Friday, June 30, 2006

here I go getting pissed off again

There's an excellent post on a blog I read regularly about the conflict between science and religion. There are lots of comments about the post, and those conversations are fairly standard for this topic, although a bit more civil than others I've seen. I want to highlight a couple comments.

Someone pointed out this article, which mentions that

A Christian pro-family advocate is linking youth violence to a godless, Darwinist worldview. Focus on the Family vice president Bill Maier says atheistic beliefs have led to an alarming increase in youth violence. Young people are more aggressive than ever, he asserts, with many participating in fight clubs and posting violent videos on the Internet. But that is what you get from Darwinist evolution, the Focus on the Family official contends. "If we have a prevailing worldview that teaches that, basically, human beings evolved from the slime and we have no intrinsic worth or value or meaning," he explains, "then naturally we are going to see individuals begin to gravitate toward behavior such as this."

In response specifically to the italicized section (my italics), someone made a great comment:

I agree with this statement completely, and this illustrates my point about science and religion being incompatible ways of being human.

If you teach kids that there is no value in being human unless you are a faithful servant of an ancient Near-Eastern war god, then when those kids learn that the god is a myth, they're going to lose the basis for their belief in the value of the human being.

If you teach kids that moral codes only have value if they are backed by the authority of the Great Cosmic Fairy-King, then when the kids realize there is no Fairy-King, they will question the value of morality.

But if you drop all that nonsense and teach kids to just pay attention to others and develop a healthy sense of empathy and a deep personal appreciation for the intrinsic value of justice and fairness in a world of interdependent people, then the Fairy-King becomes irrelevant and their sense of dignity, morality and fairness are not built on unreliable mythic vapors.

The problem is that religion keeps telling kids that the Fairy-King is essential to their worth and their goodness, and that they are essentially shitty creatures without the saving grace of the Fairy-King, and science keeps telling them the Fairy-King doesn't exist. Put those two things together and you've got a problem raising kids to be healthy, responsible, moral adults.

It's obvious that many religious people cannot conceive of morality outside of religion. And since their religious beliefs are nonsense, and they are inevitably going to be confronted with that miserable reality on a daily basis, the moral foundations of our society are weak and unreliable.

He's so right it hurts.

Thursday, June 29, 2006

Our Leaders

"Guns have little or nothing to do with juvenile violence. The causes of youth violence are working parents who put their kids into daycare, the teaching of evolution in the schools, and working mothers who take birth control pills."

– Tom DeLay, on causes of the Columbine High School massacre, 1999

Tuesday, June 27, 2006

Monday, June 26, 2006

Poker: now what?

The job search is progressing more slowly than I imagined it would, but it has been ramping up a bit lately, and I have an interview coming up soon.

Its been about a month since I decided that its time to figure out some way other than poker to make a living. Since then I've barely played at all (just 2.5 hours in June at low limits, winning $100). I've been living off my savings and some advertising revenue from my blogs. Having taken some time away from poker, I'm starting to think that maybe getting back in the game would be good for me.

Specifically, playing with my original poker goals when I quit my last job - to make a little bit of money playing a limited schedule to help pay the bills until I figure out something else. Last time I lost sight of that plan, but that won't happen now. I've spent a lot of this last month trying to figure out my priorities, and I'm making progress. Reclaiming some poker income would give me some freedom to be selective about job opportunities, which would be a good thing as long as I can keep the negatives of poker income away.

All of that assumes that I'm capable of playing winning poker, which isn't necessarily a fair assumption. I was really freefalling. If I do come back, I'm going to start slow and small. Fewer tables, lower limits until I'm very very comfortable. Almost like I'm rebuilding my game. I'd want to turn off the auto-pilot and start thinking about poker again. Maybe turn off my real-time stats for a bit. Close the office door, turn off the music and focus for short bursts of intense concentration.

Sunday, June 25, 2006

zion****m

Every once in a while this person IMs me. I have no idea who it is, and the messages are always weird. He seems truly to have embraced the spirit of the IM name I created for this blog: stalk adspar.

7/1/06 Fair enough.

zion****m: Would you like to hear about my recent confrontation with Scientologists?
zion****m: whoa!
zion****m: you're adding everything i say to you to your blog!
zion****m: i just noticed that!
zion****m: MAJOR UPDATE
zion****m: lol
zion****m: i'd sort of appreciate it if you'd remove my aim name.
zion****m: but it's really no big deal.


6/26/06 Location revealed as frequency increases

zion****m: whoa!
zion****m: italy won some soccer game, so the italians in toronto are out in force with their flags and honking and junk!
zion****m: i responded by waving a quebec flag and shouting slogans of quebec liberation and nationalism!
zion****m: some people got pissed off at me, but at least one girl smiled at me!

6/25/06 MAJOR UPDATE!

zion****m: whoa!
zion****m: just now, i was at the ymca sitting on a bench waiting, when a pretty girl walked by and so of course i SCOPED HER OUT like the perv i am.
zion****m: but then i noticed the two people walking behind her were her PARENTS.
zion****m: and, uh, not only that, but my NEIGHBOURS.
zion****m: oops!
zion****m: oh well!
zion****m: my neighbours never liked me anyway.
stalk adspar: WHO ARE YOU
zion****m: SOME WEIRDO FROM THE INTERNET
zion****m: I NOTICED YOU WERE INTERESTED IN POKER AND EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY AND ESPECIALLY PINKER
zion****m: i think in that blank slate book, pinker does a tremendous disservice to his colleauges in the humanities, especially michel foucault, who we claims doesn't believe in reality.
stalk adspar: its been a while since i read it
zion****m: yeah.

i've heard tell from people with more scientific knowledge than myself that the book, combined with the pricey speaking tour mr. pinker went on to tout its release, make it look like the book was less a scientific work than it was an attempt to bring in $.

but i REALLY like some of his earlier books, especially the ones that focus on language and the 'how the mind works' or whatever one.
zion****m: ANYWAY.
zion****m: You should start a tattoo parlour to take advantage of the influx of returning soldiers who will no doubt be jaded and want a momento of some sort to commemorate their experience.


6/14/06

zion****m:
If I know where there's a license plate that says 'COATSE', which is almost like 'GOATSE', except first segment -VOICE, should I go take a picture of it?
zion****m: If it's like five minutes away?


5/23/06

zion****m: Is it wrong to forge articles on Wikipedia?


5/7/06

zion****m: i'm going to shoot a film where it's on a ship and the sound and video start out in sync, and gradually drift into sync, upon completion of which event the ship itself sinks.
zion****m: you're welcome to act in it, as long as you can pretend to be swayed back and forth without really being swayed back and forth.
zion****m: unfortunetly, the only compensation i could provide is my hospitality.

Proud to be non-human

Excellent post from PZ Meyers at Pharyngula about science and religion: I'm proud to be non-human.

An excerpt:
Listen, world. Dawkins and Dennett and Tyndall aren't arrogant: they're right. There is a difference. That's a real problem for scientists, that they keep saying unpleasant things like "the planet is getting hotter" and "smoking cigarettes can kill you" and "unprotected sex can spread some very serious diseases" and then they back it up with statistics and measurements and scary photos of tumor-riddled lungs, and ruin everyone's fun. Similarly, when Dawkins points out that religion is fueling terrorism and encouraging people to compromise our kids' educations, he's stating the obvious truthÂ…obvious to everyone who isn't blinkered by the false promotion of religion as a virtue. That's being right.
I'm not so sure though that being right precludes arrogance. Dawkins definitely can come across as arrogant, which PZ basically concedes. Watch Dawkins on The Root of All Evil and make up your own mind. Regardless of how right he is, anyone arguing against a deeply-held belief is going to have to jump through ridiculous hoops of diplomacy to avoid appearing arrogant, and I can't say I blame Dawkins for not wanting to do that.

Anyway here's a great quote (very thoroughly cited) I noticed on that same site:

What makes a free thinker is not his beliefs, but the way in which he holds them. If he holds them because his elders told him they were true when he was young, or if he holds them because if he did not he would be unhappy, his thought is not free; but if he holds them because, after careful though, he finds a balance of evidence in their favor, then his thought is free, however odd his conclusions may seem.

- Bertrand Russell, "The Value of Free Thought: How to Become a Truth-Seeker and Break the Chains of Mental Slavery" (1944) in Bertrand Russell on God and Religion (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus, 1986), pp. 239-40.

Tuesday, June 20, 2006

Adspar's Rebuttal to Adspar's Guide to Beard Growing

[Like beards? Visit Man Beard Blog today!]

I once told Robert F. Kennedy that only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly. It is in that spirit that I write today, and I dedicate this blog entry to the eternal memory of my great wisdom. You see, it takes a great man to tell someone how wrong they are, but it takes a perfect man to admit to his own imperfections. So as the greatest of all perfect men, I shall defy paradox in this charitable effort to enlighten you the reader.

You might recall that last fall I published Adspar's Guide to Beard Growing. It contained what I thought at the time was valuable information about cultivating facial hair and beating women. I truly believed in the righteousness of beards and the worthlessness of females, and all of my words and deeds flowed from those deeply-held beliefs. I held them deep within my soul; they nourished me.

Yet here I am today, publishing Adspar's Rebuttal to Adspar's Guide to Beard Growing. If you're wondering why the change of heart, either you haven't seen The DaVinci Code or you're an ignorant fool who doesn't understand the central message of the movie. But that's ok. I'm here to help you.

In the movie, Tom Hanks teaches us that the Catholic Church has sponsored a huge conspiracy to hide the fact that Jesus was married to a prostitute and that his whore-wife, Mary Magdalene, is really the one we should all be worshipping.

It is shocking information that will shake things up across the whole world, but we know it is true because Tom Hanks is a Harvard professor of seismology so he knows what will shake the earth. And if that isn't enough proof, Gandalf showed us how the leader of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles painted a picture when he was at dinner with Jesus one time, and if you look at his painting you can see how Mary Magdalene was there being a whore right in front of Jesus. And if that isn't enough, the space between Jesus and his wife makes a letter V, which stands for Vagina.



Watching this movie, I began to realize that something was wrong with my life. I had been hating women because they were such whores. But if the True Savior was really a prostitute, that would have to mean that women aren't such a bunch of worthless bitches after all. And so Tom Hanks taught me to embrace the sacred feminine and the Holy Grail of her Vagina.

But if women were to be admired rather than despised, that clearly meant that beards had to be despised rather than admired. Suddenly everything was so clear to me. Revisiting my list of bearded heros, I saw that nothing good ever came from wearing a beard.

Famous Beards:
  1. PJ Carlisimo - This guy is best known for being choked by a player on his team. Maybe if he learned how to use a razor Latrell would have had more respect for him.
  2. ZZ Top - I can't even name one song they sing. I think maybe they sing that one song that goes "but now I might be mistaken, a ha ha ha ha!" but I'm not sure. If it was them, I guess that is a bit cool, but still, you can't understand another word in that song. They could probably enunciate more clearly if they hacked the disgusting masses of hair off their faces.
  3. Sigmund Freud - The guy literally called everyone in the whole world a mother-fucker. Get a razor, a-hole.
  4. Blackbeard - This guy was an evil, thieving, drunken pirate whose beard was crucial to his identity. His reign of terror didn't even last 3 years before he was beheaded by Robert Maynard.
  5. Ricky Williams - He keeps getting suspended from NFL for drug use. And now he is so deeply in debt that he had to get a job in Canada. Pathetic.
  6. Abe Lincoln - He tried to a good deed by freeing the slaves, but in the end his beard caught up to him, as he assassinated while watching some crappy play.
  7. Zeus - He used to have a lot of bearded power, but he was debunked by Jesus.
  8. Jesus - He used to have a lot of power, but he was debunked by Tom Hanks. His famous beard was such good padding that his "turn the other cheek" advice made some sense for him. But then he took that message to far as he let the Romans torture and execute him. If he had shaved his beard sooner, he might have realized that getting slapped across the face hurts. Then he would have called his father to totally beat down the Romans and his wife wouldn't have been suppressed by the Catholics.

We can all see a clear trend. Beards lead to substance abuse and often-lethal violence.

Tom Hanks' message was foreshadowed by Will Ferrell when the darkest days of Ron Burgandy's life were marked by the presence of a bushy beard. When the Anchorman wanted to get his life back on track, he knew that the beard had to go. Milk was a bad choice because milk comes from the sacred feminine, which naturally clashes with any brambling beard.

Yet still the milk nourished him, just as my hatred of women had nourished me. This subtle twist of irony brings me back to where I started: admitting that I was wrong to endorse the growing of beards and the hating of women.

Thanks to The DaVinci Code, my life is back on track:

  • I now see that God loves Tom Hanks, women, and smooth-faced asian men.
  • I believe that clean-shaven men are to be commended for their decision to embrace beardlessness.
  • I know that Jesus was a phoney, and that his beard led to 2,000 years of lies.
  • I understand that the only good beards belong to clams because the V is in and the cross is out.
  • I've atoned for my sins by promoting these truths.

Park Ranger Blog Entry

I'm looking for a job. Here's what one site says I'm suited for. Poker isn't on this list, although somewhere I saw an essay saying that INTPs are perfectly suited for online poker.

Possible Career Paths for the INTP:

  • Scientists - especially Physics, Chemistry
  • Photographers
  • Strategic Planners
  • Mathematicians
  • University Professors
  • Computer Programmers, Systems Analysts, Computer Animation and Computer Specialists
  • Technical Writers
  • Engineers
  • Lawyers / Attorneys
  • Judges
  • Forensic Research
  • Forestry and Park Rangers

Sunday, June 18, 2006

I finally got around to ordering The End of Faith. Here's an interview with the author, Sam Harris.

An excerpt:

Amazon.com: In what sense is your book a kind of "prayer"? Do you think ultimately that humans will be able to avoid the apocalypse that you argue is the greatest threat of religious faith?

Harris: I am not as optimistic as I'd like to be. It is an interesting state to be in, psychologically speaking, because I feel very motivated to make the case against religion, but I don't see any real basis for hope that anything will change for the better. It seems very likely that we have spent too long in the company of bad ideas to now arrest our slide toward the brink. I hope I'm wrong about this, but I would not be surprised if the human experiment runs radically off the rails in our lifetime. The people who have their hands upon the tiller of civilization are just not thinking, speaking, or allocating resources in the ways they must if we are to avoid catastrophe. The fact that we elect presidents who waste time on things like gay marriage, when the nuclear weapons in the former Soviet Union lie unsecured (to cite only one immediate threat to our survival), is emblematic of how disastrously off course we are (it is also emblematic of the role faith plays in forcing us off course). So I am not hopeful. But still, each of us has to try to contribute positively to the world as we find it. What alternative is there?

Saturday, June 17, 2006

Good links of the day

Poker: 50/100 hand against mahatma at UB

For the interested but unaware, mahatma is a legend of high-stakes online poker. This excellent thread about playing a NL hand against him illustrates how completely he can baffle his opponents, and gives some good insight into thought processes in the big no-limit games.


Bias: Stephen Carter on the ACLU

Ed Brayton makes the point that people tend to demonize their opposition, especially in matters of ideology like politics or religion.
But rational people, people who care about truth and accuracy, must fight this tendency. We must try and evaluate every claim using the same criteria. Does the evidence support it? Are the conclusions drawn from the evidence logical? Any claim that fails to meet those criteria should be rejected, regardless of whether it supports our agenda or not. Likewise, any claim that withstands that scrutiny should be accepted as valid, regardless of whether it supports our agenda or not. None of us will ever be Mr. Spock, but we should strive to evaluate all arguments as though we have no stake in the outcome.


Cognitive Science: Cognitive science podcasts from Science and the City
I haven't listened to them yet, but I came across this list of cognitive science podcasts. Should be cool.



Offensive Humor: Sarah Silverman music video

A sweet little love song from the funniest female comedian I can think of.

Wednesday, June 14, 2006

STACKED first impression

STACKED with Daniel NegreanuWow I just scanned over the first page of this blog and had to scroll a long way down before I saw any poker content. Guess that makes sense since I've played a total of 1.5 hours in June. But I finally got my copy of STACKED a few days ago, so I've played around with that a bit, so here's a quick report.

My initial overall impression isn't very good. I just don't understand the point of sitting in front of my TV playing fake money poker when I could move over to my computer and play for real. It was basically just the same as the play money tables online, and within 2 minutes of starting I just decided to play every hand to the river. What is the point of buying a video game for play money poker when you can do it online for free?

I guess it does a decent job of simulating what it is like to sit at a casino table, but that isn't really going to excite me. I like video games that simulate something I don't do every day in real life, so this game is like trying to sell a "CUBICLE" video game to office workers. Of course, all I've tried so far is cash games, so maybe if I gave the tournament mode a shot, I'd like that more. The one feature this game might have that I think would be pretty cool is if it can put you at a tournament final table against AI that plays somewhat like well-known pros. So I'll check out the tournament mode and see if that is an option.

I was looking forward to the STACKED feature where Daniel gives you advice on how to play a hand, but so far the only "pro tip" I've received was terrible - playing $20/40 limit hold'em, I was advised to check on a heads up flop where I had the button and flopped a flush draw. I'm guessing that Daniel meant for that advice to apply to no-limit but the game programming didn't distinguish. Hopefully I'll get some better advice when I try tournaments.

One good thing about STACKED is that my girlfriend wanted to play and seemed to enjoy it, at least for an hour. She doesn't play cards for money, so perhaps the novelty factor was still there for her. So if you have a girlfriend who likes video games but doesn't fully understand your poker fascination, maybe this is the game will help your relationship. Ha!

Tuesday, June 13, 2006

JJ Redick: Drunken Poet

Since a disturbing amount of my traffic comes from people searching for J.J. Redick's poetry, I feel I ought to mention that he was arrested last night for drunk driving. Here's his mugshot.


I won't pretend not to be a bit giddy about this news. After posting bail, J.J. slightly modified his classic poem to fit the occasion. Here is his new version:

My life story is read in poetic stages
I was once sober, now I'm wasted
The cause and effect of a party dudes
The mathematical breakdown of micro-brews
It's difficult to fathom the coming of the rapture
What if I awoke hungover in an empty pasture?
Suddenly every ounce of beer had been depleted
And all my determination had been defeated
The booze pours, my tears fall
The pain subsides, I stand in awe
A lightning bolt strikes, I feel a sudden energy
Thunder clouds approach, I can't run from destiny
A tornado of nausea tears me down, but I will puke again
My life is a keg of Bud Light, but I'll chug it to the end
Hey it could have been worse
At least I didn't rape a stripper

Friday, June 09, 2006

More reputable influencing to come!


I'll be reviewing these two movies next. I've never heard of either of them, but here's some hype from the press release:

CENTURY CITY, Calif. – Get twelve steps closer to superstardom as Fox Home Entertainment exposes Hollywood’s most shaming secrets when Valley Of The Dolls and Beyond The Valley Of The Dolls debut on DVD June 13, 2006. These two legends of camp – from the twisted minds of scandal-making sixties icon Jacqueline Susann, (actress, author, screenwriter and thinly veiled subject of Valley Of The Dolls), and midnight movie kingpin Russ Meyer (Faster Pussycat, Kill Kill!) respectively – horrified critics and enthralled audiences when they opened in theaters and have both remained cult classics ever since. Valley Of The Dolls stars Oscar® winner Patty Duke* (The Miracle Worker), Barbara Parkins (“Peyton Place”) and Sharon Tate (“The Beverly Hillbillies”) as three aspiring starlets who let Hollywood go to their heads. The Valley Of The Dolls DVD arrives loaded with pulpy bonus programming, including the famously sloppy screen test by Judy Garland, as well as original featurettes, “Pill Pop-Up Karaoke,” and much more. Penned by now-famous film critic Roger Ebert, the outrageously over-the-top Beyond The Valley Of The Dolls earned an X-rating on its quest to out-do the scandalous original with the story of a girl-band, The Carrie Nations, who arrive in Hollywood to find only sex, drugs and sleaze. Featuring doll-induced performances by non-actors from the rock and adult film communities, Beyond The Valley Of The Dolls is a shameless classic that proves “all are available for a price.”

good sports

I might not be as much of a sports fan as I used to be, but I'm pretty excited about sports right now.

1.) This has been an awesome NBA playoffs, and the finals should be amazing. A year ago I got carried away and picked the Mavs to win it all. I'm rooting for them again this year, and they took the first game tonight.

2.) World Cup Soccer. SILLY!

Thursday, June 08, 2006

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

As I mentioned before, I was offered a free copy of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (BCSK) if I wrote up a review of it on my blog. My first reaction to the thought of watching this movie was "1969? Aw man..." I don't generally like old movies. The production value isn't as good; the special effects aren't as dazzling; the action scenes are boring; the dialog is unnatural. I guess all the bells and whistles of modern cinema are an important part of my enjoyment of a movie experience.

ClerksI even have a tough time watching Clerks just because it is black & white, despite it being (probably underrated at) #15 on my top pure comedies list.

MallratsAnd speaking of Kevin Smith movies, I never realized that the mall security guard "La Fours" in Mallrats was based on the legendary lawman in the white straw hat from BCSK. Noticing that silly connection in the middle of watching this movie drove home a point that I was aware of on a detached level but hadn't really sunk in: this is a classic movie that has strongly influenced film makers ever since it came out.

I had seen BCSK once before, probably about 8 years ago. I didn't remember much about it other than (spoiler in white text) Butch and Sundance dying at the end in a huge gunfight. I certainly don't remember particularly liking the movie, and I haven't bothered to watch it again since then. But this time I really liked it.

The StingMaybe for me old movies are an acquired taste. In the 8 years since the last time I saw BCSK, I've watched The Sting at least half a dozen times, and it gets better each time I watch it. So maybe that exposure to Newman and Redford helped me appreciate BCSK.

And the other thing that made me enjoy it more was the realization that I've watched movies backwards, historically speaking. So my goofy reaction to seeing the BCSK character Joe Lefors was that it reminded me of Mallrats, not the other way around. Realizing that so many more recent movies that I love owe something to quality older movies helped me put things in perspective.

So I had all that in my mind while I was enjoying BCSK, when my girlfriend said "is Brad Pitt our generation's Robert Redford?" At first I didn't see it, but then I realized how much Ocean's 11 and 12 (and I think there's a 13 on the way) are influenced by BCSK. The similarities are fairly obvious - both are stylish comedic crime dramas centered on 2 main characters, which would make George Clooney and Brad Pitt our generation's Paul Newman and Robert Redford.

See the intense concentration?

George Clooney and Brad Pitt are Paul Newman and Robert Redford

See the cool confidence?



See the latest styles?



See the 1 woman between the 2 of them?





See what Clooney and Pitt are going to look like in 20 years?



Anyway, if you already like old movies, you almost certainly don't need me to recommend BCSK to you, since it is one of the most celebrated movies of all time. But if you're like me and don't generally like anything made before you were born, you should give this one a try. In addition to having an obvious influence in modern blockbusters like Oceans 11 and 12, check out this list of movies that have directly referenced BCSK. It is fun to make those backwards connections. Even without those, they shot it 38 years ago, but the dialog is still fresh and funny, the characters are likeable, and the story is engaging.

I'll also mention that the Ultimate Collector's Edition that they sent me has a ton of bonus stuff too. I'm not really into that kind of stuff, but there's plenty of info about it if you click on the banner below.

the root of all laziness

I wrote the following for my new blog, Inertia Anonymous. If you'd like to comment on it, please head over there.


One negative aspect of blogging for me has been that the cathartic act of getting all my ideas down in words can feel so satisfying that I'm content to abandon those ideas in favor of new ones. It feels kind of like finishing a crossword and throwing it away, except unlike a completed puzzle, a lot of the ideas have value beyond my first application of them.

Over a year ago, after reading Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate, I wrote this awkward, sprawling rant. It contained two related ideas that I wish I had explored more fully, and that could be very relevant to us here at Inertia Anonymous:
  1. modularity of mind
  2. our "conscious mind" may not have full access to modules
The concept of modularity implies the inevitability of modules conflicting. Meanwhile your conscious mind doesn't know what to make of the erratic impulses/behaviors resulting from those conflicts between modules. So as an example, some kind of pleasure module tells you to keep drinking while some kind of poison control module tells you to vomit. Irrational behavior ensues, and the next morning you wonder why you had that last drink.

So I'm thinking that a lot of internal struggles could be analyzed in this modularity framework, and specifically struggles with laziness. Are there inertia modules that tell us to avoid change and conserve our energy? Could looking at our battles with laziness as struggles between inertia modules and our semi-rational conscious minds be helpful to us?

So far our i-anon community includes:
  • the dude: M.D. student
  • mox: biology Ph.D. student
  • cara: M.D./Ph.D. student
  • adspar & WK: amateur evolutionary psychology enthusiasts
Considering that lineup, I'm hoping that this generates some interesting discussion.

Tuesday, June 06, 2006

Say tuned for some reputable influencing



Because I'm a "reputable influencer," M80 sent me a copy of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (The Ultimate Collector's Edition), which they are promoting for Fox. The DVD arrived today, so to hold up my end of the deal, I'll be posting a review sometime soon.

Sunday, June 04, 2006

Inertia Anonymous

My new group project:

INERTIA ANONYMOUS
http://inertiaanonymous.blogspot.com/

WK has signed on.

If you're interested in contributing, drop me a line. The catch-22 is that the laziest people won't bother.

Saturday, June 03, 2006

Shatner PURE GOLD

By the way, we had to recalibrate the Unintentional Comedy Scale thanks to this William Shatner clip on youtube.com -- everything once rated 100 out of 100 has been dropped to 99 so the ShatMan can stand alone (yes, even Carl Lewis' national anthem performance). This will never be topped. I'm calling it right now. We have hit the comedy ceiling, my friends.
- Bill Simmons



Wow, John Hollinger sucks

ESPN.com's NBA "insider" John Hollinger writes this in a recent article about the depth of the Dallas Mavericks:

"Next up was a San Antonio team that had ample big men but was less comfortable playing small ball."

Ample big men? No comfortable playing small ball? Did Hollinger even watch that series? The Spurs ran 4 guards and Tim Duncan for about 95% of the minutes in that series, occassionally throwing the artist formerly known as Robert Horry out there for the other 5%. They did that because they didn't have any other effective big men, so they were more comfortable playing small ball.

ESPN wants us to pay extra to read this crap?

Dog for a week

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

She was pretty nervous about staying with us yesterday, but she seems to have settled in now.

Friday, June 02, 2006

Argh

For the last 2 afternoons, I've been trying to write something in response to this article by Bill O'Reilly. (I think that link will only be good for a limited time.) His article basically points out that Americans are woefully uninformed about important issues, an goes on to blame it (partly or mostly, depending how you read it) on entertainment technology.

I'm frustrated though because I don't know exactly what I want to say, and I keep scrapping everything I've written so far. I think his article is a mess, and my reaction to it is definitely a mess.

O'Reilly mentions in passing a bunch of things that I have a lot of serious thoughts about: America's "issue illiteracy," "mind-numbing reality shows," video games, chat rooms, ipods, tabloids, and Barry Bonds. So I kind of want to work an intelligent discussion of all those topics into my response, but that would take way too long, and it would get a bit disorganized.

I think what most drove me to want to respond was his closing paragraph:
"Ultimately, mass electronic escape will lead to a very few exercising vast power over the distracted many. That, of course, is not the system the Founders envisioned. But when more votes are cast for American Idol contestants than for Presidential candidates, you know "the times, they are a changin'." And not for the better."

I'm giving up on making my thoughts look pretty, so here is a numbered list instead.

  1. Don't a few pretty much always exercise vast power over many? Isn't that what civilization always is? I guess we could revert to hunter-gatherer tribes where everyone had an equal say in how to run things.
  2. My understanding of the founding fathers' intentions was that they wouldn't let those rulers become abusive of their power, not that they wanted to keep the elite from ruling. Didn't they specifically set up the electoral college, as if to say "just in case you stupids screw something up, here are some people who should know better." The Founders just wanted to set up a system where the farmers could do their farming and not have to worry that the King is going to steal the crops or cut their head off for praying to the wrong god.
  3. Is it changing for the worse if American Idol is more popular than politics? People have always been a lot more interested in being entertained than sweating the details of how the country runs. Is it really so suprising that as technology shrinks the world, more people pay attention to a specific entertainment source than to a specific issue that doesn't pose an immediate threat? Isn't it nice that we have something that captures our interests so completely, and that we can enjoy it in a relatively peaceful time?
  4. The Founders envisioned a system of economic freedom where everyone was guaranteed the right to pursue happiness. Well they got it. Electronics and media corporations used their economic freedom to give people what they want, what they think will make them happy. Average Joe doesn't want to come home from a hard day of work and read up about spooky terrorist threats; he wants to watch baseball players hit homeruns. Average Joe Junior doesn't want to study geography; he wants to play Splinter Cell. Average Jane doesn't want to examine the issue of border control after she puts Joe Jr. to bed; she wants to see Taylor Hicks sing and dance like an idiot. Granted, people might be happier if they devoted more time and effort to understanding the world around them, and less time to worthless diversions, but people don't know what actually makes them happy. They don't want to do more work than they have to, and they don't want to be bored in the meantime. It would be nice if people were more educated on the issues, but is it fair to blame their ignorance on electronics?
  5. O'Reilly barely hints at 3 factors that are much more relevant to "issue illiteracy" than his cranky luddite paranoia: culture, education, and journalism.
  6. In regards to culture, O'Reilly wrote "The USA used to be a nation that valued knowledge and rallied around national standards." I agree that our culture generally doesn't value knowledge. We're more likely to make fun of a smart kid than appreciate him. This is a problem of much more concern to me than the popularity of ipods.
  7. In regards to education and journalism, O'Reilly wrote
    "Our society is so intellectually undemanding that uninformed entertainers like the Dixie Chicks can comment negatively on foreign policy and be rewarded with a Time Magazine cover. Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie can have a baby and receive more attention than the Senate vote on illegal immigration. And Barry Bonds can cheat his way to home run records and still command standing ovations in San Francisco."
  8. Our education system sucks. Maybe if we taught people some critical thinking skills they'd be more intellectually demanding. Maybe if we taught people how to set aside emotion and evaluate a political issue they'd have more interest in illegal immigration. Maybe if we taught people about ethics they'd shun the cheaters. But we'd rather force absurd stone-age myths into science classes than actual science. We'd rather be politically correct than present facts that might be critical of minorities. We'd rather fire a man for using the word "niggardly" than teach people what the word actually means. We fire the president of Harvard for offering an explanation of the gender disparity in the scientific community that we don't like, regardless of the validity of his reasoning.
  9. Journalist standards sucks. The news is now a business, catering to consumer demand. And very few consumers want objective truth. They want information that supports their existing views. And so more and more news sources just give people what they want, with little regard for truth. If you like the facts, why check if they're true, right?

I could keep going but I guess I'll stop there. And by the way, I generally like O'Reilly. While I don't always agree with him, I think he's got a good approach to a lot of important issues. But for a man who is already so widely criticized, stuff like this makes his critics' jobs easier.

Friday, May 26, 2006

4th spatial dimension

This is cool. Scientists have developed a mathematical framework that should allow them to test a 5-dimensional theory of gravity. Their theory predicts the existence of tiny black holes in our solar system that Einstein's theory wouldn't allow. We'll hear more in a few years.

3 hours of related info. Nova program about string theory, based on Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe.

Wednesday, May 24, 2006

Top TV Characters

6/6/06 - Added McCoy, Dwight, Fake Henry Gale. Shuffled the order a bit.


Minor Characters

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting


Major Characters

11.

10.
9.
8. Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting
7.

6.

5.
4.
3.

2.

1