Will Google+ Replace Facebook?

Aug 23
2011

Will Google+ Replace Facebook?

Unless you are completely OBLIVIOUS (unaware) of Internet news, you will have heard of Google+, Google’s social networking tool that is promising to be the most INNOVATIVE (using new methods and ideas) method for connecting online.

Google+, or G+ as many refer to it, is still in the beta testing stage, and many Google fans are INDIGNANT (outraged at something perceived as unjust) that they have not yet been able to access the application. At this time it is accessible by invitation-only, so some fans are reacting PETULANTLY (peevishly,irascibly) at not having been invited.

You may be wondering if G+ can COMPROMISE (place at risk) Facebook’s following. Only time will tell, but right now its highly sought-after invitations are causing a FUROR (uproar) on the Internet. Everyone wants to know more about the SCINTILLATING (brilliantly clever) new social networking tool and people everywhere are attempting to CAJOLE (coax) those who currently have access into getting them invitations.

Recently my inbox MAGNANIMOUSLY (generously) yielded the BOON (benefit) of an invitation. I am CIRCUMSPECTLY (looking cautiously) examining G+,  SKEPTICAL (doubtful) that it will be an UNPRECEDENTED (without previous example) application, but I have to admit that there are some pretty inventive features. It’s more than an AMALGAM (mixture) of Facebook and Twitter. It seems that G+ will be a BURGEONING (rapidly growing and expanding) force to be reckoned with.

G+ has Circles rather than Groups, which makes who you are sharing information with less AMBIGUOUS (unclear). You may simply categorize people into Circles and indicate with which Circle you wish to share each post. Other features include Huddle, which allows group chat, and Hangout, for group video chats. The most recent additions to G+ are games. This is an AUDACIOUS (very bold) attack on one of Facebook’s most popular features.

What will Facebook do to THWART (stop, prevent) G+’s stealing its users? How RESILIENT (coming back from adversity or challenge) will Facebook be? I doubt that they will CAPITULATE (surrender) without a fight.  I’m not CLAIRVOYANT (someone who sees the future), but my guess is that this is going to become a very ACRIMONIOUS (bitter) battle. Stay tuned to see how TRUCULENTLY (fiercely, vitriolically) this battle between social networks evolves.

 

 

 

 

As Long as We’re Discussing Harry Potter…

Aug 08
2011

As Long as Were Discussing Harry Potter...

As Long as Were Discussing Harry Potter...

 

VS.

 

 

I have long been a PROPONENT (champion of a cause) of reading a book before seeing its movie. Filmmakers are faced with the CONUNDRUM (dilemma) of boiling down complex plots and subplots laced with multiple characters, conflicts, and themes into a two-hour package. It is hard to decide what can be EXCISED (cut out, deleted) without losing the essentials of a work. Fans with ARCANE (obscure) encyclopedic knowledge of the Harry Potter books may have noticed a number of discrepancies between the book version of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 and the film version. Let’s take a look at a few…

As Hermione enters Gringott’s to access Bellatrix Lestrange’s vault, Hermione is DUPLICITOUS (deceptive) when she uses Polyjuice potion to appear as Bellatrix.  In the movie, Hermione convinces everyone by adopting the IMPERIOUS (domineering and arrogant) Bellatrix’s mannerisms more quickly and EXCORIATING (expressing strong disapproval) the gnomes for delaying her entrance, causing less suspicion and allowing faster access to the vault. In addition, the items in the vault are not CAUSTIC (corrosive, burning) as they were in the book, making their escape somewhat easier.

In one of the film’s EPIC (grand, elevated, majestic) scenes, Professor McGonnagall steps forward in the Great Hall to protect Harry against the BELLICOSE (hostile, warlike) Snape. This scene is not in the book at all. The eventual duel between McGonnagall and Snape in the movie does, in the book, actually not happen at all. There is a scene in which McGonagall, Sprout, and Flitwick duel Snape in the Ravenclaw common room where Luna is showing Harry what the Diadem of Ravenclaw looks like.

Harry’s discovery of the importance Diadem of Ravenclaw as a horcrux is quite different. It is, in fact, Nearly Headless Nick who ELUCIDATES (makes clear or plain) for Harry the importance of the Gray Lady. There are other differences in these scenes, but the omission of Nick, the resident ghost of Gryffindor tower, is disappointing to MYRIAD (many) fans. In fact, Nearly Headless Nick has not been seen in the movies since the very beginning.

Perhaps the most notable missing scene, one that would provoke a VISCERAL (instinctive rather than rational) reaction, is the death of Fred Weasley. In the book, we witness a JOVIAL (cheerful) conversation between Fred and his brother Percy about Percy switching sides and fighting against the ministry of magic. During this exchange,Fred meets his sudden DEMISE (death) as an explosion blows away a side of the castle. The death is witnessed by Harry, Ron, and Hermioine, as well as Percy.(In the film, we learn of Fred’s death only after the battle, in a POIGNANT (touching) scene, as his body is surrounded by his DESPONDENT (forlorn) family.

There are many more DISPARITIES (differences, variances) between the book and the movie, some SUBTLE (difficult to detect) and some obvious. No doubt, Potter fans will discuss the differences between the book and the movie as we look back NOSTALGICALLY (sentimentally longing for the past) on our days at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.