Kyo Yuy

Should a man who lives his life dictated by logic, listen to his gut? Despite the advice of everyone around him, and despite the own rationale in his brain?

I wonder if the voice I hear is that of divine inspiration, or my own stubborn stupidity refusing to move on.

It’s so stupid. I’ve never wavered on decisions like this before. And the conscious part of me says that it’s no use wasting time here because it’ll only cause me more pain.

So why? WHY AM I HESITATING?

Ugh, so stupid.

MATH IS HARD.

Haley, if you’re reading this, stop reading this.

I warned you.

Don’t scroll down.

I swear, you shouldn’t. Really.
—————-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
This is your last warning. If you keep reading you can’t say I didn’t warn you.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

Why do men like to talk about penises so much? Seriously. I was watching the Combat-EX vs. Chill Starcraft video, and every time the commentator went back to the ICCUP channel all the guys in the channel are like “PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS” and the commentator’s like “So everyone here is talking about penis.”

SERIOUSLY WE’RE STRAIGHT GUYS. WOULDN’T IT BE LOGICAL TO TALK ABOUT VAGINAS INSTEAD?

And Day, the commentator, kept talking about dicks and ran with the whole MY DICK THAT IS joke throughout the commentary. And while I admit that is funny, WHAT IS WITH THE OBSESSION WITH PENIS?

Also why is it that people who fail at trash talking have to resort to comparing penis lengths and having blowjobs with girlfriends and mom jokes. SERIOUSLY TRASH TALK BETTER.

Everybody knows trash talking is funnier when you target the person directly. Something the person did or something the person is. LOLOL YOU HAVE SMALL DICK I JUST INSULTED YOU LOL THAT IS FUNNY LOL I HAVE A BIGGER PENIS THAN YOU DO

Seriously… is that supposed to be offensive or funny in any way? And how does having a small penis equate to someone being bad at Starcraft? I sense a non sequitur.

I thought it was bad enough that my all boys school was full of straight guys who drew penises everywhere, which only made the school seem more gay than it really is. But now I find that even outside of that, guys everywhere like to just randomly say PENIS and compare penis sizes when the argument has absolutely nothing to do with penis size.

Sometimes I wonder if guys are more fascinated with penises than girls are. Someone enlighten me on this.

Oh wait, I mean.

PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS PENIS.

I SAID PENIS A LOT YOU GUYS. LAUGH BECAUSE IT IS FUNNY BECAUSE I SAID PENIS!!!!!!!!!11111

Dear Daycia,

I would highly appreciate it if you did not tell people false/misleading/utterly incorrect information about my meetups. I was looking forward to having Jennifer at my meetup on Friday, but apparently you had told her on Thursday that “Benson doesn’t do food at meetups.” Jennifer skipped my meetup in lieu of eating elsewhere, which was unfortunate despite the fact that Zoe brought cookies, someone else brought brownies and Little Debbie cakes, Mike brought an entire cheesecake, and Becky made oreo pudding for the meetup. I heard that you only had 2 people at the Thursday meetup, but was it really necessary to spite me by implying to the people there that I was lying and that there wasn’t going to be a picnic?

Contrary to what you may think, I don’t really go out of my way to make your life difficult. I don’t really like you, but it’s not like I dislike you (or really anyone) enough that I would deliberately try to ruin your life. I know you told LJ to tell Suzie to break up with me after telling LJ false rumors with me. And while I was extremely upset that you blocked me on AIM without notice, without even telling me what was wrong or why you were angry, then lied to me when I got another AIM name (claiming you didn’t block me and then saying “I gotta go,” then blocking me again on my second AIM name and me verifying it by seeing you online on my third AIM name), it was not my desire for me to cause you any drama back. It’s honestly not my intent to make you look bad in any way. I didn’t even tell anyone besides Suzie that it was you who specifically blocked me without even telling me why you did it (and to this day you have yet to tell me anything to my face, and you continue to talk badly about me from the shadows and spread false information about me).

I don’t know what it is. Maybe, like other people who have issues with me, you think I’m the source of all your problems. Maybe you feel like I was the one who “sabotaged Maid Games” in much the same way the Stringers felt I “sabotaged their ColossalCon halftime show.” In both cases, the staff had not approved the event occurring and both groups just assumed that the staff would approve it for whatever reason. In the Stringer’s case, I simply asked the head of cosplay IF such an event was occurring and they said that they had never approved of the halftime show being interrupted by Hare Hare Yukai - they weren’t going to allow it even if I had asked TO allow it. In your case, I didn’t talk to anyone on staff about your events at all. You simply did not talk to Jae in time to submit a panel form - it was May by the time you decided to take action, and by then the schedule had already been completely done and filled out.

I don’t really talk to you or about you any more. No one even really knows I dislike you except Suzie, because she herself does not like you for the way you have hurt me and the things you have tried to do just to spite me. So please stop trying to spread lies about me because it’s really annoying when you do such things.

- Benson

I feel like the friends I’m at odds with right now are really amazing friends and I don’t want to lose them.

But I feel like if I keep trying to stay close to them I’ll end up really hurt and they’ll abandon me any way.

I’ve had friends toss me aside for better friends before. I mean let’s face it, I’m really boring. It isn’t hard for someone cooler to come by and sweep my friends away.

I don’t know what to do. Should I just walk away from them before they start walking away from me? Should I trust that my friends really do care about me a lot and love me and that they really value me, and I should keep trying to stay friends with them and work things out with them?

I have no idea.

I’m sick of losing friends.

But I’m also sick of friends pushing me aside for better friends.

I hate it, I hate it, I hate it. Better cooler people ALWAYS appear and take my closest friends away. I’m just not fucking cool enough for anyone. I have no talents and no charm and NOTHING. People who are lonely will talk to me a lot and then I will do everything in my power to make them feel loved and important, and I introduce them to my friends and stuff like that, but as soon as they meet Awesome People (TM) it’s like I’m relegated to the backburner.

It’s all that chemistry bullshit. People build friendships and relationships with others on the basis of how well they click. Loyalty? Compassion? Caring? None of that really matters. If friends click well they click well and nothing I do can change that. If the guy has an awesome since of humor, has good looks, is a good dancer, or is charming, sorry Benson, you’re going in the “secondary folder.” That’s just the way life works, suck it up.

I want to just stop trying to form close bonds with people. If I don’t have close friends then I never have to be hurt by losing them again.

Though Kelsey says if I do that I’ll be lonely. But maybe I would be better off lonely forever than trying to form bonds only to end up utterly defeated and feeling SUPER LONELY.

Ah, hell if I know.

Someone wake me up when this nightmare ends.

So I recently watched the first episode of Fullmetal Alchemist Brotherhood.

Now, FMA was one of my favorite anime series of all time. I was introduced to the show by a very good friend of mine in 2004, and the show hooked me right from episode one. With the heartwrenching scene involving Edward and Alphonse at the very beginning of the series, the show had a fine mix of humor, seriousness, and tension. The plot progression was at a reasonable pace that was fast when it needed to be, and slow when time was needed to develop characters of the series.

Given how popular and amazing the original FMA anime was, the remake had a very high standard to live up to.

So does the new series live up to or exceed the standards set by the original? I don’t want to give up right away, but I must say I was sorely disappointed by what I’ve seen so far.

The episode doesn’t even open up with a focus on Edward and Al, but rather on a depiction of some random renegade alchemist that no one really cares about. This is a stark contrast to the first episode of the original series, which depicted Edward and Al exposing the fraud of an alchemist posing as a priest and using that to take advantage of a poor, struggling city. The latter was able to place a strong emphasis on some of the major themes of the series from the get go: the Principle of Equivalent Exchange, the idea of independence, the consequences of Edward trying to act like a hero, and the idea that sometimes corruption might be better left untouched if people are happy with the way things are.

The first episode of the new FMA series has none of that. Instead, we have a lot of action, a lot of jokes about Edward Elric being short, and some very weak exposition of the main cast that introduces them in a nondramatic and, dare I say, boring manner.

In stark contrast to the balanced humor-serious character that Maes Hughes was in the original series, the first episde of this series makes Hughes come off as rather obnoxious. Roy Mustang, who was always known to be a fine mix of dimwitted, flirty, and sympathetic, comes off as rather bland and detached.

That seems to be a problem with all the characters that have been introduced so far. Compared to how they were in the original series, many of the new characters seem rather flat, 2D, and not very emotional. Of course this is only the first episode, so I am not going to judge the entire series based on this one episode alone, but so far I must say I am not too pleased.

The show failed to capture me in the first 10 minutes of the show, so I did not bother to watch the rest of the episode. I found the pacing to be way too slow (possibly because I’ve watched too much Code Geass) and the characters to lack any sort of emotional depth. Part of the reason I didn’t watch the entire episode was because I was busy with school, so I did not have much patience to watch a series that couldn’t keep me entertained the whole time.

Hopefully, next week’s episode will have a better pace, and the characters will be able to draw me in as they were once able to 5 years ago. It is FMA, so I have high hopes and high expectations.

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2009-03-27/my-chemical-romance-founder-co-produces-ffvii/acc-song

Ever since Squaresoft merged with Enix, I’ve been less than displeased with their tendencies to make storyline sequels to the Final Fantasy games, and I am ESPECIALLY displeased with just how much the company is milking Final Fantasy VII for all its worth.

When Final Fantasy VII first came out, I immediately fell in love with it. I had played the demo at Media Play, and it was probably the second or third RPG I had ever played in my life. The story was very good, the characters had very compelling and 3D personalities, and the overall progression of the storyline was at a good pace that I could keep up with and enjoy thoroughly.

I liked Final Fantasy VII when it ended. It left a strong, lasting impression on me, and it had stayed in my heart as one of the true RPG classics of all time. Without a doubt, Final Fantasy VII opened the floodgates that allowed JRPGs to gain popularity in the states. Considering that the US only had four RPGs for the PSX prior to FFVII, there’s no doubt in my mind that FFVII was the game that proved to Sony that JRPGs had a place in the US market.

Nearly half a decade later, Square decides that it can make more money out of the FFVII franchise. So it decides to make a seemingly endless production of sequels, starting with the graphically amazing but plotwise inferior Advent Children, then producing Crisis Core, Dirge of Cerberus, and a number of spinoff RPGs and anime.

Now, I haven’t played a number of these RPGs or seen these spinoffs. But from my limited experience with Crisis Core and having watched Advent Children, I can firmly say that these spinoffs, for the large part, are vastly inferior to Final Fantasy VII. It seems that these spinoffs are largely tributes, references, homages, and allusions to other characters and events in FFVII, rather than trying to improve upon plot ideas or loose ends in FFVII. Not that FFVII really had any loose ends, which makes me question Square’s sequels even more.

I don’t like when companies intentionally produce a million spinoffs from one franchise when the obvious reason here is not to appeal to fans, but to make money. I would understand if they took 2-3 years to really develop a good sequel to FFVII or even a solid prequel that goes in depth into characters and shows solid plot development, but most of these movies and games seem poorly thrown together and are not indicate of the four year project that made FFVII the amazing game that it was.

And Square doesn’t seem to want to stop with the FFVII craze either. It’ll just keep producing sequels out the wazoo, nonstop, until everyone gets sick of FFVII and no one wants to buy it any more.

Makes me sad that it’s how FFVII will be remembered. Not as that one epic game, but as an overrated franchise that was beaten to death by its creators.

Until I started going to college, I didn’t really understand how scientific research actually worked. I know that there are a lot of fundraisers out there to help “find the cure to AIDS and cancer,” but I didn’t really know where those funds went. And although I did participate in science fair in middle school, I didn’t really understand how the scientific method really worked in a “professional setting,” so to speak. There are many depictions of scientists doing laboratory work in the media, but I think a lot of them give a limited or often inaccurate portrayal of what’s really going on.

I decided I’d blog a little bit about what I HAVE learned about scientific research through the laboratory work I’ve participated in, as well as listening and talking to various professors in academia. Granted, I am not a tenured PhD professor with extremely detailed knowledge of what goes on with scientific research, but I feel that I do have a fairly firm grasp of the whole research process, so I’m going to explain what I do know.

I’ll explain from a researcher’s point of view. A researcher can work at any given institution, such as a college, or a hospital, or in industry. The Principal Investigator (PI) is considered to be the leader of any given lab or research group. The PI is responsible for requesting funds and utilizing the funds to purchase materials necessary to do research and perform experiments.

The PI’s first step is always to acquire money. Contrary to what you see in Dexter’s Lab and other such shows, laboratories don’t just come out of nowhere - lab equipment is extremely expensive and researchers need money to purchase cells, chemicals, microscopes, and so forth.If the PI is working in a government funded institution, he/she will automatically get funds from state/government. Otherwise, the PI will have to write a grant proposal. This is basically a 30 page-ish document which describes a given hypothesis/theory about pursuing a given topic. For example, the PI may suggest that a certain chemical released in the body can kill cancer cells. The PI will list preliminary results (that is, any experiments that may SUGGEST his theory is valid but more experimentation is needed), as well as other published scientific articles to back up his/her claim. The PI will then request a certain amount of funding needed to fulfill the experiment. This may be in the form of cell lines, bioreactors, instrumentation, animals, whatever the experimenter needs to buy to perform the experiment.

This grant is then submitted to a particular research organization. Research organizations people may have heard of, include American Cancer Society, NASA, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The organization then reviews the grant, evaluates the potency and legitimacy of the theory behind the research, and then decides whether or not to allocate the funds to the person writing the grant.

When you “make a donation” to find a cure for AIDS, cancer, or any illness in general, this is usually what the donation goes toward. In effect, you are given organizations money which organizations in turn give to professors whose research seem promising. The amount of money donated to these organizations does not necessarily speed up or slow down the time it takes to find a cure - the success of research directly depends on the researchers’ ideas themselves and not the money. However, obviously, the more money that is donated, the more research projects that can be funded and the higher the chance that SOMEONE might stumble on to a successful discovery.

The PI, after being rewarded the grant, then proceeds to spend the next few years acquiring data and performing the experiments he outlined in his grant proposal. This may include culturing cancer cells on a dish, implanting tumors into a rat and administering a drug, and/or synthesizing new cancer drugs using various chemical techniques. After all the necesary data is collected, the PI will usually publish a data discussing his findings. The results may not necessarily correlate with the given hypothesis, in which case the PI (and other researchers who read his work) formulate new hypotheses in light of newly acquired data and technological advances.

Note that very few (if any) researchers actually begin a grant proposal by stating “the cure for cancer” or “the cure for AIDS.” Diseases are more complicated than just “Something bad is going on in your body and we will make a magical pill to make it go away.” Oftentimes, research has to do with IMPROVING current treatments as well as finding techniques to REDUCE THE COST of treatment. One thing my PI once told me, is that finding a drug that cures cancer is useless if the drug costs 50 million dollars to make and can only cure one person. The world has finite resources and money, so researchers not only have to worry about THE IDEAL goal, but also costs. That is why a large portion of research is simply spent on improving current drugs and current methods, rather than going out completely into unchartered territories and trying random things.

Scientific research cannot be random. Scientists HAVE to have justification for EVERYTHING they do. Likewise, they have to justify EVERYTHING they see, and no matter what results they obtain, they must try to explain WHY they acquired the results they did. The main focus of research is not performing experiments, but writing. Writing about data, writing about what is done in the lab, writing papers discussing your findings, and so on. Everything you do must be written down.

A scientist can’t just say “I think I’ve found the cure for cancer, please give me 500,000 dollars and I’ll prove it.” They must do extensive literature research AND have SOME form of preliminary experimental data to justify their claims. Since NIH and other organizations have LIMITED FUNDS, they can’t just randomly distribute money as they please or give money to every person who THINKS they’ve found a cure for cancer.

This is why a large portion of scientists’ time is spent writing grant proposals. Without money, they cannot do experiments. Without experimental data, they can’t randomly make up theories and assert that their statements are true “just ‘cuz.” Research grants are the lifeline for science researchers, and having the money they need helps them gather the data they need to make advancements in medicine.

So hopefully, I’ve provided some insight on exactly WHAT happens when you decide to give 5 dollars to the American Red Cross to find cure for AIDS. As I’ve said before, I am no expert and I am most certainly not a leading researcher. However, having had some degree of experience in academia, I thought I’d share this information with people who’ve never done research or worked in a lab before, and wanted to figure out just HOW science works.

Many people dream of being super famous. I know I’ve personally dreamed about becoming an actor, singer, writer, progamer, Nobel Prize winning scientist, or some combination thereof, but just how realistic are my dreams?

I was once friends with someone who wanted to publish his own novel, which he titled “Project Xero.” I did not really read it in detail, but I believe it was about a bunch of people trapped on an island, trying to break free. It struck me as something that was very typical of many fictional works out there, and I felt that the writing style was very unpolished. Still, his friends were extremely supportive of his dream, and he kept writing and revising his novel.

How realistic were his dreams? Not once has he attempted to contact a publisher or editor about proofreading and publishing. He has been dreaming about publishing this book for the past 5+ years, and all he’s done in this time is continue to revise the same work over and over again. I don’t even have to consider the quality of his work to conclude that, at this current rate, he has no chance of publishing. Without an established name in the industry, no one will just ASK him to publish his work. It is his own responsibility to pursue other publishing companies and see if any of them are interested in his novel.

The more I analyze books and other media in detail, the more I realize that quality is not the number one deciding factor in whether or not a book becomes published. I’ve seen some rather mundane, pointless books hit the shelves. And as an anime enthusiast, I only need to look at some of the less famous anime to see how bland and 2-dimensional many stories can be.

Even some of the most famous works tend to follow the same generic plotline. Shakespeare, who is often lauded as one of the greatest playwrights of all time, was heavily influenced by Roman and Greek literature, and many literary critics have drawn parallels between some of Shakespeare’s most famous plays and poems written by famous classical authors. For example, some literary critics feel that Romeo and Juliet is little more than an adaptation of Ovid’s Pyamus and Thisbe. Shakespeare added more characters and a greater level of detail, but the overall theme and plot of Romeo and Juliet follows the same path that Pyramus and Thisbe follows: the idea of two lovers who love each other despite parental feuds, and end up dying as a result of their disobedient love.

When we see how the BEST works of all time are often derivatives of previous writing, and how most published books are mundane and repetitive, we can see that quality really ISN’T the primary consideration in whether or not a book becomes published. So what factors are important in having a work published?

1) An established reputation - This does not necessarily have to be a reputation in writing. Famous actors, award winning scientists, and political leaders are examples of people who already have a major reputation in society, and as a result these people have a leg up in getting their work published. Since the fundamental idea is that publishers WANT TO MAKE MONEY, books written by famous people are simply likely to have an established reader base. Fans of these famous people will buy their work regardless of quality. One only needs to look at Maddox’s The Alphabet of Manliness or Stephen Colbert’s I Am America and So Can You to see how just having a name attached to a work can cause it to become an overnight best seller.

2) Prior authorship - If an author has written a book before and that work became famous, publishers will often expect that future works by this author will gain popularity, ESPECIALLY in the case of sequels. One need only look at the Harry Potter series to see that “If you strike rich with one, you’ll strike rich with the rest of them.”

3) Connections - Knowing someone with a strong connection to the industry, or being related to someone who’s had a strong impact in the literary business will go a long way in getting a book out there. One of my university’s professors, Henry Adams, has a huge leg up in publishing books because of his legacy - he is a direct descendant of second U.S. President John Adams. As such, he has a huge advantage in being recognized by publishing companies, because publishers may expect his legacy to have a noticeable impact on garnering potential readers.

4) Persistence - Barring any special connections or privileges a person might have, the only other way people can publish their books is through constant perseverance. Most potential authors will be rejected by as many as 100 publishing companies before one finally decides that their work is interesting enough to be worth publishing. Even some of the most famous authors today had their famous works rejected 25 times before finally gaining acceptance. If I recall, Tracy Dills, an author who spoke in my middle school years about publishing children’s books, was rejected by over 25 companies before her work was finally accepted. Granted, if you can also illustrate your book and are naturally talented (like my friend Haley), you’ll have a significant advantage in getting your work out there, but even then you’ll have to make arduous efforts to get your name out there. According to my friend, at the Cleveland Institute of Art, teachers tell you that even if your art is revolutionary and you’re the most brilliant artist of the 21st century, if you do not go out and contact publishers about your work, you will never be famous.

Another thing to consider is the fact that fiction, as a market, has recently been on the decline. In the Information Age, people are reading books less and less, and this applies particularly powerfully to fiction. Therefore, it may be better to start off publishing a nonfiction work (to establish your name)  before you proceed to publishing fictional works.

The moral of the story can be summarized in the following:

1) ANYONE can publish ANYTHING, regardless of quality, as long as he/she has the persistence to find a publisher willing to publish his/her work.

2) Writing quality does not necessarily decide the popularity of the work. Advertising, connections, and reputation, can all  have a huge factor in deciding whether a book collects dust on the shelf or becomes the next New York Times best seller.

3) A publishing company’s primary goal is to make money. Writing and drawing skills will ALWAYS take a back seat to making money. I think keeping this concept in mind will really help potential authors figure out what to write and also whom to contact when it finally becomes time to get their work published.