$#!% I Say

There are several forms of the game Pinochle—points and the types and number of cards vary. Here I will teach you how to play the most common form.

This form of Pinochle is played with only the cards 10, Jack, Queen, King and Ace. There are 4 of each card in each suit in the deck for a total of 90 cards. There have to be 4 players as well with partners being spaced out from each other, partners usually sit directly across from each other.

Prior to beginning the card play between the players, the cards are dealt and the points are “melded” (or calculated). Calculations are very specific and are taken into account on whether the hand can even be played. What begins is the bidding. Each player calculates what cards they have, what those cards are worth, and whether they can meld enough points to play the hand that they bid for. Bidding begins with the first person being forced to make an “open” bid which is 50 or anything higher if they wish. Bidding increments can be as low as by 1 up to 60 when they go to increments of 5 (see strategy for more on bidding). The person winning the bid is passed any 4 cards from their partner and then passes any other 4 cards back to their partner

First off, the person who wins the bid must call what the trump suit is (or the “royal” suit). That is—the suit which is stronger than the other suits and can win hands. The strength of the card goes by the following order from weakest to strongest: Jack, Queen, King, 10, then Ace. A royal card beats any non-royal card and the royal cards beat each other in the same order as just described.

The suit called as trump must have what is termed a “marriage”—a King and Queen of that suit. If there is no marriage, the hand cannot be played and the winning bidder loses points equal to the bid placed.

If there is a marriage then the points are tabulated:

Marriage in a money suit:

4

A “run” in the royal suit (meaning all cards from 10 to Ace):

20

A double run in a royal suit:

150

A marriage in a non-royal suit:

2

A Jack in every suit:

4

Double Jacks in every suit:

40

A Queen in every suit:

6

Double Queens in every suit:

60

A King in every suit:

8

Double Kings in every suit:

80

An Ace in every suit:

10

Double Ace in every suit:

100

A Pinochle (a Jack of Diamonds and a Queen of spades):

15

Double Pinochle:

30

Triple pinochle:

60

Marriage in every suit:

24

King, Queen and Jack in every suit:

28

Play is run clock-wise and the person who is due to play the next card has to play a card which beats the other card (if they have it). If they do not have a card to beat the strongest card on board then they have to throw out a card of the same suit. If they do not have a card of the same suit, they must either throw out a royal card or, if lacking a royal card, any card of any suit. If the first card is a regular non-royal card and the next card to beat it is a royal card the next player must play the suit first played, or in the absence of a card in that suit must play a royal card if they possess one. If they cannot beat the royal card and do not have the original suit they must still play a royal card if in their possession, or if not then can throw out any card.

Each 10, King and Ace is worth 1 point and the last play is worth an extra 2 points.

The player who won the bid must bring back the difference in points between the bid and the actual meld, but never less than 20 points. The non-winning bid team must bring back at least 20 points to have the meld they put down after bidding to count.

Strategy

When bidding begins the first person to bid “passes” his partner his meld. Say if I am holding a hand that only gives 14 points I will pass 10 points by bidding 51. If I have Aces (an Ace in each suit) along with that, I will bid 20 points as 52. If I have 57 points in my hand, I will pass 56 as my bid. Bidding can also be used to block communication out from the other players. If I am bidding, I will bid 59 off-the-bat simply to block my opponent’s ability to pass meld. Also, you want to be a team player so even though you may have a great hand with almost a double run in trump or a lot of points, your partner may have a better hand than you so you should not bid against your partner, you only drive up the bidding and thus the amount of points needed.

Passing cards is a vital means of getting more points. So if I have all the cards for a double run in trump except for one card, I will gamble by bidding high in the hopes of getting that one card from my partner.

Watch the meld of the opposing team as well as your partner, it is telling as far as who has which cards.

HAVE FUN PLAYING!!!! And if you want to learn more and get involved in the game go to http://npapinochle.org/.

Since we were discussing copyright, I felt this recent development was interesting. One of the attorneys is suing the two biggest legal databases based on the fact that they recieved copyright registration for their documents which were filed in the courts. Another attorney never registered his documents as copyrighted material. Funny thing is that all court records and documents are of public record. The two companies, LexisNexis and Westlaw, disseminate the material that is filed with the courts by attaining the documents from the courts, not the attorneys themselves. The companies do not change the content of the documents in any way. They simply allow for attorneys and other legal professionals, users of their databases, to peruse legal documents without having to waste their time going down to the courts, requesting the case files, waiting to get the case files, viewing the case file within the confines of the court clerk’s or record’s area, paying the copying cost (if they want a copy), and then returning the case file. This is an example of over-litigation, and further exemplifies that copyright laws should not have the strength that they currently do. The “what if?” scenario that the attorney presented about the companies providing the documents for sale on Barnes and Nobles is a stretch. Just money-grubbing skills at their finest (or not-so-finest in this case).

What’s your opinion? Do you think the attorneys here are correct? Or is it fair-use to repackage something already publicly available?

Manovich lists his five principles of new media as being: numerical representation, modularity, automation, variability and cultural transcoding. The means by which visual new media is created, its very essence, as Manovich puts it, is divided into the continuous and the discrete, or digitized, formats. Manovich purports that Jacqurd’s loom had first developed a discrete form of the visual image while Daguerre developed a continuous image with the daguerreotype.

            Manovich gives a somewhat adequate representation of what visual media consists of. He describes the means by which it developed and, I believe, rightly bunches them into two categories. By describing digital images as discrete structures, Manovich provides a good breakdown as to what the visual image is in digital format. He also describes the format of photographic and motion film as being continuous since there are no breaks within the visual image (to the naked eye at least).

            After considerable thought I believe that Manovich is on to something when discussing the two forms of visual image. I am an artist and tend to view things in their aesthetic dimension. What I am good at is taking the whole image and breaking it down into its most basic parts. But I haven’t thought of a binary means of viewing an image. By binary I mean either there are breaks in the lines or there are not. Digitizing an image causes these breaks due to the quadrant manner in which the computer must render the image. The grid format in which the computer renders the image is what causes pixilation. It works on a pixel at a time rather the entirety of the image.

            Film on the other hand is continuous, as Manovich puts it. Lines are fluid without any breaks that are visible to the human eye. What film does is replicate what the eye sees. It superimposes the light which our eyes are subject to and imprints that light, or lack of it, into the film. Our eyes see what we basically would have seen had we been looking at the image itself. The only thing which is an issue with this is that the ability of the camera and its lens may limit certain light from being picked up. So there may be certain images which will not fully replicate reality.

            Manovich then further states that there is a melding of the two formats in moving pictures. There is the continuous format in the still image taken by the video camera but when placed into motion by juxtaposing the frames one after the other there is a discrete nature which causes breaks not in the lines of the image but in the lines of movement of the image. A great observation by Manovich in my opinion. It may not sound so profound to the layman but to me as an artist it is eye-opening in its simplicity and insight.

            When I first thought of Manovich’s claim that numerical representation was a principle of new media I balked at accepting it. Yet, after much thought, I came to realize that numerical representation was meant to denote the zeros and ones which computers use to generate the image and not whatever else was running through my mind trying to grasp the expression. It was a more literal representation and thus more fitting.

            The means by which the image is produced is a principle of new media—the computer generates an image which is in a discrete format. The two formats, continuous and discrete, will soon become harder to discern with the advent of newer technologies.

I see there are others who feel the same about Facebook.

SADIA: Funny you should mention controlling people. I believe that Facebook is taking advantage of the fact that (1) there is no other social site available with as much activity as Facebook and (2) that nobody wants to move to another site and refriend all of those people. So, they are making money off of our accounts by offering data mining and focused advertising to companies. Though it is true that they provide a service for free (I forgot to mention that I have an account on a Russian social site called Odnoklassniki which charges for everything from creating an account to posting pictures), what Facebook is doing is very unethical.

PROFESSOR: Facebook just had better functionality and games. The old Facebook made doing everything easy. Though Myspace was customizable, Facebook had more class than Myspace (which mostly teens used). I didn’t “need” to move over but the games was a big attraction factor, like being able to challenge your friends at games and compare high scores. The downfall of some websites is fixing what’s not broken. There was an interview with Craig Newmark in Wired magazine where Newmark despised change for only aesthetic appeal. Craigslist is similar in the ease of use of the old delicious site, it hasn’t changed and doesn’t need to change. The morons of this world try to attain aesthetics over functionality (hence the overwhelming amount of dumb, beautiful people).

 KAMILAH: All the new updates to Facebook have been bothersome but it has not fully changed the site itself (as delicious was). Deleting your account won’t neccesarily change anything though. The second you post something, it automatically is saved somewhere on Facebook’s servers and can theoretically be retrieved at any time in the future. It bothers me when people feel an overstated sense of paranoia over opening a Facebook account. You control what you post, they don’t immediately suck the information from you via the monitor. Post nothing sensitive or embarrassing and you have no privacy or security concerns to deal with.

 I agree about delicious though I am giving it a chance now that the YouTube guys saved it from oblivion. I do miss the very simple, no-frills interface and functionality of the old del.icio.us

I started with social media when many of my old friends had pushed me to join Friendster. I had all of my friends there. Then they all went to Myspace and I followed but wasn’t as involved as I was with Friendster. Then everyone moved to Facebook. I followed suit but I think the whole hassle of re-friending all of my friends wasn’t really worth it. I did locate many old friends through Facebook and it was great to talk to them again. Yet, I found that we were all older and different so we either didn’t have time to actually hangout together but that we also really didn’t want to hangout together.

I mainly used Facebook to play the games–first it was Mafia Wars, then Scrabble, then this Ninja game, and then Poker. I spent so many hours on there that could’ve been more productively used. I made some posts but rarely. I liked posting Youtube videos and videos that I created but then Facebook got all police state and started taking everything down, which inevitably took away our individuality and expression through music (Myspace’s success). My photos that I posted were looked at by others but then Facebook changed its structure. It was hard to find my friends and photos, and my videos had all been taken down (I’m banned from uploading videos).

Though I still have a Facebook account, I rarely use it. Facebook messed with something that was great and didn’t fix it, just made it worse (like the way Yahoo bought delicious.com and ruined the entire site beyond recognition).

To Thine Own Self Be True     – Shakespeare, Halet: Act I, Scene 3

Have an image and want a better quality copy, or have an image and want to know where it originated from or on what other websites it is available, checkout Tineye the reverse image search engine: http://www.tineye.com/