GuyMcArthur.com

Home

Photos

Projects

Resources

Opinions

Links

This week, millions of Arizona citizens will be asking themselves a now critical question: "Could I be mistaken for an illegal immigrant?" Those same citizens have something else in common... their racial appearance. Yes, we have explicit assurances that racial profiling will not be done. In other words, one or more other factors such as activity, behaviour, location (location, location...), dress, etc have to play into the determination. But--let's be honest here--race is always going to be the first-order term in this equation. To meet the definition of profiling, it would have to be the only term in the equation.

And so, because of this new anti-immigrant law, legitimate Arizonans of Latino descent have cause to worry, to imagine scenarios of a sort somewhere between worst-case and every-day, where they are challenged to present their papers. The usual right-wing canard applies: "if you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to fear." How fearful would you be, having to ponder the consequences of being in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong skin color?

Better make sure we always have our driver's licenses handy, they'll say. For some reason, that seems to be an acceptable form of ID, despite the lax requirements to get one. Maybe next year it will be more stringent; liberty being ratcheted down. That family picnic a little ways up the mountain now seems distinctly unwise, better just to go to the park downtown. Fascism in action.

The perception of an illegal immigrant problem outweighs the reality. Yes, there is border violence, there is drug trafficking. Just recently, a rancher was killed. A few years ago, a Park ranger was killed also. These crimes have received a lot of attention. The Mexican teen who was shot and killed for throwing a rock at a Border Patrol agent barely made the news. Hundreds of migrants die in the desert every year, but those who leave water caches for them are arrested for "littering." And many places along the border have had a big increase in crimes in general. What gets people up in arms, however, is not the trouble along the border. I recently overheard a woman in a hospital waiting room complaining vehemently about how illegals were getting treated "for free." I've heard it elsewhere too--these are supposed crimes that have outraged off many middle-class Arizonans--that illegals are an internal friction in the system, taking services without paying taxes. Arizona's right-wingers have, of course, stoked this outrage while benefiting from it politically.

What I've read presents a very different picture. The vast majority of illegals are doing exactly what you or I would do in their situation: find a way to support our families. And it is a fact that there is a substantial labor shortage here in Arizona, but not one in Mexico. Take into account to, that getting into America legally as a labourer is a byzantine process requiring years of persistence. They've committed no crime other than the shortcut to get here. But they're politically an easy target, and it's an election year.

Mary's recuperating from knee replacement surgery, so we've been watching a massload of movies and TV.

Hot Tub Time Machine

Rob Corddry consistently keeps the humor level up, playing a profane, hard-drinking, drug-abusing washout with a Motley Crue fixation. In one scene, he tries to shake down his friend's teenage son for Ritalin, "they're all on Ritalin!" he shouts before ranting about how best to turn the pills into suppositories. Finding themselves back in 1986, he and his friends are alternately struggling ineptly to prevent their destinies and trying outrageously to preserve the future. While very funny, it's basically all crude low-brow humor, failing to make much of a commentary on the 80's, or make clever use of John Cusack and Crispen Glover. Chevy Chase has a small role that could have been used to parody the nutty professor role (like those of Christopher Lloyd in Back to the Future or Christopher Walken in Click) but instead falls flat.

Arrested Development: Seasons 1,2, and 3

I never watched this while on the air, and the comparisons to ABC's (very funny) Modern Family got me interested. It's just as funny, but the humor is more clever and witty. Now I can't stop saying "Bob Loblaw Law Blog" and other phrases from the show. According to IMDB, a movie is in the works.

The Hurt Locker

Very intense. First shakey-cam movie to win Best Picture? I like how it tries to present the reality of war in Iraq, completely devoid of politics. Requires you to suspend your disbelief that there could be a guy whose passion is defusing IED's, and who has disarmed nearly a thousand of them!

Precious

Certainly one of the most powerful films I have ever seen. Gabby Sidibe is incredible in the lead role. I can't believe that Howard Stern would say ugly things about her, thus subjecting her in real life to some of the insults her character endures. Mo'nique earns her Oscar several times over, and I'd even go so far as to say that Mariah Carey is perfect in a small but important role as a social worker. Somehow, a film about the worst degradations of humanity, and the most monstrous characters who have lost their humanity, manages to end up giving you faith in our damned species.

Where the Wild Things Are

The plot starts out great, fully realizing the depths hidden in the popular children's book (which was one of my favorites). But, like the character, it gets lost, in a long, aimlessly meandering Act II, that had me all but giving up on the movie. It does so much right: the characters, the costumes, the setting, the creatures. But then it gets boring, really boring, and stays there until the final scenes. I'd read some reviews, so didn't have high expectations, but it failed to meet them (and I'm a fan of everything else Spike Jonze has done).

Shakes the Clown

I'd love to be able to say this (Bobcat Goldthwait's 1990's movie about an alcoholic clown) is an unheralded work of genius, but the truth is, it's little more than average. Rival gangs of clowns (party clowns vs. rodeo clowns vs. mimes) struggle for supremacy in a clown-town (Padookaville) while Goldthwait's clown struggles to stay sober... it does have some funny moments , including Robin Williams as an impatient mime instructor.

Big Fan

Patton Oswald is a lowly Staten Island toll booth worker by day, an obsessed Giants-fan who lives for his nightly sports-talk-radio call-in. It's very, very dark. It reminds me of some classic New York movies like those by Abel Ferrrara, or the early films of Scorcese. Worth watching for the character portrayals.

Whip It

Drew Barrymore's directing debut worked on every level for me. It was original, avoided cliché, had good characters, an entertaining and believable story, and didn't try too hard to be funny or heart-warming.

The Invention of Lying

You probably know the premise: in a world where no one can even conceive of telling the smallest fib, where even fiction does not exist, Randy Gervais plays a guy who discovers lying. Small lies lead to bigger lies, and pretty soon, he has invented religion! Sadly, despite that refreshingly honest take on things, the rest of the movie was pretty standard Hollywood stuff: unrequited love that, through persistence, succeeds in the end (Jennifer Garner plays the love interest, in a slight twist of her 13 Going On 30 character--that was a much better movie).

Hachi: A Dog's Tale

Loosely based on the true story of a dog who became a folk-hero in Japan nearly a century ago, this one is much better than the standard Hollywood pet movie. This is due largely to the great acting (Richard Gere as the man, other fine actors in supporting roles, watch the extras to see how much work they put in with the dogs, one of them is "the Meryl Streep of Akitas"). But it helps that the story is not too contrived; they take the basic story and set in present-day New England. G-rated, kid-friendly, though (as you might expect) quite sad in the end.

Inglorious Bastards

Way too slow; very disappointing. I ended up fast-forwarding through all the pointless dialogue to the few scenes where Nazi's get their violent comeuppance.

Whiteout

A suspenseful mystery set amid the scientific research crews on the Antarctic... sounds great, huh? It starts out (incongruously enough) with a nice Kate Beckinsale undressing/shower scene, and it all goes south (so to speak) from that point onward. Whiteout? They should have called it Blackout... because I wish I had no memory of the rest of this movie! I'm pretty sure the young researchers don't cut loose like drunken frat/soho people at the nd of their tour (but maybe I'm wrong about that, will have to ask some friends who've been down there)!

Surrogates

Good, though predictable, sci-fi set in a near future where people interact entirely through robotic avatars.

2012

I'm trying to think of the few positive things this movie had going for it, and about all I can come up with is the nightmarish level of CGI realism it brings to LA sliding into the ocean, or Woody Harrelson's apocolyptic DJ being consumed by the Yellowstone supervolcano while broadcasting live.

The Lucky Ones

Tim Robbins, Rachel McAdams, and Michael Peña as a trio of Iraq vets thrown together in a cross-country trek. Another movie that wisely leaves politics aside and instead focuses on realistic characters and the conflicts they face coming back home plus the reactions they get from people they meet (both positive and negative). Great acting and a number of funny scenes.

Couples Retreat

Vince Vaughn and Jon Favreau have played some great character duos (Swingers, Made) but this time around they mostly stick to a script that doesn't give them a lot of chances.

St. Trinians

Brit comedy about boarding school girls run amok that, while funny, falls into a formulaic plot (they have to pull off a heist to save their school).

Moon

Stellar sci-fi that recalls classic stories by Arthur C. Clarke and others, while being completely new. An indie movie that mostly eschews CGI and uses model miniatures like many of the great s-f movies of the 70's and 80's (which was one of the goals of the director, revealed in fascinating Q+A on the DVD extras).

Pandorum

The haunted/infested spaceship has been a plot fixture in so many movies that it practically deserves its own genre. This one seems derivative of all of them.

The Informant!

A compulsive liar leads the FBI on a series of fraud investigations into food giant ADM (based on a true story). Matt Damon has played such a wide range of characters, and done them all so well, that it's almost unremarkable by now.

I enjoyed director Richard Kelly's (Donnie Darko, Southland Tales) film The Box, despite a poor ending that was a let-down and a little inconclusive. It reminded me a lot of a certain class of science-fiction short story that blends elements of horror and mystery and leaves out the futuristic and technical.

Without giving away too much, I will say that it's partly set at a NASA's Langley research center and the story involves an alien response to the Viking 1 Mars lander. And that it shares some things in common with Donnie Darko such as references to philosophy, a sense of nostalgia (to the 70's this time), and the prominent east coast setting, while having stronger sci-fi elements.

It does take time to get to the sci-fi parts, descending slowly and creepily. But ultimately, it felt like the story abruptly ran out. It could have been a great movie, as opposed to a merely good one.

There's a certain mid-70's zeitgeist that writer/director Jared Hess manages to capture in Gentlemen Broncos. These were times when awesomely bad sci-fi/fantasy merged with gender-bending glam rock in the morass of Aquarian idealism and indulgance. Though set in a later time, the story takes place in a small Utah backwater town where eddies of that era remain. The opening credits are artfully rendered using sci-fi paperback covers of this era, both fantastic and gauche.

His earlier film Napolean Dynamite didn't hold a lot of appeal for me. Yet I found this one quite awesomely extraordinary. Maybe that's because it's a story of smart dorks and science fiction instead of dumb dorks and high school. Michael Angarano, the kid from Sky High, plays a teen named Benjamin Purvis writing these absurdly bad sci-fi/fantasy stories, which are brought to life in amazing sequences with Sam Rockwell and others. Ben lives with his mom in a geodesic dome house. His dad died when he was young, and they struggle to make ends meet. Everybody is taking advantage of them; the story revolves around his winning back their honor and getting what he is due.

A smug, egotistical, established crappy sci-fi author, Ronald Chevalier (played with hilarity by Jemaine Clement from Flight of the Conchords), steals a manuscript called 'The Yeast Lords' from Benjamin and gets it published as his own work. Chevalier provides some great comic moments; his douchebaggery goes far beyond plagarism. In one, he ridicules a workshop of teen authors, expounding his formulaic method of inventing character names.

There's a couple of gross-out moments. In one, Mike White (from Chuck and Buck) plays a "guardian angel", sent from their church to be a big brother to Benjamin. He's got ridiculous hair, and arrives wearing all white, with a giant Burmese python on his shoulders. The python takes a huge dump all over his clothes.

The movie has many clever touches, like how the department store Benjamin works part-time in has one-half women's clothing, the other half semi-automatic weapons.

Michael Angarano plays the character of Benjamin perfectly. Initially quiet and withdrawn, as things don't go his way he becomes downbeat. Finally tired of being stepped on, he becomes assertive and takes action. Finally, in the end, when he realizes a victory against Chevalier is at hand, he smiles for the first time, breaking into a wide grin.

Hackability: the freedom to modify the technology you own, in ways that, for example, make it more useful or more interesting. Is it important? To many, it is not. As computers become more like mere appliances (and appliances more like mere computers), it is inevitable that these devices become less hackable, more tightly controlled, less open. Yet others feel that this is a fundamental right--we're talking about devices that you own after all--and we'll lose something important if it goes away.

The argument is peaking lately with Apple's iPad announcement, which promises to be the first widely purchased device with all computing power of a netbook but all the restrictions of the iPhone and iPod Touch.

I'm going to get to my take on the issue in a roundabout way. First, a case study in hackability: podcasting. Contrary to popular belief, podcasting was not invented by Apple. It was invented by people cobbling together software--hacking--on their computers. They took an open format, RSS, to encapsulate audio files and wrote programs, initially in Python (a free and open source scripting language) to do something novel: automate the delivery of home-made radio programs. One of the originators was Adam Curry who wrote the first working prototypes, despite not being a programmer.

So this is the type of software hacking I'm talking about and it's something you won't be able to do on the iPad. Yes, no doubt people will find a way to "jailbreak" them--crack the security protections, but sooner or later, they'll succeed in completely locking them down. Microsoft's XBOX 360 for example, has yet to be cracked. And, of course, you can write iPad/iPhone software, if you purchase a key and own a Mac to write the software on (presumably, those systems will never be locked down). FWIW, no less a person than the inventor of the personal computer and co-founder of Apple, Steve Wozniak, professed that his "favorite gadget" [quoted in the Gizmodo blog] of the moment is an Android device. So the greatest hardware/software engineer of all time is having fun on a platform that is explicitly hackable.

It's also worth point out that a prerequisite for hackability is the freedom to install whatever apps you want, something that Apple has steadfastly opposed (often citing apps for being explicit, or politically objectionable, or for unfathomable and contradictory reasons).

Luckily, there are hackable alternatives to Apple's mobile platforms, so their closed appliance-like nature does not really bother me, except as signs in a disturbing trend. (I don't want all computers to be locked down).

Ultimately, a great deal of innovation comes from hackable systems, as Apple's own early history perfectly illustrates. We need those people who want to push a device beyond what its software A.P.I. provides, or assemble hardware to create new types of devices. Design, be it hardware or software, is an art. They say there are three types of artists: the innovators who roughly pioneer new styles and techniques, the masters who perfect the art form in stunning works, and the imitators, who work within existing genres but lack the genius to push the boundaries. The iPad, like most Apple products since the Mac, is the work of a master; it wasn't the first tablet PC, but it will be the first to really show what the platform is capable of becoming. But those innovators need the instruments to work with too.

Lest you doubt that President Obama can perform miracles, consider this: today he proposed eliminating human spaceflight from NASA's budget and the space activist community did not erupt in outrage; in fact, overall, they seem to like it! Likewise, I definitely support it. Here's why.

Bush's Vision for Space Exploration AKA "Apollo On Steroids" had problems. Principally, it failed to articulate why we should return to the Moon. It's a dead end. Robert Zubrin (founder of The Mars Society) has said, "the Moon will be an interplanetary pay toilet but they'll pay you to make a deposit." He meant that literally, in that the Moon is so poor in organic resources that human excrement would be worth more than gold to any future lunar colonists. Dennis Wingo, writing on The Space Review, cogently points out that we need to justify space exploration in terms of economic benefits that the public can understand. The Moon, in my personal opinion, does not provide that. It's a new Antarctica, a great place for certain types of research such as radio astronomy (on the Farside), but little else for the foreseeable future. It actually costs more, in terms of fuel, to stop at the Moon on the way to destinations beyond.

Those other destinations are where the action should be, and the Obama NASA budget proposal explicitly focuses exploration here. It won't be human exploration, at least in this budget. But by pointing NASA's Exploration division (as opposed to the Science division) in that direction, it lays a foundation for a better human spaceflight program: one that won't be repeating the glories of the past but reaching for new challenges beyond. This 'flexible path' provides a diverse multitude of destinations which have demonstrable economic benefits. First, the Sun-Earth Lagrange points, gravitational islands in space where we already have operating astronomical research satellites and more, including the next-generation Hubble, will be stationed. Repair missions to these could protect our investments in this fundamental research. Next, the Near Earth Asteroids. Sooner or later, we'll need the ability to 'nudge' a potential Earth-impacting asteroid out of the way. These asteroids also contain immense mineral resources and it's not too far-fetched to think that innovative techniques could make some of those resources available to industry here on Earth. Further out, the tiny moons of Mars, asteroids themselves, do provide an economically sensible staging area for missions down to the red planet. And Mars is the ultimate destination, the most Earth-like of planets, the one most rich in resources that humans can use to live.

By proposing robotic precursor missions to these places, the Obama administration is laying out the the boldest vision for NASA since Kennedy's, and one that can pay-off in benefits beyond the "flags and footprints" of national prestige.

These rationales have been advocated by The Planetary Society, by the Augustine panel (an independent task force commissioned by Obama; they recommended a number of alternatives too), by space mission designer Robert Farquhar, and probably many others. It's a credit to the president that he's making decisions that would provide more value for the NASA buck (actually, for every dollar of taxpayer money spent on NASA, about 167 dollars are spent on other things). Congress will fight back--NASA's human spaceflight infrastructure provides for tens of thousands of jobs, particularly in the Gulf Coast states.

Congress may win. Who knows, we may end up with a NASA budget that funds the Constellation architecture (the Ares I and V rockets, the Orion capsule, etc). As an aside, one of the problems with the Constellation plan, in contrast with Apollo, is that it would require two successful coordinated launches, one for cargo and one for crew, for any trips to the Moon or beyond. Instead, Obama calls for a new heavy-lift vehicle.

He also calls for making use of the International Space Station for ten more years, until 2020. The ISS, begun over a decade ago, has only just recently been completed to the point where it can host a crew of six, as originally planned. A few more shuttle missions are scheduled to fully complete it. Since it took twelve years to build, it makes sense to make what good use we can out of it.

Additionally, Obama calls for NASA's budget to be increased incrementally, by about $1 billion a year to support increased R+D and Earth & space science missions. This is exactly what NASA needs to be doing as a core mission: developing technologies that can be turned over to private enterprise, as well as continuing to do space science that lacks a profit motive, but enriches our experience and inspires learning.

Finally, Obama proposes that deliveries to the ISS be outsourced to private enterprise, as the Shuttle is still slated to be retired in a year. There are few companies that could deliver in that timescale, but still, you have to start somewhere. This could be the kick-off of competition that finally begins to reduce launch costs which, ultimately, are the biggest obstacle in the way of further space development.

I watched, giddy with anticipation, of what wonders Steve Jobs would produce today. Some form of tablet, I've long thought, would be the ideal form for the personal computer. When Palm Pilots were the accessory du jour, I hoped for one with with a 8.5x11" screen for better book reading and web browsing. For their time, they were very useful devices (I have two), especially when they added wireless internet, cell phone capability, an MP3 player and a camera. Sadly, the company devolved and has never tried to make a tablet computer.

Microsoft, and its associated PC manufacturers, have had a decade-long experience in this field. These Tablet PC's are essentially just laptops with a slightly different form factor, but with equivalent bulk. They have not been marketed extensively to consumers.

So the iPad is the first attempt by a major player to create a mass-market tablet computer. As such, and because it is Apple, the particulars are very interesting to geeks like me, if not the entire tech-obsessed community.

The iPad name is not catchy, but that's not terribly important. iTab or i1 would have been better. iSlate would have been worse.

As expected, the operating system and user interace is the iPhone OS, a scaled-down version of OS X. When Apple introduced this with the iPhone and iPod touch, combined with the multi-touch interface, it was a major revolution--think of how terrible cell phone interfaces were (and many still are). It doesn't have the jaw-dropping sex appeal that it had in 2007, but there is still nothing better (though Android is catching up).

It's interesting that Apple is trying to position it in a niche between an app phone and a laptop, rather than an uber-device that tries to do everything. I think such a device is possible; for instance, consider an iPhone that you could also dock into any type of display: an LCD when at a desk or a thin book-sized display for around the house, and as always its own display when away. The only computer/camera/phone/whatever you would ever need.

I like the fact that Apple is using an open, DRM-free format (ePub) for books. They have still not fully embraced such formats for music and video unfortunately.

It (and all Apple devices) really should have a built-in card slot for expandability. SD cards are now available up to 64 gigabytes and will go up to 2 terabytes in the near future. Carrying around a few of those is unbeatable bandwidth.

Overall, I have a wait-and-see attitude regarding the iPad, and the anticipated slew of copy-cat tablets. Right now there are too many special purpose computers (gaming system, DVR / media hub, eBook reader, smart phone, laptop, desktop, etc). The challenge for the iPad and any other tablet computer is that they'll have to do better in at least a few of these categories if they're finally going to catch on.

I tried looking for these on grooveshark, but found very few. So it's back to YouTube. The good news is that there are more full tracks this time around (as opposed to stream rips from netradio mixes). The bad news is, the links will probably go bad again eventually.

1. Brace Yourself - Jochen Miller
2. Mumbai - Dan Stone
3. See the Sun [Aurosonic Remix] - (Matt Darey presents) Urban Astronauts
4. Borealis - DJ Eco
5. Pong - Wippenberg
6. Unprepared - Marco V
7. Anjunabeach [Nitrous Oxide Remix] - Above & Beyond
8. Deep Down - (Josh Gabriel presents) Winter Kills
9. Tuvan [Andy Blueman Remix] - Gaia
10. Sahara Nights - Temple One
11. Nothing At All - Rex Mundi (featuring Susana)
12. Maybe Next Time - Robert Nickson
13. Deep Universe [M6 Remix] - Klauss Goulart
14. Starstruck [Jochen Miller Remix] - Be:Gold
15. Metropolis - Gareth Emery
16. RAMsterdam [Jorn van Deynhoven Remix] - RAM
17. Faces - Andy Moor and Ashley Wallbridge (featuring Meighan Nealon)
18. Peace [Sander van Doorn Remix] - Depeche Mode
19. Circles [Andy Blueman Remix] - Robert Nickson
20. Rain [Cosmic Gate Remix] - Armin van Buuren (featuring Cathy Burton)

I saw Avatar a few of weeks ago and thoroughly enjoyed it. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it was one of the best movie experiences I've ever had. The 3D and CGI effects are amazing; a science fiction world is vibrantly visualized like never before. With this technology (and, currently, tons of money) sci-fi can finally be brought to the screen with little that needs to be left to the imagination (and I suppose that can either be a good thing or a bad thing)!

Some of the reviews have struck me as strange. For example, my good friend Richard Leis found the story anti-technological and anti-progress. Another transhumanist blogger, George Dvorsky, goes several steps further to add that Avatar is anti-corporate, anti-human and is "Gaianist" propoganda. With all due respect... what are they smoking?

Let's recap the story. Many reviews have pointed out similarities in plot to Dances With Wolves, Pocahontas, FernGully or Princess Mononoke. None of which I have seen, so I can't comment on that. But here's Avatar in a nutshell: a Western imperialist soldier switches allegience, coming to the aid of aboriginals, leading them to a victory they otherwise would have lost. If set in a historical setting, that would be very condescending, I would think. Set in a future, distant world it is something else; perhaps lacking in creativity you might say, maybe appropriate for a style of retro-pulp Indiana Jones sci-fi, but Cameron doesn't go there. Here's the twist: the world is a living entity, and responds to the crisis with a wave of biological activity that crushes the imperialist invaders. We might add that the imperialists in the story are the paramilitary half of a corporation (the other half is R&D) seeking to mine a mineral needed for the ongoing expansion of humanity.

Now let's examine the charges....

A first-person perspective

All day, desert broom seeds were in the air everywhere, streaming by in a persistent light breeze from the southeast. Tucson was a chilly 42 degrees in the pre-dawn morning, but less cold in the starting line, sheltered by the downtown skyscrapers. I thought that I'd be early, arriving at 6am, but by the time I got to the start, thousands and thousands of cyclists were already queued up, filling solid four or five city blocks. I squeezed into a spot in the 'Bronze' block. It seemed appropriate: in 1992, I'd done the 10th annual El Tour de Tucson in 7 hours 38 minutes [the best riders do it in under 4.5 hours], good enough for the 'Bronze' category [I think they've since changed the medal ranges]. Back then, it was a couple of miles longer, and went clockwise around the city.

So it was a little bit of a trip down memory lane as well--distant memories, faded by 17 years, almost half my life, and encountered in reverse. The dry Santa Cruz river crossing, complete with a Mariachi band serenading us. The dry Sabino Creek crossing at Canyon Ranch. The long stretch of Tangerine Road, thankfully now a descent.

Midway between these two rides, sagging like an overburdened hammock, the late 90's and early aught's, I had been pretty out of shape: over 170 lbs, high cholesterol, lacking energy. Now, after a few years of running seriously and a year or so of cycling, I feel in better shape than ever: most of those extra L.B.s had been dropped, cholesterol cleaned up... probably could do it in 6.5 hours, I hoped.

7am, dawn, rider #201 was ready to go. The start was given. But there were so many riders ahead, it was four or five long minutes before we could even start moving. We joked. "I'd just be a hazard up front," said the guy next to me. "I'm a hazard back here," I replied.

But eventually, we did get started, slowly, the streets packed curb-to-curb with riders. We covered the first few blocks at a walking pace. One rider a little ahead went down but popped back up unhurt.

So I put together this playlist of all my favorite Porcupine Tree songs that would fit on a 80-minute CD. I realized afterward that, unintentionally, they all deal with tragedies of various sorts, from the personal to the planetary (more often the latter), though with a particularly British sense of detachment and even whimsy, and always with great music. I guess these guys just like writing songs about the end of the world!

You can stream it for free with an iMeem account (they have agreements with the major labels) or download on iTunes.

1. Stars Die

"The Moon shook...." There actually was a monk in the 13th century who witnessed a large impact on the Moon, and watched the surface ripple. But in this song, we're confronted with the fact that, yes, stars die, civilizations end, or are forced to flee their solar systems. A nice touch is the audio of the greeting from Richard Nixon to Apollo 11; imagine it radiating outward ahead, endlessly, ever more faint....

2. A Smart Kid

Another beautiful song, almost a lullaby... about escape from the end of the world!

3. Even Less

What a subtle touch of genius, to take the audio of a numbers station (cryptographic messages sent in the clear) as a metaphor for the mystery of a suicide, for hidden reasons that rational minds cannot comprehend?

4. Last Chance To Exit Planet Earth...

Is that Ti or Do (the cult leader of Heaven's Gate)? Anyway, what a great, weird song. I heard this first on Radio Paradise and it sparked my interest in Porcupine Tree. (And, FWIW, read about Radio Paradise in Linux Journal!)

5. Time Flies

"I was born in '67, the year of Sgt. Pepper...." I recognize riffs in this song from Dark Side and Animals, but hey, take from the best!

6. Radioactive Toy

"Give me the freedom to destroy...." A precautionary tale?

7. Space Transmission

Creepy. Lovecraftian?

8. Every Home Is Wired

Very Twilight Zone. You think it's utopian, but then the theme is twisted and turned on its side....

9. The Sound Of Muzak

"One of the wonders of the world is going down..." the heat death of independent radio?

10. The Sky Moves Sideways

This is the live version from the album Coma Divine.

An audacious set of guidelines for health care reform. How dead in the water are they? It seems to me that it combines the benefits of nationalized health care with the inefficiencies of a deeply regulated hierarchy of public-private partnerships, while preserving a core flaw of our current system--the idea that health care can be a profit-making enterprise. If you're a health insurance company, and you can't turn anyone down, how do you grow your profits? Simple, you add as many customers as possible by buying up smaller companies, etc. The logical outcome is Wal*Care. Still, in the long run, it may be better than what we have now. There was a nice moment with the Republicans sitting there, shi**ing brix, while Obama mocked them with the hollow promise of 'demonstration projects' for their ideas.

An audacious set of guidelines for health care reform. How dead in the water are they? The stipulation that all companies must provide health care pretty much makes it D.O.A. It seems to me that it combines the benefits of nationalized health care with the inefficiencies of a deeply regulated hierarchy of public-private partnerships, while preserving a core flaw of our current system--the idea that health care can be a profit-making enterprise. If you're a health insurance company, and you can't turn anyone down, how do you grow your profits? Simple, you add as many customers as possible by buying up smaller companies, etc. The logical outcome is Wal*Care. Still, in the long run, it may be better than what we have now. There was a nice moment with the Republicans sitting there, shi**ing brix, while Obama mocked them with the token promise of 'demonstration projects' for their ideas.

Update: the Obama plan sets a threshold of 50 employees for the health care requirement.

Here's a few thoughts on District 9 without spoilers.... District 9 is great science fiction with a social message, although it doesn't beat you over the head with it, big Hollywood style. It's comparable to a really good short story rather than a condensed version of a novel. Most science fiction readers I've met claim to prefer novel-length stories, if not multi-volume epics. I've don't really understood why.

And it's real science fiction, not glorified space opera or thinly veiled action (though it does have some elements of that in a middle section that shifts away from the documentary-style technique in the rest of the movie). It seems that filmography is getting to the point where sf can be realized with enough believability that a lot of great stories could be adapted to the screen with this gritty, realistic feel!

Here's a few thoughts on District 9 without spoilers.... District 9 is great science fiction with a social message, although it doesn't beat you over the head with it, big Hollywood style. It's comparable to a really good short story rather than a condensed version of a novel. Most science fiction readers I've met claim to prefer novel-length stories, if not multi-volume epics. I've don't really understood why.

And it's real science fiction, not glorified space opera or thinly veiled action (though it does have some elements of that in a middle section that shifts away from the documentary-style technique in the rest of the movie). It seems that filmography is getting to the point where sf can be realized with enough believability that a lot of great stories could be adapted to the screen with this gritty, realistic feel!