An interesting article from the Time Magazine website:
A Fish with Fingers?
"People who doubt the truth of Darwinian evolution love to claim that there are no transitional fossils—no remains of ancient creatures that have the characteristics of two different kinds of organism, mixed together. If evolution were true, you'd expect to see them.
"Actually, you do: transitional forms like Archaeopteryx, a lizard-like bird, have been known for many decades, and more pop up all the time. But casts from a newly discovered fossil, slated to go on display at the London Science Museum tomorrow are, by all accounts, the most impressive example to date of a transitional form. They come from a remarkable creature, mostly fish-like but with some clear adaptations that let it operate on land. It fits perfectly with the conventional tale told by evolutionists the epochal moment when animals first began to emerge from their ancestral ocean." [via Daily Illuminator]
Saturday, April 08, 2006
Thursday, April 06, 2006
Self-Referential Loop
Came home from work today to discover that Boing Boing printed my comment about the Triple XXX restaurant in Lafayette.
Boing Boing: Yet another '50s kitsch restaurant called "XXX"
We used to go there a lot back in college, usually in the middle of the night. It was a pain in the ass drive getting to there and back to Rensselaer but it wasn't like there was a lot else for us to do. The place always had an interesting mix of people in the middle of the night -- students like us, cab drivers grabbing meals, truck drivers coming off of deliveries and the second shift getting off while the third shift was eating before work.
It was (still is) spitting distance from Purdue and while there were better places to eat up the street...I wouldn't trade my days and nights "On the hill but on the level" for anything. Those were some good trips. Sometimes I miss those late nights...eating fries or chili and sitting there just talking and drinking coffee. That was when coffee was still good (and cheap too) before there were fancy coffee places on every street corner.
I'm glad to see that the Triple XXX is still around, and still serving that great old dinner food. Some things need to stay around and remind us of when things were simpler.
Yeah, a part of me misses those days but I wouldn't want to go back to them either. Nostalgia makes for interesting hind sight, but it always leaves out the parts of things made up up jagged nights and broken glass. I am glad that I am where I am...just like I am glad that I've been where I've been.
After all, it was the journey through nights like those spent at the Triple XXX that brought me to where (and who) I am today. And a lot of the time I am glad of who I am today.
Boing Boing: Yet another '50s kitsch restaurant called "XXX"
We used to go there a lot back in college, usually in the middle of the night. It was a pain in the ass drive getting to there and back to Rensselaer but it wasn't like there was a lot else for us to do. The place always had an interesting mix of people in the middle of the night -- students like us, cab drivers grabbing meals, truck drivers coming off of deliveries and the second shift getting off while the third shift was eating before work.
It was (still is) spitting distance from Purdue and while there were better places to eat up the street...I wouldn't trade my days and nights "On the hill but on the level" for anything. Those were some good trips. Sometimes I miss those late nights...eating fries or chili and sitting there just talking and drinking coffee. That was when coffee was still good (and cheap too) before there were fancy coffee places on every street corner.
I'm glad to see that the Triple XXX is still around, and still serving that great old dinner food. Some things need to stay around and remind us of when things were simpler.
Yeah, a part of me misses those days but I wouldn't want to go back to them either. Nostalgia makes for interesting hind sight, but it always leaves out the parts of things made up up jagged nights and broken glass. I am glad that I am where I am...just like I am glad that I've been where I've been.
After all, it was the journey through nights like those spent at the Triple XXX that brought me to where (and who) I am today. And a lot of the time I am glad of who I am today.
Monday, April 03, 2006
Cleveland Gamers: Game Day
Edit: Here is a link to the group's email list: http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/clevelandgamers/
New Edit (4/15): We have added a new game to the line-up, there will now be a Starship Troopers RPG event being run at noon. Check out the line-up and sign up for events now.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
South Park's Chef takes his chocolate salty balls and goes home
A little late, I know, but I found this blog post particularly interesting. Very well researched and most likely with more than one grain of truth to it. The article is worth checking out, if only for the links provided.
South Park's Chef takes his chocolate salty balls and goes home
"Many media outlets including Reuters are reporting that Isaac Hayes, voice of Chef on the TV series South Park, has quit the show:
"Hayes is a long-time Scientologist. He's quoted as saying 'There is a place in this world for satire, but there is a time when satire ends and intolerance and bigotry toward religious beliefs ... begins.'
"It may appear on the surface that this is simply a principled, personal stand by the man beneath the hat, but there's likely more to it than that.
"A Wikipedia article says 'In a radio interview a week prior to the announcement on the XM Radio show Opie and Anthony, Hayes said he was not particularly offended by the episode because of the level of satire people have come to expect from the show.' So why the sudden turn?
"The 'intolerance and bigotry' line echoes Scientology's treatment of its critics. A Church-related site called religiousfreedomwatch.com paints critics of the organization as anti-religious extremists, bigots, and dangerous terrorists. The Church teaches that anyone who'd oppose Scientology has hidden crimes, and is an anti-social personality."
South Park's Chef takes his chocolate salty balls and goes home
"Many media outlets including Reuters are reporting that Isaac Hayes, voice of Chef on the TV series South Park, has quit the show:
'In ten years and over 150 episodes of 'South Park,' Isaac never had a problem with the show making fun of Christians, Muslim, Mormons or Jews,' Stone said in a statement issued by the Comedy Central network. 'He got a sudden case of religious sensitivity when it was his religion featured on the show.'
"Hayes is a long-time Scientologist. He's quoted as saying 'There is a place in this world for satire, but there is a time when satire ends and intolerance and bigotry toward religious beliefs ... begins.'
"It may appear on the surface that this is simply a principled, personal stand by the man beneath the hat, but there's likely more to it than that.
"A Wikipedia article says 'In a radio interview a week prior to the announcement on the XM Radio show Opie and Anthony, Hayes said he was not particularly offended by the episode because of the level of satire people have come to expect from the show.' So why the sudden turn?
"The 'intolerance and bigotry' line echoes Scientology's treatment of its critics. A Church-related site called religiousfreedomwatch.com paints critics of the organization as anti-religious extremists, bigots, and dangerous terrorists. The Church teaches that anyone who'd oppose Scientology has hidden crimes, and is an anti-social personality."
In Taipei You Can Live In A Blog
I found this photostream via a link on Boing-Boing. As the latest installment of Asian cultures appropriating words that they think sound cool (regardless of whether or not they know what it means or not) you can now live in a condo named "Blog"!
In Taipei You Can Live In A Blog
In Taipei You Can Live In A Blog
Saturday, March 18, 2006
Boing Boing: Marvel Comics: stealing our language
Boing-Boing is one of my favorite web-sites out there on the ole' intraweb...however, I think that they can, and do, get themselves worked up into a frenzy over the wrong things from time to time.
This, I think, is one of them.
Did DC and Marvel Comics create the term super-hero? No, probably not. However, did they not invest a lot of time, money and effort into the development of the concept of the super-hero? Certainly. Very much so, I think, and without any sort of argument. Yes, there are other comic book companies out there and, yes, they do super-hero books. However, if it hadn't been for the effort of those two companies over the last three-quarters of a century or so there really wouldn't be the concept of "super-heroes" as we know it for other sources to "exploit." I think that this deserves them more than a little consideration on the topic of trademarking the term super-hero.
Personally, I have no trouble with it and no issues at all with those companies owning a trade-mark on the word. Will this stop others from making super-hero comics? Let's ask Charlton, Fawcett, Image, Dark Horse, Valiant, and all of the multitude of greater and lesser known Independent Comic Publishers out there....hm, I guess that they can still make super-hero comics. With or without being able to directly use the term super-hero.
Frankly, the argument put forward by Cory Doctrow in this post is less than engaging. And I find it a bit asinine to be completely honest. In this case ownership of a word does not equal ownership of that concept. Whoever owns the word, it will not mean that super-hero comic books, movies, novels or role-playing games will fade away (or even be oppressed).
Don't they have something valid and worthwhile to argue about, like Sony and their draconian DRM measures?
Boing Boing: Marvel Comics: stealing our language
"Marvel Comics is continuing in its bid to steal the word 'super-hero' from the public domain and put it in a lock-box to which it will control the key. Marvel and DC comics jointly filed a trademark on the word 'super-hero.' They use this mark to legally harass indie comic companies that make competing comic books."
I am sure that this will end up being an unpopular post (if it is noticed at all in the great noise-to-signal ratio of the Internet). However, this last sentence that I quoted above is complete and utter horse-crap. Do I care if my saying that pisses folks off? Not in the least...the nice thing about the world today is that we still have the voice with which to speak up on dissenting viewpoints. I'm not usually this ranty but this post just struck me as dumb-headed and naive.
[By the way, if you decide to comment on this post...please, please, please do so. This blog is Moderated, but that is only because I receive so damn many spam comments that it is the easiest way to combat them. I never delete a comment because I don't agree with it.]
This, I think, is one of them.
Did DC and Marvel Comics create the term super-hero? No, probably not. However, did they not invest a lot of time, money and effort into the development of the concept of the super-hero? Certainly. Very much so, I think, and without any sort of argument. Yes, there are other comic book companies out there and, yes, they do super-hero books. However, if it hadn't been for the effort of those two companies over the last three-quarters of a century or so there really wouldn't be the concept of "super-heroes" as we know it for other sources to "exploit." I think that this deserves them more than a little consideration on the topic of trademarking the term super-hero.
Personally, I have no trouble with it and no issues at all with those companies owning a trade-mark on the word. Will this stop others from making super-hero comics? Let's ask Charlton, Fawcett, Image, Dark Horse, Valiant, and all of the multitude of greater and lesser known Independent Comic Publishers out there....hm, I guess that they can still make super-hero comics. With or without being able to directly use the term super-hero.
Frankly, the argument put forward by Cory Doctrow in this post is less than engaging. And I find it a bit asinine to be completely honest. In this case ownership of a word does not equal ownership of that concept. Whoever owns the word, it will not mean that super-hero comic books, movies, novels or role-playing games will fade away (or even be oppressed).
Don't they have something valid and worthwhile to argue about, like Sony and their draconian DRM measures?
Boing Boing: Marvel Comics: stealing our language
"Marvel Comics is continuing in its bid to steal the word 'super-hero' from the public domain and put it in a lock-box to which it will control the key. Marvel and DC comics jointly filed a trademark on the word 'super-hero.' They use this mark to legally harass indie comic companies that make competing comic books."
I am sure that this will end up being an unpopular post (if it is noticed at all in the great noise-to-signal ratio of the Internet). However, this last sentence that I quoted above is complete and utter horse-crap. Do I care if my saying that pisses folks off? Not in the least...the nice thing about the world today is that we still have the voice with which to speak up on dissenting viewpoints. I'm not usually this ranty but this post just struck me as dumb-headed and naive.
[By the way, if you decide to comment on this post...please, please, please do so. This blog is Moderated, but that is only because I receive so damn many spam comments that it is the easiest way to combat them. I never delete a comment because I don't agree with it.]
Friday, March 10, 2006
SmartFilter, BoingBoing, and Adult Baby - Diaper Lovers.
Well, you might just find this post a little odd in regards to the sorts of things that I normally post. Well, its my blog so that allows me to define what is and what isn't dorky.
Here's the thing, there's a company called SmartFilter who creates and maintains web filtering software that is used by a number of corporations and even a foreign country or two.
So, basically I am throwing up a link to the sort of clearing house post on this topic that Boing Boing has put up on their site. Good, bad, indifferent...whatever it is that your take is on this subject, things are moving in a certain way in the world.
The question that I have to ask is, are there multiple standards at work in what should and should not be blocked? Due to alleged interests of the point man (I'm assuming that its a man...hard to tell from the name) it looks like certain fetishistic behaviors that some parents, corporations and foreign countries would like to have blocked...aren't being blocked by this software.
SmartFilter, BoingBoing, and Adult Baby - Diaper Lovers.
All that I think I can really say is, read the linked article and read through some of the links that are in it (if, of course, your filtering software will allow you to do this) and make your own decisions.
It is a big, weird world out there and I, for one, would like to keep it that way.
Here's the thing, there's a company called SmartFilter who creates and maintains web filtering software that is used by a number of corporations and even a foreign country or two.
So, basically I am throwing up a link to the sort of clearing house post on this topic that Boing Boing has put up on their site. Good, bad, indifferent...whatever it is that your take is on this subject, things are moving in a certain way in the world.
The question that I have to ask is, are there multiple standards at work in what should and should not be blocked? Due to alleged interests of the point man (I'm assuming that its a man...hard to tell from the name) it looks like certain fetishistic behaviors that some parents, corporations and foreign countries would like to have blocked...aren't being blocked by this software.
SmartFilter, BoingBoing, and Adult Baby - Diaper Lovers.
All that I think I can really say is, read the linked article and read through some of the links that are in it (if, of course, your filtering software will allow you to do this) and make your own decisions.
It is a big, weird world out there and I, for one, would like to keep it that way.
Thursday, March 09, 2006
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
Modern Mechanix : The Gas That Makes You Laugh
"This is a Popular Science article from 1949 which teaches budding young chemists how to make nitrous oxide. It even helpfully explains that the gas produces 'a feeling of exhilaration when inhaled'."
Modern Mechanix: The Gas That Makes You Laugh
Modern Mechanix: The Gas That Makes You Laugh
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)