http://cnnbc.moveon.org says the future depends on me voting, I say: it's too late for the future

Found out about this from a friend on Facebook: http://cnnbc.moveon.org/

Essentially, it rips a page from the old TV ad campaign for Captain Power (any scifi geeks out there remember him?) and pretends to be a regular news video that gets interrupted by someone from the future who then implores us to stop the dystopian nightmare of tomorrow from happening by voting.  Of course, in typical mass-marketing fashion, the video message comes from a hot, skinny future-chick who’s got a handsome, passionate black man as a sidekick who comes in toward the end.  Also, in typical mass-marketing fashion, it utilizes Facebook to make the video personal.  Check out these screencaps:

Check out the pic that the black sidekick keeps in a locket around his neck:

I have to admit I totally LOLed, but the sad reality is that the future is already lost.

See, they make a big joke about corporations owning everything (even people) but they conveniently skip over the part where corporations already own the candidates.

On the way back from the big Rally for Sanity and/or Fear this weekend I had a conversation with a guy who said he saw hope for the future if young people would just get out there and vote.  The thing is, big money (aka corporations, in most cases) already determine who we can vote for because it’s legal for them to donate as much as they want to whom they want.  This means anyone with corporations backing them up can pretty much wipe out any message from someone with less money.

What’s the point in voting for change if someone else is already limiting the selection of people promising change?

As we now know for certain, change is more than just skin deep.  Sure, the world is definitely a better place when Democrats win, but ultimately, every elected official in government is in someone’s back pocket.  Too bad our wallet got stolen from our back pocket long ago, not that it matters since We, The People, could never afford to buy our own politicians in the first place.

Hmm… “It’s too late for the future.”  That’s good!  I’m going to use that in a story somewhere. I CALL COPYRIGHT/TRADEMARK DIBS!!

Oh and speaking of a story, have another look at the first screencap above—check out the image to the left in that first screencap.  Now go here and notice the title of a novel I wrote under the pen-name Scott Campbell a bunch of years ago.

Tee-hee!

Why Google is Actually Quite Evil

See those ads on my site? Yeah--the ones from Google. Those are pretty unfair and yet we're supposed to believe they are the key to surviving on the Internet as a content provider. The theory is that they're just like TV commercials or print ads--advertisers pay you to advertise their products. Simple, right?

Wrong.

Google Ads (at least the ones on my website) pay webmasters per click.

How many TV advertisers pay TV networks based on viewers "clicking through" their TV commercials?

How many magazine or newspaper advertisers are paid based on how many people actually go to an advertiser's website?

So, you get TV, newspapers and magazines getting paid big bucks just show ads.

But as a webmaster, I have to rely on the ability of a Google Ad to find it's market in my audience. The thing is, I don't want the ads to be obtrusive, so I go with text-only ads. Of course, it's against the Terms of Service (ToS) to ask my site visitors to click on ads (even politely), so my only choice is be obnoxious to my audience by going with graphical ads or trust Google to do their job and display the best ads.

Not very fair since Google regularly misinterprets the words on this site. Back during the 2008 presidential election, I was slamming Bush and conservatives who would vote for him and what ads pop up on my site? Republican dating sites.

Well done, Google.

Now, to be honest, I don't really pay attention to how many unique visitors I get per day. When I have checked I discovered it can range from a few hundred to a few thousand every day. Yet, do I get paid for every unique visitor who has a Google Ad downloaded to his or her browser? No.

Meanwhile, Google gets to traffic in my information, your information, and all the while they claim that their interest is in "not being evil."

Sorry, G, but displaying your ads is a service I provide to you. Yet you only pay me when people click. You benefit no matter what because your logo is displayed to every visitor I get. Your clients benefit no matter what because their ads are displayed to my audience whether my audience clicks or not.

Does this seem fair to anyone?

So, claiming to not be evil and getting a service from people without paying for it?--that seems pretty evil to me.

Am I going to take the ads down? No way. I make a couple hundred bucks a year off of them and that's a couple hundred bucks I wouldn't get otherwise. But imagine how much I'd be making if I were paid based on how often an ad was displayed to a visitor...

Apple Inc. Thinks My Mom Wants an iPod Touch for Mother's Day

Apple Inc. Thinks My Mom Wants an iPod Touch for Mother's Day, originally uploaded by thepetecom.

This from the morons who thought "cut and paste" wasn't anything people wanted on an iPhone.

Tee-hee! This is where marketers are really starting to piss me off.

"Let's try to convince EVERYONE that they need to buy our stuff--even people who would NEVER buy it!! Who cares if we waste a bucket-load of money and alienate customers who actually WOULD buy our stuff!! WE MUST BRAINWASH MORE PEOPLE TO BUY OUR CRAP!"

It must be tough believing your own line of bullcrap.

Well, my mom doesn't own an iPod now and she seems pretty confident that she doesn't want an iPod ever. She wants a Kindle long before she'll go for an iPod, so, all Apple has managed to do with their recent email to me is piss me off and make me hate them more.

IT'S A RECESSION DICKWEEDS, MAYBE YOU SHOULD TRY TELLING US HOW YOUR STUFF IS CHEAP.

Hell, it's really a depression, in which case, it's downright immoral to be trying to convince people to buy an iPod for Mom rather than, you know FEED themselves.

But hey "they've got to make a living, right?"

Sure! And that's much more important than me EATING.

Sorry, Mom! No iPod for you this Mother's Day. I hope you'll forgive me!

Yes, I am a Mac person, but I prefer to stay loyal to my soul rather than some stupid company, thanks.