« July 2006 | Main | September 2006 »
“Wait Akbar! They have a beverage cart! Abort! Abort!”
It seems like the "pick cart maneuver" might do some good if it gives an air marshal an easy shot at the bad guys' heads. If there's no marshal on board, I guess it falls to the passengers to take action before the terrorists clears the obstacle. But yes, I do suspect that much of aviation security has as much (or more) to do with placating a nervous public than with actually impeding determined attackers.
I know you were all waiting for my views on the new TV season. Good news! Here they are!
Minor side note: What's with all the one word titles? Heroes, Kidnapped, Jericho, Smith, Shark, Justice, Standoff, Vanished, Runaway. Yikes!
The votes have been counted. The International Astronomical Union has declared that Pluto is no longer a planet. Science in action? Or a demonstration of why you should never trust a committee to do something, lest it come back with the job partly done, and with that part screwed up?
New Scientist last week:
Finally, astronomers could be homing in on a definition of the word planet. After a day of public bickering in Prague, followed by negotiations behind closed doors, the latest draft resolution was greeted with a broadly friendly reception.
Only they haven’t come up with a definition of the word planet.
The planet definition committee is… stepping back from trying to define all planets in the universe, and sticking to our solar system – a slightly easier task.
I agree with Mike Smith that scientific rigor requires us to have a logical rule by which we define what a planet is. But to have one that applies to only this, our sun among trillions of stars in the universe? It’s worse than having no rule at all. If your only ambition is to define the planets in our solar system, here’s how you do it: “A planet in our solar system is any of the following nine objects: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, Uranus, Pluto.” Done.
Instead, they’ve come up with a rule that fails to include a body recognized as a planet for 76 years, but that fails to define which of the other… er, big things orbiting stars… are planets when we find them elsewhere. I’m not impressed. Perhaps this tells school children more about the workings of committees than it does about the workings of scientific method.
Engadget and DownloadSquad tell the sad tale of Apple employees let go for allegedly downloading pirated copies of Leopard, the forthcoming version of Apple's OS. The story includes this quote from one of the people who got broomed:
"All of us know that we violated our NDA and ethics policy. Therefore, because we had the character to tell the truth and to face the consequences of our actions, we were terminated."
Well... yeah, that would be the aforementioned consequence, right? What's the problem? Or is this person saying they didn't really expect to face that consequence? They told the truth expecting it would earn them less serious consequences? That would weaken the claim to character, wouldn't it?
"My only question is, if we all lied and denied it would we still be working at Apple today? Even more so, is that the kind of person that Apple wants working for them?"
I'm guessing no, Apple wants the kind of person working for them that doesn't illegally download software, and therefore has no need to lie about it.
Not since David and I inadvertently attended the Million Man March have I felt so very white as I did the other night when I attended a Shakira concert in San Jose.
I think she's a pretty solid songwriter, and not at all a bad singer. True, I didn't recognize half the songs, and of the other half, I didn't understand most of the lyrics. Nonetheless, I enjoyed the show.
But it was particularly fascinating to see a performer whose persona is so closely tied to one particular part of her anatomy. The sheer amount of gyration she did on that stage... I'm thinking that while she's on the road, Shakira doesn't have to bother spending much time at the gym.
Iran's unprecedented refusal to allow access to its underground facility at Natanz could seriously hamper U.N. attempts to ensure Tehran is not trying to produce nuclear weapons, and might violate the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, diplomats and U.N. officials told The Associated Press. (AP Photo/IKONOS satellite image ourtesy of GeoEye/WIA
I'm guessing that what’s really hampering UN attempts to ensure Tehran is not trying to produce nuclear weapons is that Tehran IS, in fact, trying to produce nuclear weapons.
No, there will be no references to Robert Guillaume or Billy Crystal in this review. SOAP is the acronym for the exceedingly accurately titled "Snakes on a Plane", which I saw last night.
So, first, a little background. No, not about the movie, about me. I stood in (very long) lines to see the first showings of all three of the new Star Wars films. I saw midnight showings of two of the three Lord of the Rings films. I know opening night crowds for geekfest flicks... And I have never seen a crowd as pumped as the one last night. As they waited for the film to start, they chanted, they cheered, they hissed, they did the wave. They cheered when the ads ended and the "Silence your cell phones" slide came up. They cheered louder when the trailer for Jackson's "Black Snake Moan" came up. And they went nuts when the film actually started.
For me, this film was everything I hoped for... and nothing more. I hoped for a straight-ahead action/horror/comedy with lots of snakes and little logic. I hoped for a cool-as-a-cucumber and blatantly heroic Samuel L. I hoped for charicatures instead of characters, and daring escapes, and plot points that in any other movie would be ridiculous, but in a film called "Snakes on a Plane" just make perfect sense.
So, anyone who has high-minded views that cinema should be an "important" art form... they -- like anyone with a fear of snakes -- should stay far, far away from this movie.
Otherwise, it's a blast.
US says Iran must expect swift U.N. action
Must it, really? I can only assume the theory here is that Iran has been secretly taken over by people who have never actually observed the U.N.
I love the idea of exotic car rentals but I doubt I'll be partaking any time soon. I mean, if you're going to bother upgrading from whatever Hertz is offering, you can't just choose something common, can you? Oh, sure, a BMW 7-Series or a Mercedes SL500 is adequate for running errands about town. But you see those cars on the street. You could even test drive one if you dressed nicely. If you're going to rent an exotic, it's got to be really out of reach. The sort of car they keep behind the ropes at the local car show. A Ferrari 360. A Lamborghini Gallardo Spyder. Maybe a Aston Martin V8 Vantage, if you're slumming. I'm thinking, though, that at $2,650 per day for the Lambo, even renting these worthiest of cars is... still pretty much really out of reach. But now you know what you can get me for my birthday.
Recent Comments