Quixotic

2003-08-09T00:01:00.000-04:00

Transition complete. I slid all of the previous posts to the MT site www.evanz.org at this point, and will be updating for aesthetic value as time permits. Unless I find an immediate use for it, this site will be inactive for awhile, but check out www.evanz.org instead. :)

2003-08-06T23:18:00.000-04:00

Over the next few days (or less if I have any savvy at all) I'll be transitioning to MT on another domain, at which point this will link to that. Fun fun.

2003-08-04T13:07:00.000-04:00

CNET has an article up that attempts to summarize the battle over syndication feed standards between Dave Winer (and others) and the world. DRAMA.

2003-08-03T12:51:00.000-04:00

I'm back, and so are the Rings - not sure why this isn't up at the fan sites/Quicktime movie site yet, but: Return of the King trailer is online (via TrojanHorseshoes).

2003-07-27T21:50:00.000-04:00

Gone working.

Bill Gates say: 5% Of Windows Machines Crash More Than Twice A Day

2003-07-26T19:35:00.000-04:00

Via MacObserver we see that Mr. Bill has acknowledged in an analyst conference call that 5% of Windows users' machines crash more than twice a day. That's the official count reported by the error-reporting service - not even a full accounting. Consider that most older versions of Windows don't have built in error reporting, so I'm guessing this means the robust newer operating systems are the ones flailing - XP, Server 2003 and Windows 2000.
Why don't more people own Macs again?

2003-07-24T15:30:00.000-04:00

Regarding Mark and Dave:

Why don't we just settle this the old fashioned way?

That'll resolve everything i'm sure...

2003-07-22T09:08:00.000-04:00

Danger Will Robinson! Apparently that article I'd quoted Hal Crowther from the other day is causing a bit of a stir, and even drawing the attention of the FBI to everyone's favorite den of terrorists, your local coffee shop. Once again this is so absurd I'll let the facts speak for themselves. That's happening too much lately. It's not funny anymore.

2003-07-21T17:14:00.000-04:00

Nice bit via Bookslut called The Writing Life.
Heres a choice phrase: "Liars and novelists have this in common: They need to sustain the lie." Interesting perspective and to be sure, it's important to maintain consistency much as a film director must in order to maintain suspension of disbelief.
I've found that I don't struggle nearly as much with this aspect of writing, however. I tend to find plotting, detail and the like to be a breeze, whereas character development might take much more work. The trick I'd say is to find a writing style that suits your strengths and help develop the weaknesses. But that's me.

Stop it God

2003-07-21T15:02:00.000-04:00

snicker

"Suspected Terrorist"

2003-07-20T21:00:00.000-04:00

John Gilmore has been kicked from a BA flight for wearing a button. Apparently the stewardess who asked that the flight be turned around to remove him thought security had put the button reading Suspected Terrorist on him to label him. Just so everyone would know. 'Cause that would be safer, right?

Better than I...

2003-07-18T13:09:00.000-04:00

Hal says it:

"It is and has always been true, in Samuel Johnson's famous words, that "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel" -- by which, of course, Dr. Johnson meant patriotism as a political and rhetorical weapon, not as a private emotion. Belittling other people's patriotism to achieve political leverage is the lowest road a public scoundrel can travel, the road where neo-conservative meets neo-fascist."

Lars has lost his mind.

2003-07-18T10:21:00.000-04:00

This just in. Hopefully AK Steel or the like will consider suing Metallica for use of the word Metal, since, you know, they've like been making it for years and any use of the word would detract from the, like, perception that they're the only ones who make it like they do. Just see it from their perspective, uh, you know?

OOP. It's a hoax. Teach me to not post so quickly, won't it? :)

Saying it makes it so... right?

2003-07-18T09:50:00.000-04:00

On the way home yesterday evening I was listening to NPR's broadcast of our fearless leader's press conference with Tony Blair. As I listened with astonishment at the alternating gall and cluelessness of the President, at least on this occasion, I was finally able to pin down that nagging feeling: this is a person who actually believe that "saying it makes it so".

He consistently says things that are either completely untrue or are far reaching and unlikely statements, and seems convinced, based upon his insistence and emotional connection his words, that simply because he has made the statement, it either is or will be true. It took my awhile to realize that's what it is, but the key moment came when I noticed what this behavior reminds me of, which is that of a young boy.

Kids sometimes make pronouncements and elocute without regard for reality. Their statements are disconnected from basis in fact, and while well meaning mostly, aren't reliable. Similarly, we have the President. He often makes statements that are soon shown to be overreaching or in many cases, already proven to be untrue. They gibe very well with his previous statements for the most part - he is consistent(and we know about the hobgoblin of consistency) - but he seems to feel consistency equates with honesty.

There are two qualities to this that occur to me: first, he is clearly a man of faith, and has placed so much weight in his faith and it's power that he is deluding himself; second, he is a narcissist, and has allowed his rise to power, money and importance to influence his self-worth in an unhealthy way. This would be ok to an extent I suppose, but he has clearly not done much questioning of how he got there. This is particularly relevant for a person who has been handed everything and had to work (and by work I mean on his own unassisted) for very little. As such, it would be inadvisable for such a person doing your average workaday job to act as he does - he'd be fired - but for a person who holds the job of President, it's downright dangerous.

2003-07-15T10:18:00.000-04:00

Alas, goodbye to Ari... Talking Points has a last quote:

No, we said it didn't rise to a Presidential level. That's what we've said, that in hindsight, we now realize it did not rise to a Presidential level. There is still -- it would be also erroneous for anybody to report that the information about whether or not Iraq sought uranium from Africa was wrong. No one can accurately tell you that it was wrong. That is not known.

-snip-

Now who says we don't have our own Information Minister?

2003-07-14T16:41:00.000-04:00

Here's a piece by one of Hitchen's former young contrarians. A good read - I'm not so sure I agree with much of it, but then I don't get to read everything Hitchens writes these days either, so perhaps the change has escaped me. I was not shocked at Hitch's support for the war - it seems in line with much of what I've read and he makes a valid argument for it - and I don't think he should oppose Bush for being Bush as seems to be the suggestion sometimes.
Much of what I read these days seems objectionable to liberals just as the article points out, but quite in line with my (perhaps limited) understanding of Hitchen's views. It is not that he is liberal or conservative strictly, but rather a gray area. Rabid devotion to either side breeds blindness to each's flaws, and I don't perceive much blindness what I read. There is no anger like that directed at one who once was an ally but suddenly is not, no matter the reason.
Nevertheless, I should hope that the article is wrong - I would hate to see Hitchens spending anymore time in the company of Coulter et al. Scary thought.

2003-07-14T14:31:00.000-04:00

There's a new catch-word (phrase... group....) in town - it, or they, are called Brights. I'm a little wary of these rather pop-ish pronouncements and many folks' rather impulsive urge to flock to them. I remember The Celestine Prophesy and Mutant Message Down Under, etc, whose hypnotic pseudo-religious crap managed to make a great deal of otherwise fine people look quite foolish. I do however feel that that many of the points made in the article as reason for this group's emergence are very valid.

It is "not cool" to say you don't believe in god. Why is that? It's less stigmatic to say you do drugs, yet there are laws against one and not the other. In my workplace I can think of numerous reasons not to bring such a thing up, not least because it is assumed that everyone believes in god. I work at a software company, so there isn't a good reason for this, but there it is. Perhaps it has to do with living in the South? That has bearing, but doesn't really explain anything. What does impact this climate from my perspective are the connections between ideas in America, and the way they are then used in the public and in media.
Patriotism. Not a word that has any reason to have religious connotation, but more recently it has begun to take on that mantle. When I see cars pass by with little magnetic (or the more permanent and somehow scarier stick-on variety) American flags I assume that that person is Christian or less often Jewish. One has nothing to do with the other of course, but that's the net effect of the past two years of chest thumping and Good God Fearing People talk by the country, the administration, and by businesses hoping to align themselves with the fervor.
When the 9/11 attacks happened there was a wonderful rallying effect that lasted for months. Over time, the effect quieted, but those who were a little unsure they liked the changes happening so quickly couldn't know when the time to start speaking out again had come. Fear of an entire country lashing out at a person critical of the gov't or Bush or even a damn tax-cut was all around, and liberals, a shakier less-prone-to-push-people's-buttons crowd kept their mouths shut until it had gone too far. It's not too late or anything, this is America after all, where the swings in allegiance are wide and dramatic, but the time it will take for our civil liberties to be restored may be longer than we could hope for.
Big events generate change much faster than many small ones most of the time, and this has been true since 9/11 as well. Change has been "sweeping", reforms have been "forthcoming", and our liberties are being "strengthened", er, well maybe not that last one, though you can drink the Kool-aid if you like. We've watched as efforts were made to secure the country and to a large extent they're worked. At least for now, there haven't been any more successful attacks. But the cost has been high - wrongful imprisonment, invasion of privacy, and destruction of trust have been the order of the day for quite some time. Dissent is greeted with accusation, which more than anything is a shame. Dissent is why we exist and why we are a great country. It's how our values are tested. And it is these small wrongs in the shadow of the larger good of protecting the country that have begun to generate energy among dissenters again. Slowly anger seems to be rising over the economy, recent misleading comments, and over the aforementioned trampled bill of rights. It's hard to say what will be the biggest result - maybe a new president. It happened once before in 1992. But one of the things that has resulted is what I was discussing before someone absconded with the point: entangling Patriotism (always uppercase you know) with religion has forced lines to be drawn, and one of the groups that has emerged are the Brights. Intelligent people who are patriots but not religious per se were finding it impossible to comfortably speak out. Hopefully redefining the terms will help. Having a new label won't make political hay, but it might help the people who are unsure of the confrontation find their courage.
It will be interesting to see where it goes, if the label remains, but at the very least it's a little progress.

2003-07-14T10:17:00.000-04:00

Now normally a game review isn't cause for pause, but this I can't resist. Greg Kasavin over at Gamespot has written a review of life as a MMOG or Massively Multiplayer Online Game (I think that's right, it's never written out these days...) like Ultima Online or Everquest. Players pursue goals, advancement and social aims enthusiastically, and there have been recent articles in the NY Times and elsewhere describing the obsession this can generate. No one ever discusses the fun and positive, but that's beside the point.
Kasavin does a fine job if you're familiar with online gaming of lampooning the time spent in these games (to which I too have devoted too much time in the past) to the detriment of life itself. Does casting the day-to-day existence in terms of a game to be played have merit? I wonder if that wouldn't breed some odd form of sociopathy myself - imagine PVP (Player-vs-Player combat) in real life? Griefers? Would you be thrilled if you had to fear coming home each day because the little kid down the street had taken to trying to kill you each day? Obviously the parallels are limited when we take them literally, but it's a fun idea.

A few fun bits:

The only problem is you're relegated to playing as a human character, though the game does randomly choose one of several different races for you (which have little bearing on gameplay and mostly just affect appearances and your standing with certain factions).

Real life features a great system whereby newbie players will automatically be guided along through the early levels by one or more "parent" characters who elect to take newbie characters under their wing. This is a great system, as these older, more-experienced characters reap their own benefits from doing a good job of guiding the newbie character along. The system does have some problems, though--sometimes you'll encounter "griefer" parents who shirk their responsibilities or, even worse, seem content to harass newbie players.

Player death is a serious issue in real life, and cause for continued debate among players, who often direct unanswerable questions on the subject to the game's developers, who are apparently (and understandably) so busy that they generally keep silent.

:)

2003-07-11T12:41:00.000-04:00

Are you freakin' kidding me?

Mr. Fleischer said. "I think the burden is on those people who think he didn't have weapons of mass destruction to tell the world where they are."

Translated could be: You're right, we can't find them, so you tell us where they are and stop complaining!
I don't know what to say about that. It makes no sense. In fact, the lack of logic and really outright weasly-ness of it is simply astounding. Ari's given up dancing and fallen back on the time tested CYA - only cover your ass is not an administration policy that the American People are likely to appreciate.

2003-07-08T12:40:00.000-04:00

Can you imagine what it takes to do this off the top of your head? You can almost hear the circus music playing in the background. Dance Ari, DANCE!

2003-06-25T17:30:00.000-04:00

Oop. This is hilarious. A sense of humor will go far in keeping the grumbling down methinks.

2003-06-25T16:56:00.000-04:00

Gone flying.

Be back in a week or so barring any intermittent posts. I hear the Athens airport might be closed for strikes, which i'm beginning to realize is standard procedure for getting what you want in Europe. We sue, they strike. 'cause throwing a tantrum is the solution to all your problems, you know.

2003-06-23T19:18:00.000-04:00

The Quick Brown Fox jumped over the truth and ran as fast as it could to the ass of the current administration, lips puckered. That doesn't sound harsh, does it?

There's a great breakdown of all of the unsubstantiated reports and outright lies offered to the greedy public by the Fox Network over here. Very nice. Glad someone had their notebook out.

2003-06-23T16:51:00.000-04:00

There it is. Oh my. Faster, Cooler, Sexier. I can live with that.

Ok, I'll stop posting about Apple now.

2003-06-23T12:44:00.000-04:00

MacNN has an updating news page up for WWDC in case (like me) you can't wait for the stream to go up.

Faster, Faster, More, Better.

2003-06-20T13:26:00.000-04:00

[Snip]

"The World's Fastest personal computer.
- 1.6 ghz, 1.8 ghz or Dual 2ghz PowerPC G5 Processors
- Up to 1ghz processor bus
- Up to 8gb of DDR SDRAM
- Fast Serial ATA Hard Drives
- AGP 8x Pro Graphics options from NVIDIA or ATI
- Three PCI or PCI-X expansion slots
- Three USB 2.0 Ports
- One FireWire 800, two Firewire 400 ports
- Bluetooth & AirPort Extreme ready
- Optical and analog audio in and out"

[Snip]

mmmm.

2003-06-20T13:19:00.000-04:00

Egos on Parade.

When asked who the most important among them is, four out of five bloggers chose themselves... not really, but close. Dave Winer is the only blogger who chose Scripting News to be in the top ten. Snicker. Andrew Sullivan Chose Andrew Sullivan as number one.
I'm not criticizing - they were asked for their opinions and let's face it, who would have expected them to choose otherwise - but I find it truly amusing. Not all of the interviewees chose to promote themselves of course, but it's interesting that those who did so most blatantly seem to be the conservatives, among whom blogging has really taken off. Is there ever a time not appropriate for promotion of one's self or cause?

2003-06-18T09:47:00.000-04:00

Your govenment at work. I wonder if this has anything to do with Mr. Hatch's recording career. Perhaps he's worried someone will download his Gospel hits? I really don't think he has much to fear there.

2003-06-18T09:44:00.000-04:00

This is great stuff - even though it's been linked into the stratosphere, I can't resist. Here's Steve Jobs real opinion about the much-hyped Segway, then known only as Ginger:

"What do you think?" said Jobs to Tim. It was a challenge, not a question.

"I think it's coming along," said Tim, "though we expect—" "I think it sucks!" said Jobs.

His vehemence made Tim pause. "Why?" he asked, a bit stiffly.

"It just does."

[snip]

Makes you want to work for him doesn't it?

2003-06-17T13:58:00.000-04:00

Snip (Via Reason's Blog):

Bill O'Reilly has produced a particularly asinine set of talking points complaining about people who write things on the World Wide Web. Sample:

The reason these net people get away with all kinds of stuff is that they work for no one. They put stuff up with no restraints. This, of course, is dangerous, but it symbolizes what the Internet is becoming.
Bloggers, unsurprisingly, are gnashing away at the Factor's soft flesh, with Eugene Volokh and James Lileks leading the attack.

Among Bungalow Bill's more confident assertions is that "you can bet you won't be seeing many corrections on the net." This is true, narrowly -- O'Reilly's June 7 column misidentifying Los Angeles Times Editor John Carroll as John "Roberts" has yet to be corrected on the Web sites of either Creators Syndicate or AOL's Intellivu.

[snip]

These net people? Is that like these brown people or these poor people? Way to go Bill. If we net people are "dangerous" and Bill O'Reilly is not, we've got real problems in this country. Oh wait, it may be too late. Volokh says it better than I.

2003-06-16T16:53:00.000-04:00

Jessa at Bookslut mentions that John Ashcroft is defending the FBI's library shenanigans. He pretty much makes an ass of himself without anyone else's assistance, so I'll leave it be for now.

2003-06-16T15:05:00.000-04:00

(Somewhat) Daily Snip

Via NYT Magazine by Nathaniel Hawthorne:
Friday, Aug. 8: Between 11 and 12 came Herman Melville and his friends Evert Augustus Duyckinck and his brother, George Long Duyckinck. I intended, should it be anywise practicable, to ask them to stay to dinner; but we had nothing whatever in the house today. It passed well enough, however; for they proposed a ride and a picnic, to which I readily consented. In the first place, however, I produced our only remaining bottle of Mr. Mansfield's Champagne.

The repast was neither splendid nor particularly abundant -- only some sandwiches and gingerbread. There was nothing whatever for Julian, except the gingerbread; for the bread, which encased the sandwiches, was buttered, and moreover had mustard on it. So I had to make the little man acquainted, for the first time, with gingerbread; and he seemed to be greatly pleased until he had eaten a considerable quantity -- when he began to discover that it was not quite the thing to make a meal of. However, his hunger was satisfied and no harm done. He enjoyed the ride and the whole thing exceedingly, and behaved like a man experienced in picnics.

After a smoke under the trees, and talk about literature and other things, we set forth again, and resolved to go and visit the Shaker establishment at Hancock. I don't know what Julian expected to see -- some strange sort of quadruped or other, I suppose -- at any rate, the term ''Shakers'' was evidently a subject of great puzzlement with him; and probably he was a little disappointed when I pointed out an old man in a gown and a gray broad-brimmed hat as a Shaker.

2003-06-16T14:14:00.000-04:00

The Freedom of Information Act is being abused: a provision of FOIA allowing for "operational" files and documents to be protected from release is being abused, denying the public the benefit that the spirit of the law would provide. It's no surprise. My fear is that this will not only continue to happen, but that it will become so commonplace (if it is not already) as to sideline the act and allow it's dismissal as having no purpose or weight and eventual repeal by those who apparently believe they know what's best for us. I already have parents. I would rather my government just be accountable, rather than trying to replace them.

2003-06-16T13:15:00.000-04:00

Happy Bloomsday!

2003-06-12T14:10:00.000-04:00

Steve Ballmer has a blog? Though it hadn't likely occured to many folks, now that it's out there I give it a week - if that - before someone digs it up (assuming it's on a public network...) or leaks the alias he's likely posting under.

2003-06-11T11:53:00.000-04:00

Finding a Way

I began writing fiction in a meandering way, based mainly on the relative ease with which I made progress and accessed my imagination, when I was about 13. I wrote highly infrequently in those years between 13 and 18, experimenting occasionally with poetry, short story and very short fiction pieces. None of those forms have energized me beyond novels and perhaps memoir, however. I'm not certain why, though I suspect it has more than a little to do with my overly logical sense of the world. I have no trouble generating imaginative (I would say ;) ideas so long as there is a framework for them to fit into.

To that end, I've worked on a total of four different novels now since I began committing to the idea of writing more than casually about eight or nine years ago. Two of those projects and one non-fiction run have taken root, but I recently discovered something about writing which eluded me for years. In school I asked some authors and researched others to find out how they did it. I wanted to know what I needed to do to get where I wanted to go. I was not looking for an outline, only pointers and suggestions for avoiding mistakes, but I invariably found that their ideas didn't work for me. I plowed along, attempting this or that method of controlling my work - setting an amount of time to write for example, some say an hour each night, some say a minimum of four each morning, others say limit what you do so that you never exhaust your flow. Hemingway used to recommend (or say - I'm not sure that he gave 'pointers') that a writer should end in the middle of a sentence each day, such that they could rejoin the flow immediately upon return. Wrong. That didn't work either, though I diligently tried.

So I dropped it eventually. I gave up wondering how it was to be done, and I just went about it in my own haphazard way. I write as often as I'm inclined, and occassionally I force myself if I know it will be good for a project that's adrift - but I'm not good at self-flagellation. Then, just the other day, I was working on a plotting project for a novel in progress and discovered that I was thriving on the energy and I was making progress. Not a first, certainly, but the first time I'd stopped to notice. Then it hit me: I'd found my method.

I won't go into too much detail here, but generally I need structure to lead me. It sounds so unromantic, true, but there it is. Ginsberg wrote Howl on one long writing binge, fueled I'm sure by genius and narcotices - but not everyone can do that. I begin a project with an idea, usually one sprouted from wherever they originate (I don't question). From there I will usually write as many as 15 pages in one sitting or a few quick sessions. Blindly, passionately, and without attempting to edit. After that, in the past at least, I would flounder. I wouldn't want to write, I'd lose focus, forget the genesis or the thread of the idea, etc. Then, on these most recent two projects I've begun, I found it.
With each I began as usual, but then looked ahead to what might come next - in terms of the non-fiction project, this was easy. For the novel though, that meant corraling my ideas and assigning them a sense of continuity. This comes before this. That after that. It worked. Each time I sit to write now, I know a direction only - few if any details - and I head that way confidently, unworried about wasting my time or losing my thread. After i've blazed ahead for awhile, I reassess the continuity. Rinse repeat. I'll keep to myself how great a pleasure and sense of purpose this imparts, but suffice it to say, I'm ready to proceed now.

2003-06-09T13:52:00.000-04:00

Pisces mortui solum cum flumine natant.
Only dead fish go with the flow

- as translated by Christopher Hitchens.

2003-06-06T15:54:00.000-04:00

"Consequences of Permissive Neglect"

An essay entitled "Consequences of Permissive Neglect" is up regarding the problems facing intelligence organizations today. It's fascinating reading, and I feel that, as much as could be expected for a person outside the intelligence community, I understand his points. But here's the thing: this is exactly the same sort of FUD that has been coming out of the current Administration as well as Intelligence Bureaucracy for years, and it's still not a clear assessment.

Yes, leaks can and do hurt. I feel certain that the US relies quite heavily on similar tools to those of Al Qaeda (the mentioned example) as well as other countries and entities to gather information. That we suffer from the same problem as the rest of the world - namely, not everyone sees intelligence in the same way - is no surprise. What surprises me is the blind pursuit and claim of these agencies to be the only guardian of our lives and liberties. I'm not of saying leaks are good, nor am I saying that they are acceptable - but they are a very large red herring, it would appear, concealing greater flaws in the process by which we (Americans) pursue our goals and protect our interests. The author even goes so far as to indicate that the leaks preceding 9/11 may have led to our lack of awareness of the coming attack. This is an irresponsible and head-in-the-sand attitude, in my (admittedly unprofessional) opinion. What pittance of thorough research has occured into the intelligence lapses that led to our failure that day indicate just that - a massive failure of our intelligence agencies to account for and protect us from the attack. Saying it was leaky behavior by this or that person/organization is absurd. Contributing factor? Sure. Cause? Of course not. And to name such leaks a trend capable of causing this much trouble not only deflects attention from real problems, it throws limited resources at a problem that is not likely to go away. Short of the establishment of a police state not unlike the one we've recently deposed, no one will stop the type of information sharing the author of the essay describes. It will continue and it will get even worse as the means by which information can be shared anonymously become ubiquitous.

What's needed is an examination of the structure and mission of these agencies in light of advancing technology and global reorganization to better prepare for the real foes. The author consistently provides examples of leaks by the media which prevent this or that, but the this or that is vague and presumptuous. If Osama Bin Laden did in fact discover that the NSA was monitoring his cell phone via national papers, what does that mean? To the author, it was a 'those damn kids' moment - had we just been able to keep that bit a secret, we'd have foiled the bad guy. Hmm.

What I see here is an essay that provides only fuel to the advocates of free speech and FofIA etc: it lays out a case that is clearly not the whole picture, using examples that are self-serving and prove little. They prove little because there is no way to know what might have happened, and they're self-serving because they leave out all of the other intelligence that, let's face it, you know we have, but was still not enough to get the job done. Saying 'had we only had this' or 'had we only been able to do that' sounds awfully whiny.

I know that eventually the lessons will be learned, and that bullying, secretive and backbiting behavior will finally take a backseat to organized, methodical and efficient use of resources. I just hope it comes sooner rather than later.

The author uses his examples as a platform for stating a need for new legistation. This smacks of anti-whistleblower legistlation on the face of it. 'We can't handle the problem without new laws' is the implication. A point is made that arguments against such an idea are self-serving. I would ask how the argument for more restriction of speech is not self-serving. Clearly, the author has an interest here, and based on his examples I would say that a scapegoat is being proferred. Why then, do we seek to offer more power to those who seem to abuse that which they have? The solution to these crises, again, is not to make the most powerful force for intelligence gathering and control in the world more powerful - it's to find ways of reform and better use of that power.

I wouldn't for a second say that the goals of the NSA, the CIA, DOD and on and on are not worthwhile goals - we need them. But we don't need them to be all powerful, and we don't need them to be gifted with legislation that allows prosecution of types of speech they deem harmful to a mission the can't tell us about. If they can't offer up a balanced case in asking for such power, how can they be trusted with greater leeway to smack down those who might question?

On another note, I have to say that all of this falls under a strange cloud in a way. The reality is, there are just as many leaks - if not more - that are for the purposes of shaping intelligence consumption and public opinion, as there are harmful ones. I doubt such measures will get to the floor of congress in a form that serves the people by truly helping intellingence gatherers. Rather, they'll become law in a form that allows only certain parties to leak, and do so with impunity. All others would be subject to the weight of John Ashcroft or the like on them - and nobody would want that.

2003-06-06T10:58:00.000-04:00

More on the FBI as hall monitor and librarian at the Commons. It's good to see that this trend is troubling to the many more enlightened and activist folks than I wandering the web. Where is the public outcry in the newpapers and nightly news? Someone has to be shot at a convenience store near the library for this it enter the sphere I suppose.

2003-06-05T13:16:00.000-04:00

Here's the full text of Arthur Sulzberger's letter to the staff of the New York Times in the wake of Jayson Blair's deceptions. It appears that Raines, the Executive Editor, will be stepping down after all - despite his clear statements to the contrary. Guess the buck stopped.

This is undoubtedly good news, as it will take these steps to repair the breach of trust at the NYTimes. I was impressed with the initial steps, but this hasn't gone away as many seem to have expected - not least because of the joyous jumping up and down of other NY papers and Fox Media outlets in particular. It's their right, I suppose, but I find it disconcerting that they posture righteously when criticizing others, yet ranckle at the idea that their reporters could be less than "fair and balanced".

2003-06-04T12:12:00.000-04:00

On another, similar note, we have this (via Politech):

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE OPA
MONDAY, JUNE 2, 2003 (202) 514-2008
WWW.USDOJ.GOV TDD (202) 514-1888
STATEMENT OF BARBARA COMSTOCK, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS,
ON DOJ TESTIMONY REGARDING LIBRARIES:

The New York Times inaccurately reported that Assistant Attorney General
Viet Dinh said FBI "agents have contacted about 50 libraries nationwide in
the course of terrorism investigations" (Eric Lichtblau, "Justice Dept.
Lists Use of New Power to Fight Terror," May 21, 2003). The transcript of
the hearing, below, makes clear that AAG Dinh was speaking of ordinary
criminal cases rather than national security cases. Information on library
contact in national security investigations is provided to Congress in a
classified format, as was also noted in AAG Dinh's testimony.

***
REP. CHABOT: Can you tell us how many times, if at all, library records
have been accessed under the new FISA standards in the USA PATRIOT Act? And
if they have been so accessed, have the requests been confined to the
library records of a specified person?

AAG DINH: Mr. Chairman, Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act, requires the
Department of Justice to submit semi-annual reports to this committee and
also to the House Intelligence Committee and the Senate counterparts on the
number of times and the manner in which that section was used in total. We
have made those reports. Unfortunately, because they occur in the context
of national security investigation, that information is classified.
We have made, in light of the recent public information concerning visits
to the library, we have conducted an informal survey of the field offices,
relating to its visits to libraries. And I think the results from this
informal survey is that libraries have been contacted approximately 50
times, based on articulatable suspicion or voluntary calls from libraries
regarding suspicious activities. Most, if not all of these contacts that we
have identified were made in the context of a criminal investigation and
pursuant to voluntary disclosure or a grand jury subpoena, in that context.
(Transcript, House Subcommittee on the Constitution, May 20, 2003)

--
I especially like the "Unfortunately, because they occur in the context
of national security investigation, that information is classified." part. Nice. So agents are able to visit and access library records and that has to be reported. Only, they can classify all reportage if they consider it of National Security importance? Not much point in having the rule, then, unless you just want to be able to say you have the rule.

Oh, and that's the most in-authentic use of the word "unfortunately" i've seen in quite some time.

2003-06-04T11:22:00.000-04:00

The locals have been getting a bit ahead of themselves. It seems that the Chapel Hill police department has officers who fancy themselves FBI, and used the fear that instilled to attempt to bully a high school student. What's sad is that they had so little professionalism and awareness as to need to deceive a teenager, but what's amusing is that it didn't really work. The young girl was savvier than they were, and knew her rights. They were wrong, too, which would have been a simple thing to figure out had they but attempted. When they charged in badges blazing they apparently didn't do a great deal of legwork. Glad to see they're slated to move on to the FBI, because god knows we wouldn't want such behavior in small town law enforcement... they'll be better utilized protecting us from the real dangers out there.

This has caused quite a stir - I've seen notices on Farber's IP list, the Politech list as well as in several papers and foil-hat security lists. It's beginning to gain national attention as there is increased scrutiny of how law enforcement is using it's shiny new power post 9/11. Hopefully these guys can be (additional) poster children for a bit more caution in the use of these powers. Not everyone is a terrorist, even if they don't like discussing their life with the FBI.

2003-05-29T12:58:00.000-04:00

In his preface to The Stand Stephen King writes an alternate version of Hansel and Gretel (via Slashdot):

"Hansel and Gretel were two children with a nice father and a nice mother. The nice mother died, and the father married a bitch. The bitch wanted the kids out of the way so she'd have more money to spend on herself. She bullied her spineless, soft-headed hubby into taking Handsel and Gretel into the woods and killing them. The kids' father relented at the last moment, allowing them to live so they could starve to death in the woods instead of dying quickly and mercifully at the blade of his knife. While they were wandering around, they found a house made out of candy. It was owned by a witch who was into cannibalism. She locked them up and told them when they were good and fat, she was going to eat them. But the kids got the best of her. Hansel shoved her into her own oven. They found the witch's treasure, and they must have found a map, too, because they eventually arrived home again. When they got there, Dad gave the bitch the boot and they lived happily ever after. The End."

Clearly this version is a brutal and unintesting read, such that were this the original version, why would it ever reach the mass consciousness that the classic Grimm's Fairy Tale has. I read and occasionally hear people of various ages describe the virtues of speed reading, the horrors of exposition, and the general unworthiness of a good long book.

There will always be kids (and adults, sadly) who want nothing more than to be spoon fed their thoughts. I hope though, that the rise of technology and out increasing ability to 'syndicate' our lives and cull out all ideas not directly related to our mode of thinking will not destroy the greater publics' interest in good books. It already has in some ways, I suppose. There are a limited number of hours in the day and we have a great deal of media to contend with. But let's not complain because the book that someone recommends us isn't abridged. If you wish to share in the ideas that a friend or colleague experienced in a book, then read it. Otherwise, it's just not the same.

2003-05-26T12:46:00.000-04:00

This is hilarious. Just starting the week off, one day short and with a touch of silliness. (via Cory Doctorow)

2003-05-23T16:56:00.000-04:00

Gone camping.

Ah, to be out in the wild sans wireless access and media saturation ... be back in a few days if I can stand it.

2003-05-22T09:49:00.000-04:00

Here's an intersting bit of reading. This is Eric Raymond's position piece on behalf of OSI. It's designed to support IBM's case in principle and to expose the idiocy of SCO's claims. Very clear and well written and a great insight into some of the history and technologies involved, for those such as myself who don't follow it day-to-day.

2003-05-20T19:15:00.000-04:00

Neal Stephenson has an e-book out now. Stephensonia though?

E-book extras: "Stephensonia/Cryptonomica": ONE: "Cryptonomicon
Cyber-FAQ" (Neal addresses "Frequently Anticipated Questions" and
other fascinating facts); TWO: "Mother Earth Motherboard" (Neal's
landmark nonfiction account of, among other techno-feats, the laying
of the longest telecommunications cable on earth); THREE: "Press
Conference": Neal answers "Why write about crypto?" and other
penetrating questions.

It's a digital version of Cryptonomicon with additional features a la DVD, to put it one more way. A great book and good to see it's in another format, even with Stephensonia. Here's hoping that's not an answering machine message created by Neal. I want to keep my friends.

2003-05-20T15:26:00.000-04:00

Technology has finally led us back to the days of bartering goods for goods. Who needs money anyway?

2003-05-20T15:18:00.000-04:00

When is an apostrophe not an apostrophe?

When Microsoft Word mangles, distorts or adds crap to it, that's when.

2003-05-20T14:39:00.000-04:00

Veeeery interesting thoughts here. As I begin to blog more regularly, something I've flirted with through several begun-and-soon-forgotten blogs in the past two years, I'm beginning to realize it will change your perspective somewhat. This depends, of course, on what you might hope to get out of it. For me, it's an outlet - an easy place to comment on subjects I might not otherwise have opportunity to pontificate on. And let's be fair, if we did speak at such length about such a wide range of subjects offline, our friends and loved ones would likely encourage a muzzle. That said, how does it change one's perspective?

In the past few weeks I've thrown up and tinkered with my space adding nooks and crannies. In doing, as with any new interest, I've explored a variety of sites designed to offer a worldview particular to blogging - Daypop, Technorati, and a variety of incestuous sites popular as much for their bitching at one another (as far as I can see) as for their admittedly impressive technical contributions.
So what's different? As the above article at Wired notes, blogging is a sport that encourages hive-mind behavior. It’s an all too commented upon concept, so I'll leave it at that and hope the idea at least hazily clear. How does this change one’s perspective? When one idea gains popularity, either through a prominent link on one site or a clique of linking nodes, it gains critical mass and hits one of the aforementioned "society" pages. It then gets mined to exhaustion within days, sometimes hours, then begins to fall as it loses popularity. It's much like high school in this way...
Perspective enters the picture when a person such as myself, accustomed to one method of data-mining the web through "daily" pages geared toward info that I know interests me, begins to take into account the opinions of others in this little sphere. Why now do I take their opinions into account? I'm not sure. I didn’t care about Dave Winer's opinion a few weeks ago, and I'm caring less and less all the time. His and other alpha-bloggers (used to be Digerati, right?) opinions lead the direction of a great deal of the discussion on the web these days it seems, which is ok. What I begin to wonder about is when these discussions hop-scotch issues that are relevant but for whatever reason fall through the cracks - lack of expertise, concern, or understanding on the part of the popular kids might characterize these issues. Nothing like a foot-in-mouth moment in front of tens of thousands of people who can say something about it directly to you.

For now, it works. Somewhat. But I'm hoping for the day that these tools begin to find a broad enough reach that their topics are not solely those of interest to the few who blazed the trail. At that point we may see the larger spheres encompassing smaller Boolean groups with central nodes, each sharing info in the same way, with links among them much like the larger web. There however, conversation will be king, even if many of us are only talking to the clouds.

2003-05-19T15:33:00.000-04:00

Ari Fleischer is leaving the White House. He's been an interesting press secretary, very controlled and relatively humorless compared to the Clinton-era folks. I can't say I've felt he was open or clear in many of his interactions that I've followed, but he's done a spectacular job for the President by playing dodgeball better than any of the other kids.

Many times I've caught the live briefings and have been truly stunned at his ability to nimbly evade the point and say almost nothing with eloquence and his unwavering poker face. Of course, that's his job, so while I may disagree with Bush policies on many things, you can't resent them for hiring good people. Much.

2003-05-19T14:39:00.000-04:00

There's a lil update over at MSNBC on Jayson Blair. He feels bad. He's sorry. Sniff.

2003-05-18T18:27:00.000-04:00

Still some of the best writing on the web, even though it's not even open for business anymore. For current events in the world of the grumpy but hilarious, be sure to check out Heather at Rabbit Blog. Just be sure you're careful about that URL not getting into the hands of someone who might use it for evil, not good.

I imagine Suck to be like a little old TV sitting in a shop window, yelling profanities at all the passersby, only it's all reruns, so no one understands exactly who they're talking to.

2003-05-17T13:28:00.000-04:00

Dave Winer points toward the potential pitfalls of blogging your personal life.
He's been pointing toward quite a few NY Times articles lately in fact - interesting, considering a new deal Userland has with the paper of record. Of course, it seems to me that Google caching kind of negates any real value in such an agreement, but what do I know?

2003-05-17T10:40:00.000-04:00

How unexpected and sweet it is to read at Bookslut that Stephen Glass, of whom Jayson Blair might be considered a protege even, is concerned about Jayson's future. Don't judge Stephen for it though. He's all better now.

2003-05-16T16:58:00.000-04:00

The Matrix: Reloaded

First off, there will be spoilers here so go away if you've yet to see the film. Also note, I wanted to like this film going in, and my expectations were simply to have a rousing 2 (and 1/2 as it turns out) hour ride. I definitely got that, but I’ll leave it to others to rip into the film's holes and oddities. I've already read several reviews that betray a horrible lack of the ability to have fun, and while I can understand disliking a film for not being able to draw you in, I can't really understand the vitriol espoused by some because they clearly don't even like the genre. BEEEEEEEEEEEEE PSA: If you don't like movies about robots and artificial intelligence, you won't like ANY of the Matrix films. For those less locked into a worldview that requires emotional criticism of tastes not yet acquired or understood, my thoughts follow.

Some years back I read a book called Sophie's World, by Jostein Gaardner, which was essentially a streamlined history of western philosophy and thought. It didn't go deep. It didn't challenge the ideas presented, but rather, smoothed out the ride so that a reader might enjoy the flow of the ideas and perhaps ruminate on them a bit while the ride was moving. It was a fun ride. The Matrix Reloaded reminds me a bit of that book. In the film we have Socratic dialogue between the protagonist and a computer program in the guise of a woman called the oracle. We have a confrontation between this protagonist, Neo, and what is ostensibly God - in the form of an old white man. We have a variety of conversations which clearly intend to move the story while hinting (very obviously of course, this IS PG-13...)[Note: oops, turns out it's R after all] at the existence of deeper meaning. Among the ideas are some classic questions given voice: Who am I? Why am I here? Do I (or we) have any meaning at all? Can we affect the future? What is the nature of choice? And underneath the surface we have several ideas, among the most important the question of the validity of Religion.
Let's take that one. Religion. It will always be human nature to ascribe meaning to things out of desire for understanding. The question of whether or not such meaning has value is a personal decision; the question of whether or not such meaning has a factual basis may never be known, hence the idea of faith. In The Matrix, faith was an ongoing theme. The teacher, Morpheus, sought, found and taught Neo to actualize. Neo is considered by those who believe to be The One, or the savior of the human race. Hmm. Belief or lack of provides several turning points in the film, as the believers are betrayed by the non-believer, and yet win in the end through the power of love. I think we've seen this theme before. Nevertheless, the second film takes this idea even further - we have an entire race living underground, in a sort of reverse of Plato's cave in which the real world turns out to be false and the true world IS the cave. These folks are ascribed no belief one way or the other - they are simply one body (writhing in dance, we see) to be used as a basis upon which The One is to exist so that they can be saved.
As the pursuit of a way to prevent armageddon is sought, Neo begins to see cracks in the seams of that belief structure which says he is the savior – yet he still has incredible power. The pursuit continues, obstacles overcome, including a lingering kiss with the temptress who would prove that love requires sacrifice. Eventually we are taken to the confrontation with The Architect, he who created the Matrix and thereby the world which they seek to destroy. He, God, lays it all out, explains that in the end, Neo is a bug - "an anomaly" that the system has become reliant upon and who therefore holds the key to it's existence. Faith has led him to this point, and now he is offered a choice – to believe, destroy Zion (preventing the armageddon), but SAVING the human race, or, to not believe, attempt to save Zion and his love while being guaranteed by this god that that choice will bring disaster. The choice is obvious in movie land – hero always saves girl. We’ll see how it ends in the final film, but for now we know that the faith Morpheus has generated and inspired in both Neo and others was misplaced, though necessary, since to save the world he had to have it, but when he finds God, god tells him to destroy himself and his love. Belief in the context of this film leads to emptiness. I suggest that this will lead to a self-reliance-instead-of-religion streak in the last film. We shall see.

On another note, this film does make broad strides down the road to realism in hacker flicks, of which this series is becoming the granddaddy, philosophically speaking. Architects and Operators will soon be normal slang words for roles in the computer community I'm sure, though how long that will last remains to be seen. The Register has put up some thoughts on this subject already. Suffice it to say, even I, a non-programmer type, noticed that there were real commands being entered at the prompt as Trinity used SSH to tunnel into the powergrid computers to shut the grid down. Long awaited and much preferred to shiny colors and assorted silliness at the hands of other films when "Hacking" must take place.

All in all, fascinating stuff. Yeah, you can shoot holes in it as much as you’d like. The same is true of any ambitious film, as well as a few belief structures we won't mention here. Yeah, this film borrows from all that came before it - but it does so creatively, and can we ask for much more from big budget Hollywood? I suppose so, but we shouldn’t expect it.
In the end, if you like this kind of stuff - you know who you are - then you'll love the movie. You may even find, as I did, the depth of ideas to be refreshing, even if shallow in the level of exploration. That doesn't mean it won’t be a fun ride.
This series will likely become the Star Wars of the current young generation in terms of pop power, now that it has some depth. Kids will want to be Neo, they'll want to be hackers, and they’ll challenge the status quo as they see it, and what more can a movie hope for?

Lest I forget, Cornell West was among the councilors of the city of Zion, suggesting some serious things in the minds of the directors. At the very least, they’re tweaking somebody. I may revisit that point after I’ve seen the film again, but on first glance it seems to suggest a lot - old white man as god, all agents are white; Zion is so diverse that it’s difficult to tell races apart - it's leaders are largely black; the savior of the film is white - but - he turns out to be the tool of the white god... before I get carried away I’m going to let this one go - but it’s there to read into if you wanted to.

2003-05-14T00:20:00.000-04:00

Oh yeah, and this is Pynchon too. Not so reclusive as one might think!

2003-05-14T00:11:00.000-04:00

An interesting distraction...
I found this while perusing Pynchon's website, drawn there after reading his recent introduction to Orwell. Fascinating what you'll find when you browse about with a purpose.

2003-05-13T12:37:00.000-04:00

BoingBoing has a story up about the new introduction to George Orwell's iconic 1984, this time by none other than last generations official "reclusive author", Thomas Pynchon.

The intro is an odd one, to be sure, but worth a glance for the sake of uniquity. It also worth it to catch a rare look at Pynchon's worldview outside of the context of his work.

2003-05-13T09:25:00.000-04:00

My Heart

I'm not going to cry all the time
nor shall I laugh all the time,
I don't prefer one "strain" to another.
I'd have the immediacy of a bad movie,
not just a sleeper, but also the big,
overproduced first-run kind. I want to be
at least as alive as the vulgar. And if
some aficionado of my mess says "That's
not like Frank!", all to the good! I
don't wear brown and grey suits all the time,
do I? No. I wear workshirts to the opera,
often. I want my feet to be bare,
I want my face to be shaven, and my heart--
you can't plan on the heart, but
the better part of it, my poetry, is open.

- Frank O'Hara

One of my favorites.

2003-05-12T13:15:00.000-04:00

Microsoft is still playing catch up I see.

2003-05-11T19:52:00.000-04:00

The NY Times (registration required, link may sunset) ran an interesting piece today.
I remember during the DC sniper crisis hearing that some of the evidence mentioned in a Times piece was being disputed, and at the time I thought it was strange - law enforcement offers no comment often enough, but rarely to my memory disputes a published record. Turns out, they were right to do so.

Jayson Blair has for years now been a fiction writer working for the NY Times. Story after story had corroboration, interviews, and even descriptions of the scene fabricated from Brooklyn, and even from within the Times building itself, when the location in the byline was anywhere from Texas to West Virginia and DC. Striking. Bold reporting if ever i've heard of it. Not honest, but then, what's a little exageration and borrowed "phrasing" between reporters, right?

What's more striking, however, is the way in which the Times dealt with the embarrassment. They ran it on the front page, above the fold, in a lengthy piece that detailed well the scope of the damage. I stay reasonably well informed, and I hadn't heard about this. I probably never would have, in fact, had they not publicized it so widely. I trust the times over any paper in the world, all things considered, to do the right thing and bring honest news. As such, it's powerfully reassuring to find that, though the incident happened there, they have the editorial courage to confront it in such a way. Perhaps now Jayson can pursue a lucrative career at the Enquirer.

2003-05-10T22:01:00.000-04:00

Good to see Gibson didn't follow through (yet) on suggestions he might stop blogging. That may have been exagerated in the followup bit of bluster masquerading as journalism in an article I read by Orlowski.

He's put up some thoughts on Johnny Mnemonic as it was shot. I've always wondered what happened. It could've been a much better film with just a few tweaks - and this suggests it actually was - that is, until fear of the Christian right swooped in at Sony. A shame.

2003-05-10T21:44:00.000-04:00

Quicksilver

Neal Stephenson has a few preview pages of his new novel in the Baroque Cycle called Quicksilver up here. It's prequel of sorts, though i've no doubt he'd have a powerfully negative opinion of that particular pidgeon hole - it does, however, precede Cryptonomicon, tracing the same family lines explored therein through some earlier years.

It looks interesting at first read and will I'm certain explore some finer aspects of what it meant to be a technology geek in even earlier times than his previous effort. I'm all for it.

2003-05-10T17:03:00.000-04:00

Primary Sources

On occasions where I've come look back on the books that I've read in my life so far, i've come to insights that inform other parts of me - namely my direction in writing and thinking in general. Clearly, this is not a groundbreaking insight - we are what we read - but it's interesting to reflect, nonetheless.

With this in mind, i'm adding my running tally of thoughts and the books that may have spawned them (emphasis on may) to the Materials sections. It is by far an incomplete list - i've only recently compiled this and begun trying to flesh out whens and whys. It will be augmented as I find time, however, and eventually I hope it will be a timeline of my reading life.
It should be noted that I do not intend to list every book - only those that have purpose, either as influences, however small, or as books of merit that encouraged new thoughts or ideas. Particularly worthless reads will probably make it as well, but blandness isn't really worth note.

2003-05-10T14:40:00.000-04:00

"Your money stinks of the corpse of the poet you never dared to become." - Andre Breton

.... nice.... don't remember where I read this, but I like it.

2003-05-08T13:28:00.000-04:00

Is history trying to tell us something?

In recent days many (or perhaps all) of the documents pertaining to the House Un-American Activities Commission headed by Joseph McCarthy have been released to the public. I'm frankly amazed, given the tenor of our current administration and the negative attitude toward release of some documents and the de-classification of others, even those which are scantly relevant, much less deserving of secrecy, that this has happened now. Eventually, sure, but now? Strange.

Nevertheless, for someone such as myself who neither lived through that era nor learned as much as I should have in K-12 or Higher education, it's fascinating reading.
I've added a brief bit of testimony to the Materials section here for interested parties. The piece is the testimony of William Mandel to Senator McCarthy, Cohn and Jackson, as well as others present, regarding his potential involvement in the Communist Party. Mr. Mandel's testimony was particularly interesting, for he made a point of displaying both honesty and a firm will in facing his accusers. Toward the end of his round, he is asked about his employment, this being an apparently useful tactic for eliciting ooperation - the accused is forced to divulge his place of employment in such a way as to encourage the employer to fire him/her. In Mr. Mandel's case, this did indeed happen.

It's interesting to note several things:
The editor of this document in recording the events apparently saw fit to end the piece with Mr. Mandel's most caustic and bold statements about the commission, suggesting at least some level of sympathy;
The Bush administration has recently encouraged behavior (particularly through Ashcroft's Justice Dept.) that, while not necessarily directly reminiscent of the McCarthy hearings, is certainly draconian in terms of it's persecution of stereotypes, support of stool pidgeon behavior and general distaste for first amendment rights - all in the name of American values;
and the current cultural shift in the U.S. seems inclined to include patriotism and fervor, of religious and other flavors, to be American traits directly inherited from the Constitution and therefore perfectly acceptable to require of others. A reading of the Constitution would encourage one to think otherwise I submit, but that's just me.

All in all, these are interesting times. We press one set of values upon the world with force, while suppressing our founder's values as set out in the constitution at home - and at the same time documents that provide evidence of both the folly and the potential reality of the consequences of this behavior come to light. Is history trying to tell us something?

2003-05-06T15:44:00.000-04:00

I'm wrapped up in a battle with myself over projects. At first, it was a broad war amongst the various factions of my eveready - should I work on a writing project, learn a new skill (i've been looking into clockworks... for some ungodly reason it's piqued my interest, and now I can't stop thinking i'd make GREAT clocks), or devote more time to catching up on reading. There's just not enough time.

I decided it'd be best, given my need to prioritize, to devote the time to what's most important to me - that is, writing. In that decision i've opened a new ranch of branches, namely, which story, essay or book to work on. I have three books in varying stages of completion, ranging from 30 to 150 pages currently (the longer of these has many more pages of notes and fleshing that has yet to be incorporated...), as well as innumberable thoughts, shorts, stories and on and on. It's a juggling act worthy of a better jongleur than I, to be sure. Then again, this is what makes life interesting, right? Don't answer that.

2003-05-06T15:34:00.000-04:00

I've added Gizmodo to the bar next door - it's a guilty pleasure and a fascinating way to keep up with new technology -and- it's tech you can buy. Now. Instant gratification... ahh....

2003-05-02T14:02:00.000-04:00

X-Men 2

I sat in on a preview of X-Men 2 last night, which recently has been tagged with the ludicrously pandering subtitle, X-Men United. I'm not even going to comment on the subtitle, the reasons for its late addition being fairly obvious and pathetic in origin, not to mention unnecessary.

The film, however, was excellent. It managed to bridge the serious tone and pace of the first film to a similar visual quality, bringing with it a payload of comic book action the likes of which had yet to be seen in a live-action film. It was exciting to watch, intelligent, and fun. I noted at several points in the film, despite myself, that the script writers had passed on the opportunity to avail themselves of obvious one-liners, choosing instead to let the actors do their jobs. A wise choice.

There's a powerful cast, with the notable addition of Alan Cumming as Kurt Wagner. Wagner, known as Nightcrawler, was always among my favorite characters in the years that I collected comics, and was very well realized here. So, too, were Pyro, and Rebecca Romijn-Stamos in a beefed up role as Mystique.

More than any other one aspect, the willingness of Bryan Singer and crew to include numerous references to the comics themselves, including visual clues, locations and the hint of future characters, lent this effort a depth that was lacking in the first. The weight of the metaphors in the first film, while necessary for tone (and with the tone set, were therefore unnecessary for this film), had the effect of preventing momentum from building. Here however, all of the groundwork is done: the tone, themes, and core characters are on display and melded in action much as they might be in any good comic cycle. It's a feat that Spiderman, while exciting and entertaining, was not quite able to attain, and one which I feel confident will only strengthen in future films.

2003-05-02T10:07:00.000-04:00

There's a column up with William Gibson sharing his thoughts about blogging here at The Guardian (and a review of Pattern Recognition in there somewhere as well).

I'm beginning to look at blogging as a writing type very much like journaling/diary writing, and as such somewhat independent of the creative process necessary for more committed projects
like novels. I find that one requires discipline and constant attention, but produces an abundance of thoughts and ideas irrelevant to a given project. I'm sure you can guess which
one.
The other allows an outlet to the excess produced by the reflection, self-examination and stringent concentration on
that subset of ideas that will become a book. Here's to the excess!

2003-04-30T19:33:00.000-04:00

Apple is out there now. It'll be fascinating, as watching Apple always is, to see how this new music service plays out. Short of actually making the rumors true and purchasing Universal Music, as was suggested, this step will put Apple in the sights of both consumers and competitors more than anything recent years. Consumers who've been stuck with MusicMatch and a slew of weaker offerings on Windows will later this year have a service that will for perhaps the first time acquaint them with Apple in a FUD free way, and will be the better for it. Competitors, however, will soon recognize that Apple has leapt ahead, and it remains to be seen if, as a runner using all of his energy at the start to dishearten the competition might, Apple is just innovating only to fall, or will truly follow through on it's long term plans.

2003-04-28T20:51:00.000-04:00

I've posted my notes from Steve Wozniak's talk at North Carolina State University on Saturday. Depending on your knowledge of Apple and Woz, you may find some interesting attitudes and ideas. I heard some news, some insight, and a great deal about him personally. All in all, very worthwhile and interesting - be sure to check out the Q&A at the end, as that's where most of the meat is to be found.

2003-04-28T09:39:00.000-04:00

I saw the 'Woz Event' at NCSU on Saturday - a talk given by Steve Wozniak. I'll be posting my notes soon - among the more interesting asides, he acknowledged that Apple will be selling music on it's new music service for "a buck a song". This won't do anyone any good however, for the announcement is set to take place today in just a few hours.

In thinking about online music, I'm skeptical about the ability of any one company to profit, even in a 'perfect world' scenario with low prices and complete availability of all artists and songs. What we'll see, I think, is a migration toward a per-song fee structure as companies like Apple make inroads. Once again, they'll lead the way, but unless they DO decided to purchase Universal and thereby secure a seat at the table, once they've shown how to do it, the companies that own the rights will eventually shut everyone else out. They have to, given the business logic they seem to ascribe to. One can always hope though - better Apple be a success than a RIAA coalition...

2003-04-25T19:53:00.000-04:00

Ironically, I read not long after posting William Gibson's blog that he'll be pulling it offline. Very funny.
I can certainly see how withdrawing that creative energy required to write open passages to the world might detract from a larger writing life - but I also suspect that the return could be worth the bargain. Sharing thoughts in forums other than those to which you devote the majority of your time has it's value. Perhaps an artist who wishes to devote all of his energy to one pursuit with run further along that path, but I submit that openness might allow a person range wider, and perhaps open avenues of thought or idea that might not otherwise be tapped. Restraint for energy's sake, that is, not having the time, makes sense. Disengaging for the sake of art seems... less logical. Art may not have one clear definition, but certainly most art requires a commitment to embracing the larger world. Of course, it's just a blog :)

2003-04-25T19:42:00.000-04:00

I read a short passage written by Neal Stephenson by way of explaining his policy not to reply to (or make himself available to) the public. Interesting. I particularly enjoyed his take on what makes writing a difficult pursuit, having read many such thoughts by other writers in the past.
To each his own, of course - far be it from me to criticize him for such a choice. From my perspective though, it seems a shame not to make a connection with the audience that has found your work worth writing about. Somehow I suspect I would wish to know the thoughts of those people compelled to attempt to reach me, though I can certainly understand wanting to avoid the overhead involved in having folks there solely for the purpose of facilitating that. There are others out there who do choose to be available - choose is the operative here - and manage to offer real insight into their process.

2003-04-23T19:58:00.000-04:00

I'm beginning to rediscover the thrill of dropping into a story and running with it. Catching the flow of the words, sometimes written long before, other times written yesterday - but somehow always familiar, burned in as they're presented to the world. A dream or thought can be lost in a moment if not recorded in some way, but somehow noting it will make it real, or at least real enough to remember.
I find that my writing waxes and wanes, succumbing to other interests here and overtaking them there - but always returning in force. I hear that discipline is a hallmark of a writer's life. I've yet to grasp that I suppose, but then, I still have a day job too, so perhaps one has something to do with the other?

I'll be noting the blogs of writers who I've read or admire here - probably mostly famous ones at this point, though (fiction) writers' blogs seems rather few and far between altogether right now. Hopefully that will change, but until then I'll do my part to create a connection to them.

2003-04-22T20:43:00.000-04:00

A few thoughts in passing... I don't know what I intend to do here. There must be a graveyard of thousands or more blogs about abandoned as their authors came to grips with the act of writing, as opposed to the idea of it. It's something anyone who writes likely faces - certainly I do - but that's all a part of the process.
As to this blog, perhaps doomed as the others, I'll be hoping to put up a deluge of my personal thoughts and opinions for the world to ignore... actually, no. Well, maybe. The reality is whether an opinion is mindless drivel foisted upon the net by folks who would never otherwise be published, or truly insightful well-thought-out and/or inspired writing is completely subjective. I'm certain to fall on at least one end of that spectrum - here's hoping I make it to both.

2003-04-21T20:12:00.000-04:00

Earlier posts are here out of convenience - I never trouble myself to get rid of much that i've written, pointless or otherwise, so in the interest of preserving random bits, they remain.

2003-04-21T19:49:00.000-04:00

[10/20/2002 9:23:46 PM | evan z] For years i've thought occasionally about the cycles we experience, more particularly that of our families and their members' lives and deaths. In an unexpected turn, as are most, my great aunt died yesterday. She had outlived her husband by some fifty years, never remarrying and devoting her time to her remaining family. She had been declining in health for many years, too, and her passing was certainly not unexpected - but the timing was unusual. I've thought for sometime that I would begin to have a rash of death pass through my family in coming years, and had morbidly been awaiting it's arrival. My father is ill, as are my remaining family member, yet I've never had to experience the loss of anyone truly close to me. Those who are gone have been gone since I was very young, while the rest aged well. I hope that this isn't the beginning of a rather dark period, but I'm inclined to think it may be. Our cycles are cojoined with others at times, and i've found that often the death of one older person, a husband say, can be followed closely by the death of a wife too. Years together encourage symbiotic relationships. Given her happiness in each day of her life despite travails, i'm sure that whatever she has found pleases her also.

2003-04-21T19:48:00.000-04:00

[10/18/2002 11:07:21 PM | evan z] I saw Christopher Hitchens speak tonight, and was reminded of the best parts of my youthful outrage as embodied in a truly insightful thinker. I was reminded also of how easy it is, in pursuit of family or career or simple complacency, to lose sight of the desire to challenge the world and be challenged by it. The value in listening to and considering the words of such a writer comes least in the message at times, or the topic, but rather in the rustling of one's own thought and spurring of new considerations about daily life generated in the event. Subjects I've left gathering dust in the corner with years since i've thought of them find a swift breeze and fresh insight with age. I think i'll pick up Orwell, Chomsky, and Borges again, and revisit other thoughts that have gathered a greater weight of disuse than I intended.

2003-04-21T19:47:00.001-04:00

[10/13/2002 11:01:28 PM | evan z] Over time my love of writing has both given me purpose and distracted me from a clearer path. There have been times in recent years that the potential for a lucrative career has arisen and I've been left with a choice: choose a route that leads me toward commitment to my daily work, or one which has less spirit in the day to day, but allows time for devotion to prose on occasion. I'm not sure that i've made the decision yet, but i'm leaning one way more and more...

2003-04-21T19:47:00.000-04:00

[10/7/2002 10:41:01 PM | evan z] Confrontation breeds turmoil, but it can also, and perhaps is intended to, breed change. I've found that confronting the reality of who my father has become has stirred something in me that I was unaware had become sedentary. I'm not sure yet of the outcome - he may be ill, or he may using his health to escape responsibility. Either way, i'm regaining memories long lost of my childhood, both happy and sad memories, and for that, I am grateful.

2003-04-21T19:46:00.000-04:00

A few older posts (just so they're all in one place) [9/29/2002 10:16:34 PM | evan z] My father wrote me today to inform me that he may have lung cancer. For reasons too old for exposition I'm uncertain that he's telling the truth, but this nevertheless poses a dilemma: How does one resolve sympathy with doubt? My uncertainty has left me not only unaware of how I should feel, but is preventing me from determining how I do feel.

2003-04-20T22:52:00.000-04:00

Hi Michelle

2003-04-20T22:11:00.000-04:00

yop