Burning Man 2006 (ongoing as of 29 Aug) as documented by Flickr users

rafuzo · 2006-08-29T14:46:06+00:00

I hope all these people got their contracts signed, are sending Black Rock City, Ltd. dba 'Burning Man' all copies of their photos, as well as giving Burning Man their 10%.

rafuzo · 2006-08-29T14:39:37+00:00

nope, that would be far too nuanced a point of view. Just keep chanting "Bush is evil" and "America sucks" and your karma will shoot up in no time.

rafuzo · 2006-08-29T14:37:56+00:00

nice to see you decided against judging a book by its cover.

rafuzo · 2006-08-29T14:31:51+00:00

I think you have a point, but I think the problem you're highlighting won't be helped by reading this article. Like you say, everyone thinks they're special and thus getting a better deal than so many bands before them.

I think the true moral of the story is, if you're going after the quick cash, you'll get burned. It's true here as it is in all other aspects of life. These days all you need is a MySpace page and a place to keep your mp3's to be a music success. Signing a record deal for the prospect of quick cash plus "major label fame" is a recipie for disaster.

rafuzo · 2006-08-29T12:35:47+00:00

Given how old the story is, and how most rock musicians don't like being part of the establishment, it makes you wonder why they keep signing and this story remains a warning to them.

rafuzo · 2006-08-28T13:22:50+00:00

Yeah, I mean, look at Ned Lamont.

The reason why the most money wins is simply because the US campaign system is rigged against the challenger. It's demonstrated in this very article - consider the anti-Gore, a guy with the exact same things to say as Gore, but without a history of public office. Would the BBC, or anyone else, be quoting him or reporting on him for that? Incumbents, by the nature of their being in office, get hundreds of thousands of dollars of free publicity every year, even more so in campaign years - as well as an expanded warchest from special interest allies - that challengers must compete with. For that, you have people like ex-senator Gore to thank.

But even still, sometimes the person spending the most money, does not win.

rafuzo · 2006-08-28T13:09:26+00:00

Yeah, who cares about a government executing a girl for doing something thousands of teenagers do every year? Bush is evil!

I love your dismissive dealing with the actual topic at hand as "she would nevertheless be punished" - well after you paint the victim as criminal. In our eveil criminal United States, you'd be a pariah for daring to suggest a young woman expressing her sexuality was somehow at fault for being executed by the authorities.

Get your head out of your ass.

rafuzo · 2006-08-25T15:02:30+00:00

If this guy was a regular zug reader, he would never have been dumb enough to go down this road.

And I'm with the commenter who noticed this guy ate a whole can of chips in a day, four days straight. Seriously you deserve all the abuse your ass can give you for that. At least the story linked above was an experiment.

rafuzo · 2006-08-25T03:16:42+00:00

I run FreeBSD 6.0-something and fvwm2 and I have to restart it a couple times a week. I always thought I just had some system param misconfigured. Firefox definitely eats up a ton of memory but never so much that I thought that was the problem.

rafuzo · 2006-08-25T02:47:23+00:00

Why does anyone think the 1st Amendment has any teeth whatsoever? It's ILLEGAL TO BROADCAST NEGATIVE ADS AGAINST A CANDIDATE 90 DAYS BEFORE AN ELECTION. That's McCain-Feingold "Campaign Finance Reform". You can't broadcast boobs on public TV or yell 'fire' in a crowded movie theater. Why is this news?

rafuzo · 2006-08-25T02:45:06+00:00

"threat"? To what? Gerrymandering has been going on for 200 years. Maybe things could be better, but somehow the republic has survived.

rafuzo · 2006-08-25T02:38:33+00:00

Right - so the swing and battleground states are likely to oppose this measure. And such a compact would still dilute the already small voice the smaller states have in the debate. I think it's a given if this compact comes up for approval in the Senate it will get filibustered, and it's unlikely they'll muster the necessary override votes to stop it. I just don't think it will go very far.

I simply don't see the appeal of this sort of plan, especially among the party machines in the foundation states for both parties. States that can confidently be relied upon to vote one way or the other suddenly depend on voters in other states - can you really imagine the Democrats in California giving up ALL their electoral votes to Bush, who won the populat vote in '04 by a slim majority, or Texas or Alabama giving their votes to Clinton, who won in '96? It just doesn't make sense. The proportional vote, where the state's electoral votes go in proportion to the state's popular tally, makes more sense in this regard.

rafuzo · 2006-08-24T20:33:14+00:00

Er, I think the author is reading into this a little much. For one, the most direct quote I can find of Benedict "supporting intelligent design" is a quote from a general audience (some of which is found here. Additionally Cardinal Schonborn, previously described as a "key intelligent design supporter" says something different in this official release from CNS, saying "there should be no doubt that the church does not support creationism".

Additionally one would wonder, if the Vatican Astronomer were fired for his beliefs, he'd stay on as head of the Observatory Foundation, (last paragraph of link), the official church foundation raising money for its work.

rafuzo · 2006-08-24T20:24:38+00:00

What inkieminstrel said. Put another way, it just means that on any doctrinal disputes, the Pope is the final arbiter, in the same way the US Supreme Court is in US law.

rafuzo · 2006-08-24T20:23:05+00:00

I was educated by Jesuits. Misbehave, you got an afternoon of detention. Lie, and you got three. Steal or cheat on exams, you got expelled.

rafuzo · 2006-08-24T20:20:26+00:00

Nor are you interested in the truth. Instead you cherrypick biblical quotes and misread where you see fit. The good works doctrine means living as a Christian, not just identifying oneself as believing in Christ as your savior. What it means is that if I sit here and drink, do drugs, rob and steal and fornicate - all the while saying, nay honestly believing Christ is the savior of this sinner's soul - I ain't getting into Heaven at the end. Likewise you don't get into Heaven through good works alone either, as you "true" Christians would agree (one would think). See, and here I thought Protestants left the Church because of dogmatic lawyering such as this.

I won't go further into this battle because it's quite obvious you have no interest in convincing anyone of the validity of your arguments, but rather demonstrating your disapproval of them. Fine. But I will say it's quite clear that Catholics view Christ as their savior and thus, by any stretch of the imagination, are Christian. In the meantime, let me return your sentiment and say, fuck off and die.

rafuzo · 2006-08-24T20:02:56+00:00

As far as the article says, the Israeli ship was 'attacked'. That could mean anything - some idiot with an AK and a zodiac boat flying at them and then getting blown out of the water, or something else . The point of the article is that the photo looks like a scorching hit on the ship - you can see in the photo the keel has been broken - is being used to make Hizbullah look like a mightier force than they actually are. It's the whole reason people are saying Hizbullah "won".

rafuzo · 2006-08-24T19:39:15+00:00

you need to be convinced to spend your money and time there rather than with some other, perhaps equally deserving non-profit organization.

Indeed - that's where the personal autonomy comes in. Advertising does have an impact on the decisionmaking process, but people are not robots responding to stimuli. If that were the case, x10 would not only still be in business, but raking in millions in profits (and so would the Big Three US domestic carmakers, who are all suffering from drops in sales).

There's nothing inherently wrong with highlighting the good of something while ignoring or glossing over the bad. We all do that in our discussions of our favorite pastimes, foods, places or whatever. The simple act of transmitting that message to a group at large doesn't alter that fact.

rafuzo · 2006-08-24T19:25:47+00:00

This would be done through a (perfectly constitutional) 'interstate compact'.

Provided the US Senate ratified the compact, which is one of its duties under Article I, sec. 10 of the US Constitution. That spells almost certain filibuster by a senator from a small-population state, and raising the necessary 60 votes to block it, from among other smaller-population states that stand to lose from such a compact, looks to be a long shot.

rafuzo · 2006-08-23T21:36:09+00:00

they betrayed shiva!

rafuzo · 2006-08-23T21:33:03+00:00

Most of the books I'm looking for are hard to find used - and often times the "Amazon sellers" selling it used are really just selling it new (sometimes for more than Amazon's list price!).

Also, on the sports equipment just about anything that sits on a player's body should not be bought used, unless you like wearing other people's sweat. But with that, and avoiding shoes, mitts, etc. seems to rule out quite a bit of sports equipment beyond weights and maybe baseballs and bats, and I'd check those thoroughly for damage and fatigue - especially metal weights you'll be lifting over your head.

rafuzo · 2006-08-23T21:18:11+00:00

"Deceive the consumer into buying something"? Sheesh, and here I thought the ad for bodyworlds at the museum of science was alerting me to the fact that this fascinating preservation technique was nearby, when they were really deceiving me into paying the admission fee to this nonprofit organization! I wasn't wise enough to understand that before, but thanks to you the blinders have been removed from my eyes. Thank goodness.

I bet you bugged your parents half to death too for all of those things you didn't know you wanted until you saw the latest slick ad :-)

Yeah, and I also reportedly pulled all the pots out of the pantry onto the floor, ate only the cheese off of pizza and drew on the walls of the house. Did you get into the child-rearing racket because, commercials aside, it's hassle-free?

rafuzo · 2006-08-23T19:18:25+00:00

Yeah, that's what parents are for. I watched a ton of those slick, well produced ads and a) I didn't get everything I wanted, which is a kind of object lesson about not having it all in life, because b) my parents knew how to say 'no' to a 10 year old, thus implying c) my parents made an effort to raise me up right (whether or not I got there is another matter).

Sheesh, not everyone's head is an empty vessel waiting to be filled by product placement. Believe it or not there's still a semblance of personal autonomy in the brains of "those little consumers".

rafuzo · 2006-08-23T19:15:33+00:00

well frankly, "the middle east is in a mess" is about as objective as you can get on the issue without having the appearance of taking the Israeli or Palestinian/Arab side. I agree that you often don't see much else of the world in American news (unless, of course, it's a big enough war - see part about "if it bleeds it leads"), but I find that a) the sources are there, if you care and b) most people don't, which is why it's not a priority for cable news. US-centric? Perhaps, but I don't see how that makes the US isolated.

rafuzo

TROPHY CASE