Amazon.com's founder and CEO, Jeff Bezos: "I always tell people, if we have a good quarter it's because of the work we did three, four, and five years ago. It's not because we did a good job this quarter."
If only our banking industry "gurus" thought like this.
Monday, December 28, 2009
Not The 'Last Airbender' One, But The Other One
I saw Avatar yesterday afternoon, and while visually it was absolutely breathtaking, and I appreciate the film's (albeit preachy and simplistic) message, unfortunately there was nothing original about the characters or plot: I guarantee that you have seen every character in this film before, and a child could have written the outline of the story.
The two modestly novel ideas that film possessed did not justify the film's three hour runtime. The clownish 'villains' uttered painfully cliche dialog, and the central treasure of the alien world was called "unobtainium." WTF? My fiancee quipped that it was probably a placeholder name that was never replaced, and that as movies are akin to software development projects, one could label that absurdity "going live with a known defect."
One other comment: my experience of the film was also hindered by the 3D glasses, which were extremely heavy and bulky and pressed my eyeglasses down upon the bridge of my nose until I had a headache. I think that was unnecessary.
I can't beat down this movie too much, though. It was a spectacle of entertainment. And as I mentioned earlier, visually, it is a never-ending feast. When I was a boy I used to gaze wistfully at Roger Dean's fantasy art for hours, immersing myself in his fantastic worlds. Apparently James Cameron, and the art designers for the film, had a passion for his groundbreaking art as well - this movie is his art realized in a motion picture. Sitting in the theater with my friends as the credits rolled, I wondered out loud whether Dean had worked on the film. He did not, but I just looked at Roger Dean's personal website, and it appears that I'm not the only one who spotted the rather striking similarities between the film and his work. Not sure what to say about that.
Anyway...
The two modestly novel ideas that film possessed did not justify the film's three hour runtime. The clownish 'villains' uttered painfully cliche dialog, and the central treasure of the alien world was called "unobtainium." WTF? My fiancee quipped that it was probably a placeholder name that was never replaced, and that as movies are akin to software development projects, one could label that absurdity "going live with a known defect."
One other comment: my experience of the film was also hindered by the 3D glasses, which were extremely heavy and bulky and pressed my eyeglasses down upon the bridge of my nose until I had a headache. I think that was unnecessary.
I can't beat down this movie too much, though. It was a spectacle of entertainment. And as I mentioned earlier, visually, it is a never-ending feast. When I was a boy I used to gaze wistfully at Roger Dean's fantasy art for hours, immersing myself in his fantastic worlds. Apparently James Cameron, and the art designers for the film, had a passion for his groundbreaking art as well - this movie is his art realized in a motion picture. Sitting in the theater with my friends as the credits rolled, I wondered out loud whether Dean had worked on the film. He did not, but I just looked at Roger Dean's personal website, and it appears that I'm not the only one who spotted the rather striking similarities between the film and his work. Not sure what to say about that.
Anyway...
Friday, December 18, 2009
Oh Yeah
I don't know why I haven't spent more of my life making cookies, especially for the holiday season. I intend to rectify this deficiency forthwith. There is little better than that hallowed, delicious enterprise, except perhaps sharing the proceeds of such labors!
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Jury Duty
In October I sat among twelve people who convicted a man of first-degree murder. A grim and solemn occasion. The accused was charged with the murder of his infant daughter and the assault of his daughter's mother. The woman, who was six months pregnant at the time, was repeatedly punched in her swollen abdomen by a stranger. The baby girl was born prematurely as a result of the assault, and she died nine days later. The state alleged that the father planned the crime with the attacker, and that in so doing he had procured the death of his daughter.
The prosecution laid out a damning circumstantial case against the defendant, but there was no evidence presented in the trial that directly linked the two men together in this crime. The defense attorney seized upon this apparent factual gap, and in his closing arguments, he brought up an old logical and scientific adage, "you can't prove a negative." He was trying to say that the defendant could never "prove" that he wasn't involved, and since the prosecution did not definitively show that he was, the jury must acquit his client.
I wrestled with this argument during deliberations and afterward. It has a powerful resonance! Did that gap in evidence constitute "reasonable doubt"? But I kept coming back to the judge's instructions: "intent, being a process of the mind, is wholly subjective and may not be demonstrable through direct evidence alone," and again "use the evidence presented, your knowledge, experience, and common sense to reach your verdict."
In the end, the circumstantial case was enough for me. I did my best to persuade my fellow jurors, and together we voted to convict the defendant on all charges: first degree murder with premeditation; second degree murder with intent; and first degree assault, great bodily harm. In a bit of courtroom theatrics, the defendant's brother stormed out, slamming the door with terrific force. But our service was complete.
After the trial, in chambers, the judge revealed that the man who committed the assault, who had plead guilty and is serving forty years for his role in the attack, refused to testify at the last moment. He had been threatened by the defendant that we had just convicted! I think that assuaged some of the jurors who felt that we needed to hear the attacker's testimony in order to convict on all counts. After all, his testimony had been promised in the prosecution's opening remarks, and it would have filled the evidentiary gap in the case. It was the 'pat on the back' that they had done the right thing.
For me, however, it was sobering: in making an argument, I tend to assume a posture of certainty. Whether they realize it or not, I think most people do. It is more expedient; it inoculates oneself against errors and the unknown. Unfortunately, this posture does not help to reveal truth, and can all-too-easily obscure it. Lesson learned. Again.
Apart from the epistemological challenges that I continue to dwell upon in the aftermath of this case, there is also the question of imposing a first-degree murder sentence upon someone for the death of a fetus. In retrospect, I wish I had discussed this question with my fellow jurors. By doing what they did, these men did commit murder; the law is very clear on this point. But it also leaves me unsatisfied. I've been a fairly strong supporter of choice, and I wonder how I can square my vote to convict, these laws, this precedent, and my views on choice.
Does this man deserve to spend life in prison without the possibility of parole because he didn't have the self-awareness, courage, and foresight to ask his girlfriend if she would consider an abortion? I don't know. Why did he have such crippled faculties of mind that he did not so much as ask? I don't know that either.
For the pain he caused and the evil that he did, he will be punished. But I feel pity for him and for the fellow who carried out the assault, for I see them as tragically ignorant fools.
The prosecution laid out a damning circumstantial case against the defendant, but there was no evidence presented in the trial that directly linked the two men together in this crime. The defense attorney seized upon this apparent factual gap, and in his closing arguments, he brought up an old logical and scientific adage, "you can't prove a negative." He was trying to say that the defendant could never "prove" that he wasn't involved, and since the prosecution did not definitively show that he was, the jury must acquit his client.
I wrestled with this argument during deliberations and afterward. It has a powerful resonance! Did that gap in evidence constitute "reasonable doubt"? But I kept coming back to the judge's instructions: "intent, being a process of the mind, is wholly subjective and may not be demonstrable through direct evidence alone," and again "use the evidence presented, your knowledge, experience, and common sense to reach your verdict."
In the end, the circumstantial case was enough for me. I did my best to persuade my fellow jurors, and together we voted to convict the defendant on all charges: first degree murder with premeditation; second degree murder with intent; and first degree assault, great bodily harm. In a bit of courtroom theatrics, the defendant's brother stormed out, slamming the door with terrific force. But our service was complete.
After the trial, in chambers, the judge revealed that the man who committed the assault, who had plead guilty and is serving forty years for his role in the attack, refused to testify at the last moment. He had been threatened by the defendant that we had just convicted! I think that assuaged some of the jurors who felt that we needed to hear the attacker's testimony in order to convict on all counts. After all, his testimony had been promised in the prosecution's opening remarks, and it would have filled the evidentiary gap in the case. It was the 'pat on the back' that they had done the right thing.
For me, however, it was sobering: in making an argument, I tend to assume a posture of certainty. Whether they realize it or not, I think most people do. It is more expedient; it inoculates oneself against errors and the unknown. Unfortunately, this posture does not help to reveal truth, and can all-too-easily obscure it. Lesson learned. Again.
Apart from the epistemological challenges that I continue to dwell upon in the aftermath of this case, there is also the question of imposing a first-degree murder sentence upon someone for the death of a fetus. In retrospect, I wish I had discussed this question with my fellow jurors. By doing what they did, these men did commit murder; the law is very clear on this point. But it also leaves me unsatisfied. I've been a fairly strong supporter of choice, and I wonder how I can square my vote to convict, these laws, this precedent, and my views on choice.
Does this man deserve to spend life in prison without the possibility of parole because he didn't have the self-awareness, courage, and foresight to ask his girlfriend if she would consider an abortion? I don't know. Why did he have such crippled faculties of mind that he did not so much as ask? I don't know that either.
For the pain he caused and the evil that he did, he will be punished. But I feel pity for him and for the fellow who carried out the assault, for I see them as tragically ignorant fools.
Monday, December 14, 2009
Out of the Woods
In relation to the news cycle, I am as old as a dinosaur and as slow as a snail, but now that I am back to writing, I cannot resist the urge to comment upon Tiger Woods' domestic problems. My initial reaction to all of this was pretty typical for me: "this is nobody's business" and "why must I once again be subjected to 'news' of a celebrity's personal foibles?"
The episode sits squarely at the top of the three-headed monster of race, sex, and class, however, and as such, it demands a bit of attention. Thankfully, coverage that I have seen has been devoid of overtly racial themes. That said, I have been made aware that person(s) known to me, big fans of Mr. Woods prior to the scandal, have made comments about black men, apparently fishing for permission to cast the conversation about Tiger into a racial one. Repugnant, to be sure. But how isolated was that attempt? Probably not as rare as one would hope.
Part of the reason I had to comment upon this story is that I cannot avoid it. Yesterday afternoon in the grocery store checkout line, I was visually assaulted by the tabloids - Us Magazine proclaimed: Mistress: Tiger Woods Told Me He "Wasn't Happy at Home With Wife"; while In Touch screamed: Tiger Tells His Mistress: I WILL LEAVE MY WIFE FOR YOU. The People magazine cover was the worst: Tiger's Wife: Inside Elin's Nightmare. All of these headlines demonstrate a prurient interest in Tiger's exploits, to be sure, but they also reveal gender politics of what I thought was a bygone era. Here in these salacious quotes is writ large: infidelity on the part of a man justifies domestic violence on the part of a woman. Is this the 21st century?
Let's go to Dubai. Why Dubai? It turns out that the richest athlete in history, like every other rich man that walked the earth before him, could not accumulate that kind of wealth without some kind of devilry. The one golf course in the world that bears Tiger Woods's name sits in that desert city; an unnatural oasis that uses four million gallons of water per day, to say nothing of the rest of the city, its appalling labor practices or its centrality to the international sex slave trade.
Nation writer Dave Zirin calls Tiger to task for this and for his corporate deals with Chevron as well. Zirin put it best when he said, "Woods has every right to keep his personal problems personal. But when he makes deals that benefit dictatorships and unaccountable corporations, all in the name of his billion-dollar brand, he deserves no privacy."
Last night my mind wandered to Tiger and his all of this recent media attention as I watched The People Speak. Muhammad Ali, one of the most famous athletes of his time, went to prison and was stripped of his title rather than fight in Vietnam, a war to which he objected. Contrast that to Woods, who would rather collect another few million than come out against barbaric labor practices, child sex slavery, or toxic polluters.
While he's taking time off, presumably to repair the damage he did to his family, Mr. Woods might consider rethinking all of his priorities and reflecting upon what truly makes a life well-lived.
The episode sits squarely at the top of the three-headed monster of race, sex, and class, however, and as such, it demands a bit of attention. Thankfully, coverage that I have seen has been devoid of overtly racial themes. That said, I have been made aware that person(s) known to me, big fans of Mr. Woods prior to the scandal, have made comments about black men, apparently fishing for permission to cast the conversation about Tiger into a racial one. Repugnant, to be sure. But how isolated was that attempt? Probably not as rare as one would hope.
Part of the reason I had to comment upon this story is that I cannot avoid it. Yesterday afternoon in the grocery store checkout line, I was visually assaulted by the tabloids - Us Magazine proclaimed: Mistress: Tiger Woods Told Me He "Wasn't Happy at Home With Wife"; while In Touch screamed: Tiger Tells His Mistress: I WILL LEAVE MY WIFE FOR YOU. The People magazine cover was the worst: Tiger's Wife: Inside Elin's Nightmare. All of these headlines demonstrate a prurient interest in Tiger's exploits, to be sure, but they also reveal gender politics of what I thought was a bygone era. Here in these salacious quotes is writ large: infidelity on the part of a man justifies domestic violence on the part of a woman. Is this the 21st century?
Let's go to Dubai. Why Dubai? It turns out that the richest athlete in history, like every other rich man that walked the earth before him, could not accumulate that kind of wealth without some kind of devilry. The one golf course in the world that bears Tiger Woods's name sits in that desert city; an unnatural oasis that uses four million gallons of water per day, to say nothing of the rest of the city, its appalling labor practices or its centrality to the international sex slave trade.
Nation writer Dave Zirin calls Tiger to task for this and for his corporate deals with Chevron as well. Zirin put it best when he said, "Woods has every right to keep his personal problems personal. But when he makes deals that benefit dictatorships and unaccountable corporations, all in the name of his billion-dollar brand, he deserves no privacy."
Last night my mind wandered to Tiger and his all of this recent media attention as I watched The People Speak. Muhammad Ali, one of the most famous athletes of his time, went to prison and was stripped of his title rather than fight in Vietnam, a war to which he objected. Contrast that to Woods, who would rather collect another few million than come out against barbaric labor practices, child sex slavery, or toxic polluters.
While he's taking time off, presumably to repair the damage he did to his family, Mr. Woods might consider rethinking all of his priorities and reflecting upon what truly makes a life well-lived.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
A Long Absence
Hi.
After alternatively avoiding and forgetting about this space for a long while, I find that I am at last drawn back to it. After all, I still aspire to be a better writer. But how to sum up the last six months and more? A lot has happened: I got engaged, bought a house, help move my fiancee across country, served as a juror on a murder case, read several books, lost more hair, started a workout program... any one of these things could be fine material for a whole series of entries.
Rather than trying to wax poetic about these events right now, I'll just say that more is on the way. Happy Holidays.
After alternatively avoiding and forgetting about this space for a long while, I find that I am at last drawn back to it. After all, I still aspire to be a better writer. But how to sum up the last six months and more? A lot has happened: I got engaged, bought a house, help move my fiancee across country, served as a juror on a murder case, read several books, lost more hair, started a workout program... any one of these things could be fine material for a whole series of entries.
Rather than trying to wax poetic about these events right now, I'll just say that more is on the way. Happy Holidays.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
I Think His Name Is John
From the Regrettable Headlines Dept.: "GM has undisclosed buyer for Hummer."
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
My So-Called Blog
Jeez. May 2009 is shaping up to be my weakest month ever as a blogger. I'd better shape up! It's not like I haven't experienced anything blogworthy. I've just been really lazy about getting over here and writing something about it. In the last two months I got engaged (!), took a trip to Austin, TX, started to chip away at my summer movie list, and finished a few books. I turned 40 just last week. Hell, I even had the most incredible dining experience of my life. Time to get back to the old blog! Just as soon as I finish this box of milk duds.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
A Plea For Reason
This is a fantastic quote.
The recent attention to teen "sexting" has focused quite a lot on the presumed self-exploitation of kids, not so much on the prurient reflex of grown-ups who spy on and punish them. It has dwelt quite a lot on the traps of technology, not so much on the desires that precede picking up a camera. Quite a lot on the question of whether the teens are sex offenders or merely stupid, sluttish or mean, not so much on the freedom to see and be. Quite a lot on the legal meaning of images, not so much on the ways in which making them might delight, or on the cultural freakout that colors law, images and how they are perceived.Hat tip to Nation contributor JoAnn Wypijewski for adding a soothing voice of rationality to the cacophony surrounding the latest teen sex scare.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Proof That Texas Is A Cool Place
I just spent a week in Austin, TX. I had a fantastic time and I really didn't want to leave. Who knew? And as if I needed and more proof of how fun Texas is, while gassing up the car Sunday evening to go home, this car pulled into the filling station right behind me.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Great Quote
A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.Robert A. Heinlein
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Sex Sells, But Don't Try To Buy It
Today on the bus ride to work I saw one of those jumbo-tron billboards that display a dozen different advertisements. As we passed, two ads flashed in quick succession made my head spin. The first was a warning to johns visiting prostitutes that their pictures will be published on a Minneapolis web site. The second depicts a demure Margaret Cho gazing seductively at the viewer, arms forward and pressed to her breasts to exaggerate her exposed cleavage. Apparently she's going to be doing a show at a nearby casino (in support of another vice).
Don't these billboard people understand irony?
Don't these billboard people understand irony?
Friday, March 20, 2009
All Right...
...I apologize for that last post. It is pretty goddamn ham-handed. But these days, short of donning black cowls and sporting moustaches, could the bad guys be any more obvious?
Plus, I like the phrase "dirty fucking hippies."
Plus, I like the phrase "dirty fucking hippies."
Thursday, March 19, 2009
The Dirty Fucking Hippies Were Right
Any song that uses the word "temerity" in it deserves some props. Even if it is more of a spoken-word rant than a song.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
The Tyranny of Do-Gooders
Bleak. Hilarious. Kinky. Violent. Atheistic. Flawed. Unsettling. All of these adjectives describe Watchmen, the latest comic book opus to be transferred to the cinema. But this film does not possess a multiplex sensibility; it is deformed, hideous, and brilliant. It is art-house/grind-house superhero-noir holding a mirror to the black heart of humanity. I saw it on Sunday with my teenage children, and I'm still trying to wrap my head around it.
I have read a series of negative reviews that have been accurate enough in their criticisms (this character was superficial or that performance was wooden or some artistic choice was derivative), but I also feel like they have missed the forest for the trees. This film is relentless and uncompromising and doesn't really care what you think.
Rorschach, the film's chief protagonist, is like Frank Booth and Travis Bickle rolled together into superhero form. Jackie Earle Haley's performance as Rorschach is so pure it could shatter glass, and make the audience laugh out loud and shiver in fear simultaneously. It is a testament to the effectiveness of the film that the two most loathsome characters, Rorschach and the Comedian, are unnervingly sympathetic.
Having seen 300, the director's previous work, I went into this film prepared for something flat and hackneyed and overlong. I came out speechless - I thought Watchmen was great. Have a look at it and let me know your thoughts. Unlike the film, I do care. *:-)
I have read a series of negative reviews that have been accurate enough in their criticisms (this character was superficial or that performance was wooden or some artistic choice was derivative), but I also feel like they have missed the forest for the trees. This film is relentless and uncompromising and doesn't really care what you think.
Rorschach, the film's chief protagonist, is like Frank Booth and Travis Bickle rolled together into superhero form. Jackie Earle Haley's performance as Rorschach is so pure it could shatter glass, and make the audience laugh out loud and shiver in fear simultaneously. It is a testament to the effectiveness of the film that the two most loathsome characters, Rorschach and the Comedian, are unnervingly sympathetic.
Having seen 300, the director's previous work, I went into this film prepared for something flat and hackneyed and overlong. I came out speechless - I thought Watchmen was great. Have a look at it and let me know your thoughts. Unlike the film, I do care. *:-)
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Thursday, February 19, 2009
The Hollandaise of Irony
"I think abstinence is... not realistic at all." - Bristol Palin, unwed teen mother and daughter of would-be vice-president and abstinence-only education advocate Sarah Palin. Speaking on FOX News! I could not have made up a thicker, richer, and more buttery ending to this sideshow.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Can You Break A 100,000,000,000,000?
I just read that Zimbabwe recently printed a Z$100 Trillion note. Zounds that's a big number. It makes the Z$50 Billion note pictured seem quaint.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Drinking the Kool-Aid
I certainly enjoy hyperbole in the service of humor. I love it! In earnest public debate, however, I usually find it to be tiresome and/or grating at best, and all too often repugnant and offensive. Lately a noxious and outlandish comparison has come to my attention that to my knowledge no one has thought to comment upon: "drinking the kool-aid." It's been said that Obama supporters have "drank the kool-aid," that faithless members of the Right have "drank the kool-aid," that a few brave conservatives have refused to "drink [Obama's] kool-aid." This is the worst kind of hyperbole: stealthy and pernicious.
The kool-aid in question was a refreshing beverage and mass-suicide potion served to cult members by their charismatic leader in South America in 1978. Now, I will grant that Obama does have undeniably messianic, charismatic qualities. I will also grant that these qualities bring out a devotion in people that extends well beyond what is rational. But this weak comparison ends there. Barack Obama is a scholar and statesman, a man with a taste for debate and intellectual rigor. He is not a man who seeks blind obedience, nor does he have any apparent megalomaniac tendencies. He seems to be measured and thoughtful and deliberate in all things.
On the other hand, there was a president who for eight years demanded unquestioning support, who shrouded his administration in an unprecedented veil of secrecy, who claimed sanction from God, and who kept his own counsel of what is right and what is wrong, much of which flew in the face of the U.S. Constitution and international laws and conventions. Now that does sound just a bit like a cult figure.
The kool-aid in question was a refreshing beverage and mass-suicide potion served to cult members by their charismatic leader in South America in 1978. Now, I will grant that Obama does have undeniably messianic, charismatic qualities. I will also grant that these qualities bring out a devotion in people that extends well beyond what is rational. But this weak comparison ends there. Barack Obama is a scholar and statesman, a man with a taste for debate and intellectual rigor. He is not a man who seeks blind obedience, nor does he have any apparent megalomaniac tendencies. He seems to be measured and thoughtful and deliberate in all things.
On the other hand, there was a president who for eight years demanded unquestioning support, who shrouded his administration in an unprecedented veil of secrecy, who claimed sanction from God, and who kept his own counsel of what is right and what is wrong, much of which flew in the face of the U.S. Constitution and international laws and conventions. Now that does sound just a bit like a cult figure.
The Man-Machine
I might possibly be getting stranger. Or perhaps I have adult onset OCD. I noticed today with some embarrassment that I always sit on the east side of the bus. When I am going north to work, I seat myself on the passenger's side of the bus. When I am southbound and returning home, I seat myself on the driver's side of the bus. This is compulsive, unconscious behavior that I am at a loss to explain. Why do I it? How long have I been doing it? Why did I notice it this morning? Weird.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Pretty Much Sums Up The Bush Years
Three cheers for David Rees, who made the insanity of 9/11 and the grotesque politics that that tragedy spawned hilarious, if painfully so. After seven years, he's wrapping up Get Your War On this month. It was a brilliant web comic. Godspeed my friend.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Just Plain Ugly
Oh man, I've gotta stop. I've been binging on economic news and the inner workings of the colossal scandal on Wall Street for the past few weeks and I'm starting to get really depressed. Why do I do that to myself? Probably because I'm a "liberal." Around election time, journalists trot out the curious results of annual surveys that clearly indicate conservatives consistently self-report being happier than liberals (incidentally, I meant to write about this year's crop of stories on the subject earlier, but I was just too damn pleased about the election results).
Generally I consider myself to be a pretty happy, optimistic person. I always have. But I cannot truly say that I am a "very happy" person. So I suppose I fit this poll and these broad categorizations neatly. But why don't I consider myself "very happy"? I just can't when I feel so much outrage about the about endless war and poverty and violence and environmental degradation and unemployment and any number of issues. I feel human misery in my bones and I want to help. In other words, I pay attention to the news and I believe that people can and should do something about each other's problems.
Good grief that sounds corny. Maybe I should just tune it all out! That might just be how conservatives do it. After all, Stephen Colbert is fond of saying, "facts have a well-known liberal bias."
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
From The "Monkey Contemplating A Breast Grab" Dept.
Thank you, ladies and gentlemen, I'll be here all week.
From The "Monkey Grabs Woman's Breast" Dept.
I almost feel like I need to create a "Priceless" tag for this post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)