Lost speculation

WARNING: This will be of very little interest to anyone. But it started as a forum post and grew a bit large. I'm not even going to waste time making links to all of the references. This is just for the tiny portion of the population that watches ABC's Lost. More specifically those are playing The Lost Experience ARG.

ADDITIONAL WARNING: If you are from outside of North America, I reference things from episodes you may not have seen yet.

Okay, now that I may be down to one reader...



In 1980, Alvar really wants to bring his brother into the fold. He knows his brother is brilliant and would be perfect for his new Dharma Initiative. Werner has extensive treatments, recreating himself as the young Thomas Werner Mittelwerk (twistedly taking his last name from a Nazi concentration camp and the first name is the Greek form of the Aramaic name Te'oma which meant "twin"). Alvar is overjoyed to be working with his brother again (poor Alvar, always seeing the best in people and looking past the evil scientist thing). Thomas of course has other long term plans for Dharma. Evil plans.

Thomas bides his time for years, building trust and building is powerbase. Secretly he begins to twist the controlled environment the Dharma. He turns it into his own Lord of the Flies, seeing how a strife and conflict can push evolution. Genetic experiments, twist psychological experiments, etc.. He pulls in other people to expand his base of experimental subjects. For example, a French research ship has a large collection of high I.Q's. He also needs children, fresh untainted minds. (see Skinner's Box). All the while he keeps Alvar in the dark.

In 2000/2001, Alvar begins to figure out that something isn't all god with Dharma. And confronts his brother. But Mittelwerk is ready to make his move. "Hey, Alvar, let's take a trip to the Island. You can see for yourself." Bad move, Alvar. You are now going to be spending a long time there (see Blast Door Map... poor Magnus).

Mittelwerk continues his work, expanding his power, using Dharma to push evolution. In outside world he has collected broad range of people to push the Dharma experiment to the final stages. He has manipulated their lives, their mental states. He also has a handful of people who are getting too close to the truth. The writer Gary Troup knows way to much of the Valenezetti equation, the very base of Mittelwek's experiments and has just written a book that not only touches on Mittelwerk's evil, but seems to allude to Alvar and his actual relationship. And then their is Liddy Wales. She was a member of the Hanso Foundation's board of directors and seemed not to buy Mittelwerk's excuses for Alvar's absence. He had her committed to a mental institution but somehow she got out and changed her name (sliughtly). She could blow the whole thing.

All Mittelwerk needs is to get them all on one flight....

The Skeletor Show

I'm a fan of repurposing one's childhood. My childhood was filled with badly animated tv shows so, like reclaiming garbage and turning it to art (lower case 'a'), I enjoy all of the SpaceGhost/Sealab/Birdman/G.I. Joe stuff. Makes me feel warm and fuzzy. Especially well the voice work is good.

There are more episodes.

Moussaoui: Wait, can I take that back?

Zacarias Moussaoui has asked if he can change his plea to not guilty.

Mmmm. Regardless of anything else about the case, it has been fascinating to watch him react to the U.S. justice system. No, it appears he has developed a certain amount of respect for the jury system.

Explaining his latest reversal, Moussaoui said in an affidavit: "I was extremely surprised" by the life sentence.

"I had thought I would be sentenced to death based on the emotions and anger toward me for the deaths on Sept. 11, but after reviewing the jury verdict and reading how the jurors set aside their emotions and disgust for me and focused on the law and the evidence ... I now see that it is possible that I can receive a fair trial even with Americans as jurors."

No, I understand that some of his twists and turns are because (1) he has/had little understanding of the justice system, (2) part of him wanted to be martyred, and (3) he's a bit crazy. But his statements also make me wonder how his sentence is playing in the rest of the world.

Four Eyed Monsters: This is how it changes

After months of watching their amazing vidcast, I finally saw the actual movie. Wonderful film. I don't want to use the term unflinching, because that isn't quite right. It is full of flinching. It makes you, the viewer, cringe in the best possible way. Capturing that struggle of finding that "other," how language doesn't come close to conveying your true thoughts, how you don't even know your own true thoughts, how art can seem so distant and unachievable but yet is the only way to speak.

To paraphrase: "I am going to say something... and I am going to film it."

For such a simple film, it work so beautifully on so many levels. Especially on the issue of art... and truth. Which makes the film seem mindboggingly pretentious, which it is not. It is slyly aware of it's place, yet manages to exceed that place. In spirit it reminded me of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.

Combine it with their vidcasts and you have a piece of meta (yes, I hate that term too) that is excruciating true. And for all it's flinch worth cringy excruciating pain, it never drops to melodrama.

Yes, I liked Four Eyed Monsters.

Afterwards, I walked home and thought of just going to sleep. But the urge to talk to the film makers overtook me, and I headed off to Soda Bar to see if they were there. They were. Let me say that Susan Bruice and Arin Crumley are just plain nice. Friendly, nice, open folks. Rambling conversations about truth, autobiography, the future of the internet, open source, art, financing, the future of film distribution, etc. These are amazingly real people.

So, go to their website. Watch the vidcast. Fill out a request for a screening in your neck of the woods.

Also, a note on the generosity of people: I have been frozen by the world, by pain, by this city. Recently, tonight in particular, I was reminded about how good people can be. It saddens me GREATLY that I am unable to either receive or return this. I hope it is temporary. But the fact is that I have destroyed so much good, have rejected it. If I was whole, if I was able to process the good that is passed towards me... Wow. I want to, and I am trying to, but I haven't yet. I pains me and to watch it pain others... Oh, hell. I can feel love, feel it embrace me, desperate to comfort me, yet I am still unable to accept it.

Sigh.

Mission: Impossible 3 - Goes Bang Good, But Still Not A Spy Film

Short review: Good flick. Fast, exciting, fairly plotless. "Goes bang good," as we used to say. Won't linger with me, but still just generally fun.

(Warning: I may have some minor spoilers, so be warned.)

First of all, I am not going to discuss Tom Cruise. Even with my unhealthy fascination with Scientology and cults in general, I could careless about TomKat or BabyTomKat (although just the fact I was about to make a choke about calling the child Suri or maybe Sluri says that I know more than I should). His performance is fine. Solid, but this isn't Chekhov. One thing you can say for Tom is that he runs really well. But I do enjoy him as an actor. He has great tiny moments, tiny little things that read both has real and has highly entertaining. At one point he gives a great delivery of the line, "Okay."

What makes this Mission Impossible better than the other two is that it attempts to get back to The Team. The television show was about the team, each person doing their part to achieve the whole. While M:I3 doesn't do it full out, it makes baby step back to that point. Baby steps. And this is my problem with the movie also. A team spy movie should be like a con movie and a heist movie mixed all up. With guns and cool gadgets. M:I3 gets the heist and the guns and the gadgets, but misses the con.

I have been watch the television show Hustle on A&E lately. It has wonderfully complex plans, lies within lies, to achieve their goals. The M:I movies mainly revolve around a tiny misdirection and a lot of running around and shooting things. This mainly revolves around Ethan Hunt (Mr. Cruise) doing the running (Run, Tom! Run!) and shooting (Shoot, Tom! Shoot!). The rest of the team has their support rolls, but for the most part they are tiny. But it is step over M:I1, where the entire team is killed in the first ten minutes, only to be replaced by another team (one of whom is evil). Or M:I2, which to be honest I can't even really remember. Ethan drove a motorcycle, that's all that stuck. M:I3 makes tiny tiny steps towards bring back the team concept.

My other issue is why is there always someone in the organization who is a mole? Why? This is also my issue with the show 24. Every season, CTU is rife with moles. Yes, yes, this allows our hero to "go rogue" and have "the whole world against them," but it is getting real real old. M:I should be about the fact that the government can't have any connection to mission but it needs to get done just the same. "If you get caught, we will disavow our involvement." That's enough. The tv show The Unit is attempting to do this. M:I3 doesn't.

But it goes bang good.

Good stunts, good action. There is a feeling of danger in it, a sense that things can fall apart and fail. I appreciate that. This has always been my problem with Bond films. Every action and plan of Bond works. Well, not every, but darn close. M:I3 allows the action to be risky.

This is what J.J. Abrams brings to the film. Alias always felt like at any moment things could fail. Abrams bring a lot of Alias to this film. Like Alias, the central conflict of the character is trying to balance "normal" life with "spy life." To me it works, if not wholly true to the original series. But it does make our central character more than just a running/shooting/jumping-off-buildings machine. The movie is even framed like the original episode of Alias, starting with our main character tied to a chair with us not having any idea what's goin' on.

There is also a wonderful cameo by Kerri Russell who played the title role in Abrams' show Felicity. Russell was originally considered for the part of Sydney in Alias, but they passed, in part because they were worried about audiences confusing Felicity with Sydney. Here we get to see Russell play the action hero, and even in her short part (and in a short "training flashback montage") we get to see her in that role. It actually, as they say in the business, kicks ass.

The entire cast is fine, but the cream is definite Philip Seymour Hoffman. He plays the villain wonderfully, seething without being cartoony (well, overly cartoony). It's been quite awhile since we've gotten a good villain. Heck, I can't think of the last villain I've really enjoyed watching. Where have all the villains gone?

One last thing, I love the music from Alias and Abrams' Lost. Michael Giacchino also does the music here. It's still good, but he needs to breakaway from his fluttering violins. I know it's his trademark, but having heard it in the final moments on Wednesday's episode of Lost, it just bugged me.


(Okay, one final thing. I love Brooklyn and all, but I have to stop seeing night movies here. Turning off cell phones seems to be beyond them. Only two rang during the movie, but FOUR folks near me had to have short conversations on them. And flipping your phone open to check who just called you when it vibrates is still a disruption. Those screens are like a flashlight in a dark theater. Also, if you are confused in the first two minutes of the movie, give the filmmakers some time to explain it. Don't asked the person sitting next to you. Perhaps if you listened you wouldn't miss so much. AND I don't particularly need to hear your predictions of what will happen next. Especially the next line. If a character is counting to ten and they've just said "Six," you aren't a genius if you guess the next line will be "Seven." I'm not exaggerating on any of these. It was a particularly obnoxious crowd tonight.

I should go. I have some kids to chase of my lawn.)

Four Eyed Monsters

This is old...sort of.

Four Eyed Monsters is a little independent film that is trying really to break the mold how films get distributed. Actually there are tons of wonderful things about this film/project. I say this without having ever seen the movie. But they also have a podcast. Watch it. Go to episode one first and watch them all.

Anyway the point of all this is that there will be free screening at the Brooklyn Museum on Saturday, May 6th (yes, tomorrow) at 8:30. Tickets will be available at the visitor center starting at 7:30. Afterwards, you can hang out at the museum until 11pm (free first Saturday stuff). And then go hang at Soda Bar up an Vanderbilt.

OR...

You can go see the start of the Gotham Girls Roller Derby second season. Also in Brooklyn (at least for now), it will be at The Schwartz Athletic Center (1 University Plaza, on Long Island University's Brooklyn Campus), doors at 7:30 and the bout starts at 8:30. It will be the Manhattan Mayhem vs. the new Bronx Gridlock.

I know. Tough choices.

Mission Best Buy & the Pantsless 8

ImprovEverywhere struck again this weekend. Approx. 80 folks, clad in Best Buy Blue shirts, entered the Chelsea Best Buy and just hung out. It went well. Customers were confused, employees flustered and the managementhad no idea what to do.

Their website is taking a lot of hits so you might not get in today, but it's well worth the read.

Also, hadn't heard that their had be a decision in the Pantsless courtcase. God to see that not wearing pants of the subway isn't counted as terrorism. The decision here.

The Oozinator - Extra Pumping Required

Just in time for summer.

There are certain things that should just not be. Someone, somewhere should have caught this before it went into production. But of course they didn't.

So Hasbro has created the bukkake simulator.

(And in case you doubt that this is a real ad or a real toy... The Oozinator.

Caption, please

Too Much Coffee Man: The Opera

Sometimes the world is just a glorious place. First Mr. Lee singing about booze to a superhero, now TMCM: The Opera. If you live in or near Portland, OR, keep an eye out for tickets.

Saruman at AA Meeting

Oh, Christopher Lee. We love you you.

This is a movie that some how made it under my radar. The Return of Captain Invincible.

In case the lyrics are hard to make out:
Mai tai say that i'm old fashioned,
tres vin ordinaire
that i want a fresh manhattan
with white anglo-saxons everywhere?
a black russian's no pink lady
give her a singapore sling.
and moscow mule is not your baby
so highball the vodka, and name your sting
be a big shot, with a bullshot
be a schwein mit der wein
have a short, or a port, or a snort, of any sort.
asti spumante . uno chianti.
Are divine!
I got some economic hocks,
a gin and tonic on the rocks.
where angels fear to tread, i say-
choose your booze! let's hit the red-eye!
think of young deanna durbin,
and how she sung on rum and bourbon.
or enhance your luncheon hour
with a planter's punch,
and a whiskey sour
if you feel like a wreck,
try a horse's neck
or a sherry with a cherry in the new fun size-
If you don't name your poison
i'll have to get the boys in
the spirit of adventure opens ones eyes
if you don't name your poison
i'll have to get the boys in
and you'll never see another tequila sunrise
Live happily ever after
with a chablis and some laughter.
between the sheets is lovely
with a dizzy blonde and a bottle of bubbly
there's nothing sicker in society
than a lack of liquor and sobriety
so! down the hatch. here's mud in your eye!
take a bracer with a chaser, wash it down with rye!
bottoms up, stirrup cup!
it'll put you in the pink.
And all you have to do is
Drink, drink, etc

Dig it! Digg digs itself into chaos!

or The Trouble with Societies

I am fascinated by how people interact and how different "systems" affect these interactions. This is why I enjoy Survivor and such. I really enjoy watching when a system starts to show its flaws. This is why I just adore the internet.

For example, the whole MySpace fiasco right now. You make a system that is borderline anonymous, has an extreme amount of freedom and is open to anyone, eventually it will be abused. As I've said over and over, it is much easier to break something than it is to create it. So its no surprise that people with use MySpace for hate or for trolling for children or whatever.

So lets look at Digg. I you aren't familiar with Digg, it is a tech news site that tries to function without an editorial system. Or rather, all of the users are the editorial system. They submit all the stories and they "vote" on which stories are worthy. If the masses agree, the story makes it to the front page. The benefits to this system are great: news can be aggregated to users attention rapidly, users feel like they have involvement in the processes, stories are filtered through an almost true democratic system and not through what what a hand full of folks might thing is interesting.

But it negatives are also large. A lot of garbage has to go in to get gems out. Since it is user submitted and any user can submit, you get a lot of garbage. Inaccurate stuff ("Comet to hit Earth on May 25th!"). A lot of non-tech related stories, mainly of the standard viral internet type stuff, but also politics, gossip, etc.. A touch of religious arguments (mainly stemming from Creationism/Evolution debate). A lot of duplicated stories. When BootCamp was announced there was a flood of stories submitted on the topic, and they haven't stopped. Most of them recycling the same information, over and over.

And then there are people who submit their own blog, usually a blog that is just linking to a different blog where the real story is. Usually these are young blogs, with out much content. But the "Digg Effect" (similar to the "Slashdot Effect") is a powerful draw. A story/link that makes it to the front page of Digg will create a huge amount of traffic (often crushing smaller sites in its glory), so I understand to temptation. Heck, I've been tempted but I have not had anything nearly worthy of it.

Now it is clear that Digg is ripe for abuse, but they to have methods to keep things under control. Don't only can you "digg" a story, voting that the story is interesting, but you can also "report" it, marking it as inaccurate, spam, bad link, duplicate, old news, or just lame. These are like anti-diggs. But unlike diggs that show a number next to the story (approximately 50-80 diggs to get to the front page), you don't see the count of these anti-diggs. They remain secret. Much of the system remains secret. There are algorithms operating behind the scenes figuring out if something is worthy of being elevated to magical front page status. I truly don't understand how it works, but my assumption it takes into account the amount of diggs a story gets, the rate at which it gets diggs and how many anti-diggs it gets. A story can also be entirely removed (automatically) if it gets enough reports. Enough people mark something as inaccurate, it will go bye-bye.

But the biggest flaw, the flaw with any system that gives users a feeling of ownership and control, is that people will find things that make their control feel less than complete. And that has happened. I won't go into it in detail, but a series of irregularities were noticed and then reported on by other sites (Slashdot, forevergeek, etc). Digg responded. This of course then led to a flood of stories submitted to Digg about digg's own abuse. Most of these stories are then rabidly anti-digged by users, which leads the posters to believe in more editorial abuse. And the cycle continues.

I have no idea if there is editorial shenanigans going on. I really don't care. Doesn't affect me. The interesting thing is how protective of people's freedoms, true of just perceived, people get. In addition, the competitive nature that the internet brings up in people. Yes, it feels good to get a submitted story t the front page, a sense of approval and accomplishment. Some people will try to do this by "cheating" (creating fake accounts, etc). And out of 250,000 registered users on Digg, there will be plenty of people who attempt to abuse it and many will succeed.

I'm not bagging on Digg for all this. It is the nature of the beast.

BootCamp, Apple, Microsoft and Dvorak

(For those of you who don't live and die by Apple news: BootCamp is a little utility for Intel-based Macintoshes that allows you to partition your hard drive and install WindowsXP on it. What this means is that when you turn your Mac on, you can hold down the option key and it will give your choice of starting up Apple's OS X or WindowsXP. And it runs XP wonderfully... although there are some minor quirks. You can't run both at the same time, but by restarting you can switch from on to the other.)

So I have had BootCamp running on my MacBook Pro for a week now. And I do love love it. Not that I use Windows for much. I have a couple of games and occasionally something pops up on the web that I want to check out (like Cloud), but I still spend the vast a majority of my time on the OS X side of my partition. (I only gave Windows 15GB to play in). But it works like a charm. Heck, it can run Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion at decent graphical levels... although it does get a bit hot so I try not to play for long stretches. I've even put FlyAKite onto Windows so it's less ugly.

(An aside: Using BootCamp was a total breeze, if the standard installing WindowsXP lengthiness issue. It has been eons since I've had to sit through a Windows install. What is it about Windows install that gives me the willies? Is it just that I felt dirty putting Windows on my purdy Mac? Or is it that I remember the days of Blue Screens of Death? Anyway, I've heard of people having problems installing it, like discovering their wireless keyboard didn't work midway through the install or installing XP on their OS X partition. But Apple's instructions are pretty darn clear on this stuff. Print the instructions. Read them through. Follow them to a tee. But I like instructions. And BootCamp is also beta, so beware.)

One of the questions that is floating around geek circles is "Why did Apple do it?" Everyone knew it was possible. In fact, some folks had done it only a week before Apple released BootCamp (although without all the drivers needed to run the graphics cards, etc.). But the speed at which Apple released BootCamp makes me believe this had been the works for a while. So after so many years of Apple being so removed from Microsoft, why open the doors now?

I have no idea if Apple switching over to Intel chips was part of this plan or if BootCamp was an offshoot of the Intel switch. I assume the latter. The Intel Core Duo chips were ready to push things fast (and less power hungry) then the G5s were. So once the switch was made, it took no time for people to get XP to boot on Macs. Apple could have just let this be something that could be done but that they ignored. But they didn't. They swooped in and did it right and, in no small way, put their stamp of "Okay" on the whole thing.

Some have said it was to grab a large chunk of the Windows users out there. Well, certainly not at this point. The average user is not going to go through the BootCamp process. Nor are many going to make the choice of a new computer based of this, unless they were are ready leaning Mac anyway. I have developer friends (especially web developers) who HAVE gone out and bought new Macs. These are folks who love Macs already but have always had to have Windows PCs around to test stuff. And, at this point, it is not going to pull in hardcore gamers, because while Macs can play games, they are certainly not great game machines for the price. They can build better game machines themselves.

If in the future (say when Leopard, the next big version of OS X, comes out), OS X can easily run Windows (and, heck, Linux or whatever) at the same time and it's built it (either to install yourself or come with it straight from Apple), then you may see more folks making the move. The Macs have always been higher end machines. If the average user goes online to search for a new computer, and sees Macs for $1,300 and a dell for $700, they are going to think long and hard if they need to Mac extras. Because Windows does work so why would they need both operating systems? (And, yes, you can get a MacMini for $700, but that is with no monitor or mouse or keyboard. Purchasing all those from Apple bring it up to almost $1,500.) The same goes for most businesses.

(There is a way to run both OS's at the same time: Parallels solution. Apparently it works pretty well.)

But BootCamp does add a lot of value to the Intel-based Macs. There is no denying it. Even if you have no desire to ever run Windows, having the option is nice. There are always things in an operating system one never uses. For many, this will be one of them.

Now, there are some folks who are saying that Apple is doing something extremely drastic. John C. Dvorak for one. After Apple announced the switch to Intel, he put forth that Apple was (perhaps) going to ditch their own OS X and switch over to Windows. Do be honest, I never understood his logic. But I suppose anything is possible. Starbucks may be moving to Folgers as far as I know, but I just can't see why they would.

Now, post BootCamp, he's put forth a new theory.

He say that "a cloud is rising over Mac OS X and its future," although he never really states what that cloud is. OS X is flying pretty high right now. It's very stable and full of features. WindowsXP is getting long in the tooth (released in October, 2001) and the next version, Vista, has been delayed. And Vista is looking a lot like the current version of OS X (Tiger), which has been out for a year. Microsoft's Vista is expected out in November, 2006, for business editions and January, 2007, for consumer editions. The next version of OS X (Leopard) will probably be out in early 2007. No one is sure what PCs will even be able to run Vista. Then there is the security debates. I am making no claims that OS X is perfect, but it looks pretty good compared to Microsoft's os.

I do agree with Dvorak that BootCamp is testing the waters. All of his points n that are valid. I am sure they are watching the reaction to it, and seeing how interested people are in it. It was a quiet announcement and there is no where to be found on Apple's front page.

But then Dvorak's proposal is, to save itself, that Apple should make OS X opensource. Not just allow it to be run on any old machine, but to be toyed with by everyone. He drops this 'solution' (a 'solution' looking for a problem in my eyes) at the end of his article. He concludes that this "would make the battle between OS X and Linux the most interesting one on the computer scene. With all attention turned in that direction, there would be nothing Microsoft could do to stem a reversal of its fortunes."

Now, don't get me wrong. Linux is great, but it is still something that you have to like tinkering with. Is the average user looking for that? Or are they looking for a stable, robust os and a phone number to call if they have a problem? Apple releases their os to the masses, to be pitted against Linux, to have a hundred different versions out there to chose from, it leaves Microsoft as the one person out there with an 'official' tag. Apple is managing OS X great. Linux is needed because Microsoft has allowed Windows to become a bloated mess.

Besides, OS X is based on opensource. So I'm not even sure what Dvorak is saying.

There is no denying that more people would use OS X if it were opened up to 'standard' PCs. But one of the reasons Macs are nice to use is that there are standards. You don't spend time searching for drivers and tweaking your machine just to get it to run application whatever. Yes, it removes flexibility, but 99% it works. It would also cut deeply into Apple's sales of their computers. Because, as I said before, people will buy something if it is cheaper. And if John Doe buys his first OS X computer and it doesn't work, it is just going to lessen Apple's brand image.

Remember, Apple did this in in mid-90s. And it didn't work. Admittedly Macs OS at the time had some big issues and wasn't nearly as stable as OS X is.

Now, because we know that OS X now runs of Intel-based computers, it seems likely that someone will figure out how to make it run on non-Apple computers. That's fine and there is no reason Apple should fight it. Nor should they make any attempt to support it or license it. Let the consumer purchase OS X from Apple and handle it themselves. Third parties could even handle putting OS X on non-Macs. There is just no reason for Apple to facilitate it.

Okay, I'm rambling. Let's just say I disagree with Dvorak and wonder about his motives for such a sloppily thought out article. He does get name for himself by making these sort of statements. I just which he'd tell us WHY Apple should do this.

Back to the question of "Why is Apple doing this?" Well, perhaps just because they can. Unless Vista kicks serious butt or Leopard seriously bites, BootCamp is not going to pull current OS X users over to Windows. It may pull a few Windows users over to OS X but not tons. But now that Intel-based Macs can run Windows and it is relatively easy and it does add a lot of value to Macs... why the heck not?

Memory, Loss, Regret

I watch Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind again last night. It's been a while since I've seen it. It really is one of my favorite films but I've had good reason for avoiding it. But I haven't been able to sleep, so I crawled into bed a slipped the DVD into my computer and watched.

I don't think there has been a character that I've related to more than Joel. With in the first few points strike to my core. Do I have anything worth saying? How can I don't be alone when I can't make eye contact with a woman? Why do I fall in love with every woman who shows me the slightest amount of attention?

How is it that things slip so far apart?

And, now, I just want to forget. But I don't. My mind slips across memmories, some sharp glass, others sweet and comforting.

I can't even remember how many times I cried last night. Not hard painful ripping of my soul, but gentle quiet tears.

How much time do I have, how many chances?

The movie ends on a beautiful note, an moment of acceptance. I just can't see that moment right now.



On a brighter note, I will later talk about Me, My MacBook Pro and Loading Windows.

I knew it.

Cheese is good for your sex life.

I suppose it all has to deal with moderation, of course.

Attractin' the ladies

Well, as April arrives many tech-esque oriented websites have decided to try to move beyond men. Many have redesigned their sites.

It appears to have started with Slashdot.
But then it extanded.

Airliners.net
Planet Half-Life
Firebal 20XL

A bit of clue in the tube

This come up all the time: "Male contraceptives."

Besides spreading the responsibility, it would be nice for men to have an option. I realize there are issues. Condoms of course have major benefit (disease and so forth), and what woman wants to put their reproductive roulette in the hand of a man (although the reverse can be true too).

So, news of a study going ahead in India, um, excites me. Ten to fifteen minute procedure, last up to ten years and reversible. Injects a gel into the ol' sperm tube. When you want it reversed, inject something else that dissolves the gel.

Sound great!

But...

In 2002, when enrollment in the Indian study was halted, more than 140 men were already using RISUG. Concern about side effects and insufficiency of safety data caused a temporary suspension of the project. However, expert panels subsequently concluded that the major side effect -- several weeks of non-painful scrotal swelling in about a third of the subjects --was not enough to stop the study.

33% chance of scrotal swelling. Mmmmm.

The power of the customer

Chevy (in some sort of tie in to The Apprentice) has a neat little "edit your own ad" contest over on their website. I suppose you could take it seriously, especially if you actually wanted to win.

But I went my own way. I call it "The Tahoe: Size matters."

Here's one from someone else: "Can't Get Out."

I don't think this is what Chevy was thinking.

Ah, Disney

Yes, this is my second Disney related post but this may be their best short film ever.

Attack Plan!

Bitchin' About Disney... but with respect

Found an interesting blog for those who find amusement parks fascinating. Imagineerebirth.