The Spirit of Christmas

I came across a news segment on the business reports for the big stores this holiday season, and apparently things aren't going too well.

Here's a quick link to the SF Chronicle, which I'm going to tell you right now, I only read the heading and I said, "That sounds close enough," so I linked it. Hey...I do it because I CARE.

But the before-mentioned news broadcast probably has the same thing this article has; sales aren't reaching expected rates, and retailers are discounting even more to boost sales. There was also something about a "lack of the must have toy" this year. You know, no Tickle Me Elmo.

And just to add more fun to this holiday picture, check out the Dad who actually kept his word. I don't know about you folks, but damn if it isn't refreshing to see someone actually punish their kids nowadays. To do it for Christmas must not be what most children look forward to, but imagine if that became a standard affair? Can you imagine how the retailers would react? Special thanks to Jeremy for throwing that one my way.

Tonight is Christmas Eve, and I have to say that I'm just as sick as everyone else with the fuss. Business is angry because it isn't making enough money, parents are angry because they have to spend money they don't have on ungrateful kids, and kids are angry because their parents have no idea what to get them for Christmas; "What the hell is this?" probably runs through the minds of more children on December 25 than any other day.

For some reason though, I try to enjoy the holidays, and like everyone else I place extra importance on them going well in order for me to maintain my overall happiness. I mean think about it, if something goes badly, it sucks. But if it goes badly during Christmas, God must hate you.

"My girlfriend broke up with me."
"Sorry to hear that."
"During Christmas."
"What an ungrateful bitch!"

But I shouldn't dwell on what sucks. I mean, I could talk about the terrible parking situations, the backed up traffic, the commercialization of a religious day, how most people work more during the holidays just to spend more than the money they make, the often awkward and revealing office parties, the fact that...er, sorry.

What do I enjoy about Christmas? To be honest, it's going to be the material stuff...food, money and presents. I never get free stuff, nor do I eat so well, nor do I come across so much money as I do when it's Christmas. Since I'm not Christian, the holiday really has no other significance for me. It's just double time at work, and another reason to hang with friends and family.

Oh, and the movies are usually worth seeing during Christmas too.

...usually.

Well, I certainly hope you all have something more to look foward to than that. Merry Christmas everyone, enjoy the holiday!

-ic

Even Bugs would be wierded out

Honda of UK sponsored this finely pieced together game of a Rabbit on Ecstasy.

Those of you out for high scores should find the bbq first, and then look for carrots so that you can optimize your game. Don't get sidetracked by the fact that you just sledgehammered a cell phone and it turned into a gazelle playing the harp.

uh...and what does this have to do with Honda by the way?

Oh, and it took a while to download on my machine, but it's strange enough to recommend, so hopefully it'll be worth your wait.

Special thanks to my bro Collin for bringing it to my attention.

-ic

Update 12/2005 - Don't know when it happened, but Honda UK changed the game to an interactive commercial...anyone know what happened to the game?

Where's the logic?

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=319403

Damn it, I never meant for this blog to become topical.

I know people use bitTorrent to download content. A lot of it is stuff nobody paid for, that yes, they really should have paid for. Where as this always becomes the focus of debate, as with programs like Napster and Kazaa, bitTorrent as a program, in my mind, has no malicious intent.

But you can bet the MPAA and the RIAA are going to try to say it does anyways. The fact that people are trading like crazy using bitTorrent (or it's many derivatives) in no way places guilt upon the program's creator.

Even if tomorrow, everyone in every house with a computer decided to do nothing but to download every movie, music cd, video game, and book ever made, all with the sole purpose of never having again to go buy anything of the sort, it can't be pegged on Cohen. My understanding of logic says that none of that justifies targeting Cohen for creating bittorrent...

...Perhaps we should sue gun manufactures for their parts in murders, or the maker of "date rape" drugs for their parts in the date rape? Clearly we do not, although equally "reactionary" groups have done so in the past. Can we argue that gun manufacturers create their weapons with the sole purpose of killing innocent people? Can we argue that pharmaceutical companies create drugs with no other purpose than to poison and allow criminals to take advantage of innocent people? I honestly can't see how we could.

And let's not forget that these aren't murders and rapists at their computers; these are average citizens. Many probably don't see the issues involved in downloading as much as they don't see the harm in speeding on the highway, or perhaps forgetting to buckle up.

Are they doing wrong? Yes. And I'm not going to reason that taking a full DVD off the internet, burning it and having a perfect copy of something they normally would have to pay for is ok. It isn't, it is dishonest.

But I will argue that we can't hold the blank DVD media manufactures at fault for providing the means of recording that ill gotten movie. I'm not going to argue that the person's internet service provider should pay a hefty fine for allowing the person to download that DVD copy, and I'm sure as hell not going to say bittorrent should be held responsible for allowing that DVD copy to be downloaded quicker.

Does bittorrent contribute to more downloading because it makes it quicker? Of course it does! How can it not! But so do high speed internet services like DSL, Cable and T1 connections. So do faster burning DVDR drives, and so do services that make the material available in the first place, like Blockbuster and NetFlix. Hell, how many pirates out there have abused the loose return policies of retailers and returned the movie they just copied on to their harddrive? Or the videogame, or music cd?

I really wish someone would open the eyes of these litigation groups like the RIAA; that the technology only aids the crime, it doesn't commit it. If that ever becomes unlawful, then the logic would naturally flow to these other huge "contributors of crime", and you can bet that there is about a thousand lawyers on that end of the rope who have nothing better than to make the MPAA shut the hell up.

It all comes down to money, and the MPAA is built on protecting money and suing the public to get more of it. If the motion picture industry had any sense it would find another way to deal with this. But too often do lawyers cloud justice with money signs.

Like a sick Escher blog...

I don't imagine I'll see too much revenue from Google's little ad sidebar, but the way it chooses which ads to display means that if I continue to talk about stuff that irritates me, it in turn will start advertising for stuff that irritates me.

Ironic. Isn't it? It is, especially given the fact that if I go off on a tirade about how much a certain video game sucks, it'll see that name, advertise for it, and then I have the chance to make money from the advertising for that game that I so blatantly rant against.

So, essentially, I can't complain about too much on this blog, or else I'll start advertising for what I'm complaining about. How do you like them apples?

Must...post...blog...

An old friend of mine let me know yesterday that she was planning to quit her job the second she finds out if she gets accepted at one of the universities she just applied to. I might be giving myself a little too much credit, but I won't get into too many details just in case someone from her job happens to stumble on my site.

Anyways, she won't be going to school until next fall even if she does get accepted, so her statement implies a lot of free time in her future.

Must be nice.

Given her situation though, especially seeing as she is pretty well to do from her current employment, all that free time really ads up to sabbatical time before she even has an excuse to take a sabbatical. It's essentially another summer vacation from the days of elementary school, except now you don't have any parents or guidelines...you can do anything. ANYTHING. Especially because she has the money. It's not like she needs to pick up a part time job at the local Starbucks to tide her over...she said she'd "Go Snowboarding". I guess you can do that for two thirds of the year...apparently.

But that brings up my topic for tonight...When is there too much of a good thing?

My example is Coca-Cola. Aww, sweet nectar of the Gods. I love Coke, and I always keep some in my fridge. But I refuse to drink it morning, noon and night. I actually go a few days without even touching a bottle sometimes. Plus, I don't go for the cheapest way to the most Coca-Cola possible; I sometimes refuse to buy the "Two-12 Packs for $4.00" deals, because it's just too much Coke. Actually, I tend to go for the bottles anyways (tastes better). Plus, I have to physically carry my groceries home, so that two 12 pack deal would be a pain.

But getting back to the point; If I consumed my favorite soft drink on an daily basis, I think I would start liking it less. Eventually, I would be entirely disgusted with it, and swear off it forever. Then I'd fall off the wagon and find myself buying all the cans out of vending machines down in the rec room...it would become a sick cycle of love and hate. But, given the nature of what my relationship with Coke would become, generally it would be hate.

However, I can say that the reverse of this is even more interesting. Remove that beverage from my grasp for say, a few months, and I would find my next can to be the best damn Coca-Cola I ever tasted. It could be warm and four years old...but my God would it be delicious.

Some would call this "addiction", but I don't think I'm that bad. Truth be told, I don't crave Coke that badly, but I do find that coming back to it after a long hiatus without it, makes it taste better. And, sometimes when I'm drinking it often, it just seems like I really need to stop; as if it will take "will power" to finish the bottle. Why is that?

"Absence makes the heart grow fonder" they say, but the reverse is, "You can have too much of a good thing." I believe that generally, we all need to find a balance for everything we enjoy, otherwise we risk ruining what makes it enjoyable. This probably could apply to everything, from money and women (sadly...I wouldn't know), to video games and snowboarding.

Yet I still feel happy for my friend. She has been afforded something that only money can afford, and that is a lot of free time. A WHOLE LOT of it. Hopefully she'll find patience to contain the cravings to carve powder everyday, though. Maybe she should start a blog or something.

Ah, but of course, you only should truly be blogging when you need to do something else. And that problem is non-existant for her.

The Importance of Grades

This topic threatens to be a big one, not that pop-ups demands national attention, but Grades are something I think anyone can discuss. Our entire system of education is structured upon them, and they in turn indicate our performance according to the standards of that education system.

But are they worth while, and are they ever accurate?

First of all, my situation is somewhat more unique than others out there because I attend an art school. Many people have expressed to me the importance of a portfolio over anything else, and to be honest, I completely agree. Yet, I cannot ignore the fact that I attend an institution that sums up my level of study in terms of A's, B's, C's, D's, and F's. What's more, I feel strongly that they fail to accurately designate those grade because of their criteria, which I couldn't say I understand, but I think lacks sense.

Now, before I get off on a rant about the Academy of Art University, understand this; I have seen a dramatic improvement in my artwork, and I understand my art in ways that I only vaguely thought of before. I am being trained in the way I would want to be trained, and if I ever find myself teaching my trade, you can bet that the same theories and techniques will be passed on to whoever calls themselves my students. Modesty aside, I didn't think I was all that bad before I began my fall semester; Now I feel like I have so much more room to develop that I can only get even better.

Call me wrong, but that is the most important thing you can get from an education. And, again, with an art education, the most important thing you leave with is a solid portfolio.

But, these grading systems drive me bonkers. To cut to the point, almost every teacher tell us that an "A" is perfection. Therefore, to receive one you can do no less than perfect. I actually had one teacher explain this as, "If you were get an A, you could probably substitute teach this class." Where is the logic in having a grading system with an A then?

Look, if you are going to tell me that an A is perfection, then what you are telling me is that I will never get an A. And I don't, I have solid B's in both of my drawing classes. All that means to me that is that the "B" stands for the "A" in those classes. No one is getting an A in my classes, and how could they? If they were good enough to teach the course, they wouldn't take it in the first place. Right? And you can't argue to me that people have to take certain classes to fill the requirements of their degree, because I know people who have been allowed to substitute other classes based on their portfolios. Despite this, I have a feeling that even if they were to take those classes anyways, the teacher wouldn't give them any more than a few A's on projects, but never an A for the class. Heaven forbid that someone is actually good enough to teach this stuff himself!

The inaccuracy of this system truly bothers me. Because, everywhere else, an A is achievable. It shows that you are damn near close to perfection, or that you have reached it. A "B" is by no means bad either, but it just isn't seen the same by others.

And you could try to tell me that probably it's just as different in other demanding schools, but I won't let you get away with that either. I'm getting an "A" in my history and philosophy course at the Academy. So right there, at the same school, the "A is perfect" method of grading isn't being followed by all teachers and departments. Therefore, the grading system isn't uniform, and the whole system lacks credibility because of it. I'm getting 92 to 95% scores on my essays on that history class. Last I checked, 95% wasn't perfect, but damn if it still didn't translate to an A!

So why is it different for my two drawing classes? The easiest answer is that it's a department thing (which I can easily accept after seeing how bureaucratic this university is). The teachers, all competent professional artists, know that the real world won't accept a "B" when it comes to the business of art. If you give an art editor a "B" assignment, he'll hand it back and tell you what to fix. That's the reality of the business.

So the teachers are justified in having this practice, but only when it comes to those who really perform well enough to achieve that A in the first place. What makes this an issue is that it's bad academic standards. By removing the achievability of "A" quality, you remove the meaning behind the whole letter grade system, especially because you've practically redefined it.

I've had perfect assignments turned in before at Arizona State, and the teacher gave me an A for it just as he gave an A to the other kid who turned in a paper worth 90%. The difference was that the teacher made sure that my perfection was recognized as an achievement that went beyond a letter grade, because "A" just doesn't tell everyone else you did it. My professor offered recommendation letters, and thereby was offering his personal endorsement, which was much more indicative to me of what perfection earns. So why do the teachers here at AAU feel that an "A" is giving too much? Why can't you acknowledge performance uniformly throughout the school, and acknowledge excellence through rewards that are truly and universally recognized as worthy of perfection?

Nominate the excellent projects for a special gallery showing of elite students, or for special consideration of scholarships, or for special privileges like private studios or parking spots. Do not trivialize the excellent achievement of perfection by making it a letter grade. Hardly anyone will look at that and say, "Wow, you must be amazing!" And if your plan is to change the world so that someday, someone will react that way, you really need to go about doing it a different way.

To offer another perspective on grading art education, I ask that you all check out the FAQ's on the website for Watts Atelier. Anyone who makes it out to San Diego Comic-Con might be familiar with Jeffrey Watts and his school of professionals teaching in the atelier style. The results are undeniable, but what's more, this school isn't accredited. Accreditation comes with restrictions that Watts didn't feel was in tune with how he wanted to teach, and so he didn't take it. While that means you don't have a recognized diploma when you leave, it doesn't mean that you come out never having learned something. I remember hearing Watts during a Q&A at Comic-Con tell about how many students retake the same courses over and over again. They don't do this because they failed, they do it because they want to improve even more. His students have a portfolio afterward, and like I mentioned before, that is the most important thing you as an artist need to get a job.

Here's a couple more issues about the grading at AAU, and I'll state for the record that what I'm about to list really is more speculative and perhaps unfair than anything else. None the less, these are issues from students aside from myself, and that bears recognition.

1. No one gets and "A", but no one really fails courses either. What results is a class that is represented by B and C grades, and that in no way really accounts for the actual berth of talent present in that class.

2. As for A's and B's, what about discouraging the students who are capable of excellence? What's the student's bottom line going to be if he can get a B by doing well, or he can get a B even after spending thirty hours on something? If that thirty hour project still adds up to "B" because he just didn't match excellence in the professor's eye, what will that student say to himself the next time he has a project? By removing something from being achievable, smart students will know better than to work toward that goal. Why try? Especially if this is only a class, and especially if the other times that student tried didn't meet with the same "Satisfactory" end.

To add to what number 2 implies; I know a fellow Illustration Grad student who's creed is "Only Give 80%". I have to admit that given everything else I do in addition to attending my classes, sometimes 80% looks real good. And after what I just explained, 80% makes sense.

My problem is, I worry that 80% will translate itself later into my work ethic. I don't match success with 80%, but perhaps I should learn which battles are worth fighting.

What do you think?

-ic

The Death of Pop-ups? I'm afraid not.

I just realized that I haven't had to deal with a really bad burst of Pop-ups in a long while. Seems like service pack 2 really ropes 'em in quite well, and couple that with regular spybot and adaware checks...hell, I'm finally back in control of my desktop.

So, I have to wonder what the other side is doing about this? Do you give up Pop-ups for your advertisements, or do you figure out work arounds?

Of course, we've all seen a few of the work arounds being used on sites now. Just as annoying as pop-up windows, these guys are integrated into the site itself, and float around demanding our attention. Usually all my attention amounts to is trying to find that Godforsaken "X" that the designer thought would be clever to hide. I mean seriously, one of these days those guys are just going to make the "X" a shade different from the ad's background color and then I'll spend so much time looking for it that I forgot why I was at the original webpage altogether. At least with pop-up ads, you knew how to get rid of them; these guys demand extra time to get the same result.

To top it off, not all of them actually disappear completely, so in a sense we're stuck with something much worse than the old pop-ups. These guys are like an annoying cousin you have no choice but to endure. You politely click the "X", and they slowly animate into a smaller version of themselves that hides in the corner.

"Just in case, you know, you change your mind."
"But I will never, ever change my mind. I want you banished from my browser window!"

Yet the annoyed satisfaction of killing these pests is robbed of us. To put it another way, imagine a swarm of flies entering your office and you with the fly swatter. Give it some time and aggrivation, but you can kill all of the bugs. If you don't mind the fact that you're poisoning your office, bust out the can of Raid and have at them. That was pop-up advertisements. With these new ones, you swat, and they go to the bench like they were given a penalty and can jump back into play in a few minutes. WTF?

Alright, here's my questions. Put away your books and bring out a number 2 pencil and a sheet of paper. You have fifteen minutes.

1. What constitutes effective advertising? Does effective in any way, shape or form, allow for a blanket campaign of ads that a majority will find irritatiing?

2. If the advertisers keep creating new annoying ads, logic would assume that someone, out there, is clicking on the current annoying ads. Do you people ever need to click them though? When was there ever a delightful consumer experience that occured from these clicking of ads? Or, as I assume is the case, were you simply mindlessly entertained for a microsecond before having to look like you were working again?

3. Why can't the beer be both Great Tasting and Less Filling? Can't we all just get along? Er...except for you two girls, of course. Please, by all means, keep up the good fight.

-ic

I should be sleeping

Something about wasting my time seems more appealing to me right now than the prospect of being ridiculously tired all day tomorrow, seeing as I have to wake up in about 5 hours.

I've been meaning to get this started though, and there's never a better time than the present...

...Of course, I could have said that to myself earlier today when I spent five hours playing Half Life 2, but we can't dwell on the past now can we?

And (just to get the phrase out of the way) looking to the future, I'm deciding to cut this inaugural post short because, yes, sleep is starting to sound better.

-ic