So, this course...

I hope I don’t fail the course for saying this, but I have never liked the English program. It is not because I don’t like the language, it’s not because I think teachers are bad, It’s not because I don’t think it’s useful; I don’t like it because I don’t think it works. It’s sad, but I have never thought that a language (any language) course will have good results if it’s once a week, for three hours. Or maybe it will, but only if it lasts for a year or more, not twelve or something classes. Again, it’s not because of the course itself, I think the problem is that it’s a mandatory course for every student. For this reason, I think, the four levels must be done in, at maximum, the four years of the career; it’s not seen as a language course, or something useful (and I think it is, at least in vocabulary, for me), it’s just a formality, needed to get your degree. If you enter in level 1, sure it will help you, but in level 4… I don’t know, it’s good practice, but I don’t know what more you can learn…
About blogs, I think they're great. Writing in school (at least my school) was incredibly boring, and nobody wanted to do it, myself included. This is good: interesting topics and not too long, is a good way to practice without getting tired or bored.

I think that what I need the most for improving my English is vocabulary. I often find myself trying to find the words I need to express what I want, and use to change part of the sentence to avoid the need of the word I couldn’t find. In writing I think I could improve in punctuation, but I don’t really know how; I usually try to use the same rules that exist in Spanish, but sometimes they are wrong, and I sure don’t want to learn a whole new set of them.

In my life there is actually a lot of English, but not for expressing myself. I like to play games, listen to music and watch movies and TV shows in English, so I’m always receiving and understanding English, but I talk and write only in classes. Or when I’m helping somebody with their homework.

I hope I don't fail for saying what I said...

This post was edited to add something about blogs. I forgot to talk about it, sorry!

So, this year...

I hate “new year evaluations”.  Or “last year evaluations”? Bah, nevermind. They are often depressing, making you think about all the stupid things you did and the smart things you did not, but should have done. I have always thought that if you want to think about consequences and possibilities, you should do so BEFORE making a decision, thinking after that is no good. It’s like buying something; you don’t go and see its price a week after you buy it, because it will be probably cheaper then. I’m not the only one, right?

However, this year has been pretty calm for me. There have been only two really big changes in my life: in March I moved in to my grandmother’s house, and have been living there all these months. It was weird at the beginning, but a couple weeks later it was my home. Well, it was my home, back when I was 4 years old, until I was 10 or 11. Now, 10 years later, it actually feels pretty much the same. I guess my grandma is one of the reasons for that.

The other very important thing is that my family got bigger. No, there were no babies, at least not humans: in May (I think…) my girlfriend and my found a puppy trying to eat garbage in the street, but the other dogs wouldn’t let her get close to food. When she saw us, she walked to us and sat on my girlfriend’s foot. From that moment, I have a dog.

I actually think that my life is pretty boring, and I can prove it with this: there are actually no other important events this year that I can think about. I’m not saying that there haven’t been any bad things, but if I don’t remember, they weren’t very important. At this point, thinking about what’s left of 2013, I can only think about doing well in my final exams, and the 16 hours a day of sleep I want to enjoy in January.

Oh, and a Nintendo 3DS. I will buy myself a 3DS as my Christmas gift.

No picture today, I don't know what I can show you. If I find something, I'll edit this post.

Johanna Blakley explains her hypothesis about how social media will, sometime, put an end to gender, age, and other demographics stereotypes that are used as a base for advertising. The reason for this assumption is a simple addition of variables.

A time ago, industries used a kind of “labels” to define and categorize people, with the belief that this characteristics were predictable; for this reason, labeling people would tell you what they like, what interest them, what they want. Nowadays, advertising works in other direction. Watching what you do online, or what you “click”, they can see what your interests are, and knowing this they can offer you things that you could “probably” buy, without the need of knowing your personal characteristics, like the ones they used for demographic categorization. As she says, it’s “kind if creepy”, but it has been like that for years now, even in our country, and nobody knew it. Chilean laws say nothing about internet, so it’s like a law-free place.

At the same time, global statistics show that women are a major part of social media users, and they spend much more time on social sites than men. From all this, Blakley asks if this would mean that women will dominate global media, and the world would see a lot more women focused shows, games and movies, although right after this she answers that that might not be the case. However, female importance in media is undeniable, so maybe, in not so much time, we will see a real big transformation in media and advertising.

In my opinion... I don't know, and actually don't think it's very important. If there is a change, and they sell more, it'll stay. If they don't, it will be back to how it was. I honestly don't think that industries use of people's interests will have more applications than this...

Picture not related...

Don't say, DO!

The argument between “environmental friendly” and “progress” have been around for a long time now. Industries abuse of the natural resources, destroying forests, mountains, rivers and oceans, affecting all kinds of life. At the same time, a lot of people and organizations have been working for everyone to know what’s happening, and that’s why we talk about this subject now. People have been informed of the problems this causes and the terrible future that will come if this continues, and nowadays it’s an important issue to discuss when a new industry wants to settle in the country.

The problem's root, I think...

However, it seems to be a problem and worries people only before it starts its functions, or when it’s close to houses where people live. When it’s somewhere without people only environmentalists do something, and while they are already working, industries are a problem only when they affect people directly somehow. Apparently, even when most people say that they worry about the planet, they actually think that as long as it doesn’t bother them, it’s ok… and destruction will not come until a very long time, so it will be someone else’s problem.

The thing is, if no one does something now, there may not be a very long time for other people to suffer. Industries are getting bigger every day, using and abusing of the resources. Sustainable development is a need right now, find a way to maintain the ecosystem how it must be. It’s simple, keep on cutting trees and soon there will be no trees to cut.

Well, it’s easier said than done. People still want their iPhones, and pollution is just collateral damage. Sad, isn’t it?

This is a looong post...

    I like internet. I love it, actually: entertainment and information, all you want, when you want it. The new hardware (computers every time smaller and cell phones with more and more functions) give you the power to have access to it from almost any place you are. The new software and websites give you more and more things to do. And as much as some people try to resist, it’s apparently in vain; society changes, adapts to the new technologies, and uses them just like any other “tool”: yesterday, corporations had to make a giant sign with lots of colours and something funny, and that was advertising, while today all those big images are seen in a screen, whether it’s a computer’s, a phone’s, a “tablet’s”, or whatever.

    However, a lot of people don’t seem to see the inconveniences or even dangerous aspects about all this. Some time ago you met people through friends, or friend’s friends, and if you liked each other sometimes you asked for their phone numbers, and after a lot of time you could say you were friends. Now, you can send an application to some unknown person, and after a click, you are “friends”. If you’re not careful, anyone can contact you and/or see everything you write or upload, like photos. And even if you are careful, nothing assures you it won’t happen. It’s like psychopaths paradise.

    I, as an example, always used instant messaging software, like MSN Messenger, but never gave some of the information that it sometimes asked. I never gave my address, of phone number, or any other identification than my name, and sometimes it wasn’t even the real one. I never trusted anyone on the internet, and surely corporations weren’t the exception. When MSN died (R.I.P.) I had to move to facebook to stay in touch with most of that people, and at the same time I found that that was my limit. Never used Twitter, nor Tumblr, or Instagram, or whatever they’re called. Actually, I never used blogs before this English course. Everything else, where I don’t need to identify myself, is welcome.
    On the other hand, talking about hardware, I never worry about new things because I have everything I would need… besides I don’t have money. What I really like are videogames, so the new consoles are something for me to see and, if possible try, but a pair of glasses that project a map while you walk, or show you the face of the person you are talking to? Why would I want that?

Google Glass

Next Google Glass...

A lot of people... or a group?

Daniel Bar-Tal is an Israeli psychologist. His studies and research are part of the social psychology area, from the basic group structure to the particular conflicts that define some of them, like the Israeli-Jewish society. Some of his work focused to the basics of the socio-psychology is so well explained that my Social Psychology teacher uses them as basic bibliography for the class. That’s where I read it for the first time.

The concept of “group beliefs” is used to talk about everything that defines a psychological group. If we want to say that a group of people is a psychological group, they must share a lot of concepts, values, goals, and well, beliefs, about themselves and the world around them. This means they have to see thing in a similar way, if they want to understand each other and live happily ever after, without the group breaking apart.

For example, if they like a soccer team, they must all like the same one; if anyone likes another one, that person should not be part of that psychological group, because his/her beliefs are different and set him apart. Of course, this is only when the group existence is about football. Maybe they don’t like the same music, but that’s not the reason they are together, so, it doesn’t matter.

I like social psychology, and I like simple things that have big implications. The “group beliefs” is a basic concept, but it explains, in my opinion, a big part of how groups are born. I mean, Bar-Tal explains that the most basic belief that must be shared is “we are a group”, what can be more obvious, and a same time, more important?

Yeah...

Happiness?

Great movie.

I have always thought that happiness is something impossible to obtain. Or, if not impossible, it won’t last; humans tend to want things they don’t have, and when they get them, it’s not how they thought it would be. Technology is a very good example: you want the phone that came out a month ago, you buy the phone, and then you start to notice all the downsides it has. Of course, the fact that the industry develops a new, improved version of the same phone every 2 weeks helps a lot.

Our ability to simulate the future, to think about possibilities, is what makes this pursuit of happiness possible. We always try to choose the best option, the one that will give us more pleasure, that we’ll like the most. However, just like Gilbert showed, we are often wrong.

This synthetic happiness that Daniel Gilbert talks about seems like the solution. We create it when we don’t get what we wanted, when our decisions don’t give us what we thought and we lose (or don’t win), basically to make us feel better. It’s good when you didn’t have any option, when circumstances are more than you can handle… but it’s also like nature telling you to stop whining and start to like what you have, or at least that’s what it seem to me. Sure, you can be happy anyway, that’s great, but I think that actually being happy anyway can make you a conformist that stops worrying about the world around you.

It’s an extreme case, I won’t deny it, but it’s not impossible.