Listen to this!
So now that you have listened to my podcast, you may be womdering what it takes to actually make a podcast. Well, to be honest, it's not that hard. Of course there are always tech. problems but for the most part it was petty easy. I think that if i was a bigger audiohead, then i might consider actually making one on a regular basis. But, since i am not, I probably won't. However, it was a beneficial learning experience and something that I am happy that I can say that I have done!
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
More trouble for blogs
In reference to this article on Wired:
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/04/internet_names_.html
There are a few things that should be said. First off, why is it that people think just because it is written down and lots of people can read it, then it must be true? I mean, that article is about a person people just speculated was the shooter. How does that even happen? Who came up with that in the first place? I understand that the nature of people is to speculate, but for people to start a rumor that the killer had a blog and then for it to turn out that it wasn't even the right guy, is potentially harmful. People can see this all the time when tabloids or magazines have covers claiming this or that bassed solely on a picture. A picture may say a thousnad words but that means nothing when the whole story can tell a billion words.
Unfortunatly, in the days of Myspace and Facebook, everyone is vulnerable. However, if I know that my professors or my parents or my boss can go on facebook and at least see my picture, then I am going to make sure not to put a picture of me naked in a pool of jello fighting wrestling a monkey. For those people who put inappropriate pictures online and then says that it is unfair when they lose a job because their boss sees it, I have no pity for you. You don't put anything online that you wouldn't want everyone to see. So while I believe that it was wrong for people to speculate about the blog of the guy with the guns, I think something like that is just a coincidence that got blown out of proportion. It is a shame that he was blamed but he seems to not be too harmed about it and wants to do good with making sure money goes to charity.
The point is that if a person has something that they don't want people to see, then they are dumb. Everyone knows that the internet is accesable to millions of people. I am not concerened about how I represent mysef online on sites like facebook or even in this blog because I make sure not to put items in facebook or this blog that I wouldn't tell my parents, my friends, or my boss.
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/04/internet_names_.html
There are a few things that should be said. First off, why is it that people think just because it is written down and lots of people can read it, then it must be true? I mean, that article is about a person people just speculated was the shooter. How does that even happen? Who came up with that in the first place? I understand that the nature of people is to speculate, but for people to start a rumor that the killer had a blog and then for it to turn out that it wasn't even the right guy, is potentially harmful. People can see this all the time when tabloids or magazines have covers claiming this or that bassed solely on a picture. A picture may say a thousnad words but that means nothing when the whole story can tell a billion words.
Unfortunatly, in the days of Myspace and Facebook, everyone is vulnerable. However, if I know that my professors or my parents or my boss can go on facebook and at least see my picture, then I am going to make sure not to put a picture of me naked in a pool of jello fighting wrestling a monkey. For those people who put inappropriate pictures online and then says that it is unfair when they lose a job because their boss sees it, I have no pity for you. You don't put anything online that you wouldn't want everyone to see. So while I believe that it was wrong for people to speculate about the blog of the guy with the guns, I think something like that is just a coincidence that got blown out of proportion. It is a shame that he was blamed but he seems to not be too harmed about it and wants to do good with making sure money goes to charity.
The point is that if a person has something that they don't want people to see, then they are dumb. Everyone knows that the internet is accesable to millions of people. I am not concerened about how I represent mysef online on sites like facebook or even in this blog because I make sure not to put items in facebook or this blog that I wouldn't tell my parents, my friends, or my boss.
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Attack on the Blogs!
I just read the article "Legal Showdown in Search Fracas." from Wired magazine (here's the link: http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2005/09/68799). First of all, I don't think that this kind of thing should ever happen! If a blog is really supposed to imitate a conversation - just with a lot of people- then how can someone sue someone else over what is said in a conversation- no matter how big it is!!! I mean, does that mean that I could get sued for just making this comment and posting that link on this blog? I also think that should someone be sued, internet providers should not be allowed to release their personal information. That internet provider is simply that-a provider of a service. They are not the internet police or the internet parent and they should not be held repsonsible for what is said on their site nor should they be allowed to release confidential information.
Also, alot of information of blogs are simply opinion...nothing that I read on a blog do I ever consider to be fact. It may be factually based, however, if it was facts, then I dont think it would be called a blog- it would be more like a newsfeed/newsletter etc. Therefore, I don't ever think that blogs should be taken as full on factual. I mean, I could say that I am 6 feet tall and that is a fact!!! However, to those who know me, they would probably just say I was dreaming. Since many blogs are anonymous, they are more like a piece of fiction, a fantasy world. With that being said, there are times when I think that what is said on a blog should be looked into. There are things in this world which are not funny and should not be joked around about. Blogs that have information on how to...say, build a bomb or molest a child should be taken down and that person be investigated. Those are serious issues that should not be taken lightly and if a person is talking about that in a joking way, they are sick individuals to begin with and should get help. Blogs that say how much a company sucks is not putting anyones life in danger. See the difference? I sure hope so! Blogs like that are no different then putting your opinions onto a comment card or a review in a magazine.
Also, alot of information of blogs are simply opinion...nothing that I read on a blog do I ever consider to be fact. It may be factually based, however, if it was facts, then I dont think it would be called a blog- it would be more like a newsfeed/newsletter etc. Therefore, I don't ever think that blogs should be taken as full on factual. I mean, I could say that I am 6 feet tall and that is a fact!!! However, to those who know me, they would probably just say I was dreaming. Since many blogs are anonymous, they are more like a piece of fiction, a fantasy world. With that being said, there are times when I think that what is said on a blog should be looked into. There are things in this world which are not funny and should not be joked around about. Blogs that have information on how to...say, build a bomb or molest a child should be taken down and that person be investigated. Those are serious issues that should not be taken lightly and if a person is talking about that in a joking way, they are sick individuals to begin with and should get help. Blogs that say how much a company sucks is not putting anyones life in danger. See the difference? I sure hope so! Blogs like that are no different then putting your opinions onto a comment card or a review in a magazine.
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
Grindhouse...winner or loser???
I have posted a review of the movie Grindhouse. For those of you unaware of this movie, it is a lovechild of Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez. The basic premise is that the movie is a doublefeature production and is a throwback to when movie houses would literally become a grindhouse, grinding out C-movies simply to bring in the dough. One movie belongs to Quentin, the other to Robert. Seeing as how the movie has not come out yet, I am unable to submit my own review. However, it's not the review that I am interested in. It is the fact that this movie has the ability to change the way movies are made in the industry. When people in the industry who routinly make good movies such as Quentin and Robert do (and I use good loosly in Quentin's case...anyone see Resevoir Dogs? Eck!!!), start making movies that are supposed to emulate bad films, it seems to me that a trend is a brewin...and not a good one. I understand the need to throw tribute to the movies that pushed you into the movie making business...but couldn't they have just had a special screening of those movies instead of going out and making one? Now, as I said before, I haven't seen the movie. I will be seeing the movie. It could knock my socks right off, only time will tell. I am just worried that other directors and producers will take this film and make bad, bad, bad emulations of it. That means movies that lack character development, overtly use sex (and many times this means degrading women), and cheap looking gore all takin in with a shot of bad dialogue and even worse story lines.
Another problem that I have is that my friend Quentin does have a certain...well a certain something about his films. In the revieew, the author was kind enough to share with the reader that Quentin has a bit of trouble actually making a film different then what he is used to making. It may be because Quentin is only capable of making one style of film. It may because Quentin thinks that that one style of film is the best and he won't ever quit using it. Either way, I fear that it will completely take me out of the film and get me comparing it to Kill Bill.
Emulating these films also creates a problem for people in the industry since these films are usually an a,b,c motif, it rarely leaves the director, not to mention the viewer, to put their own take on the film. For someone who wants to create movies, that's a sad thing to think about.
Whatever you may think about this movie, check back cause you better believe that I will be posting my own thoughts on the film once I have watched it. I could be completly wrong...however, these are just some fears that I think about when I think about heavyweights in Hollywood recreating genres that shouldnt be recreated. I would like to think that one day I could create a movie with all the elements that this film might lack. I think that the film will catch on, simply because it is something this generation hasn't seen. However, sometimes generations should look to the originals and appreciate them instead of trying to recreate.
http://movies.ign.com/articles/775/775718p1.html
Another problem that I have is that my friend Quentin does have a certain...well a certain something about his films. In the revieew, the author was kind enough to share with the reader that Quentin has a bit of trouble actually making a film different then what he is used to making. It may be because Quentin is only capable of making one style of film. It may because Quentin thinks that that one style of film is the best and he won't ever quit using it. Either way, I fear that it will completely take me out of the film and get me comparing it to Kill Bill.
Emulating these films also creates a problem for people in the industry since these films are usually an a,b,c motif, it rarely leaves the director, not to mention the viewer, to put their own take on the film. For someone who wants to create movies, that's a sad thing to think about.
Whatever you may think about this movie, check back cause you better believe that I will be posting my own thoughts on the film once I have watched it. I could be completly wrong...however, these are just some fears that I think about when I think about heavyweights in Hollywood recreating genres that shouldnt be recreated. I would like to think that one day I could create a movie with all the elements that this film might lack. I think that the film will catch on, simply because it is something this generation hasn't seen. However, sometimes generations should look to the originals and appreciate them instead of trying to recreate.
http://movies.ign.com/articles/775/775718p1.html
Monday, April 2, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)