You Stole My Bit

To conclude today's NY Times-sourced troika (the Edwards thing was pure Times), there's this article about a couple who decide to live a zero-emissions lifestyle, "for some reason," as the article didn't have the nerve to say. The Times decided to use the fact that they don't use toilet paper as a hook, despite barely mentioning it in the article. (I was kind of hoping that was their only idiosyncrasy.) But no, they don't make trash, and use cloth diapers, and only eat food grown within 250 miles of New York City, and generally make pests of themselves at restaurants and at work and in the pages of the Newspaper of Record.

The husband is a writer of "historical nonfiction," a genre that, I think, used to be called "history". He also sounds like a horrible person. I don't know what people like, but making your wife use "homemade fruit-scrap vinegar" sounds like a good way start fights. Nobody is that good of a sport.

It's easy to make fun of people different from us, but the real reason I bring this up is a commentary on the Times. What is this article? It's not exactly news; nothing has happened, and even if it had, it wouldn't be important. It's not a social trend; this is just one family, and the reporter doesn't even pretend that there are others. No, the newspaper just saw this one interesting ("interesting") thing, and thought you might like to hear about it. No pretense that it's important, or relevant or anything you might need to know. Just a big, "huh, think of that." Sound familiar?

Venceremos

John Edwards just held a press conference to announce that his wife is dying of cancer. I think. What he actually said was something like, "he and his wife recognized that it was no longer curable, though it could be managed with treatment."

Maybe there's some strange non-lethal cancer that I'm unaware of (cytologists plz. let me know) but I doubt it. Psoriasis can be managed with treatment. Cancer is a war. No, this is political talk. At the same conference, Edwards said, "Both of us are committed to the cause, and we’re committed to changing this country that we love so much and we have no intention of cowering in the corner."

"The cause?"

Then he and his wife gave big smiles.


It is not necessary to be upbeat if you're going to die. I feel like I shouldn't have to ask this, but don't most Americans find it creepy to give a big, dying grin? Of course, most Americans, the ones who care, are paralyzed with grief, and aren't really interested in the content of the press conference, so is this just a case of Edwards internalizing the "always be smiling" mantra of presidential candidates? I don't know about anyone else, but I like my candidates pathetic.

You coulda had my vote, John Edwards. If you had cried, even just a little, you could have had my vote. You blew it.

With a Spot I Damn Him

With its usual sagacity, the New York Times has uncovered another trend: Children who write enemies lists on their Livejournals. It had to happen, and they had to tell you about it. They waste a whole article on a phenomenon that could be described in one sentence or (because I am super-efficient) phrase. But I suppose that's just their way; if it's a trend, it needs the full trend treatment. Nothing less will suffice.

The New York Times obviously thinks these little Nixons are a big problem, despite the complete lack of bad consequences. In fact, it sounds like fun. Let's make our own hit list, taking a leaf from America's students:

The lists... often include gradations in the level of hate expressed, such as “to kill,” “to hurt” or “to knock out cold.” Sometimes the lists include the names of the students to be protected should schoolwide mayhem erupt.

I'm not sure how schoolwide mayhem erupts, or what protecting a student would involve. Taking a bullet for him? But I do know that in this cold, hard, post-high school world, we have to be sure who our deadly enemies are, and whom we can afford to merely "knock out cold." So, my hit list:

To kill:

• Drinking water
• Bugs
• People who say "brown people"
• Anything with mint and chocolate in it
• Tulips

To hurt:

• Bread not baked in a loaf pan
• Feta cheese
• March
• Pomelos
• People who begin written sentences with "uh"

To knock out cold:

• Showcattle.com

To protect, should schoolwide mayhem erupt:

• ASIMO

Casino Gambling

How do people learn to play casino games? Unlike most games, gambling games are no fun. If you're interested in learning rummy, well you can find people to teach you. But who's going to teach you baccarat? Not only is baccarat extremely dry, but it requires many people to play effectively. And as you can see, there' s more exception than rule. Can you imagine teaching yourself baccarat? It's certainly possible, like learning Arabic is possible, but going to all the effort to learn a game that you can't help losing money at can only be frustrating.

Even something as simple as roulette seems impossible from where I stand. I understand the theory behind it; bet on colors or numbers and it pays off with the relevant odds. But how do you place bets? How do you collect the chips? There are all those tiny squares, and that spells chaos. I suppose you could ask the dealer how to play, if you were desperate. But you're not going to a casino to make money; you're going to a casino to feel suave, and admitting that you're a dunce is not suave. I for one am not going to play a game in front of the security cameras until I know exactly what I'm doing. They just use those cameras to laugh at the bad gamblers, you know.

It might be worth learning blackjack, if you like being kicked out of casinos for card counting, but that's a whole extra level of difficulty. If you're a card counter, you're probably already a prodigy, but my little mind can't imagine how to do it without practice. Do you rope some compliant friend into playing the dealer? I don't know about you, but if I'm going to dedicate that much time to a get-rich-quick scheme, I'd like to have a better chance of not being roughed up by casino thugs.

What this comes down to is, why do people go to those casinos? I realize some people get a thrill out of gambling, but gambling on baccarat? If you aren't already James Bond, don't bother. You're not going to make money at baccarat, or any other personal affectation. Save money on your image.

ASIMO

Lately I've been reading about ASIMO, the robot that raises more questions than it answers. ASIMO was built by Honda engineers, but his purpose is unclear. There is no way they are going to make money off this little guy. If it's to raise awareness of the Honda brand, I don't see why they went to all the effort. Everybody already knows about Honda. Do they expect this to improve the opinion of their cars? I don't think it worked. I know about ASIMO and I don't know about cars, and I still think Honda makes some pretty unremarkable vehicles.

If Honda built him to get a patent on the idea of "robots", well I admire their boldness and wish them well, but I don't think it's going to work. In 20 years, knockoff ASIMOs will be on the streets of Shanghai. No, I think Honda built this robot to be cute.

ASIMO is 4'3, a height shared only with adorable creatures like chimpanzees and huge dogs. (Big dogs are more adorable than little ones.) They made no effort to make him look like a person, opting instead for "child astronaut". How can you not look at this picture and say aww?


He thinks he's people!

ASIMO facts from Wikipedia: "Honda's official statements indicate that the robot's name is not an homage to science fiction writer and inventor of the Three Laws of Robotics Isaac Asimov." The connection never occurred to me, but it makes sense. ASIMO would by inaction allow a human to come to harm.

Update: I didn't even notice this! ASIMO's fast-food-style coffee tray has "ASIMO" written on it in tiny letters. Just like a little accessory. So cute! ASIMO, you are my best friend.

Ice

Ice cubes aren't cubical. They're more of an ingot shape, and I don't know about the rest of you, but trapezoids are almost my least-favorite cross-section to be confronted with when I'm trying to party. Those ice cubes are just a few seconds of melting from being a heap, or pile of ice. Don't tell me you wouldn't go for a genuine ice cube, if there was one to go for.

I understand why ice cube trays are shaped more like ditches than anything; it's to help the ice slide out. Maybe that was the only way to dislodge ice in 1800, but it's important to remember that we live in a modern era. We have teflon and silicone and steel. If we don't want things to stick, we have options. And even if our ice trays were lined with flypaper, how hard would it be to get ice out of them? Wham them on the table, and I guarantee that ice will come loose. And then-- Real cubes of ice in your drinks. How stylish!

Eastern Fake Time

The thing nobody ever mentions about Daylight Savings Time is that it's almost completely voluntary. You're required to transact your business with the government a little earlier in the day, it's true, but that's not much of a compulsion. It would be so much easier to think of the Federal government having "summer hours" like an ice cream parlor if that was the case.

What Daylight Savings Time really is is the government asserting control over something it's not really clear the government has any relationship with. Much like whole business over whether the courts should redefine "marriage", this might be a sterile debate. It seems pretty likely that the courts can't redefine "marriage" (in the narrow sense). People will use it however they want, and if they want contrary to the Massachusetts Supreme Court, there is nothing the government can do about that. They're not proposing re-education camps for linguistic dissidents; they were just expressing, like, their opinion about what "marriage" means to them.

It's just the same with Daylight Savings Time. Congress is saying, "Well it would be nice if you all set your clocks forward." But it seems to be missing the central element of a law. There's no compulsion. If you want to keep your clock on standard time, feel free. Large portions of Indiana do, for unclear reasons, and the feds are helpless.

Moreover, even if everyone used daylight time, I'm not sure that would be the "real" time. There's a reason noon is noon. It's when the sun is overhead in the middle of the time zone. Maybe you think the government could force us to observe "midnight" at 3 PM, but I don't think they they have the power to move these celestially rooted times, any more than they can say, "The Cartesian axes now officially meet at (1,1)." Some systems just make more sense.

So given that, and the fact that I have never met a single person who appreciates daylight savings, can't we mount a campaign to overturn it? It doesn't actually net you more daylight, people. That's an illusion.

DMV Psychology

According to the DMV, reasons for "aggressive driving" include:

• Parents who teach their children that getting angry with other motorists and behaving aggressively toward them while on the road is permissible.

• A general decline in civility and courtesy.

• Conflicts in other areas of our lives that distract us from driving.

• Vehicles are often seen as "extensions" of the driver.

Other possible reasons:

• Resentment towards father transferred onto other motorists

• Is killer bee

• Was charioteer in past life

• Positive regard merely conditional

• Guilt over massacre of Native Americans

• Just dropped cigarette into lap

Nose

I like smelling as much as anyone else, but can we cut the hype about noses? Until someone explains what noses are all about, I'm going to have to assume that teleological evolution is a myth.

I know the usual stories. Noses are for smelling, itself an unnecessary sense, if a nice one to have around. You can tell with sight cues whether meat is rotten and anyhow; you can "smell" with your mouth. You could smell even better with your mouth if you didn't have a nose to confuse the evolutionary process. Besides, scent can't be the evolutionary reason for the nose. It's impossible to pull air for smelling through a nose unless it's connected to the lungs first

The other explanations are even lamer. Noses are for warming air before it enters the body? Noses are for trapping dust before it reaches your lungs? Noses are for retaining humidity? It's all there in shameful black and white, my friends. Noses aren't necessary for those functions. Noses can't be necessary for those functions, because we have mouths too. I'm no anatomist, but it seems like a mouth is the antithesis of everything nose-boosters look for in a breathing organ. A direct line to the lungs, to hell with moisture or heat or dust. I breathe through my mouth about 50% of the time (complete guess) and damned if I'm not completely healthy.

It gets even worse. At low temperatures, it's too chilly to breathe through my mouth. When humidity is low, my nose turns to shards. When it's dusty out (rare) , I just hold a handkerchief over my face and breathe that way. I get nose infections, but I've sure never gotten a mouth infection. And noses can only accommodate a little bit of air, making them useless for exercise. What good is a body part that you can only use in times of peace and relaxation? I am a man of action, and when I get excited, mouths are good enough for me.

Packing

Why do people make such a fuss about packing? Measure out as many shirts, pants, underpants and socks as you will need (about as many days as you will be gone) and put them in your suitcase. They'll get wrinkled no matter what, so that's not a problem. What else do you need? A toothbrush, I guess, and a comb if you're that kind of person. Where's the difficulty? I could do it in five minutes. I did do it in five minutes. See you Sunday.

Dicing Vegetables, From Easy to Hard

Completely self-taught!

Peppers: Peppers are especially easy, because of their vinyl-like skin. They practically snap apart. All the cookbooks tell you to dice peppers skin down, but that is completely wrong. If you dice peppers facing up, your pepper bits will be stuck together like a shattered windshield. I am not sure why we are instructed to cut peppers facing that way.

Celery: Celery is like peppers, except the tough parts are on the inside. I always dice celery successfully, but about half of my dicing wounds are from celery. Am I doing something wrong, or is it just so easy that I get complacent? This is how most car crashes happen, folks.

Onions: Onions are so hard to cut if you don't know how to do it. On the one hand, they're thoughtfully pre-cut in one dimension (polar co-ordinates), but on the other, they're so slimy and round. Success can be had by leaving the root end intact, then cutting latitudinally along the length of the onion almost to the root end, so the whole thing hangs together, until you chop it in the third dimension. Perfect onions every time.

Garlic: Garlic is too small to dice. Any attempt will just degenerate into hacking at the garlic until it's small enough. "Mincing", they call it. But I'm not fooled.

Carrots: Carrots are a bad shape to cut. The tips are so thin that you don't need to cut them across, but as you go up the carrot, you need to cut it latitudinally into more and more strips. By the time you finish the slicing, all the slices fall apart, and it makes them hard to cross-hatch.

Parsnips: are just like carrots, except with an inedible core. Draw your own conclusions

Beets, turnips, rutabagas: These are very spherical and hard. How difficult they are to dice depends on how much of them you want to salvage. You can probably trim them into cubes and get very even particles out of them. Honestly though, how often do you really have to dice these vegetables? They are not very good.

Tomatoes: You cannot really chop tomatoes. They squish under the knife blade, unless you have a really expensive knife, in which case you have bigger problems than chopping vegetables.

Potatoes: Potatoes are the worst. They're as round as beets, but slimy too. The starchy film they make causes no two potato wedges to stick together long enough to be cut. Your only hope is to rearrange the slices before each cut, like some topography problem. The trouble is that potatoes are hard enough that to cut 10 slices of potato evenly along their length requires a lot of force, which tends to make the knife go awry. It is exhausting to chop potatoes.

Capitalist Running Dog

I have a new hobby! I write nice little letters to my favorite corporations, telling them how much I love their products. I'm such a cool dude, you might think I'm doing it as an ironic commentary on our national relationship with corporations, but you give me too much credit. There are some things I just really like. I've already written letters to the Coca-Cola corporation, and to the company that makes Tabasco sauce. Sometimes you find that your feelings can't be hidden.

At first, it feels stupid. What do you say to Coca-Cola? Other than that they rock? But the words come, and let me tell you: Writing a fan letter to a corporation is the best feeling in the world. Unlike writing a weirdly complimentary letter to a friend, you don't have to worry about your words having a double meaning. And unlike writing to a celebrity, you know you're going to get a response. Apparently corporations get as excited about compliments as anybody; so excited that they often send you corporate swag.

The only trouble is that there aren't enough proprietary brands I like. Sure, I like pineapple juice, but Dole's juice is no better than anybody else's. I could not write them a letter in good conscience. I guess I like Saltines, but can I tell them from the store brand? Milk is milk and as far as this internet presence is concerned, coffee is coffee. Help me out folks. What brand-name products are worth gushing over?

Surround Sound

I don't doubt that proponents of surround sound are sincere. I guess it even does sound better than everyday sound. But why? Normal sounds come at us from one direction. When you listen to someone play the guitar, you hear them play the guitar from the front. If the acoustics are good, you get a little sound from the side, but barely. It's not the same as having two half guitars, one on each side, and yet nobody is dissatisfied with live performances.

Perhaps they think the ability to see the performer makes up for the fact that the sound quality is poor, but I've never heard anyone disparage public performances in any way. If you could get two guitarists, one on each side, playing the same tune, would that sound better? Is that why there are dozens of violinists in an orchestra? I have a lot to learn about surround sound my friends, but at least I am asking the right question.

Stalinist Aesthetics

In other simulacrum news, conservatives have launched an answer to The Daily Show, running on the Fox network. No word yet on whether they have come up with a conservative John Stewart who is as proud of himself as the original, but his face is undoubtedly less rubbery.

So we're off to a good start. All it needs now is the a studio audience that screams continuously, and to have exhausted all its jokes, and we'll have a show.

But more importantly, what's the deal with conservative knockoffs? I enjoyed Air America as much as the next guy (not at all), and remember RedState.com, but haven't they taught us a lesson? I just don't think there's a market for ideologically inverted entertainment, as the professors would put it. There is obviously something about an endlessly smug comedy show that is just intrinsically appealing to liberals, and I'm certainly not going to doubt whatever natural law is behind that.

But of course, this is how great progress is made. Or could be, if the marketing experts behind the Republican party are correct. How about

• Conservative constructivist artwork
• Conservative Unitarianism
• Conservative Scandinavia
• Conservative Democratic Party
• Conservative Noam Chomsky
• Conservative air
• Conservative black people
• Conservative apk01004.blogspot.com

Science Made Stupid

Ten percent more seriously, I don't know why everyone got so excited about Conservapedia. There was already a conservative Wikipedia. Creationwiki.org has been bringing you the questionable resource of a Creationist encyclopedia since before I can remember caring.

CreationWiki makes me feel bad, because there's not much to Creationism. "God said it, I believe it, that settles it," is a bumper sticker for a reason, and a few wrong opinions about evolutionism are not enough to flesh it out into an encyclopedia. And the whole appeal to authority thing makes it a pointless exercise. It is possible for one man to know all about Creationism; many do, so why not just ask them? There is no collaboration to be done.

Still, it sounded like a good idea at the time, so now we have a Creationist encyclopedia. There's nothing you can do about it, so why not make the most of it? That was probably the rationale behind some of the articles, which seem to serve no purpose but to make CreationWiki less sad, like the Oceanic Whitetip Shark article ("Most sharks are pretty fast but not the Whitetip shark."), or the complete set of articles on the Periodic Table.

It might seem like there's not much to say about lithium from a Creationist perspective, but CreationWiki manages, basically by ditching that perspective and just talking frankly about lithium. It contains most of the information in the Wikipedia article on lithium, but with a thick aura of desperation. Nobody is going to use creationwiki.org as a resource on freaking lithium. You know it, I know it, so why not write sentences like

Lithium is also very flammable, when place over it flame it burns at high tempters, its flames is white. Lithium will also burn when it comes in compact with water.

Or:

Nobody knows why Lithium is capable of being used as a mood-stabilizing drug.

When you're editing a forlorn little encyclopedia like that, it must be hard not to cry. I like to imagine that the misspellings are because the author's eyes were blurred with tears, but I know it was more likely religious ecstasy. The Holy Spirit moved this man to share his amateur understanding of lithium with us, and let's not doubt that he was right to do so. The Lord works in mysterious ways, and as we now know, so does lithium.

Conservapedia

The things that happen when you don't blog. I totally missed the boat on Conservapedia. I was there before the avalanche of hipster traffic crashed their servers; I just forgot to blog about it. I was there when it started, on the scene, and that is why you read apk01004.blogpsot.com. Let us remember our obligation to the people. Conservapedia is back up, so let's commence commentary.

In case you have been locked in the pantry for the last week, Conservapedia is like Wikipedia, but conservative (AKA no British spellings!). Of course, it's new... and it doesn't have many servers... and half the editors are hipster moles... and many of the users are sickeningly dumb, but its mission is conservative and pure. I know the road to hell is paved with good intentions, but what could be more heavenly than Conservapedia? Click the "random article" button a bunch for a sample.

Highlights:

The complete text of As You Like It.

List of numbers. Compare.

Sarcastic cactus article.

There are lots of articles like this.

Sterile debate topics.

A thrill. Why, without Conservapedia, we never would have known that Wikipedia is biased. Biased in the direction of no fun, that is. Next time you see a conservative, give him a high five for me-- and one for yourself, I'm sure, because take my word for it: You will love Conservapedia.

I Still Love You

Man, I guess I got so caught up in whatever it is I do besides blogging that I forgot to blog. But things will be different now. Not like before. I promise I love you; don't be like that, baby.