roaches23
Update: those guys got fired from their jobs and got lifetime bans from Toronto FC, Raptors, and  Maple Leaf games.

deathtokoalas
that would never hold up in a court. employment contracts refer to conditions inside the workplace. this is textbook wrongful dismissal - unless somebody files charges. if he challenges this, he'll win a large payout. and he should. your boss is neither judge, nor jury, nor executioner.

A Hermit
+deathtokoalas You're awfully naive I'm afrad. This kind of vulgar, abusive behaviour is actually grounds for firing. He could try and fight it I suppose, but depending on his actual position he's certainly not guaranteed a win. (Does he supervise others? Does that include women? Does he deal with customers? What effect does his notoriety have on his ability to work with co-workers, subordinates, customers?)

His employer has a code of conduct which includes not harassing women. That he's been caught on camera doing exactly that kind of leaves him without much of a case.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/firing-of-shawn-simoes-for-off-duty-fhritp-video-reflects-employment-trend-1.3071919

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/fhritp-outbursts-can-easily-cost-your-job-lawyer-1.2371690

There's a good discussion of the legal issues around his firing here:

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/05/13/does-hydro-one-have-the-right-to-fire-tfc-fan-shawn-simoes.html

deathtokoalas
+A Hermit your employer can set conditions as to how you must behave at work, but they are your employer and not your owner. a good intuitive comparison is to drunkeness. you can get fired for coming to work drunk. you can't get fired for being drunk on the weekend - unless you get charged for something, like a dui.

basically, nothing you're talking about is at all legally relevant.

droptop10001
I bet these guys will take legal actions

deathtokoalas
+droptop10001 a factor in the case is likely to be that hydro one doesn't have any competitors.

i'd lean heavily towards the idea that the only way to successfully make the argument for dismissal in a court is if it involves a conviction. just about anything else reduces to the boss morally intervening in your private affairs, which is a definite no-no. even an acquittal just says "not guilty of the accusations". the legal analysts in the papers are focusing on the idea of financial harm, but i think it's only half the argument. at the end of the day, your boss does not have the right to convict you of a crime and punish you for it. but, it can certainly react to a judicial decision.

there's really no way to argue financial harm, here. electricity is largely inelastic in demand and consumers don't have any other option to turn to.

i'm quite certain he'd win this case. these lawyers seem to be misunderstanding the situation (hydro one is not private sector) and then applying the wrong test.

Ella Jones
+droptop10001 They don't have a legal leg to stand on.

deathtokoalas
+Ella Jones rather, it's the opposite. the talking heads in media have been quick to point out that they're talking in abstract, and this kind of firing has never withstood a court challenge.

Ella Jones
+deathtokoalas That's strange, a women I worked with got fired, soooooo.

deathtokoalas
+Ella Jones i don't think anybody is arguing that they'll get their jobs back. it's a question of back pay and punitive damages.

Ella Jones
+deathtokoalas Write down the date and time, they will never get their jobs back and won't go to court.

deathtokoalas
+Ella Jones well, i don't expect them to get their jobs back - or to try. i don't know what the government actually gave them in terms of severance. court is not free, one needs to apply a cost-benefit analysis....

i'm just pointing out that, if they did go, they would almost certainly be awarded about a year's pay on top of hefty punitive damages.

A Hermit
+deathtokoalas Well that last link I gave you was was to three labour/employment lawyers discussing the issue. I'll take their opinions over some anonymous Youtube commenter's any day.

And what they're saying is that you can be fired for behaviour which might reflect badly on your employer even if legal charges aren't involved. That can't be for something like expressing a political opinion but if it's behaviour which would be in violation of your terms of employment (like sexually harassing someone) you are unlikely to have any success fighting the dismissal.

And I don't think that's unreasonable. If an employee is in the habit of sexually harassing women who are complete strangers to him in public on his time off how can you trust him to behave himself at the office? The guy's a lawsuit waiting to happen. No employer should be expected to take that chance.

deathtokoalas
+A Hermit
a few things.

i was maybe a little sloppy in what i was saying. in ontario, nobody gets reinstated under much of any circumstance. imagine getting fired and then having the court send you back to work - that's not a healthy work environment, and basically can't be. and the court can't be firing bosses, either.

when i said "you can't get fired for this", what i meant to say was "you can't get fired for this without your boss being liable for paying financial consequences.". the argument is over punitive damages for wrongful dismissal, not reinstatement. that damage is done and can't be reversed.

one of the talking heads acknowledges he is speaking abstractly, not basing his analysis on legal precedent. further, the basic idea is that people can be fired for making a firm look poorly compared to their competitors - which doesn't apply here, because this company is not private sector. you're misreading your source, which is misunderstanding the situation in the first place.

now, i agree with what you're saying about harassment in principal. the question is who gets to decide on this point. again: your boss is not the legal system. he can't go around accusing you of harassment without a conviction, then firing you for it. in addition to wrongful dismissal, this guy has defamation in his list of legal remedies.

in order for what you're saying to make sense. the only legally effective argument is a conviction. just about anything else is going to be the boss taking the law into his own hands, which he will be liable for in terms of punitive damages - because he can't and shouldn't be able to do that.

once a conviction is established, what you're saying becomes reasonable. and i would agree with putting somebody on leave while they're being tried. but, your boss can't just charge, try, sentence and execute you in the kangaroo court of his office - and if he tries then that is wrongful dismissal.

in this case? i think the behaviour falls short of harassment. the bottom line is that your boss can tell you not to be a misogynist at work, and enforce it, but he can't tell you not to be a misogynist at home. we don't have thought crimes in our legal code. we're not placed into permanent categories of thought criminals like "racist" and "sexist" by the law. rather, we're forced to deal with the consequences of specific actions that occur under specific circumstances. there's no reason to think he couldn't behave more appropriately at work, or that he didn't behave more appropriately at work.

again: the alcohol comparison is the correct one, here.

so long as he doesn't act like that at work, and no charges are filed outside of work, he is likely to win a large settlement. and despite thinking that we need to get to the root cause of this, i think that's correct.

i mean, today it's getting fired for saying stupid things to a reporter. tomorrow, it's getting fired for organizing a union. and, that's why he can't lose the settlement.

A Hermit
+deathtokoalas There's a big difference between organizing a union and sexually harassing women. I don't think the slippery slope you're proposing here is actually much of a concern.

deathtokoalas
+A Hermit see, the crux of the matter is that this accusation of harassment is not proven anywhere. i'm not presenting a slippery slope like you're suggesting. this doesn't come down to a conviction, or even an arraignment. it's just some random accusation. it's ultimately no different than firing somebody for using contraception, or being gay. i know that nobody wants to think of it like that, but there's really no objective standard of behaviour being applied here. that is why it's a problem.

it's easy to say there's a difference. but, until the issue is proven in a court? there really isn't.

so, what's the right answer then?

well, if you're going to fire him you have to give him sufficient notice if you want to make sure he can't sue you. but i think he's a network admin. that's a bad scene, for obvious reasons. and he can still sue you for punitive damages (although i think his chances of convincing a judge decrease if he gets notice).

so, to get out of all that, you give him a year's severance, and then some. i know - rewarding bad behaviour.

i think maybe the better option is to give him the option between getting fired (with sufficient severance) and going to counselling. ultimately, the goal here should not be to punish the guy. i mean, if he pushes it far enough, it's likely to backfire, yeah, but that's not really the point i'm trying to get across - punishment isn't an answer, and doesn't correct behaviour. ultimately, what you want is for him to understand he's a douchebag and knock it off. counselling is the right means to that end.

then, if it doesn't work out, there's a stronger grounds for termination without the need for a payout.

Boaz Ezekial
+deathtokoalas why you hate koalas so much?

deathtokoalas
+Boaz Ezekial it's their nefarious cuteness. they must be destroyed. and they don't deserve due process - too evil to the core.

A Hermit
+deathtokoalas Not proven?  It's right there in the video above...

deathtokoalas
+A Hermit you're not much into due process, are you? just shoot 'em all and let god sort them out? you sound like a self-righteous, moral majority type reagan republican.

if the accusation is harassment, the evidence in the video is very ambiguous. i think we can agree it was a stupid thing to say. but, the question of whether it is harassment or not requires a trial to arrive at.

based on the video? i would argue that it is not harassment. which just demonstrates that your value system is arbitrary, and you can't be going around punishing people for not adhering to your subjective code of morality.

A Hermit
I'm all for due process (and Hydro One reports that they are engaging in a process to terminate this joker's employment, so all that speculation you're engaging in about notice and severance is presumably being worked out right now.) But the idea that we can't reach conclusions without going to trial is just absurd.

Look, the guy did what he did on video in front of the whole world. He's part of a group of men who acknowledge participating in the harassment of that reporter, and admit planning to do it again and he not only defends that harassment (he knows that she's been repeatedly subjected to this demeaning threatening phrase being shouted at her) he decides to pile on more by telling her she's lucky not to get a dildo shoved in her ear.

You shouldn't need a trial to figure out that what you just saw is harassment. No one should have to put up with that kind of verbal abuse on the job. participating in that abuse is a violation of his employment contract and his employer has every right to can him.

Oh, and I'm a sex-positive feminist social-democrat, a secular humanist and a fan of the labour movement so you fail at making assumptions about people too.

deathtokoalas
+A Hermit "But the idea that we can't reach conclusions without going to trial is just absurd."

so, who gets to be dictator, then? you?

i've just disagreed with you. how do we figure this out without a trial, besides through the force of your authority?

harassment in canada is not about discomfort, it's about fear. the law does not lean towards some dictatorial concept of "safe spaces" and let one group of people demand that the other uphold their arbitrary moral convictions under the weight of some kind of self-righteous superiority, it leans toward freedom of expression regardless of consequence. from a legal perspective, it's blatantly obvious that the guy was not attempting to frighten the reporter, and it consequently would not result in a harassment conviction. it's just somebody being a moron.

if you claim otherwise, you have an argument that you need to make. and you need to convince people of the point.

until that evidence is analyzed and weighed in an official capacity, his employer remains liable for it's actions in firing him.

"i don't think your joke is funny" != "sexual harassment". even if the joke is obviously unfunny.

A Hermit
+deathtokoalas But if the "joke' is obviously sexual insulting and demeaning, directed at an individual because of their gender, repeated even after it's clear the attention is unwanted and added to with more sexual comments/innuendo and possibly threatening language...that's undoubtedly harassment. And that's exactly what happened here.

deathtokoalas
+A Hermit regarding the legal definition of harassment (which is different than the workplace definition of it - that is, people are held to a higher standard at work than outside it), the important part is the last point - repeated threatening behaviour, after being asked to stop. the reporter indicates that she deals with this repeatedly, but you can't hold an individual to account for a group's behaviour (and despite "soccer hooligans" not being an identifiable group, it's clear what i mean when i say that). his defence is actually relevant: it wasn't intended specifically at her, and wasn't meant to be threatening. the video would actually likely be used as evidence in his favour, on that point.

now, if you consider the possibility of this specific individual being filmed repeatedly? well, that's closer to the definition. i mean, if he's stalking her, than that's intimidation. but it's a different issue than what is at hand.

i'm not clear on the actual process being used to deal with this. the initial reports made it seem like he'd been turfed and asked to not let the door hit him on the ass, kind of thing. on reflection, i suppose that was never likely: i really have no doubt that hydro one is aware of the legalities surrounding a firing of this nature.

the point is that this isn't open and shut. it's far from obvious; it's actually extremely subtle, and the legal arguments are actually very delicate, because it's in a grey area of socially unacceptable but (in my estimation) legally acceptable behaviour. and, if the company wants to avoid a payout, it needs to be very careful in how it deals with this.

again: i'd prefer counselling as the best option. the only thing that's clear to me from the video is that these guys need some therapy.

(deleted comment)

deathtokoalas
+Mr Magoo you have clearly been brainwashed by the nefarious koalas. for all i know, they may have advanced in their pursuit of global domination to the point that they can use the internet; you may, in fact, be a koala. if that is true, god help us all.

no civilized society can tolerate these creatures and their disgusting cuteness. they must be annihilated, before it is too late.

(deleted comment)

deathtokoalas
+Mr Magoo see, here's the thing: i'm an anti-capitalist, alphabetical egalitarian and general grammar anti-authoritarian. i don't believe in hierarchy, or in centralized grammar authorities. the abolition of punctuation is the redemption of sanity. if we lack the freedom to order our own thoughts as we choose, we lack any freedom at all.

(deleted comment)

deathtokoalas
+Mr Magoo let me state to all who can hear: behold the manipulative nature of the koala. but, you do not fool me! no! i am on to your koala tricks, your evil plans, your nefarious aims. your cuteness disgusts me. how long can we tolerate this?

people, open your eyes! the koalas are taking over! before we know it, there will be a eucalyptus tree to replace every maple. eucalyptol to replace the maple syrup. imagine this: drunken koalas everywhere, terraforming the planet for their disgusting habits.

and, now they can type! i fear it may be too late to save us. but heed my warnings: we must declare a war on koalas. not tomorrow, but immediately! the future depends on our action, or our inaction, against this grave threat to our national security.

(deleted comment)

A Hermit
+1jomojo I think it's more like sexually harassing someone and getting fired...

No wait, it's not "like" that, it actually IS that...

deathtokoalas
+A Hermit again: these accusations are defamatory. this has been explained to you. this is rather clearly not sexual harassment under canadian law; rather, your continued insistence on defaming his character is harassment.

(deleted comment)

deathtokoalas
+Hem3fiction it doesn't matter that she went to talk to them. harassment is not about offending people, it's about intimidating them. as offensive as these idiots are, they're neither succeeding in nor attempting to scare anybody.

one way to understand this is to research the difference between the "offense principle" (which is the conservative approach to speech, sometimes pushed by a peculiar brand of right-wing foucaldian quasi-fascists) and the "harm principle" (which is the liberal approach to speech).

this is explained a little here:
plato.stanford.edu/entries/freedom-speech/

because workplaces are inherently conservative institutions, they tend to lean towards the right-wing "offense principle". this defines ideas like "safe spaces".

however, in canada, we have a legal history of liberalism, and our law is entirely focused on the "harm principle".

what that means is that the legal argument is not "you offended me", but rather "you pose a threat to harm me.".

if you don't like that, you can always move to a more conservative society.

A Hermit
+deathtokoalas And you think there's no harm in sexually harassing someone?

That's interesting...

deathtokoalas
+A Hermit that's an interesting choice of words.

A Hermit
+deathtokoalas Well you're making a distinction between "offense" and "harm".  you seem to think there is no harm in the kind of sexual harassment on display here. (and it is plainly sexual harassment by any reasonable definition.)

http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/internal-human-rights-policy-working-draft/appendix-definitions

"Harassment: means a course of comments or actions that are known, or ought reasonably to be known, to be unwelcome. It can involve words or actions that are known or should be known to be offensive, embarrassing, humiliating, demeaning or unwelcome..."

"Sexual harassment: A course of comment or conduct based on an individual’s sex or gender that is known or ought reasonably to be known to be unwelcome...

Forms of sexual and gender-based harassment could include:

Suggestive or offensive remarks or innuendoes about members of a specific gender

Propositions of physical intimacy

Gender-related verbal abuse, threats or taunting

Rough and vulgar humour or language related to gender"

I think it's reasonable to take repeatedly having "fuck her in the pussy" shouted at her and being told she's lucky not get a dildo shoved in her her fit any number of those criteria.

But you see no harm in any of that?

deathtokoalas
+A Hermit you're accidentally making my point. the ohrc is not a body that creates or enforces law, it is a body that interprets whether laws are followed. it cannot charge you with criminal harassment, it can only award damages in a situation where the human rights code is violated under the specific circumstance that the claim refers to a body or individual in authority over the claimant.

criminal law of this nature is a federal responsibility, not a provincial responsibility. again: the relationship between our provinces and central government is the opposite of what exists in the united states, because our constitution was largely built in order to prevent a civil war, which our framers blamed on the american concept of "states rights". the province does not have a criminal code.

the appropriate federal criminal law to cite is the following:

Criminal harassment

264. (1) No person shall, without lawful authority and knowing that another person is harassed or recklessly as to whether the other person is harassed, engage in conduct referred to in subsection (2) that causes that other person reasonably, in all the circumstances, to fear for their safety or the safety of anyone known to them.

Prohibited conduct

(2) The conduct mentioned in subsection (1) consists of
(a) repeatedly following from place to place the other person or anyone known to them;
(b) repeatedly communicating with, either directly or indirectly, the other person or anyone known to them;
(c) besetting or watching the dwelling-house, or place where the other person, or anyone known to them, resides, works, carries on business or happens to be; or
(d) engaging in threatening conduct directed at the other person or any member of their family.

that's harassment in canada. it is neither more than this, nor is it less than this.

before you can claim harassment, you have to demonstrate that the behaviour "causes that other person reasonably, in all the circumstances, to fear for their safety or the safety of anyone known to them.". if that's not true, it's not harassment in canada.

do we know this is true? i claim it isn't. but, the point is that it's not my choice or your choice. note the following, which is the civil rights issue i'm attempting to get across to you:

http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/code_grounds/record_of_offences

as mentioned, the legal basis of our law is mills. canada is the only part of the british empire where the liberals got to actually build the country, and the law is consequently erected on somewhat of an extreme basis, in terms of liberal ideology. speech issues in canada require a very high bar.

just to clarify the point: the ohrc enforces the human rights code, which is a law that primarily puts restrictions on the ability of government bodies to behave in a discriminatory fashion. it's not a criminal law. it's mostly in place to prevent things like not handing out driver's licenses to women, or not hiring somebody because they're muslim. it's primarily a civil litigation body, and it's remedies are largely restricted to forcing payouts for damages. it can't send you to jail or force you to do community service or anything like that.

the reporter here can't just take this random guy on the street to the human rights commission. if it was her boss? sure. but, in this circumstance, it's not the right to law to cite.

there are some limited private sector circumstances regarding things like housing and employment opportunities where the human rights code can intervene on the basis of something systemic; authority or hierarchy type circumstances.  but we don't have a general "social human rights code" that forces random people to not discriminate against each other in random on-the-street circumstances.

the code is explicit in it's application, but i would expect a concept of "analogous grounds" around the idea of "not using authority to oppress" to apply.

In Ontario, the Code prohibits all forms of discrimination based on sex – and this includes sexual harassment.

The Code applies to five “social" areas:

services, goods and facilities (including education)
housing
contracts
employment
membership in vocational associations such as trade unions.

this is hierarchical and authoritarian type stuff. not random idiots on the street.

you can kind of think of it like the same way that people often define racism as something that is only hierarchical - that is, comments and statements aren't racism, but profiling or racial hiring standards are.

the tl;dr there (after a few edits designed to clarify a few specific points....i took three years of law, but i'm not a lawyer, and the law is famously byzantine, so i'm going to sometimes get broad ideas across correctly while being a little off on specific details) is the following:

1) the ohcr definition of sexual harassment is specific to situations of authority that do not apply here. it has to be some kind of abuse of power.
2) the ohcr does not have the power to make criminal charges and must defer to federal law.
3) the federal definition of harassment necessitates the creation of fear.

i'd argue that all of this leads to the conduct in the video neither being legal nor civil harassment.

but it's apparent - from the existence of this debate - that a trial is necessary to get to an answer.

A Hermit
+deathtokoalas Very impressive, but the question here isn't whether the reporter can take the guy to court, it's whether his employer has grounds to fire him. Since his behaviour in so many ways fits the definition of harassment and his contract forbids harassment I'd say they clearly have cause. Behaviour doesn't have to rise to the level of criminality to be cause for firing.

Any honest observer shouldn't need a trial to see that he was participating in a continuing effort to demean and harass that reporter.

And whether or not that rises to the level of criminal harassment I'm amazed that anyone could look at that kind of behaviour and say that it does no harm.

deathtokoalas
+A Hermit but the question of whether he can be fired (without a payout.....your boss doesn't actually need a reason to fire you, it just might have to pay damages....) is largely dependent on whether the behaviour fits a trial definition of harassment. when a court asks the question "is this harassment?", that's what it looks at.

as mentioned, i think the situation really had nothing to do with shauna hunt. i think it had to do with trying to get on tv, and be the centre of internet attention. she just happened to be the reporter there. if it was a different reporter, it wouldn't have made any difference. this neither has anything to do with an abuse of power, nor is it really an attempt to "demean" - although being "demeaning" is not any kind of legal argument. "moooooommmmmm. he's being mean!". it's just not going to fly. and, i can't see how you - as a claimed "honest observer" - can't see that my continued counter-arguments don't make the necessity of a trial clear.

there was a similar case the other day with a comedian. now, to begin with, i think that is a situation that was legally criminal harassment - it was something like "i want to fuck you", clearly intended to intimidate and with the end result of the comedian leaving the stage, partially out of fear for her safety. those are the ingredients for a criminal harassment suit. so, this is a case of (i'd argue) far worse behaviour. the next day, she got a call from his boss indicating he's been put on paid leave while an internal investigation concludes. the employee there would have no argument for wrongful dismissal, if it happens.

icbones
+A Hermit It's not harassment.  He was asked an opinion on what some other dude did.

deathtokoalas
+icbones wait. is this issue surrounding the guy in the red shirt, or the guy that actually took the mic?

A Hermit
+deathtokoalas It's about both of them, and the rest of the nitwits who were egging on the first guy and planning to harass the reporter again.

By the way I think it's interesting that after accusing me of being a "self righteous moral majority type" you're the one hiding behind rigid legalism to try and deny the obvious...

A Hermit
+icbones He's participating with a group of people who are harassing, encouraging the harassment and planning more harassment.

And he wasn't asked for his opinion; she was talking to someone else when he jumped in to tell her how fucking hilarious it would be to see someone shove a vibrator in her ear...

deathtokoalas
+A Hermit "aiding and abetting being mean".

while this is juvenile and stupid, it's equally clear that it's wrongful dismissal - unless there were some charges filed. you can't fire somebody for expressing their opinions outside of the workplace.

based on the evidence i see, no charges were filed - which means he wins an easy lawsuit and gets a hefty payout from it. that's not a penalty for this behaviour, it's an award.

but, the truth is he deserves it. because you really shouldn't be able to fire somebody for expressing their opinions outside of the workplace - even if those opinions are juvenile and stupid.

it's yet another example of poor tactics leading to counterproductive results. authoritarianism doesn't solve anything. this is a cultural issue.

publishing thru (inri070)

i've also finished inri047 today, which is a 2xcd compilation of scored electronic music written between 2001-2003 and completed from 2013-2015. this falls outside of my record list enumeration, but it's a substantial release. influences range across the electronic music spectrum from varese to rdj and everything in between - and also to early forms of classical music - but these are all scored pieces, and very much connected to ideas of written music with the notes and the time signatures and the aaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh.....

there's plenty of weird electronic music in my discography, but this is a reprieve from that.

it's arranged in two discs that mirror each other. the first is soundblaster mixes. these mixes sound sort of 8-bit, but they're actually 16-bit; it's next gen 8-bit technology, before the game changed from wavetables to larger sample databases and software synthesizers. disc two rearranges disc one for vst software synths, which gives it a huge facelift in terms of sound quality.

this is pretty much comprehensive in terms of this style, for me. i left to hitch across the country in the spring of 2003; there's very little scored soundcard music in my discography after i came back.

so, this is a musical statement. it's a little weird, but there's a niche audience waiting for it.

===
 
back in 2001, and bleeding into about 2003, i wrote a number of tracks into a scorewriter with the explicit intent of eventually having them performed by live ensembles. at the beginning of 2014, i decided that this wasn't likely to ever actually happen and went about completing the tracks in finalized forms - which happened over 2014 and 2015.

my initial plan for this compilation was to produce a record of midi compositions mapped to modern vst instruments as a "chiptune" (not literally) project, and have it double a record of fully realized versions of the tracks. as i went about completing the project, i began to realize that these vst versions were not sufficiently different enough from the finalized versions to justify a separate album and consequently aborted the project.

however, something that's happened since 2001 is that a more mature market has developed for midi-generated music, largely on the back of the success of the gaming industry. people have nostalgia for the sounds that their childhood gaming consoles made and an interest in listening to original music in the style of the soundtracks to those games.

i need to be clear that these are not gaming soundtracks - they're a mix of various types of classical and jazz, taking in influences from across the musical spectrum but essentially none from gaming. gaming isn't a thing i've ever really done, and the little bit i've done has tended to act as an excuse for listening to music (i had a mild civ2 obsession in early high school).

however, i feel that compiling a record of soundblaster mixes is something that could appeal to a specialized, niche audience and am going to put this record together for those people. i also feel it captures the headspace that i was in at the time. i've decided to mirror this soundblaster disc with the vst disc i was initially contemplating, to demonstrate where the technology has arrived at.

all of these tracks also appear on a set of cross-listed singles, and most of them are sequenced into a record at some point. there's more info on the track pages.

i've included the raw midi files in the download for further listening and modification.

these tracks were written from 2001 until 2003 and in some cases rearranged over the course of 2014 and 2015. all disc 1 tracks rendered through a soundblaster live! wave device that was manufactured c.1999. all disc 2 tracks created in cubase with vst software synthesizer technology. the compilation date is may 14, 2015. as always, please use headphones.

credits:
j - controller inputs, programming, composition, digital wave editing, effects processing, production

the various rendered electronic orchestras include acoustic bass, synth bass, electric bass, flute, clarinet, brass, trumpet, trombone, tuba, soprano saxophone, orchestra hit, violin, cello, string section (tremolo), drum machine, electronic drum kit, hand drums, finger snaps, nylon guitar, electric guitar (distorted, clean), steel string acoustic guitar, fret noise, sitar, banjo, pc card clavinet, music box, piano, organ, bells, synthesizers, mellotron and choir. 

released april 27, 2003

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/thru

reflections (vst mix)

this is the vst software synth mix that updates the soundfonts.

some time in late 2002, sean sent me a message over msn or icq requesting that we begin a song based on looped birds chirping. i thought his idea was kind of cliched, but i took to working around his suggestions by converting them into something more musically expressive. i didn't want to write a song that literally climaxes around birds chirping, but i was willing to write something tonal that evoked the feeling of birds chirping.

at the time, i had my sister's electronic piano downstairs. she had a miniature grand upstairs. it was initially written on the keyboard with a very strange timing, which the scorewriter had difficulties capturing - partly because i was inconsistent in performing it. the piece was greatly simplified as it was arranged.

however, i believe the piece sat for a long time before the second section was added to it.

written and recorded in early 2003. transcribed, slightly rearranged, remixed and re-rendered over may, 2015. this render is from may 14, 2015.

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/reflections-5

i've seen enough leaks and exposes on the iaea to conclude it's hopelessly, permanently captured by the cia, and this really just sounds like a way to sucker them into handing over their detonator plans.

dad-bod means sugar-daddy. women are gaining more economic freedom every year, but the reality remains that what most attractive women over about 25 want is financial security, not sexy bodies. if you can get both, great, sure, but, otherwise, that's what the pool guy is for, right?

that's what these bros don't get. lifting is great if you're young, or if you want to be every married woman's fling. but, at the end of the day, if you really want the girl then you need to be exercising your brain and bringing in the cash.

lwAtErOnEl
Calling it "dad bod" is creepy as fuck. Do these girls think of their dads when they see them?

FutureDirector24
+lwAtErOnEl  Do guys think of their moms when they say "milf"? All milfs aren't moms, it's more of an age thing.

deathtokoalas
+FutureDirector24 it's not the same thing. milf is about the sexuality of older women - it's a process of objectification. "dad-bod" refers to the relative unimportance of sexual attraction in favour of financial security - just like daddy. as i mentioned, things are changing, but when you culturally enforce patriarchy you have to expect that young women are going to have this idea of husband as father. it's more than subconscious.

you can't draw these broad equivalences in a society that remains fundamentally unequal. it's more accurate to suggest that "dad bod" and "milf" are the opposite of each other, in terms of sexual objectification.

Joe Themig
+deathtokoalas Lol... patriarchy? Really?

Guess when they call a dad a DILF, it's just the patriarchy in action.

Tin foiled hat nonsense.

deathtokoalas
+Joe Themig if dilf was a thing, it would at least be an equivalence. it doesn't really actually make sense, though, as dads don't need to go through the rearrangement of their bodies that mothers do. but it's not actually a thing. and you can clearly see how a dad-bod is not a dilf, but the opposite of it.

Ivan Ivanovsky
+deathtokoalas  LOL! You said "patriarchy". Go back to Tumblr. Xaxaxa!  You can't blame "patriarchy" for stupid trend made popular by childish, trend-hopping western female.  This "dad bod" nonsense only became topic of conversation because stupid, childish, celebrity obsessed, American woman gushes over and promote Lenard DeCrapio's "dad bod".  The so-called mans getting on this bandwagon are of pathetic weak mans who think this is their chance for female approval. 

deathtokoalas
+Ivan Ivanovsky the empirical truth that women overwhelmingly choose financial stability over sexual desire is neither recent nor a trend. if you want women to choose muscles over money, that is short-term fun over long-term security, you need to ensure they have the financial freedom to do so, and exist within a culture that encourages independent thought. otherwise, the size of your house is going to remain sexier than the size of your chest, as the groupthink enforces the family structure.

Aaron Brown
+deathtokoalas So you sound like a feminist gold digger. Females want equal rights and to be treated fairly but yet you want the man to make the income. Sorry but that's that what equality is about. Taken from Merriam Webster- " the quality or state of being equal : the quality or state of having the same rights, social status, etc." So with that being said , according to "equality" the man is not equal in your "long-term security" plan. Stuff happens in the world. People lose jobs out of nowhere for no reason everyday. AND in case you try to say "I'm not a  gold digger" BAM! HERE YOU GO: a person who dates others purely to extract money from them, in particular a woman who strives to marry a wealthy man.

deathtokoalas
+Aaron Brown it's a conditioning thing - it's what women are taught. and mostly by men, although mom doesn't always set a good example or say the right things, here. i've stated a few times that things are changing. slowly. but the society continues to teach women to be dependent on male economic activity. breaking that cycle relies on opening up more opportunities, but all the opportunities in the world aren't going to break the cycle if the dominant christian patriarchal culture that teaches female submission isn't smashed, too.

i'm telling you how things are. i'm not endorsing this.

John Doe
+deathtokoalas The problem with your analysis is the "dad bod" trend doesn't equate with financial status.  Actually, in relative terms attractive men tend to make more money than less attractive men.  You're approaching the issue as a matter of "everything is patriarchy" in spite of the reality we don't live in a patriarchy.

A better way to look at the dad bod trend might be to examine if women are rethinking their stance towards hypergamy on a wider scale.  Perhaps women are realizing that always choosing relationships with men that are above them is responsible for a lot of women's relationships wounds.  Choosing the "dad bod" might be a step away from hypergamy towards lateral relationship choices, which numerous studies have shown make women happier.

deathtokoalas
+John Doe you're incoherent - you claim it's not financial, then claim it is. further, the studies you're citing about attractiveness and wealth tend to suffer from the flaw of being circular. it's difficult to define the term "attractive" but, in context, it usually means things like "well dressed" rather than "works out". as the primary thing that defines male attractiveness is wealth, you end up in this circular argument that resolves by reversing causality - it's not that more attractive men make more money, it's that men that make more money are more attractive.

Aaron Brown
+deathtokoalas Are you a christian....do you go to church....do you read the bible. If you answer no to any of these then your statement is just an observation you have made. I could look at a muslim who is all dressed up and assume that they are a terrorist or I could assume that that is their religion. One would be right and the other would be null. However for you to state this is literally as vague as saying a rainbow has pretty colors. Your view on christianity is warped. If you were to go to most modern christian establishmenst (Some denominations still live in the old times, yes) what you just said is irrelevent. They don't teach that women are to rely on the man for money.

deathtokoalas
+Aaron Brown i'll acknowledge that christianity does not have a single set of views; just about anything has been argued from the bible, and the result is that just about anything can be blamed on christianity.

the broader perspective is to realize that religion is never a world view in itself, but always a way to enforce a worldview. in the era of slavery, you had southern churches arguing that blacks were cursed by god some time back in the garden of eden days, and the bible demands they're enslaved....while you had christian abolitionists in the north. neither came to their positions because of christianity. rather, both used the religion to argue their point.

so, when you have these limbaugh and falwell type groups preaching their ideas of male dominance, it's perhaps worthwhile to point out that they're using the old testament statements as a means to convince somebody of something they'd try and convince them of anyways.

that doesn't change the reality on the ground that evangelical christianity produces, or the coercive nature of the social shaping that it promotes.

some milder denominations may have moved on, but, as a whole, does christianity (especially the evangelical sort) continue to push patriarchy? yes. absolutely.

Dom Ferris
How did this turn into a religous debate?

deathtokoalas
+Dom Ferris i'm not interested in a religious debate. christianity is stupid. this is a social debate.

erwin s
+deathtokoalas Islam is even worse ;-)

deathtokoalas
+erwin s they're all the same. ask anna comnena.

i'm just not sure exactly what the problem is. twerking is not pornography, so if you had done the video and sent it back he wouldn't be in possession of child pornography or whatever. you didn't feel comfortable, and you refused and that was that. the legal action is something else - but if the accusation is that you're defaming him by calling him a pedophile, he's actually pretty much correct in asking you to cease and desist (although the judge has some room for interpretation, there). it's certainly eccentric, granted. and i actually don't even know who he is. but eccentricity is not a crime. i'm not really clear about what the accusation, here, is...

Taylor Tanguay
+deathtokoalas This was never meant to be a legal accusation, at all. I will continue to use the term pedophile in the sense of its definition being an adult who is sexually attracted to people under the legal age of consent. Given that he was soliciting these images from girls strictly between the ages of 13-16, and openly said he wanted them because he was "horny", I believe that the term is used appropriately. But again, that may just be me.

deathtokoalas
+Taylor Tanguay if that's your logic, you'll certainly lose the court case - you're defining defamation and then claiming you have the right to it under the first amendment. you have to wait until he's at least charged with something before you can do that in a way that tarnishes somebody's reputation. otherwise, you're legally liable for the consequences of your speech.

fwiw, you should realize that pedophilia refers to attraction to children - that is people that have yet to hit puberty.

so,

1) you're not charging him with a crime.
2) you're suggesting he's guilty of a crime
3) you're suggesting he's guilty of a crime that does not fit the definition of what you're accusing him of.

i gather you're what, 17? that's your best defense.

Taylor Tanguay
I'm not accusing him of a crime. I have never once implied that this should be brought to court. I don't think theres any reason for the authorities to get involved in my case. The other, more invasive instances- maybe. But those are not my stories to share or problems to deal with. The only thing I want is for teenager girls to stop flocking to him.

deathtokoalas
+Taylor Tanguay i really strongly suggest you retract your accusation of pedophilia, then, because he will win if he can get the judge to grant you standing.

i just want to be clear: you have a right to tell your story, regardless of if it affects others, so long as it's true (and i don't doubt that it is).

but you don't have a right to make ambiguous or false accusations with the express intent of harming his career, which you've actually admitted to doing in this video.

because you're still a minor, you likely retain the ability to back out of this and focus solely on the first part, if you distance yourself from the second.

Taylor Tanguay
+deathtokoalas my exact quote containing the phrase in question is "he's like, straight up pedophile-ish". I would highly question anyone who took that as a legal accusation of pedophilia.

deathtokoalas
+Taylor Tanguay so, what they're going to want to prove, if they can take it to court, and they could conceivably sue your parents, is the following:

1) is the accusation false? (yes, by your own admission)
2) did you intend the accusation to create harm? (yes, by your own admission)
3) is there any financial hardship as a consequence? (yes, if he gets kicked off warp)

the cause and effect relationship is that you (or your parents) would then be liable for the financial consequences caused by the video, because it's intended to create harm.

i took three years of a law program before i got bored with it. but you don't have to - and really probably shouldn't - believe me. if you have access to legal advice, i would suggest it.

but you should be cognizant of the cause and effect relationship between any financial harm you intended to create (by your own admission) and any actual financial harm.

i would suspect a smart lawyer would ask you to cancel the petition. if sales fall after that, a causal relationship is harder to establish.

but clear malice behind a clear exaggeration and a clear causal relationship to financial harm is a very short case. the more lengthy argument is around your age.

Taylor Tanguay
what petition?? Literally all i did was post this video, AFTER the stories of him soliciting videos from other girls had went viral on twitter, and post my conversations with him online

deathtokoalas
+Taylor Tanguay well, i'd never heard of him before. this video is trending at the top of youtube; i check that fairly regularly. so, i googled him and a petition came up to get him off warp that appears to have a lot of signatures. i put two and two together...

that's a bad idea, though. if he were to sue you or anybody else, he would have to establish actual financial loss in order to win an award. if that petition goes through, he has sufficient financial loss (and clear causality) to launch a suit and win.

his lawsuit depends on the three things i outlined, and that causal link to your video(s) is absolutely necessary to establish. if that cannot be established, you would not be the right person to sue.

Erica Gene
+deathtokoalas It doesn't take nudity for something to be sexual. It isn't a matter of him simply possessing it, the issue is what he does with the videos when he has it.

deathtokoalas
+Erica Gene no. you have no right to interfere, out of some arbitrary and meaningless moral perspective. what he does in the sanctity of his own home is none of your business. it's not a matter of what he does with it, it's a matter of the legality of possessing it.

Erica Gene
Eh, okay.

Pink guy
+deathtokoalas She has every right to interfere, this is youtube not a court hearing. You obviously went to law school, but you missed the fact that if Austin is kicked off of the tour for felonious actions, and there is undeniable proof (which there is), he can not sue. He obviously will not sue, anyway, if this were a real court case, what would he say? "I got kicked off a tour because I was soliciting videos of teens twerking for sexual pleasure and I demand compensation"? The case would be thrown out immediately, and austin would be charged.

deathtokoalas
+Pink guy so, who exactly gave you the right to decide this?

there seems to be a general problem with young people nowadays, and your inability to understand the concept of due process. for some reason, you seem to think that trial by media is valid. you seem to think that these decisions are up to the general public to decide, rather than up to the court system. it's a problem that's been building for a few decades now, to the point that you all seem to just be oblivious to it.

we don't know why he was asking for those videos. that's the issue that needs to be determined in a court. that means that evidence needs to be provided, arguments need to be had and a decision needs to be come to to weigh all of these things. that's not done by talking heads in the media, or headlines in cnn. "it's obvious" is not a legal argument. depending on the context, it's actually possible defamatory.

now, if it's determined that a felony has taken place, then that's a defence in a defamation suit. until that time has come, your "undeniable proof" is merely possible evidence in a trial that never happened, and accusations that presume guilt are subject to censure and penalty. that's why you hear news reports use the word "alleged" so often - even in cases where it's "obvious".

the result is that, yes, he can say exactly what you're saying - if he can demonstrate a causal link between false statements made with malicious intent and a financial loss as a consequence of them.

in this particular case? you should realize that there's almost no chance he'd face any charges, unless he's selling the videos, basically. even if he's jerking off to the videos, that's neither paedophilia in a legal nor a clinical sense.

if it were, there'd be millions of people in jail for jerking off to britney spears and miley cyrus and ariana grand and the rest of them. that's just not a crime.

Pink guy
+deathtokoalas You forget that possession said videos of minors doing such acts is also highly illegal. OF course, no charges will be brought upon him, since he was never taken to court, but you can't deny that his actions were highly illegal, and the videos where he teaches them how to twerk would be considered "Bait"

And yes, jerking off to said videos is not pedophilia, it's ephebophilia. Which is the sexual attraction to someone between 15 and 17. Depending on which states you are in, that is highly illegal and can land you a good bit of jail time if caught in your possession.

The fact that he won't be charged is completely true, but you can't ignore the fact that what he did was illegal.

deathtokoalas
+Pink guy i'd argue it's just some kids dancing, obtained in consensual circumstances. that's neither pornography, nor is it coercive. i don't see what he could possibly be charged with.

you're allowed to disagree - that's what a trial is for. until then, statements of his guilt that may lead to financial consequences should be avoided, as they may lead to legal liability.

i want you to look up the video for "hit me baby one more time". she was seventeen 16 at the time.

this is "normal" across media. it's a part of the culture. you can argue it's gross, and i'd largely agree with you. but criminalizing this would have some pretty severe consequences.

Pink guy
+deathtokoalas Keep in mind, these were FANS that Austin manipulated and harrassed until they complied

deathtokoalas
+Pink guy he's not in any kind of position of authority or influence over them. and, even if he was, there's no meaningful consequence of asking somebody to dance on camera.

Pink guy
+deathtokoalas These girls idolized him, so of course they would keep talking to him. There was also a video where he was "I'm horny all the time and if we keep talking i'm probably gonna ask for a video", Austin admitted he used it for sexual reasons.

But this whole argument is pointless, so have a nice day <3

deathtokoalas
+Pink guy you're trying to tap into a legal argument that has to do with coercion. if you have a boss or a teacher, they may be able to coerce you into behaviour you don't really want in return for awards or to prevent consequences - like getting fired or failing a course. that's a well-tested legal argument, and i agree with the basis of it. people in authority should not use their authority to coerce people.

this argument has been extrapolated by some legal arguments to try and include the effects that celebrities may have on people. it's kind of scary to consider the ramifications of celebrity worship on such a deep level. but, it's a hail mary legal argument that doesn't usually work.

judges don't always base their decisions strictly on logic. sometimes, they look at a situation and say "this person has a lot, and this person has very little. i'm going to redistribute the wealth a little.". those decisions are usually reversed on appeal, if the appeals are granted. but, that's the kind of situation where these arguments work.

if this kid was, like, bono, or something? paul mcartney? i just mean somebody with billions of dollars, literally. another place this might come up is with a working class person suing a multi-national company. with something like that, you might see an activist judge step in and redistribute the wealth a little, out of a feeling that the billionaire can part with a little cash.

but, that's not the situation, here. as far as i can tell, this guy lives in his mom's basement. and the idea that he had some kind of coercive authority over anybody at all is not going to stand up in court.

social critics are unpopular, by definition. they seek to hold up a mirror, not to win popularity contests. they reject admiration and revel in pariah status. they're often killed by angry mobs, die penniless and dejected or even take their own lives.

i know exactly what i'm doing. you just can't see beyond the flaws in the human model of homo economicus.

the level of nonsense surrounding this story is hard to cut through, but binney is basically correct in how he's describing the spy game - which leads to the logical conclusion that the germans also have spies in the us government. obviously.

i have no indication that the state department has clued into this. but my hypothesis on what's going on is that snowden (and probably a few people involved with wikileaks) is the obvious spy connected to that clearly existing german intelligence network.

i think that what's happening here is a controlled leak by the germans (without american knowledge or approval) to create a crisis with the goal of reducing american influence in germany, and western continental europe generally.

which answers the question as to why they're spying in the first place.

the bear is pretending to be tough - bluffing, essentially. these tourists are not being chased. bears are generally too lazy to chase much of anything. they're just being given a spook so she can walk through with her cubs. and the cubs frankly look like they're enjoying the excitement...

these people are consequently in no danger, so long as they keep back like they're being herded to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jQd9-aBp6E

the tories went up a few seats, but i'd suggest this is a turnout issue. the snp may have picked up some seats from labour, but the swing seems to be mostly from the liberals. there does not appear to have been significant movement towards or away from either of the traditional governing parties - suggesting that they command older voting bases and are unpopular with younger voters.

rather, there seems to have been a large swing from the lib dems to the ukip, among young people. that might not make sense on first thought, but it does. every country has this "protest vote". in the united states, it's called "independent". in canada, it tends to swing around between the ndp, the greens and the liberals (and often decides elections). this protest vote is not strongly ideologically aligned, but merely against whatever exists. since wwII, it's tended to lean left in most places outside of the us, but there's no reason to think that ought to be static.

what this indicates is a strong rightward shift in the british counterculture, especially amongst young people. should that trend continue, the liberals will be replaced with the ukip. it might not have a direct electoral consequence, but it indicates a cultural swing to the right. and that should be concerning to everybody.

publishing la la la la (inri062)

inri043 completed.

--

this was meant to be the last rabit is wolf track, but instead morphed into the first trivial group song. this single explores the track from various angles.

sean wanted a song that just went "lalalala". i think his intent was to try and simplify my thought process, because what i'd been doing sounded more like FTIeikdTY7isdD7E5dk!. he was just kind of like "how about.....lalalala.".

it got a bit of an eye roll from me, as you could imagine, but i played with it. he wasn't really that excited about what i did, and it just didn't move forward. there were no further sessions, as he became interested in working with a more conventional early 00s "emotional hardcore" (think at the drive in) style guitarist and i got very involved in a relationship.

despite his initial suggestion, i'd consider the result to clearly be of my own doing. so, i took the core of what i did and warped it into the first track on the reflections symphony. this track has lain dormant since, comfortably completed.

it's now 2015, and i'm completing my discography. that puts this track in a blurry space: it was completed, but not as initially intended. while there may have been a vocal part recorded, i don't have it any more. yet, the intention is clear enough - and the manipulation would have been thick enough - that i do not consider it to be invasive to complete it on my own.

i'm releasing it as rabit because it's collaborative in the abstract, despite sean not actually existing in the track. this track was written in late 2002 and completed over april and may, 2015. final completion date is may 11, 2015. as always, please use headphones.

credits:
j - guitar, effects, bass, drum programming, soundscaping, sound design, sampling, vocals, vocoders, digital wave editing

sean - lyrical concept

released november 15, 2002

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/la-la-la-la

reflections (string orchestra mix)

as mentioned, i was going to do an orchestral mix, but decided against it in favour of a chamber mix. the chamber mix got a bit too big to be a chamber mix, so it's a string orchestra mix.

the major reason i'm uploading this is that the skittered up, glitchy percussion at the end transfers over well to pizzicato strings, creating a rather wonderful mess.

this render is from may 11, 2015.

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/reflections-string-orchestra-mix

reflections (percussion mix)

this is a purely percussive mix, mapping the instruments to things like marimbas and vibraphones and glockenspiels. render from may 9, 2015.

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/reflections-percussion-mix

reflections (homemade percussion mix)

this version is for piano, claps, bowls, pens, tables and some effects. it's mixed to sound like it's in an open room. the idea is to isolate and highlight the strange percussion choices in the original/final mix. so, this isolates the weird percussion in the track. constructed on may 9, 2015.

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/reflections-homemade-percussion-mix

reflections (soundblaster mix)

so, the soundblaster version of this track is done, and uploaded both to thru (47) and refractions (46). this completes the first disc of 47, which is likely to be finished completely tomorrow.

i've got some extra ideas for remixes for 46, but it shouldn't be a really lengthy job.

written and recorded in early 2003. transcribed, slightly rearranged, remixed and re-rendered over may, 2015. this render is from may 9, 2015.

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/reflections-4


https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/reflections-completed-soundblaster-mix

the idea that we're going to collectively sit down and think everything through before we do it is naive - we'd need to be gods for that. or maybe bees. we're going to act before we think. the thinkers are left with a responsibility to devise ways to minimize the damage from this. i think that this was closer to what marx was trying to get across, this idea that philosophers need to get out in front of the mob and try and have some influence over it before they start pitchforking each other. which, was actually somewhat of an obvious observation, coming out of the french revolution and failed revolts of the nineteenth century. lots of angry people. no coherent thought. and, isn't that actually the same problem we face today?

faced with this inevitability of people running amok one way or another, there's no other real answer. marx was just being logical. this is smelly, utopian-type thinking.

and, i think this is why marx' economic determinism is so attractive, despite being determinism. the robots are almost here, and they promise a master/slave relationship without a victim.

it's the last thing a disillusioned post-marxist wants to hear in 2015. especially from an empirical driven anarchist. but wait for it.

broadly speaking, the americans are pushing the same points the british empire was pushing 150 years ago. and the intelligentsia wants to tell you the era of empires is over...

i just hope they searched johnny boy and his cabal for opium on the way in, and specified he not arrive by gunboat.

he's not lying when he points out that the us doesn't want a conflict in the region - or at least not until it sets up it's toys. this is stalemate by necessity, not by choice. likewise, it always makes me laugh when they talk about chinese pressure on north korea - as though the dear leader wouldn't have to deal with the people's army crossing that old river again should he do anything idiotic, for the precise reason that they don't want anybody else thinking about it.

it's just not clear to my why they need the bravado. it's not like anybody really takes it seriously. it would simply come off as delusional, if i didn't know better.

you know what else is funny about this developing mess, though? i don't think a second strike is likely from china. not that i think this is a serious concern, i'm just musing.

this whole mad thing? i don't think they'd do it. they'd just take the hit as population control, go underground and wait it out. and, then you're dealing with some interesting trade relations.

the senate today passed a bill blocking imports from china due to fears of radiation. 'cause, you know. we just nuked 'em.

veterans are mostly murdering scumbags, and i fully support spitting on them. in fact, i fully support trying the bulk of them for war crimes and publicly executing them. and i'd support deporting the ones that get acquitted; i don't want veterans in my community, as they're a threat to public safety. the exception is conscription-era veterans, because they didn't have a choice. however, if they're walking around like they're proud of it, they're fair game.

these people don't solve problems, they create them.

hey, hey, nicholas connole, how many iraqi children did you kill today?

you don't think google wants to let you move your traffic to twitch, do you?

reflections (original soundblaster mix)

this is the 2003 version, which is special due to the greater focus in the mix on the skittery choir parts.

written and recorded in early 2003. transcribed, slightly rearranged, remixed repeatedly and re-rendered repeatedly over may, 2015. this render from may 7, 2015.

reflections (punk sonatina mix)

this is the original program, for piano, synth and strings. it has a more minimal feel.

written and recorded in early 2003. this render is from 2003.

reflections (windows mix)

the windows xp software synth rendered this rather differently than the old soundblaster, which just gives it a different flavour. of specific note is the guitar section at the end, which comes out sounding bowed.

written and recorded in early 2003. transcribed, slightly rearranged, remixed repeatedly and re-rendered repeatedly over may, 2015. this render from may 7, 2015.

actually, i think it'd be great to see the united states send a clear and unambiguous message that it doesn't care about religion.

at all.

the hypocrisy here is just astounding. how does this guy keep getting somebody to put a microphone in front of him? oh, that's right - it's his own microphone.

the ndp campaigns on the left and governs on the right. expect them to actually build refineries in alberta, so they can export refined product. the unions have been pushing for this for years. lots of jobs there.

but, see, i'm an actual environmentalist. and a total communist. and i want to keep it in the ground altogether. carbon tipping points and what not. i'd argue that short term jobs are less important than the environment, in the long run. i don't pretend the ndp agree with me on any of these points, and essentially nobody protesting on the ground is fooled by them...

you see the same political position show up in the federal ndp's pipeline politics. it's unifor driven, ultimately. they support the route out east - because there's refinery jobs out there, at the end of it. they oppose the keystone, because they view it as shipping refinery jobs to texas.

it has nothing to do with the environment. it just has to do with extracting wealth in the most selfish way possible. unions can never disassociate themselves from capital, or work against it. their self-interest is the same as the board's, it's just a question of who benefits most from it. the revolutionary left has largely realized this since malatesta. which was a long time ago.

so, yes, you should go ahead and relax and keep calm and vote ndp - if you're happy with the status quo.

garrtw
+deathtokoalas well when is ezra levsnt running for PC?

deathtokoalas
+garrtw maybe in the northwest territories.

garrtw
+deathtokoalas just sayn he love running his mouth off alot but we he ever run for oilberta!

deathtokoalas
+garrtw i hear what you're saying, but it's not at all likely. it would have to be a pretty obscure party or, more likely, as an independent. his media career has not been very successful, for the precise reason that he says a lot of stupid things. for that reason, none of the parties that seek to be mainstream are likely to pick him up. he's too much of a loose cannon. i wouldn't expect any kind of major conservative or progressive conservative party at the federal or provincial level to endorse his nomination.

he'd probably have to start in municipal politics.

i mean, you run him in a safe seat and you risk galvanizing the opposition, and losing that base of centrist support that votes a certain way for cultural reasons. those western ridings out in the sticks aren't really 80% hard-right conservative, it's more that the voting decisions runs in the family. no seat is completely safe. some seats are low risk so long as it's nothing too thought provoking.

you run him in an impossible seat, and you risk blowback. say what you want about the ruling party, but they're not known to take crazy risks like this, and i don't see any reason why they'd need to change that at this point. they've kept him at an arm's distance for a reason - his purpose is to try and shift the spectrum. which means he's outside of it.

what harper needs to be worried about this election is the possibility of one of the two other parties collapsing into the other, at which point it's a rout one way or the other. and, to try and prevent that, he needs to be appealing to the middle - not the fringes of his support base.

he's too taboo at this point. if he had electoral ambitions, he fell on his sword to take that sun media job - the purpose was to provoke, which he must have known would make him unelectable.

garrtw
+deathtokoalas but he still use sunmedia headlines so it that fair oops!

deathtokoalas
+garrtw generally, if you want to run for office as a conservative, you don't want to brand yourself as a 'rebel'. that's not going to win you friends in the pmo. i don't think he's really thinking about it...

...and, i wouldn't really criticize him for that, either. there's lots of reasons to criticize him, but not that. about the last thing i'd want to do is run for office. i think it's far more productive to criticize from a distance, and try to provoke non-governmental action. nothing gets done in the government anymore. it's just a rubber stamp for corporate and other special interests.

wow.

green party is the opposition?

no. wildrose. ok...

it's nice to see, but i'm a realist...

i'd suggest the ndp focus on legislation that they don't expect the wildrose party to immediately reverse, in what will no doubt be a short tenure in office, and likely actually represents the final conversion of hybrid american/british albertan conservatism into the indigenous wildrose party.

that said, i expect the ndp to actually swing to the right pretty quickly. "campaign from the left, govern from the right" is generally thrown at the liberals by leftists, but the ndp have proven themselves equally capable of backstabbing - look at the recent administrations in manitoba and nova scotia. bob rae was so corporate-friendly that he actually pushed ontario unions to the liberals (before he followed himself...), and the ndp never recovered from it. today, they even campaign on the center-right, fully cognizant of the reality that nobody on the left takes them seriously.

this has been a long time coming, and that might make what's about to happen that much more depressing. but ndp supporters should prepare themselves for broken promises - and open heart surgery.

if you're trying to use string theory to argue the existence of god, you're merely demonstrating that mathematics is a human construction.

the god you're perceiving is us.

which isn't that ironic, really. it's more just expected.

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/do-we-have-free-will-because-god-committed-suicide

ugh. it's going to get ugly down here when the humidity picks up. i'm going to drive the temperature down here up to 35, and hope he keels over.

it's may 5th - a good seven weeks before summer. the high today is 12 degrees, with a cool wind from the north. it's gloomy and overcast. it's a cold, yucky day. and, yet the air conditioner is on upstairs, seemingly set to around 10.

the result is that i have the heat set to 25, i'm wearing two sweaters and yet i'm still cold.

i've been trying to understand how the thermostat can say 25 degrees, and yet i'm shivering. it has to just be what a/c units do to the air. they suck all the good parts out, leaving the no good parts. the thermostat might say something, but it doesn't reflect the actual air quality. i mean, there's a difference between 25 with a cool wind, 25 with humidity and 25 with a dry, bright sun, right? the thermostat says the same thing in all cases, but it can run the spectrum from 'need a sweater' to 'sweating profusely'.

air conditioners are a special kind of evil in what they do to the air, though. they'd steal the oxygen right out of it if they could - vampires. you get one of these units running, and there's just nothing good left in what you're living in.

the frustrating thing is that it's actually too cold outside to open the window. i have no option but to crank the heat.

well, it might seem surreal to hear it in 2015 2014, but fordism has definitely proven itself better than it's considered alternatives. it's maybe a set of low expectations, but it's about as good as reformism is going to get. and it would help a lot. seriously.

ok, i like his rejection of trickle down, and promotion of tax cuts for law wage workers. that's something you don't hear enough. considering it's the most fucking obvious thing in the world.

this is such a joke...

the germans have been aware of this for decades - it's why they want into the core of the system. and exactly why the american's will not let them into the core: the americans would be daft to not spy on them, and even dafter to fully trust them.

the germans are sneaky, run the only serious competition to the dollar, and appear to be involved in more of the events we see happening around us than we realize.

and, despite the optics here, germany will eventually step in line: because they couldn't begin to pretend that the spying isn't necessary.

no. no. germany is not an ally of america. it is a tributary of america. a client state.

it would prefer sovereignty.

he demonstrates a lot of respect for the tactical nature of zia's leadership, but he lets on that this is a myth: if zia's ultimate plan was to move into india (and this does appear to be true), invading afghanistan in the first place was not a smart choice.

1) large loss of resources, money, etc.
2) if successful, it would have eliminated the buffer zone between pakistan and the soviets, virtually guaranteeing catastrophic (to pakistan) soviet interference in an indo-pakistani conflict.

if he was actually smart, tactically, he would have left afghanistan as an unstable mess as he focused further to the south. and, if i were india, coercing him into afghanistan would actually be something i'd actively aim towards.

the web of intercontinental alliances surrounding the conflict on the subcontinent has created a sort of MAD scenario. the mutual deterrents are actually very stabilizing, in terms of deescalating clashes between official military arms. i wouldn't expect these covert "terrorist" operations to cease any time soon, but the idea that they could ever lead to large scale war is just a misunderstanding of what these tactics are; terrorism and insurgency are the conventional workaround to the impossibilities of actual war in the nuclear era. when you see these tactics increase, it signals that the nuclear option is understood to be off the table.....

odsp drug coverage / transgender medication not covered

hi...

i'm contacting you about the issue of hormones being covered under the odsp drug benefits. whether i agree with the reasons or not (cosmetic, not medical), i understand why that this has not traditionally been covered. and i understand that it's something that is probably still a little touchy in certain circles. however, i think the current liberal majority is the type of government that is likely to throw off certain stigmas attached to the issue, that it will probably even generate broad public support, and it's something progressive forces should consequently be taking the opportunity to move a little on. you are my mp, so i'm approaching you as a first point of contact.

i've been taking hormones for years, and have been able to cover the cost for one of three drugs while the province covers the cost of the other two. i've interpreted this as "it could be worse", but the price just went up a lot and it's provided me with an incentive to try and get it covered. i understand that there's a procedure to go through to ask for an exception, but i think it really just ought to be changed altogether.

the three drugs are a progesterone, an estrogen and a testosterone blocker. the province covers the testosterone blocker because it's used to treat men that have difficulties with sexual impulses - rapists and child molesters. it covers the progesterone because it can be used as a menopause treatment. further, it will cover some types of estrogen that are used in birth control, but the doses are far too low to be useful to me.

should i really have to rely on a legal loophole for sex offenders when i have a diagnosed medical condition, and the prescription i need is approved for other uses? this condition is deeply intertwined with mental health issues. it's generally consistent in the canadian legal framework to ensure access to this kind of thing, when it intersects with issues of well being. i know i'm on the right side with this.

again: i understand why this would have been difficult twenty years ago. but, i think the society has matured enough around this issue that this medication should be interpreted by odsp as medically necessary, and consequently covered under the circumstances of my diagnosis - rather than the loophole i'm currently forced to accept. and, i think the current government provides an opportunity to move on this.

jessica

publishing reflections (inri074)

i've also uploaded an ep from 2003, untouched, as inri049. tracks 1-5 are what i consider to be my fifth symphony.

===

around october, 2002 i met a friend. i was sort of in need of a friend, and i mean that in the friend sense. but, the mental condition i was in was the explanation of why i needed a friend, if you see what i mean; i was completely unstable in this period and did all kinds of absurd things, which isolated me - and i wasn't getting any better.

i dropped out of school under the realization that i was walking down a path that wasn't getting me anywhere close to what i wanted out of life. i ended up working three jobs to raise money for gender reassignment, and it crossed me paths with somebody that was also trying to think of ways to get out of the box in terms of ways to exist.

she was trying to save up money to go to british columbia. it was some kind of warped take on the grapes of wrath, where everything works out perfectly. but, the rent was eating into her savings, which was making the goal seem impossible. well, unless we stopped having fun.

so, i suggested she should just stay at my parents place. part of it was a hope that she would move her drum kit in, although that didn't happen. and, i might add that this was done with all of the reckless abandon that could be contemplated - we were moving stuff in without even asking, it was really remarkable.

and, it seemed to me that we were getting pretty close over that period.

so, when the time came that she had all that money put aside to go to bc, it was kind of a downer to let her go. and, she initially wanted to go with a friend who dropped out. so, i ended up going across the country with her.

now, i need to be clear: we weren't planning on coming back. we were going to pick fruit or something - we didn't know, exactly, we'd figure it out when we got there.

so, this was meant as a sort of farewell to certain people i hadn't talked to in months and didn't care if i was leaving, anyways. i think it let me work some things out on weird subconscious levels, but the truth is that these songs really aren't about anybody except me, and there's no use in pretending they are - i just liked the idea of a farewell disc.

this disc was initially passed around with a cut up version of the pretentious untitled mix at the end, but this was almost immediately ejected from future burns and is not present on this ep due to the poor quality of the mix. the remaining five tracks became combined into what i now call my fifth symphony. a slightly remixed version will appear on the trivial group double lp.

written and recorded in late 2002 and early 2003. this was uploaded unmodified from a cd-r rip in may, 2015. symphony 5. as always, please use headphones.

credits:
j - guitar, effects, bass, synth, voice, piano, drum programming, generative programming (sounder), granular synthesis, sound design, soundscaping, loops, bowls, claps, tables, ebow, orchestral sequencing, digital wave editing, sampling, production, composition

the various rendered electronic orchestras include piano, synth pad, choir and string section. 

released may 1, 2003

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/reflections

publishing flying (inri064)

this was constructed as a christmas present for my partner, while in a rather absurd state of entirely preposterous euphoria. only a musician can be so absurdly invested in something so thoroughly delusional - or manage to create something so entirely self-reflective out of a theme surrounding somebody else.

the first part of this was shelved before it was ever released. i was over-exaggerating a sense of self-consciousness, but it still strikes me as unworkable. however, i think it's conceptually important in the idea of this as a christmas present and has consequently been uploaded here without modification. the second part was actually presented to sarah as a present, albeit it a little after christmas - hence the jan 1 release date. it eventually found it's way to the center of my fifth symphony, reflections: jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/reflections

these tracks were written and recorded over november and december of 2002 and uploaded, unmodified, in may of 2015. this will be a download only release. as always, please use headphones.

credits:
j - guitar, effects, bass, synth, piano, drum programming, light-sound synthesis (coagula), generative programming (sounder), granular synthesis, sound design, digital wave editing, production, composition 

released january 1, 2003

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/flying

publishing jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj^2 (inri063)

i've just finished my sixth lp.

--

the idea of a second jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj record was not something that remotely crossed my mind until i started seriously analysing my work from 2002. that was a separate idea; rabit is wolf separated it from the trivial group. however, remixed instrumental tracks over the rabit is wolf period slowly collected to the point that there was enough to justify a whole record. that wasn't a conscious choice at the outset, but it seems to be the conceptual framework collected on the record. i toyed with the idea of releasing it as a rabit remix record, but my influence over it is far too lopsided.

the thematic linkage with the first jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj record is a tendency to lean towards more "serious" ideas. there are strong influences from a few different types of classical music, including jazz, as well as some more modern electronic and noise influences. however, these songs lean more towards more palatable rock or techno based song structures and are less dependent on existing scores.

the stories for these songs are diverse and explained in more detail on the track pages.

these tracks are all based on existing demos from 2001-2002 that were initially intended to be completed with vocal parts and were remixed from july, 2014 to may, 2015 as purely instrumental recordings. final completion date is may 2, 2015. as always, please use headphones.

credits
j - electric & acoustic guitars, electric bass guitar, effects, synths, electric air reed organ, digital piano, flute, voice, electronic drum kit, drum programming, drum manipulations, drum sampling, orchestral sequencing, sampling, loops, equalization, digital wave editing, sound design, production, composition.

the various rendered electronic orchestras include tuba, french horn, trombone, trumpet, english horn, saxophone, oboe, clarinet, bassoon, flute, orchestra hit, melodic toms, timpani, orchestral drum set, piano, agogo, tubular bells, glockenspiel, koto, violin, viola, cello, contrabass and various full string sections. it also includes choir.

other musicians:
sean - harmonica (2), melody (6)
greg - drum performance sample source (4)

released december 1, 2002

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj-2

he forgot japanoize.

shame.

never heard of this person, don't care.

nobody knew the driver was drunk?

i'd say it's pretty clear...

the pickup truck did the right thing in slowing the camaro down, until it could sober up or otherwise smarten up. 100% responsibility goes to the camaro - you can't pass on the outside like that. not when you're sober. not when you're doing a fraction of the speed.

"mmmmmmom...come on...all the other kids are rioting. it's no fair."

"freddy who? i'm just trying to impress a girl. the other boys are being all tough. they're going to call me a pussy, and then she'll think i'm beta. that other guy has broken three cars already."

in the long run, the key to stopping this is largely economic. in the short run, it's probably not going to be fixed with parenting or policing. rather, young women ought to pick up a tactic from the ancient greek comedy lysistrata.

so long as the cause and effect relationship is made clear, that'd get these young boys under control. in the mean time? the plain truth is that tactics that are successful are going to continue.

it's going to be nice this weekend, which you'd think might get me out. but, rather, i need to stay home and make sure the windows stay open. the fellow above me carries roughly thrice the weight of the average individual and will turn the basement into a meat locker should he be allowed to, in order that the temperature upstairs stay below 20. that's what happens when you're grossly obese.

it's summer. you want the temperature above 20. so, fuck that guy. maybe he should move to baffin island. or hit a treadmill. i learned last year that i need to get out in front of this if i don't want to be shivering in june - i've had the heat cranked the last two days, and will have the windows wide open so long as it's over 20 (and cranked over night, when it's below 20). that may actually take the temperature in here down a degree or two until the humidity picks up, but the key is to break the seal on the air conditioner upstairs. he's either going to freeze me out or i'm going to fry him out. i need the space in the short term, but i might not in the long term. i can handle everything else about this place in exchange for cheap rent, but i hate the idea of being cold all summer.

i mean, he can't win. not unless we skip summer this year. 35 degree humidity pouring in from the basement 12 hours a day will break his air. too bad. so sad....

what i'm missing is the "blowout" in detroit, but i'd argue i'm not missing much. this magazine is focusing on an aspect of detroit that is too mainstream for my tastes. as for touring bands, i'll check out perfect pussy at some point - although i'm more excited about white lung next month. tonight, they're playing in a mall. it's going to feel awkward and sound terrible. i'll hold out for a small bar with a lower ceiling. if it were a different band, i might feel different about the venue, but this is a bad combo. tomorrow is fucked up, but i've seen them enough to know they do short sets, which is going to end the show at 11:40 and get me stuck in ferndale until 7:00 again. not excited about that for a $20 entry fee. i'll wait until they play somewhere i can walk back to the tunnel with...and they will....

the likely next show is may 6th, but i'm iffy about it. it seems like an early show. we'll see where my head is.

the only feasible way for this guy to exist in the temperature he wants is to not live above anybody. nobody is going to want to live in a 15 degree basement over the summer so the obese guy in the upstairs apartment doesn't break a sweat. he could/should have moved into the empty unit on the other side over the winter - there's nobody under him, there. i hinted at it, but he didn't listen. *shrug*.

la la la la (instrumental mix)

this mix was reconstructed from the 2002 source material in april, 2015 and slightly remixed in the process. track dated to april 30. 2015.

http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/la-la-la-la-instrumental-mix

just about any natural phenomena would exist in more than one location. and the asteroid belt is prime colonizing space. i think there’s good reason to think this is legit.

i just hope it’s not the russians…

“in communist ceres, aliens find you!”

"vasilli want know who won 1972 summit series, been cheering for motherland since."

i wonder if the spectroscopy on it is consistent with it possibly being earth junk.

so, when is he launching airstrikes on baltimore? vlad can't stop him this time....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2BhRH-Y28c