Friday, 16 May

"Yeah, pulmonologists have all the great journals. Chest!"

"Yeah, I've seen that before on the racks. Though usually it has an opaque wrapper around it."

:: Comments left behind ::

Well, actually an old Zelazny novel, the manuscript for which was "lost" in the author's papers for thirty years.

Oddly enough, The Dead Man's Brother looks like a pretty straightforward noirish action novel -- which, upon consideration, seems like it would be just up Zelazny's alley, as many of his books were sort of noirish action novels in a fantastic setting.

And, yeah, I'll be picking it up when it comes out next February.

:: Comments left behind ::

Usually it's just being lambasted by coffee aficionados, local business supporters, pop culture critics, American culture critics, or people who question their "Fair Trade" policies with coffee growers. Add to the list certain religious zealots. It seems that the temporary revival of the "classic" Starbucks logo has their knickers in a twist because it features ... wait for it ... boobies.

The Resistance says the new image "has a naked woman on it with her legs spread like a prostitute," Mark Dice, founder of the group, said in a news release. "Need I say more? It's extremely poor taste, and the company might as well call themselves Slutbucks."

The group, which claims more than 3,000 members nationwide and has found a place on the fringe advancing various conspiracy theories, is calling for a national boycott of the coffee-selling giant.

The revived image of a siren (or melusine) is actually less risqué than the original it was modeled from, in which the hair didn't cover the nipplage (and there was a navel, too) -- let alone the 15th Century Norse woodcut it was based on.

The more I read the article, and the underlying news release, though, the less sanguine I am that this is much more than an attempt to get fifteen minute of fundie fame. Still, I'm sure that some, somewhere out there, dislikes the whole female torso Starbucks thang, considering it lewd, lascivious, and sinful (because I am sure that there are teenage boys out there doing unspeakable acts as they gaze longingly at the logo on their Starbucks cup).

Crazy world. Though, for what it's worth, I'm not a big fan of the retro look, and am glad it's just temporary. Fact is, I find the original logo (and colors) just unattractive.

:: Comments left behind ::

The new voice stress lie detectors ("Voice Risk Analysis," or VRA) don't actually seem to do any better than chance in detecting lies -- but they do deter folks who are afraid of them (i.e., who don't know the above) from trying to fool them, which, for the moment, more than pays for their acquisition and use. 

Nevertheless, when American law-enforcement agencies ask Dr Sommers if they should invest in VRA, he tells them he will build them a device “that lights up and has all kinds of bells and whistles”, for half the price. He is not saying that any agency has actually sunk that low, but it raises a tricky moral question: is it all right to detect a liar with a lie?

:: Comments left behind ::

Jackie Chan's greatest stunts 

Jackie Chan's greatest fight scenes 

I don't know about the -est, but they certainly are freaking impressive.

(Somewhat NSFW due to a few admiring expletives from the narrator)

There are about eleventy-dozen other Chan YouTube videos you can get to from these.

:: Comments left behind ::

Woot!

Yes, my genetic progeny -- voluntarily getting on the phone! Calling people! Must have been switched at birth.

UPDATE: Katherine actually volunteered to call up her friends from whom she'd not heard about her birthday party on Sunday. Yikes! We discussed the things she should mention (her name, that she'd given the kid an invite, when the party is, what (if an answering machine) her phone number is) -- and she handled the whole thing like a pro.

She is such the extrovert. Which is so not Margie and me. Changeling, that must be it.

:: Comments left behind ::

So, I got a visit by a nice young college student type from Comcast. Since I get at least one mailer a month from them saying, "Hey, you already have our digital cable and our high-speed Internet service, wouldn't you like to save money by getting our digital voice service as well?" I already had my stock answer.

We get cable and broadband outages way too often. If I can go a six months or a year without them, then I'll consider digital voice service. Meantime, I like having a dial tone whenever I pick up the phone. 

Which, if I do, I will. I mean, I'm no great fan of Comcast, but it's not like I'm profoundly loyal to Qwest, either ...

:: Comments left behind ::

So I make use of some saved Google searches -- including Google Blog Search -- to get informed, via my feed reader, of some news items I'm following, such as the goings-on down in the Springs with Don Armstrong & Co. -- as can be seen by the recent entry I made on the topic.

Which then made it amusing to see that blog entry show up in my Reader based on that saved Google search ...

:: Comments left behind ::

What to do -- and not do -- when you get pulled over for a ticket. In most cases -- pretty much common sense and courtesy, leavened with a recognition of both the balance of power in the transaction and the perspective of that cop or trooper walking up toward your window ...

I.e., don't give them any reason to worry about you, and don't tick them off. Words to live by. And they might get you a smaller fine.

Things to do (read the article for explanations and further guidance):

1. Pull to the right at the first safe opportunity, then turn off your engine.
2. Stay in your car with your seatbelt fastened. Roll down your window. Turn off the radio. Don’t even think about touching your cell phone.
3. Place your hands on top of the steering wheel and sit quietly. Ask passengers to remain silent.
4. Retrieve license, registration, and proof of insurance only when asked to do so.
5. Answer questions succinctly. Avoid arguing, cursing, or interrupting when the officer speaks to you.

And things to not do (which are mostly the reverse of the above):

1. Don’t slam on your brakes when you see the flashing lights, and don’t continue driving for an extended distance.
2. Do not jump out of the vehicle, do not make any sudden movements, and do not approach the officer.
3. You can complain, you can proffer wild explanations, but not for long.
4. Do not lie. If you were speeding, admit it. If you honestly have no clue why you were stopped, wait for the officer to tell you.
5. Do not show your contempt by peeling away after the stop.

I will say two things.

First, this is pretty close to my own behavior, and I generally have had pretty good luck with the cops either letting me off with a warning or treating me what seems reasonably (I can only think of one time when it was not a righteous pull-over).

Second, on the first #1, during my one stint at post-ticket driving school, the instructor, a former CHP officer, said that when the lights go on, pull over then -- that it's the call of the officer to decide whether it's a safe place. I think it has to be a judgment call, though, and the tactics described above make sense.

Again -- honesty, civility, and not giving the cops any reason to think you're a threat (or someone who needs to be taught a lesson) are pretty safe rules to follow. Is that knuckling under to the Man? You could look at it that way -- but in most cases it's probably a smarter idea to go back to your computer and blog a nastygram about it than try to "stand up" right then and there. 

:: Comments left behind ::

From the "other" side: Pam's House Blend:: Freeper, fundie heads exploding over CA marriage ruling 

No, I won't repeat any of it here, but ... well, when you listen to some of the comments, it makes me happy for the decision all the more, if only to lead to more exploding heads.

Well, I will say a couple of things:

1. The basis for the decision, in the face of the previously (eight years ago) initiative law voted in by the populace, was that the populace and their representatives had crafted a body of law regarding domestic partnerships that was close to marriage already, save for the name. Except that it couldn't be called that. Except the justices decided that was discriminatory.
2. Despite all the rhetoric of "every child deserves and needs a mother and father," a different ruling would have done nothing regarding California child custody laws.
3. It is, in fact, one of the most important jobs of high courts to stand up to the will of the people when that will, in law, is not in keeping with the (state or federal) constitution. That can be irksome. That can also be a critical protection of your rights, too. Idjits.
4. I don't insist on knowing and approving everything you do in your bedroom. I do insist you show similar courtesy to others. I didn't ask your permission to enter into a committed relationship with someone I love; ditto on the insistence of similar courtesy.
5. Oh, and, that whole "marriage is dooooooomed!" thing? Here's what I think.

(via Les)

:: Comments left behind ::

I'm with you here.

We've had same-sex marriage here in Canuckistan for several years now. My marriage has withstood it.

In Canada, it's always been seen as a civil rights issue, not a moral or religious issue. To discriminate against someone because of their race, gender, or sexuality is against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in my country. Once the Charter was created, it was just a matter of time until a case went to our Supreme Court to extend marriage rights.

Yeah, see, to my way of thinking, it's a civil rights issue as well -- a little something in our Constitution that talks about "equal protection under the law" -- which means if the government treats one group of people one way, and another group another way, they need a darned good reason -- which aesthetics and religious dogma ought not to count toward that.

But, then, I'm one of those knee-jerk liberal atheist commie pervert-lovers, so what do you expect?