Todos nós fomos colocados nesse planeta como sofisticadas cameras móveis.

Facebook of the Dead

When, if ever, will Facebook contain more profiles of dead people than of living ones?

Emily Dunham

Either the 2060s or the 2130s.

There are not a lot of dead people on Facebook. The main reasons for this is that Facebook—and its users—are young. The average Facebook user has gotten older over the last few years, but the site is still used at a much higher rate by the young than by the old.[1]There are a zillion surveys confirming this, such as this one from eMarketer.

The Past:

Based on the site's growth rate, and the age breakdown of their users over time,[2]You can get user counts for each age group from Facebook's create-an-ad tool, although you may want to try to account for the fact that Facebook's age limits cause some people to lie about their ages. there are probably 10 to 20 million people who created Facebook profiles who have since died.

These people are, at the moment, spread out pretty evenly across the age spectrum. Young people have a much lower death rate than people in their sixties or seventies, but they make up a substantial share of the dead on Facebook simply because there have been so many of them using it.

The Future:

About 290,000 US Facebook users will die (or have died) in 2013. The worldwide total for 2013 is likely several million.[3]Note: In some of these projections, I used US age/usage data extrapolated to the Facebook userbase as a whole, because it's easier to find US census and actuarial numbers than to assemble the country-by-country for the whole Facebook-using world. The US isn't a perfect model of the world, but the basic dynamics—young people's Facebook adoption determines the site's success or failure while population growth continues for a while and then levels off—will probably hold approximately true. If we assume a rapid Facebook saturation in the developing world, which currently has a faster-growing and younger population, it shifts many of the landmarks by a handful of years, but doesn't change the overall picture as much as you might expect. In just seven years, this death rate will double, and in seven more years it will double again.

Even if Facebook closes registration tomorrow, the number of deaths per year will continue to grow for many decades, as the generation who was in college between 2000 and 2020 grows old.

The deciding factor in when the dead will outnumber the living is whether Facebook adds new living users—ideally, young ones—fast enough to outrun this tide of death for a while.

Facebook 2100:

This brings us to the question of Facebook's future.

We don't have enough experience with social networks to say with any kind of certainty how long Facebook will last. Most websites have flared up and then gradually declined in popularity, so it's reasonable to assume Facebook will follow that pattern.[4]I'm assuming, in these cases, that no data is ever deleted. So far, that's been a reasonable assumption; if you've made a Facebook profile, that data probably still exists, and most people who stop using a service don't bother to delete their profile. If that behavior changes, or if Facebook performs a mass purging of their archives, the balance could change rapidly and unpredictably.

In that scenario, where Facebook starts losing market share later this decade and never recovers, Facebook's crossover date—the date when the dead outnumber the living—will come sometime around 2065.

But maybe it won't. Maybe it will take on a role like the TCP protocol, where it becomes a piece of infrastructure on which other things are built, and has the inertia of consensus.

If Facebook is with us for generations, then the crossover date could be as late as the mid-2100s.

That seems unlikely. Nothing lasts forever, and rapid change has been the norm for anything built on computer technology. The ground is littered with the bones of websites and technologies that seemed like permanent institutions ten years ago.

It's possible the reality could be somewhere in between.[5]Of course, if there's a sudden rapid increase in the death rate of Facebook users—possibly one that includes humans in general—the crossover could happen tomorrow. We'll just have to wait and find out.

The fate of our accounts:

Facebook can afford to keep all our pages and data indefinitely. Living users will always generate more data than dead ones, and the accounts for active users are the ones that will need to be easily accessible. Even if accounts for dead (or inactive) people make up a majority of their users, it will probably never add up to a large part of their overall infrastructure budget.

More important will be our decisions. What do we want for those pages? Unless we demand that Facebook deletes them, they will presumably, by default, keep copies of everything forever. Even if they don't, other data-vacuuming organizations will.

Right now, next-of-kin can convert a dead person's Facebook profile into a memorial page. But there are a lot of questions surrounding passwords and access to private data that we haven't yet developed social norms for. Should accounts remain accessible? What should be made private? Should next-of-kin have the right to access email? Should memorial pages have comments? How do we handle trolling and vandalism? Should people be allowed to interact with dead user accounts? What lists of friends should they show up on?

These are issues that we're currently in the process of sorting out by trial and error. Death has always been a big, difficult, and emotionally charged subject, and every society finds different ways to handle it.

The basic pieces that make up a human life don't change. We've always eaten, learned, grown, fallen in love, fought, and died. In every place, culture, and technological landscape, we develop a different set of behaviors around these same activites.

Like every group that came before us, we're learning how to play those same games on our particular playing field. We're developing, through sometimes messy trial and error, a new set of social norms for dating, arguing, learning, and growing on the internet. Sooner or later, we'll figure out how to mourn.

Happy Halloween!

Tobey Maguire had to have his Spider-Man outfit slightly remodeled as the original design had not made any allowances for when the actor needed a bathroom break

When writers are tasked with creating characters, we are told to try these character exercises that entreat us to answer rather mad questions about them: hair color, eye color, toe length, nipple hue, former job, phone number of former job supervisor, what she had for lunch, if she were a piece of Ikea furniture what piece would she be (“Billy bookcase! NO WAIT, A SKJARNNGFLONG LINGONBERRY-FLAVORED COCKTAIL TRAY”). And so on and so forth.

Most of these are, of course, abject badger-shite.

They get you as close to creating a strong, well-realized and interesting character as jumping off your roof with a blankie on your back gets you to flying.

And yet, I am frequently emailed (or in the old English, ymailt) about how one creates good characters on the fly. The short answer to that is, mostly, you don’t. Characters are not a fast soup — they’re a long-bubbling broth developing flavors the longer you think about them and, more importantly, the more you write about them. (Which one assumes is the point of the inane questions asked by many character exercises, which would be a noble effort if those questions were not so frequently concerned with details and decisions that will never have anything to do with your character, your story, or your world.)

Just the same, I decided to slap on the ol’ thinking-cap (seriously, it’s really old and gross and I think a guy died in this hat) to come up a quick springboard that should get your head around a character quickly, efficiently and creatively. Note that this isn’t a system I generally use as yet — it’s me noodling on things. Just putting it out there for you all to fold, spindle, and mutilate. Especially what with NaNoWriMo right around the bend, right? Right.

Let’s do this.

The Character Logline:

Right up front, I want you to identify who the character is. And you’re going to do it in a very brief way, the same way you would conjure a logline (or “elevator pitch”) for your story at hand. You will identify this character in the same space allowed for a single tweet — so, 140 characters.

If you need help, try writing a few character loglines for pre-existing characters from other storyworlds – “Dexter Morgan is a serial killer with a code of honor hiding in plain sight among the officers of the Miami Police Department.” Or “Boba Fett is an inept bounty hunter in Mandalorian battle armor who sucks a lot at his job and gets eaten by a giant dusty desert sphincter.” Whatever. (Want practice? describe a few well-known characters in the comments.)

Problem:

Right up front, the character has a problem. A character’s problem is why the character exists in this storyworld, and this problem helps generate plot (plot, after all, is Soylent Green — it is made of people). Identify the problem. Shorter is again better (and note that you may have inadvertently identified the problem in the logline above, which is not only fine, but awesome).

Problems could be anything that defines the character’s journey: “Hunted by an unkillable star beast;” “Can’t get it up in bed;” “Trapped in an alternate dimension and unable to get home;” “Pursued by chimpanzee crime syndicate;” “Lost child in divorce;” “Life’s worth stolen by dirigible-dwelling pirate-folk;” “Can’t find gluten-free muffins in this goddamn city.”

If you take John McClane from Die Hard, his problem isn’t really the terrorists — not as a character problem. The terrorists are a plot problem, but we’ll get to that in a second. John’s actual problem is his separation from his wife. That’s his issue. That’s what drives him.

Buffy Summers is a character who wants to be a normal teen, but isn’t.

The problem is why we’re here. It’s why we’re watching this character, right now.

Solution:

The character will also have a proposed solution to that problem. I’m not talking about You The Storyteller solving the problem. I’m talking about what the character thinks is or should be the solution. A solution that, in fact, the character will pursue at the start of the story.

The character who is hunted by he unkillable star beast, well, she may decide that she has to escape to the fringes of the universe where her soul can be remade in the Nebula Forge, which she believes is the only way to throw off the scent.

The character who can’t find gluten-free muffins is going to try to bake her own. (THE FOOL!)

John McClane’s solution to his separation is to fly all the way out to LA from NY and reconnect with his wife at her office Christmas party.

If we are to assume that Dexter Morgan’s problem is: “Dexter is a secret serial killer,” his solution is to “hide in plain sight in Miami Metro PD.” (One might suggest that it his solution is to “cleave to a code of honor that forces him to kill only criminals,” but I think that’s something else — and I’ll get there in a minute, I promise, cool your testes-and-or-teats, Doctor Impatience.)

The Conflict Between:

In between a character’s problem and solution is a wonderful tract of jagged, dangerous landscape called HOLY SHIT, CONFLICT.

Or, if you’d prefer, it’s less a landscape and more a GIANT SPIKY WALL. Or a gauntless of FISTS AND KNIVES AND BLUDGEONING STICKS. Or whatever image gets you to grasp the perilous potential between points A (problem) and Z (solution).

It’s possible that this space is practically auto-generated, that the conflict writes itself as a product of the problem -> solution dichotomy. With Dexter, his problem is being a serial killer, and his solution is to embed himself in Miami PD. That conjures an immediate and easy-to-imagine conflict. Serial killer? Working for the police? Easy to see the conflict there. (I haven’t seen the last two seasons, but my understanding is they failed to capitalize on this great conflict.)

John McClane’s problem and solution auto-generate conflicts that don’t really fit in the context of an action movie. And so the writers created a kick-ass external conflict — in this case, THE INEPTITUDE OF THE LOCAL POLICE AND FBI. Oh, and also, some dude named Hans Gruber?

But even external conflicts are key to the character — the conflict born in the gulf between McClane’s problem and his solution is still one that demands the best efforts of his cop nature. The writers didn’t give him a love triangle, or a cantankerous mother-in-law, or a stuck pickle jar. He’s a bad-ass dude with a gun and a badge and no shoes and so they gave him a gaggle of terrorists. (More on his unfixable undeterred cop nature in a few.)

Ultimately, try to mine the rich, loamy, ruby-laden earth between what the character wants and what the character cannot have.

Limitations:

A limitation is generally internal — meaning, it’s something within the character that exists as part of their nature. This limitation hobbles them in some way, altering their problem/solution dichotomy (which we could ostensibly call “the mission”).

Remember how I was talking about Dexter’s “code of honor?” I consider this a limitation to his character — we the audience would perceive that as a strength but to Dexter, it’s also a limitation. It puts a limit on his role as a serial killer and thus creates not only a deeper character, but also offers new plot angles and opportunities for tension.

Limitations are traits of the character’s that get in her way — they might be flaws or frailties but they can just as easily be positive traits that make trouble for the character and the plot. You might say that Buffy’s limitations were her age, her immaturity, and her emotional entanglements with problematic boyfriends (seriously, Buffy, what’s with the choice in dudes?).

Complications:

Complications tend to be external — they are entanglements outside the character that complicate their lives. These can be more character-based or more plot-based depending on which aspect of the story you’re working. John McClane’s job is a character complication — he’s married more to the job than he is to his wife, which is what leads to the problem, which demands a solution, which opens the door for conflict. And the conflict is further complicated by his intensely cop-flavored demeanor, because he just can’t let this thing go. He throws himself into danger again and again not just because his wife is in the building, but because this is who he is. Shoeless and largely alone, all he is is pure, unmitigated yippie-kay-ay cowboy copper.

(And of course the rub is, a character’s limitations and complications are also the things that may help them succeed in their mission even while still causing them grave disorder.)

Greatest Fear:

Short but sweet: what does the character fear most? Death. Love. Disease. Losing one’s best friend. Bees. Toddlers. Chimpanzees with clown makeup. Lady Gaga. Whatever. It’s useful to identify the character’s fear — meaning, the thing they most don’t want to encounter or see happen — because you’re the storyteller, and you’re cruel, and now you have this Awful Thing in your pocket. And whenever you want, you can bring the Awful Thing out of its demon-box and harangue the character with it to see which way she jumps.

Description:

Description for characters is overrated — again, a lot of these character exercises seem hell-bent to have you figure out their eyebrow color and genital measurements and other useless metrics. That said, I do think a little description is good, and here’s what you’re going to do:

Write a description. Keep it to 100 words. Less if you can manage (once again consider the 140-character limitation). Do not hit all the bases. Do not try to stat them up like a fucking baseball player. Listen, when you look at someone, you take away a visual thumbprint of that person — it’s pushed hard into the clay of your memory. You don’t remember every little detail or aspect. Rather, you remember them as, that gangly Lurch motherfucker with the flat-top hair-do and the lips like grave-worms, or, that woman shaped like a butternut squash with the frock that smelled like cigarettes and old terriers. 

A short, sharp shock of character description. And a tip on description: writers are best describing things that break the status quo, that violate our expectations. In other words, find the things that make the character visually unique, interesting, odd, curious – different. Cleave to those.

The Test Drive:

The character’s voice and behavior is still a bit alien to you at this point — conjuring all these details and entanglements still doesn’t let you zip into their skin and grab their vocal chords like a flight stick in order to pilot them around (suddenly I’m getting a really weird narrative Pacific Rim metaphor and I must like it a lot because I think I have a boner – what shut up it’s a metaphorical boner jeez you people you’re so Puritanical with your “ew he’s talking about boners again”). So, my advice is:

Take ‘em for a test drive. Said it before, will say it again: write a thousand-word piece of flash fiction with Your Brand New Shiny Character in the starring role. Drive him around. Ding him up. Challenge him! Force him to talk to other characters: an obstinate cab driver, a belligerent cop, a drunken orangutan. Give him a new problem or one related to the character explicitly.

Let ‘em speak. Let ‘em act. See what they do when you get behind the wheel.

Inhabit the character.

And you may come away with new material you want to use in a longer work.

Rewrite The Logline:

All that’s said and done?

Rewrite the original logline.

Sharpen it like a fucking stake you’re gonna stick into a vampire’s chesty bits.

The reason you’re rewriting is:

a) Because your idea of the character may have changed a little or a lot through this whole process so, best to revisit and revamp accordingly.

and

b) Because you better get used to revision and tweaking things — plots, characters, sentences — to hone them into molecule-splitting story-razors.

And That’s That

That’s it. A quick path through character creation in what hopefully distills that character down to his or her bare quintessence. More importantly, it’s a process that in a perfect world gets you into their headspace and the plotspace that surrounds them, thus allowing you to drop-kick them right into the story without any hitches or hiccups. Thoughts, comments, questions, complaints, prayer requests, death threats, proposals of marriage –

Drop ‘em in the comments.

Piled Higher & Deeper by Jorge Cham		www.phdcomics.com
title: "Believe it or Don't!" - originally published 10/18/2013 For the latest news in PHD Comics, CLICK HERE!

This comic was brought to you, in part, by Adam Ferrero and his disdain for pudding cup lids.

Ever since the slasher genre took off in the 80s, masked killers hacking up young co-eds has been a horror movie staple. While psychotic killers existed in movies for years (like Peeping Tom and Psycho), it was John Carpenter 1978 thriller Halloween that really popularized the concept and started a chain reaction of copy-cat films.

Since then, notable slasher anti-heroes like Michael Myers and Jason Voorhees have become synonymous with horror movies in general. These franchises became extremely popular with the moviegoing audiences, but they were also the target by many various groups (including this classic Sneak Previews episode with Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert bemoaning this “disturbing new trend”) for being too violent.

Here at Film School Rejects, we love our horror movies, and we love our slasher films. However, we are also interested in reality, and that got us thinking: Just how realistic are kills in slasher movies?

The Answer: They aren’t nearly bloody enough.

What’s a good slasher villain without a bit of slashing? Psycho killers have used everything from a pick axe in My Bloody Valentine to a chainsaw in The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, but most of the favorite weapons have been objects that can stab and slice. In the interest of simplicity, let’s leave Freddy Krueger out of this because he is strictly supernatural, and anything can happen in a dream. Instead, let’s look at the most famous on-screen killers: Jason Voorhees and Michael Myers.

Most of the kills (at least in the earlier films) for both the Friday the 13th and Halloween franchises involve a blade. Jason (and his mother, of course) likes his machete, but he’s employed anything sharp that he could get his hands on. Michael likes his kitchen knife, but he can be versatile as well.

An axe through the head can incapacitate a victim quickly, but the more common cutting of the throat, stabbing in the neck, and piercing the chest won’t kill someone instantly. The wound can be fatal, but the victim would actually die of blood loss rather than blunt impact.

The human body contains about five liters of blood, more or less, depending on its size. Even if a major artery is severed, it would take a minute or two for the body to lose the 40 percent or so of its blood that would be required to bleed out.

If you go by how much is actually shown in the slasher movies (which often depicts a few ounces at the most), this is grossly understated. Forty percent of a person’s blood is roughly equivalent of a two-liter soda bottle, which is alarmingly more than what is usually shown on screen. To put this in perspective, imagine a two-liter bottle of Hawaiian Punch poured on the floor and compare it to how much blood is released in your average Friday the 13th movie kill. There’s almost no comparison.

In fact, one of the few slasher movie moments that gets the amount of blood loss right is the death of Marion Crane (Janet Leigh) in Psycho. She is stabbed in the shower, and a flood of her blood pours into the tub and flows down the drain. She doesn’t die from knife wounds, but rather from bleeding out in the shower.

But what about the bloodless kills?

Those too tend to be more tame on the screen than in real life. When not using stabbing or cutting instruments, psycho killers enjoy strangling their victims. Remember the fate of Lynda (PJ Soles) in Halloween? She was strangled by a telephone cord. Crazy Ralph (Walt Gorney), who warned the counselors about Camp Blood in the Friday the 13th movies, was choked out with a wire in the second film. Before she was the bride to the Scorpion King, Kelly Hu was strangled in Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan.

Jason and Michael make it look so easy.

Here’s the catch: strangulation is not a quick or easy death. First, it cuts off blood flow to the brain by restricting the carotid artery, causing unconsciousness within 30 seconds. Secondarily, it restricts breathing by crushing the trachea. However, this is not deadly. The person wouldn’t actually die until the brain is deprived of oxygen for at least several minutes. Somehow, Jason and Michael manage to strangle their victims in less than a minute, but in real life, the victim could likely survive (though they might have brain damage from lack of oxygen and possible breathing issues from a crushed windpipe).

In slashers, as in life, creativity counts.

Even the more clever kills face similar problems. In Halloween, Michael mounts Bob (John Michael Graham) on the kitchen door with his knife (though the knife is arguably too short to make it completely through the body, and the weight of the body would be too much for the knife to hold). In Halloween II, he boils young lovers in a hot tub and drowns them (though the time it takes to do this is too short, considering the brain death issue in strangulation).

Ignoring the blood volume factor, the only time slasher kills are completely effective is when things get really creative. For example, space-age Jason kills Adrienne (Kristi Angus) in Jason X by freezing her face in liquid nitrogen and then shattering it on the counter. In Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers, our anti-hero electrocutes one of the characters by throwing him into a transformer. These would pretty much do the trick.

Decapitation, of course, always works, even if it happens for completely preposterous reasons. In Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan, Jason literally punches Julius’ (V.C. Dupree) head clean off, which would require his fist to be traveling at more than 600 miles per hour. This is an impossibility for even the best boxer in the world, who could throw a punch at approximately 30 miles per hour. However, by this point in the series, we’re dealing with zombie Jason who was brought back to life with the healing power of electricity, so it’s possible that he could throw a punch with 20 times the power of a normal person.

So the morals to this story are: 1) slasher films aren’t nearly as violent as they would be in real life, 2) the best kills are the creative ones, and 3) you’re gonna need to buy more fake blood.

Solve More Movie Mysteries

Se beber não dirija!

We’re celebrating Pacific Rim’s DVD and Blu-ray release by punching it right in its monster face. Is it the most awesome dumb movie of all time, or the dumbest awesome movie of all time? It doesn’t matter! It has a lot of punching and this movie firmly proves that punching makes everything better.*

 

*Unless that punching is in Real Steel.

The post Honest Trailers: ‘Pacific Rim’ appeared first on Screen Junkies.

For those unfamiliar with College Gameday, it’s ESPN‘s college football studio show that films live on location at a college campus each week. It’s as pointless as most studio shows, but all the college kids in the background, drunk and sign-wielding, along with the jovial nature of the show make it a pretty fun show to watch for football fans.

It was a little more fun on Saturday when Lee Corso, a host whose weekly responsibilities include putting on the mascot head of the team he thinks will win the week’s biggest game, got body slammed to the ground by some dude in a tie-dyed t-shirt and fedora.

That man was Bill Murray. Let’s completely ignore context and watch.

The post Bill Murray Body Slammed Lee Corso on ‘College Gameday’ appeared first on Screen Junkies.

This one is dedicated to Stacy! Hope you had a great birthday!

Here are more secrets.

Bom, a Sony Computer Entertainment America anunciou o preço do PlayStation®4 (PS4™) (série CUH-1000A): o console será lançado no Brasil por R$ 3.999, e o preço sugerido dos jogos para o console será R$ 179. O PS4™ estará disponível a partir do dia 29 de novembro de 2013 nas principais lojas de varejo do Brasil.

Isso mesmo que você leu.

QUATRO MIL REAIS!!!

Vamos fazer as contas?

Lá fora, o PS4 custa 399 doletas.
399 multiplicado por um real a 2.50 dá 997,5 reais.

Vamos colocar aí o imposto a 70%, o que daria no total 1685.75 reais. Mas o preço da Sony é de 4000 reais.

Vamos fazer outro cálculo.

Passagem aérea São Paulo – Miami na ALTA temporada (cotando pelo Decolar.com): 1000 dólares.
PS4 em miami: 400 dólares.

1000 Doletas de passagem + 400 doletas do PS4 = 3.500 reais

Ainda dá pra comprar 500 reais de jogos!!!!

PORRA PLAYSTATION!!!

The post PS4: Só Antônio Fagundes, o Hell e os três reis mais ricos da Europa poderão comprá-lo no Brasil appeared first on Melhores do Mundo.

Um apenas 52 segundos. Eu disse 52 segundos! Não disse uma hora! Não disse duas horas! Eu disse apenas 52 segundos, os caras da WB Games do Canadá contaram de forma brilhante a origem do Batman. CINQUENTA E DOIS SEGUNDOS, PORRA!

Ninguém precisou viajar pro Marrocos. Ninguém precisou criar a porcaria de uma escola pra playboy virar ninja. Ninguém precisou patinar num lago congelado bancando o espertinho. Ninguém precisou fumar um narguile do capeta pra ver fantasminha. Os caras precisaram de apenas 52 segundos para contar a porra de uma história que até a vagabunda da sua mãe conhece. Pra que complicar, cacete?!

Esses caras da WB Games do Canadá tão de parabéns! Vocês são fodas para caralho!

No entanto, duas coisas podemos salientar: o jovem Bruce Wayne sendo currado no quartel e a cara do Vin Diesel que colaram na fuça da morcega.

The post Christopher Nolan, seu imprestável, APRENDA! appeared first on Melhores do Mundo.

Ubisoft released some unfortunate news via a conference call today, and that's that Rayman Legends and Splinter Cell: Blacklist both sold below expectations, according to the publisher.

This is especially disheartening to hear for Rayman Legends which was pushed back from its original February release for Wii U so that it launch on multiple platforms instead (and because the Wii U was and still is struggling). Also, no surprise here, Blacklist sold the worst on Wii U, with less than 10,000 units sold in its first month on the platform.

Fortunately for Wii U, Rayman Legends actually sold the best on it, and this is considering that PS3 and Xbox 360 have tens of millions more of an install base, so perhaps there is still a promising market for some genres on Nintendo's console.

For the meantime, we'll have to wait and see what this all means. Long-term, Legends might be all right if it continues to sell at a decent pace (and provided it finds more platforms to release on), but it's unknown whether Ubisoft will continue on with Rayman games for the time being. Even less certain is the Splinter Cell series, which seems like it could take a bit of a break after this.

Source: GimmeGimmeGames

Are you surprised that both games sold below expectations?

É solteiro, mas não consegue dormir sem um colo? Sem problemas, este travesseiro em formato de uma mulher sentada pode ser uma solução, isso se você não se incomodar em ficar parecendo um maluco durante o processo.

A novidade é vendida pela Japan Trend Shop mas no momento, eles estão em falta.

Via Drool’d.

Neste dia das crianças, nada mais indicado que um gadget que ajuda a manter seus filhos mais seguros. O FiLIP é um relógio com GPS que não só grava sua localização precisa com GPS, mas também pode ser usado para a criança te ligar diretamente, como se fosse um celular comum. Usando o aplicativo do FiLIP, você e até mais 5 pessoas de sua extrema confiança podem acompanhar exatamente onde a criança está em um mapa, além de ligar ou mandar mensagens.

A criança pode ligar para o seu número e falar normalmente, e em caso de emergência, ele só precisa apertar o botão vermelho por três segundos, o que envia uma mensagem para você, começa a gravar o som ambiente e tenta ligar para o seu número e os outros números cadastrados. É possível também marcar uma “área segura”, e receber um alerta caso o seu filho resolva sair daquele lugar.

Saiba mais sobre o relógio FiLIP.

Via Engadget.

De acordo com o site inglês Mirror, especializado em séries de televisão, a BBC quase apagou vários programas de seus arquivos: Doctor Who, Top of the Pops (com a performance dos Beatles) e a série Monty Python’s Flying Circus, entre outros.

Isso aconteceu em 1971, e a justificativa da BBC é que ela queria economizar dinheiro.

A sorte é que Terry Gilliam ficou sabendo disso, correu lá e, gentilmente os roubou salvou.

Em entrevista à CNN, Terry Jones disse que os shows quase foram dizimados pela BBC. “Isso é o que a BBC fez naqueles dias. Eles queriam as fitas de vídeo para a reutilização”.

Nota da redação: Que feio, BBC!

(com informações de Danny Walker – Mirror – 10-10-2013)

 

 

From Rob Liefeld’s table in Artist’s Alley at New York Comic Con, he’s charging $10 to sign copies of New Mutants and X-Force, $20 for the first appearance of Cable and Deadpool, and $20 for CGC’s copies. Of course, considering signed copies go for the likes of this, I’d say that’s pretty fair, wouldn’t you?

Rob Liefeld’s Policy On Signing New Mutants And X-Force

Intervalo está sendo transformada num livro (digital) pela DMP. O texto original premiado pela Funarte em 2004 está sendo inteiramente revisto. O livro vai contar também com um prefácio do autor e alguns textos complementares. A partir de agora fica interrompida a serialização da peça nesse blog. Alguns dos posts serão retirados para reedição. As novidades sobre a produção do livro e a produção da peça serão divulgadas aqui.

Meus agradecimentos a todos os que estão acompanhando a evolução desse projeto que completa 10 anos em 2014.

Oi, Micky,

Você tem doze anos, quase treze. Já é quase dia das crianças e eu quis te dar um presente!

E antes que você esbraveje, saia batendo as portas e se enfie no quarto com os seus incensos e cristais, espera eu dizer que você é uma criança dahora e que todas as histórias que aconteceram até agora serão sempre contadas com muita risada e sempre vão te trazer muita alegria.

Não tenha raiva de ser criança nem queira interromper essa fase, é a fase da sua vida onde você foi mais genuinamente feliz com pouca coisa e, juro, daqui pra frente isso fica cada vez mais difícil. A cada dia a vida vai pedir mais de você, e se ela não pedir, você mesma vai.

Mas sobre isso, eu queria te falar uma coisa muito, mas muito importante, que é o motivo de eu te escrever essa carta. No próximo ano, você vai sentir muita necessidade de ser outra pessoa. Porque mudou de escola, porque deu seu primeiro beijo, mudou de turma e quer ser mais legal. Tudo bem, faz parte. Mas eu preciso te avisar que nem tudo vale a pena.

Por exemplo, você vai querer colocar um piercing no supercílio que depois de dois anos vai ser a coisa mais ridícula do mundo e você ficar com uma cicatriz, vai querer pintar o cabelo de vermelho porque tá na moda e seu cabelo vai ficar uma bosta.

Outra coisa é que você vai gostar muito de um menino, escrever coisas, fantasiar e… ele vai querer a sua amiga que já tem peitos. Depois de um tempo você vai acabar ficando com ele e descobrindo que ele beija mal e vai começar a fugir dele em uma semana. Então não chore tanto, nem deseje tanto ter peitos porque peito que vem cedo, cedo cairá.

Mas agora, o mais importante: antes do fim do próximo ano, você vai ganhar uns dois quilinhos, que eu te juro que não é nada, é o peso perfeito pra você nesse momento. Então, quando você ler a matéria da Reader’s Digest contando a história do menino com bulimia, por favor, POR FAVOR: não faça igual.

Vou te adiantar umas coisas que você poderia descobrir tarde demais:

1 – você vai se machucar muito. Muito mesmo. Desde as primeiras tentativas de forçar o vômito, até quando você já souber como fazer. Vai machucar sua garganta, seu esôfago, seu estômago, suas mãos. Vai vomitar sangue. Isso mesmo, tenta imaginar o quão horrível pode ser esse momento. Mas você pode escolher não passar por ele.

2 – você vai ficar doente, fraca, triste, sem vontade de sair da cama. Por isso, vai perder um ano na escola, amigos, momentos felizes e vai ser muito, mas muito difícil se perdoar.

3 – você vai ficar FEIA. Nessa tentativa de emagrecer e ser linda, você vai ficar horrível. Porque olhando no espelho procurando paranoicamente os seus OSSOS, você vai ignorar o seu ROSTO, que vai ficar inchado, parecendo uma lua cheia. São as suas glândulas de saliva que vão inchar de tanto vomitar. Sem contar o seu cabelo que vai cair e quebrar e a sua pele que vai ficar toda cagada. Sério, tipo uma caveira seca, é isso que você quer? Você vai rasgar muitas, muitas fotos por isso depois. Sem contar que, quando você vomita comida, o que vai embora é sua massa magra, não gordura. Ou seja, você vai ficar flácida e vai ter que correr atrás do prejuízo antes que todas as meninas “normais”.

O que nos leva ao último e pior ponto: se você começar, vai dar muito trabalho pra voltar a se sentir normal. Ao contrário do que você possa chegar a pensar, você não vai conseguir parar quando quiser. Acredita em mim, não vai. Porque bem logo isso vai virar seu escape para fugir das frustrações (que na adolescência, já te aviso, são infinitas) e vai ser tão, mas tão normal, que mesmo quando você aprender a se controlar, sempre vai ser um esforço enorme. Como se NÃO fazer é que não fosse normal. Não sei se um dia a sua relação com a comida vai ser natural (estou trabalhando fortemente nisso, acho que vai rolar mas eu fortemente recomendo evitar o trabalho e as consequências).

Em algum canto do seu ser, a criança genial ainda vai estar guardada, então, se decidir passar por tudo isso mesmo assim, ainda vai se tornar uma pessoa legal, vai conseguir coisas legais. Mas, ao olhar pra trás, vai perceber quanto tempo e oportunidades perdeu, tentando se encaixar numa perfeição que não existe! De novo: NÃO EXISTE!

As pessoas da TV, elas não são de verdade e lindas como hoje você pensa. Muitas delas sofrem com tudo isso que você pode evitar. Muitas são lindas por fora e podres por dentro. Muitas não dormem e não têm paz.

E te juro que não compensa.

Então, por favor: se cuida. Lembra que uma pessoa linda é uma pessoa que se ama e ama a vida! Que pode até querer mudar uma coisinha ou outra, mas se ama tanto que NUNCA vai se machucar pra conseguir isso. E muito menos colocar a beleza em primeiro lugar a ponto de viver em função disso e não ter outra função no mundo (que tá precisando muito, muito de gente legal fazendo coisas legais).

Se apertar, não sofre calada, não procura na internet nem nas amigas da mesma idade que sabem tão pouco quanto você: fala com a mãe. Fala a verdade e pede ajuda, porque provavelmente nesse momento de confusão, ela vai saber a coisa certa a fazer para o seu bem. Busque ajuda, vai pra terapia sim e aproveita que tem alguém pagando por você, fia. Porque no futuro a conta é sua!

Beijos!
Ps: não perca tanto tempo da vida escrevendo cartas para os backstreet boys! vai estudar espanhol porque no futuro falar com a sua família vai depender disso!

(essa carta teria sido perfeita pra mim, pra me poupar do terror que foram todos esses anos de muito trabalho – e a luta é até o fim – mas a ideia dela ainda pode ser perfeita pra você, ou pra qualquer serzinho amado – criança ou não – que a gente possa salvar de se perder de si mesmo. BE THE CHANGE!)

Injustice: Gods Among Us invites patch 1.06 to join its ranks on October 1, bringing in a range of balance adjustments and gameplay fixes. Also dropping tomorrow, for free, is the Man of Steel skin for Zod.

Fixes impact most of the characters in Injustice, with a notable amount of tweaking for Black Adam, Zatanna and Flash. With patch 1.06, Black Adam's Lightning Strike only hits grounded opponents when performed outside of a combo, his back-dashing covers less ground, the duration of his Orbs of Seth power is reduced and its cool-down increased, and he has an improved hit advantage with the Eye of Horus combo. The hitbox on Flash's Flying Uppercut has been improved and Zatanna no longer has an infinite combo against larger characters.

Check out the hefty list of patch 1.06 fixes below.

Continue reading Injustice: Gods Among Us patch 1.06 brings free Zod 'Man of Steel' skin

Injustice: Gods Among Us patch 1.06 brings free Zod 'Man of Steel' skin originally appeared on Joystiq on Tue, 01 Oct 2013 01:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

I underestimated the Tea Party.

I really did. Once upon a time I thought, “Oh, hey, look, a gaggle of angry folks forged in the fires of a down economy and stirred up by passionate dipshit politicians. Ha ha ha, look at those silly misspelled protest signs! Oh, they think Obama is Kenyan Hitler, that’s so adorable. Hey, Bible misquotes! It’s like Tea Party Bingo up in this motherfucker.”

But time has permitted me a new perspective:

The Tea Party is actually pretty genius.

I mean, selfish as shit. Possibly possessing a few virulent strains of actual human evil. But really: genius! Like, if they weren’t such assholes, I might respect what they’re doing.”

Because what they’re doing is running a magic show full of illusions and tricks. They’re orchestrating a long-form confidence game, eyes on a distant prize.

Their bread and butter is not the political process but rather the illusion of one.

It’s all chicanery and legerdemain. Performed in service to what may be a creepy agenda. That agenda? To dismantle the power of the government and to reward private interests — not just in the systemic, “I want to bolster capitalism” sense, but to literally reward corporations and the very wealthy people who run them. Oh — and at your expense.

One. Big. Con.

The kind that might make David Mamet soak his britches.

Consider, for example, Ted Cruz’ filibuster — or, sorry, his “filibuster,” because it fucking wasn’t actually a fucking filibuster. Oh, sure. He called it that. The news calls it that. But it wasn’t. It was a really long speech organized and agreed upon by Harry Reid, meant to end at a preordained time and without having any effect at all. It let him prattle on, energizing his base, preaching from the pulpit, giving the illusion of having a practical and sustained effect when really he was just appeasing donors and speaking to his audience. He holds up a turd painted pink tucked in a hot dog bun and says, “Eat this delicious hot dog.”

And we all take a big shitty bite.

Consider, for example, how they claim to be a grassroots organization supporting the interest of the common American, but don’t really like to talk about who’s bankrolling all this shit (Rupert Murdoch, Koch Brothers, Dick Armey), all “big business” proponents who are happy to dismantle any and every safety net and regulation that keeps the actual common Americans from falling into a dark, hopeless pit.

You want a really great example? Consider the Philadelphia School District.

Which will close down in the next two years.

A whole school district, entirely or largely shuttered.

Think about that.

Now, think about how this sort of thing happens.

Pennsylvania elected, for some mysterious fucking reason, a Tea Partier as governor, Tom Corbett. (My opinions of Corbett are best understood as a series of angry vomiting sounds and rage-fueled poop noises.)

Corbett cuts a billion dollars out of state education. (This year’s budget is a little kinder, adding $50-some million to the pot, but that’s stuffing Band-Aids into a sucking chest wound what with massive shortfalls and deficits. It’s just enough to keep the schools open this year.)

You gut education and then say, “Hey, jeez, education isn’t looking too good? It’s like these teachers can’t teach! The system is failing!” Well, of course it is, jerkhead. You just stole the oxygen from the room and then are yelling about how folks are too weak to breathe.

So, with education gutted and 100% more ineffective than it was before…

PA invests money into a consulting group to examine how to make the school district more efficient; as a result the school district decides the best way forward is to allocate nearly a billion dollars toward a flush of charter schools — schools that are publicly funded but unregulated and privately operated and, oh, in Philadelphia, now mired in a series of scandals.

So, already we’ve taken money reserved for government operation of schools and thrown support in for private schooling entities.

Fine, except for the fact those must hurt by this are the underprivileged — meaning, lower-income, frequently African-American or minority students. (Here’s an interesting post as to why charter schools are bad for the urban poor of Philly and Pittsburgh.)

There exists, of course, a correlation between poor education and increased crime.

So, you reduce educational offerings, you increase crime.

Sounds bad.

Except:

Increased crime means increased prisoners.

Increased prisoners of the “non-white, urban” variety — people who almost universally vote Democrat. People who, once inside the prison system as having committed a felony…

…can no longer vote.

Like I said: pretty genius.

(This will be doubly genius if Pennsylvania starts to eventually do the Tea Party lean toward privatized prisons. Haven’t gone that way yet, far as I can tell.)

Point is, all this is a dog-and-pony show, a smoke-and-mirrors display to get you to Think One Thing so in order to accomplish Another Thing Entirely.

Which leads us to what may be a government shut-down.

Over the deficit.

Oh, wait, no — it’s not really about the deficit.

It’s about Obamacare.

But it’s also not really about Obamacare, either — because the ACA is actually based off of a conservative plan. They lie, screaming about government-run health care and death panels and other ludicrous myths about health care reform, all a series of easily-debunked lies uttered in order to continue supporting a Byzantine, obfuscatory system of piss-poor health care that presently fills the coffers of insurance companies who thrive off of our ignorance and confusion. (Translation: insurance lobbyists want to make sure that the insurance companies continue to get paid as much as they can, because that’s frequently how Giant-Ass Companies work. Which is fine, as long as our politicians are interested in helping individual Americans more than they are Giant-Ass Company Profits.)

And so they aim to shut down the government.

And possibly damage the economy in the process.

All to cry foul over health care reform that passed through the entire Democratic process without fail. It passed all three branches of government. And yet, this group of sore losers wants you to think they’re supporting the common American whose grandmother will be put on some death panel pogrom list where Obama personally shoots them in the back of the head.

The real rub is, what it does is show us — and the world — that our government is broken.

And that’s what the Tea Party wanted all along.

They operate from within — like cancer cells (or terrorist cells?) — undermining the very thing they claim to work for. They don’t want a functional government. Government big or small is the enemy. (A “post-democracy?”) The GOP tends to be more moderate in their view of government, but therein lies another genius illusion of the Tea Party, which is that they’re Republican. Spoiler alert: they’re not. They’ve just embedded themselves in that party like a tick under the skin because that’s how they ride their way into power. (And moderate Republicans are starting to figure this out, I think. Like someone who realizes far too late they invited a vampire to dinner and now he’s in the house and he’s eating all the pets oops oh well sorry.)

All a series of illusions.

Trickery to make you think they’re working for you.

A con game run on the common American.

Never mind that the common American is the one who gets hurt by a shutdown. Who gets fucked over by a damaged economy and unregulated, rampant corporate interests. The one who gets screwed by lost education and who gets thrown into a bloating prison system as a result.

The Tea Partiers wear our clothes and they sound like patriots, but they don’t give a weasel’s dick-whiskers about this country or the majority of the people in it.

They’re sexist. They’re racist. They care nothing for the young or most of the old.

They are the party of the Old White Dude Who Wants To Do What He Wants, So Fuck You.

They want to ride this horse until it breaks down and dies.

They’ll sell America to the first buyer.

They’re not the hostages.

They’re the hostage-takers.

*ends rant*

*takes a nap*

(Final note: I’m gonna leave the comments open, but should they get hairy, I’m closing ‘em down. I’ll likely not have time to respond to comments. I wanted to rant, and so, I ranted. I’m busy enough where I probably shouldn’t have even carved out the time to write this post, much less get mired in discussions about it. Also to clarify, I’m not anti-GOP, nor do I think the Democrats are the shining party of goodness here to save the day on a galloping golden steed. I tend to vote pretty moderate — leaning toward moderate politicians of both parties — and I have my back up about the NSA and drone-strikes and all kinds of other shit Obama approves on a daily, but this rant rose up after reading about the potential shutdown.)

An analog version of digitally-distributed DuckTales: Remastered will be available at retail on November 12 in North America.

Capcom announced this morning that physical copies of Scrooge McDuck's remastered 1989 adventure can be yours to treasure on Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 or Wii U for $19.99. The digital version is $14.99.

Our review of the game said "Remastered serves as a suitable alternative to the NES original, even though its attempts at forging its own identity may ruffle your tailfeathers."

DuckTales Remastered pogos into retail November 12 originally appeared on Joystiq on Wed, 18 Sep 2013 12:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Even if you don’t live in New York, most of illustrator Nathan W. Pile’s animated NYC Basic Tips and Etiquette will still be something you can appreciate. That’s because the series covers issues like kissing in public, eating on public transportation, using a cellphone while ordering coffee and more. Some of the images are more specific but still apply to any big city or to any area with cold weather, but a few can only be used in New York -like those focusing on navigating the city streets. The tips can even help protect you from scams in The Big Apple that may also be used in other cities.

We’ve included a number of his illustrations here, but if you like what you see, you can always check out his new book, NYC Basic Tips and Etiquette.

 

NYC Basic Tips and Etiquette | Imgur

Some tips to make your next trip awesome: 23 Awesome Travel Hacks That Add Fun To Your Trip

The post NYC Basic Tips And Etiquette In Delightful Illustrations appeared first on Lifehack.

This is probably the worst Kickstarter campaign ever made. Granted, it doesn’t have pay-me-to-stalk-Adam-Sandler comic appeal (or that project’s success!), but it does feature an individual with purported ties to the industry failing at every single level and offering a great teaching moment for people seeking crowdfunding (or a rubbernecking opportunity for everyone else).

That’s the good news. There’s a lot of advice buried in the rubble.

According to her website, Linda Stuart is a former lecturer at the American Film Institute, a former staff story analyst at Paramount and a script consultant for hire who will provide a full script overview (with handwritten and typed notes) for only $1,200 (a steal! (note: not a steal)). Now she wants $5M to make a comedy called Kate Allen is Getting a Life that might star several actresses who were popular in the late 1990s.

She emailed us asking to publicize the campaign, and I can honestly say that we’re going to do that. Just not in the way she was probably hoping for. Fortunately, others can learn from these mistakes and find themselves on their way to crowdfunding success. If that’s your goal, check out everything Stuart did and do the opposite.

Mistake #1: A Generic Title

Stuart’s script is Kate Allen is Getting a Life, but her Kickstarter appeal is called “Film w/ Thora Birch, Heather Matarazzo, Jennifer Elise Cox“.

First of all, this says nothing about the movie and, instead, opts for name recognition in an ironic way. I don’t mean this with even an ounce of disrespect, but those names don’t carry a lot of recognition after a decade without a mainstream appearance. As cynical as we can all be about studios relying too heavily on last names we’ll all know, there’s a reality to how effectively they can draw an audience (on the internet especially).

Whether you agree with that drawing power or not, Stuart was gambling with the first impression of her appeal solely with the popularity of those names to make you want to pull your wallet out. She probably would have done better with “A New Romantic Comedy About Chasing Your Passion Starring Thora Birch” or at least something that doesn’t come with a complimentary pillow.

Mistake #2: Whatever That Header Picture Is/Not Having a Video

Here’s where things get a bit surreal. Not only does Stuart avoid making an impassioned video plea for donations (the lifeblood of a successful campaign), she chooses to use a picture of herself instead of, say, the actresses she’s touting in the title. To be fair, she says she has letters of interest from Birch and the others (more on that later), so maybe she doesn’t have permission to use their likenesses (even as she uses their names) for fundraising. Confused yet? Good.

However, the image choice isn’t the real issue. Even though she explains directly what the movie is, who will (potentially) be in it and why she’s turning to Kickstarter (the studios are insular, potential financing deals wouldn’t let her direct), she’s effectively asking the public to support her in that freedom without showing us any proof of her skills as a director. If we’re thinking of Kickstarter in terms of a job application (which it is), she hasn’t even handed in a resume.

Beyond the simple mistake of it, it’s also more than a little insulting to a Kickstarter crowd to ask for $5M and not take the time to at least webcam yourself asking nicely. Which leads us to:

Mistake #3: Oh, yeah. That Insanely High Fundraising Goal

Five. Million. Dollars.

Five. Million. Dollars.

Did I say it got surreal up there? Because we’re still on the alternative universe train. And it sounds like this.

This detail makes me think this whole thing could be some kind of outsider art or satirical punch at crowdfunding, but assuming it’s genuine absurdity instead of a comment on it, it’s difficult to imagine how Stuart could dream that $5M would be a reasonable amount to ask for without delusion coming into play. Here’s a bit of context:

• Spike Lee asked for $1.25M
• Zach Braff asked for $2M
• Veronica Mars asked for $2M
• Someone who’s never directed a movie or had a script produced asked for those amounts combined

Perspective, please.

The fact that she’s gotten $11 pledged instead of a flat zero is sort of randomly hilarious, but even with a ridiculously large goal in place, she might still be able to get more donated by changing the worst sin of her pitch:

Mistake #4: Only One Donation Level, That’s Really High, and Comes With a Crappy Incentive

Here’s the deal — if you donate $1,000 to Stuart’s Kickstarter project, she’ll give you $25.

As you can see from the sidebar, I’m not making that up. She even reiterates in her text-only spiel that if you donate a grand, she’ll give you twenty-five bucks back (alongside a thank-you credit in the movie that you can get for donating $1). You don’t even get to be an In-Name-Only Associate Producer or anything. Hell, you don’t even get a VHS copy of the movie. Maybe her local tote bag store was closed on launch day?

Spike Lee had dozens and dozens of levels before cracking $1,000, and you got to be in the movie(!) or score some custom Air Jordans for it. Veronica Mars invited you to the red carpet premiere and after party at that level. So did Zach Braff.

At this point, I can only assume that the $11 Stuart pulled in is from friends testing to make sure the Back This Project button wasn’t broken.

Mistake #5: Talking in Hollywood Speak

This may seem like a minor infringement after the mountain of other issues, but it also could have been the saving grace of a misguided campaign. Even if it weren’t spoken directly into a camera, a heartfelt call to action might have turned an eyebrow-raiser into a quirky dark horse.

Instead, Stuart laces her pitch with generic industry speak.

KATE ALLEN IS GETTING A LIFE will be a funny, heartfelt comedy with mainstream audience appeal. 

Why would mainstream audience appeal matter to a contributor? It would to a financier thinking about a Netflix deal down the line, but not to someone looking to support something interesting and worthwhile.

The risks of film financing are such that no one knows if a particular film will be successful, but I am seeking a very reasonable amount of film financing in Hollywood terms. Steven Soderbergh’s recent hit film MAGIC MIKE was budgeted at $7 million and has made well over $100 million, so the financial and creative rewards can be great.

The financial rewards can be great…for the filmmaker. For the people donating $1,000, the financial rewards are exactly $25. Clearly our definitions of “great” differ. Also, you aren’t Steven Soderbergh.

Plus, while explaining that your ludicrous funding goal is reasonable in Hollywood terms is only a dash condescending, it’s also up to the audience to decide whether or not what you’re asking for is ultimately a fair target. When you choose to enter the Thunderdome, the audience becomes King. Besides, even though that amount of money might be reasonable in Hollywood (questionable), it’s outlandish on Kickstarter (which is where you are right now), and tossing statements like that out there hint that you’re concerned only with your rewards from the endeavor and not with the audience’s (as if we couldn’t tell that by the literal lack of rewards being offered to the audience).

I have secured letters of interest from Thora Birch, Heather Matarazzo and Jennifer Elise Cox on my own for my romantic comedy KATE ALLEN IS GETTING A LIFE, but the challenges I am facing are mainly that the big film studios and production companies are highly exclusive and insular. For the most part, they will only accept screenplays from people they know, and will only do business with people they know.

This is a tricky one. A Letter of Interest is an industry document that’s not a contract. It’s also a confusing element for a project like this because not everyone will know what it is. Either you have these actresses attached or you don’t, and even while a financier’s ears might be perked, it’s a giant question mark for someone choosing to donate money at this level. I won’t go as far to say that it’s dishonest in this context, but when what you’ve chosen as your biggest selling point isn’t even secure, there’s a problem.

Imagine when legions of Thora Birch fans drop a grand each to make this happen only to see Birch drop out of something she wasn’t even attached to in the first place. Now stop laughing. It’s not like they were going to get a DVD or anything, anyway.

But the biggest problem with all the industry-ese is something I can’t quote because it’s not in her pitch. Nowhere does Stuart explain why the movie is so important to her. Did she write it as a mirror to her own struggles as an aspiring writer? Was she moved by a situation that made her want to write about refusing to give up on dreams? Did she pick a high concept plot out of a hat?

We’ll never know those answers because in the grand tradition of screenwriting, she only tells us that her “heart and soul” are invested in the film instead of showing us. Ultimately it’s that — along with exciting proof of your abilities as a filmmaker, an interesting plot and perhaps some concept art — which propels people to give.

Optional Mistake #6: Not Donating to Other Kickstarter Campaigns

Spike Lee was criticized for saying in his pitch video that he’d been told about Kickstarter by a student weeks before he launched it — the intimation being that he saw it solely as a lark, a what-the-hell moneymaking venture instead of as a meaningful new tool — but Lee also took the time to engage with the community by donating money to several projects just before and in the weeks following his launch. He may have been new to the game, but he was interested enough in helping others who were playing it.

Obviously that’s not a must-have for all campaigns, but it’s also zero percent surprising that Stuart hasn’t donated to any other campaigns.

What Have We Learned

The cardinal rules of Kickstarter have perhaps never been so clearly displayed in reverse.

• Have a firm title that acts as a hook by describing what’s interesting or unique
• Take the time to create a video (especially if you’re a director, people)
• Be realistic about how much money you’ll need and what you can get through crowdfunding (i.e. not $5M)
• Have a multitude of donation levels with a variety of incentives (including the no-brainer of the movie itself)
• Use direct, relaxed language and recognize that you’re speaking to fans, not a boardroom of film execs
• Maybe take the time to build up some karma by supporting other projects you find intriguing

I have to admit that I struggled with writing this because it felt slightly mean-spirited, but in the end we’re not talking about an amateur who’s lost their way; we’re talking about a woman claiming experience at a professional capacity in the film industry who has earned a living from a book called “Getting Your Script Through the Hollywood Maze” while trying to snake $1,250 from aspiring writers for script coverage. The enormity of her $11 misstep here offers a sizable rubric for avoiding failure by staring directly at it.

Stuart may not have meant to, but she’s done a great service for aspiring filmmakers looking to crowdfunding as an option even as she’s proven that she doesn’t know how to get through the maze herself.

Actual sets were constructed for the cockpits of the Jaegers. They, along with the rig that controlled them were four stories tall and could drop fifteen feet. Guillermo del Toro described them as “a torture machine.”

Pacific Rim (2013)