I’m using this blog as a bit of a typography sandbox today because we’re doing a long awaited redesign to our work websites.
I’m currently trialling TypeKit – a webapp that lets you dynamically use non-standard fonts.
Here are three handy articles I’ve read today.
Interesting survey stats about the state of Christian belief in Sydney verses the rest of the country.
Note – this is not the Christians – this is all people in Sydney surveyed as part of the market research for the Jesus All About Life campaign.
Compared with all Australians, Sydneysiders are more likely to believe:
- Jesus was born of a virgin (56% SYD and 44% AUS)
- Jesus healed a blind man (60% SYD and 51% AUS)
- Jesus turned water into wine (56% SYD and 44% AUS)
- Jesus walked on water (53% SYD and 44% AUS)
- Jesus was crucified and died on a cross (80% SYD and 76% AUS)
- Jesus rose from the dead (58% SYD and 47% AUS)
- Jesus ascended bodily into heaven (55% SYD and 44% AUS)
- Jesus will return to Earth one day (46% SYD and 37% AUS)
Now tell me again why such a disproportionate rate of reformed evangelical workers are required for the harvest in Sydney?
My friend Mike is always keen to talk to people about ministry in regional Queensland – you can find his church website here.
We’ve been enjoying time with Zack and Sarah this week.
But I’ve been particularly enjoying the present they brought with them…
Mmm. Delicious.
And, in related coffee news… I received my new toy in the mail yesterday. Via the Espresso Workshop – they will take your unused portafiller (the handle thing you put your coffee in to use in your machine) and lop the bottom off for $40 – the cheapest naked portafiller I could find online (short of cutting the bottom of myself, which I didn’t want to risk).
Here’s what my coffee will look like when I take a photo of it… (picture from the espresso workshop product page)…
Rupert Murdoch is boldly going where no media baron has gone before – bravely stepping outside Google’s search results and thumbing his nose at the internet establishment – and he’s taking his media establishment with him… all the way to Microsoft’s Bing.
I’ve been sharing a few links via google reader on this matter (and on that note – does anybody want to see a return to the daily links posts?). Most “new media” experts agree – Murdoch is a wily dinosaur.
I think there’s a method to this supposed madness. Murdoch’s empire provides a fair whack of content to the Internet – giving Bing exclusive access may give a boost to Microsoft’s bid to enter the search arena. It’s a bold move. But it’s fraught with danger. Murdoch is facing a decline in circulation many people are attributing to the Internet – and he’s decided to tackle that by removing himself from the picture. Quite literally. For most casual internet browsers.
He’s in a quandary. News Ltd relies on advertising dollars to produce content, it doesn’t make a lot of sense for Murdoch to pay for traffic to come to his site via google adwords so that they might click on his ads. The internet gives the distributor all the power, not the content producer – but it’s pretty much the same story anywhere in the media business. Distribution is where all the profit is.
What will be interesting will be looking back on this decision in six months and seeing if the lesser availability of News Ltd work online (it’ll still be there – you just won’t find it via google) will have any impact on circulation. Will people pay to read the hard copy of the paper rather than breaking habits to use Bing? Will the status quo bias prevent people changing their online habits?
Much vaunted internet marketing guru Seth Godin has suggested that Murdoch’s approach to the new age of media is back to front. He says:
“You don’t charge the search engines to send people to articles on your site, you pay them.”
I’m not sure – Rupert Murdoch hasn’t got where he has by paying other people – this is fundamentally a battle of ideologies between the new “free content to everybody” consumer/marketer and the old school monopoly/conglomerate approach.
People don’t want to pay for news anyway – while I read the papers every day (in tangible form) I wouldn’t choose to pay for them personally when I can find stuff online for free. Striking a commercial and exclusive deal with a search engine seems to be a pretty sound rearguard action from Murdoch.
From a PR perspective I reckon Murdoch’s tabloid rags are going to go the way of the magazine – an interchangeable blend of advertorial, advertising and paid comment/editorial. Product placement is the marketer’s dream. I’d much rather pay money to bring a journalist to Townsville on a tour than spend the same amount on a clearly labeled advertisement.
If I were Murdoch I’d be trading on my established credibility/brand and pushing products on unwitting customers via editorial. But I’m not a greedy media baron. So I’ll stick to pushing stupid products via my blog and not receiving a commission at all – or encouraging you to buy a shirt…
I’ve been enjoying the thread of discussion started at Al Bain’s blog – Paradoxically Speaking – and the follow up threads on Simone’s… here, here, here, and here.
They’re about a favourite topic of mine – objectivity and absolutes – particularly with relation to aesthetics and if I’m understanding correctly how we can objectively define beauty based on the promise of the new creation.
Simone’s gambit in her first comment essentially nailed her definition to the proverbial mast…
“Something is beautiful if we sense (see/hear etc) in it something that reminds us of something we’ll know in eternity.”
I’m not sure I completely buy in to this argument. I think there’s beauty in things that don’t last, but it’s a temporal beauty (obviously) and there’s something about the fleeting moment that can be appreciated. Singularity is beautiful in a way that eternity can not be. I used the example of sport in particular. Because I don’t know/think that sport will be a huge part of the new creation, and while it should reflect honour and the best parts of human nature that will carry over into heaven – it actually is fun for reasons that are less eternal. The thrill of competition. The adrenalin rush that comes with a tight finish. A well executed play. These things are a meaningless chasing after the wind in the eternal scheme of things.
Will we all have equal athletic prowess in the new creation? I guess I’ve always just assumed so – but I haven’t done much thought on the matter.
If we’re all super athletes then sport is going to be a frustrating blend of perfect attack against perfect defence. An irresistible force against an immovable object. How boring. There’ll be no winning. So what’s the point. This is why I’m not worried if they play Rugby in heaven – it seems fitting. Rugby is full of boring stalemates.
This book version of the story of the old lady who swallowed a fly looks beautiful.
You can get it here (bookdepository) or pay more here (Amazon).
This is an actual invention. It is subject to a patent in the US.
It is guaranteed to get you beaten up – or at least protested against by PETA.
“Gerbil Shirt
US Patent Issued In 1999Hey, are you tired of leaving your small pets at home when you are out and about? Could you use a little more quality time with your gerbils, mice, hamsters or snakes? Well now your dreams have come true with the Gerbil Shirt! The Gerbil Shirt wraps your torso in plastic tube passageways, making your bod a super highway of fun for Binky and Bart. The interior surfaces are textured for traction and have air vents for easy breathing.”
Via Gizmodo.
I like these ads.
Just how committed do you have to be to design and build your house based on a cartoon?
I don’t know. Perhaps this answers your question…
Sadly, it’s a house built by Fox and Pepsi as a prize in a competition. Not by some fanatic nutjob. But if you want to try this at home – or with your home – there are some factors to take into consideration.
“The rooms are somewhat small and uncommonly vertical. Doorways are extra-wide and arched, to accommodate Marge’s hair and Homer’s girth. Walls will be painted in bright colors and shaded to duplicate the cartoon’s style. When possible, furnishings and accents, including Marge’s corn-print curtains in the kitchen, are being faithfully reproduced. (Robinson notes that the color of the Simpson’s refrigerator alone changed seven times over the years. The residents will have to paint the fridge themselves.)
“Our people watched 56 episodes of ‘The Simpsons,’ over the course of a weekend,” Robinson said. “One thing they found out, early on, was that (the house) was structurally unsound.”
“No load-bearing walls anywhere,” agreed Joseph Leas, the local director of construction. “They never show closets (on the show); they were a complete mystery.”
Here’s a gallery of shots from the house. Here are some samples.
You’ve probably been subconsciously wondering what the following characters would look like with beards for years.
Well, now you know. Thanks to one man, and his blog.
Right. It seems people didn’t like the idea that you can’t “humanely” kill anything you’re going to eat.
Perhaps this is what the soldiers from Townsville should have used. A photocopier shaped “taser” that stuns lobsters so that you can then kill them without them feeling the pain… except the pain of 110 volts passing through their exoskeletons.
The application of a stun (110 Volts – 2-5 amps) causes an immediate interruption in the functioning of the nervous system of the shellfish. By interrupting the nerve function, the shellfish (be it Crab. Lobster or other) is unable to receive stimuli and thus by definition, cannot feel pain or suffer distress (Dr. Dave Robb 2000 – Bristol University – paper on sentience in Crustacea, Baker 1975, Jane Smith 1991, Bateson 2000, Sherwin 2000 & Gregory & Lumsden 2000). The prolonged application of the stun causes a permanent disruption which kills the shellfish.
