If you are in possession of a mail server, and your mail filter strips out ZIP files and replaces them with a snotty message: stop it. Stop it, stop it, stop it! You are not increasing security, you are simply pissing me off.
That's all, thank you.
/misc | permalink (2007/12/13 12:06)
By request, I've enabled the Bloxsom RSS feed doohickey. It's always slightly startling to be reminded that on occasion people actually read this stuff. Makes me want to go back and erase a bunch of entries...
For instance, I wrote a snark about iPods a year and change ago. I still believe all of those words are true, but I no longer care. I have an iPod, I love working on the Intel iMac at the office, and if I wasn't fairly sure that it would melt a hole in my lap, I'd be raiding Wyatt's college fund to buy a Macbook. I've been replaced by a pod person. Give me shiny white plastic!
I should just delete the post. I don't think current me should be held responsible for the words of past me.
From my last post, it's clear that it's not too healthy to watch CNN for long periods of time. However, I've just found something worse: "Next time on Entertainment Tonight: Terri Schiavo. Murder, or Mercy? The stars weigh in! Then: Brad and Angelina's sexy new scenes!"
Somewhere, a latter-day Gibbon is writing all of this down...
New design for the site, whee! Most of the design I ripped off from various entries in the css Zen Garden database. Most notably, the bulk of the CSS for the site came from Ben Nolan's Utilitarian entry. Most of the layout is cribbed from Nelson Minar's excellent blog.
The site also validates as XHTML 1.0 Strict and CSS again. I'm sure that will come in handy. For fun, you can see what the site looks like with all of the CSS turned off here.
Hm. There are some problems with IE, apparently. Fun. Ok, that's fixed. Standards compliant browser my ass.
Commercial CG that doesn't make me wish that computers were vastly more expensive! The latest TV spots in the HP Invent ad series are really sharp. (Click, Click.) The CG doesn't get in the way, and they obviously spent a lot of time and thought to make it convey the message that it's effortless to make and manipulate digital images with HP products.
Another bit of CG that I really liked recently was the What Barry Says propaganda short that's been popping up in various places. The visual aesthetic is great, but I most admire the way the transitions play with constructs that only parse correctly from one viewpoint, creating a flowing visual that doesn't jar the viewer despite radical changes in scope and subject. (n.b. the audio track is a little Black Helicopter, turn it down, it won't detract from the visual.)
It's particularly nice to see CG coming out that takes advantage of this "limitation" of computer rendering to create effects that would not be possible if the image were truly 3-dimensional. If the Barry viewpoint tricks were presented as a proper pair of stereo images, you would spot the wires right away. This is the same technique Escher used to make his famous images that fiddled with perspective; taking advantage of the fact that a 2d projection of a 3d scene causes several points in 3-space to collapse to the same point in the picture plane. Since this stuff is my stock-in-trade, I really like it.
Non-geeks stop reading here
As a pedantic aside, it would be possible to recontruct some the HP ads if we
were rendering stereo pairs, but only for the effects in which the actor drapes
the picture frames over his head. You would have to replace the texture that
you had been rendering to the frame with the pixel for his face at the exact
moment that the point on his face intersected the texture plane. The images
that you'd have to use for textures wouldn't be nearly as neat and tidy,
however, since the frame and his face are in motion. It would have to be all
stretched and smeared, as if you'd moved a piece of paper in the middle of a
photocopy. The effects in which the piece of paper "snaps" an image while held
in front of his face would be impossible to make seamless unless you make the
assumption that the viewpoint is infinitely far away, in which case your stereo
pairs collapse to the same image.