Showing posts with label interwebs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label interwebs. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 4, 2017

Ten Years

Maybe writing this blog will make me a better writer. Or maybe this space will become just another bit of litter on the garbage-laden information stupor highway. --Knight of Nothing, January 2007
Ten years ago this week, I hung out my shingle in the blogosphere, and the result lies somewhere between these two predictions. I've split the difference!

Here are the top ten posts as of 1/4/2017, by traffic:

The (Losing) Arguments Against Same-Sex Marriage
Sep 5, 2012; 40 comments; 5348 page views

Far and away the most popular post I ever wrote, this essay was posted on social media and subsequently widely shared and discussed. It was the closest I ever came to going viral. Still pretty proud of this post and what it represents. Hoping to prevent any backsliding now in 2017, and I'll be working to prevent it in the coming year.

Katniss Everdeen: Feminist Icon, or Yet Another Sexist Stereotype?
Nov 22, 2013; no comments; 1706 page views

A quote post. Most of the traffic for this piece is probably due to hot keywords ("Katniss" & "feminism") and a contrarian point of view.

Somewhere In My Soul There's Always Rock And Roll
May 14, 2007; 4 comments; 1300 page views

A snapshot of what was in rotation on my CD player in the Spring of 2007.

From The "Monkey Grabs Woman's Breast" Dept.
Jan 6, 2009; 1 comment; 775 page views

Here we see evidence that lowbrow humor is apparently popular on the internet. Who knew? Fun fact: after "knight of nothing," the top keyword search used to find my blog is "monkey grabs boob." I wish this wasn't in the top ten, but oh well.

Catholics and Gay Marriage
Jul 17, 2012; 10 comments; 748 page views

Another serious post from 2012. In some ways, this essay is better than my more popular post on the subject: it is more focused and personal.

'300' Minus 299
Nov 19, 2007; 7 comments; 698 page views

By the time I wrote this movie review, I was mostly going for humor. Early on, though, I entertained the possibility of evolving into a film reviewer. And why not? Blogging seemed so easy in that first year: after only two months of writing this blog, I was actually contacted by a marketing person from one of the films I reviewed. I thought I might just hit the big time as a writer. Ha ha! Oh, to be so young as that again. (P.S., I liked that film, but the review is a poorly written mess.)

Goodbye, Little Friend
Nov 7, 2013; 9 comments; 505 page views

A post about my love/hate relationship with my dog, who was hit by a car.

Hillary Clinton Is Trustworthy
Jul 26, 2016; no comments; 448 page views

A link post. Wish it had made a bigger impression in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

10,000 Burpees: Day One
Apr 1, 2011; 6 comments; 344 page views

Nuff said.

The Myth of the Self-Made Man, Debunked Again
Oct 21, 2013; 5 comments; 325 page views

Remember when Ted Cruz was everywhere in 2013? God, that guy was insufferable, and it turns out that the apple didn't fall far from the tree, because his dad is just as bad. It is small comfort that he's now on bended knee to President-elect Trump.

***

I was going to dig through the archives to round up a few of my favorite posts, but I'll save that for another day.

Monday, December 12, 2016

"Get Over It"

In a discussion thread about the potential consequences of a Trump presidency, one commenter offered me this hoary advice:
Get over it. Let a businessman take a crack at it.
I am certain many others have encountered similar admonishments. But what is this really telling us to do? In the interest of saving everyone's time, I have compiled a list of things that we are being asked to "get over":
  • that members of the FBI up to and including its director materially tampered with the election by selectively releasing information about one candidate.
     
  • that Russian agents hacked one political party with the intent of damaging that party's candidate and influencing the outcome of the election. The beneficiary of this responded to this not by condemning the cyberattack, but by attacking American intelligence services.
     
  • that the "businessman" in question...
    • has global financial interests and has refused to divest himself from his businesses, release his taxes, or offer any other assurance that he will put the country's interests before his own.
       
    • has been embroiled in more than 3500 lawsuits, declared bankruptcy on multiple occasions, and in at least one instance, committed outright fraud.
       
    • bragged proudly and publicly about adultery, sexual assault, and lechery.
       
    • did no preparation for the job of POTUS.
       
  • that the "winning" candidate lost by almost 3 million votes, but will be installed as the victor thanks to an antiquated system designed to empower rural white slave-holders.
     
  • More repugnant than anything else, we are being asked to "get over" the fact that seemingly normal people made common cause with literal Nazis and Klansmen -- i.e., actual villains -- in order to elect a racist, plutocratic, authoritarian degenerate. 

Thursday, August 4, 2016

Republicans for Clinton

Update V: Former President George H. W. Bush (41) says he'll vote for Clinton. When the one-time national leader of your party plans to vote for the opposition (and also the wife of the candidate who unseated him), it might be time to give up the idea that Donald Trump is an ordinary candidate.

I don't recall anything like this in my lifetime.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/06/30/heres-the-growing-list-of-big-name-republicans-supporting-hillary-clinton/

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-meg-whitman-joins-chorus-of-republicans-1470224405-htmlstory.html

http://www.newyorkupstate.com/news/2016/08/rep_richard_hanna_we_should_all_be_done_with_donald_trump_commentary.html

https://goplifer.com/2016/07/22/resignation-letter/

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/01/politics/sally-bradshaw-jeb-bush-donald-trump-florida/

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/08/02/christie-trump-clinton-comella/87970914/

Update: not exactly coming out for Clinton, but this is a aggressive kneecap -
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/08/politics/republican-national-security-letter-donald-trump-election-2016/index.html

And I believe Collins is only the second sitting US legislator to come out against Trump -
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/gop-senator-why-i-cannot-support-trump/2016/08/08/821095be-5d7e-11e6-9d2f-b1a3564181a1_story.html

Update II: this is getting ridiculous. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/republicans-who-support-hillary-clinton/494636/

Update III:
[conservative talk radio host Michael] Medved attended Yale Law School with Hillary and her future husband; while he didn't much care for Bill, he remembered her as "intensely likable." Indeed, he said, "to this day I don't know anyone, literally not anyone, who didn't like her, find her warm, sympathetic, a manifestly good person, a well-meaning person, not full of herself, not puffed up at all, down-to-earth, and a good friend . . . much nicer than what (her) critics think."
Emphasis mine. From http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/joe-conason-republicans-love-hillary-clinton-article-1.2740094

Update IV: consolidated list from Vox.com: http://www.vox.com/2016/8/15/12444376/top-republicans-wont-support-donald-trump

Monday, July 25, 2016

The More You Know...

If you are repulsed by Donald Trump, but you also think that there is something so wrong with Hillary Clinton that you don't feel you can vote for her, I have something for you to think about. Please consider that the same people and the same forces that ushered Trump into a place of prominence in national politics have been relentlessly trying to malign Clinton for twenty-five years.

It could be that many of the negative impressions you have about Clinton are the product of a long-term smear campaign, and just plain wrong.


Monday, March 21, 2016

Sometimes...

Sometimes, something in the background is just something in the background...




But other times, the background is significant.




Thursday, April 2, 2015

What He Said

I've been reading a lot of LGM lately because those guys (and gals!) are smart and funny and have a lot to say about stuff and things. Today I read this piece which pretty much deflates any pretense that there's a good-faith effort going on right now in Indiana to preserve religious liberty:
The assumption on the right is that liberals... don't support religious freedom like we did back in the 90's. They're not entirely wrong about that, but it's an incomplete view about what has changed. Insofar as liberals changed their minds about the proper scope of religious exemptions, they didn't do so in a vacuum, they changed their mind about it because the context we're now in -- facing an utterly shameless political movement that treats any conceivable political tool as fair game to achieve its political ends -- is just simply not the kind of environment that fits well with an expansive approach to religious exemptions.
As the cool kids say, go read the whole thing.

Thursday, January 15, 2015

Islamophobia Creeps Into LinkedIn

I'm pretty disappointed with LinkedIn right now.

Every few days, I get an electronic newsletter from LinkedIn. This email contains links to a variety of professional development articles and other business-related news tailored to my career interests. I know email is pretty passe, but I review these messages regularly; I almost always find something relevant to my job or that I think might help solve issues I face in the workplace. It is one of my chief methods of staying current with my industry, and one of the features of LinkedIn that I use and like.

A few days ago, however, was a different story. I was quite frankly shocked by one of the articles that was included in the message.


Surprised by this provocative and suspicious title, I clicked through to investigate the story. It was worse than I expected: the article ominously claimed that "some areas" in the U.S. were governed (or close to being governed) by "Sharia Law." It contained no useful or thoughtful opinions; no sources were used to corroborate any of its claims, no names were given, and no specifics of any kind were provided. It simply asserted that this was so. To describe this piece as written is to refute it. In short, it was simply prejudicial fear-mongering at its worst.

Okay, so what? Lots of people believe this kind of nonsense. But this isn't some back-water basement blogger who sent me this tripe - this is LinkedIn, ostensibly a clearinghouse for professionalism, and the third largest social media site in the world. I expect more from a site like LinkedIn, and I would guess that from a bottom line perspective, it might not be such a good idea to alienate a quarter of your potential customers.

What is even more troubling is that the content of the article violates their own community guidelines: "Do not use LinkedIn's services... for hate speech acts like attacking people because of their race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, political or religious affiliations, or medical or physical condition." [emphasis added]

Needless to say, I contacted customer support to try to answer the question, "how did this come to be in my version of LinkedIn's official newsletter?" I am almost more gobsmacked that they have not yet seen fit to answer my question.

LinkedIn, I await your reply.

UPDATE: searching on LinkedIn.com, I was able to find what appears to be the source of the link, but seeing it here does not explain how the link got into my copy of LinkedIn's newsletter. I hope that a thorough explanation is forthcoming.


UPDATE II: I changed the title of this post to be less snarky, because LinkedIn finally did contact me, escalated the issue, and seem to be genuinely concerned about it. I hope that something positive comes out of this. 

UPDATE III: Fox has apologized for promoting this story as news. But LinkedIn is still standing by this story under the cover of "free expression." What gives? 

Friday, October 10, 2014

Monday, February 24, 2014

Inconceivable!

So Princess Buttercup married Humperdinck after all, and the Prince decided not to kill his Bride. Instead, Florin's newly-anointed power couple have conspired together in order to take the crown of Florin for themselves, and to consolidate power over Guilder. All that while having depraved three-way trysts with Count Rugen.

The Prince & Buttercup are not without problems, however: the Albino's body lays undiscovered in the fire swamp, having been clubbed by a bar wench for being too creepy. Who knows what the ROUS will do with the corpse. And Vizzini, with his wealth and acumen, has sided with the king and strives against them. Ultimately, though, Vizzini realizes that he cannot match Humperdinck's maneuvering. In a desperate gambit, he switches allegiance to Humperdinck. And the king, found to have visited Miracle Max one too many times, must step down.

Meanwhile, Westley still longs for true love, but his turn as the Dread Pirate Roberts has corrupted his soul, and he lives only as a mercenary to the highest bidder. Poor Inigo Montoya is gone, having been discovered dead under mysterious circumstances following a relapse into alcoholism. Did Humperdinck and Buttercup have him killed?

It looks like only Fezzik can save the day, but he has been curiously missing thus far. 

Oh, haven't you seen House of Cards?

(My mid-season review is here). 

Thursday, February 20, 2014

House of Cards, Falling Down: A Mid-Season Review

Obligatory notice: contains spoilers --the mgmt. 

House of Cards is a show that delights in its own cynicism, and Kevin Spacey's charm keeps his monstrous character perversely appealing and entertaining in spite of his abhorrent traits. His smiling, soulless portrayal of Francis Underwood alone makes the show worth watching. Halfway through season two, however, the rest of the drama is beginning to creak under its own weight.

Doug Stamper is an absurd character: on one hand, he is so extremely disciplined and loyal as to cover up not one, but two cold-blooded murders committed by his boss, manipulating the FBI to do so. Somehow, though, he is simultaneously sloppy and stupid enough to sleep with the one person who could truly bury Underwood. This contradiction strains credibility beyond belief.

The prostitute, the most expendable person in the chain that links Russo's death to Underwood, is still alive, and instead Underwood kills Zoe Barnes to protect himself. As happy as I was to see her go (she was just so annoying), it makes no sense. But if we accept it, still, there are problems: discouraging Rachel from getting involved with the church group seems extremely short-sighted: shouldn't Stamper let her forget her old life, and get her thinking about a new one? Tightening his grip on her seems surest way to get her to rebel. 

Here's another question: what is Claire's long game in sowing dissent between the President and the First Lady, using Christina Gallagher as her pawn? How do the Underwoods gain by fostering marital discord between the Walkers? It just seems like lazy intrigue, and beneath her as the shrewd and ruthlessly calculating woman introduced in the first season. Similarly, Remy Danton sleeping with Congresswoman Sharp is another example of soapy drama that doesn't seem to have much future.

President Walker has little charisma, no folksy charm, no fierce intellect, and lacks a convincing will to power. Why is he president? The show casts him as one of its weakest characters, which also strains credibility.

Apart from the Underwoods, one other bright spot of the show is Gerald McRaney's Ramond Tusk as Frank's primary antagonist. McRaney seems comfortable in the role of villainous rich eccentric, having done a turn as a similar character in Deadwood. Unfortunately, the show can't seem to maintain the quality of its antagonists: portraying Feng as a depraved billionaire seems like a hackneyed and superfluous trope.

I hope that the second half of the season addresses these shortcomings and answers my questions, because together they are sinking the show in my eyes right now. If I find no satisfying surprises and answers to these issues, I will be hard-pressed to tune in for a third season.

Final note: Netflix on Comcast sucks. Also, too.

Friday, November 15, 2013

Fun With The Magic Twitter Machine

It seems like a lot of fun is to be had on Twitter when clueless corporate shills stick their toe into roiling waters of social media. Last month, it was the Fix The Debt campaign who found themselves on the business end of the Twitter-ball bat.


 And now, yesterday, it seems that J. P. Morgan thought that it would be a good idea to reach out to the social media community for a Q and A session with JPM Vice Chairman Jimmy Lee. Hilarity, it did ensue.


Perhaps one day I shall purify myself in the cleansing waters of Lake Twitter. Sadly, "Knight of Nothing" is already taken.

Wednesday, November 13, 2013

I Wish I Had Written That


Charles Pierce once again demonstrates the gulf between actual writers and amateurs such as myself:
Through a combination of corporate cowardice and corporate avarice, the long march of the "Liberal Media" hoax has resulted in an independent information economy totally devoted to weaponized bullshit.
Preach, brother. I'll be mouthing the words at the back of the choir.

The whole piece is worth a read. It ain't long. 

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

The Strange, Capricious Eye Of The Internet

Before last year, two of the top three posts on this blog were my review of Beowulf (because it contained a link to a picture of Angelina Jolie's naked CG body) and a decidedly lowbrow one-off "nothing to talk about today" post (that featured a picture of a chimp groping a woman). Hmm... I guess maybe the internet's eye isn't so capricious after all.

At any rate, not exactly my best work.

That changed late last year. Thanks to the magic of social media, one of my posts on gay marriage in Minnesota went viral during election season, and from it, I got more traffic in that month than I had had in the previous five years of this blog. It was great! I got a lot of positive feedback from it, and there was even an honest and engaging debate in the comments as well. Good times.

I'm still pretty proud of that post, and here's why: right before the election, I saw it re-posted by a stranger. A blue-collar, salt-of-the Earth fellow from rural Minnesota shared a link to it with a challenge to read it and not be changed. As if that wasn't enough, even better was that beneath his post, there was a beautiful thank you message from his daughter. That was very humbling and it brought a tear to my eye. It still does.

Since then, my blog has mostly returned to its former modest traffic levels. But I'll keep writing, because it's good fun. And maybe someday I'll move someone again. I know that the effort is worth it.

Monday, September 23, 2013

The World According To Larry

It's you fucking liberals that let this shit into our society, so who are the sick bastards. Islam is not the only threat to our society, liberals and progressives are right next to them.
In the beginning, Larry was a low-information voter with a chip on his shoulder. He took care of his family, worked hard, and paid his dues and his taxes. But he could not escape the idea that someone was getting a better deal than him, that other people were lazy and taking advantage of him, and that the people and places and things he cared about were under attack from forces he could not quite define or confront.

There isn't anything particularly remarkable about his story: lots of people from everywhere throughout history have lived their lives harboring some sort of hostile attitude toward others. But then, a late-twentieth century convergence of culture and technology brought talk radio, Fox News, and the Internet into being. And there the real trouble began.

These entities nurtured the chip on Larry's shoulder by peddling a toxic blend of fear-mongering, misinformation, distortions, and ginned-up controversies. They created virtual communities of like-minded misanthropes indulging in all manner of imaginary problems and non-existent enemies. The chip on his shoulder thus grew from a minor antagonism into a seething resentment, and finally blossomed into a frothing, impotent rage, completely untethered to the reality of Larry's comfortable existence.

Larry has been sending me email for over a year, spanning countless topics, purposefully trying to annoy me. Now, I don't even know the man. We have never met. He's just a relative's nutty acquaintance. But after an unguarded response to one of my relative's emails, I ended up on his radar. And so the stream of emails began, and they just keep on coming.

A few weeks back, I wrote an open response to him in an effort to stop the madness. Of course, the madness didn't end. Like a puppy or a toddler, Larry feeds on attention. So I went back and surveyed his messages, and found a pattern striking in its consistency:
1. Larry sends an outrageous or provocative story, most often in the form a forwarded email of dubious and/or unknown origin.

2. When I bother to answer, I reply with evidence and sources that call into question some or all of the claims made in these stories.

3. Larry responds to tell me I am wrong, or to go on a rant, or he simply changes the subject. Sometimes he does all three. But whatever his response, he carefully avoids addressing the evidence I present, and offers no counter-evidence to dispute the veracity of my claims.
Literally every one of our exchanges has followed this pattern. In other words, he is a classic troll, as predictable as a clock, and pretty boring, actually. (And all this time, I've been unwittingly feeding him! Score one for Larry.)

But the simplicity of Larry's story and the banality of our interactions don't do justice to the complicated, phantasmagorical view of the world he and his kind have developed and wholeheartedly adopted. His emails have given me a first-hand view through the looking glass and into the world of his wingnut bubble. What follows is a snapshot of this insane milieu.

In Larry's world, liberals are the real racists.
It's the left that keeps bringing up the race card and dividing this nation, and for some reason you can't see it... [Sylvia Thompson says that] the Democratic Party stands for liberalism, and liberalism at its core, is racist. And I guarantee, she is much smarter than you are. 
In Larry's world, scary Muslims are poised to conquer all. 
You act like Islam is a peaceful religion when reality would tell something different... I dare you to walk down the street in Dearborn, MI, where all of the Muslims live... and come back with a feeling that they are a peace loving People. You most likely will not get out unharmed or alive. Get on-line and find out what the Madrassas are teaching their young. The only thing [Muslims] understand is death and their 72 virgins. 
In Larry's world, progressives are destroying women's lives with porn.
I'm glad you brought up how Liberals and Progressives have changed women's lives. You can now go into any adult movie store and buy movies depicting men [censored] and [censored] on naked young girls.  Or watch a group of men gang banging and [censored] in a young girls face.  But I almost forgot, you can see much of this on TV today. Or maybe you are into men [censored] each other.  That is what your Liberals and Progressive movement has brought into the world for your children to watch. 
In Larry's world, the globe is cooling, and science that shows otherwise is just an opinion.
It is an agenda that's at stake... A friend once told me, "opinions and reports that fit your beliefs are like assholes", everyone has one.
In Larry's world, violence is always the best solution.
The only thing [Bush] didn't do was Nuke the bastard [Osama bin Laden]. That is what I would have done, and there would have been no invasion and no other country would have dared attack us again...  I hope [Obama] bombs the shit out of Syria.  Then the true patriots take over to get people back to work and get the 50% On the Government dole off their ass and back to work... Liberals have no idea how to start or end a confrontation with a shit little country and/or a shit little Tyrant.
At the center of Larry's world is Barack Hussein Obama. President Obama looms over all as a towering villain, almost a force of nature. In Larry's view, Obama presides malevolently and gleefully over the decline of America. Yet strangely, he is simultaneously an over-matched, bungling incompetent. And of course, he's Muslim.
Obama [is] responsible for Benghazi, nine mass murders, the IRS targeting of the Tea Party for political reasons...

The bottom line: Obama is making things worse. He is extending America’s suffering. No amount of government spending will help. In fact, it will make our future far worse than most average Americans can imagine...

Obama - Muslim; Ziyad Abid - Muslim from Saudi Arabia! Saudi Muslim killer released a few days after Obama’s visit to that little town!

Obama doesn't know shit. Obama and all of his cohorts, Pelosi, Reid, and so many others do not understand OBAMA CARE!  They all signed something they do not understand, not only what it is but what it does !
Finally, here's a selection of his thoughts concerning yours truly.
You blogger guys are all alike.  You live in your own little world of Internet bullshit, and have no idea what goes on in the real world. You only blog about shit that fits your perception of reality... I hope Obama Care takes care of you, because that is the only way you will ever see the truth.
I don't hate and I am not angry, in fact I am having fun getting to you... I enjoy seeing your blood pressure rise.
Well, there you have it. The biggest threats to the world aren't war, poverty, or environmental degradation. The biggest problem in the United States isn't capital fleeing the country, it isn't the shrinking middle class, or spiraling health care costs, or decaying infrastructure. Even actual problems like religious extremism are treated with such cartoonish bombast that reality bears no resemblance to its grotesque caricature in his world.

No, none of those are the real issues of the day. In Larry's world, the biggest threats are Muslims, the Affordable Care Act, bloggers, liberals & progressives, and the President of the United States.  Larry's view of the world is as self-sustaining and impenetrable as it is wrong, and no amount of empirical data or reason will change it. I despair of ever seeing this insane bubble popped.

Here's Larry at his most refined, after the last message I sent to him: 
Fuck off Bro!
Well, as you wish. 'Nuff said. 

Thursday, August 29, 2013

An Open Letter In Which I Respond To An Angry Old White Man Abusing The Interwebs

I get it - you're angry. Really angry. Angry about immigrants. Angry that the economy isn't doing all that well. Angry about the Affordable Care Act. And most of all, angry that we have a brown president with a foreign-sounding name.

But that's kind of the point, isn't it?

You keep using the phrase "your world," as if you and I don't live in the same country, and as if your taxes don't go to the same government that mine do. Guess what? We live in the same country and pay for the same government, and we both get things that we want and things that we do not want. Learn to deal with it.

I suppose in a way, you're right: we don't live in the same world. I live in a world that I call "reality." It has verifiable facts, sources, evidence. It has nuance and subtlety, and one side is rarely one-hundred percent "right" about anything. From it I derive a sense of proportion about what is important.

Honest people may disagree with my conclusions. But you aren't honest: you live in a terrifying and mythological world of narcissism and wounded pride. If you weren't such an angry person, whose relentless stream of fact-free messages contain thinly-disguised race-baiting, a palpable hatred of strong women, and most of all, an unsavory thirst for belligerence and violence, I'd feel sorry for you.

You're not going to solve any problems. You're part of the plan and you're playing an essential role in perpetuating our nation's problems. For you and people like you, debating issues isn't the point, and facts don't matter. The hate and the fight are the only things. It's your side, the "real America," against "them," whoever "they" are.

I have my own criticisms of President Obama. Who knows, together we may have been able to find common ground. From this common ground, we might have presented a unified front to those in power and thus have some small influence on national policy. But as it stands, you've been completely co-opted by hate and anger, and as citizens, we are less able to make any changes to the status quo.

Keep hating - that's exactly what your puppet masters want. You're fighting for the wheel of the clown car *against yourself.*

Thursday, January 14, 2010

Kill or Captcha

After three years of blogging in this space, I've finally had to enable CAPTCHA. I recognize the value of the technology, but I resent having to decipher and enter the letters, and so I long resisted adding it to my site. I suppose I have been lucky enough to escape most spam for all this time. But today I had a number of male enhancement comments on my previous post, and it was time to accept the inevitable. Bastids.

Monday, December 28, 2009

Refreshingly Old-School Business Acumen

Amazon.com's founder and CEO, Jeff Bezos: "I always tell people, if we have a good quarter it's because of the work we did three, four, and five years ago. It's not because we did a good job this quarter."

If only our banking industry "gurus" thought like this.