Will the Real Issues Please Show Themselves?

This is hardly the first time the network news outlets have focused on irrelevant nonsense instead of things the American people ought to be caring about. It is also not the first time that creating smoke screen non-issues has been used for political advantage (Swift Boating).

I'm referring to the whole non-issue about a former pastor that presidential nominee Barack Obama had some association with in the past. The alleged problem? This pastor allegedly made strong statements during speeches that some might interpret as negative, racial, and perhaps anti-American. (Never mind that in our country, statements like this are protected, free speech).

Obama calmly reacted to this, basically saying "I have nothing to do with these statements, whatever they might be." But the media has not let go of it, trying to fan the fire. Have any of them ever bothered to show or play these speeches in context, or even analyze what these soundbites might actually be saying? Of course not. (All except one radio station, where it was clear this pastor was unhappy to have his soundbites taken out of context.)

Then the ABC Debate fiasco. Instead of helping us elect a president who can get our country out of a recession and deal with our Wars, ABC chose to treat it as a game show with inane questions like "Would you wear an American flag pin?" and more about this irrelevant pastor.

Here's a great parody of how the Lincoln Douglas debates might have been like today.

Seriously hoping whoever gets elected can bring us back to being a mature, intelligent country again. Reality TV shows are making us all stupid.

Fascism's Ugly Head: Your Laptop Can Now Be Screened at Border Crossings

At what point do we stop calling America the "Land of the Free," or a "democracy" and call it what it's becoming, a fascist, totalitarian police state? It really doesn't matter what the reasoning behind policy changes such as this example, where cops can arbitrarily decide to peruse your laptop when you cross the U.S. border without probable cause. This is hardly the first example to take place in Bush's post-2001 America. The excuse to eliminate our Constitutional rights is the same as China's. "We must protect the country."

The one thing we have going for us is that, in theory, we can replace our leaders with those who'll revert us back to being a true democracy, with a Constitution, with civil rights. You know, those sorts of things we've been fighting to protect in the first place.

Comic: Trust Us, the Iraq War Pays for Itself

What If Voting Were Global?

Thought of the Day:

What would the world be like if instead of being confined to vote locally and federally, we could also vote internationally?

Lessig on Whether Clinton Can Win

Lessig has another video out.

If You Support Obama, You're in Good Company

• xkcd comic strip artist Russell Munroe
• Singer/songwriter Jonathan Coulton
• Copyfighting & Anti-corruption lawyer Lawrence Lessig
• Award-winning author Michael Chabon
• Author, Daily Show correspondent, and PC Guy on Apple Mac ads, John Hodgman

Let me know of others...

Sadly, Obama did not win the vote in California, but the race was very close. This is not over!

Michael Chabon, Obama vs. the Phobocracy

Brother Henry referred me to an essay by Michael Chabon, who wrote The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay:

The point of Obama's candidacy is that the damaged state of American democracy is not the fault of George W. Bush and his minions, the corporate-controlled media, the insurance industry, the oil industry, lobbyists, terrorists, illegal immigrants or Satan. The point is that this mess is our fault. We let in the serpents and liars, we exchanged shining ideals for a handful of nails and some two-by-fours, and we did it by resorting to the simplest, deepest-seated and readiest method we possess as human beings for trying to make sense of the world: through our fear. America has become a phobocracy.
...
Fear and those who fatten on it spread vile lies about Obama's religion, his past drug use, his views on Israel and the Jews. Fear makes us see the world purely in terms of enemies and perils, and leads us to seek out the promise of leadership, however spurious it proves to be, among those who speak the language of that doomed and demeaning, that inhuman view of the world.

Clinton has not shown herself to be above this fear. She perpetuates it, leverages it and even succumbs to it. In her campaign against Obama. Her fear of the ramifications of voting against the war. Her fear of losing funding and reputation from industry lobbyists... But watch Obama speak. His focus is unity, peace, problem solving, and healing without belittling the other side, without attacking character, without misleading and spinning so characteristic of politics over the last few years.

Why Obama is the Better Visionary than Clinton

If you're Democrat and currently in the Clinton camp, I urge you to watch this well-reasoned video essay from my hero Lawrence Lessig:


Certainly, Clinton is a competent Democratic politician far more desirable than anyone running our country now. But watch Obama speak. This is not the voice of mere competence. This is the voice of an eloquent, uniting leader, something we have not seen in a very long time. It's not just that we need to restore our country to something closer to what it was before Bush / 9-11. We need to rebuild our reputation with the rest of world, to end this corporate-controlled, no-holds-barred political in-fighting that tramples our Constitution and our Democracy.

With Obama there's hope we can do that.

Federal Government to California: You're Making Us Look Bad

California is one of the States leading the way towards lowering car emissions responsible for Global Warming. While it's great that a Federal bill was passed recently setting a higher MPG benchmark (35 mpg) by 2020, one must realize this benchmark was a target for the mid-1980's during the early 1970s oil crisis and the technology already exists to get there. Look up 1980s car commercials on YouTube -- you'll find cars advertising 35 mpg. Basically, the administration is trying to get credit for taking action while caving to industry pressure. California has never been turned down before for having higher standards than the rest of the country, but today the historically corrupt Environmental Protection Agency announced they were rejecting California's request:

“The Bush administration is moving forward with a clear national solution – not a confusing patchwork of state rules,” EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson told reporters on a conference call. “I believe this is a better approach than if individual states were to act alone.”

Mr. Johnson, what is so confusing? If states want to do a better job than you, then adjust your Clean Air Bill appropriately. These States are challenging you to do a better job, to start joining the rest of world in reducing the impact of Global Warming. There is no confusion; you don't want to take real action and you don't want these States to make life difficult for your friends in the energy and auto industries.

So You Think You Can Swindle?

Very depressing Rolling Stone article about how the War in Iraq is being outsourced to rich friends of politicians and their own corporations. These "contractors" charge outrageous prices (which we taxpayers foot the bill for) and do largely nothing, and in fact threaten the lives of anyone over there who could cry foul. ("What? You don't like what we're doing? We'll stop paying for your security.") There's also the possibility that these contractors have supplied money and arms to the enemy in exchange for not being killed. Meanwhile, our government insists the surge of troop levels is working (by cooking the books and redefining terms) and that all this lovely money, er, freedom-spreading should continue.

[But] what happened in Iraq went beyond inefficiency, beyond fraud even. This was about the business of government being corrupted by the profit motive to such an extraordinary degree that now we all have to wonder how we will ever be able to depend on the state to do its job in the future. If catastrophic failure is worth billions, where's the incentive to deliver success? There's no profit in patriotism, no cost-plus angle on common decency. Sixty years after America liberated Europe, those are just words, and words don't pay the bills.

We don't have a truly free market or a Democracy once the government regulating it becomes just another business player, using its military might and media control to reap monetary benefits paid for by brainwashed taxpayers. What's really infuriating is that the Democrats do not seem capable or interested in Impeaching the whole mess of cronies along with Bush, whose crimes are against the American taxpayer, U.S. and other countries' troops, the Constitution, and the World at large.

If George Bush were Steve Jobs...

via PIDGEONBLOG.

Hazards of Unregulated Free Market Capitalism #17: Vulture Funds

Those of you (probably not reading my blog) who still have unquestioning faith that so-called Free Market economies (the particular variety with few if any regulations governing the behavior of entities within) will "regulate" themselves and play nice with the Earth, Nature, and Man-Kind should read this eye-opening commentary, a blurb of which is found below:

From salon.com:

Donegal International is a breed of investor known as a "vulture fund" -- though such an association is a foul slur upon a bird that never deserved such calumny. Surely, no living creature other than a human being could conceive of and carry through so insidious a business plan as buying up the debts of destitute African nations at bargain rates and then turning around and suing those same nations for vastly inflated sums.

The inspiration for this commentary is at documentarian Greg Palast's site.

Now I realize, buying debt is a common practice (at least in America) -- one can buy foreclosed houses, cars, property, etc. Given that we save -1% of our incomes on average, this would suggest there's a high risk of debt sales.

But buying government debts?? Who needs to invade a country -- if it's poor, just buy its debt and threaten to sue it out of existence with an army of lawyers. Settle with payments of property instead of cash.

Hmm, anyone want to buy New Orleans' debt after Katrina? Nothing illegal about it. It's a Free Market, after all. Would hurt the Economy if we stopped such a thing...
*petting* Poor little Economy. Silly regulators trying to hurt you. Oh, but what about the the Children! We must regulate regulate regulate! Nudity? Ban! Words? Ban! Evolution and other un-Godly ideas? Ban! Filthy World out there must be kept away from the Children! Filthy World tarnished by sinful Mankind, made by the Intelligent Designer. Oh, but Corporations -- those are good for the Economy. Good little Economy. There there. *petting*

Thoughts on Television

Isn't it funny that while regular Analog TVs are being forcefully phased out in the United States (by industry-paid-for government mandates) to make way for high resolution giant screen Digital Televisions, the largest demographic of content watchers in our country is NOT watching the major TV networks or cable; it's watching YouTube videos with a picture worse than a 1970s TV?

Go see "The Lives Of Others"

My friend Danny over at SPI invited me to a free Sony screening of the Oscar™- nominated German film, "The Lives of Others," about characters caught up in the surveillance society of East Berlin just before the fall of the Great Wall. The entire city is monitored by an elite group of secret police, called Stasi, who gather statistics and spy on the personal lives of citizens, looking for those spreading ideas contrary to the government, and rewarding those who turn suspects in. All mail is opened and read. Artists can be blacklisted. All public speech requires permission. It is a city that has chosen security above all other freedoms and rights.

Amidst all this, a top interrogator (renowned for his grueling 48 hour interrogation sessions) is assigned to wire-tap a playwright's house day and night. He becomes entangled in the day-to-day events of this artist, and despite his mission to find and report all suspicious activity, discovers his own motives changing.

How topical a film this is -- an example of what could happen to America if our current Administation's efforts to increase policing and surveillance power (in the name of National Security) are left unchecked. Just as now, the Socialist GDC's battle-cry was not "Hey, we're Authoritarian Fascists!" It was "We will Protect You," and just as now, the personal and business interests of government officials took priority over Law, stengthened by this Knowledge Over Everything.

If you are able, go see this film in the theatre.

Dahoo Doray! Rumsfeld Resigns!

It is a good day. Not only have the Democrats taken control of the House (and are insanely close to winning the Senate too), but the man responsible for extremely bad strategy and tactics in the Iraq Occupation is stepping down.

Granted, it will be impossible to remove the damage he and his cohorts have done to the Iraqi people and to America's reputation, but I am hopeful that the environment in which decisions are made will be far less toxic than it has been.

Keith Olbermann Demands Apology from Bush

I'm blissfully unaware of the mainstream news media, but I'm pleased to see that on MSNBC at least, there's a commentator challenging Bush and the administration head on.

Thanks to salon.com.

So long, U.S. Constitution. We'll Miss You.

From the Washington Post

A draft Bush administration plan for special military courts seeks to expand the reach and authority of such "commissions" to include trials, for the first time, of people who are not members of al-Qaeda or the Taliban and are not directly involved in acts of international terrorism, according to officials familiar with the proposal.

The plan, which would replace a military trial system ruled illegal by the Supreme Court in June, would also allow the secretary of defense to add crimes at will to those under the military court's jurisdiction. The two provisions would be likely to put more individuals than previously expected before military juries, officials and independent experts said.

Does this sound like America to you? Me neither. Maybe it's all just a bad dream.

U.S. Press Secretary unable to define civil rights

As the Senate decides whether to legislate away the potential rights of gay people (even though Bush has stated he doesn't care one way or another about it), our Press Secretary stumbles when asked why he compares this legislation to other historical civil rights legislation (presumably ones that gave rights to citizens). Click here to see the transcript and video.

Just what is a civil right anyway? Hmm. Good question. Eh, worry about that later. First, make sure we appease some gay-hating people so that they'll vote for us.

Fascism Is Easy When You Know How

Tom the Dancing Bug offers a Public Service announcement about the NSA phone record gathering program.

FOX Unbiased Reporting Example

I just saw Al Gore's film, An Inconvenient Truth. It quite calmly describes -- with evidence and without angry finger-pointing -- why not only the economy would be destroyed were we to ignore global warming, but a large chunk of mankind itself.

As usual, FOX presents very compelling arguments, like from "Mr. Flat-tax" Steve Forbes: "the fact of the matter is, the policies that result from it would hurt the economy, would create unemployment." Hmm. How? Massive flooding has a tendency to reduce employment. 100 million refugees won't exactly be helping the economy.

Meanwhile, Toyota is rocking as the number one automobile manufacturer, investing money into hybrids and alternative fuel vehicles (which consumers are buying). American companies, in contrast, are whining about it costing too much to change, and subsequently are tanking in the marketplace. They're the ones laying off people. They're spending money on lobbyists.

FOX focuses most of its show worrying about Gore getting into office, not on what to do about global warming. As Mr. Gore's film illustrates, there is really no debate here -- the world's most populated, coastal cities will flood if we do nothing.

Nintendo Wii™ Controller: Puppet Control?

You know how I've been wanting a cheap but accurate controller for manipulating virtual puppets on either a PC or a videogame console. Ever since the Nintendo N64 offered 3-D graphics on par with a circa-1994 Silicon Graphics machine, this seemed inevitable, though that was 10 years ago.

But soon, with the Nintendo Revolution Wii™ and it's 6-degree of freedom, wireless remote, capable of tracking rotation AND position, Internet connectivity, and fairly good (though not the most impressive) 3-D graphics engine, the time has come! This thing could make a great virtual rod control. Imagine four of these per box, which would be connected to other performers on the Net, performing in the same scene, or watching and providing virtual applause!

Come on! Who's with me? The development kit is only $2000 (compared to the $20,000 Sony Playstation2 kit).

What Good Ingredients, Liberty & Immigrants

Getting home was a challenge last night. The sidewalks and crosswalks were flooded with folks coming back from the Immigrant protests.

(By the way, my blog title is a line from the Schoolhouse Rock! song, "Great American Melting Pot", a great though perhaps naive song about how America is built up from people from all over the world.)

Super Mario Brothers, as a Black Light puppet show

This video impressed many at the special FX company I work for. Most of us recognized the entire level of the classic Nintendo game, Super Mario Bros., performed live using bright objects held by people wearing black. This sort of theatre can be seen in Prague and other places, and as Andrew pointed out below, the objects are often painted with UV paint and the light is a black light, enhancing the illusion of inanimate objects moving or disappearing.

Nice to see blacklight Black Light Theatre finally reach the masses!

1960's Muppet Short

Puppeteered and voiced by Jim Henson and Jerry Juhl.

Don't Let AT&T Turn the Internet into Cable TV

Recently, the AT&T telecommunications monopoly of the 1980's that was split up has managed to come back as a giant again, under much looser, monopoly-favoring government policies. This time, it wants to control who uses bandwidth on the Internet.

Click the link above for the entire salon.com article.

Technology companies do say they fear AT&T's network won't provide a level playing field, and that AT&T's competitors won't be able to deliver videos that work as well as AT&T's content. Networks have finite space, and it is a fact of network engineering that when some data is given a priority on the network, other data will be pushed aside. At the Senate hearing, Stanford Law professor and Internet policy expert Lawrence Lessig argued that this will put companies or individuals that can't pay for high-quality service at an enormous disadvantage, "reducing application or content competition on the Internet." In the past year, streaming-video Web sites have proliferated on the Internet, and some of the most popular services have come from start-ups like YouTube. Under AT&T's plan, flush firms like Google would be able to pay for all the space on the line, leaving the smaller guys out of luck. The Internet has long been a meritocracy, where smart and creative companies can act quickly and beat out established players. That wouldn't be so on AT&T's Internet.

American History For Sale: Smithsonion sells out to Showtime

From the New York Times:
Smithsonian Agreement Angers Filmmakers
By EDWARD WYATT
Published: April 1, 2006

Some of the biggest names in documentary filmmaking have denounced a recent agreement between the Smithsonian Institution and Showtime Networks Inc. that they say restricts makers of films and television shows using Smithsonian materials from offering their work to public television or other non-Showtime broadcast outlets.

Ken Burns, whose documentaries "The Civil War" and "Baseball" have become classics of the form, said in an interview yesterday that he believed that such an arrangement would have prohibited him from making some of his recent works, like the musical history "Jazz," available to public television because they relied heavily on Smithsonian collections and curators.

"I find this deal terrifying," Mr. Burns said in a telephone interview from San Francisco, where he is filming interviews for a documentary on the history of the national parks. "It feels like the Smithsonian has essentially optioned America's attic to one company, and to have access to that attic, we would have to be signed off with, and perhaps co-opted by, that entity."

On March 9, Showtime and the Smithsonian announced the creation of Smithsonian Networks, a joint venture to develop television programming. Under the agreement, the joint venture has the right of first refusal to commercial documentaries that rely heavily on Smithsonian collections or staff. Those works would first have to be offered to Smithsonian on Demand, the cable channel that is expected to be the venture's first programming service.

A Smithsonian official who is managing the institution's content and production assistance for the venture said yesterday that while the new arrangement did limit the ability of commercial filmmakers to sell some projects elsewhere, it ultimately would affect a small number of the works that draw on the museum's resources.

"It's not our obligation to help independent filmmakers sell their wares to commercial broadcast and cable networks," said the official, Jeanny Kim, a vice president for media services for Smithsonian Business Ventures.

"What it boiled down to is that we don't have the financial resources, the expertise or the production capabilities," she added, to continue to provide extensive access to materials but not to reap any financial benefit from the result.

She said films that made incidental use of a single interview with a staff member or a few minutes of pictures of elements of the Smithsonian collections would be allowed.

The Showtime venture, under which the Smithsonian would earn payments from cable operators that offered the on-demand service to subscribers, comes as the Smithsonian has suffered financial problems. At a Congressional hearing on Wednesday, a Smithsonian official said some necessary repairs to Smithsonian buildings could not be made because of lack of financing. That led to a suggestion by Representative James P. Moran, Democrat of Virginia, to suggest that the institution should charge admission, a proposal that its board of regents has rejected repeatedly.

The Showtime agreement began attracting widespread attention this week as filmmakers said they had been told that some of their projects might fall under the agreement. Two Smithsonian curators, who were granted anonymity because they feared for their jobs if they spoke publicly about the Showtime venture, said in interviews yesterday that they could not be certain what kind of projects would be subject to the restrictions because details of the contract with Showtime had been shared with few employees below the executive level.

Linda St. Thomas, a Smithsonian spokeswoman, said the details of the contract with Showtime were confidential and would not be released publicly. She said the outlines of the agreement had been left deliberately vague to allow the Smithsonian to consider "on a case-by-case basis" whether a proposed project competes with its new television venture or not. A Showtime executive, Tom Hayden, said the deal was not intended to be exclusionary but was intended to provide filmmakers with an attractive platform for their work.

One well-known filmmaker, Laurie Kahn-Leavitt, said she had been told recently by a Smithsonian staff member that her last film, "Tupperware!," a history of the creation and marketing of the venerable food-storage containers, would have fallen under the arrangement, because much of the history of Tupperware is housed at the Smithsonian. The documentary, which won a Peabody Award in 2004, was broadcast on "American Experience," the PBS show produced by WGBH, the Boston public television station.

"This is a public archive," Ms. Kahn-Leavitt said. "This should not be offered on an exclusive basis to anyone, and it's not good enough that they can decide on a case-by-case basis what they will and won't approve."

Margaret Drain, a vice president for national programs at WGBH, said she feared that public television programs like "Nova" and "American Experience" would suffer greatly because of the new restrictions.

"These are programs that regularly rely on the collections of the Smithsonian Institution," she said. "If access is restricted, we are really going to be in trouble."

She added: "I'm outraged that a public institution would do a semiexclusive deal with a commercial broadcaster."

The Administation's Tactic: Attack the Messenger

This article shows in a case by case fashion how are administration is trying to blame the media for allegedly only showing the "bad side" of the Iraq war -- you know, the deaths, the carbombs, the insurgents, our own military killing unarmed families.

Contemptuous examples include O'reilly declaring that all this is just about "idealogical hatred" by Liberals. But more insididious ones are having Bush talk to an audience member desperately trying to explain what a great place Iraq is now that we're there.

Funny how if it's against the war (yet accurate), the Administration will do anything to either stop it or punish the reporter (ie. claim it's against national security). Yet if it's completely unsupported or irrelevant (wow, two kids managed to play a game today! See? America's occupation is great!), they want this on the news. Considering how our Military is telling the Iraqi media what to say, it's not surprising it's happening here.

I can't think of any other time in American History where the Administration deliberately attacked the Constitution, the Media, the News, anyone or anything its wake, without respect for process or Law. But then I'm ignorant. Perhaps this happened and somehow we restored balance eventually.

Comic Strip: Uncle Sam, post-9/11

From salon.com:

Freedom From vs. Freedom To

I've been reading about how one of my favorite meta-blogs, Boing Boing is being censored across the world by a British/American software tool originally designed to protect children from seeing nudity. BoingBoing is not a porn site, but occasionally might have a photo containing a nude human being. The software can't tell the difference. This impacts our Freedom to get information.

The problems with any censorware are:

• False Positives, or good things getting tagged as bad.
• False Negatives - bad things getting tagged as good.
• The inherent self-interest problem of anyone in control of what is good/bad
• The potential for misuse if applied on a large scale (i.e. oppressive governments)

Computers are terrible at pattern matching. In this example, distinguishing between nudity and pornography is pretty much impossible, because it's one of those "I know it when I see it" problems that computers can't quantify.

It turns out this software is not particularly good at keeping out porn sites either (i.e. False Negative) Yet, the developer continues to sell the product to governments and unwitting parents. It has no vested interest in taking it off the market until it works better, nor suggesting that perhaps parents should look after their children better. Instead it coerces websites to "cooperate".

I don't believe websites should have to cooperate in their own censorship. Adults have a right to be adults and discuss adult things. Children can be protected by getting them interested in other things besides sex (until they're old enough).

But this is a relatively benign example. What about the Freedom to be anonymous? NPR discussed how a newspaper was able to uncover supposedly secret information about CIA agents, whose lives depend on being hidden. The down side of all this tracking of people (in the name of security) is that being hidden is next to impossible. The agents' information was simply the wake created by standard transactions, like mortgage payments. Freedom to be hidden is at odds with Freedom of access to information.

Whether or not you're in a supposedly Free country or not, Freedom is not a constant value. It's a tug-of-war between entities -- Governments, Individuals, Corporations. It's a tug-of-war between security and convenience.

I'm wary of software solutions to enforcing who wins that tug-of-war.

Henson screenings at the Museum of TV & Radio

If you're a Henson fan anywhere near New York or Los Angeles, the MT & R is showing many screenings of Muppet and other Henson works on weekends until April 30th. Of course, you can always see their collection of 140+ Henson television works, but these are showing in their large auditoriums.

By the way, I'm soo angry I did not pay more attention to MT & R's screenings. Last night, only a few walkable blocks from my apartment, the cast and producers of Battlestar Galactica were in an MT & R panel at the Director's Guild of America (where I saw Tim Burton). Aaaaah! I could have so easily gone to that. Oh well. I'll see them at Comic Con I guess (though in a far less intimate setting).

How do we tell if Iraq is actually having a civil war?

Over and over in the media I hear the phrase "Iraq is on the verge of civil war." Or "brink of civil war." Well ok, but at what point do know that it's a full-fledged civil war, versus a "sectarian conflict" or "don't worry, Iraq's doing great now that the American military is there"?

From globalsecurity.org:

civil war: A war between factions of the same country; there are
five criteria for international recognition of this status: the
contestants must control territory, have a functioning government,
enjoy some foreign recognition, have identifiable regular armed
forces, and engage in major military operations.

Hmm. That's a rather strict qualification for civil war, and it makes me wonder if that also refers to War with a capital W. Trouble with calling this whole ordeal "The War on Terror" is that is that Terror is not a nation. It doesn't control territory, have an officially recognized government, nor have identifiable, regular armed forces. Hell, it's an emotion, for heaven's sake! "Terror" is an abbreviation for "terrorism" for better propaganda purposes. But even terrorists don't fit the above criterion.

Impeachment. Not just for Sex Anymore.

The voices of impeachment are getting louder these days. For example, here, and here.

Bush Not Well-Liked — Needs 5000 Armed Personnel To Visit India

I am curious if any other U.S. president or official has been this well-protected while visiting another country. Wouldn't surprise me if rulers in ancient times had this sort of protective entourage, but this seems like a lot.

Lord of the Rings on stage!

My brother Colin knows the director Mark Warchus and has seen some of the early rehearsals for this quite ambitious adaptation of everyone's favorite Hobbit trilogy. It premieres this February in Toronto. From the Playbill article and my brother's descriptions, it sounds really really cool! Though there is music, it's not a musical. The set sounds even more elaborate than The Lion King. The adaptation is deliberately different than Peter Jackson's and has the blessing of the Tolkien estate.

You can find out more info and buy tickets on their main website

America: Democracy or Despotism?

This educational film was made in 1946. Isn't it hauntingly relevant today?

Let's Play Global Information Keep-Away

Google is now the king of search engines. It has the god-like ability of being able to know what people are looking for on the Web, and also provide people with what they are looking for. For totalitarian China, this is a problem, because it wants to control what people look for and prevent them from seeing certain things. For the quasi-democratic United States, it wants to monitor the communication of whom they have deemed criminals and/or terrorists, in the hope that this will lead to their eventual capture. It also wants to justify its desire to ban Internet porn, by gathering Internet porn search word statistics.

Google has refused to give the United States government access to data involving Internet porn search words. But it has decided to censor data (with a warning saying "This has been censored") for the Chinese government. While it is fortunate that Google's mantra is "Do no Evil", eventually self-interest tends to corrupt good intentions like that. I suspect there was no financial benefit for Google to handing over the incredible volume of data to the United States government (It's also likely that there's no reasonable way the government would be able to mine it inexpensively -- it's enormous!)

For China though, losing all access to the Chinese is billions of missing eyeballs for advertisers.

I find this very interesting because lately I've been chatting with a number of Chinese ICQ members. Many are not able to read blogs that are hosted on Blogger, but can read mine because I host it myself. Does that mean my website could get banned by the Chinese government? Why should I be under the realm of Chinese Law?

These are weird times for governments, corporations, and individual people. The Internet is acting like a supercollider of governmental & corporate & cultural rules, many of which will be in total conflict. I don't see how China will be able to continue controlling its people. Likewise, unless we change our administration and corporate law, America will be more like China as it justifies China-like behavior in the name of anti-terrorism and protecting children from pornography. Content industries are chiming in too, convincing Canada, the EU, Australia, and the United States to crack down on individuals sharing content with each other.

And just when it was getting crazy enough, the owners of the pipes beneath the Internet want more financial action. They want to set up tiers of payment, where people who pay more get the fast lanes and people who pay less get slower than they are now.

An information earthquake!

Virtual Puppets Exhibit

Oooh, I hope I can get to Pittsburgh sometime because there's a nifty interactive puppet exhibit there. There have been other attempts at interactive puppets, but this Animateering project with swappable character parts, two-player mode, 3-D animation, and marionette-like controls looks impressive. This photo shows the control box, which hooks up to two projectors, a bunch of interactive lights and glowing buttons. Guests use the touch-screen monitors to create their puppets.

Plain Stoopid & Talking Inanimate Objects

My friends Geoff and Jessica started this web comic. Jessica's a Lighting ATD here at SPI, and last year I did some puppet work with them on Geoff's killer pancake movie. I just read that Geoff was accepted into a Hollywood screenwriter's program. Congrats!