Well, the reformat didn’t work, so I had to replace the hard drive– yes if you read Kathleen’s web log, you remember the fun that all was.
Special thanks to PBFixit, whose visual guide to replacing the hard drive of an iBook G3 12″ was a godsend. And after I see what files are recovered, I’ll be posting on a regular basis again. I can tell you all can hardly wait.
Nothing like a hard drive crash (and subsequent recoveries) to destroy your productivity for the week. Wheeeee…
There’s a little piece on Pop and Politics about a woman who claims her screenplay was ripped off to make both the Terminator and Matrix trilogies:
“According to Stewart, if she wins all of the damages and compensation she is asking for, she stands to win over a billion dollars…. Stewart also plans on distributing movies and music with a spiritual message, donate to several churches, build a sound studio, and help her son with his rap career.
Stewart would also be able to release ‘The Third Eye’ as a book, which she is unable to do now, as the book is physical evidence in the case. She also has another story ‘Soul-less,’ which she will develop into a film. She believes that ‘Soul-less’ could out do the popularity of ‘The Matrix’ and ‘The Terminator.’ “The saga continues,: she says.
She doesn’t seem the least bit concerned about matching the success of the other films and confidently declares, “A master will keep creating.”
Which I agree wholeheartedly with, and as such I’d be a lot more confident of her claim if she ever actually created anything else. See, when Harlan Ellison sued over who created Terminator, he actually had, y’know, a track record. A few Hugos and Nebulas. Screenplays. Things that were published both before and after. And that’s one big reason why he won.
I am reminded of the George S. Kaufman anecdote related by Mark Evanier:
George S. Kaufman wrote or co-wrote a staggering number of successful plays. After almost every one, some failed playwright would crawl out of the woodwork and sue Kaufman for plagiarism, charging that somehow Kaufman had seen and purloined some unproduced work.
In each case, the claimant was so lacking in funds that Kaufman could have had his lawyer maneuver to run up the court costs, thereby forcing the plaintiff to drop the suit for lack of funds. This, Kaufman refused to do. He knew he was innocent and wanted to have a court say so. So no such tricks were employed and every time he went to court, he won on the merits of his case.
But of course, he was annoyed at having to go through the suits at all, and his annoyance led to a fantasy. It was to invite all the litigants to a gourmet dinner. Around a huge table, he would serve them fine food and fine wine. Then, when the dishes were cleared away, he would stand and proclaim, “I asked you all here tonight because I would like to ask each of you a question.”
He would point to the first person and ask, “You say you wrote Of Thee I Sing. What else have you written?”
Then he’d look at the second and ask, “You say you wrote The Man Who Came to Dinner. What else have you written?”
Then the third: “You say you wrote Stage Door. What else have you written?”
And on and on around the table…
I caught a certain amount of grief about this when they were first considering covering the story over at Cinematical. I said don’t bother, she’s a crank. They said, but why isn’t anybody covering it? That’s the story! I said no, she’s a nut. It’s like giving equal time to creationists in an evolution debate, there’s nothing there. Drop it. They didn’t.
(Via Making Light.)
1,346 Days
Thursday, May 19, 2005, [was] the 1,346th day since the attacks of 9/11. That is the same length of time from the attack on Pearl Harbor to the end of WWII on V-J Day. (Dec 7, 1941 to Aug 24, 1945)
Most comparisons between WWII and the Global War on Terror (GWOT) have been preposterous: Saddam Hussein was no Adlof Hitler; the “Axis of Evil” was no WWII Axis Powers; the far right even went so far as to compare Colin Powell to Neville Chamberlain.
But this milestone does provide the opportunity to compare the effectiveness of America’s responses to both crises. After the attack on Pearl Harbor, America came together, and with determination, shared sacrifice, and the effective and focused leadership of FDR, George C. Marshall, and many others, America and her allies were victorious.
After the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, America once again came together. However, within months of 9/11, the Bush Administration lost focus and never clearly defined a winnable GWOT. Monty Python comedian Terry Jones quipped: “With most wars, you can say you’ve won when the other side is either all dead or surrenders. But how is terrorism going to surrender? It’s hard for abstract nouns to surrender.”
A more serious critique came from Dr. Jeffrey Record, of the U.S. Army’s War College who wrote: ” … most of the GWOT’s declared objectives … are unrealistic and condemn the United States to a hopeless quest for absolute security. As such, the GWOT’s goals are also politically, fiscally, and militarily unsustainable … The GWOT as it has so far been defined and conducted is strategically unfocused, promises much more than it can deliver, and threatens to dissipate scarce U.S. military and other means over too many ends. It violates the fundamental strategic principles of discrimination and concentration.”
It should not be surprising that a poorly defined mission has led to poor results. Iraq is a mess and many Americans have concluded that the invasion of Iraq was unrelated to the GWOT. The situtation in Afghanistan is not much better. Worldwide terrorism is still on the rise and America is now deeply divided.
The economic consequences of this “war” have been significant and are growing. The most obvious are the war expenditures: over $250 Billion already spent and Congress has just passed another spending bill for an additional $82 Billion. Even before the ink dried, Congress is discussing the need for another $50 Billion later this year. All of these expenditures are “off-budget” and are not included in the Bush Administration’s reported budget deficits. CORRECTION: The GWOT expenditures are excluded from the “on-budget” projections, but they are included in prior year on-budget deficits. Sorry for any confusion, CR.
Additionally, according to the Financial Times, America “is losing billions of dollars as international tourists are deterred from visiting the US because of a tarnished image overseas and more bureaucratic visa policies.” This weakness in the tourist trade is occurring even with a favorable dollar exchange rate. And there are concerns that “the long-term impact for American brands Coca-Cola, General Motors, McDonald’s could be very damaging”.
And the most deleterious impact may come from the growing lack of confidence in America’s leadership. In the event of an international or economic crisis, I have no confidence that the Bush Administration will respond appropriately.
It took 1,346 days to win WWII. 1,346 days after 9/11, what have we accomplished?
The rapturists have the launch codes.: “A lot of people have commented on the evangelical takeover of the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, but as far as I can tell not one of them is appropriately paranoid about it, and has asked one timfoil question: just who staffs NORAD, and what happens if they decide it’s time for Jesus to come back right now?“
Rockonomics and Its Uses – Finally, economic proof of Elton John’s genius! By Daniel Gross
“And what’s causing the higher prices? Clear Channel, the giant radio and concert-promotion business run by the right-wing Mays family of Texas, has often been painted as a malign force in the modern music industry%u2014monopolizing venues and driving up ticket prices. But Krueger doesn’t buy it. The company’s market share of concert revenue has fallen since 2001, even as prices continued to rise. And concert prices have risen sharply in Europe and Canada, where Clear Channel has no presence. Besides, Clear Channel just announced it will spin off its live entertainment unit, which implies the company isn’t reaping extraordinary profits from it. ‘Don’t blame Clear Channel,’ said Krueger in an interview. ‘Blame the downloaders.’
Pop stars are charging higher prices because they’re realizing less income from sales of CDs and other forms of recorded music. ‘Only four of the top 35 income-earners made more money from recordings than from live concerts,’ Krueger and Connolly note. And for the top 35, ‘income from touring exceeded income from record sales by a ratio of 7.5 to 1 in 2002.’
In some ways, the rockonomy resembles the increasingly winner-take-all American economy. The rich are getting richer, and it’s good to be the king or queen of pop. In 1982, the top 1 percent of artists banked 26 percent of ticket revenues; in 2003, they garnered 56 percent.
Baby-boomers are the primary driving force behind a lot of these trends. Nostalgia-seeking, age-resisting boomers have more disposable income than youngsters, and so have more to spend on expensive tickets at the box office. Paul McCartney and the Rolling Stones topped the income-earning chart in 2002. The top 16 earners in 2002 also included 1970s-vintage draws like Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young, the Eagles, Elton John, and Bruce Springsteen. On tour, Barry Manilow and Neil Diamond easily out-earn Britney Spears and Kid Rock.”
Daniel, I love your work, but you missed one of the big reason why those particular concerts are getting so much coin.
All the big name, big selling acts listed are old. Elton John’s 58, Cher turns 59 this week, the Stones are in their 60’s, Tina Turner’s 65, half the Beatles and Who are dead– exactly how many more concerts can people expect to see from these people? They’re limited commodities. Get them now, you may never get another chance to see, say, David Crosby perform at all, much less in prime condition. (Did you ever catch any of Sinatra’s last shows? Grisly.) The youngest act around in that weight class is U2, and Bono’s 45 already.
Rebuild the Twin Towers – Bloggermann – MSNBC.com: “The best way – the only way – to further soothe the pain is, as the proponents including Donald Trump are suggesting, to rebuild it as it was. Which brings me to my caveat.
I’d use the original blueprints and design the “new” Trade Center exactly as it had been. But I’d insist that one of the towers be exactly 229 feet, four inches shorter than the other. It’s an uncomplicated gimmick to guarantee remembrance. Because, as long as these new towers would stand, someone unaware would ask, “why is one of them shorter than the other?” Whereupon an old-timer could explain, solemnly, that the difference between the heights of the towers is intentional – it’s exactly 2,752 inches.
One inch for each of the victims.
It’s all the memorial we really need.”
But it’s the wrong direction. One of the towers should be 229 feet 4 inches taller than it was, not shorter.
Well, yeah, actually. But according to this quiz, not much:
26% Republican. |
|
Interview of the Week – Seth MacFarlane:
There’s no question ‘Family Guy’ pushes the decency envelope, especially these days. How difficult is it getting story lines approved by FOX censors?
You know, I don’t know. It’s kind of a tightrope. It’s always sort of an ongoing conversation with Standards and Practices as far as what we can and can’t do. Obviously all the networks are under enormous pressure from the FCC and we deal with that every day. The phrase ‘In this post-Janet Jackson world’ is kind of bandied about like they’re talking about September 11th. I mean, it’s really an everyday thing. It’s a real challenge for us, and, you know, we hope that it will pass and that the good folks in Washington will come to their senses.
Finally, on a more serious note, thanks to a hangover, you narrowly missed a flight on 9/11 that tragically turned out to be one the doomed World Trade Center planes. What are your thoughts on the way that homeland security and the war on terror have been conducted since that day?
I think it’s been, to be honest, a huge overreaction. Just speaking completely honestly, I’m not a fatalist. I think of myself as a man of science. And you know, to me, it seems like it was horrifying and it was terrible. But at the same time, you can’t let it completely disrupt everything. It seems we’re living in a world now that is a much less pleasant place than it was 10 years ago, and I don’t think that’s essential. I think that September 11th has been used as a tool of fear by those in power, certainly. I mean, that’s my personal take. I think that there’s a balance. I think that absolutely, there needs to be intelligence. There needs to be an awareness of what’s going on. That definitely needs to be dealt with. But I think it needs to be kind of an organic thing that’s constantly moving. And I think that at the moment we’ve kind of swung a little too far in one direction. I mean, as far as my near miss, the way I look at it is, that’s the kind of thing that probably happens to you a hundred times in a year, and you don’t even know it. You know, you cross the street just five minutes later, and something could happen. This was obviously a much bigger deal than most things, but that’s my personal take on it, I guess.
Read the whole thing before it disappears.