Here’s another from the same series of missed masterpieces – the same Mikoyan, the 1930s. Madonna Alba. A copy by Bruni from 1837 hangs in the Russian museum – I will post it in the comments. Together with “Venus with a Mirror” by Titian sold for $1,700,000.
And this is Jan van Eyck. The Annunciation. 1434. It hung in the Hermitage until 1929. Originally painted on a wooden panel, when it was in Russia, it was transferred to canvas (“for preservation”). Preservation was not achieved, as Comrade Mikoyan sold it in 1929 for $502,000.
Almost the coat of arms of Moscow. On the right – Saint George the Victorious, presumably by Rogier Van Der Weyden, 1433. Or Van Eyck, there’s a debate. On the left – by Raphael Santi. 1506. This painting was sold by Mikoyan in the 1930s among other masterpieces, otherwise, it would have been hanging in the Hermitage.
“Hello! And who are you?”
It is well-known that Roscosmos has its contract for maintaining the toilet on the ISS renewed year after year. Good job, huh! Now, they plan to create a space debris recycling station. Keeping up the good work! I think Gagarin would be impressed by these advancements.
Separately, it’s amusing how the plans for recycling are relative to a _prospective_ station. Meaning, it’s a second-order dream. And the higher the order of the dream, the better, right?
Among the achievements that are no longer dreams but reality — 85 trams have been produced (by Roscosmos, https://www.roscosmos.ru/33340/). I believe that @[106095078092586:274:Birchpunk] definitely should include the trams in their next video.
How do you like this idea in the spirit of a dystopia like 1984:
* A state reliability index is maintained for each citizen
* The absolute value of the index is inaccessible to anyone
* Comparative values are accessible. It works like this: you enter N surnames, you get a ranking. For example, you hire the first person on the list
* The index changes based on recommendations and denunciations from more reliable people. If the index continues to rise, it also rises for the recommenders. Denouncers receive recommendations or denunciations in response to their reports, after verification. If unconfirmed, the denouncer receives a significant demerit. If the index drops after a good recommendation, it also begins to drop for the recommender.
* There are no notifications about changes in the absolute index. The relative index, however, can change for at least two reasons – skyrocketing of someone’s comparative index.
* Automatic recommendations and denunciations are regularly issued for everyone, including the homeless, the elite, and recluses, altering their absolute index somehow according to rules common to all. For instance, non-participation in community life, prolonged absence of positive recommendations, etc., reduces the rating. The logic of such a system is not disclosed, but it is assumed to be fair since it applies to everyone, from the elite to the homeless. If it were to malfunction, it would affect everyone at once, or very large groups, which generally wouldn’t be noticeable in relative positions.
* The automatic system includes machine learning to improve algorithms through result analysis and rule adjustments.
Of course, this is just a thought experiment. The question is, could such a system be “hacked” if it existed? Would it lead to a better society or reinforce a mechanism of negative selection?
Update:
The first major problem – who are the judges? Who evaluates the recommendations and inputs the decisions into the system? On a national scale, the number of recommendations and denunciations would destroy any fair system, and maintaining its viability would require so much money that it would be immediately optimized into unfairness.
The second problem lies in the criteria of what is good and what is bad. This is simply indescribable
In Russian, in the culture of communication, there is no such concept as “thank you for asking.” In American English, however, it is one of the standard phrases of polite conversation – thanks for asking, as a prelude to a response. It is especially common to use thanks for asking when the question is about something important to the person being asked. Or thank you for contacting us. In Russian, it was always kind of assumed that if someone needed something, they asked, got an answer, and in such a scenario, the “thank you” should come from the person for whom all this was necessary. The exception – responses to questions from an audience. There, there is an unspoken rule to thank for the question, or even to praise for such a good question.
Very interesting piece about Van Eyck by Mikhail Meyzluls. I should listen to his talks about Bosch next
Reviewed it as if it was the first time. This time in the original.
Fifteen to twenty years were enough for the part of the brain that stores movie plots to retain nothing but the title and Harry Oldman’s character’s pipe from the film. Corrected that.
If you missed it — definitely check it out. That’s the kind of humor I like (unlike “don’t look up”)
Yes-ess-ess-ess, a score of 12-0 in favor of the opponent is a serious threat to our team! But not all is lost yet—in the end, it’s only the third minute of the match!
