So, I took another one of those career tests at livecareer.com. When I was taking it, I totally thought I was going to get messed up results, but I must say that I'm surprised that it seems to represent my interests.
Here's what it had to say about me:
Your highest score was on Science, which means that you enjoy working with abstract ideas, scientific equipment, and mathematical logic and reasoning to solve practical or abstract problems. You also scored highly on Writing, indicating that you enjoy creative or technical writing. You are also likely to be interested in a broad range subjects, so finding occupations that allow you to exercise these interests would lead to higher work satisfaction for you. Your high score on the Teaching / Social Service scale means that you enjoy instructing people in learning new things, helping people solve problems, and assisting others.
You lowest score was on Sales. You wouldn't be satisfied in careers that involve selling merchandise or services. These careers involve understanding products and services, informing customers of their features, demonstrating products, and being persuasive with others. You also showed low interest in Assertive, so you wouldn't be fulfilled working in situations where you were frequently required to assert authority over others, and to direct and monitor their work. Your low score on Persuasive means that you wouldn't be fulfilled with work that involves influencing, advising, counseling, guiding, motivating, or directing the activities of others.
Apparently, my career interests can also be represented on one of those cool radar graphs:
Investigative (Thinkers) - Investigative types enjoy the challenge of problem solving in mathematics, technology, and sciences, and the abstract and practical ideas related to these areas. Applied science, such as engineering, technology or computer science may also be of interest to them. They can be technically creative.
Social (Helpers) - Social types are interested in helping to keep others emotionally or physically healthy, or in teaching others. They enjoy giving advice and working directly with people, either in groups or individually.
Artistic (Creators) - Artistic types are often thought of as original and creative by others. Such people enjoy expressing themselves in artistic ways such as acting, dancing, creating music or visual art, or by expressing their ideas either through discussion or debate.
Realistic (Doers) - Realistic types like physical activity, working with their hands, and are mechanically-inclined. They enjoy working outdoors and do not mind physical risks on the job.
Attentive (Servers) - Attentive types enjoy helping others, serving others' personal needs and looking after the comfort and well-being of others. They are happy in jobs requiring sociability, politeness, patience and a happy disposition.
Conventional (Organizers) - Conventional types enjoy supervising others in jobs where rules and tasks are well defined. They show careful attention to detail, are organized, follow instructions well and prefer jobs where their daily duties are regular and fixed.
Enterprising (Persuaders) - Enterprising types are people-oriented. They like to talk to, influence and persuade others. They are confident, adventurous, assertive and show leadership.
Sounds about right, I think. More musings on this later.
I'm sure something that title can be read to mean something more base, but give me a break; I typed it out in less than ten seconds.
If you're not already aware, I started working at Northrop Grumman in El Segundo last month. It's tough--getting up early every morning, that is. I am a morning person; that is, I derive mental and, I suppose, spiritual energy from the sunrise and the crisp morning air. But that doesn't mean I particularly enjoy getting up early or that I am especially productive in the morning. I just feel better in the morning than I do in the afternoon.
Anyway, the point is that I'm starting to adjust to the routine. And since I got my Casio Privia, I think I've learned something essential about myself: playing the piano calms my nerves. Over the winter break, I neglected to play; I was busy shooting people up and then reviving them in Battlefield. I found, by the end, that I was extremely agitated every evening. I couldn't sit still. I felt as if I was in some sort of funk or depressed state. On a whim, the other day, I decided to play the piano before commencing with the pre-sleep checks. And I mean really play--not simply to get some practice in, but to get into the "feeling" of playing. You wouldn't believe how much better I felt afterward. It was one of those cathartic moments that seem so elusive.
I suppose you might wonder whether merely listening to music would achieve the same effect. I would say it does not. It will either have no effect at all or get me jazzed up about something; that is, it has the opposite effect. To be fair, though, I haven't exactly "tested" this. But consider this: I typically use music to help keep me awake and focused (for homework and, more recently, at work).
That said, enjoy this piece of artistry I found the other day:
An old high school friend used to complain to me that journalists need to stop using in their articles euphemisms for death. Among other things, they can sometimes sound misleading. Such as this one, taken from an latimes.com headline I just saw: "Pianist's life lost during a walk home." Did the pianist die? Or did he drop his life when he was fishing his keys out of his pocket?
More descriptive was the subhead: "John Osnes, a pedestrians' advocate, died in an alleged road rage attack by Swedish rapper David Moses Jassy. The performer, so far, faces charges of assault, battery and leaving an accident scene."
So, a few friends and I went to see Quantum of Solace. Okay movie. Lots of fun action sequences, but it seemed to be missing...something. But I'll save my thoughts on that for another time because the hot topic for "Trekkies" to blog about right now is the new trailer for the upcoming Star Trek movie.
I'll keep my discourse somewhat brief in light of the fact that I'm not in a rambling mood, just a venting mood.
I speculated/complained earlier this year that I expect Stargate: Universe to be some sort of "Stargate Voyager, 90210." Younger, faster, edgier, sexier--and ultimately, for me, more annoying. The trailer left me with the same sort of feeling. That and the mix of the classic TOS styles (e.g. the clothes) with modern styles and special effects struck me as, well, odd. Everything about it seemed so unnecessarily over the top.
I'm sorry, but my sense of style must still be living in the eighties and nineties; I just couldn't get excited about what I saw. I imagine it'll make for a great movie, and since I'm such a franchise nut, I'm going to go see it, no matter what. So, the movie wins by default, I guess.
Generous, helpful, kind...a few of many positive attributes people see in you, the Helping Hand. Nothing satisfies you more than helping your teammates or friends out in all the games that you play. You may even look to assist people in some cases if there is no one around asking for help. In fact, the enjoyment that you receive from helping people rivals that of solving a puzzle, winning a battle, or achieving a hard objective in a game.
Heavily social intensive games tend to be what you enjoy the most although you can probably find something to take pleasure in with most games. For instance, if you happen to find yourself in a competitive first person shooter, you'd probably take the support class. We recommend you stick to games (and crowds!) where people will appreciate you more; these include more casual gamers seeking fun and excitement from games rather than the serious competitive ones.
It actually pegged my gaming tendencies pretty well. Those of you who play BattleField with me might be able to attest to that. I'm always laying down support fire or holding the rear door open for a tactical retreat or running through the trenches while tossing medpacks or using my defibrillator of salvation on forgotten comrades.
National Youth Jazz Orchestra – "Dirty Harry Suite"
]
I've become rather obsessed with jazz, especially jazz pianists, lately. I really don't know what to say about it. I never really know what to expect when I find a track to sample. I mean...I understand that there will be certain musical elements that I'll find, but I'm always surprised by what I actually hear. It's just so awesome.
If you haven't noticed on my scrobbler, I've been playing a few songs and artists to death lately. Here are the highlights: -- Takashi Matsunaga - "Southern Cross" and "New Morning" - KJZZ played this on the radio one afternoon during my first week at UCLA Library Business Services -- Jessica Williams - "Soldaji" - all her stuff is so awesome, but by far and away, I'm addicted to Soldaji -- Thelonius Monk - "Straight, No Chaser" - a classic whose work I'm just beginning to explore -- Bill Evans - "Waltz for Debby" - I could probably listen to Evans' stuff for hours
Anyway, I don't mean to sound pretentious, but if I've piqued your curiosity, check those songs/artists out.
So, I finally got a job offer. It's from Northrop Grumman in their integrated defense systems company. In a rare fit of unabashed enthusiasm, hooray for me!
Of course, I still have to officially accept it and fill out a bunch of paperwork. You know, the kind of paperwork that needs to exist to generate the employee that would have my name and likeness.
I know a fair number of engineers who are staying away from defense due to moral conflict with the application of their work. For example, they would not want to work on air-to-ground guided missiles or their delivery systems, such as, say, a fighter jet. Clearly, such devices are intended to be used against human targets, to extinguish life; these people object to being a part of making that happen. Certainly, this is a valid and very respectable opinion.
Of course, I, too, have such qualms about working in a division whose end products will likely be used at some point as weapons of war. But aside from the fact that I need an income, my objections are outweighed by my professional interest in the work. In other words, it sounds cool. I could embark on a meandering explanation to justify my actions, somehow linking a sense of patriotism, a desire to save lives, and argumentation about how elements of cutting edge military technologies may one day filter into everyday life. But I shall spare the world and myself the effort.
For the moment, I'll just enjoy a lingering sense of relief tinged with anxiety about what is to come.
Oh, man. I was just reading some of my early journal posts. I know I'm a narcissistic jerk, but some of the crap I used to write about astounds me. But the kicker? It's that the quality of my writing--the vocabulary I used on a daily basis, at any rate--was better.
Engineering, you destroyed my mastery of the English language. I should have known you would betray me in this fashion.
I wanted to preserve this information while it is (relatively) fresh in my mind.
So, my friend Jimmy and I were talking tonight, and we got to chatting about the future. No, not more science fiction speculation. We were talking about what to do as recent UCLA graduates.
We agreed that we have absolutely no clue what to do next. We're just pushing blindly forward, hoping that everything will resolve itself in time. In particular, he felt that he lacked a certain sense of knowing oneself enough to be able to make any of these early career decisions that could change one's fate. Certainly, there were activities and jobs that he enjoyed. For example, he likes teaching. He enjoys playing video games. And he likes looking at the sweep of history. But none of these sentiments have been able to guide him in choosing a career path.
The question he posed then became one of finding defining characteristics, something that has remained consistent in his personal life. He settled on the idea that he likes to spend his time thinking up ideas and (whenever possible) putting them into practice. As Bruce Willis' character in Armageddon might say, he's the type that sits around thinking up shit. I suggested that the kind of job that might suit that habit, of sorts, might be similar to that of a television producer, pitching and developing the show ideas and getting the project set up. The examples that I blurted out were Gene Roddenberry and J. J. Abrams. (Go figure, I guess.)
Of course, I had trouble thinking up something to define myself, but I did eventually settle on something: I like to drive (when driving is involved, not just sitting in traffic or looking for the right exit--on open roads, say). Where driving is concerned, I like that sense of freedom, of sorts, to choose the destination and how I get there. I know, it doesn't sound related to anything. Let's take another self-description: I like to take existing ideas and to refine or combine them. In other words, I like having the freedom to exercise creativity in reaching a personal goal. If true, it might be seen in such things as my commitments to UCLA AIAA and my personal projects, such as my piano playing, art projects, and engineering projects. ( For example... ) Jimmy got to thinking that I might do well as some sort of consultant or product support kind of guy. Something where I might generate new ideas from existing ones.
Of course, whatever any of this means, no one really knows. In the end, we're probably just spouting introspective bullshit. But it was an interesting conversation, anyway.
So, apparently, hot on the heels of Atlantis's cancellation, MGM and Sci Fi have given the go-ahead for a new Stargate show, Stargate Universe.
You would think I'd be ecstatic. I am not.
Atlantis has had its ups and downs. But overall, it's showing signs of getting better. After the big cast shake-up from season one, it's taken this long for the characters to fit together. And apparently, I'm supposed to exchange that for...what? A story pitch that sounds eerily familiar, but overflowing with wishful thinking? Promises for a better show and whisperings of dollar signs under your breath? Way to fail, Sci Fi and MGM.
I went through something like this already. Enterprise was just getting better. And it got killed. When Season Four of Enterprise was over, I found many more hits than misses with that year's episodes. I hope I don't find that to be the case this time. Tell me their case was justified. That they're putting a merciful bullet to the head of a dying beast. Otherwise...they're taking my cake and handing me a wad of Monopoly money in exchange. (And we all know how much I love cake.)
Now that I've been all melodramatic, I'll get a little more serious...but no less parochial in my views. Some of the words chosen to describe the show and its appeal suggest that this will be one of those new-fangled science fiction shows aimed at a younger audience. Possibly with less sci-fi and more drama.
I'm afraid that what I'm going to be shown is a teenage/young adult soap opera. With some guns and maybe some really great special effects. (This reminds me of the parody of the "younger, edgier SG-1" from the episode "200.") I'm sorry, but I've had my fill of that kind of show. Those of you who hear me rant about my television preferences know what shows I'm referring to.
That said, I shall return to being melodramatic. Only good writing can salvage the maneuver called "selling out." Returning to Enterprise, look at how the first two seasons turned out. Lack of good writing did not make up for the shortcomings (and some selling out) that it inherited.
The premise of the new show--"stranded with little hope of returning home in a new world of wondrous technology and new discoveries"--sounds a lot like how Atlantis started out. And then the writing of the story turned it into...something else. Something it probably wasn't supposed to be for at least two or three years. But it's okay. This one will be younger, edgier, more fraught with peril. Because living in fear of impending annihilation isn't perilous enough. Because knowing that, despite your overwhelming confidence or arrogance, your teammate may not return home with you whenever you step through the Gate isn't sufficiently exhilarating.
So, it's been a while since I wrote up a "To Do" list like this. But it's about time that I start trying to get some perspective on the near future. There are a lot of things that I want and/or need to accomplish in the next year. Here are the highlights:
file my application to UCLA's Mech and Aero Engineering M.S. program for next fall
unfortunately, this includes obtaining some letters of recommendation from a couple professors. not exactly my cup of tea.
score an industry internship - I'm running out of time to figure out if industry work is for me and, if it is, where in the industry.
help UCLA AIAA start a pseudo-class on basic airplane design for underclassmen - perhaps my last act as one of its leading members
assemble, test, and demonstrate my own autonomous/RC-airplane
that is, I want to put together my own autopilot. i have something to prove
remember what it was like to write, draw, and/or play the piano on a regular basis
Trouble with some of that is...I need money. That means, I probably need a job. Unfortunately, I don't want to work part-time while at school. Tried that. It sucks for someone like me. Being a student is already a full-time job. But I'm also hesitant to rush my education so that I can work or to fall back on research or TA-ships. (Seriously, I have a right to be picky at UCLA.)
I guess the bottom line is that I need to figure out what to do with my life. Jeez.
Sci Fi canceled Stargate Atlantis. At episode 100. Just like they canceled Stargate SG-1 after they hit 200. First, CBS kills Jericho (twice). Now, Sci Fi (or MGM, I suppose) kills Stargate (twice).
Jerks.
There is now only one show I watch on television: Law & Order Special Victims Unit.
Congratulations, world. You killed what was left of my home entertainment. I'm glad I can count on you to appreciate the good things in life.
This has been bothering me for a while. So, check it out. It's Stargate SG-1's F-302, the humans' first spaceship designed and built using the alien technologies they found in the previous five seasons. Its role is, I suppose, a "space superiority fighter."
Pretty cool-looking, right? It has that neat reverse-swept, drooping wing geometry that's standard fare in the form of the series' Goa'uld death gliders. Plenty of blinking lights, too. No sci-fi ship would look right without flashing lights, knobs, and some random exterior protrusions to add some texture.
There are some fuzzy things about it, though....but the one I'm blogging about this time is its propulsion system.
According to the dialogue in Season 6's opener, the prototype F-302 is equipped with four forms of propulsion: a) and b) twin air-breathing jet engines with aerospike for high-speed, high-altitude operation (think: Lockheed's SR-71 Blackbird) c) rocket booster (apparently, primarily used for rocketing into sub-orbital flight since you never see it being used during normal operation) d) naquadria-enhanced hyperspace generator
Well, that's all well and good...except you can't use the first two in space...where there's hardly any air to ram into those intakes. (Not to mention that the rocket booster was probably sized for Earth escape. They might have a hard time escaping from a planet with much higher gravity. But let's assume that they covered that, designing enough margin into the rocket engine to make it a non-issue as long as they're not flying around any really massive bodies.) So...they rocket into space to fight the enemy, and...now what? They slowly re-enter the atmosphere, luring the enemy fighters down to where the odds are more even?
Now...to the show's credit, they never specified whether upgrades were made to the design to incorporate a true space-faring propulsion system. I mean...just look at the second human spaceship to emerge from Season 6:
There's no propulsion system currently in use that could fly such a behemoth in space. So, that's where I get to relent and say, "I guess that's the magic of science fiction at work."
I don't like to "recommend" things very often. (I prefer to suggest. It sounds like less of an endorsement.) Anyway, I have become entranced by the sounds of Yellow Magic Orchestra. They're a Japanese band from the late '70s best known for paving the way for electropop music. Their music videos from "back in the day" are pretty...sick. Perhaps you'll better understand how I mean to use that word by seeing them for yourself:
When I have people to talk to, I don't blog. When the only person I talk to is myself (and even those conversations don't go too well), I talk to the wall that is the Internet.
There was a time when I wished I had fewer lunches/dinners with the same people over and over again. Now that I have none, I want those days back. I mean...the extent of my talking to others is using the radio call-outs in Battlefield 2142 and Battlefield 2. ( For example... )
I'm still rewatching my favorite moments from Stargate. I also rented Stargate: Continuum today. So, in my attempt not to do pressing work, I shall post about my ramblings regarding the pair of direct-to-DVD movies following from Stargate SG-1.
So, we're talking about Continuum and Ark of Truth. They're both pretty cool, so let's start with these direct-to-dvd movies taken together.
Thanks to the label of "movie," both productions got extra budget for special effects and on-location shooting. That's probably the big thing that these two flicks have going for them. Stargate's special effects have been pretty great in recent years, but the movies allow for more such sequences than in an ordinary pair of episodes. The on-location shooting is cool, such as the arctic shots in Continuum. It obviously looks more real than the last time they went to Earth's poles. (You couldn't really tell that there was more ice beyond the screen; it was just dark.)
There is, of course, a downside. And it's that both of these seem to me to be souped-up episodes. They're not very...movie-y. It's kind of difficult for me to pin down. Right now, it's like the feeling I got when I watched Star Trek: Insurrection. Cool things happened, but it wasn't intense. Star Trek: Nemesis had more of a movie feel. Maybe parts of it were the pacing and presentation. The conflict was simple, but you could savor its development. The characters had to try a few different approaches to solve their problem. But most of all, the conflict felt epic.
Not that movies have to be epic. The conflict just has to feel huge to the viewer, even if it's actually somewhat unremarkable. Maybe what I'm really trying to say is: I couldn't really put myself in the characters' shoes. The movie just hopped from one major plot point to the next...like an episode. There wasn't much to challenge the characters on-screen. I knew what they were probably thinking, but I wasn't made to feel the same way.
Something like that. Maybe I'll post more later.
Anyway, it sort of makes sense that these wouldn't be too much like a good ol' movie. The show was canceled, after all, and this is their way of getting fresh content to fans. And the people working on these productions are the same folks who did the television series. Makes sense for the personality to be the same.
(Next time, I'll probably ramble about one of the two movies individually.)
Okay, anyone of you who knows me and actually reads this: I have one question for you right now. Are you playing the Red Alert 3 beta?! (I already know the answer...but I'm bored.) I need a testing partner, kind of like when I started playing Battlefield 2. Darn beta doesn't have an offline skirmish mode so that I can figure out what the heck everything does.
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
nobledragoon423's journal
