Theo Verelst Diary Page

Wed aug 29 2001, 10:02 PM

I've decided after good example to write some diary pages with toughts and events.

Oh, in case anybody fails to understand, I'd like to remind them that these pages are copyrighted, and that everything found here may not be redistributed in any other way then over this direct link without my prior consent. That includes family, christianity, and other cheats. The simple reason is that it may well be that some people have been ill informed because they've spread illegal 'copies' of my materials even with modifications. Apart from my moral judgement, that is illegal, and will be treated as such by me. Make as many references to these pages as you like, make hardcopies, but only of the whole page, including the html-references, and without changing a iota or tittel...

And if not? I won't hesitate to use legal means to correct wrong that may be done otherwise. And I am serious. I usually am. I'm not sure I could get 'attempt to grave emotional assault' out of it, but infrigement on copyright rules is serious enough. And Jesus called upon us to respect the authorities of state, so christians would of course never do such a thing. Lying, imagine that.

Previous Diary Entries   |   List of Diary Pages   |   Home Page

Wed 29 Aug 2001, 10:02 PM

What about all that attention for programming?

The meaning of programs

Since I first programmed an actual computer, I think years before '80 I didn't have much change in opinion about the meaning of such activity until recently. Even before I actually programmed a (z80) computer in that time, I knew what microprocessors were, and I don't exgerate when I state that I even built a small microcomputer core which did one byte additions and some more before that, using the at the time fashionable ttl building blocks I could afford.I had a book and had read some which even tought me what multiplication machine code routines were like, and I could understand in quite some detail how such machine language programs were made out of statements (8080 at the time) and how those statement made a cpu tick.

Programming was a way to make a computer do what I or someone else wanted it to do, preferably efficiently, both at programming time and when the program runs.

A major amount of time and effort besides my school, hobbies and friends went into thinking about how such job would work well for certain problems I saw as a challenge to solve or occupy microprocessor running time with, I guess because a machine which can sort of think and do all kinds of mathematical and logical chores very quickly captures the imagination of a brain with quite some overcapacity for lifes' thinking jobs as it percieved it at the time.

So I made text roll over the screen of a trs80 clone in I guess about 78 or 79, as the first basic progam I wrote myself, and quite quickly found out it was indeed advantageous to use my digital architecture knowledge to do so by addressing the video ram of the computer directly instead of using slow string type computations, probably the first few days or so I could get my hands on such machine. I knew simple basic from a at the time freely circulating radio shack previous level basic book, and of course I knew my way around the 8080 machine instructions I had a list of and understood (unfortunately in very non-orthogonal and non-condensed mnemnonics, but then again I had the official 8080 datasheet so who could I blame).

I think I gained a working knowledge of all level II basic instructions and constructs in probably at most weeks, maybe days, I of course spent most of my free time at the machine when it was just there, and homework took me little effort, including the vartpr stuff and such, and in my case including 'usr' and 'system', because as I remember from my first program cassette tape, the third project I ever did was an assembler (one pass) written in basic which was indeed capable of generating working 8080 code. Unfortunately, the memory of the machine of 16 kB at the time didn't allow for long enough data lists to include all instructions, and I got bored with the idea of filling the ones that would fit in because I computed it wouldn't fit enough, but trying the principle was good practice, and soon enough I had access to a (legal, mind you) 2 pass assembler/editor/linker program which served its purpose quite well for years.

The second program was dedicated to line processing and associativeness: a word by word translation program, which worked fine within the boundaries of its definition 'hoe gaat het met u' 'how goes it with you', but mainly got me into self modifying code realms because I wanted to extend the word database which was included in data lines in the program itself, and after some ramblings with the basic interpreter memory map and (experimentally deduced at the time) command storage format, I got that to work, so I'd fit in new word in prefab data lines, such that they fit on line and made no mess of the remaining program.

Anyhow, those examples were to be a bit more thrilled with the idea of having a tv-like screen present text, effects, answers, mathematical solutions, graphs and (rough) graphics at the touch of the right buttons, a pleasure which lasted, though not so much in elation for years.

Within a few years time, my efforts went on into actually quite serious programming and other computer efforts, including making a functional Analog to Digital converter box for the (similar) school computers, and for instance have a progam automatically writing the graph of a pH change in a solution with that box and a little basic program.

Also, by good (book) example, I learned writing z80 machine code in professional enough sense to last into my university education, and one of the major aims with that has been to do sufficiently efficient signal programming to generate musical notes and lines with the 1.89 MHz machine. The ideas started with making graphs of sine functions on the crude graphics screen, and trying out adding fourier components, and wondering wether I could make them audible somehow. Well, I could. It was not a hard job for me at the time to hook up some TTL counters with a memory and a DA converter and have a waveform cranked out, that was doable, but not enough challenge at the time. Also, the DA was a problem at first, those were for me expensive chips at the time.

Practically, I made machine language programs which would at sufficient rate poor out samples to make for audio signals, and I fed those programs for instance with wave tables I made in basic, and was definately pleased with both the principle as the sound result, though I was never satisfied completely at the time, which was fine, since it didn't need to pay my bills, and my ego was fine enough, too. I even made a working sequencer with duophonic audio output and graphicsal note input interface, and at that time reached the limits of what I thought the machine would be up to.

Programming on my next computer, besides university and friends computers, some years later, an Atari ST (I guess in about '86) had a different angle, though not completely. Mainly, I know the 68000 at 8MHz was good enough to do some at the time serious computer tasks with, even in at first the generous but not hip amount of 512kBytes of memory.

The main purposes I had for myself, outside of sample processing and digital effects, which were present in my not very limited synthesizer and effects equipment setup at the time, was to master the C programming language, some windows programming, and make good use of lets call it multitasking and streaming tools of a professional operating system environment a la unix.

I started C programming on a very archaic but at least functional compiler, and was not all to eager to get into all the involvements of the gem/aes/dvi graphics libraries for no particular reason, so I found my way first into doing line drawings at optimal speed, and doing some of my research programming on such basis, and drew in the mouse for such purposes. The advantage of a C compiler are of course that a program can be well structured, and quite efficient both to program and to run, and that all the computers capabilities were available from that language.

I did 3D programming before I did extensive window programming, because I found that more fun, though after not too long, and after having a suitable enough programming environment, which was at the time a unix like text shell with multitasking and even (limited but functional) multi user facilities, and more streamlined compiler, I had various ideas to make the machine tick for one of the major purposes I had for it before I bought it, being synthesizer related software. I had few synthesizers at the time, and they had banks of sounds in them, which could not easily be changed or even stored, or only by expensive means such as cartridges, so I though I'd make my sound collection more accesible by making programs on the atari to deal with that problem, and I took up one challenge at first to make an accessory (which had to be graphical) to be used together with a commercial sequencer program I had.

More can follow, the main point being that for me clearly enough programming was to make a task work on the computer which I found either challenging or usefull or both, and the programming would not go out of the way of the hardest things and be hypedm because it was simply a way of getting the job I had set out to do done. And the jobs were clear enough. And of course as existing programs would exist to do such job, the boundary conditions would be that I could save money, or be better at the programming job or fill in other options. The reasoning was not alwas that I could seriously do all work myself, though after having gained a little more windowing and os experience, it would be not exaerated to say that I could have written most programs like word processors, graphical programs, and to some extend databases myself, except that a complete program of such kind would be project of the order of year programming time, and not a little hobby.

Some programs I didn't see myself fit writing at all at the time, such as the sequencer I bought, but that was mainly because the combination of many system programming jobs I didn't have enough data about, and because I didn't sit down and think about a lot of the ideas they had put in. And seriously, I made my own (parallel to serial converting) MIDI interface before I even had the atari, wrote a basic based sequencer for step (not real time) not entry, and a machine language program to real time play those notes over that interface on a poly-800, for real, so I can claim that considering the project of an atari sequencer was indeed not primarily hampered by lack of skills to do such a job, but by lack of kowledge of the system and the graphical interface at hand, and later on by the consideration that I'd rater spend a few hundred dollars equivalent (making 9 or so an our at the time) than spent a year progamming and debugging.

Only recently did the function of programming take on an additional meaning in the sense of proving the almost surhumane capability of making a program that makes a computer do what the great programmer wants, or something, and that even in some sublimated or projected form, up to making clear one could therefore also be actually good enough to plan the railtracks and even the be so honorable as doing the accurate transport bookkeeping of certain commodities that are lets say tranfered to dachau. Pun intended.

As in 'I can make a machine that actually does such things'. Well hurray, I could have done that when I was 8, and probably so could my little sister, which I didn't have. I mean seriously, the limitations of a computer program are for some maybe the idea of more freedom than their demon or favorite fuehrer ever lets them have about life, but I'm not that challenged in the intelligence department to think I must let them have such a lie and make me live the consqequences of it. I mess their program up by throwing a dice and taking a random number from the phonebook at any time, and see wether they still feel god over the head of such horrible display of freedom and life and costitutional self determnination rights.


Others it seems are hang up on the principle of a long ago program called 'elisa', which would play a (textual) shrink by semi asking questions and responding to remarks by handy word fumbling and twisting, to arrive at enough knowledge about someones' life and person and aims to claim to be over that ones head and claim to be needed to subsequently take part in the game of life directing though enslaving, for the good of the moloch, the mamon, their own projected fears and pityfullness, or God knows why.


Anyhow, being not offered decent enough programming positions already for some time, given the effort I've done, of course, I can't resist at least making clear that I find serious error in the notion 'I program, therefore I am relatively great', because it seems to me that oppression through the use of aclaimed or supposed knowledge is not at all a forgotten principle, which at least can easily be countered when the knowledge is merely supposed, and probably be beaten when acclaimed, I don't fear many in that department, not even bill non -f* gates, though granted, I wouldn't try to take his place (not scientifically or socially want to, though financially, that is another story).

In short when some claim to 'be' someone  because they happen to have some position in information technology, I and inclined to look at that with neutral eyes in this time, at least not in these circumstances and surroundings (country).

I've worked as official, state and industry funded programmer for years, so apart form contentwise knowledge I can speak claiming significant experience and background, and I don't have different opinion as I publicly had for years, being progamming doesn't mean that much, though also not nothing, to me, but it largely depends on what you can do in such position, what you are capable of, and I hold as it seems not very common position that people should work in a certain position at least also because of their capabilities ot do the job they're hired to do, call me stupid. Otherwise sin abounds from the start, I'd say.

Thinking about the phrasing a few paragraphs ago, it has occured to me that induced schizofrenic life may raise its own need for spirtual and actual leads which make the little remaining person less affraid, and when I take such an image, '39 is not far of in thinking about the consequences of such projected needs for leadership and replacement sacrifice. And that is bad, and worrying.

And seriously, when I look around, there are not many who have what I would call normal enough response patterns even from such a perspective, the idea of an individual and somewhat free live seems not very common. Even the persuit of happyness rings not enough bells, it seems, which may well be general european condition, though certainly not a constitutionally necessary one.When I take the wave and some other comparisons from James, it may well be that religeously, I end up concluding that there is considerable damnation from devine source with such effect, which I don't like, though understand are definately also the result of wanting some very bad people to be on top, which I personally would probably punich even worse (by immedeate death would become me in childabuse cases, for instance).

I've deliberately made some fun lately about the lets say ideas of lets say satanists, or less authority claiming ists or similar bloody, evil, and similarly stupid kinds, because I don't want such faulty logic to catch on, just like I don't like to live in an environment which stinks like burned petrol or where ugly paintings take the role of nice grassland, or whatever, in other words simply because I don't want the accompanying damnation to get too much place in life I could give a shit about. And of course the ultimate goal they may cherish in the unknown depths of their stupidity such as world and universe dominion, or simply getting over their mother complex, more likely, I don't just despise, I see no need for all too much correction other than making clear that I think that there is a God who even send his son to this earth who in actual fact even defeated death itself, which is hard to beat, and probably probably actually true, and He even seemed to be a nice guy, so who needs much else at all, let alone that kind. To hell with that.

Now about programming. As it seems the aforementioned kinds, as I've remarked before I've heard the term mention in my previos environment to my 10% astonishment or so at the time, have amoung other derangements the habit of 'claiming' things, and it wouldn't surprise me if it makes sense to dispell the same lie that made some musicians known has having sold their soul to the devil, which is factually impossible, and not needed at all: by birth we are already, and that maybe even therefore (gloomy dark voice on) the devil (the big greed word) 'has' all the best music.

Common knowledge is that the reverse is fundamentally, historically, and contentwise quite usually completely true. Sp the pest programs are also not the devils, they're mine. Unless someone comes along and beats me, which I hold for quite possible, and I don't have any problem if someone indeed shows me how that is done, I'm good sports, fun enough. And until some ist of such or other kinds actually does that, the best programs are mine. And let they try to claim otherwise. Ha. And for me that's not even a game, it's stupidity, but I understand some of the logic of the 'having' game holds, so I'l somewhat play against that, but then in my way, not by thinking there will always be some remainders I probably will get some share of teaming up with that kind, but simply by claiming I can make the best there has ever been, unless it is proven not so. Not by great swelling words of vanity but by working programs I too can observe to be of such incredible power or beaty or who knows what that I must stand in awe and admit my defeat. Gmpf, fat chance with that kind.

So the best programs are MINE. I claim them all, even in my own name. And of course lesser programs are less than the better ones, so I could immedeately own them too, that goes without saying.

What a stupid language, but while I'm at it, in my own name (and if that's not good enough, I could use the name above all names, who I'm definately not against), because I think that is enough, I claim the whole of computers, programs, equipment, connections, everything. And of course I'll find out that some of it is actually already hewlett packards, but we'll see how conflicting claims are resulved. I think quite some is xeroxes and ibm's, or maybe von Neuman, who was no effective ist as I remember, though with darker sides, I'm sure. Now stupidy starts to abound, so I'll be more serious for normal people.

The 'have'-ing game was also tried in the thirties, I care to remember, and the bottom lines as I seem to have gotten from the information I had were mainly that money values normally should have their counterpart in actual worth, and the there some very bad rich peoples and groups who for various obvious enough reasons want to rule the world and use money and abuse and blackmail and death along their way. Hardly news, the revolutions and the book of Romans are full of similar ideas.

I've lately though about comparing God with santa claus, which is interesting in the having contect, as long as children believe santa claus exists, you can blackmail them considerably to behave your way if they believe such person honours certain rules. I remember I wasn't unsensitive to the principle myself. So on sunday various christians or lets say believers in santa claus come together, and after dutch habit put their shoes near the chimney and wait for the big red man on broken white horse to poor gifts, aided by hordes of black man with funny clothes and african voices.

With children, in holland it isn't 'ho ho', but there is a big red book of santa claus, which has the bookkeepers accounts of their good or bad behaviour, which are gotten into the picture when the children sit on santa's knee.

Suppose they stop believing in santa claus, what would happen? God doesn't dangle childen on his knee, or consult the book of life in this time, poor gifts down chimneys nor takes charots back to his horse on the roof or throw candy to make himself popular. Nor does he return to spain after christmas or have a sort of fragile enough personality or the need the threaten children to be taken to spain in a back by some pierre, those images of course are for fun, but God santa claus is not in office.

And even when He at some points to decides to hand out free gifts, and be an aimable enough old man person, and indeed does seem to acknowledge such a concept as a book of life, I don't think the game of life is about joining the gangs who are nost valient at collecting his thrown candy or steal childrens gifts, and think that you can get away with it unpunished, unnoticed or unharmed, or decide that at the right time you can put on your best hypocrite sunday grime and collect you own approval of the great saint and your gifts with it. Unless He decides to play along, but I wouldn't like to be on the receiving end of such game.

I'd rather work some, meet and be with some nice enough people, focus on the important things in life, work according to His will, and stay pretty far form such kinds' misery, it doesn't interest me, it doesn't do anything worth while in life, it doesn't appeal much to any goal I'd ever have at all, and I don't like the smell of it, except maybe to get some children or other away from.

And of course I haven't understood yet that realy though, in the end fascism is the best way of all, the sich heil was fine enough, except indeed all that effort of following some leader is nonsense, and indeed why even bother pusing yourself all up, just go with the flow, loose all that is important, force others to do the same (what a horrific wonderfull little power of utter useless destruction that is, the deamons say you're right straight away), and you, too, can understand the depth of that holy grail of life, and its so easy, too. In case it isn;t clear to some lesser edified, fascism is historically a failure, and obviously can be predicted to be so, so why bother try, for both reasons.

Unless you don't think you'r up to defeating such things in yourself or your life, than of course you hve to redefine your low goals as being good after all, or you'd feel bad, and there is still the outside world, so why bother. Quite many are into even worse games of wanting to get certain things for themselves in such ways, already for centuries, I'm sure, what makes you think you will get something from it? Or are you sure you're on the exploiters' or colonist side? I read some university pages about such subjects on the world stage scale, and for instance found a contemporary research theme "Nation and Religion: A Comparative Study of Colonizers and Colonized", which historically obviously is valid, but does make you wonder about the implicit implication in such title, however realistic to many such reasoning may be.

So what is religion, development country, colony, desired and scarce commodity and ideolgy and revolution in the world of computers?

At least I'm very certain that when some lesser or at least considered way to equal life forms who claim and when have the chance enslave other human beings on the basis of their position in a certain software hierarchy  or even in the name of computers and their logic, or lets say (I like that one) in the name of ++ programming (which I repeat to prevent error is a skill I more than master enough), that such is unacceptable, and can most probably be undone by 1) being better (which I claim by default in the majority of cases, easily) 2) telling them to go to hell and 3) making clear that a wold on the basis of such considerations and logic is not only built on lies, but historically proven to be dangerous and in bad error, for all its constituents, maybe, and possible for all those who have something to do with the machine or concept at hand.

In conclusion I think a program for me is the added value it represents when run on a fitting computer when it does something I or someone else like better then when it would not be there.

Advanced and contemporary programming

What is advanced program in in my opinion normal enough context and meaning area? I would say making programs in a way which is not on the trivial level, in the sense of science it would have to include some ideas or experiments which aren't commongood or at least not widely spread. Contemporary means including what is fashionable, and in the sense of programming I would like to assume that the advancement level never goes down, only up, at least in areas I find relevant, I don't see much reason for devaluating programming skills are the demand for them, why would I, so then it logically follows there is a progress factor in what makes certain programs or ways of programming contemporary, which usually means some advancement.

As an example one could use object oriented programming, though withing limits, because the amount of advancement in it is arguable, though it is certainly fashionable, against which there is nothing much strongly, except the fashionability of it should not be taken for fundamental advancement, which is serious error, possibly leads to assigning to people and the things they make incorrect value, irrespective of thier relative value.

In computer world as one of the almost extreme example advancement is important, which may very well be an important fellow reason for its popularity, profitability and accumulating financial relevance. So in other words or from different, non-consumer  perspective, the thing probably most under fire from the kinds who have string feelings towards rulig the world, that must be a major target. With great stakes.

Without now going far into the content and reasons, I've lately been into at least seriously enough advanced contemporary programming, for instance the openGL programming I mentioned, the little example of a few pages back no giving a good idea of the lets say flashy possibilities at all, that was for those with some knowledge about all that to make clear I could get such type of program
and combination of purposes to become effectuated and operational down from source code to working program.

Opengl as lets say function library and program basis offers 3 dimensional graphics on windows, linux, machintosh and unix machines, with a progammers interface which is the same for all those computer types, and a power which is derived from the popular Silicon graphics graphics computers, where it is derived from. Modern computers are fast enough to offer much of its rendering potential without the need for the expensive graphics workstations straight from the pentium or other processor.

There are more than a few example and full blown applications on the basis of the opengl library and its glu glut extensions, which can offer quite fun and even sume stunning graphics and effects, with professional enough basis (many designers have probably druled too at the site of the SG workstations years ago). Because of this basis the library is of a certain (quite sane) nature, which primarily limits it to sub ray-tracing and more advanced methods such a radiosity level of graphics advancedness, which is fine for many visualisation jons, but not for the most advanced fashion graphics.

Anyhow, when one knows his or her 3D basics, and has some knowledge about the sgi/opengl graphics way, it is possible to write reliable and well working, portable and powerfull enough 3D interfaces with their currently more or less free product, and with the latest cygwin develop environment, it works quite well to built programs, even rapid enough.

I tried an extension of which I saw the library in the cygwin file tree called 'glui', which makes it possible to on top of opengl have various standard interface elements, which I now also can compile as it seems without problems, except that they are in c++ which I normally don't prefer, but for an interface module that should be fine enough, and compilation with g++ is fast enough, except the resulting executables contain the whole lib, which makes them about 200k after stripping, which is not prefered, I liked the 40kB or so executable I gut for the string simulator with some opengl interfacing and real time audio interface, that's decent, but of course it still loads the cygwin and glut dlls, which together are about a MB.

The glui examples look neat, not containing all components, but at least more than enough to make a serious interface with, so I may have the chance to go that way and do some synth stuff with neat interface.

Yesterday I picked up a book in the library called advanced C programming, of about 88 or so, which I like to have a look at, knowing I know all that, and that all that leads quite well to good and well formed (?!) programs, which mcse's know about that stuff, seriously? Donno.

Talking about advanced programming I found a book on most multi media standards, not the print some dialog boxes book, but a latex typeset one about the standards in terms of scientific foundation and technical basis for the programs, which is yummie enough for the scientific tummie of the undersigned, though of course not at this moment scienfically advanced boundary that much, though certainly presentable, especially where the barks are distributed, the fft's compansated for the harmonic lines and maybe even the codebooks presented for some jpeg kinds data. Some time ago I did find some mpeg encoding sources (audio), I didn't try them yet, but going into such (which is of course very hot enough science as in mpeg-7, at least with my background knowledge) is definately getting my interest, as simple example for instance to make a high quality piano sampler on the basis of mpeg coded samples, with real time decompression, and interpolating in coded mpeg space after appropriate choice of variables and interpolation methods. Completely worth the science and the practice, though I'm not sure the best way for such instrument.

Listening to Cajun and Zydeco (rfno but then in realplayer version)  coded at 20.7 Kbps coming live enough from an over atlantic (...) station I know the added value of that. Ever try it? A phone line and retarded modem suffice, its worth the musical idea.

You have faith, we have works

Oops, the greed word again, the verb denoting the almost unsurpassible and holy concept of actual possesion. You know dutch are known for being greedy and sgroodges ? I know. So nothing is good in holland? I don't like to think so, and am sure there are many people and places and activities which aren't even bad to begin with, but for instance gouvernement wise and when it concerns the contries' rules or mores or effectual modus operandus I fear close to the worst withing the bounds of outward appearance of democracy in various senses. Not that there is no social system and relative prosperity, I normally assume, but in terms of personal freedom, effective widely carried religeous and life rules and peoples aims in miserable and evil areas of life, I think evil abounds more than it should.

I stil have to receive notification that my ID request has resulted in a new valid card, so maybe I should watch my language; or maybe rather the opposite.

I have though (of course) again about James because it bothers me that I don't at all have an idea of its effectiveness in dealing with probably the whole of life enough, and am sure that it is effective, considering the tone, the source and subjects in it.

First, after the introduction of the main point of being the lead in all pleasurable things, not being a wave maker (maybe the poster of Narcissus by Dalifrom Tate gallery is in retrospect more relevant than I thought, where the waves and mirrored face could be a person looking at him or herself reflected in some water without waves, probably not the sea, not irrelevant considering the glass and mirrors of those days must have been quite imperfect), and not being like the rich and putting a flower in some corner without water (what's the point), the concept of freedom is actually mentioned as new testamental truth, even strong enough:

                James 1:25- (taken from the perseus in this case)
                But he who looks into the perfect law, the law of freedom, and continues, not being a hearer who forgets
                but a doer of the work, this man will be blessed in what he does. [26]  If anyone among you thinks himself to be
                religious while he doesn't bridle his tongue, but deceives his heart, this man's religion is worthless. [27]  Pure religion
                and undefiled before our God and Father is this: to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep
                oneself unstained by the world.

as in Aristotle

                "Politics" 1338b:
                but rather because this study makes a man observant of bodily beauty; and to seek for utility everywhere
                is entirely unsuited to men that are great-souled and free

Interesting enough passage, clearly from a famous work.

Yesterday, I was looking at some performances, some music, and someone sat down next to me who had a monopod, and of course a camera to be mounted on it in a bag. I'd prefer a tripod, while James as it seems makes a comparison with people who make discernments on the basis of peoples wealth to give them a good place or sit them next to their footstool, hupopodion, which is a combination of under and foot.

                James 2:1-
                For if a man with a gold
                ring, in fine clothing, comes into your assembly, and a poor man in filthy clothing also comes in; [3]  and you pay
                special attention to him who wears the fine clothing, and say, "Sit here in a good place;" and you tell the poor man,
                "Stand there," or "Sit by my footstool;" [4]  haven't you shown partiality among yourselves, and become judges with
                evil thoughts? [5]  Listen, my beloved brothers. Didn't God choose those who are poor in this world to be rich in
                faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he promised to those who love him? [6]  But you have dishonored the poor
                man. Don't the rich oppress you, and personally drag you before the courts? [7]  Don't they blaspheme the
                honorable name by which you are called? [8]  However, if you fulfill the royal law, according to the Scripture, "You
                shall love your neighbor as yourself," you do well.

Well well. 'Sit by my footstool'?

Now what the hell about the faith stuff, I'm sure I got the 'password' scene in 'Purple rain' wrong, and don't know too much about the many wonderfull ways of the world after the incredible downfall of the former prince of it, but I find this strange:

                James 2:18-
                Yes, a man will say, "You have faith, and I have works."

Huh? Why?

                Show me your faith from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith. [19]  You believe that God is one.
                You do well. The demons also believe, and shudder. [20]  But do you want to know, vain man, that faith apart from
                works is dead? [21]  Wasn't Abraham our father justified by works, in that he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?
                [22]  You see that faith worked with his works, and by works faith was perfected; [23]  and the Scripture was
                fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him as righteousness;" and he was called the
                friend of God. [24]  You see then that by works, a man is justified, and not only by faith. [25]  In like manner wasn't
                Rahab the prostitute also justified by works, in that she received the messengers, and sent them out another way?

Somewhat clear enough at least, it seems.

Thinking a bit about the greek I was looking at (see the perseus for instance, which has per word links to a decent enough though not perfect lexicon, though don't rely on the little windows' single phrase translations), some are claiming they 'have' works, and are challenged to show what trust underlies them, while the writer, and hopefully the One who inspire him, emphasizes that he prefers to show his faith through his work, I guess making clear why his works are the way they are and what faith has made them come about.

Maybe God ordained it such that sin isn't permitted that sin becomes sensible enough to utterly show His ways and power, I don't know exactly, which is fine enough considering I am not He. I twould mean that if I try to invert the sin roblem in a sane way, there is no solution, being probably better than when it would all work as intended.

I talked shortly to someone who I heared speak last sunday, and I mentioned abraham as well in to response to some statements, as in suppose you claim to have a certain faith, for instance like abraham, of being chosen, a certain person with a certain calling and message, or a certain race, and you're proven to be wrong! Then you're very mistaking.

It is sort of christian idea to have faith in all kinds of ideas and people and doctrines, and in fact it is quite babylonean, too. It seems not too fashionable to call those shots in the sense that it is challenged wether prophetical utterance, personal beliefs and statements are actually truthfull, and without question many are not, and therefore absolutely not of the Holy Spirit, and unacceptable.

Suppose you're not santa and the children are catching on...

Pigeons speaking louder then words?

I've on purpose some years ago raised a subject in a way which could have made me ridiculed. I though I could handle the idea of risking some ridiculisation, and looked for some fun I guess in that area, and brought forward the subject of 'morphogenetic fields' and pigeons following their pigeon homes over considerable distances, even with various combinations of their senses disabled.

I wanted to raise attention for the subject of figuring out what the reason is that pigeons can find their homes, even when not they but their homes are moved, what is it that makes them link with their tills? Subsequently, one may ask the question what it is that spans the real of the spirit, or realms of the spirit, which of course is an essential and fundamental question.

Not going into the hows and why and various ifs, I had the distinct impression last week to see some authority deamon make some pigeons more than a bit freaky, and in the end being put in a place it couldn't get out of it seems into the water, and in fact the whole thing was fun enough to make me hilarious, a pigeon sitting sort of like a cherub at some point seemingly imitating a duck even was a bit too much, especially when it quite unnaturally I think sat near the waterside making some show.

More naturally, why would a few of them be fighting over little pieces of food lying around just when a particular one picks it up (and get nasty picks for it) while others lost their interest while those pieces were still laying around but that one didn't pick them up. Strange. Did chimpansees ever engage in genocide?

I'm sure spiritual 'authorities' (though not higher in authority ever then I, the Holy Spirit, the name of Jesus, and quite some othersm I'm sure, in random order) play important roles in the ongoings in the world, unfortunately, and without question the curse that goes with that is a hell of a lot worse in a city known amoung others as the doorstep of the devil. And I'm sure it is possible that the damnation going with certain wrong choices can put a whole country under a damnation of God that can even last 3 centuries. For real.

Not funny. I don't like playing a game against God, I'm sure I in the end am always on the loosing side when I'd try, I don't think I want to be stupid enough, if I have the choice, thank you very much.

I had a little (not too much, certain kinds of people for their works do not deserve to merely be made fun of) fun yesterday having a look at cafe called duvel, which is a kind of beer I know, but in this case the place was called it, which is sort of an accented language for the devil, semi asking around if they'd seen the satan around lately. It seemed that was not the case. Well well is the great master not in office lately? Doesn't that wonderfull one always win? Isn't that power without compare? It seems not. Duh.

Sonlife Radio

The bottom chapter for this page, I guess, I've done more writing then I planned, which given the way I do it now is essentially fine enough, and hopefully as usefull as I think it can be, though thus far not all to profitable in direct financial sense (pun, pun, I'll send round the buckets), though I like it more to play around with for instance the prophet 5 in software form from native instruments (de) and continue my own, though not knowing what types of resistance and deliverables to achieve good that raises.

Listing to the mentioned radio station based in baton rouge over the internet (on a very bandwidth mild 16 thousand bits or 2 kilobytes per second), various thought pass my brain. It is based on the Jimmy Swaggart ministry, as such is called in general language, and I'm sure wouldn't be much without that person, which I think is objective enough.

They've live (as it quite distinctive seems) 'shows' (interesting word) as well as prerecorded sermons, meeting recordings and of course songs on the station, which is expanded as I write to various regions in the US, for which there are even fundraising shows, I think fridays, which seems to have now bought it cable or air (I'm not sure) time in also new york area, which is interesting enough in itself, except for the continuously noticable nag I'd call it of some persons who are clearly more into putting their head up in the whole thing then preach the word of God or bless people with their song talens (which I think they don't have), probably that sort of spirit is clear to many listeners, and maybe good for exposure of certain things, but I find it hard to see the whole thing as to the point acedemic discussion or such.

Quite interestingly, I cannot escape seeing quite some subjects I wrote (or even mentioned) about being produced there, which is good sign of course, though unfortunately not trough direct personal link, which is not needed but considering what I'm lets say into not unwelcome.

Revelation, it is today, and of course almost by now, churches don't get the place they claim, which is definately uncommon, as far as I can currently verify.

'Churches are adding to the intended gouvernment of God', which is interesting terminoligy itself, ask the officially seperated from state pope. Adding to Gods word allegedly (according to revelation with Jesus' words) makes curse added to the lives of those who do.