I’m gradual and inexorably reaching one of those crossroad dilemmas and I seriously have to reconsider my life and where I am heading to. Yes, I also collect bad wines.

I needn’t pass through a terrible experience to know it. I’m simply not very (to say the less) satisfied with my life (and yes, I know many people are feeling the same, but this does not mitigates this feeling). I really feel like lost. My mind says something is broken here.

At my age, I feel that people surrounding me (including those supposedly closer to me) don’t respect me; I feel continuously questioned (and almost sabotaged) in every, including the pettier, aspect or decision I try to take on my own life. And it ends up being frustrating, exhausting and, at my age, hard (it’s almost like going back to my childhood). I wonder myself what is my mistake, because it’s clear that part (if not all) the problem lies on my side.

But that hasn’t been the hardest part: the toughest one is seeing how those few people who do accept, endorse, encourages and enlighten me, or just I felt some affinity are not among us (passed away) or have moved really far away.

This has been a somewhat sad end of year, with that feeling of any past time was better.
Anyway, I don’t give up. It’s time to open that bottle of wine, now that it’s still good:

Visual Studio 2010 worked fine at the beginning, but one day, suddenly, breakpoints stopped working. A yellow exclamation mark symbol was shown over them and placing the mouse cursor over such symbols showed the message “Breakpoint won’t be hit”.

Searching on the internet for this problem I found out it was a common one in almost every version of Visual Studio, specially in 2008 and 2010. Most common causes for this error are:

• The project was compiled in Release mode, not in Debug one
• Debug symbols are not found (or wrong path)
• Incremental Debug linking option is not enabled
• Not having installed the latest service packs and patches (some of them address this problem)
• Corrupted installation: Reinstalling the application, restoring default configuration or even deleting Registry Keys and Local App configuration stored in the Windows User profile folders might fix this case

The fact was none of the above worked for me, but found out that if I started Visual Studio with a different user account everything worked like a charm. After opening two projects (each generated with a different user) and compared differences on the .vproj XML files I found these extra lines added to the “faulty” one:

Removing these lines from the .vproj file and recompiling made the breakpoints to work again! The case was these lines referenced User configurations that didn’t appear in my VS configuration panels or couldn’t change (some of them were grayed). These XML lines contain a conditional inclusion and the path is $(UserRootDir)\MicrosoftCpp.$(Platform). It happened that path was C:\Users\Boriel\AppData\Local\Microsoft\MSBuild\v4.0, which was not the Visual Studio configuration Folder. Deleting it fixed the issue (it’s regenerated the next time Visual Studio IDE is started).

To avoid even more troubles I not only removed that folder, but also the local configuration stored in my profile (C:\Users\Boriel\AppData\Local\Microsoft\VisualStudio\10.0) and related registry keys (HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\VSCommon\10.0). Afterwards I restarted the IDE and a splashscreen warning told me the application was being prepared to be used for the first time. And the problem was gone.

The problem is the following: get a product magic square, that is, a 3×3 square whose product for numbers in every row, column or diagonal gives the same (unknown) amount . All numbers are unrepeated positive integers. It’s known that the number in the center cell is 15.

My approach was to assign each cell a variable name:

An ant starts walking from vertex #1 and changes it direction at random on each vertex (might even turn back from the same edge it came from). Vertex #7 and #8 are poisoned. If the ant happens to walk into one of them it will die. The challenge consist in find out the probabilities of the ant dying or not and in which vertex (#7 or #8) when it does.

This program uses the previous one (which already defines a Graph class) to make a simple statistical simulation of the problem and give you an answer of what to expect. Obviously, the result by itself is not the entire solution: you also have to give a theoretical demonstration of such result

#!/usr/bin/env python
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
# vim:ts=4:et:sw=4:

from random import choice
from grafo import Graph, Vertex

class Point(Vertex):
    '''A vertex which can have a poison trap
    '''
    def __init__(self, *args):
        Vertex.__init__(self, *args)
        self.poisoned = False

    def __str__(self):
        tmp = '*' if self.poisoned else ''
        return '<' + tmp + str(self.i) + '>'

 
class Cube(Graph):
    ''' A Graph derived class in which each vertex (Point)
    may contain a poison trap or not
    '''
    def add(self, node, *nodelist):
        vertex = Point(node, *nodelist)
        self.vList[node] = vertex

    def run(self, N):
        ''' Puts an ant on vertex #1 and let it run for N
        random steps. Stops when the ant enters a poisoned
        vertex or it has run N steps. Returns ant's last position.
        '''
        i = 0
        pos = 1 # Initial ant position
        while i < N:
            i += 1
            pos = choice(self.vList[pos].nodeList)
            if self.vList[pos].venenoso:
                break

        return pos

 
if __name__ == '__main__':
    G = Cube()
    G.add(1, 2, 4, 5)
    G.add(2, 1, 3, 6)
    G.add(3, 2, 4, 7)
    G.add(4, 1, 3, 8)
    G.add(5, 1, 6, 8)
    G.add(6, 2, 5, 7)
    G.add(7, 3, 6, 8)
    G.add(8, 4, 5, 7)

    G.vList[7].poisoned = True
    G.vList[8].poisoned = True

    # Carry out simple statistics
    stats = [0, 0, 0] # Counters

    for i in xrange(1000000): # Total number of experiments (runs)
        pos = G.run(100) # make the ant to run 100 steps
        if pos > 6: # Map 0..6 => 0, 7 => 1, 8 => 2
            pos -= 6 # 7 = 1, 8 = 2
        else:
            pos = 0

        stats[pos] += 1 # Increase corresponding counter

    tot = sum(stats) # Total #number of experiments (must be the same number as above)
    print stats # Absolute Frequencies
    print [100 * float(x) / tot for x in stats] # Relative frequencies (percentage)

#!/usr/bin/env python
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
# vim:ts=4:et:sw=4

class Vertex(object):
    def __init__(self, node, *nodeList):
        self.i = node
        self.nodeList = list(nodeList)

    def __hash__(self):
        return self.i

    def reaches(self, vertex):
        ''' Can receive an integer or a Vertex
        '''
        if isinstance(vertex, int):
            return vertex in self.nodeList

        return self.reaches(vertex.i)

    def __str__(self):
        return '< ' + str(self.i) + '>'

    def __repr__(self):
        return self.__str__()

 
class Graph(object):
    def __init__(self):
        self.vList = {}

    def add(self, node, *nodeList):
        vertex = Vertex(node, *nodeList)
        self.vList[node] = vertex

    def hamiltonian(self, current = None, pending = None, destiny = None):
        ''' Returns a list of nodes which represent
        a hamiltonian path, or None if not found
        '''
        if pending is None:
            pending = self.vList.values()

        result = None

        if current is None:
            for current in pending:
                result = self.hamiltonian(current, [x for x in pending if x is not current], current)
                if result is not None:
                    break
        else:
            if pending == []:
                if current.reaches(destiny):
                    return [current]
                else:
                    return None

            for x in [self.vList[v] for v in current.nodeList]:
                if x in pending:
                    result = self.hamiltonian(x, [y for y in pending if y is not x], destiny)
                    if result is not None:
                        result = [current] + result
                        break    

        return result

if __name__ == 'main':
    G = Graph()
    G.add(1, 2, 8, 11)
    G.add(2, 1, 6, 9)
    G.add(3, 6, 7, 9, 10)
    G.add(4, 5, 7, 10)
    G.add(5, 4, 8, 11)
    G.add(6, 2, 3, 8)
    G.add(7, 3, 4, 8)
    G.add(8, 1, 6, 7, 5)
    G.add(9, 2, 3, 11)
    G.add(10, 3, 4, 11)
    G.add(11, 1, 9, 10, 5)
    print G.hamiltonian()

I was born in the late 70′s. I grew up in the 80 which marked my adolescence (e.g. the ZX Spectrum, but also pop music and many other iconic things of that time). I consider myself a geek and I love new technologies. But, on one hand, I hate consumerism and being always on the cutting edge gadgets (especially if they are expensive). On the other one, if I had money and space I would create my own collection of microcomputers and other vintage machines (which could be consider another form of consumerism).

When cell phones came out (I remember seeing them as objects of luxury to mid-90), seemed more of a snobbery than a necessity. Two years later I had my first phone (a brick nowadays, or let’s say a vintage mobile). After a year, although rates were expensive, the cell phone became almost a necessity. I already knew the Internet. Also, there was no ADSL then, we used modems, but I understood its importance and the revolution that internet would bring to us.

My initial reluctance and skepticism was transformed into understanding and subsequent acceptance of new technologies and new trends. However, I hate being always on fashion. I just hope that some significant part of the flock to move in a direction to follow it myself later. I do not like to be left behind, just, let’s say, an average.

Back to the topic, this is what I have observed with what I call 1.0 people, including some colleagues:

• They use email to send a short and often urgent message (which could be via SMS, twitter or any other nowadays mobile application
• Many of the important things they do are done on paper (signatures, letters and documents).
• To send a document, use the fax
• When having an appointment, they’re not accurate, “See you in the Park” (where in the park?)
• They can’t see the usefulness of social networks. Instead, they still think social networks are just for gossiping about irrelevant, superficial stuff (and what happened to Egypt?)
• They don’t use forums. Everything is done on mailing lists with loooong endless thread.

This list could be endless but I think with this chunk makes the concept clear. Younger people nowadays seem to have assimilated new technologies better. For the veterans, I’ve seen there are three groups: those who has adapted fairly well, those who cannot (usually elder people who also don’t have much interest), and finally those who simply resist to change (“I’ve always done this way and I will continue doing so”). It’s my bet those ones will be the more to be hard hit.

Not surprisingly, some related terms have already appeared (slightly exaggerated) that seek to establish the dividing line: Native digital (those who were born with this technology already) and digital immigrants for more greater than have to adapt. Personally I think this division is simplistic: many digital natives are not well versed in technology (or math or language or many other things) and there are older people have adapted perfectly (Steve Jobs and Linus Torvalds are examples of perfectly adapted non digital natives surely you and I know, but it is likely that you also know someone else near to you).

It’s about attitude, not ability or age.

Bueno, tras un mes ajetreado, vuelvo a las andadas. En el post anterior dejé caer que no estaba seguro de mi decisión en el ámbito laboral (ya vi cosas que no me gustaron desde el primer día); no estaba muy convencido, pero como me he considerado siempre una persona insegura, pensé que se debía a eso. Sin embargo mi intuición no se equivocó. Evidentemente fue un error, del que afortunadamente salí bien parado, y de paso aprendí y vi las cosas más claras (hay momentos en la vida que te iluminan).

• Aprendí, por ejemplo, que hay gente que no tiene mucha interacción contigo (y en la que no reparas demasiado) y que luego descubres que le importas; y que hay otra que te dice y te repite que es amiga tuya y que luego no lo es tanto.
• Descubrí que buscar el trabajo de mis sueños es como perseguir El Dorado. Muchos colegas que conozco sacrifican todo por unas condiciones laborales pésimas en busca de un sueño laboral (un trabajo de investigación bien pagado y de prestigio) que nunca llegará (este tipo de sacrificios sólo lo entiendo cuando eres emprendedor, porque te sacrificas para tí mismo y no para otros). El trabajo de tus sueños es aquel en el que los compañeros y el ambiente laboral es agradable y no te daña psicológicamente. Si además es un trabajo apasionante, pues es un bonus.
• También me di cuenta que todos tenemos una proyección mental de los demás, una imagen de cómo creemos que es y cómo esperamos que reaccione. Del mismo modo que yo la tengo con los demás, los demás la tienen de mí. Una persona sabia tiene esto en cuenta ya que a veces las personas pueden o quieren cambiar. Intentar romper esa imagen es difícil (en algunos casos imposible), de manera que cuando no actúas de la forma esperada pueden percibir tu reacción como distorsionada. También da igual a veces lo que hagas o digas, porque esas personas ya han oído o concluido lo que esperan de tí: la gente está cómoda con esa imagen que tiene (de tí) y esperan que sigas igual.
• Muchas personas se quejan de “lo mal que está todo”, o de “qué mal lo hacen otros” para a continuación repetir y cometer ciegamente los mismos errores; a veces es difícil reconocer que se es parte del problema.

Bueno, ya basta de tanta dosis de Boriel-Confucio. Mejor tomárselo con humor y seguir mirando hacia adelante (en mi caso, hacia atrás), porque ahora, viéndolo desde la lejanía, descubro que no sólo estoy mucho mejor (estoy pasando un buen momento), sino que hubiera sido a largo plazo un error gravísimo seguir donde estaba. A veces nos aferramos a las cosas, a las ilusiones (esa imagen, esa proyección de cómo nos gustaría que fueran las cosas) en vez de aceptar cómo son en realidad.

Así que ahora, a por nuevos proyectos (que eso nunca me falta). Algunos aparecerán por aquí.

Fumeque es una palabra Canaria usada para designar ese viento de marejada con poca visibilidad. Es una palabra que suelo usar mucho con mis amigos, y que en gran parte describe la situación que percibo.

Estos no han sido días muy halagüeños para mí. Tanto en lo profesional (que he hecho una jugada arriesgada cuyo resultado aún no me termina de convencer), como en lo personal: hace nada he cumplido ya 38 años, una edad con la que ni siquiera me puedo imaginar… Veo el futuro ante mí, y es para llorar. Podría extenderme hasta la saciedad hablando de la crisis, que parece que ahora tiene la culpa de todo lo que nos pasa, en vez de los culpables de la misma (los varones, según algunos, los banqueros según otros…). Pero no es eso lo que más me entristece.

Lo que más me duele es ver a una juventud adormecida. Una juventud muerta. Una juventud mansa que poco menos que desprecia los derechos por los que sus padres y abuelos llegaron incluso a derramar sangre.

La gente, dormida, se agilipolla viendo fútbol (como si haber ganado el mundial no fuera suficiente), navegando en la superficialidad 2.0 o viendo telebasura, que no es más que un reflejo cultural de nuestra sociedad. Que los miembros de esa mayoritaria escoria se abandonen a sí mismos es algo de esperar, pero que además no luchen por los derechos (laborales, civiles y constitucionales) de sus propios hijos me parece demencial y de malos padres.

No me vengan ahora con el cuento de “cuanto quiero a mis niños”, si los utilizas para evadirte de la realidad. Los hijos no son solo unas mascotas o peluches con los que pasar un buen rato y olvidarte de otros problemas. Son una responsabilidad.

Sí algún día tú hijo te pregunta cómo llegaron las cosas a ser como son, tienes que responderle con la verdad: “Porque pasé y no moví un dedo”.

I’ve recently had an interesing discussion about cualitative properties of things. We discussed whether Haiku, those 3-verse minimalist Japanese poems have “something special” or that “special scent” is actually a product of our mind and how we experience the reading of a Haiku.

Qualia are a term used to describe the subjective quality of conscious experience: for example, the reddish color of a rose, or the blue one in the sky. One thing is the word blue and another one is the “sensation of blue” we experiment internally in our mind. Even more, recent neuroscience experiments tend to confirm different people have really different sensations when perceiving the same phenomena. So when both you and me are seeing at the “blue” in the sky, we could be experiencing different “blues” in our minds. Even more, in the extreme case, it may happen that my favorite color was “blue” and yours “red”, but inside our minds we were experiencing the same “color” sensation (and calling the same sensation by different names).

This also applies to every sensation or experience: Is sugar “sweet” or are we who perceive them as such and “make it” sweet? The question about whether qualities are on things or in our minds is not a trivial one; it’s a philosophical debate still unsolved. At the end of past century (oops! :S) I read a book on artificial intelligence which also treated this topic:

Phenol-thio-urea is a substance that tastes intensely bitter to about 75 percent of people and is more or less tasteless to the rest. Is phenol-thio-urea bitter? This is an awkward question for someone who naively believes that a statement like ‘Sugar is sweet’ says something about sugar itself as opposed to the effect that sugar has on us. There is worse to come, though. A person’s response to phenol-thio-urea is genetically determined. This means that if those who find it bitter are – let’s imagine – prevented from having offspring, the substance will become tasteless to one and all after the passage of maybe a dozen generations (like blue eyes could be extinguished if people with blue eyes each generation were prevented from reproducing). Thus, the phenol-thio-urea would be a substance which changes from tasting bitter to most people to be a universally tasteless substance, all this without any change in the chemical or physical properties of the phenol-thio-urea.

Jack Copeland – Artificial Intelligence: a philosophical introduction, Ed. Wiley-Blackwell

So, in other words, there are two opposing schools of thought:

1. A red flower, is “not really red”. It simply reflects a wavelength and we “see it red” (or gray-reddish if you happen to be daltonic). If you think that way, you or point of view is such of a physicalist: things are the way they are, and we have a subjective experience when observing them. That’s all.
2. When we see a red flower, that flower “is really red”. The red color comes from a wavelength, but this is something external to our mind that it is on the plant and is part of its physical properties. In this case you are on the school of anti-physicalist, also called dualist.

Considering the above, I think I’m “mostly physicalist”, buy with some objections, since it might happen that some qualia have both mental and physical properties. This philosophical question is far from trivial, as it leads to deeper ones: Do two people have the same internal experience when observing the same phenomena? (reasearch seems to point “no, we don’t”) Will “intelligent machines” in the future have “qualia” experiences?

So what, Do haiku have some special quality (quale) by themselves? Or are they just ink drops on paper (or pixels in your computer screen) and the sensation we have when reading them exist just in our mind? (You can apply question this to every human art, word or creation). Again, this is not a trivial question, because even from the point of view of semiotic and linguistic, a haiku will be more than “ink drops” or “pixels”.

And finally, a Haiku by Yosa Buson (C. XVIII):

autumn rain;
walking in water
on grass

Since I was a participant, I could also record some tournament finals: