2012

Work started on Melody Generator 2.0

I’ve finally started working on a new version of my Melody Generator for Android. I’m pretty much rewriting all of the code for it, attempting to make the algorithm work more efficiently. Currently, parts of the program work by generating random sets of data and then looking through the data to see what’s usable. It works, but it can be pretty wasteful. (A bit Monte Carlo-ish — which is easier to program for melody generation, but not really needed.) I’m trying to redesign those parts so that they’ll just go “bing, bang, boom, done!” straight through, wasting no time generating and analyzing random piles of possibly unusable data. The new algorithms should also make it easier to add new features to the generator in the future.

Also, the resulting melodies should, according to my theory of melody, sound better, but I haven’t re-programmed enough of it to test it yet. (My theories work well enough for me as a human, but I think the ultimate test of completeness for a musical theory is getting a computer program to do it so all your human-based biases are sure to be out of the way.) If interested, let me know what new features you’d like to see… here are the features I’d like to add for Melody Generator 2.0 (in no particular order):

1. Any key possible, major or minor
2. 2-bar, 4-bar, 8-bar, 16-bar melodies possible (maybe more)
3. Triplets possible (16th note, 8th note, quarter note, half note)
4. Chromaticism possible
5. Pentatonic scale only possible
6. Note amount preference (do you want more notes or less notes?)
7. Syncopation preference (more or less syncopation?)
8. Fix interface problems (e.g. text buttons too small, etc.)
9. A few more bass note accompaniment options (e.g. play arpeggios?)

Heh… that’s a lot of work to do. It will take some time. Anyway, for now, I’m still on step one: rewrite the algorithms. Stay tuned…

By S P Hannifin, ago

Evolution cares not about overpopulation

Every now and then I’ll hear someone say something like: “This [insert trait here] makes perfect evolutionary sense! It prevents overpopulation!” But it shouldn’t take much thought to realize that this doesn’t make much sense.

Firstly, any given trait of any given animal cannot be said to exist only by having provided an evolutionary advantage to past generations. That is, some traits can be passed on from one generation to the next despite being a burden to the quality of that organism’s life, as long as it does not too greatly hinder the reproduction of the population as a whole.

Secondly, how would overpopulation reduce reproduction of the population as a whole anyway? Overpopulation comes about when the ability to breed is easier than the ability for all members of a population to access needed resources to live long enough to continue breeding. This will prevent the reproduction of some members of the population, but it would not affect the reproduction of the population as a whole. Therefore no evolutionary traits could possibly be passed on to prevent overpopulation. If a trait by itself hinders reproduction, it won’t be passed on. Overpopulation does not hinder the reproduction of the species as a whole — therefore it causes no evolutionary effect in and of itself. (The fight for needed resources may have evolutionary effects if those without the necessary access to the resources die off, but the cause of the scarcity of the resources is irrelevant; it doesn’t matter if the scarcity of a resource is caused by overpopulation, by competition from other populations, or if the resource is just naturally scarce.)

Every population will continue to reproduce until it reaches the limits of its needed resources, or until the limits of the resources change or the population is gobbled up by some other population (or controlled by humans). In this way, you could say it is natural for every population to breed until overpopulation occurs. The only population that can escape this nature is the human population, because we can make the conscious decision to not breed.

So, if you ever find yourself asking: “Hmmm, I wonder why [insert trait here] is passed on from generation to generation even though it does not aid reproduction?” and then find yourself answering: “Oh, to prevent overpopulation!” — please take a moment to consider your lack of logic and amend your thinking ways.

By S P Hannifin, ago

Rewriting the literary classics!

If movies have remakes, why don’t books have rewrites? I guess I will start the trend. I will first rewrite both Lord of the Rings and Peter Pan in one book. Frodo is a flying hobbit with a magical ring that prevents him from getting old, and he goes on an adventure with the lost fellowship boys. This is gonna be awesome… stay tuned.

Update: I got a cease and diseased order by a certain dead fantasy author’s estate, so I guess I will never try to rewrite anything again.

By S P Hannifin, ago

E-books need a subscription service

I would think an ideal business model (from a consumer perspective) would be a monthly or yearly fee (I’d probably be willing to pay up to $20 a month) for unlimited access to hundreds of thousands of books. No need to digitally recreate the “library check out” process that places artificial limitations on digital resources. You pay the fee, you get access. Once you stop renewing your subscription, no more access. Your monthly fee goes to the service to keep it running, and to the publishers of the books you spent the most time reading (or flipped the most pages of, or something).

Unfortunately, just as movie studios are stingy about letting audiences have too many streaming options, I doubt most publishers would be willing to allow such access to large catalogues. And this sort of business won’t work if the size of the catalogue isn’t vast enough to attract audiences. It must compete with physical libraries after all.

For now, the only thing that could pry me away from small stacks of physical paper would be easier access to a vaster selection for a cheaper price.

By S P Hannifin, ago

Stephen Fry on musical snobbery and classical music

Someone posted this on Facebook, and I quite liked it…

It’s a bit raunchy though, but it’s Stephen Fry. I would recommend listening to it, but not actually watching it, because the camera man will drive you insane. I don’t agree with his philosophical theories on the origins and purposes of dance, but that’s beside the matter. I’m not sure what the specifics are of the notion he is responding to, but I still agree with the main message… I think…

(And Mozart died before he was put in a grave…)

By S P Hannifin, ago

On morally-warped anti-bullying sentiments

I strongly agree in the wrongness of bullying in any form, but I’m also frightened and saddened by the number of morally-warped anti-bullying articles on the web. I don’t think it’s bullying that is the only cause of suffering in many situations. It’s also the fault of this emerging “complete sexual liberation” culture that’s encouraging young people to think about their natural sexual attractions in specific ways, such as:

1. It defines you, it’s part of you.
2. You should tell people about it and be completely open about it.
3. You should actively pursue it; you should not feel guilty in gratifying your desires as long as you don’t hurt anyone else.
4. People who don’t support this gratification are evil; it means they don’t support you as a person.

Each of these is so morally warped, it should not be surprising that many minds naturally struggle against them, shy away from even thinking about them at all, or agree with them so strongly that, when questioned about them, their minds bubble into a boiling rage.

Think about if, instead of sexual attractions, the four points above were about the natural feeling of envy. Who would agree that any of the four things listed above are good?

I offer these corresponding corrections instead:

1. If a desire pops into your mind naturally, it is not part of you at all. You had no choice in the matter. How can it be said to define you?
2. This is really just a precursor to number 3.
3. The idea is that if you harm no one, no harm is done. This is obviously false, as you can easily harm yourself just by letting your mind linger on the wrong sorts of thoughts. After all, a feeling of despair and self-doubt doesn’t directly hurt anyone else, does it? But who argues that that is OK? The next question is: how can fulfilling your sexual desires be harmful to yourself? That’s a huge question that, if one were seriously interested, one could Google around and find answers more carefully and logically written than I have time to write. But it should not be hard to understand why letting yourself be a slave to your uncontrolable natural desires rarely leads to good things in the long run, whether sexual, social, or material in nature.
4. This is just completely illogical. Otherwise there would be no such thing as forgiveness. (Well, I guess some people don’t even really believe in that.)

There are stories out there about young people telling their loved ones about their sexual attractions and then their loved ones being accepting, “I still love you,” and that’s it. Is that it? Are there no stories of parents and children having talks on the morality of sex? Of how one doesn’t have to fear being hated even in the case of strong moral disagreements?

Society is sliding down a pretty scary slope, and it’s all the more nightmarish because so many people are closing their eyes and smiling.

By S P Hannifin, ago

The digital future of music composition…

Some predictions about the future of music:

In the not-so-far-away future, anyone will be able to compose symphonies, concertos, string quartets, etc., with the quality of a Mozart piece. It will not be thought of as a special talent. Although computer software will not be required for this to happen, computer software will exist with the ability to aid the composer in this task, even doing the bulk of the work for them if they so desire.

With this software, a user will be able to let the computer do as much or as little of the work as he pleases. He will be able to input a melody and have the program orchestrate and flesh it out into a complete piece. He will be able to choose among the styles of various classical composers, combine styles, or create his own style. He will be able to choose the piece’s length and instrumentation.

There will be a “Compose Mozart Symphony” button.

Users will be able to compose musical pieces that go on forever, guiding them in realtime, instructing them to crescendo or switch themes or change keys whenever they wish; automated composing will have the ability to be truly interactive.

This will probably happen in your lifetime, in the next couple of decades… be prepared!

By S P Hannifin, ago

Peering over the Cliffs of Insanity

I will confess: my Animation Mentor classes have not been going well. They haven’t been going awfully, but my work is struggling. I’ve been in an anxious panic mode lately because I’m afraid my work is not going to be nearly good enough to send out to studios. But anxious panic mode only makes the work worse; it makes me work slower and more anxiously. It makes animating anything an awful tedious chore, when it should be fun and interesting. While animating, my mind focuses on other things I’d like to do: watch a movie, play a game, compose music, work on my novel, work on my cartoon series pitch, work on my melody generator, etc. Things I just hardly have any time to do… and when I do have time to do them, I do them knowing I’m eating into animation time.

I won’t complain too much about my job; it’s provided me the money for tuition to learn animation in first place. But it’s the sort of job that can really drive you mad because you can’t really concentrate on anything. And I think most human minds cherish the ability to concentrate on something; to really get lost in a project. Even mopping a floor is a nicer job when your thoughts don’t have to be interrupted every ten seconds. And having your thoughts consistently interrupted mentally wears you down, so you don’t have as much drive or energy to do anything later on when you do have time. It would also be nice if I had more regular hours. As it is now, I can’t get into any sort of routine. It’s mornings these days, evenings these days, weekends these days. Blagh!

And then there’s the Animation Mentor graduation in California. Part of me thinks it would still be fun to go, but another part of me isn’t sure it’s worth the trouble, time, and money. I have yet to get to know any classmates as well as I would like; certainly not enough for a trip out to California to seem like something I must do. I’d rather save my money and try to get a pitch meeting for my cartoon series idea…

Anyway, fortunately, so I don’t completely fail out of Animation Mentor and/or go completely insane, I’ll be taking a leave-of-absence for at least a month and a half (maybe more?), starting two weeks from today. I can’t wait to have all that extra time to put into animation and polishing my shots. And hopefully the time and energy to pursue my other creative endeavors.

While I look forward to the leave, it makes these last two weeks of work complete torture. It’s like the last days of school before summer vacation — the mind can concentrate on little else besides the presumed luxury of the impending freedom.

In other news, I rewrote my novelette from 2009 called Dreamgiver, which is now out on submission.

I also caught site of this: Strange Chemistry Open Door 2012. A pro publisher accepting submissions from unagented authors? Definitely looks interesting. They’ll be accepting submissions during the last half of April 2012. So last week I posted on Facebook a request for first readers and sent the first half of my novel-in-progress Moonrise Ink out to five or six friends. My hope is to use their feedback to help me finish the book, then rewrite the portions of it that will need rewriting, and I’m pretty confident I’ll have a draft finished by April so that I can try submitting it. That doesn’t leave as much time for editing as I would like, but I think it may still be worth a shot.

By S P Hannifin, ago

Make high school mandatory?

Whenever anybody starts talking about solutions for education, I get very sensitive about how wrong they usually are. So when Obama said that he thought it should be mandatory for people under 18 to stay in school, I had trouble understanding why.

I suppose the theory is that they shouldn’t drop out of school because it will just make it that much harder for them to get a job later on. This is partly true, but I don’t think it’s just the lack of a high school diploma that prevents them from getting a job, it’s also the factors that went into them not getting a high school diploma.

I don’t personally know anyone who didn’t graduate from high school. But my guess is that when people don’t finish, it’s because they’ve got problems, both financially and emotionally, with their home life. I don’t see how forcing them to stay in an often prison-like environment until they’re 18 is going to help much. Even if they get their diploma, their backgrounds will hinder their ability to find a job.

Perhaps the other theory is that law enforcement will better be able to prevent drop outs from forming gangs and committing crimes? Eh…

I have already described a better solution in a previous post: If I were the God of Education. If educational institutions followed my system, high schoolers wouldn’t want to drop out in the first place. School would naturally be a fun and interesting place to work in, not the prison that it is today.

So… should we make it mandatory for high schoolers to stay in high school until they’re 18? To be honest, I don’t know. Ideally, no. I don’t think teens should be forced to do anything in general. But with all the other societal enforcements that are already in place, will a new mandate such as this ultimately make life better for them? Since I have no experience with an environment in which dropping out of high school was ever a possible option, I really can’t say. Which is not to say that I would immediately trust the opinion of someone who was from such a place; I just have little basis to form an honest opinion myself.

However, the idea that a law such as this is needed completely misses the point of the problem. The problem is not that high schoolers are dropping out of high school. The problem is why they’re dropping out. It would be wiser to search for and attack that problem.

By S P Hannifin, ago

The blackout that saved the Internet

Of course everybody has heard about Wikipedia’s controversial blackout in protest of SOPA. And while some may be quick to credit the online encyclopedia as our shining beacon of online freedom, let’s not too soon forget another little blackout that made a not-so-little impact…

That’s right, we’re talking about the blog of Joe Schmoe. And although the blog only had four regular readers, which included his Mom, his friend, and himself on another computer, when he decided to take his blog offline to protest the possibility of someone else taking it offline, the entire Internet was shaken.

We talked to Joe on Skype. “At first it seemed nobody noticed,” he said. “I spent several hours watching my Google Analytics in realtime, but nothing was happening. That’s when a realized I had to spread word of my decision.”

And spread the word he did. Joe tweeted his personal blackout, and posted broken links to Facebook and a Wikipedia article he wrote on himself which will probably be deleted soon due to lack of verifiable citations.

The news spread like wildfire. A congressman from Florida said: “I had never heard of Joe Schmoe. But when friends of mine began tweeting his broken link, I suddenly really cared about what he had to say. And of course I couldn’t find out what he had to say because he had taken his blog offline. I felt so ashamed. I’m now starting to really question everything I believe in. Clearly we can’t have this. These blogs are important for the nation, I think, maybe.”

“This is a real victory for us bloggers,” said another blogger who took his blog offline to protest SOPA. “It just goes to show that while the pen may be mightier than the sword, taking all the ink out of your pen is the mightiest of all.”

And Joe Schmoe isn’t through yet. He’s now planning to burn books to protest of book censorship.

“Censorship can’t exist if there’s nothing to censor,” Joe said. “We can show the men in Washington that if they keep trying to do things like SOPA, we’re all just going to not blog or look things up on Wikipedia or really do anything… oh, wait a second, I have absolutely no idea what I’m doing.”

In loving memory of Joe Schmoe (1983-2012)

By S P Hannifin, ago