Finally!
It seems that the peer-2-peer file-sharing industry is learning the Art of War in the legal realm and going after the entertainment monoliths, using their own tactics of harassing lawsuits. (Thanks to the Legal Theory Blog for the heads-up on this.)
Kudos to Judge Stephen Wilson for letting this lawsuit go forward. This is the same enlightened judge who originally ruled that file-sharing software was protected under the same Supreme Court ruling that allowed the VCR to exist dispite the entertainment industry's attempt to quash that invention as well.
(Note: This landmark ruling for informational freedom celebrated its 20th anniversary this month. Can you imagine what society would be like if this decision went 5-4 in the other direction? No VCR's? Hence, no camcorders?? The entire informational revolution would have been strangled in its crib at the dawn of the 1980's.
To quote Home Recording Rights Coalition Chairman Gary Shapiro, "The significance of the Supreme Court's decision, twenty years ago, cannot be overstated. For consumer electronics and consumer freedom, it is the Magna Carta and the Declaration of Independence rolled into one. But increasingly, major entertainment interests are arguing that the Betamax doctrine does not apply in the digital age. Without this doctrine's protection, the big motion picture studios and others would exercise a veto over every new function of every new product.")
I wish that KaZaa had found a theory other than copyright infringement to attack the entertainment industry with. But right now this is war - and the copyright fascists must be stopped at any cost! Even if that means using their own tactics.... (Now is probably a good time to reiterate the message from my first post that only I am responsible for my opinions - not Justene or anyone else who has bestowed upon me the privilege of guest blogging.)
Will Kazaa win? Who knows? But the mere fact that the RIAA will have to spend time, money, and energy defending this should be considered a small victory in and of itself. Hopefully, it will be the start of something bigger.
It's too bad that the entertainment industry's "all or nothing" approach to intellectual property has forced otherwise moderate compromising people like me to become radicalized in the other direction. But they RIAA has made it's choice, and your humble blogger has made his own.
I say - Let the war continue!
Thomas Goetz has a great essay in today's Wired on why today's intellectual property scheme in America will eventually backfire and cause less creative works in the future in exchange for a short term windfall for today's business conglomerates.
Copyfight provides a great example of the current climate of intellectual property abuse (thanks to Trademark blog for the heads-up on this).
A bill is making its way through Congress that would actually attempt to extend copyright protection to databases! This would effectively try and overturn a Supreme Court decision known as the Feist case which struck down an attempted copyright on the White pages.
This new proposed law is an outrage. Your humble blogger is not worried about the law per se -
the notion that a copyrighted work must be original is a Constitutional requirement. Facts in databases would not satisfy the "originality" requirement and thus this law would be quickly struck down if it is ultimately passed in any substantive form. Still, the fact that some in Congress would even make a futile attempt to overturn Feist through legislation at the behest of corporate donors and lobbyists is worrisome in and of itself.
On another front, NY Times magazine has another must read article on the broader war going on in the "Intellectual Property" debate (registration may be required for this link).
Academy Award nominations came out today. Your humble blog critic only had a few requirements of the Academy this year - that "Master and Commander" be nominated for Best Director; that "Lord of the Rings" be nominated for Best Picture & Director; and that Lost in Translation be nominated for Best Picture, Director and Actor.
Thankfully, all of those came to be.
It was good to see Bill Murray already win a Golden Globe for his performance in "Lost In Translation", though there is one embarrassing thing about it. The Golden Globes is under some delusion that "Lost In Translation" is a comedy.
I don't know what film they saw, but it was obviously a different "Lost In Translation" than I saw. There are several funny moments in the film to be sure - but they are all laced with a deep sense of poignancy.
Unfortunately, people figure if that if the laughs are coming from Bill Murray, then it must be ok to label the film as a "comedy". This is a bad case of intellectual laziness on the part of critics and marketers of this powerful and affecting human drama.
We settled in with the first disk of the DVD set tonight. I think a fine drinking game would be to take a shot every time Maureen stares dumbly and adoringly at her husband.
I was very impressed though at the space walking scene. The first episode aired in September 1965. The first US spacewalk was only 3 months earlier on June 3, 1965. The first spacewalk ever (by a Soviet cosmonaut) was only shortly before that on March 18, 1965.
CNN hated this movie. Roger Ebert, in contrast, said "because it embraces its innocence like a lucky charm, it works, for those willing to allow it." For those of who are part of the great washed masses, Ebert is right.
12-year-old Amanda and I sat in the middle of a nearly empty movie theater on Saturday afternoon to watch this and giggled and squealed throughout. (The joy of having a 12-year-old is the freedom to act like you're 12.) Of course it was predictable. We knew who was ending up with whom before we sat down. We also knew how long it would take (hint: end of movie) and most of what would happen in between. Thanks to trailers and commercials, we also knew some of the best scenes and lines.
Predictability is a fine thing in movies. The last time I couldn't predict a movie ending was in Pay It Forward and let me tell you, I didn't much like it. The girls almost revoked my movie-choosing privileges after that. If I'm headed out on a Saturday afternoon, I'm shopping for entertainment. My emotional challenges are plentiful enough in real life.
Here's what works about Win a Date. Every one of these actors has mastered comedic timing. Topher Grace has developed his exasperated, put-upon regular guy act to perfection in the 70's show and it's used in proper amounts here. Josh Duhamel, coming out of a daytime soap, knows how to play the unbelievable as if it's real, and although I spent a good part of the movie convinced he was running a scam, he managed to win me over as surely as he did our heroine. The bit parts of the agent and the manager are played to delicious stereotypical excess by Nathan Lane ("The Producers") and Sean Hayes ("Will and Grace"). You can't think that the movie is engaging in anything other than parody when both are named the same (Richard Levy).
Kate Bosworth comes across as believably sweet and innocent. CNN seemed to think the movie belonged in the 50s because she was so dear. Even Ebert agreed that it came across as a 50s romantic comedy (but Bosworth made it work in his eyes). Personally, I think there are still innocents among us in 2004. Even with a wealth of outside, er, information, many young women maintain personal innocence. When Grace's character yells at her across the airport to "guard her carnal treasure", there's no doubt that either of them or any of us in the audience (including the 12-year-old Amanda) is sophisticated enough to be more graphic about it. It's the awkwardness of their relationship that requires such euphemisms.
A final note: If you go, keep your eye out for my favorite character in the movie, the bartender, Angelica, played by Kathryn Hahn.
Cross-posted to Blogcritics.
I have updated the blogroll to include the spankin' new non-Blogspot sites for both Boi From Troy and Your Daily Prescott. The latest roundup is at Jockularocracy.
Geraldine Ferraro was on TV this morning analyzing women voters who apparently don't care much about the war on terror because they have to worry about getting to work, making ends meet and being uninsured. Of course, women get scared by events like 9-11 because it won't be safe to get to work on the subway and their kids might get hurt but their main concern is domestic issues. They forget that terror stuff quickly and instead want their sons and husbands home from war.
I swear she really said all that. It's the same hardhitting analysis that carried her and Walter Mondale to a one state minority in 84. Let's simplify and talk down to those feebleminded women voters. I'm offended.
Bill Murray took home the Golden Globe for Best Actor for his role in Lost in Translation. Bill Murray is one of my favorites and incredibly underrated. I'm thrilled to see him win.
Well, this film is scary. A director eats McDonalds for a month and makes himself desperately ill.
Of course, if he had a brain and wasn't trying to make a point, it wouldn't have happened. I wager I could eat at McDonald's under different rules and lose weight. First, only eat the three meals. Second, eat what I'm hungry for and no more than I'm hungry for. Third, note that McDonalds has no alcohol, the source of most of my empty calories. I could probably do it without ever touching that disgusting sounding veggie patty.
Yes, I know there are 42 million uninsured in the US. Uninsured is now a noun. How many of those people really need insurance? Calblog husband always teases me about my annual effort to make sure the insurance company pays out more in benefits than I pay in premiums. I win every year. Most people don't however. Buying health care is often cheaper than buying insurance. It's the few who have the unexpected event that suffer the most.
The number of people who need ongoing care without insurance seems to be the specter that politicians raise. Those people do not number 42 million. UNfortunately, I couldn't tell you if that number is 1 million or 40 million. How do we solve the crisis until we know?
Here's one change I'd like to see immediately. Uninsured people pay the same amount as the insurance companies. I've been hospitalized. I've seen the $10.000 bill reduced to $1500, with my insurance paying 80-90% of it. If I couldn't afford insurance, I can't pay $10,000. Why don't I get the $1500?
You may already know that there is a move to build a high-speed rail throughout the state of California. I personally don't think this is a bad idea. Rail can be useful if put to the proper uses. Unfortanately, it appears the Executive Director of the California High-Speed Rail Authority appears to desire to put this rail to unknown purposes. He is quoted as saying "The objective is to serve the intercity-transportation needs of California in 2020 and beyond. It's not to serve commute trips. It won't serve commute trips. It's for trips that are too far to drive and too near to fly."
If the rail is not meant to serve commuters, Who in their right mind is going to be riding this thing? That probably also means the rail won't be cheap. Ah, government waste at its best.
If the goal isn't to serve commuters (mostly at least), I have the strange feeling you're going to get alot of the same people who now ride Amtrak, and we all know how good they are at making a profit. I guess at least their ride will be quicker.
Hot breaking gossip: Fresh off his official breakup with J.Lo, Ben affleck was spotted with Tobey Maguire at the Commerce Casino playing No Limit Hold 'em. According to a dealer, Ben has been there for two days straight.
UPDATE: Calblog husband clarified that Maguire and Affleck were not together.
Well, since we all know that the New Hampshire primary is a foregone conclusion(as all things are in politics), I want to offer up some free advice to Howard Dean. I know beating up on GW has gotten some miles, as has opposing the war on Iraq, but to really fire up the base...Beat up on Wal-Mart.
For the record: I think Wal-Mart is great, and would personally prefer catastrophic health plans to be the norm. I paid about $2500 over 2 years for a health plan I got nothing out of because I, like most men supposedly, don't go to the doctor unless I really have to. (Ambulence drags me there.)
I wanted to blog about the Democratic denates, which I somehow managed to watch in full. However, between trying unsuccessfully to extablish a stable DSL connection at home, figuring out whether Captain Kangaroo is a Californian anywhere else but in my brain, and that distracting law practice I maintain, it didn't happen. However, Best of the Web highlights all the things I wanted to highlight (like the Wesley Clark-Michael Moore story), so go there.
Captain Kangaroo has died. As a Californian, Captain Kangaroo has qualified his picker, Dave Worley, into a prize -- a Bear Flag League T-shirt.
What the heck is Bear Flag League? It's a loose alliance of conservative California bloggers. Email me if you want to join. If you want your own Bear Flag League merchandise, here's the shop.
I'm glad Dave won for two reasons: 1. he's a fellow victim of the slow blogging morass and 2. who else actually knew that Captain Kangaroo was still alive?
Death brings out the random thought connections in me and since I blog, I get to force them on you. I never watched Captain Kangaroo. I was a Romper Room girl. Did anyone else catch Carson mentioning Romper Room on the Queer Eye for the Straight Guy holiday reunion show?
Several sites are now commenting on the new Howard "Mean" Dean action figure where you press a button and it plays his Iowa concession speech, complete with the "Yaaarghhhh!" yelp. (I myself first saw it over at www.lucianne.com)
While I don't think Dean's yelp should disqualify him from the Presidency (his ideas should), I would still love to get one of these hilarious dolls!
But this brings up an issue I submitted to the ether of the blogosphere some months ago during the recall campaign. How can the nonsensical so-called "right of publicity" survive in any honest form when politicians try to market themselves as celebrities and celebrities are now bona-fide politicians?
For instance, if someone makes this Howard Dean doll (presumably without his permission), shouldn't they also be allowed to make a Barbara Streisand doll saying silly things using recordings of her speeches and/or songs?
Or does the legal community actually take the position that creating this Howard Dean doll should be unlawful as well?
I have said it once and I will say it again - the right of "publicity" should be thrown out by the courts as an egregious assault on the First Amendment except in the narrow case of clearly suggesting that someone actively endorses a commercial product when they in fact do not.
Could it be that your humble blogger screwed up and pulled an "L.A. Times" himself in his reporting? Perhaps.
A freind contacted me and said that the L.A. Times does indeed have a Sacramento bureau - contrary to an earlier stated blog of mine.
There does seem to be some proof of this.
My bad. I will strive to do better. Now my batting average is just slightly over the newspaper that I write about.
But then that begs the question - what does this bureau do all day? Why don't we get ANY coverage of pending bills making their way through the legislature that don't have to do with emergency budget measures?
Online Journalism Review has a notable piece by the Sac Bee's Dan Weintraub on Dan Weintraub and how his blog became vital to Californians getting anything resembling good political reporting during the recall campaign.
Weintraub would be worthwhile reading in any environment, but he definitely filled a void left by the L.A. Times.
Can you believe that the Times still does not have a bureau set up in Sacramento? No wonder why Southern Californians are so out of touch with state politics. (This despite the fact that, even in these extraordinary times, what goes on in California's capitol affects more of us directly than what goes on in Washington D.C.)
Could you imagine a large viable newspaper in Southern California that gave daily reports on the spending plans and proposed bills that passed Senate committees before they are finally voted on - instead of reporting new controversial state laws only after their final passage when its too late for otherwise informed citizens to actually have an input on them?
I could certainly imagine that - but it has amazingly never happened in my 13 years here in Southern California.
I hassle xrlq a lot, especially in his comments but he is just about my favorite blogger (there are a few in the same category so don't go getting offended if you're one of them. His new layout really is snazzy so stop by and let him know.
have begun and the place to be for results and coverage is Dean? For America? You Must Be Joking. However, early entrance polls are showing Dean is at third. America may decide quickly that Dean is a joke.
Word comes from MSNBC that sunscreen can be bad for you. Wearing it too often can lead to Vitamin D deficiencies. Now granted the risk is probably mild that one would develop a Vitamin D deficiency, but I take this opportunity to note, that the problem with being alive, is that everything is slowly killing you. More than any other individual "thing," time is what does us in, so be sure to put the time you have to your best use, and not worry too much, about how X, Y, or Z is killing you, because so is A, B, & C. Life is meant to be lived... So how about Medium-Rare!
I've created a separate category for these posts because there appears to be continued interest. Recent comments to the original post indicate that Infotel (and maybe this blog) were featured on BBC's Watchdog program and that some UK paper is reporting that Trading Standards is looking at them. I have been unable to verify those reports. If anyone has a link that they can provide me let me know. In addition, the sidebar on the main page has a link to my firm website with an address you can send non-virtual things to.
The NYSE has the quote "The World puts its Stock in Us." I think that quote is incredibly fitting. I recently wrote about the rate/tax/market environment. (Unfortunately, it didn't seem to interest anyone and I didn't get any feedback, but because I care(or have a vested interest), I write on it again.) If you didn't know, which you probably do because let's face it if you read a blog you probably know some of what's going on, the dollar has dropped quite significantly over the past couple months. Some say this could spell disaster. Many think we are headed for disaster. Others have ads which refer to the Bush Tax (the deficit in case you were confused). In other words, many seem to think the sky is falling. However, once a while ago, I was thinking, if you were thinking about a country's long-term prospects who would you put your faith in? China? Japan? A European Country? Russia? We talk about how devastating America's deficits are, and how crushing a burden Social Security will be. However, I can only think this ignores the fact that other countries are under far greater burdens than the American economy. Yes, our economy is not perfect, but I dare you to answer is there anyone better? Too often, we view economic prowess objectively. Importantly however, I think we need to take a more subjective look at the economic situation. More importantly, what this talk about entitlements forgets is that what the government gives, the government can take away. See 42 U.S.C. Section 1304 (Something I do not advocate or oppose, just note).
Andrew Sullivan appropriately titles his post Lost in Space as he discusses the "waste of money" that is GWB's space proposal. I for one, wholeheartedly disagree. Even talking it over with a few people at a Baptist Church no less, they felt much like myself "to infinity and beyond!" My biggest problem with GWB's space proposal is that it will take too darned long. Maybe Andrew had the good fortune to be alive the last time man stepped on the moon. I however, did not, and I would love to see man step on to Mars and soon, and maybe even further away in my lifetime. Personally, I'd love to see an initiative to terraform Venus. Can't be done they say, maybe not today, but if we work on it I could see it! Of course, it would involve global cooling, and we know how dangerous that is.
Professor Bainbridge notes an e-mail received from Prof. Yin regarding California Republicans' Senate troubles. Certainly, California Republicans have had plenty of miscues when it comes to the US Senate Races. I think however, that if California Republicans go with either Jones or Marin, we have a decent shot at capturing the seat. I think it would be more difficult for Kaloogian to win as he is more conservative and less well-known. That being said, my main question for the good professor is who the number 1 target is out here in California? A particular State Senate or Assembly seat maybe? Democratic Legislators as a whole? Or just winning the state for Bush? I like Bush quite a bit (sorry Clam), but I think Bush needs a new senator more than the electoral votes. (Call it a hunch, but if Bush does get the 55, the fat lady will have sung long earlier in the evening.) Also, (pre-recall) Jones and Quackenbush were the last 2 Republicans elected statewide. Quackenbush rarely gets mentioned though.
Thanks to Justene (not to be confused with my own name - Justin) for inviting me on board for some intermittent guest blogging. I had such a good time guest blogging over at socallawblog (thanks Jeff!) that I agreed to expand out in the blogosphere. You still might see me over at socallawblog on rare occasions if there are legal matters that I feel need dissecting.
The opinions in my posts are my own and don't necessarily reflect Justene's or any other blogger on this site.
Is it just me? Or is it genuinely pathetic that the biggest star at the California Democratic Party Convention this weekend was Barbara Boxer?
Couldn't they have dubbed Senator Feinstein as their star?
I didn't vote for either Boxer or Feinstein - but I at least understand how someone could admire Feinstein.
How does Boxer even keep getting elected?...The same way the state legislature keeps getting elected I suppose. Both events are a complete mystery to me.
Boxer, Gray Davis, and Cruz Bustamante all in the same room at a convention? Ooch! Enough to send shivers up my spine...
Is there anything of which one might say "See this, it is new"? You might think this post were about Ecclesiastes, but it's not, it's more about finance, money, and what not. I think those are words to live by, and try to look through that lens. Let me throw out some financial ideas, and let me know what you think as well.
So, for as long as I can remember (okay at least a long while) people have talked about the dangers of easy credit. Story, after story tells us that we are drowning in debt and foolish with our money. And that we had better watch out cause as soon as interest rates go back up...You're all SUNK! I find this dynamic interesting as can be.
If you get a moment, look at this graph too. It's the DJIA. Where am I headed with all this. That's a very good question. When I look at the graph I notice a couple things. The first is a strong upward trend over the entire period. However, there is a major period of time where that is not true. 1965 through about 1981, after that, hold on we're in for an exciting ride. When you think about it however 1965-1981 was a truly interesting time in American History. It was the rise (or fall?) of the Not-So-Great SocietyTM.
This was also the period of time in which interest rates were high and we had the malaise index (or so I'm told). As a result, most "baby boomers" got 30-yr mortgages on their homes, and ARMs are considered crazy, and the like. However, are ARMs the appropriate way to go? I can't help but wonder. Consider, rates were low throughout the '50s, in fact we are constantly told that FRB rates haven't been so low since the 50s. As a result, we are told that rates can go nowhere but up. I can't help but wonder, does this misassume the Not-So-Great SocietyTM era as a benchmark?
What if instead we are seeing a return to the "good old days." Finally, policy makers seems to understand that rates have little affect on inflation, and the policy justification for high rates seem few indeed. Maybe I'm falling into the "It's changed forever trap" (hence the reference to Ecclesiastes), but what if what's really happening is a return to the way it should be? Lastly, look at this graph. What jumps out at me is, "Look the damage from the Johnson, Nixon, Carter era has finally been undone...Maybe Reagan should be promoted to Great from Near-Great! See the Wall Street Journal
Well, I guess even if the bond doesn't fail...This is more or less an open question...What would you do about the "accumulated deficit?" I see three general possibilities. (A) have a bond, (don't like that with the wimpy spending limit.) (B) Cut Spending another $10 billion (as it works out) for one year, or (C) Have a single year increase in the VLF to the "old" value, a 1/2 cent increase in the sales tax for one year, and approx. an additional $4 billion in cuts to services. A, B, and C are guaranteed 1 year 1 time occurances, although a new bond could come about next year. Note that B and C have no bond. There is also a D, but I don't mention it, because I sure as heck hope that doesn't happen. My own impression is that B or C would probably be acceptable, C less so, but in the event the bond fails it might be workable, but I'm curious as to the impression of others especially fellow Republicans if we end up in an $10 billion deeper hole.
Calblog Husband here. Since I accurately predicted, to the percentage point, the results of the October recall, I have gazed into my crystal ball and gleamed the winner of Monday's Iowa caucuses, sparing you the necessity of having to watch Monday evening And now, the envelope, please.
And the winner is.....John Edwards. Yes, you read right, John Edwards. Here is why:
1. Dean is falling like a rock, as Iowans react negatively to his imtemperate remarks. I expect that Dean, with his organization, will come back a little in the final three days, but he will finish second. However, Dean survives to move on to New Hampshire, where Clark looms.
2. Gephardt has a consistent base of support; doesn't do worse but can't break out. He finishes third, and is finished because he won Iowa in 1988.
3. Kerry has been surging, but he will peak too soon, particularly with his toking video, which will not go over well with the large senior set in Iowa. Badly damged, he retreats to New Hampshire, where he will be eliminated.
4. Edwards is surging most of all. You can't underestimate the value of the endorsement from the Des Moines Register, which carries a lot of weight not only in Des Moines but througout the state. For a Democrat, Edwards has run a relentlessly positive campaign. Might not do so hot in New Hampshire, but will run strong, along with Clark and Dean, when things turn south and west.
My final prediction (I may be off a percentage point or two, but this is the order of finish I see):
EDWARDS 29%
DEAN 27%
GEPHARDT 24%
KERRY 20%
See the New York Times article on his new show which starts in two weeks on CNBC. He's not running for Senate. If you thought he was, you were listening to Calblog husband. What will you do now? See below post about Rosario Marin.
The 5 Republican women in the CA Assembly have endorsed Rosario Marin as the candidate to take on Boxer. I have heard mixed things about Marin but I have seen her in person and find her very impressive.
Check out Dan Weintraub's recap of poll results and prediction for Arnold's proposed revenue bond. Then scroll down for more good stuff.
Now there's a shock. Of course, unless she's delusional, she knew she wouldn't get the nom. Now that it appears to be Dean's, she's the first to support him. So she'll be in line for a plum position either in his administration (yeah right) or in the party hierarchy.
I try to be patient. I know the government is spending too much but I'm willing to ride it out, let it improve the country and hopr they're right that it will in the long run increase income. Some of these spending proposals, though, test even my patience.
Administration officials say they are planning an extensive election-year initiative to promote marriage, especially among low-income couples, and they are weighing whether President Bush should promote the plan next week in his State of the Union address.For months, administration officials have worked with conservative groups on the proposal, which would provide at least $1.5 billion for training to help couples develop interpersonal skills that sustain "healthy marriages."
HobbsOnline always has good stuff. Highlights today: The Nine Dwarves on Entrepreneurship and the US did not create Saddam.
Bill's a member of the Rocky Top Brigade and the Bear Flag League and the Brigade have a mutual defense pact. So Bill and I are practically buds.
Via the always wonderful Carnival of the Vanities comes this post on Killington seceding from Vermont (scroll down to Jan 10). I'm going to start blogging this story folks. If it happens, it could provide precedence and a framework for the breakup of California.
Places I have run across, mainly because their owners are kind enough to let me know about them:
Howard Dean for America? You Must be Joking. Check out the domain name when you link.
History Channel News Network (who needs an editor when you have readers) has a blog. And it's conservative.
martinis, persistance and a smile. The blog is good but I like the name the best.
It is an oft-repeated political mantra that illegal undocumented immigration helps keep prices low. I have always wondered about this however because last time I checked the main components in the price of a good are supply and demand, cost is a factor in supply, but only one of many factors. In fact, I think (but cannot prove) that illegal undocumented immigration actually stunts economic development, by keeping variable (labor) costs artificially low. This keeps business owners from investing in fixed (automated) costs. Investing in these fixed costs would work back into the American economy as more capital investments are made by a variety of business.
I haven't formulated a strong opinion to the current immigration proposal, but the contention that illegal undocumented immigration keeps prices low bugs me as I think it has no basis in reality. Furthermore, I think illegal undocumented immigration to any degree by which the lower costs increase supply, the additional buyers (the immigrants themselves) increase demand and as a result price to a greater degree. An excellent example of this is California where home prices are absolutely insane...I think in decent part to illegal undocumented immigration. In sum, any benefit which accrues from illegal undocumented immigration seems to be FAR outwieghed by its cost. This doesn't by the way answer the question of right/wrong just cost/benefit.
Real Estate Journal(which I highly recommend) has an interesting story about people and their preferred living arrangements. It suggests that people want to live near mass transit, and be able to walk to the store, but don't want to live close to the store, and want to live in "odd" arrangements like courts. It mentions how "poorly" planned subdivisions require a slavish devotion to one's car.
I tend to think people would rather not live close to mass transit, nor live close to commercial developments, unfortanately, this is the way of the future "smart liberal growth" requires it. Additionally, because (at least in California) Democrats refuse to put any money into roads and highways a lot of people are forced to use mass transit. IF, I could park close to work or school inexpensively, and the traffic was manageable I would rarely take mass transit, but instead I am virtually forced to take it. I think these factors more than anything else affect the prices of homes and where people feel obligated to live.
I asked this question in a comment over at xrlq's but haven't gotten a response. Perhaps an elaboration on my own blog will open discussion. Otherwise, I'll have to start stalking other bloggers with my query until I find some information. It wouldn't be the first time I started posting randomly.
Xrlq notes that illegal immigrants have become rather open and outspoken about their illegal status. It seems to me from very limited and anecdotal experience that this cavalier attitude is limited to immigrants of Hispanic descent (mostly from Mexico, maybe Guatamala too). Immigrants I have known from countries like Russia and Ireland have been, in my opinion, afraid to mention their illegal status and very aggressive about trying to remain legal if they are here legally. Is this just a sign of the circles I run in? Or are the loosening restrictions on illegal immigrants more drected at our Southern neighbor for obvious political reasons?
Ok, so I've gone on a diet. It is very difficult to get motivated since I really don't care about weight but the doctors (yes, I have several) have been pushing it. Since a diet is maligned in the medical profession, the preferred option is visiting a nutritionist and changing your EATING HABITS. Yeah, like I want to change habits.
You can only imagine my aversion to a nutritionist. It'd be like xrlq and Ravenwood combined on an extra-snarky day. I opted for WebMD's new online system. At least the nutritionist won't hear my mutterings.
First, we start with the analysis of my current diet. There's an assumption that I eat the same things all the time. I don't. I'll get into a couple of foods for months and months and then never see them again. There's also no accounting for binges. If you're overweight, chances are there are binges involved. My used to be emotion-induced but in the last 5-10 years, they are medication-induced. No provision for that.
I did my best. I got back my analysis. Looking over the analysis and then, ack, the recommended diet. One thing becomes clear: 90% of the weight loss change involves giving up scotch. Does Andrew know about this? I dare not tell my scotch drinking partner.
I muttered for a full day then discovered I could replace the wine with scotch. Whew! Now all I have to do is limit myself to 5 shots a week. That's not so bad. Ok, it's really bad but not so bad as no scotch.
So I'm on it. Regardless of what they tell you, it's a diet. Anytime I have to think about what I'm eating rather than the 50 million other things I think about, it's a diet.
Now my body discovered we were going to diet. In a highly dubious "coincidence", as soon as I stopped eating, I stopped breathing. You try losing weight on 60 mg of prednisone. To top it off, on 60 mg, pretty darn close to the maximum, I'm still not breathing adequately.
UPDATE: Not so much of a coincidence. Apparently my prediet habit of sucking Halls all day was more effective than I thought. Returning that sugar to my day has made a difference. I haven't found a sugarless version that's as effective.
We're not talking about the Beagle or even Bush's grand plan. It's the original 60's TV series, now out on DVD. I was also surprised to discover that Gilligan's Island and Green Acres are out on DVD.
We want the Invaders on DVD, as well as Charlie CHan movies.
Via So Cal Law Blog, which more of you should read, an LA Times article summarizing the initiatives we will vote on in March.
PerstoPundit, who knows economics (most Americans and bloggers don't) is writing excellent analysis of illegal immigration. Start here and scroll downward for more good stuff.
In Indiana, a teenaged married couple await the birth of their conjoined twins. An uninformed reporter says:
Though conjoined twins usually are called Baby A and Baby B in medical circles, April and Rocky named their girls as soon as they learned they were conjoined. "This way, we can pray for them by name," Marsha said.
It should have read "Though all twins are called ..." Triplets are A, B, and C. You can figure out the rest. We named Madeleine and Amanda before birth and never got the drs to call then by name. The ICU nurses were better about it.
It does appear that the twins have a better chance of succeeding. They are not joined at the head and have separate hearts.
Doctors suggested termination because the twins might be born dead. Hmm, if they had "terminated" that would have prevented them being born dead?
I'm no fan of Dean but he's getting a bum rap on the no minorities in his cabinet. He said there were only 6 members in his cabinet. He said there was a black on his staff in a senior position. then he answered the question directly -- there were none.
Buried deep in the story is the fact that the state is 98 percent white. Let's see 2% of 6 members is negligible. Yes, he was there for 10 years but the cabinet did not change often. To care about this issue, I would have to see some black or minority even arguably qualified that was barred at the door. I'm not going to condemn the man for refusing to engage in tokenism.
Hewitt takes on Dean and Clark wth some delight but the highlight of his recent entries is the fact that he seems to have just discovered Joshua Claybourn. If you, too, were not Joshua-cognizant, head there NOW.
Thanks to Justene for letting me contribute on her blog. Hopefully, I'll have something to say with some frequency. In case you want to know a little about me...I'm from Northern California. And in a couple months, I will be representing San Joaquin County in the BFL. Where the houses are actually affordable (by California standards)...Mid to High 300s Wow that's cheap! Okay for you out of staters YES It is CRAZY! Currently, I attend UC Hastings in S.F., That's a little about me.
A blogger project: to increase the coins in circulation. I like dollar coins and have used them when raveling to countries that have them. So I'm in. Hat tip: Dean
I'd be throwing my clubs. Two multi-table tournaments this week:
Tournament 1: Approximately 250 players. Prizes for #1-9. I finished 10.
Tournament 2: Approximately 450 players. Prizes for 1-28. I finished 31.
When I reported on the Worker's Compensation ballot initiative, there was only one worker's comp initiative at the AG's office website. Coincidentally, it was filed within a day or two of when the Small Business Action Committee issued the press release.
However, the SBAC initiative appeared later (I caught it a week later but not sure when it appeared). Here's the SBAC's initiative.
or two.
For a variety of reasons, all of which are too boring to go into, I'm having trouble maintaining the blog. I had hoped it would resolve by now but it hasn't and the next few months look to be worse.
If you'd like to blog on an occasional or frequest basis, let me know.
I received this email today.
Hello Justene,My name is Jeff Cameron and I work for a Computer Forensics company called H+A Computer Forensics. I am currently involved in an investigation and one of my leads involves your website calblog.com. I was wondering if you could answer a couple of simple questions for me. I won’t ask anything specific, just a general idea of how your logging works. At that point, I will contact the clients and they can tell me how to proceed.
Can you give me an idea of the information provided by people to post messages and comments to your website? I can see that people post a user name and a hyperlink.
Can people post different comments, using different user names every time, and they never register on a more permanent basis?
When a comment in posted to your database, does the program log the IP of the user?
This information would be contained directly in the database tables and may not be viewable through the web interface. It is a fairly standard practice and I was wondering if you knew how it worked. If you are not sure, or can put me in contact with the person who coded your website, I would appreciate it.
Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. I would be happy to speak with you.
If he were in the US, I might think it was related to some political appointment. He's in Canada though. I wonder who it could be.
but I was never able to prove it until now. No one tell him of the women's secret plans.
Bill Hobbs reports a story apparently missed by the mainstream outlets:
Army Maj. Gen. Charles H. Swannack, Jr., commanding general of the 82nd Airborne Division in its area of operations in Iraq, said today that attacks on coalition troops are down 60 percent in recent weeks. . . .This Reuters report from the press briefing does not mention it.
Hobbs brings you the transcript.