Oh, wow. Where to begin with Michael Bay's fourth installment of the Transformers franchise. I think he should have passed on it and let someone fresh take over. Jon Favreau maybe?
The good points: Autobots still fight the good fight, and giant robots fighting. Throw in some more "organic" aliens, and that's all cool.
And below be spoilers!
So years after T:DofM, the Battle of Chicago is still fresh, and plenty of political "See Something - Say Something" efforts are in action. Rewards, para-military hunting parties, etc. to round up the Transformers.
Basically, the CIA is using a inter-galactic bounty hunter, Lockdown, to hunt Autobots and Decepticons. Lockdown wants Optimus for he own reasons- something to do with "the Creators."
Meanwhile, back at the uber-techy KSI (headed up by Stanley Tucci- brill!), we find out that KSI has been able to create new Transformers from metal found on Earth and by melting destroyed Transformers. They call this metal "transformium" or something else worthy of groans. I guarantee Jim Jannard is laughing at that one.
Lockdown just muddies the story. He sole purpose is to introduce a bigger, badder "villain" in the Creators and bring about the Dinobots. Which could have been done in any number of ways.
I think the better story would have been to have the CIA/KSI develop the new Transformers from captured Decepticons. Then, under testing, Galvatron escapes with his new minions, and the Autobots need to find and fight them. To save Earth, or something.
During (or after, depending upon time) the fight, it is revealed that Optimus is being hunted by the Creators, and Lockdown appears, captures Optimus and takes him away. Roll credits. End credits scene is Lockdown flying in space, with Optimus hanging upside down behind him. Lockdown communicates with his employer about the success.
Things that really broke the escapism:
First fight with Lockdown and Optimus. You never saw it begin. Optimus driving off, cut to the "rally" car driving through old industrial site, then you see Optimus and Lockdown climbing a building. Uh, what?!
Michael Bay's fascination with females in white, that stay white no matter if they're in the desert, Cybertronian ship, or wherever.
Working on prototypes, but then finding in the Arctic the "transformium"-encased T-Rex. You would think they'd lead off with the discovery, then create the prototypes from that material. It just doesn't help with the story flow.
Overall, giant robots that fight is awesome. Seeing childhood toys on the big screen is awesome. Trying to create deep, intricate stories from a cartoon and toyline? Meh. Might as well try to make the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles aliens instead of mutants. Oh, wait...
Monday, June 30, 2014
Friday, June 27, 2014
"You an American?" "No, I'm from Kentucky!" (Edge of Tomorrow)
The biggest issue with the Internet is the assumption of anonymity. I think it's a cultural and generational issue that will not be considered an issue in twenty years (and not in a good way).
This is what's wrong with it.
People know they're not alone online, but the interaction is still one-sided. Interacting with people online takes a bit more effort to engage, in contrast to simply talking to someone in real life (depending upon the person, that could take an extraordinary effort). To begin or end a conversation, if you will, online only requires one to access a computer, or step away from one. Conversing requires finding the desired forum, topic, and people. And then you type. After contributing (positively or negatively), you have to wait for a response, which isn't always immediate. And then you have problems with composition and comprehension, which creates a whole dynamic of communication that devolves rather quickly. This is the failure in the structure of the Internet. People can't communicate effectively. And won't, until our global education level rises up.
But the failings of the structure are only brought about because the underlying myth that things on the Internet aren't real because the perceived anonymity. There's no direct reaction to something you do or say online from people. You get words on the screen. Sometimes you get hilarious pictures as a response.
An analogy is conversing on the Internet is like singing in your car. Most of the time, no one hears or sees you do it. But those times they do...
Or maybe that's just the reaction from Introverts. But the point is that we don't expect to have anyone see or hear us, thus a reaction by a real person. Posting to the Internet is very similar. We're shouting to the cloud, not really wanting anyone to answer. When they do, two things happen. You get affirmation, or you get rebuked and you do your damnest to rain down acid and fireballs from the heavens in the form of defensive posts, rants, and ramblings. When that fails to appease your voice that says you're always right, you resort to insults.
Your brain tells you you're on an online forum. That you're interacting with real people. But without a personal presence, human instinct and thousands of years of interaction know it's just not true. That's why people just turn into complete idiots online. You're not just shouting at the cloud, you're shouting into a tape recorder that saves your blabbering, keeps for posterity so your parents, friends, acquaintances, little Johnny down the block, FBI, NSA, and media all can experience your Great Idiocy.
But we're never going to correct this. Generations that come later will gladly overshare or negatively react. Because they'll be raised in it. I suspect it might infiltrate into real conversations and interactions, and that's when we're going to have problems.
If you're one of those people that don't care what you write or share online, this is about you.
This is what's wrong with it.
People know they're not alone online, but the interaction is still one-sided. Interacting with people online takes a bit more effort to engage, in contrast to simply talking to someone in real life (depending upon the person, that could take an extraordinary effort). To begin or end a conversation, if you will, online only requires one to access a computer, or step away from one. Conversing requires finding the desired forum, topic, and people. And then you type. After contributing (positively or negatively), you have to wait for a response, which isn't always immediate. And then you have problems with composition and comprehension, which creates a whole dynamic of communication that devolves rather quickly. This is the failure in the structure of the Internet. People can't communicate effectively. And won't, until our global education level rises up.
But the failings of the structure are only brought about because the underlying myth that things on the Internet aren't real because the perceived anonymity. There's no direct reaction to something you do or say online from people. You get words on the screen. Sometimes you get hilarious pictures as a response.
An analogy is conversing on the Internet is like singing in your car. Most of the time, no one hears or sees you do it. But those times they do...
 |
| From Hyperbole and A Half. Go Allie Brosh! |
Your brain tells you you're on an online forum. That you're interacting with real people. But without a personal presence, human instinct and thousands of years of interaction know it's just not true. That's why people just turn into complete idiots online. You're not just shouting at the cloud, you're shouting into a tape recorder that saves your blabbering, keeps for posterity so your parents, friends, acquaintances, little Johnny down the block, FBI, NSA, and media all can experience your Great Idiocy.
But we're never going to correct this. Generations that come later will gladly overshare or negatively react. Because they'll be raised in it. I suspect it might infiltrate into real conversations and interactions, and that's when we're going to have problems.
If you're one of those people that don't care what you write or share online, this is about you.
Friday, June 20, 2014
Baseball Statistics and Gunshows
The below image got me thinking about the stats. Notice the MDA is employing the baseball method of statistics- With runners in scoring position in the 7th inning with 2 strikes and stadium capacity at 34% less than full with 3,000 gallons of beer sold that night, the batter hits a homerun (rolling eyes go here).
So I looked at the overall stats. Homicides and guns as the weapon. Pulling data from Wiki, FBI, and http://www.governing.com/gov-data/safety-justice/gun-show-firearms-bankground-checks-state-laws-map.html, I started comparing the numbers.
Sixteen states have required checks for handguns and/or all firearms at purchased at gunshows. Those states are: CA, CO, CT, HI, IA, IL, MA, MD, MI, NC, NE, NJ, NY, OR, PA, and RI. And let's not leave out our bastion of freedom, our central government: DC (sarcasm font needed).
Pulling the by-state data, collectively these 16 states and DC accounted for 6,368 homicides in 2010, with 4,324 using firearms. Compared to the US totals for 2010, that's 49.8% and 48.8%, respectively.
These states are (mostly) our nation's most densely-populated states (NJ, RI, MA, CT, MD are 1-5). One-third of our states account for almost half of the homicides in our country. While correlation doesn't mean causation, one doesn't have to be a rocket scientist to see the "gunshow loophole" isn't really a loophole.
Copied from MDA-WA's Facebook's page: https://scontent-b-sjc.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/t1.0-9/p526x296/10439526_580601208724470_3829319462561309426_n.png
Here's my version:
Wednesday, May 14, 2014
"Puny god." (The Avengers)
I believe the folks involved in Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action (EGS/MDA) are a cult. Let's look at the definition of the word cult from some online sources:
Merriam-Webster-: a small religious group that is not part of a larger and more accepted religion and that has beliefs regarded by many people as extreme or dangerousDictionary.com-
: a situation in which people admire and care about something or someone very much or too much
: a small group of very devoted supporters or fans
1. a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2. an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3. the object of such devotion.
4. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5. Sociology . a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
Google Dictionary:
a system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object.So back to it, now that we have a deeper understanding of the word.
a relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or sinister.
a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular person or thing.
a person or thing that is popular or fashionable, especially among a particular section of society.
In dealing with those involved with EGS/MDA, they exude common traits that would follow the definition of a cult. The beliefs of EGS/MDA follow blindly the words of its leader(s). They dismiss any intellectual thought and evidence contrary to their position a direct threat- literally. In effort to manipulate their audience, they attempt to assassinate the character of more public persons that oppose their views. And in the most egregious transgression is their staunch refusal to even entertain dissenting thought by banning and blocking opposing viewpoints on social media.
So let's start with point one- the dogma. The leaders- or money man Bloomberg- communicate to the followers lots of information that guns are bad. They churn out statistics with such a spin, just a moment's thought shows how superficial it is. One of the biggest points is the "90% of Americans support universal background checks." This number is based on a small survey performed in the 1990's, if I recall correctly. It's been roundly dismissed because it's an irrelevant, outdated statistic.
Another wrong bit of information is the claim of school shootings are happening more and more frequent. Yet when you look at the data, that's not true. Included in these statistics are college and university incidents, school parking lots, no school in session, and a host of other things reasonable people would not consider school shooting. They get all lumped together to propagate the image of our schools being under a Columbine or Sandy Hook attack at any given point. If the data is accurately scrubbed to only include shootings at "Gun-Free School Zones," the number is fewer.
There are multiple data points that can be refuted, but the simple fact is EGS/MDA promote untrue- or at minimum highly suspect- information. And that information is parroted by it's followers. Unquestioningly.
When trying to correct EGS/MDA followers, data is highly secondary to these people. Opinion is presented as fact, and anecdotal stories trump logic. And once that is done- and by dozens of people, not just one or two- EGS/MDA followers start firing up the torches and sharpening the pitchforks, calling anyone who refutes their claims with facts and knowledge to be "gun bullies." And this term is the most polite term they have for those that oppose them. When that doesn't work, the followers begin the character assassination and name-calling. Calling more public persons "misogynists" or "paid shills" of the gun industry. They do this publicly and repeatedly, despite having no evidence to support their insults.
The most ironic thing that EGS/MDA does is hypocritically espouse their desire to have honest, open dialogue for common-sense solutions to ending gun violence. Utilizing social media, they are always claiming that they want to discuss rational ideas. The problem is that their actions completely nullify all of their intentions. The honest debate has already been addressed with their manipulation of statistics. And it's certain that they don't allow for open communication, as any person that debates and deflates their argument- whether civil or not- is banned or blocked from adding to the discussion. They don't want to discuss rational ideas since they are eyeball-deep in irrational thought and fear. They don't want common-sense solutions, supported by the fact they are trying to ban one of America's most popular rifles (and responsible for less than 1% of gun-related homicides) in the name of reducing gun violence.
In summation, EGS/MDA blindly follows its leaders without thinking, believes in false and misconstrued data, and prevents any non-like-thinking to infiltrate their circle of influence. It's simply amazing the misdirection that comes about when the opposing viewpoint defeats the dogma of EGS/MDA. The swarm of insults that follow and the straight-up refusal to have an open, honest debate based on facts and knowledge rather than opinion and hyperbole demonstrate how much of a cult EGS/MDA truly is.
Monday, March 17, 2014
"It was a stupid error." (NASCAR)
Holy heck, last entry was November '13. Been a long time since those days.
I have nothing to write, other than writing about nothing to write about. Sounds like a TV show. Anywhoo... time marches on. Waits for no man.
The one bit of wisdom I can dole out here today is: If you're ever in the mood to reformat and rebuild your computer, you know, start with a fresh slate again- make sure you backup your font folder. The one you've painstakingly maintained for 5 years of free fonts distributed through Smashing Magazine and Vandelay Design.
The one thing I missed.
DAMMIT.
I have nothing to write, other than writing about nothing to write about. Sounds like a TV show. Anywhoo... time marches on. Waits for no man.
The one bit of wisdom I can dole out here today is: If you're ever in the mood to reformat and rebuild your computer, you know, start with a fresh slate again- make sure you backup your font folder. The one you've painstakingly maintained for 5 years of free fonts distributed through Smashing Magazine and Vandelay Design.
The one thing I missed.
DAMMIT.
Thursday, November 14, 2013
"O Captain,my Captain!" (Dead Poet's Society)
What is wrong with people? Do they not have any etiquette anymore?
The movie industry has the wrong people staying at home instead of going to theaters. Why do people stay at home? Numerous reasons. It is so much cheaper to stay at home than go to a movie. If you can buy a movie on dvd for $19.99, you only spend $1.49 more for a movie you can watch at home anytime you wish. Sure, you do miss out on the giant screen, but here's are the non-tangible advantages:
1) You own it.
2) You can pause if you have to visit the W.C.
3) You can eliminate phone interruptions, or allow them at your discretion.
4) You control the volume of laughter based on who you invite over, if anyone.
5) You can make all the fresh popcorn you want for $4.50, salt it, butter it, whatever.
6) For the price of a movie soda, you can purchase a year's supply of Thomas Kemper Root Beer, or your favorite choice of beverage.
7) You can eat any choice of food or candy and not have to sneak it into the theater.
8) You don't have Annoying Man next to you who insists of fetching out M&Ms out of a bag utilizing just his index finger through a hole you couldn't fit a No. 2 pencil through (Hint for you noisy snacker: BIG hole, cup hand, pour out)
9) You don't have the other Annoying Man thinking he's on his own couch, which miraculously enough, only fits him. That's right. In a theater or any other "assigned seating" venue, legs should be no further apart than the width of the seat you're sitting in.
10) The inappropriate Howler Monkey lady who laughs at the lamest jokes, or replays the joke in her head over and over, laughing each time. Look: we all love comedy and like to laugh, but if you're still laughing from a joke 10 minutes ago, I will go ninja on you and fold my ticket stub into a throwing star and lodge it in your larynx.
11) Oh, and also enjoying movies at home you get to avoid Mr. Texture Man. This is that guy who wears a nylon jacket or track pants, constantly moves in his seat, and creates that wonderful "whoosh-whoosh" sound. It adds so much to the atmosphere, especially when the boy is reunited with his lost dog in the movie. The warm, inspirational music, slow-motion frolicking of the boy and his dog in the fall leaves, while sister, mom and dad sit on the "WHOOSH-WHOOSH-WHIZZY-WHIZZY-SHINNY-SHINNY." Nevermind. The moment is gone.
The movie industry has the wrong people staying at home instead of going to theaters. Why do people stay at home? Numerous reasons. It is so much cheaper to stay at home than go to a movie. If you can buy a movie on dvd for $19.99, you only spend $1.49 more for a movie you can watch at home anytime you wish. Sure, you do miss out on the giant screen, but here's are the non-tangible advantages:
1) You own it.
2) You can pause if you have to visit the W.C.
3) You can eliminate phone interruptions, or allow them at your discretion.
4) You control the volume of laughter based on who you invite over, if anyone.
5) You can make all the fresh popcorn you want for $4.50, salt it, butter it, whatever.
6) For the price of a movie soda, you can purchase a year's supply of Thomas Kemper Root Beer, or your favorite choice of beverage.
7) You can eat any choice of food or candy and not have to sneak it into the theater.
8) You don't have Annoying Man next to you who insists of fetching out M&Ms out of a bag utilizing just his index finger through a hole you couldn't fit a No. 2 pencil through (Hint for you noisy snacker: BIG hole, cup hand, pour out)
9) You don't have the other Annoying Man thinking he's on his own couch, which miraculously enough, only fits him. That's right. In a theater or any other "assigned seating" venue, legs should be no further apart than the width of the seat you're sitting in.
10) The inappropriate Howler Monkey lady who laughs at the lamest jokes, or replays the joke in her head over and over, laughing each time. Look: we all love comedy and like to laugh, but if you're still laughing from a joke 10 minutes ago, I will go ninja on you and fold my ticket stub into a throwing star and lodge it in your larynx.
11) Oh, and also enjoying movies at home you get to avoid Mr. Texture Man. This is that guy who wears a nylon jacket or track pants, constantly moves in his seat, and creates that wonderful "whoosh-whoosh" sound. It adds so much to the atmosphere, especially when the boy is reunited with his lost dog in the movie. The warm, inspirational music, slow-motion frolicking of the boy and his dog in the fall leaves, while sister, mom and dad sit on the "WHOOSH-WHOOSH-WHIZZY-WHIZZY-SHINNY-SHINNY." Nevermind. The moment is gone.
Thursday, November 7, 2013
"Don't chase the rabbit!" (Pacific Rim)
Living in the Seattle area, I have to deal with one of the worst commutes in America. There are all sorts of drivers that compound the traffic problems we would have regardless of the number of drivers.
Our gas taxes (federal and state) aren't enough to keep up with the our infrastructure needs. People in the lower-density areas don't want to pay for improvements in higher-density areas. At least that's the excuse we hear from Olympia. And no politician will raise the tax. Even if that's exactly what we need. Why? Because they'll be voted out. Guess what, Mr. or Mrs. Senator? I don't f**king care if you lose your elected job.
Not doing your job so you can keep your job? Yeah, you're not getting my vote. It might not be the most popular thing to do, but the right thing needs to be done. A recent example is the gun control initiatives that have failed, or cost people their elected positions. Following the Constitution is paramount; upholding the supreme law of the land trumps a misinformed and misguided fear.
But coming back to transportation, we need more money. And we need to manage it better. Sadly, I believe over 50% of the federal gas tax goes to paying debt on projects. That's pretty bad.
The other issue we have is the government mandate to increase the average miles per gallon of cars. Short-sighted as the government gets, that ecological maneuver drops gas tax revenue as people use less gas. The proliferation of electric and hybrid cars further lowers tax revenues.
So it's getting to the point where vehicles are going to be charged a mileage tax, or hefty license tax of some sort to offset the drop in gas tax revenues. Unless Boeing pulls out of Washington and turns Seattle into New Detroit, our transportation infrastructure will continue to rise.
Some of you may ask "what's wrong with mass transit?" No one wants to foot the bill for that. Transit in the area would need to triple the service they currently have. Major points on routes have large time gaps- 30 minutes or more- between stops. That may not seem very long, but consider it's Washington. 260 days of clouds and rain. Bus stops with covers that are built for 6 people. Now you want to stand out in the rain for 30 minutes? I don't think so.
In my opinion, there's a bigger issue with ramping up mass transit access. If we start having buses full of former commuters, who's paying the gas tax now? If the commuter population drops 25%- which would be amazing for the commute, gridlock-wise- gas taxes will drop 25%. And because our government is incapable of spending properly and within its means, there's going to be a huge tax somewhere else to make up for it.
The floodgates will open with dusty projects complete unrelated to transportation that will get earmarked in this round of tax increase. We've spent the last 50 years without that, Bob, we don't need it now.
So there you have it. Gas taxes won't go up because the legislature won't do their jobs in order to keep their jobs, and mass transit won't get improved because it will end up costing the government money and tax revenue.
Our gas taxes (federal and state) aren't enough to keep up with the our infrastructure needs. People in the lower-density areas don't want to pay for improvements in higher-density areas. At least that's the excuse we hear from Olympia. And no politician will raise the tax. Even if that's exactly what we need. Why? Because they'll be voted out. Guess what, Mr. or Mrs. Senator? I don't f**king care if you lose your elected job.
Not doing your job so you can keep your job? Yeah, you're not getting my vote. It might not be the most popular thing to do, but the right thing needs to be done. A recent example is the gun control initiatives that have failed, or cost people their elected positions. Following the Constitution is paramount; upholding the supreme law of the land trumps a misinformed and misguided fear.
But coming back to transportation, we need more money. And we need to manage it better. Sadly, I believe over 50% of the federal gas tax goes to paying debt on projects. That's pretty bad.
The other issue we have is the government mandate to increase the average miles per gallon of cars. Short-sighted as the government gets, that ecological maneuver drops gas tax revenue as people use less gas. The proliferation of electric and hybrid cars further lowers tax revenues.
So it's getting to the point where vehicles are going to be charged a mileage tax, or hefty license tax of some sort to offset the drop in gas tax revenues. Unless Boeing pulls out of Washington and turns Seattle into New Detroit, our transportation infrastructure will continue to rise.
Some of you may ask "what's wrong with mass transit?" No one wants to foot the bill for that. Transit in the area would need to triple the service they currently have. Major points on routes have large time gaps- 30 minutes or more- between stops. That may not seem very long, but consider it's Washington. 260 days of clouds and rain. Bus stops with covers that are built for 6 people. Now you want to stand out in the rain for 30 minutes? I don't think so.
In my opinion, there's a bigger issue with ramping up mass transit access. If we start having buses full of former commuters, who's paying the gas tax now? If the commuter population drops 25%- which would be amazing for the commute, gridlock-wise- gas taxes will drop 25%. And because our government is incapable of spending properly and within its means, there's going to be a huge tax somewhere else to make up for it.
The floodgates will open with dusty projects complete unrelated to transportation that will get earmarked in this round of tax increase. We've spent the last 50 years without that, Bob, we don't need it now.
So there you have it. Gas taxes won't go up because the legislature won't do their jobs in order to keep their jobs, and mass transit won't get improved because it will end up costing the government money and tax revenue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)