Stop-motion animation already requires saintly amounts of patience, but it’s especially tricky when you’re working with a medium as messy as water.
In the making-of video below (folks who don’t speak Portuguese should turn on the translation captions), animator Rodrigo EBA! explains how he put Cachoeira together—and it wasn’t easy. He was hoping to use larger areas of water, but found that with his surface, droplets worked best. Coffee, on the other hand, left scratches on the surface, adding an unexpected texture to his film.
Michael R. Bloomberg, making his first major political investment since leaving office, plans to spend $50 million this year building a nationwide grass-roots network to motivate voters who feel strongly about curbing gun violence, an organization he hopes can eventually outmuscle the National Rifle Association.
Mr. Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York, said gun control advocates need to learn from the N.R.A. and punish those politicians who fail to support their agenda — even Democrats whose positions otherwise align with his own.
“They say, ‘We don’t care. We’re going to go after you,’ ” he said of the N.R.A. ” ‘If you don’t vote with us we’re going to go after your kids and your grandkids and your great-grandkids. And we’re never going to stop.’ “
He added: “We’ve got to make them afraid of us.”
On Monday evening, Re/code wrote about the complicated set of rules that the FCC’s wireless bureau is hoping will be adopted for the TV spectrum auction that will take place in 2015. According to these restrictions, carriers with lots of spectrum like AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint could be prohibited from bidding on up to one-third of the auctioned-off spectrum in a given area, at least when the bidding in that area reaches a particular price.
The auction rules would dictate how many licenses a wireless company could purchase by creating two classes of spectrum licenses: restricted and unrestricted. According to Re/code, all companies would be allowed to bid on the available spectrum at first, generally in blocks of 5 MHz. Then if the bidding reaches a “threshold price,” 30 percent of the spectrum in that market would be reserved for smaller competitor companies.
Additionally, the FCC is looking to adopt new “spectrum screens” which would limit how much spectrum a wireless carrier could hold in a certain market. Under the rules, if a carrier tried to buy up more than a certain amount of spectrum in the market, that would trigger extra scrutiny at the FCC before the deal could go through. The upcoming availability of spectrum, combined with new rules for who can own it, has garnered a lot of attention.
But what was true then is true now: Dismissing one’s adversaries as wing nuts is myopic, both intellectually and politically. Like it or not, the Oath Keepers, and the myriad other “patriot” groups now emerging around the edges of the Tea Party movement, are tapping into a real strain of popular anger. And who wouldn’t be angry? Unemployment for millions, bailouts and bonuses for a few. A health care reform plan supremely undersold by a Democratic establishment unconcerned with the battle for hearts and minds (see: Martha Coakley). A GOP controlled by pro-corporate nihilists.
But righteous anger is one thing. Manufacturing fear, dare we say terror, is another—and over the past year, we have seen cynical politicians and talk-show demagogues increasingly willing to traffic in it. It’s no longer just handfuls of militia types trading overheated conspiracy theories; it’s America’s most popular cable news network giving gobs of airtime to people who all but advocate armed insurrection. It’s the man who is now our newest senator chortling, on live TV, that maybe Barack Obama was born out of wedlock—don’t you wish guys still had to face an affaire d’honneur for comments like that?—a scurrilous point we take note of only because it indicates that Scott Brown gets his talking points from extreme-right sites like WorldNetDaily (WND).
When people in positions of great power play footsie with those who advocate treason—or claim that the elected commander in chief is a bastard foreigner with no claim to the office—they are not just engaging in a lively debate. They are actively negating a fundamental principle of American politics: that the government, no matter how much you might disagree with its representatives, is of, by, and for the people.
After Lehmberg’s arrest, Perry called for her resignation, claiming that the public could no longer place its trust in an official who herself ran afoul of the law. But the governor has no direct control over her job, a locally-elected position, and a grand jury rejected a former opponent’s attempt to have Lehmberg removed from office. For her part, Lehmberg refused to resign, though she said she won’t run for reelection in 2016. That wasn’t enough for Perry. With Lehmberg holding on to her job, the governor decided to cut off the two-year $7.5 million in state funding for the watchdog unit with a line-item veto. “Despite the otherwise good work the Public Integrity Unit’s employees,” a Perry statement said after the veto, “I cannot in good conscience support continued State funding for an office with statewide jurisdiction at a time when the person charged with ultimate responsibility of that unit has lost the public’s confidence.”
Texas governors have wide discretion to veto legislation. But by publicly tying his veto of the unit’s funding to his effort to push Lehmberg from office, Perry may have run afoul of state rules that prohibit coercion or bribery of public officials. Texans for Public Justice (TPJ) a liberal-leaning good government group, filed a complaint against Perry last June, and a special prosecutor was assigned to the case. “Threatening to take an official action against her office unless she voluntarily resigns is likely illegal,” Craig McDonald, director of TPJ, said in a statement. “The governor overstepped his authority by sticking his nose in Travis County’s business.” Perry has retained a defense lawyer and stands by his veto, with his lawyer claiming that the decision was within the law.
New York City is the country’s largest city and one of its most progressive but since 2001 it’s also been at the forefront of the some of the most aggressive and controversial anti-terrorism tactics. Yesterday, city officials announced the end of one of those major tactics: targeted spying on Muslim communities.
But there’s some strange timing going on here. For one thing New York’s liberal Mayor Bill de Blasio, was in favor of the surveillance program before he was against. Then there’s the fact that the decision to end the spying program comes just days after the Justice Department ruled that it was a legal practice. More on that in a bit, first some background on the program itself.
Officially, the spying was done under the auspices of the NYPD’s “Zone Assessment Unit.” Muslims in New York City saw their mosques, restaurants and in some cases, student associations infiltrated by undercover NYPD officials and confidential informants who took notes on overheard conversations, television program that were playing, nationality of store owners and customers, and anything else that NYPD officials thought gave them a flavor for what was happening in the city’s cloistered immigrant communities that catered to Muslims from the Middle Eastern, north Africa and Eastern Europe.
A Ukrainian military convoy - including armoured vehicles - has been barricaded by pro-Russia protesters and armed forces in the town of Kramatorsk.
The BBC’s James Reynolds was watching as events unfolded and described the situation as “very unusual”.
Two blasts near the Boston Marathon finish line on Tuesday were an eerie reminder of last year’s terror attacks.
A barefoot man wearing a black hat and a black veil toted a backpack down Boylston Street, chanting “Boston strong, Boston strong,” eyewitnesses told The Boston Herald. He left two packs near the site where three people died last year after two bombs exploded.
About 9 p.m. the Massachusetts State Police bomb squad detonated one bag, which turned out to be carrying a rice cooker filled with confetti, sources told CBS News. The second bag, destroyed about 40 minutes later, may have contained photo equipment, sources said.
Boston police said the bags were “disrupted for precautionary reasons.”
One could view Rosendale’s ad as just part of a larger trend of political candidates, seemingly all Republican, releasing ads in which they literally use a gun to make a political point. But it’s almost certainly the first camapign [sic] ad to literally target a drone. - Yahoo News, 04-15-2014
Because in the land of the upstanding white rural militia and tinfoil hats, teh drones be spying on you. //
Back in 2012, the BLM announced using drones to fly over sparsely populated areas in Idaho.
Some people have expressed concern about eyes in the sky keeping a close watch on American homes. Congressional representatives have even brought forward bills to outlaw drone use without a warrant. But the BLM said its plan to put flying drones in Idaho skies won’t run afoul of privacy issues.
“We’re only flying over BLM-managed land,” said Brady. “We’re not flying over private land or state land or any other ownership other than BLM property.”
But we all know how evil the BLM is. Just ask Cliven Bundy. It may have been drones (caution: wingnut link) that documented more than 900 cattle grazing for free on public land designated to graze only 150.
The Rocket Boys
In the late 1930s, a group of Caltech graduate students were booted off campus after blowing up (part of!) their building during a rocket test gone awry. Unwilling to give up on the joy of semi-controlled explosions, the students and a few of their friends headed into the San Gabriel Mountains. They picked a deserted gully — Arroyo Seco — and got testing. This was about when their classmates starting calling the gathering the Suicide Club.
1936: Rudolph Schott, Apollo Milton Olin Smith, Frank Malina, Ed Forman and Jack Parsons: Rocket Boys, or Suicide Club?
Frank Malina studied aerodynamics at Caltech. Jack Parons was a high school drop-out and a self-taught chemist. Ed Forman was an excellent mechanic. Their first round of testing in October 1936 was less-than-successful: the last test of the day, they accidentally lit their oxygen line on fire. The line whipped around, a snaking hose of fire that somehow didn’t kill anyone. Undeterred, they kept trying. By November, their tests worked.