The balloon drop that will live in infamy.

I'm a dork. I accidentally (really!) started playing this onine game. You build an army and use it to attack other people's armies. I can't really figure out if there's a reason to attack anyone except to steal their gold. Anyway, the more people that click this link, the bigger my army gets.

Here's where I explain how I accidentally started playing: When you click the link, you have to click the number button corrisponding to the number image (to help prevent bots from cheating, or something). That's all you have to do. After that, if you want to, you can create your own account and start your own army. I didn't read the page very carefully, so I just kept filling out fields and clicking 'next...' and ended up with my own army!

PS you can click one time every day, if you really want to increase my military might =)

Today my thoughts tend toward passive-aggressive behavior. I find it annoying, not just because of the aggressive part, but because the passive part makes it so difficult to address. People throw the term passive-aggressive around a lot, but I'm not sure I have a very good definition of it. I checked out the definition at Medline, and here's an excerpt:

Passive aggressive personality disorder is a chronic condition in which a person seems to acquiesce to the desires and needs of others, but actually passively resists them and becomes increasingly hostile and angry. ... A person with this disorder may appear to comply with another's wishes, and may even say that he wants to do what he has agreed to do, but the requested action is either performed too late to be helpful, performed in a way that is useless, or otherwise sabotaged to express anger about compliance that isn't related verbally.

An interesting tidbit from the medline article notes: "psychiatrists no longer recognize this condition as an official diagnosis; however, the symptoms are problematic to many people and may be helped by professional attention, so we include it here." As it turns out, there is a bit of history behind the use of the term, and its classification as a disorder or not. I read this in an article over at Straight Dope that gives a summary of the use of the term, and also offers some analysis:

The most telling complaint, in my opinion, was that merely being passive-aggressive isn't a disorder but a behavior--sometimes a perfectly rational behavior, which lets you dodge unpleasant chores while avoiding confrontation. It's only pathological if it's a habitual, crippling response reflecting a pervasively pessimistic attitude--people who suffer from PAPD expect disappointment, and gain a sense of control over their lives by bringing it about. Some psychiatrists have suggested that PAPD be merged into a broader category, called negativistic personality disorder. Diagnostic criteria: passive-aggressive plus (a) mad at the world, (b) envious and resentful, (c) feels cheated by life, and (d) alternately hostile and clingy.

We'll let the specialists work out the details. For now, though, we lay folk should strive to use the term "passive-aggressive" more precisely in everyday life. Say for instance that a coworker cheerfully agrees to refrain from a specified uncool act, then does it anyway. Is this passive-aggressive behavior? No, this is being an asshole. Comforting as it can be to pigeonhole our tormentors with off-the-shelf psychiatric diagnoses, sometimes it's best just to call a jerk a jerk.

So passive-aggressive behavior isn't necessarily indicative of a disorder, but it's still really tough to deal with. I think that out in the open is the best way to deal with conflict (although I can't claim to practice this with 100% success), and passive-aggressive behavior makes dealing with conflict particularly difficult. I mean, that's the point of passive-aggressive behavior: to display frustration and anger in some oblique, unaddressable way.

To take an example from my next citation, a student may have difficulty with a math problem, and feel bad about himself because he can't do it. Rather than express the feelings of frustration and inadequacy, the student will act out in some other way. This acting out results in some sort of punishment or conflict. Now, rather than expressing negative feelings about himself, the teacher is expressing negative things about the student. Instead of feeling inadequate, the student feels sorry for himself, as the victim of unfair punishment.

The following comes from Passive Aggressive Behavior... preventing and dealing with challenging behavior at the preschool behavior project. Now, this is directed at preschool teachers, but really it has some insights for dealing with passive-aggressive behavior:

When you recognize the student displaying annoying, attention-seeking behavior, remember that this stems from frustration. The student needs support. If a student is working on a math assignment, you might approach the student by saying, "Ripping up math papers is not acceptable, John. Let's get you another and I'll sit down with you and we can work on it together." In this way, you are letting the student know that you do not accept his or her behavior but you are not nagging. You are also letting the student know that you care and want to help.

So I guess it's a matter of finding balance. Sometimes the appropriate reaction is to "call a jerk a jerk", and other times it is to address frustration and provide support. I know I have a tendency to psychologize (is that a word?) my conflicts and am guilty of hiding behind off-the-shelf psychology terms I don't fully understand. I guess the thing to do is articulate how the behavior makes me feel rather than just trying to label it.

They're inside my head!

Or at least they will be. I've volunteered as a subject for an fMRI experiment. That means they'll be scanning my head this weekend as I stare at a moving image for a long time. Sweet.

The only suprising thing about this article is how baldfaced it is. Nobody's suprised we're going after Iran, nobody's suprised the justification is 9/11 and nukes. Nothing new about pointing at injustice and totalitarianism. But here's how stupid they think we are:

Paragraph 1
"Bush said the CIA has found no sign of a direct connection between Iran and the suicide hijackings that killed nearly 3,000 people."

Paragraph 3
Bush: "I have long expressed my concerns about Iran. After all, it is a totalitarian society where free people are not allowed to exercise their rights as human beings."

Oh, well... the CIA found nothing... but the President says he has concerns. Sounds legit... and then, all the way down in:

Paragraph 8 (really... who reads that many paragraphs anyway)
"On Monday, Bush accused Iran of harboring suspected al Qaeda members and developing nuclear weapons."

Ok, so that's how dumb we are supposed to be. CIA finds nothing, but Mr. President makes claims, so a war with those bad guys must be the right thing. Oh, and hey, it will fit right in, as yet another government we once propped up but are now going to invade. After all, all those damn AyRabs must be hating our freedom, so we better do something.

Let it be known that in general, I abhor squirrels. They are a stark reminder of the urban ecosystem. Humans have exploited the natural world and exterminated competing predators. Our sprawling use of land has eliminated most large animals and nearly all predators. We have left the small grazers and scavengers, both of which have developed a total lack of fear due to the large absence of predators. This is why I don't like squirrels. Squirrels that lounge in the open or eat a nut (or piece of garbage, more likely) in the middle of a sidewalk deserve to be eaten by a hawk or coyote or snake. OOPS! Humans have mostly exterminated those.

Ok, so that said, I witnessed some extraordinary squirrel behavior in the park today. The squirrel had piled together a few fallen leaves. It would stick its nose in the pile, then with its front paws it gathered the leaves tightly underneath its body. All of a sudden it would then leap into the air, using its rear legs to scatter the leaves as it pulled acrobatic tricks! It would do backflips, turn 360 and 540 degree turns, and twist itself around. It would then scamper in circles and repeat.

This went on for about three minutes. Then it noticed my bemused observation, and went and hid behind a tree. As I was leaving the park I saw (what was probably) that same squirrel toting a white paper napkin up a power pole. Now I understand why people would want to carry a camera all the time (such as those built into cellphones). I would have loved to have a great squirrel backflip shot for you all. As it is, I snagged a picture from the Campus Squirrel Listings Note, UC Berkeley gets the highest possible score.

I'm suddenly wanting to get an album from the X-ecutioners. Heard a song of theirs on a video game soundtrack, and suddenly, I want more!

Added a link to Bully Magazine. Unapologetic commentary. Especially check out their piss list.

Sometimes the government gets it right. That's right. I just said something positive about the department of homeland security (specifically their Computer Emergency Readiness Team). In fact, I applaud their bravery at standing up to one of the biggest corporations in the US.

For those not wanting to read the article: Oi! Internet Explorer has big problems and could cause you serious headaches, especially if you use the web for anything sensitive like banking or credit card transactions.

What to do? Get a different browser. There's lots available. To name just a few: Firefox, Mozilla, Opera. Those are the big three, anyway. They are all free, although Opera displays advertisements unless you pay, but it's not as bad as you might think. I recommend Firefox because the download is small (only 4.7 megs) and setup is quick. And if security isn't enough of a concern for you, try one of these anyway, just for tabbed browsing