Thought Chasm

Brandy (the liquor). Somehow, this delicious distilled wine has (for reasons I can’t figure) been given a bad name. As the least possible qualified, I feel I should defend this fantastic fermented marvel.

Recently I’ve reacquainted myself with the burnt wine bliss and the following defense is entirely selfish and based on this assumption: if you understand the beauty of brandy order my new favorite for yourself (or me, because you’re so cute and your hair looks great and you smell like sexy flowers).

Let’s start near the beginning.

I haven’t drank Coca-Cola, by itself, since high school. Outside of the occasional Mountain Dew (err, Mtn Dew) to stave off fatigue or a root beer now and again, I avoid soda (“pop,” for my four-year-old or misguided Midwestern readers). Only when commingled with booze do I regularly partake in the sugary mess most of you hold dear.

If you had run into me freshman year with a 20oz bottle of Coke, you could be 98% sure it was heavily mixed. Brandy made for a reasonably priced drunk. As my tastes refined (used loosely), beer (“beer” then beer, if you get my meaning) took over.

Recently, I’ve realize the error of my ways. It started a few months ago. I forget the name, but Porter and Frye has a drink named something like the “Ginger or Mary Anne.” The mix of Hennessy, ginger beer and others is amazing (go try it, if you have $10 to spare).

Then, on the aforementioned trip to Duplex, I dabbled in the distilled delight again. When Girlfriend and I made our last trip to the drink store, I grabbed a bottle of Korbel and later some ginger ale, inspired by the Porter and Frye concoction. Back home, I mixed my first Brandy Ginger Ale, which is the “favorite” mentioned above.

It’s simple (as much brandy as I damn well please, thank you, and the rest ginger ale), refreshing and not filling (more drinking!). It’s cheaper by drink than most imports (it’s considered a rail drink). A flask and two cans of ginger ale can make an evening, so it travels incredibly well. And best of all, I’m saving the planet.

That’s right kids, my taste for this luscious liqueur has lower impact than near anything. With our preference for better beers, Girlfriend and I toss more glass than dragon chasers. This way, a bottle lasts weeks (days?) instead of… uh… an hour? (None of your business.)

I guess I’m really just asking you to buy me a drink. Save the planet!

According to Wikipedia and the Groundhog Day page, it’s nine to five (as of noon-thirty) for an early spring. Unfortunately, the most famous is one of the dissenters.

For whatever reason (I think because he hates me or thinks he’s funny), Punxsutawney Phil decided he’d like another month and a half of winter. If it weren’t for my good, adorable, kind nature, I’d shoot that jerk in the face.

Okay… some of you may point out the logistics aren’t exactly right. I agree I’m not (nor ever want to be) in Punxsutawney. I don’t have (nor ever want to have) a gun. Nor do I have a car to bring that gun to Punxsutawney. (Not to mention my not really caring either way…)

Still, Double P is lucky the majority of his compatriots have sided with a shortened winter. Had they not, I’d be sending children-tears vibes his way. If there’s any truth to negative energy or thoughts becoming things, his head would explode.

And he would deserve it. That prick.

Friday I mentioned a reason I’m not getting an i[Tab].* I’ve had some time to think about it and am still not in the market for such things. Instead, I’ll explain who is in the market for such things. The ideal people that will buy an i[Tab]…

… have never learned to type.
Hunt-peck is all you need and all you’d want with a keyboard that’s ergonomically useless. In fact, better they’ve never used a keyboard. They’ll be impressed with the non-responsiveness of it.

… haven’t bought a television in three… err, seven years (let’s be safe).
Any more recent and they’ll have seen widescreen format. Those familiar black bars at the top and bottom will remind them of home no matter where they are.

Aside: Why not make it widescreen in landscape mode? Disable the touch on the sides and dim those portions to black when in portrait mode. Apps could still develop for the fullscreen format but why not cater to those that want a sweet as video player? Disappointed!

… love iTunes.
For as much as you have to use iTunes to maintain any media on the i[Tab], they’ll have to be über fans. Maybe to the point they feed their kids with it.

And finally, they have to be old enough, mature enough or dim enough not to comprehend the glaring double meaning in the under-thought name. I mean, the jokes are endless. (Thus excluding anyone on Twitter.)

Essentially, I’m describing your grandmother. Yes, the i[Tab] is cool and will be popular but only because of the idea of it. In reality it does quite a few things adequately but nothing well.

It’s a cumbersome music player, a poorly designed video player (widescreen!), an unfortunate book reader and an unintuitive (zoom much?) browsing machine. But, it will sell because Apple aims for the market that should exist, not the one that does.

It paves the way for a future of “automatic” computing but that’s not the market I fall into. My parents had the desktop and I have a notebook; maybe this is the next stage of computation but it’ll take a minute for me to jump on board.

* I refuse, at least digitally, to refer to this thing with the absurd, marketing misstep name Apple provides.

… As of yesterday, I’ve been working as a contractor for seven weeks. By Monday afternoon, I will have moved into three different cubes; spent about fifty hours on-bus; worked past 8p twice, on three different computers and three sites; and haven’t been paid. (You read that correctly.)

After a particularly long (cou*12 hour*gh) day, I received a pitch about the many benefits and great things about signing up full-time. I was not impressed and, as my newfound stability isn’t all that stable, am still unimpressed. (I’m scheduled for a check on the 15th, as their accounting system defaults to a 60 day wait.)

… (Speaking of unimpressed.) The Apple i[Tab] (what an incredibly terrible name) was introduced Wednesday and will ship in two months. Some people will find a use for it but until I can justify paying for books instead of the library (on top of some UX choices), I’m out. My next Mac will be the Mini that runs my television after the move.

… Yesterday was my sister’s twenty-second birthday. We went to the restaurant she suggested and had a pretty great time. Afterward, Girlfriend, two friend and I went to a show. After a drink or two and waiting in line for about fifteen minutes, the power went out.

About a half-hour later someone told us they were getting information for refunds; thirty seconds after that the lights went back on. Roma di Luna’s (if you’re not listening to them, you should be) set was cut short for time and we left before the headlining act. I’m fully exhausted today.

… and finally:
This is the first FFFA since a month and a half after I was unceremoniously and involuntarily removed from my former place of employment. Since has been a whirlwind. I very much enjoyed my summer but didn’t enjoy the finance-related stress.

I’m now actively looking for work in Chicago and if any of the threes of you dear readers know of anyone that could help, please let me know. I’d love to find a local job board or hear about some specific places looking to hire.

Thanks in advance. You’re all glorious beacons of light in this dark, dark world. Well, most of you.

We used to sacrifice during war, falling heavily into debt that was sometimes recovered through growth or, not so long ago, pillaging the resources of conquered lands. Now we manufacture money so citizens can continue their glut, devaluing the currency, ballooning debt and sparking inflation.

Along with those internal struggles, a global economy means any country’s money is every other countries’ money. The interplay of loans, trade and–rarely–aid make any conflict difficult to resolve. War in the middle east cannot be won. Our nation is the largest consumer of their most lucrative export.

Each country, with no more land to forcefully take and increasingly limited resources is dependent on dozens of others. A conflict between nations is a conflict of interests. Increasingly, allies are more dependent on commodities than ideologies.

Many countries are caught in no-win relationships with their rivals. In fact, most are finding that cooperation benefits both parties more than antagonism. Those that don’t accept this are caught in endless turmoil, lofting explosives at each other between gunfire and gaining nothing.

In the past, victory was expensive but attainable. Weapons, men, supplies and mobility were found at high cost, financed or repaid with spoils and taxes. Technology now makes it possible to confront and debilitate an entire company for under a thousand US dollars.

Every “smart” missile that detonates one “terrorist cell” recruits any number of terrorists by fostering discontent and a thirst for retribution when their relatives are wounded or worse. Distinct cultures and terrain make overtaking an enemy difficult. Advances that give them the ability to kill with a cellular phone and readily available explosives make it more so.

Oil and other energy sources are costly and finite. The US Department of Defense’s per capita energy consumption is about ten times that of China, consuming as much energy as Nigeria. Three quarters is used by vehicles.

We have reached a point, through social and technological advances, where victory through war is impossible. This is a simple statement. This is a simple statement no one in power admits.

Even in Iraq I a multinational force only managed to defend a small country from invasion by another. In fifty years, no country has been taken by force. Iraq II has yet to be declared a war.

Misguided nationalism, strong support from powerful military suppliers and delusional misconceptions of power guide foreign policy. Until we accept that military victory is no longer an option, we will pathetically attempt to force countries into submission.

Our media can no longer vilify a miniscule, fringe element in order to create the illusion of an enemy population. Our politicians can no longer lead with guns. We must learn about and from other cultures.

I finally sat down and watched Powder. The movie aside for a moment, I was astounded by how hilarious the premise is. (Bear in mind, the writer subsequently wrote two Jeepers Creepers movies.)

If you haven’t seen the movie and would like to, do not read on. I won’t waste time avoiding spoilers.

Jeremy “Powder” Reed is a higher-evolved being because his mother was hit by lightening with him in the womb. An expert in high-school level theory, Donald Ripley (Jeff Goldblum!), his science teacher, makes this assertion without hesitation. He should have hesitated.

There are ideas about what humans would be like if they used all of their entire brain instead of the ape-like ten percent or so (we use more, but not simultaneously). It’s not possible for many reasons but here’s one…

We adapted the ability to use tools and language to survive scarcity. We don’t have that. In fact, we have abundance and we’re still wasting it. Humans are dim, simplistic and lack foresight.

Natural selection, Intelligent Design, the Logos, God or however you define it made us this way. We aren’t supposed to realize we’re part of nature or that our planet is dying. We’re special in that we think we’re special.

So, for someone like Powder to exist, we’d only need a few periods of unparalleled scarcity, right? Nope.

It’s unlikely we’d ever advance past the point of ignorant, belligerent ape. Even with the rudimentary tools we’ve been given we dominate the planet. We idiots are the supreme species so there’s no need to adapt to anything more.

There can be improvement, sure. We can realize we can no longer wage war, address commonality in culture instead of differences and educate our children. Or even consider ourselves part of nature, acting accordingly.

You probably know from current events or Us Weekly, we do none of this. In fact, there’s a growing movement desperately against any of this. Which makes the ideas behind Powder all the more hilarious.

As a romantic comedy between teenager and cloud, it’s stellar. (See what I did there?) As a movie, it’s entertaining. As an idea, it’s horrid and absurd. Then again, it’s more likely than a winged beast that feeds every so often on somewhat-attractive teenagers or Justin Long.

I’ve never seen the show. I’ve never been to New Jersey. I haven’t used product in my hair (or, really, had hair) for nearly a decade. I’m not even sure I want to admit the show actually exists, but I will. Why?

In the last week, nearly five people I respect have brought it up to me on separate occasions. (For the sake of their eventual progeny, they will remain nameless.) Worse still, I spent a night of cosmic bowling next to an entire group of “fans” dressed to the nines as their favorite… um… character?

If you’re not aware of what I’m talking at, please back away. In fact, clear your browser cache. No. Turn off your computer and read five pages of a book. (People Magazine is not a book.)

For the rest, you’ll have to explain the draw of this show. I’m kidding. If you try, I’ll involuntarily lose a bit of respect for you. The jokes at its expense are somewhat entertaining but I have to make judgements on the comments I’ve heard and the theme-partied bowlers.

The comments ranged from: “so much of a train wreck it’s hysterical” to: “it’s SOOO ridiculous… it’s like a sociological experiment gone awry.” One (so called) friend even likened it to season one of “Real World.” (There is no. way. that’s. true.)

That’s enough for me never to watch but then I went bowling.

On a night where temperatures hovered around freezing, this group of bowlers was dressed to prevent heat stroke. The hair was big, the skirts were short and the quotes were plentiful. (“Funbags?” Really?) They were probably great people but they were wearing the wrong uniform.

For those reasons, no matter how fervently you argue the merit, I see nothing but harm coming from this show and its ilk. Taking the mold of bringing stereotypes (optimistically, archetypes) together and making a show of stereotypes within those stereotypes is not interesting. It’s boring. To boot, MTV already made the show in 2004, which is just lazy wrapped in a warm blanket of apathetic.

If this is the state of things, where people ignore reality and instead immerse themselves in “reality,” hope is in short supply. Granted, that’s if you still have hope. To each their own.