I notice that he really seems to be enjoying what he's doing. If you don't enjoy it, you're not going to be good at it. Contrast that with the productions that are modern music. Yeah, some of his videos are really corny. But they are also very real. And I like that.
I loved his remake of "Lady Godiva". And "This Kiss". And "She Walks Right Through Me". Good stuff, Maynard!
It reminds me of what we used to call "street theater" back in the 60s/early 70s. Just go out there and have fun. Who cares about the plan, just go with the flow. And have fun! Fun is contagious.
I have always been struck by how much fun bands like Jeff Beck seem to have a lot of fun and really enjoy each other and their music. A lot of smiles there. Same with Eric Clapton's groups, especially the one he assembled for the Robert Johnson numbers in "Sessions for Robert J" and for the Crossroads Festival 2007. For new groups, Derek Trucks and Susan Tedeschi and band are having a blast!
Joseph Campbell used to say "Follow your bliss!" It looks like Day is doing that. More power to him.
I remember walking around DC looking at all the tanks and half-tracks and soldiers on every traffic circle.
I stopped by Kent State this last summer on my way back from my son's graduation. There is a bullet hole in a sculpture on the campus from a round fired by the National Guard. What I never realized before is that the hole is in an I-beam that is approximately one quarter inch thick. It was a .30 caliber magnum round. It was used against US citizens who were also students, and some of whom were not yet adults. I think the legal age then was 21, so most of them were minors.
AFAIK, this would be the FIRST release of ANY data on GM trials ANYWHERE in the world.
That is why Monsanto is so concerned about it. They definitely have something to hide there. They have patented their GM products as being new and nonobvious. They have gotten FDA approval based on the assertion that their GM products are substantially equivalent to existing products.
Of course they have something to hide. They have been able to keep one side of the equation secret until now. And those of us who have pointed out the apparent contradiction have been called kooks because we can't show the data.
The cleric elite should not have been empowered to dictate what people were allowed to learn. They should have been banned from teaching.
Given that they were the only ones who were preserving and spreading knowledge back then in Europe, you might have had to wait for the Arabs to come up from southern Spain or northern Africa to fill the void, though.
Trivia: Why was it called the "Dark Ages"? Because the King of Bohemia had veto power over the election of the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire (northern Europe). Cultural imperialism at its best!
If CyberMicrosoft had never released CyberWindows, then the Internet would have never had the level of CyberSpam and CyberViruses that it has today, and people wouldn't think it was CyberNormal to have all this CyberCrap happening to their PCs.
No wonder they're scared.
Note: CyberFUD refers to the overuse of the prefix "cyber-", not to the article.
It kind of makes sense, sort of, if you stick your tongue out the side of your mouth and squint just right.
I wonder how many biofuel production plants are in states that don't provide tax breaks for them? I know that in Iowa, gasohol would not be economical if the state didn't subsidize the price by lowering gas tax rates for gasohol - 15% and 85%.
Think about this for a while: biofuel production as it currently is implemented only makes sense for corporate, commodity export agriculture. The kind of agriculture that thinks that chemical fertilizers, herbicide and insecticide application and genetically engineered seedstock are the right thing to do.
If you pour enough fertilizer on, you can avoid looking at broad spectrum soil health. I know that people measure percent organic matter content in soil. But what isn't measured is whether the soil is alive or not. How many soil micro-organisms are present in what numbers? How many insects, earthworms, etc are present?
What trace minerals are present, not just NPK? What is the soil compaction? I have had people tell me that modern equipment doesn't compact soil any worse than 1930s tractors. However, force is proportional to the square of velocity. When you have a combine with a 24' grain head followed alongside by a semitrailer off-loading harvested grain at 20 mph, don't you think that might be a little worse than a McCormick Deering Farmall "H" going 6 mph? I know that when I was working on a simulation project, we found that a truck could compact soil somewhere in the range of 30-50 feet deep, depending on speed.
If organic matter is being removed for fodder, bedding or biofuel production, what does that do to the soil and the life it contains. It ain't just dirt, you know.
Biofuel is one of those feel-good projects that you just really want to have succeed. And it does sometimes. I've heard that the Brazilians are doing just fine with sugar cane stalks after the juice is squeezed out. But their crops and climate are a tad bit different in a way that favors biofuel production with leftovers from the harvest.
A project that I worked on back around 1980 (right before Reagan vetoed the Synfuels Bill and destroyed alternative energy research in the US for the next 25 years) found that gasohol plants only made sense as small farm-scale production units that a farmer could use to power his equipment. It took all the feedstock and transportation costs out of the equation, and some of the processing costs. Trucking and shipping grain all over the world makes sense only for the Teamsters Union.
This post is based on basic computer security principles. IANAL.
Also, let's separate legal privacy from actual privacy. I expect to have more legal privacy than I can count on for the rumor mill.
The Internet is a broadcast medium. Further, once broadcast, it can never be recalled. We need legal constraints on what the government can do with that.
Any information that I host on the Internet is on a broadcast medium. It is not as private as something that I keep inside of the firewall. It is far more private than something that I trust to a third party Internet service provider: Gmail, Facebook, Dropbox.... And "clouds" are not private at all. You do not own the cloud. They may be temporarily private, but don't count on it in the long term.
The third party providers also come in various ranks of trustworthiness. I wouldn't trust Facebook as far as I could throw one of their server farms. They keep changing the rules.
I don't trust social media at all. So I don't use social media at all. If it is my information, I will take care of it myself, thank you very much. The risk of letting go of my information is not worth any benefit that they can promise me. Ask the users of Megaupload how that worked out for them. And Megaupload wasn't even a social network. There was an expectation of privacy. If you don't have control of it, then you don't have control of it. Period. Quit arguing. If you decided to use a social network and released your private information to them, then betrayal should not be a surprise.
I learned all this stuff back in the 80s, when I was using Compuserve and the Source and BBSs. I learned not to do anything that I wouldn't do in "real life" [TM]. I learned not to expect that other people would respect my wishes about my comments, uploads or downloads. And it was more apparent back then that I was using somebody else's space.
So, while the government needs to be restrained on what they can do with my actions on the Internet, that doesn't change the practical fact that the Internet is a public place. Even in the area where I am hosting my own information. I have still put it where it can be accessed without my permission, passwords notwithstanding.
Your assumptions are so fact-free that my mind boggles.
How do Monsanto's "innovations" benefit farmers? They benefit Monsanto. Period. End of story. They benefit Monsanto so much that people rose up in arms over the Terminator gene that Monsanto wanted to put in all its seeds. It could have ended life as we know it, but it would have been good for Monsanto.
And tell me more about those profits that farmers make. The saying around here (rural Iowa) is that the crop pays the bills and the government check is the profit. Every time something happens that increases farmers income, their suppliers and buyers (middlemen) take a bigger cut. They leave enough to keep farmers in business, because they don't want to have to take the risk of actually farming themselves. But even that is changing.
Farmers do not control their own markets. They do not set the price for their crops. They can only take what is offered. It is the age-old problem with farming. You have to guess which way the market is going at least a year (or more) before you start raising the crop. What other industry operates under those conditions?
The bottom line is that Monsanto doesn't take any of the risk of planting seeds that they sell. They don't stand to lose money on a crop failure of those seeds. They don't have to worry about a market glut. They don't have to plant, cultivate, harvest, store or transport that crop. But they still want to own something that is not theirs. It's like Microsoft wanting to own everything that you produce in Word or Windows... Oh, wait, they already do that! Never mind. Want to ever see your data safe and sound again? Pay for your OS/application again. They will lock it up just as quick as Monsanto will lock up seeds. Forever.
Or maybe it's like buying a movie and wanting to watch it on your TV or on your laptop... Oh, wait! The MPAA already sues people for doing that! Never mind!
It's all part of the great public domain land grab, and Monsanto, Microsoft, **AA is the villain,. Wise up and smell the coffee. Monsanto did not invent DNA.
There is a principle involved that tells me that pure pleasure always has a downside for someone. It is that pleasure is basically self-centered. It is part of the definition for me.
If pleasure is the only goal of an activity, it is self-centered. Obviously, a couple having intercourse give each other pleasure, but they are also being other-centered and building intimacy with each other. I acknowledge that it is not always the case. But sex causes intimacy, and when intimacy is rejected, it causes harm.
There are other forms of pleasure which are more obviously self-centered that shouldn't need explanation. But even if I am by myself having a good time, telling myself that I am not hurting anybody, I am not telling the truth. Someone is missing my company, my talents, my potential. Something is not getting done because I am sunk in pure pleasure. Some path is not being realized because I am absent.
Pleasure is a very nice side benefit. It doesn't make a very good prime motive.
One problem with measuring happiness is that there is no commonly agreed on definition.
The worse problem is that many people think that happiness equates with pleasure. Wrong metric. Pleasure always has a downside for someone. Happiness does not affect anyone negatively - except me when I first wake up.
We fixate on the pursuit of happiness because it was one phrase in our country's history. I would suggest that a better metric to use would be social justice - a broad spectrum social justice, not just one or two special interests, a social justice metric that affects EVERYONE.
If you can ignore the source and take a look at the issues, I can point out a few examples. You may have your own examples that I don't know about. These are the ones that I am familiar with. I have no desire to start a flame war here. Translate as needed. End Disclaimer.
Part of the Catechism sets the foundation for WHY social justice is important to a properly functioning society.
I. Respect for the Human Person
1929 Social justice can be obtained only in respecting the transcendent dignity of man. The person represents the ultimate end of society, which is ordered to him:
What is at stake is the dignity of the human person, whose defense and promotion have been entrusted to us by the Creator, and to whom the men and women at every moment of history are strictly and responsibly in debt.
1930 Respect for the human person entails respect for the rights that flow from his dignity as a creature. These rights are prior to society and must be recognized by it. They are the basis of the moral legitimacy of every authority: by flouting them, or refusing to recognize them in its positive legislation, a society undermines its own moral legitimacy. If it does not respect them, authority can rely only on force or violence to obtain obedience from its subjects. It is the Church’s role to remind men of good will of these rights and to distinguish them from unwarranted or false claims.
1931 Respect for the human person proceeds by way of respect for the principle that “everyone should look upon his neighbor (without any exception) as ‘another self,’ above all bearing in mind his life and the means necessary for living it with dignity.” No legislation could by itself do away with the fears, prejudices, and attitudes of pride and selfishness which obstruct the establishment of truly fraternal societies. Such behavior will cease only through the charity that finds in every man a “neighbor,” a brother.
1932 The duty of making oneself a neighbor to others and actively serving them becomes even more urgent when it involves the disadvantaged, in whatever area this may be. “As you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.”
1933 This same duty extends to those who think or act differently from us. The teaching of Christ goes so far as to require the forgiveness of offenses. He extends the commandment of love, which is that of the New Law, to all enemies. Liberation in the spirit of the Gospel is incompatible with hatred of one’s enemy as a person, but not with hatred of the evil that he does as an enemy.
1940 Solidarity is manifested in the first place by the distribution of goods and remuneration for work. It also presupposes the effort for a more just social order where tensions are better able to be reduced and conflicts more readily settled by negotiation.
1941 Socio-economic problems can be resolved only with the help of all the forms of solidarity: solidarity of the poor among themselves, between rich and poor, of workers among themselves, between employers and employees in a business, solidarity among nations and peoples. International solidarity is a requirement of the moral order; world peace depends in part upon this.
1942 The virtue of solidarity goes beyond material goods. In spreading the spiritual goods of the faith, the Church has promoted, and often opened new paths for, the development of temporal goods as well. And so throughout the centuries has the Lord’s saying been verified: “Seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be yours as well”:
For two thousand years this sentiment has lived and endured in the soul of the Church, impelling souls then and now to the heroic charity of monastic farmers, liberators of slaves, healers of the sick, and messengers of faith, civilization, and science to all generations and all peoples for the sake of creating the social conditions capable of offering to everyone possible a life worthy of man and of a Christian.
Because. Bread and circuses are still more important than social justice and a fair, distributed economy.
We NEED more Beelionnaires!
Same thing goes for any part of the economy that touches entertainment - RIAA, MPAA, print publishing, news services, Artists Guild, Metallica, Microsoft (slapstick), Oracle (yacht races), The SCO Group (more slapstick)........