Right now, I'm in the midst of redesigning and reconfiguring this site. In case you were wondering why it's been so long since I published anything here.

I really wish spring would get here.
posted 9:36 AM | link

Because this is my personal site, I think I am entitled to posting cryptic stuff that makes no sense to no one but me. So, with that introduction, all I have to say is the following:

Thursday, 5:30, Tony's.
posted 2:10 PM | link

This is cute: Things my girlfriend and I have argued about.

Nothing keeps a relationship on its toes so much as lively debate. Fortunate, then, that my girlfriend and I agree on absolutely nothing. At all.

(Thanks be to Jeremy.)
posted 12:45 PM | link

Cool. My personal favorite media critic, John Leonard, hates Hannibal, too. Quoth he: "I am so old, I remember when we used to be ashamed of ourselves."
posted 11:16 AM | link

Update on a previous post, before I get in trouble: we most likely don't want to think about the Stuff that Matters. That's really hard to do.
posted 9:41 AM | link

Though I can't be sure, it seems that it's with a wonderful sense of the ambiguity of language that Evan Williams points to the following story: Surpriseyourwoman.com goes down on users.

Did I even mention how much fun it is to be an English geek? The entertainment never seems to cease.
posted 9:34 AM | link

OK, I have a question: why's everyone making such a big deal about Traffic? Granted I'm a bit of a judgmental snob when it comes to storytelling, but I thought it was less a movie, and more a two-and-a-half hour public service announcement. Also, there were not real characters in the story, whose problems I found even remotely tangible or realistic - instead there were a bunch of inconsistent, two dimensional functionaries of the Plot whose only real job was to advance the Big Message that the War on Drugs is wrong. (By the way, if you're one of those people who actually bought that scene where Michael Douglas, just-instated as the new Drug Czar, decries his own job and the entire War on Drugs, and storms out of a press conference at the White House, to go find his daughter who, ironically enough, was at that same moment having sex with her drug dealer for syringes of heroin, well, I have a bridge to sell you).

Actually, I really didn't think the movie was all that bad. In fact, it was worth seeing. Once. I just seems that, much like American Beauty, it is going to be one of those movies that people will be completely awe-struck with for, say, a couple of months after it wins movie of the year, then maybe for a while when it comes out on video/dvd, but then, much like last week's episode of Friends, it will be forgotten.

My problem is - why don't we just bypass all this pomp, all of this excitement, because we know all this excitement is temporal, that it's merely an illusion, and we know what's going to happen anyway, right? If we do that, maybe we can start focusing on stuff that matters.
posted 9:23 AM | link

And Bill Clinton says: Because of the intense scrutiny and criticism of the pardons of Marc Rich and his partner Pincus Green and because legitimate concerns have been raised, I want to explain what I did and why.
posted 1:46 PM | link

Doc has a lot to say today about the comments Microsoft's Jim Allchin made yesterday w/r/t the Open Source Movement. Here's a quote that I think sums up the entire debacle:

There is huge distrust and suspicion across the divide between the commercial software industry and the free/open software movement. A lot of nasty shit gets thrown back and forth. But smack in the middle of that divide both groups are building common infrastructure. They can't help it. Sooner or later they'll learn to help each other. Yesterday made it later.

And you know, it's really too bad that neither side is willing to make some sort effort to bridge the divide, because I do agree that there is a lot of commonality between the Industry and the Movement. That, and it's my long-standing belief that any relationship based on perpetual distrust will invariably end up with both sides getting screwed.
posted 4:43 PM | link

I have to remember to see Slingblade this weekend.
posted 10:24 AM | link

Oh, and I almost forgot to mention that I saw Hannibal last night. And I sit here now, more than sixteen hours later, realizing just how much I despised this movie. Once the initial disgust wore off (did I mention I have a phobia of human flesh?) I began seeing the thing for what it really was, and came to the realization that I'd spent the last two hours being bamboozled rather than entertained.

The vaguely present plotline, which was both morally ambiguous and overly dependent on gore, wasn't engaging in any meaningful way, and ultimately caused the movie to succumb to the very evil it was trying to expose. Kind of like Natural Born Killers, only with more exposed brain tissue. I mean, to be fair, there was a lot going on in terms of describing Human Frailty in general, with many of the characters falling victim not so much to the villain (who was, in my mind anyway supposed to be Hannibal), but to their own poor, self-serving decisions.

But still, those things that Hannibal's victims did, the decisions they made, as small minded as they might have been, in no way justified the things done to them. And I think, at least to a certain extent, that's what the movie was trying to do - in effect get us to be on the side of, or at least feel sympathy for, Hannibal. Which really just left me feeling sick, as there was really honestly no redeeming qualities to him. He did what he did simply because he felt entitled. His "tastes" were better.

But enough. I found a really good article through Plastic that I think accurately portrays the faults of this movie.
posted 3:02 PM | link

I was up in Appleton yesterday, picking up my sister from her school and visiting someone. With an hour or so to myself in the Lawrence University Library, I did something I haven't done in I don't know how long: I sat down and read the The Paris Review. It was fun and refreshing, especially since I'd spent the past week reading ultra-pendantic Microsoft and Linux technical specifications.

One thing that caught my attention was an interview with T. Coraghessan Boyle. Though the interview I read wasn't posted to the Paris Review's site, I did find another one at Salon. Here's something from the last page:

I don't think the human race is going to go on much longer in its current manifestation, that is, this kind of society. I don't think everyone will be wiped out by the pandemic that will get us first; there will be a lot of dislocation and wars, too, because of the changing of the environment. But I think it's inevitable that when an animal species has overbred to the point we have, there are natural curbs on that animal species -- and they're coming, and I don't think there's anything we can do about it.

It sounds pretty cold. And it's also kind of cold to talk about all those useless people out there, those billions. Each one is an individual, and a great and beautiful creation.

I've been following T.C. Boyle's career on and off since I was a directionless college freshman, but I've never been able to explain fully the attraction I've had to his work. I mean the guy's black-hole perception of reality makes mine seem like Martha Stewart on a healthy diet of Prozac. But reading this interview, as well as the other in the Paris Review, has given me an chance to look at it again, after gaining a bit of perspective. Here's what I've found: I've always found his stuff to be so tense and conflicted. Almost all of his narratives have been so pointed, so directed, yet at the same time wildly absurd and hyperbolic, which forms this immediate, engaging embattlement that's not unlike the one between his perfectly bleak view of the horrific world we've created and his belief that each of us in it is a beautiful creation. How inconsistent, irrational and just plain weird.

Then I remember my personal belief that all the really good, really beautiful things in life - the stuff worth fighting for, if that's not too all-encompassing and vague - is borne out of conflict. And that were it not for some sort of conflict, well goddamn if life wouldn't just be boring. So really it does make sense, even if it does lead me to different conclusions.
posted 11:17 AM | link

Sometimes, it's the stupidest human oversights that cause things not to work. Like for instance, disregarding difference between straight-through and crossover cables can really impede the functionality of your network.

And yes, this is a problem that's been irking me. For days now.
posted 2:19 PM | link

This is so cool: workspheres, from MoMa.

Here's something I found from the domestic office section:

More progess... can been seen "for community life, as the nature of the bedroom community alters due to the presence of more working adults, who need and use more local support services and amenities. Through this increased presence, people become more active and interested in local affairs, exert more control over the local economy and governance, and the community iself changes."

Now I'm not sure if it's relevant or not, but I think the part I like the most about this exhibit is how it reveals so much meaning around all the stuff that populates our lives. All those streamlined plastic cases that contain high technology seem actually alive in this exhibit, existing not as inanimate objects but as extensions of immense human complexity.

How neat is that?
posted 4:59 PM | link

Hmm... according to this, the latest release of X fully supports the ATI Rage Mobility chipset. That's good - maybe now I can get Linux running on my laptop.

That is, once I find enough time to dedicate to the project.

Does anyone have a spare day in his/her life s/he's willing to give me?
posted 11:22 AM | link

Hilarious headline from SatireWire:

SatireWire | Microsoft Says Linux Doomed, So Linux Will Stop
posted 12:33 PM | link

Okay, after a bit of a hiatus, I'm back, with a story we all knew was true, now didn't we? The Washington Post is running the following story: Clinton and Gore Clashed Over Blame for Election, which does a really good job of showing how the degenerated relationship between Clinton and Gore is really symbolic of the general mindset of Democrats in general. It describes the dynamic between the two of them as "[...] a relationship that once was exceptionally close but had deteriorated badly over the course of Gore's 2000 race."

It then goes on:

Its significance, however, was more than personal. The question the two men were debating -- why did Gore not capture the White House? -- is the same one confronting Democrats broadly as they assess the lessons of 2000.

Doc refers to this as a Catfight. It's really sort of dissapointing how well the comparison encompasses the current state of the Democratic party.
posted 11:42 AM | link

It's in the New York Times, so you'll need the free registration thingy, but here's something from Charm School Graduate in Chief:

...it's conservatives who have more to fear once the government funnels money to churches, for the churches and their often innovative community programs immediately become subject to the accounting, standardized regulations and bureaucratic interference of the government agencies dishing out the bucks; those religious organizations with existing government contracts for their social services already complain that the paperwork and legal costs can be all-consuming. How long before churches have to shell out for lobbying as well, to get their share of the increased pie?

How truly depressing. Though I'm no history expert, I'm pretty sure the whole motivation behind having a constitutional division between church and state was to allow people to have an active religous life free of governmental regulation and influence. Though keeping a specific religion out of government is important if we're going to be an inclusive and accepting nation, I think the real strength of the relationship between church and state occurs in terms of keeping government out of religion.

And notwithstanding the problems that have arisen from fundamentalism, from religous intolerance and from over-believing in general, I think the overall effect of not having a state sanctioned religion has been invaluable. Not only has organized religion been at the core of social change phenomena like the Civil Rights Movement, it has influenced the way we interact with one another, and define ourselves as individuals.

It's really frustrating to see that being co-opted by governmental regulation.
posted 11:12 AM | link

Good news:

The domain name amphibioushomelyboar.com is still open.