A truly remarkable example of the level of film animation being produced.
The second item that came to me from Bob D. (yesterday’s is here) has clearly done the rounds; the YouTube video has been watched nearly 7 million times! But if you haven’t seen this short film, just over 6 minutes long, then do watch it. It shows just how close to reality film animation has become! The story behind the film is from here, reproduced below.
Pigeon: Impossible is the tale of Walter, a rookie secret agent faced with a problem seldom covered in basic training: what to do when a curious pigeon gets trapped inside your multi-million dollar, government-issued nuclear briefcase.
The film took nearly 5 years to complete and is the first attempt at animation by writer/director Lucas Martell: “When the project started, it was mostly an excuse to learn 3D animation, but by the end of the project I had spent so much time reworking and polishing the story that I just wanted people to laugh.”
The end-result is a hilarious 6-minute romp through the streets of Washington D.C. as our hero fights to save himself, and the world from the chaos reigned down by a hungry pigeon. Breathtaking visuals and a sweeping soundtrack showcase the work of nearly one-hundred talented artists and musicians, and the film stands as a testament to what can be accomplished by a team of dedicated volunteers working for the love of their craft.
Personally, I think that last sentence is still an understatement. Just watch this – and be amazed.
A remarkably simple explanation, courtesy of a Greek Hotel, about financial bailouts!
Last week-end I was indebted to Neil Kelly for supplying a more humorous look at life for Learning from Dogs. This week-end I turn to friend, Bob D., a corporate airliner Captain out in the Middle East. Here is Bob’s contribution for today. (Editor’s note: at the time of posting this, 1 euro = 1.3405 US dollars, ergo €100 = $134 – read on, this will make sense.)
No connection with the hotel in the story!
For those interested in world events….
How the Greek bailout package works.
It is a slow day in a damp little Greek town. The rain is beating down and the streets are deserted. Times are tough, everybody is in debt, and everybody lives on credit.
On this particular day a rich German tourist is driving through the town, stops at the local hotel and lays a €100 note on the desk, telling the hotel owner he wants to inspect the rooms upstairs in order to pick one to spend the night.
The owner gives him some keys and, as soon as the visitor has walked upstairs, the hotelier grabs the €100 note and runs next door to pay his debt to the butcher. The butcher takes the €100 note and runs down the street to repay his debt to the pig farmer.
The pig farmer takes the €100 note and heads off to pay his bill at the supplier of feed and fuel. The guy at the Farmers’ Co-op takes the €100 note and runs to pay his drinks bill at the pub. The publican slips the money along to the local prostitute drinking at the bar, who has also been facing hard times and has had to offer him “services” on credit. The hooker then rushes to the hotel and pays off her room bill to the hotel owner with the €100 note.
The hotel proprietor then places the €100 note back on the counter so the rich traveler will not suspect anything. At that moment the traveler comes down the stairs, picks up the €100 note, states that the rooms are not satisfactory, pockets the money, and leaves town.
No one produced anything. No one earned anything. However, the whole town is now out of debt and looking to the future with a lot more optimism.
And that, Ladies and Gentlemen, is how the bailout package works.
Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.
The above is a quote attributed to the Buddha. It is perfect as an introduction to today’s piece.
When I sat down at my PC yesterday afternoon I was planning to finish off a Post about the BBC’s fabulous Frozen Planet TV series. But a check of my email changed all that. Because there was an email from Merci O., someone in Payson that Jean and I know well. Merci had sent me an email with a link to the following YouYube video.
Watch and be moved.
This is a non-commercial attempt to highlight the fact that world leaders, irresponsible corporates and mindless ‘consumers’ are combining to destroy life on earth. It is dedicated to all who died fighting for the planet and those whose lives are on the line today. The cut was put together by Vivek Chauhan, a young film maker, together with naturalists working with the Sanctuary Asia network (www.sanctuaryasia.com).
Content credit: The principal source for the footage was Yann Arthus-Bertrand’s incredible film HOME http://www.homethemovie.org/. The music was by Armand Amar. Thank you too Greenpeace and http://timescapes.org/
So what advice would you offer to the next generation?
One of the biggest differences between Homo sapiens and Canis lupus familiaris is that the latter is such a master of living in the present that, one assumes, the issue of worrying about the next generation is largely irrelevant. Definitely not so with us humans.
A few weeks back I was chatting to a good friend of mine, Peter McCarthy, whom I first met when I undertook a sales and marketing project for one his companies. That was many years ago but Peter and I have stayed in touch. One of the many attributes about Peter that I have admired over the years is his instinctive and thoughtful approach to entrepreneurism. Peter is still an active entrepreneur.
Anyway, Peter and I were talking about the sorts of qualities that enable some young people to take a risk-based entrepreneurial approach to life. Peter gave me the links to three videos that he thought were especially relevant to the notion of achieving success in life. So over the next few days I want to share those videos with you, dear reader. To me, these videos are, indeed, the essence of the messages that any person, especially those the wrong side of 60, would wish to leave in a bottle floating down the river of life.
So to the first. The address by Steve Jobs to the University of Stanford’s 114th Commencement on June 12, 2005. Already watched at the time of writing this by 12,690,731 persons!
Let me offer thanks to Resurgence Magazine for the written permission to reproduce this article in full, see terms at the end of the article. More background information about Robert Holden may be obtained from his own website and, finally, the Happiness Project website is here.
Robert Holden was at the forefront of ‘Happiness’ research. Here, he reflects on how that topic – initially laughed off the agenda – has gained credibility and explains why happiness is important
When I set up The Happiness Project, in 1994, the original goal was simple: talk happiness. In my training in psychology, philosophy and psychotherapy my teachers didn’t talk about happiness. We focused solely on the causes of unhappiness. This didn’t feel right to me. After all, how can you know what the causes are if you do not know what happiness is?
My goal, then, was to stimulate a conversation, so as to deepen our appreciation of what happiness is, its benefits, what enables it, and what blocks it. One conversation I focused on was the question of whether happiness is learned and whether it can be taught. To investigate this further, I created an eight-week happiness programme (which still runs today) called Be Happy.
Today happiness is a much more popular conversation than when The Happiness Project began. We are all talking more about happiness than ever before. The conversation is alive and well. Universities, hospitals, economists and governments publish new studies on happiness every week. So, what we have learned? And where does this conversation about happiness need to go next?
Let’s start with what happiness researchers refer to as ‘static happiness’. In a recent US study, it was found that when people in the 1940s were asked, “How happy are you?” the average score was 7.5 out of 10, whereas today the average score is 7.4 out of 10. In other words, in spite of all the ‘progress’ we appear to have made in the last 50 years or so, our happiness levels have remained mostly static. This tells me we need more conversations to clarify what real happiness is. For instance, we need to discern between pleasure, satisfaction and joy; and on my eight-week happiness programme we always begin by asking people, “What is your definition of a happy life?” and, “Are you living it?”
Happiness researchers have also found that most of us are only semi-happy. In 2006, I participated in a BBC documentary called The Happiness Formula. It reported, “the proportion of people saying they are ‘very happy’ has fallen from 52% in 1957 to just 36% today.” Clearly, research like this is questioning our most basic assumptions about what happiness is, and what we think will make us happy. That’s a good thing. An honest inquiry into happiness is an opportunity to rethink your life. It is one of the gifts of happiness.
Do you really know what makes you happy? This is the question both psychologists and economists are asking now. The evidence suggests we do not know. For instance, many of us believe that more money will make us happier. Some money does help, especially to cover the basics of food, rent, clothing, etc. After that, the correlation between more money and greater happiness is vague. Martin Seligman, former president of the American Psychology Association, and one of the founders of the Positive Psychology movement, concludes most forcibly: “The change in purchasing power over the last half century in the wealthy nations carries the same message: real purchasing power has more than doubled in the United States, France and Japan, but life satisfaction has changed not a whit.”
An inquiry into happiness challenges you to rethink everything. For example, almost everyone agrees with the idea that if their life circumstances improve, their levels of happiness will increase. This is the basis for almost every political and economic strategy the world over. And yet scientific research into happiness tells us this is wrong. New Zealand researcher Richard Kammann reports, “Objective life circumstances have a negligible role to play in a theory of happiness.” The same research concludes that your attitude and personal choices have a far greater influence on your happiness levels.
Another popular theory is that a better education will make our children happier. This has resulted in more tests for preschool children, more focus on regular exams, and more money spent on private education. Surely this increases happiness? “Sorry, Mom and Dad, neither education nor, for that matter, a high IQ paves the road to happiness,” states Claudia Wallis, who compiled a report called The New Science of Happiness for TIME magazine.
Happiness challenges us to rethink what is a “better education” for our children. I support the idea of happiness lessons for children at school, as pioneered at Wellington College by psychologist Nick Baylis and college Master Anthony Seldon [read his thoughts on this important topic in his article Stillness in Schools]. One opposing argument for happiness lessons at school is that children should not be “taught” happiness, but that they should be allowed to think about happiness for themselves. However, this is precisely the aim of these happiness lessons. The approach is inquiry, not dictation.
People who attend my happiness programme are always telling me, “I wish I’d learned this at school.” It’s time then for more conversations about happiness in school, and at home with our children. I encourage all my students and clients to talk more about happiness with their families. Why? Because one of the ways we evolve is through conversation. Drawing happiness with our children or talking about happiness with our partner helps us to clarify things, to heal, to come together, and ultimately to live a happier life.
And now, even governments and politicians want to talk about happiness. In Britain, David Cameron has commissioned a new survey called Measuring National Well-being. A new organisation called Action for Happiness [see what founder Richard Layard says about this new movement in his article A Better Way of Life] is working closely with the government to help create better social change in society. Again, some people are concerned that governments should not “tell us” how to be happy. I agree with this, but I don’t think governments are trying to tell us. Like us, they are simply trying to understand what happiness is, and how we can be happier.
In my latest book, Be Happy, I have written: “Your definition of happiness will influence every significant decision in your life.” It is essential, therefore, that individuals and governments alike keep happiness on the agenda because, more than ever before, humanity needs a better understanding of happiness. We have learned so much, about atoms and galaxies and other things, but we still do not understand ourselves very well; we still go to war too often, and there is still too much suffering.
I remain deeply committed to talking about happiness. Why? Because I believe that happiness is our true nature (it is the natural state of our Unconditioned Self), and for that reason happiness brings out the best in us, both individually and collectively. Happiness research has found a strong link between happiness and altruism, for instance. In a recent study by a Charities Commission, it was reported that the highest predictor of generous giving is not your income level: it’s your happiness level.
Good things come from real happiness. Happier people make better choices, which is good for society and the planet. Your happiness is a gift to the world. I believe this with all my heart.
—————————–
Robert Holden is director of The Happiness Project. His latest book, Be Happy;, is published by Hay House. For more about the eight-week happiness programme visit: http://www.happiness.co.uk
The Gift of Happiness features in Resurgence issue 269, November/December 2011.
This article is reprinted courtesy of Resurgence magazine – at the heart of earth, art and spirit. To buy Resurgence, read further articles online or find out about The Resurgence Trust, visit: http://www.resurgence.org
All rights to this article are reserved to Resurgence, if you wish to republish or make use of this work you must contact the copyright owner to obtain permission
—————————–
One final note from yours truly. Perhaps the art of happiness is yet another thing we can learn from dogs!
A delightful trawl by Neil Kelly through the call centre industry.
Picture by Neil Kelly
Are there any more annoying phrases in the English language than “your call is important to us“, or “we are experiencing particularly high call volumes“?
In 2007 companies worldwide spent some $280 billion on outsourced call-centre services, according to NASSCOM, a call-centre trade group in Delhi. Much of India’s call-centre industry, which employs roughly 300,000 agents, is located outside the ring road that encircles Bangalore, in a string of smart new business parks with tidy lawns and private security. Were it not for the stray dogs, a visitor could be forgiven for mistaking the area for Silicon Valley.
Meanwhile in Australia …
Meanwhile …… back in Wales in the United Kingdom … listen to this call centre handling a complaint from an ASDA customer – listen right to the end!
Thanks to David from neatorama.com I was able to put together a medley of hold music and without resorting to The Four Seasons! Hope to have The Top Twenty Hold Music Songs out in time for Christmas.
Finally, you may be interested in reading Your Call Is Important to Us: The Truth about Bullshit by Laura Penny which is available as a free eBook here.
In a sense this piece today connects with the conclusions from my review of David Kauders’ new book The Greatest Crash; that we are transitioning into a new era.
That’s why I was fascinated to come across a long essay about Herbert Marshall McLuhan written by Michael Valpy and published in the The Globe and Mail last July.
Let me quote some extracts from that article to illustrate why I made the connection with my book review.
The University of Toronto professor of English credited with foreseeing the Internet 30 years before it was invented and broadcasting scores of ideas about how electronic communications media was changing the way humans think has been redeemed from labels of McLuhanacy and psuedo-scientific charlatanism.
His work no longer is described, as it was in one erudite journal of the 1970s, as “a hoax so gigantic that it shows every sign of becoming an international intellectual scandal.”
Later on in the article,
Deciding recently to pay a visit to the McLuhan coach house, she wrote: “To be perfectly honest, I had never heard of McLuhan until I moved into residence at SMC, and accidentally stumbled into the book and media studies program. But as I quickly learned, Marshall McLuhan is kind of a big deal. You know that phrase that you hear everywhere: ‘The medium is the message?’ Yeah, that was McLuhan.”
And McLuhan’s problem – one of his problems – is that his message couldn’t escape his medium. As Douglas Coupland points out in a 2009 McLuhan biography, the wonderful, whimsical, boundlessly optimistic and imaginative sixties society that embraced him and lapped up his ideas morphed into the gloom of a change-fatigued seventies society that tired of hearing from him. Yet the brand remained strong. “You know that phrase that you hear everywhere: ‘The medium is the message?’” Ms. Kellogg asks us. “Yeah, that was McLuhan.”
Think of his intellectual history as a journey between two mountain peaks passing through a shadowed valley.
When one thinks of the power of the many new tools we lump under the title ‘social media’ then it’s easy to think that the way that humans are now communicating will have profound implications. Even this humble Blog was read by over 31,000 in the month of October. Back to the article,
McLuhan believed that each new technology created a new human environment and thus a new way of thinking. The medium-is-the-message meant that the content of electronic media is insignificant; it is the medium itself that has the greater impact on the environment. In other words, it wasn’t what we were seeing on TV that was important; it was the fact that we were watching TV (and not doing other things) that altered our brains.
And because, as Prof. Francis points out, McLuhan saw humans as essentially communicative animals, he believed it was the technologies of communication that were primary in shaping who we were, what we thought, and how we acted, with effects that often were subliminal and therefore not recognized.
Finally, the article concludes thus,
To truly understand McLuhan and his ideas, says Prof. Scheffel-Dunand, students have to read him.
Most students of McLuhan today, she says, read scholars who write about McLuhan rather than read McLuhan himself. Which is a mistake, she says, because McLuhan wrote as a poet: he wrote metaphorically, aphoristically, he wrote in what he called “mosaics.”
Biographer Philip Marchand agrees. “My suggestion for students is to begin with the articles written by McLuhan – ‘Acoustic Space’ and ‘The Effect of the Printed Book on the language of the 16th century’ and a couple others that appear in the anthology entitled Explorations in Communication. These articles are lucid, comprehensible introductions to McLuhan’s thought.”
To rejoin UpbeaT blogger Emily Kellogg on her coach house tour: “I don’t want to bore you, dear readers, but I just can’t help gushing. I dig this stuff. These kind of conversations, are the things that make an undergraduate degree worth pursuing. They’re the ones that give you an adrenalin rush because you’re thinking so quickly – and your brain kind of feels like a trapeze artist jumping from idea to idea.
There’s also something innately cool about having an intellectual conversation that ranges from iPhones to Heidegger in five seconds flat in the place that housed Marshall McLuhan as he wrote the books that revolutionized the field of media research.”
Ms. Kellogg: 2011 medium of McLuhan’s message.
Michael Valpy is a freelance writer based in Toronto.
Regular readers know that I do try and write something more or less of substance for each day, Monday to Friday. But today, Monday, it is already well into the afternoon and there is nothing yet written for tomorrow. The reason is that I am completing a lengthy review of David Kauders’ fascinating book, The Greatest Crash. Part One to be published on Wednesday, 23rd.
So thanks to Neil Kelly’s delightful way of seeing life, thought you would enjoy this!
Big thank you to Dennis L. for forwarding this video
Will say no more – just watch
And if that gives you a buzz, then you might want to read a Post that I published on the 30th July Free as a Bird reproduced in full below,
The wonderful combination of paragliding and flying with hawks.
Thanks to Dan Gomez for passing me a short video about this amazing activity. It was a matter of moments to find out the background. But first a picture.
Copyright Scott Mason
There’s a full description of the history of parahawking, as it is called, on WikiPedia.
Parahawking is a unique activity combining paragliding with elements of falconry. Birds of prey are trained to fly with paragliders, guiding them to thermals for in-flight rewards and performing aerobatic maneouvres.
Parahawking was developed by British falconer Scott Mason in 2001. Mason began a round-the-world trip in Pokhara, Nepal, where many birds of prey – such as the griffon vulture, steppe eagle andblack kite – can be found. While taking a tandem paragliding flight with British paraglider Adam Hill, he had the opportunity to see raptors in flight, and realized that combining the sport of paragliding with his skills as a falconer could offer others the same experience. He has been based in Pokhara ever since, training and flying birds during the dry season between September and March.
The team started by training two black kites, but have since added an Egyptian vulture and a Mountain hawk-eagle to the team. Only rescued birds are used – none of the birds has been taken from the wild.
There’s an interesting website for those that want to take a closer including more details about Scott Mason and his team here.
Learning from Dogs 