Any evidence I've seen that this military action (which is in compliance with the War Powers Act, btw, even as an undeclared war; Bush _has_ reported to Congress) is being driven by petrochemical interests is on far weaker ground than the evidence that Al Qaeda was responsible for the attacks in September.
It's also disingenuous to say that the oil you refer to is controlled by the Taliban. The simple fact is that most of that land is unsurveyed. The oil that would be at question here is from the former Soviet Republics near Afghanistan, and the suggested oil interest is a pipeline through Afghanistan.
The deoxy.org link is ridiculous. The reason that the US was found guilty is that this "International War Crimes Tribunal", which is not to be confused with ICTY in the Hague, was a kangaroo assembly set up for the propagation of the ideas of the deranged Ramsey Clarke. If you follow the link, the Testimony and Evidence section is exclusively prosecution. There is no defense allowed. Michael Ratner, one of the signatories of the "findings", litigated two cases opposing the Gulf War. This was clearly not an impartial inquiry, and was not sanctioned by any meaningful international agency.
I don't like big government either, but if you think that non-intervention and free trade are compatible ideas in this world, you're dreaming.
Oh, and it's "toeing the line", not "towing the line". HTH
You also probably signed an agreement when you took your job that released your copyright and designated your creative output as "works for hire". That's great for you! Unfortunately, there are many, many fewer businesses willing to pay a salary for a in-house composer to write music works for hire. Just because you signed away your copyright doesn't mean all programmers do. I know at least one former coworker that signed a deal where he retained rights to all his work.
"You on the other hand are only asked to create art for a few hours every so often. "
This is patently false. Most composers are not asked to create their art. They create it and then try to sell it. In circumstances where this doesn't obtain (recording contract, commissioned work), meeting the demands of the request for music is no less arduous than programming (don't try to tell me otherwise; I've done both). Even writing a decent 3 minute pop song is hard work. Much like programming, music does not spring fully formed from a wellspring of creativity. It requires practice (education), good basic themes (design), and editing (debugging). And, if you try it live, unlike programming, you have to be able to reproduce it in real time. Also, unlike programming, it's hard to find someone to compensate you for that time.
My fundamental objection to your argument has to do with your contempt for musicians and the difficulty they face. How many people write/play music as a day job to support their dreams of being a programmer? How many do the reverse?
Many people are satisfied to play music as a hobby, for friends or family, or take the occasional weekend warrior gig. For these people, something like the OAL is great. That's fine. Many devote their lives to it, hoping against hope that they'll be able to eke out a meager living. For these people, it would be insane to release under such a license. A statistically insignificant number make piles upon piles of money (though not NEARLY as much as their labels make off of them). For these lucky few, we can hope that they understand that their fans want the joy of sharing the music with their friends, a la the Grateful Dead. The real fact of the matter is that without musicians in the 2nd and 3rd categories, you wouldn't have anything decent to do while you hack away. So don't be a fucking ingrate, dig?
I do heartily agree with you that everyone is talented, and everyone is an artist. But we all have different talents in different quantities, and talent without hard work is worthless. Hard work takes time, and if you don't get compensated for that time, you don't eat.
There's no free lunch. Even authors of GPL software are getting money from someone for doing something, or they'd starve.
excellent point, but it's important to realize that _none_ of Kafka's novels were finished.
The Trial and the Castle were both assembled by Max Brod in sort of a best guess fashion, and are a couple of the most amazing books around.
If you're writing at the college level, there is no "implied bibliography". You need to cite your sources. That's academic writing. A realistic instructor might realize that this kind of thing would happen, but only a lenient one wouldn't mark down for it.
It makes more sense than just geographically. The Morning News's parent company, Belo, has a substantial cash investment in Digital Convergence.
BTW, DC's CEO (http://www.digitalconvergence.com/about/jovan_phi lyaw.html) has brought other questionable things to market (http://www.nettalklive.com/). Also, back when I was in school, the president of the technology group (http://www.digitalconvergence.com/about/doug_davi s.html) was an obnoxious sysadmin (http://www.seas.smu.edu/).
The more you know about Digital Convergence, the worse it gets.
The author of the article says that violence in these anime cartoons goes beyond the level seen in old WB/MGM/etc cartoons, but I would be inclined to disagree. How many shootings are there in your average Elmer Fudd or Yosemite Sam cartoon? For that matter, how many acts of violence in your standard fairy tale (he asked, kicking the witch into the oven)? Even the westerns and pioneer stories that today's concerned adults grew up with were chock full of violence. We're a bloodthirsty species; we like our adrenaline. This isn't new or reprehensible; it's just the way things are.
All I know is that everything I know about fighting supervillains from outer space, I learned from watching television.
There's so much comedy on television. Does that cause comedy in the streets? - Dick Cavett
I thought it was interesting that when William Rogers died this year, none of the obits I read mentioned that he chaired the Challenger commission. In light of what Feynman was clearly trying hard not to say about this guy, I wonder if this was an example of "speak no ill of the dead"...
What can you say? They're artists. Apparently the medium of choice for the art of the times is the lawsuit.
Study carefully the authoritative stride of the lawyer as he approaches the edifice of Justice. Note with admiration the loving attention lavished upon each brief. Imagine the chagrin of the assembled when the plaintiff reveals that under the robe, the judge is wearing no pants.
Rezn, don't be a jerk. Some of us don't have the time to pick up a physics degree. That doesn't mean we don't find it interesting; it also doesn't mean we think we know it all if we read a physics book targeted at the general population.
It's Hawking, not Hawkings, and I'm skeptical of taking you at your word regarding his standing in the physics community. After all, you don't hear about Rezn radiation...
Personally, my background is in music. The composer Aaron Copland wrote a book called "What to Listen for in Music" for the general populace. Do I listen for the same things that he talks about? No, I listen for more things because I know more about music than the general populace. Does someone who knows nothing about music gain from reading the book? Absolutely; just because his explanations are geared down a little doesn't hurt. The reader comes away with a richer understanding of something exciting than they had before they picked up the book. That's what I get out of books like the one reviewed here, and that's what I get out of Brief History.
If you've got to feel smug about something, then go research something about Radioactive Nuclear Structures, find something new. Maybe it'll be something interesting enough to get you your own/. news item.
In the meantime, I'll be over here telling people they don't know jack about music until they've read all of Arnold Schoenberg's books on form and harmonic structure and spent a couple of years analyzing sonata form. That way, I can feel smug too! Do we have a deal?
BILLY RADCLIFFE (by Frank Black and the Catholics, reprinted without permission)
Billy Radcliffe didn`t go to town and when we looked up he was looking right down catching blue in his eyes that were brown Billy Radcliffe / Billy Radcliffe owned by the state form his first braeth to the cementery gate he was the first boy born in space Billy Radcliffe / Billy Radcliffe very first one he really had lived just a cursed son a split in half man sung the cherubim Billy Radcliffe/Billy Radcliffe saw what the Devil man saw a spot of blue in the blank of the eye of the Lord such a cruel love is the kind that wrought Billy Radcliffe/Billy sadly didn`t live long he had to stay there because he wasn`t too strong he`s stepping out of the door blowing up like a bomb Billy Radcliffe / Billy Radcliffe very first one really a hatched man a light switched son a split in half man sang the cherubim Billy Radcliffe very first one a split in half man sang the cherubim i bet you cried when he died now didja, now didja ? / now Billy Radcliffe saw what the Devil man saw a spot of blue in the blank of the eye of the Lord now Billy Radcliffe saw what the Devil had and i feel very bad for William Radcliffe
Objective journalism died a quiet death; not surprisingly, it went unreported. For example, The Internet, where anyone can publish to the world, hasn't helped at all.
The essay was, definitely written by a Gore supporter, as he passes over the fact that many of Bush's miscues HAVE been reported in the press.
My real issue here is the pervasive negative connotation of "propaganda". Check your dictionary; propaganda is just information supporting a cause.
The origin of the word in regards to dissemination of information was from the "Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide", a division of the Catholic Church for "propagating" Christianity to new areas.
If you've ever tried to convince someone of something, you're a propagandist.
Also, as long as William Safire has a spot on the editorial page of the New York Times and David Horowitz has a column for Salon, I'm not entirely sure it's fair to say the media has a leftist bias.
the important phrase there is "by securing for limited Times"
there's no reason for copyright except for economic gain. The theory here is that by granting exclusive rights, then the authors and inventors will have an economic incentive to produce new works. The problem is that large IP companies have successfully lobbied the Congress by to extend by definite periods the length of copyright. Effectively, the limiting factor on copyright has been stripped away, because whenever an important property (Mickey Mouse is the classic example used here, i suppose) is up to expire, Congress extends the duration of copyright protection. This retains the incentive for new creation, but there is a net loss of progress of "Science and useful Arts" because appropriation becomes impossible. The use of access controls to limit fair use, noted by Kaplan, is probably the most disturbing stifling effect of this trend.
This is not a cool thing. For those of us in the US, our representatives passed it. There's an election in a couple of months, so take a good look at who are the defenders of freedom and progress, and who are its enemies.
Well, actually.....
The effectiveness of one protester in a mob in getting attention paid to his/her pet issue is not nearly as great as the effectiveness of adding one to the number of arrests in the story that's going to hit all the wire services.
As far as denying the police a free peek at his backpack.. maybe YOU don't care about your 4th amendment rights, but I do, and apparently, the author of the article does too.
so, if information can travel faster than light, i guess it's true that nothing travels faster than bad news. (good news may or may not travel equally fast.)
That much could be inferred from your past writings. I'm a bit more curious about their positions, though. In this article, there's about a 2-1 ratio of "I told them this" to "they responded with that". If you're gonna report, bring back the story, not the ideas you left with. Otherwise, all you have is a strawman that paid for sammiches.
I think anonymous reporting is potentially dangerous, but there's definitely a need for it. In many cases, potential victims have a real and justified fear of retribution. Besides, there's no functional difference between this and ratting out that goth kid in gym to the principal, except that someone is making a buck off of it. The principal isn't going to say, "well, so and so told us you were going to blow up the school". He'll say "We've heard some things that concern us."
don't look at the percentages. Look at the real benefit to society. i don't know anything about pharmaceuticals (except that $133 million MIGHT be enough to cover the valium prescription I need after some of the IIS headaches Gates has given me in the past), but as for the others:
7.7 million is enough for computers and t1 lines for around 200 libraries for one year, assuming that they're paying the same rate that an individual would (which they're not). most of that cost is bandwidth, so if they used dsl it would be much cheaper.
1 billion dollars is about enough for 10000 bachelor's degrees including fees, room, and board at many well-respected private 4 year colleges.
When was the last time you saw a one billion dollar charitable contribution from an individual?
I'm sure that there's a large PR incentive for him to do this kind of thing, especially given his total lack of personal charm (did anyone elsee see the Tom Toles cartoon last week?), but the fact is that this money will help many, many people.
Sure, artists want to make a living, preferably the best one possible, but.... "Given the countless undertakings one can pursue in life, why do they choose to torture themselves with this particular pursuit?"
I think that's pretty revealing. That's why you see so many lawyers waiting tables at night to support their day jobs, right?
Also, why do you have scare quotes around "artists"? That's not too friendly, man.
It's an incredibly hard life. I gave it a shot. I couldn't take it, so I'm in computers now. Wanna know why?
I AM in it for the money. Anyone looking for financial security gets out of that business and fast. Borrowing for rent or going without a phone for a long while really sucks, especially if you know that you're good at what you do.
I don't care for the Oscars, but as a general principle, I don't want a million-headed hyrdra making content choices for me. I have visions of: Bogie getting on the plane at the end of Casablanca. Obiwan beating Vader Romeo and Juliet living to a ripe old age, all their fire long since burned out. The Yankees always winning the world series (er....strike that one) and of course, Sid Shienberg's cut of Brazil.
Personally, even if they don't always perform up to the task, I believe that the professionals in media and entertainment industry have a better idea of how to construct a satisfying media experience than amateurs, let alone a mob of amateurs with no cohesive vision (not even a bad one).
"Sunday night's Oscarcast may have been the usual long, boring and self-congratulatory. But there were distinct signs that interactivity -- which is about content, not just the means of delivery -- is beginning to creep into even this arrogant culture."
We wouldn't know anything about arrogant culture here, would we now? Katz presumes that these people are developing crappy entertainment in a vacuum. The fact is, most of them are hardworking, if misguided, people who DO care, and DO cede power to the consumers. Ever hear of audience testing?
Apart from that, Katz's definition of "interactive" is bunk. Saying that Eggers lets people into the process is not true because a) Just because the reader can "see" the writing process doesn't mean he can affect it. An intelligent reader can "see" the writing process anyway, by paying careful attention to word choice, etc. Does this make the Iliad interactive? I really don't think so.
b) Eggers doesn't even really let the reader in. You get a highly mediated version of the writing process. It's not the real deal. Publishing a collection that had every draft... that might be a bit closer, but it's definitely not something I want to read. I want a finished, edited product, unless I'm already in the culture and am looking for insight into a colleague's methods.
The fact is, it's not easy to write even a bad book, or stage even a crappy awards show. It's even harder to do it by committee, and the difficulty only increases with the size of the committee.
.lnk files are worthless unless you're doing 1 of 2 things: 1) launching an executable 2) launching something that is a registered filetype (i e, C:\>foo.lnk where foo.lnk points to foo.txt)
This is extremely limited....... for example, you can't make a shortcut to a library if that library isn't in your path.
just for kicks, make a text file in win32, then make a shortcut to it. then: c:\>type foo.txt you get a bunch of high ascii garbage with the path of the target mixed in there.
compare $echo this way works >foo.txt $ln -s foo.txt foo.realsymlink $cat foo.realsymlink
OR, drop the -s and then try moving the target file around. Try that with your shortcut.lnk
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder whether Goldberg's statement provides any clue as to his future enterprises.
Any evidence I've seen that this military action (which is in compliance with the War Powers Act, btw, even as an undeclared war; Bush _has_ reported to Congress) is being driven by petrochemical interests is on far weaker ground than the evidence that Al Qaeda was responsible for the attacks in September.
It's also disingenuous to say that the oil you refer to is controlled by the Taliban. The simple fact is that most of that land is unsurveyed. The oil that would be at question here is from the former Soviet Republics near Afghanistan, and the suggested oil interest is a pipeline through Afghanistan.
The deoxy.org link is ridiculous. The reason that the US was found guilty is that this "International War Crimes Tribunal", which is not to be confused with ICTY in the Hague, was a kangaroo assembly set up for the propagation of the ideas of the deranged Ramsey Clarke. If you follow the link, the Testimony and Evidence section is exclusively prosecution. There is no defense allowed. Michael Ratner, one of the signatories of the "findings", litigated two cases opposing the Gulf War. This was clearly not an impartial inquiry, and was not sanctioned by any meaningful international agency.
I don't like big government either, but if you think that non-intervention and free trade are compatible ideas in this world, you're dreaming.
Oh, and it's "toeing the line", not "towing the line". HTH
Finally, a silver lining behind the huge cloud that is the ownership of Lucent stock...
but are they wireless?
If not, I know a GREAT technology that's readily available.
You also probably signed an agreement when you took your job that released your copyright and designated your creative output as "works for hire". That's great for you! Unfortunately, there are many, many fewer businesses willing to pay a salary for a in-house composer to write music works for hire. Just because you signed away your copyright doesn't mean all programmers do. I know at least one former coworker that signed a deal where he retained rights to all his work.
"You on the other hand are only asked to create art for a few hours every so often. "
This is patently false. Most composers are not asked to create their art. They create it and then try to sell it. In circumstances where this doesn't obtain (recording contract, commissioned work), meeting the demands of the request for music is no less arduous than programming (don't try to tell me otherwise; I've done both). Even writing a decent 3 minute pop song is hard work. Much like programming, music does not spring fully formed from a wellspring of creativity. It requires practice (education), good basic themes (design), and editing (debugging). And, if you try it live, unlike programming, you have to be able to reproduce it in real time. Also, unlike programming, it's hard to find someone to compensate you for that time.
My fundamental objection to your argument has to do with your contempt for musicians and the difficulty they face. How many people write/play music as a day job to support their dreams of being a programmer? How many do the reverse?
Many people are satisfied to play music as a hobby, for friends or family, or take the occasional weekend warrior gig. For these people, something like the OAL is great. That's fine. Many devote their lives to it, hoping against hope that they'll be able to eke out a meager living. For these people, it would be insane to release under such a license. A statistically insignificant number make piles upon piles of money (though not NEARLY as much as their labels make off of them). For these lucky few, we can hope that they understand that their fans want the joy of sharing the music with their friends, a la the Grateful Dead. The real fact of the matter is that without musicians in the 2nd and 3rd categories, you wouldn't have anything decent to do while you hack away. So don't be a fucking ingrate, dig?
I do heartily agree with you that everyone is talented, and everyone is an artist. But we all have different talents in different quantities, and talent without hard work is worthless. Hard work takes time, and if you don't get compensated for that time, you don't eat.
There's no free lunch. Even authors of GPL software are getting money from someone for doing something, or they'd starve.
excellent point, but it's important to realize that _none_ of Kafka's novels were finished.
The Trial and the Castle were both assembled by Max Brod in sort of a best guess fashion, and are a couple of the most amazing books around.
If you're writing at the college level, there is no "implied bibliography". You need to cite your sources. That's academic writing. A realistic instructor might realize that this kind of thing would happen, but only a lenient one wouldn't mark down for it.
It makes more sense than just geographically. The Morning News's parent company, Belo, has a substantial cash investment in Digital Convergence.
i lyaw.html) has brought other questionable things to market (http://www.nettalklive.com/). Also, back when I was in school, the president of the technology group (http://www.digitalconvergence.com/about/doug_davi s.html) was an obnoxious sysadmin (http://www.seas.smu.edu/).
BTW, DC's CEO (http://www.digitalconvergence.com/about/jovan_ph
The more you know about Digital Convergence, the worse it gets.
Does anyone really believe that there would be a cowboy named Neal?
The author of the article says that violence in these anime cartoons goes beyond the level seen in old WB/MGM/etc cartoons, but I would be inclined to disagree. How many shootings are there in your average Elmer Fudd or Yosemite Sam cartoon? For that matter, how many acts of violence in your standard fairy tale (he asked, kicking the witch into the oven)? Even the westerns and pioneer stories that today's concerned adults grew up with were chock full of violence. We're a bloodthirsty species; we like our adrenaline. This isn't new or reprehensible; it's just the way things are.
All I know is that everything I know about fighting supervillains from outer space, I learned from watching television.
There's so much comedy on television. Does that cause comedy in the streets? - Dick Cavett
I thought it was interesting that when William Rogers died this year, none of the obits I read mentioned that he chaired the Challenger commission. In light of what Feynman was clearly trying hard not to say about this guy, I wonder if this was an example of "speak no ill of the dead"...
What can you say? They're artists. Apparently the medium of choice for the art of the times is the lawsuit.
Study carefully the authoritative stride of the lawyer as he approaches the edifice of Justice. Note with admiration the loving attention lavished upon each brief. Imagine the chagrin of the assembled when the plaintiff reveals that under the robe, the judge is wearing no pants.
Rezn, don't be a jerk. Some of us don't have the time to pick up a physics degree. That doesn't mean we don't find it interesting; it also doesn't mean we think we know it all if we read a physics book targeted at the general population.
/. news item.
It's Hawking, not Hawkings, and I'm skeptical of taking you at your word regarding his standing in the physics community. After all, you don't hear about Rezn radiation...
Personally, my background is in music. The composer Aaron Copland wrote a book called "What to Listen for in Music" for the general populace. Do I listen for the same things that he talks about? No, I listen for more things because I know more about music than the general populace. Does someone who knows nothing about music gain from reading the book? Absolutely; just because his explanations are geared down a little doesn't hurt. The reader comes away with a richer understanding of something exciting than they had before they picked up the book. That's what I get out of books like the one reviewed here, and that's what I get out of Brief History.
If you've got to feel smug about something, then go research something about Radioactive Nuclear Structures, find something new. Maybe it'll be something interesting enough to get you your own
In the meantime, I'll be over here telling people they don't know jack about music until they've read all of Arnold Schoenberg's books on form and harmonic structure and spent a couple of years analyzing sonata form. That way, I can feel smug too! Do we have a deal?
BILLY RADCLIFFE (by Frank Black and the Catholics, reprinted without permission) /Billy Radcliffe saw what the Devil man saw a spot of blue in the blank of the eye of the Lord such a cruel love is the kind that wrought Billy Radcliffe /Billy sadly didn`t live long he had to stay there because he wasn`t too strong he`s stepping out of the door blowing up like a bomb Billy Radcliffe / Billy Radcliffe very first one really a hatched man a light switched son a split in half man sang the cherubim Billy Radcliffe very first one a split in half man sang the cherubim i bet you cried when he died now didja, now didja ? / now Billy Radcliffe saw what the Devil man saw a spot of blue in the blank of the eye of the Lord now Billy Radcliffe saw what the Devil had and i feel very bad for William Radcliffe
Billy Radcliffe didn`t go to town and when we looked up he was looking right down catching blue in his eyes that were brown Billy Radcliffe / Billy Radcliffe owned by the state form his first braeth to the cementery gate he was the first boy born in space Billy Radcliffe / Billy Radcliffe very first one he really had lived just a cursed son a split in half man sung the cherubim Billy Radcliffe
Objective journalism died a quiet death; not surprisingly, it went unreported. For example, The Internet, where anyone can publish to the world, hasn't helped at all.
The essay was, definitely written by a Gore supporter, as he passes over the fact that many of Bush's miscues HAVE been reported in the press.
My real issue here is the pervasive negative connotation of "propaganda". Check your dictionary; propaganda is just information supporting a cause.
The origin of the word in regards to dissemination of information was from the "Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide", a division of the Catholic Church for "propagating" Christianity to new areas.
If you've ever tried to convince someone of something, you're a propagandist.
Also, as long as William Safire has a spot on the editorial page of the New York Times and David Horowitz has a column for Salon, I'm not entirely sure it's fair to say the media has a leftist bias.
http://www.flyingbuttmonkeys.com/useofthingsyouown isnowillegal/letter-1.jpg
I say you should get serious points for getting a lawyer to use "flyingbuttmonkeys" in a letter
the important phrase there is "by securing for limited Times"
there's no reason for copyright except for economic gain. The theory here is that by granting exclusive rights, then the authors and inventors will have an economic incentive to produce new works. The problem is that large IP companies have successfully lobbied the Congress by to extend by definite periods the length of copyright. Effectively, the limiting factor on copyright has been stripped away, because whenever an important property (Mickey Mouse is the classic example used here, i suppose) is up to expire, Congress extends the duration of copyright protection. This retains the incentive for new creation, but there is a net loss of progress of "Science and useful Arts" because appropriation becomes impossible. The use of access controls to limit fair use, noted by Kaplan, is probably the most disturbing stifling effect of this trend.
This is not a cool thing. For those of us in the US, our representatives passed it. There's an election in a couple of months, so take a good look at who are the defenders of freedom and progress, and who are its enemies.
Well, actually.....
The effectiveness of one protester in a mob in getting attention paid to his/her pet issue is not nearly as great as the effectiveness of adding one to the number of arrests in the story that's going to hit all the wire services.
As far as denying the police a free peek at his backpack.. maybe YOU don't care about your 4th amendment rights, but I do, and apparently, the author of the article does too.
(And yes, Mesquite is part of the DFW Metroplex).
;)
not that Dallas claims it as such
so, if information can travel faster than light, i guess it's true that nothing travels faster than bad news. (good news may or may not travel equally fast.)
That much could be inferred from your past writings. I'm a bit more curious about their
positions, though. In this article, there's about a 2-1 ratio of "I told them this" to "they responded with that". If you're gonna report, bring back the story, not the ideas you left with. Otherwise, all you have is a strawman that paid for sammiches.
I think anonymous reporting is potentially dangerous, but there's definitely a need for it. In many cases, potential victims have a real and justified fear of retribution. Besides, there's no functional difference between this and ratting out that goth kid in gym to the principal, except that someone is making a buck off of it. The principal isn't going to say, "well, so and so told us you were going to blow up the school". He'll say "We've heard some things that concern us."
don't look at the percentages. Look at the real benefit to society.
i don't know anything about pharmaceuticals (except that $133 million MIGHT be enough to cover the valium prescription I need after some of the IIS headaches Gates has given me in the past), but as for the others:
7.7 million is enough for computers and t1 lines for around 200 libraries for one year, assuming that they're paying the same rate that an individual would (which they're not). most of that cost is bandwidth, so if they used dsl it would be much cheaper.
1 billion dollars is about enough for 10000 bachelor's degrees including fees, room, and board at many well-respected private 4 year colleges.
When was the last time you saw a one billion dollar charitable contribution from an individual?
I'm sure that there's a large PR incentive for him to do this kind of thing, especially given his total lack of personal charm (did anyone elsee see the Tom Toles cartoon last week?), but the fact is that this money will help many, many people.
Sure, artists want to make a living, preferably the best one possible, but....
"Given the countless undertakings one can pursue in life, why do they choose to torture themselves with this particular pursuit?"
I think that's pretty revealing.
That's why you see so many lawyers waiting tables at night to support their day jobs, right?
Also, why do you have scare quotes around "artists"? That's not too friendly, man.
It's an incredibly hard life. I gave it a shot. I couldn't take it, so I'm in computers now.
Wanna know why?
I AM in it for the money.
Anyone looking for financial security gets out of that business and fast.
Borrowing for rent or going without a phone for a long while really sucks, especially if you know that you're good at what you do.
I don't care for the Oscars, but as a general principle, I don't want a million-headed hyrdra making content choices for me.
I have visions of:
Bogie getting on the plane at the end of Casablanca.
Obiwan beating Vader
Romeo and Juliet living to a ripe old age, all their fire long since burned out.
The Yankees always winning the world series (er....strike that one)
and of course, Sid Shienberg's cut of Brazil.
Personally, even if they don't always perform up to the task, I believe that the professionals in media and entertainment industry have a better idea of how to construct a satisfying media experience than amateurs, let alone a mob of amateurs with no cohesive vision (not even a bad one).
"Sunday night's Oscarcast may have been the usual long, boring and self-congratulatory. But there were distinct signs that interactivity -- which is about content, not just the means of delivery -- is beginning to creep into even this arrogant culture."
We wouldn't know anything about arrogant culture here, would we now? Katz presumes that these people are developing crappy entertainment in a vacuum. The fact is, most of them are hardworking, if misguided, people who DO care, and DO cede power to the consumers. Ever hear of audience testing?
Apart from that, Katz's definition of "interactive" is bunk. Saying that Eggers lets people into the process is not true because
a) Just because the reader can "see" the writing process doesn't mean he can affect it. An intelligent reader can "see" the writing process anyway, by paying careful attention to word choice, etc. Does this make the Iliad interactive? I really don't think so.
b) Eggers doesn't even really let the reader in. You get a highly mediated version of the writing process. It's not the real deal. Publishing a collection that had every draft... that might be a bit closer, but it's definitely not something I want to read. I want a finished, edited product, unless I'm already in the culture and am looking for insight into a colleague's methods.
The fact is, it's not easy to write even a bad book, or stage even a crappy awards show. It's even harder to do it by committee, and the difficulty only increases with the size of the committee.
.lnk files are worthless unless you're doing 1 of 2 things:
1) launching an executable
2) launching something that is a registered filetype (i e, C:\>foo.lnk where foo.lnk points to foo.txt)
This is extremely limited.......
for example, you can't make a shortcut to a library if that library isn't in your path.
just for kicks, make a text file in win32, then make a shortcut to it.
then:
c:\>type foo.txt
you get a bunch of high ascii garbage with the path of the target mixed in there.
compare
$echo this way works >foo.txt
$ln -s foo.txt foo.realsymlink
$cat foo.realsymlink
OR, drop the -s and then try moving the target file around. Try that with your shortcut.lnk