mercredi 25 février 2004

Horrendous hump! "Aaron, understandably reticent to be in the same room while I used the world's most luxurious masturbatory device, returned to take a few posed shots. 'Um . . . what's it feel like?' he said, using his camera primarily to avoid making eye contact. I gave Karen a few hard pumps to illustrate. 'Y'know what?' he said, taking shots as he backed toward the door. 'You can tell me later.'" This is truly appalling, outrageously expensive and ... well, I was going to say "exclusively adult". Except that 'I Did It for Science: Sex Doll', has a creepy fascination decidedly not for the children (via Cruel Site of the Day) and stretches even my definition of adult behaviour. It's rare that I lose the nerve to beg, borrow or steal pictures. 7:58:55 PM  link   your views? [] Can't afford Photoshop? Neither can I. A look at the GIMP 2.0 "The highly anticipated version 2.0 of the GIMP, due out next month, will run under Windows, Mac OS X, or Linux, and preview versions are now available for all three platforms." GraphicConverter usually does it for me. But the GIMP is free, open source and on my machine. NewsForge previews what's in the pipeline. 7:31:58 PM  link   your views? [] Blowing cold on all the heat? It's good to see the weekend Pentagon weather report from the 'Observer' doing the rounds of the media and the blogosphere. The story of potential catastrophe by climate change gave the usually tedious France Soir the wherewithal for a front-page splash yesterday, with a double-spread inside. 'Tomorrow ... the Apocalypse' read the headline. "Quand ce ne sont pas les terroristes, c'est la météo qui s'y met" ("When it's not terrorists, it's the weather that sets about it"), comments Padawan at 'Brain Not Found' (Fr), briefly giving the gist of the story. Padawan also links, however, to a different account of the report at the 'Oakland Tribune'. While Ian Hoffman goes straight to source to debunk the "dire look at a hypothetical hothouse world" in that paper, he concludes: "At the same time, it might be a mistake to think the Bush administration will embrace predictions of climate change from the Pentagon more than it has from the EPA, the United Nations, the National Academy of Sciences and the world's major scientific societies." Some took a similar line with the second global disaster warning of the week, since "many astronomers did not agree that waking up President Bush would have been wise", the Beeb notes in a tale about a "potential asteroid strike last month" ('Earth almost put on impact alert' at BBC science). At this rate, 2004 is looking set to become the year when even mega-budget Hollywood productions outflank the headlines. This, on reflection, is scarcely surprising, since every four years, US politics is more than ever about theatre than policy, which is something the rest of us have to endure. When it comes to scientific policy, though, I've been digging around to find out where the expert apologists for not bothering to wake up the White House hang out. The Marshall Institute seems like a good place to start. Or an alarmingly disconcerting one, depending on your viewpoint. The Pentagon report by Peter Schwartz and Doug Randall dates back to October 2003 and began with the following caveat: "The purpose of this report is to imagine the unthinkable – to push the boundaries of current research on climate change so we may better understand the potential implications on United States national security. We have interviewed leading climate change scientists, conducted additional research, and reviewed several iterations of the scenario with these experts. The scientists support this project, but caution that the scenario depicted is extreme in two fundamental ways. First, they suggest the occurrences we outline would most likely happen in a few regions, rather than globally. Second, they say the magnitude of the event may be considerably smaller. We have created a climate change scenario that although not the most likely, is plausible, and would challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered immediately." For those with the curiosity, time and patience to assess the whole thing for themselves, Greenpeace (another write-up) has put it online. The 22-page .pdf document can be downloaded here (916 KB). Thanks, Gina, for the link to the link. 6:43:27 PM  link   your views? [] Reconnaissance mission "Ma boulangerie a gagné le titre de la meilleure baguette de Paris 2004, et c'est vrai elle est délicieuse ce matin..." If Jean-Michel is going to do his 09h09 pictures just three or four doors down the street, he'll have to put up with my pinching one. I'll now be keeping my eyes open for this guy and his sneaky camera on the rare occasions I'm out of my pyjamas and out of doors by nine-oh-nine in the morning. But most of J-M's daily snaps at that hour are of him, with a brief comment also translated into English. I'll be dropping by our bakery after lunch for the daily special I last night asked the lasses to set aside for me. Like the owners of an increasing number of eateries in the quartier Sam now gets "the best baguettes in Paris" from this recent arrival on Losserand Street for his clients at the Canteen. I found J-M, who probably knows me on sight too, during further forays into this country's blogosphere, which led last night to several of the promised additions to the blogroll for the French-speaking readers who get bored with me. A noteworthy feature of some of the French places I visit is an emphasis on visuals rather than text, along with some excellent blog design. People into photography may also still have Buzznet to discover. This place offers photobloggers and admirers entry into a wide range of communities, including a Paris one. 1:01:43 PM  link   your views? []

nick b. 2007 do share, don't steal, please credit under artistic licence terms; contributing friends (pix, other work) retain their rights.