xperience has taught me the role of words — not just sentence structure and arguments — in playing with one’s built-in interpretations and connotations. It may vary across cultures, but different cultures usually have different languages/dialects, so there is something universal about connotations within any particular culture. Communication between commons leads to an equilibrium or an agreement on what’s acceptable and what’s not. These are usually incorporated into one’s mind at a young age using imagery, as opposed to strict definitions of words. The way we interpret text and speech (sequences of words) very much differs from the way a computer does that.

Language is a funny thing. By controlling the vocabulary people can control thought. What sounds worse? Open Source, Free software, non-Free software, proprietary software, non-proprietary software, freedom software, licensed code, rented code, or licence to rent binaries? Depending on how this debate is posed, people will judge differently, based on prejudices and assumptions.

What are people defined by? ‘What’ am I? Not an atheist, that’s for sure, as people do not get described through negation — that is, things they do not adhere to. Can one be called a “spaghetti monster denier”? Or “pink unicorns rejectionist”? Of course not, that would be ridiculous. So what word best describes a person who adheres to the real world (or by extension, the universe)? We probably don’t have such a word, at least not in common usage. George Orwell warned about this. Lacking words that we can use, certain modes of thinking can be marginalised as they cannot be communicated. So what word better describes realists? “Logicians” maybe? Basing one’s view of life on reality, based on facts and observations, rejecting the unfounded and accepting that which is proven through rigourous tests — what is it called? Evidence-based reality is a much simpler one, but maybe not as satisfying as fairy tales, fantasy, and destinies that are never to be known (because — by definition — they come ‘after’ life, however this may actually work).

Playing the game of words helps one daemonise one side and win a debate before it’s even started, all through presumptuous labeling. That’s why I don’t call myself an “atheist”, even though others might call me that.

y personal Web site has been neglected for a while — neglected in the sense that it gets almost no updates anymore. The main issue with this ought to be out-of-date information that can easily deceive people despite the date stamps at the bottom (some pages are 8 years old). So today I updated some profiles and places in the Web site where I was described as a student. It’s about time to change those types of things. Some sites said that “Roy is an advocate of fair competition and consumer rights, who expects to complete a Ph.D. in Medical Biophysics very shortly.” An older one said: “My name is Roy Schestowitz and I am a Ph.D. Candidate in Medical Biophysics at Manchester University. I regularly blog at schestowitz.com where you can read about my interests, hobbies, opinions and pet peeves.” In identi.ca I introduced myself as “Freedom activist,” which is a very short version

Well, it has just been updated to “Roy is a Software Engineer, interdisciplinary researcher, and an advocate of fair competition. He holds a doctoral degree in Medical Biophysics.”

Since I hardly write in this blog anymore, may I suggest that those who already read this blog also subscribe to me on Twitter or Identi.ca? I am very active there.

rust used to mean “big”.

Trust used to also mean “concurring with what other people usually believe.”

As a new year’s resolution I intend to explore the issue of trust more closely, as it became rather apparent that trust had become a somewhat political issue and people’s understanding of their surroundings warped accordingly.

As a broad and general word of advice, ask not what the source (person/channel) has to deliver but ask also where that source derives this information from and what motives are at play. Trust is not a matter of falsehoods and truisms (of which there are few in this world, usually pertaining to physical sciences, not social sciences). Trust can be earned based on many criteria and few sources remain which can be trusted. Each source has its biases, which is why news, for instance, is delivered very differently depending on geographical location. Diversity of sources can sometimes establish trust.

Truth should be absolute, so lacking consistency there is no truth to be found.

JUST over a week ago I wrote about the Harvey and Anita wedding anniversary. This lovely couple had just mailed me a cheque (watch closely).

[Note: removed]

Another wonderful friend of almost the same age made a cartoon for me (which I am also grateful for).

ew people manage to maintain a healthy marriage, let alone do so for 55 years. Harvey and Anita are role models for love and companionship and today they celebrate their 55^th wedding anniversary, which I am very excited about. This couple has shaped part of who I am today, so I am grateful more than they can possibly imagine.

Anita, don’t let Harv pull that forbidden cake from his secret slot in the fridge!

There are hours of good videos from these guys, but here is a good short montage.

Summary: That’s me interrogated by Jono Bacon

Direct link (MP4) (or MP3)

For perspective, also see this feedback. I was very uncomfortable on this show, and it probably shows. I knew it would be rather hostile.