Personal-Sized, Hand-Held “Big Screen TV”

We have an entertainment center cabinet that’s a wee tad over 5′ in length. When I sit on the couch and hold my teensy lil Kindle Fire at arm’s length, it more than covers my view of the EC. Given the gorgeous display on the Fire, it’s like having my own, personal, hand-held “big screen TV”.

So, as long as I can find streaming video to suit my tastes, I can defer buying a bigger TV, eh? 😉

Of course, the lil 15.6″ screen on my laptop seems even larger in viewing area, when viewed from its usual place on my lap… Heck, in use, it appears to cover 3/4 of the whole wall facing me.

Oh what a difference perspective makes.

I Wonder…

…why it is that some people who just “can’t stand” to watch TV or movies on their laptops or desktops nevertheless find squinting at TV or movies on an eeentsy-weensy 3″-4″ smartphone’s screen to be da bomb?*

…why some people call their desktops their “hard drives” or think referring to their hard drive as “memory” is appropriate? These are often the same people who think that turning off their desktop’s monitor=turning off the computer.

…how some people confuse “upload” with “download” with “install”.

…how some people can use computers for years and not even know what OS they have installed or the names of the programs they use most OR that “program” and “application” are essentially interchangeable terms.

Just stupid, I guess, ignorant savages who think electricity and everything connected to it is just magic.


*Note: when I find some TV or movie worth watching, the only technology I prefer to avoid using to watch it is a typical big screen theater. Wastes of money on many levels, IMO–particularly in being crammed into audiences increasingly filled with yahoos, boors and “idjits”. TV (big or small screen), desktop, laptop, tablet: all fine with me, especially since in the last three formats I can have volume levels controlled to my taste and in the latter two formats I can use really, really good ear buds or earphones for surprisingly accurate sound reproduction and in the desktop format, my very good surround sound system really makes for great listening in my office. TV? Notsomuch, as its sound is shared (and that’s enough of that story).

Suspension of Belief

Good fiction–written or portrayed on film or stage–requires suspension of disbelief, but that, in turn, requires an at least minimal amount of competence from writers, editors, directors and actors in order that an intelligent and reasonably literate audience not be offended into rejection of the fiction the putative artists are attempting to portray.

It’s usually the little things. In dramatic performances, props and settings don’t have to depict things in meticulous detail in order to be believable within a story’s framework, but such things should at least evoke a credible representation of places and things that advance a story. Items evoking a late 1950s setting should not dominate a late 1960s plot line, for example, and in film, closeups of patently fake stage blood or grossly incongruous weather and lighting, etc., are distractions that any director with half a brain ought to avoid.

So, too, are problems with actors portraying behaviors that their characters engage in daily, routinely–behaviors, “business” in acting terms, that the characters are supposedly competent to perform–and botching the action, sometimes almost too clumsily for words. *sigh* And actors portraying certain professional acts incompetently are complete turn-offs for anyone with even minimal knowledge of competent performance of those actions. My “favorite” is idiots making a hash of portraying music conductors. In fact, in a lifetime of viewing dramatic fiction, I have seen actors portraying the conducting of musical performances do a credible job just twice. The rest of the time the portrayals range from simply stupid and incompetent to offensive.

In written fiction, one of the surest signs of a writer whose characters are little more than babbling descriptions by a blind man of faded shadows of statues based on paintings made from blurred photos of reflections in a carnival mirror is when the writer tries to create a character by listing the things that character owns–usually invoking some currently trendy brands of whatever objects the writer associates with the sort of person the writer thinks he’s trying to evoke. Usually wrongly.

Of course these kinds of things are common in most fiction nowadays, so finding anything contemporary that at least minimizes these sorts of distractions is a Good Thing.

But at least I’m not dealing here with the even more poorly-depicted fiction in newspapers and network news. That’s even worse.


A brief addendum. I’ve mentioned the Brit mystery show I’ve been watching. I’m currently in season seven (of fifteen), and although I still enjoy the incidental instrumental music a great deal and the scenery and sets just as much, one thing has become increasingly grating: the murders. Almost every one of the persons murdered in the stories has been a complete idiot, characters intent on lending Darwin a hand in weeding the gene pool, as it were (though an unfortunate number are portrayed as having reproduced before their stupidity eliminates them).

I’ll let one typical “victim” stand in as a proxy for almost all the rest. After bludgeoning one cooperative soul to death with a handy cudgel, the murderer continues to stand over the body of his complicit victim. As he’s standing there, another useful idiot approaches and says, “What have you done?!?” and very helpfully kneels over the body as if to say, “Me! Me! Kill me next, please!”

Of course, the murderer obliges.

*sigh*

How many idiotic characters will the writers dispose of before the show ends? The answer: both too many and not enough… No wonder the British Empire is no more. 😉 But… given that the show is still so much better than the fare that attracts viewers in droves on American TV, perhaps that indicates something about an inevitable decline of American society and even–maybe–America’s place on the world’s stage, as well.

Major British “News” Outlet: Innumerate

(Found here.)

But then, they’re not really all that different from (or, British usage: “to”) their Hivemind clones on this side of the pond. Caption on a pic of the location of a bar included this lil illiterate comment:

“…An online poll in the local Brescia newspaper asked readers what their opinion was and the majority, 46%, said… ”

Get that: 46% is a majority?

Dumbasses…


Update: a mostly British usage allows using “majority” in a very loose sense to mean “the largest number” of [whatever]. So, I suppose to a typical British Podperson and its audience, since 54% of respondents to the survey said somethings else, but the response the Podperson labeled as a “majority” was the single largest response of a number of responses, the Podperson decided to call a plurality “the majority”.

No wonder they lost the Empire.

Useful Snack Making Tools

So, I took a flyer on a Mastrad A64601 Top Chips Maker and Slicer Set at Woot.

It was inexpensive, and I figured, from the reviews at Amazon (where it costs more) that even if it wasn’t “all that and a bag of chips” *heh* I could still get my money’s worth of use out of it, especially since my set came with both the mandoline and three trays, instead of the one offered by Amazon (though more are available separately).

Sure enough, it’s been a useful lil tool set. I’ve made sweet potato and apple “chips”–though the apple chips turned out more like apple leather; still good–and loads and loads of potato chips, some with some pretty unusual seasonings.

But what about the holy grail of chips, the corn chip? Yep. As good as baked tortilla chips at least. Made a batch (4:30 mins for 1 tray or 7 mins for 2 trays, stacked), sliced monterey jack cheese and peppers while that was going on, put a plate back in for another 2 mins with the cheese and peppers on top of tghe chips made.

Yum.

(For the tortilla chips, I just cut a stack of corn tortillas into quarters and placed ’em on the trays and microwaved ’em as noted above.)

Questions I’d Rather Not Ask

You can kiss my grits and call me a stinker–I really DGARA–but there are some questions I tire of hearing “answers” to.

“How are you?” and its slightly better, less common, companion, “How are you doing?” are two of them. The now archaic-sounding “How do you do?” (still remotely and occasionally present in the greeting, “Howdy”) is another one.

“Why?”, you may ask. Go ahead, I said you may ask. *heh*

Nowadays, the most common answer I hear to either “How are you?” or even “How are you doing?” is the nonsense answer, “I’m good.” Persons answering either of those questions would be better to simply grunt a nonsense monosyllabic, “Uh.” Are they truly good? Just bragging disingenuously? Outright liars or simply ill-informed, ignorant of their own corrupt natures? No, such respondents are not “good” although they may feel well and be experiencing little or no distress. Besides, the question is not “What are you?” but “How are you?” and I doubt anyone can really answer that one without resorting to a religious exposition. It’s a matter of epistemology that certainly none of the philosophers I have read have answered satisfactorily. Indeed, how are any of us? How do we come to be and continue to exist, if exist we truly do, in a state of consciousness–if conscious we truly are?

If the question responded to happened to be “How are you doing?” then such an answer is still nonsense. “I’m good” as a response still avoids the “How” and has no information whatsoever about what good the person is doing, if any at all (most persons seem to live a quotidian existence without doing anything good at all–and rarely do anything really well, either). And again with the epistemology thingy. Indeed, if Descartes was onto something, then most people simply aren’t, you know?

All either party–asker and answerer–in these greeting formulas accomplishes with such exchanges is just the expulsions of exhaled gases through their respective vocal apparatuses resulting in nonsense sounds, empty of any exchange of meaning. Wasted breath, IMO.

Rare indeed is the person who will answer either of those questions, “I’m well” or “I’m doing well.”

I’ll leave the deconstruction and analysis of answers to “How do you do?” as an exercise for the reader.

BTW, when asked “How are you?” I usually respond, “I don’t know. That’s one of the deepest quandaries of metaphysics, and although many have asked the question and searched for answers, no one has been able to answer the question satisfactorily. What do you think? How am I?” I similarly riff off “How are you doing?”

But I’m not usually asked those questions. Often, I beat folks to the “greet” with, “How am I doing?” The completely clueless will respond with the pedestrian nonsense grunt of “I’m good” since they’ll not have heard the question. The slightly more aware might say, “You’re good” and smile at the sharpness they think they’ve displayed. Of course, when I respond, “Well, I’m flattered, but I’m hardly good. Even Jesus said, ‘There is none good but God’ and I’m not easily mistaken for God, you know?” it causes a wee cognitive dissonance. *heh* The brighter respondents will come back with something along the lines of either, “Well, you look all right [or even ‘good’ or ‘well’] to me” (“Need a trip to the optometrist, eh?” :-)) or even, “I don’t know” (Better). Best, “Oh, dear! [peering at me with “concerned look” written plainly on mug] You should be home in bed I’ll bring some chicken soup by later.” (An actual response from someone I enjoy “speaking in [nonsense] tongues” with around other, befuddled-by-our-nonsense, folks.)

But I don’t always use the “How am I doing?” line. More often, I’ll simply use a form of the neutral, also meaningless, “Good morning [afternoon, evening]” greeting, although most often in the more laconic, “Mornin’ [afternoon, evenin’]. Such a non-committal, inoffensive nonsense greeting serves the function of social lubricant better, IMO.

Of course, with friends or family, instead of casual acquaintances and chance-met strangers, I know I can engage in a genuine greeting/response, but those two classes of persons really aren’t all that common, you know?

Little Things… Again

Still. Always. *heh*

My lil Kindle Fire is a trap. As I’ve noted before, via the Amazon Prime videos, I’ve watched a lot of TV shows I’d otherwise not have watched, particularly quite a few British shows. In general, they’ve all beat the pants off the usual fare on cable TV around here. Some, though are just barely better.

Midsomer Murders. What to say about it? *sigh* Very good programatic instrumental music, and on the Fire, with a good set of headphones or ear buds, the sound in general is amazing. All the tiny sounds of the really quite interesting environment–passing traffic, birds, background conversations, etc.: wonderfully reproduced.

The sets and locations are gorgeous, very interesting, lush. And the video is very beautifully done.

So, production values: superb, in general.

But. The plots are pedestrian ripoffs of the typical English village mystery murder story. *meh* Often, the acting is really overdone–a fault in direction, IMO. And some of the details are pretty poorly executed. Depictions of blood are particularly transparently stage blood (I’ve made and used enough of it–and had even more experience with the real stuff *heh*–that the telltale look is really grating at times) poorly applied in unrealistic manners. Settings depicting places that have been ransacked or where fights have supposedly occurred are often clumsy as well.

And then there are the anachronisms and especially the chronological issues that arise when large time offsets are depicted in preview or flashback scenes.

Altogether, these sorts of things reduce what might have been an A- show to a B- or even C+ in my estimation. Sad, really, but I’ll keep watching it, because even a C+ beats the heck out of most other TV that’s available, and the music and visuals are worth it, anyway.

But still… only four episodes per season?!?

Another minor quibble, but this applies to any streaming video from time to time: pixelating, etc., when there are some pipeline issues. But, eh, notaproblem, really.