A Long Weekend

They are so nice although equally rare. I would wish I had more of them only I'm already behind in my billables as it is.

T'was a nice Thanksgiving. Nothing really special to report. My cousin made up with her brother and parents so all is right in the world (or so I am assured). Went out to dinner on Friday night with relatives, including grandparents. The usual.

On Friday, my other cousin ("her brother") and I hit Best Buy. As friends of mine can attest, when I go shopping, I go shopping. And on a day when there are deals galore, oh yes. I shopped. Snagged some DVDs (Underworld: Evolution, Inside Man, X-Men 3, The Office: Season 1, Boston Legal: Season 2), 1 CD of The Who, two 1GB flash drives, Neverwinter Nights 2 for the PC and Gun for the PS2. Everything I got was on sale except for Boston Legal. Very nice prices. So I feel like I did my part and contributed to the rampant consumerism that currently prevails.

Finished Neil Gaiman's Anansi Boys. Good book. Not my favorite of his (that honor belongs to American Gods) but a good book from one of my favorite authors.

Saw Casino Royale in the theater. Review forthcoming.

Watched Inside Man on DVD. Review forthcoming.

Last night's Desperate Housewives was a little eery. Not my favorite episode thus far but unsettling in its conclusion. Makes you wonder. Could be a post on that – maybe, maybe not.

I shall have to locate my old thread topics list(s) and relink those so I don't forget them.

Oh, there was a bonus Boston Legal last night. So good! I was going into withdrawal and now I have plenty. Good episode – sets up Tuesday night's. I always find it inordinately amusing when Alan Shore (excellent first name, by the way) gets to act completely like himself – crude, rude and lewd. It's even better when his foil is a goodie-two-shoes (like Denise Bauer, nudge nudge, wink wink). And there was another "breaking the fourth wall" (whomever came up with that one?) moment when Alan Shore referenced Tuesday at 10 as the time for a trial. I eat that stuff up. Love the show. Woot for Boston Legal!

Hehe, Tuesday night. I'm going to a concert by The Who with my mom and her friend.

I think I'm borderline coming down with a cold. My throat is generally ick in the morning. I don't feel bad, though (yet). And my tongue looks a little funny (patchiness with whiter/lighter spots and normal ones). I can sometimes tell when my body is fighting off the initial stages of a cold/flue/whatever. I'm pretty sure this is it. So I better get some good sleep, maybe get in to work a *little* later in favor of said extra sleep. And just take it a little slower, a little easier. If I can work out this phase, I can avoid the cold/flue/whatever completely. It rarely works like that but it can be done.

Another swig of coffee and off I go!

Happy Thanksgiving!

Best wishes for an enjoyable holiday! No new posts for a few days. Google has a holiday logo up.

If you're curious, I'm having a conversation with a fellow named Don in the comments to my Humanism post. Hopefully we can get back into that after the holiday.

I would link to the Butterball turkey page except I think it's all done in java and/or may require a sign-up. You'll have to dig it up on your own if you so wish. In the meantime, here's what Wikipedia has on Thanksgiving.

By the by, the President annually pardons two turkeys on this day. I'm not kidding. I do remember the President on West Wing pardoning one. If I recall, one year C.J. had to choose which, of two turkeys, to pardon. Hilarity and hijinks ensued, of course.

Tonight, I am sure many a flightless fowl will be consumed with much stuffing, garnish and cranberry sauce. Here's wishing you and all your loved ones a Happy Thanksgiving! Cheers!~

Interesting...

If I mention the word "planet" and the word "Pluto" in the same post (on the same page, perhaps?), my blog gets cross-referenced here. I learned this because my post below titled Dreamscape & More got cross-referenced (and linked) there. Very interesting...

Digital Ghosts: When A Blog Gets Its Wings

Ever wonder about digital ghosts? I'm not necessarily talking about for people per se but rather the remains left behind of no-longer-updated sites, such as this one.

Blogs and other regularly updated sites are now numbering in the innumerable thanks not only to the explosion of the internet but also to the availability of free tools that enable anyone to have a website. In fact, the slightly more professional blogs have their own, independently-hosted URLs, as evident by the lack of ".blogspot.com" in the name (for example).

However, as is the nature of the beast, much content eventually proves to be fleeting. People stop blogging, some wampeters die while new ones are born. Old sites die an otherwise non-momentous death while new sites begin their journey. In their death throes, the old sites have a choice: disappear (remove access to or delete the content and salt the earth), stay (leave everything as is with a final 'goodbye' post) or leave a monument (leave only one post, often a 'goodbye' post).

Thus are digital ghosts born.

The vast majority of the time, you will not run across a digital ghost. The site is antiquated and likely irrelevant to modern concerns. It probably won't be one of the top results of a Google or Yahoo search. Links to the site will fade as the referrers discover that the site is dead or as the referrers themselves die out. Without pointers to the site, access becomes moot since no one will find it.

But, in some cases, the site remains.

I don't know the cycle of a digital ghost. I don't know at what point the host removes access or archives the data. I don't know if or when Blogger purges itself of dead content. What I do know is that these sites are out there, standing as testaments to times now-forgotten and people now unheard.

This fascinates me.

Perhaps at another time I will further explore this topic. Something about it piques my curiosity. Maybe an archive of links to the (otherwise) forgotten? I shall have to ponder.

A Few More...

...random things for random times.

James Bond Title Sequences -- The best parts of the movies, no? Well, that's what some have argued. Personally, I may have to go with the names of the Bond girls. (You know what I'm talking about.)

Via BoingBoing: Are RIAA lawsuit damages Constitutional? (Which links to this Texas Law Review paper.)

Via Slashdot: Firefox 2.0 Password Manager Bug Exposes Passwords -- Which could be problematic if you happen to use Firefox 2.0. I don't think I upgraded yet (thankfully).

I want to link this THL post/story because it is absolutely hilarious. Go read it. (It's quick, I promise!)

I did scan a few other reactions to this week's Heroes episode. Apparently I may be in the minority with my negative reaction. So be it. Maybe I just have higher standards when it comes to superhero or comic book products? Or maybe I just missed the boat on this one? Maybe I'll think about it more another time.

I should add WWdN: In Exile to the revised blogroll. Though I've stopped regularly reading it, every now and then it's fun to see what Wil Wheaton, the consummate geek, is up to. Wil rawks.

Incidentally, if I ever try this one out... Actually, sad as it may be, it's definitely not beyond the realm of the possible. Thus I shall shut my trap. On second thought, scratch that. There is one female listed for all of CT (I think). I'll likely skip this site.

Wil also has a post titled Geek in Review: Han Shoots First (updated) wherein he "ponders why Star Wars is so important to a certain generation of geeks, and why we took it so personally that the new movies sucked so hard." Coolness in digital form.

Mental note: Look into this author/book.

Shelby County (TN) Voting Troubles. Scary.

Holy crap. Two senators saving the country $17 billion??!?!? Whoah.

Btw, found some of the above as links from Instapundit.

Electronic Ephemera -- This site (and guy) is awesome.

Just one last note. I've decided to bombard you with a barrage of posts. Deal.

On Humanism

Obsessive Law Student has a post about her religious and personal beliefs and how they reflect (or, more accurately, do not reflect) mainstream ( i.e. widespread) views of her religion (Tempting Faith and the Liberal Disdain for Evangelicals). It's rather hard to describe so you'll forgive me if I instead suggest you skim her post.

I began by wondering if, since her beliefs may not reflect widespread views of her religious categorization, she instead belonged to a different categorization. Then memory *pinged* with the recollection of Humanism and I wondered what exactly it was and whether it tied into this internal conversation. After a little exploration, I found this statement of some core beliefs (from a talk):

1. Humanism is one of those philosophies for people who think for themselves. There is no area of thought that a Humanist is afraid to challenge and explore.

2. Humanism is a philosophy focused upon human means for comprehending reality. Humanists make no claims to possess or have access to supposed transcendent knowledge.

3. Humanism is a philosophy of reason and science in the pursuit of knowledge. Therefore, when it comes to the question of the most valid means for acquiring knowledge of the world, Humanists reject arbitrary faith, authority, revelation, and altered states of consciousness.

4. Humanism is a philosophy of imagination. Humanists recognize that intuitive feelings, hunches, speculation, flashes of inspiration, emotion, altered states of consciousness, and even religious experience, while not valid means to acquire knowledge, remain useful sources of ideas that can lead us to new ways of looking at the world. These ideas, after they have been assessed rationally for their usefulness, can then be put to work, often as alternate approaches for solving problems.

5. Humanism is a philosophy for the here and now. Humanists regard human values as making sense only in the context of human life rather than in the promise of a supposed life after death.

6. Humanism is a philosophy of compassion. Humanist ethics is solely concerned with meeting human needs and answering human problems--for both the individual and society--and devotes no attention to the satisfaction of the desires of supposed theological entities.

7. Humanism is a realistic philosophy. Humanists recognize the existence of moral dilemmas and the need for careful consideration of immediate and future consequences in moral decision making.

8. Humanism is in tune with the science of today. Humanists therefore recognize that we live in a natural universe of great size and age, that we evolved on this planet over a long period of time, that there is no compelling evidence for a separable "soul," and that human beings have certain built-in needs that effectively form the basis for any human-oriented value system.

9. Humanism is in tune with today's enlightened social thought. Humanists are committed to civil liberties, human rights, church-state separation, the extension of participatory democracy not only in government but in the workplace and education, an expansion of global consciousness and exchange of products and ideas internationally, and an open-ended approach to solving social problems, an approach that allows for the testing of new alternatives.

10. Humanism is in tune with new technological developments. Humanists are willing to take part in emerging scientific and technological discoveries in order to exercise their moral influence on these revolutions as they come about, especially in the interest of protecting the environment.

11. Humanism is, in sum, a philosophy for those in love with life. Humanists take responsibility for their own lives and relish the adventure of being part of new discoveries, seeking new knowledge, exploring new options. Instead of finding solace in prefabricated answers to the great questions of life, Humanists enjoy the open-endedness of a quest and the freedom of discovery that this entails.

According to the Wikipedia piece, Humanism can further be subdivided into Secular Humanism (no theism involved at all, seemingly) and Religious Humanism (theism, tying Humanism to religious beliefs and/or a religious community).

After reading about it, Humanism felt like a good match with my own beliefs. I'm Jewish by upbringing, heritage and beliefs, but I subscribe to my own personal brand of Judaism. It ties in belief in G-d with less adherence to the stricter tenets of the religion and more freedom of person. I consider myself religious even though I do not attend services or always observe every holiday. I would rather place more emphasis on living a "good" life by one's own personal standards than on fulfilling ancient mandates from a time long past. (And I secretly suspect that G-d would want that too.)

I further looked into Christian Humanism (to guess whether it applies to OLS) and Humanistic Judaism (to see whether it applies to me). As for the latter, I do not think it a good fit as Humanistic Judaism is extremely secular and actually strives to place importance on the non-belief in G-d, which directly contrasts with my own beliefs. As for the former, I cannot say for sure but I suspect it might be a fair match.

Whenever it comes to religions and basing societal activities on religious underpinnings, I have personal issues with what is generally (or at least often) said and done. It's perfectly fine to have your own set of beliefs, just don't try to "inflict" (i.e. impose) them on the rest of the country or world. Some of the worst atrocities in humanity's past have been perpetrated in the name of religion. Live and let live, but respect always.

Back to the point, I like Humanism. The broad reach and potential application to or cohabitance with multiple, different religions appeals to me. I think the beliefs and theories Humanism encompasses are admirable, particularly as goals that can be translated to lifestyles (i.e. ways of living). And so I think I shall consider myself to be a Jewish Humanist. This is merely a categorization as Humanism appears to reflect my pre-established beliefs - it is in harmony with them. In addition, in a small manner, Humanism reconciles theism with science and, with no trace of irony, I believe in both of those. I think it's one of those things that's interesting to consider and I'm glad I have (briefly) examined it.

Various Varieties of a Veritable Voluminous Volume of Vocations

Well, not really, but the alliteration was just screaming at me and the end of the whole phrase just didn't want to stay on topic, per se. I tend to be a sucker for alliteration when I can sneak it in. Granted, the above does not actually qualify as "sneaking it in" since it is so un-subtle in its approach, but I am content with the non-sneakiness of it as, in fact, its mere presence comforts me.

Yes, I am mildly crazy. No, you cannot have a slice of pie. Now go to your room.

Side Note: It looks like much below is presented in the atypical-blog format of "paragraphs." (*GASP*) That is, instead of the otherwise-employed short bites ( e.g., one-to-three-sentence paragraphs). Too bad. Read or scan it if you like, don't if you don't.

Moving on... I have a varied multitude of items for presentation. There are common themes and interlinking, but they served merely as a jumping point for the explorations. That is, I began by clicking to a first thing. Then I clicked to the second thing in the list. Then I had a quasi-random thought about the second thing which took me to a plethora of other things and further introspection and consideration. Then, when I finished that, I clicked to the third thing, and so on. Only replace 'thing' with 'site.' "Actually, replace 'accidentally' with 'repeatedly' and 'dog' with 'son.'" (!!!)

It's been a while since I last visited UCL and it's a rather a shame too since it's an excellent blog by a lawyer (not lawyer blog). One post of his (A word about this blog) rang true for me. The post responds to some critical comments he's received about his blog and the nature of it:

I don't maintain this blog for commercial purposes or to advertise anything about myself to anyone. I'm not purposely trying to maintain a regular readership. I do thoroughly enjoy being able to interact with total strangers on things I find interesting about life, the world, the law, whatever. So I appreciate what readers I do have and enjoy getting feedback from them. But what I won't do is change the format of this blog from what I really like using it for, which is to basically serve as my soap box.

There's more, but I leave it to you if you're so inclined. I want to applaud UCL for both his blog and the post. One reason I used to regularly follow his posting (and probably should again) is because it was open, honest and him. No apologies, some holding back but not based on honesty or the truth, just the usual reservation or delay for personal items. Bravo, UCL! Bravo!

I was looking at BTQ for the first time in a long time (I can even remember when Fitz-Hume posted there and when he left) when I discovered two other blogs via comments.

The first is Still Angry, authored by a fellow named Dylan. I was rather excited to discover this one as I used to read Dylan's posts on his old blog. He always struck me as an interesting fellow who was worth listening to and conversing with. So it is with no small amount of joy that, when I do finish redoing the links column to your left, his new blog will certainly be included among the higher-up categories, possibly the one corresponding to you-should-read-this-damnit or this-is-good-damnit. I'm sure the word "damnit" will be employed in some manner or other. It is something of a shame that his old blog (which I shall let remain nameless) is gone as the posting there was worth reading. (Though I understand and appreciate why it is gone, as I can picture that, one day, this blog, too, may similarly disappear for the same reasons.)

The second one is Obsessive Law Student. Though her posts are interesting and honest (two qualities I look for in personal blogs I follow), what sealed the deal was a post of hers about her religious and personal beliefs and how they reflect (or, more accurately, do not reflect) mainstream ( i.e. widespread) views of her religion (Tempting Faith and the Liberal Disdain for Evangelicals). It's rather hard to describe so you'll forgive me if I instead suggest you skim her post.

I have a whole other post in the works responding to OLS' post. Look for it in the very near future. Originally it was included in this post but, upon further contemplation, it grew beyond the reasonable limits of inclusion.

OLS also had a post about Any Soldier which looks and sounds like something I'd like to do. I'm no soldier and I won't be serving my country by fighting in a war any time soon, but I have tremendous respect for those that do. This seems like one of those genuine ways to support them (and not the government or the Republicans or those who want(ed) to go to war but the soldiers themselves) in some small way that might actually count.

Another site I found is Between Lawyers which, although apparently posting infrequently, looks to be interesting.

Also, in The Dilbert Blog, Scott Adams discusses Comic Asses. You have been warned. (Though monkeys are occasionally involved.)

And I can't recall if I've already linked to Legal Mojo before. Good starting place for finding a law job. Excellent starting place for finding an IP law job. (Must remember!)

Dreamscape & More

I vaguely recall a dream I had last night. I was at a friend's law firm (somewhere I've never been before so it was a made-up setting) interviewing for a position. The only part I can remember right now is that I was interviewing with my old trumpet teacher, back from my high school (or middle school?) days. He was questioning me and I was contemplating whether I would leave my current job for this new one if they made me an offer. I also vaguely remember that he was reviewing my resume or record or such and was stating (for the record?) that it looked like my record wasn't very good. Or some such.

I don't have a lingering impression that the dream was good or bad, per se. It just was.

For the second week in a row, no Boston Legal. I am now going into withdrawal.

I am tired this morning, even though I got a fair amount of sleep last night (6 hours, which, for me, is average).

Good News: I have Thursday and Friday off, as most Americans do, for Thanksgiving.

Bad News: I'm spending Thursday through Saturday with my relatives. While it's nice to see them, it's certainly not relaxing.

Good News: Thanksgiving may be interesting this year as my cousin butts heads with her parents (my dad's sister and her husband).

Bad News: Thanksgiving may be interesting this year as my cousin butts heads with her parents.

Those four news bits are all tied together so they don't really count for much more than one small paragraph (equivalently).

I think that, after posting this post, I shall post something I drafted on Monday (but did not then post immediately). It's a little strange but I'd like to share it. Hopefully no one finds it terribly disturbing. Then again, I was aiming for "mildly disturbing" and it's rather hard to precisely peg shades of gray. If all else fails, remember that I can be rather odd when (a) I want to, or (b) when I let a bit of my guard down. It happens.

Otherwise, I have things to do, as is the norm.

By the by, anyone out there ever use the term "vanilla" when referring to something plain or ordinary? As in "that's vanilla" or such. I used the term in that manner when speaking with movie.girl over the phone last Sunday and she expressed surprise with the term. Albeit she liked the concept of it, I'm just curious whether it's a novel concept or not.

I think I'm here though my mildly sleep-addled head may be orbiting the non-planet Pluto (slightly). This may be a long day.

ADDENDUM: I posted that post but it's below this one due to some funky time-accreditation. I could reverse/fix that but I'm going to leave it as is. I'd rather have this post be the top-most one instead. Cheers!

Something True

I want to write something true. It's not that I generally write or say or do false things. Rather, it's that I almost never share anything wholly true.

Sometimes a friend will see what I've written here and chastise me for what I write. Say that I shouldn't have written it or that I'm treading all too close to a line I should not cross.

But I write these things because they are the edge of truth. They are not the whole truth. They are not the thoughts I think in-between the things I do and don't do. They are not the true story, though they pass for it and make for occasional conversation. They are the almost-truths, the edges of my life that are more easily visible and more easily contemplated, the shadows of the rest.

The rest of what? The rest of me, of you, of the things that go unsaid and unwritten. Some are known but never consciously acknowledged or never verbally acknowledged, at least. Some are faint sounds on the wind – that almost-annoying almost-heard conversation that lingers as whispers and shadow. And some are the true truths, parts that may never be known, even to oneself.

But I think I know more of myself or at least I know some of the hidden parts, the unsaid parts, the shadow parts. What can be maddening, sometimes, is knowing that the shadow parts cannot be revealed. Those secret impulses, those hidden thoughts, the ones that if known or made public would almost certainly be injurious. And so they languish in shadow, in the in-betweens.

But I want to write something true and therein lies the dilemma of openness and consequences.

I would love to write about my fears, for although they are not exceptional, they are part of the shadow-me and often delineate the edges of action. I would love to write about my hopes and dreams, for although they are not unique, they are of me and by me and define me. I would love to write about my shadow thoughts, for although they can be dark or mischievous or scary, they can also be bright or productive or hopeful.

Not surprisingly, what I have written here is not the truth. Not the whole truth. I have not told you anything you did not know or could not have guessed. I have phrased the issue and identified factors but I have not revealed a truth.

And I shall not. For all the reasons above and for many, many more, the shadow truths remain as they have always been, shadows. You are permitted the merest reflections of self. And that has to be enough. It always has been and must always be. For if someone wrote what they really think, what paths through their mind during the in-betweens, when no one else is looking or knows, no one would want to know what was written. They might want to read it, to see it, to realize it, but not to know it. There are places within each of us that no one else dare tread.

That is a true truth.

Heroes Is Going Downhill

Last night I watched my weekly doses of Heroes and Studio 60. While the latter was humorous and entertaining as usual, the former was rather disappointing.

The previous 7 episodes of heroes had the series building to a crescendo:

Save the cheerleader, save the world!

Chances are you've seen the tagline in their commercials. There are a series of paintings painted by a guy who can see the future, detailing the attack on her and when and where it would occur. Peter, one intrepid would-be hero, was more or less meeting other heroes and trying to get them to help the cheerleader, to save her.

So last night the paintings came true. The scenes they depicted unfurled. She was attacked, Peter was there, presumptively she was saved.

And that was it.

No other heroes came to her rescue. Not. A. One. The attack could have been bad, easily, but she survived without too much trouble and there you go.

So what the fuck was the big deal?

Why make that your tagline, build up to it with ominous messages and paintings and foreshadowing and meetings when it turns out to be fuck-all for the series? Granted, the ending was a little interesting since there's obviously something going on – some cabal of nefarious evil-doing anti-heroes (a.k.a. villains) who will undoubtedly destroy the world if not opposed by the heroes. But don't make the crescendo the cheerleader then merrily skip over it on your way to the real end-game which you have cleverly failed to suggest or foreshadow.

Good lord.

The first episode was so right and yet the series has been diminishing ever since. It makes me want to cry, to weep from pent-up rage and frustration at a concept that was perfect and initially well-formed but has now devolved into endless nothingness of not-progression and trickery. Oh how the mighty have fallen!

Congrats to the Lawless!!!

A big congratulations goes out to The Lawless One & Jo! They just got engaged!!! (Woohoo, Woot & Wahoo!) Their wedding will be next August, here in CT.

And now for the other strange part – I'm in the wedding party. (*shock*)

I am extremely happy for the two of them and also very thankful to The Lawless. I have no brothers or sisters. I wasn't in the wedding party for my nearest cousin when she got married and it's equally unlikely I'll be in it for my other nearest cousin when he eventually ties the knot. This is pretty much the only time in my life that it could (and will) happen. I have few very close friends and probably none as close as The Lawless.

I truly consider it an honor.

Me? I'm just a friend of his at his wedding. And that is unimaginably cool.

Congrats again, my friends! May love, happiness and health be your companions. Cheers!~

Just A Few

I've added a bunch of quotes to the Random Quotes page. I've also changed the blog subtitle. (Okay, these two are on the way. Coming up, right after this post.)

Hugh reminded his readers of the blog cards he sells. One of these days I'm going to order some. I'm not entirely sure why since I don't really need them per se. And I wouldn't put my blog on them. I'd probably just list my name, some new e-mail address (one exclusively for quasi-random contacts who would be the likely recipients of such a card) and my cell phone number. E-mail is usually the best way to reach me, although not the fastest. Hmmm... Maybe I should order two sets – one for professional or social contacts and one for blog contacts or such. Hrmm.

I also stumbled across a Wired article: Very Short Stories. The article has a number of six-word (Science Fiction) stories from famous people, including Neil Gaiman, Orson Scott Card, Kevin Smith and William Gibson. Very good reading.

That's it for today. Cheers!

Eating, Bowling & Scene It With A Friend+1

Yesterday I hung out with movie.girl and movie.girl's.fiancée.

By the way, when the Hell did 11:20am on a Sunday become too early to call someone? I mean, I never condoned such "early" calls back in college, especially since I often woke up between 11am and noon on a Sunday (and occasionally I'd sleep in until 3-4pm), but this isn't college any more. Don't "normal" people wake up by 11am or am I now so abnormal in my timing that I'm off by so much?

Similarly, isn't it okay to plan on meeting up for a Sunday lunch (for around 12:30pm-1pm or so)? I didn't meet up with them until 4:15pm and that, apparently, was pushing it a little. I would generally consider 4pm and after to be later in the day, especially for a Sunday. Hmmm.

I just don't get it.

Anyhow, I met up with movie.girl for the first time in over 9 months and got to meet her fiancée. It was a rather odd time. I was fairly mellow, having been awake since 8:45am (that's almost sleeping in for me), and the two of them are moderately quiet-like themselves. Add in that I was just meeting mr.fiancée and, well, it was odd. (To be honest, none of us were very comfortable, at least initially.) He's a nice guy, really, and I'm happy for her but... the dynamics between the two of them are strange. For one, he's only now moving in with her. Since they've only been going out for 9 months, I suppose the timeline for moving in is cool, although it conflicts a little with the whole engagement thing (i.e. getting engaged before living together). And at times it felt like... like they were still getting to know each other or like they were discovering aspects of the other's personality. As if there were still things about each other that they were either learning or were not completely settled with yet. It's hard to describe and I could easily be completely wrong but it wasn't that comfortable coexistence vibe that I've gotten from other couples who are friends.

In any case, we snagged an early dinner at the Wood 'n Tap (we all shared a few appetizers). Then we went bowling in East Hartford (2 games). Then we went back to movie.girl's house (i.e. their house) and played 3 games of Scene It. It was fun but... it wasn't comfortable and it wasn't that old kind of relaxed hanging out that movie.girl and I used to do. Were we (all of us) waiting for the other shoe to drop when there was no other shoe?

Everything changes.

I don't know if it was that I was uncomfortable or that I sensed it or that I caused it. From one meeting, I cannot deduce anything more. I don't know if it would be easier with repetition or whether it would never be easier. I don't know if I completely misread things or if I'm spot on. I generally trust my judgment and senses but these impressions may easily be colored by things I want to see and not things that are there.

Regardless, it was nice to see her again and I'm glad I got to meet her fiancée. I hope things work out for them. (I also kind of hope I get an invite to the wedding, though if it's in Mexico and I'm single, I'm not positive I'd go. But I'd really think about going. You don't miss weddings if you can help it.) I probably won't see her/them again in a while (e.g., 6+ weeks).

The Departed Is A Rush

A week ago I saw The Departed. It's directed by Martin Scorsese and stars Leonardo DiCaprio, Matt Damon, Jack Nicholson, Mark Wahlberg, Martin Sheen, Alec Baldwin and Vera Farmiga.

Plot:

Years ago, a powerful Irish mafia figure [Nicholson] placed a small selection of his youngest, brightest men into the Massachusetts Police Academy as cadets. Their purpose is to eventually rise within the prestigious ranks of the city's police department, to serve as the eyes and ears of their boss. While somewhere else, a young cadet [DiCaprio] was assigned with an equally dangerous task: infiltrate the Irish syndicate headed by the man sending in his own to the Boston Police. Now, one cadet [Damon] is an up and coming police official with a torn allegiance to his job and to the criminal mastermind that put him there. While the other cadet is the trusted number two of that man, only finding his professional duties are becoming blurred with his current state. But new clues have lead to unfortunate discoveries, when both sides realize they're being watched by the enemy. It's now all just a matter of time before the men assigned to find out whose the infiltrator, could come to a bloody end when someone's identity may be revealed.

I really dislike this plot summary but it's close enough to serve. For the record, Damon isn't really torn but DiCaprio is. The movie focuses on DiCaprio as he infiltrates Nicholson's cadre to try and take him down. Meanwhile, Damon is on the other side, having infiltrated the police to stymy their efforts against Nicholson. Both sides are looking for the traitor within their midst and it's only a matter of time before things come to a head.

This is an excellent movie. It's tense and, at times, bloody, but it's a great look at the pressures of undercover work. DiCaprio lives in constant fear of being discovered. Damon often fears that he might let down Nicholson. It's a fascinating game that goes round and round right up to the end. I rather enjoyed it. I recommend this movie to anyone not turned off my excessive violence and/or bloodshed. I mean, c'mon - this is from the same director who brought us Goodfellas, Casino, Bringing Out The Dead and Gangs Of New York. (I'm not mentioning Taxi Driver or Raging Bull because I haven't seen them. I know, heresy.)

Go see this movie.

Stranger Than Fiction Is Thin

A week ago Saturday I saw Stranger Than Fiction with Capt. Kate, Husband Pete and Sister Sarah. The movie stars Will Ferrell, Emma Thompson, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Duston Hoffman and Queen Latifah.

Plot:

Karen Effiel [Thompson] is an author writing her latest novel about an isolated man named Harold Crick. What she doesn't know is that her fictionalized character is real. The real Harold Crick [Ferrell] is an IRS agent who has lived a dull existence and one day begins to hear Karen's voice as she narrates what she puts on paper[]. Because of this Harold [enlists] the help of a literary professor [Hoffman] to find out what is happening and ends up changing things about his life including beginning a relationship with his IRS client, a government-hating bakery owner named Ana Pascal [Gyllenhaal]. Harold, however, finds trouble when he hears that Karen plans to kill him.

It's not a bad movie. The story is interesting and the characters are very well done. It's probably an excellent book. The really bad part is that the preview(s) give so much away. You could watch the preview and the last 10-15 min. of the movie and see more than enough. The actors and actresses are fantastic! I only wish there were more to the movie, to the story. Some deeper plot to engage the viewer. I will observe that the story is rather moralistic and somewhat upbeat. "Live every day as if it were your last" and "no regrets," that sort of thing. Maybe rental-worthy or cable-worthy. Probably not worth the price of a movie ticket.

Borat! Borat! Borat!

I saw Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan last night with a coworker, the coworker's wife, a friend of the coworker and the friend's girlfriend. Borat stars Sacha Baron Cohen and Ken Davitian.

Plot:

Kazakhstani TV personality Borat [Sagdiyev] is dispatched to the United States to report on the "greatest country in the world." With a documentary crew in tow, Borat becomes more interested in locating and marrying Pamela Anderson than on his assignment.

Of course the real plot of the movie is that SBC portrays a backwards-ish character named Borat who films Americans doing and saying some extremely off-color things, often times having tricked the person by stating the documentary would not be shown in America. Some of the criticism people have for the film is that people were tricked into doing and saying what they did. Personally, I have no problem with it since you should never do or say anything you wouldn't do or say. Yes, alcohol can push those boundaries but c'mon!

I thought the movie was hilarious!!! I loved it! I would start listing quotes from the movie but a lot of them are contextual. That is, the context within which things are said and done is of great importance to fully appreciate what is said and done.

In other words, if you think you might like it, GO SEE THIS MOVIE RIGHT NOW. On the other hand, if it seems like it might offend you or you have a problem with the trickery involved, don't go see it. Peoples' reactions will likely run hot and cold like that. There's no middle ground when it comes to this one. (But I thought it was great! I can't wait to see what SBC comes up with next since Borat was such a success.)

Too Much!

Bear with me. (Or else.)

Transmetropolitan #1 as a Free Download: Transmetropolitan is an excellent comic book/graphic novel series. I highly recommend you check out no. 1. Yay Warren Ellis!

Second Life Struggles With Copying: I played SL for a bit a while back. Interesting problem though not wholly surprising.

Bank of America loses $50 million from customers upset by false arrest: Wow. BoA screwed up and is going to pay for it, big time.

Best Buy claiming prices copyrighted: So wrong. Bad use of copyright law and/or the DMCA really pisses me off.

Dolphins taught to sing Batman theme: Sweet!

Tycho of PennyArcade relates his PS3 woes. I did the whole waiting-in-line bit for the PS2. Eventually got mine when a friend didn't want his preorder and I did. I'll probably end up getting both a PS3 and a Wii, just down the road when it's not nearly so insane. (Did I really just say "a Wii"? Yeesh!)

Ctrl+Alt+Del has its own dig at the PS3 line-waiting hoards. Hoards. What an excellent word.

Brad Guigar of Evil Inc. had some comments about one entrepreneur's thief's attempt to sell book-publishing for $469.00!!! Years ago, maybe. But now? Overpriced by some factor like 30 or so. Hence, a thief.

Drunk Australian Threatens Police With Snake: "I'm not afraid to use it!"

Judge Rules Burrito Is Not Sandwich: Well, I was confused...

Scott Adams contemplates memory and aging:

To compensate for my inevitable mental decline I am already doing triage on entire categories of my memory. Anything I don't need will be purged to make room for new stuff. I already got rid of the category I call "who wore what." If I see you in the gym wearing a full chicken outfit I will remember that as "saw you working out." Luckily I'm male, so it didn't take much work to purge that category.

Eventually I plan to release all knowledge of complicated explanations for the world whenever simpler ones will do the trick. Evolution has to go. That's way too complicated. I plan to remember only a few dozen species anyway, mostly the cute ones. I think we can all agree that there are too many unnecessary animals. I can't be expected to remember them all. My long term objective is to remember nothing about animals except that the political party with the donkey symbol exists only to raise my taxes.

I'm also going to start lumping things together in my mind based on their similarities just to save space. From now on, stem cells are babies, and Iranians are Arabs. And they all live in North Korea with Osama.

Truer words were probably spoken somewhen and somewhere by someone but I forget...

Ever wonder why "somewhen" isn't used more often? It's apparently a real word (thank you Google search), even though MSWord fails to recognize it as one. Hmmm. I think I shall henceforth adopt its usage (and/or make up such usage as I see fit). VICTORY IS MINE!

And various quotes to be added at the appropriate place somewhen:

"Victory is mine!" -- Family Guy

Kiss my awesome! -- diesel sweeties (11/17/06)

"One-handed naked Tetris it is, then!" -- diesel sweeties (11/17/06)

"Why can’t I control the weather?" -- Ryan Sohmer, LICD (11/17/06)

"Society would show wisdom if it let me run things." -- Ryan Sohmer, LICD (11/17/06)

"My mind is a dark and scary place." -- Ryan Sohmer, LICD (11/17/06)

"Never bring a snake to a gunfight, I think the saying goes." -- Lowering The Bar (11/16/06)

I'm somewhen or somewhere or something or some combination thereof. Cheers!

more, More, MORE!!!

Of what, though? No clue. Just more!

Late-Night Political Jokes

"Is this a 'neener-neener' situation or more of a 'Who's your daddy?'" -- Dilbert (11/16/06)

LICD has a mildly amusing Heroes comic.

Evan Schaeffer relates a new ABA ethics opinion on metadata. Well worth looking into this if you're involved in litigation. Metadata in documents produced for discovery could be significant and potentially harmful.

Scott Adams explains how he was hypnotizing his readers yesterday. I don't think it worked on me. Seriously. I didn't actually imagine or mentally respond to the suggestions. Plus, at the end I didn't "wiggle my toes" or even place any emphasis on the "knot in your back" phrase. *shrug*

And yesterday was only an "okay" day. Not excellent, not terrific, not great, merely "okay." Very few of my days are much better than that.

BlawgSearch, you know – for those times when you have an overriding compulsion to search the legal blogs... it might happen... Mine isn't listed there and I'm not submitting it. I may have graduated from law school and I may be working in a legal-esque job (Patent Agent), but it's somewhat rare that I actually write about anything legal.