This class has given me access to some extremely useful resources--legal documents, custom searches, government databases, this is the sort of stuff a compulsive researcher lives for. I only hope I will be able to find the time to sort it all out over the summer, become proficient at some of it. This 34 year old drug, alcohol, and estrogen addled brain may be the surest bet in getting there eventually, but it doesn't move so quickly and there was a tremendous lot to absorb in a decidedly short time. I suspect that the younger students (or at least the ones who cared to do so) assimilated this information more easily than I am able to do, we all grew up in a technological maelstrom, but my first computer was a Commodore 64 running on DOS. The first time I had opportunity to use the internet, I was 19 and well on my way to intellectual stagnation. I can only assume that many of the online resources explored in class were not as fantastical and exciting to others as they were to me.
The thing I hate most about school is the pervasive feeling that I'll never have the time to thoroughly grasp anything I have learned until I'm no longer a student and have forgotten the vast majority of it. In this class, however, I have learned things with nearly universal practical application to the other educational endeavors which normally keep me too busy to learn anything at all. I'm looking forward to putting all of this to use.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Taco Night?
The most important question in my world right now is this:
How many calories are there in a Taco Bell Beefy Crunch Burrito?
God bless America, they made like, laws and stuff recently forcing fast food companies to make their nutrition information accessible.
http://www.tacobell.com/nutrition/information
Looks like I'm I'm just barely in the clear with 500 calories, 200 from fat (my rule is nothing over 500 calories, less than 250 of them can be from fat)
But let's stop pretending that I'm not going to want two hard shell tacos supreme as well. . . .
Uggg, that's an additional 400 calories, 200 from fat. First they start bugging me about a major field of study, then this. Why does it seem like life is conspiring to make me choose between things :(
How many calories are there in a Taco Bell Beefy Crunch Burrito?
God bless America, they made like, laws and stuff recently forcing fast food companies to make their nutrition information accessible.
http://www.tacobell.com/nutrition/information
Looks like I'm I'm just barely in the clear with 500 calories, 200 from fat (my rule is nothing over 500 calories, less than 250 of them can be from fat)
But let's stop pretending that I'm not going to want two hard shell tacos supreme as well. . . .
Uggg, that's an additional 400 calories, 200 from fat. First they start bugging me about a major field of study, then this. Why does it seem like life is conspiring to make me choose between things :(
In Search of 72
I was listening to someone complain about dating guys wearing clothes from 1972, when it occurred to me that outside of a vague generalized conception of a stylistic upheaval between the 60's and the 70's, I can't really picture with any specificity what a stylish outfit from 1972 looks like.
When in doubt about fashion trends, the place to look is Hollywood.
First stop: Wikipedia's listing of the 10 highest grossing films in 1972 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_in_film).
Oooooo, #2 is The Poseidon Adventure, I remember loving this movie--Gene Hackman has never since been so dramatic, Shelly Winters had never before been so Reubenesque, and Carl Malden. . . .okay, he was pretty much the same as usual.
Next stop: Google images, The Poseidon Adventure (http://www.google.com/search?q=the+poseidon+adventure&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1366&bih=638)
This is certainly a gem:
But in any era, rich people on boats aren't representative of much other than rich people on boats. Perhaps a more appropriate avenue of inquiry would be the #1 grossing film of 72, The Godfather. Diane Keaton has never been my favorite actress, but no one can deny that she has always lived on the cutting edge of urban fashion.
Eureka!
Loud pattern, excessive frills, but on the whole, I've seen worse.
When in doubt about fashion trends, the place to look is Hollywood.
First stop: Wikipedia's listing of the 10 highest grossing films in 1972 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_in_film).
Oooooo, #2 is The Poseidon Adventure, I remember loving this movie--Gene Hackman has never since been so dramatic, Shelly Winters had never before been so Reubenesque, and Carl Malden. . . .okay, he was pretty much the same as usual.
Next stop: Google images, The Poseidon Adventure (http://www.google.com/search?q=the+poseidon+adventure&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1366&bih=638)
This is certainly a gem:
But in any era, rich people on boats aren't representative of much other than rich people on boats. Perhaps a more appropriate avenue of inquiry would be the #1 grossing film of 72, The Godfather. Diane Keaton has never been my favorite actress, but no one can deny that she has always lived on the cutting edge of urban fashion.
Eureka!
Loud pattern, excessive frills, but on the whole, I've seen worse.
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Under Where?
The "C string" (https://www.cstringdirect.com/) is marketed as an innovative and stylish new product which will eliminate panty lines and tan lines. There is no area of the product's direct order website which does not feature hypersexualized images of improbably thin, young, and beautiful women and also omni-present are product-claims in large lettering with emphatic exclamation points.
There is a section of the site devoted to consumer testimonials featuring the rave product-reviews of ostensibly satisfied customers.
The "Ladies Classic Brief" from Fruit of the Loom (http://www.fruit.com/ladies_girls.shtml?D22030) is marketed as a comfortable pair of cotton panties, a description which encompasses the entirety of the page's product-claims, printed without punctuation in bold, but small and unassuming font. Though there is a beautiful woman depicted in the advertisement, she appears to be at least in her 30's, she does not dominate the image (which is of a plastic-wrapped multi-pack of panties), and her imagery is not overtly sexual. There are no consumer testimonials in evidence on this site.
One can only assume that the C string's comparative excess in advertising is due to the fact that no human being would ever purchase or wear one, as such I believe that it's also safe to conclude that the product testimonials are false.
The Ladies Classic brief needs little promotion, it sells itself (with the help of a few creatively worded signals such as "generous full cut" to those of us who are neither improbably thin nor young). It's made of cotton, it's more comfortable than a thong, and those two facts are enough to sell a gazillion pairs. When deciding between competing products, one of the most important things to keep in mind is that an item accompanied by a huge advertising budget probably needs one to compensate for its uselessness.
There is a section of the site devoted to consumer testimonials featuring the rave product-reviews of ostensibly satisfied customers.
The "Ladies Classic Brief" from Fruit of the Loom (http://www.fruit.com/ladies_girls.shtml?D22030) is marketed as a comfortable pair of cotton panties, a description which encompasses the entirety of the page's product-claims, printed without punctuation in bold, but small and unassuming font. Though there is a beautiful woman depicted in the advertisement, she appears to be at least in her 30's, she does not dominate the image (which is of a plastic-wrapped multi-pack of panties), and her imagery is not overtly sexual. There are no consumer testimonials in evidence on this site.
One can only assume that the C string's comparative excess in advertising is due to the fact that no human being would ever purchase or wear one, as such I believe that it's also safe to conclude that the product testimonials are false.
The Ladies Classic brief needs little promotion, it sells itself (with the help of a few creatively worded signals such as "generous full cut" to those of us who are neither improbably thin nor young). It's made of cotton, it's more comfortable than a thong, and those two facts are enough to sell a gazillion pairs. When deciding between competing products, one of the most important things to keep in mind is that an item accompanied by a huge advertising budget probably needs one to compensate for its uselessness.
Saturday, April 2, 2011
Fringe-research
So, I was finishing writing a blog about piracy when it hit me--the latest episode of Fringe might be available online tonight!
Pirate site #1 (http://ganjavideo.com/a/1/fringe) says, no.
Pirate site #2 (http://www.tv-dome.net/?s=fringe) says, no as well (but in a marginally ruder tone of voice)
Legal site (http://www.hulu.com/search?query=Fringe&st=0&fs=) unsurprisingly says, no.
This is all very unacceptable, I've been watching Fringe online for nearly a month, in which time I have seen every episode to date--the last three within a day of their release to people fancy enough to have cable. Saturday night is Fringe night, right after research blogs--such is the way the well-oiled machine of my life functions.
Perhaps IMDB can shed some light on the nature of this travesty--it was certainly helpful when I needed to know why Agent Francis (who was killed by a robotic shape-shifter early in the 2nd season) inexplicably appeared in an episode near the beginning of the third season (as it turns out, they had already filmed the episode in the 2nd season, but had never aired it and needed some filler).
Alas, cruelty and lament! IMDB (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1119644/episodes#season-3) says that the next episode will not be released for another two weeks.
Didn't television shows follow a strict one-a-week format when I was little? With none of the two weeks here, three weeks there sporadic nonsense until the off season began? Maybe I'll try to find out next blog.
Pirate site #1 (http://ganjavideo.com/a/1/fringe) says, no.
Pirate site #2 (http://www.tv-dome.net/?s=fringe) says, no as well (but in a marginally ruder tone of voice)
Legal site (http://www.hulu.com/search?query=Fringe&st=0&fs=) unsurprisingly says, no.
This is all very unacceptable, I've been watching Fringe online for nearly a month, in which time I have seen every episode to date--the last three within a day of their release to people fancy enough to have cable. Saturday night is Fringe night, right after research blogs--such is the way the well-oiled machine of my life functions.
Perhaps IMDB can shed some light on the nature of this travesty--it was certainly helpful when I needed to know why Agent Francis (who was killed by a robotic shape-shifter early in the 2nd season) inexplicably appeared in an episode near the beginning of the third season (as it turns out, they had already filmed the episode in the 2nd season, but had never aired it and needed some filler).
Alas, cruelty and lament! IMDB (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1119644/episodes#season-3) says that the next episode will not be released for another two weeks.
Didn't television shows follow a strict one-a-week format when I was little? With none of the two weeks here, three weeks there sporadic nonsense until the off season began? Maybe I'll try to find out next blog.
A Pirate's Life for Me
When Napster first appeared on the world-wide web in June of 1999 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napster), the music industry trembled in fear. If people were allowed free and limitless access to perfect digital copies of any song they liked, how would the struggling artists, producers, and distributors who create hit albums be able to survive? Let's find out.
Over the last 12 years, pirating technology has exponentially improved and its usage has become a common fact of American culture. It would be interesting to learn if, in the wake of pirate-culture, there are any record companies left and if so, how they are faring?
Lady Gaga alone sold an estimated 50 million albums and 51 million singles between 2008 and 2011 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Gaga) for her label Interscope Records. Each copy of The Fame Monster goes for $10.45 at Wal-Mart (http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=lady+gaga++albums&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=5WE&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=ivnso&biw=1366&bih=638&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=4780195101952206667&sa=X&ei=uuSXTZW8DO-K0QHdzIz5Cw&ved=0CEwQ8wIwAQ#), assuming her other two CD's are similarly priced, that's approximately $522,500,000 in gross album sales, without including her 51 million singles). So much for the starving record companies, but what about the starving artists?
Without figuring in royalties, endorsements, or sign-on bonuses, Lady Gaga grossed an estimated $133,000,000 for 2010 in concert ticket sales alone (http://www.silive.com/entertainment/music/index.ssf/2010/12/2010_concert_tour_revenue_tick.html).
All of this means one of two things: either people in the music business live in an alternate universe where Earth-currency is so devalued it's exchange rate with the local tender is 1,000,000 to 1, or the recording industry is doing really well.
Why all the fuss then? The RIAA is still dumping millions into lawsuits against illegal downloaders and downloading sites, it seems an awful waste if piracy doesn't really affect profits--unless you consider power.
Many people have never considered the implications of the power record companies have enjoyed since shortly after Thomas Jefferson invented the phonograph, but if you've ever listened to a record, the radio, an 8 track, Music television, a cassette, a CD, or the radio--you've listened to something the recording industry has wanted you to hear.
Record companies don't simply sell albums, they control music itself--as completely and ruthlessly as De Beers controls diamonds. No studio conglomerate can tell you what to like, but make no mistake that it can decide what you hear. The greatest band in the world may be playing two shows a night every Friday in Gallup, NM, but if you don't live there, you'll never know about it unless a record company wants you to--or unless you have access to a P2P file-sharing network.
In its relentless assault upon bit torrent networks and free media hosts such as Youtube, the recording industry isn't trying to lock down a measly few million in pirated property, it's trying to retain a monopoly on its product--and it knows it's running out of time. Soon it will occur to people that they can produce/distribute their own music and decide what to like on their own--not as a hobby or an illegal act of piracy, but as the most sensible way to interface with a limitless world of musical expression. And when that happens, the industry is dead.
Over the last 12 years, pirating technology has exponentially improved and its usage has become a common fact of American culture. It would be interesting to learn if, in the wake of pirate-culture, there are any record companies left and if so, how they are faring?
Lady Gaga alone sold an estimated 50 million albums and 51 million singles between 2008 and 2011 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Gaga) for her label Interscope Records. Each copy of The Fame Monster goes for $10.45 at Wal-Mart (http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=lady+gaga++albums&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=5WE&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=ivnso&biw=1366&bih=638&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=4780195101952206667&sa=X&ei=uuSXTZW8DO-K0QHdzIz5Cw&ved=0CEwQ8wIwAQ#), assuming her other two CD's are similarly priced, that's approximately $522,500,000 in gross album sales, without including her 51 million singles). So much for the starving record companies, but what about the starving artists?
Without figuring in royalties, endorsements, or sign-on bonuses, Lady Gaga grossed an estimated $133,000,000 for 2010 in concert ticket sales alone (http://www.silive.com/entertainment/music/index.ssf/2010/12/2010_concert_tour_revenue_tick.html).
All of this means one of two things: either people in the music business live in an alternate universe where Earth-currency is so devalued it's exchange rate with the local tender is 1,000,000 to 1, or the recording industry is doing really well.
Why all the fuss then? The RIAA is still dumping millions into lawsuits against illegal downloaders and downloading sites, it seems an awful waste if piracy doesn't really affect profits--unless you consider power.
Many people have never considered the implications of the power record companies have enjoyed since shortly after Thomas Jefferson invented the phonograph, but if you've ever listened to a record, the radio, an 8 track, Music television, a cassette, a CD, or the radio--you've listened to something the recording industry has wanted you to hear.
Record companies don't simply sell albums, they control music itself--as completely and ruthlessly as De Beers controls diamonds. No studio conglomerate can tell you what to like, but make no mistake that it can decide what you hear. The greatest band in the world may be playing two shows a night every Friday in Gallup, NM, but if you don't live there, you'll never know about it unless a record company wants you to--or unless you have access to a P2P file-sharing network.
In its relentless assault upon bit torrent networks and free media hosts such as Youtube, the recording industry isn't trying to lock down a measly few million in pirated property, it's trying to retain a monopoly on its product--and it knows it's running out of time. Soon it will occur to people that they can produce/distribute their own music and decide what to like on their own--not as a hobby or an illegal act of piracy, but as the most sensible way to interface with a limitless world of musical expression. And when that happens, the industry is dead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)