Screw TO. Those losers in Kansas approved some anti-evolution trash. Fucking losers. Got damn them. I want coverage of that shit. National news is covering TO more than this evolution trash in Kansas. Fuck I wrote more about TO then this evolution garbage. Damn Kansas bumpkins.
Sometimes when I see someone in a wheelchair or with amputate arms or disfiguring diseases or some other debilitating condition I just think, does that really have to be. We've come to accept these things so readily as "part of life". We've raised a whole bunch of other "issues" above things like that because they are so normal to us. How in the hell can anyone on this planet call themselves caring about human life when things like that are so common and accepted. Being in a wheelchair is bullplop. No one should be in a fucking wheelchair. I'd "murder" 1 trillion fetuses to make sure no human ever has to be in a wheelchair ever again. I hate this fake humanism that is so rampant today.
TO is bad for a lockeroom but the constant barrage on this guy's character is out of line. I've read him being called a jerk and a a bad human being. Hold the fuck up here. What they fail to do is qualify there characterizations to football only. I've only read and heard one person make this distinction. Skip Bayless. He said that TO as a person that he met was not the persona we see. Skip still doesn't approve of TO's lockerroom behavior but at least he has the courtesy to be more precise about the situation. Also what is the deal with the lack of character bashing of players with real of the field problems. Ray Lewis and being involved in a murder trial. Bill Romonowski's roid rage attack on a teamate and other roid issues. Other players arrested for various civil irresponsibility. None of them recieved half the criticism TO has. They just get that sad sympathetic he needs help talk. I just don't understand that part. TO has been a stand-up citizen outside of football. He just says exactly what is on his mind and people get pissed. He probably needs to learn to back off sometimes but the raging attacks on him baffle me. Would you rather him be some ultra-performer who says nothing but ruins his life quietly outside of football. Apparently that is what people want. I see a few former players who are broadcasters being a little more delicate about the situation and not rage against TO. John Madden seems to always give a good analysis of a situation so I like to hear his thoughts. I rarely hear him say something completely and obviously biased.
Westbrook, who got a new contract says he would welcome TO back if things were ironed out. I can only imagine he feels that way because of his contract disputes with the eagles maybe gives him a better idea of what TO is thinking. This is what people are missing somehow in all this attack on TO. This whole situation is about his contract, bottom line. I would never call a pro football player selfish for wanting more money. Football is tough. You could literally get killed on just about every play. Risk of life debilitating or life threatening injuries are so high in football compared to the other major sports. Hockey too, I don't know how hockey players aren't injured as much. If it was up to me and possible I'd pay every player on the team 10 million a year just for stepping out on the field. I just feel like the whole situation can't be blamed soley on him. That there were things that could have been done to mitigate this situation.
Since only the players and the organization are privy to the goings on in a lockerroom the blitzing one-sided attacks on TO are just ridiculous. These media hounds don't know all that goes on and went on so settle the fuck down. I haven't read anyone temper their comments with an I don't know the whole story.
Well Westbrook has a new contract and now so does David Akers. Eagles are just rubbing new contracts in TO's face now. Of course not really but someone in the organization is relishing the fact that they've given out new contracts mid-season but not to him. Maybe I was wrong that the players wanted him on the field. They probably wanted his talent on the field but him out of the locker-room. They just didn't know how to handle TO. Damn them. Somebody will pick him up. Ravens?
I've been thinking about this for a while but I think the weight of it finally hit me today. Currently computer software is dominated by input methods and not functionality. Computer programs are not intelligent so we have to come up with various input methods to get the functionality we need. We as users are at the mercy of the computer's lack of intelligent and unwieldy input methods. What we want to be able to do is simply explain to a computer what we want to do and have it understand. Not have to go through various input hoops just to calculate something on a spread sheet. You should simply tell the computer that you want a certain calculation of certain data and it should do it. No more remebering various commands and typing them in. Computers should be extensions of human thought. They should be able to do things we can't do very well very fast. Like calculating numbers and whatnot. The whole software industry is built around creating various input methods to get the functionality that they think we need. We still don't have programs that automatically shape their interface to how we work or what we are thinking because a computer can't understand us.
What would be cool is on the fly customizable interfaces. You simply tell the computer how you want the interface setup and it does it.
I was just thinking about taxes. Specifically how the hell people got so turned around into thinking taxes are too high. Saying this is like raging against charity, no one will ever believe you. The tax system is so convoluted that those with the means to pay substaintial taxes use the system to pay less than they should. So they want to overhaul the system. They need to make it so that those with the means can't evade taxes using the system so easily. Then they need to raise taxes for the upper portions of the scale and reduce it completely for lower portions. How is it that anyone is complains about taxes. That is ridiculous. It is an idea put in people's heads by politicians. Low taxes doesn't benefit people of meager means. Even people of pretty good means, lower taxes are a pittance. The effect on each individual person is not nearly enough to justify the loss on the larger scale. It is simple, you don't need an economics degree to see this. Higher taxes means more money for the government, who's job it is to advance society and use it for programs that benefit the entire commonwealth. You can argue about mismanagement and whatnot, but a good portion of the money will go into education, healthcare, etc. Now what happens when we give that money back to the people individually in the form of tax cuts or lower taxes. That money is spent on personal things. Frankly what else are you going to spend that money on. However when people shop and buy sure they help the economy but a percentage of that money will go to companies and individuals who don't put it back into the commonwealth. So what happens when you lower taxes, the commonwealth suffers and the offset of better economy can't equal the governmental loss. A competent economist could explain it better. Unfortunately no one listens to them. Just the vodoo economists. That trickle down reganomics bullshit that some losers are so up on.
Often on these cable news/debate shows no one ever gets down to the core of somones arguement. They deal with surface issues so much that no one gets exposed for what they really are. I rarely hear the line of questioning the burrows down to their core beliefs. What happens when you get there is you usually find ugliness. So it is just much eaiser to deal with certain "issues" instead of peoples core beliefs. Then politicians only spread their view on issues. Which people agree with or disagree with. I think if you asked the right questions you would find that most of the views put forth clash with each other in core values. When they clash you uncover the sinister underbelly of some people. You find out what they really feel instead of getting their "view" on an issue.
So now the truth comes out. Apparently TO got into a fight with Hugh "bad-ass-ador" Douglas. After Douglas remarked that he knew some people were faking injuries. TO then challenged McNabb. This is more hilarious than ever. This is normal stuff though. It is just that TO manages to attract more negative attention than anyone. Anyone that has been on a sports team know that when things are going bad people fight. Even when things are going good. Fuck it man, I still want that dude on the field. As if players don't get into fights. Ha. I still think the Eagles created this whole situation themselves. So you can't ever soley blame TO. I wonder what would have happened if they didn;t want to pay McNabb or Kearse. They usually release players who have money disputes. But they didn't do that with TO. They admitted that he was worth more than what they were paying him by keeping him. Don't give me that honor your contract bullplop. If they didn't think he was worth what he wanted they should have gotten rid of him. Fuck the outbursts and discipline issues. They fucked up when the didn't pay him and kept him on the team.
So today I distrubingly read about how President Bush and the administration wants Brazil to back his free trade proposal for the western hemisphere. Ross Perot called out this tactic back in 1996. What free trade does to america. Jobs my ass. What happened with NAFTA is that massive amounts of jobs were moved to mexico depleting. What you get a massive amounts on low level jobs in other countries to produce goods for the US market. This is disgusting and I don't know why people don't see it. Reduce poverty? Are you kidding. Sure it will create jobs. Create a whole bunch of low level manufacturing jobs so that americans can have cheaper goods. Improve quality of life? Improve it to what? Just barely above the "poverty line". The whole aim of this free trade is to make it easier for companies to produce goods by outsourcing the production to places where quality of life is so low that it is substantially cheaper to make them there and import them to the US, tax-free mind you. They don't want to raise quality of life to something like the US that would defeat the whole purpose of the plan. The plan feeds of the fact that there are millions of people in south america that have crappy ass lives. Same thing is happening in China. It is cheaper to make things in China. Why is that? It is not a complex answer, it is simple. The standard of living in most of China is deplorably low compared to the U.S. and there are a ton of people willing to endure those conditions just to eke out a meager living. Don't give me that there are more people excuse and that creates competition. There are so many people in China in dire situations that they are willing to work for such crappy wages. They are used to it. They don't demand a better life comparable to the U.S. because they don't know any other life. But that shit won't last forever and it will begin to catch up with people.
Its pathetic that some people think this is a solution or that it is helping greatly. It raises the standard of living slightly then locks them into that slight raise because anything higher would make it too expensive to make goods. I don't hear anything about plans after their standard of living is raised. This may be a first step to something but no one talks about the integral next step. Because there is no next step to them. They want to keep this monstrous policy locked in forever.
This issue has connections to the whole border dispute that is going on today. Now some want to build a fence. That is ludicrous. Do policy makers not see the connection. All they see is people crossing the border and putting a fence there to block them seems like the best thing to do. They will bemoan danger of border crossing and its illegality but I never hear serious discussion on the factors that lead to border crossing and mitigating them. What happened the NAFTA making things better for Mexicans. That has proven to be a load of crap.
I think the people being overlooked in this TO hoopla are the players. Based on the few comments or lack of comments from players on the eagles team you get the feeling that they want TO on the field. That they could care less what he says off the field because on the field he is all business. Even eagles management is just being a baby by suspending him because he hurt their feelings. I think McNabb has gotten used to it to and wants that dude on the field. And anyone that says the eagles will be better without him is crazy. Even in the longrun unless they get another top reciever they will never be as good without him. All these freaking analysts have an opinion but they aren't the ones trying to get to a superbowl. Especially the analyst that are players from ealier in the league. They just are calling TO a cancer. Steve Young had an interesting comment. He said that he had never seen a player so disruptive of the field that was so productive on the field and it was weird to him. Players that are analyst from today's game are more forgiving probably because they played with people like that. Fuck why did the eagles go ahead and ruin the season. They should have just given him his money and called it a day. They screwed themselves. They won't even give Westbrook his money and he was quiet and patient.
I love these loser kids who say that they want to discuss intelligent design in class. I hope no one is taking their words seriously. They ignore them every other time so now when they need some help they want their words. High school kids don't need to "form opinions" in science. That is crazy. They don't know nearly enough about science to form opinions. Discussion of evolution vs. something else is left up to those who actually have a complet knowledge of evolution. Not some idiot high school kids who think there should be "discussion". Fuck man.
Cloning ignorance pisses me off. And here comes some more. What is the deal with people and cloned food. In other words eating meat from a cow that is cloned. This fear doesn't even make a remote piece of sense. First off food that is poisonous to humans usually comes from either outside contamination (ecoli, pesticides, etc..) and disease. Put it this way, you are not going to grow another eye if you eat a cow that was born with three (assuming radiation was not the cause, which is another issue). I have no idea how people make a connection between cloned beef and harm to people. That would be saying that the intrinsic structure of the animals muscle is poisonous somehow. That is ludicrous. Even in animals with natural genetic defects those things don't affect those that eat it. I can't fathom how people come up with this tenuos connection between cloned food and danger to humans. It is such an ignorant leap of logic. Do people even know what meat is. Obviously not.
Speaking of this radiation thing. I am guessing people have no clue what radiation is when they expose food being irradiated to kill pathogens. Fuck man. All you need is a basic high school education to know that food irradiation is not harmful to people who eat the food. Also they have done tests to make sure it is safe. A high energy particle doesn't make something radioactive. There is only one type of radiation that can do that. It is neutron radiation. And they don't touch food with that. Fucking losers and their complete ignorance. Irradiated food isn't safe my ass.
This was another one of those non-mold fitting movies. First off, there is no real plot. It is more of a time slice of some guys life. A string of events played out on the screen. It may have been the most accurate portrayl of what most experience in today's "wars". Movie comes from some marine's memior so maybe that is why. The movie left me as empty feeling as the marines they showed. After the movie I felt nothing in particular. My mind didn't even run rampant with thoughts. I keep thinking about the after war problems that were touched on in the movie. How a soldier is always a soldier even after the war. I don't know what else to say about this movie. Fuck the politics for now I just keep thinking about the soldier. Not being a veteran I don't know how this movie affects people who have been to war. Specifically Gulf War and the current conflict. I just wonder how truthful it is. See this movie if for nothing else to finally see a movie about war not cast in the typical hollywood mold.
But he said science, too, should listen to religion.
"We know where scientific reason can end up by itself: the atomic bomb and the possibility of cloning human beings are fruit of a reason that wants to free itself from every ethical or religious link," he said.
So I applaud half of what he says about religion listening to science. But being a cardinal means that he has to someone how defend religion. This is where he goes terribly astray. This loser thinks science should listen to religion. You have got to be joking. Science needs to finish the job of ripping religion to shreds and seeing it out the door. First of all to insinutate that science seeks to divorce itself from ethical thinking is ludicrous. Science is not a person so it has no ethics. Ethics apply to people and is usally a load of crap anyway. Secondly to deride science for the creation of the atomic bomb and not even mention the countless wars the conflict rooted in religion is idiotic. As for cloning, what a fucking loser. Don't give me that sanctity of life and playing god bullshit. Greatest part about the article is you clearly see that Pope John Paul subscribed to evolution. And most importantly of all. Religion and science are not on equal standing or two sides of a debate. Religion is a ugly little step child of human thought and knowledge. Science is all human thought and knowledge. Of course pure science is trying to rid itself of religious nonsense. Religion is giving up on science and attributing this world to mystical causes to which we can't understand. Science say fuck that shit and stop being a loser. The whopper in this is his insiting that knowledge of the faith be taken as expert in humanity. Holy flipping shit. Religion is just a bastardized dogmatic rehash of more rational human thought that exists outside its restrictive and mystical confines. Religion is no expert, it is a fucking hack that has robbed mankind of reason. The fact that it is still robbing us of our potential is disturbing. But luckily the trend is to, as the believers say "turn away from god".
So I read this review of Jarhead that says it is a war movie without a war. The reviewer is looking for a "war movie" and can't find it. What a loser. I haven't seen the movie but that review tells me all I need to know about that clown's movie watching. He is not reviewing the movie. He is reviewing the movie he wants to see. Why do some of these reviewers do this. They write they're reviews based on such strong pre-concieved molds of genres. Then in the review itself they fess up to the fact that the movie is not what they are looking for but continue to based their review on their imaginary movie. I'm trying to think of the few short reviews I wrote. I hope I didn't do that. I don't think I did. I try to look for what the movie is trying to accoplish and compare it against that. Not against a rigid pre-concieved notion I have of what the movie should be. What the hell am I talking about. I'm hungry. I'll go see Jarhead this weekend probably.
Been reading reviews and all the bad ones are the same. They are looking for the hollywood war pic of blowing shit up and ultra-violence. Never been to war but somehow that picture of war is only part of the story. Especially modern wars. The bad reviewers call the movie uninteresting because there is no political rhetoric or tons of fight scenes. I have a feeling I am going to really like this movie. It will be another one of those thinking man's movies. I like that.
When the grim realities of war and destruction finally set in for Swoff and company when they come upon a charred-up Iraqi squad that has been bombed,- full article
There is the perfect example of this reviewers mindset. This is the mindset of someone who only sees the war picture painted by media and movies. The grim realities are not just the bombing and killing it is also the waiting, the sitting around doing nothing most of the time. This assclown thinks war is all bang bang boom non-stop. What a loser. Read the rest of the review and see the picture of "real-life" this clown has. His "real-life" is a fantasy world. This clown also laments that the soldiers aren't injected with opinion about the war. I imagine that when your at war you probably could care less about the war and just want to go home.
Also I don't think very many people realize that Jamie Foxx took this role before he won the oscar. So questions surrounding that are just ignorant to the situation. Only reason I realized that was saw Jamie Foxx on an interview with Charlie Rose last night and they went over how he took this role before winning the oscar.
Ok, wanted to clarify a point I made about Linux filesystems. I didn't give enough time to my last two sentences in the post. Bottom line is that Linux filesystem naming conventions are very unwieldy for human consumption. Windows is very bad but slightly more rigid and easier to understand (no case sensitivity, etc). WinFS, the new Windows filesystem is trying to get rid of that lack or structure completely by making filesystem a relational database. An idea that has been around probably since the begining of filesystems and has been championed by Oracle Founder Larry Ellison for years.
This may be an over simplification of the issue. But I read about how major violence brakes out when people disagree over things in many other countries. The last major riot in the US was the LA riot over the rodney king case. And before that were all the civil rights related rioting. But there were no riots in the disputed election. In the united states it just appears to me that we are more apt to disagree without the threat of major violence. Maybe we are used to living in a much more stable society, that not fighting has such a high priority. I don't know, that is just the feeling I have. Can't really say for sure whether it is true or not.
You see how many fighting around the world is a result of ethnic or religious differences. People want their own land for their own group. Although there is a dominant group in the US seperatism has been all but eradicated except in the most extreme fringes. Although one can say it doesn't happen on a less apparent scale. The Chinatowns, the Little Italys, the spanish neighborhoods, etc. This is the freedom of the US at it greatest. Allowing various different people to feel comfortable living under a common set of rules. Why don't the detractors of the US from the outside see that aspect. Sure colonialism divided up some countries in the "wrong" places but you can't possibly blame every problem on that. These places have been that way for a long time now. Take for instance this Basque seperatist movement in Spain. It really has some strength and has spawned terrorist groups. I really don't get it though. Their language is different although it has characteristics of spanish and french. Regional cultures are obsviously going to be different. But what else makes them want to seperate to self-govern. Can it be simple nationalistic urges. Are they persecuted? Are they fighting over a stupid symbolic gesture of political boundaries? Do they not think they can maintain they're own culture within the borders of Spain? And are they willing to kill simply for the preservation of culture. Culture that is ephemeral and always changing anyway.
You hear about kurds wanting their own country carved out of Iraq. So far it hasn't happened. And curiously enough news coverage of their consitutional progress has slowed to a trickle. Weird. I thought it was some historical vote. Then when it happened nobody covered it. Last thing I read was that there was more participation in the vote than expected. Some giant losers want to use that to obliquely give credit to the US and what they did in invading Iraq. All the credit must be given to the people of Iraq though. I lost my enthusiasm for this thought. Time to move on.
I freaking hate how nationalistic pride or urges so often take higher priority over humanistic causes. I don't like that sense of belonging to a nation more than being a human. My sense of nationalism is more practical and functional. It serves as administrative boundaries. So that hopefully what is contained in those boundaries can generally agree on how to live. Again freedoom of american comes in the play here. Generally agree with enough play in the joint to accomodate a good amount of variance. I'm an american because I live in america and grew up here. I just doesn't go much deeper than that. I want to hold on to my way of life but still search for other things. I want to continue to build a way a life. I don't want to be static.
So China wants EU to lift the ban on selling arms to China. Just on "priciple". Principle my ass. Principle needs reasoning to back it up and often you hear this trash excuse for things without the reasoning. Nothing should ever be done on priciple alone. Principle should be the entry point for analytical and logical reasoning. It is not a reason in itself. The priciple arguement often is used to cloak real reasoning. China says it has no interest in buying European weapons but wants the embargo lifted. Hence they say principle is the reason to lift the embargo. How about you look at practicality. If your not going to buy weapons why waste time with insisting the embargo is lifted. Principle my ass. Give me the reasons behind your principle and when I discover they are weak and senseless then I'll say no again. Or maybe when you give me the real reasons like wanting to buy european weapons I will still say no. Oh wait here is a good one. They said the embargo was having a negative impact on trade. You don't have to be an economist to see the hot air in that one.
Speaking of China. What is the deal with China and Taiwan. That shit don't make any sense. Economically China is not really hurt by Taiwan. In fact their seperation doesn't hurt anybody and has been that way for 50 years now. This united china stuff is ridiculous. It isn't like the annexation of Texas. All the land is developed on the planet ain't no more to be fighting over really. As the Dali Llama said there is no place to go to anymore so we better get along. Its obviously that Taiwan doesn't want to be controlled by China's communist government. And that is what China wants to do. Control. Speaking of communism. How in the hell did Marx's vision of turn into the crap that countires pawn off on people today. Some of his ideas are a part of US government today. Can't say for sure whether the ideas I'm talking about are wholly original to Marx. But his vision couldn't have been these control fiends that represent communism today. How did he attain such a bad name. He had good analysis and insight into the structure of society and the capitalist system. Then a bunch of losers came along and turned his stuff into the trash communism we see today. Now you can't even think about Marx in a good light without evoking the putrid communist practices of the Soviet Union and its cronies. Fucking losers. His writings were about social relationships and political relationships. His analysis of capitalism is almost perfect, though his solutions to its upgrade may be off. I wonder though if China can pull off his solution. They have a chance but they will probably fuck it up. I think this is the point that China should be allowing more and more freedoms at a more rapid pace. Fuck they didn't even get Marx's solution right. The gap between the rich and poor is huge in China and growing. Bunch of losers. Fucking crazy-ass Mao. How can anyone support that loser.
Every now and then I glance over a posting. Usually I want to make changes to better state what I want to say or completely remove some things that don't make sense or that I have changed my mind on. I never remove anything the only thing I do sometimes is make grammar and spelling corrections. Postings are usually whatever is going through my head at the moment. If I revist that thought sometimes it can change sometimes not. To put it best my blog is where my mind goes to take a dump. I read that little phrase on someone elses blog. It was funny.
The thing I don't get about communist governments is this. Where in Karl Marx's manifesto did it say a communist government had to restrict the media and be ruled by leaders not elected by the people. I thought the main crux of communism was sharing and empowering the workers. Seems like everyone just went ahead with Lenin's interpretation and left the orginal ideas out in the cold.
Its no secret that I want all relgious practice to go away. But why I ask myself? Of course there are the various occurances that I don't agree with. Things that go against practical judgement and common sense. But at the crux of my dislike lies something else. It is a matter of priority. Seems like these people who are religious put religion above everything else. They are muslim, christian, jewish, hindu, sikh, etc. before everything else. When I hear these clowns preach about wanting to make people understand them (muslim, christian or whatever). I am baffled at their insistance on the importance of being part of this religious group. It is like they ignore everything else that comes before religion. They ignore basic aspects of being a human sometimes. How being apart of this group hold such high priority is beyond me. Sometimes that high priority can fracture basic human bonds of friendship. How in the hell does that happen. I just don't understand how it is taken so seriously that nothing can trump it. I don't even take the theory of gravity as seriously as some people take religion. Fuck man what the hell is wrong with people. I thought about this while reading an article about some muslims who were questioned for praying at a football game. It is a shame no doubt, but you have to look at this more broadly than a simple discrimination case. Sidenote: the founding fathers of this country were so brillant with their seperation of church of state insitance that everyday I come to appreciate it even more. They had an insight that many people today still don't posses. One of the people who was praying was saying how he grew up in New York and always comes to Giants games and whatnot. He was professing his belonging to american culture, rightfully so. Then he began to say something about wanted to teach people what it is to be a muslim. I don't get where his priority lies. I guess New Yorker is large category with the subset of muslim. But what happens when aspects of the subset overtake the larger classification. That being a muslim is more important than being a New Yorker. Religion is at its core such a private thing. But when it enters into the large public sphere, especially esoteric pratices it causes problems right away. More dangerous is the ideaology that enters the public sphere but you don't even notice that normally, which makes it so dangerous. This is where I think the insight of seperation of church and state came from. The general public psyche has a priorities that is different from the individual. They do both however share a similar structure I think. Something like being able to walk around and not be killed is part of both the public and private priority set. We humans live in a society based on this shared public priority set. You know where this is going, what I am explaining is obvious. Clashes happen, blah blah blah. The thing I want to articulate is that with the closer interaction of different societies priority sets are in greater variance then they ever have been and more clashes occur. Religion is becoming more and more of a clashing priority because in the public psyche it is dropping further and further down on the priority list (praise jesus it is). With larger human populations other things have become more and more important to survival and maintaining an increasingly complex modern society in. Even among homogenous religious populations they will have the same problems as they grow larger populations. Religion is a private priority, very little in it relates to basic human survival. The rule of law on the other hand helps to keep your ass alive and not dealing with meatheads wanting to take your food. This is what the founding fathers saw. They saw that there were far more important things to live in a stable world then what religion one practiced. So they had to remove it from the public space as much as they could because it contained very little in holding a nation together. It would do more to tear it apart than anything. Besides some religious ideas fly in the face of rationality anyway. Like what is the deal with major religions and discounting women. Furthermore what is the deal with some women accepting that trash. They subscribe to an idealogy that specifically denies them a fair break. I hate that shit. Even more annoying is some american women being subordinate in a religion. This is the land of fighting for a fair break. I don't know how seriously I could take anyone championing equality that subscribes to certain religious ideas. I should really go read some feminist literature to get a sense of what it is about before commenting. But it seems to me that sometimes people either discount or criticize feminism because of a lack of understaning of its core concepts. Which coincedently I probably don't know myself. That at is core wasn't getting women into men's school or women playing sports. It was getting women to not be subordinate. To stand up as much as men do. To be counted and not discounted. To stop playing the second banana. It is a mental change which should be followed by those concrete examples I give. Don't focus on the examples as evidence. The advancement of womens rights is benificial to all peoples not just women. I'll kick the next person that laments the "loss" of "nicities" as a consequence to the women's movement, even as just a joke.
I'm thinking about Nintendo again. Damn their strategy may be brillant. Free online gaming, old school downloads, portable gaming system that may take advantage of both. While they were late on the online gaming boat. They have clearly become the inovator and probably the leader once it launches its free service in two weeks. Their DS which is not nearly as poweful as PSP and doesn't have movie viewing capabilites is still outselling it. I think their focus on games is paying off. I'm just waiting for Nintendo Revolution to see what kinds of games they are going to make with that funky controller. I know I can count on Xbox360 and PS3 to have solid games with good graphics but the Revolution is interesting. The old-school game downloads and free online play really sell it for me though.
I think about like lower level things like brain function, biology, physics and soforth. When pondering stuff like that these "higher" level things that humans are so concerned about seem silly. Because they are completely imagined. Cells don't care about politics or love directly. Its just funny to think about it that way. Cells don't care whether they live or die. They don't even care what the definition of life is. Cells are as indiscriminate and cold as transitors.