Wherein Apple is the devil's company, and;
Wherein Macs are the tools of the devil, and;
Wherein Apple non-Mac consumer products are actually awesome;
Be it resolved that I have purchased the hipster doofus technology known as an iPhone.
....
Yeah, so after playing with the iPhone of a very lovely lady friend for a few hours last week, I was convinced enough to make the leap. It didn't hurt that my current phone is less than Bluetooth capable and Californians have a pesky hands-free law coming into effect in a few short months.
I gotta say, Apple sure knows how to put together a phone/Internet/email device. It just works so easily, and other than a few little things (why can't I ever really CLOSE an application?) it's completely intuitive. And the web browser... man, for something crammed onto a phone, it is amazing.
Anyway, I'm sure it will crap out and I'll start hating Apple again soon, but for now I just have to say well done.
I gotta get a cover soon, though, lest I confuse it's anonymous black look with somebody else's phone, and then am transported into that new movie with Obi-Wan and Wolverine, with a plot that seems exactly like that one with Clive Owen, which was super lame. Just punch the French guy! Goddamn it. He's FRENCH. What's he going to do, surrender on you?
April 29, 2008
April 24, 2008
Apologies in Advance
I know nobody cares about what I think about politics, especially those of you who read this blog and never comment.
But it's a good place to vent, so here's the latest: Hillary is a liar.
You can say what you want about political gamesmanship, or shrewd campaigning, but this is dishonest. Intellectually, factually, and in every way conceivable.
Michigan and Florida screwed their respective pooches. They wanted to be all hip and violate DNC rules regarding primaries, so they don't get votes. I am fine with that because it's the states that decided to restructure their primaries to get attention, so it's their own fault.
You can't unring this bell. Everyone agreed not to campaign in those states, and in Michigan Obama wasn't even on the ballot. Hillary can start claiming Google hits for "Hillary Clinton" as votes too, and it would be just as valid.
So to claim Michigan and Florida votes as why you're the "popular vote winner"... This is why I cannot support her. If someone out there wants to defend this tactic, please do so. I cannot fathom why anybody would think this was okay.
Non-Political Addendum: Tigers whipped the Rangers last night 19-6, but as I write this Bonderman is literally walking in runs to blow his lead in the last game of the 3-game series. Fat bastard has no control today.
But it's a good place to vent, so here's the latest: Hillary is a liar.
You can say what you want about political gamesmanship, or shrewd campaigning, but this is dishonest. Intellectually, factually, and in every way conceivable.
Michigan and Florida screwed their respective pooches. They wanted to be all hip and violate DNC rules regarding primaries, so they don't get votes. I am fine with that because it's the states that decided to restructure their primaries to get attention, so it's their own fault.
You can't unring this bell. Everyone agreed not to campaign in those states, and in Michigan Obama wasn't even on the ballot. Hillary can start claiming Google hits for "Hillary Clinton" as votes too, and it would be just as valid.
So to claim Michigan and Florida votes as why you're the "popular vote winner"... This is why I cannot support her. If someone out there wants to defend this tactic, please do so. I cannot fathom why anybody would think this was okay.
Non-Political Addendum: Tigers whipped the Rangers last night 19-6, but as I write this Bonderman is literally walking in runs to blow his lead in the last game of the 3-game series. Fat bastard has no control today.
April 23, 2008
Re: Hillary
Please stop giving her money. And, if you live in Indiana or North Carolina, stop voting for her. Stop telling pollsters that you would vote for her. Pennsylvania, I'd say I'm disappointed in you but I can't say I'm really shocked.
It's time to put this to bed. I will say it one last time:
Hillary vs. McCain = McCain is the new President.
Obama vs. McCain = a fighting chance at a Democrat in office.
It is not a disservice to the legacy of the first Clinton presidency to vote for someone other than Hillary. I know a significant portion of HRC supporters believe that we can usher back in the rockin' 90s by electing Hillary, but it won't happen.
Bill is the real architect of that success, and he has lost more than a few steps in his post-Presidency years. He is more bitter, accusatory, and lacks the charm he once had.
Electing Hillary would be like going back to your ex-girlfriend from 10 years ago. Yeah, you have some good memories, but you're different people now. It wouldn't be the same.
Let it go. Obama '08.
It's time to put this to bed. I will say it one last time:
Hillary vs. McCain = McCain is the new President.
Obama vs. McCain = a fighting chance at a Democrat in office.
It is not a disservice to the legacy of the first Clinton presidency to vote for someone other than Hillary. I know a significant portion of HRC supporters believe that we can usher back in the rockin' 90s by electing Hillary, but it won't happen.
Bill is the real architect of that success, and he has lost more than a few steps in his post-Presidency years. He is more bitter, accusatory, and lacks the charm he once had.
Electing Hillary would be like going back to your ex-girlfriend from 10 years ago. Yeah, you have some good memories, but you're different people now. It wouldn't be the same.
Let it go. Obama '08.
April 17, 2008
Reasons
Some recent decisions and arguments before the Supremes have gotten everybody up in a tizzy about the death penalty again. So I thought I'd lay this out for you folks.
The death penalty is stupid, anachronistic, and useless.
What's fun is how many liberal-types support the death penalty because it helps cut the argument that they're "bleeding hearts", and yet it's one of the most idiotic policies we Americans still cling to. Here's why:
1. It is not a deterrent. People do not stop murdering because they might get the chair (or the injection, or whatever). You can argue that this is because it takes years to carry out a sentence of capital punishment, but more likely it is because people who murder are usually not thinking rationally. It's why they are murdering in the first place.
What's worse, it may actually push those who kill to commit MORE murders, not less. If you're robbing a bank and you shoot the guard, why not just start shooting everybody? You've already crossed the line, and dead witnesses are much better for your upcoming trial.
2. It is not efficient. The safeguards we have in place to prevent unfair or unlawful executions include numerous automatic appeals, a process which takes years and sucks up valuable court time. Yes, you could argue that these appeals are the problem, but without them capital punishment is even more tenuous. We have a problem with executing the innocent already (see below), and "speeding things up" will not solve that.
3. It is not infallible. If you put a convicted murderer in jail for life, and find out 30 years later he was as innocent as he maintained, you can let him out. Pissed as hell, I bet, but he is alive. Execute him, and you're a murderer. It doesn't matter if all the evidence pointed that way (even if it often does not), if you're wrong you can't undo it. You can't give a 30-year convict his 30 years back, either, but you can stop punishment.
No punishment meted out by government should be permanent. Any advanced society must be able to recognize and correct its mistakes, and in large part our government has the framework to do just that. But capital punishment takes away this ability, and for no good reason.
4. It is not as good as life in prison. I do not understand why sending a murderer to the Great Beyond seems like a better solution. I would much rather be free of this earthly plane, than spend the rest of my waking life in a 5x10 cell.
The bleeding hearts will also argue that execution removes any chance for redemption, and while this is a bit naive, it is true. Even if it takes 40 years, what if a prisoner turns it around? He may not be able to change his life (he'll still be in prison, after all), but why should we execute someone who realizes his error and wishes to atone?
5. Do it yourself. Let's be honest here; the only reason to execute somebody is because we thirst to take from them what they've stolen from us (our loved one). So I say, take it. You, Mr. Father of the Murdered Daughter, go buy a gun and shoot him in open court.
This is a personal feeling, but if I really felt that strongly after someone murdered a loved one, I'd just kill him myself. I will accept the consequences of the action (my own imprisonment) if the feeling is strong enough. I am not advocating mob or vigilante justice--because if I am wrong, and the guy I think is the murderer is not, I will have to accept that as well.
Taking a life is Serious Business. But the government gets to do it without consequence, and that is not how it should work.
The death penalty is stupid, anachronistic, and useless.
What's fun is how many liberal-types support the death penalty because it helps cut the argument that they're "bleeding hearts", and yet it's one of the most idiotic policies we Americans still cling to. Here's why:
1. It is not a deterrent. People do not stop murdering because they might get the chair (or the injection, or whatever). You can argue that this is because it takes years to carry out a sentence of capital punishment, but more likely it is because people who murder are usually not thinking rationally. It's why they are murdering in the first place.
What's worse, it may actually push those who kill to commit MORE murders, not less. If you're robbing a bank and you shoot the guard, why not just start shooting everybody? You've already crossed the line, and dead witnesses are much better for your upcoming trial.
2. It is not efficient. The safeguards we have in place to prevent unfair or unlawful executions include numerous automatic appeals, a process which takes years and sucks up valuable court time. Yes, you could argue that these appeals are the problem, but without them capital punishment is even more tenuous. We have a problem with executing the innocent already (see below), and "speeding things up" will not solve that.
3. It is not infallible. If you put a convicted murderer in jail for life, and find out 30 years later he was as innocent as he maintained, you can let him out. Pissed as hell, I bet, but he is alive. Execute him, and you're a murderer. It doesn't matter if all the evidence pointed that way (even if it often does not), if you're wrong you can't undo it. You can't give a 30-year convict his 30 years back, either, but you can stop punishment.
No punishment meted out by government should be permanent. Any advanced society must be able to recognize and correct its mistakes, and in large part our government has the framework to do just that. But capital punishment takes away this ability, and for no good reason.
4. It is not as good as life in prison. I do not understand why sending a murderer to the Great Beyond seems like a better solution. I would much rather be free of this earthly plane, than spend the rest of my waking life in a 5x10 cell.
The bleeding hearts will also argue that execution removes any chance for redemption, and while this is a bit naive, it is true. Even if it takes 40 years, what if a prisoner turns it around? He may not be able to change his life (he'll still be in prison, after all), but why should we execute someone who realizes his error and wishes to atone?
5. Do it yourself. Let's be honest here; the only reason to execute somebody is because we thirst to take from them what they've stolen from us (our loved one). So I say, take it. You, Mr. Father of the Murdered Daughter, go buy a gun and shoot him in open court.
This is a personal feeling, but if I really felt that strongly after someone murdered a loved one, I'd just kill him myself. I will accept the consequences of the action (my own imprisonment) if the feeling is strong enough. I am not advocating mob or vigilante justice--because if I am wrong, and the guy I think is the murderer is not, I will have to accept that as well.
Taking a life is Serious Business. But the government gets to do it without consequence, and that is not how it should work.
April 14, 2008
Settlement Agreements
I can't really pretend to know what goes on inside the female mind. I've had plenty of experience with women, and with female friends, and with sisters, but there's a limit to what I can figure out.
Today on Opinionistas (which, despite being very irregularly updated these days, is a great read), we get a fiery opposition to the latest in self-help for women.
I started reading the source material, and as I often do, formed my own opinion on the topic. In brief, this chick says you ladies need to settle a.s.a.p. and stop looking for a "deeper connection" or a "soul mate". Marry the first idiot to come along that doesn't deeply offend you, just so you can have babies and not be alone.
While I agree whole-heartedly with Ms. Lafsky, in that there is little merit to people who think that the uninspired path they have chosen should be the path for everyone, I would add this:
Please do not "settle" for me. There is a quote from one guy in the original article where he says that his dream girl is now 35 and he expects to be engaged/married by the time she is 37. Why? Because although she's dumped him multiple times, with the excuse that she doesn't seem them having a future together, her good sense will be ultimately overridden by her biological and social clocks.
This guy is a doofus. "It's not settling to me, I get to marry my dream girl!" is a sad, sad lot in life.
A friend of mine (hey Amy!) has a theory that the best relationships (hetero, anyhow) are the ones where the guy is just a little bit more in love with the girl than the reverse. We've discussed the theory at length, and I have come to believe it is a good one, and has been proven accurate in numerous anecdotal situations. However, we also agreed that this disparity is supposed to be fairly small; it is not "break up 4 times and then settle" sized. If you could quantify it, it'd be somewhere around 5% difference or less.
This is extraordinarily hard to find, unless you are ready and willing to recognize when you are most assuredly NOT in that kind of relationship. Because it can be very close, or comfortable, or any of a number of things that give you pause to consider commitment.
If I end up alone in my 50s or 60s and haven't yet met that "special someone", that's fine. I will (hopefully) have lived a good life and enjoyed trying to find her, and I have more respect for that than I do for the person who settles at 39 because of fear.
Today on Opinionistas (which, despite being very irregularly updated these days, is a great read), we get a fiery opposition to the latest in self-help for women.
I started reading the source material, and as I often do, formed my own opinion on the topic. In brief, this chick says you ladies need to settle a.s.a.p. and stop looking for a "deeper connection" or a "soul mate". Marry the first idiot to come along that doesn't deeply offend you, just so you can have babies and not be alone.
While I agree whole-heartedly with Ms. Lafsky, in that there is little merit to people who think that the uninspired path they have chosen should be the path for everyone, I would add this:
Please do not "settle" for me. There is a quote from one guy in the original article where he says that his dream girl is now 35 and he expects to be engaged/married by the time she is 37. Why? Because although she's dumped him multiple times, with the excuse that she doesn't seem them having a future together, her good sense will be ultimately overridden by her biological and social clocks.
This guy is a doofus. "It's not settling to me, I get to marry my dream girl!" is a sad, sad lot in life.
A friend of mine (hey Amy!) has a theory that the best relationships (hetero, anyhow) are the ones where the guy is just a little bit more in love with the girl than the reverse. We've discussed the theory at length, and I have come to believe it is a good one, and has been proven accurate in numerous anecdotal situations. However, we also agreed that this disparity is supposed to be fairly small; it is not "break up 4 times and then settle" sized. If you could quantify it, it'd be somewhere around 5% difference or less.
This is extraordinarily hard to find, unless you are ready and willing to recognize when you are most assuredly NOT in that kind of relationship. Because it can be very close, or comfortable, or any of a number of things that give you pause to consider commitment.
If I end up alone in my 50s or 60s and haven't yet met that "special someone", that's fine. I will (hopefully) have lived a good life and enjoyed trying to find her, and I have more respect for that than I do for the person who settles at 39 because of fear.
April 9, 2008
On Which I Pontificate on a Splendiferous Multitude of Topics
This Whole Olympics Thing
This whole Olympics thing is coming to a boil here in good ol' SF. My opinion: the Olympics are about countries coming together in athletics. The ideal time to lambaste China would have been when the International Olympic Committee was deciding to put the Olympics in Beijing. But ya'll screwed up and didn't argue against it well enough, so now that's where it is.
To put up a fuss when the torch-bearer goes by is just juvenile. China's human rights problems are significant and well-documented, but the guy/gal carrying the torch has nothing to do with that.
This sort of touches on my problem with protesting generally. It seems pretty useless about 90% of the time. If you want to change something, you change it. You don't sit on the curb and yell. It's the 4-year-old in the toy store approach to getting your way.
Protesting does have its place, in my opinion, where the harm is immediate and local. Some guy is arrested unfairly; some politician is holding a vote on a community issue. But China, my friends, is not local. Nobody in San Francisco can do squat about China's human rights abuses.
Those Goddamn Bicyclists
Listen, I like riding a bike. I wish I had one. But it does not give you a license to ignore both pedestrian and traffic laws. Riding through the intersection against the green light and making me jam on the breaks, and then flipping me off, means that dear God are you lucky I wasn't having a crappy day or you'd be pinned under my front tire right now. Ass.
This problem is more endemic in the Bay Area than anyplace else I've lived. You may have heard about some of the problems we have on Critical Mass night. I hate it, because I really do support riding to work and all that jazz. But that holier-than-thou, I yield to no man or vehicle attitude negates every good intention you idiots may have.
Stop Supporting Hillary You Morons
She is not a bad person. She would be a good candidate, if we did not have a better one. She is not the best candidate and she is not worth putting in the White House simply because she is a woman.
There is no reason not to vote for Obama. He has as much experience as Hillary (her "35 years" is worth about as much as my 30), he is more honest, and he is much smarter than the last "inexperienced" President. That guy needs to be run out of town on a rail, or something.
Hellooooo Ladies
Because you people complain that I don't talk about my personal/social life enough around here. Fair enough. But is a not-so-subtle but completely uninformative remark about an upswing in my dating life really better than nothing at all?
This whole Olympics thing is coming to a boil here in good ol' SF. My opinion: the Olympics are about countries coming together in athletics. The ideal time to lambaste China would have been when the International Olympic Committee was deciding to put the Olympics in Beijing. But ya'll screwed up and didn't argue against it well enough, so now that's where it is.
To put up a fuss when the torch-bearer goes by is just juvenile. China's human rights problems are significant and well-documented, but the guy/gal carrying the torch has nothing to do with that.
This sort of touches on my problem with protesting generally. It seems pretty useless about 90% of the time. If you want to change something, you change it. You don't sit on the curb and yell. It's the 4-year-old in the toy store approach to getting your way.
Protesting does have its place, in my opinion, where the harm is immediate and local. Some guy is arrested unfairly; some politician is holding a vote on a community issue. But China, my friends, is not local. Nobody in San Francisco can do squat about China's human rights abuses.
Those Goddamn Bicyclists
Listen, I like riding a bike. I wish I had one. But it does not give you a license to ignore both pedestrian and traffic laws. Riding through the intersection against the green light and making me jam on the breaks, and then flipping me off, means that dear God are you lucky I wasn't having a crappy day or you'd be pinned under my front tire right now. Ass.
This problem is more endemic in the Bay Area than anyplace else I've lived. You may have heard about some of the problems we have on Critical Mass night. I hate it, because I really do support riding to work and all that jazz. But that holier-than-thou, I yield to no man or vehicle attitude negates every good intention you idiots may have.
Stop Supporting Hillary You Morons
She is not a bad person. She would be a good candidate, if we did not have a better one. She is not the best candidate and she is not worth putting in the White House simply because she is a woman.
There is no reason not to vote for Obama. He has as much experience as Hillary (her "35 years" is worth about as much as my 30), he is more honest, and he is much smarter than the last "inexperienced" President. That guy needs to be run out of town on a rail, or something.
Hellooooo Ladies
Because you people complain that I don't talk about my personal/social life enough around here. Fair enough. But is a not-so-subtle but completely uninformative remark about an upswing in my dating life really better than nothing at all?
April 4, 2008
Last Night
Last night I dreamed that I had clean towels.
Perhaps there was more to the dream. But what I remember is falling off my bed, onto the floor, and realizing that under my bed was where I had kept two clean and folded towels.
I was thrilled to have them, and to forgo doing "towel laundry" (a complete waste of quarters) for a bit longer.
When I woke up, I was disappointed to learn this was not the case. It was a disappointment on par with the time I woke up to realize I was not, in fact, dating a Shakespeare in Love-era Gwyneth Paltrow.
Perhaps there was more to the dream. But what I remember is falling off my bed, onto the floor, and realizing that under my bed was where I had kept two clean and folded towels.
I was thrilled to have them, and to forgo doing "towel laundry" (a complete waste of quarters) for a bit longer.
When I woke up, I was disappointed to learn this was not the case. It was a disappointment on par with the time I woke up to realize I was not, in fact, dating a Shakespeare in Love-era Gwyneth Paltrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)