General

I watched a lot of films in 2007-20092010 (updated). Here are some of my favorites. I’m a sucker for excellent cinematography, new (to me) ideas, and anything that doesn’t smell like Hollywood.

Russia
Ivan’s Childhood (1962)

Taiwan
Millennium Mambo (2001). It’s an allegory, so you may want some background information before or after watching.
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (2000)

Korea
The Housemaid / Hanyo (1960)
3-Iron / Bin-jip (2004), and Kim Ki-duk’s other films if you get hooked.
Peppermint Candy / Bakha satang (1999)

Japan
Ran (1985). Criteron’s DVD commentary recommended.
Ghost in the Shell (1995). This made more sense after I watched Stand Alone Complex.
Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex (2002)
Battle Royale (2000)
All About Lily Chou-Chou (2001). A second viewing may be required, due to the film’s structure.
The Great Happiness Space: Tale of an Osaka Love Thief (2006). It’s an unusually honest documentary about a completely alien world.
Eureka / Yûrika (2000). See Fred Camper’s review with spoilers.

U.S.
Lost in Translation (2003)
The Triumph of the Nerds: The Rise of Accidental Empires (1996). Covers the rise of Microsoft and Apple.
Network (1976)
Days of Heaven (1978)
A Boy and His Dog (1975)

Australia
Picnic at Hanging Rock (1975)

Belgium
Thomas in Love (2000). A very original and prescient science fiction film.

Germany
Run Lola Run (1998)

France
La Jetée (1962)

Mexico
El Topo (1970)
The Holy Mountain (1973). Jodorowsky’s DVD commentary is practically required.

To be clear, these are not “best of country X” lists; the countries are just an arbitrary categorization.

I have had this experience several times in my life; I come across clear enough evidence that settles for me an issue I had seen long disputed. At that point my choice is to either go back and try to persuade disputants, or to continue on to explore the new issues that this settlement raises. As Eliezer implicitly advises, after a short detour to tell a few disputants, I have usually chosen this second route. This is one explanation for the existence of settled but still disputed issues; people who learn the answer leave the conversation.

–Robin Hanson

Let’s say you’re writing some documentation, and need to point people to a comment on a web page. Keep in mind that more comments may be added at any time. If you need to point people to the second (or third, or fourth, etc) comment, you have an easy time; you just say:

“See the second comment on <X>”

But if you need to point to the first comment, and at this time there is only one comment, you need to sound like a pedant:

“See the first (and possibly only) comment on <X>”

In English, “the second object” does not imply that more objects exist, but “the first object” does imply that more than one exists. Why would you have written “first” if there’s only one? If you wrote just “see the first comment”, and the reader saw only one comment on the page, they might wonder if a comment has been deleted, or if they’re even in the right place. If you wrote “see the only comment”, and soon another comment appeared, you would cause similar confusion.

I don’t expect this to catch on, but with a new word we can express doubts about the existence of more than one object:

“See the firsteth comment on <X>”.

If anyone out there is designing a human language, please make it easier to express things about changing environments.