Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives, but I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment because they’ll never come again. What we leave behind is not as important as how we’ve lived.
“If you’re not paying for it, you’re the product.”
There’s a succinct phrase floating around the Internet that goes, “If you’re not paying for it, you’re the product.” This is how Google, Facebook, and other such services operate. You’re offered these services not because of the philanthropic tendencies of these companies but rather because you have something of value that they want—your personal information. This information gets churned with the information of countless other individuals and sold to advertisers, who use it to find ways to more efficiently market their stuff. This includes targeting individuals for particular products.
“Slave to Love” is the first single released from former Roxy Music singer Bryan Ferry’s 1985 album, Boys and Girls, The single was released on 28 April 1985 and spent 10 weeks in the UK charts in 1985 and peaked at number 9. It was featured on the movie Nine 1/2 Weeks where the entire song was played in one of the scenes. This is an achingly beautiful ballad. The music has a Latin flair, a melancholy — if not downright sad — melody against a lazy, swaying samba beat. Ferry’s unique flutter of a voice is reminiscent of old-time jazz-age singers and post-war tenors. The song clearly has a 1980s aura to it, yet “Slave to Love” was not a slave to the gimmicks of the era, sounding more timeless and classic than other radio hits from the mid-’80s. The dark tone of the song reflects the inner struggle that the narrator feels, helpless and bound to passion for a woman he fears he is losing: “You’re running with me/Don’t touch the ground/ We’re the restless hearted/Not the chained and bound/ The sky is burning/A sea of flame/ Though your world is changing/I will be the same¨. ” It’s a heartbreaking lyric that Ferry caresses with an intimate delivery.
Bryan Ferry was taught by Richard Hamilton in the 1960s.
The late Richard Hamilton is sometimes viewed as the inventor of pop art. He certainly had a profound influence on one particular pop star. I interviewed Bryan Ferry last year in his Olympia studio, the walls of which are peppered with beautiful examples of British painting, mainly of the early 20th century. I asked him what was his favourite piece and he looked, for a moment, utterly perplexed, muttering, “Oh God, very hard.” But then he drifted past his collection of Wyndham Lewis and other early British modernists, to settle on a small series of five vividly colourful pictures. “That group are done by Richard Hamilton, who taught me,” said Ferry, reminiscing about his time as an art student in Newcastle Art College in the 1960s. “They are mid-sixties pop art, which I am very drawn to. His body of work doesn’t diminish in stature, it gets greater . It’s very interesting what happened with the pop artists, because it was absorbing all the great changes that happened in modern society – magazines, film, TV – and how did art cope with all that onslaught of information? I guess it rubbed off on me.”
When Ferry came to designing Roxy Music’s iconic early record sleeves, Hamilton’s influence came to bear. “Maybe the fact that I’d studied at a school which had a big pop-art thing going on helped. Marilyn Monroe was one of the big iconic graphic figures that Richard used, Andy Warhol too. She was very much a part of what was around in the media, she represented one of the most glamorous parts of our culture. Most record sleeves had a picture of the band. I thought it much cooler to have a picture of a great-looking girl in the tradition of advertising in America: they were always selling products with glamorous women, to sell cigarettes, cars, Coca Cola, whiskey, anything. It just seemed to work with the music, and the period. The solo records had pictures of me on, to distinguish them, but I never enjoyed that so much.”
When I encounter someone brand new to the Mac, either a new client or someone who reaches out to me via email about switching or having recently done so, this is the text file I send. I thought it would be nice to share this with the world. Perhaps it will be useful to you or those you love.
Democracy.Government by the people.
These are all great ideas, but they all suffer from one fatal flaw.
Which is they’re all based on the fallacious notion that people are fundamentally decent.
Give them a chance to do right and they’ll take it.
They’re not stupid, selfish, greedy,
cowardly, short-sighted worms.
Shame on the idiots who hate on Apple ideas until they’re copied by others 3-5 years later
Daniel Eran Dilger
Microsoft is still a year (and ahem) away from bringing Windows 8 and its new Metro UI to market, but Apple has already beaten the company in releasing a hardware accelerated, animated web browser. It’s called Safari 5. ..I have to say, watching Mary Jo Foley and Paul Thurrott go gaga over a Core i3 notebook computer smoothly animating tiles on the screen is just too much. If you’re in awe of Microsoft’s ability to demonstrate smoothly animated graphics on a Intel computer with enough horsepower to need a fan, you should walk to an Apple Store and launch Safari.
Or don’t even launch Safari. Just flick the touchpad with four fingers and wet your pants as Mac OS X Lion smoothy animates between the main desktop, Dashboard, and any open virtual desktops you have. HARDWARE ACCELERATED GRAPHICS!!! It’s like 2002 is already here! GPU accelerated Quartz Extreme first shipped in Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar, folks.
This isn’t brilliant futuristic technology stuff, it’s pretty basic GPU accelerated OpenGL made easy to implement by Apple via LayerKit and Core Animation. It’s been used on the iPhone since it appeared in 2007. It was new and pretty impressive back then. It’s not going to be new next year, or whenever Windows 8 ships with Metro, Microsoft’s own animated browser for web apps.
Heck, even Palm shipped Metro back in 2009 under the name webOS. Why is Microsoft getting credit for being the last company on earth to ship mainstream technology?
Do you hate freedum and love terrorists?!
Gizmodo’s Mat Honan wrote one of the blog’s definitively childish screeds yesterday, whining that “if you already hate Windows 8, then you hate technology,” brilliantly penning “I hate the term fanboy. It’s a pejorative meant to denigrate someone’s opinion” just before referring to anyone being critical of Windows 8 as being part of the “Apple Taliban.”
Just for the record, I don’t “hate” Windows 8, I’m just not impressed to see Microsoft being hailed as “futuristic” for demonstrating early betas still a year away from fruition of its copy of work Apple pioneered several years ago.
Microsoft has distracted its vaporware demo audiences with the assurance that “Tiles” are some supersonic space age post-icon concept, when really they are just animated app icons with a lot going on inside. But Metro Tiles don’t represent new technology; they’re just an example of adding flash to something that doesn’t need it.
Apple has also avoided implementing Google’s similar flash-distraction home page widgets in Android, not because it can’t master the fine art and science of packing dynamic, animated content into the context of its app launcher, but because it thinks such widgets are not a good use of processing power and battery life.
Shame on the idiots who hate on Apple ideas until they’re copied by others 3-5 years later
When I see my Android friends around me run out of battery, I agree with Apple that my ability to keep launching apps and checking messages and watching video are all better uses of my battery than having a constantly animating display of the weather on my home screen. And a year from now, I don’t think I’ll miss having my Facebook icon not be a two inch square animating some random content as Metro promises to afford.
That’s distraction. The real technology behind the scenes, which Apple uses to functionally animate transitions to guide navigation and make iOS (and Mac OS X) feel responsive and look cool, is that OpenGL foundation Apple began laying in 2001 with Mac OS X, where everything on the screen was mapped to a surface just like the background walls of a third person shooter. It was new then, not in 2007 when Microsoft brought the same concept to the PC with Windows Vista.
And making it even easier, nearly automatic, for developers to avail themselves of this video game-style animation within their own apps via LayerKit on iOS and Core Animation in Mac OS X was new and cool in 2007 when Apple first began showing it off, not in 2010 when hardware-accelerated graphics made it to the stillborn Android 3.0 Honeycomb, or sometime next year when Microsoft releases Windows 8 with additional UI animations of its own.
Why are the people in awe of Microsoft and Google so profoundly unaware of all this?
“La idea de Dios implica la abdicación de la razón humana y de la justicia humana; es la negación mas decisiva de la libertad humana y lleva necesariamente a la esclavitud de los hombres, tanto en la teoría como en la práctica”.
it’s come to ranting hour again but not in a horrible way, just wanted to say our opinion after so many people were bitching about classic who and effects and stuff in the tags. But before the rant we’d just like to say that we love all Who and none of this is insulting anything.
Firstly, Classic Who isn’t just good for its time, its good NOW. Please give it a chance, remember that when the show started it was filmed ‘as live’ in the smallest studio ever and the directors were fresh out of training and TV was a new medium; they had no idea how to film TV; but this made them more experimental and allowed them to create things that we still draw upon today. (For example the negative effect used when being shot by a Dalek.)
These directors took adventurous scripts and turned tiny studios into alien planets and made history come alive. they used models and new effects (which at the time no one would have thought were not good enough); they used electronic music to create atmosphere (they had no composer at their disposal)
And lets face it, the 1960’s Who’s were stage plays, the ‘as live’ environment is beautiful in our opinion, we love the fluffs, it adds to the realness of it. When Ian and Barbara trek through the caves you really feel like they are there because you follow their movements through the set; you do this as a child when you play. You don’t go to the theatre and say ‘oh that cardboard tree is crap’ because you’re watching the actors, the storyline; the imagination is the backdrop and the tree becomes real.
The characters, the stories, the actors make classic Who but so does the hard work of the all the set designers, model makers that people slag off today. Maybe in fifty years we can slag off the Doctor Who special effects team of 2011, but why the hell would you? Because they are fantastic too. Technology evolves and we should appreciate the change; otherwise no-one would watch silent films, read books, watch black and white etc.
Please watch Classic Who, if you don’t like it fair enough and if you get into it, fine but remember that the boring old ‘The Doctor Who special effects are crap’ line is wearing thin on us. We are Classic TV enthusiasts and we will bitch about it because it insults us personally when people say that the special effects suck and the programme was only good because it was 1963. We studied television for three years at university and we studied Doctor Who on the course; the classic series because it is that important to our televisual culture and to us as people. rant over.
I want to know why Congressional Republicans are so determined to cause so many millions of Americans real, prolonged, unnecessary suffering, so multi-millionaires and multi-national corporations can have even more money in their pockets. I want to know why so many millions of our fellow…
“They have lots of people, lots of servers, they have Android, they have Google Docs, they just bought Motorola. Most people would say ‘we’re the users, and the product is advertising’,”. “But in fact the advertisers are the users and YOU are the product.”
¨El hecho de que Abraham estuviera dispuesto a asesinar a su único hijo solo porque dios se lo dijo y que esta sea una historia de la cual los cristianos están orgullosos, muestra lo peligroso que la religión puede ser. La gente religiosa literalmente hará lo que sea si creen que se los pide dios.¨
- Richard Dawkins
“The fact that Abraham was willing to kill his only son just because god told him to is a story that Christians are proud of shows how dangerous religion can be. Religious people will literally do anything if they believe god told them to.”