I almost missed something, and I've just got to point this out because I agree with it:
but for the last few decades, those state's rights have been eroded by a federal government that believes that it knows best.
Actually, I believe this has been a complaint for a lot longer than just a few decades. But I agree, in general I'm in favor of "state's rights".
But George W., like his father, like Reagan, like Clinton, he's just blowing hot air. Reagan and Bush Sr. were no friends of state's rights - like you said, it's been getting worse the last few decades - so why would Dubya be? It's showbiz, it's a sham. Behind the scenes Dubya isn't any better or worse than Gore, Clinton, Bush Sr., Reagan... it just doesn't make a whole lot of difference. It isn't just a cliche - these guys operate in a world whose principle dynamics are money and power, and ethics and rights and principles are... necessarily flexible. They care about state's rights (and anything else) for about as long as it's useful to them, and if it isn't, bet your ass state's rights are out the window. What I find most amazing about all of it is how many people still buy into the whole ball of nonsense. On the other hand, Jesse Ventura's pretty believable, and he got elected. Say what you will about Jesse (ever notice how "populist" is so often used as an elitist derogatory term?), but I don't get the feeling there's a whole lot of pretense going on there. I got no beef with Jesse voters... you believe in what he says, and it looks like he believes in what he says, cool. To a certain extent, same with McCain. But man... I don't get how anyone could put an ounce of faith into anything Bush or Gore says.
But anyway, yeah, not voting isn't an answer either, because you gotta be able to get all indignant after the election. That's why it's better to vote for, like, the "Natural Law" candidate or something... no matter what happens, you get to act all pissy: "See? See? If everyone would just listen to me and vote Natural Law, this wouldn't have happened... but no, only I know the way things oughta be..." See, don't think of a vote for an unelectable third-party candidate as throwing away your vote - think of it as your ticket to insufferability!
Man, and I just can't figure why my Republican family thinks I'm a dick...
It's funny how there's always at least one nuclear geek to pop up on/. every time energy comes up.
Tell you what, Oppenheimer, that all sounds real comforting. Why don't you go and build all these nice safe reactors in a region that gets magnitude 10 earthquakes, and you can live next to them. Hey, just don't open up that reactor! In the meantime, I'll go live next to a solar or wind or geothermal farm, and we'll see who's got the higher property values, OK? I mean, as long as we're talking what's theoretically the best technology and all.
In the meantime, in case you hadn't noticed: what's "currently used" for generating nuclear power sucks, and if it wasn't for old-school cold-war atomic-age gung-ho thinking like yours, there might have been more R&D into sustainable energy sources instead of the ghettoized position it's been relegated to. Nice to know, though, that instead people have been spending boatloads of money to make shitty technology slightly less shitty. Gee, that's really swell! Tell you what, science boy, you come back when you've got a practical fusion system operating, and we'll take another look, alright?
And another thing: I love how you guys always say the same damn thing, again and again: "Solar and other renewable technologies have a lot of promise, but they'll NEVER be able to deliver the power volumes needed for industrial society." Oh, really, Karnak... can you pick lottery numbers, too? Maybe work up a little astrology chart for me? I love it when these guys predict the future with such confidence, and then their favorite quotes are the ones like the 64k-will-be-enough-for-everyone variety. You'd think the dissonance would make their heads hurt, but then again, they're probably not smart enough to understand.
And finally, pal, why don't you shove your "stupid comment of the week" crack straight up your dumb ass. When you have something to say that isn't just you trying to prove that you've been reading the "Scientific American" subscription your mom got for you, you come try again.
But my take on his 'responsibility' promise is that when he screws up, he'll take the heat for it, unlike the Clintons and Gore who blame all their problems on other people, or a "right wing conspiracy".
Yeah, like the reporter who said unflattering yet true things about him - he was an "asshole". Or all the "alleged" naughty campaign tricks his side was guilty of during the McCain period - Dubya was reallll quick to find people to blame for all that. Have you heard him actually take responsibility for anything he's seriously done wrong so far (like, oh, I dunno, helping to steal millions of dollars from taxpayers during the S&L days), or do you think his whole life up to this point has been one of saintly virtue? He might talk a good game, but when it comes down to it, listen: he'll take the heat the day O.J. does.
I think that the best quote I've heard concerning this was that "Gore talks to people like he's a second grade special education teacher dealing with an exceptionally slow class."
Well... yeah. Now, I'm not saying I think people are stupid, but... no, wait, that's exactly what I'm saying. I'll also say, further, that Dubya would be at the bottom of that particular class.
And you know, I was thinking about this South Carolina flag thing. And you are totally correct: it is a state issue, and the feds have no business sticking their nose into it. I agree. And yeah, I assume it's a small yet... pungent minority who thinks flying the stars-n-bars is a swell idea. But here's my take on it... if George Bush had said something like this:
"Well, I think the federal government has no business getting involved with this issue. It's clearly a matter between the people of South Carolina and their elected state representatives. But I'll tell you what... here's how I really feel about it: Listen, you toothless dumbass backwoods cracker feebs, the Civil War was a HUNDRED AND FIFTY YEARS AGO, and YOU LOST. Don't you think it's about time you, y'know, let it go? Especially considering that pretty much every person on the face of the planet can agree that slavery probably wasn't such a good idea. You don't see many swastikas over at the Reichstag these days, do ya? You know why that is? It's because they're not particularly proud of having an evil, fucked-up past where they killed and/or enslaved a whole lot of people. Surprise! Like, what's next on your list, opening up an Andersonville theme park to celebrate the glory of the Confederacy? And another thing, the next time I'm driving around down here and I see a 73 El Camino toolin' around with a "Nuke the North" bumper sticker, look, I'm running your fuckin' ass off the road with my entire presidential motorcade. Nuke the North. That's pretty funny considering all the ICBM sites there aren't in the South. Like we'd really let a bunch of fuckwits like you at the controls of global thermonuclear destruction. I tell you what - any of 'ya'll' who want to fight the Civil War all over again, you just let me and the Pentagon know the time and place and we'll be more than happy to settle this thing once and for all, alright? Until then, all of you ignorant redneck web-toed David-Duke-votin' sick-motherfuckin' Ned-Beatty-rapin' sons of bitches can just sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up, because the rest of your species is so embarassed by your existence that the only sign of your pathetic lives we ever want to see again is the footnote in the history books that starts: 'Here's an example of a truly despicable people...'... but, uh, anyway, no, if the people of South Carolina want to fly a confederate flag or swastika or rising sun or Union Jack or whatever on their public buildings, well, that's their business."
I'm telling you, if George W. Bush were to say something like that, not only would I be first in line at the polls to vote for him, I'd paint his portrait all over my car. I'd name my dog after him. Hell, I'd change MY name to George W. in honor of him. But he won't, because either he agrees with the sentiment, which is fucked, or because he's a wuss and he'd rather dodge the question. Either way he's a douchebag. End of story.
Hmmm... I wonder if this'll go in my FBI file?
I wonder if anyone besides you an' me will ever even see these posts? Oh, well. Hope you had as much fun writing them as I did, at least.
OK, well, there's some things you and I agree on, and some things we just don't. I've got all of P.J. O'Rourke's books and think he's a wonderful writer ("How to Drive Fast on Drugs While Having Your Wing-Wang Squeezed and Not Spill Your Drink" is, in my opinion, the high point of twentieth-century literature). And my family's pretty sure I'm an asshole, too.
I still don't believe in voting for the least objectionable candidate who has a certain percentage chance of winning. I believe in voting for someone who represents me... even if that's me, and I'm the only one who votes for me (which I haven't actually done yet, by the way, but I might).
The only thing I don't get, though, is that you say you don't agree with a lot of what Dubya says... but somehow the promise to be responsible for his actions resonates with you (say, speaking of which, whatever happened to that cocaine question?). Man, I just don't get it. What the fuck is it supposed to mean? Fine, so, what, when Dubya gets an Oval Office hummer (and yeahhhhh, I'm sure that will never happen, wink wink), he'll tell us all about it in a State of the Union address? "My fellow Americans, I'm here tonight to tell ya - straight up, I'm not gonna lie to ya - whooo nelly, this new intern we got smokes a MEAN pole, if you know what I'm sayin', and I think ya do. Hey, just do me a favor and y'all keep it quiet, though... wouldn't do if the missus found out!" And who cares about the South Carolina flag (unless, uh, you live there, I guess, and even then it's a pretty goddamn goofy-ass issue to elect a president on)?
You know what I think of Dubya? Every time I see him speak I'm always waiting for him to start sounding like a down-home good-ol'-boy version of Professor Frink... "We'll be getting some revengination on Osama bin Laden, with the car bombs and the blowing up and the murderous killing of the people who he kills murderously and... hoyle!"
But! I will say this... Al Gore is nowhere near as funny as Bush, so for sheer entertainment value I suppose you can't go wrong with Dubya. If he wins, god help us all, at least we can count on a constant stream of blunders, faux pas, malapropisms and general stupidity. And that's worth something. Can't say it's worth, oh, drilling for oil in our national parks, but at least it's something. At least the Republicans make for entertaining villains... the Democrats haven't had a good bad guy since LBJ.
Ah, but who am I kidding. I'm writing in Jesse Ventura for president this year. And Hulk Hogan for vice-president. I'm hoping they'll appoint the cast of "Baywatch" for cabinet members, and really, isn't it about time Jon Bon Jovi got a Supreme Court seat?
Yeah, you think I'm just trying to be funny, but you wait 20 years. We'll see what a couple decades of voting for jerkoffs and paid-for corporate toadies gets us. Just don't come crying to me when the Olsen Twins become governor of your state.
My point was, if you hate Gore, that does not mean you have to vote for Bush. It's a false dichotomy. It's phony. It's a cheap way to try to excuse yourself of the fact that you are voting for a total moron.
A vote for Bush is not a vote against Gore, it's a vote for an idiot. When you pick your candidate, you are choosing someone to represent you. There aren't any boxes on the ballot that say "I hate Al". You pick who you want. If you want to pick "I'm with stupid", that's fine, but don't play like that's not what you're doing.
If you really don't want to vote for an asshole, then pick someone else... write yourself in if you have to. It'd be nice if there were a "None of the above" option, but we don't have that, and voting for one wanker "against" the other wanker is hardly a substitute.
Like someone else pointed out, it's not necessarily all the fault of architects, though... given a choice, people frequently DO insist on the worst design, and an architect's job is to please the client.
Having said that, man, I knew a guy from high school who designed houses... last time I saw him I happened to have a copy of "A Pattern Language" with me, which I had just discovered (it isn't the be-all and end-all of architecture, but it's the best thing going right now). I figured we could have a great discussion about it since he'd been to a decent architecture school - but as it turned out the guy had never even HEARD of it. I couldn't believe it. The most important, useful and provocative book about architecture I've ever seen, and it's been out for 25-30 years or so, and... totally ignored at this guy's school. Meanwhile, what, they're filling students' heads with Le Corbusier or Philip Johnson or some such wretchedness... no wonder our built environment sucks like it does.
By the way, Philip Johnson: what an asshole. Ever seen the JFK memorial in Dallas? WTF?!? I love the Glass House... a completely unusable space designed to make a statement, but then he encloses the bathroom (I assume that's the bathroom, anyway - never seen a floorplan) as if it's meant to be functional. What is it, Phil, house or sculpture? It's a failure at both. And this wanker is still taken seriously!
Same with Frank Gehry. Fifty years from now he'll be the guy who provides someone with a bunch of scrap titanium. Thanks, Frank, for wasting a shitload of resources on dumbass buildings that won't even make it to the 22nd century without some serious help... and who's going to bother at that point? What a joke.
But hey, not that I'm bitter or anything.
Anyway, it isn't just the architects who should be apologizing, the professors and clueless hipsters and even less clueful clients and developers should be publically groveling as well...
Wow, down here among the trolls there's a bit of gold.
Now, I say this with a mixture of awe, agreement and general empathy... but sweet bleeding zombie jesus, what the fuck IS that? I want the who, what, where, why, when and how for this...
I have a beef with having a beef with this. Look, it's not the water-saving feature per se that makes these toilets suck -- it's the DESIGN of certain water-saving toilets that suck.
No one says you have to buy a shitty toilet, Mopar. Buy a good quality water-saving toilet and I guarantee you won't have to flush it four times.
I have a water-saving toilet and it works like a goddamn champ. I've never had to flush it more than once no matter how big a load I've dumped in there. Furthermore, it seems to keep itself clean much better than any of the old high-flush models I've used. You couldn't pay me to take back one of them crappy old crappers.
Unfortunately, I can't say offhand what model my throne is, and offhand I can't think of where one might go to get ratings for different models. Consumer Reports? Deja? Dunno... but seek and ye shall find, Mopar... there are good quality water-saving toilets out there!
I think the article is pretty clear. Here's a quote:
The nascent, independent MozOffice has barely registered on Mozilla's or Netscape's radar.
I read the article and it sounded to me like someone had an interesting idea and it has little to do with the Mozilla team itself. Tell me again the problem with this article? Sounds to me like some flame-happy jerks got themselves all in a self-righteous huff over nothing... and that's CNet's fault how?
I dunno... if this Towel Shamu or whatever is saying that there are severe dangers surrounding the downloading of actual child molesters via Gnutella, well then, I think we all need to be very, very worried indeed. I know I am worried enough to write a letter to the editor of my local paper, to that nice magazine supplement that comes with the Sunday paper, AND to the local TV news station. I am confident these institutions will be able to get the word out in a clear and reliable manner.
Listen to Toe Schmoo, people! Don't let child molesters be downloaded via Gnutella!
I just went back and checked and The Previous has a new deal with an indy company called Great Big Island, and they've got a pretty good order page with Real samples for all of their albums, and you can also buy "Unpop..." songs in MP3 for.50 each. The Previous have a whole slew of other albums, and they're good too, but the best by far is Unpop.
One of my favorite albums of all time is a non-RIAA CD called "Unpop..." by The Previous. The album is the story of a high school loser named Dennis Bland (Who fans might catch a reference there) and his quest for love. It's darkly funny and every song is outstanding, and the production values are very, very high all the way around. It's $10 at CD Baby's Previous page (with RealAudio samples) or check out their home page. Seriously, it blows my mind that an album this good could be so unknown... give it a look!
Holy moley... your SUV uses a constant 260hp? Wow, you are one badass mofo. Before you go and get all math-a-matical on us, you might to sit and ponder this one a little more.
And think about this: put regenerative electric motors into that SUV with a flywheel for energy storage and solar film covering the top... and yeah, you'd probably have to plug it in every now and then, especially in your case. Someone who doesn't drive very much, like me, might never need to plug it in. But... it'd peel the rubber clean off those big dorky SUV tires. Check some back issues of Wired for a couple of articles, one on electric drag racing and one on flywheels, and see if a light bulb doesn't ding over your head. Electricity isn't just for whiny vegans. Electricity fuckin' rocks.
Yeah, but Zappa had bonafide chops. He wasn't some phony-ass teen angst band. Anybody could compliment Zappa because Zappa was truly respectable (!), an artist, as opposed to some dweeb in a phony-ass teen-angst band.
Speaking of phony-ass teen-angsty dweebs, picture Marilyn Manson getting the Orrin Hatch thumbs-up. It's like Martha Stewart hiring him to play her tea party - and being delighted with the results. Kinda kills the whole act, don't it? And without the teen angst, there's not much left to him. It'd be the kiss of death. Metallica - similar deal. Anyone else remember when Metallica were the evil satanic metalheads du jour? Lose the teen rage angle and they got bupkus. Wasn't them what did that goofy shit with some orchestra a few years back? Case in point.
But that's all I'm saying here. Frank Zappa could play Martha Stewart's house. That's really what this whole Metallica/Napster case boils down to, isn't it?
Well, sure, on the one hand it's pretty righteous. And I know that I, for one, wish he'd never gone into politics. But it's like Lee Atwater proved... politicians and rock and roll are mutually exclusive. I mean, sure, all of us "hep" people knew from the beginning that Metallica was full of shit, but the Orrin Hatch good housekeeping seal of approval has gotta be an ugly blow for the believers.
Put another way, hypothetically, this is about as cool as Johnny Depp testifying and Fred Grandy compliments his Hunter S. Thompson performance. On one hand, it'd be a nice compliment. On the other, y'know, it's not.
Now if Lars had jumped up and taken a whiz on the podium in front of Orrin, and Orrin still complimented his music, then we could talk about how rock and roll Orrin Hatch is.
"I was listening to Metallica this morning in my office," said [Sen. Orrin] Hatch, drawing laughter for the packed committee room. "Pretty darn good," he added.
My god. Look, Dee Snyder v. Tipper Gore - THAT was rock'n'roll. Zappa testifying - THAT's rock'n'roll. But Orrin Hatch, Orrin freakin' Hatch, of UTAH for chrissakes, complimenting your band in front of the whole nation... that's just sad. One minute you're an inexplicably popular headbanging band that has, in spite of itself, managed to cling to a few shreds of dignity, then suddenly whammo! Orrin Hatch digs ya.
It's like someone took away the Sammy Hagar and replaced him with Pat Boone. You'd have to feel a twinge of sympathy for Eddie Van Halen, no matter how much you hated him.
I say the only honorable path left for Metallica, besides seppuku, obviously, is the David Lee Roth path... squeeze into that rhinestone jumpsuit and brush up on your Mel Torme, Lars - next stop: Vegas!
This could be a very interesting topic in the future. With nanotech, for example, building a bigass bomb of whatever type should be pretty trivial. Now I don't know about you, but I remember the kind of kids that liked making simple little gunpowder bombs (and I'm not necessarily excluding myself from this group), and I'm not so sure it'd be a swell idea to let them play with bigger bangmakers, even as adults. And I don't think I'd want to live in a place where just anyone could build and possess large explosives, just like I don't think I'd like to live in a place where just anyone can tool around in a fully militarized tank. As much fun as I'd personally enjoy tooling around in an armed tank (and as loud as I cheered when that crazy guy stole that tank a few years back), the implications of such a policy on a large scale are a little unsettling... anyone ever been to Liberia? Mogadishu? Bearing arms is one thing - bearing weapons of mass destruction is another entirely. Just ask Iraq.
On a similar note, I wonder how we'll deal these kinds of issues in the future, when personal spacecraft become a possibility. I mean, it wouldn't take a Death Star to blow up a planet... just get a few TIE fighters cranked up to high speed and point them in the right direction, and you could at least take out a few large cities. And at some point (anyone read "The Killing Star"?), wiping the surface of a planet clean becomes relatively (no pun intended) trivial, and there's not much anyone could do to prevent it. Kinda makes you wonder, don't it?
Microsoft thinks people in the future will be willing to pay a per-use or subscription fee to use a spreadsheet and word processor.
At my company, most users were perfectly content using Office 95, and most (including me) have seen little benefit and actually some harm in upgrading to newer versions of Office. Not that Office 95 is the be-all and end-all of office apps, but the fact is there's only so much an average user does with these applications, and I seriously doubt there's going to be anything so insanely great about these.Net applications that people are going to throw away their paid-for applications and sign up for a per-use service. And for cryin' out loud, like figuring out how to access your files from anywhere is really a big schlep these days. Jesus. Even my grandma could figure that one out, what with all the free storage services on the net.
And at the same time they're going to open up the file formats with XML, so theoretically anyone can easily make a compatible application.
"Hey, boss... lookit this. We can sign up for Microsoft's service, where the security is dubious, the connection unreliable, and we have to pay money every time we do anything and if we don't then we lose access to all our files. Or look, we can download this Star Office [or K or whatever] and it's totally compatible with Microsoft applications and it works better and it will never cost us a dime."
Or gee, look, there's a service that does the exact same stuff only with reliable non-MS software and it's advertiser supported, so it's totally free for the user.
Or hey, there's an appliance with a reliable, embedded OS and the application server is included with the monthly ISP. Sounds like a good deal for grandma.
Bzzzt. Thanks for playing, Microsoft. Too bad you bet the farm on this dumbass.Net idea. Hope the market for mice gets really, really, really big in the future...
Slashdot Mirror
I guess I did hit a nerve. Nice try at being clever, but your point would be... ?
I almost missed something, and I've just got to point this out because I agree with it:
but for the last few decades, those state's rights have been eroded by a federal government that believes that it knows best.
Actually, I believe this has been a complaint for a lot longer than just a few decades. But I agree, in general I'm in favor of "state's rights".
But George W., like his father, like Reagan, like Clinton, he's just blowing hot air. Reagan and Bush Sr. were no friends of state's rights - like you said, it's been getting worse the last few decades - so why would Dubya be? It's showbiz, it's a sham. Behind the scenes Dubya isn't any better or worse than Gore, Clinton, Bush Sr., Reagan... it just doesn't make a whole lot of difference. It isn't just a cliche - these guys operate in a world whose principle dynamics are money and power, and ethics and rights and principles are... necessarily flexible. They care about state's rights (and anything else) for about as long as it's useful to them, and if it isn't, bet your ass state's rights are out the window. What I find most amazing about all of it is how many people still buy into the whole ball of nonsense. On the other hand, Jesse Ventura's pretty believable, and he got elected. Say what you will about Jesse (ever notice how "populist" is so often used as an elitist derogatory term?), but I don't get the feeling there's a whole lot of pretense going on there. I got no beef with Jesse voters... you believe in what he says, and it looks like he believes in what he says, cool. To a certain extent, same with McCain. But man... I don't get how anyone could put an ounce of faith into anything Bush or Gore says.
But anyway, yeah, not voting isn't an answer either, because you gotta be able to get all indignant after the election. That's why it's better to vote for, like, the "Natural Law" candidate or something... no matter what happens, you get to act all pissy: "See? See? If everyone would just listen to me and vote Natural Law, this wouldn't have happened... but no, only I know the way things oughta be..." See, don't think of a vote for an unelectable third-party candidate as throwing away your vote - think of it as your ticket to insufferability!
Man, and I just can't figure why my Republican family thinks I'm a dick...
Blah blah blah
It's funny how there's always at least one nuclear geek to pop up on
Tell you what, Oppenheimer, that all sounds real comforting. Why don't you go and build all these nice safe reactors in a region that gets magnitude 10 earthquakes, and you can live next to them. Hey, just don't open up that reactor! In the meantime, I'll go live next to a solar or wind or geothermal farm, and we'll see who's got the higher property values, OK? I mean, as long as we're talking what's theoretically the best technology and all.
In the meantime, in case you hadn't noticed: what's "currently used" for generating nuclear power sucks, and if it wasn't for old-school cold-war atomic-age gung-ho thinking like yours, there might have been more R&D into sustainable energy sources instead of the ghettoized position it's been relegated to. Nice to know, though, that instead people have been spending boatloads of money to make shitty technology slightly less shitty. Gee, that's really swell! Tell you what, science boy, you come back when you've got a practical fusion system operating, and we'll take another look, alright?
And another thing: I love how you guys always say the same damn thing, again and again: "Solar and other renewable technologies have a lot of promise, but they'll NEVER be able to deliver the power volumes needed for industrial society." Oh, really, Karnak... can you pick lottery numbers, too? Maybe work up a little astrology chart for me? I love it when these guys predict the future with such confidence, and then their favorite quotes are the ones like the 64k-will-be-enough-for-everyone variety. You'd think the dissonance would make their heads hurt, but then again, they're probably not smart enough to understand.
And finally, pal, why don't you shove your "stupid comment of the week" crack straight up your dumb ass. When you have something to say that isn't just you trying to prove that you've been reading the "Scientific American" subscription your mom got for you, you come try again.
But my take on his 'responsibility' promise is that when he screws up, he'll take the heat for it, unlike the Clintons and Gore who blame all their problems on other people, or a "right wing conspiracy".
... but, uh, anyway, no, if the people of South Carolina want to fly a confederate flag or swastika or rising sun or Union Jack or whatever on their public buildings, well, that's their business."
Yeah, like the reporter who said unflattering yet true things about him - he was an "asshole". Or all the "alleged" naughty campaign tricks his side was guilty of during the McCain period - Dubya was reallll quick to find people to blame for all that. Have you heard him actually take responsibility for anything he's seriously done wrong so far (like, oh, I dunno, helping to steal millions of dollars from taxpayers during the S&L days), or do you think his whole life up to this point has been one of saintly virtue? He might talk a good game, but when it comes down to it, listen: he'll take the heat the day O.J. does.
I think that the best quote I've heard concerning this was that "Gore talks to people like he's a second grade special education teacher dealing with an exceptionally slow class."
Well... yeah. Now, I'm not saying I think people are stupid, but... no, wait, that's exactly what I'm saying. I'll also say, further, that Dubya would be at the bottom of that particular class.
And you know, I was thinking about this South Carolina flag thing. And you are totally correct: it is a state issue, and the feds have no business sticking their nose into it. I agree. And yeah, I assume it's a small yet... pungent minority who thinks flying the stars-n-bars is a swell idea. But here's my take on it... if George Bush had said something like this:
"Well, I think the federal government has no business getting involved with this issue. It's clearly a matter between the people of South Carolina and their elected state representatives. But I'll tell you what... here's how I really feel about it: Listen, you toothless dumbass backwoods cracker feebs, the Civil War was a HUNDRED AND FIFTY YEARS AGO, and YOU LOST. Don't you think it's about time you, y'know, let it go? Especially considering that pretty much every person on the face of the planet can agree that slavery probably wasn't such a good idea. You don't see many swastikas over at the Reichstag these days, do ya? You know why that is? It's because they're not particularly proud of having an evil, fucked-up past where they killed and/or enslaved a whole lot of people. Surprise! Like, what's next on your list, opening up an Andersonville theme park to celebrate the glory of the Confederacy? And another thing, the next time I'm driving around down here and I see a 73 El Camino toolin' around with a "Nuke the North" bumper sticker, look, I'm running your fuckin' ass off the road with my entire presidential motorcade. Nuke the North. That's pretty funny considering all the ICBM sites there aren't in the South. Like we'd really let a bunch of fuckwits like you at the controls of global thermonuclear destruction. I tell you what - any of 'ya'll' who want to fight the Civil War all over again, you just let me and the Pentagon know the time and place and we'll be more than happy to settle this thing once and for all, alright? Until then, all of you ignorant redneck web-toed David-Duke-votin' sick-motherfuckin' Ned-Beatty-rapin' sons of bitches can just sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up, because the rest of your species is so embarassed by your existence that the only sign of your pathetic lives we ever want to see again is the footnote in the history books that starts: 'Here's an example of a truly despicable people...'
I'm telling you, if George W. Bush were to say something like that, not only would I be first in line at the polls to vote for him, I'd paint his portrait all over my car. I'd name my dog after him. Hell, I'd change MY name to George W. in honor of him. But he won't, because either he agrees with the sentiment, which is fucked, or because he's a wuss and he'd rather dodge the question. Either way he's a douchebag. End of story.
Hmmm... I wonder if this'll go in my FBI file?
I wonder if anyone besides you an' me will ever even see these posts? Oh, well. Hope you had as much fun writing them as I did, at least.
Third, what's so dangerous anyway?
Uh... I dunno... high levels of radiation?
Did you ever wish you could headslap people through the net? Bah! Wake me when they invent something useful for computers!
OK, well, there's some things you and I agree on, and some things we just don't. I've got all of P.J. O'Rourke's books and think he's a wonderful writer ("How to Drive Fast on Drugs While Having Your Wing-Wang Squeezed and Not Spill Your Drink" is, in my opinion, the high point of twentieth-century literature). And my family's pretty sure I'm an asshole, too.
I still don't believe in voting for the least objectionable candidate who has a certain percentage chance of winning. I believe in voting for someone who represents me... even if that's me, and I'm the only one who votes for me (which I haven't actually done yet, by the way, but I might).
The only thing I don't get, though, is that you say you don't agree with a lot of what Dubya says... but somehow the promise to be responsible for his actions resonates with you (say, speaking of which, whatever happened to that cocaine question?). Man, I just don't get it. What the fuck is it supposed to mean? Fine, so, what, when Dubya gets an Oval Office hummer (and yeahhhhh, I'm sure that will never happen, wink wink), he'll tell us all about it in a State of the Union address? "My fellow Americans, I'm here tonight to tell ya - straight up, I'm not gonna lie to ya - whooo nelly, this new intern we got smokes a MEAN pole, if you know what I'm sayin', and I think ya do. Hey, just do me a favor and y'all keep it quiet, though... wouldn't do if the missus found out!" And who cares about the South Carolina flag (unless, uh, you live there, I guess, and even then it's a pretty goddamn goofy-ass issue to elect a president on)?
You know what I think of Dubya? Every time I see him speak I'm always waiting for him to start sounding like a down-home good-ol'-boy version of Professor Frink... "We'll be getting some revengination on Osama bin Laden, with the car bombs and the blowing up and the murderous killing of the people who he kills murderously and... hoyle!"
But! I will say this... Al Gore is nowhere near as funny as Bush, so for sheer entertainment value I suppose you can't go wrong with Dubya. If he wins, god help us all, at least we can count on a constant stream of blunders, faux pas, malapropisms and general stupidity. And that's worth something. Can't say it's worth, oh, drilling for oil in our national parks, but at least it's something. At least the Republicans make for entertaining villains... the Democrats haven't had a good bad guy since LBJ.
Ah, but who am I kidding. I'm writing in Jesse Ventura for president this year. And Hulk Hogan for vice-president. I'm hoping they'll appoint the cast of "Baywatch" for cabinet members, and really, isn't it about time Jon Bon Jovi got a Supreme Court seat?
Yeah, you think I'm just trying to be funny, but you wait 20 years. We'll see what a couple decades of voting for jerkoffs and paid-for corporate toadies gets us. Just don't come crying to me when the Olsen Twins become governor of your state.
My point was, if you hate Gore, that does not mean you have to vote for Bush. It's a false dichotomy. It's phony. It's a cheap way to try to excuse yourself of the fact that you are voting for a total moron.
A vote for Bush is not a vote against Gore, it's a vote for an idiot. When you pick your candidate, you are choosing someone to represent you. There aren't any boxes on the ballot that say "I hate Al". You pick who you want. If you want to pick "I'm with stupid", that's fine, but don't play like that's not what you're doing.
If you really don't want to vote for an asshole, then pick someone else... write yourself in if you have to. It'd be nice if there were a "None of the above" option, but we don't have that, and voting for one wanker "against" the other wanker is hardly a substitute.
So who are you voting for? Nader? Buchanan? The Natural Law candidate? P.J. O'Rourke?
I turn thirty in just two short months... shudder... and couldn't agree more. Growing up. Pfft. I'm not done having new experiences yet.
I like the Warren Ellis quote - was that in Transmet or one of his columns or ?
Nice apology!
Like someone else pointed out, it's not necessarily all the fault of architects, though... given a choice, people frequently DO insist on the worst design, and an architect's job is to please the client.
Having said that, man, I knew a guy from high school who designed houses... last time I saw him I happened to have a copy of "A Pattern Language" with me, which I had just discovered (it isn't the be-all and end-all of architecture, but it's the best thing going right now). I figured we could have a great discussion about it since he'd been to a decent architecture school - but as it turned out the guy had never even HEARD of it. I couldn't believe it. The most important, useful and provocative book about architecture I've ever seen, and it's been out for 25-30 years or so, and... totally ignored at this guy's school. Meanwhile, what, they're filling students' heads with Le Corbusier or Philip Johnson or some such wretchedness... no wonder our built environment sucks like it does.
By the way, Philip Johnson: what an asshole. Ever seen the JFK memorial in Dallas? WTF?!? I love the Glass House... a completely unusable space designed to make a statement, but then he encloses the bathroom (I assume that's the bathroom, anyway - never seen a floorplan) as if it's meant to be functional. What is it, Phil, house or sculpture? It's a failure at both. And this wanker is still taken seriously!
Same with Frank Gehry. Fifty years from now he'll be the guy who provides someone with a bunch of scrap titanium. Thanks, Frank, for wasting a shitload of resources on dumbass buildings that won't even make it to the 22nd century without some serious help... and who's going to bother at that point? What a joke.
But hey, not that I'm bitter or anything.
Anyway, it isn't just the architects who should be apologizing, the professors and clueless hipsters and even less clueful clients and developers should be publically groveling as well...
Wow, down here among the trolls there's a bit of gold.
Now, I say this with a mixture of awe, agreement and general empathy... but sweet bleeding zombie jesus, what the fuck IS that? I want the who, what, where, why, when and how for this...
I have a beef with having a beef with this. Look, it's not the water-saving feature per se that makes these toilets suck -- it's the DESIGN of certain water-saving toilets that suck.
No one says you have to buy a shitty toilet, Mopar. Buy a good quality water-saving toilet and I guarantee you won't have to flush it four times.
I have a water-saving toilet and it works like a goddamn champ. I've never had to flush it more than once no matter how big a load I've dumped in there. Furthermore, it seems to keep itself clean much better than any of the old high-flush models I've used. You couldn't pay me to take back one of them crappy old crappers.
Unfortunately, I can't say offhand what model my throne is, and offhand I can't think of where one might go to get ratings for different models. Consumer Reports? Deja? Dunno... but seek and ye shall find, Mopar... there are good quality water-saving toilets out there!
I think the article is pretty clear. Here's a quote:
The nascent, independent MozOffice has barely registered on Mozilla's or Netscape's radar.
I read the article and it sounded to me like someone had an interesting idea and it has little to do with the Mozilla team itself. Tell me again the problem with this article? Sounds to me like some flame-happy jerks got themselves all in a self-righteous huff over nothing... and that's CNet's fault how?
I dunno... if this Towel Shamu or whatever is saying that there are severe dangers surrounding the downloading of actual child molesters via Gnutella, well then, I think we all need to be very, very worried indeed. I know I am worried enough to write a letter to the editor of my local paper, to that nice magazine supplement that comes with the Sunday paper, AND to the local TV news station. I am confident these institutions will be able to get the word out in a clear and reliable manner.
Listen to Toe Schmoo, people! Don't let child molesters be downloaded via Gnutella!
I just went back and checked and The Previous has a new deal with an indy company called Great Big Island, and they've got a pretty good order page with Real samples for all of their albums, and you can also buy "Unpop..." songs in MP3 for .50 each. The Previous have a whole slew of other albums, and they're good too, but the best by far is Unpop.
Great Big Island
One of my favorite albums of all time is a non-RIAA CD called "Unpop..." by The Previous. The album is the story of a high school loser named Dennis Bland (Who fans might catch a reference there) and his quest for love. It's darkly funny and every song is outstanding, and the production values are very, very high all the way around. It's $10 at CD Baby's Previous page (with RealAudio samples) or check out their home page. Seriously, it blows my mind that an album this good could be so unknown... give it a look!
Holy moley... your SUV uses a constant 260hp? Wow, you are one badass mofo. Before you go and get all math-a-matical on us, you might to sit and ponder this one a little more.
And think about this: put regenerative electric motors into that SUV with a flywheel for energy storage and solar film covering the top... and yeah, you'd probably have to plug it in every now and then, especially in your case. Someone who doesn't drive very much, like me, might never need to plug it in. But... it'd peel the rubber clean off those big dorky SUV tires. Check some back issues of Wired for a couple of articles, one on electric drag racing and one on flywheels, and see if a light bulb doesn't ding over your head. Electricity isn't just for whiny vegans. Electricity fuckin' rocks.
Yeah, but Zappa had bonafide chops. He wasn't some phony-ass teen angst band. Anybody could compliment Zappa because Zappa was truly respectable (!), an artist, as opposed to some dweeb in a phony-ass teen-angst band.
Speaking of phony-ass teen-angsty dweebs, picture Marilyn Manson getting the Orrin Hatch thumbs-up. It's like Martha Stewart hiring him to play her tea party - and being delighted with the results. Kinda kills the whole act, don't it? And without the teen angst, there's not much left to him. It'd be the kiss of death. Metallica - similar deal. Anyone else remember when Metallica were the evil satanic metalheads du jour? Lose the teen rage angle and they got bupkus. Wasn't them what did that goofy shit with some orchestra a few years back? Case in point.
But that's all I'm saying here. Frank Zappa could play Martha Stewart's house. That's really what this whole Metallica/Napster case boils down to, isn't it?
Well, sure, on the one hand it's pretty righteous. And I know that I, for one, wish he'd never gone into politics. But it's like Lee Atwater proved... politicians and rock and roll are mutually exclusive. I mean, sure, all of us "hep" people knew from the beginning that Metallica was full of shit, but the Orrin Hatch good housekeeping seal of approval has gotta be an ugly blow for the believers.
Put another way, hypothetically, this is about as cool as Johnny Depp testifying and Fred Grandy compliments his Hunter S. Thompson performance. On one hand, it'd be a nice compliment. On the other, y'know, it's not.
Now if Lars had jumped up and taken a whiz on the podium in front of Orrin, and Orrin still complimented his music, then we could talk about how rock and roll Orrin Hatch is.
No, man, you know what... you are so RIGHT. I don't know what the hell I was thinking back there.
Rock over London, rock on Chicago, bro!
No, no, I'm afraid it's distilled water AND grain alcohol for me from here on out.
And hey, you can't question my indie cred, man. I'm from Olympia. So, hah!
This has to be a case of life imitating Onion...
"I was listening to Metallica this morning in my office," said [Sen. Orrin] Hatch, drawing laughter for the packed committee room. "Pretty darn good," he added.
My god. Look, Dee Snyder v. Tipper Gore - THAT was rock'n'roll. Zappa testifying - THAT's rock'n'roll. But Orrin Hatch, Orrin freakin' Hatch, of UTAH for chrissakes, complimenting your band in front of the whole nation... that's just sad. One minute you're an inexplicably popular headbanging band that has, in spite of itself, managed to cling to a few shreds of dignity, then suddenly whammo! Orrin Hatch digs ya.
It's like someone took away the Sammy Hagar and replaced him with Pat Boone. You'd have to feel a twinge of sympathy for Eddie Van Halen, no matter how much you hated him.
I say the only honorable path left for Metallica, besides seppuku, obviously, is the David Lee Roth path... squeeze into that rhinestone jumpsuit and brush up on your Mel Torme, Lars - next stop: Vegas!
This could be a very interesting topic in the future. With nanotech, for example, building a bigass bomb of whatever type should be pretty trivial. Now I don't know about you, but I remember the kind of kids that liked making simple little gunpowder bombs (and I'm not necessarily excluding myself from this group), and I'm not so sure it'd be a swell idea to let them play with bigger bangmakers, even as adults. And I don't think I'd want to live in a place where just anyone could build and possess large explosives, just like I don't think I'd like to live in a place where just anyone can tool around in a fully militarized tank. As much fun as I'd personally enjoy tooling around in an armed tank (and as loud as I cheered when that crazy guy stole that tank a few years back), the implications of such a policy on a large scale are a little unsettling... anyone ever been to Liberia? Mogadishu? Bearing arms is one thing - bearing weapons of mass destruction is another entirely. Just ask Iraq.
On a similar note, I wonder how we'll deal these kinds of issues in the future, when personal spacecraft become a possibility. I mean, it wouldn't take a Death Star to blow up a planet... just get a few TIE fighters cranked up to high speed and point them in the right direction, and you could at least take out a few large cities. And at some point (anyone read "The Killing Star"?), wiping the surface of a planet clean becomes relatively (no pun intended) trivial, and there's not much anyone could do to prevent it. Kinda makes you wonder, don't it?
Which makes perfect sense when you stop and consider, hey, 42.
Criminey, I think someone's hitting the shrooms a little early in the morning today...
Let me get this straight.
.Net applications that people are going to throw away their paid-for applications and sign up for a per-use service. And for cryin' out loud, like figuring out how to access your files from anywhere is really a big schlep these days. Jesus. Even my grandma could figure that one out, what with all the free storage services on the net.
.Net idea. Hope the market for mice gets really, really, really big in the future...
Microsoft thinks people in the future will be willing to pay a per-use or subscription fee to use a spreadsheet and word processor.
At my company, most users were perfectly content using Office 95, and most (including me) have seen little benefit and actually some harm in upgrading to newer versions of Office. Not that Office 95 is the be-all and end-all of office apps, but the fact is there's only so much an average user does with these applications, and I seriously doubt there's going to be anything so insanely great about these
And at the same time they're going to open up the file formats with XML, so theoretically anyone can easily make a compatible application.
"Hey, boss... lookit this. We can sign up for Microsoft's service, where the security is dubious, the connection unreliable, and we have to pay money every time we do anything and if we don't then we lose access to all our files. Or look, we can download this Star Office [or K or whatever] and it's totally compatible with Microsoft applications and it works better and it will never cost us a dime."
Or gee, look, there's a service that does the exact same stuff only with reliable non-MS software and it's advertiser supported, so it's totally free for the user.
Or hey, there's an appliance with a reliable, embedded OS and the application server is included with the monthly ISP. Sounds like a good deal for grandma.
Bzzzt. Thanks for playing, Microsoft. Too bad you bet the farm on this dumbass