Cameron brings up a question about if kids blog or not.  I was sort of thinking along these lines for a little while and I suppose I should write something down.  The difference is that I was thinking that when I was younger, I never saw myself keeping a journal or diary.  I guess that plan sort of fell by the wayside, but I think the biggest impact that made me go ahead with a blog is that I don’t have to physically write.  I’m far more comfortable as and a much quicker typist, than I am a writer.  That and the readability (I tend to write like a doctor most times) allows me go back and read over some of the articles from time to time.  Not to mention that Cut/Copy/Paste is so much cleaner than eraser marks or strike through.  I do, however, enjoy knowing that my current thoughts are written down, rather than just fading into the ever re-structuring of my persona.  It’ll make for excellent reading in 10-20 years, I imagine.

I find it somewhat strange that people tend to keep diaries private (locked even) while on the other hand, blogs are kept quite open.  I think that people have a sense of privacy with blogs due to getting lost in the sea of web pages.  Because bloggers don’t necessarily see their readers on a normal basis, if ever, I don’t think that they mind that their “audience” reads personal details.  The other subtle benefit of blogs is that the people who read the blog might have a better understanding of the writer’s personality/history than some of the writer’s better friends.  So if a blog reader ever meets a blogger, they would know what to expect.  I find it somewhat similar to a musician getting on stage for the first time.  The first few times are coupled with feelings of nervousness and self-consciousness, but it gets easier with each appearance.  After a while, it becomes fun.

This brings up some interesting situations if a blog “fan” meets the blog writer.  One is that the reader could bring up personal instances of that bloggers life, and just start probing into details about those situations right away.  It would strike me as somewhat weird to have pretty much a stranger asking me personal questions… Maybe this is similar to what celebs have to deal with.  The other situation is that you could cut through all of the BS associated with getting to know someone, and just get on with a typical conversation as if long time friends.

I found a couple other things out last night.  The first one is that there are no self-serve gasoline stations in New Jersey.  It is all full-serve.  While that might not come as a shock to some, it did to me.  Others might wonder why I prefer self-serve and I do for two reasons.  The first is that I was much quicker at figuring out the complex pump (heh…push the button for the fuel grade.  Whew, that’s hard) and getting gas into my car, than the amount of time that it took for the attendant to come over.  By the time the attendant came over, my tank was full and I was ready to pay them.  The second reason that I like self-serve is that I don’t “top off” my tank.  I think it’s pointless… why would I risk having the little bit of gas that I can fit in my tank get gobbled up by the nozzle, when that amount of gas really wont matter when I make my next stop.

The other thing that I wanted to comment on has to do with geeks and soda.  I’m guessing that Microsoft has a deal with Coca Cola because they only served Coke products.  They had diet Coke, Coke, and Sprite.  No more, no less…  The thing that made me curious was how many people actually prefer those products over say… Mountain Dew or even water.  I was always under the assumption that geeks preferred Mt. Dew, but maybe I’m a bit biased… I do not like Coke and would not have grabbed a bottle last night had there been another free choice for a caffeine supply.  Personally, I’m a water man… if I must; I’ll have Mt. Dew or root beer if looking for some flavor.

I came across this post through a couple other linkers… Anyway, Kevin Kelly reviewed the book Art & Fear:Observations on the Perils (and Rewards) of Artmaking and posted an excerpt from it.  I thought it was worth distributing:

 “The ceramics teacher announced on opening day that he was dividing the class into two groups. All those on the left side of the studio, he said, would be graded solely on the quantity of work they produced, all those on the right solely on its quality. His procedure was simple: on the final day of class he would bring in his bathroom scales and weigh the work of the “quantity” group: fifty pound of pots rated an “A”, forty pounds a “B”, and so on. Those being graded on “quality,” however, needed to produce only one pot -albeit a perfect one – to get an “A”. Well, came grading time and a curious fact emerged: the works of highest quality were all produced by the group being graded for quantity. It seems that while the “quantity” group was busily churning out piles of work – and learning from their mistakes – the “quality” group had sat theorizing about perfection, and in the end had little more to show for their efforts than grandiose theories and a pile of dead clay.”