Slashdot Mirror

Homegrown Fuel Supply Helps Brazil Breathe Easy http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ethanol15jun 15,0,3313642.story?track=tothtml

Brazil's ethanol effort helping lead to oil self-sufficiency http://ethanolmarketplace.com/061705_news6.asp

Brazilian drivers love ethanol - Fuel costs half price of gasoline http://www.detnews.com/2004/autosinsider/0408/27/e 03-254552.htm

Brazil embraces ethanol http://www.journalstar.com/articles/2005/06/26/bus iness/doc42bc788738c34906117023.txt

A technical explanation on potency, performance, etc - I leave it to you to Babelfish it. http://www.webmotors.com.br/wmpublicador/Reportage ns.vxlpub?hnid=33796

Shut up. You're being brainwashed. Again. Go vote for Baby Bush.

40% of all cars in Brazil
today run on ethanol.
In the 80s, it was 90%.

This link may interest you.

Its premise is that any CEO who isn't a psychopath is not fit to be a CEO.

Amazon and Bezos didn't get to where they are by being nice guys, honest, or having anything resembling a conscience.

And, Lord knows, this was a slashdot-specific story, and you certainly couldn't have gotten details anywhere else before you opened your mouth.

Column in the Los Angeles Times, which I'll post before it goes into paid obscurity:

Hogwarts fans, you're stupid, stupid, stupid

Next Saturday, when the sixth Harry Potter book comes out, at the very least I want you to stammer excuses when I see "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" on your nightstand. I want you to claim you're reading it to make sure it's OK for your kids, or your future kids, or even, if you have to, for kids in general.

I don't want you to tell me how well J.K. Rowling writes, or that academics are writing papers about it, or that Harry Potter can be read on many levels. "Clifford the Big Red Dog" can be read on many levels too: One, he's a big red dog; two, if you read it after you're 4, you're a moron.

I read 50 pages of the first "Harry Potter" book, and it seemed witty, imaginative and fast-paced. It also seemed like it was for children. It's about wizards and magic cats and evil stepparents, and has a reading-level that is only slightly above this column.

Judy Blume wrote well too, but you don't see adults poring over "Freckle Juice" on the train. No matter how well-crafted "Harry Potter" may be, I'm betting that with a little work you could find an adult novel from the last three centuries that is nicely written too, and possibly explores characters with a shade more complexity.

I know reading is hard. I try to avoid it whenever possible. But if I'm going to sit down and read a book, I'm going to get something out of it other than the ability to have a conversation with my second wife, who isn't even born yet.

I'm sorry you were born too late for J.K. Rowling, but you had your C.S. Lewis and E.B. White and J.R.R. Tolkien. Isn't it a clue that you should be ashamed of reading these books past puberty when the adults who write them are hiding their first names?

I'm sure the Potter books are fun. I bet a night of Fun Dip, piñatas and Sit N Spin would be great too. I think I may have a film to pitch to Cinemax.

After a generation of boomers choosing to remain in a state of stunted adolescence -- wearing jeans, smoking pot and cranking their BMW stereos to blast Eminem songs they clearly don't like -- the next generation has opted for a stunted toddlerhood. Adults see "Finding Nemo" without bothering with the socially accepted ruse of dragging an unwilling 11-year-old nephew along. Grown men play video games and couples go to Disneyworld on their honeymoon, often for reasons other than having sex in Cinderella's castle with the dwarfs watching. You need a wad of Disney Dollars for that one, by the way, 50th anniversary or no 50th anniversary.

When we share our entertainment palette with the Wiggles set -- watching comic book movies and teenage singing talent shows -- we deny an attempt to understand human emotion.

I took both my grandmothers to see the Warner Bros. movie about the first "Harry Potter" book because Aaron Brown let me fulfill my ultimate media dream by having them review it live from Mama Ann's condominium.

In addition to Mama Ida claiming that one of the kids was hard to understand because she might have been English and referring to the special effects as "scenery," my grandmothers eventually made the one cogent point that other reviewers missed: The story is stupid if you're over 13.

A culture that simplifies its entertainment down to fairy tales is doomed to simplify the world down to good and evil. And a culture in which adults go see the "Harry Potter" movies still won't be enough to help the useless Time Warner options I got in the '90s, so you might as well buy something from the back of the bookstore instead. You won't have to wait in line for "Ulysses."

Yes, lets kill hackers, but lets let more and more child molesters out of jail

priorites people

Ask a trekkie

It's amazing what can be done with very high taxes and a relatively small land mass.

51.4% of GDP in 2003

Well, the "rest of America" may be catching up to Slashdot.

"Not having seen the wiki myself but knowing the type of obscene pictures that would get posted from slashdot, it sounds like the LA Times got flooded with images of Goatse...."

"Oh, Wiki, You're (Not) So Fine ... Last Friday, the LAT launched a "wikitorial"--an editorial in which readers took part in a grand, group rewriting--or what's known in colloquial terms as a clusterf***. It was taken down Sunday afternoon. This morning's LAT gives the gory details:

"'Sometime after midnight Saturday, [one Times editor said], he stopped monitoring the site for the night, and later pornographic images began to pour in. One image that was repeatedly posted is infamous on the Internet for its depiction of a man's private parts.'

"TP is familiar with the image. But he won't be, er, goated into revealing it...."

Circulation

* The Times' Sunday circulation is 1,392,672. Average daily circulation for Monday to Saturday is 983,727. (Six-month period ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the Audit Bureau of Circulations, subject to audit.)

* The newspaper's single-copy distribution network includes more than 8,500 retail stores, hotels and other locations and more than 18,100 newspaper racks.

* The Times' in-market home delivery area extends from Santa Barbara to the Mexican border - a 45,000-square-mile area larger than the state of Ohio.

* The Times is sold and distributed in combination with several leading daily and weekly native-language publications including the Armenian language Asbarez, Chinese Daily News, Korea Times and the Russian language newspapers Panorama and Friday Express as well as the English-language India Journal.

Thanks and apologies to the thousands of people who logged on in the right spirit.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la- wiki-splash,0,1349109.story

I read something completly opposite just teh other day... It says that you have to sign up, but I didn't have to when I found it the first time... So, try going through the "mapping the mind" page.

Not just that, but 13-26 year olds who have *proven* that they'd rather steal stuff than buy it...

Of course, how does that explain Coldplay selling 740,000 copies of their new album in the first week. Who is buying these, all the damn 40 year olds? Wonder if my grandma's picked up her copy yet?

Maybe X&Y isn't out on the torrent sites yet.... nope, there it is. My favorite torrent search engine has at least 5 very active trackers. Strange, why would ANYONE purchase it, especially those evil 13-26 year olds???

1. "Race" is not any sort of scientifically recognized term for subdividing within a species. So arguing that one thing is a "race" and another is not is ultimately a fruitless endevour...

That's because most human variation falls within, not between populations. About 85% of all genetic variation can, on average, be found within any local population, be they Swedes, Kikuyu, or Hmong. About 94% can be found within any continental population, consistent with what the Rosenberg Science study found. In fact, there are no characteristics, no traits, not even one gene that turns up in all members of one so-called race yet is absent from others.

By slightly over 3 to 1, Israeli Jews choose the ethnic Jew (43%) over the religious practitioner (13%). However, another 32% of Israeli Jews find both equally Jewish. Therefore, even in Israel, a country with strict adherence to Jewish law, nearly half of Israeli Jews would consider someone without a Jewish mother as Jewish. The question of "who is a Jew" has been the center of debate recently, with the Orthodox establishment only recognizing someone as Jewish who was born to a Jewish mother (or converted by a Orthodox Rabbi)

Wow! 70 people can extinct multiple species over a 6 million-square-mile continent. Humans are Amazing !

There have been some arrests with links to terrorist groups such as Hezbollah
The guess from the article is that it is in the $30 million range of additional funding for theses groups.

See:

Initial Hiltzik column: 'Deep Throat' Numbers Just Don't Add Up
Bailey and Barbato (directors, writers, producers of Inside Deep Throat): More Numbers for 'Deep Throat'
a somewhat longer version of their response: 'Throat' Gets Cut, Directors Perform Surgery
Hiltzik then asked them to answer twelve questions which resulted in this column:
Hiltzik: Bad 'Deep Throat' Revenue Numbers Are Multiplying

Ebert also covered Inside Deep Throat in an earlier Movie Answer Man column:
February 20, 2005

See:

Initial Hiltzik column: 'Deep Throat' Numbers Just Don't Add Up
Bailey and Barbato (directors, writers, producers of Inside Deep Throat): More Numbers for 'Deep Throat'
a somewhat longer version of their response: 'Throat' Gets Cut, Directors Perform Surgery
Hiltzik then asked them to answer twelve questions which resulted in this column:
Hiltzik: Bad 'Deep Throat' Revenue Numbers Are Multiplying

Ebert also covered Inside Deep Throat in an earlier Movie Answer Man column:
February 20, 2005

See:

Initial Hiltzik column: 'Deep Throat' Numbers Just Don't Add Up
Bailey and Barbato (directors, writers, producers of Inside Deep Throat): More Numbers for 'Deep Throat'
a somewhat longer version of their response: 'Throat' Gets Cut, Directors Perform Surgery
Hiltzik then asked them to answer twelve questions which resulted in this column:
Hiltzik: Bad 'Deep Throat' Revenue Numbers Are Multiplying

Ebert also covered Inside Deep Throat in an earlier Movie Answer Man column:
February 20, 2005

And it turns out, because of propositions such as the above, the Bush government is one major PR disaster and every government that associates itself too closely with him get lambasted in election days (Spain, UK, Italy, ...)

Nice how you fail to mention Australia in your list, the most obvious counter-example. Georgia seems to not consider Bush's administration a "PR disaster" either.

Also, if I recall, Blair *won* in the UK (admittedly not by much, but that certainly wasn't the result the anti-US crowd wanted). And Spain? Come on...If anything it shows how easily Spain's elections (and electorate) can be swayed by terrorist attacks.

And hey, at least they're having elections in Iraq and Afghanistan now...

Besides the the sarcasm he probably intended?

Here are some various and recent articles on (not) making money in Hollywood. They're not all related to (lack) of profit, but all at mention in different ways where all the money comes from and where it goes.

First three by Leonard Klady, who writes for moviecitynews.com:

Lies, Damn Lies And Statistics... (the average cost to produce and market a major Hollywood studio picture is $98 million)
Profits of Doom ... (this one goes gets around to showing how a blockbuster movie might never break even)
In Praise of Popcorn...

Then three from Slate, all written by Edward Jay Epstein:

Concessions Are for Girlie Men: Arnold Schwarzenegger's absurdly advantageous contract for Terminator 3 (a brand new article on a movie released in 2003)
How Did Michael Eisner Make Disney Profitable? Not with cartoons. (

"In 1984, when Eisner took command, the "Mouse House" produced only one animated picture every three to five years. Its entire film library had only 158 features, and its single cable channel, the Disney Channel, lost money. In addition, Disney had virtually no income from sales of videos. To keep afloat, the company depended on its amusement parks and its Mickey Mouse licensing. Yet even with these assets Disney had a tax-free cash flow of just $100 million. Its share price, reflecting this precarious financial position, was $1.33 (adjusted for splits).
In 2005, Disney was one of the richest companies in America. Its enterprise value--Wall street's favored measure of an entertainment company--had increased 32-fold since 1984 and stood at $69 billion."

)
How To Finance a Hollywood Blockbuster. Start with a German tax shelter; How NOT To Make Any Money On A Hollywood Blockbuster, a comment on the article written by David Poland, editor of moviecitynews.com, who finds it interesting but is not impressed by its accuracy.

And can a slashdot posting be complete without porn?

How much money did perhaps the most famous porn movie of all time, Deep Throat (1972), gross? The documentary Inside Deep Throat (2005) claims that it that it is the most profitable picture ever made, and that it has grossed $600 million.
Michael Hiltzik of The Los Angeles Times disputes this, using the technical term "baloney". This set off a number of responses back and forth between Hiltzik and Fenton Bailey and Randy Barbato who wrote, co-produced and directed the documentary.

Initial Hiltzik column: 'Deep Throat' Numbers Just Don't Add Up
Bailey and Barbato: More Numbers for 'Deep Throat', a somewhat longer version of their response: 'Throat' Gets Cut, Directors Perform Surgery
Hiltzik then asked them to answer twelve questions, which resulted in this column:
Hiltzik: Bad 'Deep Throat' Revenue Number

Besides the the sarcasm he probably intended?

Here are some various and recent articles on (not) making money in Hollywood. They're not all related to (lack) of profit, but all at mention in different ways where all the money comes from and where it goes.

First three by Leonard Klady, who writes for moviecitynews.com:

Lies, Damn Lies And Statistics... (the average cost to produce and market a major Hollywood studio picture is $98 million)
Profits of Doom ... (this one goes gets around to showing how a blockbuster movie might never break even)
In Praise of Popcorn...

Then three from Slate, all written by Edward Jay Epstein:

Concessions Are for Girlie Men: Arnold Schwarzenegger's absurdly advantageous contract for Terminator 3 (a brand new article on a movie released in 2003)
How Did Michael Eisner Make Disney Profitable? Not with cartoons. (

"In 1984, when Eisner took command, the "Mouse House" produced only one animated picture every three to five years. Its entire film library had only 158 features, and its single cable channel, the Disney Channel, lost money. In addition, Disney had virtually no income from sales of videos. To keep afloat, the company depended on its amusement parks and its Mickey Mouse licensing. Yet even with these assets Disney had a tax-free cash flow of just $100 million. Its share price, reflecting this precarious financial position, was $1.33 (adjusted for splits).
In 2005, Disney was one of the richest companies in America. Its enterprise value--Wall street's favored measure of an entertainment company--had increased 32-fold since 1984 and stood at $69 billion."

)
How To Finance a Hollywood Blockbuster. Start with a German tax shelter; How NOT To Make Any Money On A Hollywood Blockbuster, a comment on the article written by David Poland, editor of moviecitynews.com, who finds it interesting but is not impressed by its accuracy.

And can a slashdot posting be complete without porn?

How much money did perhaps the most famous porn movie of all time, Deep Throat (1972), gross? The documentary Inside Deep Throat (2005) claims that it that it is the most profitable picture ever made, and that it has grossed $600 million.
Michael Hiltzik of The Los Angeles Times disputes this, using the technical term "baloney". This set off a number of responses back and forth between Hiltzik and Fenton Bailey and Randy Barbato who wrote, co-produced and directed the documentary.

Initial Hiltzik column: 'Deep Throat' Numbers Just Don't Add Up
Bailey and Barbato: More Numbers for 'Deep Throat', a somewhat longer version of their response: 'Throat' Gets Cut, Directors Perform Surgery
Hiltzik then asked them to answer twelve questions, which resulted in this column:
Hiltzik: Bad 'Deep Throat' Revenue Number

Besides the the sarcasm he probably intended?

Here are some various and recent articles on (not) making money in Hollywood. They're not all related to (lack) of profit, but all at mention in different ways where all the money comes from and where it goes.

First three by Leonard Klady, who writes for moviecitynews.com:

Lies, Damn Lies And Statistics... (the average cost to produce and market a major Hollywood studio picture is $98 million)
Profits of Doom ... (this one goes gets around to showing how a blockbuster movie might never break even)
In Praise of Popcorn...

Then three from Slate, all written by Edward Jay Epstein:

Concessions Are for Girlie Men: Arnold Schwarzenegger's absurdly advantageous contract for Terminator 3 (a brand new article on a movie released in 2003)
How Did Michael Eisner Make Disney Profitable? Not with cartoons. (

"In 1984, when Eisner took command, the "Mouse House" produced only one animated picture every three to five years. Its entire film library had only 158 features, and its single cable channel, the Disney Channel, lost money. In addition, Disney had virtually no income from sales of videos. To keep afloat, the company depended on its amusement parks and its Mickey Mouse licensing. Yet even with these assets Disney had a tax-free cash flow of just $100 million. Its share price, reflecting this precarious financial position, was $1.33 (adjusted for splits).
In 2005, Disney was one of the richest companies in America. Its enterprise value--Wall street's favored measure of an entertainment company--had increased 32-fold since 1984 and stood at $69 billion."

)
How To Finance a Hollywood Blockbuster. Start with a German tax shelter; How NOT To Make Any Money On A Hollywood Blockbuster, a comment on the article written by David Poland, editor of moviecitynews.com, who finds it interesting but is not impressed by its accuracy.

And can a slashdot posting be complete without porn?

How much money did perhaps the most famous porn movie of all time, Deep Throat (1972), gross? The documentary Inside Deep Throat (2005) claims that it that it is the most profitable picture ever made, and that it has grossed $600 million.
Michael Hiltzik of The Los Angeles Times disputes this, using the technical term "baloney". This set off a number of responses back and forth between Hiltzik and Fenton Bailey and Randy Barbato who wrote, co-produced and directed the documentary.

Initial Hiltzik column: 'Deep Throat' Numbers Just Don't Add Up
Bailey and Barbato: More Numbers for 'Deep Throat', a somewhat longer version of their response: 'Throat' Gets Cut, Directors Perform Surgery
Hiltzik then asked them to answer twelve questions, which resulted in this column:
Hiltzik: Bad 'Deep Throat' Revenue Number

I don't think so.

Here's one example.

Not that surprising, when you figure that the majority of Slashdot editors fall on the Democratic side of the fence...

Ms. Huffington went to great lengths to insist that she's commissioned a multitude of Democratic party aligned writers to contribute articles to her site.. There are 14 authors on the front page today, and we've got: Tips from Cronkite on how to fix the Democratic party, Sen Corzine blasting Bush on not supporing one of his bills, Huffington making fun of Tom Delay, Rep Markly criticizing the Bush administration over N.K. nukes, another critiquing Bush's foreign policy, a critique of the wildlife commission, a critique of the Republican religious base...

Not bad! Way to change minds and win friends!

The stated application for this system is for disabled hunters, such as Dale Hagberg, a 38-year-old quadriplegic who "worked a computer mouse with his mouth and tongue on Saturday, April 9, to shoot at an antelope on a game reserve near Boeme, Texas, while lying in bed in Ligonier, a town in northeastern Indiana."

Everyone keeps heaping scorn and ridicule on "lazy hunters who can't drag their ass of the sofa to go hunting in the woods." But what about paralyzed people who couldn't drag their asses anywhere if they tried? As both this Washington Post article and the referenced L.A. Times article note, the hunt on April 9th did have the traditional elements of a "normal" hunt--Hagberg had to wait for the antelope to come into the clear, just as an "abled" hunter would do in a blind. He came away "empty-handed" as his computer wasn't fast enough to maneuver the rifle in time to get a good shot off (damn lag!)

"Lockwood, the site's creator, points to the failure of Hagberg's hunt as proof that it is truly a 'hunt,' complete with hours of idle waiting for prey and ample opportunity for it to escape. 'It's not about killing something,' he said. 'It's about experiencing the thrill of the hunt, the boredom, everything that goes with it.'"

Restricted to disabled hunters, I see nothing wrong with this website that is not also a problem with "traditional" hunting (PETA concerns, etc.) But to be solvent, I'm sure they would have to throw open the doors to Joe Lazy-Ass as well, which is less compelling.

But I would argue that, just like in Sony Betamax vs. Universal, the problem is not with the technology, but with the way the consumer utilizes it. Hagberg shows a "legitimate use" of this technology, and to ban it outright through special legistation reeks of misunderstanding and shortsightedness. I mean, Joe Lazy-Ass is also out in the woods flushing game with dynamite and using AK-47s to mow down yearlings, and we don't ban all hunting to stop him there. We should allow the proper hunting technology to the proper people, and not throw out baby with bathwater.

Trekkies aren't into murder. They like kiddie porn.

#2 seems possible.

I think we should look with interest at the new guidelines for stem cell research, which are likely to be unofficially followed by California-funded research.

http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-stemcel ls27apr27,0,4314086.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Basically, they are saying:
- making chimeras are "OK", as long as they don't reproduce
- don't implant human cell in monkeys or apes
- don't transplant cells in a way which "might make them assume some human qualities"

Good luck with figuring out that last one. We're walking a tightrope, and some may not care about falling off that much.

It's not an "old troll"... the L.A. Times article was written just a few days ago. See here: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-f g-photo27apr27.story

I found this posted originally to another article and modded flamebait, but I think it raises issues pertinent to Star Trek and which should concern all Star Trek fans.

--

This has very little to do with the article, but a few days ago the L.A. Times published an article regarding the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit that focused on their fight against child pornography ("Sifting Clues to an Unsmiling Girl"). They are the law enforcement organization that photoshopped the victims out of child porn photos in order to get the public's assistance in identifying the backgrounds (it worked). In any case, the article had this amazing claim:

On one wall is a "Star Trek" poster with investigators' faces substituted for the Starship Enterprise crew. But even that alludes to a dark fact of their work: All but one of the offenders they have arrested in the last four years was a hard-core Trekkie.

Wow. All but one in four years. Seemed rather unlikely to me.

So, I called the Child Exploitation Section of the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit and spoke to Det. Ian Lamond, who was familiar with the Times article.

He claims they were misquoted, or if that figure was given it was done so jokingly. Of course, even if the figure was given jokingly, shouldn't the Times reporter have clarified something that seems rather odd? Shouldn't her editors have questioned her sources?

Nevertheless, Det. Lamond does confirm that a majority of those arrested show "at least a passing interest in Star Trek, if not a strong interest." They've arrested well over one hundred people over the past four years and they can gauge this interest in Star Trek by the arrestees' "paraphenalia, books, videotapes and DVDs."

Det. Constable Warren Bulmer slips on a Klingon sash and shield they confiscated in a recent raid. "It has something to do with a fantasy world where mutants and monsters have power and where the usual rules don't apply," Bulmer reflects. "But beyond that, I can't really explain it."

I asked Det. Lamond if this wasn't simply a general interest in science fiction and fantasy, such as Star Wars or Harry Potter or similar.

Paraphrasing his answer, he said, while there was sometimes other science fiction and fantasy paraphenalia, Star Trek was the most consistent and when he referred to a majority of the arrestees being Star Trek fans, it was Star Trek-specific.

This has very little to do with the article, but a few days ago the L.A. Times published an article regarding the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit that focused on their fight against child pornography ("Sifting Clues to an Unsmiling Girl"). They are the law enforcement organization that photoshopped the victims out of child porn photos in order to get the public's assistance in identifying the backgrounds (it worked). In any case, the article had this amazing claim:

On one wall is a "Star Trek" poster with investigators' faces substituted for the Starship Enterprise crew. But even that alludes to a dark fact of their work: All but one of the offenders they have arrested in the last four years was a hard-core Trekkie.

Wow. All but one in four years. Seemed rather unlikely to me.

So, I called the Child Exploitation Section of the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit and spoke to Det. Ian Lamond, who was familiar with the Times article.

He claims they were misquoted, or if that figure was given it was done so jokingly. Of course, even if the figure was given jokingly, shouldn't the Times reporter have clarified something that seems rather odd? Shouldn't her editors have questioned her sources?

Nevertheless, Det. Lamond does confirm that a majority of those arrested show "at least a passing interest in Star Trek, if not a strong interest." They've arrested well over one hundred people over the past four years and they can gauge this interest in Star Trek by the arrestees' "paraphenalia, books, videotapes and DVDs."

Det. Constable Warren Bulmer slips on a Klingon sash and shield they confiscated in a recent raid. "It has something to do with a fantasy world where mutants and monsters have power and where the usual rules don't apply," Bulmer reflects. "But beyond that, I can't really explain it."

I asked Det. Lamond if this wasn't simply a general interest in science fiction and fantasy, such as Star Wars or Harry Potter or similar.

Paraphrasing his answer, he said, while there was sometimes other science fiction and fantasy paraphenalia, Star Trek was the most consistent and when he referred to a majority of the arrestees being Star Trek fans, it was Star Trek-specific.

This has very little to do with the article, but a few days ago the L.A. Times published an article regarding the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit that focused on their fight against child pornography ("Sifting Clues to an Unsmiling Girl"). They are the law enforcement organization that photoshopped the victims out of child porn photos in order to get the public's assistance in identifying the backgrounds (it worked). In any case, the article had this amazing claim:

On one wall is a "Star Trek" poster with investigators' faces substituted for the Starship Enterprise crew. But even that alludes to a dark fact of their work: All but one of the offenders they have arrested in the last four years was a hard-core Trekkie.

Wow. All but one in four years. Seemed rather unlikely to me.

So, I called the Child Exploitation Section of the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit and spoke to Det. Ian Lamond, who was familiar with the Times article.

He claims they were misquoted, or if that figure was given it was done so jokingly. Of course, even if the figure was given jokingly, shouldn't the Times reporter have clarified something that seems rather odd? Shouldn't her editors have questioned her sources?

Nevertheless, Det. Lamond does confirm that a majority of those arrested show "at least a passing interest in Star Trek, if not a strong interest." They've arrested well over one hundred people over the past four years and they can gauge this interest in Star Trek by the arrestees' "paraphenalia, books, videotapes and DVDs."

Det. Constable Warren Bulmer slips on a Klingon sash and shield they confiscated in a recent raid. "It has something to do with a fantasy world where mutants and monsters have power and where the usual rules don't apply," Bulmer reflects. "But beyond that, I can't really explain it."

I asked Det. Lamond if this wasn't simply a general interest in science fiction and fantasy, such as Star Wars or Harry Potter or similar.

Paraphrasing his answer, he said, while there was sometimes other science fiction and fantasy paraphenalia, Star Trek was the most consistent and when he referred to a majority of the arrestees being Star Trek fans, it was Star Trek-specific.

This has very little to do with the article, but a few days ago the L.A. Times published an article regarding the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit that focused on their fight against child pornography ("Sifting Clues to an Unsmiling Girl"). They are the law enforcement organization that photoshopped the victims out of child porn photos in order to get the public's assistance in identifying the backgrounds (it worked). In any case, the article had this amazing claim:

On one wall is a 'Star Trek' poster with investigators' faces substituted for the Starship Enterprise crew. But even that alludes to a dark fact of their work: All but one of the offenders they have arrested in the last four years was a hard-core Trekkie.

Wow. All but one in four years. Seemed rather unlikely to me.

So, I called the Child Exploitation Section of the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit and spoke to Det. Ian Lamond, who was familiar with the Times article.

He claims they were misquoted, or if that figure was given it was done so jokingly. Of course, even if the figure was given jokingly, shouldn't the Times' reporter have clarified something that seems rather odd? Shouldn't her editors have questioned her sources?

Nevertheless , Detective Lamond does claim that a majority of those arrested show "at least a passing interest in Star Trek, if not a strong interest."

They've arrested well over one hundred people over the past four years and Det. Lamond claims they can gauge this interest in Star Trek by the arrestees' "paraphenalia, books, videotapes and DVDs." I asked if this wasn't simply a general interest in science fiction and fantasy, such as Star Wars or Harry Potter or similar. Paraphrasing his answer, he said, while there was sometimes other science fiction and fantasy paraphenalia, Star Trek was the most consistent and when he referred to a majority of the arrestees being Star Trek fans, it was Star Trek-specific.

This has very little to do with the article, but a few days ago the L.A. Times published an article regarding the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit that focused on their fight against child pornography ("Sifting Clues to an Unsmiling Girl"). They are the law enforcement organization that photoshopped the victims out of child porn photos in order to get the public's assistance in identifying the backgrounds (it worked). In any case, the article had this amazing claim:

On one wall is a 'Star Trek' poster with investigators' faces substituted for the Starship Enterprise crew. But even that alludes to a dark fact of their work: All but one of the offenders they have arrested in the last four years was a hard-core Trekkie.

Wow. All but one in four years. Seemed rather unlikely to me.

So, I called the Child Exploitation Section of the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit and spoke to Det. Ian Lamond, who was familiar with the Times article.

He claims they were misquoted, or if that figure was given it was done so jokingly. Of course, even if the figure was given jokingly, shouldn't the Times' reporter have clarified something that seems rather odd? Shouldn't her editors have questioned her sources?

Nevertheless , Detective Lamond does claim that a majority of those arrested show "at least a passing interest in Star Trek, if not a strong interest."

They've arrested well over one hundred people over the past four years and Det. Lamond claims they can gauge this interest in Star Trek by the arrestees' "paraphenalia, books, videotapes and DVDs." I asked if this wasn't simply a general interest in science fiction and fantasy, such as Star Wars or Harry Potter or similar. Paraphrasing his answer, he said, while there was sometimes other science fiction and fantasy paraphenalia, Star Trek was the most consistent and when he referred to a majority of the arrestees being Star Trek fans, it was Star Trek-specific.

This has very little to do with the article, but a few days ago the L.A. Times published an article regarding the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit that focused on their fight against child pornography ("Sifting Clues to an Unsmiling Girl"). They are the law enforcement organization that photoshopped the victims out of child porn photos in order to get the public's assistance in identifying the backgrounds (it worked). In any case, the article had this amazing claim:

On one wall is a 'Star Trek' poster with investigators' faces substituted for the Starship Enterprise crew. But even that alludes to a dark fact of their work: All but one of the offenders they have arrested in the last four years was a hard-core Trekkie.

Wow. All but one in four years. Seemed rather unlikely to me.

So, I called the Child Exploitation Section of the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit and spoke to Det. Ian Lamond, who was familiar with the Times article.

He claims they were misquoted, or if that figure was given it was done so jokingly. Of course, even if the figure was given jokingly, shouldn't the Times' reporter have clarified something that seems rather odd? Shouldn't her editors have questioned her sources?

Nevertheless , Detective Lamond does claim that a majority of those arrested show "at least a passing interest in Star Trek, if not a strong interest."

They've arrested well over one hundred people over the past four years and Det. Lamond claims they can gauge this interest in Star Trek by the arrestees' "paraphenalia, books, videotapes and DVDs." I asked if this wasn't simply a general interest in science fiction and fantasy, such as Star Wars or Harry Potter or similar. Paraphrasing his answer, he said, while there was sometimes other science fiction and fantasy paraphenalia, Star Trek was the most consistent and when he referred to a majority of the arrestees being Star Trek fans, it was Star Trek-specific.

Their work is a daily sojourn to the underworld. Gillespie has a team of 10 men and six women who spend hours in front of their computers, extracting leads, writing warrants and sifting photos for clues. The payoff is the day they get to kick down a door and take the "bad guy" away. The mood is light and the humor often off-color to ease the horror.

On one wall is a "Star Trek" poster with investigators' faces substituted for the Starship Enterprise crew. But even that alludes to a dark fact of their work: All but one of the offenders they have arrested in the last four years was a hard-core Trekkie.

Det. Constable Warren Bulmer slips on a Klingon sash and shield they confiscated in a recent raid. "It has something to do with a fantasy world where mutants and monsters have power and where the usual rules don't apply," Bulmer reflects. "But beyond that, I can't really explain it."

That is one of the biggest challenges of the Child Exploitation Section's work. They need to get inside the minds of the victims and the perpetrators to find them, but there is only so far they can -- or want to -- go.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-f g-photo27apr27.story

Stocks slumped Thursday for the second straight day in a brisk, broad sell-off that knocked major indexes to new lows for 2005.

Investors cited unease about the economy, pointing to signs that tighter credit and high energy costs are taking the wind out of consumer spending and corporate profit growth.

No studies, I'm afraid, but examples exist in abundance. Here's the first result Google pulled up: Yucca Mountain. Granted, it's not the best example because it involves government agencies instead of independent labs, but it's one that clearly shows how various organizations can come up with whatever results they want by applying pressure in the right places.

Here's a data point for the spin on this in the mainstream media. Usually I'd consider the LA Times a mouthpiece of the Hollywood liberal establishment, but I was shocked today to read their editorial defending the Betamax decision (newspaper's editorial not guest commentary). It's a long hard road, but public opinion might be turning slowly against the studios. If there's one soundbite to take away from this is, a victory will give movie studios veto power over any technological innovation.

Also, they quoted a bookstore owner, "Anyone who reads 'Mein Kampf' realizes what a psychopath Hitler was," he said. "If more people had read it, there might have been no [Second] World War."

You cannot go generalizing all moderate Muslims around the world. Are you going to fault the Bengalis now too?

You still chose to live there. I know there are advantages to living farther out like space and affordability, but the masses of people deciding to live in suburbs that are not walkable is why we, as a country, are so addicted to driving. Many of us could use the exercise too. Good article here.

Does anyone seriously think the economy is in 'great' shape or 'improving' today? Check out this story in the L.A. Times.

What Larry said.

An action shot.

Actually, what was announced yesterday (by members of some team) was the results of a computer reconstruction of the brain, which analyzed impressions left on the inside of the skull by the pulsating brain- indicating a more powerful brain (for the size) than previously thought possible. (From today's LA Times: Data Bolster Claim of a 'Hobbit' Human Species

What world do live in where somebody who buries a 16 month old toddler alive does not deserve to die. You are a bigger man then me if you can forgive that. How can you set a firm cutoff for something that has always been dependant on the situation.

hopefully big biz will realize that this is the final straw and tell groups like the Parents Television Council to go fuck themselves (in those words). i can understand to an extent being wary of broadcast television being "indecent", but i think things have gone waaay out of hand. and besides, cable and satellite are private networks.

attempting to limit the content on paid television will hopefully backfire on them. it is parents responsibility to monitor children's exposure to "indecency and immorality". i hate to sound like a broken record, but if you don't like it, turn the channel or turn it off. a tv isn't a replacement for a babysitter.

some parents seem to have this idea in there head that if their kid sees a naked body then that kid will somehow become a perverted child molestor when they grow up. i think these folks are so scared that things like queer eye are going to lead to a nation of well dressed lisping eccentrics that want to redress their children and make them join some sort of godless cult...

the reality is that these same people are the ones that are so sexually repressed that they spout in public about how bad pornography and idecency is and yet they are some of the major customers of the stuff. it has always been a wink and a nod between congress, the lobbies that are pushing for decency limits and the lobbies that have a vested interest in the proliferation of adult entertainment from sex and the city on hbo to hardcore porn. when it comes down to it, the entertainment industry and hotels are NOT going to want to lose that revenue. this isn't about being politically correct or indecent, it is about making profits and taking care of shareholders. i think this is likely to be the last nail in this issues coffin...

in other, unrelated news:

Convicted Movie Pirate Found Dead

Russell Sprague, the Chicago man who pleaded guilty to charges of receiving Academy Award screeners from Academy member Carmine Caridi and posting them on the Internet, was found dead in his jail cell Monday, according to the U.S. Marshals Service. Sprague had been awaiting sentencing. A spokesman for the Marshals office said that, while an investigation was being conducted, all indications pointed to "a normal passing."

LA Times
U of W

There was a Variety article too, but I can't find it -- my sub has lapsed. (Or maybe it was the Hollywood Reporter...)