Mainstreamed.

I guess the point of people being in social media, blogs, YouTube, whatever is popularity. Book authors tour around promoting their newest book so they can gain fame, money, and the surplus money that will allow them to keep touring. Pleasing the public is the twenty-first century average American dream.

People flaunt that they have X amount of followers, or friends or whatever, but why do we do this? Is it purely human nature, but is there an actual psychological reason, a purpose to this madness? For that, I guess the answer is the same as if you wanted to know why people watch Daytime Television or worship celebrities. To this, I turn to fellow Interneteur, MrXibar22 on Youtube.

He tells me that we follow celebrities because in our eyes, they are at the pinnacle of perfection, and that is what we strive to be---perfect.

But in this mess of people attempting to be popular, to be discovered, to be "Mainstreamed" if you will, there are the group of rebels.

So basically there are three types of people:

• The people wanting purely mainstreamed (Close-minded individuals who are exposed to only what society 'likes')
• The anti-mainstreamers who tolerate the pop culture (who prefer the alternative styles) 
• The Rebels who wish nothing but the underground. 

As for me, I am in between the first and second. I like what I like, and not what I don't. It'd be nice to be discovered, but its not what I am looking for. Oh, and here's something new for the sidebar:

Thoughts for a Monorail

So today we decided to go to the local pool because of the looming haze and 90 degree temps in Pittsburgh. Unfortunately, once we get there it starts thundering, so I am forced to be outside of the pool, and talk to one of my neighbors.

Together we (with my chief engineering) came up with an idea that would cut back on emissions, gas prices, and the multiple car crashes that are caused by so many cars.

Can guess what I am talking about (see title)

Okay, so the thought is to eliminate at least one lane in each direction of every major highway and replace it with a monorail line. Monorails were first used in the 1950's, and have been put on the backburner for being considered an actual mode of transportation for the same reason that Amtrak is not used so much anymore. Basically, it runs on tracks.

The question I have is that if you run a high-powered monorail system between larger cities (IE, Pittsburgh-Philly-NYC) and charge based on the length of the trip, then it should pay for itself within 10 years?

While I am thinking of this, the government wants to split spending thirty-seven different ways based on need. Well, if my thought works out the way I think it will, you'll save on DOT costs... and all you really need to maintain is track and cars. As is, some cities like Seattle have adopted monorails, and others like NYC already have subways. Standardize some stuff, and we could save the country money, and have a pretty cool way of getting around.

The pool had to close, and we never got to swim, but we did have a pretty good idea in our heads.