LG Dare

November 10th, 2008

So, my contract with T-Mobile just ended, and I switched over to Verizon.

Blackberry’s are a bit spendier on every other carrier, so I decided I wasn’t going to get one this time. I am testing The BlackBerry Theory ("once you go BlackBerry, you never go back"). I gotta say… I miss it already. But, that’s not what this entry is about.

I got an LG Dare, and so far, I have to say… I am not at all impressed. Maybe it’s just that I’ve been spoiled. But the point is.... I’m not impressed.

Section One: The Touch Screen
I’ve been spoiled by competent touch screen technology. The boyfriend has an iPhone that I play with from time to time, and I’ve got an iPod touch that I regularly access the internet and type on. I barely have to touch it to get it to register my keys. On the Dare… not so much. It’s slowed down my typing speed considerably to have to go back and hitting keys that it didn’t register that I hit.

Dragging leaves a bit to be desired as well. More often than not, the phone things I selected some option that is on the screen while I am trying to drag, instead of dragging. It’s a little counterproductive one may say.

Section Two: The Other Features
The “full feature” browser is a sad excuse for an HTML browser. I think I would have preferred a normal mobile browser, as navigating and using this one is a pain in the neck. Bah.

Uhm. So, I know there were other things I didn’t like about it but since I took the phone back a couple days ago, I’ve already forgotten about it. I started writing this on Friday and took the Dare back on Saturday.

I traded it in for a Voyager, and oddly enough, the Voyager (which has a full QWERTY keyboard on the inside) has a more responsive touch screen. The browser still sucks, but I like this phone a lot better.

Though, I just saw that RIM put out a touchscreen BlackBerry, and omg, I want it.

  Opinionated  Technology   permalink   5 comments   11:26 AM

Apparently, Moses was High

March 5th, 2008

Moses and the Israelites were on drugs, says Benny Shanon, an Israeli professor of cognitive philosophy.

Writing in the British Journal Time and Mind, he claims Moses was probably on psychedelic drugs when he received the Ten Commandments from God.

The assertions give a whole new meaning to Moses being “high” on Mount Sinai.

According to Shanon, a professor at Hebrew University, two naturally existing plants in the Sinai Peninsula have the same psychoactive components as ones found in the Amazon jungle and are well-known for their mind-altering capabilities. The drugs are usually combined in a drink called ayahuasca.

“As far as Moses on Mount Sinai is concerned, it was either a supernatural cosmic event, which I don’t believe, or a legend, which I don’t believe either, or finally, and this is very probable, an event that joined Moses and the people of Israel under the effects of narcotics,” he told Israel Radio in an interview Tuesday.

The description in The Book of Exodus of thunder, lightening and a blaring trumpet, according to Shanon, are the classic imaginings of people under the influence of drugs.

As for the vision of the burning bush, well obviously that too was a drug-fueled hallucination, according to Shanon.

“In advanced forms of ayahuasca inebriation,” he wrote, “the seeing of light is accompanied by profound religious and spiritual feelings.”

Shanon admits he took some of these drugs while in the Amazon in 1991. “I experienced visions that had spiritual-religious connotations,” he said.

The initial reaction to this controversial theory from Israel’s religiously orthodox community and the powerful rabbis who lead it was less than enthusiastic.

Orthodox rabbi Yuval Sherlow, quoted by Reuters speaking on Israel radio, said: “The Bible is trying to convey a very profound event. We have to fear not for the fate of the biblical Moses, but for the fate of science.”

Source

Okay. This is definitely the most interesting article I have read all day. There are two things I try not to really talk about too much: politics, and faith. Those conversations just never seem to go well. But I couldn’t resist posting this.

Now, allow me to preface these next few paragraphs by saying this: I was born and raised Protestant. I have my ups and downs with religion as we know it. Sometimes I’m not sure if I even really believe in God as he was taught to me. I am very confused about my own personal faith. So, I think a lot about possible alternatives.

One of my favorites, that ties in with this story, is this: Why do science and religion have to argue? Why does one have to be absolutely right? What if they’re both right? I think it makes more sense to believe that they’re both right. For instance!

Let’s say Moses was high. Ok… they like to say that the Lord moves in mysterious ways. Maybe God chose to come to Moses while he was high, so that science could explain this vision, but the people that have faith would be able to exercise that faith by believing that God really did make himself and his will known to Moses. Science and Religion are both right.

What about The Big Bang theory? What if… maybe it’s crazy… but what if, when God created the Heavens and the Earth, he didn’t just will it into existence, but rather, was the cause of the Big Bang? Again, Science and Religion can both be right.

Maybe God uses science to his advantage. Maybe it’s his way of doing things so that us mere mortals can somewhat understand it. Maybe he wants us to be able to relate to him just a little bit. Maybe it was never meant to be Science verses Religion, and the two are supposed to work hand in hand to explain Existence.

... just a thought.

(now, before people start commenting, let me remind you of the comment policy, particularly rules 5 and 6. I mean it; I don’t tolerate immature fighting on my blog.)

  News  Opinionated   permalink   7 comments   03:14 PM