Is it true?
It was here, half a dozen years ago, that Cope put Emmy to sleep. She was just a software program, a jumble of code heâ€™d originally dubbed Experiments in Musical Intelligence (EMI, hence â€œEmmyâ€). Still â€” though Cope struggles not to anthropomorphize her â€” he speaks of Emmy wistfully, as if she were a deceased child.
Emmy was once the worldâ€™s most advanced artificially intelligent composer, and because heâ€™d managed to breathe a sort of life into her, he became a modern-day musical Dr. Frankenstein.
His second creation, Emily Howell, is creating modern music, letting go of the problem Emmy had, with recreating works by great composers or in their style.
But what does it say for musicians? Will art go away as we see software creating it?
Read more inTriumph of the Cyborg Composer.
Just saw a CFP for a topic that would help my publications and my chances of being accepted for that job I have an interview for… But it’s due next week.
Could I get it written that fast?
Probably not. But I might could… If I had my books with me. But I don’t, because I am at my parents’ house. I might get Ron to come over here and bring them. That’s a possibility.
I need to look at the possibility.
mixed genres= autobiography/biography with other things, fiction, recipes, etc.
mixed time= the works don’t follow a natural time progression
These two effects are significant. I think there are good aesthetic reasons for both of these. Life is not clean and easy, why should our literature be? Plus it helps the monolingual person understand the confusion and disorientation of the new immigrant/dual culture person operating in the U.S.
I think that’s what I want to say. The problem would be saying it for 4,000 words and doing a good “scholarly” job with it.
Does it make any sense that people send you email and say, “In order to ensure that you receive this mail…” and then they tell you what to do? If you didn’t get the email, you aren’t going to know what to do. If you do get the mail, do they not understand how annoying that is?
Wall Street Journal on a woman who has autism and is making a good life for herself. She’s published ten books. She sends kids to college.
I decided that since there is not a written limit to proposal numbers that I would apply to the three or four that are due at the beginning of March. Then I will wait and see if I hear anything from them before I apply to the ones in the middle of March.
I have two I would prefer to do the most, because of their topics for my rÃ©sumÃ©, another I would like to do because R has been helping me with it, two that are good because they are on the scholarship of the profession, and one that is fun.
I did decide not to apply to the science fiction group. If I ever get a full-time position somewhere that won’t slap me down, I might move into that as a field of study more strongly, but right now I need to keep my work more marketable. So…
I sincerely hope that two of the first ones accept my work early on. The problem is, of course, that no one knows me. So I do, in fact, have to be accepted on the weight of my work and it is not always sufficiently clear what they are asking for to let me feel confident that what I wrote is what they are looking for. However, I do like the ideas I have sent in so far.
I have no idea what other people are receiving. I do know that the first session I went to was amazingly cutting edge. None of my proposals are amazingly cutting edge. However, only one said they wanted cutting edge, so we will see.
I am looking at the largest English conference (MLA) in the US. It takes place next January; however, proposals are due in March.
I cannot find anywhere in the CFPs that says you can only submit two proposals. However, you can only participate in two sessions.
So, is it legitimate to apply for four or five different sessions in the hopes of getting two? What if you get accepted to all of them? Obviously some would have to be turned down.
If I applied to more than two, and I was accepted to two, I would immediately withdraw from the other sections. Obviously that would need to be done.
But I would like to present at MLA and applying to more than two sessions makes it more likely that I will be able to present.
Gotta think about the ethical implications and what I would need to do. Strategy is important too. Which sections would be the best for me to present in?
I am working on regaining my Spanish. It is very lost and I am having to search long and hard for it. This evening I read two short stories for intermediate Spanish students and it took me somewhere between half an hour and an hour to get through twelve pages. However, I did learn some new words and I was overall able to follow the story without looking up everything.
So I am keeping myself busy with Spanish, not even counting all the work I need to do with my grading. However, I have made priorities. Spanish is the priority. Getting grades back in two days is sufficient.
I also am writing proposals for the big national convention next January. I wrote one and it turned out, when I read the long call, that what I thought they were asking for was actually totally off topic. Of course, that may be true of other things since the big conf keeps the CFPs short.
I sent one off already (on teaching Old English texts) and I am working on another two (one on postapocalyptic literature and one on adjuncts as professionals).
I figured three attempts I ought to get one yes out of the bunch. But actually maybe I should do more. Unfortunately you can only get two yeses, and I wouldn’t want to turn a bunch of people down, which is why I was thinking three.
I will be sad though if none of them is accepted.
Yesterday I received a phone call for a phone interview, but I could never reach the person. (She called when I was in class, so thankfully she could not reach me.)
I did call early this morning and I have a phone interview on Thursday afternoon on my home phone (supposedly) at 2:40.
I hope it goes well.
My college has declared a hiring freeze, even though we have 27% more students than last year. So there will be no job here when I could take advantage of the absence of the person who doesn’t like me. (Of course, that has spread to others, so it probably wouldn’t make a difference. People who don’t even know me don’t like me.)
And for Lent, I am giving up procrastination.
I am struggling with what that means, but I think that God called me to that, so I am going there.
We will see how it goes.
Last year’s giving up of romance novels was much easier to begin with, at least. I knew what a romance novel was.
so goes the country.
I doubt that seriously, though our education system has offered something to the nation.
Joanne Jacobs sent me to this NYT article. It is inconsistent, inaccurate, and biased. Other than that though (seriously), there are some interesting things in it.
I love my state, so I’m a little prejudiced.
But, let me be clear, the founders of our nation were Christians- regardless of what the Times wants to say.
I went to a conference this last week and enjoyed it immensely. My talk was at 8 am on Friday and there was a full room. I’d say at least 60 people.
We had four people on the panel and everyone showed up. The papers were very disparate, though they did sort of orbit around literature (loosely).
We had good questions for everyone except the speaker who was from China and had a very strong accent. I actually think one of the questions could have gone to her, but no one asked because of the language barriers.
My panel got the most questions, which I enjoyed, of course. In fact, someone came and asked about my readings. I sent them off with my paper. I hope they enjoy it.
I’d really be interested in writing an article on that paper, but it would require more reading than I have time to do write now. Perhaps in June? (Yeah, right.)
Abstinence education makes a difference.
In Dr. Jemmottâ€™s research, only about a third of the students who participated in a weekend abstinence-only class started having sex within the next 24 months, compared with about half who were randomly assigned instead to general health information classes, or classes teaching only safer sex. Among those assigned to comprehensive sex-education classes, covering both abstinence and safer sex, about 42 percent began having sex.
Dr. Jemmottâ€™s research followed 662 African-American students at urban middle schools, who were paid $20 a session to attend the classes, plus follow-up and evaluation sessions. The abstinence-only classes covered HIV, abstinence and ways to resist the pressure to have sex.
transcript of Rick Santelli’s discussion
Business Week said:
The U.S. Treasury and Labor Departments will ask for public comment as soon as next week on ways to promote the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams, according to Assistant Labor Secretary Phyllis C. Borzi and Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary Mark Iwry, who are spearheading the effort.
And this is why the survivalists are gaining traction.
I have an old friend who is converting his life time savings into gold, silver, ammunition, booze and other non-perishable staples for what he believes is the inevitable “economic crunch.” I hope he is wrong that it is imminent, but at least now he can rest easy knowing that the government can’t get to his nest egg, and based upon the recent price of ammunition and gold/silver it is appreciating nicely.
from the Rofasix
By the way, this was proposed in 2008 in Argentina and is now fact in Argentina.
If we’re going the way of Argentina, we are in a world of hurt.
[O]n March 14, 2008, then Sen. Obama voted in favor of the 2009 budget which authorized $3.1 trillion in federal outlays along with a projected $400 billion deficit. The 51-44 vote that morning was strongly along party lines with only two Republicans saying “Yes.”
When the final conference report was presented to the House on June 5, not one Republican voted for it.
This means the 2009 budget was almost exclusively approved by Democrats, with “Yeas” coming from current President then Sen. Obama, his current Vice President then Sen. Joe Biden, his current Chief of Staff then Rep. Rahm Emanuel, and his current Secretary of State then Sen. Hillary Clinton.
How is this possibly something that happened before Obama “walked in the door” when his Party ramrodded the original budget through Congress with virtually no Republican approval — save Bush’s signature, of course — and the highest members of the current Administration — including the president himself!!! — supported it when they were either in the Senate or the House?
Sadly, Obama-loving media care not to address this inconvenient truth.
But that’s just the beginning…
Read the rest.
I do think he can blame some of it on Bush. Bush, after all, chose to sign the legislation that not a single Republican voted for. That says something about Bush’s shift to the left that I hadn’t thought about before.
Found via the Common Room.
I am thoroughly depressed about the truthful and painful talk I got from the chair today. No hiring for lit. Probably won’t hire at all. I am definitely too old. I should think of doing something else.
I feel like my students. I don’t know what to do.
I should, however, have been grading rather than reading.