Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Interesting Links for 24-04-2012

Original post on Dreamwidth - there are comment count unavailable comments there.

All in all an effective and reasonably priced product - 3 Stars.

I imagine soon the hair remover will carry a warning "Do not put on knob and bollocks, even of people who disregard safety warnings" :)

Hah. "Warning for people who do not read warnings: Do not put on knob and bollocks. Srsly."

Maybe soon the entirity of facebook will be hidden and it will just evaporate :)

Huh. I can't believe I didn't think of waiting here and waiting for asteriods to come to us... I don't know how plausible it is, but I love living in a world where "asteroid mining company" is in the headlines, after just about giving up on space exploration.

I think it's great - the SpaceX stuff has me convinced that we're entering a world of more affordable, private, space travel.

Yeah, me too.

Lots of stuff out there to go and get and bring back.

Which in turn triggers lots of demand for R&D and infrastructure. Also, opportunities for piggy-backing science onto commerical ventures– I’d be willing to bet a small that asteroid miners find out more about asteroid in a decade than the whole of science has found out in 10,000 years.

I’m also interested in what having access to space-borne rare materials does to geo-politics. Probably puts a ceiling price on the economic blackmail and reduces the incentives for colonialism.

Well, if we can cheaply mine them, and get them back to earth, yes.

If it's even slightly economic then that at least gives us a reason to start building a space elevator :->

(Which will also require all sorts of future-o-tech.)

Exciting time ahead.

Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive,
But to be young was very heaven!

"Why the Super Mario Movie Sucked"

In fact, apparently they sucked just the right amount: more than enough that no-one actually LIKED them, but not quite enough they got a cult following who liked them "ironically" for being the worst movie ever made. Or at any rate, I don't know if that's true, but I'd literally forgotten anyone even tried to make a mario movie :)

Which is a shame, because I agree it was PROBABLY going to be a disaster, but a Mario that had the cheery-but-scary vibe of the game could be quite a good story if someone with a clear creative vision got to make it up.

I've seen it. It's an appalling mess, and the explanation for that makes sense. It's a shame it wasn't at least a more interesting mess.

I'm not overly concerned with the part of that Facebook thing about companies needing to buy into advertising in order to push their own adverts onto facebook users. I'll agree it sucks for individuals setting up pages that aren't adverts, sure - but if you're a business wanting to use FB to advertise for free, then what a surprise - they want to make money from you as you try to use facebook to make money for your own business. That sounds completely fair to me. Saying "Oh but my page won't be visible if I don't pay!" really won't garner any sympathy (for a company) from me, since their adverts in any media, space or form will rarely be visible unless they at some point pay for some part of the advertising!

That's the thing - splashing the place up with adverts feels different to showing status updates from groups you've voluntarily followed.

By all means charge them for the former, but the latter feels wrong to me.

Of course, if FB actually charged people for their pages in the first place this wouldn't be an issue.

There was a computer game a while ago (I can't remember which one, but I think it was a modern day shooty thing) that had adverts for real-world companies/products. Their justification as I recall, which I agreed with to an extent, was that people are used to seeing adverts and so having adverts for real products wouldn't break immersion in any way. It can be done badly (real world product adverts in a sci-fi or otherwise unreal setting, or a very limited range of adverts so you see the same ones over and over... both of which City of Heroes was guilty of when they experimented with it)

I'd be interested in statistics, if any exist, on what percentage of internet users see adverts generally and what percentage doesn't (through adblock etc, although obviously some kinds of advert can't be blocked).

I don't know if you mean by "worse" in the sense of people not clicking or people clicking through!

Possibly the lack of people clicking is due to ads being more intrusive and annoying! Oh look, I want to read a news article and an ad expanded to take up the whole page, possibly immediately playing video and sound! Guess which ad I will deliberately avoid clicking on even if it interests me!

Edited at 2012-04-24 03:51 pm (UTC)

I bet you could get more click-throughs if people could click by shooting the ad.

I don't know if it would help with sales, but at least people would be exposed to the amazing hypnotic power of larger ads.

This is one of the things which I don't like about Blade Runner - the Atari logos now date it. I think it's better to use made-up companies, such as Umbrella Corp in the Resident Evil franchise.

You could _maybe_ envisage a scenario in which somebody buys that brand in the future and publishes games under it once again.

Another example would be the Pan-Am moonshuttle in 2001.

I think that with things like that you have to see them as artefacts of their time. It's not like 2001 isn't clearly a movie made in the 1960s, or Bladerunner in the 80s.

Aww, I was hoping to see Christina Hendricks and Elizabeth Moss bowling. Good video, though.:P

Yeah, more women would have been good.

Oh HBO. The way television ought to be made.

Almost - you're still having to subscribe to a channel - HBO2Go (or whatever it's called) is only available to subscribers.

I'm not convinced that "Make episodes, sell them individually online" would be successful, but I'd be happy to see someone try it.

The 22% and 25% figures on the attitudes to race survey were of English people, not British people.

And it seems a bit strong to say that identifying nationality with ethnicity is necessarily racist. I mean, even Sunny Hundal doesn't do this in the article, and he's usually 100% politically correct loon. It's not the definition I use*, but I wouldn't think ill of anyone who did.

* For what it's worth, I'd say someone who was born and brought up in England and whose four grandparents and two parents were all born and brought up in England, regardless of skin colour, could justifiably claim to be English. Someone who doesn't meet one or more of those criteria would be rather less English. My parents and grandparents were all born and brought up in England but I was born and brought up in Wales. I certainly consider myself less English than I would do if I was born and brought up in England, and less Welsh than if my parents and grandparents were born and brought up in Wales.

I'd also say that someone is also less English if they claim some other nationality and / or support another nation's sports team.

Identifiying _anything_ with ethnicity is necessarily racist. It's what racist means - discriminating on the basis of ethnicity.

I'm with you when it comes to definitions, although not quite as strict. I agree that being raised in England, and feeling that you're intrinsically a part of it (and vice versa) is the biggest thing, and having parents/grandparents who also felt that way is going to have a big influence on that. So I was born in England, both my parents were born in England, but because they were both the children of immigrants there was (and is) a feeling of separation, of knowing that I came here. Once there are no living members of the family your whole life who weren't born here, I suspect that feeling is quite different.

But I'd argue that identifying doesn't mean discriminating. There's no suggestion in the article that the 22% and 25% wanted fewer rights etc for the people they thought were less-English-because-they-were-less-white.

By "discriminating", do you mean "acting against someone"? In which case, absolutely, they may well not do. One can believe that someone isn't really English and not attempt to deny them citizenship.

Identifiying _anything_ with ethnicity is necessarily racist.
traits, background, allegiance, or association
How is that racist?

I was meaning the subset of ethnic that refers to race. Clearly culture and race can be entirely distinct.

So does that mean positive discrimination, such as affirmative action in the US is necessarily racist because it's based on ethnicity?

My favourite weird one here, which I've probably mentioned before, is how Sikhs and Jews are categorised as ethnic groups on the basis of religion. As such, presumably anyone who converts to either religion or who was born into it and later rejects it suddenly becomes a different ethnicity to what they were before.

Ethnicity has a variety of meanings. And "Jewish" can mean both the religion or the race.

And of course positive discrimination is racist.

I liked the Super Mario Bros movie.

I actually own the novelisation of the Mario Bros movie. I found it in a charity shop in Fort William about a decade ago for pocket change and, of course, bought it.

It's exactly as you'd expect.

Oh my God.could I borrow it?

Assuming I still have it it's back home in the highlands but I'll get a relative to bring it down for you, provided you promise to post a review of it :p!

You are viewing andrewducker