Archive for February, 2010

h1

Imaginary weeknotes #001

February 22, 2010

****DISCLAIMER: This is a response to collective “encouragement” in my office building around publishing Weeknotes. Some of this may be true, most of it isn’t, you be the judge.****

This week, I’m spending my time having cups of Earl Grey and Jasmine Pearls, working from Liberty’s tea room downstairs. It’s London Fashion Week and my personal assistant is texting me the latest collections and only the bits I would want to wear. It’s like RSS but in human form, without the need to sit on horribly designed chairs for the proles. Brilliant.

I’ve finally purchased an iPhone as they got their shit together and made a beautiful silver version commissioned by my friend Karola.

Met with the Hon Ben Bradshaw and told him about the massive missunderstanding that the Department has about creativity and culture and that simply pouring money down the local development agencies gullet wasn’t going to help at all. He suggested I be made OBE but I reminded him I was Canadian, to which he responded “Oh, your accent is very good”. I continued to sip my tea with a smile.

I’ve got some meetings planned with the London Zoo, I’d like to propose a massive animal-centric interactive piece, but I suspect they might have some problems dealing with the health and safety issues. Bloody nanny state.

Going to see my friend Sanjeev talk at a RIBA event on his work in India and over the weekend will be seeing a friend get the shit kicked out of him or beat the shit out of someone else in a boxing match. One must have balance after all.

Adam my PA for this week is making me pancakes.

h1

Running a studio (comment 1)

February 15, 2010

It’s always scary and entertaining when a concept that comes from programming techniques kindof made me think of the way I run my company.

Instead, most of a program’s overall functionality is coded into a single “all-knowing” object, which maintains most of the information about the entire program and provides most of the methods for manipulating this data. Because this object holds so much data and requires so many methods, its role in the program becomes God-like (all-encompassing). Instead of program objects communicating amongst themselves directly, the other objects within the program rely on the God object for most of their information and interaction. Since the God object is referenced by so much of the other code, maintenance becomes more difficult than it otherwise would in a more evenly divided programming design. [...] While creating a God object is typically considered bad programming practice, this technique is occasionally used for tight programming environments (such as microcontrollers), where the slight performance increase and centralization of control is more important than maintainability and programming elegance.