Oakfairy

In case you missed it, some (generous-air-quotes here) “comedians,” Will Sasso and Chad Kultgen, buried George Carlin in the ol’ Pet Sematary, where Carlin arose from death as a Paper-Jam Dipper version of himself, and the aforementioned “comedians” Weekend-at-Bernies’d him into “performing” a “comedy special,” all of which is proof we live in Hell.

That story, and Kelly Carlin’s response, can be found here.

This sucks. Obviously, this sucks. It absolutely sucks in a lot of directions. It is bad, and I hate it, and if you’re a person who does not suck, then you think this sucks, too.

I really loved George Carlin growing up. Carlin cemented my love of standup comedy but not just that — he was so fucking clever, and so very profane, and righteously angry, and perhaps best of all, he really, really loved language. His books put this well on display, how much he loved tinkering with words and the rhythm of the spoken word and how our language was not just interesting because of its construction but because of how it changed and how it exposed the inadequacies and contradictions in society. He was exceptional at dissection. He could rip us down to the struts with one sentence, and make us cry laughing doing it.

He was singular.

So, it was itself a singular desecration to see a couple of Internet jamokes have his memory vacuumed up into the belly of Generative AI, where it then digested him and sprayed the mucky bilious chunks onto the internet in the form of a brand new, and again I must emphasize the sarcastic quotation marks here, “””comedy special.”””

This comedian, this genius, who loved the art of language and the incisiveness of it to both make people laugh and make people think, gets run through the shit-grinder, and the art barf robot barfs out something whose language is graceless, whose wit is as incisive as instant pudding.

Again, this sucks, I hate it, you hate it too, because you’re a good person.

But I also think, this is a very good example of why generative AI sucks. And not just in one way, oh no. In this way, the Carlin special is a fruitful field with considerable yield — it is a manifold example that offers, with almost alarming clarity, the answer to the question of why we should be deeply resentful and distrustful toward generative AI. It reminds us bold-facedly why we should sneer at it, and spit at those who made it, and make sour faces at anyone who tries to use it.

Let’s go through it why this nicely exemplifies how gen-AI is hot garbage:

a) First, the special is bad. I don’t mean this as a moral judgment (though it fails that test, too) — I mean the special is just fucking bad. It is not funny. It does not sound like Carlin in literal voice or metaphorical voice. It isn’t even mid. The best it can aspire to is “fits of pure mediocrity.”

You ever taste something, a soda or a candy or whatever, that’s supposed to taste like another thing (strawberry, let’s say), and you eat it and it’s terrible but somewhere in there you can vibe that someone once maybe thought of a strawberry while they were making this? Like, there’s the ghost of an abducted, murdered strawberry in there? But mostly it’s just gross? This is that. It’s a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of the ghost of an idea of a dream of a old cursed VHS tape. And it’s bad.

I don’t know why we want this. Who is the market for this? “Remember that thing that was really good? Well, I took that good thing and then 3-D printed it with sewage, and now here it is again, just considerably shittier.” Who wants that? Who wants more of the same, just whittled down to splinters? Is that what we want from the human experience? “I really like David Bowie, but he’s dead, so now give me David Bowie again, just awful this time. By the way, my kink is ruining good things.”

It’s not just his poorly-replicated voice, or the shitty material. All the AI-generated imagery that serves as a backdrop, too: mediocre, weird, bad.

b) It can only steal. This exists only because George Carlin made comedy. It cannot exist without George Carlin. It stole his face. It stole his voice. It stole his material. Then ruined all three. The end.

c) To put a finer point on it, ChatGPT cost, what, $100 million to train? They’ve admitted that they could not have done that if they had to pay for rights from what they fed to the machine. If they had to pay for the rights to access and replicate Carlin’s material, that alone would have been a pretty penny. A hundred million is chump change — they would’ve paid billions in licensing fees to feed material to the machine. (And again, consider the active agency here: we speak of AI like it’s out there, roaming the countryside, wolfing down copyrighted works on its own. But there is an active human hand in this. There is human agency. Rich people want to get richer by stealing work. It’s cheap as free to them. They kidnapped all this material, then built the copy-paste button and hope you’ll push it.)

d) This one-hundred-percent confirms the fears that generative AI is not only stealing material, but will grave-rob your shit for eternity. Actually funny (and no-air-quotes-required) comedian Josh Gondelman points out in that article linked above: “There’s the idea of someone’s image being used in perpetuity, including after their death, without consent or appropriate compensation.”

e) The Uncanny Valley just gets deeper and deeper. Hearing this feels like you’re poking some atavistic impulse inside you, a deeply-buried ancestral memory of a time when we were hunted by The Things That Stole Faces. It’s like the men-in-black from Keel’s Mothman book — they show up with semi-human faces and smeared makeup and no eyelids and they’re like, YES HELLO FELLOW MEAT MAN WE ARE FLESH-BOUND HUMAN AGENTS DO NOT TELL PEOPLE OF THE UFOS OR WE WILL DIGEST YOU I MEAN ARREST YOU WHAT DO YOU MEAN I DON’T HAVE EYEBROWS. It’s fucking creepy. It makes me queasy to hear it. It’s like the bad guy from any Doctor Who episode, wearing our skin to steal more of our skin.

f) It’s also a good example of how the media might launder this stuff. Look at the headline here at USA Today when this first hit:

(My understanding is the lede here was added later, in the 1/11 update.)

This definitely vibes like, “Wow, hey, George Carlin has a new comedy special, and his digital ghost has some controversial takes, whoa, crazy!”

The media is very good at laundering negatives as if they’re positives — and it doesn’t help that our media landscape is being gutted left and right, newsrooms bereft of actual humans as waves of layoffs crush our access to news, and why? For what? Well, so AI can come in and just write the articles. It’s AI writing AI for AI from AI and we’re just watching artwork and information turn to muck and mush.

(It’s not a conspiracy if it’s out in the open.)

Listen, I didn’t want to give this oxygen. I still don’t. This is a stunt, and arguably a stunt’s job is to get attention, and I’m giving it attention. At the same time, it’s hard not to deny that this embodies a monstrous effort to… I dunno, reduce us to garbage-eaters and feed us garbage. “Look, we made the Content Recyclers to recycle content into your held-open mouths, so just be quiet and suckle at the Info-Tube. Then don’t forget to shit your entertainment slurry back into the Content Recycler! It’s sustainable content, after all. Like Taco Bell! From the sewer it comes. To the sewer, it returns.”

I think it’s important to talk about this. I think it’s good to point at it and say, “This is shit, I hate it, it’s a problem.” I think it’s good to lacquer all the output from generative AI with a slick sheen of foul-smelling mucus so that nobody wants to touch it. I want us to see that it’s a bad idea. I want corporations to see that it’s a bad idea. That we’re suspicious of it. That we don’t want it. That what we want is for artists and writers and musicians and comedians and creators to be free to create and to be paid for what they do and to not have that work stolen and fed to a machine so that some corporation can photocopy it poorly and sell it to you for money in their pocket.

Yelling about this stuff has some purpose. It ensures that when a company uses AI for a book cover or when a news outlet uses AI to write an article, there’s enough people pissed that they have to walk it back. I like it when companies have to apologize for having used AI. Put a little stink on it. Smear it up. It helps to say, “I won’t buy this if there’s AI involved.” I write books because I’m a person trying to talk to other people. I write stories because I want to grapple with all the goofy scary strange shit that is a part of the human condition. I don’t want an AI to emulate me, to steal my face and chase people down with its too-many-fingers. I don’t want people to want that of me. Why would you? Who really is the audience for this? Are we begging for it, or are corporations begging for us to be begging for it?

I also think there’s value specifically in writers saying that they don’t want to be a part of any of this, and don’t want any of it to be a part of our work. Paul Tremblay, who is an author you should always, always be reading, posted this on his Instagram —

And I think this is absolutely the right way forward. I think it’s good to make it clear that this shit won’t fly. (And in case I have not made it clear, I obviously co-sign what Paul is saying here.) It’s worth going to our agents and publishers and saying, “Yeah, keep all of this out of the AI’s mouth, please. I only want human intervention on my books.”

As an endcap to this, I note the following —

When I posted my last bit about AI (here), someone commented thusly:

And I post it here because it really is, like the Carlin special, an emblem of how bad ChatGPT and these language models are at doing what you want them to do. It is a mediocre answer that fails to understand both the source material and any potential answer to that material. It offers shallow non-answer responses, assumes I’m a visual artist (my “doodles”), insults without meaning or grace, and mostly just says “meh, fuck you, so what if AI sucks” in a variety of ways over and over again. The commenter called it priceless, and it is that, in the sense that it is worth no price, no penny at all.

Anyway. I hope this special earns the two dickheads who made it the very worst kind of attention.

And I hope that Kelly Carlin jams a lawsuit so far up their asses that they can feel American jurisprudence pressing against the backs of their teeth.

OKAY, buy my books or I die. Bye!

Android kommer få tjockare reglage i systemet och i appar, efter uppdateringar av riktlinjerna för designspråket Material You. Dagens reglage, eller sliders som de heter på engelska, är smala och har en liten rund prick som indikerar den aktuella nivån.

Utöver att vara tjockare har reglagen nu ett streck som visar nivån, medan en bubbla ovanför strecket kan visa nivån i form av siffror mellan 0–100 när användare drar i reglaget. Genom siffran blir det enklare att ange exakta nivåer, exempelvis 25 procent eller 50 procent.

De rekommenderade reglagen har fyra olika utformningar. Vi har inte sett till de nya reglagen än men de bör dyka upp i systemet och i appar framöver.

Glasgow 2024’s accommodation booking service will open to all members from Monday, January 22.  Booking for hotel blocks will be through their accommodation partner, the Glasgow Convention Bureau. The con has 800 rooms reserved across 7 on-site hotels and a further … Continue reading →

The post Accommodation Bookings Opening Soon for Glasgow 2024 first appeared on File 770.

benergy-time:

my friend just visited his grandma and found this on her wall 😭

SHE FRAMED THR KISS SCENE IM CRYING

(she also called David tennet a “dilf”)

This story was originally published by Grist. Sign up for Grist’s weekly newsletter here.

Read more...

sirfrogsworth:

You gotta hide the rabbit hole in some cheese.

[ Veggie Donut ]

amtrak-official:

mudkipspropaganda:

amtrak-official:

catboymothman:

amtrak-official:

amtrak-official:

So do people realize that we aren’t building new train tracks when we expand the amteak network, I have multiple times seen people say that we shouldn’t expand the network because it would destroy protected lands, which would be a fair criticism but Amtrak doesn’t build new tracks, we use existing tracks. We are not destroying protected lands, we are using land that has already been clear for a century

Also the alternative is more highways which destroy significantly more land for less capacity than railways. So the question is do you want to keep complaining about something that isn’t happening and let the environment get damaged as a result or do you want to actually learn how things work

So, wait… Were the tracks not in use at all? Or was it like *only* commercial transport on those tracks? Either way, its good that amtrak will be able to use them again, but one would be much more frustrating

Almost all rail tracks in the US are either abandoned or only used for freight rail at the moment

Jesus, we really have no excuse for having such a lackluster rail system, do we?

Sure we do! The US government hate both rail and you personally

fuckyeahgoodomens:

Mickey Ralph, the graphic designer of Good Omens ❤ :)

It seems like we’ve all embraced the concept of comfort reads (and comfort shows/movies) lately, particularly over the last few tumultuous years. There are cozy mysteries, domestic fantasies, stories where nothing bad happens, books that focus above all on kindness and caring—the kind of tales we turn to and share whenever we need to feel better about the world. Well, I’d like to acknowledge another type of story that belongs in this category: Competence porn. I find that competence porn can be really, really comforting (and I’d welcome more of it, so if you have any recommendations, please mention them in the comments!).

If you know what I’m talking about, you probably don’t require much convincing. If you don’t, I’ll break it down for you: What the hell is competence porn?

The term was coined by John Rogers, creator of the TV show Leverage—one of our best examples of this particular type of storytelling. If you’re not familiar with Leverage, the show is about four professional thieves with distinctive skill sets who team up with a mastermind planner to get revenge on rich and powerful assholes who take advantage of people and ruin their lives for profit. (It’s extremely gratifying.)

Rogers wanted a shorthand way to talk about the very specific kind of satisfaction that we feel when watching folks competently handle complex situations using the kinds of specialized skills and expertise that we can all appreciate (even if we can’t personally replicate them), and he came up with “competence porn.” It’s about both the process and the outcome, and the comforting safety net of knowing that whatever challenge arises, the whole thing is in, well, extremely competent hands. Of course there are different permutations and varieties and genres involved, but we can lay out some basic ground rules—a formula for the type of story we’re talking about, for the sake of discussion.

First of all, we need experts: People who are so good at their craft that they can improvise and rise to any challenge, adapting to any obstacles or changes in the plan. We start with our mastermind, the genius who sees how all the pieces fit together, the big picture-seeing visionary with the top-down view, who keeps everyone calm even when the shit hits the fan. This mastermind is watching out for the team and also for us, the audience, providing the safety net we need. Knowing that this genius is around, thinking ten steps ahead, we feel safe enough to commit to enjoying the antics that will play out, as suspenseful as they may be, and we can allow ourselves to invest in and care about the characters, in spite of the massive risks they’re taking.

Next we need a team of specialists. Sure, you can absolute argue for something like the John Wick franchise being competence porn based around a single character (he certainly is competent!), but I tend to prefer stories built around the satisfaction that comes from seeing a team or group of extremely competent people synthesizing their skills and learning to work together. It’s thrilling in the same way as watching a big dance number with complex choreography, or really great improv comedy acts, with everyone hitting their mark at the exact right time—or if they didn’t, their team covered seamlessly, and the audience will never know. Thought that was a fatal blunder? Think again—either the misstep will be revealed to be intentional, or it will be used to the team’s advantage, so that everything turns out even better than expected. There’s just something incredibly satisfying about watching a group of people so perfectly attuned to one another that they can accomplish something none of them could alone.

Now, these team members need to be people who can solve problems within their area of expertise by thinking outside the box and coming up with just the right trick, hack, or workaround. They’ve seen every iteration of how things could go, and they have all that experience to call upon, as well as the ability to improvise and quickly shift to new variations rather than sticking rigidly to one original idea or plan.

Oh and speaking of the original idea? Well, actually, there tend to be dozens of “original” ideas: Plans A through Z have been careful considered and will often come up in comical discussion between characters. In the very first episode of Leverage, computer expert Hardison asks if it’s time to go to plan B, and mastermind Nate tells him, “Technically, that would be plan G.” When Hardison asks how many plans there are, “Is there like, a plan M?” Nate assures him that yes, he has thought that far ahead, but unfortunately, “Hardison dies in plan M.” This kind of banter is de rigueur between team members, particularly when they’re under pressure—this light repartee graces the conversation of recent competent teams like the Crows in Shadow and Bone, or Lockwood and his associates in Lockwood & Co.

When it comes one-upsmanship with one another over who’s the MVP of a particular caper or which variation of the plan is best, it’s generally best to have a good dose of smartassery all around. There may be some examples of competence porn that don’t draw on this type of humor, but for me, there’s nothing drearier than a story that takes the action so seriously that nobody can ever crack a joke—no matter how high the stakes are, there should always be room for a little fun or a quick quip.

So, who do we need on our team? Well, it depends on what you’re trying to accomplish. Leverage begins with a mastermind who brings together a hacker/tech expert, a hitter (the muscle), a master thief proficient in everything from cat burglary to safe-cracking to picking pockets, and a brilliant con artist (aka: the grifter). As is often the case in these stories, the team members start out as loners who don’t play well with others, but as they learn to cooperate professionally, they eventually find themselves growing into friends, and even family. The plots are often, but not always, capers (think The Italian Job, or Ocean’s Eleven). Depending on your goals, your ideal team might include a driver, a demolitions expert, a magician, a forger, or a really good librarian. Whatever the situation calls for, they’ll be the best in their field, and probably have a bone to pick with powerful (often corrupt) individuals and institutions.

Because “competence porn” isn’t quite a genre and examples that tick most of the boxes above aren’t marketed as such, it’s always a delight to recognize one of these types of stories—and perhaps it would be best to call it a team dynamic instead of a genre (depends on how strict you are about labels). I’ve seen examples spring up all over the place in newer science fiction and fantasy stories, and I couldn’t be happier. Hyper-competent Murderbot learns to work with others (multiple times) and everything comes together when they learn to trust each other in Martha Wells’ Murderbot series. Galadriel “El” Higgins, from Naomi Novik’s Scholomance trilogy, works her team of wizards hard because it’s the only way to stay alive—but together, they thrive. Even the day-to-day grind of working in local government that we see on Parks and Recreation is incredibly fun to watch because Leslie Knope and her team (regardless of their attitudes toward their jobs—looking at you, Ron Swanson…) are actually all fantastic at what they do.

There’s something so very gratifying about watching people live up to their full potential—getting to see all the hard work they put in pay off, not just in their private satisfaction but as part of a group of similarly talented, driven people who have dedicated themselves to their craft, and a shared goal. It’s not unusual to dream about being outstandingly good at something, and in the end there’s a level of pure enjoyment that comes from seeing someone doing something they love, perform flawlessly, and win the day.

As I mentioned up at the top, I’m always searching for new books, shows, movies (or anything else) that fits into the category of “competence porn,” so I’d love to hear your thoughts, suggestions, and favorite examples of hyper-capable teams of rogues, professionals, and/or unlikely heroes—please share in the comments.

Originally published July 2023

Rachel Ayers lives in Alaska, where she writes cabaret shows, daydreams, and looks at mountains a lot. She has a degree in Library and Information Science which comes in handy at odd hours, and she shares speculative poetry and flash fiction (and cat pictures) at patreon.com/richlayers.

Are you asking if we had David Tennant grow that beard in a weekend and dye it ginger?

neil-gaiman:

On the list of things ABSOLUTELY NOBODY HAS EVER ASKED ME FOR. Here’s the dialogue from the TV show that the Young family are watching in Episode 3, before Adam heads off for an early night.

From 2019. I just ran across this on the hard drive looking for something else, and wondered if it had ever been posted anywhere…

myjetpack:

ALT

My GIFT-XPERT™ algorithm will help you with those tricky Christmas shopping decisions!

We’re still discovering new ways covid-19 can harm us, some four years after the emergence of this complicated viral disease. In a recent report, doctors in Massachusetts describe a teen girl whose vocal cords became paralyzed soon after a bout of covid-19. The girl required a tracheostomy in place for more than a…

Read more...

It’s baffling that someone really tried to legitimize fan fiction when the estate of of The Lord of the Rings author is still actively pushing out adaptations of J.R.R. Tolkien’s seminal work.

Read more...

The future is uncertain for Avengers: The Kang Dynasty. Marvel’s planned crossover film, set for release May 1, 2026, will likely feature a new face taking over the role of Kang the Conqueror as Jonathan Majors has been ousted as the MCU’s reigning big bad.

Read more...

Christopher Eccleston has had a long road of private and publicly processing his time on Doctor Who—for many years, the actor simply refused to talk about why, having helped turn the series into a sensation when it returned in 2005, he left and never looked back. But, while still largely reserved, Eccleston is now…

Read more...

pixie-mage:

summerpipedream:

vesperlionheart:

abessinier:

1. You are responsible for your own media experience. 

2. There is such a thing as a healthy level of avoidance towards topics that make you feel unwell or even (in a real-life clinical definition of the term) trigger you - but you are the one to actively take care of what you view.

3. Avoiding does not mean policing others.

4. You have no right to tell artists to censor themselves - you may criticize what others do, you may dislike it, that’s fine - but actively asking for censorship when you could easily unfollow or block a person just makes you look incompetent in your use of the internet.

5. Do not give people on tumblr or /any/ website the responsibility for your emotional well-being. Because these people do not even know you so no, you have no right to ask them to take care of you.

6. Content creators are not your parents and owe you nothing, not even a breakdown on why their content isn’t problematic. You don’t get to demand a dissertation denouncing any and everything unhealthy in a piece you don’t like. Move on.

7. Tagging is a nicety but not an obligation. You can message people, politely, and ask them to tag things, and many people will, but understand that it’s their blog and they aren’t obliged to say yes. Unfollow and block when you need to. Circling back to number 1, you are responsible for curating your own experience.

8. Don’t be a jerk. Remember at the end of the day, there are actual living, breathing people behind each screen name. Don’t say anything you wouldn’t say to someone’s face in real life. 

I cannot stress enough how important it is to remember this.

Are you enjoying that new Deck smell a little too much? Valve’s support staff are now telling users that they shouldn’t be huffing the exhaust from the Steam Deck’s grills for their health and safety, though there’s no recorded issue with folks taking a hit off their electronics’ cooling vents.

Read more...

And who's to say they are wrong?

New research shows that tirzepatide, the latest FDA-approved obesity drug, really can help people lose substantial amounts of weight—but only if they continue taking it. The study found that people who stopped taking tirzepatide after 36 weeks regained much of their lost weight within a year, while those who continued…

Read more...

Google Maps erbjuder en funktion som visar en tidslinje över alla platser och områden användaren har besökt. För att finessen ska kunna användas behöver platshistoriken för Google-kontot aktiveras (den är avstängd som standard).

Tidslinjen kommer framöver bara sparas lokalt på enheten istället för i molnet, för att förbättra integriteten. Om användaren ska byta telefon eller oroar sig för att bli av med tidslinjen kan en krypterad backup sparas. Säkerhetskopian sparas på ett sätt som gör att ingen annan kan se den, inklusive Google.

För de som aktiverar platshistoriken kommer all historik äldre än tre månader att raderas automatiskt som standard. Tidigare var standardbegränsningen 1,5 år. De som vill kunna se längre tidslinjer än så kan utöka gränsen eller välja att platsdata inte ska raderas automatiskt alls.

Google skriver specifikt att tidslinjen kommer sparas lokalt istället för i molnet – inte att den allmänna platshistoriken kommer sluta sparas i datacenter. Inlägget är lite luddigt så vi vet ej huruvida förändringen avser den kompletta platshistoriken. En lokal tidslinje hade dock blivit en mycket begränsad integritetsförbättring om platshistoriken den baseras på ändå finns kvar på Googles servrar.

En annan nyhet är att användare kommer kunna radera platsdata och historik för en specifik plats. Som exempel nämner Google att någon planerar en överraskningsfest och besöker ett bageri. Det ska då gå att radera alla sökningar, vägbeskrivningar och besök för bageriet.

Nyheterna kommer i vanlig ordning skickas ut långsamt och stegvis, för Android och IOS, utan något bestämt releasedatum.

The Timeline feature in Maps helps you remember places you’ve been and is powered by a setting called Location History. If you’re among the subset of users who have chosen to turn Location History on (it’s off by default), soon your Timeline will be saved right on your device — giving you even more control over your data. Just like before, you can delete all or part of your information at any time or disable the setting entirely.

If you’re getting a new phone or are worried about losing your existing one, you can always choose to back up your data to the cloud so it doesn’t get lost. We’ll automatically encrypt your backed-up data so no one can read it, including Google.

If you give me access to your location, I am the person who will check on you constantly and bring it up the next time I see you. “So,” I’ll start casually, “what were you doing in the city last week?” Then you’ll ask me how I knew you were down there. I’ll remind you that you gave me access one summer long ago and…

Read more...

Peter Jackson’s film adaptations of J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings are wonderful. Howard Shore’s music has tremendous atmosphere, Jackson’s direction is emotionally perceptive, and the scripts (penned by Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, and Jackson himself, with Stephen Sinclair also contributing to the second film) are skillful. The performances also dazzle; Elijah Wood’s Frodo Baggins is haunted, Sean Astin taps into the sweetness of Samwise Gamgee, Andy Serkis is horrifying as Gollum, and Ian McKellen’s Gandalf is compassionate and comforting.

There are, of course, Tolkien fans who are displeased with the changes made to the original text, but I actually think most of the changes work very well, such as Eowyn (Miranda Otto) having more of a presence in the second film. (In the books, it felt like she only came into her own in The Return of the King.) The one area where I find myself most disappointed with Jackson’s take, however, is his handling of the character Faramir in the theatrical release of The Two Towers.

Tolkien’s Faramir is dignified and morally sound, and doesn’t come close to giving in to temptation for Sauron’s ring. He does show suspicion towards Frodo and Sam due to their secrecy, but eventually he discovers their goal (to take the ring to Mordor in order to destroy it) and releases them. In Jackson’s theatrical adaptation, however, Faramir (depicted by David Wenham) has a colder, threatening presence. In his very first scene, he does two things; shoots one of his enemies, and then orders Frodo and Sam to be taken prisoner. There is no discussion, no questioning. He simply takes them and the scene ends.

When he does finally question them, they find out that he is the brother of their former fellowship member, Boromir (Sean Bean), and that Boromir has died. We later see Faramir sitting in darkness and staring into the distance, but we have no idea what he’s thinking about; Jackson leaves this open to interpretation. In the middle of the night, his men discover Gollum, and Faramir threatens to kill him until Frodo hesitantly steps in. After questioning Gollum, Faramir confronts Frodo and Sam, and is seemingly intent on taking the Ring. It’s a chance, he says, for “Faramir, Captain of Gondor, to show his quality.” Without any context, this comes across as simply egotistical and a way of showcasing the Ring’s power to seduce. (In an interview with Jackson and Boyens, Jackson explains that they did this to maintain the sense of tension in the film; having Faramir ignore any temptation for the ring wouldn’t make sense for that goal, he argues.)

Image: New Line Cinema

Faramir takes them to the city of Osgiliath, which is under attack, and despite Sam and Frodo pleading with him, he still orders them taken to his father, with the message that he is sending a “mighty gift.” (An important phrase, as I’ll touch on.) After Sam’s speech about holding on to goodness in the world near the end of the film, Faramir (watching from a distance) tells Frodo that, at last, they understand one another. He releases them, even though he is warned by his men that his life will be forfeit, and that is the last we see of him in the film.

This version is the live-action Faramir that became known to the world through the cinematic release of The Two Towers. For much of the public who never watched the extended versions or read the books, it is the only Faramir that they know. This is a terrible shame because the Extended Edition version of Faramir is not only much more nuanced, but also one of the best parts of Jackson’s adaptation.

Let’s return to his very first scene, but this time looking at the Extended Edition. There is already a crucial difference on display: Sam protests that they are innocent travelers when Faramir’s men capture them, and Faramir, with the haunted look of a man always at war, observes that there are no travelers in that land, only servants of the dark tower. When Frodo sternly tells him that people who oppose “The Enemy” would do well to aid them, Faramir targets his use of ‘enemy’ immediately, as he stares at a dead man on the ground that he has just shot:

“The enemy? His sense of duty was no less than yours, I deem. You wonder what his name is, where he came from, and if he was really evil at heart… what lies or threats led him on this long march from home… if he would not rather have stayed there in peace. War will make corpses of us all.”

(This is a mildly altered version of a passage in Tolkien’s books, which originally comes from Sam’s thoughts.) In the context of the film, we see from this dialogue that Faramir is thoughtful, empathetic, and perhaps deeply tired of war. We are given moral nuance for the story as a whole, too. I have seen Sam’s original passage used during discussions over Tolkien’s handling of good and evil in The Lords of the Rings. The absence of this moment in the theatrical edition is staggering, not just for Faramir’s character, but for the moral texture of the tale itself.

Image: New Line Cinema

When he reveals that he is Boromir’s brother, we are also shown how he found Boromir’s body drifting in the water, which gives us a snippet of his own perspective instead of keeping us outside it. After this we see him holding Boromir’s split horn, in a pose that will mirror one his father takes in the final film, and then we are allowed to see what he was thinking about in that moment from the theatrical edition where he was sitting in darkness. It’s a flashback sequence, entirely new and absent from Tolkien’s text and the theatrical version, which is one of the best scenes in the entire film:

Boromir stands high above the men of Gondor, triumphant and charismatic as he proclaims that they have retaken the city of Osgiliath from enemy forces, and that it will never again fall into evil hands. The mood is ecstatic, and when Boromir comes down to mix with the men, Faramir finds him and they share a warm moment where they drink together. “Remember today, little brother,” Boromir says. “Today, life is good.”

This is when their father enters; Denethor, the steward of Gondor, played by John Noble. Denethor embraces Boromir with real pride, but when Boromir points out that the victory also belongs to Faramir, Denethor is callous. It’s Faramir’s fault that Osgiliath was taken in the first place, he notes. “Always you cast a poor reflection on me.”

Boromir and Denethor move away and talk together, Boromir trying to tell Denethor that Faramir loves him, while Denethor is unimpressed. He urges Boromir to go to Rivendell and bring him the Ring, “a mighty gift,” before Boromir walks away again. Faramir overhears them when they return, and he offers to go to Rivendell instead. Denethor is distasteful at the very suggestion, and then we get dialogue from him that is crucial for Faramir:

“You? Oh, I see. A chance for Faramir, Captain of Gondor, to show his quality. I think not. I trust this mission only to your brother—the one who will not fail me.”

Faramir watches Boromir leave for Rivendell, and Boromir’s final words to him are, once again, reminding him to remember that day. His tone has changed now, though; he’s almost mournful. Always recall the warm moments and victory we had today, he is silently saying. He senses that darkness awaits in the pursuit of Isildur’s Bane, but even he doesn’t know that this will be the last time they see one another.

Image: New Line Cinema

This is a revealing scene. It gives us more of an idea of Gondor’s history in the war, we see the actual relationship of Boromir and Faramir and the contrasting dynamics they both have with their father. It shows us Osgiliath, which is key not just to Faramir’s arc in this film, but also to his character in the next one. It gives us more context for Boromir’s actions in the first film, helps us to understand Faramir in this one, and paves the way for Denethor’s cruelty in the final film, thus covering past, present, and future. Denethor’s line where he scoffs about Faramir wanting to show his quality is particularly important because, later on, we suddenly grasp the proper context when Faramir repeats this line in front of Frodo and Sam. It’s not egotistical at all; it is a sad yearning to please his father and prove himself. That, it seems, is what the Ring is particularly preying on.

The scene near the end of the film with Faramir telling his men to deliver Frodo and Sam to Denethor also calls back to this flashback, as Faramir uses Denethor’s exact phrase to Boromir (“mighty gift”) as a message for him. Did Faramir somehow overhear that full conversation, or is this mere coincidence? Either way, it is a reminder of what is motivating him, context absent from the theatrical edition. The important thing here is that the film gives us Faramir’s perspective. While the theatrical cut observes Faramir in a detached way, keeping him mysterious and less fleshed out, the extended one captures him intimately and sympathetically.

When Faramir decides to let Frodo and Sam go, he doesn’t simply vanish from the film as in the theatrical cut. We see him showing them a way to the woods, and wishing them well, with the most important part being Sam telling Faramir that he has shown his quality — the very highest. Now that we know the struggle Faramir has endured, and why he was tempted, this line is the perfect end for his arc in the film. (Leave it to Sam to have the most touching dialogue.)

Faramir in the Extended Edition shows his “quality” as a character, you might say, and Faramir in the theatrical edition is undeniably damaged from a narrative perspective. What makes this situation more complicated is that this also has an impact on Faramir’s depiction in the final film, The Return of the King. While my focus here is The Two Towers, there is one scene that I can’t help but reference in the third film, which is the one where Denethor and Faramir are together in Gondor, and Denethor is deeply displeased that Osgiliath has once again been taken by enemies. He clearly wants Faramir to retake it, but Faramir justifiably points out that it is simply overrun, and they are at too big a disadvantage. Denethor ignores him. Faramir then slowly asks the one terrible question: Does Denethor really wish that Faramir had died instead of Boromir?

Denethor pauses, and then simply says that yes, he wishes that. Faramir, with tears in his eyes, says he will do his best to retake Osgiliath, and only asks that if he returns his father might think better of him. “That will depend on the manner of your return,” Denethor says.

Image: New Line Cinema

It always seems to come back to Osgiliath for Faramir, doesn’t it? I wonder if, at this point, he views it as his own Waterloo. This once again shows how important the flashback scene in the extended second film was, as we saw Denethor accuse Faramir of being responsible for losing this exact location before. In a way, this scene feels like an essential sequel to that one.

This specific scene, which is thankfully in both the theatrical and extended versions of the third film, really seems to make an impact on people. It’s Wenham’s performance, his look of overwhelming hurt, and even the way he slowly walks away. Roger Ebert, who complained about what he felt was a lack of psychological depth in the films, said he only felt “truthful emotion thoughtfully paid for” twice out of all the moments in the trilogy: the endings for Faramir and Gollum. (In Faramir’s case he seems to be specifically talking about the way Denethor breaks down and attempts to burn him alive.) That twisted relationship between father and son works so well due to scenes like the one I described above, and it must surely work even better if the viewer has seen the Extended Edition of The Two Towers and the Osgiliath flashback there.

There is one thing both versions of the film Faramir, theatrical and extended, share; he seems more vulnerable, and less confident than in Tolkien’s text. Tolkien’s Faramir feels like an ideal captain; confident, wise, and morally pure. Jackson’s Faramir feels like a man trying to be a captain, endearingly so in the extended version, and mysteriously so in the theatrical. I don’t think that the fans that complain about Faramir in Jackson’s work are wrong, but they focus on the moral degradation of Tolkien’s version, while, for me, Jackson actually gave us an even more sympathetic version of Faramir but hid it in the Extended Edition. (Maybe that is fitting for a character who is supposed to have a more subtle and less visible value to him than his brother Boromir.)

Perhaps Jackson’s Faramir, even the extended cut depiction, isn’t really the same as Tolkien’s character, but I think he has, as Billy Boyd’s Pippin put it so well in the extended Return of the King, “strength of a different kind.” He’s utterly human.

Aamir Mehar is a freelance writer and a lifelong fan of fantasy and science fiction. You can find him on Twitter: @Aamirmwriter

Enligt upptäckter i senaste betaversionen av Android kommer operativsystemet låta användare dölja valfria appar. Finessen ser ut att kallas ”private space” på engelska. När användare döljer en potentiellt känslig app hamnar appen i det låsta ”privata rummet” längst ned i applådan.

Den låsta avdelningen öppnas på samma sätt som själva telefonen: med biometri eller PIN-kod. Tillverkare likt Oneplus och Samsung erbjuder redan liknande funktionalitet men att finessen bakas in i systemet gör att apparna kan döljas betydligt mer:

• Användare kan välja att det ”privata rummet” inte ens ska visas i applådan. Då måste användare söka för att hitta den dolda avdelningen.
• Inte ens Androids inställningar, likt tillåtelsehanteraren och dylika appalternativ, kommer lista de dolda apparna om inte det ”privata rummet” först låses upp.
• Alla aviseringar från låsta appar döljs.

Funktionen skulle inte bara kunna komma till pass för appar användare av en eller annan anledning vill dölja för andra personer som ibland har tillgång till telefonen, utan även för att exempelvis ge ett ytterligare säkerhetssteg för bankappar eller molnlagring.

Det verkar dock som det ”privata rummet” är långt från lansering och kanske först släpps i och med Android 15 nästa höst.

mxactivist:

Apparently the BBC (UK) has had 144 complaints about a recent episode of Doctor Who because it contained an openly trans character.

ALT

I’ve made a complaint to the BBC that there weren’t enough transgender characters in Doctor Who. I would love if 144 other people did the same thing. Here’s the link: https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/complaints/make-a-complaint/#/Complaint

(For your easy reference: “The Star Beast” aired on 25/11/2023 on BBC One, and the trans character is called Rose.)

Please note that the complaint form asks for your UK postcode, so only UK folks can join in with this - but if you suspect you might have any UK-based followers, maybe give us a reblog to boost the signal?

Reply when you’ve done it, so I can keep track of us!

Here’s my complaint:

ALT

I recommend:

• Avoid sarcasm or irony. Assume your post will be taken literally. If you are clearly joking or being mean you will be ignored or misunderstood.
• Include some gratitude/appreciation. It’s pretty great that they included a trans woman in a positive way, and they should know that they have explicit support for that.

Looking for a way to make devastating competitive moves against your friends while occupying an imaginative fantasy world? Look no further!

I play board games any chance I get. My friends and I have an unwritten rule that every hardcore gaming session must include at least one new game. This has resulted in a recent onslaught of new board games, many of which take place in unique fantasy worlds or use fantasy concepts in intriguing ways.

Here are five of my favorites—and I hope you’ll recommend your own top fantasy board games in the comments!

Small World

In Small World, the world is… too small.

You select a fantasy race to start the game. There are a few dozen in the game, including giants, dwarves, skeletons, ghouls, and more. Every type has unique abilities.

Each race also comes with a random power attached to it. You might get Giants who excel at bivouacking. Perhaps you will draw flying sorcerers. These powers are shuffled in each game, so the combinations will always be different.

You use your selected race to conquer portions of a map that’s made to be crowded. Eventually, you’ll realize you’ve stretched your crew too thin. At that point, you put your race into “decline” and pick a new one.

Small World has elements of Risk, but the battle mechanics are simpler. The purpose of the game is to conquer as much as you can and earn the points that come with your conquest. It makes you feel like the commander of a small but mighty fantasy army, putting you in a tough spot when you suddenly have to abandon your forces for a new battalion.

Of all the games on this list, Small World has the toughest learning curve. I recommend using an instructional video to get the basics down before you play.

Mysterium

I absolutely love Mysterium. It is chaotic and frustrating as all hell. It’s also the only cooperative game on this list, so pick it up if you want to test a group’s propensity for teamwork.

In the game, one player takes on the role of a ghost, using abstract art on cards to give “visions” to the other players, who must use those visions to determine who murdered the ghost, where they were murdered, and the weapon used. If you’re thinking it sounds like reverse cooperative Clue, you’re on the right track.

Mysterium’s art stands out among its playing materials. Each card is beautifully illustrated with wacky and whimsical scenes. I’ve played the ghost many times, and it’s incredibly fun to dole out cards thinking the other players will make one obvious connection, only for them to make an equally valid one I never noticed.

Though Mysterium is technically a race against the clock (the players need to correctly guess each category before seven turns end), the pressure is low, and it’s fun to see what fantastical images catch the eye of your fellow players.

Century: Golem Edition

Century comes in various forms—all the same game, but with different aesthetics. It’s an engine-building game in which you construct a deck that helps you exchange and upgrade gems in the hopes of buying cards with points on them.

Fantasy doesn’t really find its way into Century’s game mechanics. Instead, I appreciate this pick for its art and presentation. The gems you collect are shiny plastic simulacrums of the precious stones they emulate. The cards all have wonderful depictions of fantasy characters harvesting these gems, sometimes from treacherous locales and sometimes in the shadow of the hulking titular golems, which loom menacingly over the diminutive gem collectors.

The Quacks of Quedlinburg

It’s quirky! It’s novel! It’s QUACKS!

You’re a potioneer/alchemist, and you’re trying to build the biggest, best potion without the volatile mixture exploding in your face.

Quacks is played in nine rounds. In each round, players blindly draw ingredient tokens one by one from a sack. You place each token on your board based on the number it contains, and some have special powers that advance you further or give you a post-round advantage. Beware, though! Draw too many garlics and your potion will explode, ending your round and forcing you to choose between collecting points or purchasing more ingredients between rounds (players whose potions don’t explode are allowed to do both).

In between rounds, you collect points and use your progress on the board to purchase more ingredients. Will you go for lower numbers but a higher volume of ingredients? Or more powerful tokens? It’s up to you.

I enjoy Quacks for its sheer uniqueness of concept: how many other games involve creating a potion by pure chance? The clever presentation and the chaos that tends to result augment the game’s premise, pushing it atop my list of favorites.

Sheriff of Nottingham

Some play board games to relax. Some play to prove they’re the most strategic. Others—like me—want a socially acceptable forum for lying to my friends’ faces.

Enter Sheriff of Nottingham.

You’re a smuggler. One of your fellow players is dubbed the Sheriff for a round, and the remaining smugglers have to attempt to pass goods through the Sheriff’s watchful outposts. Players put cards into a bag and announce the products they’re bringing into the cities: chickens, apples, sheep, or perhaps contraband like whiskey or crossbows.

The Sheriff tries to sniff out the smugglers. If the Sheriff searches your bags and there’s nothing but above-board goods in it, you’re in the clear and the Sheriff will be reprimanded. If he catches you with contraband, though, you’ll lose a hefty portion of your resources.

There’s a catch, though. If you can tell the Sheriff is onto you, you can offer a bribe and try to sneak your goods through without inspection.

When I’m the Sheriff, I feel like a snooty noble sniffing out the lawless riffraff encroaching on my city. When I’m a smuggler, I feel like a Rogue deploying my skills of stealth and deceiving the idiotic bureaucrats who would stop me.

Best part? You get to be the Sheriff and a smuggler in each game.

***

That’s the list! Have you played any of these games? Are there others you can recommend to fellow fantasy fans?

Originally published April 2023

Cole Rush writes words. A lot of them. For the most part, you can find those words at The Quill To Live or on Twitter @ColeRush1. He voraciously reads epic fantasy and science-fiction, seeking out stories of gargantuan proportions and devouring them with a bookwormish fervor. His favorite books are: The Divine Cities Series by Robert Jackson Bennett, The Long Way To A Small, Angry Planet by Becky Chambers, and The House in the Cerulean Sea by TJ Klune.

Elon Musk’s electric car company has suffered a reversal of fortune in its ongoing battle with Sweden’s labor unions. Turns out, Teslas won’t be getting license plates in the Nordic country—at least, not for the foreseeable future.

Read more...

Read more...