Peace-loving people
How much more clearly can they say it?
(Regurgablog asked them about it, just to be sure. Saw it at the new Inappropriate Response.)
LATER: Manufacturing Dissent found a site that explains why Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist.
Saturday, May 04, 2002
Are students people?
I know they aren't adults, and they don't have all of the responsibilities and rights of adults. I understand that. But how can we expect them to respect the rights of others if they have none themselves?
Several months ago, I objected to the principal who wanted to institute strip searches. I objected to the principal who ripped the rivets out of a girl's corduroy pants because they were "too jeans-like". I objected to the principal who wanted to require all of his students to learn the school song.
And I'm objecting now to the assistant principal who took it upon herself to do an underwear check at the Rancho Bernardo High "Morp" dance -- without announcing the policy, without separating girls from boys, without regard to any semblance of privacy. Last year, apparently, a girl flashed the crowd, and administrators were eager to prevent a repeat. So they inspected underwear on the way in, just to be sure everyone was wearing some. (Just in case that link fails, there are plenty more. This story leapt over blogopolis and made the "real" media in record time.)
In what way was this better than the behavior it was intended to prohibit?
"What was she thinking?", Den Beste asks, and I think I can answer that:
Students are not people. They are a mob, a herd, and inspecting their underwear on the way into a dance is just one of those things you have to do. You can't count on their parents to make sure they left the house with underwear on, and you can't count on the kids to keep it on after they've left the house. ...Besides, what are they gonna do, take their business elsewhere? Go to another school? We're stuck with them, and they're stuck with us. We've got to maintain order however we can.
The minute a student violates school policy, yank 'em out of the dance and send 'em home. If you don't think you can do that, don't have dances. A panty patrol at the front door is so far beyond "inappropriate" that we shouldn't even be discussing this.
LATER: I see Michelle Malkin is in the "the schools have to do it because the parents won't" camp.
LATER STILL: She says her "career is over", but she's still on paid leave.
I wonder if Cardinal Edward Egan and Cardinal Bernard Law say the same thing.
I know they aren't adults, and they don't have all of the responsibilities and rights of adults. I understand that. But how can we expect them to respect the rights of others if they have none themselves?
Several months ago, I objected to the principal who wanted to institute strip searches. I objected to the principal who ripped the rivets out of a girl's corduroy pants because they were "too jeans-like". I objected to the principal who wanted to require all of his students to learn the school song.
And I'm objecting now to the assistant principal who took it upon herself to do an underwear check at the Rancho Bernardo High "Morp" dance -- without announcing the policy, without separating girls from boys, without regard to any semblance of privacy. Last year, apparently, a girl flashed the crowd, and administrators were eager to prevent a repeat. So they inspected underwear on the way in, just to be sure everyone was wearing some. (Just in case that link fails, there are plenty more. This story leapt over blogopolis and made the "real" media in record time.)
In what way was this better than the behavior it was intended to prohibit?
"What was she thinking?", Den Beste asks, and I think I can answer that:
Students are not people. They are a mob, a herd, and inspecting their underwear on the way into a dance is just one of those things you have to do. You can't count on their parents to make sure they left the house with underwear on, and you can't count on the kids to keep it on after they've left the house. ...Besides, what are they gonna do, take their business elsewhere? Go to another school? We're stuck with them, and they're stuck with us. We've got to maintain order however we can.
The minute a student violates school policy, yank 'em out of the dance and send 'em home. If you don't think you can do that, don't have dances. A panty patrol at the front door is so far beyond "inappropriate" that we shouldn't even be discussing this.
LATER: I see Michelle Malkin is in the "the schools have to do it because the parents won't" camp.
LATER STILL: She says her "career is over", but she's still on paid leave.
Wilson said that her actions that night had been mischaracterized in the press and wanted the parents who were calling for her to be fired to know that she was a "good person" who was trying to protect their children.
I wonder if Cardinal Edward Egan and Cardinal Bernard Law say the same thing.
Just because a thing can be done
does not mean it should be done
When I wrote "Now it all makes sense", I thought I was just being snarky. It appears I'm coming late to a revolution, and they really mean it.
[Emphasis above is mine.] "Troubling" does not begin to say it.
[Again, emphasis mine.] Actually, according to Den Beste, it records the whole program and removes commercials on playback, not while recording, and since he has one, I tend to believe him. But it's the removal of commercials, no matter how it happens, that has got the networks in such a panic, and they're trying to make it not merely illegal, but impossible, to do it. "In other words," he continues, "they're trying to ban scissors because they might be used to clip articles out of magazines."
Unfortunately for us "consumers", Den Beste's analogy fails at a crucial point: Broadcast media have never been governed by the same rules. They don't even have the fundamental first amendment protection that newspapers so proudly wrap themselves in. Broadcasters, for example, have to satisfy the FCC periodically that they are "acting in the public interest" or lose their license. Print media face no comparable threat.
We lost the VCR copy-protection battle. We lost the DVD copy-protection battle. We lost the DVD region-scheme battle. We're about to lose our right to hit fast-forward during the commercials.
Where is it, where is it... Ah, one of Den Beste's readers found the quote.
It's from Robert A Heinlein's first published story, "Life-Line".
(See also Den Beste, Boing Boing, PhotoDude, and I'm sure dozens of other pages.)
does not mean it should be done
When I wrote "Now it all makes sense", I thought I was just being snarky. It appears I'm coming late to a revolution, and they really mean it.
SonicBlue ordered to track ReplayTV users' viewing choices
A federal magistrate in Los Angeles has ordered SonicBlue to spy on thousands of digital video recorder users -- monitoring every show they record, every commercial they skip and every program they send electronically to a friend.
...The plaintiffs asked SonicBlue to turn over information on how individuals use the recording devices. SonicBlue said it does not track that information. The magistrate, who is supervising discovery, ordered the company to write software in the next 60 days that would record every "click'' from every customer's remote control.
..."We've been ordered to invade the privacy of our customers,'' said Ken Potashner, SonicBlue's chairman and chief executive. "This is something that we find personally very troubling.''
[Emphasis above is mine.] "Troubling" does not begin to say it.
Four separate lawsuits focus on a pair of features on the ReplayTV 4000: an "AutoSkip'' function that allows the device to bypass commercials while recording a program and a high-speed Internet port that allows users to download programs from the Internet or send them to other ReplayTV 4000 users.
[Again, emphasis mine.] Actually, according to Den Beste, it records the whole program and removes commercials on playback, not while recording, and since he has one, I tend to believe him. But it's the removal of commercials, no matter how it happens, that has got the networks in such a panic, and they're trying to make it not merely illegal, but impossible, to do it. "In other words," he continues, "they're trying to ban scissors because they might be used to clip articles out of magazines."
Unfortunately for us "consumers", Den Beste's analogy fails at a crucial point: Broadcast media have never been governed by the same rules. They don't even have the fundamental first amendment protection that newspapers so proudly wrap themselves in. Broadcasters, for example, have to satisfy the FCC periodically that they are "acting in the public interest" or lose their license. Print media face no comparable threat.
We lost the VCR copy-protection battle. We lost the DVD copy-protection battle. We lost the DVD region-scheme battle. We're about to lose our right to hit fast-forward during the commercials.
Where is it, where is it... Ah, one of Den Beste's readers found the quote.
There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or a corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back, for their private benefit.
It's from Robert A Heinlein's first published story, "Life-Line".
(See also Den Beste, Boing Boing, PhotoDude, and I'm sure dozens of other pages.)
Friday, May 03, 2002
It's always the people you never suspect
But she showed up anyway.
She's a lovely girl, there's no denying that, but hang on, she's only sixteen! Who votes for this thing? I mean, I heard some grousing during the Olympics about men ogling gold medalist Sarah Hughes in those provocative figure skating costumes. She's sixteen, too.
When did I become such an old fogy? Next thing you know I'll be carrying on about that little tart Britney or something.
Charlotte Church Wins 'Rear of the Year' Award
Teen-age singing sensation Charlotte Church has performed for princes, presidents and popes. On Wednesday, she won Britain's Rear of the Year award.
..."I think it is quite sad that image is so absolutely fundamental," she told Reuters as she strode into a sun-kissed London park, admitting she felt faintly foolish wearing her "Rear of the Year" winner's sash for the obligatory photo-shoot.
But she showed up anyway.
She's a lovely girl, there's no denying that, but hang on, she's only sixteen! Who votes for this thing? I mean, I heard some grousing during the Olympics about men ogling gold medalist Sarah Hughes in those provocative figure skating costumes. She's sixteen, too.
When did I become such an old fogy? Next thing you know I'll be carrying on about that little tart Britney or something.
Flight deck security
In the nation's attention this week is the issue of whether airline pilots should "carry". Now, the very mention of "guns" in the media draws an instinctive negative reaction, usually including the pejorative description "wild west". Clearly most reporters and editors believe there is no good reason for any private citizen to own or carry a gun. (Most reporters and editors should get out more.)
So, given their utter aversion to real firearms, United Airlines is training their pilots to use stun guns. The National Institute of Justice seems to think they would be effective. Congress is debating the issue.
You're telling me hijacking isn't a safety concern? Even stagecoaches had someone "riding shotgun."
To their credit, CNN has answered the question with an enlightening on-air report. (Which is to say, I can't find a link to it from their website.) They set up several rounds of tests, where volunteer "attackers" would be subjected to various kinds of stun-gun defenses. "Attackers" moved toward "victims" at a leisurely lumbering pace with arms outstretched -- apparently they think the typical attacker is the Frankenstein monster -- and "victims" fired their "non-violent" personal defense devices (which they already had in their hands, so they wouldn't have to fumble around for them).
They demonstrated, on camera, what policemen already know: Stun-guns sting like hell, but won't stop a determined attacker.
Personally, I want hijackers to wonder whether the pilot has a gun. At present, they can be fairly confident he doesn't.
(See also Susanna Cornett and Steven Den Beste.)
In the nation's attention this week is the issue of whether airline pilots should "carry". Now, the very mention of "guns" in the media draws an instinctive negative reaction, usually including the pejorative description "wild west". Clearly most reporters and editors believe there is no good reason for any private citizen to own or carry a gun. (Most reporters and editors should get out more.)
So, given their utter aversion to real firearms, United Airlines is training their pilots to use stun guns. The National Institute of Justice seems to think they would be effective. Congress is debating the issue.
Other lawmakers, however, said arming pilots would detract from their main job.
"Their primary duty is to see that the plane is flown and landed safely," said Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, Democrat of Texas.
You're telling me hijacking isn't a safety concern? Even stagecoaches had someone "riding shotgun."
To their credit, CNN has answered the question with an enlightening on-air report. (Which is to say, I can't find a link to it from their website.) They set up several rounds of tests, where volunteer "attackers" would be subjected to various kinds of stun-gun defenses. "Attackers" moved toward "victims" at a leisurely lumbering pace with arms outstretched -- apparently they think the typical attacker is the Frankenstein monster -- and "victims" fired their "non-violent" personal defense devices (which they already had in their hands, so they wouldn't have to fumble around for them).
They demonstrated, on camera, what policemen already know: Stun-guns sting like hell, but won't stop a determined attacker.
Personally, I want hijackers to wonder whether the pilot has a gun. At present, they can be fairly confident he doesn't.
(See also Susanna Cornett and Steven Den Beste.)
The personals
Thursday Threesome:
Onesome. Lions! Can a lion tame its mane? What about you? Tell us your worst hair memory... I'm male. Hair doesn't matter to me as much as it does to you. (I perceive the originator, and most of the contributors, to the Thursday Threesome are women.) I've been watching my forehead trying to join my crown for quite some time now: Any day now it'll make it. I kinda wish it would stay with me, but photos of me ever since high school show me that I'm probably better off without it.
Twosome. Tigers! Can a tiger change its stripes? Can people really change? Sure they can. Everyone I know has changed, except me. Perhaps I have changed too, but I don't perceive it.
Threesome. Bears! Who's a grumpy bear? 'Fess up - what makes you grumpy? Hunger.
The Friday Five:
(NOTE: The real Friday Five is taking the week off. I'm taking her suggestion and going back to get older questions I never answered.)
1. What is the weirdest thing you've ever eaten? Well, let's see. The first time I ate a crab that I'd caught myself was weird. But I guess the weirdest thing would be shark. (I figure I should at least sample anything that would eat me if the situation were reversed.) Shark is pretty good, actually.
2. Name one (material) thing you can't live without. Hm. Considering I lost everything in the housefire two years ago, that's a pretty short list.
3. Name something you've always wanted to do but didn't have time for. Travel. Where does that road go?
4. What outrageous thing do you wish you had the nerve to do? You think I'm gonna tell you? (This radio theater I'm in makes me do things I don't have the nerve to do. You think it's easy to stand up in front of a couple of thousand people and act a scene with Anthony Daniels? With no rehearsal? You try it.)
5. How do you plan to spend your weekend? Working, as usual.
Thursday Threesome:
Onesome. Lions! Can a lion tame its mane? What about you? Tell us your worst hair memory... I'm male. Hair doesn't matter to me as much as it does to you. (I perceive the originator, and most of the contributors, to the Thursday Threesome are women.) I've been watching my forehead trying to join my crown for quite some time now: Any day now it'll make it. I kinda wish it would stay with me, but photos of me ever since high school show me that I'm probably better off without it.
Twosome. Tigers! Can a tiger change its stripes? Can people really change? Sure they can. Everyone I know has changed, except me. Perhaps I have changed too, but I don't perceive it.
Threesome. Bears! Who's a grumpy bear? 'Fess up - what makes you grumpy? Hunger.
The Friday Five:
(NOTE: The real Friday Five is taking the week off. I'm taking her suggestion and going back to get older questions I never answered.)
1. What is the weirdest thing you've ever eaten? Well, let's see. The first time I ate a crab that I'd caught myself was weird. But I guess the weirdest thing would be shark. (I figure I should at least sample anything that would eat me if the situation were reversed.) Shark is pretty good, actually.
2. Name one (material) thing you can't live without. Hm. Considering I lost everything in the housefire two years ago, that's a pretty short list.
3. Name something you've always wanted to do but didn't have time for. Travel. Where does that road go?
4. What outrageous thing do you wish you had the nerve to do? You think I'm gonna tell you? (This radio theater I'm in makes me do things I don't have the nerve to do. You think it's easy to stand up in front of a couple of thousand people and act a scene with Anthony Daniels? With no rehearsal? You try it.)
5. How do you plan to spend your weekend? Working, as usual.
Thursday, May 02, 2002
War was inevitable
Thanks, Jerry, for pointing out Steven den Beste's excellent essay:
There is, of course, a third alternative: They could grow and adapt. They could take their rightful place as a valued contributor to world culture. (I am reminded of what could have been every time I see the word "algebra".) Nothing would please me more than to see them choose this option.
But they must choose it. And I don't think there's much chance of it.
Thanks, Jerry, for pointing out Steven den Beste's excellent essay:
The great strength of Western (especially American) culture is that it is particularly good at adopting the best it sees from competing systems and improving itself in that way. Because of that it has gotten progressively stronger and more widespread.
The great weakness of extremist Arab Muslim culture is that it does not do so. It is the nature of its meme that it rejects any change. But because of that, it is becoming progressively less competitive. It's now backed into a corner: it can fight or die.
There is, of course, a third alternative: They could grow and adapt. They could take their rightful place as a valued contributor to world culture. (I am reminded of what could have been every time I see the word "algebra".) Nothing would please me more than to see them choose this option.
But they must choose it. And I don't think there's much chance of it.
Now it all makes sense
Several of my fellow bloggers have mentioned this article from CableWorld, but in my opinion it can't get enough exposure. This is Jamie Kellner, CEO of Turner Broadcasting, talking about using "personal video recorders" (TiVo) specifically to avoid commercials:
Normal people do not call it "ad-supported": We call it free.
I realize that in a medium where all but the most remote areas have a hundred channels to choose from, you must feel rather possessive of your viewers. I also realize that, from your point of view, programming is just the stuff you run between commercials to bring people into the tent. I also realize that this interview was not intended for the general public, but for the industry insiders who read CableWorld. That Darn Internet.
However, we don't tune in for the commercials, Jamie. And my decision to tune to a Turner network (which I will think twice about, now) does not constitute a "contract" by any definition. Get over yourself.
LATER: See also Den Beste.
Several of my fellow bloggers have mentioned this article from CableWorld, but in my opinion it can't get enough exposure. This is Jamie Kellner, CEO of Turner Broadcasting, talking about using "personal video recorders" (TiVo) specifically to avoid commercials:
It's theft. Your contract with the network when you get the show is you're going to watch the spots. Otherwise you couldn't get the show on an ad-supported basis. Any time you skip a commercial or watch the button you're actually stealing the programming.
Normal people do not call it "ad-supported": We call it free.
I realize that in a medium where all but the most remote areas have a hundred channels to choose from, you must feel rather possessive of your viewers. I also realize that, from your point of view, programming is just the stuff you run between commercials to bring people into the tent. I also realize that this interview was not intended for the general public, but for the industry insiders who read CableWorld. That Darn Internet.
However, we don't tune in for the commercials, Jamie. And my decision to tune to a Turner network (which I will think twice about, now) does not constitute a "contract" by any definition. Get over yourself.
LATER: See also Den Beste.
A fine line between dedication and obsession
I don't blame Last Page for cutting back on activity -- CPS is not fun (how well I know) and life often beckons. Nobody expects you to take a laptop to the wedding...
Hey, wait a minute. You know, you *could* install ViaVoice on the laptop and mutter snarky comments into it during the ceremony...
Naah, that would be going too far. Wait until the reception. That's when people are bound to say something really embarrassing. Hey, it's not like it's your wedding.
You know, if you could run voice recognition on a Palm, and upgrade to Blogger Pro so you can e-mail to your blog, you could literally blog all the time... Look out, InstantMan, I sing the Blogger Bionic!
Maybe I need a nap.
I don't blame Last Page for cutting back on activity -- CPS is not fun (how well I know) and life often beckons. Nobody expects you to take a laptop to the wedding...
Hey, wait a minute. You know, you *could* install ViaVoice on the laptop and mutter snarky comments into it during the ceremony...
Naah, that would be going too far. Wait until the reception. That's when people are bound to say something really embarrassing. Hey, it's not like it's your wedding.
You know, if you could run voice recognition on a Palm, and upgrade to Blogger Pro so you can e-mail to your blog, you could literally blog all the time... Look out, InstantMan, I sing the Blogger Bionic!
Maybe I need a nap.
Tuesday, April 30, 2002
Now that's dedication
If there's an award, give it to Natalie Solent. You'll see why when you get there.
If there's an award, give it to Natalie Solent. You'll see why when you get there.
Monday, April 29, 2002
The right reasons
Ok, I can't overlook Matt Welch any longer, and I'm sorry it took this long to put him on my link list.
Ms Bardach, your readers would rather you just told us what's going on. We'll decide what needs changing. Thanks.
I could use a few myself. Serve me, and one day all this may be yours.
I suppose improving the content is out of the question. No wonder newspaper readership is down. I have high hopes for the next great L.A. paper, Mr Welch.
Ok, I can't overlook Matt Welch any longer, and I'm sorry it took this long to put him on my link list.
[Ann Louise] Bardach bemoaned that kids nowadays get into journalism for the wrong reasons (money and fame, dontcha know), unlike her generation, which wanted �to change the world.�
Ms Bardach, your readers would rather you just told us what's going on. We'll decide what needs changing. Thanks.
During the Q&A period, some young would-be reporter asked the panelists for advice. Bardach suggested serving internships, because �journalists always need interns.�
I could use a few myself. Serve me, and one day all this may be yours.
She suggested the panel discuss the pressing problem of �hating the home-town newspaper.� She hoped they would find strategies �how to work against that.�
I suppose improving the content is out of the question. No wonder newspaper readership is down. I have high hopes for the next great L.A. paper, Mr Welch.
Who is Steve Ditko?
Well, since he's credited as the co-creator of Spider-Man in the upcoming movie (perhaps you've heard of it), a number of reporters have been asking that question. They're discovering what comic book fans already know: Ditko doesn't talk. To anybody. But what little is known about him has been assembled in one place for general audiences by the LA Times.
You won't find an overview of his work there: Try here. (It's an ugly page -- sorry -- but it's crammed full of images and information.) Ditko's principles and personal tastes have made him paradoxically influential and obscure. His biggest hit was Spider-Man, and only he knows why he left the title in 1966, never to return. Stan Lee was probably the only scripter who could have brought Ditko into the mainstream, however briefly.
But boy, those first four years...
LATER: In the New York Times (link requires free registration), Stan Lee speculates on the reasons for Spider-Man's popularity. Mark Evanier warns you not to believe the story about Amazing Fantasy having already been cancelled when Spider-Man appeared in #15; I'll express skepticism when Lee claims ""Spider-Man" was the first comic book to make extensive use of "thought balloons"".
I should also tell you, I who have no financial interest in it, that you can own all of Ditko's Spider-Man stories for about $30 if you buy The Essential Spider-Man volumes one and two.
Well, since he's credited as the co-creator of Spider-Man in the upcoming movie (perhaps you've heard of it), a number of reporters have been asking that question. They're discovering what comic book fans already know: Ditko doesn't talk. To anybody. But what little is known about him has been assembled in one place for general audiences by the LA Times.
You won't find an overview of his work there: Try here. (It's an ugly page -- sorry -- but it's crammed full of images and information.) Ditko's principles and personal tastes have made him paradoxically influential and obscure. His biggest hit was Spider-Man, and only he knows why he left the title in 1966, never to return. Stan Lee was probably the only scripter who could have brought Ditko into the mainstream, however briefly.
But boy, those first four years...
LATER: In the New York Times (link requires free registration), Stan Lee speculates on the reasons for Spider-Man's popularity. Mark Evanier warns you not to believe the story about Amazing Fantasy having already been cancelled when Spider-Man appeared in #15; I'll express skepticism when Lee claims ""Spider-Man" was the first comic book to make extensive use of "thought balloons"".
I should also tell you, I who have no financial interest in it, that you can own all of Ditko's Spider-Man stories for about $30 if you buy The Essential Spider-Man volumes one and two.
What is a memorial for?
From the Spring 2002 City Journal:
I'm sold. This is it.
(The essay is also available at WSJ Opinion Journal, but City Journal has a better image of the design. See also the full redevelopment plan for the WTC site from the Autumn 2001 issue.)
From the Spring 2002 City Journal:
Whatever monument we finally choose, it should rise in a square amid a rebuilt center of business, not in the midst of a 16-acre necropolis. Even though emotions are raw, we have to keep in mind that we are building for the ages. Fifty years from now, the best memorial to those who died in the attack will be that their monument adorns what is still the world trade center.
I'm sold. This is it.
(The essay is also available at WSJ Opinion Journal, but City Journal has a better image of the design. See also the full redevelopment plan for the WTC site from the Autumn 2001 issue.)
Just another talk show
Whenever I catch myself thinking that it must be Significant, or at least Dignified, for someone to testify before a Congressional committee, I think of this. And now, I hope, you will too.
LATER: Please note that Lamond is covering the microphone in front of the puppet's mouth.
Whenever I catch myself thinking that it must be Significant, or at least Dignified, for someone to testify before a Congressional committee, I think of this. And now, I hope, you will too.
LATER: Please note that Lamond is covering the microphone in front of the puppet's mouth.
Sunday, April 28, 2002
The new phone book's here! I'm somebody now!
Well, not quite. But I do welcome all of you who came here via a permanent (if cryptic) link from InstaPundit. It says something about the traffic flow that I can pinpoint to within fifteen minutes or so the time he must have added the link. And yes, that nighttime map of the world is one breathtaking graphic. It's been my wallpaper for several weeks, ever since President Bush made that speech at the end of the South Korean rail line, at the DMZ.
Thanks, Dr Reynolds.
Well, not quite. But I do welcome all of you who came here via a permanent (if cryptic) link from InstaPundit. It says something about the traffic flow that I can pinpoint to within fifteen minutes or so the time he must have added the link. And yes, that nighttime map of the world is one breathtaking graphic. It's been my wallpaper for several weeks, ever since President Bush made that speech at the end of the South Korean rail line, at the DMZ.
Thanks, Dr Reynolds.
How to attract attention without really trying
Or, Caught in the act of throwing your life away.
Oh, it gets better. She's eighteen. He's wanted for failure to appear at a drunk driving hearing. They were parked across the street from the courthouse.
LATER: The child is with the grandparents. Is it heartless of me to observe that, having failed to instill any common sense in the second generation, they now get a shot at the third?
Or, Caught in the act of throwing your life away.
Public tryst as tot wanders lands mom, partner in jail
Burlington police were dispatched about 9 a.m. to North Main Street - not far from the police station - after a caller reported two people were naked in a car.
Police arrived to find a couple in the front seat of a 1989 Chrysler LeBaron - and also discovered an 18-month-old boy wandering in an alley nearby. The boy was the woman's child, authorities said.
Oh, it gets better. She's eighteen. He's wanted for failure to appear at a drunk driving hearing. They were parked across the street from the courthouse.
LATER: The child is with the grandparents. Is it heartless of me to observe that, having failed to instill any common sense in the second generation, they now get a shot at the third?
Paradise is for adults only
There, see what you can do when you try?
But not the adults, right?
I have visions of cardboard cutouts of a grinning Arafat, with his hand held up at 4' 6", labeled 'Terrorists must be at least this tall.'
(See also USS Clueless.)
There, see what you can do when you try?
Gaza Police Say They Intercepted 20 Boy Attackers
GAZA (Reuters) - Palestinian security forces in the Gaza Strip have intercepted around 20 youngsters planning assaults on Israeli settlements since the deaths of three boy suicide attackers Tuesday, a senior official said Friday.
Amin al-Hindi, chief of Palestinian General Intelligence, said his men were on high alert to stop copycat attackers who he said were bent on avenging Israel's military action in the West Bank.
But not the adults, right?
I have visions of cardboard cutouts of a grinning Arafat, with his hand held up at 4' 6", labeled 'Terrorists must be at least this tall.'
(See also USS Clueless.)
"I'll take the Effing Obvious for $100, Alex" Headline of the Week
Well, it's in the Newspaper of Record, it must be true. (Link requires free registration.) (See also Letter from Gotham and Cut on the Bias.)
Does that mean hatred of Israelis is OK, as long as it isn't hatred of Jews generally?
Anti-Semitism Is Deepening Among Muslims
The use of Nazi imagery, the newspaper caricatures of Jews with fangs and exaggerated hook noses, even the Arab textbooks with their descriptions of Jews as evil world conspirators -- all of that, Arab leaders often insist, reflect a dislike for Israelis and Zionism but not for Jews and Judaism.
Yet in many Muslim countries the hatred of Jews as Jews, and not only as citizens of Israel, has been nurtured through popular culture for generations.
Well, it's in the Newspaper of Record, it must be true. (Link requires free registration.) (See also Letter from Gotham and Cut on the Bias.)
Does that mean hatred of Israelis is OK, as long as it isn't hatred of Jews generally?
Saturday, April 27, 2002
Raising the bar
(Or, stuff to read when you're not reading me.)
"When is being told you've got five years to live good news?" Myria at It Can't Rain All The Time... has the answer. It's not pretty; the truth sometimes isn't. It's also not short, but it's worth the time. It is, I think, ultimately hopeful, and we all need that.
Is the death penalty about to be declared unconstitutional? Melissa K Fox of Non Sequitur File doesn't offer a prediction, but defines the question.
The Rabid Librarian knows what your dog and cat are really thinking.
(Or, stuff to read when you're not reading me.)
"When is being told you've got five years to live good news?" Myria at It Can't Rain All The Time... has the answer. It's not pretty; the truth sometimes isn't. It's also not short, but it's worth the time. It is, I think, ultimately hopeful, and we all need that.
Is the death penalty about to be declared unconstitutional? Melissa K Fox of Non Sequitur File doesn't offer a prediction, but defines the question.
The Rabid Librarian knows what your dog and cat are really thinking.
Who owns a movie?
If you ask the studio that made it, they'll say they own it. When you buy a video, you're not buying the movie, you're buying limited individual viewing rights to the movie. Right? That's what the FBI warning says.
And I remember the story of the movie theater manager who was so offended by parts of "The Center of the World" that he removed them from the print. As I recall, the Hollywood position is that the theaters do not own the movies, they only rent exhibition rights -- and if they aren't showing the film as shipped from the distributor, they are in violation of their contract. They are not showing the film they're advertising.
Okay. I think I follow this so far.
Then what about Cleanflicks? It's a movie-rental franchise that specializes in family-friendly movies. And if they aren't already, they make 'em so. Yes, they do. They edit the movies they rent, in effect producing a television version.
I don't buy Cleanflicks' spokesman's reasoning that "I own the movie, I can do what I want to it." If the MPAA worked like the RIAA, they'd shut these people down. But the studios have chosen not to challenge this: In fact, the article reports, New Line has released "family-friendly" edits of four films (including "The Mask") for this market.
I'm OK with it if the studios are, I think. As long as there is full disclosure that these versions of the films are edited. And by whom. And why.
Perhaps it is not in their best interests to challenge it: The fact that this can even be done, and leave an understandable story, could indicate just how gratuitous some "adult content" really is. (Check out Cleanflicks' blacklist of films they won't edit. It's rather short.) And although Cleanflicks deals exclusively in VHS tapes, there's no reason a DVD couldn't contain instructions to play a "family-friendly" edit on a player with parental controls turned on. Many filmmakers already produce alternate edits of some scenes in anticipation of the inevitable "broadcast television version": This really isn't that big a leap.
But this scares me:
This sounds like a guy who shouldn't be allowed out of the house.
LATER: Heh. Boing Boing calls their take on this "What Would Jesus Rent?" and provides a link to the Nando Times rather than the original source in the Christian Science Monitor. Since they may know something about link expiration at the CSM that I don't know, now you have both.
If you ask the studio that made it, they'll say they own it. When you buy a video, you're not buying the movie, you're buying limited individual viewing rights to the movie. Right? That's what the FBI warning says.
And I remember the story of the movie theater manager who was so offended by parts of "The Center of the World" that he removed them from the print. As I recall, the Hollywood position is that the theaters do not own the movies, they only rent exhibition rights -- and if they aren't showing the film as shipped from the distributor, they are in violation of their contract. They are not showing the film they're advertising.
Okay. I think I follow this so far.
Then what about Cleanflicks? It's a movie-rental franchise that specializes in family-friendly movies. And if they aren't already, they make 'em so. Yes, they do. They edit the movies they rent, in effect producing a television version.
I don't buy Cleanflicks' spokesman's reasoning that "I own the movie, I can do what I want to it." If the MPAA worked like the RIAA, they'd shut these people down. But the studios have chosen not to challenge this: In fact, the article reports, New Line has released "family-friendly" edits of four films (including "The Mask") for this market.
I'm OK with it if the studios are, I think. As long as there is full disclosure that these versions of the films are edited. And by whom. And why.
Perhaps it is not in their best interests to challenge it: The fact that this can even be done, and leave an understandable story, could indicate just how gratuitous some "adult content" really is. (Check out Cleanflicks' blacklist of films they won't edit. It's rather short.) And although Cleanflicks deals exclusively in VHS tapes, there's no reason a DVD couldn't contain instructions to play a "family-friendly" edit on a player with parental controls turned on. Many filmmakers already produce alternate edits of some scenes in anticipation of the inevitable "broadcast television version": This really isn't that big a leap.
But this scares me:
"I've tried to rent videos and speed past the nudity and violence, but, doggone it, you already saw it and it already affected you," says Mr. Miller. "It's not just an innocent video, it's affecting the way you're going to behave. I'm thrilled that someone is making a monumental step in the right direction."
This sounds like a guy who shouldn't be allowed out of the house.
LATER: Heh. Boing Boing calls their take on this "What Would Jesus Rent?" and provides a link to the Nando Times rather than the original source in the Christian Science Monitor. Since they may know something about link expiration at the CSM that I don't know, now you have both.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)