Bad news! Ps4 price should be cut or...

According to many websites we know the Playstation 4 price. It should be $799 for the basic edition and $899 for the deluxe one. At least for the Us market but I guess they could be 799 and 899 euros or pound in Europe (and not €620 and €699 or £530 and £600 according to actual change).

What a suicide decision!

What is wrong with them? Haven't they learnt nothing by the Ps3 launch in 2007? Haven't they learnt nothing by Move, Psp and Psvita fail launches? 

There is an huge economic crysis that comes along world to a worldwide collapse (especially in Europe) and people didn't waste their money buying useless stuff. I mean 'useless' because Ps3 is still a good console and videogames like 'Tomb Raider', 'Far cry 3' and masterpieces-to-be like 'The last of us', 'Remember me', 'Beyond two souls' and 'Gta V' are here to show it.

Ok, PS4 is much more powerful than PS3 and it will come along us for years but 900 euros is a very expensive price for most of those who'd want to buy it. 

I remember the PS3 launch: it cost as high as this and it was a fail. Later they decided to cut its price and sellings raised up till now when Ps3 is the second most sold console of this generation. After the Nintendo Wii. 

Well, what about the Wii's launch?

The real console was the 'wiimote', the revolutionary controller of that console, which was just a Gamecube with a new fashionable outfit.

It arrived in the market between two colossuses as Sony and Microsoft's consoles and anyboy could bet one pound on Wii but Nintendo started selling millions of Wiis since dayone. Why? Sure, the wiimote seemed a revolution, sure games were fun and casual gamers thought wiimote could be the cooler way to have a new funny party with friends but... At its launch the Wii cost €250 with a game in bundle. At the same time X360 cost double and Ps3 cost triple. It was more competitive than others and it won.

Lately, Nintendo has made the same Sony's mistake with the WiiU launch: it's more innovative than Wii or others but it costs too much for the actual economy. And it's still on shelves.

The right price for a console is €250/300. I assume fanboys will buy it at dayone but others (especially casual gamers) will buy it when it'll cost less. 

Will it be an epic fail or Sony's managers will be wiser?



Update: According the Sony's E3 conference we know the real now. It will be $399 in the US, €399 in Europe and £349 in UK.
Good but not perfect because it doesn't think of the change.
To have pair prices everywhere we should have (getting the dollar as a reference):
US - $399
EURO - €300
UK - £250

If we start from the English Pound, prices worldwide should be:
UK - £349
EURO - €400
US - $540

So, if you want to buy the new PS4 the cheapest place will be the United States' market.

Cristin Milioti is the 'How I met your mother''s mother. And I already love her!

I was lying on my bed watching it on the ipad. I like to watch videos under the cover, in the night, with my earphones in and in the deep darkness. While my wife  sleeps beside me. I put the ipad under the blanket and, when I wasn't ready, a star appeared to slash the night: it was Cristin Milioti, 'The Mother'.

What a stun! I didn't expect to know her anymore. 8 seasons and hundreds episodes after we have known the girl to which 'How I met your mother' is based on and she's really perfect!

I still remember my first time with this show.

I was struggling against the anxiety and it was a time where I've stopped to watch dramas or thrillers movies or anything else could let my anxiety raise up. I looked for some funny shows, something without complaints, tears or illness and I found two chances: 'The big bang theory' and 'How I met your mother'. I watched a couple of episodes with Sheldon, Leonard and their friends but they didn't hit me while Ted, Barney, Marshall, Lily and Robin immediately began my best friends. Their lives, their thoughts, their stories were so familiar to me I couldn't stop myself to watch them. Episode after episode I've literally run up across the seasons, starving for the new ones. Till last august when I watched the seventh season's last episode. No more Barney ot Ted... I was scared!

Fortunally the eight one showed off on last September and month after month I've continued to feed myself with it, even though with only one episode a week (and not 5 or more a day as before). 

The eight season has been fantastic finally again with a good Ted (in the central seasons Barney was the unbreakable star even though Ted was the formal star of the show) especially when he pushes Robin to Barney's arms with ones of the most heartful and romantic words. And then, with the astonished revelation. I didn't expect it. I didn't know how many episodes miss and I wasn't ready to cozy her. 

But she came up. On a cold night of this weird May, in London, the Mother has appeared! And I'm not talking about the Virgin Mary, of course...

The actress is Cristin Milioti and in the show we see her just for a bunch of seconds, just the time to buy a ticket, just the time to fall in love with her.

She's perfect for Ted: big shiny eyes, a completely expressive glimpse, as perfect and funny as she could be. Becase along this seasons we have understood what Ted likes.

Unfortunally we won't know anything about her and their love story till next September when the show could come up back for its last season. We only know Cristin will join the rest of the group that will be composed by three couples: Marshall&Lily, Barney&Robin (let's hope because the next season will be set on the three days before their wedding) and Ted&Mother (we still don't know her character's name).

I already love her, and you?

What if crime was legal for one day a year?

It's the new scifi-horror movie The purge's plot: what if crime was legal for one day a year?

Of course this is just the fantastic idea from which the movie starts with a story about scary events, badly music and a stunning vibe that'll freak out youngsters (and horror movies lovers) all over the world.

I won't go to watch it because I don't like movie where I get off with screams and frightful scenes. I'm not thrilled to be scared so it won't have my money, but the basic idea is outstanding.

So, I can't let go this chance to talk about it. What if crime was legal, even though only for one day?

Let's start from the biggest point: human beings can't be prisoned into a cage. As other animals: try to close a dog in a cage and see what it'll do when you'll freed it. Probabily it will attack you. 

It's because of the living beings' energy. Every life thing in the world is made by a lot of cells and blood and other stuff that allow the life.

Every cell is connected to others with synapsis and these are decided by the Mind and are regulated by organs and hormones. If we could see inside a body (every one) we'd see a chaotic organization as well as a big office in rush hours where many people run every where like crazy arrows. The whole movement is made by the life energy (the one every religions try to explain with their own Godnesses). This energy can be sometimes high (when we're excited, emotionally or physically, or angry) and sometimes low (when we meditate, sleep, loaf, relax...), and in any case it must be released otherwise this can be dangerous for our body.

It's the basic idea of Psychosomatic theories: this energy must flow out, if it remains inside it starts to attack inner organs. For psychosomatic scientists and psychologists a lot of illness are caused by this energy leashed. From little hysteric illness (i.e. a passenger blindness or mygraine or psoryasis) to big problems as cancer.

Do you know when you're so much angry you'd want to harm something but you don't do anything and, literally, you eat your problems and your anger? Ok, this is not good because that anger is a bad energy that must attack something like a starving shark or a virus: isn't the wall in front of you? Isn't a boxer ball or something else? It doesn't matter, it will attack your organs.

This explains why animals can't stay in a cage: they don't know how to eat the anger to control themselves and so when you freed them they will attack you: they're so overwhelmed they can't control it.

It's not different what happens to every free person in the world every day (I mean 'people not jailed'). They have a bad boss and they'd like to say something against him, but they can't, they control their angry against him and maybe after they'll yell their wife or politicians or someone else.

Do you know those cases when a man kills his own family and his neighbours say he was normal, peaceful and anybody could think of the carnage? 

We must face up to our angry and we don't have to say we don't have it or we know how to handle it because it's very difficult to manage it and it's not so simple to learn how.

Yes, the energy has also a good face (love), but try to put an angry person in front of a lover one and let them to fight... Angry energy controls our strenght, our arms, our legs, the love energy controls sexual parts (this is why religions have always had rules against sex) and our heart, our smile.

A happy man, a lover one lives better (not forever because even the happier man in the world must struggle anger) but an angry one lives longer, especially after a fight.

Whatever, come back to the topic. 

What if crime was legal?

After what I've said about living beings it's simple to imagine what could happen.

Imagine if you could go to a store and steal whatever you want without anybody could say you something. Imagine if you could breach the Bank's door and getting all money you can get. No Police, no Laws, no rules, no arrest, no Trial, no prison.

Cool? It'd be anarchy: just one day could destroy the whole world as we know. We should spend the year after trying to fix up all damages.

But would it be this way for real?

I'm not so sure thanks to what I wrote some lines before: the anger control.

I wrote that human beings should live freely and that we should unleash our energy. Yes we should, but there's a reason why we don't do: balance.

Controlling the angry we don't see people who yell against their partners, bosses or others. Actually we see a world where people try to do their best to have a control of themselves, where they try to live quietly, facing bears everyday, figuring out solutions 24h a day.

We like peace, we like living with no screams around us and the religion's education (that controls the world) has gelled our minds on a no-war way. 

Sincerely, if you could rape a girl or kill your boss with no consequences, would you do it? I don't think so.

We refuse rapes, burgles, snatches, wars, murders, pedophilia (perfect example how religion's education has changed our mind: something more than 2 thousands years ago there was no pedophilia because having sex with children was normal).

Maybe someone would do it but most of people would be close in their houses ready to face eventually burglars. For 24 hours.

Anger controls our minds if we don't allow it to flow out, but we have an education, ideas that have changed our behaviours. We're not prehistorical men any more, we're not as other animals. 

And if crime was legal for one day we won't see a war, I guess.

How to have a date and find a partner: that's simple today!

I remember when I was a single. So many women all around me, but too shy to talk with them, too scared by conseguences: do they have some hide boyfriends who can suddenly come up when I start to talk to? 

I was young, a young adult, I was in the 90s' and I didn't know the world was gonna change. Or well, I could imagine: It was in 1996 when I hung out with a girl known on an internet chat. It was the prehistorical era of internet and after that many other websites have been helping people to meet people. And I'm not only talking about meetings just for a chat or for going to a cinema together. No, I'm do talking about dates, more or less romantic. Sex? Yes there are websites specialized in this issue as 'Ashley Madison' (www.ashleymadison.com) which allows you to find a girl or a boy to have sex or to cheat on your partner. 

Sexually. Professional escorts? Prostitutes? Definitely not, you find normal boys and girls who wants to have sex without too much toughts.

Do you have to pay them? Of course not. Just a bunch of bucks for subscribing the website and maybe for paying a dinner or a coffee, then f you guys like each others during the date iyou go to have sex.

On the other hand there are also a lot of websites about professional escorts, masseuses with the 'happyend's shot'  fake tantric therapysts and so on, but they are professionists, it's their jobs, and not always it's her own choice.

No, I'm talking about singles people, normal ones with a normal job, with normal habits, normal friends and normal families.

Maybe people too shy to go to a pub or a 'Starbucks' and start talking to the nearest guy or girl.

Maybe people too tired to start a love affair from the beginning: look at a girl, reserve some good words to her, make presents, flowers, chocolate boxes, rings, nicklaces with her name, having a date in a theater or a restaurant and going up to the hill to see the stars... Too complicated, too long and with no guarancy of success.

Wouldn't be easier if you contact a girl, maybe you already know which interests you have in common, and you ask her for a date? 

'Ashley Madison' wants you to become a cheater and promises you to find easily a sexual partner. It's its goal.

There are other social networks that hide this goal with the main slogan-excuse 'find new friends'. It's not about 'Facebook' or 'Twitter' where is still possible to be just social without any conseguences.

I'm talking about 'Badoo' (badoo.com), my new web discover.

It's easy. You log in and find millions of other people ready to hang out with you.

Graphically is like a catalogue: you see thousands mini-pictures of others and when you choose one you see his/her other pictures. There are public and private ones.

It's easy to find people here. Thanks to the localization you can find the nearest people and thanks to interests list you can find who has more things in common with you.

So, you can see a lot of pictures chosing who you like, start to chat, have a date somewhere and then, who knows?

You look for sex with 'Ashley Madison', here you look for a relationship or just a date (and also new friens of course).

Shy? Escorts? Expensive meeting agencies? Nothing like that. Everything's easier.

Just a click from you there is your soulmate... Or just a date... Or just sex.

It only depends on what you want.

What do you want? :-)

Who doesn't fall in love with Lara? And how to fix the glitch...

There is a reason about my loathe for everything (novels, movies, videogames, jokes...) isn't real. Characters like gnomes, princesses, kings, seers or ghosts are really boring. I started to sleep after 15 minutes watching 'The lord of rings' movie. They are so stuffy!

This is why I love 'Watchmen' for example, because they are normal guys who want to fight the crime without a superpower but with just a coloured and strange costume.

And this is why I really loved this game! The new Lara Croft isn't a sexbomb, she's not as cruel as a professional hunter, she's not an unmistakable superhero as she's been for years since she appeared in the '90s.

She's a normal girl, she's just a bit more than a teenager, she has fears, she doesn't know how to shoot with an arch or a gun. And she cries when she must kill a deer to have something to eat. 

She's a youngster and her only 'superpower' is the memory of her father, a dead famous archaelogist.

And she's human. When she runs or when she's tired or worns out after a long climb we hear her complaints, her tough breathes... Do you remember the former Lara Croft? She felt herself as a Wonder woman, maybe stronger.

She has her own weaknesses and we feel ourselves as she feels in the videogame. She's scared and we're scared cause of the ability to enter into the videogame. Emphaty is on very high levels...

Exactly as it happened with Niko in 'Gta IV' or Ezio in 'Assassin's creed 2' (an extraordinary example of a sequel that is better than the original) or with Jason in 'Far cry 3' (the same: the former chapters were fine but the third is The Game with a capital G).

Take a look, I'm talking about masterpieces...

Here it's the same. Since the first scene you become Lara.

Read it again: you become Lara.

Isn't this the goal of every characters and of every videoplayers or readers or watchers in the world? 

This is the most important reason why the new 'Tomb raider' must be bought and played asap.

Another reason is the graphic. We don't know how 'Gta V' or 'Beyond two souls' or 'the Last of us' will be but here we have one of the best graphic title of this generation at same peaks of masterpieces as 'Heavy rain', 'Far cry 3' or 'Uncharted'. 

Bad point. It's not a game without problems. At first the gameplay. It's funny, the main story is very interesting but the gameplay is always the same. We have a huge island (as in 'Far cry 3' we also have referrences to 'Lost' tv show) to discover with a lot of misteries but at the end we always do the same actions: we go from a point A to a point B. We kill somebody along our journey, we workout some riddles, we do some other stuff but nothing more. It's like an interactive movie and also the 'survivor's aspects' aren't so important. Lara should kill animals to eat and survive but even if he doesn't she lives very well. The same about her equipment: you can improve your stuff or not, it doesn't matter to finish the game.

It's not the most revolutionary gameplay in the story but it's passionated and this could be enough for a first chapter.

Yes, because the sensation is this is only the start of a long long saga as 'Assassin's creed' for example. One chapter a year? I don't know because I'd like more variety in the gameplay and I don't know if they can think about it and realize something new. Now it's a game that sounds like a more passionated edition of 'Uncharted' but let's hope to the future.

I finish talking about the glitch inside the game. It's disappointed but you can find it during your game (it's not sure you find it....). 

After at least 30' or something more there is a point on a mountain where you verge and you can crossover the hole with a wood bridge. Well, it's possible you don't find any bridge. So, what can you do? Simple. Exit the game, cancel this saving and start it again: you'll find out you won't have played a lot but when you'll arrive at that point you can see the bridge. And you can go through. It deserves it.

It's just a glitch, it happens.

Enjoy!

TOMB RAIDER
Crystal Dinamics
Rate: 90%

Devices: Xbox 360 - PS3
Genre: Adventure

An undertone Zucchero heart breaks the Royal Albert Hall

It's always a pleasure go to the Royal Albert Hall for a concert. The sound is great and an old-style vibe that can smooth even a rockstar as Zucchero.

Yes because I don't know what happened to him but we (Italians) use to see a different Zucchero on a stage.

Maybe he was tired to sing the same songs everytime or worn out by the travel, I don't know why, but who I saw yesterday night at Royal wasn't the usual Zucchero.

He's a bluesman who likes to melt different sounds. He's almost a rocker, someone who's gonna to wreck the stage with his carisma and his energy.

Have you ever listened songs as 'Rispetto' or 'Solo una sana e consapevole libidine' or 'Il mare impetuoso al tramonto' and others? They are so full of energy that you feel yourself burnt and you start to dance, to sing, to hug everybody around you...

Yesterday? Nothing. He just sang his songs with any kind of sparkles.

No fireworks, no visual effect or something could let people to say 'wow'.

Just his songs, always amazing songs ok but nothing more. 

You know what I mean? I'm talking about that sensation when you go to a concert and after that you haste to buy his last cd. Well, yesterday I used those money to eat after. No cds. Money saved.

What a pity...

See you next time ZucCHEro (and the capitals are about his love to Cuba and those sounds that moved his energy on a salsa club for grandfathers...)

ZUCCHERO AT ROYAL ALBERT HALL
Rate: 50%

Why Stramaccioni failed at Inter

I still remember when Ranieri tried to figure out the Inter situation last year while everything was a mess around him. 
He had arrived on September after Gasperini layoff and he managed to do something good with a team that wasn't built by him. It was a team were the attack section was composed by the riddle player as Zarate, two old glories as Forlan and Milito, the young guy Castaignos (1 presence, 1 gol), a ghost as Pandev and Pazzini, never loved by Inter fans. It wasn't the Mourinho's glorious Inter and nor the Benitez-Leonardo one. It was a bad team with unacceptable players as Alvarez, Jonathan, Palombo, and others.

He managed to fix that team broken by Gasperini and his weird 3-5-2 (impossible with old defenders as Lucio, Chivu and Samuel or slack ones as Ranocchia) and he did it with a normal, boring but always useful 4-4-2. 

Then, something went wrong during the january market (Coutinho, Muntari and Motta out against no ins) and he lost the team leadership.

Last year's spring was awful and this was happening while a young coach was winning everything with the Inter's Primavera team: this one was Stramaccioni, Inter's Primavera coach, who won the Young Champions League and the Young Scudetto.

After the young european finale Massimo Moratti decided to fire Ranieri and moving up Stramaccioni as first team coach. 

Young, handsome, funny, winner: he had the best profile in that moment. There was a new breath in the Inter ambient.

In just 8 matches he fixed a broken Inter and just for a little he missed the Champions League qualification. Very good: he deserved the confirmation for the next season.

Now, after a whole season I can say that dream is broken.

And now Stramaccioni would deserve to be fired and going somewhere else to learn how to coach a top team. I'm unhappy because I really thought he could be our Guardiola but... well, it happens.

While I'm writing the President Moratti is deciding if keep on with him or changing with someone else (Mazzarri? Mancini? I hope the last one...) but here the point is why Stramaccioni has failed to figure out the situation and working for a better future.

1) Setting up. If you have to build a palace you must have your ideas very clear. You must know which kind of palace you want, its usage, its features. Everything must be definited before going to the hardware store for buying everything you need. 

The horrible Inter of 2012-2013 (from now on I'm gonna call it 'Lemon' cause my heart's crying call that bunch of shit 'Inter') was created and assembled by Stramaccioni. He wanted a team with no directors in the midfield but only hammers to defend to let Snejder and others creating something in the attack.

Ok, but for this you need a defensor could start the action from behind, you need three or more forwards very good and hoping something can come up with. This sounds like: 'Well, go to the pitch and try to come up with something'. This means playing on a defensive way and using only the counterattack. This is fine for how many games? Five? Ten? Thinking you can do it for a whole season is a suicide. In effect it worked perfectly against Juventus but only in that match...
We are Inter, with the capital 'I', we must go to every pitch and impose our game. This is possible only with a director: Juventus with Pirlo teachs it.
This is about the tactical idea, but issues are also about players.
The Inter last summer market:
IN (GOOD) - Handanovich (ok but before we had Julio Cesar...) and Palacio (ok but we had been following him for two years so he was chosen by Strama)
IN (BAD) - Silvestre, Pereira, Mudingay, Gargano, Cassano.
The Inter last winter market:
IN (GOOD) - Kovacic
IN (BAD) - Kuzmanovich, Schelotto, Rocchi
Are those players fine for Inter? Of course, even a child would say no but Stramaccioni was really happy for this.
A big laugh starts if we add the transfer:
SUMMER - Julio Cesar, Caldirola, Faraoni, Lucio, Maicon, Poli, Castaignos, Forlan, Zarate, Pandev, Pazzini
WINTER - Snejder, Coutinho, Livaja.
So, if you sell top players as Maicon, Pazzini, Lucio, Snejder and Coutinho and you buy Schelotto, Silvestre, Gargano and Pereira you're insane. It's unbelievable.
Another funny story let to the history is the choice to sell every striker and let only Milito as striker in the team. Milito. A 34-years striker. A player with a long injuries' story. Only him. Pazzini sold. Castaignos sold. Snejder and Coutinho away. Young top players-to-be as Longo and Livaja sent on loan somewhere else. Only Milito. Anybody has asked to himself: what if he take a flu? Worste. He broke his leg and he has been injuring for months.
Isn't this a choice made by a mad?
Who's the head behind this decisions?

Stramaccioni, because a society works following the coach's ideas.

And his ideas were really fuzzy.

2) Youngsters. When he arrived I was happy because Inter has one of the best youngsters area in Europe. Juvenile area is the secret of Barcellona (yes they spent millions to buy top players but their real top-top-top players Xavi, Iniesta and Messi are producted by themselves) or Borussia Dortmund. Have you seen Robert Lewandoski or Mario Gotze or Mats Hummels? 

Anybody knows Inter's youngsters better than him. Stramaccioni was the Duncan, Longo, Bardi, Pasa, Mbaye, Bessa, Livaja, Caldirola and others coach last year. I thought he could already put some of these in the first team last year but nothing, he said 'they're not ready for the first team yet'.
Ok, so I hoped to see them on the new season but nothing.

'Not ready yet'. Arguable because is Longo worse than Rocchi? Is Duncan worse than Gargano? Isn't Caldirola at the same level of Juan or Ranocchia. 

We have been playing with players (or whatever they are) as Pereira, Gargano, Mudyngay, Alvarez, Rocchi, Cambiasso, Chivu, Jonathan for a whole season.

We have arrived ninth. Would it have been different if we had played with youngsters?

Nope, maybe better or maybe not but now we'd have a bunch of players already prompt to play as protagonists next season. Instead, we have only one young player ready: Juan. Stop. Only 1 youngster.

And this happens while Milan plays with Niang, Balotelli and El Sharawi.

3) Tactics. He likes the 4-3-3. Ok.

He started last summer with the 4-3-3.
Then he moved to a 4-2-3-1.

After first difficulties he changed to a 3-5-1-1.

Not happy he changed to a 3-4-2-1.

Other difficulties come up and he changed again to a 4-4-2.

Then to 4-2-3-1 and to 4-4-1-1 after. 

I'm not talking about the last two months with all those injuries. I'm talking about the Inter with all players available. Too much confusion.

7 different tactics were changed during a season and during every single match.

Players as Guarin could play as right winger at the kick off, for going forward after 20 minutes, passing in front of defensor after 40 minutes, coming back to the wing on the other side after 60 minutes and finishing the match as a central midfielder. Players moved as pawns in the chess. But they are men not pawns and everybody know players are disoriented. Even though they are top players.

Anyone knows that a player takes his own best playing in the best role for him and for a while...

Anyone but Stramaccioni...

4) Injuries. If you read the Inter eleventh player in last two months matches you can see a normal team. Not good enough to win the title, but not a team able to get only 4 points in 10 matches. It nuts!

For example the last match against Udinese: Handanovich, Pasa, Cambiasso, Juan, Nagatomo, Kuzmanovich, Kovacic, Pereira, Alvarez, Guarin, Rocchi.
Pasa a part all others are players chosen by Stramaccioni. Players Stramaccioni wished.
Injuries can't be an alibi.

You have some players off? At first try to prevent them not selling all substitutes (Pazzini, Castaignos, Longo, Livaja letting only Milito) and then get players from your youngsters area, change tactics to use better who's available if you're in emergency.
Nothing, toughtful and confused and with a only phrase: 'when we were completed we were fine'. And it even isn't right because at half season we had 35 points, 9 less than Juventus and in fifth position. Is it fine enough? I don't think so.

5) First halftimes. Anybody seems remind it but before the 'alibi time' Stramaccioni used to be wrong a lot of halftimes. The initial elevenths seemed fine but in the first 45 minutes they played very bad. During the pause he changed the formation and in the second half Inter managed to win or draw the match.

'He's learning', somebody used to say. Ok, but after that he's continued to be wrong every match. More than 50 matches and don't you even understand which players of yours are better than others? What do you do during the week? Don't you see that some players are out of form or unfit? And you do choice those players?

Whatever, I could go on for a long time but it's useless. Maybe Stramaccioni is really a dead-man-walking, as UK journalists like to call people on a bad position like him, people that verge to be fired. Maybe today afternoon or tomorrow Stramaccioni won't be the Inter coach anymore. Or maybe Moratti will confirm him and next year we will see the famous 4-3-3 with other amazing players as the young Icardi, as Ruben Botta, as Andreolli and Campagnaro, who knows.
Anybody knows what Moratti is thinking right now. Maybe neither him knows it.
The important issue is that Stramaccioni used last season as a school. He've been wrong a lot, he did something good and a lot of bad. Overall he showed up he doesn't understand from his mistakes. He's wrong now and he'll be wrong next week again. And this is astonished for a Serie A coach.
However, we're gonna see the future.
Let's hope.

L'Attimo fuggente

Because we are food for worms lads. Because, believe it or not, each and every one of us in this room is one day going to stop breathing, turn cold, and die. Now I would like you to step forward over here and peruse some of the faces from the past. You've walked past them many times. I don't think you've really looked at them. They're not that different from you, are they? Same haircuts. Full of hormones, just like you. Invincible, just like you feel. The world is their oyster. They believe they're destined for great things, just like many of you. Their eyes are full of hope, just like you. Did they wait until it was too late to make from their lives even one iota of what they were capable? Because you see gentlmen, these boys are now fertilizing daffodils. But if you listen real close, you can hear them whisper their legacy to you. Go on, lean in.

Should I really live as a child? I don't think so

Since I've started to think about life meaning, asking 'The Questions', I've read a lot of books, handbooks and Holy testimonials about life secrets. The biggest, perhaps the most important, is trying to become as empty as a child. Clean your mind, stop to be toughtfull, so you can let the life fulfill yourself...

Therefore, what does a child do?

He approaches life differently: everything is a game, everything is new, he is leaded by his curiosity, his vitality, his energy...

Is it true? Is it really true?

So, let's think about it.

What does he really do?

1) Places. He's centered on himself so London or a small town is the same. Is it good? I guess no. We live in a world made by places and each one of them has his own particularity. It's amazing to soak up it. It's like a recharge.

South Africa lifestyle is different than Los Angeles or Madrid or Tokyo ones.

Can children understand the difference? No.

2) Possession. An adult can fight for what he considers his property, a child can't.

Is it true? I don't want to talk about Bowlby and his psychological theory about the attachment but children don't really know what a share is. Yes, they know it if their parents have taught to him but it's not usual. Possession is fundamental for a child because it helps the creation of his world.

3) Enthusiasm. 'Look at a child: look how he sees the world, his glimpses...'

Really? I just see children who are more involved in what they like than whatever they see. I noticed this morning in a toy store. I went there with my little niece but thanks to her I noticed it even in other children. We were in 'Hamley's toy store' in London, you know, it's the biggest toy store in whole Europe and maybe in the world. Pratically there's every kind of games existing in the world, a lot of more than what a child can imagine.

So, was she amazed by this Heaven? Of course not. Now she's involved into Winx, Violetta and make up stuff and nothing of these were in the store, so?

We just bought a doll and nothing more. And others?

There were children who liked robots, others videogames, others dolls or Lego... but I didn't see that 'glimpse'.

4) Others judgement. Another important point about this 'fairy tale' as we should be like children is that children don't mind other people's judgements.

This tale refferres to fact they live in their own world. Is it real? Really don't they mind?

Ok, have a trial: go to a child and say him his draws are rubbish, he's stupid or something could bother him. Try it. 

He'll start to cry because he needs someone else approvals and your disappointment, every your 'no' will be read as a failure of him.

5) Independent. 'Take a look of children: they don't need stuff or other person to play, they can invent their own games'. Sure, even a withdrawn adult can do it but you know how much an adult likes to share his life. Cause human beings are social animals, we live and we move flowing and not alone. And for children it is the same. Get a child and let him play by himself. He does but then he wants to go to his mother or father or someone else to ask for a feedback. And this is because our identity is made by feedbacks.

Therefore, children aren't independent, they need someone could say them what to do and what don't because they don't know how to survive. And this is made by  orders, sure, and by feedbacks as well.

I could go ahead for a while but I guess it's enough. 

I was really confident that 'Living as a child' was the Secret but now I'm not sure anymore.

- I love going to a place and soak up its energy: it doesn't matter which, everyone has its own features...

- I love having my own things. And for 'things' I mean my house (what a harmful sensation of peace when I come back home and I take a bath...), my games (watching sports on tv pr playing football or videogaming: everytime is a different experiebce), my lovers (I love you honey!!!).

- I love new events. Am I matured enough to stop my mind and enthusiasm myself with every new events. I don't know, surely more than a child. 

- I enjoy a new tasty food by an oriental cuisine. I enjoy finding out new tv series or movies or videogames. I enjoy every new person I meet. I enjoy new jobs, new experience. I'm old enough to go somewhere else doing something else new. And enjoy it.

- Yes I consider others judgements but what's the problem? Judgements are the no-written rules of a society and they're the most important. I don't like them? Change (city, friends, job, lovers) what you are. It's impossible if you're a child: you could only cry.

- And, of course, I'm independent. The power of change (what you are, where you live, what you do) is the power of the independence and children don't have it.

So, should I live as a child?

Come on, let's hope no....

Can the ambient changes us?

What does it mean rambling around London. I've been living here fat bit more of one month and I still don't realize where I am. I live as usual, I use to do what I generally do. 
The only differences are that I watch movies in english, I try yo memorize english words, I see people around me talking in english. Then? Nothing, I do what generally do in Italy.

So, the question is: can a different place change us? 

I can't answer. I could say yes because here I walk more, I'm in a smooth ambient where I feel fine but... What am I doing here that I couldn't do somewhere else?

I'm saying we need to look deeply inside us before let a city change us. I'm pretty sure we can get away but habits live inside us are gonna hold us back because of they're stronger.

If I see ghost in my house doesn't mean they really exist and if I change the house probably I'm gonna see them again for a while.

And what are my habits? What are my bas behaviors and bad thoughts?

See you tomorrow

What a poor world with these gurus

I have been a meditator for years. I was one of those who talks about energy, about happiness from our heart, about a peaceful lifestyle.

Oh gosh, how many mantras, how many theories, ideas, explanations about what I should do to switch off my mind.

"You have to give away your desires, you must stop any research, any thought, you must set aside your ego, your beliefs,.. With a simple word: yourself".

I should live in here and now and anything else. No past, no future.

Fine. Then, there is the Life.

Every masters I have had were so good with words but when somebody tried to asks fir further information, well, the same answer: your way is still long, you have to figure out, now you can't understand, maybe one day". And meanwhile pay a lot for mediation/therhapist classes or for praying. 

Shut up and clean your mind.

Even if there are a lot of ways everyone refers to only one: buddhism. 

Thousands years ago one guy decided to  stop with his own life and went under a tree just to meditate. And he become the first enlighted man in the history. 

Fine, amazing. But...

What if he had a wife? And what if she was ill?

To find yourself you must have the courage to change. Jesus told: "I'm here to divide youngers from their parenthood".

Fine, but what if I'm a father of one or more sons ? And of I'm unemployed?

And what if I'm a company owner but my customers don't pay me because of crises? Therefore, I can't pay my employees' salaries. And they couldn't pay the food for their families. 

Am so on.

What should I do? Easy. You come first, others come after.

Because if you are fine, everybody will be fine. Therefore everything refers to myself.

Others? Fuck them, I must think only of me, I must be enlightened, I must find my peacefullness and if others want to stay fine, you know, give a guru's address who can help them.

At last I remember what Freud wrote: "every human actions is decided by a selfish mind, every human being is selfish. The most charity action is moved by a selfish man, even if he's convicted is a charity man".

Well, Freud was attacked for these words but he has been the only one enlightened man in history.

Charity? It's only one action to ferl yourself more comfortable. And others? Yes but they come later... 

If you chamge everything changes around you.... Meanwhile (you change) fuck them.

What a poor world that one need this kind of gurus...

Just a coffee... In London!

This is a big surprise to me. I've spent years on working for moving to New York City and what happens? I'm in London. And I like it! You know, New York is still New York on my mind and in my heart but here it's something really close to. English speakers everywhere, a lot of fun, different life style and coffees... well, coffees. For Italians there is only espresso, just a little finger of black water, very tasty, and no time to spend in talking in front of a hot cup of coffee. In Italy you can't stay lie down on a chair for hours (try to go with tour laptop or a book for more than half an hour in a Bar...), here you can!
Now I'm in a 'Caffè Nero' coffee shop, surrounded by strange people talking the strangest language of the world and it's fantastic.

Keep in touch, let's go to discover London, together! :-)

I know who's the "Mother"!

I know it's not a big news. When this episode came up on our screen somebody already supposed she could be the "Mother" but now, after 8 season, hundreds episodes and much more clues I can say. With no doubt: she's the "Mother".
Everything happens in the episode number 12 of the 3rd season: Ted is in a club with Barney-with-green-suits and in a scene he just bump into a girl. Only two seconds, just a "oh I'm sorry", "oh, that's ok" and nothing else.
Only two seconds but very important.
Why is there this scene? In that moment, after only 55 episodes, we didn't know how screenwriters wanted to develop the story. But now we know that in no other 184 episodes there is a scene like this. One of the reason for whom "How I met your mother" is one of the best of every time is that every phrase, every scene, every moment is referred to another one or to a bigger point.
Just one moment is disconnected. This.
This is the most important aspect that move to a second layer the "yellow brolly". At the end of the episode we see Ted coming back to the club the morning after. He finds a big mess in the room but outside it's starting to rain and he needs an umbrella. He came back inside and gets a yellow brolly that the Narrator tells us it belongs to the "Mother".
So, why is there the rain outside? Why this particular clue in this particular episode?

So, at last, I'm glad to introduce you the "Mother", the Ted's wife, a girl that we still know as "Bump girl" but that we know she used to live with a former Ted's girlfriend (after who she become lesbian), she like to play guitar and that she's gonna meet Ted at Barney&Robin's wedding party.
Nicole Muirbrook.
Amazing eyes, a heartbreak glimpse, she was born on March 19, 1983 in Salt Lake City (Utah, US).
Would you like her as "kids"' mother?
Will she really be the "Mother"? Let's wait for another couples of week and we'll find out.

Welcome Nicole!

The link video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNXcuFIRu9g