Re¢ently

  1. Kansas, again

    brian on 2003.04.24
    at 12:20 am

    Yes, we all remember when the Kansas state school board thought that science books should be labeled with a sticker telling students that evolution is just a theory, and thought creationism should be taught along side in biology class.

    Now the State is trying to out do itself. By charging sales tax on illicit drug transactions. Unreal. Please write in and tell me this is a joke. More at WhatDoIKnow.org

    Posted in: Politics

    Talk Bubble 0 Comments

  2. Who do you trust?

    brian on 2003.04.23
    at 11:41 pm

    Georgia is considering designing a new flag to replace its controversal, Confederate-cross-bearing flag.This article about it, and its new "motto" (In God We Trust), is brilliant. I am not against religion in any way (shape or form). However, I do find it to be wholly out of place when involved in government. The framers of the Constitution agreed.

    It disturbs me when I see a bible in court or in a "swearing in" ceremony. It's on money, and soon it may be on Georgia's state flag (replacing a flag with a confederate emblem, with a flag with a confederate emblem and a reference to monotheism).

    "It's being put on the flag to increase its acceptability to voters," Bordeaux said. "I had a colleague say that putting 'In God We Trust' on the flag will ensure that it will pass because, as he put it, 'Who will vote against God?' I think that's a sacrilege to use God to sell a flag."

    And that's exactly my problem with it, too. And the fact that in America's 2000 or so religions, many involve much more than a "God" in the Christian sense. Every time I see "In God We Trust," I read it as government propaganda, and a slap in the face of constitution. And cheapening to everyone's belief of choice. But, who's going to stand up against this? Not politicians. They raced each other to criticize the possible removal of "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance. God doesn't exist to lend faith to a government. It should be trustworthy enough to stand on its own.

    Posted in: Politics

    Talk Bubble 0 Comments

  3. Initial study links tea to system defense

    jake on 2003.04.23
    at 07:09 pm

    CNN.com is reporting that a study on the effects of drinking tea provides benefits to the immune system. Researchers found a substance in tea called L-theanine. This substance is involved in the production of gamma-delta T cells, the first line of defence in the body.

    "We worked out the molecular aspects of this tea component in the test tube and then tested it on a small number of people to see if it actually worked in human beings," said Bukowski. The results, he said, gave clear proof that five cups of tea a day sharpened the body's defenses against disease.

    There needs to be more research done on this topic. Why give the other group coffee, why not water, or nothing? Or use different levels of tea? Five cups a day is possible, but I don't know many people who actually have five cups.

    Either way, I'm glad I don't have to stop my tea addiction.

    Posted in: Science

    Talk Bubble 2 Comments

  4. Record labels try squeezing stone.

    jake on 2003.04.23
    at 03:51 pm

    Like in horror movies, two record labels are poking Napster with a stick to make sure it’s dead. Universal Music Group and EMI Recorded Music are going after Hummer Winblad in a lawsuit.

    The 23-page complaint charges that the Napster system, as conceived and implemented, “provided a safe haven for the rampant piracy of copyrighted works on an epic and unprecedented scale…Hummer Winblad knowingly facilitated infringement of plaintiff’s copyrights for its direct financial benefit.”

    Someone should do some market research and figure out that crappy music results in crappy sales. I still buy CD’s, when I like the band a lot, or I like the album a lot. Tha average person will not buy an entire album for $17.99 at the mall when they want one song. Sometimes buying a CD single is an option. But when an album has sixteen tracks, and they release only two, that’s fourteen tracks I might like. If someone wants only one of those fourteen, they’ll just download the song.

    That’s where the online music services can fill in. Too bad they’re just starting to get off the ground and instead of spending effort promoting the services heavily the industry is too busy with lawsuits. So all the public sees is a greedy conglomerate that rips off everyone. Consumers don’t like to deal with greedy conglomerates.

    To add to all the fun stuff going on, the plaintiffs are asking for the maximum $150,000 per infringement. So let me get this straight, I have U2’s One on my computer, I let my friend download the song from me. Wow, U2 just made $150,000. Oh wait, no they didn’t, the rest of the recording industry did.

    If you figure twelve tracks at $13.99 then the record industry as a whole, including the artists, makes about a $1.17 per song. That’s a lot less than $150,000.

    Posted in: Music · Rant

    Talk Bubble 0 Comments

by date

« Apr 2003 »
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30
today