Letter to the Jerk in 17C

This is an open letter to the grumpy old guy in seat 17C on today’s US Airways flight 115:

In case you don’t remember your seat number, you were the guy who was sitting in the aisle seat next to a dad and his son (in 17 A & B), and the kid’s mom was seated in front of you (16C). They got a bad break and weren’t able to get seats next to each other, presenting you with a great chance to help them out.

I was in the unfortunate position (across the aisle in 17D) to be able to observe this incident but unable to offer any help - that was your unique opportunity. Let me refresh your memory, since I’m guessing you didn’t even give it a second thought…

Giving you the benefit of the doubt that the thought hadn’t occurred to you, the flight attendant suggested that you switch seats with the mother in front of you so that they could be together, since her seat was identical to yours: an aisle seat in the very next row ahead of you.

You looked up from your book and asked if she could move you to first class. Good try, BTW, but since US Airways is really trying to push selling those upgrades at the gate, that was unlikely to happen. Can’t blame you for trying, but the shocking part was when the attendant said she couldn’t do that, and you told her that you “liked the seat you had”, and that you were totally unwilling to consider trading.

Fortunately for the family, the plane was not completely full. In fact, it was just full enough to contain people with hearts and a shred of decency that were willing to shuffle around until there was a whole row open that the family of three could be moved to.

In the end, you ended up with the whole row to yourself, since the boy and his father had moved to the space everyone else made for them. Congratulations, although you may want to ponder the significance of those two empty seats next to you as a metaphor for your life in general if you continue to treat people that way. Here’s hoping you consider something better next time…

Are WordPress Themes & Plugins Auto-GPL’d?

Dan recently linked to a post commenting on the ongiong discussion within the WP dev community (theme designers particularly) as to whether themes or plugins to WordPress automatically inherit the GPL license from WP as derivative works, and if so, what that means for people trying to make a living selling their themes.

Beagle has an interesting take on the subject, although I think his reasoning is a bit shaky (not interested in arguing that issue, though). I think it might be more interesting to consider the opposite side of the coin of his point, which is that it doesn’t particularly matter whether the GPL (and some of its restrictions, etc.) flows through to “premium” (dumb term) themes until someone starts acting as though it does.

In other words, the only opinion on whether the license and redistribution requirements inherntly apply to all WP themes is the opinion of a judge in a theoretical lawsuit which a theme seller would need to bring against someone who is redistributing their themes for free or for pay - either would be within their rights if the GPL applies.

It isn’t that Matt or other GPL advocates have to “force” the non-GPL-ers into complying with the GPL, but rather the non-GPL-ers who would need to attempt to stop the people who are acting as if the GPL applies.

Since this hasn’t happened yet, if I were a theme author, I would be exceedingly hesitant to build my business on the assumption of which way that ruling might fall. Basically, they’d just have to wait around for someone to try and redistribute their themes (which I’m sure is more likely to happen the more popular the theme gets) and then incur the significant costs (time and money) to try to bring that person into court and force them to stop, with no guarantee that the law is on their side.

Of course, if you go too far down this conversation, the “premium” theme authors will inevitably respond with some variation of “how do you expect us to make money then?”. I would submit that that’s a seperate issue, but one that I’m not terribly interested in and actually doesn’t have any bearing on the issue at hand anyway. No one has some sort of fundamental right to make money writing themes, so props to you if you can do it, but don’t try to use the potential inability to do so as an argument on this licensing issue - it isn’t relevant. The GPL doesn’t prohibit anyone from making money, but it doesn’t guarantee that they can either.

In case it isn’t clear yet, I lean towards the side of WP themes & plugins being inherently GPL’d because of the way they derive from WP itself. I’d really love to see this truly tested in court just to put an end to the ongoing discussion about it though.

And don’t even get me started on the alternative approaches I’ve heard some theme / plugin authors talking about. They generally fall into the “The theme/pluign is GPL, but I’m going to make money from it by…”

  • “selling support” - Nightmare time sink. I’m highly skeptical that this is a viable option for most theme / plugin devs, just due to the large amount of time required to offer it and the low prices most people would be willing to pay.
  • “selling updates / upgrades” - OK, you get the base package as GPL, but then you pay a subscription to get updates and upgrades. This falls apart under the same logic - if the plugin/theme is GPL because it is derived from WP, then the updates/upgrades are GPL because they derive from the GPL plugin/theme and can therefore be freely redistributed once obtained by one person.
  • “selling services that are used by the GPL product” - This is the one I would think has the most promise. If you can distribute something that needs to communicate back to your server as a part of its core functionality (think Akismet), then you could theoretically charge for that service access, while keeping all your distributed code GPL. The main problem is that most plugins / themes have no legitimate need to call back to the server, and you need that dependency on a service that only your server must provide in order for this to work. It can’t be communicating with the server *only* forĀ  license-checking, since that checking code could then be ripped out and the plugin/theme could be redistributed again without it.

Your thoughts?

Stop Motion Video With Tilt-Shift Photography

This is so cool looking. I like the song too.

Larger video available at the link below;
I suggest watching it there.

Bathtub IV from Keith Loutit on Vimeo.

Watchmen Review Revised

OK, so my initial thoughts on the film have been tempered over time, mostly due to reflecting on the reactions of other people, some of whom have read the original story and some who have not.

I think I may revise my initial recommendation to suggest that you should see the movie only after having read the book (even though I know most people won’t bother). I now realize that I may have been taking too much for granted in basing my appreciation of the story on things that I was aware of by way of familiarity with the source material. It is now apparent to me that someone without that prior knowledge would necessarily have a very different experience, since they can only digest the parts that the movie version presents.

Here are two notable highlights that I encourage everyone to read that give a good perspective that may be missed in standalone movie viewings:

[1] Gareth explores how the missing pieces in the movie (at least that’s part of the reason) can lead you to miss the point of the message on “heroic violence”. I mentioned a bit about changes I had heard about in this regard in my comment on Alex’s blog, but I forgot to come back and touch on that in my review. In short, I agree that you definitely are not meant to view characters like Rorshach as “good guys”; rather you’re supposed to be disgusted by the lengths that they go to in pursuit of their cause, or at least be upset with yourself if you do find yourself rooting for them.

While I actually think the movie may have dulled this to some degree by making Rorshach (and the Comedian, to some extent) a bit more palatable by way of amping up the brutality in some of the other characters which were not portrayed that way in the book (namely Dan and the Silk Spectre), I believe that further reflection must challenge us to question why (as a society) we don’t seem to be repulsed by this sort of thing. On the contrary, we root it on in most cases, as far as entertainment goes. Even when the author of the story is intending to push you over that edge and make you question yourself and who you’re attached to in the story (and why), it doesn’t seem to come across too easily. It’s easy to blame this part on the failing of the movie to carry forward that aspect of the story as faithfully as it should have, but I don’t think it’s quite that simple.

[2] Tim explores this aspect of it very well in his post on the nature of vigilantism. An excerpt:

Rorschach is a parody of a type - a type that remains resolutely resistant to parody. No matter how far the creators go in order to paint the vigilante in an unflattering, belittling, comical light, as long as the essential motivation of the urban vigilante remain untouched, the appeal can’t be diminished. Rorschach is dirty, destitute, delusional, traumatized and dumb, and yet we still want to identify with him. We still want - we still desperately need the freedom to condone his actions, despite their reprehensible nature.

Anyway, sorry that this post was a bit more of a downer than the first one. Don’t get me wrong - I still enjoyed the movie a lot; I’m just not quite sure at this point what I would think of it if I didn’t have the advantage of having experienced a lot of back-story aspects that flush out the story and intended subtle messages so much more fully.

Twitter - I was starting to think that we might not need this web site anymore: http://isloston.com but it looks like I was wrong…

I was starting to think that we might not need this web site anymore, but it looks like I was wrong…
Is Lost On?

Watchmen

Well, I saw Watchmen last night, and the short summary is that I was very pleasantly surprised.

I went into the movie anticipating that it would never be able to live up to the story it was adapting. In its original form, it was such a thorough and highly regarded body of work that I could not imagine how they could squeeze it all into a single movie (even a long one) and a series is not really an option for telling this tale.

I could only assume that in the hands of a Hollywood team attempting to make it palatable to a mainstream audience that the movie will need to be “successful” (financially), such trimming would be awkward and bound to chop out important aspects that would just ruin it for the die-hard fans. While there was definitely a *lot* taken out, I have to say that it was done much better than I ever imagined it could have been, and I was generally satisfied with the results.

Since I’m sure you will find many avid comic fans ranting about all the discrepancies and inconsistencies found in this translation, and since I’m not interested in dwelling on them here, I’ll take a pass and skip over those in this review. There is also a multitude of layers of depth to be dug into in terms of subtle meaning and message, many of which found their way from the original story into the movie, but I’ll also avoid rambling on too much about those, since this thing is going to be long enough as it is.

Let’s start with the surface: visually, it was perfect, as can be expected from Snyder after 300. His rich colors painting the backgrounds and skillfully framed comic panel-esque shots in 300 were probably my favorite parts of that movie, but in Watchmen he chose a more subtle and a bit darker approach, which suited it comfortably. I also really enjoyed the soundtrack they picked for a lot of the scenes, even though it was a bit surprising at first.

As for the quality of the adaptation, while much was (and had to have been) left on the cutting room floor, I thought it admirably stayed true to some of the core aspects that made the story great. On the one hand, it is a satisfying murder mystery / adventure story, yet as it unfolds you discover that it’s actually deconstructing the super hero genre right before your eyes.

As I noted over on Alex’s blog, this story was originally presented in the context of a comic book culture that was dramatically different than what we have today. Those of you who are old enough probably remember most “capes & tights” stories as the happy-go-lucky (even campy) type of approach taken in the original incarnations of the characters that we are familiar with. In the mid-80s, this world was about to be blown wide open and (for many of the classics) take a darker turn, as well as give rise to a vibrant independent scene which would delight and enlighten those of us comic fans to a wider world of storytelling potential that the comic medium is capable of. Anyway, it’s an interesting contrast / parallel to today’s recent boom in popularity of super heroes in the movies; perhaps the “comic book movie” needs a similar degree of boundary-box-breaking.

As the world of the Watchmen unfolds, you begin to realize (more quickly for some characters than others, and each in their own way) that literally every single person who devotes themselves to a life of masked do-gooding isn’t the pure, shining example of heroism that you may expect, but rather has deep, psychological issues that have motivated them into pursuing this line of “work”. “Under the hood” (the title of Mason’s book), they are all pretty twisted in one way or another. It’s no accident that the only one with true “super powers” (John) is also the least “human”, and it’s a causal association. Or take Adrian, who is arguably the second most “powerful” of the group (he lacks “powers” but is regarded as the most intelligent man alive and has trained his body to the upper limits of physical potential), is also therefore detached enough from humanity to be capable of the vision / psychosis necessary for what he ends up doing.

[ spoiler below ]

Speaking of that, it’s a classic twist that I’m certainly glad was translated well into this story. The climactic final scene is abruptly shaken from the realm of fantasy when he announces that he isn’t the classic comic book villain. He didn’t just waste his time explaining himself to them to give them a chance to whip something out of the old utility belt and save the day, but rather the whole thing already went down before they even got there - it was already over.

[ end of spoiler ]

Anyway, there’s probably much more that could be said here, but I figure no review would be complete without addressing the one thing that probably everyone who has remotely heard anything at all about this movie seems to be obsessed with… yeah, you know what I’m talking about.

Let me first say that if I did have one gripe about the stuff that was lost in the translation, it might be the fact that a considerable amount of the back-story for the various players was removed (due to time constraints, I’m sure), and I think it may have lessened the impact of this one particular point, which is very probably lost on most of the audience (or at least the crowd of giggling teenagers).

During the full story, you see more flashes back to the past in John’s life. While some of them are still present in this version, it may not have been enough to make it blatantly obvious that from the time of the “incident” until the present day, if you rearrange his appearances into chronological order, there is an intentional progression. John originally is relatively “well covered” (for a super hero costume), and as time passes his costume “simplifies”, eventually to the point of vanishing altogether. It is a perfect symbol of his gradually loosening grip on his own humanity; as that fades away from him, things like shame and concern for appearance naturally do as well. So, no, it *isn’t* gratuitous.

Long story short: I liked it. The changes that were made didn’t bother me much at all, and in the end I believe they made the story better for this current audience. I recommend it. BTW, if anyone’s interested in reading the original, they can borrow it from me anytime.

Link - YouTube - Everything’s amazing, nobody’s happy

GR Shared Link - AVAILABLE ONLINE FOR FREE (the Sticker)

from: F.A.T.

GR Shared Link - Without You - Mark Gormley

from: Jared Bangs's Friends' Facebook Posts

GR Shared Link - Trailer: The People Vs. George Lucas

from: Geekologie - Gadgets, Gizmos, and Awesome