Friday, February 16, 2007

NATIONAL JOURNAL: REPUBLICANS REALLY STUPID

OK, so that's not exactly what the National Journal said, but they might as well have. Check out this screengrab I took of a recent PDF they put out displaying the results of a poll they took of politicians inside Congress:



Yep, you're reading it right! I wonder if these guys think cigarettes are bad for you (duh) or that AIDS is transmittable by tears (oh, come on!). Yes, I know there is no direct link between global warming and human's behavior, but sometimes you can't always link things directly--science isn't perfect. However, since there are a number of ways we individual humans will benefit from treating the connection as real, it would seem pretty thickheaded to continue this line of BS that thinks we're not responsible for the damage being done to our planet.

This kind of denial also shows us (once again) how Republicans generally like to pretend that denying something is the same thing as making it not exist. What else are they telling us isn't a problem but is actually killing us?

Oh, let me count 'em!

Damn, too many and I got a bus to catch! Have a good morning everybody!

Thursday, February 15, 2007

Project365 day 046





Project365 day 046

Originally uploaded by thepetecom.


Moxie... is a drink that my friend John sells at the Boba Loca he runs here in Westwood, CA. One of the many old-skool soft drinks he sells. I tried Moxie for the first time tonight and didn't care for it so much. However, it's such a bizarre, unique taste I'm glad I gave it a shot. Still, I'd go with the original formula Dr. Pepper ;) All with cane sugar so it's not as bad for you as modern soda which has refined sugar. When in Westwood, CA, why not stop by and give one a try? :) (And tell 'em ThePete.Com sent ya!) (No, I don't get a discount/kick back if you do!)

Big Brother Week: OUR TECHNOLOGY WILL BETRAY US

Welcome to part 4 of ThePete.Com's Big Brother Week! Today, I'm going to cover how our technology can be turned against us. Well, it's not always "our" technology as you'll see.

One of the sucker plays big brother pulls in order to get us to give up our freedoms is by telling us something is for our own good. Remember when you were a kid and your parents told you how you had to eat your spinach? I remember mine telling me it was for my own good. Then they used Popeye as a reason for me to do what they told me.

Well, as adults we need things to be a bit more subtle before we fall for this kind of scheme. One of the things big brother is always said to be horny for is playing the uber-voyeur. In George Orwell's book, 1984, the government would place these view-screens in everyone's homes. Citizens could be looked in on, but they couldn't look back out at those watching them. After 911, cameras started popping up all over the place. We were told they were for our own good--they'd fight crime, lower traffic accidents and keep us safer. Of course, we didn't think of these cameras as the view-screens from 1984 because we all own cameras and these were all in public places. If you didn't want to be recorded, you just don't go to where these cameras are.

The catch is, these cameras could be anywhere. Hell, reasonable quality cameras are in almost every cell phone now. They use nightvision cameras in movie theater to stop bootleggers (but don't get frisky with your date!) and cameras almost intentionally hidden in traffic light posts to allow authorities to keep an eye on high crime areas--or where lots of people travel on foot.

The reason this is bad is because it turns us all into suspects. Each one of us are looked at as potential criminals and should the people watching us make a simple mistake of misidentification, it is the citizen who pays the price. Sure, he may not be convicted in a trial, but it's totally unjust that he got arrested and detained in the first place, isn't it?

What's even worse is that some people want to see even more of an uber-voyeuristic reality come true. Check out this cutting from [http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/14/smile-youre-on-big-brothers-in-plane-camera/|a February 14, 2007 post] at Engadget.com:
The folks in the UK aren't laissez-faire about this Big Brother thing one bit, them and Germany are throwing £25 million (bout $49 million US) at the "problem" of monitoring airline passengers with small cameras and microphones in every single seat back to monitor for suspicious behavior. The system will be able to detect rapid eye movements, excessive blinking, twitches, whispers or other symptoms of somebody trying to conceal something, and check the data against individual passenger profiles for alerting the crew to a potential terrorist.


Nice, so not only can you not sneak a little nookie from your significant-othery travel companion, but if you exhibit signs of nervousness or fidgiting, you just might get tagged as a terrorist. Too bad you were only upset about the dead uncle whose funeral you were flying to Bristol for, or perhaps you just got fired and are flying home to mom's. You could even be afraid of flying and find yourself showing off the symptoms of being a mad bomber.

But you know, it's for your own good. Their might be a terrorist on the plane. Don't you want him to be caught?

Of course, odds are that you will NEVER EVER fly with a terrorist aboard the same plane as you. Once again, cameras and microphones in every seat turns every single person who flies into a suspected criminal.

Switching gears back to a technology I blogged on [http://thepete.com/big-brother-week-real-id-act-and-states-rights/|earlier in the week], [http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/14/hitachis-rfid-powder-freaks-us-the-heck-out/|another February 14, 2007 post] at Engadget.com reports that RFID chips are about to get smaller. MUCH smaller. Check out this cutting:
As if the various other permutations and teensyness of RFID weren't wild enough, here comes Hitachi with its new "powder" 0.05mm x 0.05mm RFID chips. The new chips are 64 times smaller than the previous record holder, the 0.4mm x 0.4mm mu-chips, and nine times smaller than Hitachi's last year prototype, and yet still make room for a 128-bit ROM that can store a unique 38-digit ID number.


Yeah, that's right--they're calling it powder. You could dust a donut with this stuff and make a fat cop trackable anywhere there is a RFID chip reader without him even knowing he's being tracked. Once again, according to the Engadget post, we are told this powder is for our own good--it will be used to help prevent counterfeiting. However, the potential nefarious uses are obvious.

Speaking of cops and tracking people without there knowledge, check out a cutting from [http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/04/court-rules-that-sly-gps-tracking-isnt-unlawful/|a February 4, 2007 post] at Engadget.com:
Earlier this month, the Seventh Circuit of the US Court of Appeals "ruled against a defendant who claimed that the surreptitious placement of a GPS tracking device amounted to an unconstitutional search," essentially giving the coppers the green light to add a GPS module to a suspicious ride sans a warrant. While we're sure the privacy advocates out there are screaming bloody murder, the district judge found that they had had a "reasonable suspicion that the defendant was engaged in criminal activity," and it seems that a well-placed hunch is all they need for lawful placement.


The quote from the Engadget post says it all. If they think you're up to something, they can track you. Forget the fact that they are humans and that all humans can make mistakes. These guys can follow you where ever you go because, well, it's legal now.

Don't forget that bigbrotherists don't have to be members of the government. In the ultimate nightmare scenario corporations and government are one in the same, only appearing to be separate. In that brand of bigbrothery you will see corporate folks wanting to "keep prices down" by "foiling bootleggers", aka, doing it for your own good. A recent example of a corporation overextending it's reach into it's customers privacy is reported [http://www.internetnews.com/xSP/article.php/3659401|in a February 12, 2007 article] at InternetNews.Com:
Google's YouTube and a company called Live Digital will offer no refuge to users who uploaded pirated copies of Fox Television's "24" and "The Simpsons" onto their video platforms.

In an e-mail to internetnews.com, a 20th Century Fox Television spokesperson said that Google and Live Digital complied with subpoenas issued by the U.S. District Court in Northern California and disclosed to Fox the identities of two individuals who illegally uploaded entire episodes of "24" prior to its broadcast and DVD release.


So, to protect Fox's copyrighted material, they're willing to go to the government and get them to demand that Google, a company that promises to do no evil, give up the names of anyone who posts said copyrighted material. And for what? Can Fox prove how much money they're losing when someone uploads an episode of 24 to YouTube.com? They can't. Yet they're able to go after you like it's a crime anyway. Imagine if you told the police that someone had stolen a painting of yours. You painted it and you saw it through the living room window of your neighbor. Yet, you still have your painting on the wall of your living room. So, how have you lost money, exactly?

So, in the end we see that the very technology we thought would help our lives is actually turned against us by the very companies that provide said technology to us in the first place.

OK, be sure to swing by tomorrow for the final installment of ThePete.Com's Big Brother Week where I present ways how Hollywood is worshiping at the temple of Bigbrothernity.

PHANTOM MENACE (1999)

[asin: B00003CX5P]
Positive Experience/Entertaining? Taken on it's own, as the first part of a six-episode saga, this is a really un-positive experience. Lots of neat explosions and FX, but as far as "good" goes? There's not much in this film (I know, big surprise).


Technically any good? You know, I saw this movie back in 1999 a BUNCH of times. I watched it once on DVD with friends. We made fun of it. For Valentine's Day (yesterday), my wife downloaded Mike Nelson and Kevin Murphy's commentary track for this film from RiffTrax.com and decided to watch it again. While the commentary track is definitely worth the $2.99, I think we'd have been better off just listening to it, rather than watching the film, too. It's unbelievably worse than I remember it ever being. There is NO character development WHATSOEVER. ZERO. NADA. No backstory for ANYONE. The FX, obviously, were passable for the day, but actually do seem a little crappy by today's standards. The acting is pretty stilted, as though they know how crappy this movie is.


How did it leave me feeling? Stunned. If it weren't for our love of the original Star Wars films, there is simply NO WAY we could have enjoyed this movie back in theaters. In fact, if Lucas had started his saga with this film, he would have finished it there, too.


Final Rating? DNS - Do Not See - unless you're interested in hurting yourself mentally (or if you download the Rifftrax!)

US INSPIRES COMPETITION

Competition. They always say it's good for capitalism but how is it for world powers? America has had a free run of planet Earth (for the most part) since the Soviet Union crumbled under it's own weight back in the late 80s/early 90s. Generally speaking, we haven't been too dickish (although I wish we had been more isolationist since we had plenty of problems at home to be dealing with--and still do), but since the Neo-Cons were able to get control of the White House (all according to their [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNAC|Plan for a New American Century]) America, it seems, has been excessively dickish.

This isn't (just) my opinion, ask the India, China and Russia who, according to [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article1386812.ece|a February 15, 2007 article] at http://TimesOnline.co.uk, are meeting to form an alliance to stand up against American domination. Here's a cutting from said article:
India, China and Russia account for 40 per cent of the world’s population, a fifth of its economy and more than half of its nuclear warheads. Now they appear to be forming a partnership to challenge the US-dominated world order that has prevailed since the end of the Cold War.

Foreign ministers from the three emerging giants met in Delhi yesterday to discuss ways to build a more democratic “multipolar world”.

It was the second such meeting in the past two years and came after an unprecedented meeting between their respective leaders, Manmohan Singh, Hu Jintao and Vladimir Putin, during the G8 summit in St Petersburg in July.

It also came only four days after Mr Putin stunned Western officials by railing against American foreign policy at a security conference in Munich.

The foreign ministers, Pranab Mukherjee, Li Zhao Xing and Sergei Lavrov, emphasised that theirs was not an alliance against the United States. It was, “on the contrary, intended to promote international harmony and understanding”, a joint communiqué stated.


Of course, that last bit can only be achieved by providing a counter balance to America's weight in the world. Of course, those countries might have realized that Globalism is favoring western countries like America and on behalf of their own country's corporations they want a bigger piece of that Globalist pie. If that's the case, I'm concerned we'll enter a new dark ages here on Planet Earth.

You don't expect corporations to look out for what is in our best interests do you?

Hm, I really hope these guys just want to counter-balance us. We could use it, in my opinion...absolute power corrupts, as they say...

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Project365 day 045





Project365 day 045

Originally uploaded by thepetecom.


Awwww, this is me and the rose my wife got me for V-day. The SK3's camera
makes the rose look almost black, but in person it's a very beautiful, very deep red.

Big Brother Week: DISSENTING JOURNALISTS

So, 24 year-old Josh Wolf attends a protest rally with a camcorder and documents the event. At the protest things got a little violent. A San Francisco police officer ended up with his skull fractured and his car on fire. The city decides they want all of Wolf's footage. Wolf says he didn't shoot anything of value to the prosecution and refuses to turn over the tape to authorities. He is put in jail for contempt of court. He's now been there for months. He did offer to show the tape to the judge, so he/she could determine whether there is evidence of any crime on the tape. However, this offer was refused. Wolf believes that he has already posted to the web all the footage of any news value. Thanks to the government disagreeing with him, he's in jail.

The real story is that that the police want to use him as an arm of big brother. They want to be able to grab evidence gathered by reporters to help them do their job better. The catch is, reporters must be able to protect their sources or they won't have any sources and therefore no way to report certain stories involving what may considered illegal acts.

Ultimately, in my opinion, what this boils down to is the police/government not wanting to do their job and gather their own evidence. If Wolf wanted to help them, great, but since he doesn't, they shouldn't be able to put him in jail, they should shut up and do their job--find evidence elsewhere. Why? Because the next time any protesters see a camera on them, they'll run--whether they're committing a crime or not. That's the effect this has.

Read more about it in [http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/12/1540208|the transcript from the February 12, 2007 podcast from Democracy Now] available at DemocracyNow.org. Or you can check out JoshWolf.net to follow his adventures trying to get out of jail.

Good luck, Josh! All of us independent journalists are pulling for ya! (Hey, according to Webster.Com, [http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?sourceid=Mozilla-search&va=journalist|I'm a journalist], damn it!)

MORE IRAN ATTACK NEWS

Isn't it cute how Bush says he's not planning to invade Iran? Isn't it equally cute how these news stories reporting on the apparent involvement of Iran in Iraq-based violence come along at just the right moment for Bush? Isn't cute how both the New York Times and the UK's Telegraph weren't able to cite the sources for their stories on Iranian weapons in Iraq?

Well, check out more cute in [http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/02/14/iraq.main/index.html|this February 14, 2007 article] from CNN.com that reports on how authorities in Iraq say insurgent bad-boy Muktada al Sadr is in Iran, but his own lackeys say he's still in the big "B", Baghdad.

Which is it for realz? Doesn't matter--this is another case where an "al Sadr in Tehran" story is just too convient for Bush right now--just like the very fictional story of Al Qaeda meeting with Saddamy types in Baghdad used, in part, to justify the Iraq Attack.

As always, don't believe the hype on Iraq Iran.

Oh, and do believe that Bush wants an Iran Attack. Watch for it by spring. You know, when hope is eternal ;)
OK, so that joke doesn't totally work, sue me...

DRUDGE: IRONY MAKES ME LAUGH

Surfing DrudgeReport.Com on my Sidekick last night and saw this:



I'm sure Matt Drudge thinks he should get the Pulitzer Prize for irony after posting a headline like that.

What's really sad is that usually the irony Drudge employs on his site is accidental. Take the below screengrab from a few months ago:



So, Americans and Iraqis are dying by the truckloads in the Middle East thanks to Bush' lies and his "news" site "reports" that China making animals do sports is sick. What's sick, Matt, is that you make buckets of money on your site and I make a couple hundred a year off of mine. That doesn't even pay my hosting fees.

Now THAT'S some irony!

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Big Brother Week: REAL ID ACT AND STATES' RIGHTS

This is part two of the ThePete.Com's Big Brother Week series. This one talks about the homogenization of something almost every adult in America carries and why its homogenization is a bad thing. Ready? Here we go!


So, waaaay back in 2001, on the eleventh day of September, something very big and scary happened in New York City. Perhaps you're familiar with 911. if not, you probably haven't attended any Republican rallies since then. Ha.


Anyway, so one of the myriad big brothery laws that the USG passed post-911 was the Real ID Act. He can [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR00418:|read all about it] at The Library of Congress website (http://LOC.gov). In short, here's the official description of what this law is to do:

To establish and rapidly implement regulations for State driver's license and identification document security standards, to prevent terrorists from abusing the asylum laws of the United States, to unify terrorism-related grounds for inadmissibility and removal, and to ensure expeditious construction of the San Diego border fence.


Wow--if that's not big brothery enough for you, I don't know what is!


OK, now those of you non-believers may wonder just what the big deal is here. What could be wrong with making it easier to "prevent terrorists from abusing the asylum laws of the United States?"


Well, let's assume for a moment that our beloved United States Government (USG) is not perfect. I know--hard to believe, but, please, for the sake of argument, let's just say it is.


What this law does is say that every state in the union must adopt the same standards--standards established by the USG. You can probably see where I'm taking this.


So, now that the law is passed (it is, this isn't hypothetical) every state must adopt the USG's guidelines for how to design and handle their drivers' licenses. However, what if the guidelines from the USG are not good guidelines? What if they're flawed or vulnerable to weakness? One of the proposed changes to IDs is to include an RFID chip into each ID card. The pro-argument says that this will allow a lot more info to stored on the card. The catch is, RFID chips are about as secure as a prostitute's chastity belt. With $100 and the nearest Radio Shack I could build a device that could steal all the data on an RFID chip and encode it to a new RFID chip, thus stealing your identity. I wouldn't even need to see your card, I could read the data from a couple feet away in most cases.


Sure, you could use a wallet that shields your RFID chip from being read, but I could just wait until you were about to pay for something. When you pull your wallet out, BUZZ! There goes my scanner.


Now, the Real ID Act doesn't allow for states to veto any of the requirements of the law.


This is essentially our government (big brother) forcing every state to adopt flawed plans. Seems pretty lame, huh? So, why would our government want to put our personal identities (and therefore our finances and therefore even our lives) in danger? That's a question to ask your leaders.


In fact, some states aren't even bothering to ask--they're putting their foot (feet?) down to say no way. Check out this cutting from [http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070126/pl_nm/usa_idcard_dc_1|a January 25, 2007 article] from Reuters.Com available at News.Yahoo.Com:

Maine lawmakers on Thursday became the first in the nation to demand repeal of a federal law tightening identification requirements for drivers' licenses, a post-September 11 security measure that states say will cost them billions of dollars to administer.


Maine lawmakers passed a resolution urging repeal of the Real ID Act, which would create a national digital identification system by 2008. The lawmakers said it would cost Maine about $185 million, fail to boost security and put people at greater risk of identity theft.


Maine's resolution is the strongest stand yet by a state against the law, which Congress passed in May 2004 and gave states three years to implement. Similar repeal measures are pending in eight other states.



So, there ya have it! The USG is trying to tell the states what to do. Another time this kind of disagreement happened it resulted in the Civil War. Let's hope big brother--I mean--the US Government comes to its senses and repeals the Real ID Act.


OK, stop by tomorrow for DAY TWO of ThePete.Com's Big Brother Week when I'll be going into how big brother tactics are being used to make sure the press plays along with the Bush 43 Administration's plans for Iran. They're actually putting journalists in jail for not cooperating. Don't believe me? Check out tomorrow's post or to get all hardcore, check your local PBS listings for the first episode of Frontline's new documentary miniseries "News War" which premieres tonight. You can also check out their special preview page here:


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newswar/preview/


This is all for real, people. I'm not making this up. I really wish I were.