Today the postal services dropped of a sweet package from Amazon, containing one hardcover book bearing the ominous title ‘Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows’.
I’m at page 101, and it’s awesome.
Update: I’ve finished it. Right now I think it’s the best book in the series, but a definite decision will have to wait until I’ve reread it. I was very pleased with the turns the story takes.
As the next Harry Potter book that is making its way to my house right now in some mail bag, somewhere between the Amazon UK storage buildings and Ostend, I think it might be a good idea to make some predictions regarding its content.
Dumbledore is really dead, and won’t be coming back, Rowlings said. But what about Snape? He spoke the curse that killed Dumbledore, and as such, people think he never gave up being a Death-Eater. I’m still ambiguous about that. On the one hand Harry always mistrusted Snape, and we have the Unbreakable Vow he spoke to Narcissa and Bellatrix. But Dumbledore always trusted Snape. And I am not conviced that Dumbledore didn’t give his life so Snape could get close to Voldemort and play a signifiant part in his downfall in the last book. We do know that Snape is a superb occlumens, as both sides think he’s on their side. So the coin could fall either side. But, on the chance of being completely wrong, I make the claim that Snape really turned over to the good side, and did what he had to do, with Dumbledore’s knowledge and consent, to keep his cover intact. In the end he will help to take down Voldemort.
Who dies? The prophecy uttered by Trelawney says that at least either Harry or Voldemort must die. It’s not excluded they both die, and I seriously doubt the series will end while they both live. Since his coming of age, and the loss of the ancient protection his mother gave him, Harry can be killed by Voldemort. The series started out as a tale for children, but as the series evolved the tone darkened (e.g., Dumbledore dies). If it had not evolved in this way, I’d wager on a happy ending. Now, I’m now so sure. Both Harry living and Harry dying appeal to me. Of course, given that the tale spins on in the now, and that the wizard world is hidden from us, it would be bad if Voldemort won, since this would mean the death of a lot of Muggles. So, the claim I make is that both Harry and Voldemort die.
I was pleasantly surprised. Though the movie does not show all goodies from the book, it’s certainly giving enough information to be able to follow the story. Fast-paced, quite dark, and with good effects. A lot of spells, and while their childish names still bother me, the effects were pretty awesome. As has been the case in all the books, there is another new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher: Dolores Umbridge. And I liked her – or should I say disliked her. Bottom line: I’d like to see it again, and the book has bubbled up in my to-reread stack. To its top, actually. Before the last book arrives, preferably.
The Kinepolis website officially sucks. And I’m not just referring to the crappy interface. I admit, I was inattentive. I mistakingly ordered tickets for the Friday Harry Potter show at 17:30 instead of the Sunday one. How could this happen? I’m quite careful when ordering stuff online, because once the button is pushed, you’re hanging.
The Kinepolis website specifically states that to buy tickets, one should click the hour of the show one wishes to attend. So, check the day (i.e., Sunday), uncheck the other days, to make sure I’m not picking the wrong day, and click on ‘17:30′. Popping up is a nice new window that once again gives you the hours of the various movies playing … the day you click, not the day of the show you clicked on! To the right, it now appears (hindsight is 20/20), there are the days for which you can select a show, starting with today. So, my mistake was to fail to notice this and just click ‘17:30′ once again. But what you should click first is … the day on which you wish to go to the movies. What idiot thought up this scheme? And what idiot approved it? Come on!
Now, this movie better had be very, very good. I expect no less than the same thrill the first Harry Potter movie gave me (I had not yet read the books back then).
Besides that, the site is half fubar in Safari (2.0.4).
As with any social networking site, people can walk out, drop content, or get banned. So if you have faved a nice selection of flickr pictures you might wish to be able to look at them, even if the owner takes them offline. A tool to check the list of your favourites, and download them if possible, in the size you prefer (e.g., medium) may come in handy. Thus I present a simple python script I wrote to do just that. You also need Brian Hall’s flickrapi.py, of which you can also get a snapshot with which the favourites script works.
You need a configuration file as explained in the favourites script file, with two sections: general and flickrapi. The former contains the name of the browser that will be used to setup your flickr account to allow access to it using the API key you want to use with this application. The latter contains the API key and the API secret, both of which you can obtain from flickr.
Note to the neighbours. Next time you set loose your cats in your garden – which I have no problem with at all – make sure they have shit before they cross to my garden. Otherwise you might find my boots on your doorstep to clean them. Thank you.
Last week, I received my bank’s card reader, which can be used to generate keys for logging into the online system. The card reader replaces the old scheme, which uses a key file, placed on your machine and a password phrase, consisting of (at most) 32 characters. So, now the security is based on the possession of the reader, the card, and the knowledge of the card’s 4-digit pin code. Previously, it was based on the possession of the key file and the knowledge of a password phrase.
Of course, a lot of people will be careless and use a feeble password phrase, or a short one, or one containing important dates, but some people will also use a strong phrase. For example, my password phrase consists of 30 characters, so that’s 36^30 possibilities. I can’t but wonder if the security of the new scheme is far worse for my particular situation. After all, I need to carry both the reader and the card with me when I travel, if I want to access my bank account. Things do get stolen, and breaking a 4-digit pin-code is not very hard. The claim the bank makes, is that having a possession attribute that is not connected to the machine, and thus not to the internet makes it inherently safer. I wonder is that’s really true. It sounds acceptable, until you compare 4^10 to 36^32.