FAIL!

They should just change the show to FAIL- or better yet, EPIC FAIL. The cardinal rule of Vampire fiction: you don't use Bella Lugosi's Dead (especially, a shitty version of it). Otherwise you violate the Laws on Pretension Prevention, a little known subsection of the Geneva Convention.

Also, knew it was the girl as soon as she was on screen.
Read More...

The Un-Kosher Flu

First off, fuck the pork industry for getting upset that "swine" flu might cause their sales to drop: Everyone they should be concerned about feeding already knows you don't get the H1N1 flu from bacon, you get it from Mexicans- and apparently a couple kids at Heritage Middle School in Madison, Alabama.

Second off, fuck the pork industry for being justifiably concerned people might think they can get ManBearPig Flu from bacon. But more importantly:

FUCK ALL THESE IDIOTS.

So far, there is no indication that Swine Flu is worse than regular seasonal flu.

From the CDC:

Yesterday, CDC issued new interim guidance for clinicians on how to care for children and pregnant women who may be infected with this virus. Young children and pregnant women are two groups of people who are at high risk of serious complications from seasonal influenza.

(emphasis mine)

How serious is swine flu infection?
Like seasonal flu, swine flu in humans can vary in severity from mild to severe. Between 2005 until January 2009, 12 human cases of swine flu were detected in the U.S. with no deaths occurring. However, swine flu infection can be serious. In September 1988, a previously healthy 32-year-old pregnant woman in Wisconsin was hospitalized for pneumonia after being infected with swine flu and died 8 days later. A swine flu outbreak in Fort Dix, New Jersey occurred in 1976 that caused more than 200 cases with serious illness in several people and one death.

In other words, it's not actually all that bad. Stop freaking out; or bury yourself in your flupocalypse bunker and throw away the key.

I'm not lucky enough that this will kill all of you.

-You Loving Kludge

P.S. Warren Ellis knew about all this since, at least, last Friday.
Read More...

But Religion Did SOME Good Things!

To which I say: "Fuck You."

If the argument that religion has done some good things for some people seems even the least bit compelling, you should consider the other side of that coin: the horrible fucking shit it has done to so many.

In Topeka, Kansas there sits a church. The Westboro Baptist Church. Home of people I have long considered evil pieces of shit, but now wonder if they aren't actually terrified slaves.

Read the speech that Nate Phelps gave at the American Atheists' Convention in Atlanta a few weeks ago. (April 2009)

Then go read his article about giving the before and after the speech and the crowd response.

In the end, religion doesn't do anything for people that it doesn't equally undo with "interest".




-or-

Displayed to EVERYONE...

Hidden, except for interested readers.
Read More...

I hate J J Abrams

Well, 9 times out of 10, anyway. I liked Transformers, but I hated Lost, Alias, and Fringe.

Remember my accurate predictions about Watchmen, right before I saw it? Star Trek gets the same treatment after the fold...



If you're interested in a no spoilers (so long as you've seen the trailers) story about the people who made Star Trek- which opens on May 8th- go read this NY Times.com article. (thanks Tom)

If not, I'm going to quote from it anyway, to illustrate my thoughts that the Star Trek movie isn't going to be nearly as good as so many people are saying/wanting/needing it is/to be.

First, it's J J Abrams, director of Mission Impossible: III (I will give him it was better than John Wu's; but that's like being less retarded than the most retarded retard) along with other shitty shit shitshit.

There's a LOT of qualifying in the article. They are desperately trying to ensure fans that their beloved show/series/movies/franchise isn't being ass-raped by drunken clowns:

For the “Trek” faithful there are plenty of nods to past television episodes and movies, familiar catchphrases and Kirk’s notorious solution to a supposedly unwinnable mission simulation. But there is also a conscious effort to inscribe this “Trek” in the storytelling traditions popularized by Joseph Campbell, in which heroes must suffer loss and abandonment before they rise to the occasion.

[...]

Though their revisions may be contentious, the filmmakers said they were necessary; the “Star Trek” empire entrusted to them has been in dire straits.

The one that swayed me the most was:

Mr. Abrams said that throughout the production process Mr. Orci and Mr. Lindelof, both acolytes of “Trek” history, were there to keep an eye on him. The filmmakers also received the blessing of Leonard Nimoy, who created the role of Spock and agreed to reprise the character in the film as a wizened old man.

“Any fan who would think that it’s not ‘Trek’ has to say that to Leonard Nimoy’s face,” Mr. Orci said. “Don’t talk to me, talk to Spock.”

But then I remembered Nimoy really hated being identified as Spock for years. Sure, he's accpeted it all now; but my impression of Nimoy is that he's a pompous jackass. Really, only Gene Roddenberry's opinion would sway me. Not his wife's, and certainly not Rick Berman's opinion. But Mr Roddenberry is dead, so: Fuck You, Abrams, no swaying for you!

That's not all, but it is a large portion, of the qualifying. However, that's as much as I care to share. (Read more qualification at the link already provided.) In general, that level of "But it won't suck because..." in an article sets off my Suck-o-Meter alarms, big time! If it didn't suck, would you really need to tell me it didn't suck that much? "The lady doth protest too much, methinks" {Hamlet, Act 3, scene 2; I looked it up to make sure I wrote it correctly.}

Now, here's why I think the movie is going to blow:

Mr. Abrams and his partners are guys with mainstream pop-culture aspirations; their forte is taking on genres with finite but dedicated fan bases — science fiction, fantasy and horror — and making them accessible to wider audiences. And what they had in mind for their “Star Trek” movie is a film that is consistent with 43 years of series history but not beholden to it.

Re-parse that into non-marketing-ese:

Mr. Abrams and his partners are people who want to make lots of money and have lots of people like them; thy are exceptional at taking sub-culture and bleaching it, dumbing it down, and scrubbing away it's filthy underground musk until it's stupid enough for any idiot to get moist over all the pretty people and colors/explosions. And what they had in mind for their "Star Trek" movie is a film that is not beholden to 43 years of series history, the intentions of Gene Rodenberry, or anything that won't increase their profits- principles, for instance.

A couple self-explanatory bits:
This:

there is also a conscious effort to inscribe this “Trek” in the storytelling traditions popularized by Joseph Campbell, in which heroes must suffer loss and abandonment before they rise to the occasion.

This:

Perhaps more audaciously, this “Star Trek” also has a time-travel story line that essentially gives those on its creative team license to amend internal “Trek” history as they need to, and they aren’t timid about exercising it. (For example the villains of the movie are Romulans, even though the Enterprise’s first encounter with this alien race occurs in a well-known original “Trek” episode.)

Though their revisions may be contentious, the filmmakers said they were necessary

And:

Despite their collective reverence for “Star Trek” — and “Star Wars,” and Indiana Jones, and X-Men, and other cultural artifacts of their awkward adolescence — none of them are total “Trek” completists (not even Mr. Orci, who once owned a telephone shaped like the Enterprise). They say that makes them the ideal candidates to upgrade Gene Roddenberry’s creation for 21st-century audiences.

Before having been associated with a movie he hopes will attract all the fans, plus the not-fans:

ENGAGE J. J. Abrams in conversation for even a few minutes and he will gladly confess the role that “Star Trek” played in his cultural coming of age. “I was not a fan,” he said recently.

And After:

“I now consider myself a Trekkie,” he declared, “which I literally could not have ever imagined saying to anyone.”

“which I literally could not have ever imagined saying to anyone."

Mr. Abrams said his responsibility was not to the “Trek” loyalists, but “to create a movie that would be for moviegoers who love an adventure, and movies that are funny and scary and exciting — not ‘Star Trek’ fans, necessarily, but not to exclude them either.”

I'm fucking glad we're not gonna get excluded! Especially since we're the after thought, and not the focus! Yay!

What remains to be seen is whether the patient, thoughtful and deeply philosophical tradition of “Star Trek” is compatible with a “Star Trek” movie that is variously flashy, frenetic, dirty, slapsticky and sufficiently steeped in popular culture to accommodate both the Beastie Boys song “Sabotage” and a cameo by Tyler Perry.

Look, there's an ass ton more of this crap over there, go read it. But I want to end with one more:

“We’ve become so familiar with the idea of space travel because of so many movies and TV shows that it’s lost its adventure and its possibility, its sense of wonder,” Mr. Abrams said. “Forty-three years ago it was not a boring idea.”

Let's take this out of marketing-ese again:

"The whole concept of Star Trek was how cool Space Travel was. It's not anymore, so we're gonna dump what I see as the main concept. Ha ha, fanboys, fuck me? FUCK YOU!"

Okay, so that last bit may not have actually been in there; but my translator assures me she doesn't want to be beaten with the rubber hose, and her work tends to be pretty damn accurate.

He doesn't get what Star Trek was about. It wasn't about Joseph Cambell and SPACE TRAVEL!; those were tricks to discuss things. That's when Star Trek is at it's best, when it's speculative fiction- when it's using these future star ships, technologies, and aliens to explore contemporary things (like race) in a way that people won't just close down and vigorously ignore. Putting it in the future with aliens makes it easier for people to think about. Instead of shutting down, they think; and Star Trek blossoms.

And we know Abrams is going to throw in some pandering god references. But look back at Star Trek: it was the most relevant and exciting in TOS (the Original Series) when Roddenberry made it rational and secular. It was worst in DS9 (Deep Space 9) and Voyager, where they were constantly dealing with god and their personal spiritualities. Except they weren't issues, except as things characters refused to give up.

So, no philosophy, no social commentary, no strict science-based rationality (even from Spock); but up the pretty visuals. Down on space travel, up on time travel; down on Trek canon, up on new, easy to grasp Campbell-ian backgrounds/plots.

It's going to be pretty and very very stupid- like Jenny McCarthy, but pretty.
Read More...

Choice: Vaccinate or Murder

It really is that simple. Vaccinate yourself, and your children, or you could murder someone.

Bad Astronomer and President of the JREF, Dr. Phil Plait, has a post up on his blog about a recent Australian News story. A 4 week old girl died of Whooping cough in a region of Australia where only 1 in 3 children are vaccinated. The girl, who would normally be protected by herd immunity until she could receive the vaccination herself, was 1 of 3 children in a month with such severe whooping cough that she had to be air lifted to another hospital- she was the only one of the three who died.

Whooping Cough isn't Ebola, it doesn't kill every person who gets it; it's not even Marburg. But Whooping Cough can kill, and those deaths are entirely preventable. The anti-vaxxers- those people opposed to all or some vaccinations- are killing children with ignorance, stupidity, and fear mongering. Notice, in the video below, how the anti-vaxxer Meryl Dorey claims that whooping cough and measles don't kill people, and cause Autism. Except the whole thing is about how whooping cough killed that poor baby, and as the Doctor points out there are absolutely no links between vaccination and autism. (Measles can kill)(Autism rates have spiked due to an expanded understanding and definition of Autism; and better, more intensive, efforts to identify people with it.) (And let's not even get started on how horri-bad Polio is!)

Read the original article, by the Bad Astronomer Phil Plait, at his blog Bad Astronomy, and/or watch the video below. Then share this story with anyone you know who thinks vaccinations are optional.



For further, informed, reading about Vaccinations, I recommend the Science Based Medicine Blog. It's written by doctors, and contains this funny little concept I like to call: science. This link takes you to all their posts on Vaccines.


-or-

Displayed to EVERYONE...

Hidden, except for interested readers.
Read More...

Your TV Shows

A while ago I talked about Fringe. I mentioned that The Psychic Olivia was a dropped plot point. It's been 3 episodes, and they've picked it back up- just like I mentioned they'd done before. And they invented a whole new bucket of bullshit for the viewer to choke down, thinly disguised as "creepy" and "dramatic".

What I'd like to add is two points:

First, in the big mystery of episode 17, the viewer easily makes the connections about 3-5 minutes before the characters in the show make them- which is stupid and bad writing, in my opinion. It's one thing to let the viewer in on it from the jump; or to let the viewer make the connection a few seconds before the characters. It's an entirely other matter for the characters to have no clue, get one more piece of information and then magically jump to the same conclusion the viewers- who haven't been made aware of anything other than what the characters know- have already surmised.

Second, the ending of episode 17 means one of two (I'll include a third just to cover my ass) things. Either, the good Crazy Doctor has had his memory messed with (which I think they've alluded to, and suggested he might have done it to himself); or the writers seriously think anyone is buying their tacked on bullshit. That second possibility isn't quite as remote as it may first seem. It could be the writers going "Oh, hey! Great idea, what if we add in all this stuff to kinda tie things in and make it creepy and mysterious?" And no one catching how/that it makes earlier episodes inconsistent. Or it could be there's an actual meta-plot and it's that ridiculous.
Read More...

SOUTHLAND, Part II

Watched Southland, episode 2, today. There's not much to say, that I haven't already said. It's crap, recycled at best. Bleeping curse words to add edginess, a cop who "[thinks she] made a mistake" with her own kid and baby-daddy putting it all on the line for an imperfect family, nice guy cops trying to do the right thing while the system- uncaring- refuses. Probably won't watch the third episode, but we'll see- certainly don't expect it to be any better.
Read More...

Polls are for lulz

Go read this article on why you should never trust anything that allows anonymous internet voting- like ratings of music or videos- and how /b/ made marblecake also the game the most influential 21 people on Time.com.
Read More...

Suicide is Painless

That's the title of the opening theme for MASH, written by Johnny Mandel with lyrics by (the then 14) Mike Altman. It comes from the Movie. Painless Pole- a dentist- declares his intention to commit suicide. They have a mock funeral, and the song is sung in the background. "Suicide is Painless, it brings on many changes, and I can take or leave it if I please."

Suicide has been a part of my life for as long as I can remember. My grandpa's brother killed himself in Texas during his twenties. Another of his brothers killed himself after getting some bad medical news- he was in his eighties. I remember being young, and vaguely understanding why a relative was sitting on a different couch with their wrists covered.

"Through early morning fog I see visions of the things to be, the pains that are withheld for me. I realize and I can see..."

When I was in High School, I was on a drug called Accutane for acne. Though it's unclear if Accutane actually causes suicidal/clinical depressions, my own experience seems to indicate that it does. I took aspirins- and a lucky thing, too; that quantity of Tylenol would have killed me.

I remember thinking about my grandpa, my dog, and how the deaths of my dad (when I was 12), and my grandpa (when I was 7), had hurt terribly. Children shouldn't have to deal with death. In my mind, it all seemed very unfair. I was 15 and stupid; and that fucked up sense of entitlement meant a trip to the ER, a drink of Charcoal, and a night in the Pediatric ICU.

"The only way to win is cheat, And lay it down before I'm beat, and to another give my seat- for that's the only painless feat."

I had terrible migraines while on Accutane. Full blown grand mal brain seizures, or so it felt. Everything would get fuzzy and weird. My vision would tunnel, until I could barely see anything- everything coated in dense gray static. Then the headache, the nausea, the sensitivity to light, sound, movement, and tastes. I learned quickly to expect the night of vomiting.

I've never had migraines, except during the time I took Accutane; but even then they were uncommon. I had one within a few months of when I stopped taking it. The migraines say to me that the drugs screwed with my brain chemistry. I firmly believe that Accutane took me from depressed to suicidal- it's something I have to believe, for my own sake.

"A brave man once requested me to answer questions that are key, is it to be or not to be; and I replied 'oh why ask me?'"

I've heard lots about Samurai, and Ancient Romans/Greeks/Egyptians. People always bring up the Burning Monk (or some other "heroic" suicide or attempt), or the terminally ill. I always consider what these things imply, and what they mean to me and in my view.

In societies with strictly regimented honor codes- like the Samurai- there are always "suicide clauses." I see them as pressure release valves for the people who can't cut it, or who are too dangerous. In the South of Modern America there can be some strict social mores; but I wouldn't call them strictly regimented. The pressure release valve here is discretion- "out of sight, out of mind"- or moving somewhere else (Key West, Miami, New Orleans, San Fran, New York, LA, etc etc). Committing suicide to get away from them would be something like killing a cockroach with a howitzer.

As for "Heroic Suicides", I see that as pretentious grand standing at best, and ill conceived stupidity, motivated by anger, more often. Regardless, it's the biggest oxymoron I've ever encountered. In the case of the Burning Monk, he was making a point, and he made it big- but he never made another one. I wonder how many others thought they were doing the same, but no one remembers today.

The terminally ill have a right to decide they want to die with dignity, instead of suffering through months of agony in a hospital bed. That doesn't excuse selfish, otherwise healthy, thirty/twenty somethings or teenagers from trying to take what they see as "the easy way" out. Cowardice is cowardice, shameful and repugnant- especially when it's stupid. A terminally ill cancer patient may find asphyxiation less unpleasant than slowly dying as their insides rot; but to think that suicide is actually "painless" or "easy" is nothing more than stupid: death hurts.

"The sword of time will pierce our skins. It doesn't hurt when it begins; But as it works its way on in, The pain grows stronger...watch it grin"

Suicide is many things. What it always is, what it can't not be, is selfish. Ignoring the emotional pain death inflicts on the survivors goes beyond stupid and uncaring. It implies the statement: "My current pain is worse than anyone else's pain, for the rest of their life, at the loss of me." It's one thing for someone dying of Huntington's Disease to talk about their choice with friends and family, come to an understanding that there is nothing else they can do continue living without suffering terribly, and then take some poison. It's another to hunker alone, unthinking, drowning in self pity, and try to swallow a bullet.

Consider my death.

There are people I know who would forget me within a year or two. There are a few who would still think about me 5 or 10 years down the road. Maybe even one or two people I'm not related to who would remember me as long as they live. My family would never forget. Many of them would blame themselves, increasing their stress levels- rightly or wrongly. My four year old nephew would experience the death of his favorite uncle. I know what growing up with an intimate knowledge of death is like, I'd rather he didn't. I think it would drive my sisters apart, but it might bring them closer together- which might be worse. My mother would freak out. I'd hate to think how my grandma would react.

But I wouldn't care- hard to do that, dead.

Except whatever else I think, I'd like to be remembered fondly, instead of with pity. I really hate pity.

Instead of taking the coward's escape, I can get away for a while, reading a book or watching a television show (even one I hate). I can go fly a kite or hunt for worms with my nephew. I can go online and read something funny, or watch beautiful people do beautifully disgusting things to each other. I can listen to a comedian, or go hangout with friends (or just in a public place).

And if that doesn't work, I could call:
The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline 1-800-273-TALK (8255)
The National Suicide Prevention Hopeline 1-800-SUICIDE (784-2433)

Fuck going out easy, anyway; I'd rather do it the hard way and laugh at everyone else when I finish regardless.
Read More...

Your TV Shows

Fringe is such a stupid show. There is nothing redeeming about it. It's not sci-fi, because science fiction would imply some sort of actual science. It's more like modern fantasy- wild conjectures with very loose, very badly strung together, science facts used to, I guess, try and explain things.

They take it right up to the edge, and let the viewer make the conclusions. The acting is good, sometimes, but mostly it's too "serious" to actually be serious. They're not trying to be as campy as they are. It's got all the great hallmarks of horror/thriller sci-fi, and I think that's why I watch it.

I wouldn't recommend anyone else attempt it. Fringe is truly crap-tastic. But years of less than B slasher flicks, zombie fests, and monster movies keep me viewing. Just like all those horrible examples of "entertainment" (read: train wrecks), the creators obvious intend one reaction, and miserably fail.

If they accepted that despite their big budgets, their great special effects, and their sleek look/marketing, they were just shitty camp horror, it would suck even more. But throwing the lady with the robotic arm in with the mad (read: crazy) scientist who was researching every single bit of the latest and greatest in cutting edge science, 30 years ago, doesn't make it sci-fi.

What irks me is, if someone tried to write this shit, they'd be laughed at. Not because it's stupid, which it is, not because it's childish and predictable, which it is; but because it glories in the dumbest, worst, most throw together hodge-podge of "plots" that ever got rejected- and it does it without the slightest bit of irony.

There's talent in the pool that creates each episode; but it still can't overcome being absolute shit.



Plot points that were about to happen, then completely dropped, ignored, and never mentioned again:

* The Psychic Olivia. Episode 14 revealed Olivia was a powerful psychic able to control electronic devices. Then there was a long break, and in two episodes it has never been mentioned again. Instead there's the romantic angle of who is Peter romantically interested in: Olivia or her sister? Hint: It will be Olivia, as was thoroughly demonstrated in episode 14. (That is, assuming consistency is in anyway important to the writers- a big assumption that has no evidence to support it in the 16 episodes so far.)

* The Cyborg Lady. Sure, she's been in other episodes, and has shown disturbing interest in Olivia- which we can assume has something to do with her Psychic abilities. But there's been no more about cybernetics, and we've gone two episodes without hide nor hair of her or her ominous megacorp.

* The Hairless Man. He's a gimmick ("See him in every episode!"), a shitty Where's Waldo where the camera tends to settle on the hidden person, to underline that he's "secret" or "important" or just because this is a prime example of stupidity and hodge-podge. More importantly, though he is in episode 14, and in a VERY unsurprising role, all the geniuses and investigators, who have all discussed/encountered him before never ONCE mention him when they meet a kid who is also hairless and "important". They've shot their wad with him, in a way, having had a full episode devoted to him; but that's bad planning, in my opinion, and so I consider him a dropped plot point.

* The Roguish Villian. Charming, star of City of Lost Children, and with an English accent, he was prominent in the episodes leading up to the break. Since then? Not even a mention of an off-camera hunt for him.

And that's the thing, innit:

1) No one is surprised, in the least bit, when they somehow try to tie a plot point back to something else- inventing a bunch of information that must be shoveled at the viewer like so much thought manure. Some of these plots are being PURPOSEFULLY ignored, at the moment, because hiding the obvious 4 episodes down the line makes it "smart", "savy", or in some other way, not obvious. (Uhm.... Hint: No it doesn't.)

2) All it would take, to force Olivia and Walter out of their Mary Sue status, and make the whole fucking show about a million times better, is to insert some throw-away lines about off-camera investigations. And guess what that would do? Allow the production staff to make web-based games, or text stories, or just blogs, for viewers (I hesitate to think anyone would actually be a "fan" of this drivel) to go exploring. In other words, it would allow them to move into the digital, interactive, internet age. (And you just KNOW the kind of people who like this shit are the weirdo internet conspiracy kooks who all think it's a fucking documentary- and all fo whom are avid members of ONLINE communities.)

Sense some hostility on my end? You might be a psychic- [insert irony here]- or it might be that I'm jealous people can write such sub-puerile bullshit and make a hella good living off it.

UPDATE: MEALWORMS ARE MEALWORMS, PUSHING THEM UP FROM A "CORPSE" AND CALLING THEM "MONSTER LARVAE" DOESN'T MAKE THEM NOT-MEALWORMS! (Technically, Mealworm Beetle Larvae.) Stupid, over-done, unsurprising, and shit-tastic. With as big a budget as they must have, you'd think they could use something other than standard horror staples as larvae for their "monster". Not to mention how stupid the whole concept is, scientifically speaking.
Read More...

All I have to say

Watch the first episode of Season 5 on Hulu.
Read More...

Your TV Shows

Dear Mr. Television Writer,

Waiting three episodes, or thirty, doesn't make the obvious any less so.

Jealously,
-Me
Read More...

The New Dick-shun-ary

Weekend - (n) (1) the time when real life always conspires to keep you from enjoying the only two-four days you're not supposed to be working. (2) when most accidental babies are made. (3) Usually the two days in the week when the most stuff, and the least productivity, happen.
Read More...

26 Seconds

Cool:


(And something we should all have known, understanding fluids and densities and buoyancy, but probably hadn't put together)

(Spotted over at BoingBoing)
Read More...

NoGodTube

In response to GodTube, and problems with YouTube (votebotting, flagbotting, etc) resulting in harassment and banning (with subsequent reinstatement), there is now NoGodTube.

[Personally, I would suggest atheists, agnostics, and others interested in using the site, also put their videos on YouTube, but encourage linking and embedding to NoGodTube. This way, we still have a voice in how the YouTube community continues to evolve, and we also have a place where our videos will be easy to find and available to anyone interested.]

So, in honor of the new site, I give you the following discussion between Blair Scott and Leonard Adams, recorded in February of 2008, about Black Atheists.

/>

Parts 2 and 3 (along with the URLs to all three) are below the fold...


/>


/>

http://nogodtube.com/play.php?vid=128
http://nogodtube.com/play.php?vid=130
http://nogodtube.com/play.php?vid=131

Very interesting talk. Blair is a lot of things- Director, Founder, User of Shitty English Accents- leave him some comments, reviews, and feedback.
Read More...

YouTube and the JREF

If you haven't seen it elsewhere:



I don't agree, fully, with Randi; but I think the problems are with the DCMA, and YouTube's policies because of it.

UPDATE:
This, from /., seems to illustrate my point very well. It also suggests, to me, that everyone who wrote to YouTube saying they demanded an explanation and an apology was right to do so- it keeps them on their toes and, hopefully, squeamish about the policy so that they might change it if the legal situation ever changes.

Read More...

Great News!

From Bad Astronomy:

"Wow, I get wrapped up in my own personal world for a coupla days, and find out I almost missed this: the Iowa Supreme Court said that banning gay people from getting married is unconstitutional."


-or-

Displayed to EVERYONE...

Hidden, except for interested readers.
Read More...

Dollhouse

If you had the ability to erase a persona, then with the clean slate, add whatever persona you could design- and you'd shown you could design almost anything- who would you not design?

Topher? Designed. The Watchers? Designed.

If it was me, everyone working at the dollhouse would be designed. Everyone would be wiped, at some point. There'd be wheels within wheels within wheels, as Frank Herbert might say.


Read More...

Open Minded?

Blair posted this on the NAFA Forums
Read More...

SOUTHLAND

There's a new show coming out, in a week, on NBC. It's nothing new: cop drama, following various police officers operating various cases. Quick to start, then develops, camera quality goes back and forth between faux COPS and production grade. Sound effects are crap- witness the first shooting, where the guns all sound like something less than caps.

Anyway, the pilot is up on Hulu, a week before it airs on TV. Because an obvious ploy for no reason is as good as a ploy with a reason, I guess. (I suppose it's to get word of mouth spurred.)

Nothing unique about it. Multiple arcs, from episodic to multi-show: something to get new viewers and keep the old ones. A mix of personal and professional, with emphasis (understand it's only the first show) on the professional. A great ensemble cast, and a heavy smell of money, so expect to be hearing raves about it soon.

Seriously, nothing unique about it. A mix of things from a hundred cop drama TV Shows and Movies, already out there- the rich-boy rookie with the hardass vet partner (overcompensating for being gay), the empathetic black female detective (taking care of her elderly sick mother) with the not quite as good younger white male partner, the "Gang life is stupid, pointless, and harmful" angle (complete with "community testimony" and "community fear"), the misogynist with a female partner, the cop on his first marriage that's about to die surrounded by hardened divorcees...

Absolutely nothing to set it apart. It reinforces the idea that stereotypes and cliches are okay, so long as they're not negative. It's crap, throwaway, dressed-up reruns with better production values. If you've been hankering for a fix since NYPD Blue dropped off, you'll probably like this. If you're a fan of the cop drama genre, you'll probably like this. If you like anything that's good and interesting, and have a memory like a goldfish (so you don't place all the old tired bullshit), you'll probably like this. Otherwise, leave it to the fans, the idiots, and the young. (caveat: For now)
Read More...

A Load of Honor

Honor is such crap.

Honor doesn't work unless everyone follows the same "code".
Examples:
Person A believes it's not honorable to kill.
Person B believes it is honorable to kill those who don't think it's honorable to kill.

Person B kills Person A. From a game perspective, who "won" there, for all sets of "won" that include "continued to live"?

More real-life example:
Person A believes it is not honorable to steal.
Person B doesn't consider stealing to effect honor in any way.

Person B steals Person A's Thing.

Who "won"? Hint: It's not Person A.

For all sets of providing reasons to support an argument where one person suggests "honor" as a reason, that person is a fool. A self-righteous fool, at that.
Read More...

It's April Fools Day

And if you're expecting a joke, here, you're a fool.
Read More...