Celebrity Crush, Part 2
In response to Got a Crush on a Celebrity…, Derek writes:
So it’s an uphill climb. Understood. But, there are guys out there that KNOW (think) that they are MORE than enough to take the challenge (think Pros vs Joes).What kinda advice would the DG give to those guys? Would could a guy do once he’s left his life, moved to the city of his desire?
I’ll met enough people to understand your initial answer all too well (think “astronaunts”). A type-A personality guy (definitely NOT me) wouldn’t let something like reality stand in the way. They are the same guys that blow horns and give cat calls to pick up women (see my last video posting – I don’t know how to link it here).
Actually, this is something else I’ve never thought about because up until recently, all the stars were in LA/Hollywood. Unless you lived out there, AND were running in their circles, there was ZERO percent chance that you’d meet a star anyway, unless she came to your local mall to sign autographs or was doing a show in your town.
In the case of doing a show, you’re done. She’s there for business, and you’re not getting near her. If she’s there for a book signing or whatever celebrities do to meet their fans, you’re not going to have but about a minute near her so your best bet is to come in the door looking jiggy-fresh, slide her your number and tell her to call you… outside of the earshot of cockblocking assistants and managers, of course.
Anyway, at this point, now that there are internet celebrities, they’re way more accessible to average joes, because none of this is being done in studios under locked-down conditions. Consider YouTube, for instance, you have some of the most REGULAR chicks that are STARS on YouTube. They probably work as cashiers in the local Wal-Mart, even.
As far as actually getting on, there’s no specific formula to that, because as predictable as chicks are, they all get off on different things. Some chicks like bad boys, some chicks like nice guys… Play the wrong style and you lose. :) The only advantage you have in these situations is if the chick puts a lot of information online about things that she likes. That way, you can play it off like you’re interested in the same things and gain rapport.
So it’s not really different from the basic formula…
Gather information, then Fake It, Till You Make It! :D
Marry Rich
Yes, I know I said “only date broke chicks”, but now, we’re talking about marriage! :D
If you’re going to get married to a chick, make *SURE* she’s got ‘mad ducats’! :D
Don’t put yourself in the screwed-up position of having to support some deadbeat chick. That went out of style with The Flintstones and The Honeymooners. Women’s Lib is in FULL EFFECT… YA HEARD? Chicks have their own jobs… Chicks have their own money…. They’re even allowed to own land now. There’s no reason why you can’t find yourself a *RICH* chick to get married to. None.
You may have to do a little bullshitting, because chicks like to hook up with guys that are more successful than they are. Go hang out at the country club. Order an overpriced water and act like you’re drinking vodka. Drop a lot of references to your yacht and the several homes you own around the world. You know the drill. ;)
Anyway…
Now, there are two types of rich chicks you can go for. There’s the self-made rich chick that is educated and has her own career and has done what she’s needed to do to elevate her lifestyle to the lap of luxury. All props and credit to those women! :D … Then, there’s the type that’s rich because either her father or her ex-husband worked A LOT, and she’s become the beneficiary of their labor. It all depends on what you plan to do with her money, which kind of rich chick you want to go for….
If you want to keep her money to yourself, marry the rich, self-made chick. The higher she gets in her career, the more hours she’s going to have to spend working. This means you get to drive her fancy luxury car back and forth to the store to pick up the latest video games on her credit card. In this case, you’re basically the butler, Jeeves. It’s your job to pick her up from work after you chilled all day, drive her to the restaurant for dinner, since your ass probably can’t cook worth a damn, drive her back home and pamper her for about an hour before she falls asleep since she needs to get up early to go make you some more money in the morning. So, basically, by ‘working’ between 6 and 10pm every day, the equivalent of a part-time job, you enjoy all the luxuries she’s working so hard to make available to you. This works best with chicks you have no intention of having sex with.
OTOH… >:D … If you actually ENJOY her company and want to hang out with her and hit it, etc… then make sure you get one of those beneficiary-chicks. The bad thing about trust fund chicks and divorcees is that they’re spending their money faster than YOU’RE spending their money! :O The good thing about them is that they don’t actually have to waste time going to GET that money, so you have loads of time to hang out with them all day, every day! :D Paris on a Tuesday? No problem! :D Tavern On The Green on Thursday afternoon? No problem! :D
Fortunately, even though the divorce/cheating rates hover around 50% to 60%, there are still a bunch of dummies that get married without prenuptial agreements, so there are tons of divorcees around. um…. And don’t think I’m talking about old-ass chicks, either! :D Check out what Wikipedia has to say about Marriageable Age in Utah! :O
Utah: 18 generally for first marriage, 16 with parental consent, 14 with court approval or previous marriage.
… um…. Previous marriage *BEFORE* 14? :/ …. Anyway, you see what I’m getting at. By the time those chicks are divorced, they’ll just be turning legal age. By the time they’re divorced for the second or third time, they’ll be the age they would have been if they had graduated college…. *IF* they had gone to school past the 4th grade, when they got married the first time :/ So that’s two alimony checks, and the chick’s dumb as a box of rocks!…..
SWEET!!! :D
Take her to the Book Store!
ok… So, DatingGenius stumbled onto this great new technique for kicking it to geek-chicks! :D (assuming you’d want to do that in the first place)….
This chick was talking about how happy she was that she was on a date, and the guy took her to A BOOK STORE!!! :/ … Now, of course, DatingGenius thought this was a ridiculous as well as RETARDED idea, so I needed to get to the bottom of this…. hmm… does anyone know proper form for referring to one’s self in third person? It seems strange to say “HE needed to get to the bottom of this”… hmm… anyway…
Now, obviously, taking a chick to a book store doesn’t help you to get on, ASAP… which is the entire reason you took her out in the first place. If you didn’t want to tap that, you wouldn’t be on a date with her. You’d be HANGING OUT. So, since she considered herself on a date, the job of the guy was to demonstrate to her WHY she should be his girlfriend/fiancee/wife, whatever he has in mind for her. All he was expressing to her by taking her to the book store was that he DIDN’T intend to hit it anytime soon, and he’d rather read a book then try to get her alone in a bar bathroom with a couch and a lock on the door.
So we got into this conversation, and I can just see the LIGHT in her eyes while she’s talking about being in this book store, and being happy about his choice of books, because if they weren’t into reading the same kinds of things, she wouldn’t have been as interested in him, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah….. So I’m like WTF is she talking about? His choice of books? Do you even know if this guy likes chicks? Do you know if he’s going to tap it proppah? WTF difference does it make WHAT BOOKS HE READS if you’re DATING this guy, trying to find a boyfriend? :/
See, that’s what’s wrong with relationships, and that’s why the cheating and divorce rates are through the roof. People hook up for the most RETARDED reasons! :D … HEY! We like the same books! Let’s go out with each other! OKAYYYY! :D … Next thing you know, they’re calling themselves boyfriend and girlfriend, and he’s trying to screw her five times a week, and she’s trying to screw him five times A MONTH! :O
See the problem there? They didn’t check the IMPORTANT stuff before giving each other meaningless titles. That’s why taking a chick to a book store is RETARDED before hitting it, because it’s a waste of your time. You’re checking to see if y’all can be *FRIENDS*, NOT boyfriend/girlfriend.
However… hehehe Like I said, this chick was going for the okey-doke, so it occurred to DatingGenius that this was a valuable concept that needed to be explored.
As we all know, Chicks give sex to get relationships and guys give relationships to get sex. In the case of GEEK-chicks, though… they’re not thinking about the sex AT.ALL! :D They’re not even planning to barter it to you to get you to call them your girlfriend. See, what you have to remember about the geek chicks is that most of them grew up…… geeks. :D They were NOT the fashion plates. They were NOT the popular girls. They were NOT the pretty girls or the cheerleaders. They were NOT in high demand whatsoever by the male population. Therefore, by the time they get to dating age, they’re not used to being physically touched.
The reason this is important is that when they think about themselves with their hypothetical “boyfriends”, all they’re thinking about is someone to do stuff with. They have no mental concept of actually getting laid, other than by some fluke. They have no intention on “giving it up” on a regular basis, because that’s not their physical experience of life. SO… If you go out on a date, and you suddenly come to the realization that this girl is a geek, switch gears! Go into “fun stuff we can do together when we’re boyfriend/girlfriend” mode.
Take her to the book store.
Go roller blading with her.
Buy her ice cream in Central Park.
Take her to the waterfront in Brooklyn so you can see the Manhattan lights at night…
All that waste-of-time stuff that you wouldn’t actually do with a regular chick… DO IT! :D This way, you endear yourself to her because you socialize in the same way she does. You come off as one of those geek-guys that had the same experience of life that she did. BADA-BING, BADA-BOOM, next thing you know, you’re tapping that, and all is right with the world! :D
DatingGenius
Network-Quality Series Developed For The Internet
Chuck Barney, of the Contra Costa Times posted an interesting article on freep.com today, entitled “‘Quarterlife’ ready for Internet debut“.
According to the article, “Quarterlife”, a series by Marshall Herskovitz and Edward Zwick (creators of the hit TV series “Thirtysomething”) is being touted as the first time a “true, network-quality series” has been produced directly for the internet.
Herskovitz is quoted as saying “It’s a very risky, expensive gamble, that’s for sure”, and the article later mentions:
While each hour of “quarterlife” — at $400,000-plus — costs substantially more than the typical online production, the overall budget for the project is “way less than half” of a typical network drama. Also, the crew is much smaller, and they’re forced to shoot on location because there’s no rent money for soundstages.
I’ll assume that an “hour of Quarterlife” refers to finished running time of the series. They have made (or are still in the process of making?) 36 eight-minute “webisodes”. The article doesn’t state their release schedule… daily? weekly? Either way, it’s 288 minutes of finished material, which is 4.8 hours, which @ 400k per….. comes out to One Million, Nine Hundred and Twenty Thousand dollars.
$1,920,000 = 36 x 8-minute shows? Hmm… maybe I calculated incorrectly… Let me try it a different way. :D
How about if we break it down to minutes instead? :D
While each hour of “quarterlife” — at $400,000-plus — costs substantially more than the typical online production…
(60 minutes = $400,000) / 60 => (1 minute = $6,667)
(1 show = 8 minutes) x $6,667 => (1 show = $53,336)
(1 season? = 36 shows) x $53,336 => (1 season = $1,920,096)
Hmm… ok… Good… ~$7,000 / finished minute for a “true, network-quality series” being produced directly for the Internet. I, for one, will be *VERY* interested to find out what the ROI will be for this project… as will the Yahoo Videoblogging Group, where we often discuss the intricacies of and potential for monetization of internet video. I’m sure the currently striking Writers Guild of America will be paying close attention to how well this project is received on the internet as well… especially for this reason:
The “quarterlife” concept was conceived three years ago as a pilot for ABC. The network rejected it. Instead of bailing on the project, Herskovitz and Zwick revamped it for online purposes. But they’re quick to emphasize that this isn’t just another case of producers dumping a failed pilot onto the Internet.
If ‘Quarterlife’ works out, financially… that means an entire world (literally) is opened up to television professionals as an alternative method to put bread on the table or even to have entire successful careers based on creating online content.
Caroline McCarthy, a CNETNews.com staff writer (c/net: the social), previewed the first six episodes of “Quarterlife” and is quoted in the article as saying:
“Obviously, it couldn’t have come at a better time for the show,” McCarthy says about the strike. “It might appeal to some people who are looking for something new to watch and are ready to change their viewing habits.”
This is an interesting point, considering many people watch television from their computers already, and some people don’t watch television at all, choosing instead to derive their entertainment from online sources such as web sites, aggregators and rss feed readers. If struck shows go into reruns, people may very well turn to online content such as “Quarterlife” merely to receive ‘fresh’ entertainment. While they’re browsing ‘the space’, they might end up checking out Rocketboom or other daily- or weekly-produced internet shows.
Yes… This will be very interesting. I’m looking forward to finding out what a ~$7,000/minute internet series will “feel” like. We can already tell what it will *look* like from the video posted to the “Quarterlife’ site. The show is scheduled to start on November 11th on MySpace, so “tune in tomorrow” for the jump-off, and let’s see if a “true, network-quality series, produced directly for the internet” helps to revolutionize the online media and content creation space.
Bill Cammack • New York City • Freelance Video Editor • alum.mit.edu/www/billcammack
end of days…..
On December 31, 2006, almost 10 months ago, I decided I was going to do a text blog. I needed a title, since I didn’t want it to be called “Bill’s Blog”… *YAWN*
As I searched my mind for a title that meant something to me at the time, “Wasted Days” is what I decided was the most relevant. At the time, I wrote:
The blog is named “Wasted Daysâ€. I don’t know why. I just like that name. Well… I think I DO know why, but the reasons aren’t tangible right now, so there’s nothing to say/print/type about it.
I did know why I was writing “Wasted Days” at the time, however, I didn’t feel like ‘flavoring’ the blog with the reason, so I left it out. Also, the reason didn’t permeate my existence, so it wasn’t really fair to call the blog “Wasted Days” to begin with. I didn’t want to add to that unfairness by clarifying my personal meaning for the title.
As this seems to be the season for people ending things, such as blogs, and starting new ones, I was prompted to revisit my text blog, which I had long since abandoned anyway. I figured I’d wrap it up, so that’s what I’m doing right now. I’m ending “Wasted Days”, because the ‘period’ is no longer relevant, and things have morphed so much in the last 10 months (really, even the last three months) that it’s really time for something new. :)
To me, Days are Wasted when you know there’s something you want to do or that you feel you *SHOULD* be doing, and you’re not doing it. For me, at that time of title-creation, my not-doing was that I had (and still have) a very special and important-to-me friend that lives on the other side of the country that I had never met IRL, and I knew that as inspiring to me as she was [is], that I wasn’t going to go see her.

The Ghost in the Machine
This was a strange situation for me at the time, because I’m not a long-distance person. It’s basically “out of sight, out of mind”, and I’m not usually inclined to even consider girls that don’t live in Manhattan, and even then, within about 15 minutes on public transportation from my house. :) Nevertheless, thanks to the wonders of the internet (no… not J-date), here I was, admiring someone that I would be bugging every day to hang out if she lived within my AO [Area of Operations], but since she doesn’t, I remained here and she remained there, and my days remained wasted.
“Wasted Days” had the fringe benefit of loosely alluding to alcoholic beverage consuption, :D but it was really about “What would you do if you couldn’t [wouldn't] do what you really felt like you *should* be doing?”. This is why, in December of last year, my days were wasted.
I believe the first thing I noticed was that since I was blogging, the days weren’t actually wasted, almost from the beginning. I was being creative. I was doing something I felt was interesting and worthwhile. I was also learning… Learning about the process of blogging, tagging, social sites, myspace, facebook, linkedin, ning… I was learning about editing with new software & incorporating new techniques. I was learning about compresson, flash, h.264, fps, data rates… So, once again, even though, inspirationally, the days were wasted, they really weren’t wasted at all…..
Meanwhile, I was making new friends.

Bill, Grace, Rachel, Charles, Obreahny, Sandra, Mike
I’ve always been blessed with fantastic friends… the few, the elite. Ever since kindergarten, and probably before I can remember, I’ve always had my “crews”. Necessarily, as time goes on, we move from social location to social location, from Elementary to JHS to HS to College, some folks to Grad School, then to the workplace, different neighborhoods to live in, different gyms to join… There’s always the building and eventual dissolving of “crews”. The internet in general, and videoblogging in particular has now changed all of that. People are seeing, hearing and learning about like-minded individuals and groups all over the planet and making global, international alliances. This has completely replaced… for me, anyway… local interactions based on physical proximity.
Without recapping the last ten months, which has included 202 linkedin contacts, 279 facebook friends, 247 twitter followers (lots of overlap between all three), etc etc etc… (which I only bring up because it’s an OUTLANDISH number for someone like me that’s used to selecting a few CLOSE, CLOSE friends and staking our claim in the universe)… there were a couple of events in particular that really made me “sit up and take notice” as far as what was really going on and how my Days were TOTALLY not being Wasted….
The first event was meeting Roxanne Darling IRL (In Real Life). We had met via the Yahoo Videoblogger’s group and she had reason to be in NYC, all the way from her home in Hawaii. The first thing that was striking to me was that she just set up the camera and was ready to do an episode of her show Beach Walks with Rox… which now that I checked out that post, that was actually last November 9th, before I even started “Wasted Days”… Anyway… she was ready to just do an episode with no rehearsal, no talking about what we were going to discuss… NOTHING! :O … Just turn on the camera and talk to each other… I was like WHAT??? But I rolled with it, and it came out ok. :)
That was a learning experience in and of itself, however, we hung out afterwards and had this really great, intelligent, fascinating conversation, mostly about videoblogging and “the space”, but also about life in general. As I’ve told Rox, that was the best IRL conversation I had had with someone I knew from the internet in AGES. I wasn’t aware at the time that *THIS* is the potential of the internet where people get to express themselves and align themselves with people who have similar viewpoints or even people who have opposing, yet intelligently articulated viewpoints. I knew there was something ‘odd’ (read: FANTASTIC!!!) going on, but I didn’t have enough data to figure it out.
The second event was in January, 2007 @ Andrew Baron’s house, which I have labeled as Rocketboom Party Photos. I don’t remember what the genesis of that party was, but I don’t believe I even had *MY* camera with me that night… Which shows how long ago it was, because I ALWAYS have my camera now. :D
At some point, I saw Bre Pettis, whom I recognized from Jonny Goldstein’s show on Phovi.com, “Reinventing Television”. When I walked up to Bre, I introduced myself and started to explain something about myself (that I don’t remember) to him, and his reply was to look at me oddly, as if I had amnesia, and he said “…I know who you are”.
Now, this was somewhat shocking to me, because I considered myself a spectator of Jonny’s show. Until that very point in time, I hadn’t given a single second’s worth of thought to the possibility that people that I didn’t specifically personally solicit to check out my site might have done so. I CERTAINLY hadn’t considered that someone on a show might actually research members of the “studio audience” that were there in the text chat. Whatever the actual circumstances were, I never found out, because my mind was suddenly off on the tangent of “what’s really going on, here?”. I now had to consider my interactions on the net as TWO-WAY instead of one-way, like television. To me, that situation was as if I had walked up to Chow Yun-Fat and told him that I had seen his movie “Hard Boiled”, and he said “I know who you are”. Strange, yet fascinating, amazing and transformative all at the same time. :)
Also at that party, I recognized Kenyatta Cheese. I had had a chat with him via blog comments over a quasi-contoversial topic, and I was aware that he had no idea what I looked like, but I knew what he looked like. I walked up to him and introduced myself, and he gave me this weird look, like “How come this guy I’ve never seen before is addressing me in a friendly manner?” I went on to bring up the blog comment conversation I had had with him, and his entire demeanor changed to one of recognition and acceptance. We went on to have an extended, IRL conversation about the blog post in question as well as peripheral topics that we most likely would never have gotten into in text comments.
I still didn’t “get it” after Drew’s party. I think I considered both the Bre and Kenyatta incidents to be easily explained away as isolated situations. I wasn’t getting that people were forming actual friendships and respect for each other that had never met each other IRL. I wasn’t getting that people were learning things about me that I didn’t tell them, because I posted it on the net and they read or watched it without telling me they did. I wasn’t getting that as opposed to selecting compatible people that are within our physical locations where we live, hang out or work, we now have the opportunity to interact… A. LOT…. with people with whom we share similar likes and interests that live ANYWHERE in the world.
I get it now… At least to the degree that I can write this post and wrap up my “Wasted Days” blog. What I get is that it’s not so strange… hehe well, to me at least! :D … to admire my friend across the country even though I’ve never met her IRL. It’s not uncommon to make friendships with people outside of one’s neighborhood, town, city, state, or even COUNTRY!
The Days aren’t Wasted just because I’m not in physical proximity to her. There are so many other ways that people communicate and get to know each other and build respect and create friendships and all formats of relationships that the only way your days are going to be wasted is if you aren’t figuring out what YOU want to do with your own life and your own time…. and DOING it! :D
–
Fin.
Bill Cammack
2007… The Wasted Days
http://billcammack.com
http://reelsolid.tv
NY:MIEG Interview – Debbie Berebichez

Click Here to Watch
Debbie Berebichez speaks with Kevin Shively about being the first Mexican woman to graduate with a Ph.D. in Physics at Stanford University, her NSF felloship work on a new method for delivering highly targeted wireless communications with amazing accuracy and security and her new Internet TV show about the science of everyday life.
From Bill Sobel’s NY:MIEG Group blog. [permalink]
Dude… Where’s My Twitter Link?
As I reported back on June 28, 2007, Twitter ‘ruined my life’ [link].
I realize _now_ that there’s something that I left out.
Today, Charles Hope twittered… Yes, “twittered”… There’s no such thing as a “tweet” or else the app would be named “tweeter”…. Anyway… Charles twittered that the “older” link was no longer at the bottom of our Twitter pages. I checked it out, and sure enough, there was no link allowing me to check back past my first page of the most recent posts. I figured that since they’re always doing tests and trying to improve how twitter works, it was a programming error and that it would be quickly replaced. Then, someone mentioned an issue with spam, and that the link was deliberately removed in response to it.
I still wasn’t concerned, because I know that I can type http://twitter.com/home?page=2 directly into my browser to get to the next-most-recent page of posts. No dice. Pages 2, 3, 4 and 5 all returned the exact same Page 1 entries….. MINUS the entries that had fallen off the edge of the flat Earth, because new people had twittered since I had last refreshed. :/
The link removal wouldn’t be a big deal to people following a handful of people, but when you’re following > 230 people, like I am, it’s a major ‘problem’ and jacks a critical amount of functionality that I get out of Twitter. Fortunately, out of the > 240 people following me on these social status-update sites like Twitter and Pownce (and Jaiku? … Haven’t heard from that app in AGES!), Veronica Belmont replied to my status update on Pownce [link], informing me not only that it was a temporary issue, but pointing me to the Twitter blog where Biz Stone had already addressed the issue earlier this morning. Fortunately, she replied on Pownce, because on Twitter, her post would have scrolled off the bottom of my “page 1″ and been (temporarily) lost forever, unless she had added an @BillCammack to it and it would have alighted in my “replies” section. So, thanks to Veronica, this is a different post than it would have been. :)

Photo Credit: Jared Klett
For me, one of the values of Twitter is that you don’t have to pay attention to it and it will save the status updates for you. I’ve gone back as far as 11 pages, which span several hours. That’s normally where you lose the “older” link. This means that when it’s crunch time, and I’m being my most effective and efficient, I can release Twitter from my mind entirely and only get back to it when I have processing cycles for it. Removing the “older” link from the first page means that I have to constantly remember Twitter to check it on the web site or I’d actually have to install a widget which would keep sending me the messages, non-stop, all day, consistently distracting me from what I’m trying to do. Neither option’s optimal.
It’s one of those things that you don’t miss until it’s gone. :) Taking the “older” link from the front page of Twitter turns it into the home page of Facebook. As far as I can tell, there’s no way to increase the number of pages of updates that you can see on Facebook’s home page. They’re not even in chronological order. If they were, you wouldn’t see that an entire stack of your friends just joined a new group… You’d see individual instances with other types of updates in between them. When I get to the bottom of Facebook’s ome page, I invariably wonder what happened BEFORE the edge of the flat Earth that the rest of the updates fell off of. Of course it’s a good ploy to make it so people go to Facebook more often specifically so they DON’T miss the revolving-door updates, but that doesn’t work for me personally, so removal of the “older” link on Twitter is nothing short of a disaster. :)
I just checked my page right now, and there are only 20 twitters on the front (read: ONLY) page. Amongst the > 230 people I’m following, the oldest post is a whopping 22 minutes old. :/ I’ve been writing this post for more than 20 minutes, so there’s an entire ‘generation’ of comments that I’ve entirely missed and will never ever see unless they fix their spam bot issues within the next 8 hours or so.
This isn’t the stock market, so it’s not mission-critical for me to know in real-time what my Twitter friends are doing, thinking or saying. However, I was glad to read in the Twitter blog that the “older” link is going to be reinstated ASAP. Part of my daily productivity is using down-time during rendering, uploading, etc to catch up with what’s been going on in the last couple of hours since I even THOUGHT about Twitter at all. 22 minutes worth of status updates from > 230 people isn’t even a drop in the bucket.
Good thing I checked twitter within 20 minutes of Charles’ post, or I would have been completely in the dark as far as WhereTF my “older” link went! :D
Bill Cammack • New York City • Freelance Video Editor • alum.mit.edu/www/billcammack
Livecasting
My excellent friend ActionGirl hung out with me today. We did a dual-channel livecast using ustream.tv.
Livecasting, if you’re not familiar, is one of the newest internet fads, but it’s also NOT new. Technology has advanced to the point that the average joe has the ability to broadcast his or her life effortlessly and without cost (except for the obvious costs of computer, webcam, broadband connection, etc).
Similar to quasi-scripted MSM shows like MTV’s “The Real World”, people now have the ability to leave a camera running and pointed at them as they go about their daily business. Some people livecast from work. Some people livecast from home. Some people livecast on the move with EV-DO modem cards and laptops, like Sarah and Lisa do on justin.tv.
I became intersted in livecasting after watching Drew Olanoff’s feed from PodCamp Philly. It was fun watching Drew roam the hallways and run into conference attendees and presenters. There was something cool about interacting with this live show that was going on, NOW. :) It was different because you could actually affect the course of the show, assuming the host was monitoring the text chat room. It was different because you could call your friends that you saw in the background and have them come over and talk to you on camera. It was cool because you were receiving information RIGHT NOW, just like everyone that was actually in Philadelphia for the conference.
So I wanted to check it out, and ActionGirl was down to experiment with me….. um…. was down to join me in my livecasting experiment. :)
We started out outdoors, utilizing free WiFi in the area. We were streaming about one frame per five seconds. Our video was choppy and our audio wasn’t much better. Some glitch occurred where ActionGirl had bars of wireless signal, yet was unable to connect to the internet at all. Strange. Next, I tried receiving signal via my EV-DO modem card and sharing my internet connection with ActionGirl via airport. That was really slow, but I’ve never tried that before, and I think it was due to my card not connecting properly. I didn’t have this diagnostics entry in my taskbar that I should have had, so I don’t figure the card was functioning optimally at that point.
We retired indoors and used WiFi connections to stream from each of our macbooks. Connection was quick, and I was able to embed both of our streams plus a text chat on one page and run that from my site. I later added our friend Chris’ stream, so we had three simultaneous live streams on the page.
Livecasting is tough to do properly, IMO, without monitoring your chat room(s). I suppose there IS no ‘proper’ way to livecast, since it’s really “anything goes”, but in order to interact with your audience, you have to read what they’re typing to you. If you’re not planning to interact with them, clearly, you don’t have to bother with that. I found myself responding late to comments because while we were saying something, the text chat was scrolling up and I’d have to read up to notice what people said minutes before.
I think the audience is as important as the host… Meaning that if you have the right audience, even if that’s ‘only’ one or two people who actually know you or are genuinely interested in what you do, livecasting can be a fun and rewarding experience. The best times today were when our friends were on, even just for a few minutes, and we got to interact with them and answer their questions. OTOH, when the audience isn’t prime, it’s tough, if not impossible to get revved up to deliver your best ‘performance’.
For me, *teamwork* is key. I’m not interested in doing my own solo livecast. If I know I’m going to be around interesting people or at an event that would be of interest to people I know, then I’m glad to broadcast it. It also helps if you actually like and enjoy the person you’re livecasting with so you know that even if NOBODY shows up, you’re going to have a good time that day. :)
Eventually, we called it a night. I felt pretty exhausted by then, actually. When we shut our feeds down, it actually felt strange to me to NOT be on camera. Once we came inside, we were on from around 6pm to 9pm, and even that felt like an eternity. I’m not sure how (or why) people do that during their every waking hour. I guess you have to be the type of person that enjoys random people interacting with you. I suppose some people do it for the fame or notoriety.
I don’t know that there’s going to be a way to monetize lifecasting. I experimented with product placement, including beverages and t-shirts. It’s tough to do well, live, trying to get products in front of a tiny webcam lens in the optimal size, focus and location. Still… A lot of people like to broadcast their lives, and a lot of people like to watch those broadcasts, so we’ll see where this fad takes us next. :)
Bill Cammack • New York City • Freelance Video Editor • alum.mit.edu/www/billcammack
Married Life = Life Over?
Reader Derek writes:
Bill,I just saw part of the movie “I think I love my Wife.” I’ve always like Chris Rock ’cause the man just tells the truth about stuff, the movie was right on the cusp of what breaks up marriages.
Kerry Washington’s character kept after Chris’s character, even though she knew he was married (and of course HE knew it also). I can understand the sexual attraction, but no fling is above any marriage. She just wanted to be a friend, but friends like that are deadly to a marriage – regardless of the platonic nature.
The grass is greener, but whose to say that green ain’t astroturf…
What’s the dating genius [ DG (tm) ] have to say about this situation?
It all depends on who you are.
If you can be friends with a chick without tapping it… feel free to hang out with her as much as you want.
… however… what’s the point of THAT? :D
It all comes down to willpower. Marriage is a decision… A choice to make a public statement to people that you’re with this chick, and she’s with you. That’s why chicks take guys’ last names in marriage… It’s like those shirts that say “PROPERTY OF The New York Yankees”. People need to know “whose chick that is”.
Many people fail to calculate that by choosing one female, you’re un-choosing all the rest of the females on this planet during the rest of your lifetime. You have to have CHARACTER to stand up to a committment like that. As you can see from the cheating and divorce statistics, there are a ton of people with ZERO CHARACTER.
Married Life <> Life Over. It’s a change in the game. Instead of focusing on whatever chick’s currently within arm’s reach of you, you focus on ONE chick that you determined deserves your time and energy.
I haven’t seen the clips from the movie, but what sense does it make to go bowling with some chick you’re not having sex with when you could go bowling with YOUR WIFE?
DatingGenius
Cruxy / Suzanne Vega
Photo / Video shoot I did for cruxy.com documenting Suzanne Vega’s “Second Life” interview.
http://cruxy.com/features/suzannevega/epk/
Check out this YouTube video about the event made using Second Life by Draxtor Despres.




Web:




