

Photojackers of the world, unite.
But before we break out the champagne substitute to honor the three-point seat belt's demi-centennial, we might also consider the possibility that some drivers have caused accidents precisely because they were wearing seat belts.Buckle Up Your Seatbelt and Behave
This counterintuitive idea was introduced in academic circles several years ago and is broadly accepted today. The concept is that humans have an inborn tolerance for risk—meaning that as safety features are added to vehicles and roads, drivers feel less vulnerable and tend to take more chances. The feeling of greater security tempts us to be more reckless. Behavioral scientists call it "risk compensation."
The principle was observed long before it was named. Soon after the first gasoline-powered horseless carriages appeared on English roadways, the secretary of the national Motor Union of Great Britain and Ireland suggested that all those who owned property along the kingdom's roadways trim their hedges to make it easier for drivers to see. In response, a retired army colonel named Willoughby Verner fired off a letter to the editor of the Times of London, which printed it on July 13, 1908.
"Before any of your readers may be induced to cut their hedges as suggested by the secretary of the Motor Union they may like to know my experience of having done so," Verner wrote. "Four years ago I cut down the hedges and shrubs to a height of 4ft for 30 yards back from the dangerous crossing in this hamlet. The results were twofold: the following summer my garden was smothered with dust caused by fast-driven cars, and the average pace of the passing cars was considerably increased. This was bad enough, but when the culprits secured by the police pleaded that ‘it was perfectly safe to go fast' because ‘they could see well at the corner,' I realised that I had made a mistake." He added that he had since let his hedges and shrubs grow back.
Knowing I could get only six hours of sleep at the most, I would start to panic. Worrying about not sleeping kept me from sleeping, and by the time my alarm clock sounded, I was lucky if I’d gotten four hours.So I'm glad they didn't have Ambien when I was in high school. The reason I think that article is interesting, though, is because of how easy it is to become addicted to something. Even something as apparently innocuous as Ambien. Now I understand why so many sleep aid commercials talk about being "non-habit forming."
TUSCARORA, Nev. -- The residents of this tiny town, anticipating an imminent attack, will be ready with a perimeter defense. They'll position their best weapons at regular intervals, faced out toward the desert to repel the assault.Against Insect Plague, Nevadans Wield Ultimate Weapon: Hard Rock
Then they'll turn up the volume.
Rock music blaring from boomboxes has proved one of the best defenses against an annual invasion of Mormon crickets. The huge flightless insects are a fearsome sight as they advance across the desert in armies of millions that march over, under or into anything in their way.
But the crickets don't much fancy Led Zeppelin or the Rolling Stones, the townspeople figured out three years ago. So next month, Tuscarorans are preparing once again to get out their extension cords, array their stereos in a quarter-circle and tune them to rock station KHIX, full blast, from dawn to dusk. "It is part of our arsenal," says Laura Moore, an unemployed college professor and one of the town's 13 residents.
In flyspeck villages like Tuscarora, crickets are a serious matter. The critters hatch in April in the barren soil of northern Nevada, western Utah and other parts of the Great Basin, quickly growing into blood-red, ravenous insects more than 2 inches long.
Then they march. In columns that in peak years can be two miles long and a mile across, swarms move across the badlands in search of food. Starting in about May, they march through August or so, before stopping to lay eggs for next year and die.
In between, they make an awful mess. They destroy crops and lots of the other leafy vegetation. They crawl all over houses, and some get inside. "You'll wake up and there'll be one sitting on your forehead, looking at you," says Ms. Moore.
Customer: “Oh! Is this smoked salmon?”Not Always Right
Me: “No ma’am, it’s actually sashimi, the Japanese way of serving fish, so it’s cleaned and served raw.”
Customer: “Raw? That can’t be healthy! Are you sure you are allowed to serve raw fish? Someone could get sick!”
Me: “I can assure you, raw salmon won’t get anyone sick. We have served this for years.”
Customer: “But it’s raw! Someone will get sick! That’s what raw fish does - gets people sick!”
Me: “Ma’am, the Japanese have been eating raw fish for centuries. I think it will be OK.”
Customer: “Well, they also lost World War 2. I don’t think this is safe!”
...
Customer: “I bought this computer here, and it’s broken. I want to return it.”
(She dumps out the bag, and inside is a laptop that is broken completely in half.)
Customer: “It was like this when I opened the box.”
Me: “Okay… well, do you have the receipt, and the original packaging?”
Customer: *hands me a receipt*
Me: “Ma’am, this receipt is from three months ago.”
Customer: “I know, I bought it three months ago but I just opened it today.”
Me: “Well, do you have the original packaging?”
Customer: “No, I threw it away.”
Me: “So, let me get this straight. You opened the box, three months after buying the computer, and the laptop was broken in half, so you threw out the box?”
Customer: “Yeah, I didn’t think I needed it.”
Me: “I really don’t think you can return this.”
Customer: “Alright, but you can fix it. It’s still got a manufacturer warranty.”
Me: “I’m sorry, but manufacturer warranties don’t cover accidental damage, just defects.”
Customer: “But it’s not accidental damage! It was like this when I bought it!”
Me: “I find that really hard to believe, and so would anyone else. Nobody in their right mind would believe that it came out of the box like this.”
Customer: “But why would I lie about that?”
Me: “To get a free repair? I’m sorry, I just can’t do it. Your warranty does not cover accidental damage.”
Customer: *thinks for a moment* “But what if it wasn’t an accident?”
Me: “Excuse me?”
Customer: “What if it wasn’t an accident? I did it on purpose. That’s not accidental damage.”
Me: “…”
Customer: “Hmmmmmmm?”
Me: “Have a good day, ma’am.”
In Join Or Die, I paint myself having sex with the Presidents of the United States in chronological order. I am interested in humanizing and demythologizing the Presidents by addressing their public legacies and private lives. The presidency itself is a seemingly immortal and impenetrable institution; by inserting myself in its timeline, I attempt to locate something intimate and mortal. I use this intimacy to subvert authority, but it demands that I make myself vulnerable along with the Presidents. A power lies in rendering these patriarchal figures the possible object of shame, ridicule and desire, but it is a power that is constantly negotiated.
I approach the spectacle of sex and politics with a certain playfulness. It would be easy to let the images slide into territory that's strictly pornographic—the lurid and hardcore, the predictably "controversial." One could also imagine a series preoccupied with wearing its "Fuck the Man" symbolism on its sleeve. But I wish to move beyond these things and make something playful and tender and maybe a little ambiguous, but exuberantly so. This, I feel, is the most humanizing act I can do.
March 2009
The Justice Department announced (pdf) over the weekend that it will not intervene in the Charlie Lynch medical marijuana case. The federal judge in Lynch’s case had postponed Lynch’s sentencing to inquire if the Obama administration might want to back off, given Attorney General Holder’s recent statements about not prosecuting medical marijuana distributors who are complying with state and local law.Pretty much speaks for itself.
It would be merely disappointing had the DOJ based its decision not to intervene on the fact that a verdict had already been rendered in Lynch’s case. But the DOJ response goes much further, specifically stating that entire prosecution of Lynch is consistent with the government’s new position on medical marijuana, as laid out by Holder. I’s hard to say, then, exactly what distinguishes Obama’s position on medical marijuana from Bush’s. Lynch sought out and received assurance from state and local authorities that he was in complete compliance with state and local law. If that isn’t enough to meet Holder’s new policy, what is?
NAPOLITANO: Well, you know, Sheriff Joe, he is being very political in that statement, because he knows that there aren't enough law enforcement officers, courtrooms or jail cells in the world to do what he is saying.Whoa, really? As Nick Gillespie asked, "In what alternate universe is the secretary living where it's evil (E-VIL!) to hire immigrants who are willing to work?" And wasn't throwing around terms like "evil-doers" part of what got so many people irritated about Bush?
What we have to do is target the real evil-doers in this business, the employers who consistently hire illegal labor, the human traffickers who are exploiting human misery.
Taking them at their word, EFF -- which was the lead counsel in the lawsuits against the telecoms -- thereafter filed suit, in October, 2008, against the Bush administration and various Bush officials for illegally spying on the communications of Americans. They were seeking to make good on the promise made by Congressional Democrats: namely, that even though lawsuits against telecoms for illegal spying will not be allowed any longer, government officials who broke the law can still be held accountable.Even the good thing Obama did, releasing the Bush torture memos, is effectively negated by Obama's insistence (or at least, that of his Attorney General) that there will be no prosecutions or apparently investigations.
But late Friday afternoon, the Obama DOJ filed the government's first response to EFF's lawsuit (.pdf), the first of its kind to seek damages against government officials under FISA, the Wiretap Act and other statutes, arising out of Bush's NSA program. But the Obama DOJ demanded dismissal of the entire lawsuit based on (1) its Bush-mimicking claim that the "state secrets" privilege bars any lawsuits against the Bush administration for illegal spying, and (2) a brand new "sovereign immunity" claim of breathtaking scope -- never before advanced even by the Bush administration -- that the Patriot Act bars any lawsuits of any kind for illegal government surveillance unless there is "willful disclosure" of the illegally intercepted communications.
A study of the extended family tree of the House of Hapsburg has found that the last Spanish Hapsburg king, Charles II, was the offspring of a marriage that was almost as genetically inbred as an incestuous relationship between a brother and sister or parent and child.Revealed: the interbreeding that ruined the Hapsburgs
Scientists have found that the Hapsburg fashion of marrying their relatives to keep their dynastic heritage intact had dire consequences for subsequent generations, which culminated in the last heir to the Spanish throne being sickly and impotent.
Charles II of Spain was nicknamed El Hechizado – The Hexed – because people at the time thought that his physical and mental disabilities were the result of sorcery. Now a study into the genetics of his immediate ancestors has found that he was so inbred that he probably suffered from at least two inherited disorders.
Despite his deformities and severe health problems, Charles had married twice in the hope of continuing the rule of the Hapsburgs, but he was incapable of fathering an heir and died childless at the age of 39. He was the last of a long line of Hapsburgs and it spelled the end for the Spanish branch of the dynasty.
Scientists believe they can show just how inbred Charles was following a study of more than 3,000 relatives of the Hapsburg family extending over 16 generations. The researchers found that his "inbreeding coefficient" – a measure of the proportion of inbred genes he had inherited from his parents – was on a par with that of the offspring of an incestuous marriage.
Starting today [that is, some time last week] and running through the 25th, A temporary bar dubbed "Alcoholic Architecture" is popping up in London offering a cloud of breathable gin and tonic to it's patrons.London bar pumps gin and tonic into the air
The brainchild of culinary adventurers Sam Bompas and Harry Parr, Alcoholic Architecture creates a intoxicating vapor using the same ultrasonic humidifier system found in Antony Gormley's installation at the Hayward in 2007 called Blind Light. Patrons pay around $7 for hourly slots between 7 and 9pm where they can don protective suits and get drunk off the air. It's a novelty for sure, but $7 isn't a bad price for an hours worth of gin and tonic no matter how you look at it.
I used to have all of the "Just Ask Owen" column, but I had a hard drive crash a few months back and I don't think they survived that. I know that there were some political columns, stuff done in 1996, thatA Jody Stitt did not win the English Core Teaching Award in 2006, but was a finalist. Jody Stitt: not a lot of help.
were archived somewhere on the Net; some quotations, too.
I also know that there was a blog post somewhere that had Owen Fulrice's real name, Jody Stitt; he's a untenured English professor in a Southern university now. I haven't researched far enough into that; imagine a scholarly paper written like these columns, Frederico Jalapeno being cited, etc.
Joseph Stitt grew up in Cullman, Alabama, went to college at the University of Alabama (B.A. and M.A. in English, 1993 and 1995), taught composition for a year at Wallace State College, then worked for four years as a writer and editor for the web sites Hecklers Online and Greenthink.com. For the last two years he has taught composition and literature at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. His story “Sunset for a Tennessee Mule” was in the spring issue of the Aura Literary Arts Review. He has published numerous essays, articles, book reviews, and parodies both in print and online.Next up, I guess, is sitting outside his house in my car, waiting for him to come outside.
But it might surprise you to learn that one of the largest and most-celebrated new-media ventures is burning through cash at a rate that makes newspapers look like wise investments. It's called YouTube: According a recent report by analysts at the financial-services company Credit Suisse, Google will lose $470 million on the video-sharing site this year alone. To put it another way, the Boston Globe, which is on track to lose $85 million in 2009, is five times more profitable—or, rather, less unprofitable—than YouTube. All so you can watch this helium-voiced oddball whenever you want.It's weird to me that YouTube pays for content, instead of the other way around. I don't know anything about it, of course, but why aren't Fox, NBC, ABC, etc, paying YouTube for space in exchange for letting them put up whatever kind of ads they want on their videos? And why doesn't YouTube have tons more ads? Even if the problem is figuring out who the market is, some companies (auto insurance, Coca Cola) have an interest in reaching every single demographic, which YouTube can do. It is quite confusing.
[...]
YouTube isn't alone in Poor House 2.0. Yahoo bought the popular photo-sharing site Flickr in 2005, and though the service might be marginally profitable, it certainly hasn't added appreciably to Yahoo's bottom line. (Yahoo similarly doesn't break out Flickr's financials.) Facebook provides an even better example. The social network is running up a huge tab to store and serve up all the photos, videos, and other junk you stuff into your profile. Last year, TechCrunch reported that Facebook spends $1 million a month on electricity, $500,000 a month on bandwidth, and up to $2 million per week on new servers to keep up with its users' insatiable photo-uploading needs. (Members post nearly a billion photos every month.) But Facebook gets relatively little in return for storing all your memories. Ad rates on its network are terribly low, the company doesn't make a profit, and it hasn't shed any light on how it will make good on investments that valued the company at $15 billion.
A bias in favor of male offspring has left China with 32 million more boys under the age of 20 than girls, creating “an imminent generation of excess men,” a study released Friday said.Pundits and science fiction writers have asked what the future for a China with a massive oversupply of men might be. I tend to be pessimistic, so I imagine things going a bit more negatively. A mild export of the gender imbalance to other countries is almost certain. A decrease in the position of women is likely, either due to growing demand for them or a backlash against women trying to use their new found rarity to improve their lot. And at what point does war become likely, either to distract an unruly male population or because of unrest?
For the next 20 years, China will have increasingly more men than women of reproductive age, according to the paper, which was published online by the British Medical Journal. “Nothing can be done now to prevent this,” the researchers said.
Chinese government planners have long known that the urge of couples to have sons was skewing the gender balance of the population. But the study, by two Chinese university professors and a London researcher, provides some of the first hard data on the extent of the disparity and the factors contributing to it.
In 2005 , they found, births of boys in China exceeded births of girls by more than 1.1 million. There were 120 boys born for every 100 girls.
This disparity seems to surpass that of any other country, they said — a finding, they wrote, that was perhaps unsurprising in light of China’s one-child policy.
But a handful of scientists think that these ultra-marathoners are using their bodies just as our hominid forbears once did, a theory known as the endurance running hypothesis (ER). ER proponents believe that being able to run for extended lengths of time is an adapted trait, most likely for obtaining food, and was the catalyst that forced Homo erectus to evolve from its apelike ancestors. Over time, the survival of the swift-footed shaped the anatomy of modern humans, giving us a body that is difficult to explain absent a marathoning past.The Running Man, Revisited
Our toes, for instance, are shorter and stubbier than those of nearly all other primates, including chimpanzees, a trait that has long been attributed to our committed bipedalism. But a study published in the March 1 issue of the Journal of Experimental Biology, by anthropologists Daniel Lieberman and Campbell Rolian, provides evidence that short toes make human feet exquisitely suited to substantial amounts of running. In tests where 15 subjects ran and walked on pressure-sensitive treadmills, Lieberman and Rolian found that toe length had no effect on walking. Yet when the subjects were running, an increase in toe length of just 20 percent doubled the amount of mechanical work, meaning that the longer-toed subjects required more metabolic energy, and each footfall produced more shock.
“If you have very long toes, the moment of force acting on the foot’s metatarsal phalangeal joint becomes problematic when running,” explains Lieberman. Our hominid ancestors, Australopithecus, of which Lucy is the most famous specimen, had significantly longer toes than humans. “Lucy could have walked just fine with her long toes,” says Lieberman. “But if she wanted to run a marathon, or even a half-marathon, she’d have had trouble.”
An alleged practice of certain evil people, especially rock musicians, of saying or singing words which, when listened to backward contain evil messages such as "My sweet Satan"* or "Kill yourself." Or they might contain messages such as "it's fun to smoke marijuana"* or "sleep with me, I'm not too young."* Of course, you probably won't hear these messages until somebody first points them out to you. Perception is influenced by expectation and expectation is affected by what others prime you for.