THE PRAYER CYCLE... a eulogy for the 20th century ...a prayer for the 21st...

On Sundays, the Music from the Hearts of Space website lets listeners hear the featured weekly program for free. This week, they are repeating a program, a Choral Symphony, that has been selected to commemorate the 10th anniversary of 9-11.

PGM 605 : "TERROR AND HOPE"
PGM NOTE : remembering 9/11 with 'The Prayer Cycle'
FIRST BROADCAST : 21-Sep-2001

INTRO : This week we mark the 10th anniversary of the historic attacks on the U.S. on September 11, 2001. Memory of traumatic events changes over time; while others will be recounting the facts and events of that day...we will recall some of the feelings it provoked by repeating a special program from the following week. Even after 10 years, the wound remains tender, the fear it created remains present, and the hope for a better world remains a vision and a prayer.

It was an epoch-defining event that temporarily rendered everything else insignificant. Even our ordinary diet of violent media had not prepared us to comprehend the implacable hatred and disregard for life/ of this phantom enemy. Perhaps no single act in American history has raised more questions, more emotions, more tears.

In the weeks following the attacks, as we arose from our pain and began to move forward, we remained poised on the edge of catharsis — and it is in that spirit that we bring you a program called TERROR AND HOPE.

If spring is the season of hope, then it is fitting that in the spring of 1999, in advance of the Millenium, Sony Classical released a choral symphony by New York composer JONATHAN ELIAS, titled THE PRAYER CYCLE. As we did in 1999, this week we devote the entirety of Hearts of Space to this extraordinary music. But this week, it will sound different, feel different, and will have a different meaning.

JONATHAN ELIAS began writing THE PRAYER CYCLE in the period immediately before the birth of his first child. "I was excited by the possibilities for my child," he says, "but I also felt anxiety and sadness about the world she was about to enter. With all the wondrous advances of mankind, it was painful to acknowledge the other defining characteristic of the 20th century, which is more calculated and cold-blooded than any other period of recorded history. Is man's inhumanity to man as common in our nature as other forms of survival? With these thoughts and concerns, I began to write 'The Prayer Cycle.'"

The effect of this brilliant multi-cultural, multi-language production is extraordinarily powerful and appropriate. "Prayer," says composer Elias, "is what we turn to when the only thing we have left...is hope."

JONATHAN ELIAS' THE PRAYER CYCLE... a eulogy for the 20th century ...a prayer for the 21st... and a plea for a world where we have no choice but to get along — because anything else is unthinkable. TERROR AND HOPE...on this edition...of Hearts of Space.

It's described in further detail at Amazon.com:


The Prayer Cycle

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com
It is with primitive urgency and lustrous clarity rising like flickering embers from a fire that Jonathan Elias's ambitious Prayer Cycle is given voice. Woven together like knotty wool, silk, and fine strands of silvery water, the disparate yet complementary voices of the late Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, Alanis Morissette, Yungchen Lhamo, Ofra Haza, the American Boychoir, Salif Keita, and others intertwine in multiple languages with the superb English Chamber Orchestra and Chorus. Prayers of supplication, gratitude, and longing build in layers, one on top of and 'twixt and 'tween the other, as movements titled "Mercy," "Grace," "Innocence," "Compassion," and the like. Remarkably, Elias's Prayer Cycle eloquently captures the ecstasy, pain, grief, and sublime beauty of humanity--as he simply and poignantly writes in his liner notes, "The world we live in is both joyous and cruel." --Paige La Grone

Then there is this, from one of the Amazon.com customer reviews:

"If this does not move you, then you have no soul."

I first heard this as part of a radio program on the local NPR station, and was shamed into silence. The diversity of collaborators in this work (including US folk-rocker James Taylor, Yemenite singer Ofra Haza, Canadian rocker Alanis Morissette, the late Musrat Fateh Ali Khan [one of his last performances], the American Boychoir w/Devin Provenzano, the English Chamber Orch. & Chorus) shows the great number of fields that composer Jonathan Elias was drawing from.

The song "Hope" will lift your spirit, while James Taylor's melancholy vocals on "Grace" will move you to tears (At first, I thought he would be horribly out of place, but his voice fits the work perfectly!). The lyrics run all over the map in language. There are lyrics in Urdu, Mali, Latin, English, French, Italian, Hungarian, Dwala, Tibetan, German, Spanish and Hebrew, but they are listed in English in the CD booklet. I gather this is Elias' way of uniting the world. The lyrics are prayers, laments and pleas for forgiveness. The themes are loneliness, war and regret.

The style of music is definately classical, but does not limit itself to European roots. There are distinct influences from Africa, the Orient, and even various tribal nuances. For someone who was raised on European Classical music, it may be a shock to the system, but it works, and it is wonderful!

I forsee this recording to be one of the hand-picked few that future generations will draw upon for inspiration. As we as a people on this planet become closer, our world seems to become smaller. Our hopes, dreams, and cultures begin to overlap. This recording is proof that, when skillfully co-ordinated they can create incredible harmony.

Highly, highly reccomended.

I love Choral music. This reminded me of Carmina Burana, which was also a multi-language choral work in the classical style, though I think Prayer Cycle goes further, by blending in non-classical styles as well. It reminds me of some of the "World Fusion Music" I've heard, which is a growing music genre.

Perhaps this is a glimpse of what is going to be the future of classical music in our Brave New World? Only time will tell.

The song list for Prayer Cycle on Amazon looks slightly different than the one on the Hearts of Space website. There may be different versions. The one at Hearts of Space is available to hear in full for free, but today only.

     

My most popular blog post is on a most unpopular topic

At least it's unpopular with me. It's the blog post I did in 2007, about 9-11, and the circumstances of the people who jumped or fell to their deaths:

The 9-11 jumpers; they didn't "jump"

It's not a nice topic by any means; it was painful to write about. Yet it receives more hits in Google searches than any other post on my blog. And each year around September 11th, the hits skyrocket. I think this year, it will be the highest ever:


Source: My Site Meter

People leave comments on the post. Some of them are incredibly vile, cheap and disgusting. Others push political agendas and conspiracy theories.

There are other places to post that stuff. The topic of the jumper post is the jumpers/fallers. I try to keep it on that topic, and delete anything else.

I sometimes think I'd like to turn comments off for that post. Perhaps I will one day. But some people seem to use the comments to help them deal with something, so maybe that's a good thing. And they aren't all bad.

Someone left this comment today:

Thank you. I want to understand the world around me before I choose my own conclusions. I do not want to be pushed around, I'm tired of it. Thank you for your honesty, for your courage with difficult material, and for the respect you have shown all of us who have read this article. [...]

That IS what I was trying for, so I'm glad some people understand that. I was not trying to tell people what to think, but rather to just try to provide a complete picture of the variables many of the jumpers/fallers may have faced (and the lack of acceptable choices available to them).

And I will quite freely admit that it's possible some people jumped out of despair. But there are many variations on the human theme; each person was unique, and we just can't know what was going through all their minds, or the details of what each one faced. Yet, I think it's likely that NONE of them would have jumped or fallen that day, if the planes did not hit the towers. They were forced into impossible circumstances that are painful to even imagine.

The above commenter ended his comment with:

[...] Again, thank you. This thoughtfulness, honesty, and respect for others is the only path back to national greatness. [...]

Those qualities, given and received, are much needed. I hope we will all strive for them, because it will help. It's impossible for us all to agree on everything, nor do we need to, but we do need to stand on common ground and be united on those things we can be united on.
     

From 9-11, to a Farm. Life, Death, and what is important to us.

I was living in San Francisco when 9-11 happened; I'd lived there for many years. I'd always preferred rural life to urban life, but I needed to work, and cities offered more job opportunities.

By 2001 I was a business owner. But as the economy soured, our business suffered, and we sold up and moved out. To a rural area, where we have a business in town and a small farm at home. I always figured we were heading to a place like this eventually. But 9-11, and it's effect on the economy and our business, made us decide to make the transition sooner rather than later.

While surfing the net, I came across one woman's 9-ll story. She worked near the towers. She got caught in the dust cloud when the first tower collapsed. She's a writer, and reading her story makes you feel like you were there:

First-hand account of 9/11

At the Wall St. train stop people were covered with papers. A plane crash. That's what everyone said. Then a boom. Everyone ran. I ran to my office and called my brother in the Midwest.

I wanted to be closer. At the corner of Church and Broadway, I angled my way through a large, packed crowd to get the best view. We talked about people jumping. The police stood behind the yellow tape. Minutes later, there was a boom. I thought it was a bomb, so I crouched, but people ran, so I ran. I couldn't see anything. I don't know how far I ran. Couldn't see where I was running. Didn't know if I was in a street or next to a building. Didn't know what street I was on. No one could talk because the dust filled our throats. After about ten steps I tripped over a pile of people and then people tripped on me.

I laid there. The only sound was the falling of dust and debris. No one moved under me. The weight of people on top of me got heavier. I couldn't breathe. I knew we were all going to die in that pile. I pulled myself out of the pile. My slip-ons slipped off. I stood up and saw nothing. Not even an inch in front of me. I put my hands out and felt for something. [...]

She ends up drinking out of a ... well, read the whole thing.

She writes for a living. She has a blog, and she's written about how the experience has affected her, shaped her life, even 10 years later:

Surviving 9/11: Ten years later

She also lives on a farm now. I can't say there are a lot of other similarities between my life and hers. But she does have some keen insights, and I do know, like her, that, when you think you are going to die in the next moment, your priorities suddenly become very clear. And when you survive, instead of die, if you have any sort of depth to you, those revealed priorities stay with you the rest of your life.

And I have to say, poking around her blog, I've really enjoyed reading some of her rants, observations, and advice:

What to do in college right now

Bad career advice: Do what you love

Motivation Tips from the Bath

Best alternative to grad school

Voices of the defenders of grad school. And me crushing them.

Overcome the willpower myth

Figuring out where you fit

She isn't politically correct, and her posts are full of interesting embedded links.
     

Corriander, our beloved Chug, is no more

She was a Chihuahua - Pug mix, so we called her a "Chug". She was 16 years old, which is something like 115 in dog years. She died one week ago tonight.

It was my ham radio night, when our radio net meets on the air. I always feed the dogs a little later on those nights. The net had ended, and I had prepared her food and was bringing it to her when I heard her yelping rapidly, in a panic. She was on her bed, with her head hanging over the edge, like she was trying to get up.

I put the food down and rushed to her, just in time to hold her while she died.

I think it was her heart. It didn't last long. I held her and stroked her and rubbed her ears and spoke the usual words of comfort to her, as the life left her body.

It was sad. And it sounds kinda awful, but it wasn't really. She died at home, in the hands of someone who loved her. And it was quick.

She was completely deaf, and almost completely blind. She slept most of the time.

Last year, she started to lose her mind, like a kind of doggie alzheimers. The vet put her on some prescription dog kibble, called "b/d" (for "brain diet"). It worked; she came back to us, mentally. But she continued to slow down physically.

I had to walk her on the leash, or she wouldn't walk with us. Toward the end, I carried her a lot. On that last day, I could not find her leash, so I had carried her most of the way through our walk in the woods.

At night she would poop and pee on newspapers I left out for her, because she couldn't manage the stairs anymore, or even the dog door. Lately she had stared to become careless about going on the paper; I was dreading having to take her to the vet to be put down, putting it off as long as I could. Now that won't be necessary.

I had hoped she would die quietly in her sleep. But perhaps she needed me to be there at the end. Anyway, that's how it played out. I was there.

Our other two dogs were there, watching. They understood.




She had a good long life. We had some fun times. I posted once years back about how she survived cancer, using natural treatments. She continued to enjoy life, even as she aged. As she slowed down, we made it easier for her.




We buried her in the garden, next to Saffron, our Boarder Collie - Aussie Shepard mix, whom she was very attached to. I planted blue daisies on top of her grave, so that when I say "Corrie's pushing up daisies now", it will be more than just a figure of speech.




Good bye, Corrie. You will always be my favorite Chug.
     

"The psychological pain will be much greater than the Great Depression, even though the physical conditions will be much better."

That's a quote from an author selling a book about the coming burst of the "dollar bubble", and what changes it will bring to life in the USA.

I've posted previously about dangers to US currency, about various scenarios such as a complete collapse of our currency similar to (or even worse than) the hyper inflation of 1920's Germany.

But what if, the actual consequences were not as bad as any of those? Or even as bad as the Great Depression of the 1930s? Authors of a new book make a similar claim, but they also say it's going to SEEM worse to us, because we've gotten so used to easy money and credit for so long.

Their book is called "Aftershock":

Aftershock: Protect Yourself and Profit in the Next Global Financial Meltdown

From the Inside Flap
From the authors who accurately predicted the domino fall of the conjoined real estate, stock, and private debt bubbles that led to the financial crisis of 2008 and 2009, now comes the definitive look at what is still ahead in 2012 and beyond—and what investors can do right now to protect themselves.

Based on the authors' unmatched track record of precise predictions in the two landmark books America's Bubble Economy and Aftershock, this Second Edition of Aftershock updates the original book by more than 35 percent with fresh analysis of the latest economic developments, plus offers new in-depth advice for how readers can prepare now for protection and profits in the next global money meltdown.

The second edition of Aftershock shows readers:

Why the latest actions by the U.S. Federal Reserve will eventually damage the dollar and hurt investors worldwide

How future rising inflation and interest rates will harm your specific investments, and what to do about it

The future fall of China's bubble economy, as well as current and future problems with European debt

Detailed investment advice about real estate, retirement, annuities, life insurance, and much more

What's next for stocks, bonds, currencies, commodities, and other assets

How to buy and own gold and silver before, during, and after the coming Aftershock

O.K. fine, another one of THOSE books. They all seem to say "buy gold", which is fine if you got plenty of spare cash lying around. Sorry, none of mine is spare or lying around, it's all working. Then they usually offer advice about managing your stock portfolio, your 401K, and other things I don't even have.

I haven't read this book, so I don't know if it's like that. I don't even know if I would buy it. So why am I writing about it?

Because, the authors claim that their publishers made them delete a chapter from the book, that talks about what life is going to be like in the USA after the currency bubble bursts, on the grounds that it was "too grim".

Well, that did make me curious. And it turns out, they have made that 20 page chapter available as a free download on their Amazon page:

More to Explore: Bonus Chapter
Read a bonus chapter (PDF)--available exclusively on Amazon.com--which details the authors' predictions and recommendations for a post-dollar-bubble world.

Now of course I know this is a promotional device for selling the book. Duh. But that doesn't mean that some of the ideas expressed aren't interesting. Lets have a look at a few excerpts and see:

[...] When the dollar bubble collapses, the huge government debt bubble will fall, too. That means the falling value of the dollar will have caused enough foreign investors to become concerned enough about the value of their dollar-denominated investments that they will no longer be willing to buy U.S. government bonds at a reasonable price. This means the government will not be able to refinance its debt (just like a company that loses the faith of its creditors) and instead the government will have to resort to inflation, tax increases, and budget cuts to deal with the situation (see Chapter 3).

Like a family without their credit cards, the U.S. government will be forced to live within the constraints of its actual income, which at this point will be a rapidly declining tax base, much like what California is now facing, but far worse because the U.S. government became very comfortable receiving so much income from deficit financing. Inflation would normally be an additional tool for the government to raise money, but inflation can only be raised so far without destroying a modern industrial economy, such as that in the United States. The amount of inflation the government can feasibly run was discussed in Chapter 3 (about 50 to 100 percent).

That means the government will not be able to create any big stimulus packages or tax cuts or anything of the sort. It will have to cut, cut, cut spending so it can live on its income. Some may see this as a refreshing change—a government that lives within its means. But it will not feel very refreshing. Many things we take for granted, like large pensions, will have to be curtailed. We have gotten very comfortable with a government that always has money and never has to worry about running out; a government that never has to raise taxes to fund wars or stimulus packages; a government with unlimited credit. That’s over.

Even during the Great Depression the government’s finances were rock solid and it could certainly borrow money, if needed. But, in the post-dollar-bubble world, the government will be like the rest of us, only worse. It will have its credit cards cut off and a much lower income while still having a massive debt that it can’t possibly make payments on or even pay interest on, and eventually it won’t make principal or interest payments. So, it will have to live within its means.

[...]

Key cuts will hit both the "guns and butter" of the government budget. Cuts in military spending will be much larger than contemplated today and will focus disproportionately on the Navy and Air Force.

On the "butter" side, the most important cut will be to make Social Security means tested, making Social Security essentially a welfare program. For those who have little or no income or assets, Social Security will definitely be there to help. However, for those who have income or assets, forget it.

In addition, Medicare (medical care for older people) reimbursements to doctors and hospitals will be reduced. Since huge numbers of unemployed people and retirees with no more retirement money will qualify for Medicaid (medical care for poor people), Medicaid will explode in size so reimbursements to doctors and hospitals will have to be cut from their already abysmally low levels, and there will be tougher rules on what gets reimbursed. A large percentage of doctors today won’t even accept Medicaid payments because the reimbursements are too low. But Medicaid will grow to be so important that doctors won’t have any choice but to accept its payments. Essentially, in a post-dollar-bubble world, Medicaid will become our national health care program.

High inflation will do much of the dirty work in cutting budgets. Remember, when inflation is high, budget cuts are accomplished simply by not raising budgets to match inflation. So, inflation will be blamed for much of the government budget cutting. [...]

It goes on to describe huge "progressive" tax increases, why they are unavoidable, how they will play out, etc. All important and interesting but too much for me to excerpt here.

There is lots more, but I'm going to skip to a few highlights:

[...] The high unemployment and high bankruptcy rates of the post-dollar-bubble economy, combined with a greatly pared down government will, for a while, create an unusual set of economic conditions. For example, in such a chaotic economic situation, there will be little incentive for people to pay their mortgages or other debts. Many of their creditors will be insolvent and there will be no significant market for selling the properties. Much of the management of these debts will be handed over to an overwhelmed government with little interest in foreclosure. Even if it did foreclose, who would it possibly sell the properties to? And there will be no serious financing available for buyers at that point, anyway. Certainly, the government won’t be able to provide financing.

A good decision for many people will be to simply stop paying their debts. Even rent may not be worth paying as evictions could become increasingly politically difficult for elected sheriffs to carry out. Plus, it will be difficult for landlords to find good tenants to replace the bad ones. Debt repayment will become a bit lawless during this period.

Businesses will follow a similar path as individuals. They will stop paying mortgages and other debts and even limit the rent they pay to what is needed to fund basic utilities and maintenance. They won’t be making much money and if they have to pay rent above basic costs, in many cases, they will go under—something the landlord doesn’t want to see either since there are no good tenants to replace them.

As a result of all this, squatters will be increasingly common for business, and even more common for individuals since it will be politically difficult, and of little economic advantage, to throw tenants out. Local governments will have very tight budgets and won’t have the resources to spend on throwing people (and voters) out of their homes so that the landlord can have a vacant property with no prospects of rental. This situation will not last forever, but in the meantime, people will take advantage of it.

[...]

Pension fund investments in stocks, bonds and real estate will plunge in value. Government contributions to pension funds will also plunge along with falling tax receipts. Government unions may protest, but the reality will be a lack of tax revenue and there will be little ability or interest in raising taxes to fund payments to employees who aren’t working while governments have to massively cut the number of employees who are working.

Yes, there may be lots of legal challenges, but in the end, the bottom line will be the bottom line. Also, since inflation will be high, the easy way to cut pensions will simply be to raise them less than inflation. If pensions are not inflation adjusted, they are easy to eliminate. If they are inflation adjusted, expect the laws to be changed so that they are no longer inflation adjusted.

Yes, there will be court fights, but the money simply won’t be there anymore. Even federal pensions will go the way of state and local pensions. So, clearly there will be will be no federal government bailouts of state and local pensions.

[...]

FDIC insured savings accounts are a bit different. There will likely be some sort of needs based payment for small insured accounts. Clearly, there won’t be full payment, but the government may be able to pay with inflated dollars some portion of FDIC insured savings when banks fail. Since so many banks will be failing, the government can’t possibly pay accounts that are above the insured level, but it could pay some amount of money on accounts under the maximum level of insurance, currently $250,000.

The government will also be able to maintain a payments mechanism so that there will be no problem conducting transactional banking business, such as writing checks or using debit cards. The government will also be able to support banks in making asset- based loans on items such as inventory and receivables. However, the government won’t be able to support banks to make mortgage loans, non-asset based business loans, commercial real estate loans, loans to buy businesses, credit card loans, etc.

[...]

No New “New Deal”

While some people now say they are worried about drifting toward socialism or "sharing the wealth," in fact there won’t be much wealth to share. Instead of the rich funding the poor, the middle class will shoulder most of that burden by paying very high taxes to fund nearly all of the enormous number of people on welfare. Instead of shared wealth we will have "shared poverty".

With the government essentially in default on its loans, it will have no way to raise money for its welfare programs, other than through taxes. And since there will be so few wealthy people left to tax, that leaves only the middle class and the much smaller upper-middle class to carry the load. Still, working and paying very high taxes, perhaps as high as 50 percent, will be better than not working at all.

[...]

The most important difference in the post-dollar bubble world from the pre-dollar bubble world won’t be lower stock or real estate prices, but interestingly, jobs. On a day-to-day level, the lack of jobs will be what affects people the most. Many people lucky enough to have jobs will move down the ladder, not up. For example, a former senior accountant at an accounting firm might have to take a job as a bookkeeper or very junior accountant at a business, and at much lower pay, rather than at an accounting firm Employees will work longer hours for less pay and in less appealing conditions. Benefits will be gone or reduced and competition for jobs will be fierce. Just about everyone will know they could be easily replaced.

However, it won’t be anything like the Great Depression of 1929 because of two important differences:

1. The nation will be much wealthier, so few will suffer like they did in the Great Depression.

2. Paradoxically, because we are much wealthier, unemployment will be much higher, likely in the 40- to 60-percent range, when counting the discouraged unemployed.

Unemployment can be much higher when the nation is wealthier because people don’t have to have jobs. Unemployed people can live with parents, children, relatives, or friends. Plus, there will be a solid safety net of welfare from the government, although people who are used to today’s prosperity will consider the net abysmally low.

In the Depression, if there were a job paying pennies for picking oranges (as in The Grapes of Wrath) you’d take it because you had to. In our much wealthier society, the people who do have jobs will be much better paid and will help support friends and relatives who are unemployed.

[...]

With unemployment in the 40- to 60 percent range, GDP will also drop by a similar amount, but again, even with a 50 percent drop, that would still be a $7 trillion economy in today’s dollars. That’s still pretty big bucks. However, it won’t feel like big bucks. And that is another big difference between the post-dollar-bubble world and the Great Depression: The psychological pain will be much greater for us today.

[...]

As mentioned earlier, This is because expectations were so very high prior to the Bubblequake; much higher than before the Great Depression. Real estate had gone up phenomenally, stock values had gone up phenomenally, and money was easy, not only in the United States but overseas, as well. It seemed like a new billionaire was born every minute. [...]

There is lots, lots more. How small businesses, student loans, education, banks etc. are going to be affected. And of course a pitch to read the whole book.

I'm not saying I think it's all true; but I can see the logic of many of the arguments. Anyway it's food for thought, in the interesting times we live in. Read the whole thing and see what you think.

Whether or not it's a glimpse of the Brave New World ahead of us, remains to be seen. At any rate, we shall see.
     

Good Lessons from the "Photo-Chemical Age"

I recently did a post about Super 8 film making in the 1970's when I was a kid. I've seen many stories on the internet about other people who did so too.

The following story I found amusing, and close to my own experience. The author goes into detail about how different film making was back then, in the "Photo-Chemical Age", and the valuable lessons it taught us budding film makers:

Blood, Sweat and Latex: An Ode to Super 8mm Film

[...] Growing up in the late ’60s and early ’70s was a challenging time for burgeoning filmmakers. There were no consumer video cameras, no computers with editing software, and certainly no digital cameras. I recently heard someone describe this as the “Photo-Chemical Age” in an attempt to make it sound horrible and archaic. After all, now we can shoot, edit, and post our films more easily than sitting through 80% of what Hollywood has to offer these days.

Well, it was the opposite back then. Motion Pictures were fantastic, and the theater experience was a tremendous joy, but making your own movies required a level of commitment that certainly would discourage anyone with a mild interest. Equipment wasn’t cheap and it had its limitations as well. Call it what you will, but the Photo-Chemical Age was glorious as well as frustrating.

[...]

It was the mid-1970s when I asked for my first Super 8mm* camera. I had looked through that Christmas’ Sears Wishbook and had found, what I thought, was the slickest movie camera that my father would creak open his wallet and purchase for me. Instantly, I had delusions of shooting King Kong in my garage. Really? How hard could it be?

Christmas arrived and I recall holding my first Super 8mm in my hand. This was it. I was now a filmmaker without ever shooting a frame of film. However, I was determined.

I began by building my first miniature set for my dinosaur epic. Taking brown paper garbage bags, cutting them up, turning them inside out, I fashioned a cliff-side wall for my backdrop rather than painting a cyclorama. I found appropriate plants and sticks to fashion miniature trees and flora. I even made vines out of painted cotton string.

Grabbing my camera, I looked through the eyepiece and found myself staring into a fantastic primordial world! Pulling the trigger back, I heard the motor kick in, the film begin moving in the cartridge and just like that, I was then, REALLY a filmmaker!

I grabbed one of my Prehistoric Scenes dinosaurs, pulled its head off and puppeteered it in front of the camera. Genius! I grabbed my Space: 1999 Eagle model kit off of my bedroom shelf, tied black threads to the framework and lowered it into the jungle. Oh, man! This was going to be SWEET! Dinosaurs! Space ships! I had made my first epic.

Finally, I heard the film stop in the cartridge and shooting was officially wrapped on my first effort. What I had done would be the envy of everyone I knew.

Then, came a series of hard lessons in Super 8 filmmaking.

When we were young and shooting Super 8 film with joyous abandon, the first thing most of us learned was this: After you shoot, you had to bring your exposed film to a Drug Store to have it developed and, at least in New Orleans, this processing could take up to 3 weeks!

[...]

When I got my first film reel back from the drug store, I remember opening the little plastic case it was in and spooling the leader on the ground, I held it up to the sun to see if anything turned out. HOLY COW! I could see green! It must be the jungle! I loaded the film into my projector and the real “film school” began.

1. It was out of focus. I didn’t realize that my camera had a “fixed focus” lens, which meant that if you shot anything from infinity to 3 feet from the film gate, it would probably be in focus.

2. It wasn’t lined up correctly. I didn’t realize that film cameras came in two models: Reflex and Parallax. Reflex cameras essentially were “view through the lens” where Parallax had view-finders (or “range finders”) that were independent of the main camera lens. I had a Parallax camera.

3. The exposure wasn’t correct. Most of these basic Super 8 cameras were automatic exposure meaning that it would be taking constant light readings through a little sensor and adjust the aperture constantly causing dark and light extremes throughout the shot.

So much for my big Sci-Fi effort. Not having much to go on, I went to the library and checked out as many books on Home Film Production that I could.

[...]

Now, for a bit of honesty: I rarely saw a Super 8 film that looked any good. Because the film was so small, it tended to be grainy. There were a couple of people that managed to get some good results, but I wouldn’t meet them until college. But what was so good about the format is that it forced you to think and plan.

You couldn’t just turn your camera on (or pick an app on your iPhone) and start shooting. You had to take your time, check your exposure, check your focus, make sure your eyepiece was closed (or your eye was against it), and then rehearse. Film cartridges were only 3 minutes and could run up to $7. Wasting film was not an option. In short, it TAUGHT you how to make movies through hard knocks. [...]

He mentioned the Space: 1999 model spaceship. I had one of those, and filmed it too. I also made backdrops and sets and experimented with stop-motion animation... and made all the same mistakes, but also learned the same lessons.

In the full article he mentions Super-8-filmaker magazine (with an embedded link), and the "Craven Backwinder", which was used to back-wind the film for double exposures, allowing you to do amazing special effects. I know because I had one, and used it to full advantage. I had great fun experimenting with it. I was also an avid reader of Super-8-Filmaker magazine.

Read the whole thing. It's a great remembrance of the joys and the agonies of the those pre-digital, Photo-Chemical days. When movie-making was challenging, and film was film!


Also see:

Super 8 filmmakers of the '70's. I was one!

Super 8 Film and High Definition Video

"Super 8" is Great

     

Technological Dinosaurs

VMWare Chief To Microsoft: Who's The Dinosaur?

[...] What we’re seeing in the cloud era is not just hundreds of millions but billions of new users and devices now coming into play. Three years ago over 95 percent of the devices connected to the Internet were personal computers. Three years from now that number will probably be less than 20 percent. More than 80 percent of the devices connected to the Internet will not be Windows-based personal computers. [...]

Read the whole thing, for context and embedded links.
     

A glitch in the sidebar

There was something wrong with the blog the past two days. The page would load, then be re-directed to another site when the blogroll code in the sidebar would try to load. I've deleted the code, so the blog should load normally now.
     

Myers-Briggs says that I'm a "Trustee"

I'm taking some on-line FEMA courses as part of my Amateur Radio Emergency Service training. The course I'm doing presently recommended taking an on-line test, the Myers-Briggs personality Type indicator test. It categorizes people into 16 different personality types, and it's often used by corporations and other groups to determine the best job positions to put various personality types into.

The link the FEMA course gave for the free test is no longer valid. The test is available on several sites as a service you pay for, with follow-up from a qualified professional to help you interpret the results. Prices range from $59.00 to over $200.00. More than I'm willing to pay.

I did however find a free site that offers a test they claim is based on the Meyers-Briggs concepts. Since it's free, I tried it out. Below is the result. It say's that I'm the "Trustee" type:

ISTJ - "Trustee". Decisiveness in practical affairs. Guardian of time- honored institutions. Dependable. 11.6% of total population.

Take Free Jung Personality Test
Personality Test by SimilarMinds.com

The test results offers other details too. And there are many sites that discuss the different personality types. In fact, each personality type even has it's own Wikipedia page. For example, ISTJ (the Trustee). ISTJ is also sometimes described as the Inspector, which is one of the sub-groups of David Keirsey's Guardian Temperament category.

If you take the Free Jung Personality Test, you will be asked to state your gender, then you will be given 48 questions with sliding scale answers.

One thing I found especially interesting was, the advice it gave me regarding jobs/careers for my personality type:

favored careers:
data analyst, scientist, researcher, engineer, financial planner, statistician, office worker, government employee, lab technician, nuclear engineer, office manager, biomedical engineer, account manager, ceo, investment banker, analyst, academic, systems analyst, pharmacy technician, network admin, genetics researcher, research assistant, strategist


disfavored careers:
entertainer, artist, filmmaker, musician, actor, fashion desinger, singer, music journalist, comedian, massage therapist, photographer, dj, model, author, bartender, painter, school counselor

Nearly all the career testing I've done in the past has said I should focus on jobs and careers in the Creative Arts, more than Sciences/Business. This seems to be saying almost the complete opposite.

It's funny, but I've always been attracted to both the Arts AND the Sciences, but never felt comfortable enough to try to make a career out of anything artistic, despite what other tests have said. Much of this test explains why.

I've read that the "real" Meyers-Briggs test is longer, and the results more complete, taking into account more subtleties, which is why they recommend a trained counselor to help you interpret and use the results.

I wish I had taken the test when I was a highschool freshman. I could possibly have used it to plan my educational choices better. Oh well. It's interesting anyway.

Here is a good introduction about it:

Free On-line Myers Briggs Personality Tests

[...] Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is a personality test designed to assist a person in identifying some significant personal preferences.

The Indicator is frequently used in the areas of pedagogy, group dynamics, employee training, leadership training, marriage counseling, and personal development.

The Indicator measures four bipolar factors, Intraversion/Extraversion, Thinking/Feeling, Intuition/Sensing, and Judging/Perceiving, but these names don’t exactly mean what we commonly understand when saying somebody is “extroverted” or “introverted”. Have a look at their meaning below.

As a test result you will get a 4 letter personality type and you can then read up on the description of this specific type as well as typical careers, how it relates to family/relationships and get suggestions for personal growth. And there are even tests for assessing children’s type. [...]

Follow the link for more details.

For even more details, try www.myersbriggs.org

     

Super 8 filmmakers of the '70's. I was one!

I recently saw the Sci-Fi flick, "Super 8". Set in 1979, it's about a group of kids who are making a Super-8mm movie, when a train wreck in their town results in the escape of a captured alien being transported by the Air Force.

The Sci-Fi aspects of the story were rather "Spielbergesque"; it was ok, made for an entertaining movie. But the Super-8 part of it was more interesting to me; it evoked a lot of nostalgia.

I was in high school in 1979. I used to make 8mm films. And like one of the boy characters in the movie, Charles, I used to read Super-8-Filmaker magazine, and wanted to make a film to enter into a film contest. Charles had his friends helping him with makeup, costumes, special effects, models, etc. I used to do all of those things, too. It really brought back a lot of memories.

In high school I attempted to make a Super-8 sound film, by borrowing a sound movie camera from the school library. I eagerly developed the film, but when I projected my first sound film... there was no sound. Something was wrong with the camera, and it had to be sent away to be serviced. I never saw it again. Thus, I never made my sound film to enter into a contest.

If that camera had worked, would it have launched my budding career as a filmmaker? Would I now be a Steven Spielberg or a J.J. Abrams, having started my career in Super 8 films like so many have done? ;-)


Backyard Auteurs

In 2003, James Cameron called a man named Lenny Lipton to thank him for writing the book that inspired him to become a filmmaker. Back in 1975, Lipton had published The Super 8 Book, a how-to guide for using super 8, the inexpensive film stock that allowed a generation of novice filmmakers to make their first motion pictures. Lipton was grateful for the call, if not surprised by it. "I hear that all the time," he told me. Joel Silver, the producer of The Matrix and Die Hard also got in touch recently to express his gratitude. A ring from J.J. Abrams, whose film Super 8 premieres Friday, can't be far off.

Introduced by Kodak in 1965, super 8 was the cheapest film around—each roll was about $5, and worked on cameras that started for under $30. Many families purchased super 8 cameras to document birthday parties and barbecues, but the handheld cameras were light enough for a child to use, and soon kids were out in the backyard, playing auteur.

According to Rhonda Vigeant, the director of marketing for Pro8mm, a processing, scanning, repair, and sales business in Burbank, Calif., a slew of today's most successful filmmakers got their start shooting on super 8 film. "We know that because we've transferred all their original movies," Vigeant says conspiratorially, referring to the process of digitizing old film. She's says she's seen super 8 work by Ron Howard, Steven Soderbergh, Sam Raimi, Francis Ford Coppola, Martin Scorsese, and, of course, J.J. Abrams.

[...]

For filmmakers growing up in the '70s and '80s, super 8 was a gateway drug into a lifetime of addiction. Steven Soderbergh's super 8 fixation began as a distraction from a dull animation course his father enrolled him in at age 13. "I quickly gravitated toward grabbing the Nizo [a German-made super 8 camera] and shooting live action," he recalled in Outsider Features: American Independent Films of the 1980s. Growing up in Houston, Wes Anderson used his two brothers as stars and paper boxes as sets in his super 8 films. Chris Nolan got the directing itch as soon as he picked up his father's super 8 camera at age 7. Tim Burton "made models, fooled around with them and burned them and filmed them," on super 8.

Did the medium leave its mark on the work of these directors? The low cost of super 8 encouraged experimentation. "You didn't have to worry about experimenting with it. There was this sense of being able to be playful and experimental and try things out," recalls Claude Kerven, co-chair of the filmmaking program at the New York Film Academy. At the same time, the short length of each roll forced amateurs to frame scenes with calculation and immediacy: They could only shoot for about two and a half minutes per roll. Kerven also noted that the lightweight nature of super 8 equipment allowed its users to incorporate motion into their work. "It kind of freed you a little bit from the idea that everything had to be so solid and locked down [on a tripod]," he says. "It really encouraged you to learn how to move the camera in creative ways."

In filmmaker John Russo's book Making Movies: The Inside Guide to Independent Movie Production, Sam Raimi recommends all young filmmakers start making movies in super-8. "You have all the same basic elements that are used in professional filmmaking, so it's a chance to refine your skills and techniques," Raimi says, noting that he made his first super 8 movies in high school. "You've got to write a script, deal with camera placement, movement, angles and lenses. The actors have to be directed and orchestrated in the same manner as in 35-milimeter filmmaking."

One of super 8's most important lessons came after the film was shot: The budding filmmaker would then have to mail it to Kodak for processing, which could take anywhere from four days to several weeks. Waiting to see the finished product required patience, a trait that isn't exactly encouraged by today's users of instantaneous-view digital technology. "The generation now is so different," explains Anderson. "Fewer people are shooting film because everyone wants it [developed] yesterday."

The sharp, digital images of today have rendered super 8 the picture of the past. Watching film shot in super 8—even if it was shot just last week—evokes nostalgia for the era when the film first appeared. The film is grainy and just a little bit out of focus. The colors look warm and faded—there's a spectrum of mellow tones. But Vigeant is quick to dispel the idea that super 8 is a medium of the past. She describes a robust contemporary market for the film: Pro8mm still works on more than 1,000 super 8 film projects a year for TV, music videos, and commercials. Celebrities like Christina Aguilera and Aaron Eckhart wanted their weddings filmed in super 8 because, Vigeant says, it gives the footage a retro look. Sen. John Kerry and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton used super 8 during their campaigns to establish warm, down-to-earth personas. Filmmakers attempting to fake a scene from the past often shoot in super 8. And young cinematographers, seeking to emulate the greats, may trade the sterility of digital for the messier, more hands-on format that their idols learned on.

"Super 8, in some ways, is having a comeback now," says Amos Poe, who teaches at New York University's film school. "I know my students at NYU love it. [...]

The article started off mentioning Lenny Lipton. He was a regular contributor to Super 8 Filmaker magazine, and I read his book, too. Very inspiring.

Interestingly enough, Lipton is now a leading authority on 3D movie technology. That's interesting, because I remember, back in the seventies, when he did an article about 3D film making for Super 8 Filmmaker Magazine:



There is a Super-8 blog that has a nice post about Lenny Lipton, past and present:

Catching up with Lenny Lipton - a Super 8 living legend.

But, back to us "Backyard Auteurs". I expect there were many of us film director "wannabes" in the '70's. But we certainly weren't all destined for Hollywood. I actually moved to California with the aim of going to film school, but didn't stick with it, for various reasons. But even I could see that:

A.) Hollywood is and INDUSTRY. It's not all about Art, or even talent; you have to be a good businessman too. Films there cost millions of dollars to make, and you have to have the confidence to sell yourself in that milieu, to convince others to INVEST in you and your ideas.

B.) Hollywood films are huge productions, and you are just one cog in the machine. Part of a team. You have to be good at schmoozing with people, and compromise a lot.

There is nothing wrong with any of that. But it's very competitive, and not a milieu that everyone can succeed in. I soon realized that I liked SMALL, INDEPENDENT filmmaking. On that scale, you can keep creative control, experiment, and do what you want. That's more where my interest and passion was. And sometimes I wish I had persevered with it, with super 8 or 16mm or video. But life pulled me in a lot of different directions, and filmmaking was not one of them.

Fast forward 30 years or so. Technology wise, a lot has changed. Super 8 as I knew it has gone, but it's still around, being used in different ways. And new technology has allowed a bridge between Super 8 and video, film and video. Independent filmmaking is now cheaper and easier than ever!

I would like to get into that again, on some level. Even if it's just making films I enjoy, and putting them on YouTube. I'd like to start by transferring my old 8mm films, and the ones my parents made, onto my computer's hard drive and editing them there. It would be fun and a good learning experience, and after that, who knows?

The first step for doing that would be finding a place to have my films transferred to miniDV tape, so I can copy it to my HD and edit it with my computer. As I explore affordable options for that, in a effort to find the best one, I may post about it on this blog.

     

Why 2010 was the "Year of the Linux Desktop"

This is probably the best argument I've read for it:

The Linux Desktop Came on Little Cat Feet

Somehow, some way, the year 2010 may have finally been the year of the Linux desktop -- but no one noticed. Maybe no one needed to. In 2010, smartphones got hot, and Android OS smartphones collectively overtook the iPhone in units sold. At the same time, Android tablets gained traction as popular alternatives to the iPad.

A subtle shift in the notion of what defines "desktop," and suddenly Linux emerges in anonymous glory -- leaving Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) playing the silly (but familiar and perhaps a bit dangerous) role of catch-up. Looking back, could 2010 really be the year when Linux, in the form of Android, became the desktop?

What is a desktop anyway?

A distinction may be necessary. While I may make a case that 2010 was the year of the Linux desktop, I realize the form factor is different, and it's a little new. But computers evolve, and the point -- that the Linux-based Android is a major player in the user-interface world -- is not lost or any less relevant. More important is that in smartphones, Linux trumps Windows. (More data to follow when next of kin have been notified.)

Naysayers may argue that Android as a desktop is a stretch but, really, what does define a desktop? In the first place, "desktop" has always been a muddy metaphor. Seriously, who puts "wallpaper" on a desktop? Distilled to its essence, the computer desktop is an infrastructure providing end-user computing. In that context, smartphones (iOS and Android based) capably provide just that, and in some ways more than traditional desktops do.

Android and Desktop computing

Traditional desktop computing let users do their banking online, make travel arrangements, play games, listen to music, and communicate with friends and family. Android does too, but with some obvious and some nuanced benefits. [...]

The article goes on to take a detailed look at those benefits. Read the whole thing and have a look at what Linux success looks like.


Also see:

Has "Wintel" been replaced by "Quadroid"?

     

Has "Wintel" been replaced by "Quadroid"?

A case can be made for it. First, the Wintel monopoly is dying off, ironically from it's own practices:

HP is Wintel's latest victim

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- For nearly three decades, personal computer makers thrived by building their PCs around two key ingredients: Intel chips and Microsoft Windows.

It's an unprecedented success streak in the fast-changing tech market, where new technologies displace old ones in an eyeblink. But now, it looks like the "Wintel" party is finally winding down.

[...]

"The tablet effect is real," HP CEO Leo Apotheker said Thursday on a conference call with analysts. "Consumers are changing how they use PCs."

In the new "post-PC" era, razor-thin profits are no longer attractive.

"The PC business only returns a few points of margin. HP is really good, and they only return 5%," said Martin Reynolds, analyst at Gartner. "Staying in the PC business is relatively risky. Who knows where these things will go over the next few years?"

[...]

"I think what we're seeing -- what HP's move is really about -- is the aftermath of the Wintel strategy, in which you give all the profits to Intel and Microsoft," said Carl Howe, analyst at Yankee Group.

While companies like HP and Dell are getting by with single-digit margins in their PC businesses, Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500) is the fourth-most profitable company in the Fortune 500. Intel (INTC, Fortune 500) is 14th.

"Guess what? That model is driving them all out of business," Howe continued. "It has made companies like Apple look really smart. Wintel is falling apart."

HP would follow IBM's exit of the PC market -- albeit seven years later.

IBM's move is looking more and more prescient: When it sold its iconic PC business to Lenovo in 2004, IBM (IBM, Fortune 500) said it believed the PC market was commoditizing. It didn't want to play in a market with so little upside.

Even Microsoft appreciates the changing tide. It's planning for the post-PC era by developing a new version of Windows for tablet PCs, running on mobile chips designed by British company ARM (ARMH). That's also why it's fighting so hard to make Windows Phone work: Microsoft realizes it can't afford to be left out of the computing platform of the future.

So if we're really witnessing the "final collapse of the Silicon Valley PC era," as Howe suggested, who's next to go? [...]

Read the whole thing to find out. But don't just look at who's next to go; consider also, perhaps more importantly, who's next to come, and why:

Android and Qualcomm are the new Wintel

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Google's Android mobile operating system has been credited with saving struggling handset manufacturers, but it may ultimately be the thing that kills a number of them off.

Before Android came around, mobile devices typically had hardware integrated with custom operating software, which differentiated LG phones from Samsung phones from Motorola phones, and so on. No two devices from rival manufacturers were at all alike.

But now, for the first time ever in the wireless ecosystem, a standard platform is emerging: At least a dozen handset makers have brought to market more than 90 different smartphones that run Android, and more than three quarters of those handsets have Qualcomm chips embedded in them, according to a new study by consultancy PRTM.

The Qualcomm-Android standard, or "Quadroid" as PRTM calls it, is becoming a parallel to the Windows-Intel, or "Wintel," standard that developed in the 1990s.

Like with Wintel PCs, Quadroid devices' software and hardware is essentially a commodity -- they're very similar on every phone, making differentiation a difficult task. Form factor is still a battleground -- some people want keyboards, some don't -- but drop past the top-tier of the very newest devices and the distinctions are tiny. Kickstands, dual screens, very high resolution cameras and OLED touchscreens are among the features Quadroid smartphone makers are using to set themselves apart.

It was a problem that Wintel PC companies tried to solve -- mostly unsuccessfully -- with customizability (Dell), unique design (Alienware), and cow-print boxes (Gateway).

But Quadroid has an added wrinkle: Android is open source, meaning it's free for device manufacturers to use and manipulate. That makes the barrier to entry almost nil, opening the door to a number of no-name manufacturers to produce smartphones that compete with the big guys. Two years ago, no one had heard of HTC or Kyocera, LG had virtually no smartphone presence, and Motorola (MOT, Fortune 500) had been left for dead. Now they're at the industry's vanguard. [...]

So a whole bunch of new players have jumped in and are at the head of the new trends, where Microsoft and Intel have not been able to go... yet. They are rushing to catch up and cash in. Will they make it? Will the competition they face produce better products? And will it all end up again being just a few major companies dominating everything in the end? We shall see.
     

HP is getting out of the computer business?

Apparently:

HP's strategic shift away from TouchPad; PCs, too?

If there's a notch on the technology timeline demarcating the PC and post-PC eras, we might have just crossed it.

Hewlett-Packard on Thursday effectively announced it was done with the personal computer, extending a crazy week in tech news that saw Google double down on mobile devices with its enormous bid for a Motorola division.

HP, a storied brand that was instrumental in expanding the PC industry, announced that its board had authorized exploring "strategic alternatives" for its computer division. That's corporate speak for a sale or spin-off.

The Palo Alto tech giant and the industry as a whole have seen a drop-off in laptop and desktop sales and margins, as consumers shift to tablets and smart phones.

And yet ... HP also announced plans to discontinue the phones and tablets based on the operating system it acquired through its now clearly ill-fated $1.2 billion purchase of Palm last year. That means it's pulling the plug on its highly promoted TouchPad tablet, less than two months after it hit the market.

The news underscores two critical points about the state of the technology industry:

First, we're rapidly moving into a world where consumer demand for mobile devices is outstripping that for PCs, dampening business prospects for the sector.

Think about it this way: HP, the largest PC manufacturer, a company whose Silicon Valley history predates the personal computer itself, is effectively saying there isn't enough upside to bother staying in the game.

"The increasing momentum of the media tablet market, led by the iPad, is creating a difficult environment for the PC industry," said Matthew Wilkins, principal analyst at research firm IHS iSuppli, in a recent report.

Second, even companies trying to embrace the post-PC world are struggling to get their arms around it as Apple crowds them out. A year and a half after the Cupertino company introduced its breakthrough iPad, not a single serious rival has emerged. The industry blog All Things D reported this week that Best Buy has sold only 25,000 HP TouchPads, less than 10 percent of the supply sitting in warehouses. That compares with more than 9 million iPads sold in the last quarter.

It seems even heavyweight contenders like HP can drop big dollars without making so much as a dent.

Consumer impact

For consumers, these trends are a mixed bag. They'll likely see falling prices for PCs, but it means yet another business has failed to gain strength in mobile computing. Less competition invariably means fewer options in the market and more pricing power for leaders like Apple. [...]

IBM has also gotten out of the hardware business, and is now focusing on software and services. Now HP. Who next... Dell?

I'd hate to see everything go "Apple", because Apple is IMO overpriced and overrated. And without healthy competition, it's likely to become even more so. I'd never want to be locked into their proprietary stuff. Thank goodness they are getting competition from Qualcomm/Android.

Also see: HP shakeup - buying Autonomy, dropping webOS
I think webOS was supposed to be HP's version of Linux. What a short life it had.
     

Just what IS an "X-Class" Solar Flare?

This is a pretty good explanation:

Solar Flares: What Does It Take to Be X-Class?

Solar flares are giant explosions on the sun that send energy, light and high speed particles into space. These flares are often associated with solar magnetic storms known as coronal mass ejections (CMEs). The number of solar flares increases approximately every 11 years, and the sun is currently moving towards another solar maximum, likely in 2013. That means more flares will be coming, some small and some big enough to send their radiation all the way to Earth.

The biggest flares are known as "X-class flares" based on a classification system that divides solar flares according to their strength. The smallest ones are A-class (near background levels), followed by B, C, M and X. Similar to the Richter scale for earthquakes, each letter represents a 10-fold increase in energy output. So an X is ten times an M and 100 times a C. Within each letter class there is a finer scale from 1 to 9.

[...]

Although X is the last letter, there are flares more than 10 times the power of an X1, so X-class flares can go higher than 9. The most powerful flare measured with modern methods was in 2003, during the last solar maximum, and it was so powerful that it overloaded the sensors measuring it. The sensors cut out at X28.

The biggest X-class flares are by far the largest explosions in the solar system and are awesome to watch. Loops tens of times the size of Earth leap up off the sun's surface when the sun's magnetic fields cross over each other and reconnect. In the biggest events, this reconnection process can produce as much energy as a billion hydrogen bombs.

If they're directed at Earth, such flares and associated CMEs can create long lasting radiation storms that can harm satellites, communications systems, and even ground-based technologies and power grids. X-class flares on December 5 and December 6, 2006, for example, triggered a CME that interfered with GPS signals being sent to ground-based receivers. [...]

Follow the link for more info about all the different classes of flares, and a video too.


Also see: TheTchijevsky Index of Mass Human Excitability
     

A sneak preview of our own future?

The London Riots? Lets hope not, although there are many uncomfortable parallels. Is it just a mater of degree at this point? See what you think:

Thomas Sowell, Social Degeneration

Someone at long last has had the courage to tell the plain, honest truth about race.

After mobs of young blacks rampaged through Philadelphia committing violence -- as similar mobs have rampaged through Chicago, Denver, Milwaukee and other places -- Philadelphia's black mayor, Michael A. Nutter, ordered a police crackdown and lashed out at the whole lifestyle of those who did such things.

"Pull up your pants and buy a belt 'cause no one wants to see your underwear or the crack of your butt," he said. "If you walk into somebody's office with your hair uncombed and a pick in the back, and your shoes untied, and your pants half down, tattoos up and down your arms and on your neck, and you wonder why somebody won't hire you? They don't hire you 'cause you look like you're crazy," the mayor said. He added: "You have damaged your own race."

While this might seem like it is just plain common sense, what Mayor Nutter said undermines a whole vision of the world that has brought fame, fortune and power to race hustlers in politics, the media and academia.

[...]

In the United States, despite the higher poverty level among blacks than among whites, the poverty rate among black married couples has been in single digits since 1994. The disparities within the black community are huge, both in behavior and in outcomes.

Nevertheless, the dogma persists that differences between groups can only be due to the way others treat them or to differences in the way others perceive them in "stereotypes."

All around the country, people in politics and the media have been tip-toeing around the fact that violent attacks by blacks on whites in public places are racially motivated, even when the attackers themselves use anti-white invective and mock the victims they leave lying on the streets bleeding.

This is not something to ignore or excuse. It is something to be stopped. Mayor Michael Nutter of Philadelphia seems to be the first to openly recognize this.

This needs to be done for the sake of both black and white Americans -- and even for the sake of the hoodlums. They have set out on a path that leads only downward for themselves.

Thomas Sowell, Social Degeneration Part 2

Although much of the media have their antennae out to pick up anything that might be construed as racism against blacks, they resolutely ignore even the most blatant racism by blacks against others.

That includes a pattern of violent attacks on whites in public places in Chicago, Denver, New York, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Los Angeles and Kansas City, as well as blacks in schools beating up Asian classmates -- for years -- in New York and Philadelphia.

These attacks have been accompanied by explicitly racist statements by the attackers, so it is not a question of having to figure out what the motivation is. There has also been rioting and looting by these young hoodlums.

Yet blacks have no monopoly on these ugly and malicious episodes. Remarkably similar things are being done by lower-class whites in England. Anybody reading "Life at the Bottom" by Theodore Dalrymple will recognize the same barbaric and self-destructive patterns among people with the same attitudes, even though their skin color is different.

Anyone reading today's headline stories about young hoodlums turning the streets of London into scenes of shattered and burning chaos, complete with violence, will discover the down side of the brotherhood of man.

While the history and the races are different, what is the same in both countries are the social policies and social attitudes long promoted by the intelligentsia and welfare state politicians.

A recent study in England found 352,000 households in which nobody had ever worked. Moreover, two-thirds of the adults in those households said that they didn't want to work. As in America, such people feel both "entitled" and aggrieved.

In both countries, those who have achieved less have been taught by the educational system, by the media and by politicians on the left that they have a grievance against those who have achieved more. As in the United States, they feel a fierce sense of resentment against strangers who have done nothing to them, and lash out violently against those strangers.

During the riots, looting and violence in England, a young woman was quoted as saying that this showed "the rich" and the police that "we can do whatever we want." Among the things done during these riots was forcing apparently prosperous looking people to strip naked in the streets. [...]

Thomas Sowell, Social Degeneration: Part 3

[...] With all the damage that was done by these rioters, both to cities and to the whole fabric of British society, it is very unlikely that most of the people who were arrested will be sentenced to jail. Only 7 percent of people convicted of crime in England are actually put behind bars.

"Alternatives to incarceration" are in vogue among the politically correct elites in England, just as in the United States. But in Britain those elites have had much more clout for a much longer time. And they have done much more damage.

Nevertheless, our own politically correct elites are pointing us in the same direction. A headline in the New York Times shows the same politically correct mindset in the United States: "London Riots Put Spotlight on Troubled, Unemployed Youths in Britain." There is not a speck of evidence that the rioters and looters are troubled -- unless you engage in circular reasoning and say that they must have been troubled to do the things they did.

In reality, like other rioters on both sides of the Atlantic they are often exultant in their violence and happy to be returning home with stolen designer clothes and upscale electronic devices.

In both England and in the United States, whole generations have been fed a steady diet of grievances and resentment against society, and especially against others who are more prosperous than they are. They get this in their schools, on television, on campuses and in the movies. Nothing is their own fault. It is all "society's" fault. [...]

Read'em all. We are often told by the elites, that we need to learn from other countries how to do things better. Sowell ends up saying that in this case, perhaps we need to learn what NOT to do, to learn from their mistakes.
     

Super 8 Film and High Definition Video

The two would seem to have nothing in common. But recently, when I was looking into options for having some of my Super 8 movies transferred to video, I came across this page that makes a strong case for having Super 8 films transferred into High Definition video format. Among other things, you can actually see more of the original film frame when your transfer to High Definition:

Standard Definition or High Definition

[...] But whether you transfer to either High Definition or Standard Definition, there are some other things to consider. The aspect ratio, that is the "shape", of HD and SD is totally different. SD is 4:3, while HD is 16:9 in proportion. But home movies have a totally different "shape" and it fits neither SD nor HD ideally. And here's the bigger surprise: Even if you project the original film in your living room using Grandpa's old Brownie projector, you STILL don't have a perfect "match" for the original film frame!


As seen in example "A", there is considerable cut-off due to the undersized gate on the movie projector. This made production of the projector easier but at the sacrifice of much detail that exists on the outer edges but never seen. Example "B" shows how much more is revealed in an enlarged gate 4:3 transfer to Standard Definition video. [...]

And that's just one of several things to consider. Check out their "B" and "D" options, and other things they have to say about SD vs HD. Follow the link, I would say this is a MUST READ if you are considering having your films transferred to video or archived to a digital format.

And be sure and visit the MovieStuff homepage, and explore their website. It's easy to navigate, and very informative.
     

Is crime easy and risk-free in Great Britain?

So it might seem. This explains a lot:


Crime Is Easy

Maybe there is a simple explanation for the riots. In Great-Britain crime is easy and almost risk-free.

In his startling book ‘A Land fit for Criminals’ insider David Fraser demonstrates it with figures and facts.

Detection rate of crimes is 5 per cent. Of these cases only 2 per cent are processed in court. Only a mere 0.3 per cent of all crimes result in prison sentence. Offenders deem themselves untouchable. Fines are seldom paid. In 2002 it was reported that tens of millions of pounds in unpaid fines were written off.

Even persistent offenders with a long record of previous convictions and a complete lack of motivation to reform are granted probation and put back in the community.

The evidence shows that for them this means business as usual. The reconviction rate for all male offenders in 61 per cent; for offenders given community service 67 per cent.

‘Offenders are not corrupted by prison but by the unchallenged success of their criminality’, concludes Fraser, who served in the National Probation Service for twenty-six years, and was an analyst with the National Criminal Intelligence Service.

He blames the criminal justice system for putting consideration for the criminal first and the safety of the public second: ‘The bizarre fact is that all governments since the sixties have gone out of their way to introduce policies that have encouraged criminals to become more criminal. Numerous obstacles have been placed in the way of finding, arresting and convincing them.’ [...]

If you have read this far, then you've already read more than half the article. But read the rest, it's just as shocking.


Also see:  Can political correctness destroy a nation?
     

Related Links:

Political Correctness — The Revenge of Marxism

Did Tony Blair advance a "Culture of Lies"?

What is the Nature of Multiculturalism?

Our Culture, What’s Left Of It


About British gun laws:

England and Gun Control --- Moral Decline of an Empire

RESULTS ARE IN ON BRITISH GUN LAWS

Britain’s Gun-Control Folly
         

Is Google's Android OS the "Linux Desktop" that will challenge Microsoft?

There is a case to be made for it:

Android the real Linux desktop threat to Windows

[...] Aside from being an open source Linux distribution, which is already starting to gain traction in the mobile phones space, Android has the backing of Google. And as Microsoft well knows Google is no Canonical, Novell or Red Hat. Google is a heavyweight - it's a powerful company with considerable resources.

[...]

From most accounts and my own experience Android is intuitive and user friendly on mobile hardware such as the HTC Dream. However, there is no doubt that Android compared to full blown operating systems like Windows, Mac OSX or Ubuntu Linux is still very much a lightweight.

It is also true, however, that the trend of desktop computing is toward mobility - notebooks and netbooks. In the era of hotspots and ubiquitous Internet, consumers and business users alike want something they can take on the road with them.

The trend to netbooks and low-power consumption mobile devices favours lightweight operating systems. Users - particularly sub-notebook users - want to do much if not most of their work in the cloud. They may not be able to do everything, such as watch DVDs or play games, but they can still accomplish most of what's required to run their part of the business they work in.

Likening Android to Windows is like comparing Google Apps to Microsoft Office - it's not quite there yet. Steve Ballmer is wrong when he says Google Docs can't even do a footnote, but his point that Microsoft Word is much more powerful is well taken - for now. However, for many, myself included, Google Docs, Calendar and Gmail are more than good enough.

The critical success factors behind operating systems are device drivers and applications. More than anything else, this has been the downfall of Ubuntu and the other Linux distribution hopefuls.

Starting from the mobile phones environment and working upward, Android, backed by Google, is likely to succeed where other Linux distributions have failed. It is likely to garner support from both device manufacturers and applications vendors.

It's early days and there's a long way to go but if a Linux desktop is ever to make an impact in the mainstream, then it is likely to be Android. Ironically, by the time it takes the mantle of market leader from Microsoft, the cloud may well have made the desktop a thing of the past.

It makes some good points. But the "cloud" may not be embraced by everyone, for everything; it's a concept that's still evolving.

One of the comments left at the end of the article made a few good points on that:

[...] As for netbooks, they are such incapable pieces of hardware that the only way to get any real work done on any of them is to use them as dumb terminals, or slow-witted terminals, for the cloud. But, as Richard Stallman, one of the founding fathers of the open-source movement, has railed about, the cloud surrenders control to a corporate third party and promises a vassal-ship to corporate authority that will be, if anything, more subjugating than the rein of Microsoft has wrought. The cloud not only presents problems of reliability; it also will, I think, prove in many cases to be more expensive than shrink-wrapped software, and it gives a corporation, almost certainly a powerful one like Google or Amazon, possession and control of your data and your applications and, through the use of proprietary APIs, will lock your data and applications to that corporation.

Servers and networks get more expensive and more prone to failure as they scale and the intensity of use increases, and, thus, comes a dramatic increase the price of the service. And because the could will consists at best of an oligopoly of few corporations and because users' data and apps will be locked to that corporation's particular cloud, i.e., network, servers, and OS, users, who foolishly surrender their independence to the some corporation's cloud, will be able to do nothing but pay the price that their could vendor demands. And for that king's ransom, users will get a cloud that becomes less reliable as it becomes more popular.

But the main tenor of Stallman's criticism, which is related to oligopolistic control, is that once your rely on a cloud for your data and applications, you're owned. As tough as it is or is perceived to be to switch from Windows to OS X, Unix, or Linux, that is nothing compared to trying switch when all your data and your business critical apps are in a cloud. When you are completely in the cloud, you don't have anything left to switch. And for consumers, they may be spared paying the full costs of cloud computing, but they will pay instead with their personal information and by ceding the right to access them with advertisements 24/7, I am with Dr. Stallman: This rush towards cloud-computing is foolishness and the greatest hidden form of slavery to be foisted on users of computers since, well, Windows.

If the cloud is what netbooks shall bring, I suggest that we all take a pass.

The cloud could have some uses, but I doubt it will be all things to all people. There will always be people who, quite sensibly IMO, want direct access to and control of their own data, without relying on a 3rd party's infrastructure to provide that access and control.


Also see:

Google: Android is “the Linux Desktop Dream Come True”

The Linux Desktop Came on Little Cat Feet
     

Is the PC about to become Obsolete?

One of the designers of the first PC seems to think so:

IBM PC daddy: 'The PC era is over'
Chucks own invention into vinyl record bin

One of the dozen engineers who designed the original IBM PC, which celebrates its 30th anniversary on Friday, says that the reign of the personal computer is coming to an end.

"They're going the way of the vacuum tube, typewriter, vinyl records, CRT and incandescent light bulbs," writes IBM's Middle East and Africa CTO Mark Dean in a company blog post.

"When I helped design the PC," Dean writes, "I didn't think I'd live long enough to witness its decline. But, while PCs will continue to be much-used devices, they're no longer at the leading edge of computing."

Dean, who now uses a tablet as his "primary computer", believes that computing is no longer centered around devices, but instead on people's interaction with them.

"These days," he writes, "it's becoming clear that innovation flourishes best not on devices but in the social spaces between them, where people and ideas meet and interact."

It is, of course, to be noted that Dean is toeing the company line. IBM is extricating itself from making devices, and through its Smarter Planet initiative is focusing more on outcomes and usage models than mere hardware. [...]

I got a close look at an Acer A500 tablet the other day, when I was helping one of our customers connect it to our wi-fi. He was a 31 year old, and quite enthusiastic about it and it's features.

It only has 1 gig of memory. It can do most things like internet browsing, email, social media, etc. He says he can even pay bills on-line with it.

Still, I doubt it can run QuickBooks yet, and even if it could, I want a real keyboard and a large screen, not a touch pad. I think you can plug a larger screen into it, and perhaps a real keyboard too.

Anyhow, it seems to be mostly about portability and the touchpad, two things I don't need. It seems almost like a cross between a smart phone and a netbook. I don't see how a serious computer user could use it as their "primary" computing device.

But of course, this is only the beginning. I've already read about more powerful versions in the works; I don't doubt that their popularity will continue to grow, along with their capabilities. But in the end, won't they just be PC's that are lighter, more portable, and easier to use? More like the next step in the evolution of the PC, rather than the end of it.