Sunday, September 4, 2005

He's the one that you're about to meet...

Once again, I had a pretty nice weekend. I managed to find enough time to talk to various people on AIM as well, some of which I haven't talked to in a while. So that was pretty cool. Although things are going at a relatively slow pace (or they may appear to be), I am very excited about various things that are coming up for this network. Art of Otaku will be a really significant test, because really, it's becoming quite a unique publication. The sheer size of it is quite remarkable and it manages to cover a good amount of visual styles. More importantly still, Adam is editing it very carefully and it seems that the final result will be something different to what's out there currently. Other things are happening too. Soon I will be handling a redesign of the Velegant site, to transform it into something more representative of our overall network. It is difficult to summarize the network in some respects, without listing off a bunch of URLs. And that's too confusing. So creating a PR hub, so to speak, will be nice. It'll be good to point business partners and clients to one location for a more organized summary of what we do here. I'm also pleased with Shy's latest OB event, The Legionnaires. So far it seems to be doing quite well, considering the ambitious nature of it. Managing so many roleplayers cannot be easy, but Shy is up to the task (afterall, he's had to organize other major events in the past). Speaking of events, I think it would be fun to do another Otaku Big Brother one day. I am still very much a fan of the general concept - it's unique and in practice, it seemed to work quite well. Apart from actually having members who were not involved in the prior versions, it would be nice to put some new spins on the idea and to further increase the production value. I wouldn't expect just one person to operate it though...it would really require maybe two or three senior staff to watch over it. So we'll see how that goes. In recent times, I have also been slowly doing a little work on a next generation N-Sider site. Right now work goes very slowly, because I don't think I'm ready to pull together all of the specific design elements. What I'm really interested in doing is building up some of my skills in certain areas first, before I continue. I have spent considerable time working on various types of glassy surfaces, for example. But to do this properly, I may need to start thinking about using other software. Other than online things, life has been quite busy. More work, more social time (perhaps a bit too much) and recently I signed up to my local gym with my sister. I haven't exercised in about three months now and even when I did, I was never in a gym. So that will be good fun - I've already toured the place and it seems quite nice, although it does lack a few features (the squash courts were rennovated to expand the gym itself, which is a bit disappointing). Still, it should be fun. SamSandy: Ah, but you are missing a key point here. Yes, the "star" of The Sopranos is Tony Soprano, who is a gangster. However, the story really revolves around his relationships with others - including his family, who are largely innocent of any crime. The show never attempts to represent his "job" in a positive light. As a character, his mafia side is not idolized at all. In fact, the show actually demonstrates the many negative consequences of the life he has chosen. As a result, the show is actually against organized crime, by displaying the hardships and difficulties that it brings to one's life. Tony himself constantly struggles with the dual desire to provide for his family while simultaneously coping with what he does for a living. In the final analysis, I think that The Sopranos indicates that life is not a black and white place. There are good and bad things, but it usually comes down to what a person is willing to live with and so on. Anyway, I won't keep rambling, but I think it's worth shedding a little light on the subject. John: Yeah, he has quite an incredible mind. It's funny how Mario has become so popular, considering his relatively humble origins. Annie-kun: I don't watch TV much either, other than a variety of news channels. But Sopranos is definitely worth watching, or at least trying out. ^_^ Sara: But I appreciate that you made the effort! indifference: Yeah, commercials make TV more annoying to watch, especially in recent years. Good thing we have been watching that show on DVD. SunfallE: If you do watch it at some stage, I'd definitely be interested to hear your take on it. It kind of reminds me that there are a few other series I might like to buy, especially Seinfeld. Oh, I saw this article about human evolution on MSNBC a couple of days ago. Obviously no amount of evidence is going to stop fundamentalists from thinking that the Earth is flat and only 6,000 years old, but those who are interested in this subject may want to read it. The second page in particular is interesting, due to the break-down of key points. This reminds me of a documentary that I saw recently about human evolution. They were talking about how scientists did not know what species was the first to significantly deviate from the monkey in evolutionary history. There are, of course, fossils of pre-humanoids (which are not monkies or apes, but which bear qualities from either of those alongside unique human qualities). However, for a long time, it was not known what the biggest single development was, on the path of human development. It seems the brain would be an obvious answer, but the brain seems to have developed partly as a response to other physical improvements. For instance, the feet of the earliest-known human ancestor is unlike an ape and more like our own (ie: longer, thinner, with a non-seperated big toe). This same species (the fossil of which was discovered not too long ago), also had a spinal entry underneath its skull, rather than on the back. This indicated that it walked vertically and was bipedal. I wish I could remember the name of the documentary, it's very worth watching. It reminds me that yes, there actually is quite a lot of evidence on this subject. And quite a lot of specific evidence too - the fossil I referred to just now is essentially the "missing link" species. To my knowledge, similar skeletons have been uncovered in recent years (one was uncovered in Egypt only last year I think). In this documentary, there was also a discussion on brain development. Basically the brain development is thought to have come from the more sophisticated social structure of various monkey species. There is a need to remember many details (physical and social, based on heirarchy) and the ability to interpret sophisticated body language and so on. Some of these same species were also apparently the first to utilize tool making. So I imagine it is somewhat like a snowball effect. Anyway, hopefully that was not too rambly, but it was something I was thinking about just now. In any case, the article is interesting. In case you do not read it, I thought I'd leave you with a revealing quote: "Researchers said the chimp/human comparison served as the most dramatic confirmation yet of Charles Darwin's claim in 1871 that humans and chimpanzees had a common ancestor. Today, scientists believe that the most recent common ancestor lived 6 million years ago. "I couldn't imagine Darwin hoping for a stronger confirmation of his ideas than when we see the comparison of the human and chimpanzee genome," Waterston told reporters during a Washington news conference. The researchers also used the chimp genome as a new reference point for judging how rapidly various areas of genetic code have changed: Waterston said it appeared that genes linked to the wiring of the nervous system and the perception of sound changed particularly quickly in primates, compared with other mammals. As for genetic changes that are peculiar to humans, the "most intriguing" one involves transcription factors, the proteins responsible for controlling the expression of other genes, Waterston said. Scientists believe that tweaks in transcription factors may spark rapid evolutionary change, even though the genes they control are relatively unchanged — just as the same classical melody can sound dramatically different when given a jazz interpretation." Yay for knowledge!

Comments (3)