This blog covers everything except sports and gardening, unless we find a really good link about using dead professional bowlers for mulch. The author is a StarTribune columnist, has been passing off fiction and hyperbole as insight since 1997, has run his own website since the Jurassic era of AOL, and was online when today’s college sophomores were a year away from being born. So get off his lawn.

The Airport Jewelry Kiosk Interview Show

Posted by: James Lileks under Technology Updated: February 28, 2014 - 2:56 PM

I was vaguely aware you could call a phone number and get movie information, but why would I do that when the listings are in the paper? Things changed; now I think why would I check the listings in the paper when I have Fandango? Sometimes it’s a race between myself and my wife; she checks the paper, I whip out the app, and we see who can get the information first. She usually wins because the print version of the newspaper does not display a holographic 3D trailer of a movie and require her to search for the NO THANKS button.

Which brings us to Moviefone. AOL bought it for $400 mil back in 2001. Brilliant. This week they announced they’d drop the “fone” part and move the service to app-only, where it will compete with everything else. Does this NYT story resonate with you?

For 25 years, residents of America’s biggest cities have been able to call 777-FILM to receive movie listing information and buy tickets. The service’s goofily booming greeting became a cultural catchphrase: “Hello, and welcome to Moviefone!”

Never used it. Never called. Well, let’s go to YouTube . . . Nope. Can’t find it. But I did find a clip, where the Voice of Moviefone - Russ LEATHERMAN - is interviewed on . . . this show

There’s a whole series. You wish it was bad enough to be one of those discoveries that suddenly get famous  after someone on Reddit plucks it from obscurity, but it's not. 

DIG IN Friday may be half-over, but I believe this is the most memorable sentence of the day:

“Curiosity piqued, I headed over to the site, which explains how it plans to cultivate edible meat from cloned celebrity tissue samples.”

More here. The company says they’re quiteserious about selling dried, aged, cured and spiced lab-grown celebrity meat.

SCIENCE! Here’s something incomprehensible, from Discovery.

This cluster, named RX J1532.9+3021 (its friends call it RX J1532), is 3.9 billion light-years away and extremely massive – about a thousand trillion times more massive than our sun (and about a thousand times more massive than our entire galaxy.)

Inconceivable. You don’t know where to start figuring out how much you cannot understand the dimensions at work here. Anyway, that’s a story about a black hole that “Blasts Galaxy-Sized Gaps in Space,” but that’s last month’s news. This month has this: “Monster Black Holes Can Kill Galactic Star Formation.” That’s if you’re unlucky enough to have a supermassive enormo-gigantic ultra-honking black hole in the center of your galaxy. If you do there probably isn’t a you in the first place. Point is, the headline accurately sums up the story. This isn’t how you get hits these days. Let’s look around the rest of the page and see if it’s possible to recast good science news in Upworthy-BuzzFeedy headlines.

A powerful NASA telescope has found not one, but 10 supermassive black holes. And it did so by accident!

That’s okay, but the exclamation point makes it look like you’re trying too hard. The ideal formation would be NASA pointed its telescope at the wrong place and no one guessed what they’d see next” or some such drivel.

Dnews: Why Sitting Too Much Can Kill You!

Much better. But let me show you how it’s really done. This popped up on a page the other day.

That’s how you do it. Macro photography of some hideous beastle that may be living inside of you. Who could resist?

TECH How do we preserve old games? It’s possible, thanks to emulation and dedicated hobbyists, but it also requires enough time, money, and people. This article discusses the problems facing the preservation effort, but it doesn't address an ephemeral aspect of gaming: the experience. You can save the game, but no one who plays it in 2050 will understand how it felt to play it in 1996, for example. Just as it's hard today to understand how movie audiences in 1921 experienced a new type of FX. I played a little "Hexen" the other day, and it was claustrophic,  jerky, blocky, and flat. Almost unplayable, and hard to enjoy. At the time? Cutting-edge and addictive.

NEWS  Finally: this. A simple account that gives you an idea of what they want in Ukraine. Besides the Russian boot, of course. It's short, and worth a read.

That's it for this week; thanks for the patronage. See you on Monday. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT