Inauguration (ĭn-ô'gyə-rā'shən)
1. Formal induction into office.
2. A formal beginning or introduction.
I am watching.
Showing posts with label united states. Show all posts
Showing posts with label united states. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Flickr is like a Stalinist Regime
Flickr really pissed me off today. Flickr has a mechanism for users to "flag" their photos as either safe, moderate, or restricted. My interpretation of these flags are:
It's important to note that Flickr allows people to alter their search preferences. So, if you only want to see safe photos, you leave your preferences as safe. There are three settings:
I am upset because Flickr has a means for people to self-moderate photostreams, but they can intervene at any time to dictate morality. Here is the guidance Flickr offers when flagging photos:
The thing that really bothers me is that my mother would have no problem seeing either photo, and neither would my kids. In fact, they saw the real thing at the parade. It's the freaking puritanical US of A that pisses me off. You can watch someone's head being blown off on prime time broadcast television, but show a breast and you have a date with the FCC.
I think we should all adhere to local standards. In Ontario, for example, it is legal for a woman to be topfree in public. She need not fear any oppression from the patriarchy (well, she might suffer some sexual oppression, but legally, she can bare those breasts). Of course, in the puritanical USA, it is illegal for women to be topfree in most states. So, if it is legal for a woman to exercise her topfree rights, then these photos ought to be permitted as safe or moderate. If the city permits men to march nude in a parade, then these photos ought to be considered as safe or moderate, and certainly not resticted.
End of rant.
P.S. My flickr account is not listed under my Zydeoc Fish alias, but my real name.
Flickr really pissed me off today. Flickr has a mechanism for users to "flag" their photos as either safe, moderate, or restricted. My interpretation of these flags are:
safe: photos of flowers, sunsets, trees, buildings, cars, food, chairs, puppies, rivers, urban scenes, etc.So, I have dutifully flagged any photo with nudity as moderate. Since I have no photos of people crashing the custard truck, I have nothing flagged as restricted. A couple of my photos, from a recent Toronto Pride Day parade, do feature male frontal nudity. I flagged these as moderate.
moderate: any photo with nudity, like breasts, bums, flaccid male appendages
restricted: sex acts, pornography, graphic displays of genitals, etc.
It's important to note that Flickr allows people to alter their search preferences. So, if you only want to see safe photos, you leave your preferences as safe. There are three settings:
SafeSearch on: You'd prefer to see photos and video that is safe for a global, public audience.As far as I am concerned, I flagged my photos appropriately. But, like the good old days of Joseph Stalin, when someone turns you in, you get punished. Someone, who had changed their search settings to moderate, reported me to the Flickr secret police, who then flagged two photos as restricted without any consultation with me. These are photos that have been viewed more than 22,000 times and 5,000 times respectively, and only one person complained.
SafeSearch moderate: You're OK seeing the odd "artistic nude" here or there, but that's the limit.
SafeSearch off: You're over 18, and take full responsibility that you're comfortable to see whatever turns up.
I am upset because Flickr has a means for people to self-moderate photostreams, but they can intervene at any time to dictate morality. Here is the guidance Flickr offers when flagging photos:
Safe - Content suitable for a global, public audienceThis sounds like my original interpretation and like the description in the safe search settings. So, why the hell did the Flickr Politburo change my settings? Because 0.0045% of the people who have viewed one of these photos was offended. In the USSR, under Mr. Stalin, all it took was one person out of millions to point the finger.
Moderate - If you're not sure whether your content is suitable for a global, public audience but you think that it doesn't need to be restricted per se, this category is for you
Restricted - This is content you probably wouldn't show to your mum, and definitely shouldn't be seen by kids
The thing that really bothers me is that my mother would have no problem seeing either photo, and neither would my kids. In fact, they saw the real thing at the parade. It's the freaking puritanical US of A that pisses me off. You can watch someone's head being blown off on prime time broadcast television, but show a breast and you have a date with the FCC.
I think we should all adhere to local standards. In Ontario, for example, it is legal for a woman to be topfree in public. She need not fear any oppression from the patriarchy (well, she might suffer some sexual oppression, but legally, she can bare those breasts). Of course, in the puritanical USA, it is illegal for women to be topfree in most states. So, if it is legal for a woman to exercise her topfree rights, then these photos ought to be permitted as safe or moderate. If the city permits men to march nude in a parade, then these photos ought to be considered as safe or moderate, and certainly not resticted.
End of rant.
P.S. My flickr account is not listed under my Zydeoc Fish alias, but my real name.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Bananas and Sleep and Politics
Is there anything more disappointing than going into your usual grocery store and discovering that all of the bananas are as green as emeralds? It either takes a week for the bastards to ripen, or they do so overnight, because they are genetically-inferior and end up tasting awful.
But, on to more important things. For some inexplicable reason, I slept very badly last night. I woke at 3:00 AM and failed to get back to sleep. I really hate it when that happens, mostly because I am a great sleeper and rarely have any problems.
In other news, an old high school friend showed up on Facebook. Two, actually. That's all well and good. One friend now lives in a large American city. During our exchange of messages, he complained that the democrats were now coming to power and that this would sink the economy. Is he on drugs? I wanted to ask him if he happened to notice that the economy tanked on the Republicans' watch. Of course, talking politics and religion with friends is probably a bad idea.
I am kicking myself for not taking today off. I like taking Fridays off. Why didn't I take Friday off?
Is there anything more disappointing than going into your usual grocery store and discovering that all of the bananas are as green as emeralds? It either takes a week for the bastards to ripen, or they do so overnight, because they are genetically-inferior and end up tasting awful.
But, on to more important things. For some inexplicable reason, I slept very badly last night. I woke at 3:00 AM and failed to get back to sleep. I really hate it when that happens, mostly because I am a great sleeper and rarely have any problems.
In other news, an old high school friend showed up on Facebook. Two, actually. That's all well and good. One friend now lives in a large American city. During our exchange of messages, he complained that the democrats were now coming to power and that this would sink the economy. Is he on drugs? I wanted to ask him if he happened to notice that the economy tanked on the Republicans' watch. Of course, talking politics and religion with friends is probably a bad idea.
I am kicking myself for not taking today off. I like taking Fridays off. Why didn't I take Friday off?
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
The Times they are A-Changin'
All I will say today is that I am delighted by the election results south of the border (Alaska went red, but that's OK).
Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don't stand in the doorway
Don't block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There's a battle outside
And it is ragin'.
It'll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'
All I will say today is that I am delighted by the election results south of the border (Alaska went red, but that's OK).
Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don't stand in the doorway
Don't block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There's a battle outside
And it is ragin'.
It'll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
A Political Detour
"Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" - John McCain
The American presidential primaries are a fascinating spectacle. There is a part of me that sympathizes with a couple of Russian journalists who once said that the entire world should be permitted to vote for the president of the United States because the actions of the US government affect almost everyone in one way or other. That is very apparent in Canada, considering our deep personal, cultural, economic, and political ties. After all, the USA is our largest trading partner. Unfortunately, we also have Stephen Harper, who seems bent on becoming a puppet of the American President.
I am absolutely dumbfounded by John McCain. In case you missed it, he started to sing the line "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" to the tune of the Beach Boys' Barbara Ann. Of course, that was last year. What I also recently learned is that he was singing a parody that had been written and performed by Vince Vance and the Valiants, who wrote the song in the midst of the Iran Hostage Crisis in 1979. Here are the lyrics:
This is one of the videos of John McCain breaking into song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAzBxFaio1I
Of course, I immediately recalled Ronald Reagan's live microphone accident (August 11, 1984) where he announced that bombing of Russia would commence in five minutes. This summed up Reagan's sheer intolerance, misunderstanding, and total hatred of a political system that differed from the American system. No, I am not a fan of authoritarian governments and clearly the Soviet Union was not a model to be emulated. As we all know, Reagan presided over the largest peacetime military buildup in American history, a buildup directed at the former Soviet Union and its allies, rather than address the possibility of arms control. MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) was mad.
Reagan also signed a drug enforcement act as part if his War on Drugs. I think we can conclude that the war on drugs has failed and has resulted in glaring racial disparities in prison populations, mostly because of the different sentences handed down for crack cocaine, a lower class drug used by mainly African Americans and other impoverished ethnic groups, and powdered cocaine, an upper class drug used mainly by white folks including George W. Bush. Yes, he refuses to deny that he has used it. But, I am getting sidetracked.
I was fully in support of the American action in Afghanistan, but the USA virtually quit Afghanistan to hunt Saddam Hussein and walked away from Osama bin Laden. The effect has been very clear in Canada, the nation that is currently in charge of military operations in the Kandahar region. With the US military more interested in Iraq, many Canadians understandably have a hard time distinguishing between Canada's NATO role in Afghanistan and the US war on terror. Our troops effectively freed-up American forces to move to Iraq, and so we have become part of the problem.
John McCain is on record as suggesting that he would not be opposed to American troops staying in Iraq for 100 years! His argument is that Americans would not object to such a deployment either. What they will object to, he argues, are casualties of war. It's clear that McCain, the Viet Nam veteran, is a war hawk. What I find even scarier are those who argue that McCain isn't "conservative enough." I can only hope that the American public will not endorse a man who wants to take their nation into another pointless war that cannot be won. My choice, given the American political landscape, would be anybody but McCain...well, maybe that's going too far.
Addendum
As we all know, blogging about politics is no-win situation. You either attract comments from those who revile your political views and simply tell you that you have no idea what you are talking about (usually offering only dogma and unsupported opinions to counter what you have said) , or you receive congratulatory comments from those who accept everything you say with the hopes that a few of the undecided will be convinced to join your side of the ring.
This, of course, reminds me that Ethan Zuckerman advised us to resist homophily in social networks. I have read lots of right wing blogs and left wing blogs and I think that we are all guilty of promoting our opinions at the expense of impartiality. Such is the polarized landscape of the self-important amateur political blogger. My experience from previous political posts (especially this one) is that I had been surrounded by a few like-minded people (the homophilous, if you like) and our opponents (another homophilous group). In the end, I would describe the bloggers, the commenters, and our statements with such words as intransigent, intractable, recalcitrant, and belligerent.
Blogging has given me a new appreciation of the difficulties in writing without bias. So, the preceding is biased, but what can you expect from a Canadian who routinely votes for the NDP?
"Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" - John McCain
The American presidential primaries are a fascinating spectacle. There is a part of me that sympathizes with a couple of Russian journalists who once said that the entire world should be permitted to vote for the president of the United States because the actions of the US government affect almost everyone in one way or other. That is very apparent in Canada, considering our deep personal, cultural, economic, and political ties. After all, the USA is our largest trading partner. Unfortunately, we also have Stephen Harper, who seems bent on becoming a puppet of the American President.
I am absolutely dumbfounded by John McCain. In case you missed it, he started to sing the line "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" to the tune of the Beach Boys' Barbara Ann. Of course, that was last year. What I also recently learned is that he was singing a parody that had been written and performed by Vince Vance and the Valiants, who wrote the song in the midst of the Iran Hostage Crisis in 1979. Here are the lyrics:
Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran.Now, I can sympathize with this parody in light of the Iran Hostage Crisis. Sometimes, we need to show our anger, rattle some sabers, and show some solidarity.
Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb, bomb Iran!
Let's take a stand, bomb Iran.
Our country's got a feelin'.
Really hit the ceilin', bomb Iran.
Bomb bomb bomb, bomb Iran."
Gone to a mosque,
Gonna throw some rocks.
Tell the ayatollah,
Gonna put you in a box! and
bomb Iran. Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb, bomb Iran!
Our country's got a feelin'.
Really hit the ceilin', bomb Iran.
Bomb bomb bomb, bomb Iran.
This is one of the videos of John McCain breaking into song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAzBxFaio1I
Of course, I immediately recalled Ronald Reagan's live microphone accident (August 11, 1984) where he announced that bombing of Russia would commence in five minutes. This summed up Reagan's sheer intolerance, misunderstanding, and total hatred of a political system that differed from the American system. No, I am not a fan of authoritarian governments and clearly the Soviet Union was not a model to be emulated. As we all know, Reagan presided over the largest peacetime military buildup in American history, a buildup directed at the former Soviet Union and its allies, rather than address the possibility of arms control. MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) was mad.
Reagan also signed a drug enforcement act as part if his War on Drugs. I think we can conclude that the war on drugs has failed and has resulted in glaring racial disparities in prison populations, mostly because of the different sentences handed down for crack cocaine, a lower class drug used by mainly African Americans and other impoverished ethnic groups, and powdered cocaine, an upper class drug used mainly by white folks including George W. Bush. Yes, he refuses to deny that he has used it. But, I am getting sidetracked.
I was fully in support of the American action in Afghanistan, but the USA virtually quit Afghanistan to hunt Saddam Hussein and walked away from Osama bin Laden. The effect has been very clear in Canada, the nation that is currently in charge of military operations in the Kandahar region. With the US military more interested in Iraq, many Canadians understandably have a hard time distinguishing between Canada's NATO role in Afghanistan and the US war on terror. Our troops effectively freed-up American forces to move to Iraq, and so we have become part of the problem.
John McCain is on record as suggesting that he would not be opposed to American troops staying in Iraq for 100 years! His argument is that Americans would not object to such a deployment either. What they will object to, he argues, are casualties of war. It's clear that McCain, the Viet Nam veteran, is a war hawk. What I find even scarier are those who argue that McCain isn't "conservative enough." I can only hope that the American public will not endorse a man who wants to take their nation into another pointless war that cannot be won. My choice, given the American political landscape, would be anybody but McCain...well, maybe that's going too far.
Addendum
As we all know, blogging about politics is no-win situation. You either attract comments from those who revile your political views and simply tell you that you have no idea what you are talking about (usually offering only dogma and unsupported opinions to counter what you have said) , or you receive congratulatory comments from those who accept everything you say with the hopes that a few of the undecided will be convinced to join your side of the ring.
This, of course, reminds me that Ethan Zuckerman advised us to resist homophily in social networks. I have read lots of right wing blogs and left wing blogs and I think that we are all guilty of promoting our opinions at the expense of impartiality. Such is the polarized landscape of the self-important amateur political blogger. My experience from previous political posts (especially this one) is that I had been surrounded by a few like-minded people (the homophilous, if you like) and our opponents (another homophilous group). In the end, I would describe the bloggers, the commenters, and our statements with such words as intransigent, intractable, recalcitrant, and belligerent.
Blogging has given me a new appreciation of the difficulties in writing without bias. So, the preceding is biased, but what can you expect from a Canadian who routinely votes for the NDP?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)