No doubt people have heard of major movie theaters nationwide canceling their screening of an edgy Seth Rogan and James Franco flick called The Interview, which pillories North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Un.
Ultimately, The Interview didn’t go well, and Sony’s controversial film appears dead. Regal and Cinemark said today that they will not screen the Seth Rogen-directed comedy, and other major exhibition chains including AMC and Cineplex are expected to follow suit.
And they did. This follows a vague threat of ‘9-11 style’ attacks on movie theaters (that doesn’t make much sense, but I digress) and President Obama even telling people to “go to the movies.”
On the one hand, I'd just like to point out that these are the same people doing and saying stupid things like American soldiers are evil/horrible creatures guilty of the worst atrocities in the known world. These are also the same people who like to defend ISIS and other terrorist nations, uttering the non-sensical claims that if we would just listen and talk to them, they wouldn't want to kill us so much. Isn't it amazing, then, that when the same political realities that give them a virtually automatic microphone and built-in audience to speak their own banal thoughts to the masses as informed experts suddenly turn around and harm "their work" they suddenly find something objectionable about caving to politically correct whims? Just thought that was worth pointing out. In this case, I happen to agree with most of the thoughts above - this was a terrible, terrible precedent to set, and absolutely the wrong move. Time will tell if other situations turn out differently, or if this will morph into a new form of negotiating with terrorists and/or terrorist sponsoring nations. I suspect Apatow is probably correct that more people will ultimately see the film now, but has the damage already been done? I sincerely hope not.
This was announced a few days ago, but it's still some awesome news so I thought I should highlight it today:
The Star Wars team is thrilled to announce the cast of Star Wars: Episode VII.
Actors John Boyega, Daisy Ridley, Adam Driver, Oscar Isaac, Andy Serkis, Domhnall Gleeson, and Max von Sydow will join the original stars of the saga, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Mark Hamill, Anthony Daniels, Peter Mayhew, and Kenny Baker in the new film.
Director J.J. Abrams says, "We are so excited to finally share the cast of Star Wars: Episode VII. It is both thrilling and surreal to watch the beloved original cast and these brilliant new performers come together to bring this world to life, once again. We start shooting in a couple of weeks, and everyone is doing their best to make the fans proud."
Star Wars: Episode VII is being directed by J.J. Abrams from a screenplay by Lawrence Kasdan and Abrams. Kathleen Kennedy, J.J. Abrams, and Bryan Burk are producing, and John Williams returns as the composer. The movie opens worldwide on December 18, 2015.
Been frustrated with Netflix lately? Me, too. Streaming has been low-quality and rebuffering often over the past couple of weeks. Here's why:
Netflix users across the country have been enduring extremely slow streaming rates and poor video quality lately. But nailing down the culprit is harder than you might think.
The growing feud between Netflix and Internet Service Providers has gotten pretty hot recently. While reading the headlines of the latest collision between Netflix and major ISPs, specifically the recently reported slowing of Netflix streams over Verizon’s Fios Internet service, its hard not to imagine “Showdown” by ELO playing somewhere in the background.
Netflix’s monthly ISP Speed Index report showed that streams from several service providers, including Verizon’s Fios and DSL internet service, slowed down in January. The report fed directly into fears that have been simmering since Verizon won a court case last month centered around Net neutrality, which stifled the FCC’s ability to regulate ISPs under current rules.
The verdict out of DC sent the Internet abuzz with fears of a new era of draconian rule by ISPs. The already powerful conglomerates ostensibly gained the freedom to charge more money to some companies for use of their Internet pipelines than others, setting up a pay-to-play scenario. First on the list, many worried, would be Netflix, a company which at last tally accounted for up to 31.6 percent of North American Internet traffic in peak hours.
Fuel was added to the flames when a recent Blog post by David Raphael of iScan Online posted a screenshot of a chat with a Verizon representative, who admitted that Verizon was limiting the bandwidth of cloud providers to intentionally “throttle” speeds from streaming services, including Netflix. Verizon representatives have vehemently denied any so-called “throttling,” blaming the speed loss instead on individual servers, and the routing of traffic.
However, even if Verizon’s claims are true and no throttling is taking place, Netflix has run into a basic logistics problem. By many accounts, the company has simply tapped out the speed of the existing video delivery infrastructure. To solve the issue, Netflix has been trying to get ISPs on-board with its Open Connect program, which is essentially an open gateway that pumps Netflix streams straight to ISPs, with no twists or turns along the way.
But the big boys like Verizon, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, and AT&T all want compensation from Netflix to switch to the Open Connect system. As the Wall Street Journal reports, executives from many major providers also maintian Netflix is to blame for the streaming issues that are popping up across the country, claiming the company is sending its streams inefficiently.
While the two sides fight it out like school children on the playground, a bigger issue is at play. Net neutrality and general network configuration issues have the potential to do more than just slow down your favorite Breaking Bad episode. Apart from concern for the future of streaming video, many fear the loosening of FCC regulations could also set a troubling precedence for the entire structure of the Internet going forward, in which big money is required set up shop. And without a level playing field, smaller companies may not be able to compete with larger, long-established corporations who took advantage of the old rules.
The FCC is already working on a new method to regulate ISPs, detailed in Digital Trends’ recent report on the subject. But as for now, there are plenty of balls in the air, with the future of video streaming, and the basic structure of the Internet itself at stake.
And so it begins. Right on the heels of a highly publicized deal in which Netflix agreed to pay Comcast an undisclosed fee for a more direct link to its Internet pipelines, Verizon and AT&T representatives have claimed that similar deals between their services and Netflix are also in the works.
The news doesn’t come as a huge surprise, and is a sign of the crossroads that Netflix and the major Internet Service Providers are sitting at.
While many immediately cried foul at the precedence the seemingly unholy deal struck between Comcast and Netflix could create, this tumultuous new landscape of pay-to-play between Big Red and the major ISPs has reportedly been in the works for some time. In fact, in a recent interview on CNBC, Verizon CEO Lowell McAdam claims Verizon and Netflix have been in negotiations over the issue for a year.
The situation really began with a very simple problem: Netflix became too damned popular. As Netflix streams started eating up more and more bandwidth, taking up as much as 31.6 percent of all North American internet traffic at peak hours at last count, the company realized it was going to have to find a more efficient way to pump its content into our TVs, computers and mobile devices.
The solution Netflix came up with is called Open Connect which, at its core, is a way to store its most popular content on in-house servers closer to ISP delivery channels, allowing that content a much more direct pathway to the homes of all those millions of viewers. As Reuters reported, ISPs like Google Fiber, Cox and Cablevision all got on board with Open Connect, and have seen little to none of the Netflix speed issues that have plagued much of the Nation as of late.
However, some of the biggest providers like Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, and Time Warner, refused to play ball with the Open Connect system. That is likely one of the major reasons unhappy customers everywhere saw Netflix streaming speeds take a nose dive recently.
Of course, another reason could be the DC court ruling for Verizon in January, in which the FCC’s ability to enforce Net neutrality in its current form was struck down. The verdict opened the possibility for ISPs to essentially sell their fastest service to the highest bidder, creating fears that fair play online could be seriously threatened. Those fears weren’t helped by the latest Netflix ISP Speed Index Report that came out in the same month as the verdict, showing grinding streaming speeds from many of the same companies who fought against Open Connect.
Since then, accusations that Verizon and others are intentionally ‘throttling’ Netflix streaming speeds to extort money from the company like a mafioso thug have run rampant. A prime example came from a blog post by David Rapheal, showing a screen shot of a chat in which a Verizon employee admitted the company has been intentionally slowing Netflix streams as of late. For its part, Verizon completely denies any throttling of Netflix, or any other streaming service.
Either way, it seems money, not time, heals all wounds. The ISPs seem to have gotten what they wanted. And on the other side of the equation, Netflix is apparently brokering deals with the Open Connect holdouts it can live with. Still, since we don’t know how much Netflix is paying for its shortcuts on the information superhighway, a lot of questions remain.
One you might be asking right now is whether or not these ISP payment plans will be passed on to you, the consumer. And if not now, who knows whether the agreed upon fees will go up in the future and cut into Netflix’s bottom line. But perhaps the bigger question is: What does this mean to everyone else in business online? Sure, the biggest streaming site in the world can afford the toll, but what about new start-ups looking for their share of the streaming market place?
For now, we just don’t know the answer to these questions. What we do know is, ostensibly, the way business is conducted between ISPs and video streaming services just took a huge left turn. All we can do now is wait and see where this new road leads.
Like most things, I suspect this will be a double-edged sword. On the upside, those companies (like Netflix) that are able to pay for direct connections to the vehicles for their services will provide a great product and continue to grow and do great things. On the other hand, if having deep pockets is a requirement to play the game, that's going to limit competition, which ultimately hurts consumers due to lack of choice and lack of price competition. Don't kid yourself - the new costs will inevitably be passed on to paying subscribers, so the prospect of paying twice for content is only a short trip down this road. Like the article said, we'll just have to wait and see how this plays out to know for sure.
In the meantime, at least this explains why your Netflix has sucked lately.
The NFL season ended last night not with a bang, but a whimper, as the Toydaria Wattos steamrolled Peyton Manning's Hoth Tauntauns on their way to victory. Or, at least, that's how it would have gone in the imagination of John Raya, a designer who lovingly reimagined every NFL team's logo and helmet on his way to re-branding them all for the Star Wars universe.
The project maintains each team's color scheme and basic visual identity: the Denver Broncos, for example, became the Tauntaun Hoths by keeping the left side of the team's horse-logo head, while replacing the face with that of the frigid beasts of the Star Wars ice planet, while the Wattos take the visual tone of the Seahawks' totem bird and replace it with The Phantom Menace's greedy shopowner.
Some of the helmet redesigns required little change: The Minnesota Vikings became the Shili Togrutas--named for a blink-and-you'll-miss-'em species that appeared in Attack of the Clones--merely by adding some shading to the horns. Others, like the Ryloth Interceptors, barely resemble the Atlanta Falcons on which they're based. In either case, though, poring over the images should help pass the time for the specific type of nerd whose Venn-diagram of interests includes both professional football and Star Wars until the start of next year's NFL season, which'll in turn bring us five months closer to Star Wars: Episode VII.
This is definitely one of those things I wish I'd thought of! Hit the link above to see every helmet. My favorites are the Falcons, Colts, and Cardinals, with an honorable mention to the Titans and Cowboys: Unfortunately, I think the Chiefs got a rather lame adaptation: *sigh* The designer must be a Raiders fan. But at least we're better off than the Redskins...
Sorry posts have been in short supply lately! There's been a lot going on, actually. Also, I've had a bunch of little stuff that I wanted to post, but no real theme in which to arrange it all. So, rather than continue to let it build up, I'm doing a Whole Sort Of General Mish Mash post. Enjoy!
Why do our voices sound so different when we hear it on a recording? Here's your answer:
On a related note (not really), did you know just how much symbolism is enshrined in the $1 bill? Check it out:
What's that weird pyramid drawing on the reverse of the bill?
The two circular drawings on the reverse of the bill are actually
parts of the two-sided Great Seal of the United States. Although we
don't see the entire seal outside of our wallets too often, the notion
of having a great seal is actually as old as the country itself. The
Continental Congress passed a resolution on July 4, 1776, to create a
committee to design a great seal for the fledgling nation, and heavy
hitters John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson got the
first crack at creating the seal.
Congress wasn't so keen on the design these big names brought back,
though, and it took nearly six years and several drafts to finally find a
suitable seal. Congress finally approved of a design on June 20, 1782.
What's the story behind the Great Seal of the United States?
According
to the State Department, which has been the official trustee of the
seal since 1789, both the obverse (front) and reverse (back) of the seal
are rich with symbolism. The obverse picturing the eagle is a bit
easier to explain. The bird holds 13 arrows to show the
nation's strength in war, but it also grasps an olive branch with 13
leaves and 13 olives that symbolize the importance of peace.
(The recurring number 13, which also appears in the stripes on the
eagle's shield and the constellation of stars over its head, is a nod to
the original 13 states.) The shield floats unsupported over the eagle
as a reminder that Americans should rely on their own virtue and
strength.
The symbolism of the pyramid on the seal's reverse is trickier. The
pyramid has 13 steps—the designers apparently never got tired of the 13
motif—and the Roman numeral for 1776 is emblazoned across the bottom.
The all-seeing Eye of Providence at the top of the pyramid symbolizes
the divine help the early Americans needed in establishing the new
country. The pyramid itself symbolizes strength and durability.
The divine overtones don't stop with the unblinking eye, though. The Latin motto Annuit Ceptis appears over the pyramid; it translates into "He [God] has favored our undertaking." The scroll underneath the pyramid reads Novus Ordo Seclorum, or "A new order of the ages," which was meant to signify the dawn of the new American era.
How did the seal end up on our dollar bill?
We can thank former Secretary of State Cordell Hull's busy schedule
for that one. Secretary of Agriculture Henry A. Wallace had to wait for a
meeting with Hull in 1934 and decided to kill time by thumbing through a
State Department pamphlet on the Great Seal. The pamphlet contained an
illustration of the reverse side of the seal with the pyramid, and
Wallace was quite taken with the drawing. He took the seal to President
Franklin Roosevelt and suggested the country mint a coin using the two
sides of the seal.
FDR liked the seal, too. (Roosevelt and Wallace were both Masons and
loved the all-seeing eye part of the reverse design, which echoed the
concept of the Great Architect of the Universe.) He thought the seal
should be on the reverse of the dollar bill rather than a coin, but he
was worried the mystical imagery would offend Catholics. After
Postmaster General James Farley assured FDR he didn't think his fellow
Catholics would have any problem with the design, Roosevelt approved a
new dollar bill design that first appeared in 1935.
Did the Founding Fathers swipe any ideas from a magazine?
Possibly. The familiar E Pluribus Unum motto that the eagle
holds in its beak underscores the union and togetherness of the 13
colonies. It might also underscore early Americans' love of periodicals.
According to the State Department, recent historical research has indicated that this Latin motto may have been borrowed from Gentlemen's Magazine, a London publication that ran from 1732 to 1922.
The magazine was popular in the colonies, and its title page always carried the E Pluribus Unum motto.
Why don't the dates on the front of the bills change that often?
At the lower right of the portrait on the bill's obverse you'll see
the word "Series" and a year. You might notice that these don't change
each year the way the numbers on minted coins do. Why not?
According to the Treasury, the series date only changes when there's a
new design for a bill, a new Treasurer of the United States, or a new
Secretary of the Treasury. (These are the two officials whose signatures
appear on either side of the portrait.) The series year itself changes
when the Secretary of the Treasury changes, while a change in the
Treasurer of the United States means that the series year remains the
same, but a suffix letter gets tacked onto the end of the year.
What are the various other numbers on the obverse of the bill?
The bill's serial number is the most prominently displayed set of
digits on the dollar, but they're not alone. If you take out a dollar,
you'll notice there are four large numbers in the corners of the bill's
open space. Like the encircled letter to the left of Washington's
portrait, these
numbers tell which Federal Reserve Bank issued the note. (Each Fed's
number corresponds the letter of the alphabet assigned to the bank, with
A=1, B=2, and so on.)
The tiny letters and numbers that appear on the top left and bottom
right of the bill's obverse indicate the position of the note on the
Treasury's printing plates. If your dollar bill has a tiny "FW" before
this code, those letters indicate that it was printed at the Treasury's
facility in Fort Worth, Texas, rather than in Washington, D.C.
Not everything is a prank, though. I love it when people are awesome, and this clearly qualifies:
AWESOME!!!
But that's not all...check out their awesomeness on the soccer field, with a shot put, with a waboba ball (twice), and water slide alley-oop shots. Side note: this group supports Compassion International with portions of their profits. Even more awesome!
Finally, you may or may not be a fan of Game of Thrones. Personally, I'm a fan of anything with cool special effects, and GoT's dragons certainly fit the bill. I'm also a fan of behind-the-scenes videos that show how special effects are done. Thus:
The first one possessed introspection and heart, this one attempts to contain the explosive action. Both are tremendous, and the prospects of this movie just keep getting better and better...!
I've never liked Superman before, but the way this is shaping up, I'm actually pretty excited to see it. Action, effects, and heart? They've got the ingredients for quite the success, I think:
Jon Acuff is a Christian author and speaker who maintains a blog of thoughts, observations, and witticisms. One of his most recent blogs contained some funny pictures for Lord of the Rings fans. Here's my favorite:
I noticed this pattern every time I've read Jurassic Park, and I thought it was simply a repeating pattern that Crichton came up with for the book. Turns out it's a real thing, and much more fascinating:
For the record, yes, the book is better than the movie...if you enjoyed the movie at all, you really should read the real thing. You won't regret it, for many more reasons than the fractals...
Now that we're around the corner of the new year, it's time to start looking forward to the upcoming slate of movies! Here are some that I'm particularly looking forward to.
Start the popcorn now... IronMan 3: Both of the first two movies in this series have been surprisingly entertaining. I've never been a fan of IronMan, but Robert Downey, Jr. strikes a perfect note of selfless narcissism that provides humor, drama, and excitement. The character development is surprisingly good, too; hopefully this new installment will continue the trend.
GI Joe 2: Ah, what to say? The first GI Joe movie was, at best, a shallow action flick. But sometimes that's all it takes to be an awesomely entertaining movie. The writing was cheesy, the acting somewhat tinny, and the plot was completely ridiculous...and it was exactly like I remember it in my mind from when I was playing with these toys when I was young. Part 2 appears to be right on target, as well. I can't wait!
Star Trek Into Darkness: I was very pleased with the first of the newly refreshed Star Trek series. The characters were great, and the casting was spot on (especially with Zachary Quinto as Spock). The only thing that stretched believability (you know, other than the obvious) was how Kirk went from a young enlisted man to Captain in the blink of an eye. That was silly, but I suppose they had to make it happen or he wouldn't have been able to call the shots. That being said, it looks like this round is going to really delve into his psyche and force him to grow up a bit, which is an exciting prospect. And, I cannot imagine a better villain than Benedict Cumberbatch, who is absolutely phenomenal in Sherlock.
Eh, probably Netflix... Man of Steel: I've never been a Superman fan. The guy can do literally anything, so it's frankly pretty hard to imagine how anyone can ever beat him (even Luther). I'm not saying this looks fantastic, but it appears that they're trying to make this superhero very, very human, and that could make it much, much better.
Oblivion: Cruise just doesn't appear to age, and seems more than up to the task of this action flick. Scifi is always a good grab for my attention, and the plot seems pretty intriguing, too. It doesn't hurt that this one seems very like Minority Report - if it comes off that well, I'll be happy.
The Incredible Burt Wonderstone: Steve Carrell and Jim Carrey team up once again in what looks sure to be a good laugher. What remains to be seen is if this move has any heart and substance, or is just a shallow slapstick movie. If they can pull off a Bruce Almighty-type message while delivering their considerable combined comedic superbness, this could be really fun.
Pacific Rim: Super cheesy? Certainly. Overly done hype? Count on it. Silly plot and shallow writing? Undoubtedly. But when was the last time we had a blockbuster movie with super-giant mech warriors fighting inter-dimensional aliens from the ocean floor? Exactly. Sign me up...
Dragon: Had to throw in something high class. I'm not a terribly big fan of the Hong Kong style of people flying across the room and doing mind-bendingly awkward moves that are as fictional as the oceanic monsters in Pacific Rim...but Donnie Yen is the real deal when it comes to martial arts, and I'm pretty much a fan of anything he's in. If there's an actual plot where good and evil, and past and present collide, well, so much the better.
I suspect The Hobbit part 2 will be the highlight of the year for me, but I haven't seen a trailer for it yet. Don't worry, it'll come soon enough.
That's the list at the moment, but the year is just getting started...!
According
to the State Department, which has been the official trustee of the
seal since 1789, both the obverse (front) and reverse (back) of the seal
are rich with symbolism. The obverse picturing the eagle is a bit
easier to explain. The bird holds 13 arrows to show the
nation's strength in war, but it also grasps an olive branch with 13
leaves and 13 olives that symbolize the importance of peace.
(The recurring number 13, which also appears in the stripes on the
eagle's shield and the constellation of stars over its head, is a nod to
the original 13 states.) The shield floats unsupported over the eagle
as a reminder that Americans should rely on their own virtue and
strength.
these
numbers tell which Federal Reserve Bank issued the note. (Each Fed's
number corresponds the letter of the alphabet assigned to the bank, with
A=1, B=2, and so on.)
