philosophy is the science of measuring, comparing, marshalling logical implications with, and interpreting entities and matters that are not and may never be defined in a way that would allow logical verification of these posits. i guess a PhD diploma reads something like "the trustee beings of the scholastical establishment by virtue of the capacity vested in them and a vague recommendation of the seriously collegiate institution of the great graduate school may or may not have conferred the degree of doctor of philosohpy on the mostly gasping and sweating entity probably named franz könig on approximately the start of fall and attested him optimal pertinency for disposing of esoteric appurtenances on the teleshopping channel."

the panavision 1.85:1 aspect ratio does not equal the hdtv 16:9 ratio.
<img src="/lomo/kompakt.jpeg" width="384" height="256">

"no opcodes. is this cool, or what?"

"what?"

the basic rule is that you write i before e. the exception to that rule is that you don't do this after a c (or when the vowels are pronounced like i or a [as in height or weigh]). the exception to this exception is that you still write i before e after a c if they are followed by an n (or if the word is 'weird' or 'foreign' or 'leisure' or 'seize' or maybe 'neither', if you speak an inferior us-american dialect and pronounce it wrongly). the exception to this exception to the aforementioned exception is that certain words with romance or latin origins, like ceinture, enceinte or fluorescein, don't obey the i after c before e before n rule. and, of course, compound words like priceindex or confidenceinterval, but that should be obvious.

i totally agreed with his comment. it was clever, correct, to the point. the signature below said: "if you disagree, don't vote, comment." so of course i voted him down.

arguing that the voting system is bad and shouldn't be used is debatable, but crying when people disagree with your own opinions and vote you down---while still wanting to be voted up---is just childish and stupid. the mission statement "let's all be nice to each other" is very counterproductive when it is interpreted as the exact opposite to "let's rate the content in a democratic way to strengthen the signal and suppress the noise". in many cases, it makes much more sense to interpret it as "let's all be nice to each other and tell people why they were rated down", but you can't always do that. trying to explain to everyone why exactly he is an idiot would consume too much time.

if you want to have some really good fun, you should plan it beforehand and chart it out in your filofax. thursday, 1800 to 2315: have really good fun. because if you just consider that you might have some fun friday evening, there will be an empty spot in your schedule and righteously beg for being filled with postponed tasks that could not be finished within their allocated time slots. and of course they won't be finished before their new deadlines either, because not later than the next evening you will have to go out and have some fun, arrive at home at about 2100 after having eaten something, still having to find fresh clothes, remove some excess hair, feed the rats and so on. in the end, neither seriousness nor fun will have worked out properly. as you can see, having really good fun involves taking it really seriously.

learning why exactly video black looks blacker on video than superblack, although it has a higher lightness value, demystified the phenomenon, but didn't make it appear less perverted.

please excuse my clumsiness, i have trouble looking at things because i stopped liking colours.