News

I found an article on Forbes about what are called high-frequency programmers, the people who code the trading algorithms for companies like Goldman Sachs, complaining about their unsatisfying six-figure salaries. These coders feel that because their programs bring in up to $100,000 a day, they should be paid more than their measly $150,000 salaries. Particularly since their bosses are paid millions to simply manipulate the algorithms they write. They also feel they should be able to take their code with them when they leave. I'm sorry, it's tough for me to write this through all the tears streaming down my face for these poor unfortunate slaves being taken advantage of by the evil nobility.

To me it sounds like they are living in some sort of fantasy land. When I write code for my employer it is owned by my employer. Just like, if I designed a car, that design would be the property of the employer. Just like if I made widgets, they would be owned by the employer. Also similarly, the person who makes widgets probably gets paid less than executives who market or sell those widgets. This is pretty much the understood process of a business. So how greedy can these people be to say that their six-figure salaries just aren't enough?

The correct answer is "pretty frickin greedy."

I came across two robot love stories yesterday, both of which were adorable. The first is a short film by director Spike Jonze, who recently directed Where the Wild Things Are. The film is called I'm Here and tracks a familiar love story between two humanoid robots in Los Angeles, but with a twist that kind of reminds me of The Giving Tree. It's about 30-35 minutes long and I highly recommend it. There's also a trailer if you'd like to get a feel for it before diving in.

I also have a little music video by one of my favorite YouTube vloggers, Meekakitty called Don't Unplug Me by the All Caps. And yes, I realize this song is entirely done in autotune and I have already declared my distaste for it, but... uh... They're robots! It makes sense! Or something...

Check'em out and coo at all the cuteness.

Found on 2TheAdvocate:

During the board’s meeting Thursday, several board members expressed an interest in the teaching of creationism, an alternative to the study of the theory of evolution, in Livingston Parish public school classrooms.

Board Member David Tate quickly responded: "We let them teach evolution to our children, but I think all of us sitting up here on this School Board believe in creationism. Why can’t we get someone with religious beliefs to teach creationism?"

Fellow board member Clint Mitchell responded, "I agree … you don’t have to be afraid to point out some of the fallacies with the theory of evolution. Teachers should have the freedom to look at creationism and find a way to get it into the classroom."

Yes, because it's clear public education has failed all of the adults on this board, let's ensure their children experience the same overwhelming failure of education as well!

Keep the creationism lessons in Sunday school, but don't mix your spiritual life with science in the publicly funded classrooms of a country that believes in the separation of church and state.

This review is going to be short for a couple reasons, first, I don't want to give anything away. Second, it doesn't take many words to say how great a movie this is.

It's clear a lot of thought went into perfecting and polishing this film. The pacing is great, the action is great, the concept is great. Also, great acting and plenty to keep you thinking long after you walk out of the theater. I loved the cast, including Ellen Page, though she did feel a little out of place... but I still dig her. If I had to write down a complaint, it's that I didn't feel the need to write pages about this movie as I did Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, though it did feel similar in many ways. That's not something I would hold against Inception, it's just that I really wanted to spend more time working over the meaning of the movie when there really isn't any meaning. It's just, a good puzzler.

4/5

I think everyone felt the idea of basing a series of movies on a theme park ride was a really bad idea. Yet the Pirates of the Caribbean movies turned out pretty good. Then, forgetting that, we all thought basing a series of movies on a short clip from a largely in-cohesive dialog-free musical movie was a bad idea... Well, here's The Sorcerer's Apprentice to prove us wrong again.

To put The Sorcerer's Apprentice into context, I would say it's similar to something like Harry Potter in that you've got a dorky nerd-child who is introduced to a world he can barely understand and is, coincidentally, the savior of the world. We're introduced to magic and get some explanation on how it works and the basic "rules" of magic. This is something I really appreciated. Compared to the very limited and almost non-existent explanations we get from the HP movies, we at least get a workable framework in The Sorcerer's Apprentice that I am reasonably comfortable with. There's some solid humor in the movie and a few somewhat touching scenes.

If I had to complain about anything it's that there was clearly a lot of contributing content cut from the final film. In fact, there are at least two scenes in the trailers that don't appear in the final cut. I understand the final cut is, I think, 1 hour and 51 minutes, so I can see they probably had a lot more content that was dropped to keep the movie under two hours. That's okay, but I feel like there may have been some useful scenes left out. For example, one of the scenes you see in the trailer involves Dave blowing up a baseball in lecture he's teaching. Some of the machinery you see in that scene (that is not in the final cut) is used in the climactic final battle... but in the final cut, we don't see that equipment before the final battle. It only made sense seeing the trailer again after having seen the movie. So, it's kind of a shame that we lost some potentially good scenes to the cutting room floor... Or not. I guess we won't know till the DVD release.

In the end, I really enjoyed the movie and look forward to the sequels.

3/5

Please stop abusing our music. We're through. I never want to hear you. The end.

So let's see, a science fiction movie that includes such things as: heavily armed soldiers, laser cannons, stealth aliens, giant dog things covered in spikes, and no Arnold. Alright, I'm in. Basic premise, all sorts of people are kidnapped and dropped (literally) on to some alien planet that's basically a huge game preserve, and then they get hunted by the predators. It's simple and it works. All in all, I would say it's better than the original Predator because it feels a little more sophisticated and it's not really trying for anything quite as complex as the original.

3/5