From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Various ramblings...
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 92 18:58:09 GMT

In article <1992Aug15.164156.16540@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:
>In  <1992Aug15.072142.24961@menudo.uh.edu>  kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown) writes:
>
>> So yes, I've learned.  But my point remains: whenever you don't know
>> what you're doing, the consequences can be severe.
>
>Stage shows do openings out of town, to try it out and check out the
>audience reaction before trying to open on Broadway.  If you go to
>someplace where nobody knows you, and just "let yourself go" without
>trying to analyze every action to death, then if you make a fool out
>of yourself, so what?  Just don't go back there.

This is definitely a good piece of advice--it's much easier to experiment
with new behaviors when you're in a completely unfamilliar area with
people you've never met before.  (You shouldn't be too self-conscious
either--I think it was Fran Leibowitz who observed that few people would
be self-conscious at all if they knew just how little attention everyone
else was paying to them--you'd probably be surprised with just how much
more you can get away with than you'd expect.)

>> Yes, clearly.  So the question is: how do you do things intelligently
>> without appearing to be intelligent?
>>
>> That is, what's the difference (to the outside observer) between "showing
>> off how smart you are" and using your intelligence whenever you can?

The most important difference is "who is the observer making the 
judgment?" 

>> That's not what I was referring to.  I was referring to the fact that the
>> subject matter that would be of interest to most people on this subject
>> is rather sparse, i.e. not very wide or deep.
>
>Personally, I agree - once you get beyond what happens in a microwave, there's
>not much to say.  But nevertheless, "cat people" can talk about their pets
>for hours.

Indeed--I've had to flee parties that have been taken over by multi-hour
long stories of "my cat did the cutest thing last week...."

[about getting into better shape]
>> Yes, I could.  It would take a great deal of time, a great deal of
>> effort, and a great deal of money to do it right, i.e. without killing
>> myself in the process.  My brother's into bodybuilding, so I've done
>> some studying of the subject.
>
>Who said anything about bodybuilding?  If you're flabby, you could
>work on that without trying to turn yourself into Mr. America.  And
>it takes time and effort, but *not* necessarily a lot of money.

There's nothing that says that exercise has to be all that time-consuming
or expensive--you can pick up a pretty good used bicycle for under $100
(I've gotten some decent racing and touring bikes for $10 at garage sales)
and an hour or two of serious riding every other day would do a lot 
towards increasing your fitness level.  As far as weights are concerned,
if you're not planning on competing, a half-hour to an hour long high-
intensity workout should be plenty--indeed, for someone at your current
level of fitness, anything longer would be counterproductive.  (In fact,
there are some competitive bodybuilders who work out for less than half
an hour.)

Trygve