Movie: here and now

.

‘Here and now’

Just for a short while,
the memory lingers.
Enduring imprints,
from the here and now.

 

The final version of small movie containing a poem by Rob Walker called Transcending Silence and the art installation by ‘Dance’ by Myra Wildmist. The whole tied together by shadows, a misty mountain in Japan, second world war. A the burned in patterns on the skin of a Japanese woman. I would say: enjoy.

 

Poem

two weeks ago in japan i sat on that Mountain
the bald young monk explaining zazen meditation
the release from past and future
and the silence of engyoji temple
teaching me the here/now
and here and now we sit in The Vales
a silence broken
by the eternal happiness of hi-5
on a blaring tv
which is everlasting
you my balding father
hair stolen not by time but radiation
you sit on the bed in your tracksuit pants
bulging with the incontinence nappy
below your buddha belly
your corporeal form shapeless as a toddler’s
i ask if you need anything
you don’t
all your physical needs met
in this daily malignant shallowness
the blastoma has excised your past
and your future is inoperable
you don’t remember who came yesterday
or what you ate for breakfast
you have achieved a kind of benign transcendence
only those around you
feel the eternal depths of sorrow
but you
are in the perpetual
Here and Now.

text © rob walker, 2010

http://www.robwalkerpoet.com/?p=1134

 

Computing Forever takes on the EU(starting with Richard Dawkins)2/2

2:50 “It is not difficult to do some basic research[]”(Computing Forever)
Sometimes it works to look at the sources someone uses for his arguments.
https://youtu.be/omlGfwLC2Lw

These are Computing Forever’s named sources.
1 The sun.
2 An article by a pro-Brexit writer, written for a news website called Heat Street, a libertarian source. The article is otherwise unsupported.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_Street
look up : Lukas Mikelionis to get to know the writer.
3 Above article(point 2) is in itself is based on a article by a former UKIP politician writing for the daily mail who cites no sources and is otherwise unsupported.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janice_Atkinson
4 Infowars, a website run Alex Jones, a man who is a libertarian and a  conspiracy theorist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Jones_(radio_host)

None of his named sources are supported by credible sources like:
http://www.onlinecollegecourses.com/2012/12/17/the-best-english-newspapers/
I don’t mean that they do not support him. I mean even if they support his claims he doesn’t mention them.
Above link is just an example. Go look for yourself.Check this man’s sources and claims.

Note that Computing Forever hardly uses any credible source even if these supports his claims.
He uses the Guardian once, only to cite a biased interview of a former Greek finance minister who can hardly be viewed as being objective.

Here is a detailed breakdown:

00:00
CF opens  with an article on Theresa May and Scotland that comes from the sun.
The sun is a tabloid paper with a pro-Brexit stance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)
It is also not considered a reliable source.
http://www.djsresearch.co.uk/MediaAdvertisingAndPRMarketResearchInsightsAndFindings/article/The-Sun-Crowned-Most-Read-and-Least-Trusted-Newspaper-by-UK-Poll-00886
No other sources support this article.

00:45
She wants to slowly forget about it.”
An unsubstantiated statement by CF.

1:10
The Eu “[] is an anti-democratic superstate.
Anti-democratic:Unsupported claim.
Superstate: Unsupported claim.
It is not a state:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union.

2:05
So many scientists seem to be against leaving out of self-interest.
Unsupported claim.

Note:there are however sources that support this claim, but CF does not use them. He simply fails to back up his claims even if he can.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jul/07/brexit-is-also-a-vote-against-the-elitism-in-science
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-the-science-community-says-no-to-brexit/
http://www.nature.com/polopoly_fs/7.35380!/file/Brexit%20survey_full%20results.pdf

2:10
Now I am not saying that is the reason Dawkins is against Brexit, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it was.

It can be easily found that he is. Did Computing Forever even look?

Twitter:
The #Brexit vote makes me seriously doubt the existence of any sort of human evolution
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/richard-dawkins-eu-referendum-brexit-david-cameron-a7059201.html
http://www.wired.co.uk/article/richard-dawkins-brexit-catastrophe
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/29/eu-referendum-parliament-leaders-david-cameron-david-mitchell
https://richarddawkins.net/?s=brexit

2:40
Basic research how the EU operates

a) First mentioned article: 6 Time EU bosses who sneered at the electorate.
This is written by Heat Street, a libertarian news agency by a pro-Brexit writer. He ends the article with: “Vote Leave to wipe the smirk off their faces”

Point by point:

1) Euro parliament president: Referendums for “mentally weak”, “like Nazis”


The underlying source is an article by Janet Atkinson in the daily mail. She mentions no sources and no other sources support what she says. She was a UKIP politician and therefore can be assumed to be a Brexit supporter. More about her here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janice_Atkinson
As it comes to nazis it was Schulz who was being accused of being one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Schulz
See the incident with Godfrey Bloom.
And
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/tory-mep-provokes-uproar-with-attack-on-nazi-eu-776748.html

2)“Decisions taken by the most democratic institutions in the world are very often wrong.
Jose Manuel Barroso 2010
This is an often quoted statement and seems valid enough. Context hard to establish.

3) Rompuy: “But we do it anyway.”
http://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20140429_01087318
Not accessible, so hard to establish context or validity. I am Dutch so I can read the Standard. Can’t access the page without becomming a member.

4) “Britain belongs to us.”
http://www.itv.com/news/2015-06-17/martin-schultz-britain-belongs-to-the-eu/
Quoted out of context if you look at it as Schulz says the UK belongs to the EU(not us) as it is part of it.
But the writer conveniently overlooks Schulz saying that Britain is free to suggest changes as any other member state can at 1:10 into the interview.

5)Juncker: “PM’s listen to voters too much.”
Quote:
“Elected leaders are making life “difficult” because they spend too much time thinking about what they can get out of EU and kowtowing to public opinion, rather than working on “historic” projects such as the Euro, he said.

6)Trade Commissioner: “I don’t take my mandate from the European People.”
This is quoted by John Hillary in his article. He is an opponent of TTIP for which the Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström is responsible. She has denied saying this.  See controversy:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/i-didn-t-think-ttip-could-get-any-scarier-but-then-i-spoke-to-the-eu-official-in-charge-of-it-a6690591.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecilia_Malmstr%C3%B6m

b)”Greece Is A Scapegoat For The Disintegration Of The EU”
http://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2015/apr/29/the-austerity-delusion
Based on an interview with the Former Greek minister of Finance.

c)Hate speech code.
Unsourced, so here are the sources Computing Forever fails to mention. Read for yourself.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/31/facebook-youtube-twitter-microsoft-eu-hate-speech-code
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-1937_en.htm

d)ELITE WILL USE MIGRANTS TO DESTROY EUROPEAN LABOR
http://www.infowars.com/elite-will-use-migrants-to-destroy-european-labor/
This is an article in infowars.
It is run by Alex Jones.
He is a conspiracy theorist.  
I can confidently say he is a crackpot. The aritcle is written by Kurt Nimmo, but based on what Alex Jones thinks(see associated movie on website).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Jones_(radio_host)
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Alex_Jones

3:50
“(sarcastic) We should just listen to our politicians? They can never be corrupted, biased or plain wrong on any issue?
What he seems to claim is that he doesn’t trust in the democratic process with which the country is organized.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_the_United_Kingdom

4:44
I can’t believe that I bought two of his books.”(about Dawkins)
Apparently, books get only credible when the writer agrees with you in everything even if the books discuss unrelated subjects.

5:25: “Where have I heard this before?“(on a second referendum)
From Nigel Farage.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017

6:15 : False dichotomy: it is referenda or dictatorship and nothing in between.
Yet, he refuses to vote a second time in the Irish 2009 one.  https://youtu.be/pZ9fxpmM1lA?t=66

6:20 “you are anti-democratic to the core.”(to Dawkins)
Dawkins is undemocratic because he says that the decision should have been left to an elected parliament and he proposes a second referendum.
Computing Forever doesn’t like this.

6:25 “Ireland and France were asked again for the Nice and Lisbon treaties because the EU doesn’t care for[].”

Referenda are not enforced from the EU. In fact the democratic elected parliaments and governments have to initiate and approve them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amendments_to_the_Constitution_of_Ireland
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendums_in_France

7:50
I will always respect you.”(about Dawkins)
Look back at 4:44 where CF wonders why he bought two books from Dawkins.

And that is the end.

What it all boils down to is that you are watching a video that uses as sources articles from the sun, heat street and infowars, twitter and the like. And biased interviews.  The only credible source he mentions is the guardian. Otherwise his statements go unsourced or unexplained.

Computing Forever takes on the world 1/2(starting with Thunderf00t)

Computing Forever takes on people like  Richard Dawkins and Thunderf00t on his YouTube channel.https://youtu.be/pZ9fxpmM1lA

Oh… Who are these guys you might ask?

This is Richard Dawkins:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkin

This is Thunderf00t:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Mason

I ran into Computing Forever when he called out Thunderf00t in his video.

What struck me was that he says this about Thunderf00t:

“These arguments he makes in the video come from a place[]of speculation, hearsay, emotion,[] none of the rational empiricism[]. It is just a series of cognitive biases throughout.”

So.. well. Maybe he is right. I thought.

And what do I discover?

That you can say about Computing Forever:

“These arguments he makes in the video come from a place[]of speculation, hearsay, emotion,[] none of the rational empiricism[]. It is just a series of cognitive biases throughout.”

You do not believe me?

Read on:

On the 15th of June Computing Forever publicized on the Undoomed channel his criticism of Thunderfoot’s stance and arguing against a Brexit.

The video started out with Computing Forever stating at 00:45 about Thunderf00t that

“These arguments he makes in the video come from a place[]of speculation, hearsay, emotion,[] none of the rational empiricism[]. It is just a series of cognitive biases throughout.”

Next Computing Forever goes into criticism on the arguing of Thunderf00t. And to a point his arguing can be taken as valid, even when you don’t agree.

But the Computing Forever uses this video to launch his own arguments for a Brexit and one would expect that after launching that hefty dose of criticism he would be sure to not make the same mistakes.

And does he not make the same mistake?

Let’s see him argue for the Brexit(which is more: why I am against the EU).
Starting 10:15. 

The UK will lose its own sovereignty.
Computing Forever does not elaborate how that would come about. He just makes it a matter of fact statement without backing it up with any source, link or proof. You either believe him or not.

So I did the work he forgot to do, and if you read the Wikipedia on sovereignty you will see that it can not be lost. It is either given away or taken by force:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acquisition_of_sovereignty
If Computing Forever wanted to argue the UK would be suckered into losing its sovereignty, then he is free to do so. But he doesn’t. He just states it as a fact.But it isn’t a fact. It is speculation on his part.

10:17: The EU wants to have its own police force.
Another claim by Computing Forever that goes unsourced.
So again I looked it up.

There is no proof to be found on the internet. So if he has any proof it would be nice to be supplied with that proof, otherwise: it is hearsay.
There is Europol:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europol
“The agency has no executive powers, and its officials are not entitled to conduct investigations in the member states or to arrest suspects. “
There is a European gendarmerie which is an intervention force operated by five nations and has nothing to do with the EU.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Gendarmerie_Force
What sources I can find are like these:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/1360785/What-the-EU-really-wants-now-is-its-own-police-force.html

10:18: Its own rule of law.
Computing Forever accuses the EU of trying to get its own rule of law.
Whatever does he mean?

Rule of law: “the restriction of the arbitrary exercise of power by subordinating it to well-defined and established laws.”
The EU already has a rule of law. Or does he mean he rather has no rule of law?
He might mean something but he does not tell.

An  own constitution.
It is true they tried to have a constitution and I think that someone argued that the legal arrangements already in place are a de facto constitution. However when it was attempted to have a constitution this was blocked by the French and Dutch.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_establishing_a_Constitution_for_Europe

We will see further into the movie how emotional he reacts when it comes to the Irish referendum.

Become the  United States of Europe.
No sources that such is occurring or planned.
So here are some sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Europe
So according to the polls held there are more people for than against it. If he wanted to support his case,he could have pointed to this poll. But he didn’t.

The EU is profoundly undemocratic.
It would be very nice if he somehow can explain why it is undemocratic. But he doesn’t.
What sources keep track of democracy are focused on countries.
Here are some sources that he might have given.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_deficit_in_the_European_Union
http://internationaldemocracywatch.org/index.php/european-union

We can continue on to the slightly skewed representation of the Irish referendum where Computing Forever becomes pretty emotional.

To wit: he is exactly like he accuses Thunderf00t to be.

It doesn’t make him wrong, it is just that:

00:45 “These arguments he makes in the video come from a place[]of speculation, hearsay, emotion,[] none of the rational empiricism[]. It is just a series of cognitive biases throughout.”

To be continued….

 

Sl Art: The Vordun, the Titanic, Celeste Forwzy and Fancy Decor

vordun03b

Second Life is an ever evolving place and it is hard to keep track of all the changes. I happened to bump into a Titanic exhibition that was at The Vordun gallery. Now normally such things pass by unnoticed, but there are a few reasons I wanted to post the exhibition and related things here.

One thing is the Vordun gallery itself. Next to the Titanic exhibition there are the exhibitions in the gallery itself. These were interesting because the Vordun gives you a hud that has a voice tell you something about the picture. Below is an example.

 

vordun04 copy
A tale within a tale: audio tracts.

 

 

 

vordun04
more Vordun.

 

This picture is called the Allegory of Fortune. There is a story behind it. The picture caused a row at the time and it artist had to be saved from retribution. I won’t go into details here. Either go to the gallery or look it up. The main reason I mention it here is that by using this hud the Vordun created an extra level of narrative. A story within a story. My suggestion would be this. Go and watch the pictures without activating the hud. Make up whatever you think they are telling, then use the hud to hear the story behind the picture.
But maybe, perhaps, you might not want to because maybe the story you got in your head is the better one. Who knows.

 

titanic01
A  night to remember.

 

A night to remember is the main exhibition for the Titanic disaster. I like the detailed exhibit as the maker used mesh to its fullest. He also used various means to convey the tale. It is a small exhibit, but a likable one that tries to push the envelope. I still had something to moan about of course.I would have wished it was embedded in a broader tale. Not a personal one alone, but one that went to trace what impact it had in general and most of all, the allegorical sign. The Titanic was perhaps the pinnacle of shipping prior to WW 1. It was part of the very upbeat times prior to the Great War called the Belle Epoque marked by optimism, regional peace, economic prosperity and technological, scientific and cultural innovations. Its demise symbolizes the demise of that time with its good things, but also with its bad things(class distinction for instance). If you like to read something about that try Stefan Zweig, “The world of yesterday”. I have to admit, I have never read anything by him, but a friend of mine recommends him.

 

titanic02
The captain of the Titanic

 

 

titanic03
A partial view of the exhibit.

 

 

titanic04
The iceberg and the guy who spotted it.

 

 

 

titanic05
The guy who made the exhibit.

The Titanic exhibit is in the North Wing, in the south wing is something completely different. It is art by Celeste Forwzy. I like it that the gallery is not themed to one thing.

 

 

forwzy01
Modern art: Celeste Forwzy

 

 

forwzy02
Art by Celeste Forwzy. 

 

forwzy04
Celeste also has a shop.

 

fancydecor01
Fancy Decor

 

On the same sim there is also a shop called Fancy Decor. It is a neat shop with mesh things that are really neat made by Jake Vordun.

 

Fancydecor02
Altar piece.

This is one example of the neat things you can get. It is not a big store. But it has some neat things. Everything is made out of mesh, so you won’t have to worry too much about your prim allowances.

 

 

 

 

Story telling: In the heat of the night 2/2

In the hunt for key scenes in movies, it was hard to make a decision for In the heat of the Night. In an earlier post I showed one scene somewhat one-third into the movie where Virgil Tibbs is sitting at a train station waiting for the train so he can leave the town of Sparta with its oppressive atmosphere of racism.
Another scene I find intriguing happens about halfway into the movie. Virgil Tibbs and Police Chief Bille Gillespie visit the local big wig plantation owner Endicott played by Larry Gates. The scene is set in a greenhouse where Endicott is tending to  Orchids. After an intro, which is in itself epic, talking about orchids and comparing the meticulous tending of orchids to the tending of blacks the two policemen seem about to leave.

IF

IF

IF

After the discussion about the orchids the suspicion against Endicott grows as fern was found in the car of the victim and fern is used in the cultivation of or orchids. Gillespie makes a move towards the exit.

IF

In these scenes we see Endicott change from amicable condescending, to downright condescending and then the quarter drops. The key trigger is Gillespie who basically uproots the exchange by suggesting to leave.
And you can see Endicott, beautifully played by Gates get suspicious and hostile. For why did they come here?

[SCM]actwin,0,0,0,0;Netflix - Google Chrome chrome 6/3/2016 , 9:37:39 PM

This is a classic WTF moment.

The next scenes move the story towards the slap scene.

[SCM]actwin,0,0,0,0;Netflix - Google Chrome chrome 6/3/2016 , 9:38:06 PM

Now the roles switches, staying perfectly formal and neutral Tibbs explains their presence, but it is obvious that he feels and acts in no way that Endicott finds acceptable. The ‘Negro’ becoming the dominant one and questioning him.

 

[SCM]actwin,0,0,0,0;Netflix - Google Chrome chrome 6/3/2016 , 9:39:18 PM

Gillespie’s presence in this scene is important. He seems like a neutral bystander just watching what is happening.. Steiger plays Gillespie in a way that it is hard to get what he is thinking. People around him vent their opinions, but he never seems to have one. This is a handy way, for people often take it that by having a clear opinion he seems to agree with them.  As the movie progresses it becomes clearer that a kind of respect is growing between him and Tibbs. At the end of the movie this results in a scene in which Gillespie turns around and tell Tibbs to take care of himself.

[SCM]actwin,0,0,0,0;Netflix - Google Chrome chrome 6/3/2016 , 9:55:41 PM

[SCM]actwin,0,0,0,0;Netflix - Google Chrome chrome 6/3/2016 , 9:39:18 PM

At this point Endicott drops all pretense of civility and enraged slaps Tibbs in the face.
Tibbs instantly returns the favor, to the astonishment of everyone.

[SCM]actwin,0,0,0,0;Netflix - Google Chrome chrome 6/3/2016 , 9:52:42 PM

[SCM]actwin,0,0,0,0;Netflix - Google Chrome chrome 6/3/2016 , 9:52:48 PM

[SCM]actwin,0,0,0,0;Netflix - Google Chrome chrome 6/3/2016 , 9:52:50 PM

[SCM]actwin,0,0,0,0;Netflix - Google Chrome chrome 6/3/2016 , 9:52:53 PM

[SCM]actwin,0,0,0,0;Netflix - Google Chrome chrome 6/3/2016 , 9:52:58 PM

We are now halfway through the movie and Gillispie, a sheriff from a town deep in the south sees a ‘negro’  slap a white man. But this particular negro is a fellow policeman and the suspicion that Endicott might have been involved, which is what Tibbs believe or like to believe, might have gotten hold with Gillespie too.  And  so he doesn’t act. Or rather he acts by not acting. Hence Endicott’s reaction:

[SCM]actwin,0,0,0,0;Netflix - Google Chrome chrome 6/3/2016 , 9:53:02 PM

The interesting part about the movie isn’t the investigation of the murder. It is pretty pedestrians as murders come. On the face of it, it seems like a movie about racism. And while that is true, it is more about the relation between Gillespie and Tibbs and how this unlikely pair of policemen work together and find common ground and respect. And thus racism might disappear.