Monday, July 14, 2008

You can't trust the Internet, etc.

Or at least, you can't trust everything you read on it.
But you already knew that, didn't you? ;o)

Some of you also know that when someone sends you a photograph of themselves standing on a gigantic ant bed, it might be a joke photo that they made with Photoshop. . . (g)

. . .On the subject of Photoshopped pictures, here's a little quiz that tests your ability to tell whether or not a photo has been manipulated. (I think it's a little hard to tell, sometimes, with such small photos, but it's still interesting. If you want to give yourself a little better chance on the quiz, you might want to watch the segment of NOVA that deals with this subject.)

Anyway, where was I?

Oh, yeah. I was making the brilliant observation that many times you can't trust what you read online, because anyone (myself included (g)) can get on here and write just about anything. Sometimes we know what we're talking about, but sometimes we don't.

For instance, I was wondering why some yarn is called "ombre" and some is called "variegated". I figured there must be a difference-- but what? I (of course) looked to the Internet for an answer. Multiple sources indicate that "ombre" yarn is dyed various tints and shades of a single color/hue (dark blue, medium blue, and pale blue, for example), while "variegated" yarn is dyed a number of completely different colors (yellow, blue, and green). This holds true for some of the yarns I've seen, but there are also plenty of "ombres" that don't fit that definition.

So which is correct? The supposed definitions of ombre and variegated yarns, or the manufacturers and namers of yarns? Even the Internet can't tell me-- and it's so vital that I know, too! ;o)

_ _ _ _ _ _ _

Dog-lovers: There are some new photos of Soffi (Donald's parents' new puppy) here. There's also a video of Soffi and Lukas playing together. (Just be aware that the video may take a while to load.)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _

After taking a little break from crochet, I finally tried my hand at making something other than a granny square. Nothing fancy-- just a simple flower shape from some scrap yarn. I imagine I made some mistakes along the way (partly because there are still a couple of things I'm not 100% sure how to do), but at least you can make out that it's a flower.

You know what this means? I may be able to follow patterns, provided that they're very basic. Amazing. ;o)

It may not sound like much, but I'm not much for following patterns. I was more of a "play it by ear/heart" musician in Band-- which meant I never applied myself much to learning to read sheet music well-- which meant my sight-reading skills were very poor, later on. I'm pretty much a "play it by ear" sort of person in most of my hobbies. . . I think I prefer some things that way, but for crochet, it's probably a good idea to learn to follow patterns.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _

Donald and I went out for lunch and a movie, today. We saw WALL-E. I'm not sure what I expected, but whatever my expectations were, I think they were surpassed. (g) It was a really sweet and amusing movie-- especially considering that the main character is a robot.

I don't want to give away too much, so just to be sure that I don't spoil it, I'm posting a SPOILER WARNING now. Don't read the rest of this post if you don't want the film potentially spoiled for you.



(for WALL-E)


I was already in a somewhat more emotional mood than usual, today. (I woke this morning from a sad dream involving Daisy, and some of those feelings were still hanging around, I guess.) So I'm not sure how much of my emotional response to this movie was from something other than the movie itself. . . Maybe it was the lack of dialog in the first part of the film. Maybe WALL-E reminded me of E.T. Who knows! (g) Whatever it was, I found myself repeatedly getting teary while watching this movie.

As I wrote before, over all, I enjoyed the film. It was sweet in spots, funny in others, and generally entertaining. Even if you aren't a "robot person" (and I'm not), most people will enjoy this movie.

However, there are definitely some not-so-hidden messages. For instance:
  • People are growing increasingly fat and lazy.
  • People are so constantly connected to their gadgets that they're becoming distanced from one another and disconnected from the world around them.
  • The world is becoming too "consumerist"/consumption-driven.
  • We're killing the planet, and soon the only way it will be able to "heal" itself is for us to leave for a long, long time.
I think there's truth in some (not all) of the messages. (Well, obviously. All we have to do is look around us-- or even in the mirror :o(-- to see the first one.) However, I can't really envision a future where there'll be so much garbage that there's nowhere else to put it but to pile it higher than sky-scrapers. (g) And honestly, I guess what it boils down to is that I feel that it should be my decision how much I want to "consume". Also, I'm a bit put off by the trendiness (some would say "timeliness", but no, I mean "trendiness") of the environmental angle.

Anyway, even though there were "messages", they certainly didn't ruin the film for me (and I think Donald found them less obvious that I did. . . or at least not really "political" in nature). If you want to see a really weird movie full of propaganda, rent Happy Feet. Not really appropriate for young kids (assuming you don't want to brainwash them). . . Nowhere near amusing enough to hold an adult's attention. . . Who in the world was the target audience?! I didn't care for it. ;o)

Well, enough rambling. . . Back to regular schedules tomorrow!