So, why hasn't the filmed beating of a transgender woman at a McDonald's been in the news like Rodney King?

The three-​minute video depicts the 22-​year old transgender woman being kicked in the head repeatedly, and dragged across the floor by the two teenaged assailants. Once the attack stops, the woman rests against the wall, only to be kicked again. Then, as her attackers appear to be leaving, they return and continue the assault, literally dragging her from the back of the restaurant almost all the way to the front door. She has a seizure and convulsions as the beating continues.
...
The video shows McDonald’s employees did nothing to stop the attack, and actually laughing. The McDonald’s manager did little more than yell, “Stop!” Only one customer, a middle-​aged woman — who subsequently also got pushed and kicked — made any attempt to aid the young transgender woman.

Why do people lose perspective as soon as a matter concerns the law?

Today's Internet example comes from Gizmodo's article about a "ballsy teen who sold his own authentic white iphones." Essentially, some kid figured out the Original Equipment Manufacturer for the next-gen iphone parts, batch ordered a bunch, then resold them for people who wanted next-gen iphone hardware ahead of release. Apple sued him, but has now dropped their lawsuit following his offer to settle out of court.

Is that questionably legal? Sure. But is it theft? People persist in deliberately misusing the concept of theft: downloading TV shows, previewing comics, and getting backup copies of music they actually own may or may not be copyright violations, but never are they theft.

Theft is the illegal acquisition of a good (without consideration) and also the disappearance of that good from its original owner, who loses its use. Of course, the distinction with downloading is that no good has gone missing. In the mock iPod case, there are physical goods, but there was also consideration: money changed hands. Furthermore, the goods did not come from Apple. Most likely the OEM was contractually obligated to not sell those goods ahead of time, but that is hardly the kid's problem: he has no legal duty to enforce or abide by contracts that do not concern him.

This is not a merely academic distinction: copyright violation is a civil offense, which essentially means that money was not given to the right people or in the proper way. On the other hand, theft is a criminal offense, a more serious matter.
Continue reading →

“I hope that real love and truth are stronger in the end than any evil or misfortune in the world.”
- Charles Dickens

This is a beautiful hope. But I prefer to see people do things to make it happen.

Between Peter Thiel and Scott Adams, there's a lot of questioning of higher education right now.

The thing is, both of these guys made their money by essentially working the system. I won't go so far as to say Adams doesn't create anything, or that PayPal doesn't fulfill roles in the economy, or anything like that. It's just that their primary mode of wealth acquisition is not wealth creation. It's the acquisition of wealth stored by other people.

In his article, Scott Adams portrays his blatant gaming of the system as "valuable life lessons." For its part, PayPal is notorious for how poorly it treats customers (with repeated delays and fees) and how quickly it freezes assets when it can get away with doing so. Recently, we witnessed how PayPal treated Julian Assange as soon as he became politically unpopular. Far from standing by their client, they froze his funds, thereby gaining the right to use them indefinitely, interest-free. They didn't turn them over to the government; they just seized them and held on to them. This came as little surprise to anyone aware of prior complaints about PayPal's weird delays and procedures, all of which serve to tie up money and basically allow them interest-free use of customers' funds.

The spirit of working hard, fitting in the system, and creating new wealth isn't there. Their form of getting rich is to access existing wealth, by shortcuts where possible.

Do you need to go to school for that? Probably not. Hustling is learned on the streets, after all. But - and this is where they fail - do we want a society full of people doing that instead of going to regular jobs, paying taxes, etc.? That would be disastrous. Adams and Thiel ought to get down on their knees and thank whatever God they worship (which, admittedly, is likely to be something like Ayn Rand's dollar sign) that the world isn't composed of people like them.

Here's a quote from the IGN boards where Vitalsign, a businessman, explains how he games the system:

Marriage smarriage. Vitalsign's epic ownage of the system.Date Posted: 11/16/2008 11:45:AM

Here is just one example of marriage being an idiotic idea (and our tax code).

I've been with my girlfriend for 3 years and she has two kids from a prior marriage. We've been discussing marriage for awhile and have decided to do what I've been telling people gays should do. Get "married" at the place of your choice, but don't worry about the marriage certificate.

By us not "officially" marrying we get the following: she gets about $5,000 a year in tax "credits" (she pays no taxes and barely makes any money). The children also are on Medicaid and she recieves food stamps as well as childcare coupons from the county.

The greatest thing about it is I make almost $100k a year. But since we are not "married" my income doesn't count.

If you are married with children it makes no sense. You can pull one of these moves too. Totally legal. Get divorced, have one person not work, collect free loot, save thousands at the end of the year.

This nanny state stuff is pretty neat. I look forward to what Obama will be adding to the prize pool.

This is precisely the sort of thing Scott Adams exalts in his article - taking advantage of the system without giving a damn what the system is supposed to be there for.

And we're supposed to want this to become commonplace?

Adams says it himself: the sciences, arts, and so forth are necessary for society to develop. But he doesn't want to participate, because he's not (he says) a genius, and so it's not for him. I suspect the real reason is that science is HARD, and he can get by just fine without having to resort to that. Gaming the system and drawing humor comics has made him richer than I'll probably ever be. But if EVERYONE (or everyone apart from the academics, which is still nearly everyone in his vision of the future) were to game the system, then it would fall apart.

Remember Radovan Karadžić? Well, the Butcher of Bosnia's general, Ratko Mladić, managed to evade authorities until yesterday. It appears that roughly 15 years after the fact, he will now get to stand trial for genocide and other war crimes.

As I wrote in 2008, "because of killing and forced migration, the 1995 population of Sarajevo was less than two-thirds of the prewar population." Mladic is the general who carried out Karadžić's insane policy of depopulation and massacre. Due to his alliance with Slobodan Milosevic, former president of Yugoslavia, Mladic was untouchable for years.

The Independent has a list of the major accused Balkan war criminals:

General Ratko Mladić: Former Bosnian Serb military chief. Accused of orchestrating Serb atrocities throughout the Bosnian war, including the 1995 massacre at Srebrenica of some 8,000 Muslims and the deadly campaign of shelling and sniping in the capital, Sarajevo. Charged with genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Arrested in Serbia today.

Radovan Karadzic: The former Bosnian Serb political leader accused together with Mladic of ultimate responsibility for Serb atrocities throughout the Bosnian war, including the Srebrenica massacre and Sarajevo bombardment. Charged with genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Arrested July 21, 2008, in Serbia. Trial began October 26, 2009, and is continuing.

Slobodan Milosevic: Former Yugoslav president accused of responsibility for the Balkan wars on the 1990s. Charged with genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes. Arrested by Serbian authorities after he was ousted from power and transferred to The Hague in 2001. Trial started February 2002. Died of a heart attack March 11, 2006, and his trial was aborted.

Biljana Plavsic: Succeeded Karadzic as Bosnian Serb president and the only woman indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. Pleaded guilty to persecution in a plea bargain. Sentenced in 2003 and released in 2009 after serving two-thirds of an 11-year sentence.

General Ante Gotovina: Senior Croatian general accused of ethnic cleansing in a 1995 military campaign to seize back land from rebel Serbs. Captured in Spain December 7, 2005, and transferred to The Hague. Convicted last month and sentenced to 24 years in prison. He has appealed his conviction.

Ramush Haradinaj: Former Kosovo prime minister. Accused of murder, rape and torture of Serbs as a commander in the Kosovo Liberation Army. Surrendered to the tribunal in March 2005. Acquitted of all charges on April 3, 2008. Appeals judges ordered a retrial, saying his trial was undermined by witness intimidation.

Goran Hadzic: Last remaining fugitive. A political leader of rebel Serbs in Croatia during the mid-1990s. Charged with murder, torture and deportation of non-Serbs from the eastern Slavonia region. Indicted in June, 2004.

From imakeshinythings:

One of my lovely customers sent me a message today with this link.

And here is my United/World of Love line:

My heart sank a little bit. The World/United States of Love line that I created is one of the reasons that I was able to quit my full-time job. They even stole the item...

Until we have a regulatory system that proactively and aggressively pursues this kind of thing, we are going to see more and more artists ruined when large, corporate entities rip them off. It's a failing of the present legal system that getting into court and having your case heard takes a lot of time and money. Big companies know this, and many are quite happy to exploit the economics of the situation.

Of course, the workings of Urban Outfitters are not transparent to us. It could be that one of their own in-house artists ripped the design off, and passed it off as his/her own while assuring the company that it was original. On the other hand, it's possible they will claim that scenario and name a fall guy just to keep the company safe. The truth may be impossible to get at now that things have reached this point, but it is far from the first time UO has had this problem, so it's reasonable to assume that at the very least, they keep hiring people who rip artists off.

This was a Yahoo question and response a while back. The more I look at one response, the more ridiculous it seems. First, the setup:

Any suggestions on how to tell a guy you like him?

So got any good suggestions on how to go about it?

I don't think you should ask a guy out. A girl's way of letting a guy know she's interested in him is by flirting. If you've already tried flirting, you may have to be a bit more obvious about it. To get him alone, tell him you need his advice on something and then ask him something he knows a lot about. Get real close to him when he's talking, maybe brush something off his shirt. This lets him know you didn't really want his advice, you want his attention. Then you can ask him to help you with whatever the advice was about or drop hints about wanting to go somewhere but don't have anyone to go with. The bottom line is that you want him to come after you. He's supposed to pursue you. I know in this day and age a girl can ask a guy out, but on a subconscious level it doesn't work as well. The girl doesn't feel good about herself because he didn't have to prove himself to her. When a guy asks a girl out, he's putting his heart on the line for a girl. He's saying that he thinks so much of you that he's willing to be rejected for you. That takes a lot of courage.

Courage which, apparently, you do not yourself possess. What makes you think that the girl can't be the one to be courageous and favorably impress the other party? Are only men allowed to be courageous? Are only women allowed to be impressed? Demanding that he take all the risks sounds more like selfishness than anything else.

You want him to do that for you and your worth it. You just have to make it easier for him by letting him know that you won't reject him. Flirting is the way you do that. Keep your flirting very light hearted though, don't seem desperate. Don't act too interested. Act like you want him to convince you he's worthy. You want him to think you're a good catch. And always smile at him when you first see him. The other problem with a girl asking a guy out is that on a subconscious level the guy thinks he could do better.

No, the real problem with it is that somehow your entire worth has become tied into whether or not a guy is willing to buy you dinner. See, if you know that you're worth it, you don't need him to validate it to you. You should probably fix this before you start seriously dating. Demanding repeated affirmation from other people is not a healthy way of dealing with your insecurities - and those will ruin relationships later on, if not dealt with.

The girl seems a bit desperate by asking a guy out and guys have an instinct to pursue girls. You need to feed that instinct. Make him work for you a little. You need to get in his head. The best way to do that is to confuse him . That's why you don't act too serious in your flirting.....fun, fun, fun. And don't ask him out, don't tell him how you feel about him (you can do that after you start dating), and don't ever make the first move. You have to make him think he's in control. I have faith in you, you can do this. Go get your man.
-dementedhumor

Seriously, this advice is terrible. Was the original poster looking for a romantic partner, or a plaything? If the former, why is the entire approach based on manipulation, deceit, and mind games?

Just make a serious, aggressive move in person.

The suggestion that it is not a woman's place to know what she wants or to be comfortable making her move is ridiculous on multiple levels. Many men are waiting for some sign that the one they like is interested in them, but they are also very bad at reading signs. An assertive girl is well within her rights, and many men find it attractive when a woman knows what she wants.

The reverse - that only men may initiate - is a ridiculous throwback to the Middle Ages.

"Let identity be your religion." - Lady Gaga

In a way, Gaga's assertion is the logical end of postmodernism: the idea that your interpretation of things is ultimately what matters. Inherent in the idea is the subjectivity of perception, but rather than concluding with the idea that perception is thus arbitrary, it goes on to say that self-perception is supreme.

I always thought in formal settings these were euphemistically called "health aids" or some such.

From The Register:

Cops apparently found Bildsten lying in the grass near the Six Flags Great American theme park, the paper reports. The officer asked her if she was OK and suggested she pay her bill. She reportedly replied that all her money was at her nearby home, and the cop offered to accompany her to get some cash to settle the bill.

However, once indoors Bildsten apparently produced what the police described as a "clear, rigid feminine pleasure device" from a drawer. She then waved the wobblesome blunt instrument over her head before advancing on the cop in a "threatening manner".

Bildsten is booked to appear in court next month charged with aggravated assault, theft of labour and walking on public roadways while intoxicated.

Given that the woman was 56 and so drunk she was lying out on the grass, I hope she wasn't beaten for her ridiculously ill-conceived "assault." Sounds like she's just a mean drunk who did some extraordinarily stupid things.

Kevin Kamps, the guy who compared Fukushima to Chernobyl, apparently does not have a graduate degree in science. And yet - he gets billed by MSNBC as an "expert"? Congress accepts his statements as fact? He gets equal consideration as guys who have spent years to get PhDs in nuclear physics?

Now, it seems that he's stopped short of claiming any such degree. However, media did portray him as an "expert" and he calls himself a "radioactive waste specialist."

What gives?

If I read all of Oliver Sachs' books on patients with unusual neurological conditions, do I get to call myself a "neurology specialist"?

If I watched every basketball game for several years, and was curious enough to read up on controversies like ACTN3 and the NCAA's implementation of mandatory sickle cell anemia testing, would I suddenly be a "sports physiology specialist"?

I eventually found a third party source with a more accurate portrayal of his real credentials:

Kevin Kamps covers all aspects of the nuclear fuel chain with particular expertise on government
and industry efforts to dump nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, as well as on the risks of
radioactive waste generation and storage at reactor sites, and transportation through communities
across the country.

Okay, yeah. He's not a nuclear waste expert; he's a nuclear waste policy expert. That means his field of expertise is the arguments that sway people for or against stances on nuclear waste, and the actions that governments take to deal with nuclear waste. That's valid, but if that's so, don't give the impression that you're a PhD in physics.

Joe Cirincione isn't much better: http://bit.ly/eH2fAu All this talk about how much time he's spent, but no degree.