Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sistine Chapel

vatican.va

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–246 of 246 posts

Re: Sistine Chapel

#241

Post by Myrmornis »

EzGraphs wrote: post #221
cgore wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bach was deeply religious, and not just because of some lap-dog sense of "that's who's paying the bills." He signed most of his works as "SDG", short for "Soli Deo Gloria", which roughly translates as "to God alone belongs all glory. His meaning being that any ability Bach thought he had was solely just God showing off: Bach made beautiful music, but God made Bach, and he knew it.

That is a great quote. I used it in the dedication section of a book I wrote recently. Bach is fascinating on many levels - lots of C.S. types quickly appreciate the structure/counterpoint in all of his instrumental music. But because so much of his music was written for a worship context, a whole additional dimension can be seen where he uses musical devices to comment on or support words being sung.

lots of C.S. types quickly appreciate the structure/counterpoint in all of his instrumental music

What on Earth does that mean?

Re: Sistine Chapel

#242

Post by walden42 »

Alex3917 wrote: post #141
cfield wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious what you mean by "white people invented Buddhism 150 years ago". What is this in reference to?

I was being a little flippant, but it was a reference to this: http://meaningness.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/a-new-world-reli... I haven't read the books he cites, but if you listen to the Buddhist Geeks podcast (and really everyone should) then the differences between modern buddhism(s) and traditional buddhism(s) is a recurring theme.

You can (and many do) just follow the simple teachings of the Buddha that lived 2500 years ago. You don't have to buy into any ideologies you don't want to.

Re: Sistine Chapel

#243

Post by dmoo »

jimmcslim wrote: post #57
tjr wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish more places would specify "no flash photography" when that's really what they mean. I suppose some people don't know how to turn it off, but for those who do (or for those who don't bring a flash in the first place), it would be nice.

Most galleries I have been to lately have this policy now (obvious joke: 'but photos taken with rubbish cameras are fine...'), given the invention of cameras in everyone's phone its generally a lost battle to expect people won't take photos. > I suppose some people don't know how to turn it off I would argue that a majority of people either wilfully ignore this instruction or don't know how to do it.

Perhaps they should have a shared flikr account so that everybody could download good quality images of what is hanging on the walls

Re: Sistine Chapel

#244

Post by prutschman »

Myrmornis wrote: post #241
EzGraphs wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a great quote. I used it in the dedication section of a book I wrote recently. Bach is fascinating on many levels - lots of C.S. types quickly appreciate the structure/counterpoint in all of his instrumental music. But because so much of his music was written for a worship context, a whole additional dimension can be seen where he uses musical devices to comment on or support words being sung.

lots of C.S. types quickly appreciate the structure/counterpoint in all of his instrumental music What on Earth does that mean?

You can read that as "interesting patterns" for an approximate idea of what it means.

Re: Sistine Chapel

#245

Post by Myrmornis »

prutschman wrote: post #244
Myrmornis wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lots of C.S. types quickly appreciate the structure/counterpoint in all of his instrumental music What on Earth does that mean?

You can read that as "interesting patterns" for an approximate idea of what it means.

No, I wasn't asking to be patronized. If I want to know what counterpoint is I'll look it up. I'm asking what on earth it has to do with computer science. Sure there's the Hofstadter book but with no explanation this comes off as merely pretentious. Do resist the temptation to patronize and mansplain though; I know it is one if the things we as a profession excel at.

Re: Sistine Chapel

#246

Post by prutschman »

Myrmornis wrote: post #245
prutschman wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can read that as "interesting patterns" for an approximate idea of what it means.

No, I wasn't asking to be patronized. If I want to know what counterpoint is I'll look it up. I'm asking what on earth it has to do with computer science. Sure there's the Hofstadter book but with no explanation this comes off as merely pretentious. Do resist the temptation to patronize and mansplain though; I know it is one if the things we as a profession excel at.

I wasn't trying to be patronizing.

Clearly we both know you can look up "counterpoint" if you want to, so I read into your post you were a tiny bit interested but not so interested as to bother looking it up.

I'd hoped the shorthand would give you enough additional idea that you could decide whether doing so was worth it for you, the link between interesting patterns and computer science being hopefully obvious.

Post reply on HN