Download File

Miniature Entry Advice That Made a Difference

My favorite quote by the late Maya Angelou isnt from one of her poems, and in fact theres not even a trace of it (that I can find) online.

It came from an answer to a college students question about changing the world. She told the student that if you want to change the world, start by making your bed every day.

Why?

Because if you havent got sufficient will and dedication to do that one simple thing, you might want to reconsider whether you have what it takes to reach your more ambitious goals.

You dont have to agree with her about this. But I do. And its one of the only pieces of Advice from a Sage Thinker that has made any damn difference in what I do with my day.

Available link for download

Mini Reviews of a Whole Lotta Underrated Movies

The holidays have ended and Im back at school, but with all that spare time - that Ill no longer have - I watched a whole lot of underrated gems (I saw a couple of these movies way back at the start of December). So in alphabetical order, Ill serve up a few words on Richard Linklaters Bernie, Ralph Fiennes Coriolanus, Tony Kayes Detachment, Lee Tamahoris The Devils Double, David Ayers End of Watch, and Amy Heckerlings Vamps.


Bernie (2011) / US / Out on DVD now / Directed by Richard Linklater / Written by Richard Linklater and Skip Hollandsworth / Starring Jack Black, Shirley MacLaine, Matthew McConaughey, Brady Coleman / 104 mins

Ive already said a lot about Jack Blacks performance as convicted murderer with a heart of gold, Bernie Tiede. And there wont be a point for a very long time where I dont champion that performance. Everything just clicks, and usually Black annoys the heck out of me. The movie itself is just wonderful - and I saw it twice in the holidays. I wouldnt say Im an expert on Richard Linklaters films, but I feel like he is one of the best working directors and no one really realises it. Hes just so consistent in his work. This film, all about the Bernie Tiede case where he kills a woman hes been living with (Shirley MacLaine) coz hes had it with her, is mostly told mockumentary style, with real people who were around during the whole ordeal relaying the events for the camera. It feels so real, in a bizarrely unreal way. To be honest, this is the Matthew McConaughey performance from 2012 that I have no trouble going back to again and again. I mean, who really wants to brave Killer Joe a second time? And yeah, Magic Mike wasnt my favourite.
Why see it? The performances. And it is damn entertaining.




Coriolanus (2011) / UK / Out on DVD now / Directed by Ralph Fiennes / Written by John Logan based on the play Coriolanus by William Shakespeare / Starring Ralph Fiennes, Gerard Butler, Brian Cox, Vanessa Redgrave, Jessica Chastain, James Nesbitt / 122 mins. 

Basically, this has been my most anticipated movie forever, not only because it is my favourite actor, Ralph Fiennes directorial debut, but because my favourite actress, Jessica Chastain is also in it. I mean, I could basically hear a choir of angels floating around going "this is all for you Stevee, you can just wait a year and a half for it though". I wouldnt say I completely loved the movie, particularly because admittedly, Im not so into Shakespearean language when I dont have the chance to fully digest them. This film takes the language and puts it into a very modern setting, filled with modern warfare and exile. The basic bones of the story is that theres much unrest in a city much like Rome, and a lot of people blame Roman general Caius Martius Coriolanus (Fiennes) for that, including his arch enemy Tullus Aufidius (Butler - turning in a surprisingly fantastic performance). The story definitely does fit the modern setting, particularly because the story is rather bleak and the setting is quite scarily empty and damaged, so they really go hand in hand. Fiennes has quite the flair for directing, especially getting the most he could out of modernising Shakespeare. I can see there was a bit of influence from Kathryn Bigelow - whom he worked with on Strange Days and The Hurt Locker - here, with his jerky camera and straight and narrow way of playing out the facts. Vanessa Redgrave turns in a performance which really should have been nominated for an Oscar last year. Jessica Chastain is wonderful, despite the fact she has very few opportunities to shine.
Why see it? It is a good - not great - modernisation of Shakespeare. Plus, Ralph Fiennes doing Shakespeare is one of the best things ever. And Jessica Chastain.


Detachment (2011) / US / Currently undated in NZ / Directed by Tony Kaye / Written by Carl Lund / Starring Adrien Brody, Christina Hendricks, Marcia Gay Harden, Sami Gayle, James Caan / 97 mins.

Detachment is one film which I hadnt heard that much about until I happened to watch it by chance earlier this month. And Im damn glad that I did end up watching it. It is a film of many facets. In one way, it looks at the state of education in America from the point of view of the teachers. In another way, it looks at the state of the students who are being educated. In a whole different way, it is a character study of substitute teacher Henry Barthes (Adrien Brody in one of his best performances of the past few years), who is wandering through life trying not to care for or about anyone. It doesnt always meld these different facets together well, but that doesnt make it any less fascinating. I definitely wasnt expecting the film to pack such a punch like it did, but I havent been able to shake the end for quite some time. All I can say is that you see this flawed masterpiece for yourself. Even if Tony Kayes direction gets a little bit distracting sometimes, his film is something to behold.
Why see it? It is one of the most intriguingly made films to surface recently.


The Devils Double (2011) / US / Out on DVD now / Directed by Lee Tamahori / Written by Michael Thomas, based on the books by Latif Yahia / Starring Dominic Cooper, Ludivine Sagnier, Raad Rawi, Philip Quast / 109 mins.

If you look at the poster to The Devils Double, we have a whole scene doused in gold, including Dominic Cooper holding a rather large gun. I dont know what it is, but theres something absurdly intriguing about this poster. And it pretty much sums up the film. It is based on the supposedly true story of Latif Yahia, who is hired to be the body double of Saddam Husseins sadistic son Uday, with Dominic Cooper playing both roles. Basically, the film is extremely sadistic, violent, and everything that makes an R18 film what it is. For the most part, it was so absurdly put together and the House of Hussein was one interesting place when put on film. I cant say it always had its eye on the ball the entire time (it seemed to delve into violence when it ran out of ways to go), but it was immensely entertaining even if it was sickening. By far and beyond the best thing about this film, though, was Dominic Coopers dual performances. Id put him just behind Michael Fassbenders performance in Shame for the best performances of 2011, hes that good. You can always tell exactly which character hes playing through his on point mannerisms and utter fearlessness. It may help that Ive always been a fan of Cooper - sadly from his "you tried" performance in Mamma Mia - but his performance here is truly back-breakingly fantastic.
Why see it? Dominic Coopers performance. And it is directed by a New Zealander. Not that youd realise it. Lee Tamahori has come a long way since Once Were Warriors.


End of Watch (2012) / US / Currently undated in NZ / Written and Directed by David Ayer / Starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Michael Pena, Natalie Martinez, Anna Kendrick, David Harbour, America Ferrera, Cody Horn / 109 mins. 

To be honest, End of Watch was not high on my watchlist until every man and his dog kept raving about it. I sure as hell wasnt expecting to be sitting on the airplane flying over the Equator bawling my eyes out. Yeah, thanks for warning me about that everyone. Anyway, the film is filmed in a found footage kind of style that also has some other grainy, documentary style stuff going on at the same time. It is hard to explain, and while it is a little bit silly sometimes, it works for the most part (but that comes down to the fantastic material). It mostly just follows the story of cops Brian Taylor (Gyllenhaal) and Mike Zavala (Pena), both in their work and in their personal lives. Things go bad for them when a gang want them dead. Admittedly, the gang were a bit one dimensional and too annoying to be threatening, but that didnt really detract from what was going on. Whats interesting is that most of the banter between Taylor and Zavala was improvised, and it just felt totally natural. In fact, most things about this film felt totally natural, and thats why it worked so well. It isnt your typical cop drama - it is one that you should definitely believe the hype for. It was crazy good.
Why see it? It is one of the best cop films Ive seen in a long time.


Vamps (2012) / US / Out on DVD now / Written and Directed by Amy Heckerling / Starring Alicia Silverstone, Krysten Ritter, Dan Stevens, Wallace Shawn, Sigourney Weaver / 92 mins.

Amongst all of these dramas and the like, heres a very light-hearted comedy that I guess is a bit of a guilty pleasure for me. Written and directed by Amy Heckerling, the mind behind Clueless, and also starring Cher herself, Alicia Silverstone, Vamps is a rather funny, but also kind of depressing vampire comedy. Silverstone stars as Goody, a nearly 200 year old vampire who lives in New York with her younger vampire sister Stacy (Krysten Ritter). The two pursue dating, and the later falls in love with none other than Matthew I cant drive properly Crawley from Downton Abbey, who is also named Joey Van Helsing of all things. Yeah, it is pretty silly, but what I loved most about this film, apart from Dan Stevens being adorable without being Matthew Crawley, was the fact that it was really just an ode to the past through Goody, as shes been through so many time periods in her life. The final montage was so beautiful, as it went through all the different fads and phases she had to go through in order to keep up with the human world. Plus, Krysten Ritter is awesome. I wouldnt say this film is amazing, but it is definitely an underrated comedy that deserves more of an audience.
Why see it? It is an ode to nostalgia - not as effective as Midnight in Paris, but close to it, in a guilty pleasure sort of way.

Have you seen any of these films? What did you think of them?

Available link for download

Merlin In A Winter Wonderland

Merry Christmas, viewers. Heres a present for you: Gabriel finally managed to dislodge his thumb from its usual comfort zone (up his butt) to record a gameplay video of Young Merlin. Then we jabbered over it, as is our funny little way, for the benefit of any other total saddoes who have nothing better to do throughout the Christmas season than watch Youtube videos.

The game turned out to be a bit slow and backtracky, so our conversation had a slightly unfortunate tendency to drift back to cocks a lot.


UPDATE 26/12: Events shudder messily to a climax!

Available link for download

Merry Christmas and A Happy New Year!

Merry, merry Christmas to all of yall! As this year comes to a close, I want to say a big, fat thank you for being a part of this little cozy corner of the Internet May Richer Fuller Be occupies. I love sharing here, and it certainly wouldnt be what it is without you!

Im heading out today to soak up the rest of this season with family and friends, and I hope youre doing the same. I may pop in sometime next week, but if not, heres to a restful, peaceful and joy-filled time - see you in 2015!

Available link for download

Modeling a Tree using L System

An L-system or Lindenmayer system is a parallel rewriting system, namely a variant of a formal grammar (a set of rules and symbols), most famously used to model the growth processes of plant development, but also able to model the morphology of a variety of organisms. [wikipedia]

When using this model, we have to define a set of grammar rules that will be used to describe the growth of the branches of a tree. The rules that we define will later be implemented as the growth of the tree in an iterative fashion. In this system, we define these following alphabets that will be used in the production rules:

f : create branch
l : create leaf
[ and ] : define a set of local area/branch. The definitions of the area are put inside the [ and ]
+ and - : rotate the branch right/left in x-axis
^ and v : rotate the branch up/down in y-axis
<> : twist the branch left/right in z-axis

By using the symbols above, we can begin to create a tree with our system. But before that, we also have to define several properties that are also important in generating the tree, which are:

• The number of production rules iterations, for determining the level of the branches,
• The angle, for determining branch curves, and
• The radius of the branches and the decreasing value of it, in an iterative way The length of the branches

The following are several examples of the production rules that are used using the system:

Tree A

Angle : 25
# Iterations: 6
Branch radius: 0.02
Branch radius reduction: 0.0015
Branch length (height): 0.15
Initial value : fffffA
Production rules : A = f[++Al][--Al]>>>A



Tree B

Angle : 30
# Iterations: 10
Branch radius: 0.01
Branch radius reduction: 0.001
Branch length (height): 0.16
Initial value : fA
Production rules : A = f[^Bl]>>[^Bl]>>A, B = f[-Bl]B


Tree C

Angle : 15
# Iterations: 13
Branch radius: 0.02
Branch radius reduction: 0.0015
Branch length (height): 0.15
Initial value : fA
Production rules : A = ^fB>>>B>>>>>B, B = [^^f>>>>>>A]

Available link for download

Maybe a trainer ride this morning

With sleep aid medication, like Ambien, its quite often that I wake up early. If I try to go back to sleep more often than not the remaining sleep is fitful. This half sleep leads to a groggy feeling so its better to just get up.

Today I get up and say, you know,self, I need a ride bad. The stresses of the times are putting me on the edge Gotta fuel up right to ride so start hitting some carbs. Its still pitch dark outside and didnt check the weather but assumed it would be at least rideable.

My wife comes down and in our conversation says that shes going to skip running because it is raining. Raining!. I check out the back and sure enough its raining.

Ate those carbs. Now what am I gonna do. Gotta burn it off somehow. Maybe its time to pull ye old trainer out. It has honestly been 6-8 months since Ive been on it. Maybe twice and both those workouts were bust. The trainer used to be a magnet for me drawing in the moth to the flame. But these days I have no desire, no drive to get on it.

The saving grace for me is the terrain here. Its hilly. So by virtue of the route I can hit many hills. No need for desire. The only way to get home is to get through the hills. A 1hr hilly ride 2x a week provides enough effort to keep me with a little fitness.

I hope the trainer still works. But betcha I make it no more than 10 mins!

Available link for download

Mixing Celedon and a GIVEAWAY

[It has been pointed out to me that I have misspelled CELADON.  Whoops!  Very bad manners.  I wont change it in the post or video; just humor me and my misspelling.  (Thanks, Lucie).]

I get asked about this color pretty frequently.  Celedon.  Its a color from Blick Matte Acrylics, and it is only available in 2 oz bottles.  I typically put four to six bottles of it in each Blick order.  I recommend you do the same, so that they might consider offering it in the 8 oz size.  However, you can mix your own, and get some variation and nuance to your taste:

This is the "piece" I made with the leftovers.

This piece obviously relies heavily on this celedon range of color.  This is an example in my Balancing Opposites composition course: balancing large areas with small elements.

This is the GIVEAWAY!!!

I am offering a giveaway that includes:

• 8 oz bottle of Black
• 8 oz bottle of White
• 2 oz bottle of Celedon
• 1 oz (I think) of Golden Open Hansa Yellow.  (The Open acrylics take longer to dry, but mixed with other colors they just extend the working time a bit).

To enter the drawing, just comment on this post, and identify yourself.  I will post a winner on Wedneesday, February 18, and it is the winners responsibility to contact me with a mailing address.  Good luck!  And have fun mixing your own celedon and other beautiful neutrals.

Available link for download

McDonnell Douglas F A 18 Hornet

The F/A-18 Hornet is an all-weather, carrier capable, fighter/attack aircraft, that was designed in the 1970s for service with the United States Navy, and Marine Corps., air forces from other nations use it too.

Introduced on 7th January, 1983, the Hornet was built to replace the F-4 Phantom, A-4 Skyhawk, A-7 Corsair, and to complement the F-14 Tomcat. It was very versatile, and reliable, and its main roles are fighter escort, fleet air defence, suppression of enemy air defences (S.E.A.D.), interdiction, close air support, and reconnaissance. It first saw action during Operations Prairie Fire, and El Dorado Canyon. VFA-131 Hornets from U.S.S. Coral Sea were involved.

The origins of the F/A-18 Hornet lies in the experimental aircraft YF-17 Cobra. The Cobra was designed as many from the fighter community believed the F-15 Eagles price, and size was too large for many combat roles. Originally designed to be a lightweight day fighter, the YF-17 was navalized, scaled-up, and in-turn, became the F/A-18 Hornet. The Cobra shared no essential dimension, or primary structure with the Hornet.

An F/A-18 Hornet of VFA-146 "Blue Diamonds" in flight on a mission during Operation Enduring Freedom. (Photographed by Lt. Kyle "Chet" Turco, United States Navy. Date is unknown. I apologize for any inconvenience.)

Variants of the F/A-18 Hornet are the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, which is a distinct, and evolutionary upgrade of the Hornet, and the EA-18G Growler, an electronic warfare version of the F/A-18.

The following is a list of countries that currently operates the F/A-18 Hornet.
-U.S.A.
-Australia
-Canada
-Finland
-Spain
-Kuwait
-Switzerland
-Malaysia

The F/A-18 has been criticized for its low range, and payload compared to its comtemporaries.

Available link for download

Misplaced Blame A Doomed Presidency

Available link for download

Messi paso a paso

Aquí posteo el proceso de uno de los dibujos de Adidas.
*hecho integramente a photoshop.

Available link for download

Merkley Levin Is a Joke

The Merkley-Levin Amendment (SA 3931) is a version of the Volcker Rule. The Volcker Rule, if youll recall, is a ban on proprietary trading at banks and bank holding companies (BHCs). If you ask Merkley and Levins offices, theyd no doubt tell you that their amendment significantly strengthens the existing Volcker Rule language in the Dodd bill (Section 619 of S.3712). Dont be fooled — it does nothing of the sort. I spent the majority of my career as a lawyer for one of the big investment banks, and my first thought after reading Merkley-Levin was: "Wow, this would be cake to get around." Wall Street is scared of the Volcker Rule, but believe me, theyre not scared of Merkley-Levin.

This requires a bit of explanation. To ban prop trading at BHCs, the law must distinguish between market-making trades and propietary trades. Market-makers stand ready and willing to buy or sell securities for their own account, at firm bid and offer prices. If an investor is looking to sell a security, the market-maker will buy the security using its own capital, and hold it in inventory until an investor whos looking to buy the security surfaces. Holding many inventories of securities (i.e., bonds, stocks, derivatives) exposes market-makers to all manner of short-term market risk, interest rate risk, foreign exchange risk, etc. This requires market-makers to do quite a bit of hedging in order to safely carry these inventories. We dont want to prevent banks from hedging the inventories they hold as market-makers, but we do want to prevent banks from entering into trades that arent intended to hedge a risk associated with its market-making activities — that is, purely speculative prop trades. This is a difficult and complicated task, but it can be done (Ive seen it done from the inside).

Ideally, what the financial reform bill would do is just say, "Proprietary trades are banned; market-making trades are allowed," and then let the regulators work out how to define "market-making trades" and "proprietary trades." This is something that simply cant be done at the statutory level; it has to be done at the regulatory level. Unfortunately, these days its fashionable for people to bash any sort of regulatory discretion as tantamount to letting Wall Street win. This is where Merkley-Levin comes in, because its clearly a response to this "anti-regulatory discretion" meme.

The biggest problem with Merkley-Levin is that its authors appear to confuse "definitions with more words" with "more specific definitions" (and thus less of that evil regulatory discretion). Merkley-Levin prohibits "proprietary trading," which it defines very broadly, and then creates 9 categories of "permitted activities" (listed in section (d)(1) of the amendment). The categories of "permitted activities," which function like exceptions to the definition of "proprietary trading," are so ridiculously broad that they completely swallow the amendments prop trading ban. The most important exceptions are sections (d)(1)(B), (C), and (G).

First, lets take section (d)(1)(B), which explicitly permits:

(B) The purchase, sale, acquisition, or disposition of securities and other instruments described in subsection (i)(4) in connection with underwriting, market-making, or in facilitation of customer relationships, to the extent that any such activities permitted by this subparagraph are designed to not exceed the reasonably expected near term demands of clients, customers, or counterparties.

Section (B) was obviously supposed to be the generic market-making exception — but notice, crucially, that the term "market-making" is still undefined. Instead of offering a more specific or more narrow definition of "market-making," Merkley-Levin actually weakens the Volcker Rule by creating a whole bunch of new categories of exceptions to the prop trading ban. Essentially, section (B) consists of three separate categories of permitted trades: (1) trades "in connection with underwriting"; (2) market-making trades; and (3) trades "in facilitation of customer relationships." Regulators still have to use the rulemaking process to define "market-making," which will no doubt encompass any trade which can be justified as a hedge against any risk the bank faces in its trading book.

But even if a trade cant be justified as part of the banks market-making activities, theres literally no trade that cant be justified as "in facilitation of customer relationships." As long as the counterparty on the trade has some sort of trading relationship with the bank (e.g., the counterparty is a prime brokerage customer, or has an ISDA Master Agreement with the bank), then its very difficult to see how the trade wouldnt come under the definition of a trade done "in facilitation of customer relationships." All counterparties are "customers" of the bank on some level, and because every trade has to have a counterparty, literally every trade could be justified as "in facilitation of customer relationships." And remember, the exception for trades "in facilitation of customer relationships" is in addition to the exception for "market-making" trades.

The limitation that any trades allowed under section (B) have to be "designed to not exceed the reasonably expected near term demands of clients, customers, or counterparties" isnt a serious limitation. At most, it would just require a trader to come up with a plausible explanation for why he decided to take on a certain position — which could be satisfied by a story about what the trader thought other market participants were going to do at the time.

Next, we have section (C), which permits:

(C) Risk-mitigating hedging activities designed to reduce risks to the banking entity or nonbank financial company.

Whereas the exception for market-making in section (B) will no doubt include trades which hedge risks in the banks trading book, section (C) goes one step further, permitting trades which can be justified as hedging any risk in the entire BHC, not just risks in the trading book. Also, Id expect the banks to argue that "diversification" reduces risks to the banking entity as a whole, and thus that trades which have the effect of diversifying the banks portfolio are permitted under section (C).

Finally, we have section (G), which permits:

(G) Proprietary trading conducted by a company pursuant to paragraph (9) or (13) of section 4(c), provided that the trading occurs solely outside of the United States and that the company is not directly or indirectly controlled by a United States person.

Section 4(c)(13) of the Bank Holding Company Act is an exemption which permits certain BHCs to own foreign bank subsidiaries (and certain foreign companies). Goldman, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan, even CIT Group — they all own foreign bank subsidiaries under section 4(c)(13). To my knowledge, all the major BHCs own foreign bank subsidiaries under section 4(c)(13).

So essentially, section (G) allows BHCs to continue their prop trading through their London offices, provided they find non-US counterparties (shouldnt be too difficult), and the trading isnt being controlled by someone in New York (fine, just send all your prop traders to London). And this is in addition to all the prop trading the banks could do out of their New York offices under the ridiculously broad "permitted activities" in sections (d)(1)(B) and (C). Seriously, this would be like taking candy from a baby for the dealer banks.

Now, I should tell you that Im assuming that section (d)(2)(A)(i) of the Merkley-Levin Amendment will either be removed, or defined away by regulators. Its basically incompatible with the clear intent of the amendment, so Im pretty confident that itll be taken out (if not in the Senate, then in conference). Section (d)(2)(A)(i) prohibits even permitted activities if they:

(i) would involve or result in a material conflict of interest (as such term shall be defined jointly by rule) between the banking entity or the nonbank financial company and its clients, customers, or counterparties.

This is simply incompatible with market-making, which involves taking the opposite side of clients trades, and its the clear intent of Merkley-Levin to allow market-making. If for some bizarre reason this section doesnt get removed, regulators would have to consider the clear intent of the amendment to allow market-making in defining "material conflict of interest," and would effectively be forced to define "material conflict of interest" so narrowly that it might as well not exist as a limitation. The fact that this section is even in the amendment I think is indicative of how poorly it was drafted.

People often ask why I say that complicated financial regulations cant be written at the statutory level. The reason, sorry to say — which Merkley-Levin demonstrates quite well — is that Congress sucks at writing complicated financial regulations.

Available link for download