Sunday, 4 December 2011

Wenn die beste Freundin

The past, the future: Wenn die beste Freundin

When the best girlfriend
With the best girlfriend,
for shopping,
for shopping,
going for a walk,
tramping the streets,
blabbing about everything,
says the best girlfriend
to the best girlfriend.
My best girlfriend.
o my best girlfriend,
o my pretty girlfriend,
o my faithful girlfriend,
o my sweet girlfriend!
Walks the best girlfriend
With the best girlfriend,
says the best girlfriend
to the best girlfriend:
My best, my best girlfriend.

-Yes, what does the best girlfriend say?
Tell me what crosses your mind!
- Also, I can only tell you one thing, if
I didn’t have you, we get along so well…
- Yes, we get along terribly well.
- How good we get along!
- We can hardly bear how great we get along,there is just one person I
get along with equally well, and that is my little cute husband.
- Yes, with your little cute husband

Yes, my husband is a man!
What a man, like my husband!
Like the husband of the wife,
like the husband of the wife
We used to have paramours,
but they exist no longer!
Today instead of paramours,
we have girlfriends!

- Your little man is a bit pushy!
-So?
-Yes.
- Why?
- Well, I find
- Well, why?
-Why I find …?
- Why you find?
- He does those things…
- I don’t like that!
- Hmm. Okay,. Let’s make up! (Kisses)
- Okay, we make up! (Kisses)

Friday, 25 November 2011

Every Person

Every person has at least one secret that will break your heart.

Monday, 7 November 2011

The Love of My Life

"I feel happy with you, I think you're the love of my life, and I don't ask for anything more than that.  But that shouldn't be possible: I ought to ask for more.  I'm trapped in a system from which I get so little, and which I know is pointless, but I don't know how to get out.  At some point, everyone should take the time to think about it, but I don't know where we are supposed to find that time."

(Houellebecq, Michel, "Platform", Vintage International, New York, 2004, p. 117)

Thursday, 25 August 2011

Respect the individual, not the multitude

Man is by nature good.
Men are depraved and perverted by society.
Respect the individual, not the multitude.
- Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1776), from "Emile" (1762), (trans. Dent, p. 198)

Saturday, 16 July 2011

A vast cerealic, frugiferous, lanigerous and pelliferous region

"MULTILOQUENT VERBOSITY  This week I stumbled upon a review in an
American magazine, The Academy, dated 1 October 1881. It was of E W
White's Cameos from the Silver-land; or the Experiences of a Young
Naturalist in the Argentine Republic, a classic work of economic
geography and natural history. The reviewer complained, "The author
is terribly fond of long words. To him plants become bosquetish,
plains are sabulous, cattle are meat-bearing beeves, dead men are
cadavers, parrots are psittacs. The Republic is 'a vast cerealic
and frugiferous as well as a lanigerous and pelliferous region'."

A glossary - "bosquetish": of bushes or woods (related to "bosky");
"sabulous": sandy; "psittac": parrot (the review is one of only two
citations for the word in the Oxford English Dictionary's entry,
the other being from 1425); "cerealic": of cereals (the only
example in the OED); "frugiferous": fruit-bearing: "lanigerous":
wool-bearing (related to "lanolin", from Latin "lana", wool); and
"pelliferous": this is unknown to the Oxford English Dictionary or
any other source I've checked. I'm guessing the author created it
from the old word "pell" for an animal's hide (a close relative of
"pelt", from Latin "pellis", skin, leather, or parchment), from
which came the equally rare "pell-monger", a dealer in skins and
furs; from context the word means "rich in fur-bearing animals"."

 - from Michael Quinion's World Wide Words - an excellent resource regarding words and language. Consider subscribing to his newslist (http://www.worldwidewords.org/maillist/index.htm) and have a look at his site (http://www.worldwidewords.org/).

Friday, 15 July 2011

But if, at this instant, you were holding the hand of a woman you loved

'Well, of course, that's an understood thing; the heart's not an apple;
you can't divide it. If you're in love, you're justified. And I wasn't
thinking of scoffing. My heart's as soft at this moment as if it had
been melted.... I only wanted to explain why nature has the effect on us
you spoke of. It's because she arouses in us a need for love, and is not
capable of satisfying it. Nature is gently driving us to other living
embraces, but we don't understand, and expect something from nature
herself. Ah, Andrei, Andrei, this sun, this sky is beautiful, everything
around us is beautiful, still you are sad; but if, at this instant, you
were holding the hand of a woman you loved, if that hand and the whole
woman were yours, if you were even seeing with her eyes, feeling not
your own isolated emotion, but her emotion--nature would not make you
melancholy or restless then, and you would not be observing nature's
beauty; nature herself would be full of joy and praise; she would
be re-echoing your hymn, because then you would have given her--dumb
nature--speech!'
 - Turgenev, Ivan Sergeevich (1818-1883), "On the Eve" (trans. Garnett, Constance (1861-1946), Project Gutenberg (http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/6902), eBook-No 6902, 1 Nov 2004

Wednesday, 6 July 2011

21 steps to philosophy

A XKCD strip had an image text rollover which stated:
Wikipedia trivia: if you take any article, click on the first link in the article text not in parentheses or italics, and then repeat, you will eventually end up at "Philosophy".
This site has a little script which lets you test it out (I have included a sample below) - but it is fun doing it yourself.  Follow the instructions above and you will see that it really does work.

Mind you - it does not always work - there are some pages which result in an endless loop - which may constitute philosophy in its own right!



xkcd wikipedia steps to philosophy


(Wikipedia trivia: if you take any article, click on the first link in the article text not in parentheses or italics, and then repeat, you will eventually end up at "Philosophy")
Start from article: http://en.wikipedia.org.wiki/
sutherland
  1. sutherland
  2. registration_county
  3. great_britain
  4. island
  5. continent
  6. landmass
  7. land
  8. earth
  9. planet
  10. orbit
  11. physics
  12. natural_science
  13. science
  14. knowledge
  15. information
  16. sequence
  17. mathematics
  18. quantity
  19. property_(philosophy)
  20. modern_philosophy
  21. philosophy
21 steps to philosophy

Friday, 27 May 2011

Speaking and Preparation

“If I am to speak ten minutes, I need a week for preparation; if fifteen minutes, three days; if half an hour, two days; if an hour, I am ready now“
- Woodrow Wilson

Thursday, 26 May 2011

Missing Something

You will miss a ton, but that’s OK. We’re so caught up in trying to do everything, experience all the essential things, not miss out on anything important … that we forget the simple fact that we cannot experience everything. That physical reality dictates we’ll miss most things. We can’t read all the good books, watch all the good films, go to all the best cities in the world, try all the best restaurants, meet all the great people. But the secret is: life is better when we don’t try to do everything. Learn to enjoy the slice of life you experience, and life turns out to be wonderful.

Not cohabitation but consensus constitutes marriage - Cicero

Not cohabitation but consensus constitutes marriage - Cicero

Monday, 18 April 2011

This right and true man

This right and true man
This egregious damage
to one so fine, so good
Matters not, matters not.

It is hard to accommodate the paradox that we can find the world so beautiful, and so much in the world so beautiful, and other people so beautiful, when, in fact, the reality is that the world is inhospitable, terrible and terrifying, utterly contemptuous of humanity and human nature.

It rejects humans.  It rejects finer thought and finer things.  It's viciousness knows no bounds and it is unequivocal in its uncaring impartiality.  It matters not who lives or who dies, who prospers or who declines.  It cares not that one minute it makes one person tall and strikes another down, to then, the very next minute, strike down the tall one and bring forth to glory the downtrodden one - or, if it will, leave the downtrodden to be even further defeated.  Dust to dust whilst still alive.

This is not god.  This is not a vengeful and spiteful god.  There is no justice, there is no right, no fairness, no caring.  There is unknowing and unknowable chance, colliding happenstances that infiltrate and rearrange existence, now in another manner, now in another form.  It matters not, matter is pliable, and it plies its horror on us and through us.  We keep the universe alive by letting it manipulate us, in its dance of destruction and regeneration.  The choice we make is to breathe.  The control we have is to breathe.  Yet, that is no choice, no control, at all.  We exist to breathe, to now become another, to not be the same thing we were prior to our breath.

That is us.  We are now done.

Friday, 15 April 2011

Risibility

Besides, risibility come to man from his fundamental intention: he tortures himself, bloodies himself, and kills himself trying to reach the sublime summit.  And what does he hope to find there?  Being.  Well, supposing the impossible, were he to reach it he would merely discover universal nonbeing and his own nothingness.
 - Jean Paul Sartre, Carol Cosman: "The Family Idiot, Gustave Flaubert 1821-1857", The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1989, page 190

Sunday, 20 February 2011

The Logline - The most important 27 words a screenwriter will ever write

Re-blogged from http://www.crackingyarns.com.au/2010/03/25/the-most-important-27-words-a-screenwriter-will-ever-write/ - with kind permission I hope - completely referenced. Read their blog - it is excellent.



The most important 27 words a screenwriter will ever write

by Allen Palmer on March 25, 2010
Liam Neeson and Ben Kingsley grapple with the challenge of summarising the plot of Schindler's List in just 27 words.
Before you write a single scene of your 120-page screenplay, try to express your film’s logline in 27 words or less. Putting your concept to this simple, early test can help focus your narrative, gauge potential and save years of wasted effort.

Write your logline at the beginning – not the end

Typically, screenwriters sweat for months or years over a screenplay, going through endless drafts, major revisions and minor refinements. Only when the script is “finished”, and even then only at the request of the producer, will they write the logline. This is arse about. Here’s why.

Writing the logline up front could save you years

I was recently asked to produce script notes for a project that has been in development for several years. Yet after reading just 10-15 pages of the screenplay I knew the project was in trouble because the fundamental concept wasn’t sound. Thousands of dollars could have been spared and years could have been saved – if only the writer had first written a logline.

What is a logline?

The logline is a single sentence description of your film’s basic story idea in 27* words or less. You might also hear it referred to as the concept or the premise. It’s the concisely written version of what you say when people ask you the question, “So what’s your film about?”.

Why the logline is a good test of story – simplicity

Film is a demanding medium. You have just an hour and a half – 2 hours if you’re lucky – to tell your story. That’s nothing. The average 300-page novel might take 6 hours to film – which is one reason why book adaptations are so hit-and-miss in the cinema. So good movies tend to have simple story ideas. The plots might be complex, but the concepts are almost always simple. That’s why the logline is such a great test of film stories. One sentence. 27 words. If your story’s too complex to be told in 27 words, then it’s almost certainly too complicated for a 90 min movie.

Why the logline is a good test of story – marketability

Writing films is tough but marketing them is even more difficult. How do you arrest people’s attention in a one-sheet poster? How do you hook them with a tagline? How do you open a window in their diary with a 15 second trailer? Again, it’s going to need to be a simple, easily communicatable idea. But it’s also going to need to be immediately compelling. If you can’t hook me in 27 words you’ll have no chance with the cinema-going public.

What should you include in the logline?

Learning to write loglines is an art in itself. Here are some tips for what you should include in those precious 27 words:
Who is the hero? – You should identify the protagonist (though not necessarily by name), the person whose story this is, the character with whom we are meant to identify. e.g. an ageing baseball player, an alcoholic lawyer, a struggling single mother.
What is the Quest? – What does the hero want? What is the overarching external goal that is going to drive the events of the second act at least and possibly even the third act as well. e.g. has to kill a great white shark, rescue the princess from a dragon, find the groom.
What is the hero’s flaw? – Stories are plots that force the hero to grow. What is your hero’s failing? Does he lack courage or compassion? What sort of opportunity is there here for emotional growth? e.g. selfish, cowardly, greedy, materialistic, immoral, womanising, ruthless, workaholic, obsessive.
Where is the conflict? – Drama is all about conflict so we need to understand why this quest is going to be difficult for the hero.
What’s at stake? – For audiences to care, the hero has to have a very strong motivation. If they don’t achieve this goal, the consequences are massive – in their eyes any way. You will generally try to convey in your logline what’s at stake .
Who is the antagonist? – You won’t always include the antagonist – unless it’s a romantic comedy – but it can be a good way to establish the conflict and the impossibility of the hero’s quest.
What is the tone? – If it’s a comedy, it’s a good idea to try to convey that through either the title or the logline.
What’s the USP – In advertising, they used to talk about Unique Selling Point (USP). The thing that set the product apart from its competitors. What is it about your film that is most likely to appeal to the audience? Your logline should attempt to convey this quality or element to us.
How do you do all that in 27 words? Yeah, it’s not easy but here are some clues.

How to write your logline

If you’ve read any Joseph Campbell or Chris Vogler, or you’ve been to one of my courses on classic film story structure, you’ll know that we meet the hero in their Ordinary World, that they get a Call to Adventure and that this quest presents a challenge to their character. Consequently, it’s often effective for your logline to have a structure something like this:
When < flawed hero at start of story> is forced to <call to adventure>, he has to <opportunity for emotional growth> or risk <what’s at stake>.

What you don’t include in the logline

There’s one thing you shouldn’t include in the logline. The ending. It must tease, tempt and demand that the person reads your script. Give away the ending in the logline and you’ve removed that need.
You also shouldn’t include a goal that isn’t concrete. e.g. “must find true love”. What is that? How will we know when they’ve got it? The goal has to drive the drama so it needs to be specific.

Examples of film loglines:
Here are some examples of loglines for well-known films:


Schindler’s List:
When a materialistic, womanising Aryan industrialist discovers his Jewish workers are being sent to Nazi death camps, he risks his life and fortune to save them.


Groundhog Day:
An egotistical TV personality must relive the same day in small town Punxsutawney and be denied the girl of his dreams unless he can become more selfless.


Raiders of the Lost Ark:
A dashing archaeologist must reunite with the ex he dumped if he is to beat the Nazis to find the all-powerful lost Ark of the Covenant.


Little Miss Sunshine:
When a dysfunctional family reluctantly embarks on a road trip to a Californian junior beauty pageant it’s forced to address its serious underlying tensions or fall apart forever.


When Harry Met Sally:
When a cynical anti-romantic befriends a cheery optimist he’s forced to challenge his belief that men and women can’t have a Platonic relationship.


The Hangover:
After a wild Vegas Buck’s Party, a dysfunctional bunch of guys wakes with no memory of last night, a tiger in the bathroom, and no groom.

Judging your logline – try to be objective

One of the great things about the logline is that it’s almost self-regulating. The 27-word limit will make it impossible to communicate ideas that are too sprawling or ill-focused for a mainstream movie. However, just because you’ve written a logline that complies with the word limit doesn’t mean you’ve got a blockbuster on your hands. Be honest in your assessment of your logline. Better still, give it to someone who isn’t your lover, spouse or mother. Does it intrigue them? Do they want to know what happens? If not, chances are your idea isn’t strong enough for a movie. If you’re disciplined, you’ll rework the idea or ditch it altogether. If you’re a fool, you’ll persist and potentially waste years on a project that has only the slimmest chance of success.

The logline – write it early and write it often

I would encourage you to put your film idea to the logline test very early in the writing process. Trying to express the idea in a single sentence of 27 words can help distil the essence of your idea.
  • Whose story is it?
  • What do they want?
  • What’s stopping them getting it?
  • What’s at stake?
Constantly revisit your logline during the writing process. Is your story still true to the logline? Or have you strayed? Sometimes during the writing process you’ll come up with an idea that takes the story in a new direction that you believe has even better potential. If so, rewrite your logline. Move from logline, to story, to screenplay, then back to logline again. In this way, you’ll hopefully avoid the all-too-common mistake – particularly in Australia – of spending years writing a screenplay that either no-one wants to make or no-one wants to see.

Related screenwriting articles:

The 6 most common logline mistakes

10 screenwriting insights I wish I’d had 25 years ago

* Why 27 words? That’s what I asked my lecturer at UCLA Extension, Peter Exline (who, incidentally, was one of the inspirations for the Dude in The Big Lebowski.) He said “Because it works”. He was right. It does.

IBM Watson and Jeopardy

IBM's Thomas J Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights, NY has recently completed a new grand challenge - to program a computer to play the quiz game "Jeopardy".

I have been following this (as have many many other people) - and it has been absolutely fascinating.
This link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bifUJCyMwI) to a youtube of the final session should also give you links to the previous sessions over the 3 days.  The link to details of Watson (http://www-943.ibm.com/innovation/us/watson/) will no doubt also give you the relevant video links, and much more.

Basically, IBM have developed a natural language processing and deep analytic question and answer system, using massively parallel processing and huge amounts of memory (as stated here: 2880 processor cores in 90 Power 750 computers and 15 terabytes of RAM) to implement a system which can answer any sort of general knowledge question (which have been asked in a variety of ways, including through association, analogy, puns, etc), and to get so many correct that Watson totally beat the best human players.

The results were fascinating.

At the end of the first day, Ken Jennings was on $4,800, Brad Rutter was on $10,400 but Watson was a massive $35,734 (I also answered the questions as they appeared on the screen and achieved $22,400 - although one can not completely equate the results, since the physical presence of having to press the button first when the light comes on and then answer was not the same for me watching it on a computer screen).

At the end of the second and final day, Brad scored $5,600 before final jeopardy, wagered the lot to obtain $11,200 which totaled him $21,600 over the 2 days.

Ken did much better on the second day, managing a pre-final jeopardy score of $18,200 but only wagered $1,000 to finish with $19,200, to total $24,000 for the 2 days.

But Watson.  Well, he (since we can really be anthropomorphic here) scored $23,440 before final jeopardy, wagered $17,973 to make his daily score $41,413 and a massive total of $77,147 for the 2 days.

(By the way, I managed $14,000 for the second day, wagered the lot and got the final jeopardy answer correct (it was Bram Stoker) to finish with $28,000 on the day and $50,400 over the 2 days).

The prize money of $1,000,000 awarded to Watson was donated by IBM to World Vision and to the World Community Grid, whereas half the second prize of $300,000 (to Ken) and $200,000 (to Brad) was donated to other charities.

Two important take-aways from this brilliant piece of research.

Firstly, this technology from IBM has so so many uses - not just in the medical field (as the first offerings appear to be) but also in the energy and resources fields, the urban planning fields, and certainly in the legal and justice fields.  The ability to ingest natural language materials (such as legislation, case law, briefs, submissions, depositions, statements, judgments and miscellaneous other materials) and then to answer complicated questions concerning that material (and link to associated material not previously related to the matter) will be extremely important in the future.

Secondly, IBM Watson was truly amazing.  Certainly a breakthrough in technology.  But the human beings standing there, that did pretty well against the massive machine, were still, themselves, rather incredible.  Humans, in essence, are still mighty powerful.  The Jeopardy show had to be filmed on a special set built in the IBM Research Facility, because the computer system comprising Watson took up a whole room and was too massive to move.  Whereas Ken and Brad simply walked into where ever they were needed and did their thing.  Mind you, computer systems in the 1960's and 1970's took whole rooms - and their capability would now be eclipsed by an iPad or small notebook computer.  Twenty years from now, Watson will definitely be in the palm of one's hand (in one form or another).

Monday, 31 January 2011

learn live die

disce quasi semper victurus vive quasi cras moriturus

Learn as if always going to live; live as if tomorrow going to die.

Thursday, 27 January 2011

Tim Crago Dies

Tim Crago, who worked in Harris & Sutherland and remained a friend from that time on, died on Thursday 27 January 2011.

Now is done thy long day’s work;
Fold thy palms across thy breast,
Fold thine arms, turn to thy rest. In Memoria Nostra Semper
Tony Sutherland and all those from H&S

(The initial 3 lines are from “A Dirge” by Alfred Tennyson, in “Poems of Tennyson”, Alexander Classic Library, p.28.  The Latin phrase can be translated as” Always In Our Memories”).

Tim Crago Dies

Tim Crago, who worked in Harris & Sutherland and remained a friend from that time on, died on Thursday 27 January 2011.

Now is done thy long day's work;
Fold thy palms across thy breast,
Fold thine arms, turn to thy rest.

In Memoria Nostra Semper

Tony Sutherland and all those from H&S

(The initial 3 lines are from "A Dirge" by Alfred Tennyson, in "Poems of Tennyson", Alexander Classic Library, p.28.
The Latin phrase can be translated as" Always In Our Memories").