How to add RSS feeds in Microsoft Outlook

It was asked of me in a comment how to add the RSS feed for my blog into a feed reader. I did not know at the time, but have since figured it out how to add it to Outlook, so I will post the instructions on how to do this now. I don’t use any feed readers and only use Outlook because I use it for e-mail, so it’s convenient. I assume the instructions would be similar for any feed reader, but if you would like me to post instructions for adding feeds to a free feed reader, just ask me in the comments and I will see if I can figure it out. The instructions will just be text for now, but I may add screenshots later if everything works correctly. Here we go:

If you scroll down to the bottom of a page on my blog, you will see two RSS links; one for “Entries” and one for Comments. Choose the one you want to import and copy the URL by either right-clicking the link and selecting “Copy link address” (or similar wording) or by clicking the link and copying it from the address bar of the browser. Now go into Outlook and right-click on “RSS Feeds” in the list of folders to the left. Select “Add a new RSS Feed” and paste the URL into the dialog box that pops up. You may have to use Ctrl + V to paste. Outlook will add the feed to your list of RSS feeds and pull in any previous entries.

There’s the instructions for how to add an RSS feed to outlook. Again if you would like instructions on adding feeds to another free reader, just ask in the comments and I’ll see what I can do.

Bible quoting

I’ve been reading/hearing about people who quote the bible and about how some of it is contradictory or that all verses aren’t treated the same for a while now. I just finished reading through some stuff on www.fallwell.com and decided to blog about what I think. Not my stance on gays (though I see nothing wrong with being gay), but rather my stance on quoting the bible.

The most recently written books in the bible are believed to have been written in the 4th century (300-399 AD), while the Old Testament is believed to have been written in the first millenium BC (1000BC-1BC). The oldest records are from around 200BC. That’s 800 years in which any number of things might have happened that changed the exact wording of the original documents. Then there’s the 2000 years since then that would also contribute to changes to the text, accidental or otherwise. If you’ve ever played “telephone” (the game where a phrase is said to one person, who then whispers it to the next person in line and so on until the end where what the last person heard is announced) you know what this means. The original documents would have to be transcribed every so often to keep the book(s) alive and relevant, and who knows if the scribes had the whole text as a source. It’s entirely possible (as mentioned in a fiction book I recently read regarding a completely different book) that the original words may have been too worn to read, so the scribes would have had to guess at the words based on the context.

And then you have to take into account not only how many different versions and wordings would surface in that period of time, but also the different versions that might appear in the same time frame, such as the King James version and the New International Version that are popular now (these are the only two I can think of off the top of my head). You can only imagine how multiple versions, all considered “correct” and “unquestionable” could be further mangled by further transcriptions and interpretations.

You also have to take into account that it is very unlikely that the original authors knew English (I think I’ve heard that they didn’t, but I don’t want to claim an assumption as fact), so you have to factor in translations, which can be brutal on exact wordings, depending on the languages. Often they can only be relied upon to get the basic idea of the message.

Basically, I feel that the bible, while holy and a good source of guidance, should not be taken literally or word-for-word. There are just too many things that could have happened in addition to the things that must have happened to trust that what you are reading is word-for-word what the original authors (the apostles, if you prefer) intended. Plus the fact that there are at least two different versions of the bible in mass publication, each with slightly different wording doesn’t help.

I could lead this into how Christianity is only slightly different from Catholicism or Judaism (as I understand them…which is not very well, I admit) and that I feel it is entirely possible that these separate religions branched apart at some point in history where different groups believed the text should be read in different ways. In a Wikipedia article I was reading (not the best source, I know…) about dating the bible, there’s a section about the Hebrew bible and the Torah which mentions books from the Christian bible. But before I get too in depth with that, I’m going to stop. That was not and is not the purpose of this particular post, though it somewhat leads to my next point (which I was going to put in anyway).

Anybody who spreads the word of the gospel, especially reverends, preachers, or any widely accepted “authority” on the subject of a particular holy text, should keep in mind that 1. It is highly unlikely that the text is word-for-word as it was originally written, and 2. that everybody will have their own interpretation of the text. They are free to preach their interpretation and to help others find guidance through faith, but they need to keep in mind that what they believe the text says, may not be what somebody else thinks it says, and neither of them is necessarily wrong. None of us were alive when Jesus walked the Earth; nobody alive today was present when the books of the Old Testament were written, and as such, nobody at all (that we can physically talk to) is the absolute authority on the bible, their religion, or their religious figure. In fact, I firmly believe that if Jesus or God were to ever physically walk this Earth in present times, they would be surprised at some of the things we do in their name and/or in worship of them. I don’t have any specific examples, but I’m sure we have taken things farther than ever intended, if worship was ever intended in the first place.

 

Unlike my previous posts, where I just posted my thoughts and left well enough alone, for this one I’m actually going to ask that you post a comment with your thoughts or opinions, not that I expect much traffic. Just, please keep it civil. I like hearing opposing viewpoints, but I can’t stand arrogant “my opinion is better than yours” talk. Any comments I feel are like this will not be approved. I am not so starved for attention/recognition/feedback/traffic/etc. that I will let anything go by. Also, as I touched on a second ago, I don’t get much traffic, which means I can easily moderate every comment one at a time. I choose to do so to help keep spam out. Between the low traffic and over aggressive spam filter, I don’t check the pending comments very often, so if you post something, don’t be surprised if it doesn’t show up for a while. (Man I did not mean for the after-word about comments to go so long. I guess I just can’t help talking too much…)

UPS residential deliveries

So, Thursday I come home from classes and find a notice from UPS saying that they couldn’t deliver a package they had for me because it required a signature and that they would be back the next day (Friday, AKA Today, AKA October 8, 2010) at “10:30 – 2:00″. I have to leave for work by 10:30 on Fridays (I work part-time), so I knew I wouldn’t be there to pick it up, but hoped that they would deliver it on Saturday. Got home today to find a note that said they couldn’t deliver it (this time because “Your written authorization is required to leave package(s)”) and that they will try again on Monday at “10:30 – 2:00″…….WHAT THE HECK UPS!? JUST HOW STUPID ARE YOU? “Let’s try to deliver packages to a residential address in the middle of the day on a work day…The recipient wasn’t there, so we’ll try again on the next work day in the same time slot. Surely they’ll be there then…Nope. They weren’t there. We’ll try one more time on the next work day in the same time slot. If they’re still not there, we’ll send it back to the sender.”

Why the heck would you assume that somebody who is not at home during work hours on a work day will be available any other work day during work hours? I understand that they only work during normal work hours, but why not have Saturday delivery? Especially for residential addresses and packages that require a signature. To me, that just makes sense. If the recipient of a package is not available during work hours on a work day, it just makes sense to assume that they are WORKING and will not be available any other work day during work hours.

If the package doesn’t need signed for and/or can be left at the address without the intended recipient physically receiving it (business deliveries or roommates) then it’s fine, but otherwise WTF?

50/50 chance?

So, I can’t decide whether to go to my late class today from 7:30 to 8:45 or skip it to go see the free screening of Kick-a** downtown at 7:00. For most people this would be a no-brainer, but I take classes very seriously and have only skipped a class once in all my 13 years (so far) of school. So, in my indecision, I decided to flip a coin. I only had a penny handy, so I used that. Anyway, I flipped it once, claiming, “Heads: skip class, tails: go to class”. It came up tails. I resigned myself to go to class, but then thought, what if? So I flipped it two more times (best 3 out of 5) and they both came up heads. I then flipped for best of 7 and got two more heads. I flipped it one final time with the mindset of this will decide it, and got tails. So I ended up with 5 heads and 2 tails. Curious as to the distribution and the implication, I tried again with Heads being to go to class and tails being skip class. I again got: heads, tails, tails, tails, tails, tails, heads. I had repeated it exactly the same way, physically, with only the interpretation differing. I really don’t want to skip class, but I really want to see the movie for free tonight with a bunch of friends. What really confuses me is that the numbers say skip class, but the one-shot’s say to go to class. By the time anybody reads this, it will probably be too late for any advice, but I just wonder what the results mean…

Bioshock 2

I bought Bioshock 2 last night, but I didn’t really get to play it until this morning. It’s pretty fun. Nothing groundbreaking so far, but there are a few improvements.  The biggest one, in my opinion, is that you’ve got plasmids in your left hand and your gun in your right, so you can quickly and easily hit someone with a plasmid mid-combat without getting hit while your switching between the two. My personal favorite combo using plasmids and weapons is shocking the enemy while I’m reloading, especially the LeadHead splicers. Then they can’t hit me while I’m “defenseless”.  Another change, some may consider it good, others bad (I could go either way) is that while there are still Gene Tonics, they are not separated into combat, engineering, and whatever the third category was (sorry). Instead, you have multiple rows (3, I think) in which you can put any tonic you have. That means you could have 7 combat tonics and 5 engineering tonics if you wanted. A downside, though, is that you only start with 4 slots unlocked. You have to buy the rest. In Bioshock (1), you had the three categories and 3 slots out of 5 (I think) unlocked at the beginning.

While the plasmids-in-left gun-in-right combat is the biggest improvement, the biggest change is that you play as a Big Daddy (but you probably already knew that). As far as I can tell, you are a Rosie model instead of a Bubbles model (Bubbles is the one with all the “eyes”, and I think Rosie is the one you dressed as in Bioshock (1) ), but you get the drill that the Big Daddies are famous for. You can use the drill attack by holding down the right trigger (on Xbox 360), or you can press the right trigger and release (or the B button, they do the same thing) to do a “drill swing”. It’s exactly as it sounds. You swing the drill to hit a close enemy. Using the drill attack (spinning the drill by holding right trigger) takes fuel. You can collect fuel as you would any other ammunition in the game, except that occasionally you can find fuel pumps that will fill up your fuel for free. I miss the wrench, though.

Hacking is also different. Be aware that in Bioshock 2, when hacking, it doesn’t pause the game. You can still move, fight, and be attacked while hacking. This may sound impossible, but not with the new hacking system. Instead of complicated mini-games, you get a simple meter with a needle going back and forth and you have to stop the needle (press the A button) when it is within a green section (or a blue section for a bonus). If you stop it in a white section, you will get a shock, be ejected from the hack mini-game, and will have to start over (you will have to hit a green/blue section multiple times to hack the system). You also have a new, unheard of gun that can shoot hacking tools to hack from a distance (helpful against turrets), auto-hack (again, at a distance. there’s no close-range auto-hacking tools), or the third ammo for that gun. I know that’s really vague and lame of me, but I haven’t gotten the third type of ammo for the gun yet and I don’t want to look it up for the sake of the article. If I did, it wouldn’t be my information.

The research camera makes a comeback, but it works a bit differently as well. Instead of a picture camera, it is a video camera, and you don’t have to buy/find film! How it works is that you equip the camera like you would any other weapon, find an enemy (but make sure you don’t have a red circle-cross-thing over the shot), and press the trigger. It will start the camera rolling and will count up research points as long as the enemy is alive (in most cases). It counts up slowly (approx 1pt/sec) if nothing is happening, but when you attack it, the research goes up by hundreds at a time. When the enemy dies, the camera automatically stops recording and you get the points added to the research track for that enemy type.

Well, I think that’s all I have to say for now. I’m not very far in yet, so I’m sure I don’t know much about the whole story, but it’s fun. I’m going to bed. ‘Night.

Borderlands of Death

Since I didn’t post last night, I’ll post this morning and hopefully again tonight…

Last night a friend came over and we played Borderlands. He brought the game because he thought I might like it. Well, after playing for awhile my Xbox Red Ring’ed. I like to say that he (my friend) or the game broke my Xbox, but I know he didn’t. And since this is the second time it’s Red Ring’ed, I’m not going to mess with sending it back.

It’s kind of ironic though, my xbox (the one that just red ring’ed for a second time) was originally his. He sold it to me when he decided to buy an Elite. As condemning as this may sound to some people, no, he had nothing to do with the Xbox red ringing. Especially after Microsoft “fixed” the problem the first time. I say “fixed” in quotations because, since it happened again, apparently they did not fix it.

Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman

Well, I just finished disc 2 out of 6 from season 3 out of 4 (that I own), and I just can’t get over how much I love this show. I always used to watch it as a kid (or at least what I could before I had to leave for school) and this is at least the second time going through the discs I have. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen them, though, and this time through I noticed a lot of things I’ve taken from the show that I never realized I had picked up. I can’t think of any specific examples, but there are some actions, perspectives, and morals in the show that I have found in common with myself. I never really thought about where my actions/perspectives/morals may have come from, but as soon as I saw them in the series, somehow I knew that I had gotten them from the show. I never realized how much I missed it or how much it has impacted my life. I just hope I never have to write a paper on it because I’d have to watch the whole series again. I would enjoy it, but it would take way too long for an English paper.

Daily ramblings

So, I’ve decided to try posting something daily, but I want a separate page for my major rants and big topics. If anybody’s interested, I will try to update this daily, but don’t expect much. Occasionally I’ll update the main page with some kind of rant or big topic, but I feel like trying this. I will try to get some length and substance, but don’t expect it.

Super Bowl XLIV

Colts lost. Damn. The colts seemed to just lose it in the last quarter. My boss at work is a Packers fan, so I expect to hear it from him, though I really don’t want to. Could be worse, he could be a Saints fan, I guess, but I still could do without working tomorrow.

Wireless Phone coverage

So I’m sure I’m not the only one to do this, but after reading one of my friend’s tweets, I decided to compare for myself the coverage maps of Verizon and AT&T. Since Verizon’s 3G coverage comparison page also included Sprint and T-Mobile, I figured I’d look into those too. Here’s what each Verizon says about each provider, and what each other provider says about their services:

First, Verizon’s voice coverage map:

AT&T’s voice coverage map:

Sprint’s voice coverage map:

T-Mobile’s voice coverage map:

Ok, there you go. There’s the voice coverage maps and legends (if needed). Verizon’s and AT&T’s maps were both pretty much, “you have it here, you don’t have it here,” really no need for a legend.

Next I’ll compare the Data/Broadband coverage:

Verizon:

AT&T:

Sprint:

T-Mobile:

Ok, there’s the data coverage. This may or may not include 3G, I’m not sure, though I doubt it. I can still access the web from my phone in certain areas without 3G or Wi-fi.

Finally, I’ll compare Verizon’s 3G claims side-by-side with the claims of the other providers. The maps from the providers will be the same as above, but put in again for easier comparison.

Verizon claims their 3G coverage is:

Verizon 3G coverage map

Verizon also says their Broadband coverage is:

Some small differences, though I can’t say for sure that the Broadband coverage is all 3G. It seems most likely that if you were to overlay the 3G map over the Broadband map, the places that are left as blue or green would have Broadband access, but not 3G.

Verizon claims AT&T’s 3G coverage to be:

Again, AT&T’s data coverage is:

On a side note, Verizon’s map of AT&T’s 3G coverage looks a bit similar to AT&T’s Mobile TV coverage map, doesn’t it? (see below):

(Just in case you were wondering, Verizon’s mobile tv coverage map isn’t much different than AT&T’s.)

So, while I do have to say the same thing regarding data coverage vs. 3G, AT&T does say (copied + pasted from the AT&T website),

AT&T has the nation’s fastest 3G network. This network covers 233 million people or 75% of the population. All AT&T 3G devices connect to AT&T’s EDGE network covering 301 million people or 96% of the population. With both 3G and EDGE coverage, customers can access the Internet, send e-mail, surf the Web, stream music, download videos, send photos, text, talk and more. The only difference — with some data applications, 3G is faster than EDGE. AT&T’s GPRS network covers 303 million people, allowing you to talk, text, e-mail and access basic websites optimized for wireless.

So, even if Verizon’s map of AT&T’s 3G coverage is accurate, AT&T’s 3G coverage reaches 75% of the population just fine. So while 25% of people may be out of luck there, Verizon probably has to charge more to cover the cost of all that 3G coverage that a minimum number of people use.

Edit: So I just found a page on AT&T’s site that seems to be a rebuttal to Verizon’s commercials. It’s here: http://www.att.com/truthabout3g.

Next is Verizon’s map of Sprint’s 3G coverage:

vs Sprint’s Data coverage map:

Finally, Verizon’s map of T-Mobile’s 3G coverage:

vs T-Mobile’s data coverage map:

There you have it. A comparison of each provider’s coverage using maps provided by their own sites. I tried to be impartial, and I feel I have succeeded. I personally like AT&T the best, but only because I am a loyalist and have had AT&T since before cellphones became mainstream (our landline provider was AT&T). My preference is not based on any data, factual or fictional, and I really have nothing against the other providers. If I’ve offended anybody who happens upon this post (not that I expect anybody to read this), please let me know in a civil manner, and I will do my best to resolve the problem.