Category Archives: Fun

I Love Cricket

A little bit of whimsy



PwC Alumni Function

Went along to an alumni function at PwC on The Terrace this evening. Caught up with some former colleagues, including one who had just recently walked the Camino de Santiago. Sounded most intriguing.

The highpoint of the function was an interesting address by Therese Walsh – ICC World Cup NZ Chief. It sounds as if NZ and Wellington will have an event to be proud of, plus one that will be of economic benefit.

#IITp Conference 2013 – Tauranga

Arrived late Wednesday afternoon in Tauranga. Checked into the Trinity Wharf hotel. Great location on the water. Beautiful views of tranquil waters. Hotel comfortable and modern with the advantage of free WiFi.

First up event was a Welcome reception, conferences are such hard work.
Refreshed, I retired for the night to be ready for the fray today.

Classic folk rock

The superb Fairport Convention with a performance of Wake Up John, from the Babbacombe Lee album. Given the feelings re finance companies etc this album and songs about hanging seems somewhat appropriate

Whimsy #4 – Beeswing

Richard Thompson’s lovely lyrical love song. Every time I hear it I wonder at the anguish and pathos expressed in the lyrics

Whimsy #3 – Mythical Kings & Iguanas

Marvelous tune and song from one of the best chanteuses around

Whimsy – That’s why God made the radio

I remember idyllic weekends in the late 60s and early 70s listening to the Beach Boys.

They were the bast evocation of summer, ever!

This new song, whilst perhaps not their best brings it all back.

Whimsy – Hotel California

The superb Eagles, playing the classic Hotel California.

Just right for a summer afternoon in NZ

A little touch of iPad in the night!

From the Department of Whimsy :-

Touch Me

Yesterday, the NPD Group released the results of a survey of iPad owners. The most intriguing finding was that “20 percent of users’ time with the iPad was spent with it in bed.” One has to wonder what other sorts of activities are being displaced by the nocturnal stroking of the iPad’s highly responsive screen.

posted by Nicholas Carr at his blog 1 October

Facebook – the movie!

In existence only a few years and now it is the subject of a major movie.

The Social Network, the new movie, released in the US October 1, directed by David Fincher, Curious Case of Benjamin Button – Fight Club – Zodiac, and written by Aaron Sorkin, creator of The West Wing, is about Mark Zuckerberg and the creation of Facebook.

This extensive review in The New Yorker, by David Denby, begins:-

The Social Network,” directed by David Fincher and written by Aaron Sorkin, rushes through a coruscating series of exhilarations and desolations, triumphs and betrayals, and ends with what feels like darkness closing in on an isolated soul. This brilliantly entertaining and emotionally wrenching movie is built around a melancholy paradox: in 2003, Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg), a nineteen-year-old Harvard sophomore, invents Facebook and eventually creates a five-hundred-million-strong network of “friends,” but Zuckerberg is so egotistical, work-obsessed, and withdrawn that he can’t stay close to anyone; he blows off his only real pal, Eduardo Saverin (Andrew Garfield), a fellow Jewish student at Harvard, who helps him launch the site. The movie is not a conventionally priggish tale of youthful innocence corrupted by riches; nor is it merely a sarcastic arrow shot into the heart of a poor little rich boy. Both themes are there, but the dramatic development of the material pushes beyond simplicities, and the portrait of Zuckerberg is many-sided and ambiguous; no two viewers will see him in quite the same way. The debate about the movie’s accuracy has already begun, but Fincher and Sorkin, selecting from known facts and then freely interpreting them, have created a work of art.
I am looking forward to the movie being available in NZ. It will be interesting to see in the future whether ‘truth’ is the movie or whether the actual reality. After all as two characters in John Ford’s Western classic  The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance remark after the real version of the event is told:-

Ransom Stoddard: You’re not going to use the story, Mr. Scott?
Maxwell Scott: No, sir. This is the West, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend.

Cynically, I suspect The Social Network will prove the essential truth of that observation.

However, it will be fascinating to see how the creator of one of the phenomena of our time is treated. In that regard , I found this comment in the review very interesting and thought provoking:-

By focussing on the moment of creation, Fincher and Sorkin are getting at something new. From the first scene to the last, “The Social Network” hints at a psychological shift produced by the Information Age, a new impersonality that affects almost everyone. After all, Facebook, like Zuckerberg, is a paradox: a Web site that celebrates the aura of intimacy while providing the relief of distance, substituting bodiless sharing and the thrills of self-created celebrityhood for close encounters of the first kind. Karl Marx suggested that, in the capitalist age, we began to treat one another as commodities. “The Social Network” suggests that we now treat one another as packets of information. Mark Zuckerberg, as interpreted by this film, comes off as a binary personality. As far as he’s concerned, either you’re for him or you’re against him. Either you have information that he can use or you don’t. Apart from that, he’s not interested.
In that regard readers might find this profile of Mark Zuckerberg, from The New Yorker of interest.
Given the comment noted above from the review, my earlier post of an interview Zuckerberg gave to the WSJ is, I suggest worth looking at, as Zuckerberg did not appear really all that comfortable in that session.
At the end of the day it will be interesting to see whether or not viewers of the movie agree with Denby’s summation:-
It may not be fair to Zuckerberg, but Sorkin and Fincher have set him up as a symbolic man of the age, a supremely functional prince of dysfunction. Charles Foster Kane was convivial and outgoing; Zuckerberg engages only the world he is creating. But those viewers who think of him as nothing more than a vindictive little shit will be responding to only one part of him. He’s a revolutionary because he broods on his personal grievances and, as insensitive as he is, reaches the aggrieved element in everyone, the human desire for response. He’s meant to be a hero—certainly he’s Fincher’s hero, an artist working in code who sticks to his vision and is helpless to prevent himself from suffering the most wounding personal loss.
In addition, will the movie impact on how we look at Social Media? It will probably impact on how we perceive Zuckerberg. Will it illuminate any of the issues relating to Social Media and how we use it?