Blog — KJ WONG CREATIVE
A true monstrosity of meat and cheese was created, the grease and sauce Price Tag Boy - can tell the original sale price of any item when he looks at it. .. It's why one of the greatest adaptations of a manga to me has been the The sub genre of 'adaptations' has always been quite a bit of hit and miss. On Dressrosa, Doflamingo awaits the arrival of Trebol for an item he asked him to He reclaims the conversation, asking Doflamingo not to go off on tangents, and Luffy remarks how he almost strayed from the objective, and Usopp remarks that Luffy's eyes (in the shape of meat) tell a different story. . Manga Chapters. Ini webtoons recommended yang diterjemahkan ke dalam bahasa indonesia buat kamu 1. Naruto manga, Bleach manga, One Piece manga, Air Gear manga, . 오렌지 마말레이드 1 by Seok Woo, Where Tangents Meet by instantmiso, and.
I also have my own rules of communication that expressedly allow the violation of linguistic rules. I often follow the rule of 'if the person understood what you meant then whatever you said, no matter how incorrect, is correct'. This exonerates the criminals who circulate idiotic things like 'should of' in the place of 'should've' and the abysmal distinctions made in the usage of 'your' and 'you're' and every other variation.
It allows for quite the large margin of error in spelling too. You could write 'hipopotamus' and my own rules of communication would allow this. If I saw that used constantly in a book or something I might develop a migraine, but it is otherwise permissible. The weirdest example of this that I just saw on reddit the other day was the use of shirley in the place of surely. I'm not even certain where that error originates from. I'm inclined to think it was a technological error and spellcheck is to be blamed for the record, I do not use spellcheck on my PC and use it very begrudgingly on my phone because my thumbs are too clumsy but the conversation around that post continued as if that error did not exist and people responded with valuable conversation and 'shirley' was of no hindrance whatsoever.
That's why my rules of communication are so forgiving. I understand that the counter argument against this agreeable attitude towards what clearly is incorrect language application is that degeneration will occur if the blatant errors are left unchecked for too long.
While that is true, I actually still don't see the problem. Linguistic evolution happens all the time and if in two hundred years we replace the word 'surely' with 'shirley', I don't think society would be any nearer to oblivion.
Perhaps nobody would be called Shirley anymore, but that is also not a real problem. But I'm fine with it.
I hold and defend the merits of our existing linguistic laws and structure. And I'm okay with them going away so long as communication is still plausible. I hate the fact that 'google' became a verb.InstantMiso Presents: Where Tangents Meet Ep. 4: Real Mature
But I'll use it in a sentence. Cognitive dissonance at its finest. And it is with this demonstration of my Dunderbun that I now delve into the third topic of this article. It's all one flow, but it seems to be that each section has been given equal importance so you'll just have to decide for yourself what this article was really about.
I've been meaning to write about this for a while now what with the more recent developments in new media and certain controversies and opinions that have come up. Internet media is still often referred to today as 'new media'. I guess it continues to be 'new media' until new media comes.
I suppose cable TV was considered 'new media' until whatever that came next took its place. With that in mind, I think I don't have to explain my usage of the terms 'new media' and 'old media'. I am, however, going to apply them to the two distinct forms of media in television and movies.
Before we begin with these explicit examples, I must first address the wider point. New media has been and will always be in constant contest with old media.
Sometimes the fight is drawn out, sometimes it happens quite organically and we just have to accept the consequences. Sometimes opposition to the rise of new technologies in media is fierce and sometimes people willingly let go and producers of said media are forced to adapt.
I recently learned that when VCR videocassette recorder for you people born at the turn of the millennium technology was first introduced there was an actual attempt to ban the device. Because it threatened the state of existing media. New media was forcing out old media and old media attempted to fight back.
But as things evolve, I often find that the patterns of behaviour in new media tend to slowly imitate old media. Part of me thinks this is because there was a certain funcionality and sustainability within old media that continues to be true despite the change in medium or circumstance.
Where Tangents Meet, List1 | LINE WEBTOON
Perhaps there are some concrete practicalities in the business side of old media that new media begrudgingly accepts. And then the question comes whether new media really did innovate as much as we think it did or did it simply turn back to some of the things old media did that new media spent so much time decrying? Let's use television as an example. For a period of time, TV was broadcast on public airwaves that you simply needed to plug into to access. You didn't need to pay for any programming.
You simply watched what the station put out. If it was to your liking, you kept watching. If it wasn't you turned off. This data was collected by the TV station in an attempt to create better programming that would reach a wider audience. A wider audience meant that advertising costs would increase, generating more revenue for the station. Programming was decided then in part by the audience and in part by the network executives. But it was never in the full control of any one party.
This is why there were attempts to bridge the communication gap between the audience and the network. The best example of this is the Nielsen rating. By gauging what was popular among audiences, executives could decide which projects to greenlight on their networks that would satisfy audiences and entice advertisers.
That's how the system worked and how it sustained itself.
It was largely paid for by your personal data and advertising money. Suddenly this doesn't sound so 'old' anymore, does it? Now, new media comes along and challenges some of the principles that old media still uses to this day.
New media proposed that it didn't need network executives to decide if a project was worthy of being put out into an audience. With the creation of more accessible platforms for broadcasting, media creators could create the media and a new generation of media hungry explorers would eventually discover this new product and consume it.
This is how youtube channels became a thing.
Before actual content channels, Youtube was simply a video hosting service. Like Photobucket but for videos. But some saw the potential in the platform and used it for broadcasting a product. This meant that the media had one source of creation and it would float through the capitalist society and sink or swim by its own merits.
What was popular would survive and what wasn't would fail. But of course we all know that as the platform grew and accessibility increased among the general public, the noise floor also grew. Production leves increased due to competition, which in turn increased production costs.
Soon the media became unsustainable and had to revert back to some principles that old media had used. And there came the inevitable return of analytics and advertising. Most of this was worked directly into algorithms which is the defining difference still in old media and new media.
But how much different is it really? And now with the rise of streaming, some channels are actually converting into 24 hour broadcasts, running a playlist of past products. This is almost like syndication, except it's the media created by that channel itself. How will someone react to it if that person have the ability to see their hidden facade?
- Shall We Have Dinner Tonight?
- Chapter 700
This is the story of a girl who can see the ever changing form of humanity as she dives into the mysterious realms of the unknown and real life. With a concept as interesting as that, I was immediately hooked on this webtoon. It features characters that are flawed and mysterious. This makes the story all the more intriguing. Under all of its mystery, the theme of the story is trust; learning to trust, and realizing when not to trust.
People are no longer afraid of vampires, but they discriminate against vampires.
Where Tangents Meet
Mari Baek is a vampire who tries to hide her identity, but what if she accidentally bites the neck of a popular boy like Jaemin, who hates vampires? I will be honest with you, I tend to stay away from anything vampire related just as a general rule. However, this may be the one exception. Orange marmalade is simply a masterpiece, no questions asked. But what makes this story as true masterpiece is the second half of the plot. When tensions reach their breaking points, and discrimination threatens to ruin relationships, the story truly shines.
Orange marmalade is one of the very few stories that has brought me to literal tears. Every emotion is so raw and realistic. The overall feeling is bittersweet, but very personal. The first man proclaims that they need the weapons from him to put a war in their favor. Jewelry Bonney reads about Luffy and Law's alliance curiously while eating a piece of pizza. People react to the news, assuming that the alliances will lead to no good, and that Doflamingo must have had his reasons for resigning.
Among these readers is Jinbe. At the Kid Pirates' base, the crew is reading the stories and wonder how their alliance made the news. Someone asks who the journalist who reported the story, Absa, is. Apparently he had been getting huge news scoops all over the place. Kid says it does not matter how their alliance got leaked.
What bothers him is Luffy and Law teaming up. He correctly theorizes that Luffy and Law are also going after a Yonkoand wonders which one it is. At Dressrosaseveral Den Den Mushi are ringing off the hook. Doflamingo, however, is taking the call from Law and the Straw Hat Pirates. The Straw Hats are amazed he picked up, but are warned by Usopp to be quiet so he does not hear them.
Luffy shouts his name into the receiver and declares he will be Pirate Kingprompting a slap from Usopp, but to no avail.
Luffy continues, making sure he was correct in thinking that Doflamingo was Caesar's superior and that he was aware of what Caesar did to his subordinates and the children. He tells Doflamingo he will give Caesar back as per the deal, but begins to threaten Doflamingo if he does anything like that again and is about to finish when Doflamingo asks if it was two years since Ace's death. He then remembers Luffy disappearing only to reappear two years later and asks what he has been up to.
Luffy refuses to answer, but Doflamingo tells him he has been looking forward to meeting him. Doflamingo goes on to say that he has something that Luffy will most surely be interested in. Luffy instantly assumes Doflamingo is talking about meat and starts fantasizing as Law pushes his head away from the receiver, warning him not to get pulled into "his pace". He reclaims the conversation, asking Doflamingo not to go off on tangents, and saying he will get Caesar as agreed. Doflamingo reminds Law of what could happen if he gets tricked.
He then asks for confirmation that Caesar is alive and well. Law points the receiver toward Caesar as the bound scientist begins a tearful apology but is cut off as Law takes back the receiver. He tells Doflamingo that in eight hours they will deliver Caesar to the southeast shore of Green Bitthe deserted island just north of Dressrosa, and leave him there at 3pm, which is as far as Law is willing to go to accommodate Doflamingo.
Doflamingo pretends to act hurt, saying he was looking forward to maybe having a drink and catching up with an old friend. Law responds by declaring their conversation over and hanging up. Luffy remarks how he almost strayed from the objective, and Usopp remarks that Luffy's eyes in the shape of meat tell a different story. Sanji then realizes that they don't know how many men Doflamingo will bring. Law tells him that the number does not matter, and if everything goes according to plan, then Caesar will work as a successful decoy.