Showing posts with label computers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label computers. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 6, 2009

Fun IT Blog, with footnotes

II've just discovered The Daily WTF. Currently reading through the back archives (because, well, that's what you do on the internet; why miss the back-issues just because you arrived late?*). My favorite so far is the VB-turned-C programmer who realized that with macros, you can pretend to be programing in anything.

*There's an interesting case to be made that this - not even free access or flash animations or anything else - is the big difference between traditional comics and webcomics. Scott McCloud, in Reinventing Comics (sequel to the excellent Understanding Comics) argues that internet-based comics will have a host of advantages over conventual paper-based ones: they have none of the space limitations of conventional paper, they can include visual effects not possible in print, they can take advantage of the internet's abilities to create branching plots, and so forth. But in the nine years since publication, essentially none of that came off. Most webcomics creators - even the professional ones - don't have the time to create more than one plot, or fill out more than one conventional strip worth of artwork, or add anything more programmatically intricate than a .gif file. 

What was different - and the fact that this was missed is kind of surprising, since it's a property of the medium of webcomics itself, not any one comic in particular - was that internet archiving means that any individual comic is available to anyone at any time. Print comics can't do this: if you pick up your newspaper one morning and haven't read the funnies a three weeks, you still want to be able to laugh at Garfield's antics; so everything - plot, setting, characterization, even the jokes themselves - has to be as broadly set out and as static as possible. Even relatively story-based comics (such as Doonesbury) tend to simply throw the cast in various situations and let the jokes fend for themselves**.

The webcomics paradigm is different. Readers can come and go as they choose, but - thanks to the miracles of archiving - they never have to miss a strip. Indeed, most webcomics creators take advantage of this to get rid of all the "Gilligan's Island" plotting and endless recapping that plagues print comics. Instead, webcomics can be highly decompressed, and have long-running story arcs and much larger, better-developed casts, albeit at the cost of making reading all the back archives necessary, even for established readers, and making the front-end comics absolutely incomprehensible to new readers. Fortunately, these new readers can simply trawl through the backstory, although with some of the longer-running comics starting to approach 10 years of 7-comics-a-week updating, this can become a daunting task. Not all webcomics do this (the excellent xkcd comes to mind as a well-made gag-a-day strip) but many do, and, even without showy visuals or funky web effects, it opens up vast new storytelling areas long denied to comics. Probably the best example of this is Narbonic, which is a couple of years long and changes a great deal in the process: you can see the creator realizing she doesn't need to make every strip funny on its own, right in front of your eyes, and it improves greatly for it.

So check out Narbonic and see what I'm talking about. It's a good read.

**Although, if you really really want the backissues of Doonesbury, they're here. Just increment the url.

Friday, May 1, 2009

Saturday Night Live no longer exists

I was going to continue my Lorem Ipsum post but this struck me just recently.

Saturday Night Live no longer exists (on the Canadian internet).

See, back in the heady days of 2008, I got into Saturday Night Live, largely because of the American election that year, and even more so because of the internet. 2300 to 0100 on Saturday night (technically, it's mostly on Sunday morning) is not really a time I watch TV. At home I usually don't stay up that late, and at university I don't have a TV. Also, the few times Ihad seen it it was... well, live comedy, good when they hit it but with a high proportion of just painful sketches that went on too long. I preferred Whose Line Is It Anyways, which tended towards the consistently brilliant and even better was on at a reasonable time. But in the fall of 2008 I kept getting link after link to SNL, especially Tina Fey's dead-on impression of Sarah Palin. So I watched it online at the NBC site, found it pretty funny, and kept watching on and off for a couple of months.

Cut to yesterday. I decide for various reasons that I want to see the SNL vice-presidential debate ("I would throw myself on a live grenade for John McCain! But for the sake of every man, woman, and child on Earth, we must never allow him to become President!") So I look up "SNL Vice President Debate" on youtube and get... nothing. A couple of brief clips and some longer clips that look like they used to contain the whole skit but currently consist of a single still and a textbox directing you to the NBC site. Apparently NBC has run amuck on youtube taking down all the SNL clips and replacing them with redirects to their website. All right, so I go to the NBC page...


Well, that's annoying. And pretty much every hit for the video, and every other SNL video, is either down or a direct link-through to NBC or the similarly geographically restricted hulu. So essentially, SNL no longer exists on the internet for Canadians.

The particularly hilarious bit - apart from the fact that a little judicious proxying can get you around it anyways - is that it seems so, well, pointless. NBC broadcasts in Canada. SNL goes on the air in Ottawa at the same time that it does in New York, on the same channel (it also goes on the air on Canada-based Global, although the video section of the Global website is pretty sad). The whole point of web-based videos is to expand your audience - you can sell ads on the net just as well as TV spots, and because you're no longer limited to watching the show once at 2330 on a Saturday night six months ago, you'll get more viewers in total. So why stick geographical restrictions on it? Hulu I can see, maybe, because they're working with other people's content and are probably trying hard to stay on the very conservative side of copyright laws. But NBC owns SNL. They can publish it anywhere they like. So why don't they?