I've been so ignorant about God and His angels...
Until last night.

Truly, Legion has given me such an insight about how the skies works, and I would feel egoist not to share it with you.

Let's start :

1. Armageddon takes place in the US

It sort of make sense. They have, after all, the best media resources in the world. I would be Him, I would definitely count on that to launch my big scale purification and get broadcast worldwide, showing them heathens what's coming at them.
Funny though that the savior of mankind has to be from around Vegas. Why not Mongolia? We will never know.


2. His means are limited

I would have thought that if He wanted to exterminate human race, he would just have to snap his fingers. Watching movies in general and Legion in particular made me understand that He can not interact directly with our existence, especially in the US, which He's tried to bombard with meteors, deadly viruses, Japanese rampaging monsters and dinosaurs since a little while now.
So in Legion, humans will have to cope with the Spider Ice Cream Man. Of course He fails, again.

3. He has a complex and troubled personality

I understand that. Frankly. I mean, you can't face the infinity of the multiverse and all its quantic possibilities as your every day routine without losing it a little. A simple technical requirement sheet can drive me nuts for a week and He had to deal with the Platypus' blueprints.
So when, in the end of the movie _spoiler_ you hear Michael telling Gabriel "You gave Him what He wanted, I gave Him what He needed", try not being to hard on Him. He's got a complex and troubled personality.Platypus.

4. He's a really good decision maker, roots for shoe lace budget

Say, you are Him and one evening you realize that humans just came across gunpowder, what would you do? I can see the scene clearly when he calls a dispatch for immediate meeting with all the executives, and introduces gunpowder as the today agenda. I can imagine Michael, always thinking fast but somewhat vertically suggesting: "We could cancel the chemical property of gunpowder so it doesn't detonate anymore, hence preventing humans from killing each other."
Then He would reply "That's a good practical solution, Mikey, but I've got better. We keep the gunpowder (and everything that go boom) as a mean of growth control from now on, that will prevent us to plan another "great end of all things" for some times. And with the cut into the Armageddon budget, I got you angels a little something... BULLET PROOF WINGS!!"
Shinyyyyyyy!

5. Angels are from Sparta, their uncle is McGuyver, their landlady is Lex Luthor.

Except that normal Spartans generally dine in Hell. But these ones got promoted with, as an addition to the standardized spartan armor, the...bullet proof wings (shiny) and the Swiss Army Spiked Club. That's actually the McGuyver genes talking here (along with the fog horn). This tool is the Dremel of the warriors, you can unfold the spikes, extend them, rotate the head (practical if you need a very very sharp eggbeater) and sprout a long pointy bit from the top of the shaft, all that by only pressing a few button on the handle, order now by calling our toll-free number. The first angel to have tried it must still have a bad leg from the first time he sneezed while holstering it.
Then yes, they seem to live in the evil lair of Lex Luthor, high on the mountain. I'd give you the photos from Google Maps but I'm too tired.

6. A human possessed by an angel turns into Christopher Walken.

That's because of the teeth. Have you ever watched Sleepy Hollow? Actually it's a good move from Him, since hey, minions of the final destruction have to be creepy and, frankly, have you taken a good look at Christophep Walken without being creeped out?

Here is just for the comparison:




Well, this movie is slightly less hilarious than Dogma, pretty funny that is. Don't hesitate and go watch it.



Follow me on Twitter

Here is the second part on the Internet Wars series, where I take a look into the near future and tell you all, beloved readers, why the obvious is bad for what you have.

Today, DRMs and copyrights

DRM is not a new technology, we already all enjoy downloading files that get tethered to our computer, in-copy-able and mostly overpriced. We also (well many of us) enjoy downloading or encoding ourselves DRM free media, most of the time illegally.

Copyrights VS Users is an old story, with the Jammie Thomas case as its best know issue.

What's going to change this year?

The Obvious:
Now e-books are coming to hold the front lines of download-able content along with music, video and games we will see some interesting web-literature emerging to face a wider public, I am talking about pro and anti copyright rants. There will be big headlines such as this one, depicting the fight between authors, publisher, on line shops and off course users. So to speak, many people are going to have it bad over the e-book free for all.

The Less Obvious:
Unless you're spending your days downloading songs, you're not to worry about copyright laws, and for all I know, many among us don't really give an intercourse in a blimp about them.
This is going to change. The book reading crowd is somewhat different from the massive music download crowd. The difference is not only about converging/diverging interest or culture, but also about the access to the media and buyers/downloaders habits.

A hard cover book is easier to share in real life. Book readers are used to pass books to one another, sell and buy them is used books shops. Books are one of the most tangible part of mankind's culture.

A song is easier to transfer to a computer. Even if you have to encode a whole album, you won't need more than an internet connection and an encoding software. You insert your CD, press the button and let the music play. From there, you can distribute them via a plethora of means.

A song is easier to buy than a book. For the main reason that you can preview it. You can't preview a book, you have to rely on other people's opinions, or your past experience of reading a particular author.

A book is time consuming. "I've listened to all their albums" and "I've read all his book" occupy a drastically different space-time. You can listen to anything while driving, don't try reading.

For all these reasons, the book buyers are harder to please than music buyers, much more critic and most of all are still (may it last) clinging to the idea that a book is a physical belonging, bought once, appreciated and shared.

This 'new' public to content download will not take kindly (pun unintended) things like content providers fiddling with their electronic libraries and spying their transactions. They will want availability, because that's what e-books providers will use as a main argument, low prices, because there is no paper involved and freedom of use, because that's what a book is all about.

So yes, many complains to be expected, a major case or two during the second quarter, many changes in end user agreements, an people will get better informed about DRM's.

The Risky:
The MCA might be modified, and I see a whole debate about the tangibility of digital content such as music and books approaching. A whole new approach of personal digital property might be applied. There is going to be a lot of change.

The Outcome:
The Jamie Thomas case outcome will mark a milestone in the copyright laws history, it will be one of the decisive factors for the media labels and publisher to act in favor or against the freedom of data. It will either be catastrophic, and prices and limitation of use will raise against the will of the consumer, either reasonable, and labels/published will have to understand the the crowd might become tired of being presumed guilty.

Keep tuned for the following articles of The Internet Wars

• Augmented reality - The gadgets attack
  
• Google - Why it needs to evolve
  
• Apple VS Google - We're caught in the middle
  
• The Fall of Firefox
• Privacy - Will you still have any?
  
• Online marketing's deceptions

And already on the shelves:

Social Media Fatigue - Geolocation Gold Rush


Follow me on Twitter

I just found my lost crystal ball, it's time for me to make my own previsions about what's gonna happen in 2010 and be proven utterly wrong in 2011 (hopefully not, though)

You've probaby already read this kid of article before. But they all (well most of them) have something in common: they state the obvious and put safe bets on the table: "2010 Will Be Social"... thank you very much.
So here I'm going to try and be daring, and tell you everything about my hunches.


Social media

The obvious:
Just take a look at the Facebook's statistics. More than 350 millions users, sending 8 friends requests per month and spending 55 per day on the site. That's just Facebook. If you browse around a bit you know that Twitter is ever growing, new services are building around it every month, and the advance in mobile broadband being what it is, it won't stop there... so yeah, that won't stop

The less obvious
Everybody is enjoying the social rush for now. For now. Privacy issues are arising (later on I'll come to that) and one there is one thing everybody seems to ignore: the noise. Real time social information is extremely dense, and if Facebook has some answers for it, Twitter has absolutely none and relies on third parties to sieve the unwanted data.

I've seen users complaining already, and I'm ready to bet that the noise is going to be one major factor of social media fatigue for 2010, let's say we will hear about it during the second quarter.

Another thing that seems to be overlooked is the redundancy factor. The web is opening itself, we are much less depending on log-in and account set up procedures, but there are downsides.
First off, now your tweets are search-able, we are seeing a growing amount of content-farm-like websites based on real-time content only gathering real-time info and placing commercials, that's bad for search and considerably increases the noise.
Then, there is something I'd call data dissemination. Not so long ago you would share your pics on Flickr, your notes on your blog and you life/self promotion on Facebook.
Now, I feel confused, where should I put what? Tweetphoto , Flickr, twitpics? Another service?
Where should I post what in order to be seen? What service shall I use in order to do what I want to do? How to manage them all?

The risky:
I'm writing it, I don't care if you call me a fool, but I see a social media bubble burst in the end of 2010. With many services shutting down and maybe a big surprise, like twitter being abandoned for something better yet to come out.

Why the war?
Because Google and Apple are beginning to understand that they've left the social aspect of the internet behind, because Yahoo! and Microsoft don't want to be left behind. Because ruling the social web give you access to a considerable mass of behavioral data, and everybody wants a share of that cake.

Outcome?
On this particular issue the outcome will benefit the users. The concept is user centric, hence the only solution to gain followers is to please them. Good for us.

Geo-localization

The obvious: It's booming, it will keep on booming. Duh! I won't harass you with statistics here or there, you can Google it and it will show. FourSquare is expending godspeed, people seem to love the idea, and yes it's practical. No need to emphasize...

The less obvious:
Geo-Localization is a pretty new concept, as in all pretty new concepts, its implementation will keep on following the pioneer->copycat->leader model. What does it mean? It means FourSquare might not be the leader in it's niche anymore in the end of 2010.

The risky:
Mid-2010, a serious contender to the FourSquare might be launched. It will have much more features, be more connected, and it will surpass the leader in term of active users in the end of the year. Later on it will merge geo-localization to augmented reality all in the cloud.

Why the war?
Because of the pioneer->copycat->leader model, and because the technology is still young and attractive enough for a lot of start-ups to still be able to build upon it. Let's not forget the giants will also want their shares. Buyouts are to be expected.

Outcomes?
Still positive for the users, same reason as earlier, user centric services must spoil their members. But... what about the privacy concerns? I see news about Geo-Stalkers comming in next summer.

Stay tuned for the next topics of the Internet Wars:

• Augmented reality - The gadgets attack
  
• Google - Why it needs to evolve
  
• Apple VS Google - We're caught in the middle
  
• The Fall of Firefox
• Something wrong with DRM
• Privacy - Will you still have any?
  
• Online marketing's deceptions
  

Follow me on Twitter

Here is a very concise AppleScript to move files from a folder to another.
There is no error handling yet, I don't know if I want to implement it anyway :D
Also, I've only tested it on Snow Leopard, it might work on earlier versions of the OS though.

To run it you will need QuickSilver:

- Open the apple script editor
- Save it as script
- Add the saved script as a custom trigger in QuickSilver

set The_Target to choose folder with prompt "Chose destination folder"
tell application "Finder"
move selection to The_Target
delete selection
end tell

In the finder, select the files you want to move, then press the shortcut you defined in QuickSilver. A window will open asking you to chose the destination folder.
Once you have chosen the folder, the script will copy the files there, and only then delete the source files.

Hope you find it useful!


Follow me on Twitter

I won't develop anything here.
Video adds on YouTube are getting annoying, I used to ignore the banners on practically every website I visit, but damn, that's bad taste for a Monday morning.

Source : http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/11/AR2010011102007.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010011304181




Follow me on Twitter

I swore to myself I wouldn't be talking about Avatar, here is an epic fail.

Here I want to rant. I just read Some see racist theme in alien adventure 'Avatar' and it's not making any sense to me.

Let me destroy the argument.

But [Robinne Lee] said the film, which so far has the second-highest worldwide box-office gross ever, still reminded her of Hollywood's "Pocahontas" story — "the Indian woman leads the white man into the wilderness, and he learns the way of the people and becomes the savior."

"It's really upsetting in many ways," said Lee, who is black with Jamaican and Chinese ancestry. "It would be nice if we could save ourselves."

Oh right. So there is a movie exploiting one of the oldest theme ever, and just because now everything is about PC (politically correct), it's becoming upsetting? The Na'Vi are a small tribe, deeply connected with nature, they have accomplished all that mankind could accomplish in probably 2000 more years, and they are peaceful. They chose harmony over technology, they chose to NOT rule nature, they are powerless against pure destructive power and pure human cruelty first because they don't know the concept, and second because they haven't been shipped the handling book. What the hell is wrong with a dude from outside deciding to show them how to do it?

You sir, do not seem to travel a lot, come over my place and I'll show you some real chunks of cultural shock. You won't believe it (I love it).

Here is another nauseating comment (in here):

As Left-wing conceits go, this one surely tops all the others: the ethnic Na’vi, the film suggests, need the white man to save them because, as a less developed race, they lack the intelligence and fortitude to overcome their adversaries by themselves. The poor helpless natives, in other words, must rely on the principled white man to lead them out of danger.

What a triumph of PC, what a triumph for blindness and self disgust! Yes the Na'Vi are a less developped race, lacking intelligence and fortitude, of course they are, but only if you chose to see them like that! So they don't have iPhones and bulldozers, they don't have machine-guns, they don't have the Bomb... they are inferior, right? Oh right, they don't seem to ever get sick, they can communicate with mostly everything (so long, facebook) even with the dead, they are happy and they are tough, but it doesn't seem to count.

They rely on the white man? I thought they relied on the only dude who knew about the other dudes plans to obliterate their home. I could be wrong, yes, maybe in the movie I've missed the scene where someone says "Oh yes we need to believe him because you know, he's white".

Or are you just regretting all the blood our ancestors have shed in the name of civilization and don't wanna be reminded anymore?

Let's play a game. Let's change the hero, replace him by, say, Will Smith. Does it change anything? I don't think so, the Na'Vi are still blue. Ok, let's spice it up, let's put some Na'Vi on the human side, and give them all guns and ipods. And let the Na'Vi build a Death Star to eliminate the human invaders and smite them to smitereens.
Oh...wait...It's not the same...MOVIE anymore.

What would you chose to represent harmony and peace with nature? I'd chose a tribe in the forest over a gang of armed rebels. Sorry, I'm racist, I would love to live like them, get rid of all the techno crap all around me and talk to my horse the way they do. Forgive me.

And the best for the end, here

…Commander Quaritch (leader of the mission) says to Jake, “you’re going to get your real legs back”…Yet this piece of dialogue overlooks a fact that’s glaringly obvious: Jake still has his legs! Yes, he has a disability, but what’s the problem with his legs and/or wheelchair? The commander is implying that there is something not just physically, but morally, wrong with Jake’s disabled legs and wheelchair use: it is unacceptable in the military for a soldier to be disabled and, moreover, to show it.

Ok, Jake you still have your legs! You can't do shit with them, but at least, you know, you still have them, and boy, to turn you in a monster killing machine in a battlefield, that's such an asset! And I'm sure you're happy to still have them even if later on you'll go as far as switching bodies to get rid of the dead weight.
Sad to say, I won't type really well with paralyzed fingers, and if some idiot told me I'm still lucky to have them attached, I'd throw my elbow at his face.

So, critics, people, read:

Men and women are different
Being and healthy is cool and old and sick sucks
Bing short makes it hard for you to play basketball
Some people have different skin color
Colonization has killed civilizations
Some people hare happy without ipods

Now, if you see the word 'inferior', you put it there by yourselves. Sorry.

But I liked the movie, and agree with the (old) storyline. So I must be the intolerant racist.

So be it.



Follow me on Twitter

I don't know if I can make it really long or informative, It's my 30th hour without sleep...
But...

There is a debate going on, I'm tempted to say lately, but it's been several years now, and I feel it's just surfacing. Behold Print Media Vs Digital Media!

What made me want to write this post is this article on eff.org, which makes great sense and can be summed up in just one quote:

Anyone who claims that readers can’t and won’t and shouldn’t own their books are bent on the destruction of the book

For reference, there is my old rant about the Amazon Kindle where I explain why the device is bad, why it spies on you and why it robs you from your rights as a reader and as a consumer.

To my mind it goes even further than that. First off, print and digital media are fighting a battle that will only leave losers, it's already happening by the way, with Google attempting to limit the access to free news. Then, print media are so scared to lose their precious advertisers that they try competing on the long lost ground of the instant info.Digital media, on the other end, are brawling about content producing and space filling, and end up publishing top10s after top10s.

The truth is, now it's begun, we need digital media, as much as the audience crave for information. Everything moves fast, everybody reacts fast, the Holy Buzz travels faster than physically possible, and we need to keep track of that. Why, because information is togetherness, is community, is social acknowledgment, and us humans need it, it's in out genes.

The truth is, we still need print media. So much for the trees, I know, but we need print media. One reason is that trends and moods need time to form, situations are not formed instantly but are the result of a process of thoughts and actions, and, well, you know, you analyze the game after it's over... during the game, you comment it. Print media are good at that, they can afford to take more time, to investigate the topic and to spare us the effort of analysis, giving the prerogative to people who, more often than not it you read Time or Newsweek, know what they are writing about.

Yet there is another reason.

Have you tried to read a floppy disk recently? That's what I'm talking about. Now we are comfortable with our hard disks and pen drives, and trans-flash and... and all the information, petabytes of data, is totally unreadable without the proper material... Soon will be time for the Qubit and quantum computing, and our current storage systems will be obsolete.
I can read my grandmother's diary. I can read a 200 years old book.
I cannot read a 20 years old floppy. Even if my whole genealogy is in it, I can't access it.

I'm perplex about all that. Information can't be kept in, now less than ever, especially for a mercantile purpose. But it's raw information we are talking about, and a good analysis over this info is priceless and deserves a durable, non versatile medium.

Sooner or later, "they" will probably realize it too...wait and see...

Follow me on Twitter

I went out against my will and spent much more money than I really wanted to.
I met a good friend, but I would have liked to meet him in a better condition.

There is one thing I don't regret at all though, seeing the Crowd of Jakarta locking Jalan Sudirman, on of the city's major arteries, old and young alike around midnight.

For those who don't know yet what a crowd might look like, here, photos and a video :