kimmy

I heard a lot of people felt the same way about season 2. On its own, it would have probably been ok, but after season 1, a let-down. Lately I've been watching summer sci-fi series: -Defiance (SyFy, 3rd season.) The premise is that in the near future a fleet of aliens arrive at earth seeking to conquer it to be their new home (I believe their old homeworld was destroyed, I forget the details.) Everybody lost the resulting war... the alien fleet was destroyed, most of human civilization is in tatters as well. Defiance is set decades after the invasion, in the town of Defiance (near where St Louis used to be) where survivors of the war, humans and the various alien races, live together in an uneasy peace. Its blend of post-apocalyptic earth and space aliens makes it seem somewhat like a mash-up of Farscape and Road Warrior. It's tolerable, but not exactly brilliant. They've done a good job in fleshing out the culture of some of the alien races, and some of the characters are quite entertaining. -Dominion (season 2, SyFy). This series is based on the movie Legion of a few years back. In Legion, God decided to rage-quit on humans again, but instead of another Great Flood, he just sends legions of angels to wipe everybody out. The archangel Michael fights to thwart this plan; he's learned that a woman is pregnant with a baby who will grow to be the savior of the human race. I haven't seen Legion, but I gather Michael was able to save the baby, because in Dominion, we pick up the plot 25 years later when savior-baby is all grown up. Humanity clings to survival in a few heavily defended cities like Vega (formerly Las Vegas). God is nowhere to be found, even the angels can't hear him anymore. Michael continues to help the humans; the archangel Gabriel has carried on the war to exterminate humanity, believing it's the only way to bring God back. The lower-caste angels all support Gabriel; they're zombie-like creatures who have taken possession of human bodies. Most of the higher caste angels support Gabriel as well, though Michael does have at least one on his side. A third archangel, Uriel, is also in the mix, but it's unclear which, if any, side she supports. Savior-baby has grown up to be Alex, a bad-ass commando guy in Vega's army, who only just found out he's "the Chosen One." He doesn't know how he's supposed to save the world or anything, but he's got magical tattoos on his body, and he's slowly learning to decypher them. It's ... well, it's not exactly high art, but I find it entertaining. It has Anthony Head as one of the human villains, a ruthless civic leader in Vega. If you ever wondered what Giles from Buffy The Vampire Slayer would be like if he was a scumbag politician with a Texas drawl, this is your show. -Killjoys (first season, SyFy/Space co-production). It's a space shoot-em-up adventure, set in a solar system with four inhabited planets on the brink of a class war. The main characters are a group of three bounty-hunters, or "killjoys". It stars Aaron Ashmore (from Warehouse 13) as Johnny Jacobi, a tech expert. He's the junior member of the team, but still more than capable in a fight. Johnny is the only member of the team who's really all that sane. His brother Davin Jacobi is a discharged soldier with PTSD and flashback issues... he's an unstoppable fighting machine, but he's got some mental issues that they're trying to get sorted out. The leader of the group is "Dutch", a woman who was raised in some kind of zany cult harem where she was trained to be an assassin from the time she was a toddler. She's got some issues as well. She escaped from the cult... except she really didn't. As they try to execute their warrants-- which range from simple cargo transport to apprehending fugitives to salvage to -- well, there's a variety... we also learn more about the characters and the setting. It's only 7 episodes in, but I quite like this show so far. -k

Sure. I don't think it's realistic to pin that on government policy, and I'd also be very skeptical of any politician who says he's got some policy that can just make these jobs reappear. It's a result of economic factors that are bigger than our government can control. The inflated Canadian "petro-dollar" might have sped along the demise of Canadian manufacturing jobs, but the plunge in the dollar isn't going to just make those jobs appear out of nowhere. -k

Really think those plants would have ended up in Ontario if the electricity bills were a little lower? Give corporations cheap electricity, and they'll complain about property taxes. Give them property tax breaks, they'll complain about environmental regulations. Relax environmental regulations, and they'll complain about the cost of labor. Until such time as Canadian workers are willing to work for $3/hr, corporations will have a powerful incentive to locate their plants in Mexico instead of here. And ultimately, if the way to get manufacturing jobs in Canada is to pay manufacturing workers $3/hr, then these jobs aren't the well-paying manufacturing careers that previous generations had. What's the point of jumping through hoops to create $3/hr jobs? -k

So Sanders is actually just playing into Clinton's hands? What should he do instead? Not run? Run as a third-party candidate? That would be awesome, assuming you want to see a Republican win the election... Whatever he's doing, the Clinton campaign will have to address it. This week he drew crowds of 28000 in Portland and 27000 in Los Angeles ...surely they can't just pretend he doesn't exist anymore. The biggest crowd Clinton has drawn has been 5500. -k

I just did a bit of reading about Michael Crichton, and found that he studied medicine at Harvard and earned his MD there, but never practiced medicine professionally, as by the time he graduated he had become quite successful as an author. His medical training was apparently quite influential in writing "The Andromeda Strain". Unrelated factoid: Crichton was 6'9. The Wiki article about him includes this snippet from a New York Times obituary written when he passed away in 2008: I recall feeling as if I actually learned something about cloning after watching Jurassic Park. I recall the movie went to some amount of detail on the cloning technology (they even had a little animated movie-within-a-movie explaining the process!) whereas the chaos theory portion was considerably less well presented (I recall something about Jeff Goldblum putting drops of water on Laura Dern's hand, and saying "life ... uh, finds a way.") Crichton seems like a good example of an author using real science in his story telling. -k

Yes, we have long-standing social conventions passed along to us from our parents about things that aren't polite to say to people. By and large these social conventions are the result of white peoples' learning experience in relating to other white people. They're a result of a pretty homogenous culture, and they're somewhat incomplete in a society where things are a lot less homogenous than they used to be. There's no law that says you can't ask someone how much they get paid, or how much they weigh, but people usually avoid asking these questions in casual conversation because they understand they're stepping into potentially touchy subjects. If there were a bunch more potentially touchy subjects that your momma didn't warn you about, wouldn't you rather know? So the University of California publishes this little brochure for their professors and staff, to let them know "hey, here are some topics that could potentially cause your non-white students to feel negatively toward you. Exercise caution!" People are free to completely ignore the information, but perhaps they might want to use it to their benefit. Why wouldn't they? I keep putting this out there: salesmen, do not talk to the blonde girl like she's mentally retarded. Perhaps some salesman out there will read this and say "yeah, that's a good tip, I'll keep that in mind." Perhaps some other salesman will read that and say "that's not legitimate! There's no long-standing social convention that says not to do that! I completely reject this. Nobody is going to make me change how I interact with my customers! I will continue to talk to blonde women like they're idiots, as is tradition! I'm not going to change my behavior to avoid causing illegitimate offense to somebody who has no legitimate reason to be offended based on established social convention! They're just looking to be offended!" He's certainly free to do that, but he's not getting a commission from me. And professors can certainly disregard the information they're given about micro-aggressions if they wish, but the professor who rants in class about the tyranny of affirmative action shouldn't be too surprised at the end of the semester when he gets back a bunch of student evaluations that say "this guy is a f***ing prick." -k

Oh, wait, you were serious about this? AHHHH HAHAHAHHAAAAA I know someone who makes her own clothes for her toddler and her infant. She's very good at it and saves a lot of money doing so. She decided to open up a web-store on Etsy to try to earn some extra money. So, to illustrate the economics of this: she can make a nice baby onesie or a beautiful dress for a little girl in about 4 hours. Meanwhile in China, a crew of 10 machine operators can make about 4000 dresses in the same amount of time. If she wants to compete on price with that crew of machine operators, her hourly wage has to be 1/100 of their hourly wage, because with their specialized equipment, the 10 of them can produce 1000 times the output she can. With the typical manufacturing worker in China earning something like $4/hour, the labor cost of each of those Chinese dresses works out to (10 workers)*($4/worker)/(4000 dresses) = $0.01 per dress. So even if she can get material for the same cost as the Chinese factory, my friend can only equal the Chinese price if she pays herself 2 CENTS PER DAY of labor. I'm sure you'd agree, Canadians working at home hand-crafting stuff for a wage of $7.30 PER YEAR is not going to jump-start the Canadian economy. So she can't compete on price, and doesn't even attempt to. She makes things when she receives an order, and she sells her stuff with a mark-up that gives her reasonable compensation for the time she puts into it. Price-wise this puts her into a high-end boutique products category, and as you can imagine there aren't a lot of customers. Most people with young children are just as cash-strapped as she is. Her customers have been mostly people buying heirloom-quality gifts for young families in their lives. She sells only a couple of items per month, and she does make some extra money at it, but this is far from a viable source of income. It's primarily a hobby that happens to add a few bucks to the family budget from time to time. -k

Yep, pretty dumb... Sanders is about the closest thing to an ally they're likely to find. -k

But Mary Cheney was just a campaign staffer. Few voters knew that Darth's daughter was gay, or that she was working for the GOP in any capacity. -k

Said before, will repeat, the question has a very different connotation if you're used to hearing it from people who assume from your appearance that you're Fresh Off the Boat. Why is it so difficult for you guys to accept that other people have different experiences than you? And, since we're back here again, why is it that none of you guys care to elaborate on your ideas of when it's "legitimate" to be offended. Earlier on TimG said he felt that the microaggressions brochure should make clear that it isn't "legitimate" or "rational" for people to take offense. Bryan asserts that people who react negatively to stuff that he thinks is harmless are "just looking for a reason to be offended." I have asked who decides what's legitimate to be offended by, and whether it's ever legitimate to be offended. No responses. Is it ever legitimate to take offense? If somebody goes around addressing black people as Negroes and they don't like it, is that "legitimate"? When I go into an electronics shop and the sales guy talks down to me as if I had the mental capacity of a toddler, is it "legitimate" that I think he's a prick? I just want to hear more about this idea of what's "legitimate" to take offense at. -k

err... that's Tyrion Lannister, not Stark. -k

I feel like there's two separate questions in August's post. First off, what are some good science fiction movies? And second, are there any movies that present real science in an accurate way that's important to the plot? To the first question: For me, the best science fiction movies I have seen in a long time are "Edge of Tomorrow" and "Guardians of the Galaxy". Guardians is just an action adventure that happens to be set in a futuristic space setting; what I really liked about it is that it just embraced the medium by presenting a series of incredible locations and characters and creatures and weapons and technologies. They didn't feel any need to explain any of it, they just say "this is a big universe full of mind-blowing things, just sit back and let it happen." To me, that's one of the things that made the original Star Wars movies really cool, is that the amazing variety of settings and characters and creatures and gave the feeling of a huge universe full of infinite possibilities, and to me Guardians evoked the same kind of sense. As for Edge of Tomorrow, I think what made it really work is that they started off with a plot device (the protagonist, through unlikely circumstances, gains the ability to relive a day over and over-- like Bill Murray in Ground Hog Day) and they explored this ability in a really rational way-- thinking through how the characters would make use of it to fight against the dire circumstances they're in, as well as thoughtfully considering the emotional effects it would have on the people involved. The evolution of the Tom Cruise character, and especially the relationship between him and Emily Blunt's character, is what really makes this film exceptional. He spends hundreds of days with her, and yet each time he meets her, he's a complete stranger to her. During his time with her, he becomes more and more in love with her. And he watches her die over and over again. To me, what made this a great movie is that they took this video-game gimmick (he's essentially playing Halo with an unlimited number of lives) and put a lot of thought into how it would be to actually experience that. As for movies that make effective use of real science... uh ... I'm kind of at a loss. The laws of physics are usually more of an obstacle to science fiction stories, and I'm usually just happy when a movie gets something right. (the Alien movies made an effort to represent how ridiculously slow space travel is, with the cryogenic chambers and people arriving decades after they left and discovering everything changed in the decades they'd been in transit...) -k

So far Jeb is not exactly off to a great start. Even assuming Trump implodes himself, it seems like there's still other candidates with more momentum than Bush. -k

Me neither, I only found out when I started reading about him. It was kind of a coincidence because I've been into Allman Brothers lately... so things collided in an unexpected way. Time for more music! First off, some Creedence Clearwater Revival. Everybody knows CCR! They make happy, up-tempo toe-tapping songs that last 2 minutes and 15 seconds. Right? Doo-doo-doo, lookin' out my backdoor! Wellllll, they also have some darker material in their shed. People are probably familiar with "Run Through The Jungle" and "Put A Spell On You" ... but this eery track is one that I'd never heard until I stumbled across it on a Youtube playlist. It's called "Effigy" and I think this is pretty great: And this little ditty is one Lynyrd Skynyrd song many people probably haven't heard. It's certainly not on the radio, so probably only fans are familiar with it. It's a traditional-sounding song, with a four-bar lyrical structure, acoustic guitar, and harmonica. It describes the travel plans of the titular Mississippi Kid. To make a long story short, the Kid is planning a trip to Alabama to visit his lady friend and obtain some of her delicious corn bread. However, the Kid is clearly anticipating trouble, because he is bringing his weapons and sending out this musical message to any Alabama residents who might try to waylay him. Basically, his message is "I am well armed, I am a formidable character, and if you attempt to cause me trouble, you may find yourself in grievous circumstances." That's the gist of his message. It seems simple enough. But upon closer consideration, perhaps there is more to the story. Why is he anticipating trouble? Has he done something to earn an unsavory reputation in Alabama? Why is he so heavily armed for what seems, on the surface, like a harmless trip? Is it possible that this "corn bread" his lady friend has waiting for him might actually be moonshine or narcotics or some other kind of contraband? Is that why this "corn bread" is so highly sought after? What aren't you telling us, Mississippi Kid? -k

She's certainly got political aptitude. A certain base cunning and a knack for talking to rubes and rednecks. And if she hadn't gone into politics she probably could have made a killing selling monorails. -k

She's probably one of the many Republican women who would have made a better VP nominee than Sarah Palin. Like Carly Fiorina, Liddy apparently couldn't raise much money, and she dropped out very early (like Carly is going to.) -k

I don't advocate for Fiorina as a presidential candidate. Shady's the one who called her a rising star, and her performance in the "junior varsity debate" this week got a lot of people talking about how intelligent and well-spoken she is. (that's two things I don't think anybody accused Sarah Palin of...) And you know, when Palin first showed up on the scene I thought she was pretty cool. I really wanted to like her. And I did, for a while... but eventually I was forced to concede that she was a real dumb-ass. -k

Ok: so personally I think Derek is on point in comparing Fiorina to Palin. Not in terms of their qualifications or intellectual capacity or that sort of thing, but rather in terms of how they might become politically relevant. In Palin's case, the only reason she appeared on the national stage is that the Republicans wanted to play demographic politics. They had their candidate, who happened to be an elderly white man... and they were going into an election against a young mixed race man. And they hoped that maybe if they brought in a VP nominee who was young and fresh and female, they could maybe tap into some of the female voters who were embittered that their best chance at a female president, ever, had been snuffed out. In Fiorina's case, that's probably how she gets her big chance as well. The Republican nominee will not be as elderly as John McCain, but he will be male. There is not a hope in hell that Fiorina could win this, and she's the only female candidate who even entered. So... will the Republicans once again be tempted to play demographic politics? Pre-emptively take action against the inevitable "war on women" rhetoric and attempt to counter Hillary Clinton's appeal with female voters by offering a female VP nominee? They tried that before and it was a bitter failure, but suppose they learned their lesson and say "this time, let's pick a female nominee who isn't a mental cripple!" And if they did go that route, then maybe Fiorina is one of the names they would consider. As Derek points out, governors Sue Martinez and Nikki Haley would be potential picks as well. -k

By demonstrating herself to be a poorly-informed candidate and lightweight thinker during the 2008 campaign... and a sloganeering opportunistic huckster in the time since. -k

The real winner of the first debate? According to some, it was Megyn Kelly. -k

Mary Cheney has never held public office or been part of the US government. Perhaps once elected the Bush family could prevail upon her to reprise her role as Secretary of State, or perhaps some other role in the cabinet, but I can't picture her being on the card as a VP nominee during the election. It would be unacceptable to some of the core constituencies the Republicans are beholden to for electoral success. -k

Actually I kind of think Palin made herself a joke. So aside from supporting the removal of the Confederate Battle Flag from the state house, what "socially moderate" credentials has Haley got? As for Rice, I think she's an interesting person. I would be interested to see what would happen if she did decide to take a run at high political office, but it doesn't seem like she's very interested. And I don't think the party in its current state would have her anyway. She is to some degree pro-choice. And she's a never-married woman who shares a home with a long-time female friend... questions about her personal life will never go away. She may be too private of a person to subject herself to the scrutiny that a run for office would bring to her private life. -k

Marvel's Cinematic Universe is big box office. Fox's X-Men movie franchise is also big box office. Fox's Fantastic Four movie franchise is ... uh, well, the X-Men franchise is big box office. And with all these hundreds of millions of dollars at stake, it should be no surprise that behind the scenes there is conflict between Marvel/Disney and Fox (which of licensed the movie rights to several of the Marvel comic books, most notably the X-Men and Fantastic Four). Particularly interesting-- Marvel has apparently killed off the Fantastic Four comic book, after 50 years. Fox owns the Fantastic Four movie rights until 2020 or something like that, so Marvel has apparently decided to just kill the comic book, in an effort to cut the legs out from under the Fantastic Four movie franchise (from what I've read, what really damages the Fantastic Four movie franchise is the Fantastic Four movies... but that's beside the point.) Of course, Marvel isn't going to kill off the X-Men comics, because-- unlike the Fantastic Four-- the various X-Men comics are among Marvel's top sellers. But they did kill off an X-Men animated TV series, which had been an unprecedented success... because they just didn't feel like producing a TV show that promoted the competition's movies. And they've put a ban on introducing new characters in the X-Men comics. New characters have to come from other comic series so that Fox doesn't get movie rights to that character. As well, since Marvel/Disney owns the merchandise rights to the X-Men characters, they aren't making merchandise for the competitors' movies. So Fox has no merch for their movies. Next time you wander through a Wal Mart you'll see 80 metric tons of Captain America, Thor, Black Widow, Iron Man backpacks and action figures and bed sheets and lunch boxes... and zero Wolverine backpacks and lunchboxes. Anyway, I thought this was interesting: -k

If support for gun rights, opposition to abortion, and opposition to same sex marriage make you like Sarah Palin, then every Republican candidate in recent history is like Sarah Palin. Those positions are essentially mandatory for any Republican candidate. If you don't share those positions (plus a robust faith in Jeeeezusss) then you can't be the Republican nominee. Can you refresh our memory? I've forgotten who they were. -k