Friday, December 28, 2007
Benazir Bhutto and the bloggers
While it is obviously not a good thing and is newsworthy that former Pakistani PM Benazir Bhutto was murdered by Islamic terrorists, I have just one thing to mention about the story.
Bloggers all over the net are blogging this story like they care and they are fully informed about Benazir Bhutto’s career and politics. Meanwhile a search of archives at a few A-list blogs (that shall remain nameless) show not one post mentioning this woman before she was killed.
Actually, more than a few. I checked at 12 of the blogs I think are A-listers, three of which are far left, two of which are far right. Not a single one of them has ever mentioned this woman prior to her murder.
Remember that when you read these long diatribes about who she was and what her death means to the region, terrorism and Pakistan’s future.
Posted by JimK at 03:45 PM on December 28, 2007
Permalink | Trackbacks (0) | Email to a friend
Categories: News, International Events, The Middle East, The Blogosphere
Tags: Benazir Bhutto Islam Politics blogging
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Are trackbacks dead?
While I always believed in the ability of trackbacks to generate traffic and inter-blog discussion, as well as auto-alerting other bloggers that you have commented on their material...are they dead? Did the spammers kill them as an effective tool for bloggers? Half the time they don’t work between platforms. I have a HELL of a time tracking back to most MT blogs. I can’t trackback to anything on Typepad. Blogger works sometimes. Haloscan works about half the time. Wordpress does OK, as long as the blogger hasn’t gone crazy with security plugins. WP can usually tell between a real trackback and a spammer though.
So...is it even worth having trackbacks enabled anymore?
Saturday, September 22, 2007
The other day, Steve from HogOnIce wrote this. Today he wrote this. Skip the pepper talk, although I find it interesting as I like to grow stuff and cook and whatnot. The part I want you to see is the part that refers to the conservative blogging stuff.
Now, this is not the first time Steve has written on this subject. Nor is it the first time I have agreed with him. Pajamas Media screwed up the whole right side of the blog world. Right wing bloggers are so busy competing and fighting over petty differences that they cannot form anything resembling the united front of the left part of the blog world. Forget that, though. I don’t want to just be part of some side of a battle. What I would like is to stop being treated like a red-headed stepchild by *both* sides, but more by the one I’m supposed to be on, ya know what I mean? Originally I picked the URL due to the wordplay of me being right but also being on the right, and I was doing it in part to show solidarity with the right-o-sphere...but to hell with ‘em. The whole A-list can kiss my ass, and the B-list can get in line behind ‘em. I only get love from smaller bloggers who aren’t worried about their place in the frigging Technorati or Ecosystem lists anyway. There is no movement. Online, at least, the right has failed and is dying faster than Rosie O’Donnell’s movie career.
On top of all that, I wonder how many people stay away from this site just because of the URL and/or name.
And I don’t feel comfortable with it anymore, it just doesn’t seem to fit me.
I’m thinking of going back. Back to “Starkthoughts.” with a .com at the end. I’ll take the hit from Google, rebuild my pagerank, all that. I’ll redirect right-thoughts.us to the new domain. But I think maybe I’d be better off switching back. And it’s not the first time I have felt that way.
What do you all think of this idea? Any opinion will be welcome...let me know if you think it’s a crazy, stupid idea. I am really, really leaning toward doing this...if anything above should be given more weight it’s that I just do not feel right...no pun intended...with this URL and blog name anymore. If someone can give me a really good reason not to do change back to Starkthoughts, I will absolutely listen, but it’s gonna have to be an awfully good reason.
Friday, August 17, 2007
You may have noticed my absence…
...all three of you that read this blog. It’s been a tough week around here, and on top of that I just didn’t feel like blogging anything.
In the larger sense you may have noticed my political content dwindling away. I’m fed up, and how many times can I write the same thing? I hate reading blogs that repeat the same political crap day in and day out. Every story comes back to one of two boogey-men - Bush or Clinton. Sometimes it’s Rove or Pelosi. I’m so sick of it. I have a limited amount of “political capital” to spend before I need to get silly or look at boobs. These past few months it has been spent on Moore, health care and Cuba. Not to mention the fact that worrying about a presidential race this early has driven me, and most other people who are getting tired of it, insane.
I realize that there are some people who are obsessed with being angry at every perceived injustice by the government, they other side, people on their side and so forth. Some folks seem to have an infinite well of angst and bile from which to draw, and can turn any story into a political rant against whosoever it is they hate this month. I don’t. Besides, most of ‘em can’t think unless someone else tells them what opinion to have. If the “uberbloggers” and political rags stopped publishing tomorrow, half the political bloggers on the intertubes wouldn’t know what sock to put on first without direction. I’m fed up with it all. Right, left, center, you can all fuck off until next summer. I am out of caring, and the caring store is fresh out of refills.
I’d rather write 3000 bitterly sarcastic words about Bret Michaels than one more fucking blog post bemoaning the state of our Union. Because it’s a hell of a lot more fucking fun. Of course, you just know I will be bemoaning the state of our Union again...because I can’t help it. So everything I just wrote is total bullshit.
See, it’s my consistency that keeps you coming back. I just know it.
On the diet/weight loss front: Holding even. OK, truth is I re-gained almost a pound, which seems like it shouldn’t be measurable on a lump as big as me, but it’s reading the same every day, so...it must be there. I’ve actually stayed under 1700 calories a day on average this week, so it’s not the food intake. I’ve not been sleeping well at all due to a miscalculation in my BiPAP (a miscalculation I made), and this week it has caught up to me. I have been noticing that I am more and more physically exhausted both before and after a workout. This week it got to the point where I had to lighten up on what I was doing because I simply couldn’t move my arms. I wasn’t in pain, I was just completely exhausted. I’ve slept better the last couple of nights, and I will be going to the pool to try to do another quarter-mile this evening, so we’ll see if things have improved. Although I gotta say, I’m feeling both exhausted and dizzy right now, so...yeah, that means caffeine. Mmm...coffee. Only not this coffee, about which I will write tomorrow.
So anyway, I will make a bigger effort on all fronts next week. Let’s just call this a really shitty vacation. One where I didn’t go anywhere and no relaxation was accomplished at all. And I had to have my cell phone replaced again, as the front screen went dead. Again. Just like it did twice on the previous model I owned. Is LG making these things out of gossamer? What the fuck?
Oh! You know what I did accomplish? Shooting a -26 at Pebble Beach in three rounds. In Tiger Woods PGA Tour ‘07, of course. It’s not like I would actually walk a golf course and do that for real. That would involve both going somewhere and the day star, plus his cousin Fresh Air. We don’t do that here. Fresh air and sun are for boy scouts and migrant farm workers. We simulate. I swear to God, I will volunteer for the Matrix when the Robot Day Of Atonement comes. Anyway, that;s a pretty good score, I think. You may begin worshiping me whenever it is convenient for you.
Lastly...BIOSHOCK! Oh my GOD! Has a game every promised such a deep (no pun intended) story with such creep-tacular elements and cool retro-steampunk action? The answer, in case you are curious, is no. The demo is so awesome I can hardly contain my enthusiasm. I haven’t paid full price for any Xbox 360 game since Crackdown. I ordered Bioshock with no care for the price. It’s beautiful, fairly easy to control, has amazing amounts of creep factor, and to top it all off, seems to be telling a truly film-worthy story in a cinematic way that no other game to date has been able to pull off. I’m really interested in playing not just to see what weird and wonderful powers the plasmids will give me, but also to know what happens next in the story. I am really interested in this story. It’s basically the story of a man, sick of governments of all kinds, who attempts to create a libertarian paradise under the sea, only his ego and domineering ways turn it into a combination of a morality-free science experiment-plus-social free-for-all and a dictatorship. You, the player, come in as the last remnants of Rapture, the underwater city, are coming down around your ears and the citizens - what is left of them - have mutated into...something else. Much of the story is told in the details strewn around the world, like protest signs, newspapers, film clips that play on screens, etc. As someone who appreciates libertarian philosophy but believes that it must be limited or it will result in chaos, I’m looking forward to seeing where they take the story. It seems to have been written to my specifications, with some gross-factor, a high amount of creeping me out and a decent backbone of reality. Plus, did I mention it looks simply amazing? I can’t believe that I ever thought Gears of War looked good. Gears looks like a sixty-year old transvestite in a dirty chiffon skirt and a pair of torn leggings compared to Bioshock.
Recently Roger Ebert got into it with gamers, saying that video games couldn’t be art. Well fuck you, Roger. If no other game before it could truly own that label, Bioshock wears it deservedly. As Tycho from Penny Arcade said
It is my intention to secure two copies of the game, entire - one Collectors’ edition, and one exclusively to shove up Roger Ebert’s ass. If Bioshock isn’t “art,” then art is the poorer for it.
Preach on, brother.
Posted by JimK at 03:27 PM on August 17, 2007
Permalink | Trackbacks (0) | Email to a friend
Categories: Entertainment, Gaming, Xbox 360, News, Politics, Personal, The Blogosphere
Tags: gaming politics blogging Bioshock
Thursday, August 02, 2007
I R Not A Gurl
Drumwaster posts this awesome lolcat from ICanHasCheezburger. I admit in his comments to being addicted to ICHC and CuteOverload, and confess my fears that I am, indeed, a female. Buzzion comes back with this:
Nah, its just due to the fact of your complete masculinity. Its just so strong that the only way to let out your sensitive emotional side, is through looking at stuff like that. Thus allowing for you to remain at your proper level of dude-itude normally.
Best. Rationalization. Ever. Buzzion, you win. Whatever game we were all playing, you are the winner. That’s pure awesome and it’s now my reason for liking cute pictures of fuzzy animals. I am just that much man that I have to look at this stuff to keep my man-parts in check, or I might just start fornicating with every living thing around me and then start a war.
Thursday, June 07, 2007
Does no one get this?
Legal immigration - one thing. Illegal immigration - something else entirely.
Opposing illegal immigration doesn’t make you a racist. That’s a bullshit Michael Moore trick, trying to turn two separate things into the same so you can rail against people for opposing something they don’t oppose. The President, and everyone else that is attacking people who oppose illegal immigration, should be ashamed of themselves for turning to such dirty tricks to call their opposition names.
If you;d like to see just some of the problems with the latest immigration shambles being fast-tracked into law, Sen. Jeff Sessions released a list of 20 of the biggest loopholes in the bill, including this one, which is just baffling:
* Loophole 8 – Gang Members Are Eligible:
Instead of ensuring that members of violent gangs such as MS 13 are deported after coming out of the shadows to apply for amnesty, the bill will allow violent gang members to get amnesty as long as they “renounce” their gang membership on their application. [See p. 289: 34-36].
Oppose this nonsense. Call, fax, email and write your Congressperson today.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Internet Explorer stuff
Two things...if you use IE, can you clear your cache and see if you still get that “operation aborted” error? I’ve been eliminating things to try to get rid of it. Secondly, how the hell do I get IE 7 to stop blocking Blogads.com? I can’t see my own BlogAds which makes me wonder if anyone can…
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Once again, Andrew Sullivan gets it wrong *UPDATED*
Originally posted 2007-05-08 08:06 PM
Andrew Sullivan, a true conservative:
If gun rights are civil rights, why would anyone feel the need to hide the fact that they own one?
I just don’t understand how people think this moron is anything but a grandstanding poseur. The answer to your stupid question is practicality and security, stupid. Practicality to prevent hysterical, reactionary nitwits like you from freaking the hell out every time you see one and security in not making yourself a target of anti-gun whackos and criminals looking for an illegal way to get a gun. How intelligent does one have to be to understand that?
Andrew Sullivan is equally as conservative as your average Democratic candidate for President.
Saint Sullivan of the Bleeding heart updates with this question, which if you can believe it is even dumber than his original;
But I’m not that impressed by wusses who don’t want to be ostracized by liberal elites at their neighborhood barbecues. Isn’t that part of the point of owning a gun - pissing off liberals?
Wow. This is supposed to be the “soul” of today’s conservative? What an asshole. It’s also clear he knows absolutely nothing about guns or gun owners. He’s as liberal as a NYC Democrat when it comes to guns. Some conservative...Bush is more friendly to gun owners than Sullivan is, and Bush loves the “assault” weapons ban.
Like any good liberal on the internet, when Andrew finds himself in a hole, he just keeps digging…
A simple question: aren’t gun permits in the public record? If so, doesn’t the privacy defense crumble a little?
Yeah, because there’s no difference between a criminal having to go to the town hall and show ID or go to the local state police barracks and ask for the list as opposed to just spending 35 cents anonymously for a frigging newspaper. No practical difference at all there. You’ve spotted the flaw, Andrew. You’re a genius. /sarcasm
Again I ask, who could take this clueless putz seriously? Everything he claims to be as a conservative is betrayed by everything he actually says when all these little issues pop up. He never puts this alleged conservatism into practice. He tells you he’s a conservative, one of the few left in the known world, but he responds like a Democratic candidate for office when faced with most issues. He’s not the “true” conservative soul that can salvage the Republican party. He’s just trying to sell books and get invited back to Bill Mahr’s show.
But forget all that. It doesn’t matter that Saint Sullivan of the Bleeding Heart pretends to be conservative. The fact is he’s flat out wrong about this and has been from the start. His inability to recognize that fact, coupled with his inability to admit that others called him on his bullshit, is what keeps him digging in this hole. First rule when you find yourself in a hole you;ve dug - stop digging. Second rule - open your eyes and assess the situation. This is about publishing a list of gun permit holder in an easily accessible way that doesn’t leave any trail of accountability for accessing it. What could that information be used for by the general public that would be good? Can anyone think of anything that list could be used for that isn’t prejudicial and potentially harmful - or worse, fatal - to the people on the list?
How can a conservative really be advocating that we start printing lists of people who are obeying the law as if they were a sub-class of citizen who should be marked in public so as to be more easily identified? What’s next, branding them with a letter of some sort? A big scarlet “G” maybe. Or a yellow cutout of a pistol sewn on their clothing so good and decent anti-gunners can know to stay away from them and not contaminate the purity of the blood. Gun owners will be forced to put this symbol in the windows of their business so that pure
Germans conservatives bigots morons will know not to do business with them.
Yes, that seems practical, conservative and definitely on the side of liberty and security to me. I saw we implement this plan sofort mein Führer! Schnell, schnell! Mark the gewehrinhaber! It’s perfect! The German word for gun owner is “gewehrinhaber. We can use a big yellow G! Oh this is truly a great day for American freedom. All thanks to the wit and wisdom of Andrew Sullivan, a true conservative.
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
He beat me to it
I’m reading this post at Bill Quick’s and I read this:
Senator Charles E. Schumer, a New York Democrat, told CNN on Sunday, “It would be nice to have someone who’s head of France who doesn’t have a knee-jerk reaction against the United States.”
Before I was done reading them, I thought “Yeah, it would be nice to have a Senator from New York that didn’t have a knee-jerk reaction against the United States.” Then I kept reading.
Hell, it would be nice to have a Democrat in the Senate who doesn’t have a knee-jerk reaction against the United States.
Dammit Bill! Get out of my head! This is all in reference to France electing a guy who has publicly declared that he intends to repair relations between the U.S. and France. Sarkozy stated that friends can disagree and still remain friends, and he was contrite and apologetic for Chirac’s arrogance. Bill Quick titled his post “I think I like this guy.”
Posted by JimK at 06:48 PM on May 08, 2007
Permalink | Trackbacks (0) | Email to a friend
Categories: News, International Events, Politics, The Blogosphere
Tags: France Schumer Sarkozy international politics
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Blogger’s Code of Conduct
Jesus Christ. A guy publishes a few books that geeks love and he thinks he can fucking tell people how to post on their own god-damned blogs?
When I wrote my Call for a Blogging Code of Conduct last week, I suggested some ideas of what such a code might contain, but didn’t actually put forth a draft that people could subscribe to. We’re not quite there yet, but we have a plan.
We’ve drafted a code of conduct that will eventually be posted on bloggingcode.org, and created a badge that sites can display if they want to link to that code of conduct.
Oh great. A never-stable, always-moving target that me and you fuckers will be expected to adhere to if we ever expect or hope to get a link from our betters. Can’t fucking wait for that motherfucker to spread like herpes on a Hilton sister.
We define unacceptable content as anything included or linked to that:
- is being used to abuse, harass, stalk, or threaten others
- is libelous, knowingly false, ad-hominem, or misrepresents another person,
- infringes upon a copyright or trademark
- violates an obligation of confidentiality
- violates the privacy of others
We define and determine what is “unacceptable content” on a case-by-case basis, and our definitions are not limited to this list.
See? See the back door that is already in the “code?” It’s the perfect wiggle room for not dealing with one incident while coming down like the hammer of God in another. Bloggers will be blackballed, others will never be questioned for the same behavior and the whole thing will devolve into a never-ending battle of no-sex-getting geek assholes that hold the keys to the kingdom of big-traffic links.
Two words, Tim: Fuck off. I’ll follow that up with good old-fashioned common sense: No one will ever agree on just what the rules should be, no one will actually follow them, the very few that do will find them being used against them and ultimately too restrictive, and of course the last: Who the fuck are you to decide what proper conduct is on my blog? Don’t like what goes on here? There’s an X in the corner of your browser. Fucking use it, you officious prick.
(Was that over the top at all? I can hardly tell anymore.)
Dialing back the viciousness for a moment, we need this like we need a hole in the head. Self-censorship, tone, decorum or anything else about the style of writing in a given blog is the domain of the individual who owns that blog, not some group, voluntary or not.