Amusement

You are currently browsing the archive for the Amusement category.

Avatar Movie Poster

Avatar Movie Poster


It has been a busy holiday season, but I finally made it to see James Cameron’s film Avatar yesterday. I was amazed.

I’ll not endeavor to write a full review with spoilers, but I’d like to say that the combination of a good Science Fiction story and Weta Digital’s groundbreaking effects make this one of the most impressive films to see. There has never been a cinema experience like it.

I did go to see it in Digital3D, which I feel significantly changes the experience. I’m generally not a big fan of 3D. The glasses normally give me a headache, and I find myself distracted from the film because I’m busy wondering why this film needed to be in 3D. I would say that this is only the second film I felt benefitted from the Digital3D experience, the other being Henry Selick’s Coraline.

The story of the film is quite good. I thought it was somewhat reminiscent of Orson Scott Card’s Xenocide, but wasn’t derivative.

If you haven’t seen Avatar yet, you have something to look forward to. I’m certain to see it again before it leaves theaters.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • FriendFeed
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • TwitThis

Garden Noam Chomsky (via Boing Boing)

Garden Noam Chomsky (via Boing Boing)

Please forgive me for adding nothing original or profound to this. I merely wanted to post this so more people see it. It is an item posted last week on Boing Boing, and replayed in countless blogs, tweets and Facebook updates. I just couldn’t resist. (Click on the image to read the full story at Boing Boing

Just a quick update: Last week, when I wrote “I really loved your book! Would you sign my Kindle?”, I knew it was only a matter of time before it happened. Well, thank you David Sedaris, you have pioneered the ridiculous once again. Here’s a link to the New york Times article Kindle Joins a Literary Ritual: Authors Can Autograph It.

That’s all, for now.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • FriendFeed
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • TwitThis

Tags: , ,

OK. I’m a self-professed digital enthusiast. I’m a technology teacher and consultant. You’d think I would place myself firmly in the camp of digital over analog. MP3 over vinyl. Photoshop over the darkroom. Kindle over books.

Preposterous.

And yet… in a practical sense, I do listen to digital music, not records (in fact, I haven’t owned a turntable for years, and my old records have been gathering copious amounts of dust). I use a digital camera almost exclusively now. And I own a Kindle.

Back in the mid-1990’s I was happily working at one of the larger independent bookstores in the country and reading voraciously. There were no digital book readers. The half-millennial continuum of writing and printing remained intact. We in the book trade (even those of us with a strong interest in technology) were happily oblivious to the coming shift in the industry that would come from online retail and digital readers.

Now, that continuum is showing signs of stress. It is not broken, but it is suddenly becoming clear that the path has taken a new direction. Publishing is not the same. Book-selling is not the same. Books themselves are not the same.

What is a book?

If you had asked me this question in 1995 I would have had no trouble answering the question with confidence. A book is a physical object which serves as a container for written or graphical works. It is a collection of pages (arranged in signatures), bound along one edge between two protective covers. As physical objects, not all books are equal. Some are hard bound with nice thick pages. Others are cheap paperbacks with a very uniform, standardized feel. There are as many varieties of book in a physical sense as there are written books in a textual sense.

While I was working at the Tattered Cover Bookstore in Denver, I got great pleasure from attending book signings. Nothing thrilled me more than spending $25 (a considerable sum from my meager bookstore earnings) on a brand new hardcover and standing in line to have the author sign the book for me. In fact, as I worked there, I often got to meet some of these writers in the employee break-room or smoking area. And so I have a nice collection of signed firsts from such luminous characters as William Gibson, Kurt Vonnegut and Peter Matthiessen.

In these days of Amazon Kindles and Sony Readers, I’ve been trying very hard to keep up with the flood of thought on publishing, but lets face it, the Internet is far too vast to allow anyone to “keep up”. Some interesting posts include:

Follow the Reader: The Outer Limits of Publishing
A Newbie’s Guide to Book Publishing: More on the Amazon Kindle (author JA Konrath’s fascinating discussion of the economics of self-publishing on Kindle)
Kindle Notes And Highlights Now Accessible On the Web
Michael Hart, the inventor of eBooks, says the Kindle won’t go
Screenwriter of Complex Ideas Experiments With Kindle
and this favorite Got a Kindle, but miss that booky smell? This spray is for you

(These are just a couple of the more interesting posts I’ve stumbled upon in the last couple days)

Suddenly is seems that technology has propelled us forward into a highly convenient but awkward period in the history of books. Considering all the buzz surrounding these devices as technical accomplishments, and our relative inability to make any sense out of the legal foundations for the publishing industry, we should reasonably expect a very chaotic and fun period ahead. Already we have factions forming: The EFF, Creative Commons, Larry Lessig, Cory Doctorow, and others against a faction of reactionaries and nostalgics exemplified by Mark Helprin (see his May 2007 NYT Op-Ed), businesses (publishers, mostly, who cannot rightfully be called reactionary or nostalgic because they represent the commercial traditions of publishing as it has progressed for 500 years.) I don’t want to go over the ancient battles between RIAA and Napster, but all this is now part of the on-going discussion about publishing, Intellectual Property rights, and, ultimately, the ability for creative people to make a living off the IP they create as well as the ability for that creative work to sustain the consuming public and the publishing & retail industries which funnel these items into us.

Honestly, I’m not much of an oracle, but I do feel that the business model is faced with a vast army of tech-wise adversaries who have more and more tools at their disposal for rendering content, and that there is no way for the publishers to win. It just isn’t possible. They’d have to spend too much money fighting against a waterfall of free technologies designed to undo DRM and copy-protection. At least, this has been my way of seeing things for the last decade.

But now I’m coming to a new way of seeing things. Not only is it technically and financially unreasonable for the established business model (the publishers, and their advocacy groups like RIAA and MPAA) to control the digital content as they wish, it is suddenly becoming possible for creative producers and artists do more without publishers. It’s small, and it does rely on a delivery platform like Amazon.com (and believe me, they are a big business when it comes to working with little individuals) but still, they are there and a person can easily offer a title for publication there and expect to generate some income. The better and smarter the writer, the more they can generate.

But here’s the rub: Amazon. I can’t say I want to see all the established publishing houses go the way of the Dodo to see Amazon.com become the new face of publishing. As altruistic as JA Konrath’s blog on self-publishing sounds to us little people, to Jeff Bezos and Amazon, it sounds like a resounding advertisement for their business model. Sony have a far less capable device in my opinion, but their content model (especially the connection to Google Books) is advantageous.

What do we do now? Bezos declared “This isn’t a device, it’s a service.” when he was hyping the first Kindle. The device (that sleek white thing you paid $400 for) is basically nothing more than a very cool Welcome mat that beckons you into the cool stream of Amazon-only content. (I know, this is not entirely fair, because there are ways to have Amazon convert content to Kindle format for you at no cost.) But try self-publishing your novel for Kindle and not making it available via Amazon. Hmmm. Now I need an eCommerce system, a way to convert my novel from text to .azw Kindle format, and a way to make such a book relevant to a market where it doesn’t exist (no downloads via Whispernet, no “Folks who bought this also bought”, no Amazon at all. In the world of online marketing, Amazon are in the Pantheon, and it is not because of the things they say about themselves and the products they sell, it’s all a part of the mechanics of how they sell.

So here’s how I get the most out of my Kindle. First, I don’t use it all the time. Rather than purchasing some aerosol canister of book scent to spray and give me that whiff of physical authenticity, I still get books from my local library (I get lots, in fact). I have several interesting newer titles that I’ve purchased from Amazon which are always available and loaded on my Kindle. These I also access from the Kindle App in my iPhone (because nothing kills me more than having to wait an hour at a Doctor or Dentist office or waiting while I get my car serviced and not having anything interesting to read. I can tap right into my Kindle books from the device or my iPhone. I really like that.

Then, I load my Kindle up with tons of stuff from Project Gutenberg. I like to read to my kids, and so I have tons of classic Children’s books loaded on the device. Andersen’s Fairy Tales, Grimm’s, Lewis Carroll, Edith Nesbitt (who is a real find), L. Frank Baum and J.M. Barrie. I have loads of books — everything from Thucydides to Poul Anderson. In all honesty, nothing says “Happy Geek” like reading Frederich Schiller’s (complete) History of the Thirty Years War as a free eText on your eBook reader. In fact, all these titles are available from Gutenberg as mobi formatted downloads (mobi is a DRM free format that is a precursor to Amazon’s .azw format and fully supported on the Kindle. The only mild inconvenience is that I have to download the content to my computer and then plug the Kindle in via USB to copy the new content. But, with a nice SD card, the Kindle can accomadate a ton of books, and I load a GB of free mobi books on mine just to ensure I never run out of good reading. I still have ample room for Amazon purchases.

I have no regrets about buying a Kindle: I am still a proud card-carrying Library patron, and I’m pleased to now say that I think Project Gutenberg is not just a good idea (which it has always been), but a great place to get reading material. I hate reading off computer screens any more than I have to, and the Kindle is a great electronic approximation of the printed page.

Now all we need to figure out is how we can get authors to autograph our electronic books.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • FriendFeed
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • TwitThis

Tags: , , , ,

Slings & Arrows (2003)

Slings & Arrows (2003)

Americans, I am sorry to admit, have a very strange relationship to our northern neighbor, Canada. (Please don’t laugh at the Wikipedia link, Canadians. Many American’s will find it useful.) For the most part, we’re almost completely clueless about Canada, and all things Canadian. I wonder if this is the reason why I only recently came across the absolutely brilliant Canadian TV show Slings & Arrows?

The show is set at at the fictional New Burbage Shakespeare Festival in Southern Ontario. It only ran for three short seasons, each following the staging of (and story from) a different Shakespeare play. Season 1 starts with the celebrated star of a past staging of Hamlet who has since fallen on hard times, Geoffery Tennant (brilliantly played by Paul Gross) who comes back to the New Burbage Festival after the accidental (and gruesome) death of his former mentor and the festival’s long-time artistic director, Oliver Welles (played by Stephen Ouimette).

The show is written by Susan Coyne (who also plays Festival secretary Anna Conroy), Mark McKinney of The Kids in the Hall and Saturday Night Live fame (who also plays Festival General Manager Richard Smith-Jones) and Bob Martin (who plays a lesser character and is credited as “Creative Producer”). Susan Coyne is a well-known Canadian actress and writer and is the author of a memoir Kingfisher Days. The show has a core group of characters who appear in all episodes and all three seasons, then others who come for just a season.

Season 1 is adapted from and deals with a production of Hamlet.
Season 2 is primarily focused on Macbeth, but it also has a subplot dealing with the production of Romeo and Juliet.
Season 3 is King Lear.

So, if you, like me, are guilty of gross ignorance of excellent Canadian cultural achievements, get thee to Netflix and bless thy queue with all three seasons. If you love theater, Shakespeare, comedy, or if you just think you would love Canada if only you knew her, do not let Slings & Arrows pass you by. This is some of the finest television of the last decade.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • FriendFeed
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • TwitThis

Tags: , ,


I couldn’t let this one go. Sorry.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • FriendFeed
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • TwitThis

Let’s face it, who can afford it anymore to stalk top celebrities? You think it costs nothing to get into Brad and Angelina’s kitchen? To follow Paris and Miley to each and every port of call? Most of us can hardly afford our monthly star map budgets these days. So what is a celebutard-craving wanna-be stalker to do?

The answer: Twitter.

From Shaq, to Ashton and Demi, P Diddy, Ellen Degeneres, even Lance Armstrong; they’re all there. And the cool thing is, with Twitter, you can follow them all at the same time, for free.

I joined Twitter a year or so ago, and found it was mainly a useful tool to communicate the occasional short, odd thought to a select group of fellow knuckleheads who happened to take an interest in such things (namely, little old me). I amassed a modest following of 18-20, and committed myself to keeping up with about the same number. There was always something reciprocal about it; you follow me, and I’ll follow you.

There’s a service called Twitalyzer where you can enter a twit’s name and get some ranking information. I just entered mine, indigitis, and find that I have an Influence score of 0.1 (what they deem, “just emerging” as if I were suddenly going to explode in some volcanic act of relevance), a Signal-to-Noise ratio of 12.5% (considered low), a Generosity rating of 0.0% (”very, very, very low” thank you very much for coming up with a euphimism for none-at-all), a Velocity score of 1.1% (again, “very very low” and decreasing, but surprisingly high for a person who sits as much as I do), and finally, a Clout rating of 0.1% (still, “very, very low” and apparently unchanged for some time).

I ought to feel very bad. Very bad indeed.

So, let me now compare myself to Ashton Kutcher. Ashton is a very famous person, married to Demi Moore, who does some not completely unwatchable commercials for Nikon Camera, and played the character Kelso on That 70’s Show. You know who he is. Ashton is known as aplusk on Twitter. Here are his Twitalyzer rankings…

Influence: 76.3 (”astonishing”)
Signal: 100% (”astonishingly high”)
Generosity: 6.3% (”very low”, but lets face it, fame isn’t about being liberal in giving or sharing.)
Velocity: 4.3% (”very, very low” but what, 4 or 5 times my own?)
Clout: 100% (you guessed it, “astonishingly high”)

So what really makes Ashton so much more influential than me on Twitter?

It’s very simple: he has 532,000+ followers. I currently have 18 (I would have 22 but I blocked a few because they looked like they were getting ready to target me in a sinister multi-level marketing scheme, or they provided no profile information except some dubious web address with the word “viagra” featured in the domain name… not the kind of riff-raff I’m looking to have read my precious tweets.

I’ll leave poor Mr. Kutcher alone.

In fact, I conducted a bit of an experiment. I decided to follow a number of so-called “Celebrities” for a while, just to see what I could learn.

Here are some of the luminaries I’ve been following (in no particular order):

Ashton Kutcher (and for a week or two I followed Demi Moore just so I could make sense of some of Ashton’s tweets)
Eddie Izzard
Al Yankovic
David Lynch
Tina Fey
John Cleese
Stephen Fry
Lance Armstrong
Al Gore

Only one of the people on this list have I met personally, in a social situation (if almost running over a person on the Hana Highway could be construed as a social situation. A story I’ll tell some other time). None of the above have reciprocated to follow me. Also, I must say to the credit of most of the people I’ve chosen to name here, they have, for the most part, not been that bad to follow. The truly offensive and pointless celebrity twits I followed are not being named here. In my opinion, Tina Fey is the ultimate Twitceleb. She posts about 5-8 times a year, and her posts are invariably scintillating.

Alright so here we are getting to the ultimate point of this post. Why on earth would a person want to be one of half a million people listening in to the frequent, mostly incoherent, at times completely stupid >140 character ramblings of a person who you don’t know except from their over-produced music, TV sitcom, or what-have-you? And why would anyone want to participate in such a circus?

Here are my thoughts on being a happy twit.

1. Limit the number of people you follow who do not follow you in return. I assure you you’ll spend more time communicating and engaging with interesting people than reading stupid unimportant crap nobody cares about. Also, most people set their account to only accept direct messages from the people they follow, so if Martha Stewart’s not following you, she’ll not get your giddy, 140 character compressed recipe for coq au vin that you frantically thumbed into your Blackberry.

2. If you do decide to follow someone because you like the character they played on Bones, make sure to remember that you can drop them at any time. Just because you are following Al Gore on Twitter doesn’t mean you have to credit him with starting the Internet or that the ozone layer over West Texas will suddenly collapse if you decide you’ve got better things to read.

3. Get as much mileage out of Twitter as you can. I have my Facebook page set to automatically update my status from my tweets. Find a good iPhone or Blackberry interface so you can pollute the twitterverse with the occasional random observation. You are far less likely to post interesting tweets while sitting at home watching Law and Order than you are when you are standing in line at the grocery store or otherwise engaged in the real world. Seriously, someone I was following recently attempted to post a synopsis to an hour long episode of Stargate in tweets. It took 6 or 7 consecutive tweets, none of which made any sense and all of which were painful like bad dentistry to read. Find a suitable description somewhere on the Net, or write your heart out on your blog, get a tinyURL, and in one elegant coup de pouce you can spare your followers the rush to remove you from their following list.

4. Stay the hell away from sites like Twitalyzer if you find it hard to accept that you are not as popular as P Diddy or Lance Armstrong. Be happy with 15-20 knuckleheads following you. Look at the bright side of things. Half a million people are not reading your tweets, and this is a good thing. If you don’t believe me, follow a celebrity for a while. You’ll see. They generally adhere to the same crap-to-interest ratio as everyone else. (I’m going to quote Britney Spears‘ profile: “Yes! This is the real Britney Spears! We’ve got updates from her team, her website and yes, even Britney herself!” Does this make you imagine a minivan-load of Britney’s personal assistant’s all struggling to update her twitter page? How many junior high graduates does this “team” consist of? Is Britney Spears real or just a character from a Firesign Theater routine run haywire?)

5. Finally, use Twitter as a supplement to RSS. A simple Twitter iPhone or Blackberry app is all it takes to keep up on breaking news, just by following the NYTimes, GuardianTech, Boing Boing, or even your local TV affiliate or newspaper. You can and should also follow individual journalists and bloggers who you find valuable. In my experience, these people follow good etiquette on Twitter and post links to new blog items or stories and generally don’t go too crazy posting personal items. This is a broad category of sources to follow. I follow several newspapers (like RSS some of the larger papers break up their Twitter accounts into logical divisions. I Follow the New York Times Books as well as their Obituaries), journals, publishers, journalists, blogs, and one or two non-profits, like the EFF. Heck, I even follow a few of my favorite writers and thinkers, less with an interest in getting a glimpse of their personal life than to keep up with their blogs. Case in point, I’ve been following Neil Gaiman, and through his tweets I learned that Public Radio International featured Jane Curtin reading one of his stories on a recent podcast, Selected Shorts.

If Twitter is not a useful, lightweight way to stay connected to the people, ideas and information you find useful, get off. You’ll be far happier and more productive. If you have heard about Twitter (every major newspaper you can think of has run a story on it at least once a week for the last 3 months), think about what you want to get out of it before you get lost following people with hundreds of thousands of followers. There’s a great deal more to Twitter than following celebrities.

NOTE: I would like very much to acknowledge that I appreciate Leo Laporte’s position on the use of the term Twit, and while I have liberally peppered this blog entry with abuses of the name, I do tip the hat to Leo, This Week in Tech and the Twit Network. None of my raving is in any way related to them. In fact, Leo himself recently contributed his two cents in a good LATimes article which is certainly worth reading.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • FriendFeed
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • TwitThis

Tags: ,

Balloon Launch

Balloon Launch, originally uploaded by indigitis.

This morning we headed out early to catch the Colorado Balloon Classic’s annual Labor Day launch. Loads of photos on the indigitis flickr feed (just click on the photo to go there), or click on the Photos page.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • FriendFeed
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • TwitThis

Tags:

Baseball

It has been a very long time since I’ve taken an interest in Baseball. At one point in my life, while living for a summer in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and working for a large printing company, the allure of Brats, Beer and Baseball was so powerful that I didn’t just visit the old Brewers stadium as often as I could for games, but I actually read the sports pages in the Milwaukee Journal once or twice a week. But that was twenty years ago, and I have to admit that the MLB Strike of 1994 turned me off completely to Baseball. I lost all respect for the game and MLB as an organization. For me, the days of Baseball were forever in the past.

So, last Sunday, while in Denver with family, a cousin took my kids and I to a Colorado Rockies v. New York Mets game at Coors Field. I had a wonderful time with my kids, and even though the Rockies lost, it made me appreciate the game again, if only slightly. Unfortunately, Major League Baseball is all about big money and nothing else. Fun, like great players, seems to come and go, but the flow of cash is constant, and so Baseball continues.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • FriendFeed
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • TwitThis

/>

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • FriendFeed
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • TwitThis

« Older entries