randomwalks/dj

Examiner column for June 9.

     Last week, J.K. Rowling startled many, including her audience, by delivering the commencement address at Harvard University. I had an invitation to that momentous event, but I chose instead to grade Advanced Placement exams in English Literature.

    I did this with some regret. As I watched Rowling’s address on YouTube, I stopped kicking myself long enough to realize that her words were relevant to what I had chosen to do instead. Her funny opening spoke of her nerves: “Now all I have to do is take deep breaths, squint at the red [Harvard] banners, and convince myself that I am at the world’s largest Gryffindor reunion.”

It struck me that I, and not she, was at “the world’s largest Gryffindor reunion.” In the English literature AP reading alone, there are 1100 teachers who gather yearly in one enormous room to spend a week helping College Board award college credit to high school writers.

    Our three cafeteria meals a day are not quite as atmospheric as those in the dining hall at Hogwarts, but between meals we grade students’ AP tests. Similar rituals play out in other venues for every single Advanced Placement test offered in high schools.

    In Rowling’s novels, Hogwarts teachers are devoted to their students and to teaching. It is a wonderful school of magic precisely because those teachers would have chosen to spend a week serving their students rather than traveling to hear a famous author!

    None of that was any consolation, however, on the day I missed Rowling’s speech. I was reading essays on how minor characters serve as foils to major characters in novels and plays, while my husband and son were chuckling at Rowling’s words about her parents, who thought “my overactive imagination was an amusing personal quirk that could never pay a mortgage.”

    The words I was reading were not as funny or engaging as Rowling’s, yet her words hit home. The huge gathering of AP teachers had a single purpose: to “reward students for what they do well.”

    Rowling’s reward did not come easily. She wanted to read Classics rather than something that would translate directly into a lucrative career. That involved some struggle, years with little money, and many failures. All that fueled her imagination, she claimed, yet I know she would have given anything to have been “rewarded for what she did well.”

    The AP teachers who have temporarily given up their families, jobs, and even an opportunity to hear J.K. Rowling, hope that our work liberates some students to pursue their talents. Good AP test grades can put students in the college class that will change their lives forever.

     So with each exam, I imagine a new J.K Rowling—someone for whom college credit will make the difference between being able to pursue a dream rather than a vocation.

    What is this AP reunion for, if not to encourage future “Gryffindor” graduates to work the magic that resides within themselves? There are no Harry Potters in the test booklets I am grading, but there are many future authors, and encouraging the next J.K Rowling makes not hearing the current one a sacrifice worth making.

Originally posted by Erica Jacobs from TeacherTalk, on June 7, 2008 6:19 PM

(ed.note: If you missed it, see the speech here.)

From TPM Reader KW ...

For those who found Hillary's concession speech to be too much about her I would only say it was about those of us who supported her candidacy. Her speech was inspiring and gracious and spoke to the millions of Democrats, Republicans and Indpendents who worked for her campaign and voted for her. If there are those Democrats who still feel it is necessary to denigrate Senator Clinton and her run for the Presidency, I would ask them to think about the change they advocate and the no more politics as usual. The only way to say no to the Washington politics of the past 20 years is to stop hating and start moving forward. Senator Clinton delivered a message of hope and action that deserves praise rather than condemnation. As a woman of what the media pundits have chosen to call "a certain age", I am decidely saddened by her withdrawal, but I also understand that she has lost the contest for the nomination. That loss, however, does not give anyone who supports the candidacy of Senator Obama the right to laugh or express derision about Senator Clinton or her supporters. That loss does not give anyone the right to think any less of her and what she stands for as a Democrat, as a woman, and as a viable candidate for President of the United States. I fear that view will not be one shared by many supporters of Senator Obama. I have been disheartened by the level of incivility expressed by both sides during this race and would hope that the winning side will not now gloat and the losing pout. If there is to truly be change in this country, we do not have room or time for such behavior. A John McCain presidency would certainly be a disaster for the United States and for the rest of the world; we cannot hope to keep him from winning next November by discounting the views and votes of 18 million Americans.

From TPM Reader BC ...

I disagree with David's speculation that those of us who are not Clinton fans would think it was too much about her. I live in NY and voted against her in her last Senate primary and this year's Presidential primary.

I thought it was a fantastic speech. In fact, if her actions in the Senate had matched the rhetoric of that speech, she would be the consensus nominee going away. She dug herself a pretty deep hole with her actions over the past month capped off by her non-concession earlier in the week. Excused the mixed metaphor, but that speech cleared the slate as much as a speech possibly could have. Her support of Obama sounded utterly sincere and whole hearted.

Now, let's see if the actions live up to the words ...

From TPM Reader JS ...

She did so much "just right" and could have won it had she not had the rough treatment from the media. I sensed that you found it difficult to pay her a compliment even now.

As one of those loyal supporters who are feeling let down by the process, let me say that I will likely come around to voting for Obama-absolutely never for McCain.

You like to put it all on her. Obama is the victor, now let's see what he does. The burden is on him as it should be. We knew she would deliver. Listen to her speech and focus on her words about taking it all and going on with grace. She always has and will continue to do so. Yes, I'm one of the women who looks to her for strength and example. She picks herself up and goes on and you all keep delivering the vicious, over the top negatives and there she is back in view with grace.

She did it for us and will continue to be our spokeswoman. She has more than earned it. We know she gets it and has done so much for women and children around the world.

Now let's see if Obama can deliver. He has much to do and undo. Yes, his unfortunate comments "Hillary, you are likeable enough" spoke volumes. He was some work to do.

Thanks for inviting comments.

TPM Reader EM ...

I thought Hillary's speech was a little schizophrenic, maybe like her campaign. It obviously had cobbled together sections, and I thought it was clear that her heart was most in the parts about her and her supporters. This came across in several ways:

1) She continued with that insistent use of the word I rather than a more inclusive our or this when talking about the campaign. There was also that odd, ambiguous little moment near the beginning of the speech when she said something about having wanted to regain the White House.

2) Technically, Obama has a name with a built-in charge. In poetic terms, it's a strong iamb for his first name, strong amphibrach for the last. It's a name that's all but designed for creating a rhetorical point. Hillary made it uneventful and conversational, quiet, a little sing-songy, as if it were all she could do even to say it.

3) She kept that dazzling smile she's shown off in this campaign entirely away from the endorsement parts.

4) While she used some of Obama's campaign language effectively, she didn't come up with anything soaring about what it means to her that there's an African-American nominee for president; she didn't really say that there'd been two mirroring paths to the nomination, both about inclusion and equality of opportunity, and that now those paths need to join as one single road to the White House.

All that said, as a concession speech and a rallying of the troups, I think it was all that the Obama camp could have wanted given how recently the campaign ended, and how deeply invested Hillary was in her desire to be president. I felt it was Hillary at her best, but I feel that best, in spite of all her gifts, lacks a certain empathetic core and magnanimity of spirit, which is probably why she could make the bruising mistakes in her campaign that probably cost her the nomination.

TPM Reader MS ...

For all the talk of whether Clinton's concession speech was sufficient to bring her most ardent supporters into the Obama fold, I think the speech accomplished something else, at least for me, a strong Obama supporter: it softened my opinion of Clinton at a time when I had become absolutely fed up with her escalating nonsense over the last few weeks. While I still don't think an Obama/Clinton ticket is ideal for purely political reasons (there are better possibilities), I now would not be as opposed to such a ticket on a purely visceral, personal level. I couldn't have said that yesterday. If one of Clinton's goals today was to begin repairing the division between herself and those voters who didn't support her, I believe she succeeded.

TPM Reader DG ...

Senator Hillary Clinton made me so very proud to be a woman and a Democrat today. As an Obama supporter, I was very concerned. Turns out I needn't have been concerned. Hillary proved herself to be a classy, loyal, smart woman, and her speech was an example of how great this country can be!!!!

TPM Reader NG ...

Hillary's concession and endorsement speech was near perfect. She drew her audience gently up to the moment when she brought up Obama, endorsed him and offered words that I briefly thought might well have come from him (as you pointed out), and then just as gently led her folks out the open door with her. Masterful.

At the same time, to those who think this was a great indication that she should be VP, I have this thought: Speaking the way she has today I believe she can be much MORE effective a surrogate in the general specifically if she is NOT on the ballot (with an obvious personal stake in the outcome).

There are plenty of places for her to go, plenty of people for her to persuade, and she should not be hampered by being on the ticket.

TPM Reader MM ...

DK asked for a "thought," so here's mine. After her much criticized speech earlier this week, I dug through my record collection to find my vinyl copy of Ted Kennedy's 'concession' speeech from the 1980 Democratic Convention. (Yep--they released one and I bought it 27+ yrs ago). It was, from beginning to end Ted Kennedy's acceptance speech. It contained one sentence, in the final paragraph, acknowledging Carter's nomination. (I congratulate President Carter on his victory). Other than that, he essentially claimed the nomination that the voters had given to Carter months before. Standing at the podium of the Convention itself, Kennedy let the nation know he believed he deserved the nomination.

That speech reminded me all over again of the legitimacy of the charge that Kennedy tore the party apart over his failed ambition.

Compared to that speech, and even in its own right, Hillary's speech was a model of grace and reconciliation. Once the speech is published, it will be easy to nibble away at the sentences where she held on to this or that difference with Sen Obama. But those who expected Hillary to give Obama a pinched and begrudging support need to admit that they were very wrong. Who gives a damn if it took her a couple of extra days to do it?

TPM Reader VM ...

I have to agree with David and Greg that Hillary Clinton's concession was one of the best political speeches ever given.

I'm from Illinois, so I was an early and enthusiastic Obama supporter. Throughout the campaign, I kept trying hard to take the high road, insisting that I would support Hillary if she were the nominee. At times in this highly competitive campaign, it was hard. Very hard.

As I listened to Hillary's speech, the thought that kept running through my mind was how gracious and she was. I'd like to think that if my candidate were in her shoes, he would be equally magnimous. Most importantly, I'd like to think that I would accept the words of my candidate in the spirit intended.

The speech would ring hollow if she did not refer to the historic nature of her candidacy, and to its successes. As an Obama supporter, I'm fine with her taking a victory lap; she deserves it.

I hope that other Obama supporters acknowledge our friends who supported Clinton. Clinton ran a great campaign, and it was historic. Our friends should be congratulated.

And as for the times that I may have been negative towards Clinton during this primary -- well, that's what happens during an extremely competitive campaign. I'm glad that my candidate won, but I'm also glad that Hillary is still around. Had Obama lost, I would certainly expect him to remain visible and active in national politics. For the same reasons, I hope Hillary remains in the spotlight.

Originally posted by Josh Marshall from Talking Points Memo, on June 7, 2008 5:14 PM

Ill be Djing (as JD Salinger) for a book release party for a new book project I recently did in collaboration with Dexter Sinister (www.dextersinister.org/)...actually, the book is based off of a video, but anyway,.......my DJ set will be based off of Paul Morley's essay in the book titled REPRODUCTION...think alot of Tangerine Dream (my new favorite band FYI), The Monkeys, Robert Rental, and Richard Strauss.

Originally posted by (author unknown) from Cory's Web LOG, on June 6, 2008 7:50 PM

Posted by Marissa Mayer, VP Search Products & User Experience, and Micheal Lopez, Web Designer

You may have noticed that Google has a new favicon, the small icon you see in your browser next to the URL or in your bookmarks list. Some people have wondered why we changed our favicon -- after all, we hadn't in 8.5 years(!). The reason is that we wanted to develop a set of icons that would scale better to some new platforms like the iPhone and other mobile devices. So the new favicon is one of those, but we've also developed a group of logo-based icons that all hang together as a unified set. Here's the full set:



The design process we went through was rigorous and interesting, so we thought we would share more of it here. We tried in total more than 300 permutations. It was much harder than we thought at first. We wanted something distinctive and noticeable, so we aimed toward transparency or semi-transparency, so the image would have a more distinctive noticeable shape than just a block. We wanted something that embraced the colorfulness of the logo, yet wouldn't date itself. Since we don't really have a symbol that means Google, we felt it best to work with the logo and letters within it. Our design team tried literally hundreds of approaches. You can see some of our explorations here.


By no means is the one you're seeing our favicon final; it was a first step to a more
unified set of icons. However, we really value feedback from users and want to hear your ideas that we may have missed. If you have your own notions about the Google favicon, please send them to us. We'll do our best to work them in, and maybe your idea will be the one that people see billions of times per day.

Originally posted by A Googler from The Official Google Blog, on June 6, 2008 4:48 PM

There is something about the conjunctival redness of this market heat chart (via Finviz) today that is overwhelming:

Originally posted by pk from Paul Kedrosky's Infectious Greed, on June 6, 2008 3:03 PM

UPPER WEST SIDE— Tom Valenti sends in an important clarification about last week's sighting: "So, there I was, walking up to Jeffrey's Manhattan Eyeland on 88th and Broadway when I stopped to take a phone call...you know, the one that stops you dead in your tracks...those tracks happened to stop in front of Aix...and the next thing I knew...I haven't been inside Aix in a very long time but I was, in fact, outside...if only for a fleeting moment." Meaning, Tommy V is unfortunately not involved in the new project. [EaterWire]

TOP CHEF UNIVERSE— Responding to the complaints/accusations regarding Lisa's continued presence on the show, Tom Colicchio once again goes blogging to defend Top Chef's integrity: "I'm compelled to give my once-a-season response to those cynics out there who insist we make our decisions to manipulate the ratings. If I sound defensive, I think I'm entitled...I think Lisa, along with a few chefs from past seasons, benefited from a phenomenon I call the 'lucky-dog-who-keeps-skating-by-effect.'" [Bravo via Eater SF]

JAMES BEARD— Want to watch the James Beard Awards live but don't have a ticket? Well if you can't wait for the coverage on all the blogs (even though there's always the chance of Mr. Ed Levine liveblogging), Devour TV will be streaming it live. [Devour TV]

Originally posted by Amanda from Eater, on June 6, 2008 1:32 PM

I hadn't seen a tape in ages. And then, Mark showed me that it still exists. You gotta love it!

http://alexdeve.vox.com/library/post/mark-and-tapes.html

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Originally posted by Krissy from david’s Neighbors, on June 6, 2008 1:31 PM

Dedicated readers will recall me obsessing over and over-analyzing Auto-Tune in pop music earlier this year. It is, then, my pleasure to report that, thanks to the inestimable Sasha Frere-Jones, Auto-Tune analysis has gone legit. Behold, no less an authority than the New Yorker weighs in on Auto-Tune, especially T-Pain's (ab)use of it:

This, roughly, is what happens: Auto-Tune locates the pitch of a recorded vocal, and moves that recorded information to the nearest "correct" note in a scale, which is selected by the user. With the speed set to zero, unnaturally rapid corrections eliminate portamento, the musical term for the slide between two pitches. Portamento is a natural aspect of speaking and singing, central to making people sound like people. A nonmusical example of portamento would be "up-speak," a verbal tic common in some people under thirty. (Can you imagine the end of every sentence rising in pitch? Like a question?) Processed at zero speed, Auto-Tune turns the lolling curves of the human voice into a zigzag of right-angled steps. These steps may represent "perfect" pitches, but when sung pitches alternate too quickly the result sounds unnatural, a fluttering that is described by some engineers as "the gerbil" and by others as "robotic."

The gerbil.

Originally posted by Anil from Anil Dash, on June 6, 2008 1:17 PM

This weekend on SNY, Mets Weekly looks at the return of Pedro Martinez; the construction site of Citi Field; and Lynn Cohen’s t-shirts on GaryKeithAndRon.com. 

Also, the third episode of Playing for Peanuts will air this Sunday at 6 pm on .

According to the show’s notes, “Back at the stadium, the Peanuts are visited by former MLB slugger Cecil Fielder and manager Wally Backman chews his team out after a sloppy performance.”

ShareThis

Originally posted by Matthew Cerrone from MetsBlog.com, on June 6, 2008 10:42 AM

As I’ve said many times before, having to choose between Ricardo Montalban and F. Scott Fitzgerald is exactly the sort of Sophie’s Choice situation that no one should ever be put in.

- Erik Henriksen in the Mercury blog

Originally posted by Valarie Smith from Crazed Teacups, on June 6, 2008 10:40 AM

David Wright is the only player to play every single inning for his team this season.

Prior to last night’s game, Willie Randolph told reporters that he may give Wright a day off soon, saying:

“We’ve been talking about that, but he says he feels great.  We’ll try to find a spot here and there.  If I really feel like he’s struggling, then I’ll give him a day off…If he’s swinging the bat good, you’ve got to be careful – you don’t want to throw him out of rhythm.”

…i’m guessing that this is why Abraham Nunez promoted from Triple-A New Orleans, to give the team an option at third other than wright…

However, regarding Nunez, Ted Berg writes the following in a pretty funny column for SNY.tv:

“Here’s the short list of players who were hitting better than Nunez in New Orleans: Everybody.”

Wright, as quoted by Newsday:

“Mentally, you just can’t think about it.  You can’t think about needing a day off. That’s kind of accepting defeat mentally, giving in to being tired. It’s a grind, but I take a lot of pride in trying to go out there every day…It’s one thing if you’re rolling as a team, playing well and racking up the wins. But when the team is scuffling a little bit, I want to be in there. When we’re this inconsistent offensively, I feel responsible as an everyday guy to go in there and make something happen.”

…i mean, if wright needs a day off give him a day off…but, if he doesn’t, and he feels good and he’s hitting well, let him play…i don’t think this is very complicated…said Cal Ripken…

ShareThis

Originally posted by Matthew Cerrone from MetsBlog.com, on June 6, 2008 10:22 AM

In July 1968, a train delivered the body of Robert Kennedy from NYC to Washington D.C. so that he could be buried in Arlington National Cemetery next to his brother. Photographer Paul Fusco was on that train and shot a bunch of photos of the hundreds of thousands of people that spontaneously turned up along the train route to mourn Kennedy, photos that were recently rediscovered. Fusco narrates a slideshow of the photos.

The amazing photos will be on display at Danziger Projects from June 6 - July 31...Danziger has more about the photos -- which he calls "my favorite body of work in photography" -- on his blog.

I'll let the pictures speak for themselves, but I'll also tell you the only area where Paul and I disagreed. For Paul, the event and the photographs represented the end of hope. To me they represent the indomitability of the American spirit.

Either way, the photos are powerful but also show the ordinary American-ness of that time period.

Originally posted by jason@kottke.org from kottke.org, on June 6, 2008 9:52 AM

Hillary will endorse Obama tomorrow at noon, at the National Building Museum, in Washington, D.C. It will almost certainly receive wall-to-wall coverage.

The moment will come exactly one year and 137 days since she released this YouTube on January 22, 2007, announcing her candidacy...

It will have taken Obama 502 days to defeat Hillary and her formidable political operation and get her concession.

But defeat her he did.

Originally posted by Greg Sargent from TPM Election Central, on June 6, 2008 8:44 AM

karinalongworth:

alexbalk:

Reblogging this again because I’ve been looking at it all day, and here’s what makes the picture: It’s not the fistbump at all. It’s Michelle Obama’s eyes and what is just about to turn into a smile on Barack Obama’s face. It says almost everything about them at this point. I don’t give a shit if the president and his wife love each other, and I certainly don’t think a candidate’s family life is in any way indicative of how he’ll be as an officeholder, but strictly from the point of a photograph capturing a moment, this is one of those rare images that gives such an incredible picture of its subjects

Also, immediately after the fists broke apart, Michelle sauntered past Barack and, briefly watching her walk past, Barack patted her upper ass.

Originally posted by (author unknown) from shey.net, on June 6, 2008 7:25 AM

The McCain campaign is touting an email that Joe Lieberman sent out to McCain's list announcing a new effort that Lieberman is chairing called "Citizens for McCain," whose chief mission is to reach out to Independents and moderate Dems.

Never mind all the narcissistic boilerplate in the email about how independent Lieberman is, and focus instead on this key line...

As you know, I caucus with the Democrats as a United States Senator and was the Democrat Party's nominee for Vice-President of the United States against President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

What's so amusing is this is that it's a kind of double-slur. It's simultaneously a reminder that the Democratic Party bestowed on Lieberman the high honor of nominating him as Veep and a reminder that despite this Lieberman cheerfully continues to echo the most inane and childish of GOP attacks on that same party.

As Steve Benen cracked: "Maybe Obama needs to back him up against another wall."

Or, maybe, you know, perhaps the fellow who is the head of the Senate Dems and who is responsible for maintaining Lieberman's plum committee slots might consider dealing with this one day? Naah.

Hendrik Hertzberg's valuable rundown on why "Democrat Party" is a slur is here. Full email after the jump.

To: Fellow McCain Supporters

From: Senator Joe Lieberman

Date: June 5th, 2008

Today, I asked Senator McCain if I could create and chair a new grassroots organization, "Citizens for McCain."

Citizens for McCain is an organization within the McCain campaign for people who put country before political party and support the candidate for President who has a proven record of bipartisanship.

As you know, I caucus with the Democrats as a United States Senator and was the Democrat Party's nominee for Vice-President of the United States against President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

But first and foremost, I am an American. I have an obligation to do what I think is best for our nation regardless of political party. My love for this country and strong belief in John McCain's character, judgment, and willingness to work with leaders of both parties has convinced me to support him for President.

I have worked with John McCain for many years in the U.S. Senate and know from experience that he can unite Democrats, Republicans and Independents like no one else in this country. He did it in the United States Senate and he can do it as President of the United States.

But we need help from McCain supporters such as you to reach out to Americans who are not currently involved in the campaign. Will you help us by recruiting your friends, family, and co-workers who may not consider themselves members of the Republican Party and ask them to join the Citizens for McCain organization?

I am confident we will find many Democrats and Independents who, like John McCain and me, put country before political party and will support a leader with a real record of bipartisanship.

Time and time again John McCain has put his country first. He refused early release when he was held captive in Vietnam. He continued to put his country first as a national leader in the U.S. Senate. He put country before party when he fought to pass campaign finance reform, sought a bi-partisan solution to the immigration problem, and consistently supported pro-environment policies. His courage to stand up to the failed Iraq war plan of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and lead the fight for a new strategy in Iraq will go down in history, and it saved American lives. These were not always the easy things to do. In fact, they were usually very difficult, and often threatened his political career. But John McCain did what was right.

He said it best in his speech in New Orleans on Tuesday night:

"(The American people) know I have a long record of bipartisan problem solving. They've seen me put our country before any President -- before any party -- before any special interest -- before my own interest. They might think me an imperfect servant of our country, which I surely am. But I am her servant first, last and always."

The phones at the campaign headquarters have been ringing with disaffected Democrats calling to say they believe Senator McCain has the experience, judgment, and bipartisanship necessary to lead our country in these difficult times. Many of these supporters are former supporters of Senator Clinton.

Senator McCain has had a very good working relationship with Senator Clinton and will continue to do so in the future. In the same New Orleans speech he said:

"Senator Clinton has earned great respect for her tenacity and courage. The media often overlooked how compassionately she spoke to the concerns and dreams of millions of Americans, and she deserves a lot more appreciation than she sometimes received. As the father of three daughters, I owe her a debt for inspiring millions of women to believe there is no opportunity in this great country beyond their reach. I am proud to call her my friend."

I am proud to call John McCain my friend and ask you to help our friend become the next President of the United States.

Please forward this email to your lists today and ask your friends, family, and coworkers who do not consider themselves Republicans to join me in filling out the Citizens for McCain form today.

Thank you for your willingness to help me expand this new organization. Together, we will make history.

Originally posted by Greg Sargent from TPM Election Central, on June 6, 2008 6:38 AM

Yesterday I linked to a new poll finding that 45% of African Americans would support Hillary on the ticket -- something which, I suggested, could mean that African Americans aren't perhaps all that embittered about the Hillary racial tactics.

Well, today brings a new Gallup poll that suggests the opposite in striking terms, finding that Hillary's favorability rating has dropped an astonishing 26 points since June of last year...

Her fave rating dropped from 84% in June of 2007 to 58% today. Meanwhile, her unfavorable rating jumped from 10% to 36%, which is more than a third.

Originally posted by Greg Sargent from TPM Election Central, on June 6, 2008 6:28 AM

rawr

Originally posted by (author unknown) from the real janelle, on June 6, 2008 5:59 AM

Last year Scott Stevenson put together a fun event at the Apple store during the week of WWDC, and invited me to participate. We talked about a variety of indie Mac issues, and also took questions from the audience.

The great news is Scott is doing another event this year: Tuesday, 7PM at the Apple store. I’ll be talking about some experimenting I’ve been doing along the lines of “visual debugging,” in particular visualizing the key focus responder chain in a Cocoa application. Other people will be talking about much more interesting things!

Hope to see you there! Last year the place filled up pretty quickly so I recommend arriving early if you want to get a seat.

Originally posted by Daniel Jalkut from Red Sweater Blog, on June 6, 2008 5:09 AM

We didn't even know he was having a baby!

Reps for actor Vin Diesel announced yesterday that The Fast & The Furious star welcomed a brand new addition to his family, as his girlfriend, Paloma Jimenez, gave birth to their first child on April 2. Vin and Paloma, who is a model, now have a bouncing baby girl.

The actor will lay off pacifier duty (get it? He starred in The Pacifier) for a while this summer, as he films the third installment of his car racing flicks, Fast and Furious, which is due in theaters Summer 2009.

Congrats!

Originally posted by Tracy Pepey from iVillage - Daily Blabber, on June 6, 2008 2:39 AM

Five ways to spot a faked photo. Comparing the light reflection in the various eyes in a photograph is an especially clever technique.

(link)

Originally posted by jason@kottke.org from kottke.org, on June 5, 2008 6:13 PM

So, the geniuses over at boston.com realized that little itty bitty newsphotos sucked.

So they said, ‘hey, why don’t we curate some of the best news photography out there and post ‘em real big-like in essay-type format?’

So they did, and they saw it, and they saw that it was good.

Originally posted by Paul from pf.org, on June 5, 2008 4:39 PM

great post about the Washington Post being held back by their print editions and mindset [via] 

Originally posted by (author unknown) from Waxy.org Links, on June 5, 2008 4:37 PM

From Required Eating

Not Martha makes adorable pies in tiny jars after seeing them at lloyrdandlauren.com. The result is an ample supply of snack sized pies in ready-to-bake containers that you can pull out of the freezer whenever you get a pie craving. Follow Not Martha's tips for successful tiny pie-making!

Related

For an Edible Container, Try Bacon Bowls
Photo of the Day: Crawly Spider Cakes
Vodka: the Secret to Foolproof Pie Dough

Originally posted by Robyn Lee from Serious Eats, on June 5, 2008 2:45 PM

PAPER's beloved editor-at-large Peter Davis has been a bit shy of the blogosphere... and understandably so! It's a dog eat dog world out there in the 'sphere! But with some heavy cajoling and serious coaxing, we finally got him on board. So, on a regular basis, he'll be doling out fashion, nightlife and celebrity-related nuggets culled from his life as a globetrotter and boy 'bout town. As a play on the fact that Peter is something of a Facebook-aphile, his blog will heretofore be called Peter Davis' Status Update. Enjoy his first blog! "This is like a block party for preppies," Maggie Katz said scanning the crowd outside the Hanley store, which happens to be next to JG Mellon's, the 10021's fave hangout for Bloodys and Burgers. Nicole Hanley's flagship boutique opening was a sea of pink and green. Hanley herself dresses and designs clothes (think suede trimmed shirts and leather skirts) with more edge than LL Bean, but nonetheless she is a staple in Palm Beach and the UES. Who did I spot? Hanley's beau Matthew Mellon, Amy Fine Collins, Vogue's Devon Shuster and Valerie Boster, Bartle Bull, Dori Cooperman, Casey Johnson (who just moved back to NYC from LA), Carter Peabody, Carrie Cloud and Travis Acquavella, to name just a few of the people I love.

Originally posted by (author unknown) from PAPERMAG: WORD UP!, on June 5, 2008 2:14 PM

I still go to Maya because of this.

doree:

I was discussing the merits of various bikini waxing places (palaces?) around town, and was reminded of one TODO (that godawful one-thing-a-day feature that Choire mercifully killed as one of his first acts in office) that was actually fun to write. Here’s a little taste:

We’ve got to hand it to her—bitch was fast. We barely had time to blink, let alone tear up, before large sections of our nether regions were being removed with alacrity. She was also reassuring, telling us that it wouldn’t be much longer now. (Rrrrip!) “You want me to do lips, yes?” she asked in her Russian accent. We nodded, barely, not really thinking. Wait—lips? Those lips? we thought, panicked, as she hoisted our leg in the air. Just when we thought we couldn’t take anymore, she said, “Okay! Almost done. Now you turn over, and hold your butt cheeks open!” Aha, we thought, flipping over awkwardly and stickily, on the paper she’d rolled on the table. We felt vaguely like a newly shorn lamb.

All that being said, I never did go back to Maya.

Originally posted by (author unknown) from Jessica Coen, on June 5, 2008 1:32 PM

Chris Heilmann

The most amazing thing about this is happening under the hood: the developer wrote a library that abstracts browser rendering engines using Canvas, SVG and Flash (on a per-need basis) into a unified language, Objective J, which is — as the name suggests — a mapping from Objective C to JavaScript.

(Thanks to Joe Clark.)

 ★ 

Originally posted by John Gruber from Daring Fireball, on June 5, 2008 1:03 PM

Think you’re hot shit Markos?  Dec. ‘06?  July ‘04?  Pshaw!

How about June ‘04 on this blog, baby?  Just sayin’.

(knocking on wood furiously)

Originally posted by agolis from andrew golis, on June 5, 2008 12:26 PM

After McCain's Tuesday night prebuttal speech trainwreck I was afraid he might keep going with no discernible message and just a lot of imagery and themes stressing age, being part of yesterday and generally being completely out of touch. But boy was I wrong. Here's a screen capture of the front page of McCain's website as of 3:55 PM this afternoon with the four tabs across the top apparently signaling McCain's top four agenda items ...

Late Update: Many of you have noted, as the Hotline Blog shows here, that McCain's new logo appears to be literally ripped off from Obama's logo -- much as his new slogan is. I think this is actually part of McCain's new plan to demonstrate leadership and demonize Obama by appropriating all his campaign iconography and slogans.

Originally posted by Josh Marshall from Talking Points Memo, on June 5, 2008 11:52 AM

Russian writer Maxim Gorky wrote one of the first movie reviews in 1896 after seeing a collection of Lumiere films. Film/sound editor Walter Murch introduces the piece:

It is written on a completely clear slate, by someone who had not already been taught how to regard the cinema by a thousand other writers, and the newness of it all leaps from the page. What is remarkable is Gorky's prescience in the last two paragraphs, as he leaps ahead from his description of the first films to speculation on what directions the cinema might eventually take, toward sex and violence. How did he know?

The bulk of Gorky's short review concerns the absence of color and sound from the films, as if he's viewing shadows of reality.

Their smiles are lifeless, even though their movements are full of living energy and are so swift as to be almost imperceptible. Their laughter is soundless although you see the muscles contracting in their grey faces. Before you a life is surging, a life deprived of words and shorn of the living spectrum of colours -- the grey, the soundless, the bleak and dismal life.

In a collection of accounts of new technology, the NY Times has a pair of film reviews, the first from the Paris debut of the Lumiere films in 1895:

Photography has ceased to record immobility. It perpetuates the image of movement. When these gadgets are in the hands of the public, when anyone can photograph the ones who are dear to them, not just in their immobile form, but with movement, action, familiar gestures and the words out of their mouths, then death will no longer be absolute, final.

And this one from the projectionist of the first Lumiere in NYC:

You had to have lived these moments of collective exaltation, have attended these thrilling screenings in order to understand just how far the excitement of the crowd could go. With the flick of a switch, I plunge several thousand spectators into darkness. Each scene passes, accompanied by tempestuous applause; after the sixth scene, I return the hall to light. The audience is shaking. Cries ring out.

The Times also has a short article previewing the debut of Thomas Edison's vitascope¹, which demonstrates the difficulty in describing this new technology to the public.

The vitascope projects upon a large area of canvas groups that appear to stand forth from the canvas, and move with great facility and agility, as though actuated by separate impulses. In this way the bare canvas before the audience becomes instantly a stage upon which living beings move about.

That sounds a bit boring but audiences loved it.

So enthusiastic was the appreciation of the crowd long before this exhibition was finished that vociferous cheering was heard. There were loud calls for Mr. Edison, but he made no response.

By 1898, the language of cinema was beginning to sort itself out, more or less, as this Times editorial notes.

All the resources of the word-builders see to have been exhausted in finding names for the simple but ingenious machine that throws moving pictures on a screen. The essential features in every device of this sort are the same -- a brilliant light before which a long band of minute photographs is rapidly drawn, and a lens to focus and distribute the rays properly. The arrangements for the manipulation of the light, the band, and the lens are numerous, but they vary only in the inconsequential details, and for all practical purposes the machines are identical. Some mysterious impulse, however, has impelled almost every purchaser of the apparatus to buy with it, or to invent for it, a distinctive name. Vitascope and biograph are most familiar here, with cinematograph coming next at a considerable distance. These hardly begin the list that might be formed from a careful study of the amusement advertisements in the papers of this and other countries. From such sources might be taken phantoscope, criterioscope, kinematograph, wondorscope, animatoscope, vitagraph, panoramograph, cosmoscope, anarithmoscope, katoptikum, magniscope, zoeoptrotrope, phantasmagoria projectoscope, variscope, cinograph, cinnomonograph, hypnoscope, centograph, and xograph. This is far from exhausting the supply. Electroscope exists, and so do cinagraphoscope, animaloscope, theatrograph, chronophotographoscope, motograph, rayoscope, motorscope, kinotiphone, thromotrope, phenakistoscope, venetrope, vitrescope, zinematograph, vitropticon, stinnetiscope, vivrescope, diaramiscope, corminograph, kineoptoscope, craboscope, vitaletiscope, cinematoscope, mutoscope, cinoscope, kinetograph, lobsterscope, and nobody knows how many more. Here, surely, is a curious development of the managerial mind.

It's difficult to read these accounts and not think about how we'll all sound in 100 years as we now attempt to explain the internet, mobile phones, the web, blogs, and the like.

[1] Edison didn't actually invent the vitascope. Thomas Armat sold the rights to his invention to The Edison Company on the condition that Edison could claim to have invented it. ↩

Originally posted by jason@kottke.org from kottke.org, on June 5, 2008 11:24 AM

Inquiring minds want to know if there is anything at all that Joe Lieberman could say about the Democratic presidential nominee that would get Harry Reid to tap the Connecticut Senator on the shoulder and say, "Psst -- hey bud, you enjoy your senior committee slots at my pleasure, so watch it."

It's a question that many Democrats are asking right now, in the wake of Lieberman's aggressive foreign policy attacks on Barack Obama yesterday. Even Obama himself took Lieberman aside and privately rebuked him yesterday.

Now Reid himself has been asked about this, and he told reporters that, yes, he has given Lieberman a talking-to of sorts...

"I've had conversations with Lieberman at some length. I'm not going to discuss the conversations here. But I think the discussions he had with Obama yesterday and the discussions he had with me yesterday were fruitful. We'll let the future decide what it's going to be, but I'm not about to threaten anybody."

"Fruitful," huh? Anyone who thinks Reid will put any kind of pressure on Lieberman behind the scenes is just kidding himself. It isn't going to happen, and Lieberman will continue to attack Obama -- and soon enough will start portraying him as too weak to defend the country -- secure in the knowledge that the only thing that will happen to him is that he'll get more press attention for it.

Originally posted by Greg Sargent from TPM Election Central, on June 5, 2008 10:18 AM

Here's the statement, sent over by Obama campaign spokesperson Bill Burton:

"Senator Obama appreciates the hard work that Chairman Dean has done to grow our party at the grassroots level and looks forward to working with him as the chairman of the Democratic Party as we go forward."

Historically, a DNC chair's tenure is uncertain once a nominee is chosen, since said nominee might want to install his own guy there, but as Ben Smith notes, Dean has a power base built up among state party chairs across the country who love his 50-state strategy of investing in them.

The DNC earlier today confirmed that Obama had installed his man Paul Tewes to serve as his eyes and ears at the organization, a sign that Obama is moving quickly to re-shape the party in his own image. Obama's party, it turns out, will include Dean at the top of the DNC.

Originally posted by Greg Sargent from TPM Election Central, on June 5, 2008 7:53 AM

Jake Tapper provides some more details of that talking-to Obama gave Joe Lieberman yesterday on the senate floor.

Originally posted by Josh Marshall from Talking Points Memo, on June 5, 2008 7:50 AM

Jim Webb takes a crack at proving that he can be an effective high-profile surrogate for Obama in an interview with The Huffington Post.

The key takeway from the interview is that Webb is clearly trying to showcase two ways he can act as an effective messenger for Obama. First, his military cred enables him to effectively take on McCain with Obama's foreign policy message about negotiating with hostile foreign powers...

"Under the right circumstances, you have to [talk to your enemies]," he said. "My model for Iran is China in 1971. China was a nuclear power, it was a rogue state, it had American war on its border with Vietnam, it was spouting the same kind of hostile rhetoric. We took none of our military options off the table, we abandoned none of our alliances, but we reached out in a aggressive way diplomatically to bring China into the world community."

Second, Webb tries to demonstrate that he would be able to effectively make Obama's case to Appalacia and rural Americans, arguing that affirmative action, rather than entrenched racism, is the problem. "If you can get the rural whites in this country at the same table as African Americans, it would be good for American politics. I think Barack Obama has the potential to do this," Webb concludes.

The rest here.