Wednesday, January 30, 2008

Let's stage a dramatic reading of Gil Thorp

Despite my interest in current events and the inner workings of print media, I read my local newspaper -- The News & Observer -- primarily for entertainment, not information. Each morning (or late afternoon, or whenever the hell) I grab the A section (which has the always ludicrous Opinion section in the back), Life, etc. (the lamely named weekday features section), and occasionally metro (whenever Barry Saunders has a column). On Fridays, I always grab the North Raleigh News supplement, brainkillingly boring except for the restaurant inspections.

But my attention is truly devoted to the comics, which until a few years ago (I think? it's so not worth looking up) proffered moldy three-panel shitshows Cathy, Drabble, Gil Thorp, Wizard of Id, and Hagar the Horrible. Until they got dumped for some kinda half-decent strips (like the cute Pearls Before Swine and Calvin & Hobbes semi-homage Frazz). I have this weird thing where I have to read all the comics, in order, every day. I'd dive into the inevitably shallow, inane, and misogynistic Cathy; turn a glazed-over gaze on Drabble and Wizard of Id, and marvel at how the fuck the Browne could sustain a semiliterate readership over multiple generations. But I honest to God couldn't stomach the seven seconds it took to read Gil Thorp six days a week.

Now, years later, I find myself compulsively reading This Week in Milford. Under such scrutiny, Gil Thorp is even more inscrutable and bizarrely drawn than I remember. It is also hilarious. Viz:



ETA: In the nanoseconds I spent researching this post, I discovered that Lois of Hi and Lois is supposed to be Beetle Bailey's sister! I know! I mean, it's obvious that nepotism runs wild on the comics page, but I didn't realize that shit extended to characters. This explains so much.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

lolbunn

Lekha made an Office-themed lolbunn!



(starring Catilla and Komissar)

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

14 NC Central University sousaphones stolen

From this morning's News & Observer:
Thieves steal band's thunder

That's some shameful shit.

What kind of master criminal made off with 14 sousaphones without their cases? Seriously, this would require significant preparation and sleight of hand. If someone sees a sousaphone occupying the entire backseat of your car, you can't just be like "Um, cashed in some Best Buy giftcards" the way you could for fancy electronics or something. And, you know, times 14. Christ.

At the same time, I can't imagine these assholes won't get far -- fencing that stuff has got to be difficult. Then again, the article states that the thefts occurred on at least two incidents at least through December. Lame that we're only hearing about it now. I can only imagine how Central's bassline must feel. Boo.

This guy might have more details. Updates TK!

Film execs, take note: Who needs screenwriters when Drumline II pretty much just wrote itself?

Friday, January 11, 2008

<3!

I didn't realize how much I'd missed the incendiary sexiness of John Oliver until he proved to be the high point of Wednesday night's Daily Show.


The RIAA: Still obfuscatory jerks

Forgot to post about this last week. My fave newsy NPR show, Talk of the Nation, hosted Washington Post writer Marc Fisher, who authored the article on the most recent audacity in the RIAA's file-sharing lawsuits, and RIAA president Cary Sherman to discuss the whole crazy thing.

Sherman refuses to firmly state whether or not the RIAA considers simple uploading to a computer or music player legal, but he calls Fisher out for misquoting the section of the brief upon which the article hinged. At the end of the segment, the RIAA's policy remains murky as ever, but it turns out that Sherman was right: The RIAA maintains in the brief that the mp3s in this case were located in a shared folder and therefore illegal -- not just because they were uploaded in the first place. The Post has since copped to the mistake and corrected the story.

But Ryan Singel at Wired's Threat Level blog makes the case that the RIAA's legal campaign against file-sharers has presumed uploading to be illegal since their ultimately victorious case against Jammie Thomas this past year.

...the RIAA's lawyer used that argument -- that individuals don't even have the right to make MP3s - to persuade a jury to levy exorbitant fines on file sharer Jammie Thomas. The judge told the jury to consider that simply offering files for download constituted copyright infringement -- the RIAA didn't have to prove anyone actually downloaded the files.

But it wasn't clear until after the testimony whether the judge would require proof that someone actually downloaded the songs she made available on Kazaa. So the RIAA''s lawyer engaged in a scorched earth campaign, argumentatively asking Thomas if she had gotten permission to simply rip the songs.

Before knowing whether the judge would enforce a burden of proof the RIAA couldn't meet -- they had no proof anyone actually downloaded songs from Thomas, the RIAA's lawyer was building a case to have Thomas found liable for simply ripping songs without permission. That's why the Sony executive said ripping a song was the same as stealing one, though now the RIAA finds it convenient to say she didn't understand the question.


Same as it ever was (ineffective and preposterous, that is).