Friday, July 29, 2005

And I thought MY job was easy

I don't envy cops. I certainly wouldn't want to trade jobs with them. Or would I? This article makes you think. Especially the very last sentence in the article, which says, matter-of-factly:

"Before arresting the women Thursday, the undercover deputies watched nude dancers on stage, bought some of them drinks, and received lap dances from others."

That part pretty much speaks for itself.

I also find the inclusion of the mugshots very amusing. I get the feeling that it was intended to embarrass the strippers, in hopes they'd find another line of work. Because it's easy to see how people who dance naked for a living, in front of total strangers, would be easily embarrassed. Poor girl, the embarrassment is written all over her face.


Friday, July 08, 2005

Spy Camera

sd200_hands, originally uploaded by weissjeffm.

"Where's my spy camera? Where's my spy camera?"

I think Bart would have been more impatient to get his hands on this item, which I just picked up at Best Buy for a reasonable price. What I find really amazing is that it takes very high quality video - leaps and bounds better than my Canon G1, which weighs about 5 times as much and is now almost 5 years old.

I am also reminded of another quote, this time from "Back to the Future":

Doc: "This is truly amazing. It's a portable television studio. No wonder your President has to be an actor, he's gotta look good on television!"

Doc's referring to a circa 1985 VHS Camcorder, the kind you put on your shoulder. Now the joke is even funnier because that camcorder that was so impressive then is now a dinosaur. Marty would be just as impressed with the my little digicam as Doc was with the Camcorder.

I wonder what size television studios will be in 2025.

PS. That is a stock photo, those are not my hands.

Thursday, July 07, 2005

How do we know?

The world is a complicated place. We all make up rules about how it all works, that help us keep make sense of it. I like to keep mine as simple as possible. In fact, I feel like I spend a lot of effort re-organizing them and combining them to make a shorter list.

So here's one that I haven't been able to put in a nice neat package: How do I know when I am right?

There are those who know, and those who only think they know. It seems to me, there's a slight problem with dividing people into these two categories. The only people that can tell the difference between the two, are the people who know. The others have it completely backwards. Before you decide if I'm talking out of my ass again, let me give you an example.

For instance. When you're a child, you think that you're responsible, and that your parents are evil dictators who love nothing more than to see you suffer under their oppressive rule. They won't let you get a skateboard, or jump off the roof with an open umbrella, or let you work the gas and brake while they steer the car. Then you grow up, and realize that you were the jerk after all. All those things your parents wouldn't let you do, you would have been a complete idiot to have done. Your parents really knew. You only thought you did.

So, when it comes to the belief "children should be allowed to decide for themselves what's good for them", kids and adults are very neatly divided, each thinking the other is ignorant of the facts. And yet, aren't the adults clearly right, and the children clearly wrong? That's a loaded question, since everyone reading this is probably an adult, so right or wrong you'll all agree with me.

I thought about this more today after reading this story on Salon about how people with no sex drive are considering themselves just another sexual orientation - asexual. According to them, there's nothing wrong with them, they are perfectly happy without sex, so they don't consider it a disorder.

It becomes a bit of a philosophical quandary. When you have two divided schools of belief, each believing the other doesn't have the facts, how do you know you're right? You can't just say "use logic". Each group will merely accuse the other of having a faulty logic system. It seems to me that a handy way to break the tie is to examine the people who have been in both groups.

As it turns out, the two examples above have something in common. That is, virtually no one ever transitions the "other" way. Once you believe children need parental guidance, you don't change your mind again. Once you believe that sex is worth having, you don't change your mind back. Even after the fire of youth has cooled, you still remember it fondly.

So that's it then. The group with the lowest number of defectors wins. Or should it be percentage based?

Or am I just talking out my ass again?

One could probably use my argument to show that Scientologists are right and the rest of us are wrong. I'll keep working on it.