secrets
Me, Marco, Evelina and Sving are planning something really fun for next week.
I'll tell you more later!
happy birthday, love!
My birthday boy! ♥
Computer enclosures
Since ive been plannin on buying and building my own computer i might as well tell what parts ive been planning on putting together, i just hope it doesnt end up becoming to much of a behemoth! xD
At the moment im very interested in what kind of case id like. im just planning on keeping it all in a mid size tower. I have three potential cases to choose from. an outside opinion is much appreciated here!
1. CoolerMaster Storm Sniper
2. SilverStone Raven 2 (rv02)
3. SilverStone fortress 2 (ft02)
quick overviews of each wil come in the near future!
"Mending Wall"
Something there is that doesn't love a wall,
That sends the frozen-ground-swell under it,
And spills the upper boulders in the sun,
And makes gaps even two can pass abreast.
The work of hunters is another thing:
I have come after them and made repair
Where they have left not one stone on a stone,
But they would have the rabbit out of hiding,
To please the yelping dogs. The gaps I mean,
No one has seen them made or heard them made,
But at spring mending-time we find them there.
I let my neighbor know beyond the hill;
And on a day we meet to walk the line
And set the wall between us once again.
We keep the wall between us as we go.
To each the boulders that have fallen to each.
And some are loaves and some so nearly balls
We have to use a spell to make them balance:
'Stay where you are until our backs are turned!'
We wear our fingers rough with handling them.
Oh, just another kind of out-door game,
One on a side. It comes to little more:
There where it is we do not need the wall:
He is all pine and I am apple orchard.
My apple trees will never get across
And eat the cones under his pines, I tell him.
He only says, 'Good fences make good neighbors'.
Spring is the mischief in me, and I wonder
If I could put a notion in his head:
'Why do they make good neighbors? Isn't it
Where there are cows?
But here there are no cows.
Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
What I was walling in or walling out,
And to whom I was like to give offence.
Something there is that doesn't love a wall,
That wants it down.' I could say 'Elves' to him,
But it's not elves exactly, and I'd rather
He said it for himself. I see him there
Bringing a stone grasped firmly by the top
In each hand, like an old-stone savage armed.
He moves in darkness as it seems to me~
Not of woods only and the shade of trees.
He will not go behind his father's saying,
And he likes having thought of it so well
He says again, "Good fences make good neighbors."
Something there is that doesn't love a wall,
That sends the frozen-ground-swell under it,
And spills the upper boulders in the sun,
And makes gaps even two can pass abreast.
The work of hunters is another thing:
I have come after them and made repair
Where they have left not one stone on a stone,
But they would have the rabbit out of hiding,
To please the yelping dogs. The gaps I mean,
No one has seen them made or heard them made,
But at spring mending-time we find them there.
I let my neighbor know beyond the hill;
And on a day we meet to walk the line
And set the wall between us once again.
We keep the wall between us as we go.
To each the boulders that have fallen to each.
And some are loaves and some so nearly balls
We have to use a spell to make them balance:
'Stay where you are until our backs are turned!'
We wear our fingers rough with handling them.
Oh, just another kind of out-door game,
One on a side. It comes to little more:
There where it is we do not need the wall:
He is all pine and I am apple orchard.
My apple trees will never get across
And eat the cones under his pines, I tell him.
He only says, 'Good fences make good neighbors'.
Spring is the mischief in me, and I wonder
If I could put a notion in his head:
'Why do they make good neighbors? Isn't it
Where there are cows?
But here there are no cows.
Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
What I was walling in or walling out,
And to whom I was like to give offence.
Something there is that doesn't love a wall,
That wants it down.' I could say 'Elves' to him,
But it's not elves exactly, and I'd rather
He said it for himself. I see him there
Bringing a stone grasped firmly by the top
In each hand, like an old-stone savage armed.
He moves in darkness as it seems to me~
Not of woods only and the shade of trees.
He will not go behind his father's saying,
And he likes having thought of it so well
He says again, "Good fences make good neighbors."
By Robert Frost
This here is possibly my favorite poem residing with a few Emily Dickinson poems. I was planning on having a quick look through this piece of literature. The summary of "Mending Wall" is that a stone wall brings two neighbors together. One of the neighbors which is the speaker questions the wall and why they annually mend the wall. Whilst the other in the speakers opinion may seem old fashioned, for instance always refering back to his fathers words; "Good fences make good neighbors".
Theory of Knowledge Essay
This here is my ToK essay i wrote. The essay bases its discussion on the question provided below(italics). please comment and say what you think. My main sources were:
http://ibtokspot.blogspot.com/2008/12/tok-prescribed-titles-2010-question-5.html
Richard van de Lagemaat, Theory of Knowledge, ISBN 978-0-521-54298-2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“What separates science from all other human activities is its belief in the provisional nature of all conclusions” (Michael Shermer, www.edge.org). Critically evaluate this way of distinguishing the sciences from other areas of knowledge.
This statement focuses on 'science' in comparison to other areas of knowledge. The statement suggests the problem of induction is a probable factor present in justifying the contrasts of science from other areas of knowledge. Falsification and verification are used in science to present theories with high degree of probability.1 By suggesting all conclusions to be provisional the statement conveys all things are relative to, or dependent upon, something else. Scientists use inductive reasoning to hold and test theories. For example Newton's third law, where every action holds a reaction.2 If Newton's third law holds in all observed studies, it becomes universally true. Though if another study was to take place how can we be sure if Newton's third law was to hold true.
The statement provokes the belief one holds for 'science' as it harms the objectivity and certainty that it appears to give to us.3 This is so because science initially becomes the pure fact since inductive reasoning is used, but one believes 'science' as it is supported by expert opinion. This is much like for example an advertisement promoting toothpaste with support from a renown dentist. An arising thought comes to play as the statement potentially undermines science and all that bases upon scientific knowledge.4 Could Michael Shermer possibly imply that other areas of knowledge may harbor a higher certainty of conclusions than science.5 Potentially ethics, history, and the Arts. Mathematics is not brought into discussion as certainty is well implemented whence this area of knowledge is studied. This is well apparent since if one was to ask another what he/she was most certain of they would most likely answer; 2+2=4.6 Howbeit what makes science any more provisional than the other ways of knowledge. To some extent all knowledge becomes provisional, except for mathematics. This becomes apparent whence different ways of knowing are brought to hand.
Apropos science a comparison of Human and Natural science is required. Natural science relates to the outside world with observations and experiments. The science of nature is arguably structured and mechanistic, for instance the properties of a substance in the periodic table.7 Here we can see how mathematical knowledge gives more certainty to scientific conclusions. While Human sciences is based around the behavior of humans.8 To some extent this is more provisional than Natural science, as behavior may vary by influence of cultural diversity, some parts of the world wear shoes indoors whilst this becomes potentially peculiar or disrespectful in different ethnical groups. Also rather provisional is Ethics, a system of moral principles. Moral reasoning is the individual practical reasoning about what, morally, one ought to do.9 For example I do like spinach/ I do not like spinach, the moral dilemma becomes some what of taste. But tastes are not of interest in what is right or wrong, value judgments are therefore used.10 Providing why a subjective reason to 'taste' is decided.11 Unlike science, ethics are often not universally recognized to a singular prospect. An intriguing idea is if a politician is to follow a populaces' needs or to use the populace for attaining votes to stay in power thereafter making decisions based on their own political needs.12 Fortunately it seems as science preserves us from the sort of relativism found within ethics. Science is able to hold a sense of common understanding as long as induction is successive.
The nature of history is not simply concerned with describing the past, but also with explaining it.13 Additionally history too is provisional as accounts of the past change. Cultural and national biases pursue a subjective path, where past is potentially changed due to the manipulation of the present.14 Also the fact which pertains history to only a highly subjective area of knowledge is to what degree is something historical. History is a selection of a selection.15 To some extent this shows how assumptions can drive our conclusions. In turn this may parallel induction used by science. For example all metals expand when heated.1617 But this may not be true if new metals are observed and tested. This is potentially where science distinguishes itself from other ways of knowing. Science assimilates new knowledge with further in depth observation until a new induction replaces the previous. The provisional nature of historical knowledge leads to national/cultural/personal conflict because of its capability to change past through subjective thinking.18 Fortunately I find this contrasts science. Further, assumptions and prejudices are nonexistent in science.
Little can be said for distinguishing science and the arts. Though much can be stated for the arts for itself. Without the arts life would seem cold, grey, and dull. Surprisingly, “great works of art make the familiar strange and make the strange familiar.”.19 I find the arts as provisional impressions, much of its way of knowing is found through perception and emotion, a clear example is impressionism where visual brush strokes accompany human perception and experience, and unusual visual angles.20 Soon after the development of impressionism in the visual arts analogous movements in other arts too emerge, impressionist music and literature.21 Though there is no such of a tradition of great arts, the arts maintain an evolutionary position.22 Similarly as if an induction of science is falsified and a new induction is presented. Though in the arts area of knowledge the previous beliefs or evolutionary status is not labeled to falsification but simply another link in the chain, neither wrong nor right, merely humans provisional impression at a peculiar time.
In the evaluation of the statement a second-order question comes to mind; was Michael Shermer intending to undermine science and for what potential reason?23 A possible reason to intentionally undermine science is to represent other areas of knowledge, to not only become dogmatic. One has to be in thought of themselves, open-minded, and eager to question everything. Over the discussion and comparison amongst the areas of knowledge to science, I had found all knowledge to conditionally be 'provisional'. An assumption can be derived from the question brought up; “everybody is permitted to reach their own 'provisional conclusions and we have to get along somehow.”.24 Excluding mathematics, there are no right or wrong answers. There are no answers besides ones decision of answers in comparison to themselves.25
Word count: 1202
This statement focuses on 'science' in comparison to other areas of knowledge. The statement suggests the problem of induction is a probable factor present in justifying the contrasts of science from other areas of knowledge. Falsification and verification are used in science to present theories with high degree of probability.1 By suggesting all conclusions to be provisional the statement conveys all things are relative to, or dependent upon, something else. Scientists use inductive reasoning to hold and test theories. For example Newton's third law, where every action holds a reaction.2 If Newton's third law holds in all observed studies, it becomes universally true. Though if another study was to take place how can we be sure if Newton's third law was to hold true.
The statement provokes the belief one holds for 'science' as it harms the objectivity and certainty that it appears to give to us.3 This is so because science initially becomes the pure fact since inductive reasoning is used, but one believes 'science' as it is supported by expert opinion. This is much like for example an advertisement promoting toothpaste with support from a renown dentist. An arising thought comes to play as the statement potentially undermines science and all that bases upon scientific knowledge.4 Could Michael Shermer possibly imply that other areas of knowledge may harbor a higher certainty of conclusions than science.5 Potentially ethics, history, and the Arts. Mathematics is not brought into discussion as certainty is well implemented whence this area of knowledge is studied. This is well apparent since if one was to ask another what he/she was most certain of they would most likely answer; 2+2=4.6 Howbeit what makes science any more provisional than the other ways of knowledge. To some extent all knowledge becomes provisional, except for mathematics. This becomes apparent whence different ways of knowing are brought to hand.
Apropos science a comparison of Human and Natural science is required. Natural science relates to the outside world with observations and experiments. The science of nature is arguably structured and mechanistic, for instance the properties of a substance in the periodic table.7 Here we can see how mathematical knowledge gives more certainty to scientific conclusions. While Human sciences is based around the behavior of humans.8 To some extent this is more provisional than Natural science, as behavior may vary by influence of cultural diversity, some parts of the world wear shoes indoors whilst this becomes potentially peculiar or disrespectful in different ethnical groups. Also rather provisional is Ethics, a system of moral principles. Moral reasoning is the individual practical reasoning about what, morally, one ought to do.9 For example I do like spinach/ I do not like spinach, the moral dilemma becomes some what of taste. But tastes are not of interest in what is right or wrong, value judgments are therefore used.10 Providing why a subjective reason to 'taste' is decided.11 Unlike science, ethics are often not universally recognized to a singular prospect. An intriguing idea is if a politician is to follow a populaces' needs or to use the populace for attaining votes to stay in power thereafter making decisions based on their own political needs.12 Fortunately it seems as science preserves us from the sort of relativism found within ethics. Science is able to hold a sense of common understanding as long as induction is successive.
The nature of history is not simply concerned with describing the past, but also with explaining it.13 Additionally history too is provisional as accounts of the past change. Cultural and national biases pursue a subjective path, where past is potentially changed due to the manipulation of the present.14 Also the fact which pertains history to only a highly subjective area of knowledge is to what degree is something historical. History is a selection of a selection.15 To some extent this shows how assumptions can drive our conclusions. In turn this may parallel induction used by science. For example all metals expand when heated.1617 But this may not be true if new metals are observed and tested. This is potentially where science distinguishes itself from other ways of knowing. Science assimilates new knowledge with further in depth observation until a new induction replaces the previous. The provisional nature of historical knowledge leads to national/cultural/personal conflict because of its capability to change past through subjective thinking.18 Fortunately I find this contrasts science. Further, assumptions and prejudices are nonexistent in science.
Little can be said for distinguishing science and the arts. Though much can be stated for the arts for itself. Without the arts life would seem cold, grey, and dull. Surprisingly, “great works of art make the familiar strange and make the strange familiar.”.19 I find the arts as provisional impressions, much of its way of knowing is found through perception and emotion, a clear example is impressionism where visual brush strokes accompany human perception and experience, and unusual visual angles.20 Soon after the development of impressionism in the visual arts analogous movements in other arts too emerge, impressionist music and literature.21 Though there is no such of a tradition of great arts, the arts maintain an evolutionary position.22 Similarly as if an induction of science is falsified and a new induction is presented. Though in the arts area of knowledge the previous beliefs or evolutionary status is not labeled to falsification but simply another link in the chain, neither wrong nor right, merely humans provisional impression at a peculiar time.
In the evaluation of the statement a second-order question comes to mind; was Michael Shermer intending to undermine science and for what potential reason?23 A possible reason to intentionally undermine science is to represent other areas of knowledge, to not only become dogmatic. One has to be in thought of themselves, open-minded, and eager to question everything. Over the discussion and comparison amongst the areas of knowledge to science, I had found all knowledge to conditionally be 'provisional'. An assumption can be derived from the question brought up; “everybody is permitted to reach their own 'provisional conclusions and we have to get along somehow.”.24 Excluding mathematics, there are no right or wrong answers. There are no answers besides ones decision of answers in comparison to themselves.25
Word count: 1202
Stationary Computers 0.1
Ahhh yes!! i really wouldn't mind getting one of those. (for those who are lost already, read the header)
A computer witha nice big screen and a proper chair to go along with it!
no that isn't the only reason, actually im looking fowards to building my own computer. the whole idea of ordering parts and assembling it, kinda like lego i think! maybe a little more challenging. ^^
So what else...... id like this system resonably strong, enough for the latest games, fast file rendering etc.
And i know for sure that im not going to buy a ready made computer. what i mean by a ready computer is for instance a Dell, Acer, HP branded computer. i wont do this for another good few years i hope, unless a laptop.
my laptop future
Heey everybody!
First off, this is actually my (Marco) first blog I've ever done, so dont expect too much from little old me.
I've got a little computer I'd like to talk about today!
The ACER ASPIRE 6935G
intel Core 2 Duo Processor T9400 (2.53 Ghz, 1066 Mhz fSB, 6MB L2 cache)
16" full HD 1080P cinecrystal LCD
Geforce 9600m GT 512MB DDR3
4GB DDR3
320 GB HDD
Windows 7 ultimate
I really like the laptop, but I've been having lots of problems with it since day one all the way up to now. The problems range from BSOD's (blue screen of death) and my battery not being able to charge, hence forth a battery life of 5 minutes.
Well, I'ts almost been a year since I bought it so I'm going to send it in before my warranty expires!
Hope that I can make something out of the warranty!
oral commentary
Marco last night, studying for his oral commentary in English.
I ♥ Poochie. 
cake for valentine's day
I (Nathers) made a cake for Valentine's Day, some friends came over to help us eat it.
His birthday is coming up
You heard me, Marco's birthday will soon be here (February 23) and I just ordered his birthday present right from the net. They have things you can't find here in Bollnäs. Marco keeps asking me for clues and hints.
This picture is the best hint I can give him:
We are the world
I (Nathers) tripped over some nice music through Facebook last week.
Sends me shivers all over.
Sends me shivers all over.
There is a new version made from the song "We are the world", originally made by Michael Jackson and Lionel Richie.
We all remember the first version from -85 with the two gentlemens mentioned above and a whole lot of world famous artists. Here is the clip for those who cant remember.
This is the new version recorded in the exact same studio as the original.
LOS ANGELES — The energy was electric Monday night (February 1) at Henson Studios as more than 80 of music's biggest stars gathered for a charity remake of "We Are the World" in support of Haitian earthquake relief.
Read more at MTV's website.
Amazing!
Sälen 2009
Once upon a time (22th February - 1st March to be exact) we went to a cute winter paradise called Sälen.
We want to put up some pictures from the trip and also a video that Marco's good childhood friend Rhys made for us. Martyn, Emelie, Anton and Olof was also joining us.
This is how the cabin looked like.
And a short video to show it in motion.
Some of us played Smash, we had lots and lots to drink..
Marco turned 18 while we were in Sälen. I made him a cake!
I wasn't able to write "Marco" on the cake, after making the "M" i realized that there was no room for "arco". "M18" was fine enough. His birthday was truly awesome.
And for the grand finale..
The video that Rhys made! Enjoy!
Winter Holiday in Sweden from Rhys Duindam on Vimeo.
Happy Valentine's!
Happy Valentine's Day everyone! I remember that I played Scrabble last year this same day.
This year I'm spending it with Marco!
Cravings for vitamins and love the night before.
Woke up to this!
Marco went out to get us some breakfast. And what a breakfast!
Thanks pooch!
Shy and tired.
All my favorite things to eat! A big plus for the red and purple tulips, the most beautiful flower of all.
We wish you all a nice Sunday!
// Nathers and Marco
Sushi
We decided to invite some of our friends, Olof, My and Brian for dinner. Sushi was on the menu!
Brian gives it a try. "How hard can it be?"
Marco is awfully concentrated. Why so serious?
Olof will never ever do the wasabi again. ;)
(These pictures are clickable)
