Pages

Saturday, 16 January 2016

What did I say?



A movie editing development from Disney:-

We present a method to continuously blend between multiple facial performances of an actor, which can contain different facial expressions or emotional states. As an example, given sad and angry video takes of a scene, our method empowers a movie director to specify arbitrary weighted combinations and smooth transitions between the two takes in post-production.

Clever stuff which certainly sends the imagination roaming over other possibilities.

Thursday, 14 January 2016

Anachronism

An oddity of TV period drama is how certain kinds of anachronism seem to be accepted as part of an authentic ambience even though they are clearly no such thing. Our notion of period authenticity seems to have been conditioned by museum visits and we forget that the things we see must have looked very different when new.

Early nineteenth century furniture in a Jane Austen drama should look fairly new but the wood usually has a rich patina which must have taken two centuries of polishing to mature. It should be much lighter, showing the original colour of the wood – possibly quite garish to our eyes.

We see heavily weathered Victorian brickwork which should look virtually new or the entrance to a stately home has sandstone pillars pockmarked with far too much age.

Leather-bound books which should look bright and fresh with gold lettering on the spine. Instead we see shelves full of books more akin to the interior of a modern antiquarian bookshop.

We often see china teacups in antique style but with modern backstamps. Alternatively mid Victorian teacups used in a nineteen thirties setting. Not impossible this one, but unlikely and...

...okay I admit it. Spotting these things is mildly enjoyable. How sad is that?

Wednesday, 13 January 2016

Lottery Winners Come Forward



In a shock move today, mega lottery winners "Mr and Mrs C" have finally come forward.

The world has been waiting to know who they are and although they wish to preserve a degree of anonymity we can finally reveal that humongous "Lottery of Life" winners are "Mr and Mrs C" from southern England. However there will be no big spending spree just yet as Mr and Mrs C are adamant that their good fortune will not change their lifestyle.

"We'll carry on buying tickets," grins Mr C. "You never know do you? I'll also carry on working for a few years at least," he adds. "That should give us enough time to work out a new direction".

We understand that Mr and Mrs C are being advised by the ultra discreet Blair & Blair LLP.  

Tuesday, 12 January 2016

If everyone knows everything

They don’t of course, but just for fun let us assume they do – everyone knows everything. Or at least, let us assume that all those with access to the internet could know anything on the web if they so wished. This doesn’t cover everything by any means but close enough for a short ramble through possibilities.

This post isn’t about climate change, but a brief observation may clarify things. Over the past few years, the lack of global warming seems to have coincided with a marked decline in the quality of official warming narratives. These days we rarely see anything but obvious drivel whereas once upon a time there were much more robust attempts to keep the narrative respectable.

Perhaps this is because everyone knows everything. Everyone who takes an interest in the climate game knows that the official catastrophe narrative is sinking. Even warmists know it. Unless global warming resumes it has become impossible to defend the narrative in a convincing manner and everyone knows why.

For any political argument there is an alternative.
For any economic argument there is an alternative.
For any social argument there is an alternative.
For any narrative there is an alternative.
For any standpoint there is an alternative.
For many scientific arguments there is an alternative.

The alternatives have always existed; the key differences are range of opinion, low cost and ease of access. Everyone knows governments are too inefficient for socialism to deliver its promises, especially those starry-eyes utopian promises which seemed so seductive only a few decades ago. You know – the ones Corbyn and his groupies profess to believe in. Similarly everyone knows there are hardly any honest politicians, no left-right dichotomy and the world is far too corrupt.

It is not a question of what you know but who you know.

Never was a dictum more true and it may become even more significant in a world where everyone knows everything. Knowledge is bound to be devalued if everyone has access to it. The value of knowledge is roughly equal to the research effort behind it and that effort has been in steep decline since the internet went mainstream. Anyone can click on a link.

Personal and family connections have always been more important than ability, but in a connected world and to an increasing degree there may be little else to set one apart. Other than a handful of geniuses and technical wizards that’s it.

A consequence of all this ease of knowing is that elites could become ever more blatant. As the peasants know everything why bother to hide venal motives behind fine words? A patchy veneer of respectability will do and that too will go in time.

Monday, 11 January 2016

Drunken robots



The biped robots shown after the quadruped door opening device - they look drunk to me. How does one make a robot drunk though? One of the marvels of technology I suppose.

Sunday, 10 January 2016

An extraordinary sense of leisure


I cannot tell you the extraordinary sense of leisure that we two seemed to have at that moment. It wasn’t as if we were waiting for a train, it wasn’t as if we were waiting for a meal — it was just that there was nothing to wait for. Nothing.
Ford Madox Ford - The Good Soldier (1915)

When I first came across this quote it set me wondering about my own sense of leisure and that delicious feeling of relaxation which isn’t as common as it might be. Is it connected with having nothing to wait for? I suppose it could be if one is the kind of person who doesn't find it easy to wait for something without dwelling on it then dwelling on it again.

As Ford indirectly suggests, it doesn't have to be a glass of wine on a summer afternoon, a cosy winter evening by the fire or a day spent lazing on the beach. It can be more to do with future, with not having to wait, which means not having to mark time, not watching the clock, the diary, the to-do list. This sense of leisure seems to come from clearing the mind which isn’t easy if there are things to be done, appointments to be kept, projects to steer, jobs to be done which all involve waiting for this, expecting that.

Some people seem able to clear their minds anyway, even if a whole pile of commitments clutter up their immediate future. Others don’t find it so easy. I’m in the latter group which is probably why Ford’s observation chimes with me. Having nothing to wait for, nothing to anticipate isn’t particularly common, but sometimes it all subsides into trivia and that sense of leisure does indeed emerge.

I suppose it is one reason why our anticipated life of leisure disappeared, the one automation was supposed to have delivered by now. What destroyed the dream wasn’t only a need to continue working, but the clamour of modern life. There is always something to wait for, some event, some change. A sense of stillness becomes impossible and with it dies that extraordinary sense of leisure where there is .nothing to wait for. Nothing.

Saturday, 9 January 2016

My blood is thick with surrender



My blood is thick with surrender.
Sherwood Anderson - Dark Laughter (1925)

Modern political life is indeed thick with surrender. It is one of the most characteristic features of our times, that constant, nagging demand to surrender as an individual, to submit to the politically fashionable will. Not that this is a dramatic change in the long history of the human condition, but a little while ago something less oppressive and more rational seemed to be in the air. Now all that seems so long ago. 

Cameron and Corbyn both preach surrender as a political philosophy. Neither man seems to have any real notion of the individual as an agent of change or progress. They expect us to surrender as they themselves have surrendered body and soul to the shifting sands of political fashion. 

Surrender to the EU is one of our big issues at the moment, but there are many more. Cultural surrender is another big one. It swirls through the immigration debate without ever solidifying around the cultural preferences of those who are already here. Whatever they might be, we are not encouraged to clarify because even our cultural future must be surrendered to the fads and exigencies of the elite.

The whole spirit, the whole ethos of political surrender seems to be an end in itself. Surrender is what totalitarian political regimes require as their basic political philosophy. Surrender is the groundwork of modern political thinking where genuine democracy has become a quaint relic of more optimistic times.