Slashdot Mirror

Start using breeder reactors and we have solved our current nuclear "waste" "problem".

As for the windmills. Currently the problems listed usually deal with birds and bats flying into them or getting hit by them. http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,690 3,1130672,00.html
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/17/news-lewis.php
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=16383

Ignoring the eminent domain portions, the main problem seems to be that all the best spots for wind power are on bird migration routes. (Makes sense if you think about it). If you mean what effect it could have on the weather? Well, wind comes from air moving from higher to lower pressure areas. That usually means from warmer to colder as well. We are tapping a fraction of that energy to make electricity. (Not sure what fraction, mind you). So we probably are affecting the weather to some extent, but probably not enough to have a noticeable impact. It would all depend on the ammount we are extracting from the wind.

Um, come on, guys.

You want a radio station catering to the evacuees run by people who literally believe things like the Bush administration is not only responsible for the poor response[1], but is actually responsible for the hurricane itself? Or who would invite those who believe the levees were blown up by the government as a plot to remove all of the black people from New Orleans so the rich whites could take it over? (After all, they needed more room!)

Yeah, that'll really help the situation!

Bullshit. In an emergency housing situation, the infrastructure at the facility, the facility-wide loudspeaker system, and newsletters/handouts/flyers are *more* than enough to disseminate information. We don't need a bunch of self-righteous radicals inciting people who already believe the government wanted to kill them.

In an alternate reality where this station was allowed, run with the agenda that Houston IndyMedia and Village Voice certainly has, many evacuees would no doubt be incited, and the authorities would *still* be blamed for "not getting them out of temporary housing fast enough" or "not responding to their needs fast enough", even though Texas and Houston have gone completely out of their way to assist in any way possible.

I guess a lot of people can and do look a gift horse in the mouth.

[1] As an aside, someone said in other post "look at the difference between 9/11 and NOLA...rich white financial district, and help was there within 5 minutes", etc. Um, hello? Who responded to 9/11 in NYC itself? Local authorities. Who *didn't* respond in a satisfactory fashion in NOLA? The same. Oh, wait, let me guess: it's not a state and local municipal responsibility, it was somehow magically a federal one? Just sent thousands of people to a fucking convention center and football stadium with NO PLAN whatever, save "waiting for the feds"? Yeah, real smart, folks.

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/25/web-finke.php torn to pieces.

Here's one for him, I just pulled a paper out of my ass on this topic and this[LAWeekly.com] was one of my sources.

The crack-in-LA reporter was Gary Webb. http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/04/dissonance-coope r.php

He committed suicide at the end of 2004 after 20 years of being called a crazy conspiracy theorist. But what he really reported (that the CIA did not care whether their LA informants sold drugs) turned out to be true. The CIA admitted it in an internal investigation prompted by Webb's report and subsequent book.

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/22/news-reed.php I think is the same story. I haven't compared them that much.

LA Weekly had a couple articles about this a few months ago-- Myths Debunked and New Small Future
that pointed out that overall CD sales were going up, but the sales of the biggest sellers (i.e. the stuff produced by RIAA members) were going down drastically.

There is a lot more depth to list of CDs that people buy than the major labels would like (the majors want to stamp out enormous numbers of a few titles and not have to deal with the breadth of catalog that listeners seem to want), and a lot of it is due to the increased access to samples of alternatives that people get through filesharing. Filesharing has probably replaced radion for many people as their source of introductions to music, and it allows them to find things that they otherwise would never be exposed to via the conventional RIAA/Clear Channel sources. Niche labels are doing well as a result, because they get the free marketing and people go on to buy the CD, either to support the band or for the higher quality, or maybe for some other reason.

There are even bands that have given up with labels and are dealing the CDs themselves-- They Might Be Giants is one, and Einstürzende Neubauten is another. They seem to prefer both the greater control over their work and not having to get paid through a label.

LA Weekly had a couple articles about this a few months ago-- Myths Debunked and New Small Future
that pointed out that overall CD sales were going up, but the sales of the biggest sellers (i.e. the stuff produced by RIAA members) were going down drastically.

There is a lot more depth to list of CDs that people buy than the major labels would like (the majors want to stamp out enormous numbers of a few titles and not have to deal with the breadth of catalog that listeners seem to want), and a lot of it is due to the increased access to samples of alternatives that people get through filesharing. Filesharing has probably replaced radion for many people as their source of introductions to music, and it allows them to find things that they otherwise would never be exposed to via the conventional RIAA/Clear Channel sources. Niche labels are doing well as a result, because they get the free marketing and people go on to buy the CD, either to support the band or for the higher quality, or maybe for some other reason.

There are even bands that have given up with labels and are dealing the CDs themselves-- They Might Be Giants is one, and Einstürzende Neubauten is another. They seem to prefer both the greater control over their work and not having to get paid through a label.

...These are but a few of the signs that the record business is coming to grips with a small new future. That doesn't mean the industry's overall revenues will shrink, nor that record sales will go down. Right now, record sales are plainly rising... They're just not rising in the ways we've become accustomed to -- the biggest, most famous artists are no longer posting ever more impressive sales figures. Suddenly, there are more and more records selling 10,000 to 500,000 copies each year, and less and less selling 1 million to 10 million. To put it simply, the patterns that used to govern sales no longer work. The industry's biggest successes are now small ones.

Industry insiders are just as confused by the good news as they are by the bad. Here are the kinds of questions they've been asking themselves: Why doesn't Eminem break out on the order of the Beatles and sell 10 million copies of every release? Why can't Britney, Whitney, Madonna and Mariah make hits like they used to? Why can't the Strokes break through to the mainstream, stymied at 500,000 units shifted? Conversely, they wonder how a one-off Sub Pop release like the Postal Service's Give Up -- a mash-up of the niche genres of bedroom electronica and emo-punk -- has sold well over 250,000 copies. How could Matador sell a half-million copies of the debut by an unheralded New York band like Interpol? Why are bands like Modest Mouse, the Shins, the Yeah Yeah Yeahs and Wilco selling hundreds of thousands of records, where a few years ago they would have -- optimistically -- sold 50 thousand?

Listen to independent (usually college) radio. I spent my formative years listening to KXLU and KALX.

Listen to indie internet radio stations. A lot of people like KEXP; check the directories at shoutcast.com and icecast.org or your mp3's builtin directory (eg iTunes) (shameless plug - I run punk stream if you like punk)

Read indie newspapers, if available. L.A. Weekly if you're in Los Angeles, for example.

Read web sites that cover indie (pitchforkmedia.com is a start). Download stuff at random.

Go to music buying sites like audiolunchbox and magnatune, and listen to samples at random.

Ask friends for recommendations. Borrow stuff from them.

Hit alt.binaries.sounds.mp3.indie. Download stuff at random.

Go to indie record stores and buy stuff at random. I actually used to do this, buy something based on the cover art. Discovered some great stuff this way. And this was on a high school allowance.

All you need is a seed, and it can open up a whole new microgenre to explore.

Once you find something you like, research them. You'll often find information along the lines of "if you like X, you might like Y". Maybe a band member used to be in another band.

Look up that band's label's site. Often, indie labels have a common "sound" across their lineup, so you might like some of their label mates. Indie label sites usually have downloadable sample songs- download them.

And so on.

I do all these things. I take music seriously, it's a big part of my life. Sometimes it feels like work, to tell you the truth. But I'm driven by the idea that, no matter how much I like the music I've enjoyed in the past, there's something even more incredible out there.

I have a lot of CDs and I continue to buy a lot. But I also have a lot of downloaded music. I have a fairly clear conscience though. I genuinely feel that most indie bands wouldn't hold it against me that I downloaded their music to give it a listen, to see what they are about.

Does all the above sound like "too much effort"? Then, perhaps, music doesn't mean as much to you as me. That's cool.

Me- I'm not content to be fed stuff by commercial interests whose agenda run contrary to my search for interesting music. And I have the time and desire to invest in this pursuit. I can appreciate that others may not. Or maybe you're out in the sticks, with no broadband. In which case, I think you to resign yourself to a certain lifestyle, anyway.

That's why I don't live in the sticks :).

-h3

Halliburton, the oil conglomerate once headed by Dick Cheney, involved in a massive $180 million bribery scheme in Nigeria on Cheney's watch?

Man, if they'll even fall for large-scale 419 scams, no wonder the fell for the 911-iraq-wmd scam.

Anyways *puts on his tinfoil hat* how do you know there isn't an uncontrolled secret police?

Check out these two articles: This one and this one

I doubt he knows. The Commander-in-Chief doesn't even read newspapers.

And regarding D&D, some of the most brilliant people I know used to play (most of us don't anymore). A few neanderthals did too. I think it promotes creativity, but I also think creativity and intelligence are orthogonal.

The LA Weekly had an article on this in the April 4-10, 2003, issue: Buckyballs and Screaming Cells: The amazing miniature world of UCLA chemist Jim Gimzewski

James Gimzewski's Website: Pico Lab

The LA Weekly had an article on this in the April 4-10, 2003, issue: Buckyballs and Screaming Cells: The amazing miniature world of UCLA chemist Jim Gimzewski

James Gimzewski's Website: Pico Lab

Monopolies only apply to single companies, not to an industry association. No single company can seriously be said to have a monopoly over selling music to the general public, nor is any single company using its market position to create an uneven marketplace. So there's not really a case for anti-trust policy, because it's just an industry association acting on behalf of its members, not a single company acting exclusively in its own interests, against the others.

So when does this "association" cross the line into racketeering? When they are their own law enforcement? Or practices wholesale extortion?

This isn't news to anyone here, of course. They're US-based of course. The best government money can buy!

How quickly you forget this (covered here on slashdot, though I couldn't find it).

Quoth the link:

Though no guns were brandished, the bust from a distance looked like classic LAPD, DEA or FBI work, right down to the black "raid" vests the unit members wore. The fact that their yellow stenciled lettering read "RIAA" instead of something from an official law-enforcement agency was lost on 55-year-old parking-lot attendant Ceasar Borrayo.

Looking like and acting like an officer of the law would warrant being detained (if not outright arrested) by a cop if Joe Average did the same.

I know there's at least one cop that reads /. If you're reading this thread, please chime in?

Judging by, among others, these articles in Slate (here and here); these articles regarding an Eisner biography (here and here); this little gossipy titbit; and this critical letter of resignation from Roy E. Disney, the dissatisfaction with Eisner seems to have been brewing for quite some time.

[...]
And you can't copyright a fact. A copyright on a 9, 10, or 11 digit number just isn't going to stand,
[...]

Well let me be the first to drag RIAA into this...

If one subscribes to RIAA legal logic then you can copyright the many-many-digit binary number that is the representation of the bitmap image (barcode) should be "protectable", especially binary representation of the 2-d image of it.

By association, the lesser-quality or lossy, smaller (in terms of data) representations should be protected, right? Pretty much anything that can substitute as a usable copy, right?

Seems that the act of copying that data (your original bitmap, or apparently, any usable representation of it) to thier devices would be a violation.

Time to send in the Copyright Enforcers (tm). Perhaps if they "voluntarily" hand over the infringing equipment (all PCs used in the process) we the infringed may agree not to sue.

Hahaha
If only it were that easy!

-dave-

Dennis Kucinich for President! All the right answers to the right issues!

He voted against the repressive USA-PATRIOT act, and wants voting reform, media and corporate reform, and drug reform!
Check him Out!

How about making copyright reform a central issue in the upcoming election?

Very likely most politicians don't know if the DMCA is fit to eat, feel Disney and the RIAA are important campaign contributors whose requests should be given priority, and music downloaders are simple thieves who deserve every bit of punishment they get.

You can change that. But it's going to take some work. There are enough people sharing music in America - more people than voted for George Bush - that if you get off your collective asses and get politically active, you can get laws passed to get the RIAA off your back.

In Change the Law, I explain that copyright is not a Constitutional right, like free speech. Instead copyright is allowed (but not required) to serve a useful purpose, a purpose which I feel has long since outlived its usefulness.

I suggest steps you can take to bring about copyright reform, ranging from speaking out to practicing civil disobedience.

One thing I'd like you all to do today is to write your elected representatives to ask their opinion of the current state of copyright law given its widespread abuse by organizations like the RIAA and MPAA, and to urge them to work towards copyright reform. Let them know your vote will depend on a positive response.

When you're done writing that letter, write to the other candidates for each office in the upcoming elections, to ask them the same question.

Sixty million American peer-to-peer file traders have the potential to raise a lot of Hell with the politicians. I want every candidate to be peppered with questions about copyright reform at every campaign stop and in every press interview. I want the repeal of the DMCA to be discussed in the Presidential debates.

People marched in protest when Dmitry Sklyarov was arrested. Dmitry is free now - but the law under which he was jailed is still on the books.

If you agree with me that something needs to be done about copyright, I need your help.

Thank you for your attention.

No, it's the RIAA's job to hijack property from street vendors.

How about making copyright reform a central issue in the upcoming election?

Very likely most politicians don't know if the DMCA is fit to eat, feel Disney and the RIAA are important campaign contributors whose requests should be given priority, and music downloaders are simple thieves who deserve every bit of punishment they get.

You can change that. But it's going to take some work. There are enough people sharing music in America - more people than voted for George Bush - that if you get off your collective asses and get politically active, you can get laws passed to get the RIAA off your back.

In Change the Law, I explain that copyright is not a Constitutional right, like free speech. Instead copyright is allowed (but not required) to serve a useful purpose, a purpose which I feel has long since outlived its usefulness.

I suggest steps you can take to bring about copyright reform, ranging from speaking out to practicing civil disobedience.

One thing I'd like you all to do today is to write your elected representatives to ask their opinion of the current state of copyright law given its widespread abuse by organizations like the RIAA and MPAA, and to urge them to work towards copyright reform. Let them know your vote will depend on a positive response.

When you're done writing that letter, write to the other candidates for each office in the upcoming elections, to ask them the same question.

Sixty million American peer-to-peer file traders have the potential to raise a lot of Hell with the politicians. I want every candidate to be peppered with questions about copyright reform at every campaign stop and in every press interview. I want the repeal of the DMCA to be discussed in the Presidential debates.

People marched in protest when Dmitry Sklyarov was arrested. Dmitry is free now - but the law under which he was jailed is still on the books.

If you agree with me that something needs to be done about copyright, I need your help.

Thank you for your attention.

How about making copyright reform a central issue in the upcoming election?

Very likely most politicians don't know if the DMCA is fit to eat, feel Disney and the RIAA are important campaign contributors whose requests should be given priority, and music downloaders are simple thieves who deserve every bit of punishment they get.

You can change that. But it's going to take some work. There are enough people sharing music in America - more people than voted for George Bush - that if you get off your collective asses and get politically active, you can get laws passed to get the RIAA off your back.

In Change the Law, I explain that copyright is not a Constitutional right, like free speech. Instead copyright is allowed (but not required) to serve a useful purpose, a purpose which I feel has long since outlived its usefulness.

I suggest steps you can take to bring about copyright reform, ranging from speaking out to practicing civil disobedience.

One thing I'd like you all to do today is to write your elected representatives to ask their opinion of the current state of copyright law given its widespread abuse by organizations like the RIAA and MPAA, and to urge them to work towards copyright reform. Let them know your vote will depend on a positive response.

When you're done writing that letter, write to the other candidates for each office in the upcoming elections, to ask them the same question.

Sixty million American peer-to-peer file traders have the potential to raise a lot of Hell with the politicians. I want every candidate to be peppered with questions about copyright reform at every campaign stop and in every press interview. I want the repeal of the DMCA to be discussed in the Presidential debates.

People marched in protest when Dmitry Sklyarov was arrested. Dmitry is free now - but the law under which he was jailed is still on the books.

If you agree with me that something needs to be done about copyright, I need your help.

Thank you for your attention.

How about making copyright reform a central issue in the upcoming election?

Very likely most politicians don't know if the DMCA is fit to eat, feel Disney and the RIAA are important campaign contributors whose requests should be given priority, and music downloaders are simple thieves who deserve every bit of punishment they get.

You can change that. But it's going to take some work. There are enough people sharing music in America - more people than voted for George Bush - that if you get off your collective asses and get politically active, you can get laws passed to get the RIAA off your back.

In Change the Law, I explain that copyright is not a Constitutional right, like free speech. Instead copyright is allowed (but not required) to serve a useful purpose, a purpose which I feel has long since outlived its usefulness.

I suggest steps you can take to bring about copyright reform, ranging from speaking out to practicing civil disobedience.

One thing I'd like you all to do today is to write your elected representatives to ask their opinion of the current state of copyright law given its widespread abuse by organizations like the RIAA and MPAA, and to urge them to work towards copyright reform. Let them know your vote will depend on a positive response.

When you're done writing that letter, write to the other candidates for each office in the upcoming elections, to ask them the same question.

Sixty million American peer-to-peer file traders have the potential to raise a lot of Hell with the politicians. I want every candidate to be peppered with questions about copyright reform at every campaign stop and in every press interview. I want the repeal of the DMCA to be discussed in the Presidential debates.

People marched in protest when Dmitry Sklyarov was arrested. Dmitry is free now - but the law under which he was jailed is still on the books.

If you agree with me that something needs to be done about copyright, I need your help.

Thank you for your attention.

Michael D. Crawford
crawford@goingware.com

The RIAA acknowledges it all -- except the notion that its staff presents itself as police. Yes, they may all be ex-P.D. Yes, they wear cop-style clothes and carry official-looking IDs. But if they leave people like Borrayo with the impression that they're actual law enforcement, that's a mistake.

from the article 9th paragraph.

We went in there primarily to (hopefully) increase our own security.

I can't see how this war has done diddily for increasing US security. It took attention (read: money) away from Afghanistan, so now the Taliban is making a comeback. It caused huge rifts between the US and its allies, which will make international police work harder. It caused a lot of effort to be taken off finding Osama. It's caused a lot of Arabs to have personal reason to hate the US and given Al-Quda and other similar outfits a huge pool to recruit from.

I really do wish I could see how the Iraqi war improved our security. I don't really want to believe that we've wasted that much money, and all those lives just because it gives Rumsfeld and Cheney a war they've wanted since the mid 90's.

Again, don't misundertand me, the fact that Saddam is out of power is a good thing. Likewise I have no doubt that most Iraqis are very glad he's out of power. Its the other issues (and the long term in Iraq) that worry me.

The LA Weekly has story on the deliberate "spin" this administration is using. Amusing, but scary.

The LA Weekly has story on the deliberate "spin" this administration is using. Amusing, but scary.

Link please.

Unforunatly only the rich part happened because the republicans ran idoiot #1 Bill Simon.

Actually, Davis helped in making sure Simon would run by doing an attack campaign against Richard Riordan, the opponent that could have beat him.

So now they are useing the money they stole from you durning the energy crisis to block a balenced buget (The republicans in the state senate only voted OK after the buget increased spending)

Again, Link please.

I'm sorry but you don't live in reality

I'd say that goes double for you...

The articles make it pretty clear that he took the plea because the prosecutor and judge scared him by threatening to make it a terrorism case. What bullshit, like this kid was gonna join al Qaeda? (yeah, anarchy goes over really well with fundamentalist Islam). My point is that this is a means of using intimidation (threatening to put him away for 20 years for terrorism) in order to silence him. Yeah a good lawyer could have got him off, if he had money to afford good lawyers and a different judge. When the judge is more convinced of the kid's guilt than the prosecutor, you have a problem. Read some of the background to this case.

Maybe but has any company other than Disney released Pixar (run by Steve Jobs) flix?

From the article I linked to: "as soon as February 2003, when Pixar delivers Finding Nemo and is contractually free to start negotiations on a new partnership, he'll likely be looking at a distribution deal elsewhere."

I'm holding off until it comes out on DVD.

I thought Steve Jobs hated the CEO of the company that currently controls the Pooh franchise.

Walt Disney Inc. / CIA / Apple conspiracy

Disney and Apple getting together? Horse hockey. It's one of Hollywood's worst kept secrets that Apple CEO and Pixar CEO Steve Jobs hates Disney CEO Michael Eisner and would rather lose Nemo.

Otherwise, you have a valid point. Can somebody translate the preceding paragraph into Klingon for me?

Frankly, now that it's on, I'm hoping the warhawks are right and the Iraqis will surrender peacefully after they're done pissing their pants. And then I'm hoping they will make good on their pledges to help create and sustain a democratic Iraq. But I don't trust any of these people as far as I can throw them. They have demonstrably lied to the American public over and over again, many in the current administration have been lying to us since Vietnam. A couple of them are convicted criminals who lied to Congress during Iran/Contra!

*Sigh* There may be a justification for a war against Iraq, but not for a war led by Bush & Co.

They tried diplomatic pressure and other means with America alongside. It didn't work.

But it did work, in the end there were results and that's why a lot of countries wanted the weapons inspectors to go on with their work. If there is proof, that the Iraq has a significant number of B- or C-weapons the USA never presented it. In the end the Iraq was complying (though grudgingly) with the demands layed down by the UN. In the meantime north Korea more or less publicly announced their intention to produce nuclear bombs, so shouldn't Bush et al. strike at north Korea before going for the Iraq?

So when Bush couldn't convince the world that Iraq was threatening the world with weapons of mass destruction he switched rhetorics and talked about having to free the Iraq of that evil dictator Saddam. Now Saddam Hussein is an evil dictator, but that's none of the USAs business, as it hasn't been for the past 20 years (like when the USA even supported the current Iraqi regime). The last demand that Saddam now leave the country within 48 hours is not an ultimatum, it's a joke. Everyone can imagine that that'd be suicide for Saddam.

This war isn't about terrorism either, it's easier to construct a link from Osama bin Laden to Bush than to Saddam Hussein, and war isn't a means to get at terrorists who're probably not even in the attacked country. As a result of the war even more terrorist attacks are expected in the US and the threat level is raised.

So the war isn't about chemical weapons or terrorists, neither is it an idealistic mission to free the Iraq people from their evil dictator (or do the USA now intend to attack any country where the government isn't to their liking?). Many people (even inside the US) see it that way and that's how they arrive at the conclusion that the war isn't justified but is just about oil and distracting the american people from their problems at home.

This war is also a very bad precedent, as it shows that the USAs government doesn't care what the UN have to say on the issue, they do what they damn well please anyway. So now whenever any country wants to start a war all they need are some unsupportable and made up reasons and then they can go ahead? Or is that only right for the USA but noone else?

Also the arrogant way the USA dealt with the UN and other nations (and also opposition at home) has weakened the UN and hurt diplomatic relationships worldwide. More and more the USA is percieved

A company called AC Propulsion built an all-electric car that can outrun a 'vette, and just about any other production car out there. 0-60 in 4.1 seconds. The 30mph-50mph range is done in 1.4 seconds. The acceleration curve is linear, which also helps since there are no 'blips' during gear changes. This is one seriously cool car. Of course, if you're going 100 mph continuously, you'll probably only get 50 miles out of it. But it is an absolutely beautiful design.

This is patently false. The California state legislature voted to cap energy prices for consumers under the guise of deregulation. So you had consumers paying a fixed price for energy despite an energy shortage.

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/02/22/news-rappleye.ph p

If UFOs/aliens exist, prove it. Show me the "starcraft". Show me the alien. Give me the proof, and then I'll believe it. Science is not based on secondhand accounts and shady eyewitness reports (at least, not the good, solid science). As another poster pointed out, using this same logic, I could prove Elvis is still alive:
(1) There are eyewitness accounts of Elvis walking around after his death.
(2) QED, Elvis is alive.

That's ridiculous. That's not science, and that's not how human knowledge progresses.

"UFO-ology" and "cryptozoology" don't deserve to have "ology" attached to them.

This movie (as well as much of Moore's other output) has been discredited time and time again, even by writers on the left who agree with his basic opinions. By all reports it is staged, manipulated, and completely worthless as far as getting unbiased data about the gun-control debate.

See:
From Spinsanity
From LA Weekly
From the National Post
From the Weekly Standard
From The Globe and Mail

There is an article about this in a recent LA Weekly that some might find interesting:

I believe the link you're actually looking for is: http://www.linuxandmain.com/comment/ed040702.html.

I was set to take issue with you, but starting out with "the noted anti-Semite Robert Fisk" lost a lot of points for DEP in my book. (People should read the interview with Fisk in the LA Weekly, and decide for themselves if he's anti-Semitic or not.) Criticizing European developers for being more supportive of socialism than American developers also shows a lack of connection to the rest of the world that's, well, sadly typical. The "socialism = communism = end of democracy" meme over here has been so successful that most Americans can't conceive of the mere possibility that a fully democratic country might support some kinds of socialism. (Suggest to them that the multiparty parliamentary systems most of those "socialist" countries use are, in fact, arguably more democratic than our "winner takes all" nonparliamentary system, and you might as well be speaking Martian.)

I believe the ``anti-terrorist'' (Patriot Act) legislation proposal that President Bush
is currently supporting will allow more of this kind of activity. Here is
an article on the bill from LA Weekly. It's about a month old, but I don't think much
has changed since then.

• Atlanta Journal-Constitution - (grade: C+) "Maybe Darwin was wrong: this remake shows no sign of evolution."

• Chicago Tribune - "...a rouser, a screaming-banshee fun house."

• CNN.com - "...this is one really bad script."

• Deseret News (Salt Lake City) - (3 stars) "...when it's good, it comes close to being great."

• E! Online - (grade: C+) "...offers an eye-appealing world but a truly disappointing story."

• Entertainment Weekly - (grade: C+) "...[features] everything...but imagination."

• L.A. Weekly - "...underwritten..."

• Los Angeles Times - "...over-plotted and under-dramatized..."

• Mr. Showbiz - (rating: 2/5) "...despite its presentation, the film is so very ordinary, without urgency or revelation."

• New York Times - "...both a gas and distant, a toy sealed in its unbreakable box."

• People - "The fault lies not in the stars here but in the script."

• Roger Ebert - (2.5 stars) "I expected more."

• Salon - "...stops far too short of being completely seductive."

• San Francisco Chronicle - "...an amazing display of imagination."

• TV Guide - (2.5 out of 5 stars) "...sorely deficient on the story front."

• USA Today - (3 out of 4 stars) "...[the costumes] allow the power of the performer inside the ape gear to break on through."

• Search the Movie Review Query Engine

Tim Burton's "Planet of the Apes" wants to be all things to all men, and all apes. It's an action picture and a satire of an action picture. It's a comedy and then it gets serious. It's a social satire and then backs away from pushing that angle too far. It even has a weird intra-species romantic triangle in it. And it has a surprise ending that I loved, even though Matt Drudge spoiled it last weekend with a breathless "scoop."

The movie could have been more. It could have been a parable of men and animals, as daring as "Animal Farm." It could have dealt in social commentary with a sting, and satire that hurt. It could have supported, or attacked, the animal rights movement. It could have dealt with the intriguing question of whether a man and a gorilla having sex is open-mindedness, or bestiality (and, if bestiality, in both directions?).

It could have, but it doesn't. It's a cautious movie, earning every letter and numeral of its PG-13 rating. Intellectually, it's science fiction for junior high school boys.

I expected more. I thought Burton would swing for the fence. He plays it too safe, defusing his momentum with little nudges to tell you he knows it's only a movie. The 1968 "Planet of the Apes" was made before irony became an insurance policy. It made jokes, but it took itself seriously. Burton's "Planet" has scenes that defy us to believe them (his hero survives two bumpy crash-landings that look about as realistic as the effects in his "Mars Attacks!"). And it backs away from any kind of risky complexity in its relationships.

The key couple consists of Leo (Mark Wahlberg), who is the human hero, and Ari (Helena Bonham Carter), who is the Eleanor Roosevelt of the apes. They're attracted to each other but don't know what to do about it, and the screenplay gives them little help. Leo is also supposed to be linked romantically, I guess, with a curvy blond human named Daena (Estella Warren), but her role has been so abbreviated that basically all she does is follow along looking at Leo either significantly or winsomely, as circumstances warrant. At the end, he doesn't even bid her a proper farewell.

Leo, to be sure, is not one for effusive emotional outbursts. He's played by Wahlberg as a limited and narrow person with little imagination, who never seems very surprised by anything that happens to him--like, oh, to take a random example, crash-landing on a planet where the apes rule the humans. He's a space jockey type, trained in macho self-abnegation, who is great in a crisis but doesn't offer much in the way of conversation. His basic motivation seems to be to get himself off the planet, and to hell with the friends he leaves behind; he's almost surly sometimes as he leads his little band through the wilderness.

The most "human" character in the movie is, in fact, the chimpanzee Ari, who believes all species were created equal, casts her lot with the outcast humans, and tells Leo, "you're sensitive--a welcome quality in a man." Helena Bonham Carter invests this character with warmth, personality and distinctive body language; she has a way of moving that kids itself.

There's also juice in a character named Limbo (Paul Giamatti), a scam artist who has a deal for everyone, and a lot of funny one-liners. That he sounds like a carnival pitch-man should not be held against him.

The major ape characters include the fearsome Gen. Thade (Tim Roth), his strong but occasionally thoughtful gorilla lieutenant Attar (Michael Clarke Duncan), and Sen. Sandar (David Warner), who is a parliamentary leader and Ari's father. There's also a cameo for Charlton Heston, as a wise old ape who inevitably introduces a gun into the plot and has a curmudgeonly exit line. Watching the apes is fun all during the movie, while watching the humans usually isn't; the movie works hard to bring the apes to life, but unwisely thinks the humans can take care of themselves.

It's interesting that several different simian species co-exist in the planet's ape society. It may be a little hard to account for that, given the logic of the movie, although I will say no more. One major change between this film and the earlier one is that everyone--apes and humans--speak English. The movie explains why the apes speak English, but fudges on how they learned to speak at all.

The movie is great-looking. Rick Baker's makeup is convincing even in the extreme closeups, and his apes sparkle with personality and presence. The sets and locations give us a proper sense of alien awe, and there's one neat long shot of the ape city-mountain that looks, when you squint a little, like Xanadu from "Citizen Kane." There are lines inviting laughs ("Extremism in the defense of apes is no vice") and others unwisely inviting groans ("If you show me the way out of here--I promise I'll show you something that will change your life forever"). And a priceless moment when Leo wants to stop the squabbling among his fugitive group of men and apes and barks: "Shut up! That goes for all species!"

"Planet of the Apes" is the kind of movie that you enjoy at times, admire at times, even really like at times, but is it necessary? Given how famous and familiar Franklin J. Schaffner's 1968 film is, Tim Burton had some kind of an obligation to either top it, or sidestep it. Instead, he pays homage. He calls this version a "reimaging," and so it is, but a reinvention might have been better. Burton's work can show a wild and crazed imagination, but here he seems reined in. He's made a film that's respectful to the original, and respectable in itself, but that's not enough. Ten years from now, it will be the 1968 version that people are still renting.

Copyright © Chicago Sun-Times Inc.

Let's make a tradition of this!

Dude. It's just paper. There's no reason that a mass-produced little sheet of green paper that costs $0.01 to print should ever be worth $1 just because it has a picture of George Washington on it. That's insanity.

Here's some links:
Background of Boggs in the LA Weekly
Boggs' website, including an example of his art

Also, look into the book by Lawrence Weschler, "Boggs: a Comedy of Values"

June 30, 2000: MP3 Summit Ian at MP3 Summit webcast
You can find Ian's hour long talk at the MP3 Summit about 1 hour 8 minutes into the Wednesday webcast.

June 16, 2000: Guardian Free market fight for music moguls
Interesting article in a British national newspaper.

May 27, 2000: LA Weekly Genie 1, Bottle 0
Very amusing article on Freenet and copyright. Highly recommended.

May 24, 2000: Channel 4 News Hackers stay one step ahead
A very cool news item talking about recent attempts by the British government to censor the Internet and how Freenet will make this very difficult. Includes text and streaming video of the item.

May 23, 2000: Libération L'anarchie est au bout du clavier
An interesting French article about Freenet, concentrating on the freedom of information aspects of the system rather than just copyright.

May 12, 2000: National Post Napster secured page in Internet history
Interesting description of why Freenet is not vulnerable in the same way that Napster is, although I must say that their "final thought" is slightly perplexing!

May 12, 2000: O'Reilly Network Gnutella and Freenet represent true technological innovation
A nice article concentrating, for a change, on the technical side of Freenet and Gnutella. Reasonably accurate, although it understates the efficiency improvement that Freenet should provide (describing it as of comparable efficiency to the WWW where it should be much more efficient).

May 12, 2000: Het Nieuwsblad Vrijheid van downloaden
A Belgian article about Freenet.

May 10, 2000: Houston Chronicle Software developer pledges to foil all intellectual property watchdogs
A version of the article below, doesn't require that you register.

May 10, 2000: New York Times The Concept of Copyright Fights for Internet Survival
One of the better articles; concentrates on the copyright issue. Requires free registration.

April 27, 2000: PCFormat Daily FreeNet
A brief article on Freenet.

April 27, 2000: Heise News-Ticker World Wide Anarchy: Netz ohne Kontrolle
A German article on Freenet.

April 26, 2000: CNET.com Free, anonymous information on the anarchists' Net
Entertaining article with some nice quotes.

April 17, 2000: The Irish Times Anarchy Rules Alternative Web
A rather amusing article on Freenet.

April 16, 2000: Freshmeat Client As Server: The New Model
An interesting article discussing distributed systems and how systems like Freenet are actually in a similar spirit to the original Internet.

April 13, 2000: El País Freenet propone una red sin censuras, alternativa a la WWW
A Spanish article about Freenet.

April 10, 2000: Slashdot.org FreeNet's Ian Clarke Answers Privacy Questions
A very informative interview conducted by the readership of SlashDot.org, probably the closest thing to a FAQ, aside from our faq.

March 25, 2000: ABC News Freedom on the Net?
A rehash of the New Scientist article below, but likely to reach a much larger audience.

March 25, 2000: New Scientist Out of control
A "big bad Internet"-style article, but it is reasonably well researched and seeks the opinions of those who might be considered Freenet's opposition.

March 23, 2000: Heise.de Ein Netzwerk, das Zensur unmöglich machen soll
A German article on Freenet.

March 14, 2000: OLinux Freenet, a polemic concept to deal with WWW
An English translation of a Brazilian interview with Ian Clarke. Focuses on the technical aspects of Freenet, and goes into a reasonable amount of detail as to how the system works.

March 10, 2000: Webwereld Anoniem Freenet ultieme schuilplaats voor piraten
A Dutch article on Freenet. My Dutch is a little rusty but it looks like it is primarily inspired by the Wired article below.

March 8, 2000: no spoon FreeNet : le réseau anonyme distribué qui supplantera le Web
An excellent French article on Freenet, draws an interesting parallel between Freenet and the writings of Neal Stephenson.

March 3, 2000: Need To Know sufficiently advanced technology: the gathering
A brief but excellent article again approaching Freenet from a pro-freedom standpoint.

February 24, 2000: PigDog Journal Get in on the Ground Floor of Freedom
A very positive little article describing Freenet and why they think it is interesting using some rather "colorful" language.

August 14, 1999: Brave Gnu World FreeNET
One of the first articles about Freenet back when it was 100% theory. Still an excellent introduction to the way Freenet works.

If acceleration is what you want, why not take the same power and put it into a much lighter vehicle, like a TVR (see specs & performance). Oh, but I forgot, it's not about *avoiding* accidents, is it? Gotta love this article...

-Laplace

Yes, they can take your stuff, and then never let you have a trial. It happened
to my friend, money artist (and NOT a counterfeiter!!!!) J.S.G. Boggs. The SS
took his stuff and didn't charge him, in order to make him sue. They knew from
long experience that when he gets in front of a jury, they let him off, so they
forced the issue by never charging him after stealing his stuff. Stupidly, the US
Supreme court just denied cert. after he finally had to sue to get his life's work
returned. Not good from a free speech or property-rights perspective. :(

His studio page, with links to the
appeals court transcript and an
article about him. Here's a
Swiss gallery with some of his stuff (they may have counterfeits, too, according to Boggs).
another article. And
another. Finally, if you want to see one of the REAL reasons my friend Boggs gets in trouble, click on:
this and note the inscription over the dome: "Red Gold We Trust," in a year of campaign finance
scandals. That, and making folks actually THINK about the value of art & paper
money is not counterfeiting, but it IS very subversive. IMO. I don't own that bill
anymore, and the current owner, if he will sell, wants a lot of gold for it. Don't ask. :)
JMR

(Speaking only for myself, again.)

I think not.

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/99/ 27/cyber-lewis.shtml

FreeBSD runs most linux binaries just fine and if you have source code, it's even better. She did mention some writers were pre-apologizing for flames she would get...