to be clear: my understanding is that one of these people leaves for work late in the evening, and that this person seems to be in control of the situation, when she's there - but that, as soon as she leaves, the other people light up.
see, and this is as disrespectful to the person on the lease as it is to me. but, she may feel as though she has no responsibility. that's just a bad friend, whatever kind of friend it is...
it was nice in here. warm. dry. clean.
it's a shame they had to ruin it.
Sunday, April 15, 2018
i've suspected for a while that there's two people living there, taking shifts.
it may be that the night shift seems to be worse than the day shift and that the night shift only works weekdays or something. i dunno. but, it seems like it's that one is worse than the other.
the property manager insists there's only one person living there, but this isn't true. is the bigger problem even on the lease? and, if so, why is this woman letting this other woman create all of these problems for her?
it may be that the night shift seems to be worse than the day shift and that the night shift only works weekdays or something. i dunno. but, it seems like it's that one is worse than the other.
the property manager insists there's only one person living there, but this isn't true. is the bigger problem even on the lease? and, if so, why is this woman letting this other woman create all of these problems for her?
about 21:30, they're back at it.
so, what happened over the weekend, and why did it change all of a sudden?
i'm going to guess that there's a point where they get too stoned to care; like i say, i know the psychology fairly well. they may even regret it when they wake up, but they'll decide it doesn't matter any more. and, this is a cycle - if they get another scary warning, they'll stop for a few days, and then get really stoned and stop caring again.
again: somehow, these people are being prescribed marijuana as a cure for depression and apathy. it's not clicking that it's at the root cause of their problems, rather than a solution to them. and, any doctors that are enabling them ought to be liable for this.
for right now, i have no choice but to open the windows and hope it clears out.
so, what happened over the weekend, and why did it change all of a sudden?
i'm going to guess that there's a point where they get too stoned to care; like i say, i know the psychology fairly well. they may even regret it when they wake up, but they'll decide it doesn't matter any more. and, this is a cycle - if they get another scary warning, they'll stop for a few days, and then get really stoned and stop caring again.
again: somehow, these people are being prescribed marijuana as a cure for depression and apathy. it's not clicking that it's at the root cause of their problems, rather than a solution to them. and, any doctors that are enabling them ought to be liable for this.
for right now, i have no choice but to open the windows and hope it clears out.
i don't know what changed, exactly, but i'm happy about the air quality this weekend.
is there some possibility that this could still work? well, i don't really know what happened. i know that the second letter appears to have had some effect, but who knows for how long.
i guess i should wait until may 1st before i finish cleaning up and setting up the studio.
it's been almost a week since i was at this, but here i go, back at it. let's get through 2015 before i do anything else....
is there some possibility that this could still work? well, i don't really know what happened. i know that the second letter appears to have had some effect, but who knows for how long.
i guess i should wait until may 1st before i finish cleaning up and setting up the studio.
it's been almost a week since i was at this, but here i go, back at it. let's get through 2015 before i do anything else....
so, it seems as though the pipeline meeting was pointless.
here's the thing: trudeau can write some new legislation if he'd like. but, that legislation will then be subject to a constitutional challenge, and that itself will be very lengthy.
even if the pipeline is owned by the feds and it only goes through federal land, that federal land is still in provincial jurisdiction, and, perhaps more importantly, surrounded by land that is, as well.
the division of powers in the constitution is not specific enough to make a clear deduction, and lawyers suggesting it is are in for a rude surprise when they get to court. these lands are probably mostly subject to the changes that occurred in the transfer agreements of 1930, which should give the provinces jurisdiction over natural resources; at the time, a part of the reason this was done was to minimize aboriginal influence, as their treaties were with the crown, rather than the province. now that the province is onside with the aboriginals, the fed wants to take control back again, by citing the 1867 documents. that's not going to work.
this is going to take some time to work out, and everybody will need to deal with it.
that said, trudeau has some leverage, in terms of withholding funding. but, if he were to withhold funding to build a pipeline, it would turn him into a pariah, the country over. that would be suicidal.
here's the thing: trudeau can write some new legislation if he'd like. but, that legislation will then be subject to a constitutional challenge, and that itself will be very lengthy.
even if the pipeline is owned by the feds and it only goes through federal land, that federal land is still in provincial jurisdiction, and, perhaps more importantly, surrounded by land that is, as well.
the division of powers in the constitution is not specific enough to make a clear deduction, and lawyers suggesting it is are in for a rude surprise when they get to court. these lands are probably mostly subject to the changes that occurred in the transfer agreements of 1930, which should give the provinces jurisdiction over natural resources; at the time, a part of the reason this was done was to minimize aboriginal influence, as their treaties were with the crown, rather than the province. now that the province is onside with the aboriginals, the fed wants to take control back again, by citing the 1867 documents. that's not going to work.
this is going to take some time to work out, and everybody will need to deal with it.
that said, trudeau has some leverage, in terms of withholding funding. but, if he were to withhold funding to build a pipeline, it would turn him into a pariah, the country over. that would be suicidal.
and, of course, if abbey road meant it was bed time, then sgt peppers meant it was time to wake up.
i blew the day, yesterday. it happens sometimes. i need to do a bit more cleaning and get back to work tonight.
the air quality in here has improved dramatically over the last 48 hours; we'll have to see if my second letter worked or not, but it's going to be a while before i can make any conclusions. for right now, it's better, at least. if it stays like this, i won't have to move.
if.
i blew the day, yesterday. it happens sometimes. i need to do a bit more cleaning and get back to work tonight.
the air quality in here has improved dramatically over the last 48 hours; we'll have to see if my second letter worked or not, but it's going to be a while before i can make any conclusions. for right now, it's better, at least. if it stays like this, i won't have to move.
if.
it's unclear to me why a city the size of toronto would be unable to recycle items that are recyclable elsewhere, and i'm frankly tired of being told that citizens are at blame for this, as though the recycling industry is above us in some way, and that it's alright if they can't be bothered to separate out things.
the coffee bins are a good example. there's a big market for these things. so, it should fall on the city to find a way to recycle them, if they end up in the bin - even if that means shipping them somewhere else.
if something is recyclable, the city should not be throwing it away just because it isn't locally recyclable; it should be making that effort to deal with the issue. and, if that costs money then they should ask for it; recycling is a core, essential service and not something that should be done on the cheap.
we need a change in culture, alright. and, it seems like the first culture that needs to change is the culture at the recycling plant.
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2018/04/13/bringing-purity-to-torontos-blue-bins.html
the coffee bins are a good example. there's a big market for these things. so, it should fall on the city to find a way to recycle them, if they end up in the bin - even if that means shipping them somewhere else.
if something is recyclable, the city should not be throwing it away just because it isn't locally recyclable; it should be making that effort to deal with the issue. and, if that costs money then they should ask for it; recycling is a core, essential service and not something that should be done on the cheap.
we need a change in culture, alright. and, it seems like the first culture that needs to change is the culture at the recycling plant.
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2018/04/13/bringing-purity-to-torontos-blue-bins.html
what we should do is create an organization and model it after the mormons, who are known for posthumously baptizing people. i think this is a strange thing, but i don't imagine that a dead person would care much if they were baptized; there's not really a mechanism for it.
but, we should create an organization that posthumously awards all of the people that have died from drug overdoses with darwin awards, and have that organization keep detailed records in a deep library, as though they are monks, and the monastery they administer has a sacred purpose to remember the lives of all of the people that willingly removed themselves from the gene pool.
the liberals were never the stupid party. we'll see in a few weeks if they've become it or not.
but, we should create an organization that posthumously awards all of the people that have died from drug overdoses with darwin awards, and have that organization keep detailed records in a deep library, as though they are monks, and the monastery they administer has a sacred purpose to remember the lives of all of the people that willingly removed themselves from the gene pool.
the liberals were never the stupid party. we'll see in a few weeks if they've become it or not.
my view on drugs is towards total state non-involvement.
the laws should not be changed, but they should not be enforced, either - which, in canada, is really the status quo. they only really arrest dealers, here.
but, no new money should be spent on treatment, prevention or enforcement. that money should be spent on more valid health care priorities to help people that aren't individually responsible for their own fucking problems.
and, i actually think that if the government gets completely out of the way then the industry will kill itself off; it's state involvement that keeps it going. by stepping in and saving the lives of addicts, and regulating use through various schemes, we're actually propping the industry up...
if you just step back and completely wash your hands of it, they'll eventually all die, and the problem will cease to exist.
but, this is no doubt why the industry wants state regulation - to maintain a customer base. the longer the state keeps you alive, the more drugs you buy. it's how you would expect the cartels would want to design the system.
the drug conglomerates of the future will have treatment subsidiaries, along with distribution subsidiaries. because, they are of course going to want to make a profit from the entire cycle of drug abuse - from first use right to death.
the laws should not be changed, but they should not be enforced, either - which, in canada, is really the status quo. they only really arrest dealers, here.
but, no new money should be spent on treatment, prevention or enforcement. that money should be spent on more valid health care priorities to help people that aren't individually responsible for their own fucking problems.
and, i actually think that if the government gets completely out of the way then the industry will kill itself off; it's state involvement that keeps it going. by stepping in and saving the lives of addicts, and regulating use through various schemes, we're actually propping the industry up...
if you just step back and completely wash your hands of it, they'll eventually all die, and the problem will cease to exist.
but, this is no doubt why the industry wants state regulation - to maintain a customer base. the longer the state keeps you alive, the more drugs you buy. it's how you would expect the cartels would want to design the system.
the drug conglomerates of the future will have treatment subsidiaries, along with distribution subsidiaries. because, they are of course going to want to make a profit from the entire cycle of drug abuse - from first use right to death.
see, this is really just a bunch of utter nonsense.
the reality is that treatment doesn't work. so, this idea that we have some kind of successful option in front of us rather than a failed option is a false dilemma - neither of these approaches will save lives, and they are both absurdly expensive.
the real difference is around two questions:
1) should we be socially sanctioning drug use? it's almost impossible to not do that in a society where drug use is legal.
2) who profits from the drug trade? this includes the treatment industry.
underneath every article like this is a financial trail. somebody stands to profit from legalization, and they are the people writing these pieces.
drug addicts don't get better, and it's irresponsible to suggest there's a way to fix them by spending a lot of public money. that is money that could be put into other areas with better likelihoods of successful outcomes, like cancer research.
you just need to let them go and move on with your own life.
i oppose the resolution and hope it fails.
but, ironically, if it passes, it would make the ndp less unattractive - because they're both supporting the same thing, anyways.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2018/04/15/the-case-for-decriminalizing-drugs.html
the reality is that treatment doesn't work. so, this idea that we have some kind of successful option in front of us rather than a failed option is a false dilemma - neither of these approaches will save lives, and they are both absurdly expensive.
the real difference is around two questions:
1) should we be socially sanctioning drug use? it's almost impossible to not do that in a society where drug use is legal.
2) who profits from the drug trade? this includes the treatment industry.
underneath every article like this is a financial trail. somebody stands to profit from legalization, and they are the people writing these pieces.
drug addicts don't get better, and it's irresponsible to suggest there's a way to fix them by spending a lot of public money. that is money that could be put into other areas with better likelihoods of successful outcomes, like cancer research.
you just need to let them go and move on with your own life.
i oppose the resolution and hope it fails.
but, ironically, if it passes, it would make the ndp less unattractive - because they're both supporting the same thing, anyways.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2018/04/15/the-case-for-decriminalizing-drugs.html
the author of this piece misunderstands the point.
the bill doesn't intend to place indigenous spiritual belief on the same footing as science in an epistemological sense, it merely codifies an existing judicial precedent that orders industry to have some respect for the religious beliefs of the indigenous inhabitants before they start fucking around with things.
i don't have a lot of patience for these spiritual beliefs. but, i don't have to believe in the premise of a land being sacred in order to respect that these other people do believe that and that, as the land ought to belong to them and only does not due to a historic injustice, they ought to have sovereignty to make those decisions, whether i accept the premise or not.
i can consequently make fun of them for their goofy beliefs and uphold their right to make sovereign decisions around those goofy beliefs, all at the same time - and stand in solidarity with members of their own community that may have their rights, as individuals, inflicted upon by those same goofy beliefs, when it is the case.
i don't know who the author of the piece is, but i suspect they don't know much about canadian law. and, i'd suggest to the washington post that the candian jurisprudence really is complicated enough that you actually do really have to get a canadian expert to talk about it; sending american lawyers after canadian jurisprudence (and legislation modelled after it) is just going to create some confused yankees.
but, the logic is simple enough: this is an additional requirement, and it may be no less important than the science as a requirement, but that doesn't place it on an equal footing with science on an epistemological level...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2018/04/13/how-trudeau-is-sacrificing-science-in-the-name-of-aboriginal-peace/
the bill doesn't intend to place indigenous spiritual belief on the same footing as science in an epistemological sense, it merely codifies an existing judicial precedent that orders industry to have some respect for the religious beliefs of the indigenous inhabitants before they start fucking around with things.
i don't have a lot of patience for these spiritual beliefs. but, i don't have to believe in the premise of a land being sacred in order to respect that these other people do believe that and that, as the land ought to belong to them and only does not due to a historic injustice, they ought to have sovereignty to make those decisions, whether i accept the premise or not.
i can consequently make fun of them for their goofy beliefs and uphold their right to make sovereign decisions around those goofy beliefs, all at the same time - and stand in solidarity with members of their own community that may have their rights, as individuals, inflicted upon by those same goofy beliefs, when it is the case.
i don't know who the author of the piece is, but i suspect they don't know much about canadian law. and, i'd suggest to the washington post that the candian jurisprudence really is complicated enough that you actually do really have to get a canadian expert to talk about it; sending american lawyers after canadian jurisprudence (and legislation modelled after it) is just going to create some confused yankees.
but, the logic is simple enough: this is an additional requirement, and it may be no less important than the science as a requirement, but that doesn't place it on an equal footing with science on an epistemological level...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2018/04/13/how-trudeau-is-sacrificing-science-in-the-name-of-aboriginal-peace/
nobody outside of alberta is going to vote in favour of a pipeline; this does not affect non-albertans at all in any way.
however, plenty of people outside of bc will vote against a pipeline, because it certainly does affect everybody, and rather considerably.
so, while i'm not going to comment on the results of online "polling", which i consider to be so useless as to be no better than a random guess, the numbers that they are measuring are of little value in the first place.
trudeau can only lose seats by supporting the pipeline.
but, if he's lucky, the number of sophisticated voters like me - that expected him to support the oil industry, and are more interested in structural approaches towards transition - will outnumber the number that kneejerk against it.
but, he has to do a lot more on the transition file; he has to demonstrate concrete results.
however, plenty of people outside of bc will vote against a pipeline, because it certainly does affect everybody, and rather considerably.
so, while i'm not going to comment on the results of online "polling", which i consider to be so useless as to be no better than a random guess, the numbers that they are measuring are of little value in the first place.
trudeau can only lose seats by supporting the pipeline.
but, if he's lucky, the number of sophisticated voters like me - that expected him to support the oil industry, and are more interested in structural approaches towards transition - will outnumber the number that kneejerk against it.
but, he has to do a lot more on the transition file; he has to demonstrate concrete results.
Saturday, April 14, 2018
the show last night was...
they play short sets. that's how it is.
it was good, but too short.
i was there way too early; my bike is ridable in the short term, but probably going to literally crumble in my hands at some point. i'm not going to bring it back to canada. i'll just ride it until it dies. i'll probably bring something to clean the rust off, next time. if i can get a year out of it, it was a bargain. it won't last another winter...unless i can get it in somewhere, like the trumbullplex.
they might let me do it. they have space.
as i was there early, i pre-drank a lot, and i ended up pretty drunk. so, i'm actually just coming to in any serious sense, just now. i smell like the fire pit at el club, and need to shower.
i'm developing a love-hate relationship with el club. the sound is great, and the crowd is always solid. but, the shows end before midnight. consistently. the band was done at 11:50, and i just don't know if the set was or could have been longer.
but, i know that they do this - that they have this attachment to half hour sets as an inherently punk thing.
and, they consequently rarely play older songs.
there were a few points in the show where i had this different understanding of them, as an off-broadway kind of operatic show tune act. her vocals are becoming the central focus of what the band is doing, and i do think that the whole thing is shifting in the process.
but, this isn't a full review, which i'm very behind on.
they play short sets. that's how it is.
it was good, but too short.
i was there way too early; my bike is ridable in the short term, but probably going to literally crumble in my hands at some point. i'm not going to bring it back to canada. i'll just ride it until it dies. i'll probably bring something to clean the rust off, next time. if i can get a year out of it, it was a bargain. it won't last another winter...unless i can get it in somewhere, like the trumbullplex.
they might let me do it. they have space.
as i was there early, i pre-drank a lot, and i ended up pretty drunk. so, i'm actually just coming to in any serious sense, just now. i smell like the fire pit at el club, and need to shower.
i'm developing a love-hate relationship with el club. the sound is great, and the crowd is always solid. but, the shows end before midnight. consistently. the band was done at 11:50, and i just don't know if the set was or could have been longer.
but, i know that they do this - that they have this attachment to half hour sets as an inherently punk thing.
and, they consequently rarely play older songs.
there were a few points in the show where i had this different understanding of them, as an off-broadway kind of operatic show tune act. her vocals are becoming the central focus of what the band is doing, and i do think that the whole thing is shifting in the process.
but, this isn't a full review, which i'm very behind on.
trump is complicit in the ongoing catastrophe in yemen and is responsible for a couple of stupid stunts in syria.
but, let us stop to pause for a moment.
clinton - yugoslavia
bush - iraq & afghanistan
obama - libya, yemen, ukraine & syria
trump - has not started a war, yet.
let that sink in for a minute.
right now, trump is the only president in modern history that hasn't started a war.
and, frankly, if he holds to that, he may end up the lesser evil in the next cycle.
it's a shame that he's so terrible on the climate....which is really what the democrats should be running on in the next cycle...
but, let us stop to pause for a moment.
clinton - yugoslavia
bush - iraq & afghanistan
obama - libya, yemen, ukraine & syria
trump - has not started a war, yet.
let that sink in for a minute.
right now, trump is the only president in modern history that hasn't started a war.
and, frankly, if he holds to that, he may end up the lesser evil in the next cycle.
it's a shame that he's so terrible on the climate....which is really what the democrats should be running on in the next cycle...
i might actually suggest that these ads don't have a lot of reach anymore.
i don't have a tv, and i run an adblocker. that was the only time i'll see this ad. and, i'm likely to forget about it altogether in 5....4....3....2...1...
http://nationalpost.com/news/ontario-liberals-launching-first-campaign-ad-ahead-of-election-focus-on-ford
i don't have a tv, and i run an adblocker. that was the only time i'll see this ad. and, i'm likely to forget about it altogether in 5....4....3....2...1...
http://nationalpost.com/news/ontario-liberals-launching-first-campaign-ad-ahead-of-election-focus-on-ford
this is a valid point.
but, it's an argument to pull out of nafta, not an argument to complete the pipeline.
http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/terence-corcoran-ottawas-next-big-pipeline-problem-kinder-morgan-suing-us-through-nafta
but, it's an argument to pull out of nafta, not an argument to complete the pipeline.
http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/terence-corcoran-ottawas-next-big-pipeline-problem-kinder-morgan-suing-us-through-nafta
this is a much better explanation than anything you'll see in the tory media.
https://www.desmog.ca/2018/04/13/they-re-not-getting-how-constitution-works-why-trudeau-notley-can-t-steamroll-b-c-kinder-morgan-pipeline
https://www.desmog.ca/2018/04/13/they-re-not-getting-how-constitution-works-why-trudeau-notley-can-t-steamroll-b-c-kinder-morgan-pipeline
i agree.
justin trudeau is teaching us a very valuable lesson about aristocracy. the tory media, ever a mouthpiece for inherited wealth, really isn't helping the situation by confusing people - perhaps including the prime minister - about the nature of a federal system.
i don't actually think that it makes sense for alberta to be in a confederation with ontario.
but, what trudeau is showing us is that he doesn't understand the law. and, why would he? what training does he have?
he's operating solely on the "whining rich kid" level. and, that's exactly what he's going to do in this meeting he's scheduled with horgan - he's going to cry and whine and stamp his feet and yell that he's not getting his own way.
because he always gets his own way - that's the nature of the kind of privilege he grew up in.
and why he was always a terrible choice for any sort of executive position.
https://www.nationalobserver.com/2018/04/14/news/quebec-warns-trudeau-about-kinder-morgan
justin trudeau is teaching us a very valuable lesson about aristocracy. the tory media, ever a mouthpiece for inherited wealth, really isn't helping the situation by confusing people - perhaps including the prime minister - about the nature of a federal system.
i don't actually think that it makes sense for alberta to be in a confederation with ontario.
but, what trudeau is showing us is that he doesn't understand the law. and, why would he? what training does he have?
he's operating solely on the "whining rich kid" level. and, that's exactly what he's going to do in this meeting he's scheduled with horgan - he's going to cry and whine and stamp his feet and yell that he's not getting his own way.
because he always gets his own way - that's the nature of the kind of privilege he grew up in.
and why he was always a terrible choice for any sort of executive position.
https://www.nationalobserver.com/2018/04/14/news/quebec-warns-trudeau-about-kinder-morgan
geez, guys, everybody knows it's never the cook.
it's always the butler.
c'mon. those are the really important sanctions.
https://www.thestar.com/news/analysis/2018/02/17/russian-indictments-appear-to-target-putins-cook.html
it's always the butler.
c'mon. those are the really important sanctions.
https://www.thestar.com/news/analysis/2018/02/17/russian-indictments-appear-to-target-putins-cook.html
i don't know if there were chemical weapons used in syria.
past attacks have been orchestrated by us-friendly rebels in order to instigate or justify american bombing runs.
it would not justify a unilateral airstrike, if there were. that should go through the united nations.
but, i don't believe a word that the united states says.
past attacks have been orchestrated by us-friendly rebels in order to instigate or justify american bombing runs.
it would not justify a unilateral airstrike, if there were. that should go through the united nations.
but, i don't believe a word that the united states says.
so, they bombed some empty factories.
now, trump can go on the talkshows and be the military guy for a few days. and the news can focus on something besides the scandals for a few days.
russia has to sound tough. but they shouldn't overreact. the key needs to be in using that deconfliction line to make sure the targets are understood beforehand.
and, hopefully the united states is not far from more responsible military oversight.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-attack-syria-1.4617438
now, trump can go on the talkshows and be the military guy for a few days. and the news can focus on something besides the scandals for a few days.
russia has to sound tough. but they shouldn't overreact. the key needs to be in using that deconfliction line to make sure the targets are understood beforehand.
and, hopefully the united states is not far from more responsible military oversight.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-attack-syria-1.4617438
Friday, April 13, 2018
it turns out that this woman is smoking drugs with her grandkids in the unit, which confirms she's in her 40s. i don't think she's much older than that.
it's just hard to believe that somebody that old hasn't grown out of this yet, or plays top 40 radio at full blast on her stereo. she acts like a teenager.
must have had the kid very young. my own grandmother became a grandmother in her late thirties.
anyways, i got the letter to the property manager, who tried to guilt trip me on it, but that's not happening.
i can't believe she's chain-smoking pot in front of her grandson.
well, believe it lady, 'cause that's what's happening.
this property manager is not going to be of any use to me; she's clearly on the pothead's side. we'll have to see if i can get a more rational/honest response from the owner or not.
it's just hard to believe that somebody that old hasn't grown out of this yet, or plays top 40 radio at full blast on her stereo. she acts like a teenager.
must have had the kid very young. my own grandmother became a grandmother in her late thirties.
anyways, i got the letter to the property manager, who tried to guilt trip me on it, but that's not happening.
i can't believe she's chain-smoking pot in front of her grandson.
well, believe it lady, 'cause that's what's happening.
this property manager is not going to be of any use to me; she's clearly on the pothead's side. we'll have to see if i can get a more rational/honest response from the owner or not.
but, i mean, really, here.
what is a better idea?
1) telling smokers to their face that they're disgusting and hoping it sinks in.
2) coddling them about being "bullied" and telling them they're not really disgusting, while secretly agreeing with the bully.
it's not bullying if it's true.
and, you know this is (almost certainly) somebody susceptible to peer pressure, because they're smoking in the first place.
if you follow this line of reasoning to it's end point, you're going to have to go back to the days where models and athletes advertised smoking on tv and in magazines (because that's realistic, right? which brand was most recommended by doctors...?), because you wouldn't want to offend children with all of those gory images of burnt out lungs and chemotherapy patients, right?
i'm not big on political correctness, anyways.
but, this is an issue where it's not just annoying - you are truly doing great harm to everybody by perpetuating the bullshit.
what is a better idea?
1) telling smokers to their face that they're disgusting and hoping it sinks in.
2) coddling them about being "bullied" and telling them they're not really disgusting, while secretly agreeing with the bully.
it's not bullying if it's true.
and, you know this is (almost certainly) somebody susceptible to peer pressure, because they're smoking in the first place.
if you follow this line of reasoning to it's end point, you're going to have to go back to the days where models and athletes advertised smoking on tv and in magazines (because that's realistic, right? which brand was most recommended by doctors...?), because you wouldn't want to offend children with all of those gory images of burnt out lungs and chemotherapy patients, right?
i'm not big on political correctness, anyways.
but, this is an issue where it's not just annoying - you are truly doing great harm to everybody by perpetuating the bullshit.
the question of whether smoking inside is disgusting or not - and thereby whether the person engaging in the behaviour is disgusting or not - is an empirical question to be determined objectively using science.
and, given that cigarette smoke (or marijuana smoke. whatever.) is the most dangerous substance known to humanity, in terms of toxicity level as a consequence of chronic exposure, it would follow with very little ambiguity that smoking cigarettes inside any dwelling is, in fact, completely disgusting - and that it would follow that anybody that engages in that behaviour is also completely disgusting.
if that hurts your feelings, you're just denying the facts, and i have no patience for you and no interest in discussing the issue with you further.
...because i am on the side of science, first and foremost.
which i've been quite clear about.
and, given that cigarette smoke (or marijuana smoke. whatever.) is the most dangerous substance known to humanity, in terms of toxicity level as a consequence of chronic exposure, it would follow with very little ambiguity that smoking cigarettes inside any dwelling is, in fact, completely disgusting - and that it would follow that anybody that engages in that behaviour is also completely disgusting.
if that hurts your feelings, you're just denying the facts, and i have no patience for you and no interest in discussing the issue with you further.
...because i am on the side of science, first and foremost.
which i've been quite clear about.
you know, in canada we have a lot of data, because the society is so multicultural.
and, the numbers are correct - black students underperform everybody else. they underperform white students, east asian students, south indian students, arab students, eastern european students - they are dead last across the board on every metric.
and, most of our black students are not the descendants of slaves, either. they're not disproportionately lower class. they don't come from ghettos. they really start off with the same opportunities as everybody else, here.
so, why do they perform so poorly?
it's not aptitude. we've ruled that out.
i think the black community needs to look at itself - at it's role models, at it's culture. it doesn't uphold academic achievement, does it? it doesn't prioritize it.
and, where does this culture come from? it comes imported from american media, with the intent on constructing a certain kind of person.
and, this is the reality: middle class canadian blacks - the children of doctors and professors - are being niggerized by american media.
so, how do we push back on this?
it's not by attacking a woman that means well and has made positive changes, that's for sure.
https://ipolitics.ca/2018/04/12/kathleen-wynne-takes-heat-at-black-community-leaders-debate/
and, the numbers are correct - black students underperform everybody else. they underperform white students, east asian students, south indian students, arab students, eastern european students - they are dead last across the board on every metric.
and, most of our black students are not the descendants of slaves, either. they're not disproportionately lower class. they don't come from ghettos. they really start off with the same opportunities as everybody else, here.
so, why do they perform so poorly?
it's not aptitude. we've ruled that out.
i think the black community needs to look at itself - at it's role models, at it's culture. it doesn't uphold academic achievement, does it? it doesn't prioritize it.
and, where does this culture come from? it comes imported from american media, with the intent on constructing a certain kind of person.
and, this is the reality: middle class canadian blacks - the children of doctors and professors - are being niggerized by american media.
so, how do we push back on this?
it's not by attacking a woman that means well and has made positive changes, that's for sure.
https://ipolitics.ca/2018/04/12/kathleen-wynne-takes-heat-at-black-community-leaders-debate/
nobody cares where the stores are.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/first-to-pot-shop-controversy-1.4617671
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/first-to-pot-shop-controversy-1.4617671
these groups just continually demonstrate that their opponents are absolutely correct to be apprehensive about their commitment to freedom of expression, which is not present in their native cultures.
it would be weird if they did embrace these ideas, given that they're so foreign to them. they don't exist in their religious traditions, and they don't exist in their political culture.
it's a serious problem. and it's not something we can stop at this point - we're going to have to brace ourselves for a conflict over it.
liberals cannot be taking the wrong side on this. and, there must be a struggle within the liberal party to ensure they aren't.
it would be weird if they did embrace these ideas, given that they're so foreign to them. they don't exist in their religious traditions, and they don't exist in their political culture.
it's a serious problem. and it's not something we can stop at this point - we're going to have to brace ourselves for a conflict over it.
liberals cannot be taking the wrong side on this. and, there must be a struggle within the liberal party to ensure they aren't.
you can't ban people from running because you don't like their views.
go back to iran.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/04/12/doug-ford-not-banning-tanya-granic-allen-because-he-owes-her-for-leadership-race-support-wynne-says.html
go back to iran.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/04/12/doug-ford-not-banning-tanya-granic-allen-because-he-owes-her-for-leadership-race-support-wynne-says.html
see, the complicated thing was this...
my mom got a certain amount of money from the state because she had kids. she didn't want to have kids, but she didn't want to give up the extra money (which she spent on drugs). so, she actually fought my dad for custody, and even received child support on top of it - and then took all that money and used it to fuel her drug habits.
the court should have given my dad custody and sent my mother to jail.
but, that was seen as "unnatural" at the time. children were seen as best left with their mothers, even if their mothers are negligent drug addicts. and, here i am, with chronic bronchitis, and uncountable other problems, thirty+ years later, as a result of it.
my mom got a certain amount of money from the state because she had kids. she didn't want to have kids, but she didn't want to give up the extra money (which she spent on drugs). so, she actually fought my dad for custody, and even received child support on top of it - and then took all that money and used it to fuel her drug habits.
the court should have given my dad custody and sent my mother to jail.
but, that was seen as "unnatural" at the time. children were seen as best left with their mothers, even if their mothers are negligent drug addicts. and, here i am, with chronic bronchitis, and uncountable other problems, thirty+ years later, as a result of it.
what eventually ended up happening was that my stepfather built me a bedroom in the basement, and the rule was that there was no smoking down there.
i would then pretend i was sleeping so i wouldn't have to sit through meals, and then come up when everybody was asleep to make myself something to eat. this was when i was like 9.
in hindsight, that may have saved my life.
i would then pretend i was sleeping so i wouldn't have to sit through meals, and then come up when everybody was asleep to make myself something to eat. this was when i was like 9.
in hindsight, that may have saved my life.
i've been feeling it come in for a few days.
but, as of apr 13, 2018, the second hand smoke in the unit has officially triggered my bronchitis. this is going to put me in a fit of extreme coughing for the next 4-12 weeks.
once it hits, there is no solution. removing myself from the source of the smoke does not help. there is no way out of this. i will cough and hack and wheeze for weeks, whether anybody likes it or not.
the reason is that my lungs are quite seriously damaged from my mother's heavy smoking habits. they gave me a puffer when i was about seven or so, because i was disrupting the class. i still have one, but it has really never been effective. my mom seemed to understand what she was doing, but really simply didn't care - and may have even taken some pleasure in causing harm.
if abortion was legal at the time, i wouldn't exist; that's the kind of thing you get from mothers that really don't want to raise kids, but are forced to by the government, against their will. when i coughed from the smoke, she'd just yell at me to shut up and light another one.
and, that's all i'm likely to get from these tenants, too.
i can't do anything about the situation besides cough it out and hope i get a reasonable response from management, soon.
but, as of apr 13, 2018, the second hand smoke in the unit has officially triggered my bronchitis. this is going to put me in a fit of extreme coughing for the next 4-12 weeks.
once it hits, there is no solution. removing myself from the source of the smoke does not help. there is no way out of this. i will cough and hack and wheeze for weeks, whether anybody likes it or not.
the reason is that my lungs are quite seriously damaged from my mother's heavy smoking habits. they gave me a puffer when i was about seven or so, because i was disrupting the class. i still have one, but it has really never been effective. my mom seemed to understand what she was doing, but really simply didn't care - and may have even taken some pleasure in causing harm.
if abortion was legal at the time, i wouldn't exist; that's the kind of thing you get from mothers that really don't want to raise kids, but are forced to by the government, against their will. when i coughed from the smoke, she'd just yell at me to shut up and light another one.
and, that's all i'm likely to get from these tenants, too.
i can't do anything about the situation besides cough it out and hope i get a reasonable response from management, soon.
Thursday, April 12, 2018
i think it's just too much calcium, actually - and i eat a lot of cheese and fortified soy milk as it is. i'd probably just be putting myself at risk for kidney stones, as i piss most of it out.
if i ever test deficient for calcium, i can try it, i guess.
for now, i'm thinking it'll likely end up in a park. just don't let your kids play in the dirt....
if i ever test deficient for calcium, i can try it, i guess.
for now, i'm thinking it'll likely end up in a park. just don't let your kids play in the dirt....
i decided against composting my eggshells at the community compost. i wasn't ever really sure those kids were doing it right...
should i just eat them?
i'm thinking i could microwave them to kill whatever's left (they've been left frozen.) and then mash them up and add them to my smoothies.
i need to do more research than this...
the other option, i'm thinking, is to leave them outside in a park. that might sound gross at first. but, the calcium takes a long time to breakdown, which is the reason it's maybe not the best thing for actual compost. so, you want to put them in places where the soil is more continually utilized, so they can replenish the soil as the calcium comes out.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/01/science/eating-the-shell-along-with-the-egg.html
should i just eat them?
i'm thinking i could microwave them to kill whatever's left (they've been left frozen.) and then mash them up and add them to my smoothies.
i need to do more research than this...
the other option, i'm thinking, is to leave them outside in a park. that might sound gross at first. but, the calcium takes a long time to breakdown, which is the reason it's maybe not the best thing for actual compost. so, you want to put them in places where the soil is more continually utilized, so they can replenish the soil as the calcium comes out.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/01/science/eating-the-shell-along-with-the-egg.html
they could always try and evict me, but it would be faster and cheaper to pay me out, considering i actually want to leave, so i'm not sure why they'd make a bad choice like that.
and, i think i was clear enough about that in my letter.
at the least, if he gets proper legal advice, it should get me a clear answer on an eviction attempt downstairs, which is not likely to be successful - which i pointed out clearly in the letter.
and, i think i was clear enough about that in my letter.
at the least, if he gets proper legal advice, it should get me a clear answer on an eviction attempt downstairs, which is not likely to be successful - which i pointed out clearly in the letter.
well, the property manager claims that the building owner is in the process of contacting his lawyer.
i don't know if that means that he's planning on carrying through with an eviction or planning on buying me out. but, that was pretty much the only answer i could accept without moving to the next step.
and, i guess they'll have until monday to get me a response.
the cheapest and easiest thing to do is to buy me out, and i'll happily take the offer.
i don't know if that means that he's planning on carrying through with an eviction or planning on buying me out. but, that was pretty much the only answer i could accept without moving to the next step.
and, i guess they'll have until monday to get me a response.
the cheapest and easiest thing to do is to buy me out, and i'll happily take the offer.
how much do you figure a free elizabeth shirt is going to cost?
this might even bring back pemberton.
judges aren't usually this daft. must be a harper appointee. but, i'll take the free martyr.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/elizabeth-may-kennedy-stewart-kinder-morgan-arrest-court-appearance-1.4611437
this might even bring back pemberton.
judges aren't usually this daft. must be a harper appointee. but, i'll take the free martyr.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/elizabeth-may-kennedy-stewart-kinder-morgan-arrest-court-appearance-1.4611437
i'm home.
compost run done; freezer clear. it actually feels good, for some reason.
and my grandmother called when i was out.
she does indeed sound pretty rough, which i'm noticing for the first time.
i've never meant to ignore her, i just live in my own head. so, i need to call nana first, and then the property manager second.
compost run done; freezer clear. it actually feels good, for some reason.
and my grandmother called when i was out.
she does indeed sound pretty rough, which i'm noticing for the first time.
i've never meant to ignore her, i just live in my own head. so, i need to call nana first, and then the property manager second.
i had to pick between the university and the community centre, and i went with the community centre. it's where the community garden ought to be.
they do the free food thing. i like that...
if you have one of these things around, and you probably do, give them your food scraps.
it's really the least you can do. literally.
https://www.facebook.com/FordCityCommunityGarden/
they do the free food thing. i like that...
if you have one of these things around, and you probably do, give them your food scraps.
it's really the least you can do. literally.
https://www.facebook.com/FordCityCommunityGarden/
you know, being able to bicycle to the tunnel kind of opens the city up, if i have to move.
it opens up a larger area to exist within...
i'm going to give the property manager to the end of the day before i call her, just to make sure she's received proper instructions - and because i'm curious about whether the banging i heard around 22:00 was my door or not (i was asleep, and not sure where it was coming from...nobody was there when i got up...but it was a while later...i sleep through anything and often literally can't get up when awoken, if not expecting it...).
it opens up a larger area to exist within...
i'm going to give the property manager to the end of the day before i call her, just to make sure she's received proper instructions - and because i'm curious about whether the banging i heard around 22:00 was my door or not (i was asleep, and not sure where it was coming from...nobody was there when i got up...but it was a while later...i sleep through anything and often literally can't get up when awoken, if not expecting it...).
yeah, well, they'd better have a nice tidy list in place by the next election.
https://www.nationalobserver.com/2018/04/11/news/trudeau-government-puts-massive-investments-get-public-transit-track
https://www.nationalobserver.com/2018/04/11/news/trudeau-government-puts-massive-investments-get-public-transit-track
"why don't you just get stoned and create?"
because you can't create anything when you're stoned - it is a condition that is antithetical to creative expression.
creativity requires clear thinking through the proper observation of sobriety.
what inebriation is good for is numbing the pain of repetitive tasks. it is good for low wage workers that just need something to help them through the day, or people that can't find a purpose in a system that is designed to make it impossible to find one.
but, nobody uses drugs to make music - or at least not to make music worth listening to.
and, perhaps you might want to actually listen to the music i create to hear how distant it is from marijuana culture. it's basically classical music.
because you can't create anything when you're stoned - it is a condition that is antithetical to creative expression.
creativity requires clear thinking through the proper observation of sobriety.
what inebriation is good for is numbing the pain of repetitive tasks. it is good for low wage workers that just need something to help them through the day, or people that can't find a purpose in a system that is designed to make it impossible to find one.
but, nobody uses drugs to make music - or at least not to make music worth listening to.
and, perhaps you might want to actually listen to the music i create to hear how distant it is from marijuana culture. it's basically classical music.
there was a period, from 2011-2013, where i didn't have access to my gear, and i really did just get drunk and stoned all of the time. i spent this period living with my grandmother and hanging out with occupy protestors.
when you take away my ability to create, i lose focus. and it follows that if you insist that i get fucked up all of the time then the way to do that is to separate me from a purpose.
but, that changed over five years ago.
when i first moved to windsor, i stopped drinking & smoking almost altogether; although it took a few years to get a handle on the cigarettes, i really did quit smoking in the winter of 2015/2016. i have relapsed for a few weeks at a time since, but i have not and will not go back to this.
i have also since spent some extended periods partying on weekends, but this is actually mostly an act of depression. i would rather be sitting in my room by myself recording, but i haven't been able to do this, so i've gone out and gotten drunk instead.
i have never habitually smoked marijuana, nor have i ever wanted to do so. given that i have smoked it sporadically and recreationally for over 20 years without having developed any desire to convert it into a habit, i'm just about the lowest probability target you could imagine in terms of becoming a regular, daily-smoking marijuana addict. that is not going to happen.
however, the more separated i become from my art due to constant distraction and inability to create, the more likely i am to sink into daily alcohol use, as i become more and more depressed and more and more distraught. while marijuana may end up as a complement to this alcohol use, it is not going to reverse that depression. nor do i want to become a daily marijuana user, have i ever seen myself as a daily marijuana user or will i ever conceptualize myself in these terms.
this is simply not who i am.
i was in bed around 19:00 last night, but the smoke was so horrible that it woke me up around 22:00. i spent some time cleaning and slept all morning. so, i am going to follow through with the process within a few hours, and seek clarity on the building's approach: will they seek eviction or not?
any other answer besides "yes, we are seeking eviction" will leave me no choice but to assume they are not doing so, and to formally request repairs to the unit below me.
and, if they acknowledge they are seeking eviction, at whatever difficulty, i'll have to sit tight and wait it out.
when you take away my ability to create, i lose focus. and it follows that if you insist that i get fucked up all of the time then the way to do that is to separate me from a purpose.
but, that changed over five years ago.
when i first moved to windsor, i stopped drinking & smoking almost altogether; although it took a few years to get a handle on the cigarettes, i really did quit smoking in the winter of 2015/2016. i have relapsed for a few weeks at a time since, but i have not and will not go back to this.
i have also since spent some extended periods partying on weekends, but this is actually mostly an act of depression. i would rather be sitting in my room by myself recording, but i haven't been able to do this, so i've gone out and gotten drunk instead.
i have never habitually smoked marijuana, nor have i ever wanted to do so. given that i have smoked it sporadically and recreationally for over 20 years without having developed any desire to convert it into a habit, i'm just about the lowest probability target you could imagine in terms of becoming a regular, daily-smoking marijuana addict. that is not going to happen.
however, the more separated i become from my art due to constant distraction and inability to create, the more likely i am to sink into daily alcohol use, as i become more and more depressed and more and more distraught. while marijuana may end up as a complement to this alcohol use, it is not going to reverse that depression. nor do i want to become a daily marijuana user, have i ever seen myself as a daily marijuana user or will i ever conceptualize myself in these terms.
this is simply not who i am.
i was in bed around 19:00 last night, but the smoke was so horrible that it woke me up around 22:00. i spent some time cleaning and slept all morning. so, i am going to follow through with the process within a few hours, and seek clarity on the building's approach: will they seek eviction or not?
any other answer besides "yes, we are seeking eviction" will leave me no choice but to assume they are not doing so, and to formally request repairs to the unit below me.
and, if they acknowledge they are seeking eviction, at whatever difficulty, i'll have to sit tight and wait it out.
Wednesday, April 11, 2018
i found some compost drop-offs for tomorrow...
but, i'm still convinced that this woman is smoking meth.
when i moved in, i noticed some difficult-to-get-off orange stains over the stove. i thought it was just a sloppy cook; it could have been ancient grease stains. but, i cleaned most of it.
these stains have reappeared today at the end point of the tarp over the kitchen, in the same place i was sitting when i got loopy on the stimulants.
that hasn't happened since; the contact high i got at the end of april was exactly that, and i recognized it for what it was. but, these orang stains are associated with meth use...
there's also the issue of the inch worth of stains i pulled out of the bathroom floor. i thought it was some kind of urine, maybe from a cat. but, this is also a potential build-up from a meth user.
hey, if i can use it to get the tenant out, i'll do it.
but, i'm still convinced that this woman is smoking meth.
when i moved in, i noticed some difficult-to-get-off orange stains over the stove. i thought it was just a sloppy cook; it could have been ancient grease stains. but, i cleaned most of it.
these stains have reappeared today at the end point of the tarp over the kitchen, in the same place i was sitting when i got loopy on the stimulants.
that hasn't happened since; the contact high i got at the end of april was exactly that, and i recognized it for what it was. but, these orang stains are associated with meth use...
there's also the issue of the inch worth of stains i pulled out of the bathroom floor. i thought it was some kind of urine, maybe from a cat. but, this is also a potential build-up from a meth user.
hey, if i can use it to get the tenant out, i'll do it.
trump's projected bombing in syria is a political stunt.
the russians would be wise to get out of the way, as he'll lose interest in a few days.
but, they know that, and are no doubt just gritting their teeth for their own cameras.
don't get me wrong: syria is a dangerous situation. but, the russians need to be smart enough to know that trump is just wagging the dog, here, and react accordingly.
there's of course caveats.
but, he'll probably bomb an empty field, anyways.
the russians would be wise to get out of the way, as he'll lose interest in a few days.
but, they know that, and are no doubt just gritting their teeth for their own cameras.
don't get me wrong: syria is a dangerous situation. but, the russians need to be smart enough to know that trump is just wagging the dog, here, and react accordingly.
there's of course caveats.
but, he'll probably bomb an empty field, anyways.
dear tory media,
i know that you're convinced that the rule of law refers to the idea that the state is able to ensure it does what it wants by force.
but, as usual, you've got this backwards; the rule of law refers to the idea that the government is itself not above the law.
and, these absurd op-eds take on a more ominous tone when you understand this.
the elder trudeau once found himself in a situation where he felt he had to send the army in to arrest protestors without charge, a decision that is still attacked today as an egregious abuse of power - that is, a lapse in the rule of law - and that he came to realize was a terrible mistake. in response to his own mistake, he wrote a constitution for the country, so future leaders would not repeat that mistake, for whatever reason - influence from foreign powers, financial corruption or just plain stubborn arrogance and foolish pride.
the younger trudeau will need to follow these rules that were put in place by his father.
for, that is the rule of law, in this country.
as always,
deathtokoalas
i know that you're convinced that the rule of law refers to the idea that the state is able to ensure it does what it wants by force.
but, as usual, you've got this backwards; the rule of law refers to the idea that the government is itself not above the law.
and, these absurd op-eds take on a more ominous tone when you understand this.
the elder trudeau once found himself in a situation where he felt he had to send the army in to arrest protestors without charge, a decision that is still attacked today as an egregious abuse of power - that is, a lapse in the rule of law - and that he came to realize was a terrible mistake. in response to his own mistake, he wrote a constitution for the country, so future leaders would not repeat that mistake, for whatever reason - influence from foreign powers, financial corruption or just plain stubborn arrogance and foolish pride.
the younger trudeau will need to follow these rules that were put in place by his father.
for, that is the rule of law, in this country.
as always,
deathtokoalas
i haven't really been in this room this morning, and it still has a herby smell that i can't fully finger the source of, although it appears to be coming from directly under my bed, but the rest of the apartment seems to be ok.
i've decided to wait for the next episode to call. i expect that to be in a few days.
this morning was spent cleaning and rearranging, and i don't even know why - wishful thinking, i guess.
for this morning, i need to find a way to get the compost out of my freezer. it's just time to get it out...i'm running out of space...
i've decided to wait for the next episode to call. i expect that to be in a few days.
this morning was spent cleaning and rearranging, and i don't even know why - wishful thinking, i guess.
for this morning, i need to find a way to get the compost out of my freezer. it's just time to get it out...i'm running out of space...
so, how did we end up with this joke of an idea - this "medicinal marijuana" crock of shit?
it's a legal loophole. it's not science; there's no science upholding this, and plenty debunking it.
the reality is that it's hard to legalize pot, because of the international drug laws around it. that's ultimately the reason i don't expect it to happen here at all. so, you get around that by calling it a medicine and letting a doctor prescribe it.
but, smart people can see through this, and can see that the whole charade has done more to damage the medical profession than it has to legitimize the marijuana industry.
the right answer is to deregulate it like alcohol (it's harmless, in moderation.), to treat potheads like alcoholics (they need help.) and to stop selling it like snake oil.
and, for fuck's sake, don't smoke in the goddamned house.
it's a legal loophole. it's not science; there's no science upholding this, and plenty debunking it.
the reality is that it's hard to legalize pot, because of the international drug laws around it. that's ultimately the reason i don't expect it to happen here at all. so, you get around that by calling it a medicine and letting a doctor prescribe it.
but, smart people can see through this, and can see that the whole charade has done more to damage the medical profession than it has to legitimize the marijuana industry.
the right answer is to deregulate it like alcohol (it's harmless, in moderation.), to treat potheads like alcoholics (they need help.) and to stop selling it like snake oil.
and, for fuck's sake, don't smoke in the goddamned house.
listen.
i've smoked a lot of pot.
and, the idea that it would treat depression is retarded.
if there's any benefit of drug use on depression, it would be due to the fact that drug use is often social. so, you get the benefits of social interaction caught up in taking the drug. and, that's what these people need - friends, not drugs.
smoking mad amounts of pot by yourself is going to end with you crying in the corner while you're trying to masturbate. it's not just wrong; it's flatly moronic.
likewise, longterm chronic marijuana use - of the type associated with "medical" users - is thought to cause psychosis, not treat it.
there's no scientific excuse for this. and, if your doctor gave you marijuana, he belongs in jail - he's not a doctor, he's a drug dealer.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/medical-cannabis-guidelines-alberta-1.4537039
i've smoked a lot of pot.
and, the idea that it would treat depression is retarded.
if there's any benefit of drug use on depression, it would be due to the fact that drug use is often social. so, you get the benefits of social interaction caught up in taking the drug. and, that's what these people need - friends, not drugs.
smoking mad amounts of pot by yourself is going to end with you crying in the corner while you're trying to masturbate. it's not just wrong; it's flatly moronic.
likewise, longterm chronic marijuana use - of the type associated with "medical" users - is thought to cause psychosis, not treat it.
there's no scientific excuse for this. and, if your doctor gave you marijuana, he belongs in jail - he's not a doctor, he's a drug dealer.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/medical-cannabis-guidelines-alberta-1.4537039
Tuesday, April 10, 2018
what i'm learning from this is that the idea of "medical marijuana" should really be abolished.
it should be regulated like alcohol, and treated as a recreational drug that is mostly harmless in small dosages but potentially fatally toxic in large doses. daily smokers are drug addicts that need treatment, not patients that need access. doctors should not be prescribing this, and should not be normalizing it - and should be liable for negligence charges if they are. and, nobody should be getting subsidies for it.
the only exception i'm willing to allow for is people diagnosed with a terminal illness. in that case, nothing else really matters anymore.
but, the "doctors" that are prescribing this to healthy people and telling them it's ok to smoke all they want should be rounded up and shot. what a waste.
it should be regulated like alcohol, and treated as a recreational drug that is mostly harmless in small dosages but potentially fatally toxic in large doses. daily smokers are drug addicts that need treatment, not patients that need access. doctors should not be prescribing this, and should not be normalizing it - and should be liable for negligence charges if they are. and, nobody should be getting subsidies for it.
the only exception i'm willing to allow for is people diagnosed with a terminal illness. in that case, nothing else really matters anymore.
but, the "doctors" that are prescribing this to healthy people and telling them it's ok to smoke all they want should be rounded up and shot. what a waste.
the pothead appears to be basically retarded. i don't know what she
was like before they prescribed this to her, but she doesn't appear to
be mentally capable of comprehending the situation, as it is. she's
forty-something years old, but she's mentally comparable to a fourteen
year old child.
the only response anybody is going to get out of her is going to be something like "so what if i smoke", "it's ok if i smoke", "i have a card", "i'm allowed to smoke", etc.
the only thing she's going to understand is her own behaviour. she's going to be convinced everybody is judging her, that the issue at hand is the morality of her own behaviour, etc.
she's never going to understand the premise of her behaviour affecting others. this is just too abstract, too complicated.
so, it's maybe unfair of me to call her selfish; she's not capable of understanding this, no doubt as a consequence of the drug use.
if they could detox her and send her to rehab, she might get better after a few weeks and be able to get her head around it. right now? this is pointless. it's just beyond her mental capabilities.
the only response anybody is going to get out of her is going to be something like "so what if i smoke", "it's ok if i smoke", "i have a card", "i'm allowed to smoke", etc.
the only thing she's going to understand is her own behaviour. she's going to be convinced everybody is judging her, that the issue at hand is the morality of her own behaviour, etc.
she's never going to understand the premise of her behaviour affecting others. this is just too abstract, too complicated.
so, it's maybe unfair of me to call her selfish; she's not capable of understanding this, no doubt as a consequence of the drug use.
if they could detox her and send her to rehab, she might get better after a few weeks and be able to get her head around it. right now? this is pointless. it's just beyond her mental capabilities.
i can't get a clear answer from the property manager, so i've asked her to call her boss.
i suspect the truth may be something along the lines of the property owner wanting to kick the smokers out, and the property manager being on the side of the smokers. so, she's trying to stand in between and being obstructionist on purpose.
i mean, if i'm to take her at face value, she doesn't seem to understand her own job. and i don't think that's true; i think she's just playing stupid.
so, the manager is not a willing participant, here, and i may find myself with somewhat of a pyrrhic victory, as a result. but, it's not clear to me yet if they're going to follow through...
the owner may jump at it, while the manager drags her feet.
but, i need to be clear: i can't tolerate this situation. and, if i don't get a prompt response, i'm moving to the next step.
i suspect the truth may be something along the lines of the property owner wanting to kick the smokers out, and the property manager being on the side of the smokers. so, she's trying to stand in between and being obstructionist on purpose.
i mean, if i'm to take her at face value, she doesn't seem to understand her own job. and i don't think that's true; i think she's just playing stupid.
so, the manager is not a willing participant, here, and i may find myself with somewhat of a pyrrhic victory, as a result. but, it's not clear to me yet if they're going to follow through...
the owner may jump at it, while the manager drags her feet.
but, i need to be clear: i can't tolerate this situation. and, if i don't get a prompt response, i'm moving to the next step.
Request for Renovations in The Unit Below Me
this is a backup letter. she hasn't ruled out eviction, yet. i don't expect her to follow through, though....
===
In my previous letter, I identified four approaches to addressing the problem of continual plumes of second-hand marijuana smoke coming from the unit below me, which is making me sick/inebriated and rendering the unit uninhabitable.
I need to reiterate that this tenant chain smokes marijuana for hours at a time. She must smoke upwards of 30 thick joints a day. This is not casual or occasional use, but sustained drug addiction on a level that I can barely comprehend. I can’t imagine what kind of negligent doctor would prescribe this; it seems cartoonish, truly. I’m repeatedly getting really, really high on nights that I want to be completely sober; trying to read when you’re baked is extremely unpleasant. It’s hard to focus; it’s hard to stay awake. I’m also finding myself with a smoker’s cough. I can only imagine her own cognitive state, or lack thereof. So, my claim that the unit is uninhabitable is in no way an exaggeration, unless, perhaps, you’re a Rastafarian. No sane person would merely accept this.
I also now suspect that she may smoke cigarettes, after all. It’s just hard to tell because she smokes so many drugs...
It is obvious that the first approach - a simple request to smoke elsewhere - is not viable, and will not be mentioned further. This tenant does not appear to understand the health hazards of second-hand marijuana smoke, and/or does not appear to be even remotely concerned about the well-being of the people around her. She simply doesn’t care if her habits are making the other tenants sick and/or inebriated when they don’t want to be. Sadly, she may even think that the smoke is healthy.
You initially decided upon the path of removing this tenant below me, but have since decided against that option. I frankly did not expect you to pursue this option in the first place and am not surprised that you’re not following through with it.
That leaves us with two further paths to attempt: we could try and renovate the unit, or you could agree to release me from the lease (with compensation). This letter outlines my perceptions around renovating the unit, in a last attempt to maintain my tenancy in this building. I have decided that I will not sue to force these renovations, that I would rather sue to end the tenancy, so this is up to your discretion to pursue in order to maintain the tenancy; if these renovations end before they are successful, i will move directly to the next option of asking the board to end the tenancy in a reasonable time frame, and with compensation.
My sole concern is my health. This is the most important thing in life - maintaining one’s health. And, I frankly don’t expect the renovations to be successful.
To begin with, I should point out that i have already gone to great lengths to try and keep the smoke out of this space, and that it has ultimately not been successful. It took me some time to understand what was happening, but I believe the situation is as follows: whenever I block an area, it merely moves the smoke to another one. So, I do believe that I was initially successful in blocking the smoke from entering my bedroom, but this ultimately just pushed it into the hallway. When I tried to stop the smoke from entering the hallway, i merely pushed it back into the bedroom. Now, the seal I created in the bedroom is broken, and the smoke is coming in both spaces, once again. I think you might want to imagine this like a balloon filling up from two separate directions, and then popping on both sides - leaving me no better off than when i started.
So, it seems to be the case that once the smoke has entered the subfloor, it has nowhere to go except out; any serious attempts to block the many holes in my space will merely create more holes, as the smoke forces itself out elsewhere. Caulking this unit could actually damage the flooring further, as the substantive amount of smoke being produced merely finds other ways to escape the subfloor, by enlarging existing holes or creating new ones. So, in order to prevent the smoke from entering this unit, it will need to be kept out of the subfloor altogether. Any renovations must consequently be done in the smokers’ unit, rather than in mine.
If we are to embark upon this process, I would expect a continuing conversation, as it will take several attempts to resolve the problem. I’m not going to be able to give you an easy request - this is going to go on for a long time. I cannot concern myself with how this might affect the other tenant, as that basic concept of respect is not being and will not be reciprocated. But, to begin with, we can look at the following actions:
1) caulking holes in the unit downstairs - especially in the bathroom, bedroom, kitchen, closets and shelving units.
2) the shelving units in the downstairs unit may need to be rebuilt altogether, as this is one of the worst sources
3) the ceilings below me badly need to be sealed.
4) i suspect that the water closet downstairs is a major source of smoke entering the subflooring, as it is then coming in through the bathroom fixtures. this will need to be sealed. note that caulking the bathroom in my unit will just force the smoke into my bedroom, and that fixing my own water closet will just push it back into the bathroom.
5) the tenant appears to enjoy “hotboxing” the closet, which is sending smoke into both my living room and my kitchen. her closet will likely need to be rebuilt.
more generally, i suspect that there is substantial smoke damage in the downstairs unit and that the only serious solution is going to be in fixing that, where it is found. all that caulking up here will do is push the problem around under the floor. and, i suppose that you’ll have to talk to the tenant about those costs, as they are ultimately of her creation - this problem is ultimately rooted in the damage she’s already done to her own unit.
i need to reiterate that i will not sue to force renovations, because i’ve come to realize that the damage to the subfloors is too great, from however many years of smoking however many different things. i will work with management to resolve the issue for as long as they would like to try to resolve it, but my next step will be to ask the board to let me out of the lease. reasonable compensation will be enough to cover the costs i’ve put into smoke-proofing the unit and the expenses required to allow me to move somewhere else.
===
In my previous letter, I identified four approaches to addressing the problem of continual plumes of second-hand marijuana smoke coming from the unit below me, which is making me sick/inebriated and rendering the unit uninhabitable.
I need to reiterate that this tenant chain smokes marijuana for hours at a time. She must smoke upwards of 30 thick joints a day. This is not casual or occasional use, but sustained drug addiction on a level that I can barely comprehend. I can’t imagine what kind of negligent doctor would prescribe this; it seems cartoonish, truly. I’m repeatedly getting really, really high on nights that I want to be completely sober; trying to read when you’re baked is extremely unpleasant. It’s hard to focus; it’s hard to stay awake. I’m also finding myself with a smoker’s cough. I can only imagine her own cognitive state, or lack thereof. So, my claim that the unit is uninhabitable is in no way an exaggeration, unless, perhaps, you’re a Rastafarian. No sane person would merely accept this.
I also now suspect that she may smoke cigarettes, after all. It’s just hard to tell because she smokes so many drugs...
It is obvious that the first approach - a simple request to smoke elsewhere - is not viable, and will not be mentioned further. This tenant does not appear to understand the health hazards of second-hand marijuana smoke, and/or does not appear to be even remotely concerned about the well-being of the people around her. She simply doesn’t care if her habits are making the other tenants sick and/or inebriated when they don’t want to be. Sadly, she may even think that the smoke is healthy.
You initially decided upon the path of removing this tenant below me, but have since decided against that option. I frankly did not expect you to pursue this option in the first place and am not surprised that you’re not following through with it.
That leaves us with two further paths to attempt: we could try and renovate the unit, or you could agree to release me from the lease (with compensation). This letter outlines my perceptions around renovating the unit, in a last attempt to maintain my tenancy in this building. I have decided that I will not sue to force these renovations, that I would rather sue to end the tenancy, so this is up to your discretion to pursue in order to maintain the tenancy; if these renovations end before they are successful, i will move directly to the next option of asking the board to end the tenancy in a reasonable time frame, and with compensation.
My sole concern is my health. This is the most important thing in life - maintaining one’s health. And, I frankly don’t expect the renovations to be successful.
To begin with, I should point out that i have already gone to great lengths to try and keep the smoke out of this space, and that it has ultimately not been successful. It took me some time to understand what was happening, but I believe the situation is as follows: whenever I block an area, it merely moves the smoke to another one. So, I do believe that I was initially successful in blocking the smoke from entering my bedroom, but this ultimately just pushed it into the hallway. When I tried to stop the smoke from entering the hallway, i merely pushed it back into the bedroom. Now, the seal I created in the bedroom is broken, and the smoke is coming in both spaces, once again. I think you might want to imagine this like a balloon filling up from two separate directions, and then popping on both sides - leaving me no better off than when i started.
So, it seems to be the case that once the smoke has entered the subfloor, it has nowhere to go except out; any serious attempts to block the many holes in my space will merely create more holes, as the smoke forces itself out elsewhere. Caulking this unit could actually damage the flooring further, as the substantive amount of smoke being produced merely finds other ways to escape the subfloor, by enlarging existing holes or creating new ones. So, in order to prevent the smoke from entering this unit, it will need to be kept out of the subfloor altogether. Any renovations must consequently be done in the smokers’ unit, rather than in mine.
If we are to embark upon this process, I would expect a continuing conversation, as it will take several attempts to resolve the problem. I’m not going to be able to give you an easy request - this is going to go on for a long time. I cannot concern myself with how this might affect the other tenant, as that basic concept of respect is not being and will not be reciprocated. But, to begin with, we can look at the following actions:
1) caulking holes in the unit downstairs - especially in the bathroom, bedroom, kitchen, closets and shelving units.
2) the shelving units in the downstairs unit may need to be rebuilt altogether, as this is one of the worst sources
3) the ceilings below me badly need to be sealed.
4) i suspect that the water closet downstairs is a major source of smoke entering the subflooring, as it is then coming in through the bathroom fixtures. this will need to be sealed. note that caulking the bathroom in my unit will just force the smoke into my bedroom, and that fixing my own water closet will just push it back into the bathroom.
5) the tenant appears to enjoy “hotboxing” the closet, which is sending smoke into both my living room and my kitchen. her closet will likely need to be rebuilt.
more generally, i suspect that there is substantial smoke damage in the downstairs unit and that the only serious solution is going to be in fixing that, where it is found. all that caulking up here will do is push the problem around under the floor. and, i suppose that you’ll have to talk to the tenant about those costs, as they are ultimately of her creation - this problem is ultimately rooted in the damage she’s already done to her own unit.
i need to reiterate that i will not sue to force renovations, because i’ve come to realize that the damage to the subfloors is too great, from however many years of smoking however many different things. i will work with management to resolve the issue for as long as they would like to try to resolve it, but my next step will be to ask the board to let me out of the lease. reasonable compensation will be enough to cover the costs i’ve put into smoke-proofing the unit and the expenses required to allow me to move somewhere else.
so, you shouldn't be surprised to learn that the high-speed rail plan in ontario isn't what the tory media is presenting it as.
unfortunately, it isn't really what i want it to be, either.
i look at the expanding toronto megacity, which is expanding quickly to it's west, and the most immediately pressing issue to me is in trying to figure out how we get all these cars off the road. downtown toronto has a large, successful & rather popular electric transit system (that doug ford seems to not like so much...). how do we expand that system to the rest of the mega-city?
& that's really the crux of the reality, here - that london is being absorbed into a suburb of toronto, and that the city needs expanded inter-city transit options.
what i'd like to see is consequently a kind of expansion of the subway system, with the purposes of easing congestion - and reducing emissions. a high speed rail system could in theory do that, by convincing people to take the train to work instead of driving.
and, i'm all in favour of that.
but, it seems a little pricey, for that end, and that seems to be the problem that these systems are facing, elsewhere: it just costs too much.
i'd be willing to see the province subsidize that. but, it seems to be pitching it as an economic driver instead of as a climate change plan, and the whole thing is consequently existing in this imaginary narrative - it's being pitched as something it won't be, and then deconstructed on terms it shouldn't be aspiring towards.
another aspect that is being overlooked is that, if the train is successful, it could conceivably help lower electricity costs. remember: electricity prices are high because the transition to electric vehicles never happened. at this point, it may be easier to get people to take the electric train than it is to get them to buy an electric car, but the effect should be more or less the same, if we can shift generation away from freeways and into windfarms.
we're currently just wasting all this generation, and then paying for it through higher rates. but, you won't see this discussion in the tory media, either - nor will you see it from the government, which doesn't want to talk about it.
so, i do support the rail line expansion - but i support it on climate grounds, not economic ones. and, i'd even like to see the province subsidize it to get it going, and ultimately treat it less like an exclusive cab system for the wealthy and more like an expansion of the subway system.
unfortunately, it isn't really what i want it to be, either.
i look at the expanding toronto megacity, which is expanding quickly to it's west, and the most immediately pressing issue to me is in trying to figure out how we get all these cars off the road. downtown toronto has a large, successful & rather popular electric transit system (that doug ford seems to not like so much...). how do we expand that system to the rest of the mega-city?
& that's really the crux of the reality, here - that london is being absorbed into a suburb of toronto, and that the city needs expanded inter-city transit options.
what i'd like to see is consequently a kind of expansion of the subway system, with the purposes of easing congestion - and reducing emissions. a high speed rail system could in theory do that, by convincing people to take the train to work instead of driving.
and, i'm all in favour of that.
but, it seems a little pricey, for that end, and that seems to be the problem that these systems are facing, elsewhere: it just costs too much.
i'd be willing to see the province subsidize that. but, it seems to be pitching it as an economic driver instead of as a climate change plan, and the whole thing is consequently existing in this imaginary narrative - it's being pitched as something it won't be, and then deconstructed on terms it shouldn't be aspiring towards.
another aspect that is being overlooked is that, if the train is successful, it could conceivably help lower electricity costs. remember: electricity prices are high because the transition to electric vehicles never happened. at this point, it may be easier to get people to take the electric train than it is to get them to buy an electric car, but the effect should be more or less the same, if we can shift generation away from freeways and into windfarms.
we're currently just wasting all this generation, and then paying for it through higher rates. but, you won't see this discussion in the tory media, either - nor will you see it from the government, which doesn't want to talk about it.
so, i do support the rail line expansion - but i support it on climate grounds, not economic ones. and, i'd even like to see the province subsidize it to get it going, and ultimately treat it less like an exclusive cab system for the wealthy and more like an expansion of the subway system.
Monday, April 9, 2018
that money would be better spent on economic diversification.
the idea that it is in the national interest relies on the idea that we need a secondary oil market to lessen dependence on american oil purchases. but, this logic only holds in the context of the country existing as a petrostate, which is itself not in the national interest.
what is in the national interest, first and foremost, is to lessen our fiscal dependency on oil exports.
i think the courts need to remind trudeau that he has a set of rules, called a constitution, that he has to follow.
...and that the government is following a wrongheaded set of priorities that is outside of it's mandate, will harm itself electorally and will leave the country worse off, over all.
i expected him to support these pipelines, don't get me wrong; they all supported all the pipelines. but, he has apparently forgotten that he campaigned heavily on transition - and that this is where the country's focus and resources should be focused, first and foremost.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2018/04/09/trans-mountain-pipeline-extension-will-be-built-trudeau-vows.html
the idea that it is in the national interest relies on the idea that we need a secondary oil market to lessen dependence on american oil purchases. but, this logic only holds in the context of the country existing as a petrostate, which is itself not in the national interest.
what is in the national interest, first and foremost, is to lessen our fiscal dependency on oil exports.
i think the courts need to remind trudeau that he has a set of rules, called a constitution, that he has to follow.
...and that the government is following a wrongheaded set of priorities that is outside of it's mandate, will harm itself electorally and will leave the country worse off, over all.
i expected him to support these pipelines, don't get me wrong; they all supported all the pipelines. but, he has apparently forgotten that he campaigned heavily on transition - and that this is where the country's focus and resources should be focused, first and foremost.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2018/04/09/trans-mountain-pipeline-extension-will-be-built-trudeau-vows.html
when she's not coughing and hacking and heaving, she's crying or
cursing - but she sounds drunk more often than stoned, so who even knows
what she's on. if it's medical, it's not helping with any symptoms,
that's for sure - not with anything physical and not with anything
emotional. and she has that patty/selma croak in her voice that makes
her sound like she's on the brink of shooting up a playschool.
this is a scary person, through and through.
this is a scary person, through and through.
i'm actually hoping that they don't follow through with the secondary complaint, so i can just go ahead and apply to get out of the lease.
i just want to get out of this place, asap.
this woman appears to smoke upwards of a half ounce of pot a day.
i'm continually astounded by this.
it's like something out of a cartoon.
but there's no end to it. there's no reprieve. it's just constant.
and, it's terrible for my skin :(.
i just want to get out of this place, asap.
this woman appears to smoke upwards of a half ounce of pot a day.
i'm continually astounded by this.
it's like something out of a cartoon.
but there's no end to it. there's no reprieve. it's just constant.
and, it's terrible for my skin :(.
i mean, i keep pointing out that i'm going to have the same problems in the next place: that there isn't a solution to this.
but, i'm living on top of what is probably the most disgusting person in town.
she's chain smoking marijuana, for hours. she's bringing people in to smoke with her. there might not be a perfect answer, but the status quo is almost the worst situation imaginable.
but, i'm living on top of what is probably the most disgusting person in town.
she's chain smoking marijuana, for hours. she's bringing people in to smoke with her. there might not be a perfect answer, but the status quo is almost the worst situation imaginable.
actually, i should...
this is just logic. i'm not an engineer. i can't even build a paper airplane.
but, if trying to tarp over the floor leads me to the conclusion that i'm just moving the smoke around, it follows that the problem is that the smoke is getting into the subfloor - and the actual renovations that need to be done are in the smoker's unit, not mine.
i'm just wondering to myself what kind of reaction that would produce in the smoker. if i could get a court order to renovate her unit, would she stick around for it?
and, would they just pay me to leave, instead?
but, this is what i need to present: that renovations need to occur in the unit below me.
i have nothing to lose by upsetting management; i don't want to be here.
this is just logic. i'm not an engineer. i can't even build a paper airplane.
but, if trying to tarp over the floor leads me to the conclusion that i'm just moving the smoke around, it follows that the problem is that the smoke is getting into the subfloor - and the actual renovations that need to be done are in the smoker's unit, not mine.
i'm just wondering to myself what kind of reaction that would produce in the smoker. if i could get a court order to renovate her unit, would she stick around for it?
and, would they just pay me to leave, instead?
but, this is what i need to present: that renovations need to occur in the unit below me.
i have nothing to lose by upsetting management; i don't want to be here.
i spent some time tossing and turning, but i'm ultimately still awake - tired and angry and frustrated, but still awake.
i'll have to give them until wednesday, but i'm going to be making a call on that day.
we initially had four options:
a) talk to her
that's clearly not going to work.
b) get rid of her.
i have to continue my due diligence on this, but it's a very difficult and probably unsuccessful process. and, it will no doubt embolden her, if she wins.
c) fix the unit.
i'm giving up on this.
i initially thought i had the bedroom fixed up, but what that did was push the smoke into the bathroom and hallway. so, i patched those areas up, and it just pushed the smoke back into the bedroom.
i patched up the closet the other day, and it just came up a few feet to the side of it.
i had to do the experiment to see how bad it really is, but it seems like i'm not just patching up holes, but in need of replacing the whole floor. i kind of realized i'd need to tear out some fixtures, but it's beyond that, i'd have to tear down the whole unit. really.
the smoke is just going to have to come out somewhere, eventually. and all i'm doing by putting down tarps and taping up spaces is moving it around - i need something much deeper than this.
so, i'm realizing that i can't win this fight on these grounds. it's really gotta be that one of us leaves.
d) let me out of the lease.
this is going to have to be the option i pursue on around the 1st of may, unless i get a clearer response over the next few days.
so, it's not going to be a letter. it's just going to be a call. i'll have to update her on the situation: the n4 didn't work, and my attempts to smoke proof the unit have led me to the conclusion that this would require replacing the entire floor. i consequently need management to dedicate itself to removing the tenant below me, or prepare to have me try and escape the lease.
i can't live in filth, like this.
i'll have to give them until wednesday, but i'm going to be making a call on that day.
we initially had four options:
that's clearly not going to work.
b) get rid of her.
i have to continue my due diligence on this, but it's a very difficult and probably unsuccessful process. and, it will no doubt embolden her, if she wins.
i'm giving up on this.
i initially thought i had the bedroom fixed up, but what that did was push the smoke into the bathroom and hallway. so, i patched those areas up, and it just pushed the smoke back into the bedroom.
i patched up the closet the other day, and it just came up a few feet to the side of it.
i had to do the experiment to see how bad it really is, but it seems like i'm not just patching up holes, but in need of replacing the whole floor. i kind of realized i'd need to tear out some fixtures, but it's beyond that, i'd have to tear down the whole unit. really.
the smoke is just going to have to come out somewhere, eventually. and all i'm doing by putting down tarps and taping up spaces is moving it around - i need something much deeper than this.
so, i'm realizing that i can't win this fight on these grounds. it's really gotta be that one of us leaves.
d) let me out of the lease.
this is going to have to be the option i pursue on around the 1st of may, unless i get a clearer response over the next few days.
so, it's not going to be a letter. it's just going to be a call. i'll have to update her on the situation: the n4 didn't work, and my attempts to smoke proof the unit have led me to the conclusion that this would require replacing the entire floor. i consequently need management to dedicate itself to removing the tenant below me, or prepare to have me try and escape the lease.
i can't live in filth, like this.
as should be obvious, i don't care if people smoke pot, in the abstract.
i just don't want them to plume smoke into my unit, which i've always kept completely smoke-free.
i have never smoked inside, anywhere.
and, when it's obvious that people are blowing smoke in my face to upset me, i'm willing to use whatever tools are available to me to get them to stop.
i don't grasp the intent of people that want to split the world into binary choices of smokers and non-smokers. that's like arguing that everybody who has a glass of wine now and again is an alcoholic. most people measure their alcohol intake on a monthly or yearly scale, not a weekly or daily one. so, it shouldn't be that hard to understand.
enjoying a glass of wine now and again doesn't mean you want your bedroom to smell like vomit and urine. likewise, enjoying a toke when i'm out at a concert doesn't mean i want my pillow to smell like a bong.
this is not binary.
there is a very wide spectrum.
and, i am an extremely infrequent smoker that doesn't want to live in a hazy environment.
i just don't want them to plume smoke into my unit, which i've always kept completely smoke-free.
i have never smoked inside, anywhere.
and, when it's obvious that people are blowing smoke in my face to upset me, i'm willing to use whatever tools are available to me to get them to stop.
i don't grasp the intent of people that want to split the world into binary choices of smokers and non-smokers. that's like arguing that everybody who has a glass of wine now and again is an alcoholic. most people measure their alcohol intake on a monthly or yearly scale, not a weekly or daily one. so, it shouldn't be that hard to understand.
enjoying a glass of wine now and again doesn't mean you want your bedroom to smell like vomit and urine. likewise, enjoying a toke when i'm out at a concert doesn't mean i want my pillow to smell like a bong.
this is not binary.
there is a very wide spectrum.
and, i am an extremely infrequent smoker that doesn't want to live in a hazy environment.
Sunday, April 8, 2018
she's having some kind of party downstairs, so i have the windows wide open, and will have to keep them open all night - and potentially for the next several days.
it's hard for me to understand how a grown woman could act like such a child. she's received multiple complaints about second-hand smoke...so she throws a smoke party. how do people this stupid exist? and, how are her friends so irresponsible?
if she keeps it up, she's going to get evicted. and i don't care..
see, and it was mostly actually pretty much ok all week, after she got the n4, too.
i suppose one of two things is happening, right now.
1) the n4 in ontario gives you a week to change your behaviour. i suspect that her warped concept of logic interprets that as "i can get away with smoking as much as i want for the next week".
2) she's just ignoring the n4.
either option seems to be an attempt to upset me.
i can't do anything tonight, except take note of the utter childishness of this. but, if the situation doesn't improve immediately, i'm going to file a second complaint on tuesday.
and, there is a good chance that i'll have to call the cops tonight.
it's hard for me to understand how a grown woman could act like such a child. she's received multiple complaints about second-hand smoke...so she throws a smoke party. how do people this stupid exist? and, how are her friends so irresponsible?
if she keeps it up, she's going to get evicted. and i don't care..
see, and it was mostly actually pretty much ok all week, after she got the n4, too.
i suppose one of two things is happening, right now.
1) the n4 in ontario gives you a week to change your behaviour. i suspect that her warped concept of logic interprets that as "i can get away with smoking as much as i want for the next week".
2) she's just ignoring the n4.
either option seems to be an attempt to upset me.
i can't do anything tonight, except take note of the utter childishness of this. but, if the situation doesn't improve immediately, i'm going to file a second complaint on tuesday.
and, there is a good chance that i'll have to call the cops tonight.
artists are dependent creatures, by definition.
we are to exist in a culture of dependency, or not exist at all.
but, concepts of dependency are only meaningful in the context of currency, and, ultimately, in the context of property; "dependency" has no meaning when property is placed in common, as we are all dependant upon each other - which is true, anyways, but flatly denied by capitalism. this is what property is all about: the delusional denial of our irresolvable interdependence. and, doing away with this denial is what socialism is really all about.
we are to exist in a culture of dependency, or not exist at all.
but, concepts of dependency are only meaningful in the context of currency, and, ultimately, in the context of property; "dependency" has no meaning when property is placed in common, as we are all dependant upon each other - which is true, anyways, but flatly denied by capitalism. this is what property is all about: the delusional denial of our irresolvable interdependence. and, doing away with this denial is what socialism is really all about.
you have to remember that, as an artist, a proletarian revolution is just a means to an end, for me. i'm 50% bourgeois and 50% lumpen, but really only of the working class by necessity.
it really doesn't matter to me how my subsidies come to me.
and, if you want to tell me to work or starve, then that is not my revolution at all.
it really doesn't matter to me how my subsidies come to me.
and, if you want to tell me to work or starve, then that is not my revolution at all.
it's actually easy enough to understand why anti-poverty advocates would oppose a ubi: they'd be out of a job, and possibly on it themselves.
i posted a discussion with david graeber a while back where he points the situation out pretty clearly. a ubi is going to eliminate thousands and thousands of government jobs. but, anarchists are about getting rid of governments, not creating pointless jobs.
that is the difference between myself and paul krugman. i mean, i'll take keynes if i don't have another option, sure. but, i'd rather tear the system down than prop it up.
and, this is really just a reflection of how depraved the status quo is.
i posted a discussion with david graeber a while back where he points the situation out pretty clearly. a ubi is going to eliminate thousands and thousands of government jobs. but, anarchists are about getting rid of governments, not creating pointless jobs.
that is the difference between myself and paul krugman. i mean, i'll take keynes if i don't have another option, sure. but, i'd rather tear the system down than prop it up.
and, this is really just a reflection of how depraved the status quo is.
the new screaming females record is getting strong reviews. i actually gave it a wide berth, as it's been clear for a while that the band may be..."growing up" a little. i've been getting the impression for a while that the lead singer may be feeling sort of suffocated, in a role that she walked into before she was old enough to define who she really is, and that she's been role-playing for a few records - and ultimately wants out.
i get the impression that she's a lot more of a "normal"twenty thirty-something female than her persona might suggest, and that she's going to need to find a way to get out of this now completely phony teen-goth-angst schtick, one way or another.
she might actually secretly be a big green day fan.
that said, any substantive fears i had regarding the record appear to be being pushed off to the next one. the record starts off as strong as any other, but slows down quite a bit in the middle. it's not about soft or loud for me, but i just don't like country music, and when you take the kick out of punk rock, country music is what you're left with. it's more of an urban/rural thing....
see, i openly admit i hold prejudices towards rural culture. i try to rationalize them in real-world situations as best as i can - i try very hard to treat people fairly and not judge them and people that run into me in real-life will uphold that - but i simply don't want to celebrate anything to do with rural americana style culture. and, i have to be blunt: this culture really doesn't accept me, either. this isn't out of nowhere with this band, or with alternative/grunge music in general, but it kind of sticks out here.
that said, it's only a couple of tracks - minor enough to reduce the problem to the suggestion that the record has a bit of filler in it.
i preferred the more direct attack of the last one; this band excels when it's in early pumpkins mode, recycling sabbath riffs and just rocking out. but, it's a strong enough record, for the moment.
i do remain apprehensive about where they're going, but i'm also in total solidarity with complete honesty, even if i end up tuning out as they get more and more accessible.
and, i'll always have time for that tone.
i expect the show next week to be worth attending.
i get the impression that she's a lot more of a "normal"
she might actually secretly be a big green day fan.
that said, any substantive fears i had regarding the record appear to be being pushed off to the next one. the record starts off as strong as any other, but slows down quite a bit in the middle. it's not about soft or loud for me, but i just don't like country music, and when you take the kick out of punk rock, country music is what you're left with. it's more of an urban/rural thing....
see, i openly admit i hold prejudices towards rural culture. i try to rationalize them in real-world situations as best as i can - i try very hard to treat people fairly and not judge them and people that run into me in real-life will uphold that - but i simply don't want to celebrate anything to do with rural americana style culture. and, i have to be blunt: this culture really doesn't accept me, either. this isn't out of nowhere with this band, or with alternative/grunge music in general, but it kind of sticks out here.
that said, it's only a couple of tracks - minor enough to reduce the problem to the suggestion that the record has a bit of filler in it.
i preferred the more direct attack of the last one; this band excels when it's in early pumpkins mode, recycling sabbath riffs and just rocking out. but, it's a strong enough record, for the moment.
i do remain apprehensive about where they're going, but i'm also in total solidarity with complete honesty, even if i end up tuning out as they get more and more accessible.
and, i'll always have time for that tone.
i expect the show next week to be worth attending.
there seems to be this strange idea in the anti-smoking literature that you can keep smoke inside.
and, i kind of need to ask these people: if you tell smokers to smoke inside with the windows closed, where exactly do you think this smoke goes?
do you think it disappears through some kind of black hole?
that it becomes one with the furniture?
the smoke is going to eventually escape. if the unit is newer, it will escape through ventilation units. if it's older, it will escape into neighbouring units.
so, why isn't the focus on ventilation? why don't you tell people to go smoke outside, in out of the way places?
there's a large & usually empty church parking lot across the street. that should be a designated smoking area.
and, again, i'll tell you why: it's because the anti-smoking initiatives in this province are not about health. they're about class.
and, i kind of need to ask these people: if you tell smokers to smoke inside with the windows closed, where exactly do you think this smoke goes?
do you think it disappears through some kind of black hole?
that it becomes one with the furniture?
the smoke is going to eventually escape. if the unit is newer, it will escape through ventilation units. if it's older, it will escape into neighbouring units.
so, why isn't the focus on ventilation? why don't you tell people to go smoke outside, in out of the way places?
there's a large & usually empty church parking lot across the street. that should be a designated smoking area.
and, again, i'll tell you why: it's because the anti-smoking initiatives in this province are not about health. they're about class.
i actively hated the show friends and everything it stood for.
like, it wasn't just passive disinterest, or broad disdain. it was a deep level of contempt.
and, i'm not going to write this essay right now, but i will ask the question: do these people not reflect everything that is wrong with society, and everything about it that needs to be reformed? and, is the filter they are presented in not the biggest problem of all?
i keep saying this: yes, i absolutely do want to destroy your way of life.
sorry.
like, it wasn't just passive disinterest, or broad disdain. it was a deep level of contempt.
and, i'm not going to write this essay right now, but i will ask the question: do these people not reflect everything that is wrong with society, and everything about it that needs to be reformed? and, is the filter they are presented in not the biggest problem of all?
i keep saying this: yes, i absolutely do want to destroy your way of life.
sorry.
Saturday, April 7, 2018
i slept in, so i'm certainly 100% staying in. if i was out anyways, i could talk myself into dealing with the cold for an overnight binge. but, it would be stupid of me to wander into the cold with intent, with a bicycle or not.
i have a gut feeling that the set was lacklustre, or at least was relative to my own tastes. as mentioned: i'm rather fond of their work with son lux, but i don't have any interest in 00s indie rock, more generally. if i was the person everybody wanted me to be, i'd care about sufjan stevens or the dirty projectors; the fact is that i don't, and never did, and that it was really never likely that i was ever going to.
the piece that lott wrote for them sounds commissioned, and i've always had such a problem with that - because it's always so obvious. you can't write good music in exchange for money; it has to come from somewhere, it's not just a market operation. it sounds uninspired; kind of flat - disappointing, given how emotionally engaging lott's work usually is. this is somebody that has a talent for being compelling. you could argue he has charisma, or something. so, how did the work end up so dry?
you put a price tag on it, that's how. you had to work around complicated schedules. you gave it time lines. you set goals. all of these things can only ruin art.
at some point, it became a product - and art cannot be commodified and remain art.
which is not to say that i don't hope that other people enjoyed it, so much as to say that i don't think i would have, and that this is much, much further from where i exist than perhaps would like to be imagined.
i have a gut feeling that the set was lacklustre, or at least was relative to my own tastes. as mentioned: i'm rather fond of their work with son lux, but i don't have any interest in 00s indie rock, more generally. if i was the person everybody wanted me to be, i'd care about sufjan stevens or the dirty projectors; the fact is that i don't, and never did, and that it was really never likely that i was ever going to.
the piece that lott wrote for them sounds commissioned, and i've always had such a problem with that - because it's always so obvious. you can't write good music in exchange for money; it has to come from somewhere, it's not just a market operation. it sounds uninspired; kind of flat - disappointing, given how emotionally engaging lott's work usually is. this is somebody that has a talent for being compelling. you could argue he has charisma, or something. so, how did the work end up so dry?
you put a price tag on it, that's how. you had to work around complicated schedules. you gave it time lines. you set goals. all of these things can only ruin art.
at some point, it became a product - and art cannot be commodified and remain art.
which is not to say that i don't hope that other people enjoyed it, so much as to say that i don't think i would have, and that this is much, much further from where i exist than perhaps would like to be imagined.
i took one of those 7/11 caffeine boosts this morning, and i'm still wired; impressive given that i had several drinks last night [2 jagers, 1 mikes & 2 strong beers]. i should be tired, but i'm wide awake...
i braved the cold last night, but the truth is that what i did was stupid. i was in some serious danger of hypothermia, and probably only staved it off because i'm in such ridiculously good health. i don't want to do that again tonight.
my bicycle is still where i left it, but the lock is frozen. this is actually a big deal, because having a bicycle would solve most of these problems. then again, i could also take my canada bike with me...hrmnnn...
i'll need to get some sleep, first.
i braved the cold last night, but the truth is that what i did was stupid. i was in some serious danger of hypothermia, and probably only staved it off because i'm in such ridiculously good health. i don't want to do that again tonight.
my bicycle is still where i left it, but the lock is frozen. this is actually a big deal, because having a bicycle would solve most of these problems. then again, i could also take my canada bike with me...hrmnnn...
i'll need to get some sleep, first.
this is wrong.
it's probably true that incumbents are hard to beat in the united states, across the board - because the districts are so heavily gerrymandered to ensure stasis. even in a republican state, the democrat districts are....they're designed to be democrat districts. they just set it up so there's less of them.
in canada, it depends on the type of election. we saw this in the last federal election: popular sitting mps got turfed in what was a liberal sweep. i don't think anybody expected people like paul dewar or megan leslie to lose their seats. and, the conservatives got crushed in ontario and quebec - many cabinet ministers got turfed.
if the 2018 ontario election is a change election, you want to talk about incumbency being a disadvantage. people seem to want to clean house.
i consequently think that this might actually help them - if compelling candidates appear in these ridings, that are able to generate support bases independently of the broader narrative.
it's a big if, granted.
but it's maybe more likely that some fresh blood is going to generate some excitement in these ridings than a vote for the status quo is.
that said, it's also a clear vote of non-confidence in kathleen wynne.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-election-liberal-incumbents-not-running-1.4606871
it's probably true that incumbents are hard to beat in the united states, across the board - because the districts are so heavily gerrymandered to ensure stasis. even in a republican state, the democrat districts are....they're designed to be democrat districts. they just set it up so there's less of them.
in canada, it depends on the type of election. we saw this in the last federal election: popular sitting mps got turfed in what was a liberal sweep. i don't think anybody expected people like paul dewar or megan leslie to lose their seats. and, the conservatives got crushed in ontario and quebec - many cabinet ministers got turfed.
if the 2018 ontario election is a change election, you want to talk about incumbency being a disadvantage. people seem to want to clean house.
i consequently think that this might actually help them - if compelling candidates appear in these ridings, that are able to generate support bases independently of the broader narrative.
it's a big if, granted.
but it's maybe more likely that some fresh blood is going to generate some excitement in these ridings than a vote for the status quo is.
that said, it's also a clear vote of non-confidence in kathleen wynne.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-election-liberal-incumbents-not-running-1.4606871
in the time i've been in detroit, i have a total of one blackout, in the fall of 2016.
that was the night i woke up in some dude's car. some dude that thought i was cis and was trying to fuck me.
i have a complete recollection of all other nights.
honest.
really.
no, seriously - i do. i know i look messy sometimes, but i'm almost always in control of myself.
that was the night i woke up in some dude's car. some dude that thought i was cis and was trying to fuck me.
i have a complete recollection of all other nights.
honest.
really.
no, seriously - i do. i know i look messy sometimes, but i'm almost always in control of myself.
wait.
i think i know where i was that night, now.
"didn't i see you passed out at..."
like i could answer that. like i could remember where i was passed out at.
but, i've never been to this place in my conscious existence. and the one night i blacked out, and woke up in some dude's car, was the night i was supposedly in that neighbourhood.
*shrug*.
i think i know where i was that night, now.
"didn't i see you passed out at..."
like i could answer that. like i could remember where i was passed out at.
but, i've never been to this place in my conscious existence. and the one night i blacked out, and woke up in some dude's car, was the night i was supposedly in that neighbourhood.
*shrug*.
well, i guess i went out after all, huh?
the magic stick was bopping. nice to see.
but i should have asked around about after parties instead of making assumptions. it seems like people wanted to even bring me there, as they noticed me and asked me about it, but i took off right away in an attempt to get to one asap. big mistake - the place i went to was empty, and i ended up back at the diner.
i had fun at the show. and i needed that, too.
the magic stick was bopping. nice to see.
but i should have asked around about after parties instead of making assumptions. it seems like people wanted to even bring me there, as they noticed me and asked me about it, but i took off right away in an attempt to get to one asap. big mistake - the place i went to was empty, and i ended up back at the diner.
i had fun at the show. and i needed that, too.
Friday, April 6, 2018
the most recent mainstreet poll claims the following responses, which should really not pass any intelligent poerson's bullshit detector:
liberals: 23.9
conservative: 50.3
ndp: 18.3
and, yet they claim that ford has a net negative favourability rating.
so, you want people to believe that doug ford is running at 50%, and yet that 75% of people disapprove of him.
they then have the panache to present this as some kind of paradox.
they're probably getting a 30% undecided rate - but they're not publishing it. and, so the numbers are probably more like this:
conservatives: 35.21
undecided: 30.0
liberals: 16.73
ndp: 12.81
and, those undecideds probably hate everybody, but lean centre-left: they may not vote liberal in the end, but they probably won't vote for doug ford.
when the numbers tighten up, everybody will feign shock. it's all bullshit.
and, they should be publishing undecideds - that is a valid response at any stage in the cycle.
liberals: 23.9
conservative: 50.3
ndp: 18.3
and, yet they claim that ford has a net negative favourability rating.
so, you want people to believe that doug ford is running at 50%, and yet that 75% of people disapprove of him.
they then have the panache to present this as some kind of paradox.
they're probably getting a 30% undecided rate - but they're not publishing it. and, so the numbers are probably more like this:
conservatives: 35.21
undecided: 30.0
liberals: 16.73
ndp: 12.81
and, those undecideds probably hate everybody, but lean centre-left: they may not vote liberal in the end, but they probably won't vote for doug ford.
when the numbers tighten up, everybody will feign shock. it's all bullshit.
and, they should be publishing undecideds - that is a valid response at any stage in the cycle.
again: the recent round of polling in ontario is distributing undecideds, which is wrong in our spectrum, and is therefore not useful.
the numbers being reported right now are not a basis in which to be shocked by a close election, should it happen; unfortunately, even the companies are playing into the obfuscation, by presenting dishonest calculations.
until we get polling that is accurately reporting the level of the undecided vote, we have no reliable data in ontario.
the numbers being reported right now are not a basis in which to be shocked by a close election, should it happen; unfortunately, even the companies are playing into the obfuscation, by presenting dishonest calculations.
until we get polling that is accurately reporting the level of the undecided vote, we have no reliable data in ontario.
freeland has been falling all over herself to appeal to american democrats in order to push this bullshit hoax of substantive russian interference in western elections.
the idea that she's some kind of a victim of russian intrigue is a joke; she brought this on herself.
http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/russian-diplomat-calls-expulsions-over-remarks-un-canadian
the idea that she's some kind of a victim of russian intrigue is a joke; she brought this on herself.
http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/russian-diplomat-calls-expulsions-over-remarks-un-canadian
the cold weather in ontario right now is consistent with all three potential explanations.
1) we've had a couple of cold summers in a row, here. this is consistent with the observation of decreasing solar output, as it pushes the jet stream down a little.
2) despite the physical errors in the model, it is consistent with the idea that it's being caused by melting sea ice.
3) it is also consistent with the idea that we live in canada, and we often have shitty springs in this part of the world.
my money is on (1). but, you need to look at longer term patterns regarding how the continuing decrease in solar output is going to affect the continuing increase in global mean temperatures, especially in the northern hemisphere. and, the difficult reality is that science can't tell you the answer with any certainty until it's already happened.
but, it is certainly not a reason to reject climate science.
1) we've had a couple of cold summers in a row, here. this is consistent with the observation of decreasing solar output, as it pushes the jet stream down a little.
2) despite the physical errors in the model, it is consistent with the idea that it's being caused by melting sea ice.
3) it is also consistent with the idea that we live in canada, and we often have shitty springs in this part of the world.
my money is on (1). but, you need to look at longer term patterns regarding how the continuing decrease in solar output is going to affect the continuing increase in global mean temperatures, especially in the northern hemisphere. and, the difficult reality is that science can't tell you the answer with any certainty until it's already happened.
but, it is certainly not a reason to reject climate science.
to be clear:
what i am doing right now is running through a master document of comments i have put aside. it is 6200 pages long, but this is set to grow quite a bit as i copy data from 2016 onwards from the blog back into it. it contains posts i made to facebook, google+, youtube & all kinds of news sites, going back to about 2008. it is not comprehensive, but i do wish that it was...
i am taking comments out of that master document from 2013-2016 and posting them to two separate blogs:
1) the political comments blog:
http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.ca
2) the music blog:
http://musicofjessicamurray.blogspot.ca
the reason i'm doing this is to create a combined master list for the music blog, going back to 1996. i have chosen 2015 as the start date for the political comments blog, but will eventual fill that in backwards, as well - with as much information as i can find. in the short run, once the gaps are filled, the political comments blog will exist from 2015 onwards.
the focus right now, however, is on the master list for the music blog, which is currently about 1000 pages, but is also going to grow quite a lot in the next few weeks. this needs to exist in these two mirrors from 2013 onwards. i will also be building it up in the alter-reality from 1996 onwards; i am very far behind on this.
i have to do this in order to close inri000, because the last part of the process is incorporating a pdf of the relevant portions of the music blog, which includes reconstructed notes from the 90s, and notes regarding the remastering process, from 2013-2018. this will be repeated for each release, moving forwards.
but, you're too fucking incompetent to even read that, aren't you?
"she's just working for the russians."
you fucking retards...
what i am doing right now is running through a master document of comments i have put aside. it is 6200 pages long, but this is set to grow quite a bit as i copy data from 2016 onwards from the blog back into it. it contains posts i made to facebook, google+, youtube & all kinds of news sites, going back to about 2008. it is not comprehensive, but i do wish that it was...
i am taking comments out of that master document from 2013-2016 and posting them to two separate blogs:
1) the political comments blog:
http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.ca
2) the music blog:
http://musicofjessicamurray.blogspot.ca
the reason i'm doing this is to create a combined master list for the music blog, going back to 1996. i have chosen 2015 as the start date for the political comments blog, but will eventual fill that in backwards, as well - with as much information as i can find. in the short run, once the gaps are filled, the political comments blog will exist from 2015 onwards.
the focus right now, however, is on the master list for the music blog, which is currently about 1000 pages, but is also going to grow quite a lot in the next few weeks. this needs to exist in these two mirrors from 2013 onwards. i will also be building it up in the alter-reality from 1996 onwards; i am very far behind on this.
i have to do this in order to close inri000, because the last part of the process is incorporating a pdf of the relevant portions of the music blog, which includes reconstructed notes from the 90s, and notes regarding the remastering process, from 2013-2018. this will be repeated for each release, moving forwards.
but, you're too fucking incompetent to even read that, aren't you?
"she's just working for the russians."
you fucking retards...
Thursday, April 5, 2018
if i had been able to use my gear over 2016, i wouldn't have spent all the time i spent analyzing the american election, and i wouldn't have produced all of this writing that they seem to find so damaging.
then, they claim i'm working for the russians because i'm able to correctly deconstruct the situation. no - i'm just wasting time, because i can't use my gear, because it has a very obviously audible bug in it. this is a situation of their own creation. call it blowback, even.
some people waste time by playing games on their phones. but, i'm a nerd. so i waste time by analyzing elections.
i'd rather use the gear.
but i can't record or mix over an echo or a redirected stream that i can't get rid of...
then, they claim i'm working for the russians because i'm able to correctly deconstruct the situation. no - i'm just wasting time, because i can't use my gear, because it has a very obviously audible bug in it. this is a situation of their own creation. call it blowback, even.
some people waste time by playing games on their phones. but, i'm a nerd. so i waste time by analyzing elections.
i'd rather use the gear.
but i can't record or mix over an echo or a redirected stream that i can't get rid of...
why haven't they figured out the obvious?
because they're completely fucking incompetent.
that's the uncomfortable truth: these frustrations are a function of their own uselesness.
if they were anywhere close to halfways competent, they would have figured out years ago that there is nothing to accomplish in spying on me, and left me alone to create.
because they're completely fucking incompetent.
that's the uncomfortable truth: these frustrations are a function of their own uselesness.
if they were anywhere close to halfways competent, they would have figured out years ago that there is nothing to accomplish in spying on me, and left me alone to create.
as i've stated before: i don't even care if they spy on me.
i'm too boring to care. i don't do anything illegal; most of the time, i don't do anything at all. they can spy on me all they want...
that's not what's so amazingly depressing about the situation.
i need my gear to work; it's that i can't get the loopback out that is so saddening and frustrating and depressing.
i'm of no threat to anybody at all, but the state is intent on ruining my ability to create, in order to listen in, for no reason i can even make sense of.
i'm too boring to care. i don't do anything illegal; most of the time, i don't do anything at all. they can spy on me all they want...
that's not what's so amazingly depressing about the situation.
i need my gear to work; it's that i can't get the loopback out that is so saddening and frustrating and depressing.
i'm of no threat to anybody at all, but the state is intent on ruining my ability to create, in order to listen in, for no reason i can even make sense of.
it seems like the intelligence services have installed the same
loopback software on this laptop that they had previously installed on
my recording pc.
the best way i can describe this is knowing your phone is being tapped. if you're talking to somebody on the phone, you can hear that there is a third person on the line because the connection sounds "open". you can hear the empty space on the other side of the third person's line..
i've had to modify my network architecture to take account of this, by only connecting to the internet through a defined access point [although there are two, with the other one in the living room to watch videos on]. this appears to be being installed at the hardware level, because reinstalls after disconnecting from the internet haven't resolved it. and, i'm not even sure if these open lines are connecting anywhere - or merely distorting the sound signal.
because i've set this computer up this way, as an access point, the eavesdropping is acting solely on the level of an annoyance. i'm not mixing on this device. but, i don't understand what the point of eavesdropping on somebody that posts their entire life to the internet is.
and, i need to reiterate, yet again, that this is harmful to me - because this is what i do; this is my art.
i also need to point out that the logic is backwards - much like these smokers, that think smoking through my windows is going to get me to close them. unfortunately, the reason i've been spending time posting to the internet is that my recording gear is not functioning, partially because it's been hacked by the cia. this has been going on for years, now; i could and probably should be mostly through period 3 by now, but i haven't even been able to start it. so, they keep spying on me, for what reason i'm not entirely sure - maybe they think i'm secretly in kahoots with something or somebody, although it's hard to understand how the fact that i'm an introverted loner isn't obvious, given how much time i spent ranting on the internet.
it should be obvious that i simply don't have time to be in kahoots with anybody because i spend so much time typing. it's obviously the only thing i do, or have been doing for years.
so, the more they spy on me, the more typing i do - which is the thing they seem to want to prevent.
if they would stop spying on me already, i'd get back to doing what i actually care about.
again: it would be one thing if i wasn't so transparent, if i didn't type so much. but i'm literally constantly posting: videos...music...comments...essays...it's at the very centre of my existence. what can be accomplished by bugging the audio on my laptop?
the best way i can describe this is knowing your phone is being tapped. if you're talking to somebody on the phone, you can hear that there is a third person on the line because the connection sounds "open". you can hear the empty space on the other side of the third person's line..
i've had to modify my network architecture to take account of this, by only connecting to the internet through a defined access point [although there are two, with the other one in the living room to watch videos on]. this appears to be being installed at the hardware level, because reinstalls after disconnecting from the internet haven't resolved it. and, i'm not even sure if these open lines are connecting anywhere - or merely distorting the sound signal.
because i've set this computer up this way, as an access point, the eavesdropping is acting solely on the level of an annoyance. i'm not mixing on this device. but, i don't understand what the point of eavesdropping on somebody that posts their entire life to the internet is.
and, i need to reiterate, yet again, that this is harmful to me - because this is what i do; this is my art.
i also need to point out that the logic is backwards - much like these smokers, that think smoking through my windows is going to get me to close them. unfortunately, the reason i've been spending time posting to the internet is that my recording gear is not functioning, partially because it's been hacked by the cia. this has been going on for years, now; i could and probably should be mostly through period 3 by now, but i haven't even been able to start it. so, they keep spying on me, for what reason i'm not entirely sure - maybe they think i'm secretly in kahoots with something or somebody, although it's hard to understand how the fact that i'm an introverted loner isn't obvious, given how much time i spent ranting on the internet.
it should be obvious that i simply don't have time to be in kahoots with anybody because i spend so much time typing. it's obviously the only thing i do, or have been doing for years.
so, the more they spy on me, the more typing i do - which is the thing they seem to want to prevent.
if they would stop spying on me already, i'd get back to doing what i actually care about.
again: it would be one thing if i wasn't so transparent, if i didn't type so much. but i'm literally constantly posting: videos...music...comments...essays...it's at the very centre of my existence. what can be accomplished by bugging the audio on my laptop?
i have a really strong fashion aversion to any kind of jackets.
if you look at the options, they're all unacceptable. leather jackets are the most disgusting fashion decision in the history of fashion; denim is perhaps a close second. they're both utterly pretentious looking. then, you have to accessorize them...and who has time for that...
when it's so cold that you need a jacket then so be it. but i'd rather stick with the kinds of big, clunky things you get at walmart, and wear them as sparingly as possible.
the dmst show in december was an exception. but, i tend to just avoid the problem by staying in until i can just put a sweater on. that means i need the temperature to stay above five degrees, and the weather just hasn't been able to accomplish that.
if you look at the options, they're all unacceptable. leather jackets are the most disgusting fashion decision in the history of fashion; denim is perhaps a close second. they're both utterly pretentious looking. then, you have to accessorize them...and who has time for that...
when it's so cold that you need a jacket then so be it. but i'd rather stick with the kinds of big, clunky things you get at walmart, and wear them as sparingly as possible.
the dmst show in december was an exception. but, i tend to just avoid the problem by staying in until i can just put a sweater on. that means i need the temperature to stay above five degrees, and the weather just hasn't been able to accomplish that.
i actually simply forgot about the lightning bolt show. i guess my head was elsewhere. but, i'm not sure i would have went. haven't heard any new material, and the weather was horrific. that said, it was a saturday, so i could have in theory made it home.
it's more the kind of thing i'd want to go to if it's nice out, because it's nice out.
the construction on the tunnel could be a problem for me this spring because it means i can't get to weekday shows without doing the overnight, and i might not want to do that.
that said, the weather is finally set to turn next week, it seems. i know it's been nice on the coasts, but detroit is stuck in a blocking pattern that has had us hovering at freezing for weeks. it felt like february all the way through march: dreary/overcast, cold and unpleasant. and, april has been shit so far, too.
even if it was a few degrees warmer, i could handle some things, but this is still winter jacket weather, and i just don't enjoy going out to places when it's like this.
i'm considering maybe going to see ymusic at the cube on saturday, but i don't know what they're going to play. i know them through their work with son lux, but i'm really not interested in their other projects; 00s indie rock is really the dredges of boring bullshit, and not worth trying to convert into a serious artform.
it's more the kind of thing i'd want to go to if it's nice out, because it's nice out.
the construction on the tunnel could be a problem for me this spring because it means i can't get to weekday shows without doing the overnight, and i might not want to do that.
that said, the weather is finally set to turn next week, it seems. i know it's been nice on the coasts, but detroit is stuck in a blocking pattern that has had us hovering at freezing for weeks. it felt like february all the way through march: dreary/overcast, cold and unpleasant. and, april has been shit so far, too.
even if it was a few degrees warmer, i could handle some things, but this is still winter jacket weather, and i just don't enjoy going out to places when it's like this.
i'm considering maybe going to see ymusic at the cube on saturday, but i don't know what they're going to play. i know them through their work with son lux, but i'm really not interested in their other projects; 00s indie rock is really the dredges of boring bullshit, and not worth trying to convert into a serious artform.
i am never running for office, anywhere, ever.
i'm not a spy. i'm not building a footprint for my own machinations.
i'm an artist with a smart analytical mind that's trying to sell you experimental classical music. the link is on the side.
that is all.
deal with it.
and, if the bastards want to shut me down and martyr me, they're just demonstrating how right i am - historically. because this is what they do to us. ask oscar wilde. fuck, ask socrates. and, i don't know if we'll ever know why john lennon died, either.
this is the way the world turns.
but, do you want to be the piece of shit that has to explain to history why i didn't make it to 40?
i'm not a spy. i'm not building a footprint for my own machinations.
i'm an artist with a smart analytical mind that's trying to sell you experimental classical music. the link is on the side.
that is all.
deal with it.
and, if the bastards want to shut me down and martyr me, they're just demonstrating how right i am - historically. because this is what they do to us. ask oscar wilde. fuck, ask socrates. and, i don't know if we'll ever know why john lennon died, either.
this is the way the world turns.
but, do you want to be the piece of shit that has to explain to history why i didn't make it to 40?
this is perhaps not surprising, as it is consistent with the marketization of everything that comes with the continuing expansion of neo-liberal dogma, but the premise of putting a price on human life should remain a non-starter.
the buying and selling of human beings was banned in canada in the early nineteenth century.
this has nothing to do with gay rights, and we should be shocked to hear anybody frame the issue in these terms.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trudeau-it-s-time-to-talk-about-lifting-ban-on-paying-sperm-egg-donors-1.3871380
the buying and selling of human beings was banned in canada in the early nineteenth century.
this has nothing to do with gay rights, and we should be shocked to hear anybody frame the issue in these terms.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trudeau-it-s-time-to-talk-about-lifting-ban-on-paying-sperm-egg-donors-1.3871380
they're panicking far too early, and it's making them look like a bunch of retards.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trudeau-cites-propaganda-on-foreign-affairs-minister-as-russian-interference-1.3871653
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trudeau-cites-propaganda-on-foreign-affairs-minister-as-russian-interference-1.3871653
Wednesday, April 4, 2018
it seems that the liberals are trying to prove they're tough on crime in order to attract the "tim horton's socialist" voters.
they had a lock on educated voters, but they sem more interested in governing in a way that is designed to appeal to dropouts. and, the sad part is that this is calculated.
they really do think we're this stupid.
https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/8xk5z5/justin-trudeaus-crime-bill-is-just-the-latest-liberal-social-justice-mishap
they had a lock on educated voters, but they sem more interested in governing in a way that is designed to appeal to dropouts. and, the sad part is that this is calculated.
they really do think we're this stupid.
https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/8xk5z5/justin-trudeaus-crime-bill-is-just-the-latest-liberal-social-justice-mishap
so, how is an anti-trans christian female really a repressed lesbian?
well, the real problem is just that they're attracted to us, and can't deal with it - so rather than admit that they have a sexual attraction to women, they insist that we're men. that way they don't have to face up to what they're feeling.
and, i've been over this repeatedly.
trust me, ladies: if you think i'm hot, it's because you like girls, whether you realize it or not. maybe you like the idea of a girl with an erection, sure. but, it's the girl you like - because there's nothing masculine in front of you.
at all.
well, the real problem is just that they're attracted to us, and can't deal with it - so rather than admit that they have a sexual attraction to women, they insist that we're men. that way they don't have to face up to what they're feeling.
and, i've been over this repeatedly.
trust me, ladies: if you think i'm hot, it's because you like girls, whether you realize it or not. maybe you like the idea of a girl with an erection, sure. but, it's the girl you like - because there's nothing masculine in front of you.
at all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)