Yea.. sorry dumbass

Was reading the Daily News today and a piece about N. Liberties.

“I’m in a constant state of rage,” said Jesse Gardner, 48, designer of the Liberty Lands park at 3rd and Poplar streets. His home on 4th Street near George was broken into in July while his family slept.

So, the people living in N. Liberties are upset becasue their houses are being broken into. Yea, sorry.. you chose to live in a bad neighborhood in Philadelphia. If this were New York, I’d be right there with you, but how could you expect to be perfectly safe living in Northern Liberties? Are you kidding me?

Hissy Fit on CNN

Weather guys get no real respect until “Big Weather” events happen. The hurricane is one of them.. Anyway, here is a funny clip of a CNN weather guy getting pissed that the talking head is butting into his broadcast: “Let me talk!” heh..

here is the clip.

Aldous Huxley is important

I’m not finished it yet, but I have to say that I’m really enjoying the book “Island” by Aldous Huxley. No, this isn’t the book version of the movie “The Island” that they tried to get us to watch this summer, it’s something a lot more important.

Let me back up a bit and talk a little bit about Aldous Huxleys other important book “Brave New World“. I’m sure you’ve all heard of that one. If you haven’t, I really suggest that you go out and read it as soon as you can. It’s amazing. It is fiction but what it proposes is a society that just may become real in some distant future. At the same time, in some ways it is also a very good commentary on how things are today. I had actually never heard of the book when I was turned on to it by someone quite smart after I had been trying to turn them on to a movie that I was in love with “The Matrix”. After I gave them this huge description of the film and how the world was just an illusionary prison she said to me: “…sounds like Brave New World”. I immediately bought the book and it’s been one of my top 5 important reads ever since.

So, “Brave New World” describes a future society that is far from a Utopia. “Island” presents us with the exact opposite, a society that is just incredibly perfect in so many ways. It presents us with new ways of looking at child rearing, psychology, medical science, sex and religion. A lot of the ideas I’ve read so far appeal to me on so many levels. It’s kind of like the piece I wrote about winning in Iraq: It just makes so much sense.

The amazing thing is that “Brave New World” was written in the 30’s and “Island” was written in 1962. It’s impressive how Aldous was able to see the future in so many ways. It actually makes me wonder how much has actually changed since then. I bet little or nothing of consequence has.

Anyway, I urge you to read both books, perhaps back to back. However, this only applies to non-red state people. As I’ve said before, red-staters seem to be of one of two camps, the very close minded or the very clueless followers.

Yea.. sorry dumbass

Was reading the Daily News today and a piece about N. Liberties.

“I’m in a constant state of rage,” said Jesse Gardner, 48, designer of the Liberty Lands park at 3rd and Poplar streets. His home on 4th Street near George was broken into in July while his family slept.

So, the people living in N. Liberties are upset becasue their houses are being broken into. Yea, sorry.. you chose to live in a bad neighborhood in Philadelphia. If this were New York, I’d be right there with you, but how could you expect to be perfectly safe living in Northern Liberties? Are you kidding me?

Hissy Fit on CNN

Weather guys get no real respect until “Big Weather” events happen. The hurricane is one of them.. Anyway, here is a funny clip of a CNN weather guy getting pissed that the talking head is butting into his broadcast: “Let me talk!” heh..

here is the clip.

Aldous Huxley is important

I’m not finished it yet, but I have to say that I’m really enjoying the book “Island” by Aldous Huxley. No, this isn’t the book version of the movie “The Island” that they tried to get us to watch this summer, it’s something a lot more important.

Let me back up a bit and talk a little bit about Aldous Huxleys other important book “Brave New World“. I’m sure you’ve all heard of that one. If you haven’t, I really suggest that you go out and read it as soon as you can. It’s amazing. It is fiction but what it proposes is a society that just may become real in some distant future. At the same time, in some ways it is also a very good commentary on how things are today. I had actually never heard of the book when I was turned on to it by someone quite smart after I had been trying to turn them on to a movie that I was in love with “The Matrix”. After I gave them this huge description of the film and how the world was just an illusionary prison she said to me: “…sounds like Brave New World”. I immediately bought the book and it’s been one of my top 5 important reads ever since.

So, “Brave New World” describes a future society that is far from a Utopia. “Island” presents us with the exact opposite, a society that is just incredibly perfect in so many ways. It presents us with new ways of looking at child rearing, psychology, medical science, sex and religion. A lot of the ideas I’ve read so far appeal to me on so many levels. It’s kind of like the piece I wrote about winning in Iraq: It just makes so much sense.

The amazing thing is that “Brave New World” was written in the 30’s and “Island” was written in 1962. It’s impressive how Aldous was able to see the future in so many ways. It actually makes me wonder how much has actually changed since then. I bet little or nothing of consequence has.

Anyway, I urge you to read both books, perhaps back to back. However, this only applies to non-red state people. As I’ve said before, red-staters seem to be of one of two camps, the very close minded or the very clueless followers.

How to win the Iraqi war

In the NYTimes today there is a story titled “Winning in Iraq” that attempts to bring a very strong theory into the mainstream. It is a theory by a very smart man (and former Army Lt. Colnel) named Andrew Krepinevich that outlines a plan that could help us actually win the war in Iraq.

I urge you all to at least read the NYTimes piece and if you are really interested, read the actual essay by Mr. Krepinevich (which is very readable and actually quite interesting). But, for those of you who want the quick synopsis, I’ll give you my take on it.

We are fighting the insurgency like a game of Whack a Mole. For the uninitiated, this means that we are going into towns, trying to stamp out insurgents, and then we move on to the next place that they are. This method is understandable. In Iraq, we all can agree that there was no post invasion planning done. In the absence of a plan, the plan becomes “put out the fires you can see”. I mean, you’re a military force, you are there and you can see little goals along the way, why not follow them?

This is a huge problem for a number of reasons on a number of levels. I don’t need to outline them here, you can see them. The people in Iraq are not helping us fight the insurgents (even though they are usually victims), the people here and around the word see no progress at all, and the insurgents just keep coming.

It seems to mr. Krepinevich (and I fully agree with him) that a good strategy to the fight over there would be one that restores the good will of the Iraqi people, shows the world that we are making progress, and actually increases security in the nation.

His plan is simple and it’s simply incredible that the people of our government haven’t thought of it earlier. I mean, aren’t there people in the Pentagon sitting around thinking of ways to win this war?

Anyway, the plan is this. Start with a piece of land, a town or a city, move in and make it secure, stay there, fix the electric, sewers, and plumbing. Train the Iraqi forces there to help you patrol and make that area safe. Make it so that the residents there feel as safe as we do here in our cities and towns. Once that is accomplished, expand the borders of the safe zone a bit. Repeat, continue outward.

These are things our government wanted to do all along. They wanted to make the country safe, they wanted to restore power and water, they wanted to train the Iraqi people to protect themselves. The difference is that we are focused on one area. This focus has obvious benefits across the board. But there are two benefits that aren’t so obvious. First is that the people will finally trust us and will actually aid us in intelligence gathering a bit. The second (and the BWH would love this one) is that the media can actually see progress. It is centered in one place. So instead of a fixed power plant in one town and a insurgent free day in another and a new school in another, it’s all happening at once in one place.

Think of the people who aren’t living in that town. They will be begging us to include them next once they see how nice things can be. Once they see that America is actually there helping them. The world at large would become more positive as well. The insurgency, which feeds on national discontent will finally wane out.

I could totally see a “grass is greener” kind of accelerated positive revival thing happening in Iraq.

I’m not smart enough to say weather we should totally pull out of the county or not but I am smart enough to demand that if we’re going to stay there, we should at least have a plan and a strategy to actually accomplish something.

DVD diector commentaries

So, I can’t be the only one listening to director commantaries on DVD’s. If I were, they wouldn’t be spending the extra time and errort to add them. Anyway, my problem with them, even though I love them and really shouldn’t be critisizing them at all, is that generally they are in 2 channel stereo and take the place of a standard 2 channel stereo mix of the film.

So, what you end up hearing is the movie a little bit and then it fades down and the director (or actor) fades in and says something interesting while you miss the dialog and sound on the screen.

I find this really odd.

The DVD experience is one where you are immersed into the film and 5.1 audio helps you with that immersion. We all know how well 5.1 sounds in a room with a properly calibrated audio system. So, my question is this: Why can’t the commontary be mixed in with a 5.1 program? If this happens, the directors voice can be placed in the soundfield where she (or he) will be most appreciated, back next to you and not up near the screen.

In a 7 channel DTS system, this could be really taken to the extreme with the direcors voice coming in just over your shoulder.. picture it “Oh, this part is cool, see how I did this shot?”, etc..

I have no access to anyone who could make this suggestion reality, so I ask you.. anyone out there know a big director or producer?

How to win the Iraqi war

In the NYTimes today there is a story titled “Winning in Iraq” that attempts to bring a very strong theory into the mainstream. It is a theory by a very smart man (and former Army Lt. Colnel) named Andrew Krepinevich that outlines a plan that could help us actually win the war in Iraq.

I urge you all to at least read the NYTimes piece and if you are really interested, read the actual essay by Mr. Krepinevich (which is very readable and actually quite interesting). But, for those of you who want the quick synopsis, I’ll give you my take on it.

We are fighting the insurgency like a game of Whack a Mole. For the uninitiated, this means that we are going into towns, trying to stamp out insurgents, and then we move on to the next place that they are. This method is understandable. In Iraq, we all can agree that there was no post invasion planning done. In the absence of a plan, the plan becomes “put out the fires you can see”. I mean, you’re a military force, you are there and you can see little goals along the way, why not follow them?

This is a huge problem for a number of reasons on a number of levels. I don’t need to outline them here, you can see them. The people in Iraq are not helping us fight the insurgents (even though they are usually victims), the people here and around the word see no progress at all, and the insurgents just keep coming.

It seems to mr. Krepinevich (and I fully agree with him) that a good strategy to the fight over there would be one that restores the good will of the Iraqi people, shows the world that we are making progress, and actually increases security in the nation.

His plan is simple and it’s simply incredible that the people of our government haven’t thought of it earlier. I mean, aren’t there people in the Pentagon sitting around thinking of ways to win this war?

Anyway, the plan is this. Start with a piece of land, a town or a city, move in and make it secure, stay there, fix the electric, sewers, and plumbing. Train the Iraqi forces there to help you patrol and make that area safe. Make it so that the residents there feel as safe as we do here in our cities and towns. Once that is accomplished, expand the borders of the safe zone a bit. Repeat, continue outward.

These are things our government wanted to do all along. They wanted to make the country safe, they wanted to restore power and water, they wanted to train the Iraqi people to protect themselves. The difference is that we are focused on one area. This focus has obvious benefits across the board. But there are two benefits that aren’t so obvious. First is that the people will finally trust us and will actually aid us in intelligence gathering a bit. The second (and the BWH would love this one) is that the media can actually see progress. It is centered in one place. So instead of a fixed power plant in one town and a insurgent free day in another and a new school in another, it’s all happening at once in one place.

Think of the people who aren’t living in that town. They will be begging us to include them next once they see how nice things can be. Once they see that America is actually there helping them. The world at large would become more positive as well. The insurgency, which feeds on national discontent will finally wane out.

I could totally see a “grass is greener” kind of accelerated positive revival thing happening in Iraq.

I’m not smart enough to say weather we should totally pull out of the county or not but I am smart enough to demand that if we’re going to stay there, we should at least have a plan and a strategy to actually accomplish something.

DVD diector commentaries

So, I can’t be the only one listening to director commantaries on DVD’s. If I were, they wouldn’t be spending the extra time and errort to add them. Anyway, my problem with them, even though I love them and really shouldn’t be critisizing them at all, is that generally they are in 2 channel stereo and take the place of a standard 2 channel stereo mix of the film.

So, what you end up hearing is the movie a little bit and then it fades down and the director (or actor) fades in and says something interesting while you miss the dialog and sound on the screen.

I find this really odd.

The DVD experience is one where you are immersed into the film and 5.1 audio helps you with that immersion. We all know how well 5.1 sounds in a room with a properly calibrated audio system. So, my question is this: Why can’t the commontary be mixed in with a 5.1 program? If this happens, the directors voice can be placed in the soundfield where she (or he) will be most appreciated, back next to you and not up near the screen.

In a 7 channel DTS system, this could be really taken to the extreme with the direcors voice coming in just over your shoulder.. picture it “Oh, this part is cool, see how I did this shot?”, etc..

I have no access to anyone who could make this suggestion reality, so I ask you.. anyone out there know a big director or producer?