Some Blog Site

Okay, okay, it is 2017 at this point, but the results are headlines as 2016 because they match with the 2016 predictions made in 2016 for the 2016 season. Also, the results are not all-haiku, just the predictions were. A more accurate title would be “Results for the All-Haiku Predictions made in 2016”.

Before the bowl games commenced for this past college football season, I made some predictions. Here, for your reading enjoyment, is the tally of those predictions. Note that the results are not in haiku form, in contrast to the predictions.
Read the rest of this entry »

Here are some entries for the Hindsight is 20/20 Department:

• Maybe a college team that didn’t win its conference shouldn’t be in the playoffs ahead of the team that beat it and did win the conference.
• Maybe the Heisman should be awarded after the bowl games.
• Maybe we shouldn’t doubt the Packers, especially if Aaron Rogers makes a declaration as such.

Regarding the second point: maybe Lamar Jackson had a lackluster bowl performance because he’s not that good. Or maybe it was because LSU was looking to shutdown the Heisman winner. Or maybe it was because Jackson already won the Heisman so he wasn’t very motivated. There may be other reasons too, but all of them reinforce the idea that the Heisman should come later.

It is time once again to update Some Blog Site readers on the results of my Some Fun Site project to create a more accurate football prediction method.

The 2016 NFL season is over, and here are the most accurate methods for predicting regular-season game results:

• ITP: 62%
• MPWLS: 61%
• MPW: 60%

This is the first year that neither MPW nor MPWHFA have been the best predictors of wins. Since I didn’t change anything, I will chalk that up to a statistical anomaly. Or maybe I can blame the Rams for moving to LA.

(For the ideas behind the methods, please visit the Some Fun Site page.)

I realized recently that you can use animated GIFs for favicons. And if that sentence meant nothing to you, come back another day for a different topic.

In general, I’m a fan of animated GIFs. And I don’t care what anyone else says, I’m pronouncing it with a hard G. But animated GIFs don’t belong everywhere. And a favicon is one of those places because it looks like the page is always loading.

At first, it seemed like a good idea. It would set your webpage apart from the crowd. But people are so conditioned to having a repetitive movement near the tab bar mean that something is loading, so they would be annoyed with your page for not loading. If they paid close attention, they would see a difference between the loading icon and the moving favicon, but not many people are going to notice that detail.

In summary, don’t animate your favicons.

So long, 2016.

Mini movie review here. Went and saw Rogue One, or – as I like to call it – Star Wars episode 3.5.

Not a full review, because it’s Christmas break and I don’t feel like spending much time writing here.

Summary: It’s Star Wars-y. It has a lot of lasers shooting things and people. A bunch of people (and other beings) die, but without gore (as in true Star Wars fashion).

It is a better story than some other Star Wars movies, and it is told better than some other Star Wars movies. I liked it better than the recent Episode 7, as that had nothing really original whereas Episode 3.5 has an actual plot and good characters to go with it.

Of course, there were some parts that were hard to believe, even within the Star Wars universe. And that one near the end was particularly grating on one’s brain. But overall, it was much better to watch than Episode 7 and Episode 3 and Episode 2. Plus, it explains a number of things in Episode 4, which I won’t list here so as not to spoil anything.

I’ve noticed a number of news items or recent articles highlighting the belief that our lives as humans here on planet Earth are merely part of a giant computer simulation.

While many have wondered how we got here and what is the purpose of life, this particular answer does not really fulfill any of life’s great questions.

There are a number of ways one could go about analyzing the meaning of all that, but the main point that I see is that it is pointless. If life is a simulation, then someone is running (or has setup) the simulation. To say that our life is a giant computer simulation gets us nowhere. There is still a reality outside the simulation.

So one cannot cause reality not to exist by claiming that we are just part of a simulation. And if one is inside a simulation, there is no way to break out of it. Again, it’s pointless to believe this. It does make for an interesting diversion, and some entertaining movies have been made on that or a similar premise, but I think that belief is bad for us. Morally, socially, physically, spiritually – the negative implications of that belief outweigh the positive outcomes. Especially for those of us who live in reality.