From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V17 #242 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Thursday, September 10 2009 Volume 17 : Number 242 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: in either computer science or photography news to-day... ["Stewart C.] Re: in either computer science or photography news to-day... [kevin study] Re: in either computer science or photography news to-day... ["Stewart C.] Re: in either computer science or photography news to-day... [lep ] Re: in either computer science or photography news to-day... ["Stewart C.] Re: in either computer science or photography news to-day... [lep ] Re: for Stewart R. ["Stewart C. Russell" ] The Seeds on "The Mother-In-Laws" (Full Episode) [HwyCDRrev@aol.com] Re: for Stewart R. [Steve Schiavo ] Re: for Stewart R. [2fs ] Re: for Stewart R. ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Re: for Stewart R. [Rex ] Re: for Stewart R. ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Re: for Stewart R. [lep ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 17:33:03 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: in either computer science or photography news to-day... lep wrote: > this is pretty interesting - an open-source digital camera they're > developing at stanford. an acquaintance of mine will be on this like stink on a monkey. He's developed techniques for dynamic panorama generation and resolution enhancement from video, and holds several imaging patents that earn him the latest pro Nikon DSLRs. He promptly butchers them to do very strange things. He's also Toronto's cyborg-about-town: Steve Mann, http://eyetap.org/ Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 19:29:39 -0700 From: kevin studyvin Subject: Re: in either computer science or photography news to-day... On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Stewart C. Russell wrote: > lep wrote: >> this is pretty interesting - an open-source digital camera they're >> developing at stanford. > > an acquaintance of mine will be on this like stink on a monkey. He's > developed techniques for dynamic panorama generation and resolution > enhancement from video, and holds several imaging patents that earn him > the latest pro Nikon DSLRs. He promptly butchers them to do very strange > things. He's also Toronto's cyborg-about-town: Steve Mann, > http://eyetap.org/ I love that designation cyborg-about-town. Sounds like something that Walter Winchell would say, in an alternate universe. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 22:34:32 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: in either computer science or photography news to-day... kevin studyvin wrote: > > I love that designation cyborg-about-town. Sounds like something that > Walter Winchell would say, in an alternate universe. Well, just look at him: ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 23:05:07 -0400 From: lep Subject: Re: in either computer science or photography news to-day... Stewart says: > an acquaintance of mine will be on this like stink on a monkey. He's > developed techniques for dynamic panorama generation and resolution > enhancement from video, and holds several imaging patents that earn him > the latest pro Nikon DSLRs. He promptly butchers them to do very strange > things. He's also Toronto's cyborg-about-town: Steve Mann, > http://eyetap.org/ from the looks of it, he probably already found out it is *his* ACM daily newsletter. i confess, those MIT boys impress me (we all have our shallows spots.) xo - -- "people with opinions just go around bothering one another." -- the buddha ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 23:07:53 -0400 From: lep Subject: Re: in either computer science or photography news to-day... lep says: > Stewart says: >> an acquaintance of mine will be on this like stink on a monkey. He's >> developed techniques for dynamic panorama generation and resolution >> enhancement from video, and holds several imaging patents that earn him >> the latest pro Nikon DSLRs. He promptly butchers them to do very strange >> things. He's also Toronto's cyborg-about-town: Steve Mann, >> http://eyetap.org/ > > from the looks of it, he probably already found out it is *his* ACM > daily newsletter. ugh. i'll try that sentence again: from the looks of it, he probably already found out it in *his* ACM daily newsletter. NB: ACM is trade organization for computing sciences (american computing machinery.) xo - -- "people with opinions just go around bothering one another." -- the buddha ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 20:32:35 -0700 From: kevin studyvin Subject: Re: in either computer science or photography news to-day... On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Stewart C. Russell wrote: > kevin studyvin wrote: >> >> I love that designation cyborg-about-town. Sounds like something that >> Walter Winchell would say, in an alternate universe. > > Well, just look at him: > Looks strikingly like local comedy nerd John Keister http://images.google.ca/images?gbv=2&hl=en&um=1&sa=1&q=almost+john+keister&aq=f&oq=&start=0 if he'd been created by William Gibson. /KS (in his MIT t-shirt) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 00:53:06 -0400 From: lep Subject: Re: topher, yay! (100% dollhouse) jeff 2fs says: * warning * * "Dollhouse" spoilers to follow * * warned * > I agree that she's *not* playing the same, or even a similar, character each > time. But the similarity you point out...is, I think, intentional: it's > Caroline slipping out, gradually. I see your point here, but I don't necessarily agree with it. It just doesn't strike me that the storyline is nuanced in the particular way that it would need to be to take that into account. > It seems to me that a running idea to be > examined is whether some essential core of a person can be wholly > overwritten...and I think the show leans strongly toward "no." So it would > make sense to retain *some* continuity or similarity, to convey that idea. I definitely agree that it's a strong "no" - I think that's one of the central themes of the show. And it would make sense, but I just don't see it in the episode-to-episode details. I do think the writing and plots became more articulate in that, by the end of the season, they were getting at some very interesting and complicated questions -- for example, is Caroline's nature, at the heart of the matter "good" while Alpha's might be seen as "evil" -- but, to me, it seemed an evolution of the writing and not the acting. > I've always felt in general that Whedon is very good at working with the > actors he has - so much that even actors who begin with not a whole lot of > skills other than an impressive physique and scary forehead (whom we might > call, say, "Mr. Boreanaz") can end up capable of quite powerful performances > after a few years developing their skills. For those odd folks who don't get their guilty pleasures by watching "Bones", Mr. Boreanaz, IMO, does a quite a fine job on the show. He's such a good "leading man" as they say. Once again, he plays a smarter-than-he-seems, never-quit kind of guy, so perhaps he has a narrow range, but, if that's the case, he does such a good job in that range that I forget for it to be an issue. > The downside of this - building on the actor's actual personality, often - > is that sometimes it does seem as if the actor's always playing the same > role under a different name when s/he gets other parts...but that may also > be writers/casting directors/producers typecasting the actor. I see your point. I confess I was inclined to put the blame on Ms. Dushku that Echo, when imprinted, is rather reminiscent of Faith, but perhaps Joss has a weakness for those bad-girl Boston types. Although, shit, I just realized I don't like either the character of Faith or Caroline all that much, so maybe I just have a bad attitude (I don't particularly *dislike* them or anything, the characters are just not subtle enough or something for my taste.) > Also: Olivia Williams rocks. The end. Not quite the end as I'll add: yes, she does. I loved the episode when she got all silly British. "Epitaph One" question: so, there are certainly fewer souls than imprints, right? Do the evil souls just want to suck up as many actuals as they can? Is this why HQ, in Victor's body, makes the point that he's in "ten bodies as we speak"? I'm having trouble with the actual, doll (non-imprinted), doll (imprinted), doll (hostile takeover) count (yes, once again, I'm thinkin' too hard.) And, most importantly, why doesn't Topher have an IMDB photo? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1135300/fullcredits#cast xo - -- "people with opinions just go around bothering one another." -- the buddha ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 07:39:01 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: in either computer science or photography news to-day... lep wrote: > > NB: ACM is trade organization for computing sciences (american > computing machinery.) erm, association for computing machinery, you meant. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 08:08:46 -0400 From: lep Subject: Re: in either computer science or photography news to-day... Stewart says: > lep wrote: >> >> NB: ACM is trade organization for computing sciences (american >> computing machinery.) > > erm, association for computing machinery, you meant. oh dear. i'm highly embarrassed. and, to boot, what i wrote doesn't even parse. i find the "computing machinery" part so endearing that it looks likes i just went brain-dead on the "A" part of the acronym while being all entertained by the "C" and "M" parts. and while i'm on the subject of screw-ups, it's "frankencamera", not "frakencamera" (the latter sounds a bit too close to "frakkin'camera") (i can't even take credit for recognizing the typo as it was pointed out to me offlist.) ugh, lauren p.p.s. i'll try not to make a typo or regular-type error here: the AAAI actually was the american association for artificial intelligence; they not-so-long-ago changed it to the association for the advancement of artificial intelligence. they wanted to get rid of the "american" but keep their acronym: http://www.aaai.org/home.html - -- "people with opinions just go around bothering one another." -- the buddha ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 07:36:05 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: for Stewart R. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.wordpress.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:41:46 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: for Stewart R. 2fs wrote: > joy! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 10:15:43 EDT From: HwyCDRrev@aol.com Subject: The Seeds on "The Mother-In-Laws" (Full Episode) http://bit.ly/xUbdB The Seeds on "The Mother-In-Laws" (Full Episode) Season 1, Episode 30 How Not to Manage a Rock Group http://bit.ly/L5Bdr "The Buells and the Hubbards decide to invest in a new rock group called The Warts." My Bob Dylan Examiner Column http://www.examiner.com/x-21829-Bob-Dylan-Examiner my blog is "Yer Blog" http://fab4yerblog.blogspot.com/ http://robotsarestealingmyluggage.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 08:31:44 -0500 From: Steve Schiavo Subject: Re: for Stewart R. > Theirs is a sanitised and anaemic version of American blues-inspired > rock and roll, he complains. It's certainly OK to not like the Beatles, but most of the complaints in the article are silly or irrelevant. On Sep 10, 2009, at 7:36 AM, 2fs wrote: > - - Steve __________ Mojo: If push comes to shove, what is your all-time favourite album? Harry Shearer: Right now it would be Apple Venus by XTC. Every fucking song on that record is a killer, and I just think it's Beatles-esque in the best sense of the term. We'll never see it live, which I both treasure and bemoan. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:05:13 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: for Stewart R. On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 8:31 AM, Steve Schiavo wrote: > Theirs is a sanitised and anaemic version of American blues-inspired rock >> and roll, he complains. >> > > > It's certainly OK to not like the Beatles, but most of the complaints in > the article are silly or irrelevant. > > > > > On Sep 10, 2009, at 7:36 AM, 2fs wrote: > > >> > > A lot of is, I think, received opinion nearly as old as I am. I mean, yes: some early Beatles records are "prissy" or "anemic" blues covers...but then, so were some early recordings of the Rolling Stones and the Who. The Beatles were smart enough to recognize their strengths, which is why they rarely did blues-based stuff later. But honestly: is every Beatles song really more "prissy" than, say "Lady Jane"? Were the Beatles really the first band (or best example of) that did "slick pop" (which, one presumes, includes the slick inclusion of Ringo's squeaky bass-drum pedal and single-take recordings on those early, oh-so-slick recordings)? As for "sanitized": had the Beatles attempted to pretend to be poor, elderly black men from the US South, they would have been derided as phonies...but apparently, being themselves means "sanitizing" the blues because their versions don't reflect a lifetime of poverty. Well, yeah. But if lower-class = authenticity...I'm pretty sure most members of the Stones, and of the Who as well, actually had more privileged backgrounds on average than the Beatles... Almost none of the above has anything to do with taking the music on its own merits: it's all about blaming the Beatles for being something they're not, for their purportedly malign influence (as if, had the Beatles not come along, someone else wouldn't have experimented with different textures and less blues-rooted sounds & structures), etc. Mostly, though, rather than just say "I don't like many Beatles records," there's this attempt to justify one's taste - even though, as one critic quoted points out, the Beatles' influence has been so pervasive over the last 40 years that if you really don't like the Beatles and everything that follows from them, you'd also dislike pretty much all popular music today - since that influence continues to be audible even in rather unlikely places. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.wordpress.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:05:40 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: for Stewart R. 2fs wrote: > > Mostly, though, rather than just say "I don't like many Beatles records," > there's this attempt to justify one's taste I don't think I've ever tried to justify my taste through this. While there are a few Beatles records I can listen to without feeling nauseous, the only one I can think of right now is Fiona Apple's cover of "Across The Universe". I do love what the Beatles marketing people have done, and really doubt that it's likely to ever be possible again. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 11:24:29 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: for Stewart R. On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Stewart C. Russell > I don't think I've ever tried to justify my taste through this. While > there are a few Beatles records I can listen to without feeling > nauseous, the only one I can think of right now is Fiona Apple's cover > of "Across The Universe". > Of course, that one is, for me, a one-way ticket to Pukesburgh. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 15:25:12 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: for Stewart R. Rex wrote: > > Of course, that one is, for me, a one-way ticket to Pukesburgh. De gustibus, amirite? Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 20:43:20 -0400 From: lep Subject: Re: for Stewart R. Rex says: > On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Stewart C. Russell > >> I don't think I've ever tried to justify my taste through this. While >> there are a few Beatles records I can listen to without feeling >> nauseous, the only one I can think of right now is Fiona Apple's cover >> of "Across The Universe". >> > Of course, that one is, for me, a one-way ticket to Pukesburgh. that cover seems to be fairly well-hated among fans of the beatles and fans of ms. apple. personally, i love her version of it - the flatness and lack of emotion make the song into a lovely trance. i probably shouldn't say this out loud, but it's bowie's version that doesn't make the cut for me. even when he's caught in the the groove of "young americans", it is just SO not his song. as ever, lauren - -- "people with opinions just go around bothering one another." -- the buddha ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V17 #242 ********************************