Random Thoughts XIV: Pizza, Pomegranate Juice, and Shreddies

Only on a flat plane. That does not work if you are talking about for example land. I always think that point is under emphasised in school.
 
Birdjaguar said:
I watched it (the whole Apple presentation) from end to end. The crushing part was great and came across as I expect Apple wanted it to: iPad can do all of these things in 5.1 mm. Hardcore traditionalists may see it differently. Who is Apple appealing to? Professional with money and who like technology.
Click to expand...
I don't know about that. The video doesn't just show the old ways giving way to the new; there's an especial emphasis on the violence of the procedure, how relentlessly those items are crushed.

Consider the doll at the end that gets its face crushed and its eyes pop out. Unlike most of the other items it doesn't get crushed smoothly but agonisingly. There is also the anthropomorphic symbolism of the doll; more than the other items the human viewers will identify with the doll's face and the play of expression of confusion and shock and agony.

Consider also how the placid and peaceful opening contrasts with the violence in the middle, as if to specially emphasise the violent aspect. Consider the angles and shots, and the many many choices made, there is no way this wasn't done deliberately by whoever directed this video.

I find it fascinating, really. Did no one in the social media approval team wise up to the loud visual signalling? Or did they understand it perfectly well, and it was what they were looking for? Did the person who made this do it out of a sense of rebellion against the corporate intruding on the creative? Or did his higher-ups tell him to do it this way?
 
Bonyduck Campersang said:
Or did they understand it perfectly well, and it was what they were looking for?
Click to expand...
@Farm Boy's got a good take over in the Objective/Subjective thread. The little squeezyball doll heads represent the artist him or herself. The implication is that not only can the ipad duplicate the final results of all other arts artistic processes (a painting, a song), but that the device has creativity itself squeezed into it.

That at least gives the ad-makers some plausible intention for why they created this Dante-worthy nightmare.

@warpus' read is plausible, too: they knew it would be triggering to actual artists and they want the "earned media" that comes with controversy.
 
Last edited:
All good points. I think thinness was on their minds and they were looking back to the iconic 1984 ad and saying to themselves: "Can we create another epic advertising moment?"
 
Bonyduck Campersang said:
Consider the doll at the end that gets its face crushed and its eyes pop out. Unlike most of the other items it doesn't get crushed smoothly but agonisingly.
Click to expand...
And I would add one more thing. He's made to look like he's trying to escape the destruction, but fails to do so.

It's an intentionally triggering ad. Apple is going to get out of me all the talk (and thus free advertising) that this is designed to elicit. But they will now never ever sell me an ipad.
 
Gori the Grey said:
It's an intentionally triggering ad. Apple is going to get out of me all the talk (and thus free advertising) that this is designed to elicit. But they will now never ever sell me an ipad.
Click to expand...
An iPhone perhaps? They are pretty awesome.
 
1715801511921.png


That's a ridiculously grandiose "house".
 
I guess Apple has apologized for the ad.
 
Yesterday I saw a car with 3" decal letters spelling out WWG1WGA (Where we go one, we go all, the Q conspiracy slogan).

The letters ran from the drivers' side taillight to the center of the trunk, where they met up with the car's brand logo.

It was a Honda, so that's basically an H, and roughly the same size as the decals (though a different "font" if you will)

Even so, that made me think to myself "Where we go one, we go ahhh."

And that made me think of Q conspiracists going to a dentist.

But going together.

Because, you know, where one of them goes, they all go.
 
www.theguardian.com

‘Loud-mouthed bully’: CS Lewis satirised Oxford peer in secret poems

Exclusive: Chronicles of Narnia author detested HC Wyld so intensely he wrote mocking verse in a copy of his own book
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

One poem begins: “Loud-mouthed, a bully, publicly professing / The impartial, scientific attitude, / Yet, on the point of dialects, confessing / How pruriently class-conscious was his mood.”
Click to expand...
Lewis ridiculed his obsession with analysing sounds at the expense of texts themselves: “He opens and closes his glottis at pleasure,/ Explosives and stops he is able to measure,/ No grunt and no gurgle escapes his attention,/ Religiously marking each slackness and tension”.
Click to expand...
Joking that an infuriated Lewis had perhaps composed them during one of Wyld’s lectures, Horobin noted that one of them identifies Wyld through an acrostic with the initial letters spelling out the name “Henry Cecil Wyld”.

He added: “On the remaining blank pages he penned a series of additional satirical verses lampooning Wyld – one in English, alongside others in Latin, Greek, French and even Old English. It’s exciting to see Lewis composing poetry in a range of languages at this early stage of his academic career.
Click to expand...
 
Assassination and murders in Europe. Protests on American campuses. Conspiracy theories everywhere. It is enough to make you think the Russians are behind it all trying to destabilize the West.
 
You don't need Russians to have created the mess in my province or the Trump fans in the federal conservative party. All you need are delusional people following their own twisted ideologies and making use of American advisors in how to engage in dirty politics.
 
It'd be a lot more intuitive to use θ/360=length of arc/2πr= a (how many radians)/2π than something like the formula θ/180=a/π which needlessly asks you to memorize a mere simplification instead of just taking the fractions of the circle.
And yet many books have the latter. It's done to hold your hand during the so dangerous equality of the length (sarcasm) so as to convert degrees to radians, but really should had been avoided even at much greater cost. And even if they didn't want to avoid it, they should had then presented the obvious way to understand the tie.
I am reminded of Feynman's speech in Brazil, with the students not knowing what Socrates said about the relationship between truth and beauty, but knowing the text if the chapter number was mentioned.
 
Last edited:
Kyriakos said:
It'd be a lot more intuitive to use θ/360=length of arc/2πr= a (how many radians)/2π than something like the formula θ/180=a/π which needlessly asks you to memorize a mere simplification instead of just taking the fractions of the circle.
And yet many books have the latter. It's done to hold your hand during the so dangerous equality of the length (sarcasm) so as to convert degrees to radians, but really should had been avoided even at much greater cost. And even if they didn't want to avoid it, they should had then presented the obvious way to understand the tie.
Click to expand...
I thought this was a reply to warpus' post in the other thread, and I was expecting it to tie to it towards the end but it never did
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Valka D'Ur
  • Locked
Random Thoughts 3: A Little Bit of This, and a Little Bit of That...
49 50 51
Replies
1K
Views
46K
Arakhor
Arakhor
Kafka2
Historical Filth- Priapic Princes and Confused Kids
Replies
14
Views
6K
Panda
Panda
Top Bottom