Join 3,524 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


I Found Michael McDonald
November 2, 2007 9:11 AM   Subscribe

umeancompetitor.blogspot.com or How to make "giffords" yourself: part one & part two.
posted by geos (17 comments total) 5 users marked this as a favorite

 
try to see how many tabs of flashing madness your browser can stomach...
posted by geos at 9:12 AM on November 2, 2007


From the comments
Fourier's theory will never make any face since it's like you said an addition of sines with their Fourrier coefficient. But this for regular curves and not parametric ones that could do so. Sorry to break your dreams like that, but I had to tell it to you. The explanation given in the link is not the easiest to understand Fourrier and his theory.
posted by delmoi at 9:48 AM on November 2, 2007


Eyes, goggles, nothing, etc.
posted by DU at 9:55 AM on November 2, 2007


WTF?
posted by tommasz at 9:59 AM on November 2, 2007


I don't have the timecube for this
posted by Jofus at 10:06 AM on November 2, 2007


flagged as "wtf, d00d."
posted by shmegegge at 10:14 AM on November 2, 2007


NSFE: Not safe for epileptics.
posted by supercres at 10:15 AM on November 2, 2007


This guy is just angry because "Webpagesthat suck.com" was taken.
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 11:03 AM on November 2, 2007


try to see how many tabs of flashing madness your browser can stomach...

It crashed on the fifth of six. Thanks for nothing, dick.
posted by dersins at 11:05 AM on November 2, 2007


Thank you for the eye cancer.
posted by Terminal Verbosity at 11:13 AM on November 2, 2007


I would comment on this post but I'm blind now.
posted by salvia at 3:04 PM on November 2, 2007


Do not want.
posted by neuron at 9:27 PM on November 2, 2007


I can't believe more people haven't come to the defense of umeancompetitor. I've been watching this blog, and its amazing tangled storylines involving Juelz Santana, Michael McDonald, Epcot Center etc. etc. for, I guess, a couple of years.

I think what is so great about his work is his ability to tap into and exploit the randomness/painfulness/crudeness of so many internet ads and designs and push it out into some other extreme.

He is also incredibly funny - for example:

I don't really understand why this equation does what it does. What I do know is that it makes Kathie Lee Gifford's forehead develop an ectopic pair of upward-scrolling magenta eyes, and so therefore I feel that this is a very powerful equation for the internet.
posted by huffa at 12:05 AM on November 3, 2007


I can't believe more people haven't come to the defense of umeancompetitor.

Perhaps because the links in this post have either:

1. Crashed their browser, rendering them unable to post.
2. Blinded them, rendering them unable to find the "Post Comment" button.
or
3. Driven them permanently mad--I mean, like, looking-into-the-face-of-the-elder-gods-level mad-- rendering them unable to do anything but gibber and drool for the remainder of their days.

Just putting that out there as a possibility.
posted by dersins at 12:19 AM on November 3, 2007



1. Crashed their browser, rendering them unable to post.
2. Blinded them, rendering them unable to find the "Post Comment" button.
or
3. Driven them permanently mad--I mean, like, looking-into-the-face-of-the-elder-gods-level mad-- rendering them unable to do anything but gibber and drool for the remainder of their days.


Exactly!


...



(I mean, yeah, I understand the annoyance, but that glitchy, incorporating browser slowdown/crashes into the work is I think exactly what he's going for. That being said, if you don't know that going in...well, I'd be annoyed too.)
posted by huffa at 1:26 AM on November 3, 2007


*recovers vision*

I can't believe more people haven't come to the defense of umeancompetitor.

I'm not saying I'm not impressed. In fact, few things I've seen on the internet have seared my eyes so painfully. That website is to good webdesign what goatse is to tastefulness and what timecube is to logic. It took bad webdesign to its pinnacle of perfection. Count me a "fan."
posted by salvia at 12:11 PM on November 3, 2007


My first take was that it reminded me of a poorly-executed version of something I saw on jodi.org ten years ago. That was art, and this is eye abuse, I thought. But reading the posts on the math involved in manipulating the images in the animated GIFs, I have to say, it's a little more like madness than a simple campaign to get epileptics off the web. Thanks.
posted by myrrh at 5:22 PM on November 6, 2007


« Older Eternal Image's licensed caskets and urns aim to m...  |  Gillespie, Kidd & Coia: Archit... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments