Pandora, the shirt I wanted was taken.

So, I attended a Pandora meetup last week, Pandora being the internet radio service that’s grown out of the music genome project that studies songs, assigning scores among 400 different “genes” to sort of stamp out what the qualities of a song are. It’s a mechanism for finding recommendations based on what you like, rather than genre expectations or cultural approval. They built it into a radio system where you plug in an artist or song that you like, and then play songs that are qualitatively similar.

A bit (the whole meet up was basically a “town hall” meeting led by Tim Westergren, one of the founders) went toward explain the selection process, which is the sort of gear shifting that interests me. Since the genes are rated, there’s score to a song. So the next song may be the next closest in score. If all but one gene is the same, the different one...ehh...rhythmic vocalizations*, will define the distance. A song with the score of 5 may be followed by one that’s equal except for a 3 in a gene, rather one euqal except with a 9. And there’s weight to the genes as well, so a song 5 apart on vibrato might still be played before another one that is only 2 apart, but on the tempo scale—changes in tempo being much more significant (the most significant, actually). A neat business that means you might hear a lot of Celine Dion (the most thumbed down artist), whatever you might think you like.

Interestedly, “era” is a gene, and means that song selections gravitate toward a 20 year spectrum from the jump off. That’s a little off to me, since it seems like a non-musicology oriented classification to have—maybe it’s used to account for the variance in production values of the years.

I’ve enjoyed the system, and think it’s worth a shot for those who want to sample something close to what they like. I discovered my love of No Doubt and Gwen Stefani—‘cause really, that’s just New Wave isn’t it? Sadly, no Duvall approved “dumb lyrics” +/- system has yet to be implemented.** The site itself may be robust enough to a have a community, for those into that sort of thing, though I wonder how many presences people can maintain. Anyway, Pandora is pretty big. It managed 400,000 faxes in three days, the fasted inundation of Congress ever, after a call to arms regarding recent RIAA royalty shenanigans and internet radio. A fact both impressive and sad (as Westergren noted), since it means the most people get riled about is when you threaten their free music.

Learned other things: its on an value-added advertising business model, random recs is an interesting idea that executes poorly, as is computer listening (Pandora has 50(?) full time trained listeners quantifying songs). Then I dodged a thunderstorm.

Didn’t get the nice looking shirt (for the best, I don’t need more shirts), but got a nice hat, though. You know me and hats.

* I’m making shit up.
** No, Pandora, I do not like Ashlee Simpson. Stop it.

Reading list: Yotsuba&!

Yotsuba&! is the perfectest comic ever. If you do not think so, your heart has been replaced by a shriveled up turnip.

* EDITED TO ADD: On a related note, there's a new action figure. If you follow the links, I actually think the old one is better. Better yet, there should be a plush. Not that I'd get one, mind you...

Stanook of Stanooklyn

After reading hcduvall's post on Civil War, I started thinking, "what other things piss me off?" and I immediately thought of the The Stanhattan Project. A few days ago, I found out about this outreach done by Marvel in the early 90's as a result of a conversation about Brian K. Vaughn. Now, I have nothing in particular to say about Vaughn. I think he has a great deal of talent and would have probably become a successful writer no matter what. But the way in which he broke into comics was particularly of interest. Vaughn was a sophmore at NYU studying dramatic writing when he came across the Stanhattan Project. Basically, at the time, Marvel was introspective enough to realize that there was an unhealthy amount of overlap between the writing staff and editorial staff. And like all incestuous relationships, the product was suffering. So, from what I've gathered from a few lazy google searches, they assigned two Marvel editors to NYU, with the express goal of finding new young talent, trained in diverse areas. Vaughn was a direct outcome of this program (where they would initially just script already paneled and inked pages). And I'd say he's one heck of a find.

So, I guess what I'm saying is, the Stanhattan Project sounds awesome. What the heck happened to it? Are the editors too busy drawing pin-ups for alternate covers? I make the case that comics are even more of an incestuous old boys club nowadays, and the cynical half-literate social commentary that Civil War thought itself to be aside, every major title seems to be suffering for it. I feel like I've been bouncing up and down with my hard-earned dollars in hand, just begging the doors to open every wednesday morning, and then walking away unable to buy a single thing. How is pit ossible for a company to continually push away a customer that is looking for every excuse to buy their product?

Alternate takes: Civil War

Civil War (for those of you who aren't Danny Don't) was Marvel's last event crossover where a disaster amongst superpowered beings prompted the US gov't to enact registration laws--an arguable "realistic" idea and really a pretty good one for a story. So all the superfolks line up for and against, and this being about superheros, punch their way to resolution. Along the way, Captain America starts recruiting sociopaths, Iron Man connives like Lex Luthor, Venom gets pupils, and I ponder who're the idiots who had to approve Clor. Basically, a good idea executed even worse than expected, which is to say, clumsier than having the drug czar's daughter in Traffic sell herself to the representative young/black man/inner city menace, who thankfully didn't talk jive like drug dealers in 21 Jump Street. Actually, Civil War's not that bad if you think of Tony Stark as Rhett Butler and Steve Rodgers as Scarlett O'Hara..."Frankly, Captain America, I don't give a damn." Spider-Man is Ashely and Reed Richards is codependent Mammy.* Except, I guess, the South wins.**

Anyway, it's just been revealed to much fanboy whinging, that instead of Loki or Iron Man himself, the whole fracas might've been instigated by the shape-shifting other known as Skrulls. A pretty weak idea. In the course of lamenting it, though, a Newsarama commenter describes the bad idea in the form of what I think is a great idea.

Suddenly, Skrulls!

If I was one of those folks with inclination, I'd photoshop a fake Broadway sign with that phrase, lights around it like 42nd Street or Ziegfeld Follies. I know it'd be hard in comic book form but Marvel should sure as hell make its next crossover a musical if it can.


* This might not make sense if you've read the book or watched the movie, of which I've done neither. It amuses me though.
** Until the Hulk, representing the economic and industrial might of more developed North, smashes. World War Hulk indeed. My next rpg character's gotta be named Sherman Hulk.

Big Brother is Watching...

Running off various conversations and perusing Boingboing, I've been wondering about the scope of privacy with all the new technology that is emerging. And the debate is getting shrill on both sides. You have people who don't ever want their pictures taken and posted, even if they are in a public setting. And you have others who contend that this first group are a bunch of wackos who don't understand technology and its penetration. And of course, tied up in all this is something of the debate over open source, DRM, Google scholar, and copyrights.

I don't have any clear answers on this, only a few observations. First, I'd love to see how Japan handles it. Second, I have to admit that the shrillness on the pro-tech, pro-open source side (for extreme lack of a better description) seems to me more galling than the other anti-tech side, if only because they've already accepted the increased influence of technology, but don't really understand why people get squeemish about it. It's that lack of empathy to a pretty understandable human reaction that I find disturbing.

Third, the pro-tech side seems to feel like measures to opt-out of programs like Google Streetview are sufficient. If you have the ability to get out of these things, then you shouldn't really complain. But I don't think that's enough. In basic photography, it's considered good etiquette that, if you take someone's picture (where they are clearly identifiable), you should ask them if it's okay for you to use it. Now, there's some question as to whether you do this before or after taking the shot, etc., but you are using someone else's image, which they may or may not be cool with. Simply as a respect matter, it's a nice thing to do.

The issue with opting out when you start discussing advanced technology is one of knowledge and accessibility. When shooting a movie or a photo, you can usually make immediate contact with the individuals to ask them for permission. At the very least, it is easier to make a good faith effort, because people are more likely to notice what you're doing. But with these other techs, it's difficult to know when you're online. In the same way that the recent Supreme Court case on gender discrimination was horribly decided, it seems galling that someone be reasonably expected to know when their images or identity are placed on something as vast as the internet and take legal and moral responsibility.

And this goes to an interesting question, not simply between the rights to property versus religion versus speech, but what we mean by public and private. Can we meaningfully "switch hats?" Do different protocols apply when we, say, run to the shops versus when we make political speech? To a certain extent, yes, in that political speech is governed by the first amendment, whereas running to the shops is governed by property. But to any observer, figuring out what is public and what is private is difficult to know, the moreso when you have the boundary of advanced technology taking the place of meetings and interactions between individuals.

In the end, my political sensibilities fire up. There is certainly a danger on the anti-tech side of too much privacy, of an inability to disclose anything for fear of embarrassment. This applies especially, I think, to government action and oversight, and you'll find no one more supportive of monitoring of public actions and roles. But, in the impulse to "democratize" (again, so not the right word) that is given by the Internet, the push against monolithic controls and eavesdropping which is such a common refrain amongst "Web 2.0 or 3.0"-ers must be tempered with the knowledge that "Big Brother" is not always a single organ. There can be just as much tyranny of the group, or just simply lots of individuals, as there is tyranny by one body. Just as there is a chilling effect when one group takes it upon itself to interfere excessively with other peoples' business, we have to be concerned about the stifling of expression and creativity if everyone is watching everyone else, particularly in public spaces. We watch celebrities because we are attracted to their public personas, but at the same time, most of us know enough not to want to have to constantly be putting up those personas. That's an issue that requires much more thought than is presented by the polarized debate.

Knocked Up

All I can say is "Go see it." Not quite as funny as "The 40-Year Old Virgin", but still hilarious.

Pa-pri-ka!

Satoshi Kon's Paprika is a frequently beautiful movie about dreams, neurotic ones and others, but mostly controlling dreams. Specifically how they exert their own influences on the people who carry them. Plot: there's an invention (the DC Mini), created by a childish genius (Tokita) that allows people to enter each others' dreams and...well...just share them really. Actually controlling them, like lucid dreaming, is a pretty nebulous concept here. Perhaps one can coax insight from them instead. Some of the prototypes go missing, and while there are beneficial unauthorized uses of such things (as by Paprika, the instinctual therapist), suffice to say there's some dangerous circumstances when dreams are let loose; ambition and dreams mix uncontentedly. There's also a cop and an unsolved murder, and the chairman of the board, who doesn't seem to like any of this. And along the way Kon may show you a parade (probably no less fantastic if you happen to recognize some of the mystical creatures within).

The spectacles onscreen are entertaining and fun, but don't overwhelm the pretty straightforward ideas that presented, and which actually don’t collapse after a glance.* Quite the rare thing in anime. Kon is telling a story about creativity itself and the people who traffic in it. All geniuses are creative people, whether artists or scientists, and share the same drive. Its quite a refreshing thing to see the trappings of modernity not as something dehumanizing—harmony and well-being as being possible within modernity. Paprika has neither the abject simple wonder of technology of say, Steamboy, or fetishing as with Oshii or Shirow, or just retrograde, luddite thinking (anything in feudal French costume). Hayao Miyazaki probably sits somewhere between in this (he’s just melancholy). I’m sure one who spelunk further and other themes than that, like the connection between dreaming and movies that gets its own airing out, but I haven’t unpacked all the imagery just yet.

The most pleasant surprise to me, I will venture to add, were the women in the movie. That Dr. Chiba and Paprika are fully-realized people. Paprika has pretty traditional ideas about sex, but mature and respectful ones. And the women are active in the story. And as opposed to men with breasts and guns, they are adults.

It’s a movie about movies while not being about just this movie. It's about things Satoshi Kon has thought about before (and had more than one conversation about). It doesn’t lecture, and it entertains, and it’s warm and imaginative. That's more than you get most days, and not in your summer blockbusters.



*Oh Ghost in the Shell 2, you are the dumbest, boringest cyborg story ever made. Pretty though.

fast zombies vs. slow zombies

Slow zombies are the slow, horrible encroachment. Damp things you can't stop. Slow zombie movies are about life without your brain. Being dead in your body or your mind. That's useful metaphoring right there.

Fast zombies are pouncy, like smelly sabertooth tigers. Or big roaches. Fast zombie movies are slasher films. That's panic, not dread.

Slow zombies rule.

Last one from me today

After a long drought, it appears that I can't stop posting. So, last one from me. A great article in the NYTimes about new products designed to improve earning capability and basic tasks in developing countries:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/29/science/29cheap.html

See the actual exhibit here:

http://www.peoplesdesignaward.org/design_for_the_other_90/

Turkey redux

I just finished Snow by Orhan Pamuk, a writer whom everyone says is "narrating his country into existence", or something like that. Evidently, a lot of people are reading this book, although I got it because GF gave it to me as a present.

It's a remarkable work, both for its immediacy as a political novel and the intimacy with which the grandly political is made insular and personal. There were a lot of dimensions to this book, but they cut along the lines of Islam versus secularism, radical Islam versus the West, city versus rural, poverty versus affluence, happiness versus unreasonable expectations, and love versus love. All well reflective of the social divergences I saw in Turkey when I was there two months ago. And given the recent protests, somewhat common knowledge now in the world more generally.

Which leaves me wondering several things about the book. First off, there was a line at the very end where a character asks the author (also named Orhan) to include his statement that readers shouldn't believe anything Orhan writes about them. That's not a real question, but something that leaves a pall over all my questions. Second, I wonder how genuine the conversations are, how reflective they are of what a secularist and an Islamist would say to each other given the chance. Because the interactions/discussions portrayed in the book oftentimes startling in their brutality, duplicity, and general lack of awareness. Pamuk (the real author) seems to place most of this onus on the Islamists, so I wonder how genuine this portrayal is or if it is a sign of his political sensibilities. In either case, the fifth chapter or so when the Director for Education is shot is an illuminating look into Turkish Islamism, or at least Pamuk's understanding of it.

And finally, was I supposed to hate all the characters about 3/4 of the way through? At that point, I wanted to throw up my hands, go to Kars (the setting for the novel), and straighten them all out, if only because a solution seemed so blindingly obvious. But, then I think Pamuk wanted readers to feel that way, because it sets up some greater tension and meaningful disappointment later on.

But overall, a great read, especially for knowing more about the tensions in a really interesting (and strategically important) country. Can't wait to read "My Name is Red."

Pirates 3

The short version of my review: it sucked. Not as badly as #2, but that's really not hard, since the second was a 2-hour trailer for the third.

Now the longer version. It was nice to see some of the various storylines coming together, but the missing element in all this was the interests each of them had in their...whatever it was they were doing (mostly screwing each other over - and btw, spoilers ahead). It wasn't clear, for example, why Orlando wanting to save his father necessarily goes against Keira Knightly. Or what the hell Jack Sparrow was after (immortality? legendary status?). As a result, you didn't get the banter or witticisms that came from Jack playing off all the characters against each other in the first and to a lesser degree the second.

Action was fine, and there were some really cool shots, but the lack of motivation for the characters really inhibited things. I think a big inhibiting factor is that no one has really ever made a successful naval battle shine on the screen (please correct me if I'm wrong, as I'd love to see it). It all boils down to what happens on deck, or in the tight framing of two ships going at it, but you don't get the grand sense of what's happening in the wider battle. Truth be told, this is probably the case in larger land battle films, but the particular nature of naval warfare (separate ships and all) makes it hard to film. I guess one could go the Alexander the Great-route (the movie with Colin Ferrell), but that style was just terrible.

Now, the ending. I actually liked the ambiguous nature of the ending, and how Will Turner and Elizabeth Turner (married in the middle of a naval battle in probably one of the worst contrived scenes ever made) could only see each other every ten years. It was much better than the saccarine tales where everyone lived happily ever after. But Duvall has sent me to

http://pwbeat.publishersweekly.com/blog/2007/05/29/pirates-of-the-caribbean-at-exhaustions-end/#more-2620

where I discovered that that was not, in fact, the ending. I would have vastly preferred the nominally more "heart-wrenching" ending, if only because it suits my sensibilities of responsibility and adulthood better, and it's a nice way to round off the series. But of course, that closes off the possibility of Pirates 4, which, unfortunately, I'm sure someone will drag me to see.

*sigh* The series started out with such promise, but it pulled a Matrix in the end.

T Minus 10

Izicmo and her classmates at SVA just finished their first year, and have put on a show that I heartily endorse to those interested in graphic design (the thesis show is probably a good bet too). They're about social issues as toylines, in attractive packaging and done with more than occasional wit. Even the weakest ones have one or two items that are contenders for great ideas.

The good, the bad, and the not quite there as general categories are pretty much universal amongst most observers*. But final rankings end up may be exercises in taste, and it’s in the nitpicking that all the interesting talk happens.

My own contributions to such discussions are influenced by one of the quirks in my thinking, my faux-laymanism (what a terrible sounding –ism. I’ll replace it later.) Basically, there are a few exhibits that are middlebrow—as a category, not a pejorative. Meaning, hot topics the way “racism is bad” and “babies are cute” are hot topics. Nothing no one can’t get behind. I don’t mind that, though the thing is, if you present me a topic that don’t think I’m an expert in (as in virtually anything)**, and I think of something I don’t hear/or see commented on or considered, or in this case presented, then I think you didn’t try too hard. I’m pretty accepting of earnestness these days, just not lazy thinking. That’s pretty much what middlebrow is to me…anything I go with “yeah, and?” to. Still, I feel a little guilty when my judgment is more or less a huffy "not as smart as me."

My other tweak, and this is probably obvious, is that I prefer concept over execution, such that marginally different things, like the dim idea crappily executed, I find better than the no idea beautifully rendered. (I gather that the one I took as a dim exhibit may also have been a no idea one. But you got to give the participants authorial intent, or else you’re playing inside baseball—which isn't really part of this exercise and is playing off personality rather than work). So your reach can exceed your grasp, if you’ve got the nerves to talk something interesting. At least it'll be interesting.

I’m purposely not being too specific about the exhibits, because, well, there’s nineteen of them and I’m lazy and if you can you should see for yourselves. And if comic reviews are kinda awkward without pics, then this is an even steeper hill unless I turn it into a Slate shopping guide or I'll have to focus on one. May'be I'll try (oooh, another one for the wishful thinking bucket). Anyway, my criteria doesn't necessarily give you the best of graphic design (communication as creative problem solving?), but I do think my favorite of the exhibition, “Lone”, happens to be the most successful one too. Great execution coupled with subtle concepts. It should be a contender for everybody’s best, if not favorite.

If you folks check it out, look out for "Lone", the vinyl siding costume, the foie gras duck backpack (even if hanging them on the ceiling fan is a misfire), and the slutty virgin mary***, and give “Gloomy” time to grow on you.

* Of the sophisticated crew I was with. The rest of you unless I know you or you agree with me are all philistines.
** Except the Guardians of the Galaxy. I even wrote letters. One even got printed.
*** Bit of a gimme. But then, given the persistence of the Madonna/Whore thing, blunt is probably best.

filler

I picked up Nova #2 today, because I felt consumery and I wanted to read something where post-Civil War Iron Man, oh how far you've fallen, and another character didn't talk like doofs. Other than Speedball looking like Spawn...when did Venom get eyeballs?

bloglines + Heroes + filler

For those three of you who may read this,* may I direct you to several of esteemed content providers on the right? I should've when I added them, but am a fool.

Geoff Klock analyses comics and pop culture with intellectual rigor and discipline. I can only do that for things I don't. Recommendations are much cooler than snubs. Therefore Geoff Klock is much cooler than me, despite the villainous moniker.

Warren Peace reviews lots of promising comics. If they're good he'll tell you. And if they're not he'll tell you also. And he uses a scanner. So he blogs text and pictures practically everyday, which leads me to suspect he's a supernatural creature of some sort, or at least has one in his service.

Clean Plate Club catalogs places with good food in New York City. That probably makes it the most useful of the lot. And it's witty too.

Memes provides Hobs the space for Hobs to pontificate without my rude interruption. Actually thats not true, but it'd doubtless be a good thing if it were true.

And I don't think this merits its own post, so here it is, stuck to the bottom of the shoe: I saw part of Heroes last night, and I must say, I didn't realize that a full third of the people seem to have emo haircuts. And then I watched Volver and processed four thoughts: Penelope Cruz is really pretty. Pedro Almodolvar is really good. His sense of proportion regarding the beauty of pure emotions and personal responsibility (emotional concessions to social mores) seems off. (see also: Talk to Her) I would kill for wallpaper like the patterns that appeared during the credits.**

***

* Ahh, I'm behind on my reading list posts, huh? Naruto and Mushishi: not done. Bleach: coming up. I wonder how often I can change the template in a simulation of progress--or use these filler posts in a simulation of content production.
** Not a human being. Probably, just any animal you don't automatically anthropomorpize. I might maim though; I liked the patterns that much.

***EDITED TO ADD SAID CREDITS FROM THE INTERNET'S NO.1 SOURCE OF COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL

Purchases

Every so often I get the buying bug, and that mostly means I pick up a video game or some books or - lately - components for my computer. And because I'm cheap, I agonize over every purchase: is this worth it? Do I really need this? How much will I really enjoy this? Wouldn't I be better served by just listening to more NPR? blah blah blah

To give you a sense of scale, I spent months selecting components for my PC (Duvall can attest to this) and, after living in my new city for over two years, I have only just gotten an Internet connection after much debate. My life has improved immeasurably because of it.

In the interests of letting you take part in this angst, I have a question. My current buying bug is focused on getting a DVD burner for my computer. I already have a DVD player, but sometimes I wonder whether it would be nice to play a CD and a movie at the same time. I would only really use the burner to copy some files on a DVD, which I could probably do at work. But the idea of having two appeals to me for some reason.

So, what do you all think? And if you think two players is a good thing, why? What could I do with them both?

Die Spinne III

Maybe I make too many concessions to adaptations, and perhaps I didn't think the second one was much better than the first, and therefore the apotheosis of comic book movie. I liked Spider-Man 3. I thought it handled itself well, and I think it was better for all the clutter than a smoother, simpler plot--which would've involved a lot more emotional hammering (that's what I think of the second one).

All the excesses and tics of the first two are present here, after all. Dead earnestness is always required for the melodrama, and while the effects have kept on improving, the character's have always been the most important part (which is probably why I don't mind not being in costume so much). Swinging only looks cool when he's falling anyway. I'm slightly annoyed with a butler scene.* Some scenes probably needed more breathing room, but I prefer the clunky movie we got, rather than an interminable 3 hour slog. Which of course meant any draggy bits had to be shorter (than the second one again. What? did people actually like that doctor impotent thing, or the neighbor's cookie scene?). It's like a comic printed on a bad register, the colors all fall out of lines, and his hand looks like it's the jacket, but it's better for it.

>>NERD TRANSMISSION BEGINS

My degree in advanced nerd compels me to say that there ought to be at least 3 more movies: No. 4 A disabled, powerful industrialist hires a thieves to steal Oscorp technology in the hopes gaining some of the biotech. He hires Dr. Curt Connors to decipher the tech. Terrible accident caused by Spider-Man creates the Lizard, who Spider-Man needs to stop. But oh, another thief made off with the straight tech. No. 5 The industrialist Alister Smythe attacks with the Spider-Slayers, and outfits another thief with a powered suit (The Scorpion), in hopes of getting the rest of the Osborn technology. Spider-Man needs to rescue Dr. Connors, who is captured and convinced to continue the research in hopes of curing himself, even as he is asked to advance the serums for the Smythe. Smythe thinks Connors is holding out on him and doses him. Inexplicably Connors looks cured and he doses himself. In the meantime Spider-Man tracks them down with the help of the thief from the 4th movie, the Black Cat. Connors helps Smythe escape, even as he helps Spider-Man beat the Scorpion.
No. 6 Enter the Sinister Six: Kraven the Hunter appears to chase after Spider-Man for ratings for the first act, and just when he's cornered: the Scorpion, Mysterio (as Doc Ock has sadly been rendered useless), and Carnage (a failed synthesis of the Osborne serum and the symbiote also created by the gov't) at the same time, all manipulated by Smythe, the newly insane new Goblin. Venom reappears just 'cause he hates spider-Man that much, though you know he'll fight Carnage later. Only with Sandman and Black Cat, and I dunno, with someone like Silver Sable (hired to capture Kraven), will Spider-Man have a chance.

>>NERD TRANSMISSION COMPLETE

The overstuffed nature actually made it similar to my old comic reading experience. All it needed was a caption box with the editor telling you where to read scenes you missed (the novelization, as those things are usually based on a full screenplay). Spectacular to see this scene, or check out avengers number whatever to find out about the meteor that is a remnant of an inhuman battle with the fantastic four or something. Which, in the end, is probably why I seem to like this movie better than most people do. All the stories I didn't see on screen I've read and have in my head. I know all the whys and wherefores, plugged the gaps, and moved along.


* And I have fanboy complaint: the spider-sense wasn't played up much. If he looks in the right direction most of the time, it would've worked. And Venom clocking him would indicate he does sense him. You can even exposit that "you don't see me, do you?" or something. But fanboy complaints are worth as much as a blog post.

I went to edit some spacing...

And just lost about 400 words out of my Hikaru No Go post.

I already miss it.

EDIT: God bless Google cache. Good for me, bad for you, my one reader, as if I ever attempted to retype it, it would probably have been shorter and more coherent.

He should have gone with Hex

The other day I rented Reboot: Daemon Rising, which is the first "movie" in season 4 of the tv series (the dvd was apparently mastered improperly, so everyone sounds dreadful). I remember it fondly--it was basically action-adventure show with it's nerdage on its sleeve, even if no one remembers the pilot episode like I do, where they were threatening to emerge from the disk drive or something. . . . Anyway, I think it pulled off its animation the same way that Batman and Tron did, actually good design without muss. And by naming characters after obsolete printer systems. And there was this one, where the web is first introduced, and Scsi and Modem guest star...

In honor of its half-hours of geeky amusement, the recap of Season 3:

Reading list: Hikaru No Go, Volume 9

One of the reasons for these Reading List posts is so I could work why I’m reading what I am. Like many comic fans, there’s I had a collecting phase, with bags and boards and unopened copies. There’s quite a bit of my collection that was purchased via inertia—and this reviewing process is something of an exercise in determining if I should continue to follow these series.

So one on my list that has had its position grow tenuous in the last few installments is Yumi Hotta and Takeshi Obata’s Hikaru No Go. It’s about Hikaru, a middle schooler who encounter’s the family bloodstained relic go board in the attic. When he does, he encounters Sai, the ghost of a Go master who still seeks the Divine Move. All of which is impetus for Hikaru’s natural talent and interest with Go to emerge, as he chases an early opponent who’s become a pro ahead of him. It’s obviously a collaboration, and Yumi Hotta is the writer, with Obata (best known for his work on Death Note) provides the visuals. Teamed books are common enough elsewhere, but it appears to be a rarity in Japan. And it’s a book for younger readers (<15) size="2">* Iwasaki 7 Dan’s suit is awesome. He’s wearing 70s curtains as a suit. Man, I should get a scanner or something.

** Spider-Man may have come out of the recent Civil War fracas the best because he actually had a character arc that didn’t have a downward trajectory—accepting his identity and unmasking and all that. Batman could do with a revival “now less of a jerk” arc as a corrective to his recent portrayals. Otherwise, because Spider-Man’s personality doesn’t change story to story, they necessarily have to be plot, fun new adventure oriented. Even if they haven’t been fun in a while.

Taiwan Fracas

In response to a comment made in some other post, it's time to return to serious matters. Namely, Taiwan independence again.

Well, no. Really, I just have time to share this website, which lists numerous science badges. I'm pretty sure I qualify for the:

1. "I left the respectable sciences to pursue humanistic studies of the sciences" badge
2. "I can be a prick when it comes to science" badge
3. "sexing up science" badge
4. "I know what a tadpole is" badge
5. "somewhat confused as to what scientific field I actually belong to" badge
6. "statistical linear regression" badge

There may be others, but I have certainly not earned the "have violated the posterior of an animal in the name of science" badge.