Can I ask you a favour, please?
Next Christmas, don't watch The Sounds of Music. Or Night Before Christmas, or any other traditional film you watch on that day. Instead, get a copy of Merry Christmas.
The film is based on true events, the Christmas ceasefire of 1914, when WWI soldiers on both sides of the front line left their trenches to bury their dead and play football in No Man's Land. It ends with a disclaimer that any similarity to real persons is purely coincidential - but I have to say, such similarity is deeply flattering. This is a film that shows with profound sincerity the nature of human spirit, thrown into a place of concentrated despair unlike what was ever seen before (and quite possibly, since) - scared, broken, trampled upon, and yet still capable of sensing joy at the sound of bagpipes in the night, and a beautiful voice singing Silent Night in the language of your enemy. The spirit that experiences infinite truth, and through recognizing it, feels no shame for any act that men who have not climbed the wall of a trench would call treason.
On Christmas Eve, 1914, several hundred Germans, Frenchmen and Brits decided that the bloodiest conflict in human history would just have to wait. On this night, The Last War had no power over a small Belgian field.
As the credits rolled, half a thousand people simply sat there, not daring to break the magic of the movie. As the lights came up, they exploded in applause. Not formal theater applause, a reluctantly given tip for the time and effort of humans; there were no creators at the showing. Instead this was applause that every person in that room had no choice but to give.
Watch this film.
Saturday, December 10, 2005
Thursday, December 08, 2005
World Wide Webshite
Saw a link to an article in the New York Times by one John Batelle:
What a comprehensively ridiculous notion. Not the syndication bit, although that's overhyped as well, but the bit about finding your true business model.
This seems to be the fundamental basis for Internet bubbles past and present (and probably future). People somehow get it into their heads that the Internet is a magic new entity that completely changes the way the world works. It is no such thing. The Internet is a tool for human communication, and its dynamics are no more than a minor evolution of the rules of society - the underlying forces are the same, and they manifest themselves in the same way. Opening a business with no clear understanding of how you intend to make money, instead substituted by a vague philosophy of people coming to your website just because it's there and clicking on banners out of sheer gratitude, is a good way to lose money and be ridiculed. I mean, take Antyx for example. It's got its own domain name, appears high up in a lot of Google results, and has a lot of absolutely killer content - and yet in the three months it's been up, it has been viewed less than three thousand times.
Joel Spolsky says that the goal of an IT company should be converting capital into software that works. In a recent podcast he gave an example of how this benefitted him, allowing a situation where his company managed to take a raw idea and implement it into an excellent product in a very short time, using resources that were already in place. According to Joel, what you do is create a team capable of building a better mousetrap, knowing that there are plenty of ideas for the better mousetrap out there that you can implement.
Then again, in that same podcast he admits that a software vendor cannot succeed unless they are actually solving a problem that a lot of people are having. His own company made a content management system, which was a popular thing to make back then, but it never went anywhere; then they made something as pedestrian as a bug tracking system, and it became hugely successful.
You know why Microsoft is the ruler of all it surveys? I'll tell you. It's because I have a document on my work PC that I made months ago. It has a bunch of Visio drawings in it. I usually keep the VSD file with the original drawings for when I need to update them, but this time for some reason I couldn't find it. I'd have to remake the whole schematic, half a dozen drawings, by hand. Except I wouldn't. Because (as it turns out) if you copy and paste a Visio drawing into a Word file and then double-click on the image, it opens an embedded Visio editor, with all the individual objects already recognized.
That's why Microsoft is more successful than any other software company. But it's not why Microsoft is, to begin with, a successful company. That would be because it has a couple of programs which allow me to make documents and draw UML diagrams. If it cared about ease of use, rather than giving people something they needed to do their jobs, it would be... Well, I guess it would be Apple.
"In fact, syndication has become the de facto business model of many start-ups: if you build a new service that garners a decent audience, syndication can provide enough revenue to give you time to refine your services and find your true business model."
What a comprehensively ridiculous notion. Not the syndication bit, although that's overhyped as well, but the bit about finding your true business model.
This seems to be the fundamental basis for Internet bubbles past and present (and probably future). People somehow get it into their heads that the Internet is a magic new entity that completely changes the way the world works. It is no such thing. The Internet is a tool for human communication, and its dynamics are no more than a minor evolution of the rules of society - the underlying forces are the same, and they manifest themselves in the same way. Opening a business with no clear understanding of how you intend to make money, instead substituted by a vague philosophy of people coming to your website just because it's there and clicking on banners out of sheer gratitude, is a good way to lose money and be ridiculed. I mean, take Antyx for example. It's got its own domain name, appears high up in a lot of Google results, and has a lot of absolutely killer content - and yet in the three months it's been up, it has been viewed less than three thousand times.
Joel Spolsky says that the goal of an IT company should be converting capital into software that works. In a recent podcast he gave an example of how this benefitted him, allowing a situation where his company managed to take a raw idea and implement it into an excellent product in a very short time, using resources that were already in place. According to Joel, what you do is create a team capable of building a better mousetrap, knowing that there are plenty of ideas for the better mousetrap out there that you can implement.
Then again, in that same podcast he admits that a software vendor cannot succeed unless they are actually solving a problem that a lot of people are having. His own company made a content management system, which was a popular thing to make back then, but it never went anywhere; then they made something as pedestrian as a bug tracking system, and it became hugely successful.
You know why Microsoft is the ruler of all it surveys? I'll tell you. It's because I have a document on my work PC that I made months ago. It has a bunch of Visio drawings in it. I usually keep the VSD file with the original drawings for when I need to update them, but this time for some reason I couldn't find it. I'd have to remake the whole schematic, half a dozen drawings, by hand. Except I wouldn't. Because (as it turns out) if you copy and paste a Visio drawing into a Word file and then double-click on the image, it opens an embedded Visio editor, with all the individual objects already recognized.
That's why Microsoft is more successful than any other software company. But it's not why Microsoft is, to begin with, a successful company. That would be because it has a couple of programs which allow me to make documents and draw UML diagrams. If it cared about ease of use, rather than giving people something they needed to do their jobs, it would be... Well, I guess it would be Apple.
Wednesday, December 07, 2005
Patriotism
In my travels to various countries here in Europe, I have noticed an interesting trend. It is not without exception, certainly, but has caught my eye enough times to have me start looking out for it.
In an "old" European country with a large proportion of visible minorities, the people you see in a position of authority are usually the title race.
I first noticed it in Sweden, then in Norway, Finland, Holland, the UK... countries where you walk down the street and see a huge variety of skin tones. (This opposed to Small Country, where the permanent black residents can be counted on the fingers of one very deformed hand.) Immigrants are often accused of living off welfare and not working, but that's a whole different problem and one which, I believe, gets solved over a generation or two.
I also don't believe that visible minorities are discouraged from going into law enforcement and similar disciplines. I do, however, believe that they tend not to care.
The job where I have found many minorities was that of bus driver. Naturally, it is the biased view of a traveller on a budget that tends to use the cheapest form of public transport to get from the airport/ferry terminal to the center of town. But it does make sense. Driving a bus requires a couple months of training; unlike driving a cab, you don't need to know the language particularly well; and in Western Europe, it's a heavily unionized job. Here in Small Country with its national obsession with the free market, the transport workers are really the last trade union with the strength to demand something, as opposed to pleading for it. So your average bus driver in a European capital is going to be paid fairly well.
On the other hand, the police is not somewhere you go for the money. There's a huge problem right now in Small Country with the rescue workers (firefighters basically, but tasked with anything outside the strict responsibility of the cops and ambulance guys). Basically they earn nothing. The typical salary is half the national average. It's better in other departments and certainly better in other countries, but the pattern is still there.
The people who patrol the streets, fight fires, work the customs desks at the airport, are all people who care about their homeland.
Again I repeat, there are plenty of exceptions. But the next time you fly to Stockholm, the first stereotypical Norseman you are likely to see will be the border guard spot-checking you for drugs once you get off the plane - rather than the flight attendant or the cabbie driving you to your hotel.
Finally, the point about immigrants being lazy. The most non-European place I have been to was Rotterdam. Admittedly not a touristy city. Over four days in a metropolis with a population that matches the entire Small Country and perhaps exceeds it, I saw maybe three people who looked like you'd expect the Dutch to look. The rest of them were Africans, southeast Asians, Arabs, Turks... you name it. I was told by the people I stayed with that it wasn't just me - Rotterdam was in fact a predominantly non-white city.
And yet, it is the biggest seaport in the world, serving shipments to and from all of Europe, essentially. Keeping up that status takes a lot of hard work.
Oh, and the first Dutch-looking person I saw on that trip? The ticket-taker on the train from Schiphol airport.
In an "old" European country with a large proportion of visible minorities, the people you see in a position of authority are usually the title race.
I first noticed it in Sweden, then in Norway, Finland, Holland, the UK... countries where you walk down the street and see a huge variety of skin tones. (This opposed to Small Country, where the permanent black residents can be counted on the fingers of one very deformed hand.) Immigrants are often accused of living off welfare and not working, but that's a whole different problem and one which, I believe, gets solved over a generation or two.
I also don't believe that visible minorities are discouraged from going into law enforcement and similar disciplines. I do, however, believe that they tend not to care.
The job where I have found many minorities was that of bus driver. Naturally, it is the biased view of a traveller on a budget that tends to use the cheapest form of public transport to get from the airport/ferry terminal to the center of town. But it does make sense. Driving a bus requires a couple months of training; unlike driving a cab, you don't need to know the language particularly well; and in Western Europe, it's a heavily unionized job. Here in Small Country with its national obsession with the free market, the transport workers are really the last trade union with the strength to demand something, as opposed to pleading for it. So your average bus driver in a European capital is going to be paid fairly well.
On the other hand, the police is not somewhere you go for the money. There's a huge problem right now in Small Country with the rescue workers (firefighters basically, but tasked with anything outside the strict responsibility of the cops and ambulance guys). Basically they earn nothing. The typical salary is half the national average. It's better in other departments and certainly better in other countries, but the pattern is still there.
The people who patrol the streets, fight fires, work the customs desks at the airport, are all people who care about their homeland.
Again I repeat, there are plenty of exceptions. But the next time you fly to Stockholm, the first stereotypical Norseman you are likely to see will be the border guard spot-checking you for drugs once you get off the plane - rather than the flight attendant or the cabbie driving you to your hotel.
Finally, the point about immigrants being lazy. The most non-European place I have been to was Rotterdam. Admittedly not a touristy city. Over four days in a metropolis with a population that matches the entire Small Country and perhaps exceeds it, I saw maybe three people who looked like you'd expect the Dutch to look. The rest of them were Africans, southeast Asians, Arabs, Turks... you name it. I was told by the people I stayed with that it wasn't just me - Rotterdam was in fact a predominantly non-white city.
And yet, it is the biggest seaport in the world, serving shipments to and from all of Europe, essentially. Keeping up that status takes a lot of hard work.
Oh, and the first Dutch-looking person I saw on that trip? The ticket-taker on the train from Schiphol airport.
Monday, December 05, 2005
Lifeblood
Judas Priest concert on Thursday. Got off work early, caught the bus to Capital City. Saw the show (extremely good - better than Alice Cooper by miles), went to dad's place. Stayed up for hours playing TOCA Race Driver 2. Had four hours of sleep, got up at 5.30 am, caught the 6.45 bus back to Campustown. Came to work. Had a mocca and some energy drink. Interesting sensation: body completely knackered, mind wide awake.
I don't drink coffee normally, never did, not even during exam sessions at college. I don't have immunity, so even one has a serious effect on me. (My boss, on the other hand, imbibes the most vile brew you are likely to see in your meager existence, black as a lawyer's heart and bitter as Monday morning.)
I'm like a person that's convinced himself he's given up smoking. I won't purchase stimulants out of sheer principle, but a coworker has taken to hoarding energy drink in his desk, and as soon as he opens a can, I pounce. I have a fine-tuned ear for the scratch of tin on a desk surface and the pop of the tab.
I don't drink coffee normally, never did, not even during exam sessions at college. I don't have immunity, so even one has a serious effect on me. (My boss, on the other hand, imbibes the most vile brew you are likely to see in your meager existence, black as a lawyer's heart and bitter as Monday morning.)
I'm like a person that's convinced himself he's given up smoking. I won't purchase stimulants out of sheer principle, but a coworker has taken to hoarding energy drink in his desk, and as soon as he opens a can, I pounce. I have a fine-tuned ear for the scratch of tin on a desk surface and the pop of the tab.
Friday, December 02, 2005
Gadget porn
All right. I admit it. I'm a gadget wanker.
It seems fairly logical to me that the human brain just has a general capacity for producing pleasurable impulses. These impulses are most easily and commonly triggered by sexual references, but can be initiated by any desire sufficiently strong. Certainly the feeling I get when reading the specs and looking at pictures of an Archos PMA400 is close to sexual, and so is the one caused by witnessing the image of the new Lamborghini Gallardo roadster. (Like some others, its design somehow just comes together marvellously in droptop form - despite the fact that it's only a traditional electric canvas roof, basically the same as you'd get on a Miata. The Concept S, much more outrageous, somehow isn't quite as stunning.)
If this reasoning is valid, it is an interesting example of humans mutating to adapt to civilization. I'm sure the capacity for object desire has been ingrained in Homo Sapiens from the start, but while the effect of sexual imagery is easily explained - procreation requires men to become aroused, so nature has made it simple to accomplish - gadget porn, or car porn for that matter, is a bit of a conditioned development.
Interestingly enough, in my experience marketing is not particularly effective at emulating this sort of reaction. You can use all the black backdrops, suggestive angles and hip models you want, but a BMW 7-series will still be ugly enough to give you a sympathetic toothache. And an Alfa Romeo Brera in an unfortunate color, covered in mud, jacked up at the side of the road with a wheel missing, will still be absolutely stunning.
It seems fairly logical to me that the human brain just has a general capacity for producing pleasurable impulses. These impulses are most easily and commonly triggered by sexual references, but can be initiated by any desire sufficiently strong. Certainly the feeling I get when reading the specs and looking at pictures of an Archos PMA400 is close to sexual, and so is the one caused by witnessing the image of the new Lamborghini Gallardo roadster. (Like some others, its design somehow just comes together marvellously in droptop form - despite the fact that it's only a traditional electric canvas roof, basically the same as you'd get on a Miata. The Concept S, much more outrageous, somehow isn't quite as stunning.)
If this reasoning is valid, it is an interesting example of humans mutating to adapt to civilization. I'm sure the capacity for object desire has been ingrained in Homo Sapiens from the start, but while the effect of sexual imagery is easily explained - procreation requires men to become aroused, so nature has made it simple to accomplish - gadget porn, or car porn for that matter, is a bit of a conditioned development.
Interestingly enough, in my experience marketing is not particularly effective at emulating this sort of reaction. You can use all the black backdrops, suggestive angles and hip models you want, but a BMW 7-series will still be ugly enough to give you a sympathetic toothache. And an Alfa Romeo Brera in an unfortunate color, covered in mud, jacked up at the side of the road with a wheel missing, will still be absolutely stunning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
