Jul 2009
The Essential iTunes & iPod Handbook
27 July 2009 @ 21:30 in Work
How remiss of me; completely forgot to pimp my latest
project, MacFormat presents The Essential iTunes
& iPod Handbook, chez
recedinghairline.co.uk, so get ready for some
pimpin’. Basically, it’s an
everything-you-need-to-know guide for anyone with
an iPod, with reviews, tutorials, features and
more, and it’s written for Mac and PC users in
clear, jargon-free English. Plus, there’s purdy
pictures – you can download a pack of stunning
images of the iPod range to use as desktop
backgrounds – and a free copy of the
excellent CoverScout 2 (worth €30) for Mac
users. Look at the pretty example spreads!
Dog of the Week: Trudy
Trudy – a cross between a collie and a lab, I think –
was described as ‘very boisterous’. Quite. Still,
after the first twenty minutes of mentalness, she
settled and would even sit well – until the very last
lungey second – as we waited to let other dogs
pass. More pictures on Flickr. (What is Dog of
the Week?)
Old, batty and racist
Despite the 5am start, today’s visit to Brighton was
wonderful. Met up with some of the dudes from
Realmac for brunch, then caught
up with The Nicest Man In The World® Simon
Handby. Man, it was lovely to see him again.
Then it was time for The Dave & Mendy Hour™,
and it was all kinds of wonderful to see the
little pair of scamps again. The most surreal
moment – apart, possibly, from the tale of the
glow-in-the-dark paint in the marital bedroom –
was when a random biddy came up to our table in
the middle of an anecdote to ask us if we could
send a text message on her phone for her. Fair
enough. Bemusedly, Dave complied, as the other
three of us fought hard to avoid eye contact.
It would all have been fine, even though she then just started randomly telling us facts about her life and basically just not buggering off again after the message was sent, but for one odd little postscript to her rambling. It could have been ‘the gays’, but I think she was actually complaining about all the coons, and how they get everything and we get nothing. It’s apparently why she won’t go to London. At this point I made it clear somehow – it may have been by saying ‘goodbye’ with uncharacteristic firmness – that we were done talking, and she ambled off. The bigoted old trout.
It would all have been fine, even though she then just started randomly telling us facts about her life and basically just not buggering off again after the message was sent, but for one odd little postscript to her rambling. It could have been ‘the gays’, but I think she was actually complaining about all the coons, and how they get everything and we get nothing. It’s apparently why she won’t go to London. At this point I made it clear somehow – it may have been by saying ‘goodbye’ with uncharacteristic firmness – that we were done talking, and she ambled off. The bigoted old trout.
Food. Of the. Gods.
Some people take pictures of their first born. Some
takes pictures of the amazing places they have been
privileged to visit. Me, I use photography to
immortalise such epic meals as tonight’s risotto,
which looked so fine in the evening sun as I brought
it through from the kitchen that I thought it
deserved capturing, uploading to Flickr, Twittering, posting on Facebook, and blogging
here. It was that good. Good job, Wife.
Dog of the Year: Stig
Stig, my most favouritist of the nutjobs from the
Bath Cat & Dogs Home, is shortly to get a
new home. It’s not ours, sadly, so we took him
for a last walk today. Man, I love this dog.
Girls on film! (well, CMOS sensor)
It was a Venn diagram intersection of serendipity: I wanted to muck about with some portrait photography, and Wife fancied some up-to-date shots. So off we toddled to Westonbirt with my cheap-but-lovely f/1.8 lens and a bag full of shrugs and egg yolk to take some pictures. Much fun was had there and in Lightroom, and further results can be seen on Flickr.
Evolution, not revolution
07 July 2009 @ 20:43 in Life
[SKIPPABLE
INTRODUCTION I’m late to the
Darwinpalooza, but I want to say something about
evolution. Good little child of the enlightenment
that I am, I accepted evolution as fact from whenever
I was aware of the idea, but it wasn’t until early
teens that I really got it. I can’t remember if there
was a particular book, radio programme or whatever
that caused the Damascene moment or whether it had
just been ticking away in the back of my head, but to
this day I understand the basic idea of evolution as
follows below. I’m recording it here because in all
the Darwin stuff that we’ve seen in this anniversary
year, I haven’t seen it explained like this, and
either I am therefore a genius, or I’m fundamentally
misunderstanding the process. Or both. Comments in
the usual place, please.]
Detractors of evolution say that you can’t see it happening. Supporters of evolution say that that’s not bloody surprising because the effects take millions of years to be readily discernible. I say bollocks; I say, you can see the process of evolution happening every time a baby is born. Let’s take humans, because we can – unsurprisingly, and not a little punnily – relate to them. If a Caucasian man and a Caucasian woman have a child, the child will be Caucasian, yes? Let’s take a more specific example: If a man with an enormous nose fathers a child, that child too has a chance of having a similarly Brobdignian schnozzle. The child inherits – not exactly, not perfectly, but it inherits nonetheless – some of the traits of the parents. And if those traits are useful or desirable, children who inherit them grow up to be big and strong and will have nookie and will make new babies to whom they will pass these traits.
(Note: nobody – save perhaps Hitler and other eugenicists – consciously decides what constitutes useful or desirable. It might be a slight resistance to malaria – in which case the child will have a better chance of reaching sexual maturity and being physically able to reproduce – or something less quantifiable. The mechanism isn’t perfect, and we may prize characteristics that have no apparent evolutionary pay-off – why, for example, do gentlemen prefer blondes? – but it keeps poking away, pushing and thrusting in different directions to see what works.)
It takes so long both because the process is inexact – we don’t create clones or even averages of two parents when we reproduce – and because we don’t practice eugenics. We may think that a genetic propensity for baldness, myopia or a pot-belly are undesirable traits, but, as your humble narrator can attest, they’re not sufficiently debilitating in the short-to-medium term to stop people growing up and bonking. That species go extinct suggests that evolution is simply too slow to accommodate changes to the environment – both in the ‘trees and clouds’ and the ‘animals and shit around you’ sense – and I wouldn’t be surprised if folks were to show me examples of where evolution has pushed a species down an awkward road from which it can’t retrace its steps, but none of that argues against the basic mechanism. Look at a child, see how like its parent it looks, extrapolate a little and apply your understanding of basic reproduction, and evolution, I think, looks inevitable. The theory of evolution isn’t tied up neat with a bow – there is, I’m told, lots still to work out – but I remain puzzled at how the contentious the observable facts are; we pass on characteristics, and if they prove useful to a species, they stabilise and flourish, and shape species over their lifespans.
Detractors of evolution say that you can’t see it happening. Supporters of evolution say that that’s not bloody surprising because the effects take millions of years to be readily discernible. I say bollocks; I say, you can see the process of evolution happening every time a baby is born. Let’s take humans, because we can – unsurprisingly, and not a little punnily – relate to them. If a Caucasian man and a Caucasian woman have a child, the child will be Caucasian, yes? Let’s take a more specific example: If a man with an enormous nose fathers a child, that child too has a chance of having a similarly Brobdignian schnozzle. The child inherits – not exactly, not perfectly, but it inherits nonetheless – some of the traits of the parents. And if those traits are useful or desirable, children who inherit them grow up to be big and strong and will have nookie and will make new babies to whom they will pass these traits.
(Note: nobody – save perhaps Hitler and other eugenicists – consciously decides what constitutes useful or desirable. It might be a slight resistance to malaria – in which case the child will have a better chance of reaching sexual maturity and being physically able to reproduce – or something less quantifiable. The mechanism isn’t perfect, and we may prize characteristics that have no apparent evolutionary pay-off – why, for example, do gentlemen prefer blondes? – but it keeps poking away, pushing and thrusting in different directions to see what works.)
It takes so long both because the process is inexact – we don’t create clones or even averages of two parents when we reproduce – and because we don’t practice eugenics. We may think that a genetic propensity for baldness, myopia or a pot-belly are undesirable traits, but, as your humble narrator can attest, they’re not sufficiently debilitating in the short-to-medium term to stop people growing up and bonking. That species go extinct suggests that evolution is simply too slow to accommodate changes to the environment – both in the ‘trees and clouds’ and the ‘animals and shit around you’ sense – and I wouldn’t be surprised if folks were to show me examples of where evolution has pushed a species down an awkward road from which it can’t retrace its steps, but none of that argues against the basic mechanism. Look at a child, see how like its parent it looks, extrapolate a little and apply your understanding of basic reproduction, and evolution, I think, looks inevitable. The theory of evolution isn’t tied up neat with a bow – there is, I’m told, lots still to work out – but I remain puzzled at how the contentious the observable facts are; we pass on characteristics, and if they prove useful to a species, they stabilise and flourish, and shape species over their lifespans.
Dog of the Week: Marvin
Marvin was, despite his angelic looks – brought to you here courtesy of my review iPhone 3GS – a bit of a Bad Dog. He was very young, pumped full of Collie madness, and clearly not dealing well with kennel life. Still, that was no excuse for jumping up, grabbing my t-shirt in his mouth, and tugging at it. It was all in play – no damage to the material, even – but never have I issued a ‘No!’ with such force. Bad dog!





