Yes, more rants. Get over it.
At the risk of becoming a link blog, I had a few interesting things to share here and there. Interesting to me, anyway. And I'll intersperse them with opinions of varying subjects. Doesn't that sound fun? For ease of use, I'll be labelling the headers here so you can skip things that will make you angry, or sad, or cease to be my friend.
Vista: No comparison
Thanks to my new favorite site, Newsvine (see previous post), I found this amusing little gem. Granted the results are slightly skewed, but it still seems like a pretty interesting little experiment.
Dubai Bye-Bye
So the port deal is nixed, and thank God. We wouldn't want the world thinking that we mean it when we say we want the Arab world to flourish, or that we don't jump to conclusions. After all, we had very justifiable reason for mass-panic, and if we had ever had the 45-day investigatory period Congress had promised, we certainly would have found tons of shady dealings and large carts marked "evil" all over the operation. But now we don't have to bother with that, because it's been nipped in the bud.
In all seriousness, I am a little suspicious. I was a supporter of the port deal, but this all seems just a tad too convenient for everyone. Dubai saves face, Congress doesn't have to be on the President's bad side, and Bush doesn't have to make good on his veto threat. Perhaps a phone call or two was made that we don't know about.
Origami, Just as Useless
Microsoft finally unleashed its paper-folding project to the world. I'm underwhelmed. It seemed cool in concept, but in execution I fail to see how this is really useful. It's like war. What is it good for? Absolutely nothing. (Hey!) Point is, it's not quite as functional as a laptop, and doesn't do very much that a PDA can't. So we're paying you more, why exactly?
A Man's Right to Choose
I can almost smell woekitten's rage from here. This all comes from a pretty interesting article on a court case that's coming up. I have mixed feelings on this. On one hand, I can see the point of men. In a pro-choice America, and from a completely layman's perspective of logic, it does seem unfair to deny men rights. This is a microcosm of the plethora of parents' rights that men are denied, from child support and inability to comment (or even know) about unwanted pregnancy to the court's default setting on female custody. Looking at it from the perspective of straight-out fairness, it seems a bit wrong.
But our legal system doesn't really work on fairness. As someone commented in the CNN coverage of the story, Roe vs Wade is about forcing a woman to carry a child to term, not forcing her to raise the said child. We actually have no law stipulating that a woman is required to raise a child that she has; other than child support (which comes rarely from our court system), she has no obligation towards it at all. Men have no real equal to Roe vs Wade, because they never have to carry to term. But the law does require men to raise and support the child, just as a woman is forced to be a "good mother" if she keeps the child. Which makes things equal, except for the simple fact that the mother alone has the right to decide whether or not to opt for adoption, which again skews the parents' rights towards leaving more towards the mother and less towards the father. Some would say this is fair based on the biology of the situation, but I'm not sure biology is a good substitute for justice.
In all, this is really a complex issue compounded by the fact that men's rights as a parent have been ignored for so long. This particular case has no real clout, but it is opening several lines of dialogue as to how little choice men have in the lives of their children, unwanted or otherwise. As one who respects the law I have to oppose it based on legal grounds, and as a pro-life advocate I think it's silly not to do what's best for the child. That is why ultimately it will get rejected.
But that once again raises the question of Roe vs Wade again: if the man is forced, legally, to do what is best for the child's well-being, wouldn't a logical law-based society force a woman to do the same thing? Somehow I don't think abortion is best for most children. The child that will live an agonizing two weeks, sure, but what percentage of abortions are honestly that tragic in their basis? That's what this is going to center around, at some point. It's a complicated subject, and easy to see all the sides of.
Attack of the iPod Clones
A New York Times article does a pretty good job of detailing the latest iPod clone, and why they tend to fail. It's not in any one aspect, it's in the shared ones, and imitating all of that at once is damn-near impossible.
In closing, I'd like to take this opportunity to once again plug Newsvine which I recently found out is not only a great news site, but is composed of some very friendly staff that actually replied personally to me when I sent them some kudos. Also, simmer in jealousy, because that Neko Case album that's gotten my top rating so far for the year will soon be supplemented by seeing her in concert. The day after my birthday she's playing at the 9:30 club and I grabbed some tickets. Happy Birthday to Me.
Vista: No comparison
Thanks to my new favorite site, Newsvine (see previous post), I found this amusing little gem. Granted the results are slightly skewed, but it still seems like a pretty interesting little experiment.
Dubai Bye-Bye
So the port deal is nixed, and thank God. We wouldn't want the world thinking that we mean it when we say we want the Arab world to flourish, or that we don't jump to conclusions. After all, we had very justifiable reason for mass-panic, and if we had ever had the 45-day investigatory period Congress had promised, we certainly would have found tons of shady dealings and large carts marked "evil" all over the operation. But now we don't have to bother with that, because it's been nipped in the bud.
In all seriousness, I am a little suspicious. I was a supporter of the port deal, but this all seems just a tad too convenient for everyone. Dubai saves face, Congress doesn't have to be on the President's bad side, and Bush doesn't have to make good on his veto threat. Perhaps a phone call or two was made that we don't know about.
Origami, Just as Useless
Microsoft finally unleashed its paper-folding project to the world. I'm underwhelmed. It seemed cool in concept, but in execution I fail to see how this is really useful. It's like war. What is it good for? Absolutely nothing. (Hey!) Point is, it's not quite as functional as a laptop, and doesn't do very much that a PDA can't. So we're paying you more, why exactly?
A Man's Right to Choose
I can almost smell woekitten's rage from here. This all comes from a pretty interesting article on a court case that's coming up. I have mixed feelings on this. On one hand, I can see the point of men. In a pro-choice America, and from a completely layman's perspective of logic, it does seem unfair to deny men rights. This is a microcosm of the plethora of parents' rights that men are denied, from child support and inability to comment (or even know) about unwanted pregnancy to the court's default setting on female custody. Looking at it from the perspective of straight-out fairness, it seems a bit wrong.
But our legal system doesn't really work on fairness. As someone commented in the CNN coverage of the story, Roe vs Wade is about forcing a woman to carry a child to term, not forcing her to raise the said child. We actually have no law stipulating that a woman is required to raise a child that she has; other than child support (which comes rarely from our court system), she has no obligation towards it at all. Men have no real equal to Roe vs Wade, because they never have to carry to term. But the law does require men to raise and support the child, just as a woman is forced to be a "good mother" if she keeps the child. Which makes things equal, except for the simple fact that the mother alone has the right to decide whether or not to opt for adoption, which again skews the parents' rights towards leaving more towards the mother and less towards the father. Some would say this is fair based on the biology of the situation, but I'm not sure biology is a good substitute for justice.
In all, this is really a complex issue compounded by the fact that men's rights as a parent have been ignored for so long. This particular case has no real clout, but it is opening several lines of dialogue as to how little choice men have in the lives of their children, unwanted or otherwise. As one who respects the law I have to oppose it based on legal grounds, and as a pro-life advocate I think it's silly not to do what's best for the child. That is why ultimately it will get rejected.
But that once again raises the question of Roe vs Wade again: if the man is forced, legally, to do what is best for the child's well-being, wouldn't a logical law-based society force a woman to do the same thing? Somehow I don't think abortion is best for most children. The child that will live an agonizing two weeks, sure, but what percentage of abortions are honestly that tragic in their basis? That's what this is going to center around, at some point. It's a complicated subject, and easy to see all the sides of.
Attack of the iPod Clones
A New York Times article does a pretty good job of detailing the latest iPod clone, and why they tend to fail. It's not in any one aspect, it's in the shared ones, and imitating all of that at once is damn-near impossible.
In closing, I'd like to take this opportunity to once again plug Newsvine which I recently found out is not only a great news site, but is composed of some very friendly staff that actually replied personally to me when I sent them some kudos. Also, simmer in jealousy, because that Neko Case album that's gotten my top rating so far for the year will soon be supplemented by seeing her in concert. The day after my birthday she's playing at the 9:30 club and I grabbed some tickets. Happy Birthday to Me.