November 2008 Archives
I really enjoy playing Risk when I get the opportunity. Everything Thanksgiving, some of Carrie's cousin's get a game together and play. The first year I attended, I won, and I've had a target on my back since. :)
I wanted to play my Lord of the Rings edition of Risk, but unfortunately that has a maximum of four players, so we ended up playing the standard version instead. When I got home, I still spent some time reacquainting myself with the more complex rules of the LoTR Risk. Part of what is interesting about this version is the addition of leaders and strongholds. Leaders, when part of an attacking or defending army, adds 1 to the highest dice roll. Strongholds add 1 to the highest dice roll of the defender. So if you are defending from a stronghold with a leader, you add 2 to the highest die. (You don't get the option to add the bonuses to the second highest number or split them). This got me thinking that to take the best advantage of the bonuses when defending was to only defend with one army instead of two. But I couldn't be sure until I did the math.
So I did.
Well, I didn't exactly do the math specifically (it's tricky given the specific rules), so I wrote a computer program to run every possible dice combination and see how things turned out.
Here are the results. Or, if you'd prefer to have fun with sorting, here's the Excel file.
(If you do spend some time actually looking at this file, here's a quick explanation. The left four columns are the dice/bonus combinations, the next four columns the exact number of combinations that yield particular results, the odds of each of those results, and then on the right the number of armies that either side could expect to lose out of two armies (which would be two rolls with one defender and one roll with two defenders).)
Some interesting things come out of analyzing this data. Assuming the attacker rolls 3 dice, and the defender has 2 bonus points to the attacker's 0, then the best case is to roll only 1 die as the defender. Per each turn, the defender rolling 1 die can expect to lose 0.6667 armies vs. 0.7490 armies by rolling two dice. The opposite, however, is true if the defender has only 1 bonus point. In this case, with 1 die the defender lose 0.9877 armies per roll instead of 0.8868 armies with 2 dice. This is, in fact, the only instance where it is actually beneficial to roll 1 die instead of 2 as a defender.
I know there is more analysis and further calculations that can be done, but seeing how writing this program and looking at these numbers have taken the better part of my afternoon, I think I'll call it a day.
I wanted to play my Lord of the Rings edition of Risk, but unfortunately that has a maximum of four players, so we ended up playing the standard version instead. When I got home, I still spent some time reacquainting myself with the more complex rules of the LoTR Risk. Part of what is interesting about this version is the addition of leaders and strongholds. Leaders, when part of an attacking or defending army, adds 1 to the highest dice roll. Strongholds add 1 to the highest dice roll of the defender. So if you are defending from a stronghold with a leader, you add 2 to the highest die. (You don't get the option to add the bonuses to the second highest number or split them). This got me thinking that to take the best advantage of the bonuses when defending was to only defend with one army instead of two. But I couldn't be sure until I did the math.
So I did.
Well, I didn't exactly do the math specifically (it's tricky given the specific rules), so I wrote a computer program to run every possible dice combination and see how things turned out.
Here are the results. Or, if you'd prefer to have fun with sorting, here's the Excel file.
(If you do spend some time actually looking at this file, here's a quick explanation. The left four columns are the dice/bonus combinations, the next four columns the exact number of combinations that yield particular results, the odds of each of those results, and then on the right the number of armies that either side could expect to lose out of two armies (which would be two rolls with one defender and one roll with two defenders).)
Some interesting things come out of analyzing this data. Assuming the attacker rolls 3 dice, and the defender has 2 bonus points to the attacker's 0, then the best case is to roll only 1 die as the defender. Per each turn, the defender rolling 1 die can expect to lose 0.6667 armies vs. 0.7490 armies by rolling two dice. The opposite, however, is true if the defender has only 1 bonus point. In this case, with 1 die the defender lose 0.9877 armies per roll instead of 0.8868 armies with 2 dice. This is, in fact, the only instance where it is actually beneficial to roll 1 die instead of 2 as a defender.
I know there is more analysis and further calculations that can be done, but seeing how writing this program and looking at these numbers have taken the better part of my afternoon, I think I'll call it a day.
Carrie had her first ultrasound today, and we learned that we're going to be having a baby girl. Here are some pictures. Sadly, I haven't been able to read the video files on the CD that the nurse sent home with us, so we're left with odd pictures. The baby really put on a show for us, too, squirming around and really moving her arms and legs. It was pretty awesome.
Up first is a picture of the baby's head. The nurse couldn't explain the pacman ghost you see right under her head, though. :)
Followed by a picture of something I'm not sure. Attention should be focused on the brighter white section toward the top, I imagine. It made much more sense seeing it live.
Here's a picture of the baby's legs. It looks kind of funny because you're seeing her quads, basically. Again, focussing toward the top, the solid mass on the bottom is all Carrie.
Here's a shot of her arms, hands, and feet. She was hiding her face for much of the ultrasound.
Here's another shot of the arms, this time in the upper left portion of the picture.
There are some other pictures, but those are far less clear. Maybe I'll get lucky and someone will figure out these videos for me.
Up first is a picture of the baby's head. The nurse couldn't explain the pacman ghost you see right under her head, though. :)
Followed by a picture of something I'm not sure. Attention should be focused on the brighter white section toward the top, I imagine. It made much more sense seeing it live.Here's a picture of the baby's legs. It looks kind of funny because you're seeing her quads, basically. Again, focussing toward the top, the solid mass on the bottom is all Carrie.Here's a shot of her arms, hands, and feet. She was hiding her face for much of the ultrasound.Here's another shot of the arms, this time in the upper left portion of the picture.There are some other pictures, but those are far less clear. Maybe I'll get lucky and someone will figure out these videos for me.After yesterday's post about some people missed out on the icing to their prank-cake (mmm... prank-cake) by not including a score with the abandoned piano, I've come across two more fun music items.
First, This American Life, my favorite radio program, just posted a program about music lessons, and it is definitely worth a listen if you've had any connection to music whatsoever.
Second, the Opposable Thumbs blog posted an item about a Wiimote that was hacked to create a theremin. Here's the video:
Apparently someone in Massachusetts left a piano in good working order in the woods. The bench is out as though someone was or was about to play. The only question that remains (aside from who put it there) is was there any music? The picture provided doesn't show any, but if someone did this as a prank, which seems to be the case, I'd be pretty darn curious to know if they had any music on that stand. Oh well...
From CNN.com:
Was it a theft? A prank? A roundabout effort to bring some holiday
cheer to the police? Authorities in Harwich, Massachusetts, are probing
the mysterious appearance of a piano, in good working condition, in the
middle of the woods.
From CNN.com:
Was it a theft? A prank? A roundabout effort to bring some holiday
cheer to the police? Authorities in Harwich, Massachusetts, are probing
the mysterious appearance of a piano, in good working condition, in the
middle of the woods. Discovered by a woman who was walking a trail, the Baldwin Acrosonic piano, model number 987, is intact -- and, apparently, in tune.
Sgt. Adam Hutton of the Harwich Police Department said information has been broadcast to all the other police departments in the Cape Cod area in hopes of drumming up a clue, however minor it may be.
But so far, the investigation is flat.
Also of note: Near the mystery piano -- serial number 733746 -- was a bench, positioned as though someone was about to play.
The piano was at the end of a dirt road, near a walking path to a footbridge in the middle of conservation land near the Cape.
It took a handful of police to move the piano into a vehicle to transport it to storage, so it would appear that putting it into the woods took more than one person.
Asked whether Harwich police will be holding a holiday party in the storage bay -- tickling the ivories, pouring eggnog -- while they await word of the piano's origin and fate, Hutton laughed. No such plans.
Harwich police have had some fun, though. Among the photos they sent to the news media is one of Officer Derek Dutra examining the piano in the woods. The police entitled the photo "Liberace."
Well, I finally picked up the recording from my lecture-recital, and I am quite pleased. Ok, so I may not have listened to more than a few seconds of the lecture portion (enough to realize that my voice sounds weird), but the recital portion came out really well. I'd have to say that aside from a few slips, the Duckworth sounded just as I wanted it to, which is simply an extraordinary feeling. The Borden sounds quite good as well, though there are a couple of places that I think could be polished further, but I doubt many would hear those spots. :)
Here then, are the mp3's of the recital. I'd strongly recommend that you listen to the recital on headphones or with good speakers, especially to hear the cool effects of the Duckworth.
Lecture (download .mp3 file)
"Interpretive Straties with Post-Minimalist Piano Music"
William Duckworth Time Curve Preludes (download .zip file)
David Borden Double Portrait (download .mp3 file)
Dr. Andrew Granade, second piano
------------
As a side note, Carrie told me that the baby didn't kick in the least when I was playing through the recording. When I put on one of our favorite Christmas songs, "Baby, It's Cold Outside," afterwards, the baby went nuts. I think there's still time to get the baby to appreciate this music, though.
Here then, are the mp3's of the recital. I'd strongly recommend that you listen to the recital on headphones or with good speakers, especially to hear the cool effects of the Duckworth.
Lecture (download .mp3 file)
"Interpretive Straties with Post-Minimalist Piano Music"
William Duckworth Time Curve Preludes (download .zip file)
David Borden Double Portrait (download .mp3 file)
Dr. Andrew Granade, second piano
------------
As a side note, Carrie told me that the baby didn't kick in the least when I was playing through the recording. When I put on one of our favorite Christmas songs, "Baby, It's Cold Outside," afterwards, the baby went nuts. I think there's still time to get the baby to appreciate this music, though.
I am a very fortunate person. I am constantly being exposed to new, cool music. Just as I approach the end of my doctoral coursework and am feeling pretty burned out (I didn't take any time off from undergrand to masters to doctorate...), I get reinvigorated by all this new music. The only frustrating thing is that there aren't a whole lot of people running around to share it with. :(
So, I'm gonna mention Jean-Phillipe Goude here because a friend of mine (who expands my ears with his nonPop podcast) was playing this CD and I couldn't stop listening. Just head over to Goude's MySpace page and tell me that you don't enjoy the first track that starts playing. That's cool music.
Now, I know that there are things that I'm working on (such as An Hour for Piano) that are more difficult to listen to, but I really think that so much of this stuff is really accessible and fun to hear. I'll post my recital recording once I get it, but for now, go check out JP Goude. He's also on iTunes if you want to download the album. Happy listening!
So, I'm gonna mention Jean-Phillipe Goude here because a friend of mine (who expands my ears with his nonPop podcast) was playing this CD and I couldn't stop listening. Just head over to Goude's MySpace page and tell me that you don't enjoy the first track that starts playing. That's cool music.
Now, I know that there are things that I'm working on (such as An Hour for Piano) that are more difficult to listen to, but I really think that so much of this stuff is really accessible and fun to hear. I'll post my recital recording once I get it, but for now, go check out JP Goude. He's also on iTunes if you want to download the album. Happy listening!
In case you haven't noticed, my recital is this evening, and my brother decided to actually fly in from New York just to hear it (and have dinner with me last night). My sister also came down from Truman, so this will be the first time all the Lee siblings have been together this year.
Unfortunately, my brother kind of spoiled the surprise by posting a status update to the effect of "John just bought his plane ticket to Kansas City." I, being on the internet far more than is healthy, noticed this rather quickly and responded with "?????" Which prompted him to delete the status, post fake status updates about things he was doing in NY, and prompting friends to respond to said fake status updates. All of this might have worked save for one other problem... he kept calling his accomplice (my wife), who, despite her many wonderful traits and qualities, does not have a pending career as a CIA operative. I did manage to put two and two together, figuring he'd come in for the recital, but I was surprised that they were already at the restaurant when we went out last night.
Another related Facebook cautionary tale concerns my sister. Upon learning that my parents would be moving to Houston, she posted a status update announcing the move. Well, this got around to a few people and before you knew it, my Dad's boss found out before my Dad could personally tell him. Now, my Dad is retired and was working part-time at a nice golf course, mostly for the free golf, so it wasn't a terribly big deal. Also, his boss knew that they had sold their house and were kind of in limbo, but it still serves as a reminder that word travels quickly in the 21st century.
Unfortunately, my brother kind of spoiled the surprise by posting a status update to the effect of "John just bought his plane ticket to Kansas City." I, being on the internet far more than is healthy, noticed this rather quickly and responded with "?????" Which prompted him to delete the status, post fake status updates about things he was doing in NY, and prompting friends to respond to said fake status updates. All of this might have worked save for one other problem... he kept calling his accomplice (my wife), who, despite her many wonderful traits and qualities, does not have a pending career as a CIA operative. I did manage to put two and two together, figuring he'd come in for the recital, but I was surprised that they were already at the restaurant when we went out last night.
Another related Facebook cautionary tale concerns my sister. Upon learning that my parents would be moving to Houston, she posted a status update announcing the move. Well, this got around to a few people and before you knew it, my Dad's boss found out before my Dad could personally tell him. Now, my Dad is retired and was working part-time at a nice golf course, mostly for the free golf, so it wasn't a terribly big deal. Also, his boss knew that they had sold their house and were kind of in limbo, but it still serves as a reminder that word travels quickly in the 21st century.
I think I may have finally corrected the slowness that my blog has been experiencing lately. Here's hoping the changes stick.
We lost power at approximately 2:45 pm today. The skies were clear and there wasn't the noise of a branch knocking down a power line. I called the power company a few minutes later (after calling my parents in Houston to get the number) and let them know I didn't have power. Around 3:30 pm I got a call stating that the meter was still reading fine and to call again if I didn't have power (I didn't). I finally get a hold of a person who informs me that they can send someone out, but if nothing is wrong they will charge my account, as though I was just messing with them. Around 4:30 pm the power truck arrives and the guy checks things outside. He knocks on my door and then asks if there are people living next door (we're in a duplex). I tell him that there are (at least the dogs are still barking), and he says, "I think they switched off power to the wrong place."
We now have power, and if I've guessed correctly, our neighbors do not.
We now have power, and if I've guessed correctly, our neighbors do not.
Since 2004, I have read the Lord of the Rings every Christmas break, and with one other summer reading, this will be my sixth time reading the work. This little tradition was not at all planned. In fact, I didn't even buy the book. Carrie owned it for whatever reason (though she's never read it), and I just decided to read it over break. Then, when break came around the next year, it seemed like a good way to pass the time again. Now, as the weather gets colder, I can't help but start thinking about reading the story again. I actually start feeling really excited about the chance to read the book again. (I can't do it during the school year, it just consumes me a bit too much.) I mean, yeah, it's good to see family and stuff, but I also miss Gandalf and Aragorn and Frodo and the rest of the gang...
Is that weird?
Is that weird?
As I watched the election results last night, it became pretty clear early on that the polls would be true and McCain was going to lose. As 10:00pm (CST) approached, it became obvious that CNN was going to declare Obama the victor as soon as the polls in California, Washington and Oregon closed. And yet, when it was announced, the significance of that announcement hit me. In one instant, I forgot about policy differences, I forgot about the campaign ads, I forgot about the stump speeches, I forgot about all those calls we'd received these last few days. The only thing I saw was that America had just elected its first african-american president.
Even as I sit here an recall last night, I remain overwhelmed. I cannot, and probably never will be able say anything of meaning on this subject, but I think seeing the crowds from across the country and the tears that flowed says enough. I do not think I've ever been more proud to be an American than I am today.
To think that it was just 40 years ago that Martin Luther King, Jr. was assisinated absolutely boggles my mind. To think that Obama was not quite seven when it happened is just as amazing. I know this election represents a dramatic leap forward in the push for racial equality, and I can only hope that it will begin the final chapter in what has been a long, long fight.
I'll conclude this post the only way that seems appropriate, with King's "I Have a Dream" speech, delivered on August 28, 1963, just over 45 years ago.
Even as I sit here an recall last night, I remain overwhelmed. I cannot, and probably never will be able say anything of meaning on this subject, but I think seeing the crowds from across the country and the tears that flowed says enough. I do not think I've ever been more proud to be an American than I am today.
To think that it was just 40 years ago that Martin Luther King, Jr. was assisinated absolutely boggles my mind. To think that Obama was not quite seven when it happened is just as amazing. I know this election represents a dramatic leap forward in the push for racial equality, and I can only hope that it will begin the final chapter in what has been a long, long fight.
I'll conclude this post the only way that seems appropriate, with King's "I Have a Dream" speech, delivered on August 28, 1963, just over 45 years ago.
Time at poll: 5:50am
People in line: 100-125
People in line at 6:00: 175-200
Smokers directly in front of me: 2 (thanks guys)
Time done voting: 6:35am
Things were moving pretty quickly at the polling station, but lines are gonna be long. Last time I voted in the presidential election I voted at 6:00am as well. There were maybe 10 of us. I just saw on the news that they are expecting 77% voter turnout in Missouri.
So plan on waiting a bit--but get your butt to the polls.
People in line: 100-125
People in line at 6:00: 175-200
Smokers directly in front of me: 2 (thanks guys)
Time done voting: 6:35am
Things were moving pretty quickly at the polling station, but lines are gonna be long. Last time I voted in the presidential election I voted at 6:00am as well. There were maybe 10 of us. I just saw on the news that they are expecting 77% voter turnout in Missouri.
So plan on waiting a bit--but get your butt to the polls.
Seriously. Don't forget.
For those of you not in Missouri, you can skip this post. I just wanted to counter the constant advertisement that supports this measure.
First of all, the measure as it will appear on the ballot:
Shall Missouri Law be amended to:
At first glance, some of the points of this seem good. An increase in casino taxes, more funding for education and other services, and no more casinos to be built. At second glance, though, it's clear that this was written for and of course is being promoted heavily by the casinos.
The biggest thing is the removal of loss limits. Some estimates say that this alone could increase casino revenues by 30%. The paltry increase in taxes is clearly just a way to help sell this to the voters. The net benefit is definitely to the casinos. As a side note, in this economy, I don't want to know what will happen to some people if these loss limits go away.
Oh, and how about the ID regulation? Do you really expect the casinos to be really strict about ID'ing those that look 21?
Now, I tend to be against casinos in general (go into a casino on a weekday and look at the demographics of gamblers), so limiting casino construction is nice, but also is really good if you have a casino already. Eliminates competition...
Now, what about this $100 million for schools that is getting thrown around the TV? You have to hand it to the casinos who have enlisted the help of some recognized educators for their campaign. But how much money is that really? The Missouri appropriation for primary and secondary education for FY2008 was just over $5.2 billion. An extra $100 million is about a 1.88% increase. Not a big deal. Especially when you consider how much state funding accounts for in a school budget. State funding accounts for just 37% of the Liberty School District funding. No, I haven't surveyed beyond that, but realize that even if state funding accounts for half of the budget, any school district can expect about a 0.94% increase in funding due to this measure (of course, that assumes equal distribution which I doubt is the case). It would help, yes, but that doesn't sound quite as impressive as $100 million annually, does it?
As for me, I will be voting against this measure, and felt the need to get some bad press out there for it. I would ask those few from MO who might read this to consider who might have drafted this proposition and who might benefit the most.
First of all, the measure as it will appear on the ballot:
Shall Missouri Law be amended to:
- repeal the current individual maximum loss limit for gambling;
- prohibit any future loss limits;
- require identification to enter the gambling area only if necessary to establish that an individual is at least 21 years old;
- restrict the number of casinos to those already built or being built;
- increase the casino gambling tax from 20% to 21%;
- create a new specific education fund from gambling tax proceeds generated as a result of this measure called the "Schools First Elementary and Secondary Education Improvement Fund"; and
- require annual audits of this fund?
At first glance, some of the points of this seem good. An increase in casino taxes, more funding for education and other services, and no more casinos to be built. At second glance, though, it's clear that this was written for and of course is being promoted heavily by the casinos.
The biggest thing is the removal of loss limits. Some estimates say that this alone could increase casino revenues by 30%. The paltry increase in taxes is clearly just a way to help sell this to the voters. The net benefit is definitely to the casinos. As a side note, in this economy, I don't want to know what will happen to some people if these loss limits go away.
Oh, and how about the ID regulation? Do you really expect the casinos to be really strict about ID'ing those that look 21?
Now, I tend to be against casinos in general (go into a casino on a weekday and look at the demographics of gamblers), so limiting casino construction is nice, but also is really good if you have a casino already. Eliminates competition...
Now, what about this $100 million for schools that is getting thrown around the TV? You have to hand it to the casinos who have enlisted the help of some recognized educators for their campaign. But how much money is that really? The Missouri appropriation for primary and secondary education for FY2008 was just over $5.2 billion. An extra $100 million is about a 1.88% increase. Not a big deal. Especially when you consider how much state funding accounts for in a school budget. State funding accounts for just 37% of the Liberty School District funding. No, I haven't surveyed beyond that, but realize that even if state funding accounts for half of the budget, any school district can expect about a 0.94% increase in funding due to this measure (of course, that assumes equal distribution which I doubt is the case). It would help, yes, but that doesn't sound quite as impressive as $100 million annually, does it?
As for me, I will be voting against this measure, and felt the need to get some bad press out there for it. I would ask those few from MO who might read this to consider who might have drafted this proposition and who might benefit the most.
