courtney in the nyt (by proxy.)
courtney was featured as designer of the day on design*sponge on the same day design*sponge was featured in the new york times.
coincidence? i think not.
i disagree with everything you just said.
courtney was featured as designer of the day on design*sponge on the same day design*sponge was featured in the new york times.
back when i was a kid in the early 80's, i had this friend whose mom kept all her living room furniture covered in this thick crinkly clear plastic. because it was the good furniture, and she wouldn't have wanted to ruin it by, you know, touching it. that she couldn't see it, enjoy it, or use it as it was meant to be used &mdash well, you can't have everything.
i know the armitage quote from this article is already anywhere and everywhere in the global echo chamber, but i'm tacking it to the wall here, too, as a reminder to myself as much as anything else. i can't think of a better one-paragraph summation of what's gone wrong:
Then, after a minute's pause, he adds a third regret: "The biggest regret is that we didn't stop 9/11. And then in the wake of 9/11, instead of redoubling what is our traditional export of hope and optimism we exported our fear and our anger. And presented a very intense and angry face to the world. I regret that a lot."
while in tokyo, you must stop in at zoff [1], a branch of which you'll find around pretty much every street corner. they sell eyeglasses, but cheap, oh so cheap: i picked up a terrific pair for $50, and that included frames, lenses, and examination (fortunately, i didn't have to try to identify blurry kanji.) the most expensive pair clocked in at around $100, slightly more if you want the supah-thin lenses, still around $300 less than i've spent on every other pair i've ever bought here at home [2]. half an hour after the exam, i stroll out with a new pair of rectangular, gray/green, vaguely japanese looking specs. and every clerk in the place made sure to swing by and thank us as we stepped out the door. what could be better?
for all the things i used to imagine the web could be, back in the day — "the new punk rock" was always a favorite, but "revolutionary medium for remote interpersonal communication" took second place — the only thing the web has consistently proved to be over the years is, alas, highly distracting from the task at hand. that's capitalism for you. history just wasn't on our side.
[leaving the bar.]
tokyo in pictures, including the most fun i've ever had eating sushi (at least, until amanda locates one of these in sf.)
sadly, my experiment with gmail as my universal outbox was not to be. turns out that gmail transforms the "from:" address of every message sent through its smtp server to "[account]@gmail.com," regardless of what's been specified as the correct "from:" address by my mail client. ineffective for my business email, so that's that. the setup's still valuable for incoming mail; i'm just abandoning it for outgoing.
i'm here in tokyo, watching cnnj (cnn japan), which magically has an english language track, when i'm surprised to see that there's an advertisement for cnn's havana bureau. "wait, what?" i ask, "cnn has a havana bureau?" it's followed by a lengthy advertisement for the experience and trustworthiness of the cnn head of news for africa. "wait, what?" i ask, "cnn covers african news?"
here's something incredibly boring that i nonetheless spend a fair amount of time on: spam. my main email address has been out on the web for so very long that it gets somewhere in the neighborhood of 2,000 spam messages a day, which is just sad. still, i refuse to give it up [1], so i find myself forced to apply ever-increasing layers of filtering technology to keep the cialis offers at bay. up until very recently, that meant 1) spamassassin, deleting every message with a score of 8 or greater, and tagging every one between 5 and 8 as spam; 2) procmail, deleting the most obvious forms of spam as well as all the bounced mail i get from people spoofing @monstro.com as the "from:" address for spam they're sending out; and 3) mail.app's spam filter on mac os x, filtering most of the rest of what gets through into the spam folder, for me to browse through every couple of days to make sure nothing fell in by accident.
thanks for indulging the geek. back to more interesting topics (sex, decadence, high design, and proper grooming, in more or less than order of importance) soon, promise.
[1] because then the terrorists will have won.
[2] who doesn't love the search?