Lebron plays in a league that's majority black in the footsteps of Michael Jordan, who was the most famous athlete on the planet and on the way to being a billionaire and owner. Lebron was anointed Jordan's heir while still in high school, and he got drafted straight into the NBA with the #1 overall pick. He's had numerous huge endorsements over his career.
Exactly how did he struggle as a basketball player? White Men Can't Jump was a 90s movie, and back in the 80s, Bird was a the great white hope as redneck from Indiana, because the top players were mostly black, and Bird was even called out as unathletic by Dennis Rodman and Isaiah Thomas after he won a playoff game over them in Detroit.
It sounds stupid but I first learned this concept from the movie "White Men Can't Jump" in 1992 when I was just a kid. I don't accept the idea as a hard rule but I do think it's a valuable perspective to understand.
Apart from the specifics of this or any other court case involving Apple attacking Samsung, I find the desire to defend Samsung odd. Obviously they copied Apple as much as they felt they could get away with. They did this because it was a very conservative way to make a lot of money.
This isn't an admirable strategy. It's annoying. It's precisely the strategy that major movie studios use to give us one boring, risk-free "blockbuster" after another. The other day I read a history of the making of White Men Can't Jump:
The head of Fox at the time, Joe Roth, mentions, "That movie wouldn't get made today. Us moviemaking guys, the studios, have less courage to make a movie like that today with the kind of racial, sexual overtones." It's sad. I would appreciate a big budget movie studio that did not consistently churn out the safest derivative crap they can.
I do appreciate that there's one consumer electronics company that attempts and succeeds at novel, high risk products. Of course, there's a good chance that risk taking spark died recently, but I have appreciated its presence until now.
Maybe patents are bad, but I don't think is a case where that stance holds much emotional appeal other than to those who like to see Apple lose. Most people think Samsung clearly did something shady here and deserves to be punished.
Hacker Cinema
3 comments on Hacker News
Lebron plays in a league that's majority black in the footsteps of Michael Jordan, who was the most famous athlete on the planet and on the way to being a billionaire and owner. Lebron was anointed Jordan's heir while still in high school, and he got drafted straight into the NBA with the #1 overall pick. He's had numerous huge endorsements over his career.
Exactly how did he struggle as a basketball player? White Men Can't Jump was a 90s movie, and back in the 80s, Bird was a the great white hope as redneck from Indiana, because the top players were mostly black, and Bird was even called out as unathletic by Dennis Rodman and Isaiah Thomas after he won a playoff game over them in Detroit.
It sounds stupid but I first learned this concept from the movie "White Men Can't Jump" in 1992 when I was just a kid. I don't accept the idea as a hard rule but I do think it's a valuable perspective to understand.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajBHZKoKYbU
Apart from the specifics of this or any other court case involving Apple attacking Samsung, I find the desire to defend Samsung odd. Obviously they copied Apple as much as they felt they could get away with. They did this because it was a very conservative way to make a lot of money.
This isn't an admirable strategy. It's annoying. It's precisely the strategy that major movie studios use to give us one boring, risk-free "blockbuster" after another. The other day I read a history of the making of White Men Can't Jump:
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8266665/an-oral-history-ron-shelton-basketball-comedy-white-men-jump
The head of Fox at the time, Joe Roth, mentions, "That movie wouldn't get made today. Us moviemaking guys, the studios, have less courage to make a movie like that today with the kind of racial, sexual overtones." It's sad. I would appreciate a big budget movie studio that did not consistently churn out the safest derivative crap they can.
I do appreciate that there's one consumer electronics company that attempts and succeeds at novel, high risk products. Of course, there's a good chance that risk taking spark died recently, but I have appreciated its presence until now.
Maybe patents are bad, but I don't think is a case where that stance holds much emotional appeal other than to those who like to see Apple lose. Most people think Samsung clearly did something shady here and deserves to be punished.