this record is now finished.
==
when i sat down to complete my discography in 2013, one of the ideas that immediately jumped out was to try and reinterpret some of the inri tracks from the late 1990s as modern pieces. as i believed that my source tapes were unusable at the time (which i eventually realized was not the case - see inri024), the conditions for this being a workable project would need to be the existence of the original drum tracks, along with the existence of some midi files.
i was gifted my ry30 in the summer of 1997 to compensate for the loss of my drum kit and studio space, but i did not have any recording gear again until christmas. so, i spent the fall programming the drum machine and teaching myself the basics of sequencing and sound design, using the primitive tools i had available to me. by the time i got my four track, as well as my jx-8p, the ry30 was full, and re-recording my first songs was just a matter of transferring the completed material from the electronic equipment to tape. so, i initially considered making a companion ep to inrisampled that would document my time spent programming the ry30 along with my time spent learning how to manipulate sound. the difference between the drum tracks at this stage and the initial collage experiments, however, is that the drum tracks were not complete songs. so, this was abandoned due to the product being a little dry. but, i still wanted to make an ep around the ry30, perhaps by orchestrating the existing companion midi tracks.
this idea then quickly merged with what would become thru (inri070) and eventually discarded itself within itself when it was realized that the existing midi files for the 90s material were too sparse to really utilize, especially in comparison to the midi files from the early 00s. thru was deleted and then resuscitated over the course of 2014 and 2015, eventually releasing in mid 2015 as a 2001-2003 project, leaving the 90s material in the dustbin of my own history.
it was in june, 2015 that i realized that the source tapes were usable after all, and cycled back around to the beginning of the reconstruction in order to complete the relevant tracks as instrumental pieces. this idea kind of recreated itself in the nature of the source tapes, as i had bounced all of the electronics together into the same channel as a mixing step, back in the 90s. so, i found myself with these ready-to-publish electronic tracks right off the tape that incorporated a combination of the ry30 tracks, jx-8p parts, soundblaster programs, zoom 1010 noises and cool edit experiments. all they really needed was a little attention on the mastering.
i flipped this over, in the end: what each of these tracks are is their final album mixes, with the guitar and bass parts deleted (unless the bass was done on a synthesizer). so, there was some post-production added over 2015 in the form of updated soundfonts, digital mastering and digital effects processing. but, these are really flourishes on the existing tracks.
it was at the end of dec, 2015 that further similar electronics-only ry30-centric remixes were creating for some later songs, as well, thereby filling out the disc and closing the project.
i sold my ry30 in may, 2003 to raise money to go to british columbia. my logic was that i'd really maximized what i was going to get out of it, and that i'd already discarded it, anyways: by that time, i'd been writing drum parts in the scorewriter for a few years already, and had barely touched the ry30 in a long time. but, i regret that decision, in hindsight. and, i expect to pick up another one, one day.
originally written, programmed and recorded from 1996-2002. reclaimed & remixed from june to december of 2015. initial completion date was december 31, 2015. as always, please use headphones.
credits:
j - drum & other programming, orchestral & other sequencing, guitar effects, digital effects processing, digital wave editing, synthesizers, loops, vocal noises & relics, sampling, sound design, production
the various rendered electronic orchestras include organ, sitar, bells, synthesizer effects, tuba, saxophone, flute, clarinet, orchestra hit, piano, violin, viola, cello, contrabass and various full string sections
released april 22, 2003
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/electronic-pieces-in-a-primitive-style
Thursday, December 31, 2015
idischzo
so, this version got done first.
i think that the track is actually fine, it's just that the static this morning is a little bit strong. we'll see if i'm right and it fades over the day.
initially written in 1996. recreated in feb, 1998. reclaimed july 12, 2015. reprogrammed and reconstructed on dec 31, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/idischzo
i think that the track is actually fine, it's just that the static this morning is a little bit strong. we'll see if i'm right and it fades over the day.
initially written in 1996. recreated in feb, 1998. reclaimed july 12, 2015. reprogrammed and reconstructed on dec 31, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/idischzo
the term "natural climate change" implies that it's an act of god or something. but, historical climate change has been the consequence of a myriad of complex causes, including biological activity. look up the great oxygenation event for one particularly extreme example. one should consequently not mentally categorize "natural" and "anthropogenic" climate change as different things. they're really fundamentally the same thing - same causes, same consequences. and, we can modify so-called "natural" climate change just as well as we can modify so-called "anthropogenic" climate change.
the real question is about how long it takes for the oil industry to drop the orwellian charade and realize they're only fooling the village idiots.
...and about why it is that humans insist on separating themselves from nature.
www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/huge-natural-gas-leak-still-spewing-methane-in-california/61769/
the real question is about how long it takes for the oil industry to drop the orwellian charade and realize they're only fooling the village idiots.
...and about why it is that humans insist on separating themselves from nature.
www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/huge-natural-gas-leak-still-spewing-methane-in-california/61769/
i'm still holding out hope on a winter cancellation in the very south-western reaches of ontario. i think it's a definitional problem, though: what defines winter in an empirical sense? is it temperature dependent? because it's not unknown in canada to have short, disconnected bursts of cold weather at any time of the year. so, then it should be sustained. see, i'm not convinced we can get a sustained level of sufficiently cold weather here this year to qualify, but what is the temperature, anyways? zero seems reasonable. but, then is it zero for the overnights or zero for sustained highs? i don't see a sustained period of subzero highs here in windsor, so by that metric it seems doubtful.
but, it's probably not the best to measure it by sustained highs, as we're dealing with a continuous rather than a discrete problem (quantizing things isn't always useful, and is pretty much always really just a shorthand guess when it is). so, if we get a sustained continuous period of near-zero temperatures with only moments above freezing, that may be close to qualifying as winter. but, then how near-freezing is it, really, and what are the actual observable changes? that happens sometimes in november, or even october, and we consider that to be fall.
i think a better metric is probably related to snow cover. that is a clear indication of winter. and, i think that's what i'm holding out on not happening at all this year in windsor - that we're able to avoid any serious cold snap below -10, and that we're able to avoid any snow cover at all. if that happens, winter will have been cancelled for the year.
www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/january-pattern-change-to-make-mildness-a-distant-memory/61773/
but, it's probably not the best to measure it by sustained highs, as we're dealing with a continuous rather than a discrete problem (quantizing things isn't always useful, and is pretty much always really just a shorthand guess when it is). so, if we get a sustained continuous period of near-zero temperatures with only moments above freezing, that may be close to qualifying as winter. but, then how near-freezing is it, really, and what are the actual observable changes? that happens sometimes in november, or even october, and we consider that to be fall.
i think a better metric is probably related to snow cover. that is a clear indication of winter. and, i think that's what i'm holding out on not happening at all this year in windsor - that we're able to avoid any serious cold snap below -10, and that we're able to avoid any snow cover at all. if that happens, winter will have been cancelled for the year.
www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/january-pattern-change-to-make-mildness-a-distant-memory/61773/
if this is a culmination of ten years of work, how did you end up titling it obama in china?
so, what do i think about the rebalance, or the pivot, or the strategic rethink or whatever you want to call it? well, i think the first point is that questioning what you want to call it immediately brings up the question of who the audience is for this, and i have to assume it's domestic - because the administration has to realize that the chinese are going to see past the marketing issues and analyze it for what it actually is. so, the question of whether this is a containment policy or not is really directed at the pacifist streak in the democratic base.
of course it's a containment policy.
but, see, even the language they use indicates a containment policy, it's just being marketed as some kind of reasonable containment policy. the united states is an established power. china is a rising power with the - distant - potential to eclipse it. no established power is going to try and work against the interests of a rising power. rather, it's going to seek to protect it's own interests and then attempt to interact with the rising power as a collaborator, perhaps to attempt to influence it to help carry out it's own goals. that's what a containment policy means in the existing context.
(edit: ask britain about this, regarding it's continuing influence over america)
now, that's a different thing than a containment policy of china fifty years ago, when it was trying to re-establish itself as an actual, existing state. and, it's different than a containment policy for a small, largely irrelevant state like cuba. it's just what a containment policy for a large, potentially powerful state looks like - protection of assets first, and then attempts at co-option.
so, to say that china is meant to be a part of the rebalance is not to deny it is a containment policy, it's just to define what a containment policy means under the existing circumstances.
do i think it's a good idea, though?
i think the idea of china striking a country like australia at any point in the near future is so distant that the chinese are correct to be alarmed by a military build-up in the region. 60% of the navy in what is essentially a colonial holding? so, that's the first point - it makes sense to protect assets, but this is being done with a level of force such that questions about possible offensive capabilities are more than chinese paranoia. it is reasonable to suggest that if it was truly about protecting assets then it would not be such a strong focus.
i also think that the americans are holding to certain positions that have no outcome besides conflict. china has every right to include taiwan and vietnam, at least, in it's sphere of interest. historical chinese claims on the phillipines have long expired but, beyond that, i think that the only region that america has any business seriously defending is japan. even south korea is an inevitable loss, and one that is not worth fighting for.
and, really what are the americans fighting for? the answer is cheap labour. they're trying to siphon out the chinese peripheral through "trade agreements" that reduce largely to plantations for american products. note that the chinese government continues to fund communist insurgencies throughout the region; the inevitable outcome of this is a string of proxy wars that america cannot hope to win.
truly partnering with china as a rising power - and containing them effectively - would require america to back out of certain relationships and hold to a broader peripheral.
there's no doubt that this is logically necessary, if your logic is imperial. but, it's overly aggressive and, if that is not reversed, it may succeed in creating the problems that it's meant to prevent.
so, what do i think about the rebalance, or the pivot, or the strategic rethink or whatever you want to call it? well, i think the first point is that questioning what you want to call it immediately brings up the question of who the audience is for this, and i have to assume it's domestic - because the administration has to realize that the chinese are going to see past the marketing issues and analyze it for what it actually is. so, the question of whether this is a containment policy or not is really directed at the pacifist streak in the democratic base.
of course it's a containment policy.
but, see, even the language they use indicates a containment policy, it's just being marketed as some kind of reasonable containment policy. the united states is an established power. china is a rising power with the - distant - potential to eclipse it. no established power is going to try and work against the interests of a rising power. rather, it's going to seek to protect it's own interests and then attempt to interact with the rising power as a collaborator, perhaps to attempt to influence it to help carry out it's own goals. that's what a containment policy means in the existing context.
(edit: ask britain about this, regarding it's continuing influence over america)
now, that's a different thing than a containment policy of china fifty years ago, when it was trying to re-establish itself as an actual, existing state. and, it's different than a containment policy for a small, largely irrelevant state like cuba. it's just what a containment policy for a large, potentially powerful state looks like - protection of assets first, and then attempts at co-option.
so, to say that china is meant to be a part of the rebalance is not to deny it is a containment policy, it's just to define what a containment policy means under the existing circumstances.
do i think it's a good idea, though?
i think the idea of china striking a country like australia at any point in the near future is so distant that the chinese are correct to be alarmed by a military build-up in the region. 60% of the navy in what is essentially a colonial holding? so, that's the first point - it makes sense to protect assets, but this is being done with a level of force such that questions about possible offensive capabilities are more than chinese paranoia. it is reasonable to suggest that if it was truly about protecting assets then it would not be such a strong focus.
i also think that the americans are holding to certain positions that have no outcome besides conflict. china has every right to include taiwan and vietnam, at least, in it's sphere of interest. historical chinese claims on the phillipines have long expired but, beyond that, i think that the only region that america has any business seriously defending is japan. even south korea is an inevitable loss, and one that is not worth fighting for.
and, really what are the americans fighting for? the answer is cheap labour. they're trying to siphon out the chinese peripheral through "trade agreements" that reduce largely to plantations for american products. note that the chinese government continues to fund communist insurgencies throughout the region; the inevitable outcome of this is a string of proxy wars that america cannot hope to win.
truly partnering with china as a rising power - and containing them effectively - would require america to back out of certain relationships and hold to a broader peripheral.
there's no doubt that this is logically necessary, if your logic is imperial. but, it's overly aggressive and, if that is not reversed, it may succeed in creating the problems that it's meant to prevent.
Wednesday, December 30, 2015
i think canada should build a wall on the border.
canada is eventually going to be faced with a serious problem of americans migrating north to escape an uninhabitable region.
i really don't want to let them in. sorry.
so, i think trump is on to something. and, i'd be happy to see my tax dollars build it, too.
in fact, it will create a lot of jobs.
canada is eventually going to be faced with a serious problem of americans migrating north to escape an uninhabitable region.
i really don't want to let them in. sorry.
so, i think trump is on to something. and, i'd be happy to see my tax dollars build it, too.
in fact, it will create a lot of jobs.
fettay schake
who cares if the lgbt community is insulted
deathtokoalas
+fettay schake
i think a better thing to point out is that the lgbtq community broadly doesn't really care what pewdiepie thinks.
there's no "pedophile" in lgbtq.
deathtokoalas
+Ariana Terrince
"people should be allowed to use the internet without being called disgusting."
no. that's not a right that stems from any historical process. it's something that your kindergarten teacher made up and lied to you about.
however, a right that is enshrined in our history is the right to call somebody disgusting without legal consequence. there may be social consequences, though.
just as i have the right to suggest that pewdiepie is basically a retarded pedophile anyways, and nobody with an iq higher than two sds below the mean cares what he thinks.
he can say whatever he wants. really. nobody cares.
if it's not true yet, it will be true soon: pewdiepie will be the thing that it's cool to grow out of. kids that were 12 five years ago are 17 now. it's going to be that thing that people collectively look back and cringe upon, which will filter it's way down and kill his audience at the source.
let him dig his own grave. he's already half done.
who cares if the lgbt community is insulted
deathtokoalas
+fettay schake
i think a better thing to point out is that the lgbtq community broadly doesn't really care what pewdiepie thinks.
there's no "pedophile" in lgbtq.
deathtokoalas
+Ariana Terrince
"people should be allowed to use the internet without being called disgusting."
no. that's not a right that stems from any historical process. it's something that your kindergarten teacher made up and lied to you about.
however, a right that is enshrined in our history is the right to call somebody disgusting without legal consequence. there may be social consequences, though.
just as i have the right to suggest that pewdiepie is basically a retarded pedophile anyways, and nobody with an iq higher than two sds below the mean cares what he thinks.
he can say whatever he wants. really. nobody cares.
if it's not true yet, it will be true soon: pewdiepie will be the thing that it's cool to grow out of. kids that were 12 five years ago are 17 now. it's going to be that thing that people collectively look back and cringe upon, which will filter it's way down and kill his audience at the source.
let him dig his own grave. he's already half done.
you'll meet some vegans that do the research and live relatively healthy on it - and that means taking supplements. any vegan that tries to tell you that you don't need supplements is the other kind, which doesn't do the research and is every bit as unhealthy as your average diabetic, overweight american.
pizza doesn't become better for you by taking the pepperoni off and replacing the processed animal cheese with processed soy cheese. and, all those processed soy meats are really just another type of fast food.
the reality is that 95% of the vegan food you get in the store is really absolute petrochemical trash. in fact, here's a hint: if it advertises itself as vegan, it's almost certainly trash.
you can't avoid the absorption issues either, but ymmv on it. that is, you might not notice it. but, there's a reason vegans tend to wake up one day, eat a steak and claim that they're all of a sudden ten times more energetic - you do notice the absorption issues when you reverse the diet.
the moral issues are...what do you do with a billion cows if not kill them? and, then why not eat them? i mean, i'm not denying the moral quandary, here. but, the existence of mass agriculture is an infinite loop that you can't escape from.
climate change is a better argument, but it leads to the conclusion that we need to reduce consumption rather than eliminate it. and, that's what your doctor will tell you, too. you want a little meat in your diet. you just don't want to eat twice the daily requirement three times a day.
that said, the soy milk is actually better fortified than real milk. that's a good idea.
Dorna Moss
+jessica Animal agriculture is definitely NOT an "infinite loop that we can't escape from." Look up "supply" and "demand." The idea is, if more people went vegan, the demand for meat would go down and as a result, fewer cows, chickens, and pigs would be bred for meat consumption (i.e., the "supply" would also go down, once demand does). Just consider cigarettes: consumers purchase far fewer cigarettes today than they did in the early 1900s, and as a result, far fewer cigarettes are produced. In terms of having billions of animals "on the loose" if everyone went vegan, the truth is, "everyone going vegan" will not happen overnight, so this isn't a realistic concern. In terms of climate change, I agree that collectively, we do need to "reduce consumption," and reducing/eliminating animal products is an excellent way to do this. A vegan diet uses 600 galons less water per day, per person, and cuts your greenhouse gas emissions in half. Not only that, but the amount of grain fed to farm animals today is enough to feed the world twice over. And finally, in terms of diet, more and more studies are coming out every day touting the health benefits of a plant-based diet. For example, see the China Study by Dr. T. Colin Campbell, and check out some of Dr. Michael Greger's stuff.
jessica
+dorna moss so, you're suggesting a slow, managed genocide, then.
if you kill a billion cows tomorrow, you've killed a billion cows. how many do you want to kill? 100 billion?
Dorna Moss
"Over 56 billion farmed animals are killed every year by humans. More than 3,000 animals die every second in slaughterhouses around the world." - Quick Google Search.
If we refrain from consuming animal products, there will be fewer animals "mated" to make our food, and ultimately, fewer animals will be killed. It wouldn't be a "slow, managed genocide" because by definition, a genocide implies deliberate killing. "Deliberate killing" is exactly what happens in slaughterhouses around the world, so it would be far more accurate to call the current "status quo" of animal consumption a "genocide." I'm not trying to argue with you -- you seem like a bright young person who is smart enough to ask questions. I'm just stating facts that I (and many others) have uncovered after having done extensive research. If you want to learn more, watch Earthlings, Cowspiracy, Forks over Knives, check out some of Dr. Michael Greger's stuff, and read the China Study.
jessica
+Dorna Moss i appreciate your recommendations, but i think i'll have to pass on them.
what's currently happening with cows is not a genocide, but more of a system of slavery. i mean, that's what farming is; or, perhaps one could suggest that slavery is a type of farming, the point being that they're virtually equivalent - and different than a genocide. the slave master wants to ensure future generations, not eliminate them.
it's actually an important point that a lot of people miss in a wide array of contexts - for example, when they compare south africa to palestine. south africa was slavery; farming. palestine is genocide.
what you're suggesting is genocide instead of slavery. and, what i'm suggesting to you is that the total loss in life would actually be lesser if we killed them all at once.
and, so it is an inescapable loop. and, it is. for we cannot grant the cows their freedom. that's beyond the limits of liberalism.
Dorna Moss
I really liked your analogies. Whether it's slavery or genocide, what we're doing to the animals is wrong. You seem like a smart kid. Consider looking into the documentaries I mentioned, especially Cowspiracy (it's free on Netflix). It clearly shows how animal agriculture is destroying this planet.
pizza doesn't become better for you by taking the pepperoni off and replacing the processed animal cheese with processed soy cheese. and, all those processed soy meats are really just another type of fast food.
the reality is that 95% of the vegan food you get in the store is really absolute petrochemical trash. in fact, here's a hint: if it advertises itself as vegan, it's almost certainly trash.
you can't avoid the absorption issues either, but ymmv on it. that is, you might not notice it. but, there's a reason vegans tend to wake up one day, eat a steak and claim that they're all of a sudden ten times more energetic - you do notice the absorption issues when you reverse the diet.
the moral issues are...what do you do with a billion cows if not kill them? and, then why not eat them? i mean, i'm not denying the moral quandary, here. but, the existence of mass agriculture is an infinite loop that you can't escape from.
climate change is a better argument, but it leads to the conclusion that we need to reduce consumption rather than eliminate it. and, that's what your doctor will tell you, too. you want a little meat in your diet. you just don't want to eat twice the daily requirement three times a day.
that said, the soy milk is actually better fortified than real milk. that's a good idea.
Dorna Moss
+jessica Animal agriculture is definitely NOT an "infinite loop that we can't escape from." Look up "supply" and "demand." The idea is, if more people went vegan, the demand for meat would go down and as a result, fewer cows, chickens, and pigs would be bred for meat consumption (i.e., the "supply" would also go down, once demand does). Just consider cigarettes: consumers purchase far fewer cigarettes today than they did in the early 1900s, and as a result, far fewer cigarettes are produced. In terms of having billions of animals "on the loose" if everyone went vegan, the truth is, "everyone going vegan" will not happen overnight, so this isn't a realistic concern. In terms of climate change, I agree that collectively, we do need to "reduce consumption," and reducing/eliminating animal products is an excellent way to do this. A vegan diet uses 600 galons less water per day, per person, and cuts your greenhouse gas emissions in half. Not only that, but the amount of grain fed to farm animals today is enough to feed the world twice over. And finally, in terms of diet, more and more studies are coming out every day touting the health benefits of a plant-based diet. For example, see the China Study by Dr. T. Colin Campbell, and check out some of Dr. Michael Greger's stuff.
jessica
+dorna moss so, you're suggesting a slow, managed genocide, then.
if you kill a billion cows tomorrow, you've killed a billion cows. how many do you want to kill? 100 billion?
Dorna Moss
"Over 56 billion farmed animals are killed every year by humans. More than 3,000 animals die every second in slaughterhouses around the world." - Quick Google Search.
If we refrain from consuming animal products, there will be fewer animals "mated" to make our food, and ultimately, fewer animals will be killed. It wouldn't be a "slow, managed genocide" because by definition, a genocide implies deliberate killing. "Deliberate killing" is exactly what happens in slaughterhouses around the world, so it would be far more accurate to call the current "status quo" of animal consumption a "genocide." I'm not trying to argue with you -- you seem like a bright young person who is smart enough to ask questions. I'm just stating facts that I (and many others) have uncovered after having done extensive research. If you want to learn more, watch Earthlings, Cowspiracy, Forks over Knives, check out some of Dr. Michael Greger's stuff, and read the China Study.
jessica
+Dorna Moss i appreciate your recommendations, but i think i'll have to pass on them.
what's currently happening with cows is not a genocide, but more of a system of slavery. i mean, that's what farming is; or, perhaps one could suggest that slavery is a type of farming, the point being that they're virtually equivalent - and different than a genocide. the slave master wants to ensure future generations, not eliminate them.
it's actually an important point that a lot of people miss in a wide array of contexts - for example, when they compare south africa to palestine. south africa was slavery; farming. palestine is genocide.
what you're suggesting is genocide instead of slavery. and, what i'm suggesting to you is that the total loss in life would actually be lesser if we killed them all at once.
and, so it is an inescapable loop. and, it is. for we cannot grant the cows their freedom. that's beyond the limits of liberalism.
Dorna Moss
I really liked your analogies. Whether it's slavery or genocide, what we're doing to the animals is wrong. You seem like a smart kid. Consider looking into the documentaries I mentioned, especially Cowspiracy (it's free on Netflix). It clearly shows how animal agriculture is destroying this planet.
i'm sick of this.
the modern evolutionary synthesis is now over 75 years old. you would have to be at least that old to be tied to the ideas that existed before it.
we're getting past the point, now, where this is an acceptable discussion. i want to hear media take the responsible position here, which is not providing creationist "balance" to entrenched and thoroughly tested science but outright rejection of superstition and ignorance.
all the old people are dead, now. that was true ten years ago, really; it's beyond question, now. so, let's get with it.
let's say you were born in the year 1900. maybe you went to a one-room school (and walked uphill both ways, no doubt - in the blizzard. in june.), and maybe it taught you your r's just fine. but, maybe the core of the curriculum was the bible. maybe something as simple as an acid-base test was kind of exotic.
so, it's 1970. you're old. you know what you were taught, and you're resistant to changes. holding to your ignorance is not a particularly strong argument, but it's at least some kind of excuse. and, democracy demands some kind of representation.
that excuse is no longer valid, or at least is not here. almost everybody alive today was born after 1935, and had perfectly open access to scientific literature. it's a choice to be ignorant.
...and that choice should be acknowledged for what it is and treated as what it is.
the modern evolutionary synthesis is now over 75 years old. you would have to be at least that old to be tied to the ideas that existed before it.
we're getting past the point, now, where this is an acceptable discussion. i want to hear media take the responsible position here, which is not providing creationist "balance" to entrenched and thoroughly tested science but outright rejection of superstition and ignorance.
all the old people are dead, now. that was true ten years ago, really; it's beyond question, now. so, let's get with it.
let's say you were born in the year 1900. maybe you went to a one-room school (and walked uphill both ways, no doubt - in the blizzard. in june.), and maybe it taught you your r's just fine. but, maybe the core of the curriculum was the bible. maybe something as simple as an acid-base test was kind of exotic.
so, it's 1970. you're old. you know what you were taught, and you're resistant to changes. holding to your ignorance is not a particularly strong argument, but it's at least some kind of excuse. and, democracy demands some kind of representation.
that excuse is no longer valid, or at least is not here. almost everybody alive today was born after 1935, and had perfectly open access to scientific literature. it's a choice to be ignorant.
...and that choice should be acknowledged for what it is and treated as what it is.
it's always astounding to me that white people have such a hard time understanding that they're monkeys, too.
the vid is fake, though. it's satire.
this kind of confrontation - while perhaps dramatized here - is not uncommon. and, protesters tend to enjoy mocking the situation.
it's very common for protesters to satirically approach each other like this.
the vid is fake, though. it's satire.
this kind of confrontation - while perhaps dramatized here - is not uncommon. and, protesters tend to enjoy mocking the situation.
it's very common for protesters to satirically approach each other like this.
Tuesday, December 29, 2015
see, there isn't a left-right criticism here. it isn't even really a criticism of drug culture, per se. it's more of a criticism of the groupthink that comes with hyper-commercialism - which was really the basis of what we call the 60s "counter-culture". it's consequently some kind of an anti-capitalist critique. what frank was able to see was that the so-called "counter-culture" was really just expressing the same value systems that the dominant culture was. it was just a type of fashion, and, as such, was firmly rooted in capitalist values. that's what he's mocking here - the reality that the supposed revolutionaries of the period were just all about buying into something.
i've pointed this out before: it categorizes zappa properly as the definitive proto-punk.
i've pointed this out before: it categorizes zappa properly as the definitive proto-punk.
finalizing nicotine actually has relatively useful properties as a stimulant
i took a look at what i could do with the files from this track and concluded i couldn't do a whole lot. to begin with, the tape was warped over the start of the track. second, a lot of the detail was added in at the wave editing stage, and consequently cannot be reconstructed. so, remastering it became a non-starter. further, without the extra flourishes, the electronics only version is pretty boring.
but, the track does belong in the concept of this record - if it were excluded, it would be the only major track to be excluded (except "too cold", which i do not have tapes for).
as it happens to be, though, this is the only track from this period that i kept an instrumental copy of. so, i've just run it through the mastering effects i've used for the other tracks, for consistency, and uploaded as is.
there's one more track left. this will really be done by the end of the year!
initially written in 1997. recreated over the summer of 1998. remastered on dec 29, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/nicotine-actually-has-relatively-useful-properties-as-a-stimulant
but, the track does belong in the concept of this record - if it were excluded, it would be the only major track to be excluded (except "too cold", which i do not have tapes for).
as it happens to be, though, this is the only track from this period that i kept an instrumental copy of. so, i've just run it through the mastering effects i've used for the other tracks, for consistency, and uploaded as is.
there's one more track left. this will really be done by the end of the year!
initially written in 1997. recreated over the summer of 1998. remastered on dec 29, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/nicotine-actually-has-relatively-useful-properties-as-a-stimulant
finalizing young people have informed and defined views that should not be discarded off hand due to their age
this track is also closed. i have two more tracks to analyze before this record closes.
the trick was that i had accidentally stumbled upon an error in my copy of cubase: when you duplicate a track, it seems to reproduce itself slightly misaligned. this opened up a lot of space for wave interference in the higher harmonics, which created a little bit of distortion in the high end of the bass guitar - a slightly unusual effect. but, when you reopen the track, it realigns properly - which was just overloading the bass guitar.
it was when i was finally able to reproduce the error that the mix came into focus.
initially written in 1996. recreated over 1998 and finalized in dec, 1998. reclaimed july 19, 2015. corrected to control for malfunctioning electronics on dec 29, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/young-people-have-informed-and-defined-views-that-should-not-be-discarded-off-hand-due-to-their-age
the trick was that i had accidentally stumbled upon an error in my copy of cubase: when you duplicate a track, it seems to reproduce itself slightly misaligned. this opened up a lot of space for wave interference in the higher harmonics, which created a little bit of distortion in the high end of the bass guitar - a slightly unusual effect. but, when you reopen the track, it realigns properly - which was just overloading the bass guitar.
it was when i was finally able to reproduce the error that the mix came into focus.
initially written in 1996. recreated over 1998 and finalized in dec, 1998. reclaimed july 19, 2015. corrected to control for malfunctioning electronics on dec 29, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/young-people-have-informed-and-defined-views-that-should-not-be-discarded-off-hand-due-to-their-age
Monday, December 28, 2015
Sunday, December 27, 2015
neither sanders nor corbyn are leftists. they're at most center-left moderates. before history came to an end, they would have been in the mainstream of their respective parties.
i think we're just learning that the truth is that history isn't over, after all.
and, that maybe it was kind of....stupid....to think that it was.
rather, the elites have just steered the spectrum to a point of total disconnect - both from reality and from voters. this needs to be corrected.
we saw the same thing in canada, who maybe experienced the first correction. the liberals moved right in the 90s, along with everybody else. history was over! starting around 2004, the electorate started moving from the liberals to the ndp, the nominal left-wing protest party. this ended up electing the conservatives. the ndp got opposition status in 2011, even. it took the liberals ten years to figure out that we still have history to write, and realign themselves to the center-left.
there's a helluva campaign slogan:
"it's time to make history again."
i think that may be more than an ironic turn of phrase, too. i think it might have some serious potential to tap into something, to mobilize something.
www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/12/27/larry-bernie-sanders-jeremy-corbyn_n_8860508.html
i think we're just learning that the truth is that history isn't over, after all.
and, that maybe it was kind of....stupid....to think that it was.
rather, the elites have just steered the spectrum to a point of total disconnect - both from reality and from voters. this needs to be corrected.
we saw the same thing in canada, who maybe experienced the first correction. the liberals moved right in the 90s, along with everybody else. history was over! starting around 2004, the electorate started moving from the liberals to the ndp, the nominal left-wing protest party. this ended up electing the conservatives. the ndp got opposition status in 2011, even. it took the liberals ten years to figure out that we still have history to write, and realign themselves to the center-left.
there's a helluva campaign slogan:
"it's time to make history again."
i think that may be more than an ironic turn of phrase, too. i think it might have some serious potential to tap into something, to mobilize something.
www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/12/27/larry-bernie-sanders-jeremy-corbyn_n_8860508.html
carnigeon
written 1999-2000. reconstructed from electronics source files in dec, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/carnigeon
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/carnigeon
rept
these parts were all written and recorded over the first half of 2002. this section was remixed repeatedly in late 2014 and finally isolated and rendered in this form on dec 27, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/rept
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/rept
insp
written in the summer of 2001. remembered over july, 2014. completed august-september, 2014. isolated on dec 27, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/insp
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/insp
deus ici
initially written in 1996. recreated in mar, 1998. reclaimed july 20, 2015. corrected to control for malfunctioning electronics on dec 27, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/deus-ici
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/deus-ici
finalizing suicide is a personal choice
this track is now closed. this is the first time i've uploaded an instrumental version of the track, meaning i'm finally over the hump and moving forwards again.
this is not the file i rendered on july 20. however, i have not modified the cubase file since then, either. i was unable to create a null...
the common theme in being unable to recreate the output seems to be when i'm doubling tracks and rendering before i re-open the save. i'm going to guess that it's essentially a cascade of run-off and floating point errors; stuff ends up phased differently, routed differently, etc. i might be able to recreate the exact output if i stripped the project down completely and tried to recreate my steps, but...
...i can't hear the difference in an a/b, anyways. so i just rerendered.
regarding the phones...
i was testing with this track for quite a while this evening and led to the conclusion that it needs a bit of a boost in the high end, and a bit of a cut in the low end. but, before i actually saved over the project, i swapped back to the old phones to verify....and realized i was compensating for the exaggerated bottom end.
it would have been a mild cut - a db around 100 hz. but, it's enough that my ears picked it up, and i'm consequently swearing off mixing with them.
i don't want to reflect overly badly on the new phones. they otherwise sounded great. but the 440-IIs are just flat as saskatchewan, and the difference really was immediately noticeable. it's more that i'm used to mixing with very flat phones. like i'm a real producer or something.
the reality is that almost everything sounds better with a bit of a boost on the bottom, especially material that's been compressed to mp3. i will find a good use for these phones. but, i can't go from what would be $500+ studio phones today to $150 consumer phones and not notice the difference.
i knew that. i was just hoping i could maybe double with them in a pinch. and, i think i still might be able to. but i need to finish this project with my tinfoiled over archaic babies and hope a new cord fixes what ails them...
initially written in 1996. recreated over 1998 and finalized in dec, 1998. reclaimed july 20, 2015. corrected to control for malfunctioning electronics on dec 27, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/suicide-is-a-personal-choice
i mean, i gotta be clear...
the record sounds very dynamic through the new phones. it's a bass-heavy disc, and they do a good job of stretching it out without losing the rest of the spectrum. i'd recommend it, even.
but i can't mix with them, because they're not flat.
or, at least, i'd have to spend a long time getting used to them. and i'd rather fix my flat phones.
it's just a question of what the proper application is for a tool. you don't hammer a screw, right. and you don't mix with bassy phones. well, unless you make particularly lame hip-hop.
i think the proper application for this pair is stationary listening to material that has already been mastered, probably while reading or daydreaming. they really seem to be orthopedically designed for reclining. so, you'll get your extra db or two of bass without killing the rest of the signal, and it will mostly sound good.
but if you want totally flat phones, they don't do that.
this is not the file i rendered on july 20. however, i have not modified the cubase file since then, either. i was unable to create a null...
the common theme in being unable to recreate the output seems to be when i'm doubling tracks and rendering before i re-open the save. i'm going to guess that it's essentially a cascade of run-off and floating point errors; stuff ends up phased differently, routed differently, etc. i might be able to recreate the exact output if i stripped the project down completely and tried to recreate my steps, but...
...i can't hear the difference in an a/b, anyways. so i just rerendered.
regarding the phones...
i was testing with this track for quite a while this evening and led to the conclusion that it needs a bit of a boost in the high end, and a bit of a cut in the low end. but, before i actually saved over the project, i swapped back to the old phones to verify....and realized i was compensating for the exaggerated bottom end.
it would have been a mild cut - a db around 100 hz. but, it's enough that my ears picked it up, and i'm consequently swearing off mixing with them.
i don't want to reflect overly badly on the new phones. they otherwise sounded great. but the 440-IIs are just flat as saskatchewan, and the difference really was immediately noticeable. it's more that i'm used to mixing with very flat phones. like i'm a real producer or something.
the reality is that almost everything sounds better with a bit of a boost on the bottom, especially material that's been compressed to mp3. i will find a good use for these phones. but, i can't go from what would be $500+ studio phones today to $150 consumer phones and not notice the difference.
i knew that. i was just hoping i could maybe double with them in a pinch. and, i think i still might be able to. but i need to finish this project with my tinfoiled over archaic babies and hope a new cord fixes what ails them...
initially written in 1996. recreated over 1998 and finalized in dec, 1998. reclaimed july 20, 2015. corrected to control for malfunctioning electronics on dec 27, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/suicide-is-a-personal-choice
i mean, i gotta be clear...
the record sounds very dynamic through the new phones. it's a bass-heavy disc, and they do a good job of stretching it out without losing the rest of the spectrum. i'd recommend it, even.
but i can't mix with them, because they're not flat.
or, at least, i'd have to spend a long time getting used to them. and i'd rather fix my flat phones.
it's just a question of what the proper application is for a tool. you don't hammer a screw, right. and you don't mix with bassy phones. well, unless you make particularly lame hip-hop.
i think the proper application for this pair is stationary listening to material that has already been mastered, probably while reading or daydreaming. they really seem to be orthopedically designed for reclining. so, you'll get your extra db or two of bass without killing the rest of the signal, and it will mostly sound good.
but if you want totally flat phones, they don't do that.
Saturday, December 26, 2015
finalizing sample used without permission
i'm closing this track.
i couldn't get the output to null with the version from july, but i do not believe that the version from july was correct, either. it seems to be routed differently. it's very strange, too, as the time stamps suggest it's almost impossible for the output to be unreconstructible.
to be clear: everything nulled perfectly except a thirty second section of guitar. but, that guitar part is layered over 8 times in the cubase project so it's not as simple as just resetting an eq.
i would be tempted to think that i was getting layered over floating point or round-off errors on all the eqs (i think i'm getting that for another track), but the difference in sound is fairly dramatic - it's really more like it's routing differently.
the only thing i can really think of is that the july output was some kind of error. i may have temporarily placed a bus on those guitar tracks, or perhaps routed them directly to the master.
whatever it was, the reality is that version i have saved in cubase sounds much better and has been uploaded in replace of the previous version.
initially written in 1996. recreated in jan, 1998. reclaimed july 2, 2015. remixed july 12, 2015. corrected to control for malfunctioning electronics on dec 26, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/sample-used-without-permission
i couldn't get the output to null with the version from july, but i do not believe that the version from july was correct, either. it seems to be routed differently. it's very strange, too, as the time stamps suggest it's almost impossible for the output to be unreconstructible.
to be clear: everything nulled perfectly except a thirty second section of guitar. but, that guitar part is layered over 8 times in the cubase project so it's not as simple as just resetting an eq.
i would be tempted to think that i was getting layered over floating point or round-off errors on all the eqs (i think i'm getting that for another track), but the difference in sound is fairly dramatic - it's really more like it's routing differently.
the only thing i can really think of is that the july output was some kind of error. i may have temporarily placed a bus on those guitar tracks, or perhaps routed them directly to the master.
whatever it was, the reality is that version i have saved in cubase sounds much better and has been uploaded in replace of the previous version.
initially written in 1996. recreated in jan, 1998. reclaimed july 2, 2015. remixed july 12, 2015. corrected to control for malfunctioning electronics on dec 26, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/sample-used-without-permission
there's so much racism on youtube...
...and so much of it as actual racism, too. not just mindlessness. but, actual arguments for racial hierarchy.
listen.
let's say you carried out a cross-oceanic trade in people, then took those people and separated out the weak and turned the strong into slaves. now, let's say that you selectively bred those people for physical characteristics, and you killed all the ones you thought might be smart enough to figure out a way to stop you. now, let's say that this carried on for hundreds of years, over many generations.
if, centuries later, the descendants of these people showed disproportionate levels of aggression and a heightened difficulty in assimilating, along with exceptional athletic abilities, would you suggest that the cause of this is their skin colour?
if i were a deity trying to correct the consequences of human folly, i would ensure that the descendants of black american slaves find their way to new african immigrants in order to breed. and, i would no doubt work in mysterious ways.
if i were a government representing a people that is opposed to forced marriages, and there are of course good reasons to oppose forced marriages, i would prioritize infusing more ancestral african dna (i'm trying to avoid using terms related to increasing variation, because that's not quite right - it's more a question of watering down the effects of the targeted breeding) into the african american population by increasing immigration from africa. it actually doesn't even have to be targeted at the smartest people. it just has to counteract the saturation of certain alleles, by providing american blacks that do not show these gene expressions greater opportunity to avoid mating with people that do. self-selection may not be a proper evolutionary concept, but we are unique in our cognitive abilities on this planet.
the point is that there are good reasons to try and minimize population increases from certain particularly devastated segments of the slave descendant population.
i think the long term genetic consequences of slavery should not be underestimated. one could point to the middle east as an example of a society that has been defined by the genetic consequences of not just slavery but also mass rape, and the consequences are somewhat dire. mass rape, especially, prevents women from choosing proper suitors, creating a generation of children who did not have mothers that screened for good sperm. it's well understood that a lot of the problems that exist in the broader middle east today can be traced to the mongol invasions, but i don't think that the genetic component is well understood. that's not a racial comment, either. any group invading a region, killing the men and mass raping the women would create a comparable demographic problem where, a few dozen generations down the line, the majority of the population is the consequence of forced breeding rather than proper mating rituals. women are gatekeepers of their eggs for good evolutionary reasons.
...and so much of it as actual racism, too. not just mindlessness. but, actual arguments for racial hierarchy.
listen.
let's say you carried out a cross-oceanic trade in people, then took those people and separated out the weak and turned the strong into slaves. now, let's say that you selectively bred those people for physical characteristics, and you killed all the ones you thought might be smart enough to figure out a way to stop you. now, let's say that this carried on for hundreds of years, over many generations.
if, centuries later, the descendants of these people showed disproportionate levels of aggression and a heightened difficulty in assimilating, along with exceptional athletic abilities, would you suggest that the cause of this is their skin colour?
if i were a deity trying to correct the consequences of human folly, i would ensure that the descendants of black american slaves find their way to new african immigrants in order to breed. and, i would no doubt work in mysterious ways.
if i were a government representing a people that is opposed to forced marriages, and there are of course good reasons to oppose forced marriages, i would prioritize infusing more ancestral african dna (i'm trying to avoid using terms related to increasing variation, because that's not quite right - it's more a question of watering down the effects of the targeted breeding) into the african american population by increasing immigration from africa. it actually doesn't even have to be targeted at the smartest people. it just has to counteract the saturation of certain alleles, by providing american blacks that do not show these gene expressions greater opportunity to avoid mating with people that do. self-selection may not be a proper evolutionary concept, but we are unique in our cognitive abilities on this planet.
the point is that there are good reasons to try and minimize population increases from certain particularly devastated segments of the slave descendant population.
i think the long term genetic consequences of slavery should not be underestimated. one could point to the middle east as an example of a society that has been defined by the genetic consequences of not just slavery but also mass rape, and the consequences are somewhat dire. mass rape, especially, prevents women from choosing proper suitors, creating a generation of children who did not have mothers that screened for good sperm. it's well understood that a lot of the problems that exist in the broader middle east today can be traced to the mongol invasions, but i don't think that the genetic component is well understood. that's not a racial comment, either. any group invading a region, killing the men and mass raping the women would create a comparable demographic problem where, a few dozen generations down the line, the majority of the population is the consequence of forced breeding rather than proper mating rituals. women are gatekeepers of their eggs for good evolutionary reasons.
Friday, December 25, 2015
this is actually a really enjoyable record. if you could consider toning down the misfits' misanthropy and splicing it with a "jello has been mellowed-out-by-pot" fronted dead kennedys - it's not serious, but it's cheeky and it's consequently found a middle point of....fun...that is generally (strangely) absent from punk rock nowadays.
i actually have no real feelings about christmas. i mean, on some level i think it's....stupid. basically. but, i really have no meaningful aversion, or attachment at all, to it.
https://night-birds.bandcamp.com/track/less-the-merrier
i actually have no real feelings about christmas. i mean, on some level i think it's....stupid. basically. but, i really have no meaningful aversion, or attachment at all, to it.
https://night-birds.bandcamp.com/track/less-the-merrier
Thursday, December 24, 2015
23-12-2015: headphone testing
tracks worked on in this vlog:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj-2
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj-2
Wednesday, December 23, 2015
i walk around the neighbourhood, and i don't smell much food baking - but i do smell a lot of marijuana. for blocks, around.
i suspect this christmas will be remembered by canadians as "the year we smoked mom".
see, i think it's already fairly normal for the family members under 40 - or is it 50 now - to take a walk out to the garage at the christmas get together and come back smelling a little funny. i guess the proposed change is more an inclusive thing.
i suspect this christmas will be remembered by canadians as "the year we smoked mom".
see, i think it's already fairly normal for the family members under 40 - or is it 50 now - to take a walk out to the garage at the christmas get together and come back smelling a little funny. i guess the proposed change is more an inclusive thing.
cheetahs may not be easy to tree, but they are in fact closely related to cougars. it's interesting to wonder what would happen should the cheetah make contact with a cougar of the opposite sex.
if it weren't for the collar, i may even wonder how likely it would be for a cougar to maintain their spots to such an age.
what would a cougar-bobcat hybrid look like? being intermediate in size is almost guaranteed, and cheetah-like spots are a distinct possibility.
www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/cheetah-on-the-loose-along-highway-near-kootenay-bay-bc-/61268/
if it weren't for the collar, i may even wonder how likely it would be for a cougar to maintain their spots to such an age.
what would a cougar-bobcat hybrid look like? being intermediate in size is almost guaranteed, and cheetah-like spots are a distinct possibility.
www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/cheetah-on-the-loose-along-highway-near-kootenay-bay-bc-/61268/
thanks
got your card and your check. thanks.
it's been very warm here, too. there were days in november where we got over 20 degreees, and over 25 with the humidex. humidex readings in november! and, we've gotten over 15 a few times in december.
it's 12 right now, but it's more than the temperature - it feels like april. just the air humidity. the fact that there is no frost in the ground at all. i don't think we're going to actually get a winter, here at all. the closest thing to winter will be a few snaps around 0.
i mean, the days are getting longer, now. there's no ice on the lakes. there's not even much snow cover in northern ontario. in order to have winter here, we have to have snow cover north of here to reflect the sunlight and we have to have the lakes freeze over, at least a little bit.
it's supposedly the el nino, and that's no doubt true. but these increasingly intense el ninos are a consequence of warming ocean temperatures.
i think it might get cold again for a few years after this, though. when the el nino fades, we're going to have to go back to dealing with those exaggerated jetstreams as a consequence of the upcoming solar minimum. so enjoy the nice weather this year.
it's been very warm here, too. there were days in november where we got over 20 degreees, and over 25 with the humidex. humidex readings in november! and, we've gotten over 15 a few times in december.
it's 12 right now, but it's more than the temperature - it feels like april. just the air humidity. the fact that there is no frost in the ground at all. i don't think we're going to actually get a winter, here at all. the closest thing to winter will be a few snaps around 0.
i mean, the days are getting longer, now. there's no ice on the lakes. there's not even much snow cover in northern ontario. in order to have winter here, we have to have snow cover north of here to reflect the sunlight and we have to have the lakes freeze over, at least a little bit.
it's supposedly the el nino, and that's no doubt true. but these increasingly intense el ninos are a consequence of warming ocean temperatures.
i think it might get cold again for a few years after this, though. when the el nino fades, we're going to have to go back to dealing with those exaggerated jetstreams as a consequence of the upcoming solar minimum. so enjoy the nice weather this year.
i'm going to explain why this is a bad tactic: it's because it's too easy to emulate, and turn horribly. in fact, it's probably already too late.
imagine the conservatives, with defense industry backing, running an action movie star that wants to turn canada into a terrorist killing supermachine. boom boom. pow wow. when you lower the narrative this far, you open people up for this level of manipulation.
fashion is highly subjective, but there is one objective truth about it: it always burns itself out. there's always a new thing. it's a way to write yourself directly into irrelevance, by giving yourself an expiry date.
but, i think you have to expect this kind of institutional pr shtick from the liberals. the team is full of educated, upper class people. they'll never figure it out.
www.cbc.ca/news/arts/sophie-gregoire-trudeau-style-icon-1.3376861
SkyBlue1
Hahahaha! you're kidding right? This is the Arts and Entertainment section, I think people can figure it out for themselves except those miserable cons who can't get past the fact that their guy lost.
jessica murray
they seem to be following a conscious strategy of mobilizing the apolitical. it's a strategy that various third parties have cited for quite some time - this idea that 30% of the population doesn't vote, and if you can tap into them then you can build a base out of them. while there may be some value to this, mobilizing them on the basis of fashion or popular culture is a self-defeating proposition.
imagine the conservatives, with defense industry backing, running an action movie star that wants to turn canada into a terrorist killing supermachine. boom boom. pow wow. when you lower the narrative this far, you open people up for this level of manipulation.
fashion is highly subjective, but there is one objective truth about it: it always burns itself out. there's always a new thing. it's a way to write yourself directly into irrelevance, by giving yourself an expiry date.
but, i think you have to expect this kind of institutional pr shtick from the liberals. the team is full of educated, upper class people. they'll never figure it out.
www.cbc.ca/news/arts/sophie-gregoire-trudeau-style-icon-1.3376861
SkyBlue1
Hahahaha! you're kidding right? This is the Arts and Entertainment section, I think people can figure it out for themselves except those miserable cons who can't get past the fact that their guy lost.
jessica murray
they seem to be following a conscious strategy of mobilizing the apolitical. it's a strategy that various third parties have cited for quite some time - this idea that 30% of the population doesn't vote, and if you can tap into them then you can build a base out of them. while there may be some value to this, mobilizing them on the basis of fashion or popular culture is a self-defeating proposition.
yeah. this is basically reducing a classic work of art to strict pornography.
i would probably react well to something that was more thought out.
i need to point something out, though.
if i were the remaining members of queen, as one entity, i might be somewhat unhappy with the song's identification with wayne's world, and might want to have that changed - both for artistic reasons and perhaps also for financial ones. that association seems to be fairly engrained in people's minds.
see, they'd have to do a lot better than this to break that association, though.
i mean, honestly.
imagine having your masterpiece forever entangled with a dana carvey & mike myers skit. there should have been a "no rhapsody" sign on the filming set. it's an injustice!
i would probably react well to something that was more thought out.
i need to point something out, though.
if i were the remaining members of queen, as one entity, i might be somewhat unhappy with the song's identification with wayne's world, and might want to have that changed - both for artistic reasons and perhaps also for financial ones. that association seems to be fairly engrained in people's minds.
see, they'd have to do a lot better than this to break that association, though.
i mean, honestly.
imagine having your masterpiece forever entangled with a dana carvey & mike myers skit. there should have been a "no rhapsody" sign on the filming set. it's an injustice!
that flow, baby. that flow.
i'm just a little confused by this recent meme of rem being the whitest music ever.
not that there isn't some gleam of truth to it, or that it would be terrible if it were true.
but, i think that the idea of pigeon-holing their music by race would strike them as a revolting one, and i think there's plenty of potential for cross-cultural enjoyment of their music - especially, as it would be, with hip-hop fans. there's actually legitimately some very serious crossover potential, there.
it's sad to me that people don't see that, and are willing to jump to what are blatantly unsupportable conclusions based on minimal exposure.
i'm just a little confused by this recent meme of rem being the whitest music ever.
not that there isn't some gleam of truth to it, or that it would be terrible if it were true.
but, i think that the idea of pigeon-holing their music by race would strike them as a revolting one, and i think there's plenty of potential for cross-cultural enjoyment of their music - especially, as it would be, with hip-hop fans. there's actually legitimately some very serious crossover potential, there.
it's sad to me that people don't see that, and are willing to jump to what are blatantly unsupportable conclusions based on minimal exposure.
Tuesday, December 22, 2015
i think that compensating those convicted of non-violent marijuana offenses is a noble use of some of the tax funds.
if we acknowledge that consensual marijuana use amongst adults is absolutely harmless today, it means it always was and the state has a duty to right the wrong created by it's previous negligence.
a class-action suit would win, and should win.
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/marijuana-convictions-justin-trudeau-legalization-1.3377056
if we acknowledge that consensual marijuana use amongst adults is absolutely harmless today, it means it always was and the state has a duty to right the wrong created by it's previous negligence.
a class-action suit would win, and should win.
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/marijuana-convictions-justin-trudeau-legalization-1.3377056
Monday, December 21, 2015
if you're going to title your talk "obama in china", i fully expect gratuitous use of airbrushed photos of obama's head on nixon's body, dancing provocatively in front of giant pictures of mao.
hey. the republicans would pay good money for it.
deathtokoalas
+jessica i've been waiting for years for the discourse to change to language that suggests that the problem is being taken more seriously, and if anything the language and consequent ideological approaches have only gotten worse. i actually read one report a little after paris that criticized the agreement for being too reliant on "20th century governing approaches" and not "implementing modern, incentive-based policies".
all that this language broadcasts is that the issue isn't actually being taken seriously - still.
i think maybe some of it might have to do with the way that wealthy people interact with the environment. it's seen as something in the realm of philanthropy. politicians treat it all as legacy issues. the result is that the upper class has this warped perspective - making space for a wetland is "giving something back", merely an act of unprovoked kindness, whereas destroying a wetland is just doing business. there's no sense of duty - either legally or morally.
from this warped concept, we get the idea of levying fines to address climate change. we give out fines for breaking rules that have few externalities, or largely meaningless ones. if you park your car on the side of the road, or cross the street away from the lights - that's a fine. and, if you dump acid into the river then that's a fine, too - because not doing so would be an act of kindness, of giving back.
we're never getting anywhere with this until we change our attitude. dumping acid into the river is a crime and should land you in jail. that's right. jail. down the river. cuffs.
you think that's too much? then you're not taking the problem seriously.
stop. shut up. you really aren't.
hey. the republicans would pay good money for it.
deathtokoalas
+jessica i've been waiting for years for the discourse to change to language that suggests that the problem is being taken more seriously, and if anything the language and consequent ideological approaches have only gotten worse. i actually read one report a little after paris that criticized the agreement for being too reliant on "20th century governing approaches" and not "implementing modern, incentive-based policies".
all that this language broadcasts is that the issue isn't actually being taken seriously - still.
i think maybe some of it might have to do with the way that wealthy people interact with the environment. it's seen as something in the realm of philanthropy. politicians treat it all as legacy issues. the result is that the upper class has this warped perspective - making space for a wetland is "giving something back", merely an act of unprovoked kindness, whereas destroying a wetland is just doing business. there's no sense of duty - either legally or morally.
from this warped concept, we get the idea of levying fines to address climate change. we give out fines for breaking rules that have few externalities, or largely meaningless ones. if you park your car on the side of the road, or cross the street away from the lights - that's a fine. and, if you dump acid into the river then that's a fine, too - because not doing so would be an act of kindness, of giving back.
we're never getting anywhere with this until we change our attitude. dumping acid into the river is a crime and should land you in jail. that's right. jail. down the river. cuffs.
you think that's too much? then you're not taking the problem seriously.
stop. shut up. you really aren't.
you would need to run super-computers in parallel, hillary. it needs to be brute force.
unless you think you can revolutionize number theory in ways that are widely considered to be impossible and have eluded mathematicians for thousands of years. can you find a pattern in the distribution of prime numbers, for example? these are very difficult, but very foundational, questions in mathematics. history has repeatedly presented answers to questions of these sorts in the form of accidents, and often from unknown prodigies. i'd love to see the money directed that way, but you're not going to get a better theory of arithmetic by increasing spending.
there's no royal road to geometry.
there's a sticker on my microwave that claims that the device is complaint with communications regulations. what that actually means is that it can be controlled remotely. this is true of almost any electronic device. if you can pass a law that says the government has the right to take control of your toaster, i don't know why it's considered so brazen to pass a law that says that the government has the right to take control of your phone.
i think people need to change their perspectives on digital privacy. it's not even a question of ideals, it's more of a question of being realistic. if you have a reason to not use a phone, you should really not use a phone. i don't mean to present that in your typical "you have nothing to hide" context, i mean to state that as a pragmatic directive: if you are an activist, and you have any legitimate concerns about privacy whatsoever, be it in the context of civil disobedience or perhaps corporate espionage, you should not use any telecommunications devices.
what you do through telecommunications - which travels in public through airwaves or cables - needs to be perceived as as public as what you do at a shopping mall. i guess the disconnect is that you were once on a computer in your living room, so people saw the internet as in the realm of your personal life. but, this collapses pretty quickly when you think about it. if you're walking around in public and sending signals through the air to towers then you're in public - and should behave as though you are.
if you're going to use their servers, you're simply naive to expect them not to snoop on you. this question of exactly what they're doing and exactly what they're not doing is not what you should be concerning yourself with.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Gph0CupQv0
unless you think you can revolutionize number theory in ways that are widely considered to be impossible and have eluded mathematicians for thousands of years. can you find a pattern in the distribution of prime numbers, for example? these are very difficult, but very foundational, questions in mathematics. history has repeatedly presented answers to questions of these sorts in the form of accidents, and often from unknown prodigies. i'd love to see the money directed that way, but you're not going to get a better theory of arithmetic by increasing spending.
there's no royal road to geometry.
there's a sticker on my microwave that claims that the device is complaint with communications regulations. what that actually means is that it can be controlled remotely. this is true of almost any electronic device. if you can pass a law that says the government has the right to take control of your toaster, i don't know why it's considered so brazen to pass a law that says that the government has the right to take control of your phone.
i think people need to change their perspectives on digital privacy. it's not even a question of ideals, it's more of a question of being realistic. if you have a reason to not use a phone, you should really not use a phone. i don't mean to present that in your typical "you have nothing to hide" context, i mean to state that as a pragmatic directive: if you are an activist, and you have any legitimate concerns about privacy whatsoever, be it in the context of civil disobedience or perhaps corporate espionage, you should not use any telecommunications devices.
what you do through telecommunications - which travels in public through airwaves or cables - needs to be perceived as as public as what you do at a shopping mall. i guess the disconnect is that you were once on a computer in your living room, so people saw the internet as in the realm of your personal life. but, this collapses pretty quickly when you think about it. if you're walking around in public and sending signals through the air to towers then you're in public - and should behave as though you are.
if you're going to use their servers, you're simply naive to expect them not to snoop on you. this question of exactly what they're doing and exactly what they're not doing is not what you should be concerning yourself with.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Gph0CupQv0
i'm a little skeptical of the idea that light is the absolute limit, but i'm not at all skeptical about the idea of a boundary point occurring in mass-energy transfer. the reason light is claimed to be the speed limit is because it's assumed to be pure energy. no mass. there's no experimental support for this claim; rather, we have a particle-wave duality that ought to cast some questions on it. on top of that, the math makes more sense when you acknowledge the existence of the always present implied epsilon, rather than pretend it's not really there.
but, if light is not the fastest thing then the fastest thing cannot be much faster because light cannot have much mass. there is some space for the possibility of moving two or three times the speed of light, but not faster than that.
so, therefore aliens are impossible, right? no. because, you're making another assumption without realizing it: that aliens must have comparable life spans to humans. if an alien could live for tens of thousands of years, space travel would be an entirely feasible proposition.
some biologist will reject this offhand. but, the truth is that we seem to have taken a wrong turn on the evolutionary tree in terms of longevity, some time many millions of years ago. had we evolved from turtles, we would likely live for several centuries rather than several decades. there's no intrinsic requirement for cell death; arguments about the laws of physics on earth only apply to the earth. a different kind of environment may actually select for extreme longevity.
it seems to be clear that space travel is not something that humans will be possible of for many eons, if ever at all. we're running up against a biological limit rather than a technological one. now, there's abstract ways around this. we could consider cloning our consciousness to data storage and then reuploading it into a new clone created from scratch - that way we could exist in the computers for the thousand of years of travel time. but, that is not just solving the problem of space travel, it is solving the problem of mortality.
i think the key point in grappling with this is in realizing what the actual problem is in contemplating the likelihood of travel, and it's that our lives are too short.
but, if light is not the fastest thing then the fastest thing cannot be much faster because light cannot have much mass. there is some space for the possibility of moving two or three times the speed of light, but not faster than that.
so, therefore aliens are impossible, right? no. because, you're making another assumption without realizing it: that aliens must have comparable life spans to humans. if an alien could live for tens of thousands of years, space travel would be an entirely feasible proposition.
some biologist will reject this offhand. but, the truth is that we seem to have taken a wrong turn on the evolutionary tree in terms of longevity, some time many millions of years ago. had we evolved from turtles, we would likely live for several centuries rather than several decades. there's no intrinsic requirement for cell death; arguments about the laws of physics on earth only apply to the earth. a different kind of environment may actually select for extreme longevity.
it seems to be clear that space travel is not something that humans will be possible of for many eons, if ever at all. we're running up against a biological limit rather than a technological one. now, there's abstract ways around this. we could consider cloning our consciousness to data storage and then reuploading it into a new clone created from scratch - that way we could exist in the computers for the thousand of years of travel time. but, that is not just solving the problem of space travel, it is solving the problem of mortality.
i think the key point in grappling with this is in realizing what the actual problem is in contemplating the likelihood of travel, and it's that our lives are too short.
Stone Pestal
Hey Justin I am a Canadian who cannot find a job ,along with 1,000,000 plus other Canadians .Your government just allowed 27,000 unknown Syrian refugees into Canada .Meanwhile Canadians are homeless ,living on the streets and short of food .You are paying $375 a month for rent to people on Welfare .You have just brought in refugees while Canadians are suffering and there is an affordable housing crisis .What ? Are you going to do for Canadians ?
jessica
+Stone Pestal
there's not really a reason why we have to choose between helping existing canadians and getting people out of a situation of imminent genocide. i don't want to stop the flow of refugees, but i would like to see more resources put into subsidized housing.
the thing you have to understand, though, is the way the division of powers in the country works. it's not 100% a provincial responsibility. but, it's about 90% a provincial responsibility. trudeau can basically do one thing, here, and it's write a check. if you're concerned about the low level of assistance, or the shoddy state of subsidized housing, you need to contact your mpp and your local city council representative.
jessica
+Karl Hans
if the refugees we're admitting were in support of sharia law, they'd have stayed in the region.
the governments of syria and iraq, pre-catastrophe, were both secular. organizations that outlawed groups that supported sharia law. you could be executed for joining the muslim brotherhood, which is actually relatively moderate.
the historical roots of the assad and hussein regimes were in atheistic socialism, not islamic fundamentalism. this has been the conflict in the region for decades.
the refugees are more likely to be communists than fundamentalists.
Hey Justin I am a Canadian who cannot find a job ,along with 1,000,000 plus other Canadians .Your government just allowed 27,000 unknown Syrian refugees into Canada .Meanwhile Canadians are homeless ,living on the streets and short of food .You are paying $375 a month for rent to people on Welfare .You have just brought in refugees while Canadians are suffering and there is an affordable housing crisis .What ? Are you going to do for Canadians ?
jessica
+Stone Pestal
there's not really a reason why we have to choose between helping existing canadians and getting people out of a situation of imminent genocide. i don't want to stop the flow of refugees, but i would like to see more resources put into subsidized housing.
the thing you have to understand, though, is the way the division of powers in the country works. it's not 100% a provincial responsibility. but, it's about 90% a provincial responsibility. trudeau can basically do one thing, here, and it's write a check. if you're concerned about the low level of assistance, or the shoddy state of subsidized housing, you need to contact your mpp and your local city council representative.
jessica
+Karl Hans
if the refugees we're admitting were in support of sharia law, they'd have stayed in the region.
the governments of syria and iraq, pre-catastrophe, were both secular. organizations that outlawed groups that supported sharia law. you could be executed for joining the muslim brotherhood, which is actually relatively moderate.
the historical roots of the assad and hussein regimes were in atheistic socialism, not islamic fundamentalism. this has been the conflict in the region for decades.
the refugees are more likely to be communists than fundamentalists.
Gravitating
To this day.. I have no idea what Michael Stipe is signing about.. I like to think, that he was singing about something, so Beautiful, it couldn't be expressed in words...
deathtokoalas
+Gravitating
he'd long grown out of mumbling at this point. and, in general, i don't think he's as hard to decipher as a lot of people claim. but, i think the general theme of this record is exasperation. there's a kind of process of accepting the futility of struggle that, in places, comes off as sort of absurdist.
i think this is the most important line on the record:
i know that this is vitriol. no solution, spleen-venting,
but I feel better having screamed. don't you?
the record exists in that space where you're done screaming. or, at least are for the day, anyways.
Peter Gray
+deathtokoalas ..true to the exasperation in point - but maybe it's a kind of maturity.. almost like Ghandi's non violence ethos .. accepting a higher (not particularly religious) plane, and way of thinking .. complete absurdity (?) - yet sublime (?) ..after the storm is always peace.
deathtokoalas
+Peter Gray
but, i think there's a difference between this kind of philosophical perspective that change is impossible in general and concluding, through observation, that change is impossible right now.
i didn't really understand stipe well until i read up a little on the beat poets. i mean, i got the themes, sort of, but i didn't really grasp it. i think there was a big buddhist slant in their writing, but i also think there was a big existentialist slant in it. stipe draws from both traditions, but i think he tends to lean more towards an existentialist concept of futility than a buddhist concept of release.
To this day.. I have no idea what Michael Stipe is signing about.. I like to think, that he was singing about something, so Beautiful, it couldn't be expressed in words...
+Gravitating
he'd long grown out of mumbling at this point. and, in general, i don't think he's as hard to decipher as a lot of people claim. but, i think the general theme of this record is exasperation. there's a kind of process of accepting the futility of struggle that, in places, comes off as sort of absurdist.
i think this is the most important line on the record:
i know that this is vitriol. no solution, spleen-venting,
but I feel better having screamed. don't you?
the record exists in that space where you're done screaming. or, at least are for the day, anyways.
Peter Gray
+deathtokoalas ..true to the exasperation in point - but maybe it's a kind of maturity.. almost like Ghandi's non violence ethos .. accepting a higher (not particularly religious) plane, and way of thinking .. complete absurdity (?) - yet sublime (?) ..after the storm is always peace.
deathtokoalas
+Peter Gray
but, i think there's a difference between this kind of philosophical perspective that change is impossible in general and concluding, through observation, that change is impossible right now.
i didn't really understand stipe well until i read up a little on the beat poets. i mean, i got the themes, sort of, but i didn't really grasp it. i think there was a big buddhist slant in their writing, but i also think there was a big existentialist slant in it. stipe draws from both traditions, but i think he tends to lean more towards an existentialist concept of futility than a buddhist concept of release.
Sunday, December 20, 2015
your constitution is hundreds of years out of date, functionally obsolete and needs a serious rewrite, and you're just going to fall further and further behind until you figure that out.
i could say something ironic about false idols. but, this is more like blood-letting.
i mean, don't let it get as bad as it's gotten with the christians.
it's an over two hundred year old text, and you're still thumping it around like it's a state of the art document. will you be doing this when it's two thousand years old? how long before enough is enough?
don't be that country.
canada's constitution is only 33 years old. it's a modern, comprehensive document - far superior to your moldy old thing.
(deleted post)
jessica
somebody just asked me if that means i think communism was right (the comment was painfully stupid and has been removed).
the constitution is actually so old that it says nothing about communism because it didn't exist yet, and couldn't have existed yet. it was before marx ever wrote anything. it was before the failure of the french revolution. in fact, it was before any kind of industrial revolution in the united states.
this is actually useful in grappling with how irrelevant the document is. we currently live in a post-industrial economy; call it what you will, but it's defined by the unravelling of the socialization of labour. and, that phenomenon suggests that marx was very wrong.
yet, you want to base your society around a document written before the industrial revolution? you want to hold to it without modifications? read it literally?
i think you need to rip it up and start all over again, myself. it's become so out of date that it's an impediment to progress.
John Roy
+jessica It has been changed since the industrial revolution, it can be amended, has been many times before. Tearing it up and starting new wouldn't help much. If we did that then most of what was already on there would return.
deathtokoalas
+John Roy the modifications are minor. you replaced chattel slavery with wage slavery, for example. but, the document is still fundamentally designed for an agrarian society, and an agrarian economy. it can't and won't be able to keep up with changes in the modern world. so long as america holds to the archaic document, it will fall further and further behind.
you have routine yearly crises around trivial governing issues that most countries couldn't even contemplate. it's not an expression of greater democracy, it's just a waste of everybody's time and everybody's resources. it actually fuels mass apathy. you can't get basic agreements signed. you can't participate in international forums as a full member. it's really a noose around your neck. and, it's only a matter of time before the rest of the world gets fed up and relegates you to the status of a failed pariah state.
i could say something ironic about false idols. but, this is more like blood-letting.
i mean, don't let it get as bad as it's gotten with the christians.
it's an over two hundred year old text, and you're still thumping it around like it's a state of the art document. will you be doing this when it's two thousand years old? how long before enough is enough?
don't be that country.
canada's constitution is only 33 years old. it's a modern, comprehensive document - far superior to your moldy old thing.
(deleted post)
jessica
somebody just asked me if that means i think communism was right (the comment was painfully stupid and has been removed).
the constitution is actually so old that it says nothing about communism because it didn't exist yet, and couldn't have existed yet. it was before marx ever wrote anything. it was before the failure of the french revolution. in fact, it was before any kind of industrial revolution in the united states.
this is actually useful in grappling with how irrelevant the document is. we currently live in a post-industrial economy; call it what you will, but it's defined by the unravelling of the socialization of labour. and, that phenomenon suggests that marx was very wrong.
yet, you want to base your society around a document written before the industrial revolution? you want to hold to it without modifications? read it literally?
i think you need to rip it up and start all over again, myself. it's become so out of date that it's an impediment to progress.
John Roy
+jessica It has been changed since the industrial revolution, it can be amended, has been many times before. Tearing it up and starting new wouldn't help much. If we did that then most of what was already on there would return.
deathtokoalas
+John Roy the modifications are minor. you replaced chattel slavery with wage slavery, for example. but, the document is still fundamentally designed for an agrarian society, and an agrarian economy. it can't and won't be able to keep up with changes in the modern world. so long as america holds to the archaic document, it will fall further and further behind.
you have routine yearly crises around trivial governing issues that most countries couldn't even contemplate. it's not an expression of greater democracy, it's just a waste of everybody's time and everybody's resources. it actually fuels mass apathy. you can't get basic agreements signed. you can't participate in international forums as a full member. it's really a noose around your neck. and, it's only a matter of time before the rest of the world gets fed up and relegates you to the status of a failed pariah state.
i'm not sure if he's applying for president or that-barely-used-snl-cast-member-that-nobody-is-aware-of.
i gotta wonder though: is this focus grouped? and is the republican base really that warped? or is this just desperate, aimless flailing?
as a canadian, what i really see here is some kind of weird, post-modernist version of stephen harper.
i gotta wonder though: is this focus grouped? and is the republican base really that warped? or is this just desperate, aimless flailing?
as a canadian, what i really see here is some kind of weird, post-modernist version of stephen harper.
see, you gave him the benefit of picking a segment where he's saying something that's actually true. in an attempt to "prove she's tough", hillary has become a horrible, barbaric, war monger. her stint as secretary of state really renders her unelectable, in the same way that ignatieff was unelectable from the start in canada. trump is more so, mind you. and, she'll get a little help from history - she's so close to dubya, that he will probably end up taking credit for her catastrophes. but, only if she's forgotten...
she was really amongst the worst foreign policy leaders that the country has ever had. this was predictable, but not to this extent. we all should have known she has going to wave her cock around a little in the republicans' faces. that was predictable. but, the scale of it was not predictable. the consequences of her rather substantial errors are going to take decades to resolve.
it may be the best argument for electing her - so she can fix the mess she created.
again: i'm not suggesting trump is better. i'm suggesting that trump v clinton means we're all fucked. they're both lunatics. they're both war mongers. they're both insane. we're probably looking at an escalation of world war three, either way.
but, this is a trick - he doesn't sound smart here because of the tone of his voice. he sounds smart because he's actually right, for once.
but, the broad swath of you seem pretty stupid for thinking that intelligence is contained within style rather than within substance.
we should really all take a moment to reflect on the candidacy of bernie sanders. i think this is bigger than the current election cycle. people say that about every election cycle, i know. but, i think it's actually true this time.
the united states is in one of those historical pivot points, where it needs to choose a longer term direction. the direction being presented by clinton differs little from the direction being presented by the republicans. and, it is a path towards the conversion of the "perpetual endless wars" of the "war on whatever" towards a serious geopolitical conflict that could only be referred to as a new world war.
i mean, these forces are already in full swing. it's not a question of starting something. it's a question of stopping something.
i'm not exaggerating when i suggest that electing sanders may be the only way to save the country.
she was really amongst the worst foreign policy leaders that the country has ever had. this was predictable, but not to this extent. we all should have known she has going to wave her cock around a little in the republicans' faces. that was predictable. but, the scale of it was not predictable. the consequences of her rather substantial errors are going to take decades to resolve.
it may be the best argument for electing her - so she can fix the mess she created.
again: i'm not suggesting trump is better. i'm suggesting that trump v clinton means we're all fucked. they're both lunatics. they're both war mongers. they're both insane. we're probably looking at an escalation of world war three, either way.
but, this is a trick - he doesn't sound smart here because of the tone of his voice. he sounds smart because he's actually right, for once.
but, the broad swath of you seem pretty stupid for thinking that intelligence is contained within style rather than within substance.
we should really all take a moment to reflect on the candidacy of bernie sanders. i think this is bigger than the current election cycle. people say that about every election cycle, i know. but, i think it's actually true this time.
the united states is in one of those historical pivot points, where it needs to choose a longer term direction. the direction being presented by clinton differs little from the direction being presented by the republicans. and, it is a path towards the conversion of the "perpetual endless wars" of the "war on whatever" towards a serious geopolitical conflict that could only be referred to as a new world war.
i mean, these forces are already in full swing. it's not a question of starting something. it's a question of stopping something.
i'm not exaggerating when i suggest that electing sanders may be the only way to save the country.
but, this is in fact the time of year when the sun is down for days at a time. there is somewhere in canada that will have no light over that period.
www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/15-days-of-darkness-in-november-its-not-going-to-happen/59800/
www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/15-days-of-darkness-in-november-its-not-going-to-happen/59800/
what if the reason we can't make contact with extra-terrestrials is that we're in some kind of a system that treats us as an infection, and we simply haven't been treated yet?
what if it doesn't even know we exist, yet? what kind of depths would we need to penetrate to set off a reaction?
see, this is why cosmological theories don't impress me. i'm not really looking for a technical argument right now, but all these broadly unjustifiable assumptions just mask the limitlessness of the actual possibilities. nothing we think we understand about the universe makes sense unless we assume it's a closed system. but, i think we have more reasons to think it's open, and then the entire concept of the universe collapses - on the basis of reversing a single, tiny and mostly unrealized but absolutely vital and yet entirely baseless assumption.
what if it doesn't even know we exist, yet? what kind of depths would we need to penetrate to set off a reaction?
see, this is why cosmological theories don't impress me. i'm not really looking for a technical argument right now, but all these broadly unjustifiable assumptions just mask the limitlessness of the actual possibilities. nothing we think we understand about the universe makes sense unless we assume it's a closed system. but, i think we have more reasons to think it's open, and then the entire concept of the universe collapses - on the basis of reversing a single, tiny and mostly unrealized but absolutely vital and yet entirely baseless assumption.
this is just a little bit of historical fiction that i was thinking about as i was having a smoke.
i was thinking about something i typed somewhere, about how any kind of serious cold war monument would have to recognize the struggle of the cuban and angolan freedom fighters against the apartheid regime. that's loaded language. but that's also the correct and necessary language - perhaps toned down only by a miniscule degree. the cubans and their communist allies would need to be recognized as being on the correct side of history in that struggle, however complex the situation may have been.
it got me to thinking that you really have to put apartheid in the context of the cold war, and we never do that, here. so, we don't really understand it, because we don't put it in context. at the bottom line of everything else, the new british empire - and remember that south africa was a reasonably important british colony - had to maintain an imperialist friendly regime in the face of russian interests in the region. finding some way to transition power that was acceptable to the british would have meant ensuring that there were no communist-friendly elements, and that was a non-starter for decades. it's not a coincidence that the anc took over at the same time as the collapse of communism, allowing for eventual effective western co-option in the absence of any meaningful russian influence.
so, then how does that lesson apply to israel? well, it would suggest that any effective strategy would have to remove israel's strategic usefulness to the british imperialists. that is at the core of the issue. the americans will only change their policy relating israel when maintaining control of israel is no longer such a pressing geostrategic necessity. this is related to oil. so, the solution is oil independence - or fossil fuel abandonment.
that got me to thinking about the fracking push in the united states....
i was thinking about something i typed somewhere, about how any kind of serious cold war monument would have to recognize the struggle of the cuban and angolan freedom fighters against the apartheid regime. that's loaded language. but that's also the correct and necessary language - perhaps toned down only by a miniscule degree. the cubans and their communist allies would need to be recognized as being on the correct side of history in that struggle, however complex the situation may have been.
it got me to thinking that you really have to put apartheid in the context of the cold war, and we never do that, here. so, we don't really understand it, because we don't put it in context. at the bottom line of everything else, the new british empire - and remember that south africa was a reasonably important british colony - had to maintain an imperialist friendly regime in the face of russian interests in the region. finding some way to transition power that was acceptable to the british would have meant ensuring that there were no communist-friendly elements, and that was a non-starter for decades. it's not a coincidence that the anc took over at the same time as the collapse of communism, allowing for eventual effective western co-option in the absence of any meaningful russian influence.
so, then how does that lesson apply to israel? well, it would suggest that any effective strategy would have to remove israel's strategic usefulness to the british imperialists. that is at the core of the issue. the americans will only change their policy relating israel when maintaining control of israel is no longer such a pressing geostrategic necessity. this is related to oil. so, the solution is oil independence - or fossil fuel abandonment.
that got me to thinking about the fracking push in the united states....
Saturday, December 19, 2015
finalizing i’m sure your mom is probably a very nice person
this track is now closed. i've also stuck with the mix from last july.
the remaining tracks have yet to be uploaded.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/im-sure-your-mom-is-probably-a-very-nice-person
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/omm
the remaining tracks have yet to be uploaded.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/im-sure-your-mom-is-probably-a-very-nice-person
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/omm
finalizing no longer confused
i'm closing this one as well. no changes since july...
there will be a few more mixes of this track coming. if i do any singles, this track will get a single.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/no-longer-confused
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/cnusodef
there will be a few more mixes of this track coming. if i do any singles, this track will get a single.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/no-longer-confused
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/cnusodef
finalizing yup. i still fuck the dead.
i'm closing this, as well. no alteration since july.
the pattern is clearly that the mixes were stable all along, and it was the playback that altered. that's now clear, although it wasn't for quite some time.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/yup-i-still-fuck-the-dead
the pattern is clearly that the mixes were stable all along, and it was the playback that altered. that's now clear, although it wasn't for quite some time.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/yup-i-still-fuck-the-dead
finalizing just say no to mood altering prescription drugs
i had remixed this track in september, but i was confused about what the natural conditions of the output should have been. i double compressed it, which squished the fuck out of the drums.
i have replaced the september version with the initial july version and closed the track.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/just-say-no-to-mood-altering-prescription-drugs
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/open
i have replaced the september version with the initial july version and closed the track.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/just-say-no-to-mood-altering-prescription-drugs
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/open
splitting the ry30 mixes off from inrimixed
i had decided to add an extra component to inrimixed of ry30 mixes. i've decided to split this off into it's own idea, and include ry30 material that was created after period 1.2. so, this will now be inri05x and positioned at the end of period 2.
that opens up some more spaced on inrimixed for loose ends that i think ought to be released.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/ry30-remixes
that opens up some more spaced on inrimixed for loose ends that i think ought to be released.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/ry30-remixes
i know i said that i give up, but i'm still flabbergasted.
so, when you say you're pulling out of a mission, that's something you need to plan for. you need to give your allies notice, ensure a transition is in place, etc. that's going to take a few months. i don't understand what's confusing.
further, the government has indicated repeatedly that the reason they're pulling out is because they have a mandate to. now, i think this has actually gotten worse over the week - because now you're actually denying the mandate, rather than having a discussion about it.
i'm all for the resulting discussions. i've had them. if it's necessary, i'll reiterate. but, let's get the mandate part clear, first.
www.cbc.ca/news/politics/real-change-comes-early-to-liberal-promises-1.3371721
mnovak
if you are already flabbergasted, think how you will feel about this government in 3 years time?
jessica murray
i'm not confused by the government. the government has been very clear. i'm flabbergasted by how the media is seemingly unable to understand what is really very simple and clear messaging.
Day Tripper
My how you Liberals change your story once elected. We all heard what JT said during the campaign and no amount of spin will change what he said. He had no idea what he was talking about and lied period.
jessica murray
well, i'm not a liberal. it would be more accurate to call me a new democrat, although i think they're both far too right-wing for me to really identify with either party. i'm actually a left libertarian.
but the point is that the story is not being changed. the media seems to be trying to force them to change their story, and they're very much resisting this. it's got to the point where instead of debating interpretations of their mandate to withdraw, they're denying a mandate altogether.
the reason i'm keying on this is that i'm really just sort of concerned by the way the media is reacting to this. it goes beyond the usual media incompetence and suggests some kind of ulterior motive. war drums are being beaten loudly, by what has becoming a jingoist, pro-war media. why is this happening?
i mean, how did canada end up with this aggressive, militaristic media? when did this happen?
you could reasonably ask in return: when did the country become isolationist? and while liberals may suggest that something like "non-interventionist" is better language, they'd be spinning that argument: the country is currently isolationist. and i can answer when that happened: when we got stuck in an intractable conflict that we don't actually want anything to do with.
so, when you say you're pulling out of a mission, that's something you need to plan for. you need to give your allies notice, ensure a transition is in place, etc. that's going to take a few months. i don't understand what's confusing.
further, the government has indicated repeatedly that the reason they're pulling out is because they have a mandate to. now, i think this has actually gotten worse over the week - because now you're actually denying the mandate, rather than having a discussion about it.
i'm all for the resulting discussions. i've had them. if it's necessary, i'll reiterate. but, let's get the mandate part clear, first.
www.cbc.ca/news/politics/real-change-comes-early-to-liberal-promises-1.3371721
mnovak
if you are already flabbergasted, think how you will feel about this government in 3 years time?
jessica murray
i'm not confused by the government. the government has been very clear. i'm flabbergasted by how the media is seemingly unable to understand what is really very simple and clear messaging.
Day Tripper
My how you Liberals change your story once elected. We all heard what JT said during the campaign and no amount of spin will change what he said. He had no idea what he was talking about and lied period.
jessica murray
well, i'm not a liberal. it would be more accurate to call me a new democrat, although i think they're both far too right-wing for me to really identify with either party. i'm actually a left libertarian.
but the point is that the story is not being changed. the media seems to be trying to force them to change their story, and they're very much resisting this. it's got to the point where instead of debating interpretations of their mandate to withdraw, they're denying a mandate altogether.
the reason i'm keying on this is that i'm really just sort of concerned by the way the media is reacting to this. it goes beyond the usual media incompetence and suggests some kind of ulterior motive. war drums are being beaten loudly, by what has becoming a jingoist, pro-war media. why is this happening?
i mean, how did canada end up with this aggressive, militaristic media? when did this happen?
you could reasonably ask in return: when did the country become isolationist? and while liberals may suggest that something like "non-interventionist" is better language, they'd be spinning that argument: the country is currently isolationist. and i can answer when that happened: when we got stuck in an intractable conflict that we don't actually want anything to do with.
i think everybody should read this and think about it:
http://www.theweedblog.com/how-can-you-tell-if-your-marijuana-comes-from-a-cartel/
imagine buying a bag with paperclip in it. has that ever happened to you? no, worse - imagine being the guy that sells the bag with a paperclip in it.
"dude. you sold me a bag with a paperclip in it. what the %$#!?"
(and i apologize for censoring that myself, but there are certain childish rules in this forum that one has no choice but to adhere to, should they decide to use the forum. it is what it is.)
"really?", suppressing laughter, "it had a paperclip in it?"
"yeah. not joking."
"i don't know where that came from man, but i think i should be more careful with my sources, clearly. i'm sorry man."
"you know you're never going to live this down right. ten years from now, i'll be asking you if there's a paperclip in it. if i ever go over to your place with my grandchildren, they will ask you if there's paperclips in the meals you prepared and my daughter-in-law will carefully check the meals to make sure."
i think that the major aim of the cartels is to cross borders. it's something that requires significant amounts of bribery, and hence necessarily requires a proper system. but, the canadian market doesn't source it's marijuana from outside the country, and there therefore isn't a requirement for a cartel system. that would only be necessary for canadian exports - and for imports into canada of more tropical drugs.
i just think we need to understand what we're actually driving out of business before we drive it out of business, and take a good long think about it.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/why-should-liquor-control-boards-manage-weed-sales-they-already-know-how/article27757191/
--
Wild bill 2
When marijuana is sold as all other products I will have one more thing to worry about when I drive my car
Now we have drunk drivers - drivers on cell phones - drivers texting - - drivers taking selfies - drivers eating - drivers having romance with their ladies - and now thanks to selfie baby PM Trudeau we will have drivers high on marijuana
I think it is time to pull the car over and park !
deathtokoalas
you'd be doing future generations a tremendous service if you were to drive less. i would like to thank you for them, in advance, as they will not get a chance to, themselves.
http://www.theweedblog.com/how-can-you-tell-if-your-marijuana-comes-from-a-cartel/
imagine buying a bag with paperclip in it. has that ever happened to you? no, worse - imagine being the guy that sells the bag with a paperclip in it.
"dude. you sold me a bag with a paperclip in it. what the %$#!?"
(and i apologize for censoring that myself, but there are certain childish rules in this forum that one has no choice but to adhere to, should they decide to use the forum. it is what it is.)
"really?", suppressing laughter, "it had a paperclip in it?"
"yeah. not joking."
"i don't know where that came from man, but i think i should be more careful with my sources, clearly. i'm sorry man."
"you know you're never going to live this down right. ten years from now, i'll be asking you if there's a paperclip in it. if i ever go over to your place with my grandchildren, they will ask you if there's paperclips in the meals you prepared and my daughter-in-law will carefully check the meals to make sure."
i think that the major aim of the cartels is to cross borders. it's something that requires significant amounts of bribery, and hence necessarily requires a proper system. but, the canadian market doesn't source it's marijuana from outside the country, and there therefore isn't a requirement for a cartel system. that would only be necessary for canadian exports - and for imports into canada of more tropical drugs.
i just think we need to understand what we're actually driving out of business before we drive it out of business, and take a good long think about it.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/why-should-liquor-control-boards-manage-weed-sales-they-already-know-how/article27757191/
--
Wild bill 2
When marijuana is sold as all other products I will have one more thing to worry about when I drive my car
Now we have drunk drivers - drivers on cell phones - drivers texting - - drivers taking selfies - drivers eating - drivers having romance with their ladies - and now thanks to selfie baby PM Trudeau we will have drivers high on marijuana
I think it is time to pull the car over and park !
deathtokoalas
you'd be doing future generations a tremendous service if you were to drive less. i would like to thank you for them, in advance, as they will not get a chance to, themselves.
well, see, i'd rather interpret this as a well-deserved insult to lettuce, which is basically useless. check the nutritional components. you'd might as just have a glass of water. i've long made a habit of holding the lettuce, as it's just entirely pointless and simply takes up too much space. when you get off it for a while, getting something with lettuce starts to taste like you left it underwater.
www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/the-one-way-lettuce-is-actually-worse-for-you-than-bacon/61296/
www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/the-one-way-lettuce-is-actually-worse-for-you-than-bacon/61296/
see, when trudeau says he's going to spend the money from pot legalization on "treatment" and "education", this is what i worry about happening.
it's really only a cgi sloth away from being realistic.
also, regarding relevant substitutions for pot, i think i'd lean towards prozac.
this is not a good reflection of what pot does to you. but, it's a reasonable reflection of what prescription drugs can do to you.
it's really only a cgi sloth away from being realistic.
also, regarding relevant substitutions for pot, i think i'd lean towards prozac.
this is not a good reflection of what pot does to you. but, it's a reasonable reflection of what prescription drugs can do to you.
Friday, December 18, 2015
there's a very simple two-step solution to this problem.
1) F. and don't give in on it. hold to it. as long as it takes. let his parents deal with it from there.
2) students that fail - even once - need to be put in separate classes. they should be able to get out of those classes by passing a full year, too. but, it's the way to get out of this pushing-them-through mentality. nobody wants 20-somethings in high school. that does have real consequences; i broke some asshole's arm in the ninth grade by pushing him down the stairs because he kept slamming me into the locker, and he should have been in 12th grade (and he was white, of german descent). so, put them in their own classes. at their own schools, even.
we need to bring back the idea of failing.
1) F. and don't give in on it. hold to it. as long as it takes. let his parents deal with it from there.
2) students that fail - even once - need to be put in separate classes. they should be able to get out of those classes by passing a full year, too. but, it's the way to get out of this pushing-them-through mentality. nobody wants 20-somethings in high school. that does have real consequences; i broke some asshole's arm in the ninth grade by pushing him down the stairs because he kept slamming me into the locker, and he should have been in 12th grade (and he was white, of german descent). so, put them in their own classes. at their own schools, even.
we need to bring back the idea of failing.
this is actually a useful short because it explores the situation from russia's defensive priorities, which has been their dominant concern since before stalin. so much western media focuses on this bluntly comical idea of russia as an offensive power, trying to conquer the world.
it's also useful in the sense that it really draws the connection between modern russia and historical rome. this foreign policy is quintessentially byzantine, and so are the consequences - perpetual suspicion of imperial treachery.
i think that, in the broader historical perspective, "western civilization" has yet to truly break it's way out of the division of the roman empire. i know this is very abstract, but it's something i've drawn attention to before and i really think there's a lot of truth to it.
it's tied into the american historical psyche, and to the foundations of the nation itself - this idea of america as the new rome. but, it's sort of typically american in it's lack of scope. london was the actual new rome. washington is in many ways the new constantinople.
but, it's recursive. as much as the american revolution was a civil war within the british empire rather than a revolution, one that ended with washington as the new center of the british empire, the new roman empire, this is only the western half of the story.
the eastern half of the story sees moscow as the new constantinople, the continuation of the eastern sphere of roman civilization. and, it sees the russian empire as the continuation of the byzantine sphere.
so, then what was the cold war, really?
as history unfolds, conflicts localized in space and time open themselves up to these broader interpretations. the details fade. what's left is the broader narrative.
when this story is told to children on distant planets, it seems unlikely to me that any meaningful separation will occur over what we call the modern era. the whole thing will coalesce. moscow vs. washington, constantinople vs. rome, pope vs patriarch - this will all become intertwined into a single, epic struggle for control over roman civilization.
it's also useful in the sense that it really draws the connection between modern russia and historical rome. this foreign policy is quintessentially byzantine, and so are the consequences - perpetual suspicion of imperial treachery.
i think that, in the broader historical perspective, "western civilization" has yet to truly break it's way out of the division of the roman empire. i know this is very abstract, but it's something i've drawn attention to before and i really think there's a lot of truth to it.
it's tied into the american historical psyche, and to the foundations of the nation itself - this idea of america as the new rome. but, it's sort of typically american in it's lack of scope. london was the actual new rome. washington is in many ways the new constantinople.
but, it's recursive. as much as the american revolution was a civil war within the british empire rather than a revolution, one that ended with washington as the new center of the british empire, the new roman empire, this is only the western half of the story.
the eastern half of the story sees moscow as the new constantinople, the continuation of the eastern sphere of roman civilization. and, it sees the russian empire as the continuation of the byzantine sphere.
so, then what was the cold war, really?
as history unfolds, conflicts localized in space and time open themselves up to these broader interpretations. the details fade. what's left is the broader narrative.
when this story is told to children on distant planets, it seems unlikely to me that any meaningful separation will occur over what we call the modern era. the whole thing will coalesce. moscow vs. washington, constantinople vs. rome, pope vs patriarch - this will all become intertwined into a single, epic struggle for control over roman civilization.
i really think we need some fact-based analysis here.
1) most people don't buy pot from cartels. they buy it from local growers.
this is useful reading:
http://www.theweedblog.com/how-can-you-tell-if-your-marijuana-comes-from-a-cartel/
2) your kids' hook-up ultimately probably comes from somebody's dad, or somebody's older sibling, and not from organized crime.
3) marijuana is not addictive.
4) because marijuana is not addictive, pushers don't push it. they push speed. meth. it's big business, and run by smart business people. if you can create a speed addict, you're going to get steady revenue streams from that person - regularly, multiple times a week. if you get a marijuana customer, you'll get sporadic sales every once in a while. so, they don't focus on pot because it's not in their self-interest to.
i've had these discussions with street-level dealers, and a lot of the time they don't even know where to find pot - despite having a knapsack full of speed that they're selling on the corner. you ask them for pot, and they try and push you speed and then tell you to get lost.
i'm not opposed to putting some of the money towards treatment centres. but, it would be better spent on treatment for actually damaging and actually addictive substances. the most damaging, addictive substance in our society is alcohol.
www.cbc.ca/news/politics/legal-marijuana-taxes-1.3370358
(removed reply)
as i mentioned, marijuana is not addictive. acid isn't either, and i wouldn't be opposed to legalizing it, although i'm not about to strenuously argue the point, either. the thing about hallucinogenics is that you'd have to set a higher legal age, but the truth is that people mostly grow out of them by the age of 21.
the gangs push speed and meth, mostly. they don't start with pot. they jump right to the stuff that hooks them; pot is useless in hooking them. it's all about pills. and, it's actually a very different subculture, too. you would be targeting very different kinds of kids that would go for popping a pill to get an upper than kids that want to smoke a joint and chill out.
also: kids don't do heroin. it's an adult drug
i remember watching kids pop speed pills on the school bus when i was 13. nobody in that group had ever tried or knew how to get pot. i don't even think any of them had smoked a cigarette. and, i think that observation is pretty normal.
they weren't the outcast kids, either. they were the popular kids - the in crowd.
--
anglophile
No one will buy pot from a Gov't outlet. It will be expensive, much like cigars, or more. Once the substance is legal, pot smokers will simply grow it in their backyards, even if it is less potent. There will be no legal means to prevent this from happening. Also, remember that pot can't be used without abusing it. only a few "tokes" will have you completely inebriated. Unlike alcohol, it can't be used responsibly. A "casual" pot user, would be equivalent to an excessive drinker. One can enjoy a couple of glasses of wine with dinner, and still be legal to drive home, or supervise their children. Parents who smoke at home might find that they are putting their children at risk, if they smoke a joint only to find they have to rush the kid to the hospital for some reason. Their judgment would be so impaired that they might not even recognize a serious situation. Also, pot will be the chosen drug for kids at school. A few tokes between classes will get you stoned, while the same high might requires 7 or 8 beer, which would be hard to carry around, or consume inconspicuously.
jessica murray
i'm not going to comment on your conclusions regarding how marijuana users behave, but i want to point that you're half right about effects.
marijuana tolerance increases as you smoke. i'm a light, sporadic and social smoker - i only need a three toke pass to get stoned for the night, and into the morning. that wouldn't be true if i smoked regularly, but it is true because i don't smoke regularly. so, you're right that you don't need a lot, if you don't use a lot.
the flip side of that is that marijuana does a fraction to you of what alcohol does, and plateaus at a fairly low point. you will never blackout and forget what you did last night due to marijuana use. you won't spontaneously pass out. "as stoned as you can get" is roughly equivalent to the immediate buzz you get after talking 2-3 shots at the same time and it lasts for several hours - but then you can't get more stoned than that, and you don't deal with the effects of drunkenness.
so, it's faster, yes. and you need less. but it's also impossible to overdo it.
it's common sense that one should not drive stoned. but, the reality is that you're never going to see any stoned person stumbling all over the place, slurring words, cursing, unable to walk straight. marijuana just doesn't have the ability to create that effect, or at least not on it's own.
--
AlanWilliams
This will only drive the drug dealers to push harder more dangerous substances into the market. They will plan to adapt in order to maintain their market share and profits. This will result in even more people in addictive states unable to function in a sustainable lifestyle. The liberals are only doing this to protect the rich kids of Toronto (Rosedale) from getting a criminal record! They don't care about the devastating results although they say the money will go into addiction programs. Why not just criminalize pot as a deterrent and save lives???
jessica murray
actual drug dealers - bikers and whatnot - already mostly ignore pot, because you can't build dependence on it. they don't bother selling it as a gateway or whatever. they just jump right to selling speed in candy wrappers. and that's something that people should actually be concerned about.
--
captain canada
I can just see the fun at the border when Canada legalizes pot . Get ready to wait while US customs searches for that one joint your kid left in the back seat of the car and you end up in jail for smuggling pot to the USA .
jessica murray
bernie is claiming he'll drop the federal restriction. if he doesn't win, i can't see it being more than 4-8 years away.
1) most people don't buy pot from cartels. they buy it from local growers.
this is useful reading:
http://www.theweedblog.com/how-can-you-tell-if-your-marijuana-comes-from-a-cartel/
2) your kids' hook-up ultimately probably comes from somebody's dad, or somebody's older sibling, and not from organized crime.
3) marijuana is not addictive.
4) because marijuana is not addictive, pushers don't push it. they push speed. meth. it's big business, and run by smart business people. if you can create a speed addict, you're going to get steady revenue streams from that person - regularly, multiple times a week. if you get a marijuana customer, you'll get sporadic sales every once in a while. so, they don't focus on pot because it's not in their self-interest to.
i've had these discussions with street-level dealers, and a lot of the time they don't even know where to find pot - despite having a knapsack full of speed that they're selling on the corner. you ask them for pot, and they try and push you speed and then tell you to get lost.
i'm not opposed to putting some of the money towards treatment centres. but, it would be better spent on treatment for actually damaging and actually addictive substances. the most damaging, addictive substance in our society is alcohol.
www.cbc.ca/news/politics/legal-marijuana-taxes-1.3370358
(removed reply)
as i mentioned, marijuana is not addictive. acid isn't either, and i wouldn't be opposed to legalizing it, although i'm not about to strenuously argue the point, either. the thing about hallucinogenics is that you'd have to set a higher legal age, but the truth is that people mostly grow out of them by the age of 21.
the gangs push speed and meth, mostly. they don't start with pot. they jump right to the stuff that hooks them; pot is useless in hooking them. it's all about pills. and, it's actually a very different subculture, too. you would be targeting very different kinds of kids that would go for popping a pill to get an upper than kids that want to smoke a joint and chill out.
also: kids don't do heroin. it's an adult drug
i remember watching kids pop speed pills on the school bus when i was 13. nobody in that group had ever tried or knew how to get pot. i don't even think any of them had smoked a cigarette. and, i think that observation is pretty normal.
they weren't the outcast kids, either. they were the popular kids - the in crowd.
--
anglophile
No one will buy pot from a Gov't outlet. It will be expensive, much like cigars, or more. Once the substance is legal, pot smokers will simply grow it in their backyards, even if it is less potent. There will be no legal means to prevent this from happening. Also, remember that pot can't be used without abusing it. only a few "tokes" will have you completely inebriated. Unlike alcohol, it can't be used responsibly. A "casual" pot user, would be equivalent to an excessive drinker. One can enjoy a couple of glasses of wine with dinner, and still be legal to drive home, or supervise their children. Parents who smoke at home might find that they are putting their children at risk, if they smoke a joint only to find they have to rush the kid to the hospital for some reason. Their judgment would be so impaired that they might not even recognize a serious situation. Also, pot will be the chosen drug for kids at school. A few tokes between classes will get you stoned, while the same high might requires 7 or 8 beer, which would be hard to carry around, or consume inconspicuously.
jessica murray
i'm not going to comment on your conclusions regarding how marijuana users behave, but i want to point that you're half right about effects.
marijuana tolerance increases as you smoke. i'm a light, sporadic and social smoker - i only need a three toke pass to get stoned for the night, and into the morning. that wouldn't be true if i smoked regularly, but it is true because i don't smoke regularly. so, you're right that you don't need a lot, if you don't use a lot.
the flip side of that is that marijuana does a fraction to you of what alcohol does, and plateaus at a fairly low point. you will never blackout and forget what you did last night due to marijuana use. you won't spontaneously pass out. "as stoned as you can get" is roughly equivalent to the immediate buzz you get after talking 2-3 shots at the same time and it lasts for several hours - but then you can't get more stoned than that, and you don't deal with the effects of drunkenness.
so, it's faster, yes. and you need less. but it's also impossible to overdo it.
it's common sense that one should not drive stoned. but, the reality is that you're never going to see any stoned person stumbling all over the place, slurring words, cursing, unable to walk straight. marijuana just doesn't have the ability to create that effect, or at least not on it's own.
--
AlanWilliams
This will only drive the drug dealers to push harder more dangerous substances into the market. They will plan to adapt in order to maintain their market share and profits. This will result in even more people in addictive states unable to function in a sustainable lifestyle. The liberals are only doing this to protect the rich kids of Toronto (Rosedale) from getting a criminal record! They don't care about the devastating results although they say the money will go into addiction programs. Why not just criminalize pot as a deterrent and save lives???
jessica murray
actual drug dealers - bikers and whatnot - already mostly ignore pot, because you can't build dependence on it. they don't bother selling it as a gateway or whatever. they just jump right to selling speed in candy wrappers. and that's something that people should actually be concerned about.
--
captain canada
I can just see the fun at the border when Canada legalizes pot . Get ready to wait while US customs searches for that one joint your kid left in the back seat of the car and you end up in jail for smuggling pot to the USA .
jessica murray
bernie is claiming he'll drop the federal restriction. if he doesn't win, i can't see it being more than 4-8 years away.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)