I missed the opening ceremonies, I was busy at a re-education center.

I only watched about 18 minutes of the ceremony (and was incredibly bored by even that so I'm completely in Bush's camp if he had to sit there for all 5 hours) but I believe Costas mentioned that as host country China automatically earns competition spots in every single event at the games without having to qualify.

And what does "No computers" mean in Australia?

"No computers" in Australia means the same as "No rigged vote counts in the USA", "Fast food is good for you", "Bush is Great" and "The Media always tells the truth".

...and since this (healthy) debate continues, how about the question of under-studies? Just a small percent of absent performers would have spelled "disaster" on the old mega-typeroony.

Hugs,

The Stoat XXX.

I just don't get why you think they'd be deceiving us on this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight (Post 231427) I just don't get why you think they'd be deceiving us on this?

Dear GD,

Well, that's a good question, and warrants a considered answer, which goes like this:

Before I start, I am not against good show-person-ship.

The Olympic Games present a venue for which hosting countries spend a $hitload of bucks (more than your and my next pooty upgrade) to say how great they are to the rest of the non-tree dwellers.

In this particular case, after several displays of demonstrated self-control in the context of state "singularity", in which each individual can see (and therefore synch with the other), how better to sell the notion of national precision (aka prowess) by inferring that a large team of individuals could do the seemingly impossible?

First I considered the sheer grunt of the technology used up to the point in question…for example a pedestrian-capable screen that could occupy a large area of the arena just for starters. So money, technology and person-power were not a limitation.

Secondly I considered the risk of failure. Now that’s something one doesn’t want to fvck up on a World stage. How would I reduce the risk? One option includes filming a perfect rehearsal first and playing it back (not an option here, but I can think of at least one event that lent its self to this). Another option is to reduce the human element to sheer grunt power. I’d do this because there is no way I could train performers to trade places with each other…they’d have to learn a whole new script of movement and timing…and we aren’t talking Waltz Time on a metronome, we are talking variable time. Nah – too risky on a World stage.

So I would want a system in which I could replace a ‘unit’ with another if I had to at the last minute…after all, the apparent mechanism would be hidden until the last minute – and no-one would know.

Thirdly, if I worked for a humble kind of country (that is, one with nothing to prove to the rest of the World), I’d probably not reveal how it was done, somewhat like a Magician doesn’t reveal the machinations of their best tricks. China is not renowned for its Civil Rights, so I’m disinclined to believe it revealed the performers for their own benefit, but rather to add credibility to ‘the larger picture’.

There is no crime in performing a great illusion. I loved it – and wish I had thought of it first…but there is no way I wouldn’t use technology to assist if I could get way with it…and I think it’s easier to support the notion that China did than it didn’t.

Many hugs,

The Stoat.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kather..._b_117913.html

Not sure if that link was posted. Totally agree with that article.

While the ceremony was very visually impressive (jaw-dropping, more like), it was completely hypocritical BS on China's part.

And what NBC did in covering it was really unforgivable here. The commentary ranged from completely innane (really, they talked about Big Macs?!?! stfu) to READING COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA. China (and NBC) obviously take us for complete idiots.

Great observation ABG !!!

So they used technology when they could see and hear each other...and then dispensed with it when they couldn't ???

Hmmmm...talk about doing it the hard way. Not.


I'm still impressed at the concept though.