As if we didn't love the guy already

Because this picture isn't getting enough press.

Funny story:
"I hate to break it to you, but everyone already has a gravitational field around them."
"Not me, I'm made of photons."

Oh Sparky Oh Jet

Quintessential YouTube: a teleology satisfied. I believe the ascension will be complete soon. In other news, why does Slashdot insist on giving me mod points? Just because I'm an awesometastic mod doesn't mean you should. *sigh* back to work...

She felt she had to do it

Which was strange, because she didn't feel much of anything these days

Would anyone be so kind as to remind me of what that's called, when you stick a word into another word? They mentioned this elusive little linguistic phenomena(non? more literary puzzles) on QI, but it escapes me right now.

Unmitigated douchebaggery: I have to admit it right now. Having a laptop is AWESOME

Bastardly devious business practice:

"If I'm selling you drugs, the best thing I can do is sell you $400 a month of marijuana, but if I can get you on to heroin at $4000 a month, that's dead easy to do. All i've got to do is spray the marijuana with heroin in a drying process and you'll be addicted within a week. The chances of you getting off it, if you do into detox, is about 12 per cent. Most people can't get off it." [emphasis added]

Hot damn. That's so cunningly evil, I'm repellently impressed. And I thought I was good at evil...I think I want in on this. Interestingly enough, from a business magazine about 'leadership'.

I'm almost embarrassed by the number of lesbians I know. Almost.

There is a God

Scrolling through the SEP (as to deluding myself that is equivalent to research on my essay) I ran into these:

Zombies.

Holy carp.

Oh but it gets better.

Scroll down to the end of that, and you get:

Zombies on the Web. Featuring the works of: Daily Dinosaur Comics!

David Chalmers contributed to the SEP entry, and also maintains (in addition to a whole cavalcade of other philosophy related minutia) Zombies on the Web. I knew David Chalmers as a smart Australian philosopher when I ran into some of his work for logic. What I did not know was that a) he's funny and b) A total goddamn hippie.

Look at him! Also featuring such great work as: Ramsey + Moore = God.

EDIT: Why the fuck do I continue to use Opera, when it seems to have a indefatigable need to eat or generally destroy the formatting of my posts?

The infinite cruelties of old age

this isn't over yet

Article the first: A few things:

You walk wrong. If you're still obstinate about this, atleast admire the pretty trompe l'oeil pictures. There's some nice shoes in there as well, of atleast one I want a pair of (The 3mm sole ones, if you must know). One page version, if you don't want to give NYmag the money (I know I want to.)

Article the Second:
I wrote what I believe is one of the greatest sentences I have ever done, or perhaps, ever will do.

On not providing a sketch of even a basic taxonomy of political protest (or even just civil disobedience):

"I prefer not to think of this as philosophical cowardice or intellectual laziness, but rather due to the incredible range and critical complexities engendered in political intercourse."

And I threw it away in a footnote. I am so fucked for honours.

Article the Third:
Grrr. Winter's coming back. Wasn't part of the deal. Also, depressingly useful to know that chronic depression makes you smarter (Answer: No.) Or does being smart make you chronically depressed? (Answer: No.) Either way, I'd prefer one of those two things.

Article the Fourth:
I realised I cannot die.

Article the Fifth:
We, the Highest Authority of the Land, hereby fully and completely, do solemnly revoke the fourth article, with Prejudice.

Article the Sixth:
I've realised I cannot die until I've learnt enough french to read In Search Of Lost Time (À la recherche du temps perdu, in the original french) atleast once. At the least, frustrated with trying to learn enough french to give up and just read the damn thing in english.

Addendum to Article the Sixth:
If anybody gives me shit about certain proper nouns not being capitalised, this is your fault. I know, and it was deliberate.

Dammit, where's a sound engineer when you need one

This problem comes up a surprisingly awful lot. I have suspicion that this is faked somehow.


Mario Theme Played with RC Car and Bottles

Continuing the vein of the Mario Theme played in awesome ways.

Because I didn't turn up to Uni today (i'm a terrible, terrible person) I've posted some extra stuff for youse guys. Enjoy!

Hilarious litigatory action

Not at all hot.

Funny though!

First, this. This is the one making the rounds on the WEB 2.0 (policy dictates this is always capitalised) or the Intertubes, as I believe it's called. It's a little dry and technical at the start and middle:

D323643 is the least dissimilar to the Tartan connector of any of the patents, and stands as an obstacle to any claim of infringement of the others because it establishes prior art; if its scope, like the others, is granted the breadth you argue for, then the Tartan connector falls plainly under the prior art and cannot constitute an infringement of the later, and more dissimilar, patents. Read the patents narrowly, and Monster loses; read them broadly, and Monster loses. You are welcome to point out any error in my reasoning; but I have to say that I will be unreservedly surprised if you are successful in doing so.

In legal terms, that's known as a ZING!

But get through that and the man decides to go and tear them a new one:

It may be that my inability to see the pragmatic value of settling frivolous claims is a deep character flaw, and I am sure a few of the insurance carriers for whom I have done work have seen it that way; but it is how I have done business for the last quarter-century and you are not going to change my mind. If you sue me, the case will go to judgment, and I will hold the court's attention upon the merits of your claims--or, to speak more precisely, the absence of merit from your claims--from start to finish. Not only am I unintimidated by litigation; I sometimes rather miss it.

Bahahahahhahahahah.*wipes tear* I nearly fell over my chair when I read that. Good times.

Second, more historical piece: Arkell v Pressdram, or how to say fuck off in legal proceedings properly.

If you hate Wiki for some ungodly reason:

[The plaintiff, Arkell, was the subject of an article relating to illicit payments and so sued the defendant magazine Pressdram.] The magazine had ample evidence to back up the article. Arkell's lawyers wrote a letter in which, unusually, they said: "Our client's attitude to damages will depend on the nature of your reply". The response consisted, in part, of the following: "We would be interested to know what your client's attitude to damages would be if the nature of our reply were as follows: Fuck off".

I look forward to more hilarious legal mischief.

Silly observations

Food crisis, shmood crisis. I'll eat the same as I ever did.

I find it astonishing (and quite frankly, appalling) that I would commit what might be regarded as borderline acts of starvation or malnutrition, all for the sake of short-term convienence. The fact that I have been doing this for several just compounds the madness of this.

Be advised: boundless human curiousity without adequate and appropriate scaffolding will kill you, or at the best, lead you to slow, drawn-out half-death. However, it's goddamn fantastic inbetween.

Tomatoes

I recently had an experience while chopping tomatoes that readers may find a little disturbing. However, in the interests of posterity, i'm recording this as a not-so-weird reminder on my life.

The scene: a kitchen. The players: Me, a knife and a tomato. The play: replete with erotic (sub)text.

I started chopping this tomato to put onto my bread. Everything seemed normal. I picked up the knife and began. There seemed nothing unusual about this; I should note however that the knife was serrated.

From the moment I started cutting, something happened. The way the knife plunged into the tomato was unmistakably arousing; the sound of that red flesh being gently sawn apart was electrifying. This was crazy.

My breathing slowed; the heart raced. The dawn huskiness crept into my voice. I deliberately slowed down cutting as to continue that soft, sibilant hiss of the knife slowing cutting that tomato apart.

And when I was finished cutting that first tomato, I did it all again for a second one.

Don't mind me, it's just the solanine talking

Green potatoes and bargains, that is.

You know, the number of things that I find myself complicating really grows rather large. I've made the supermarket my latest paramour; commerce, especially banal commerce, is ever so thrilling and complicated. You know that crazy guy who walks around the supermarket a lot, talking to himself, looking at things, putting them away, then coming back, going away, and eventually leaving either purchasing a) tubers b) dairy product or c) nothing? I'm that guy.

The economic and moral opportunities (starvational challenges, more like) presented to me in supermarkets are somewhat absorbing. I've stood in front of a dairy section for about half an hour once, debating silently, and sometimes not so silently, what kind of soy juice to buy (if indeed, anything at all is purchased).

Minor changes to the place. I'm wondering what to do as regards archives; given that i've got more visitors to this place (hullo!), I'm thinking about changing the availability of archives. However, that seems to involve a bit too much effort on my behalf, and frankly, at time of printing (how marvellously quaint), I don't care. My one advice is not read too far back, lest you wish your senses assaulted.

Goddamn, I was emo back then. And a terrible writer. That must be how Goethe felt.

I kid, I kid. I'm sure Goethe was better than that. He was German, and I am not.

Resource-rich: or the intoxication. I like it when money is given in physical form. I love the rich (entendres abound) corporeal feel, the usefulness of its instrumentalism. It even distracted from thinking about those sexy kids...

For about 10 seconds. Then it came back.

I think i've had a long day, though I very much doubt it. I'll say this much: smart people are rad. Maximal trust signals maximal return, though i'm inclined not to play that with an economics student. Or me.

I have something else (to my standards, oddly disturbing. I'll venture that others probably find it confusing, but not dangerous. It's funny that things that are truly disturbing and dangerous is what I indulge in, and I refuse to give these up. Yet, i'll gladly embark on half-hearted crusades [A weak Pope, you see] to eradicate my more wholesome desires) to write about. It's about a little encounter I had with tomatoes.

This week sure has me with a lot of run-ins with the nightshade family.

I've said too much, and not all of it well enough. I'll be good.

Shit be going down in Harare, Sir

Good news!

Mugabe (and his party, more accurately) recently lost control of Zimbabwe's parliament, ceding control to the MDC. Huzzah! Now, i'm not one to get theological on you, but may he rot in Hell. Depressingly odious man.

In other news, my philosophy of law lecturer (The awesome Rick Benitez, or rb, for short [NB: his abbreviation, not mine]) actually used the word theosophical in class! Properly, even! The heart sings.

It sure can

He spoke the words into his lips

what happened

There exist, in the course of human life, innumerable little verities that are deeply vexing to one's person that nobody mentions. To mention them would be a moot point; it would be as if to get annoyed at the sky being blue or grass being green.

However, these lilliputian bastards can build up to the point wherein you just want to go, 'Goddamn, I am so fucking sick and tired of the sky being blue or grass being green all the goddamn time.'

A better question would be probably be to ask, 'What are verities, and what are not?' But that's a different question, for a different night.

David Gerrold (Marker)

"We don't necessarily want accurate maps, we want useful ones. But accuracy is extraordinarily useful."

Waaaagh, he gets it. Can you believe this is also the guy who wrote The Trouble With Tribbles?! Crazy Awesome. Will obtain novels to read.

Humorous Errata

Let us whack mightily upon our enemy as the oaken staff assaults an unwary pinata! All for the chocolatey treasures within!

This time I'm with you 100 percent, Javier.

I don't want to imagine the amount of time and effort required to produce this. God Only Knows..

This quote nearly made me cry

In 1784 the provision banning slavery was narrowly defeated. Had one representative (John Beatty of New Jersey), sick and confined to his lodging, been present, the vote would have been different.

"Thus," Jefferson later reflected, "we see the fate of millions unborn hanging on the tongue of one man, and heaven was silent in that awful moment."

Mary, carry your shame

Well past all those eyes across the avenue

Running across this (This actually came up in a Boston Legal episode as well, so go figure), I came across some interesting legal trivia, more specifically relating to the Roth v. United States case. It's a somewhat important case in First Amendment law, and it's a sweet interpretation too, from the wonderful Mr. Brennan:

Obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment, but more strictly defines what is considered "obscene". 

Reading on, I was strangely confused that there were dissenting opinions on such a smart ruling. Turns out, the dissenters (Justices Hugo Black and William O. Douglas) argued the ruling didn't go far enough; they argued that the First protected all obscene material. Impressive, yes?

Additional trivia: Heterochromia is nifty.

Also, if you're interested, Slate is hiring general question answerers.

Pushing the fat man

And why apparently now I have trouble doing it.

Traditional trolley case: Oncoming trolley. Lever for you. If you pull, kill 1 save 5. Do nothing, kill 5 save 1.
The fat man case: Trolley oncoming. Pushing fat man will stop trolley saving 5 lives, but kill the fat man.

Consequentially, the cases have the same effects. 1 down, 5 up.

But why I can't push the fat man is this: I actively participate in his death. With the traditional trolley case, the one person on their own on the tracks has assumed some element of risk by being on the tracks; (regardless of whether they've actually assumed responsibility for taking said danger). However, with the fat man, I take his position from a level that has no risk to one that is actively fatal towards him.

Musing about deontological rights. Wonder if this intuition matters all that much. Wonder what Caroline would say about this...

Beetroot dip motherfucker

Do you stock it?!

Surprisingly, not really. Strange, really, that one would only find such few choices of beetroot/beetroot-themed dip in the wonderful world that is the Western marketplace today.

Have taken a liking to dips and bread recently. I don't know what hasn't possessed me to do so till now. Crazy, n'est-ce pas?

I don't know whether that's grammatically correct. More to the point, I don't care.

That was one of the things I find seriously frustrating about learning other languages. Fundamentally, grammar structures can be seriously, seriously different (e.g. My name is example vs. I am(je, itself conjugated)) named/appended(m'appelle) example) and native speakers are completely used to it. What may sound strange is basically culturally conditioned.

In other words, lots of memorisation. Frustrating, nevertheless.

This was inspired by late-night SBS and kittens. In a french movie, obviously.

Breaking the law shouldn't be a crime.

Well, not all the time.

Or: A plausible defense against random fellatio on the street?

For you see, as per Shaw's riposte ("Do not do unto others as you would expect they should do unto you. Their tastes may not be the same.") to the golden rule, (of which there exist many formulations; the most trite being "He who has the gold, makes the rules" to the more conventional "do to others what you would have them do to you") a more holistic approach to the ethic of reciprocity is required.

A better approach may in fact involve doing unto others as you would think they would want done to them. This helps avoid the differing tastes problem, but yet it overlooks a crucial fact: the lack of easily obtainable information as regarding taste.

This is where the random fellatio on the street comes in (that was a terrible pun). I have it on highly, highly reputable sources that this problem is reaching epidemic proportions. It most likely is the single greatest threat to our productivity (working families) and the glorious new epoch under the RUDDVOLUTION (Party policy dictates it must always be in bold, and always in capitals. Because that is the nature of this change.)

Now, how best can we balance the ethical dilemma of allowing the freedom of random fellatio on the street, with the dangerous possibility of it spiralling out of control? Simple: Large enough data sets. I propose that their be a nationwide census of random fellation, in order to determine whether, we, as a nation, are prepared to abide and tolerate random strangers giving us oral sex. It will be a taxpayer-funded revolution of epic proportions.

And of course, the revolution will be televised.