I know, in the world of high speed access, the idea of reducing the graphic content seems ridiculous, but hey, one must keep Chris happy razz

So there you are.

Condemnable!

Iran focus on Women

In which there's at least a half dozen stories of 'sentenced to death by hanging' because the woman was raped. No, it's not the 'raper' getting hanged, it's the woman.

As well, sentenced to death by stoning for women who use violence to get out of abusive relationships.

And a few 'acid thrown in faces' of women who don't dress properly.

In the 21st century these atrocities against women are allowed to happen? Where's the outrage? Where's the moral courage to stand up against the leaders that not only allow these travesties to happen, they pass laws that enforce these reprehensible actions??

Look at some of the titles of the articles--

Iran’s Islamist rulers want sex segregation on pavements

Iran to hang teenage girl attacked by rapists

Iran sentences 17-year-old girl to death

Iran’s Islamists terrorise young women with acid

Selection of Iran’s leader to remain a men-only domain

Iran court sentences woman to hanging

Iran’s Supreme Court gives go-ahead for execution of woman

Iran sentences woman to death by stoning for adultery

Iran to speed up flogging of women for “bad” veil

For the love of Justice--never mind, we're talking about Iran.

Islamist rulers? Tyranny of the Religious Crackpot Zealots, more like.

If history has shown us anything, it's that the moment you put doctorine, belief, dogma, religion, or 2000 year old (or even 250ish year old) parchment above the people around you, these atrocities have occured, are occuring, and will continue to occur.

And the first victims, time and time again, are those least able to defend themselves.

If this is done in the name of 'Allah', then 'Allah' isn't worthy of my spit.

I'd like to see how the 'men' (and I use that word unwillingly here, for the male Iranians who allow these atrocities to occur certainly aren't what I would consider 'real men') would react if they were on the 'wrong end' of the stonings or the hangings or the 'acid in your face' attacks.

I cold go on but I think I've said enough.

Bottom line -- another thing that history has shown us is that "there is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom. Against that power tyrants and dictators cannot stand"

Iran, sooner or later your day of reckoning will happen.

Until that time, each Iranian leader that allows and partakes in these travesties will have your day of reckoning when you're standing before the true Allah.

Then we'll see how 'manly' you really are.

'cause well, we were...

The front pic on the 'old' opening page was recently updated.

If you click on this link--Sparky's and Sandy's Old Front Page and wait until all pics have loaded--check out the default pic in the middle.

Awwww, aren't they cute?

I think the one on the left is a definite hottie--at least she will be in 30ish years from that pic wink

It's Dot Com....

It's the same web site, but I registered a 'top level' domain. Hopefully it's easier to remember--

http://sandysparky.net

The old one is free so you can continue to surf to 'sparky.i989.net', but if you wanna tell your friends, it's easier to remember 'sandysparky.net'.

So there you are.

Long ago in a galaxy far away...

Actually, right in Winona, but that's close enuf....

I stumbled across a long-forgotten piece of nostalgia whilst cleaning up this very website.

Tranquility 1

It's a futuristic story about a base on the moon, and the people who live and work there.

Actually, the web pages don't go that far into it 'cause I just stopped doing it, but somewhere in our house is probably a box of papers full of ideas and stuff that Andrew and I worked on. We were expanding the LEGO universe that I originally started back when I made LEGO Wars in the '80's.

Eh, thought I'd share.

It's the best choice for me

As many of you are aware, or at least should be (if you're a Canadian), we have a federal election looming on the 23rd of January.

I've been struggling with the 'Who do I vote for' issue for a while. In the past, I have typically voted NDP on the federal level beause I do believe that the socialism that Canada practices is best for everyone in Canada. It's assuring, at least to me, that I can go to a hospital whenever I need to without the worries and concerns about whether I can afford it or not.

However, that said, Jack Layton seems like a used car salesman(at least to me). Even his 'righteous indignation' when asked about his 'new gun policies' rang so false with me that I just shook my head--Ed Broadbent, I wish you were party chief today--the NDP would have had my vote.

But alas, not to be.

Of course, the Liberals are out. I mean, we've heard it over and over again, but it really is true--Paul Martin was the finance minister when all that money went missing. Either he knew and is lying now when he says he didn't know and wasn't involved, or he's just incompotent, what, with being the finance minister and all. Either way, if anyone has any sane reason why they would vote for a Liberal candidate in this election, I'd really like to know it. I'm not going to talk about the other scandals plaguing the Red party at this time--there are many but I'll just go with the aforementioned.

And then the Conservatives. They had a better shot at my vote than Mr. Martin, but there's just something about the whole thing--The Reform party is what caused the Liberals to be in power over the last dozen or so years because they split the conseravtive vote between them and the Progressive Conservatives. Now that the two have 'merged', it's suppose to be all better. Well, I don't think so. We're where we are today (the Bloc, the lying/stealing/cheating Liberals, etc.) because of what I consider to be the mismanagement and the ego-stroking of the various incarnations of the conservative(s) party. So Mr. Steven Harper, no vote for you, either.

Of course, I can't vote for the Bloc, nor would I consider doing so even if I could. To all my French brothers who think that separation is a good idea--Canada is better when we're united than when we're divided. That said, if you want to separate and become your own distinct country, vote on it now--don't wait until it's politically expedient to do so--as my papa used to say, "Either poop or get off the pot!". Gilles Duceppe is just a player hiding at the sidelines until the time is favourable to play--A person who can't stand for what he or she believes in at all times no matter which way the "political winds" are blowing does not deserve my respect, yet alone my vote.

So that's the 'big 4'. I was really on the fence for the longest time--do I plug my nose and vote NDP, even though that means I'm putting money into Jack Laytons coffers, or do I go against my Federal socialist beliefs and vote Conservative ('cause I won't vote Liberal or Bloc, and in the grande scheme of things, some of what the Conservatives actually stand for I agree with).

But then I heard this guy on Q107 the other day--Jim Harris, leader of the Green Party.

Now I've heard of the Green Party in the past, but I lumped them in with the Rhino Party and other such political 'jokes'.

Turns out that Jim Harris and the Green Party aren't such a joke after all. In the 10 minutes I heard him speaking on the air, I was suitably convinced enough to give the Green Party some consideration.

So I did, and I became even more impressed. I've always been inclined to conservation and environmentalism. I find that these ideals are completely reflected in the Green Party. Though they use the idea of a 'holistic approach' to things (I've always thought that people who use the word 'holistic' are one hair shy of chaining themselves to trees), their ideas as laid out in their platform are sound.

If they do seem to be a little 'over the top' on the environmentalism, it's due to the basic idea that we've been neglecting the enviornment for decades. The example they give is astounding--20 years ago, 1 in 100 children had asthma, now it's 1 in 5. One kid out of 5 kids has asthma! As Jim rightly pointed out--when will we get concerned about the enviornment? When it's 1 in 3 kids with asthma? 1 in 2? When every child has asthma? If this doesn't tell you that we need to start paying attention to the environment around us, then I don't know what will.

I am still studying the various parties that are vieing for my vote on the 23rd, but right now, by far in the lead, is the Green Party.

In the end, whatever your particular political affilitation, no matter what you feel about the parties--you have to do your civic duty and vote! If you don't think that one vote makes a difference, remember that this is the closest federal race this country has seen in a long time.

So get out and vote!

and you're going to jail

Unless, of course, you use your real name...

In what will undoubtably lead to a wonderful case in court pretty soon , the U.S. governmnet just signed a new piece of legislation into law--annoying someone over the internet is now a federal crime.

The law--"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

As the article astutely points out, this has First Ammendment issues written all over it--in the U.S., you have the right of 'Free Speech', even if what you're saying annoys other people. Not so much on the internet anymore, by the looks of it.

Anyway , I thought that it was rather interesting--the whole thing actually. This new law rode in on the coat-tails of "an unrelated , must-pass bill to fund the Department of Justice. The plan: to make it politically infeasible for politicians to oppose the measure."

Perfect--hijacking important legislation for political gain. But that's nothing new.

As well, "an earlier version that the House approved in September had radically different wording. It was reasonable by comparison, and criminalized only using an "interactive computer service" to cause someone "substantial emotional harm." But that wasn't good enough--from "substantial emotional harm" to "annoy". I get annoyed with The Weather Network web page when it shows rain in the forecast when I want to go out bike riding. Can I bring federal charges against them?

Eh , more laws, more lawyers getting paid to interpret these laws on both sides of the issue, more of our hard earned tax dollars wasted, either way.

Have I annoyed anyone yet?

Under where?

I get a brand new pair of pants for Christmas. This I am excited about--they were from Sandy smile

So I wear 'em a bit, then throw them in the laundry.

Yesterday was the first time I wore this particular pair of pants since laundry day, and, again, pretty happy to wear 'em.

Put the pants on, finish dressing, leave the house, drive to work...

I tell you all this so you have all the relevant details for what is about to transpire.

I get out of my truck and all of a sudden my inner thigh feels cold. I look down and see nothing wrong with the pants so I blame it on 'shifting or settling pant leg' when I got out of the truck.

Thinking nothing more of it, I get to my desk and proceed to do my daily duties.

After a bit, I get up to go for a coffee (well, actually I don't drink coffee, but we still call it 'going for a coffee). I get to the kitchenette and do the 'water cooler chat' with the folks there (folks actually waiting for their coffee), grab my co-co and go back to my desk.

Little while later I'm having a hankering for a tall glass of H20, so again, back to the water cooler, and there again, chatting with folks.

Walking back to my desk, I glance down for whatever reason and I catch a glimpse of something rather odd around my ankle level.

I stop, look down and note that I have underwear sticking out from my pant cuff.

blush

Thankfully, in the grande scheme of things, it was my underwear and not Sandys, for that would have been a whole lot more "well then..."

I have no idea how long the underwear was sticking out of my pant leg like that, but I have a hunch that it was since I got out of my truck in the morning.

At least it was clean underwear!! smile

and a wake-up call

This is probably going to make some waves through all sorts of communities--

America's model housewife turns feminist as husband abandons her

"Terry Hekker wrote a book in 1980 that made her famous. Ever Since Adam & Eve was a passionate defence of her decision to eschew a career and spend her life as a wife and a mother."

The issue today--her husband left her for a younger woman on their 40th wedding anniversary.

"Today, Hekker told The Observer, she is planning a follow-up book. Its working, albeit jokey, title is bluntly honest: Disregard First Book. For her life did not turn out as she planned, and she now believes her decision to become a housewife and homemaker should serve as a warning for young American women."

Oh so many things I want to say... but I'll try to keep things coherent.

First, talking with any married couple, such as your uncles and aunts who have managed to stay together for 50+ years, all of them will tell you that marriage takes work and committment. We've heard that before from, well, everywhere, but do we actually take these words to heart? Do we bring them inside ourselves--wrestle and struggle with them and understand the true meanings of 'Work' and 'Committment'? Somehow, in the 'I want my happiness and I want it now' generation--you know, the one that doesn't want to have any knowledge of personal responsibility, sacrifice, loss or pain, the concept of work and committment might as well be on Mars--no way of getting there.

I had a conversation with two of the most intelligent people I have ever met--my uncle George and my aunt Nellie. We discussed something like this a few weeks back. I pointed out that their generation started in the Great Depression, lived through a war and into the prosperous '50's. When kids started to arrive in the '50's and '60's, the war and depression were just stories. As well, many parents didn't want to burden the kids with the horrors of either and left their kids wanting for naught.

If you're given everything--if you don't have to work or sacrifice for anything, then you have little respect for what you have. The problem gets exacerbated through subsequent generations. Not by everyone, to be sure, but enough to notice via statistics (from the same article)--

"One study from the University of Michigan showed that the proportion of women aged between 55 and 60 who divorced jumped from 4.8 per cent in 1970 to 18.7 per cent in 2002."

4.8 to 18.7 in 30ish years. My guess would be that this number will continue to rise, and here's why--

People want the 'easy life'. I believe it's just part of human nature--why work for something if you can get if for free? This extends to every aspect of life, including marriage. "Why would I put effort into this marriage when it's easier not to?" Or in Terry Hekker's case, her ex-hubby decided that a 'younger woman' is probably 'more fun and less work'.

Whatever the case may be, the husband didn't want to work on the marriage. Not knowing all the details, we can't assume that Terry did, but that's irrelevant to the discussion.

The relevant parts are as follows--'Work' and 'Committment' have a result, and that result is 'Trust' and 'Faith'.

Trust that the marriage will continue to flourish next week, next month, next year. Faith that you won't be emotionally scarred by the person you care most about.

Of course, all this presupposes that the person opposite you when you said your 'I Do''s also is coming at the relationship with the same mindset. That's the other point--you can't put your intelligence--your discernment--on hold. If your spouse isn't fulfilling your needs, either physically, emotionally, intellecutally, or spiritually, it's time to open up those lines of communication.

Oh, there's another one--communication--the key to work, committment, trust and faith. If you're putting alot of effort into something yet the other person was expecting something else, what's the point?

This could go on, but I don't want to sound preachy.

People 'fall in love' pretty easy. To prevent 'falling out of love', however, requires effort. Not a one-time only effort but daily work. None of my relatives that are still married after many decades say that it was easy. It isn't.

Yet all of them say the plusses by far outweigh the minuses.

That settles it for me.

Has Begun!

Dian (Dave's step-mom) and I headed out bright and early today to start the hunt for the perfect wedding dress.

Our travels took us to the beautiful little town of Waterdown.

I had been to Waterdown many times before because my good friend Lynn lived in the heart of downtown, but I had no idea about the beautful bridal shops there.

Our first stop was the Coach House Bridal Salon

Me standing outside the Coach House

We chose numerous dresses from various designers along with various styles and colours. We picked dresses that I wouldn't have imagined trying on and dresses that I absolutely loved.

I wish I had pictures of some of the dresses that I tried on, but unfortunately, this bridal shop did not allow you to take pictures due to copyright issues -- totally understandable.

I think I tried on about 15 dresses and then "the one" happened.

I put the dress on and turned around to look at myself in the mirror -- my eyes welled up and I cried! I didn't want Dian to see me cry, so I took a some time to gather myself together. Once I was able to stop crying, I opened up the curtain and Dian took one look at me and started to cry -- then I was crying again.

I won't go into too much detail (as I am sure I will be back within a couple of weeks with my mom to see the dress again and place the order) but I will say that it was simple yet elegant. The dress fit the way every bride wants her wedding dress to fit. Once the sales lady added the veil and tiara to complete the look, Dian and I were in tears yet again.

After finishing up at The Coach House, we headed to the Tea At The White House for some lunch.

Dian had mentioned that she had been there once before and that they served scones with a really nice cream and preserves. We both ordered the "Devonshire Cream Tea - Freshly baked scones with Devon double cream and locally made preserves served with your choice of a pot of regular priced tea". The Devon double cream was to die for and I ended up buying a jar for both Dian and myself.

We headed out to our next Bridal store -- Village Wedding Bells and tried on more dresses. This store allowed pictures to be taken so we took a few to capture the memories.

Inside of Village Wedding Bells and me trying on one of the many beautiful dresses available

All in all it was a very fun day and I know I have found the dress of my dreams.

'cause you know, I need therapy...

After all the hustle and bustle of the Christmas season, after the mini-renovations of the homestead, and after a few other little things that won't be mentioned here, I sat down in the basement.

For those of you that don't know what's in my basement--there's thousands, probably hundreds of thousands, of little plastic bricks down there, and they all have 'LEGO' imprinted somewhere on the surface.

Yep, sat down and did some sorting and organizing. Actually, the primary reason for this is that, once again, part of my collection is going for a visit to John Knox Memorial Christian School in Fruitland, Ontario.

Every year a few classes take part in 'Options'--kinda like a 'leisure ed.' course that we took in college. At John Knox, the kids are allowed to choose from a variety of activities--one of them is getting to build LEGO creations. I wholeheartedly support this endeavour smile

As well, I have a train show coming up in April--got to get something ready for that. And I can't forget the LEGO robot competition in February.

So I guess my LEGO hobby is moving back to the forefront! And when that happens, it's good to have an organized collection.

Which brings this right back to the therapy. I've always liked the "LEGO sorting time'. It calms the nerves and relaxes the soul. Since sorting LEGO bricks into their various colours nad shapes takes relatively little mental effort (except when you're colour-blind, but that's neither here nor there) and not much physical exertion (except when moving big totes full of LEGO bricks around), you can let your mind go off and wander.

The better news is, since the mind is partly focused on the sorting, it can't wander off too far. I've noticed in my past that when my mind wanders off too far, I seem to always end up in some sort of mischief/hot water... wink

So I love sorting my LEGO collection every once in a while--I get a 'refresher' of what parts 'n pieces I actually own (and am usually surprised by a part I've never seen before but must've owned for years), and the brain files that info for future building purposes, and my mind just gets to relax and enjoy meandering thought processes for a bit.

Now that it's as sorted as its' going to be (for a while anywayz), it's on to the building stage. That's another part I also definitely look forward to!

Build on!

Yeah, it's about Dubya...

I'm gonna get me on the U.S. 'No Fly List' yet...

So I'm surfing to my usual internet hangout spots, when, to my wandering eyes did appear, yet another article regarding the absolutely contentious and outrageous Bush policies affecting Joe Citizen--

Branded by James Moore.

For those too lazy to click on the link, Mr. Moore published a book critical of the Bush administration, entitled, "Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential".

Writing books critical of government and authority isn't bad.

Putting authors of books that are critical of the current US administration on a 'No Fly' list is. When someone has no legal recourse at all--no explanation, no way to obtain information, and no way to remove his or her name from the list--At best it's harassment of ordinary citizens.

Is that what the U.S. has come to? Because of 9/11 (as Dubya reminds us constantly), anyone that is critical of the administration is harassed? What happened to that precious piece of paper--the Constitution and the ammendments therein--if I do recall, one talks about the freedom of speech. Another states that citizens should be free from illegal searches and invasion of property? Oh, and what about the one regarding due process? I do believe that those sort-of important ideals are covered. Or are we at a point, as many political pundits are stating, where the Constitution really is just a piece of paper and the President (and therefore the U.S. administration) is 'above such nonsense'?

You know, the more and more I read about what's going on in the country to the south of us, the more I'm concerned that it's going to implode (and they "love their guns down there", so you know it'll be very bad for all concerned).

George W. Bush--you, sir, are a moron. I'm not the first Canadian to say it, nor will I be the last.

I believe that had the 'MSM' (main stream media) done its job back in 2000, Al Gore would have been president instead of you. I also believe that you had the same 'luck' in '04, but eh, whatever.

My hope is, at some point over the next two years, that at best you get impeached. At worst, you should be thrown out on your ear.

I've read numerous blogs, both by Democrats and Conservatives, over the last number of years. The most ironic thing I have ever seen was two pictures--side by side. One of Dubya walking across the tarmack in his flight gear with fighter jets in the background and one of John Kerry wearing his bermuda shorts and carrying his windsurfing board to the beach. The implication that the person was trying to get across was 'George Bush is presedential and a military man' whilst John Kerry is, well, I guess on vacation alot.

Reality check time--

John Kerry's military service in Vietnam in which he received numerous medals, including the Silver Star and the Bronze Heart.

George W Bush's vacation time, at least by August of 2003, was at 250 days.

Who's the military man and who's on vacation?

Yeah, my displeasure for the current president is rising all the time. He should be removed from any position of power. He's not qualified to run a used car lot, yet alone the most powerful nation in the world.

Eh, no use getting my blood pressure up. It won't change anything.

Kinda makes me yearn for the heady days of 'Bubba' Clinton, though.

Phear my l33t PhotoShop SkiLlz0rs!!!

Stardate 2006.01.05

Mindstorms Starship NCC-RCX1.0 on patrol in a new quadrant of space. Captain James T. Kirk commanding.

Captain Kirk: Mr. Spock, anything on the sensors?

Mr. Spock: Nothing at this time, captain. Wait, I'm picking up a subspace anomaly generating ahead. A spaceship is emerging from the heart of the anomaly. It doesn't match any configuration in our datalog.

Kirk: On Screen!

Kirk: What is it, Mr. Spock?

Spock: Unknown at this time, captain. Our limited sensors cannot even distinguish the colours of the spaceship at this time.

Kirk: Can we outrun it, Spock?

Spock: Negative, captain. As you can see, the unknown ship has 3 engines compared to the two of ours.

Kirk: Lieutenant Uhura, open hailing frequencies.

Lt. Uhura: According to my readings, captain, they can already hear us!

Kirk: What type of new technology is this?

Uhura: We are being hailed, sir. On speaker.

(Over speaker): This is Captain Jean Luc Picard of the Mindstorms Starship NCC-NXT.

Kirk: They can speak from this new starship?? Not just 'beeps' and 'boops'??

Capt. Picard: According to our distance sensor, your ship will enter the anomaly in 2 standard minutes. We advise against this.

Kirk: A distance sensor even! I'd have to buy one of those from third party vendors for my ship!

Spock: Captain, we have a more pressing emergency at this time--we are approaching the anomoly.

Kirk: What can we do, Mr. Spock?

Spock: I suggest that we request aid from this new Mindstorms starship. Perhaps they can assist.

Kirk (over intercom): Captain Picard, can you assist us?

Picard: Captain Kirk, I'm noticing that our ships are not completely compatible--you are using the old 'studded' technology, whereas ours is 'studless'. However, we will investigate the matter.

Kirk: Thank you Captain Picard.

Mr. Scott: Cap'n, if I may--if we use the compatible friction peg connectors to connect both ships together, that'll do the trick!

Kirk: As usual, Mr. Scott, you're a miracle worker!

Scott: Aye, just doing what I can...

Honey, guess what I want for Christmas next year...

What will undoubtably cause a flurry of posting activity across all LEGO Mindstorms User Groups on the internet, The LEGO Group has officially announced the newest in their line of buildable robots--What’s NXT? LEGO Press Release

Whereas the first Mindstorms robotic brick was known as the 'RCX', the new one is called the 'NXT', and it's quite the upgrade!

32 bit processor, bluetooth, digital wiring, servo motors, new sensors and more!

For a wonderful article with many nifty details, head on over to the Wired News Article.

As usual, the flurry of postings (as mentioned above) has already started over at LUGNET. From the "I can't wait until August!!" (the tentative public release date) crowd to the "There's no studs!! It doesn't look compatible with the RCX!!" crowd.

As for me, I'm pretty much excited! Considering I bought my first RCX back in, what was it--'99?, and the hours... nay, days, weeks, months... spent building and programming LEGO robots. One just has to look thru this very website to see that.

So I'll ignore the naysayers (once again) and I'll pick me up one (or more) Mindstorms NXT sets at the earliest possible time!

Build On!

- - -