Occasionally I remember a conversation I had about games in which, on discussing how I'd tried out 3D glasses (imagine the old red/blue things) with some games, I was told "3D can stay the f*** out of my games. I was taken aback at the time, and it still seems odd to me now; enough that I've mulled it over sufficiently to want to rant about it.
It's popular these days to either love or hate 3D; however, I think that to do either of these things for all 3D media is misguided.
I can think of some compelling arguments for why 3D simply isn't a good fit for a lot of cinema. Much media has gotten used to being presented from one direction; cinematography and TV is filled with scenes where everything is essentially occurring well away from the camera (in TV shows, especially live ones, this is so prominent that I'd argue this is a significant reason for the relative lack of 3DTV adoption). Additionally, depth isn't a hugely important dimension in storytelling in most films.
As the technology becomes more familiar, I think this will change to some extent. Watching Lindy Beige (not necessarily a film expert, but he is a persuasive talker) in his video on the introduction of 48 fps (particularly his point near the end about zooming techniques), it seems to me that cinematography techniques will always take some time to adapt to new technology. By extension, I think cinema can adapt to 3D... When it feels it necessary. After all, there are numerous theatrical styles, but there are not all adopted all of the time.
The goal behind 3D, in my opinion, is to draw the viewer into the experience. If you were to think of this in theatrical terms it would similar to invisible theater, which brings the action right in front of you. It must be spectacularly difficult to produce a story that is spatially distinct, which you can navigate and interact with; however, games take such an idea and allow you to experience it at your leisure.
In most games, you become an actor in the theater. It thus makes sense to me that if you are an actor in the story then this story should be occurring all around you. What's more, gamers have had the freedom of exploring their game worlds in 3 dimensions (albeit via the 2D of their screens) for years, and while I think 3D is going to take time to mature in the cinema, games developers have been thinking in 3D constantly for years now. Even some existing games would work spectacularly well.
Yes, there will need to be adaptations, but mostly nothing that wasn't already on the to-do list: more detailed actors and props, better physics implementations, and more attention to details such as the placement of actors during important plot points (For example, in Skyrim you may sometimes find other actors or props obscuring your view of someone you're in conversation with). Very few things need to change in games that would be unnecessary if 3D didn't exist.
So, I still disagree that 3D screens/goggles are in any way bad for games. Luckily for those who think otherwise, implementing such technology requires almost no changes to the mechanics of a game, so we both get what we want.
But anyway, give it another 5 years, and no one will want to consume 3D games on a 2D screen any more.
Thursday, March 5, 2015
Monday, March 2, 2015
Breathing life into sluggish Android devices: Samsung Galaxy Fame GT-S6810P
Another departure from all things Japanese to talk about making technology easier to manage. In particular, I want to commit to writing the method for installing a fresh operating system on the Samsung Galaxy Fame GT-S6810P (before I forget it). Off-the-shelf, it is atrociously slow, but it can be improved a lot by installing Cyanogenmod 11 on it (nothing miraculous, but it feels much more responsive).
All of the necessary information can be found on this thread; however, having never tampered with my phone at all, it took me a while to get the job done, plus having just installed cyanogenmod on my Nexus 7 I had gotten cockey and by skipping a step got the "status 7" error, which was caused by having the wrong recovery for this installation (see below).
Before proceeding, as with the thread above, you tamper with your phone at your own discretion, preferably with a backup phone on-hand in case you screw up, because I can't help you if you do. Phones come in many models, and some may not be compatible with the following instructions, if you attempt to tamper with your phone without being sure you wont brick it, then it is ultimately your fault when it dies.
0a) Turn on USB debugging on the phone
0b) Get a copy of adb. You can use adb by going to the command prompt, navigating to the folder where you have adb, and then just typing adb and a command. E.g.
0c) Get the USB drivers for your phone! I'm not sure if I needed them, since adb recognized my phone without them, but I installed them anyway, so I recommend it.
1) I downloaded ODIN 3.07 (don't forget to virus scan the file, and be careful where you download ODIN, as my internet security went haywire on a couple of sites).
2) I followed the instructions on this post
2a) I flashed CWM6 using ODIN (turn off the phone. Plug the phone in, then hold the power, home and vol down buttons at the same time - keep holding until the download mode appears - then, in ODIN, add the CWM6 tar file to the PDA section of ODIN and click start)
2b) in command prompt I ran adb like so:
Now my phone works better than it has ever worked before. It's slowed back down a little after I choked it with all my "must have" apps, but it is still faster than before the tampering.
All of the necessary information can be found on this thread; however, having never tampered with my phone at all, it took me a while to get the job done, plus having just installed cyanogenmod on my Nexus 7 I had gotten cockey and by skipping a step got the "status 7" error, which was caused by having the wrong recovery for this installation (see below).
Before proceeding, as with the thread above, you tamper with your phone at your own discretion, preferably with a backup phone on-hand in case you screw up, because I can't help you if you do. Phones come in many models, and some may not be compatible with the following instructions, if you attempt to tamper with your phone without being sure you wont brick it, then it is ultimately your fault when it dies.
0a) Turn on USB debugging on the phone
0b) Get a copy of adb. You can use adb by going to the command prompt, navigating to the folder where you have adb, and then just typing adb and a command. E.g.
cd C:\Path\To\ADB
adb devicesthe "adb devices" command queries for the plugged in android devices. If you dont see your phone on the list, you will need the USB drivers for the phone.
0c) Get the USB drivers for your phone! I'm not sure if I needed them, since adb recognized my phone without them, but I installed them anyway, so I recommend it.
1) I downloaded ODIN 3.07 (don't forget to virus scan the file, and be careful where you download ODIN, as my internet security went haywire on a couple of sites).
2) I followed the instructions on this post
2a) I flashed CWM6 using ODIN (turn off the phone. Plug the phone in, then hold the power, home and vol down buttons at the same time - keep holding until the download mode appears - then, in ODIN, add the CWM6 tar file to the PDA section of ODIN and click start)
2b) in command prompt I ran adb like so:
adb reboot recovery2c) this reboots the phone into CWM6, a recovery system. From here you can sideload a second recovery which is either more compatible with the phone, or more compatible with the Fame version of Cyanogenmod 11. This is achieved by selecting the menu option to install a zip by sideload, then use adb again:
adb sideload C:\Path\To\Recovery\GFameAngerManagementRecovery.zipand when that is finished:
adb reboot recovery2d) install cyanogenmod through sideload again:
adb sideload C:\Path\To\Cyanogenmod\cm-11-20150129-NIGHTLY-nevisp.zip3) At this point, I rebooted the phone (adb reboot) to check that it was usable. Sure enough everything was working. However, there were no google apps. Thankfully, the author provides a link to the google apps on his post (same post as before). This can be installed by sideloading as before (reboot into recovery, then use adb to sideload it in)
Now my phone works better than it has ever worked before. It's slowed back down a little after I choked it with all my "must have" apps, but it is still faster than before the tampering.
Wednesday, January 21, 2015
Why the Asus Transformerbook T100A isn't a work machine
These words might be redundant already, but I've seen it is still on the shelves, I have some words of warning as I lay my faithful Asus Transformerbook T100A to rest...
Recently, I upgraded to a Toshiba Dynabook N514/21K. To my eyes the specs between it and my Asus Transformerbook T100A are almost identical; dual core processor, identical screen resolution, Intel HD graphics (Skyrim on low settings with algoBoost seems to work OK on both), sizeable HDD disk space. However, what difference there is in specs has a huge impact on your experience.
The main difference between the machines is that the Dynabook came with an extra 2GB of memory, and doesn't have the 16GB SDD drive.
The 2 vs 4 GB problem is fairly intuitive for anyone who has had a few computers in their time, and to be clear 2 GB is not enough memory to run Windows 8 stress-free. If you utilize the machine for work then this becomes problematic whenever you want to browse and use other programs at the same time. Web browsers these days love to fill up the RAM, and websites are getting heavier all the time (my subjective feeling). If you're working then maybe you have a tab for your email, maybe even a music site to make the work experience more palatable, and in the foreground whatever office programs you might be using. Add in Skype, Dropbox, and a few other minor programs, and that is about the limit of the Transformerbook's abilities. I would invariably have task manager open in the background ready to zap Skype or any other program when the computer inevitably froze up.
The SDD drive is another problem that I didn't really anticipate since the Transformerbook comes with an extra, sizeable HDD. However, the OS is installed on the SDD, and every now and then you will come across a program that just demands to be installed on the same partition as the SDD. This lead my SDD to fill up within weeks of purchasing the computer and subsequent file juggling to keep it clear. A more careful person might not have this problem, but I like to think I'm not entirely careless either.
The added advantage of being able to use the Transformerbook as a tablet isn't enough to justify it as a work computer. In fact it is the very tabletization that made the Transformerbook a failure in this regard, mainly in that the SDD is too small, but also because tablets are so difficult to upgrade. My new Toshiba has accessible RAM and HDD slots (I'm not sure of how much RAM it can actually take, but 4GB is enough for me... for now).
Additionally, the webcam doesn't work correctly out of the box (this is fixable, mind), and the microphone is terrible, meaning even something simple like Skype requires using a microphone (I count myself lucky for having kept the mic+earphones from my old HTC tattoo).
That said, the Transformerbook can handle less intensive use very well, so long as you're not multitasking, it can manage MS Office, video, even games as recent as Skyrim (damn, is it 4 years ago already?) on lower settings. Plus, audio-wise, the Transformerbook sweeps the Dynabook off its feet (I now have a set of speakers, the first time I've felt compelled to by speakers for a laptop since 2007 - oh dear Toshiba, oh dear). The Transformerbook's reduced size also means it is much more portable for use with presentations etc. But not great for use on-the-go as the Transformerbook's screen doesn't tilt quite far enough backwards for comfortable use on the lap.
So my closing remarks on the Transformerbook: A great laptop/tablet for messing around, but a stress-magnet when you need to get things done.
Recently, I upgraded to a Toshiba Dynabook N514/21K. To my eyes the specs between it and my Asus Transformerbook T100A are almost identical; dual core processor, identical screen resolution, Intel HD graphics (Skyrim on low settings with algoBoost seems to work OK on both), sizeable HDD disk space. However, what difference there is in specs has a huge impact on your experience.
The main difference between the machines is that the Dynabook came with an extra 2GB of memory, and doesn't have the 16GB SDD drive.
The 2 vs 4 GB problem is fairly intuitive for anyone who has had a few computers in their time, and to be clear 2 GB is not enough memory to run Windows 8 stress-free. If you utilize the machine for work then this becomes problematic whenever you want to browse and use other programs at the same time. Web browsers these days love to fill up the RAM, and websites are getting heavier all the time (my subjective feeling). If you're working then maybe you have a tab for your email, maybe even a music site to make the work experience more palatable, and in the foreground whatever office programs you might be using. Add in Skype, Dropbox, and a few other minor programs, and that is about the limit of the Transformerbook's abilities. I would invariably have task manager open in the background ready to zap Skype or any other program when the computer inevitably froze up.
The SDD drive is another problem that I didn't really anticipate since the Transformerbook comes with an extra, sizeable HDD. However, the OS is installed on the SDD, and every now and then you will come across a program that just demands to be installed on the same partition as the SDD. This lead my SDD to fill up within weeks of purchasing the computer and subsequent file juggling to keep it clear. A more careful person might not have this problem, but I like to think I'm not entirely careless either.
The added advantage of being able to use the Transformerbook as a tablet isn't enough to justify it as a work computer. In fact it is the very tabletization that made the Transformerbook a failure in this regard, mainly in that the SDD is too small, but also because tablets are so difficult to upgrade. My new Toshiba has accessible RAM and HDD slots (I'm not sure of how much RAM it can actually take, but 4GB is enough for me... for now).
Additionally, the webcam doesn't work correctly out of the box (this is fixable, mind), and the microphone is terrible, meaning even something simple like Skype requires using a microphone (I count myself lucky for having kept the mic+earphones from my old HTC tattoo).
That said, the Transformerbook can handle less intensive use very well, so long as you're not multitasking, it can manage MS Office, video, even games as recent as Skyrim (damn, is it 4 years ago already?) on lower settings. Plus, audio-wise, the Transformerbook sweeps the Dynabook off its feet (I now have a set of speakers, the first time I've felt compelled to by speakers for a laptop since 2007 - oh dear Toshiba, oh dear). The Transformerbook's reduced size also means it is much more portable for use with presentations etc. But not great for use on-the-go as the Transformerbook's screen doesn't tilt quite far enough backwards for comfortable use on the lap.
So my closing remarks on the Transformerbook: A great laptop/tablet for messing around, but a stress-magnet when you need to get things done.
Sunday, December 14, 2014
America-envy, and why Brits are unsufferable
Not really a rant so much as an opinion-dosed observation...
I landed upon a YouTube video of American's eating food from British McDonalds. To be honest I think it was amusing, especially the last sound bite* of the video.
As you can expect, the comments section was a mess of nation-based bigotry. It amused me that one person pointed out:
"... You want talk about how americans piss you off? People from UK Piss me off. Any american that goes there gets shit talked 24/7 do we shit talk people their? no. They just are jealous of our country to be honest. That's the only reason I can think of, as to why dumb ass british people make fun of americans all time." - AnimeGirl
To be honest, I think AnimeGirl was generous to us Brits in assuming that the root of this anti-American sentiment is jealousy. Many, many British are overtly, and mindlessly of the British-is-best camp. Maybe this is a psychological compensation for the fact that -geographically- the British Empire waned long-ago; however, my personal experience of 26 years living in the UK has led me to the alternative conclusion that we deride the Americans not because of jealousy, but because we're gits. Brits will gladly deride any culture, even ourselves. To an extent, I think there is even a perverted sense of pride in this stance, but I don't count myself among that number.
I lived for a year in Japan initially out of curiosity, but I moved out here more permanently in part due to feeling fatigued at the general hostility one encounters in the UK. I can remember no instance of even being so much as unduly criticized here in Japan, let alone outright insulted, by a stranger. There are likely other factors at work**, but as it stands every year here reinforces the illusion that the gits are more numerous in the UK. Whether or not the same is true of America, I couldn't say. I've only spent a week (working) there. The only observation I was able to make was that people seemed more keen to interact than in the UK***.
Anyway. To regain some balance to the topic, perhaps I'll switch sides of the fence again when I've been here 20 years; there's only so different people can be while sharing >99.9% of their genetic data, and Japan, like anywhere, has its problems. No doubt gits will be gits in different ways depending on their culture. But hell, at least we're not at war, and hell, I have the freedom of time to write such a flaccid rant inspired by YouTube comments (never a good start to a discussion), and you had the time to read it. Apparently that's progress. What a strange world we live in.
* in a punning mood today, sorry..
** e.g. perhaps people are less inclined to insult a foreigner here either due to anticipated lack of understanding or reciprocation of the hostility; or differences in my commuting habits etc. Additionally, I've heard that my racial profile gets a better deal than some of the other minorities.
*** About which I hold the paradoxical view that this is both a good thing, but at the same time I don't like talking to strangers very much.
I landed upon a YouTube video of American's eating food from British McDonalds. To be honest I think it was amusing, especially the last sound bite* of the video.
As you can expect, the comments section was a mess of nation-based bigotry. It amused me that one person pointed out:
"... You want talk about how americans piss you off? People from UK Piss me off. Any american that goes there gets shit talked 24/7 do we shit talk people their? no. They just are jealous of our country to be honest. That's the only reason I can think of, as to why dumb ass british people make fun of americans all time." - AnimeGirl
To be honest, I think AnimeGirl was generous to us Brits in assuming that the root of this anti-American sentiment is jealousy. Many, many British are overtly, and mindlessly of the British-is-best camp. Maybe this is a psychological compensation for the fact that -geographically- the British Empire waned long-ago; however, my personal experience of 26 years living in the UK has led me to the alternative conclusion that we deride the Americans not because of jealousy, but because we're gits. Brits will gladly deride any culture, even ourselves. To an extent, I think there is even a perverted sense of pride in this stance, but I don't count myself among that number.
I lived for a year in Japan initially out of curiosity, but I moved out here more permanently in part due to feeling fatigued at the general hostility one encounters in the UK. I can remember no instance of even being so much as unduly criticized here in Japan, let alone outright insulted, by a stranger. There are likely other factors at work**, but as it stands every year here reinforces the illusion that the gits are more numerous in the UK. Whether or not the same is true of America, I couldn't say. I've only spent a week (working) there. The only observation I was able to make was that people seemed more keen to interact than in the UK***.
Anyway. To regain some balance to the topic, perhaps I'll switch sides of the fence again when I've been here 20 years; there's only so different people can be while sharing >99.9% of their genetic data, and Japan, like anywhere, has its problems. No doubt gits will be gits in different ways depending on their culture. But hell, at least we're not at war, and hell, I have the freedom of time to write such a flaccid rant inspired by YouTube comments (never a good start to a discussion), and you had the time to read it. Apparently that's progress. What a strange world we live in.
* in a punning mood today, sorry..
** e.g. perhaps people are less inclined to insult a foreigner here either due to anticipated lack of understanding or reciprocation of the hostility; or differences in my commuting habits etc. Additionally, I've heard that my racial profile gets a better deal than some of the other minorities.
*** About which I hold the paradoxical view that this is both a good thing, but at the same time I don't like talking to strangers very much.
Sunday, November 30, 2014
Why atrocities occurred in the Far East, why it still matters, and what we should do about it
Yesterday I watched through a BBC documentary on war crimes committed by Japan during WW2. The documentary discusses -in sometimes horrifying detail- the crimes against humanity committed by the Imperial Army of Japan. I think it is a pretty good introduction to the subject, and to summarise further, part 1 frames the atrocities in the context of increasing militarism in Japan, increased brutality of training in the Imperial Army, and nationalist/imperialist propaganda, before embarking on a tour of the first half of Japan's war with acts of brutality being the landmarks.
After watching part 2 (which completes the tour by focussing on the horrifying result of the belief in death-before-dishonour, as well as some of the American-inflicted suffering of the Japanese), I sat thinking about how it is both sides were willing to indiscriminately kill civilians.
As part 1 illustrated, POWs were treated very well by Japan during WW1, I'm not sure if this extends to non-Europeans, but it goes some way towards confirming that the Japanese are not intrinsically inhumane (I sincerely hope this doesn't need stating, but there it is anyway), but rather the social environment at the time was the root cause. Looking at the domestic history of Japan, it seems fairly obvious this was the case; however, why did America end up indiscriminately firebombing Japan?
Let's assume you're asked to run a bombing mission over civilian area during a war. Whether you agree is probably going to be based on: 1) whether you are blindly obedient, 2) whether you feel the mission will prevent defeat/danger to your homeland or allies, 3) whether you respect the people who will die. That is the order I would have written those items had I not watched the documentary, but now I think 2 and 3 are in the wrong order. Firstly, its evident that the Japanese soldiers -revelling in their early victories- had a contempt for their victims. But to an extent the same contempt is shown by the Allied soldiers, and while this is usually towards the Japanese soldiers, it seems that the bomber pilots (if not contemptuous) were indifferent to whether their targets were military or civilian, and they surely could not have been concerned for the safety of their homeland while dropping bombs on an increasingly crippled Japan, right? Perhaps they just wanted a quick end to the war to save their comrades the risk of being shot down, but even so, to weigh the lives of so many civilians (arguably they don't know how many civilians they will end up killing; however, I expect these people were fairly conversant with the power of their weaponry) against their comrades still hints to me of a disdain (or at least indifference) towards their victims.
OK, so what does this matter? Well firstly we can say with relative certainty from the above that atrocities will occur when there is disrespect for the opposing side, and these atrocities become worse with increasing disrespect, and increasing distance. Asking combatants to "please, very kindly respect the people whose government you are at war with" is just plain stupid because soldiers have a job which is psychologically devastating (killing people and exposure to mortal danger - how is that better than minimum wage?), which will inevitably lead to some level of unwanted behaviour, and when such behaviour is not systematically guarded against, and additional negative propaganda is imposed on top of that, you get the Imperial Japanese Army.
In other words, any war will lead to some atrocities, and propaganda makes things much, much worse. The problem is we have a number of warmongering nations (I'm looking at the US and UK here, but things have gotten more complicated than I've had time to keep up, recently), and a number of nations with state-run media (China, and Russia are often accused, but they're not the only ones). The examples in brackets are unlikely to go to war right now, but situations change (Japan was allied with the UK in the first World War, and with the Nazis in the second).
In this respect, the relative (and mutual) animosity* between Japan and China has to stop, because in the remote possibility that a war did happen between them, it would be terrible.
But what should we actually do? Well, here I think some politicians should take heed of a psychological experiment called "Robber's Cave Experiment". In that experiment, it was found that a group of boys separated from each other would naturally come into conflict when competing at given tasks, but that this could be overcome by integrating the groups and having them work towards common goals.
Translated to the world stage, this means we need to focus less on the transgressions made against each other, and more on cooperating on common goals. Note this doesn't mean letting ourselves get trodden on, but simply that we shouldn't ostracise countries because they do not conform to our expectations, rather we should use some of that energy create more opportunities for collaboration.
To an extent this is already happening due to trade. Trade has become essential to our societies, and this necessitates some degree of cooperation. When we go into our favourite shop, where we have a good relationship with the owner, and we comment that the paint job on the door looks like it needs redoing, that owner is far more likely to take on that information than if we said the same in a shop where we have no such relationship.
We all want the world to change for the better, and we want to do it now. Unfortunately, we simply cannot do it directly, the relationship must be built first, otherwise our clamouring for change simply drives us apart. Even when we have the power to impose the change, has this really worked for us in the past?
The problem with this is implementation. There is little we can do but vote for the moderate political candidates, promote tolerance, and focus on the benefits of collaboration (trade, science, and the arts are all exceptional examples).
*I've heard a number of my Japanese friends talk about the Chinese is really quite disturbing ways, and you really don't need to look hard to see that the Japanese are thought less-than-well of by a proportion of China too. Then again, perhaps looking harder would reveal otherwise.
After watching part 2 (which completes the tour by focussing on the horrifying result of the belief in death-before-dishonour, as well as some of the American-inflicted suffering of the Japanese), I sat thinking about how it is both sides were willing to indiscriminately kill civilians.
As part 1 illustrated, POWs were treated very well by Japan during WW1, I'm not sure if this extends to non-Europeans, but it goes some way towards confirming that the Japanese are not intrinsically inhumane (I sincerely hope this doesn't need stating, but there it is anyway), but rather the social environment at the time was the root cause. Looking at the domestic history of Japan, it seems fairly obvious this was the case; however, why did America end up indiscriminately firebombing Japan?
Let's assume you're asked to run a bombing mission over civilian area during a war. Whether you agree is probably going to be based on: 1) whether you are blindly obedient, 2) whether you feel the mission will prevent defeat/danger to your homeland or allies, 3) whether you respect the people who will die. That is the order I would have written those items had I not watched the documentary, but now I think 2 and 3 are in the wrong order. Firstly, its evident that the Japanese soldiers -revelling in their early victories- had a contempt for their victims. But to an extent the same contempt is shown by the Allied soldiers, and while this is usually towards the Japanese soldiers, it seems that the bomber pilots (if not contemptuous) were indifferent to whether their targets were military or civilian, and they surely could not have been concerned for the safety of their homeland while dropping bombs on an increasingly crippled Japan, right? Perhaps they just wanted a quick end to the war to save their comrades the risk of being shot down, but even so, to weigh the lives of so many civilians (arguably they don't know how many civilians they will end up killing; however, I expect these people were fairly conversant with the power of their weaponry) against their comrades still hints to me of a disdain (or at least indifference) towards their victims.
OK, so what does this matter? Well firstly we can say with relative certainty from the above that atrocities will occur when there is disrespect for the opposing side, and these atrocities become worse with increasing disrespect, and increasing distance. Asking combatants to "please, very kindly respect the people whose government you are at war with" is just plain stupid because soldiers have a job which is psychologically devastating (killing people and exposure to mortal danger - how is that better than minimum wage?), which will inevitably lead to some level of unwanted behaviour, and when such behaviour is not systematically guarded against, and additional negative propaganda is imposed on top of that, you get the Imperial Japanese Army.
In other words, any war will lead to some atrocities, and propaganda makes things much, much worse. The problem is we have a number of warmongering nations (I'm looking at the US and UK here, but things have gotten more complicated than I've had time to keep up, recently), and a number of nations with state-run media (China, and Russia are often accused, but they're not the only ones). The examples in brackets are unlikely to go to war right now, but situations change (Japan was allied with the UK in the first World War, and with the Nazis in the second).
In this respect, the relative (and mutual) animosity* between Japan and China has to stop, because in the remote possibility that a war did happen between them, it would be terrible.
But what should we actually do? Well, here I think some politicians should take heed of a psychological experiment called "Robber's Cave Experiment". In that experiment, it was found that a group of boys separated from each other would naturally come into conflict when competing at given tasks, but that this could be overcome by integrating the groups and having them work towards common goals.
Translated to the world stage, this means we need to focus less on the transgressions made against each other, and more on cooperating on common goals. Note this doesn't mean letting ourselves get trodden on, but simply that we shouldn't ostracise countries because they do not conform to our expectations, rather we should use some of that energy create more opportunities for collaboration.
To an extent this is already happening due to trade. Trade has become essential to our societies, and this necessitates some degree of cooperation. When we go into our favourite shop, where we have a good relationship with the owner, and we comment that the paint job on the door looks like it needs redoing, that owner is far more likely to take on that information than if we said the same in a shop where we have no such relationship.
We all want the world to change for the better, and we want to do it now. Unfortunately, we simply cannot do it directly, the relationship must be built first, otherwise our clamouring for change simply drives us apart. Even when we have the power to impose the change, has this really worked for us in the past?
The problem with this is implementation. There is little we can do but vote for the moderate political candidates, promote tolerance, and focus on the benefits of collaboration (trade, science, and the arts are all exceptional examples).
*I've heard a number of my Japanese friends talk about the Chinese is really quite disturbing ways, and you really don't need to look hard to see that the Japanese are thought less-than-well of by a proportion of China too. Then again, perhaps looking harder would reveal otherwise.
Friday, September 12, 2014
Background checks for renting in Japan
Summary for applying for an apartment in Tokyo
-Have your proof of income ready
-Easiest if you're an employee
-Bring your bank books and any relevant invoices etc.
-Be ready to substantiate your reasons for moving
-Be ready to share relevant contact details
-Be prepared to wait ~4 working days for the application to go through
-Be available. You will likely be called by guarantor companies, management companies/landlords
There are a lot of articles, forum posts etc. on renting apartments in Japan, all of which are pretty easily accessible from Google; however, I thought I'd share my experience on background checks for renting, which I couldn't personally find much information about.
So, I'd found some places on athome.jp that I liked, emailed the estate agent involved, and arranged a meeting. As seems pretty typical, none of the places I'd found were available, but they showed me some other places instead. I found one I liked, and we headed back to the office to start the application.
During the application (which took about an hour) I filled out a couple of forms. You might save a minute or so by knowing your birth date in the Japanese calendar. You'll probably save considerably more time if you're not self-employed. I am self-employed, so I also had to show reasonable proof that I could make the rent. I had 2 months worth of invoices (they would have preferred 3) and my bank book, of which they took copies.
They also wanted to know the reason I was moving to Tokyo. Now, in my head, the reason is that I'm more likely to find a research position in Tokyo than in rural Japan; however, in actuality I'm only in relatively preliminary discussions with one of the professors over here. Nonetheless, I opened my big mouth, assuming any old reason would do. This actually ended up with me having to provide the aforementioned professor's contact details (thankfully the professor is a nice guy, and was willing to help out), and these were not just retained by the estate agent, but passed on to both the guarantor company and the apartment's management company. To try and avoid making myself look like a complete ass from my prospective professor's point of view, I stressed to the estate agent, guarantor company, and management company that unless something firm was decided upon, my main subsistence was from my translation work.
At some point, and I don't recall exactly why, the estate agent took a copy of my PhD certificate. It was probably relevant to something I said.
After making the application on Saturday, I got phone calls from the guarantor company and management company on Monday and Tuesday, respectively. Basically they just went over the contents of the forms I'd filled on Saturday, and concentrated on the weakest part, being the reason for moving, to which I basically said moving to Tokyo will also be helpful for my translation work, but I intend to do research if possible. I think they were also keen to double check my earnings.
On Wednesday, I got the call from the estate agent to say the application had been successful. Just 4 days from applying! I'm pretty thrilled about that: I thought they were going to keep me hanging for at least a week, and I was half-sure they were going to reject it.
On reflection, I'm not sure how useful my case is. I imagine most people will not be self-employed, which will mean they have all the proof of income and reasons necessary to make things as smooth as possible. Also, perhaps having a professor (and a PhD) to vouch for me made a difference? Mine is a pretty unique case, so all I can really offer in advice is to have all your proof of income and be ready to substantiate your reasons for moving. For example, I really should have contacted the professor beforehand.
Still, as far as time scales go, you can probably expect to wait just a few days for the check to go through before you know you'll be able to move in.
P.S.
Lastly, if possible, I advise using a Japanese-speaking estate agent, I went both the a gaijin-friendly and to a normal estate agent, and found that the normal estate agent tended to have the better deals, or in the very least was more inclined to show them to me. If you have the patience to go to 2 or 3 estate agents, then I would highly advise it.
Oh, and never take flats on the ground floor. Maybe my nose has been over-sensitized by damp, dingy England, but the first-floor apartments I viewed universally smelled of mold. Given that I've lived in a house for the last year, and that the ground floor here is fine, I didn't really believe it, but having actually gone to 3 first-floor rooms and taken a good whiff (as well as inspect the cupboards for mold, and found it in 2 of them: use a torch or the light on your phone and look at the corners of the most difficult to clean part of the cupboard, usually the underside of the lowest shelf to the floor -ignore any strange looks from the estate agent- any fluffy specks that come off when applying pressure with your finger are probably mold), I'm never going to consider a ground-floor room again.
-Have your proof of income ready
-Easiest if you're an employee
-Bring your bank books and any relevant invoices etc.
-Be ready to substantiate your reasons for moving
-Be ready to share relevant contact details
-Be prepared to wait ~4 working days for the application to go through
-Be available. You will likely be called by guarantor companies, management companies/landlords
There are a lot of articles, forum posts etc. on renting apartments in Japan, all of which are pretty easily accessible from Google; however, I thought I'd share my experience on background checks for renting, which I couldn't personally find much information about.
So, I'd found some places on athome.jp that I liked, emailed the estate agent involved, and arranged a meeting. As seems pretty typical, none of the places I'd found were available, but they showed me some other places instead. I found one I liked, and we headed back to the office to start the application.
During the application (which took about an hour) I filled out a couple of forms. You might save a minute or so by knowing your birth date in the Japanese calendar. You'll probably save considerably more time if you're not self-employed. I am self-employed, so I also had to show reasonable proof that I could make the rent. I had 2 months worth of invoices (they would have preferred 3) and my bank book, of which they took copies.
They also wanted to know the reason I was moving to Tokyo. Now, in my head, the reason is that I'm more likely to find a research position in Tokyo than in rural Japan; however, in actuality I'm only in relatively preliminary discussions with one of the professors over here. Nonetheless, I opened my big mouth, assuming any old reason would do. This actually ended up with me having to provide the aforementioned professor's contact details (thankfully the professor is a nice guy, and was willing to help out), and these were not just retained by the estate agent, but passed on to both the guarantor company and the apartment's management company. To try and avoid making myself look like a complete ass from my prospective professor's point of view, I stressed to the estate agent, guarantor company, and management company that unless something firm was decided upon, my main subsistence was from my translation work.
At some point, and I don't recall exactly why, the estate agent took a copy of my PhD certificate. It was probably relevant to something I said.
After making the application on Saturday, I got phone calls from the guarantor company and management company on Monday and Tuesday, respectively. Basically they just went over the contents of the forms I'd filled on Saturday, and concentrated on the weakest part, being the reason for moving, to which I basically said moving to Tokyo will also be helpful for my translation work, but I intend to do research if possible. I think they were also keen to double check my earnings.
On Wednesday, I got the call from the estate agent to say the application had been successful. Just 4 days from applying! I'm pretty thrilled about that: I thought they were going to keep me hanging for at least a week, and I was half-sure they were going to reject it.
On reflection, I'm not sure how useful my case is. I imagine most people will not be self-employed, which will mean they have all the proof of income and reasons necessary to make things as smooth as possible. Also, perhaps having a professor (and a PhD) to vouch for me made a difference? Mine is a pretty unique case, so all I can really offer in advice is to have all your proof of income and be ready to substantiate your reasons for moving. For example, I really should have contacted the professor beforehand.
Still, as far as time scales go, you can probably expect to wait just a few days for the check to go through before you know you'll be able to move in.
P.S.
Lastly, if possible, I advise using a Japanese-speaking estate agent, I went both the a gaijin-friendly and to a normal estate agent, and found that the normal estate agent tended to have the better deals, or in the very least was more inclined to show them to me. If you have the patience to go to 2 or 3 estate agents, then I would highly advise it.
Oh, and never take flats on the ground floor. Maybe my nose has been over-sensitized by damp, dingy England, but the first-floor apartments I viewed universally smelled of mold. Given that I've lived in a house for the last year, and that the ground floor here is fine, I didn't really believe it, but having actually gone to 3 first-floor rooms and taken a good whiff (as well as inspect the cupboards for mold, and found it in 2 of them: use a torch or the light on your phone and look at the corners of the most difficult to clean part of the cupboard, usually the underside of the lowest shelf to the floor -ignore any strange looks from the estate agent- any fluffy specks that come off when applying pressure with your finger are probably mold), I'm never going to consider a ground-floor room again.
Saturday, August 9, 2014
Technology and translation
Before I got into freelance translation, I thought of it as completely detached from computer translations. Indeed, when we talk about Computer-Assisted Translation (CAT), we are not referring to a computer translating for us, rather we're referring to the fact specialised software is used to assist in the translation.
Every now and then, I come across some complaints in the translation industry about technology, usually this centres on CAT tools, but here is an extreme example: In it, a translator is described who essentially was using a typewriter and fax machine into the age of email and word processing. Granted, to continue doing that, they must have been both an excellent translator and precise typist; however, resisting technology in today seems like a very, very bad idea.
Let me explain. A good CAT tool today will analyse the sentence you are currently translating, search through your previous translations, and if a decent enough match is found, it will automatically perform a translation. This spares the translator anything between 10-100% of the time translating that sentence (depending on how well the current context matches the context of the previously translated sentence). Clearly, anyone already using such tools has a competitive advantage in terms of speed. They can also offer lower rates.
The problem with CAT tools is that often one is forced to offer a lower rate, because the translation agencies know the translator is doing less less hours of work for the same work. Thus, you either keep up with technology or spend longer on a project for which you'll be paid less. At the moment, the situation isn't too bad: only one of the agencies I work for requests a lower rate for translations due to the CAT tools' ability to assist with some of the document.
However, are CAT tools going to become more or less efficient at this? I think you can guess the answer. At the moment, the CAT tool spiel touts that they make translation 20% faster (or more, depending on which spiel you're looking at). As technology progresses translators will be spending less time translating, and more time checking the CAT tool's work.
Then of course, at some point one of the big technology companies is going to come out with a computer that can do the whole thing for you, then we'll only need to review. Seriously. Did you imagine 15 years ago that you could ask a phone the weather, or mark appointments in the calendar for you? I'm possibly not being realistic*, but it is undeniable that the situation can only become more technology dependent.
*I imagine that when it comes to increasing translation speed, CAT tools will find it progressively difficult as they push past +50%. But machine translation is a bit of a black box to me: words go in one side and half-understandable gibberish comes out the other. The problem is that machine translation only needs to get to the point where words go in one side and really bad English comes out the other before one can basically say "we don't need translators any more! But we are hiring reviewers!". There are already companies that offer human-edited machine translations. The other problem with this being a "black box" is that is difficult for people on the outside to work out when the algorithms are going to reach that level of proficiency.
Every now and then, I come across some complaints in the translation industry about technology, usually this centres on CAT tools, but here is an extreme example: In it, a translator is described who essentially was using a typewriter and fax machine into the age of email and word processing. Granted, to continue doing that, they must have been both an excellent translator and precise typist; however, resisting technology in today seems like a very, very bad idea.
Let me explain. A good CAT tool today will analyse the sentence you are currently translating, search through your previous translations, and if a decent enough match is found, it will automatically perform a translation. This spares the translator anything between 10-100% of the time translating that sentence (depending on how well the current context matches the context of the previously translated sentence). Clearly, anyone already using such tools has a competitive advantage in terms of speed. They can also offer lower rates.
The problem with CAT tools is that often one is forced to offer a lower rate, because the translation agencies know the translator is doing less less hours of work for the same work. Thus, you either keep up with technology or spend longer on a project for which you'll be paid less. At the moment, the situation isn't too bad: only one of the agencies I work for requests a lower rate for translations due to the CAT tools' ability to assist with some of the document.
However, are CAT tools going to become more or less efficient at this? I think you can guess the answer. At the moment, the CAT tool spiel touts that they make translation 20% faster (or more, depending on which spiel you're looking at). As technology progresses translators will be spending less time translating, and more time checking the CAT tool's work.
Then of course, at some point one of the big technology companies is going to come out with a computer that can do the whole thing for you, then we'll only need to review. Seriously. Did you imagine 15 years ago that you could ask a phone the weather, or mark appointments in the calendar for you? I'm possibly not being realistic*, but it is undeniable that the situation can only become more technology dependent.
*I imagine that when it comes to increasing translation speed, CAT tools will find it progressively difficult as they push past +50%. But machine translation is a bit of a black box to me: words go in one side and half-understandable gibberish comes out the other. The problem is that machine translation only needs to get to the point where words go in one side and really bad English comes out the other before one can basically say "we don't need translators any more! But we are hiring reviewers!". There are already companies that offer human-edited machine translations. The other problem with this being a "black box" is that is difficult for people on the outside to work out when the algorithms are going to reach that level of proficiency.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)