Why International Blasphemy Day is important

What can I say about Blasphemy day that wouldn't simply be me adding to the noise about it? I could repeat all of the clever things I've read about it, such as blasphemy is the only true victimless crime. Still, that's just regurgitating what's already out there.

So here's the truth: I angry at religious people. All the time. It's silly to be angry at religion itself. A religion is simply a set of rules. No matter how hateful, sexist and abusive those rules are, if no one plays by them then there's no problem. And all organized religions have employed practices of sexism, abuse and hate, form Judaism to Buddhism to whatever other religion you can think of. But it's not religion I hate. What's really important to remember is that it had a purpose at one time. Back when were were barely civilized (relative to today, not stating that we are truly civilized now) we needed religion. Why? Because of the fear and terror that it instilled in humans. When there was very little communication and transportation was slow what reason was there to not kill the next goat herder, take his clothing and flock and move on. It could be months before anyone knew the victim might be missing and most likely no one would ever know who's path he had crossed. People had less to work with and live on. People had more to fear from nature. That fear was the only thing that could keep a community in line. And that hate, or at least distrust, of the other was all that could keep a community together. You combine superstition with hate and community and that's a very simple recipe for religion.

As the years went on people needed more from it. Religion had to offer deeper truths than just a legal system to abide by. So mythology began to mesh with philosophy to become a more modern version of religion. The problem is that religion already has to have answers. What good is a system of universal truths if some of it isn't true? So religion starts with answers and and then works those answers into the observable world. It's the equivalent of trying to write the answers to a calculus book before calculus has been invented. In short; it's a poor choice.

And we've come so far since then. We've learned about the world and our brains. We don't need the idea of an invisible friend sitting in the sky, watching our mistakes, in order to not be cruel to each other. But those answers that were written before we were smart enough to ask the right questions still apply to most of the population. That fear and hate is still tethering people to their ethics. What terrifies me are the really religious people who are afraid of atheists. They rant about how people can't be moral creatures without the fear of god. What that tells me is that they can't be moral creatures without their fear of god. That were they to realize there's no reason for them to be a theist then they'd feel OK killing and stealing.

Does this apply to all religious people? Yes, but not to the extent of murder. I've seen religion tie some of the kindest people I know to horrible rules of behavior. One of the people I used to trust with advice and knowledge actually encouraged me to find someone else to marry because my fiance was not of the same religion. I've seen people who believe in equality for all people no matter their sexual orientation turn their backs on gay marriage because they thought their bible told them to. Hell, Christianity's strongest ties to Judaism are based on a handful of mistranslations and passages taken out of context by apologetic cultists trying to gain political power.

Today the only thing religion is good for is making your decisions for you. Bibles don't take the last few thousand years into account so the choices are probably not going to be the soundest choices. So what's the alternative? Well, I'm going to side with the tools we've been building up for millennia: amazing communication and an incredible understanding of the world around us as well as within. Beyond that, for when we come to unmapped regions of knowledge? We have logic and the scientific method. Yes, it's slow but the universe isn't going anywhere. It's more work to actually think and be rational but a deeper understanding of the natural world lets people see that this universe is so much more complex and impressive than if it had been tossed together over a week by someone who was bored and lonely. Reality is majestic enough without throwing a blanket of magic, fear and lies over it.


How does all of this relate to Blasphemy Day? The whole point of Blasphemy Day is to protest (specifically regarding the UN) rules both legal and social that make it taboo to criticize religions. Defamation of character is an attack on a person but defamation of religion is a defense of reason, which is what the modern world is built on. Blasphemy Day is supposed to show those who live by faith that talking about religion in all of its glory and gory details won't destroy creation. The proper response to criticism isn't anger and violence. It's to think about it and then respond in kind. Blasphemy isn't a crime. It's an invitation to discussion. Once a topic is declared off limits to criticism then it's off limits to growth and instantly becomes irrelevant. Every single idea in science is open to scrutiny under the scientific method. If it doesn't hold up continuously then it's torn down and built up or tossed out. Nothing in science is sacred and untouchable. Why is religion different than any other set of ideas? Fundamentalists keep complaining that they want equal regard in society, schools and the government. That means opening up to analysis, observation and criticism. When they hear blasphemy that's only because it's the answer you've already chosen for whatever question is asked. But what it really is is an invitation to the equal treatment they've been demanding.

I could just put out a string of insults that are factually true but phrased to create ire:

• The main reason you're the religion you are is because of where you are born
• Pascal's Wager applies just as much to Zeus and Satan as it does to Jesus and God
• If you believe that Jews and Christians have the same god then you haven't read either bible
• The Jewish bible, Christian bible and Koran all have many authors and editors. There is no direct line of truth from any of those writers to the version you have read
• Even Buddhists have committed acts of violence in the name of their faith
  

I'm not going to end with those, however. The most blasphemous and useful thing I can close with is this:

I have no faith in god. I have no faith in people. But in regard to people I do have hope.

Blasphemous, I know. Oh, and maybe one quote for the road.

"Faith is believing what you know ain't so."
- Mark Twain

Rosh Hashsanah ice cream!

Well, it's that time of year again. New year, that is. Tonight I'm headed out to a dinner with some friends and family so I wanted to make something special. What, you ask? Apple cider ice cream. It is a modified recipe that I then continued to modify so I have no idea how close it is to the original. What I do know is that my version is heavy on the apple and spices so it's very heavy tasting. To keep with the apples and honey it will be served with honey as a topping... with apple pie. Hey, if you're going to have a holiday feature an awesome fruit then you should really take advantage of that.

The first version of this recipe is from A Is for Apple: More Than 200 Recipes for Eating, Munching and Cooking with America's Favorite Fruit.

The second version is from SeriousEats.com

Here's my version:

Apple Cider Ice Cream

-makes about 5 cups of ice cream-

Ingredients

2 cups apple cider
1 cup sugar
cinnamon to taste (I used 3-4 dashes)
2 cups heavy cream
2 cups milk
6 large egg yolks
pinch of salt
quick pour of vanilla extract
3 tablespoons of apple butter
honey

Procedure

1. Combine the cider, sugar, and cinnamon in a heavy medium saucepan and bring to a boil over high heat, mixing with slotted spoon. Boil until the cider is as thick as maple syrup and the sugar has caramelized, about 20 minutes. As the cider reduces in volume, it will bubble up to the top of the pan. When this happens, lift the pan off the heat and stir until the bubbles subside, and then continue cooking. Don't be afraid of the boiling as this is when it actualy loses water and becomes the reduction.

2. While the syrup is cooking, scald the cream and milk in a large heavy saucepan over medium heat. (The mixture is ready when you see small bubbles around the edge of the pan and steam rising from the surface.) A wrinkled "skin" may also be present; just leave it alone. Keep hot over low heat.

3. As soon as the syrup is ready, pour it into the hot cream and milk while whisking vigorously. Cook over low heat, whisking constantly, until the syrup is thoroughly incorporated into the cream mixture. Remove the pan from the heat.

4. In a medium bowl, whisk the yolks and salt just to combine. Whisk in the hot cider syrup mixture. Scrape the mixture into the saucepan and set the pan over medium-low heat. Cook, stirring constantly but gently with a heatproof rubber spatula, going all around the sides and bottom of the pan, until the custard thickens enough to coat a metal spoon, about 10 minutes. Don't let it boil or it will curdle and ruin.

5. Immediately remove the pan from the heat and strain it into a bowl. Cool the custard, uncovered, stirring occasionally, until it reaches room temperature. Add in the vanilla extract, then cover and refrigerate over night.

6. Freeze in an ice cream maker following the manufacturer's instructions. When mixture is getting to a solid state, just past half way, add in 1.5 tablespoons of apple butter. After the consistency is a bit harder, add the other 1.5 tablespoons of apple butter. Opening the ice cream maker twice may add some additional time to the standard instructions.

7. When serving drizzle with thin lines of honey. This will quickly freeze and harden as a topping. Enjoy.

Why Glee doesn't work

So Glee had its second/third premier or second episode of actual premier or whatever Fox is calling it. The first episode aired months ago and has been on TV again and on the internet all summer long. The show started up the actual season last night. And I’m still not impressed. Judging by the reaction of the internet I’m part of a select few. I know only of two others who are as not won over as I am.

But this is not without reason. There are many things about the show that I can specifically point to and say “This is what is bothering me”. So I’m going to go ahead and share those points. If there are any Glee fans reading this perhaps you can address some of my grievances.

• I’ll start with something small but important. The film is obviously filmed in widescreen. It is obviously cropped for standard broadcast. I know this because during episode two there were multiple times when the speaking character did not appear on screen, or appeared with only a partial face. There are other shows filmed in widescreen now that are also shown in that format for their standard definition broadcasts. Why this horrible chop job on Glee?
  
  I don’t even think it’s Pan And Scan. It appears that Fox simply framed the centre of the image and cut out the rest. So when someone is speaking and it appears that they aren’t even in the room it really makes watching a show difficult.
• While we’re on the subject of editing let’s talk about the sound. The dubbing and post-processing during the songs is so bad that it destroys the performances. How a show about singing can have the worst sound editing on television in recent history is beyond me. I understand that the songs are not going to be performed live. However, they don’t sound live. They sound like the person singing is:
• standing still. The performances are usually done while the characters are performing choreography so that makes the bad lip syncing all the more noticeable.
• in a recording studio. These kids are singing in auditoriums and small rehearsal rooms. There should be some sort of interaction between the acoustics of the room and their voices.
• mastered for an album. And not a live album. It has the quality of a highly polish, over produced studio album. I get that they’re trying to push the iTunes downloads but this is ridiculous.
• There are no dynamic characters on the show. They are all flat caricatures at best. Some of the regulars don’t actually get any lines or acting at all. Want to take a look? Sure. And I’ll call them by their roles as I don’t remember a single character name.
• Principal – money-obsessed administrator
• Cheerleading coach – Bitch. That’s really all there is to her. Her main goal in life, above that of coaching, seems to be to end the glee club. Why? Because they are taking away money from that pays for her cartoonish obsessions with details regarding the cheerleading team such as international dry-cleaning. I don’t get her as the villain of the story.
• Everyone in Glee Club
• Big black diva
• Type A obnoxious (aka Mini-Menzel)
• The Jock
• The homo – This is not a pejorative. His main trait is that he’s gay. The only other things you can tell about his character is how he looks. As a person… he’s just gay.
• Asian girl
• Wheelchair guy
  If there’s anything else we’re supposed to know about these kids it sure is not being conveyed through actual writing.
• Cute OCD teacher – Who is also annoyingly weak in regard to her one relationship which consists of doting on main character.
• Bitchy wife – The main character’s wife. She seems obsessed with money (then why marry a teacher?). She is obsessed with getting a large house. She often times forgets that she’s married and appears to believe she has a live in man-servant. There is nothing redeeming about her and I don’t understand how a shrew like that manages to keep someone in a relationship unless he’s
• A) being blackmailed
• B) completely whipped
• Main character – He seems to be completely whipped. He takes abuse from his wife, from students, from other teachers. His strongest moment came in episode two when he politely left after cheerleading coach finished her bitching monologue.
• The main character sucks. I assume he’s supposed to be the sympathetic character viewers identify with and follow through his journey. I don’t feel particularly sympathetic to him. The problem is he’s too pathetic. In regards to his wife he has three viable options in regard to his wife: murder, divorce, suicide. I know it’s a poorly written character when even if she was pregnant the most sympathetic choice would still be to leave her. And it’s been set up ever so obviously since the pilot that main character is supposed to leave bitchy wife for cute OCD teacher so why should I bother becoming invested in his current marriage at all?

So really that’s the entire show so far. I know it’s only two episodes in and I’m going to give it a few more tries (if only because the other people I hang out with on Wednesday nights want to) but so far I’m not impressed. The characters are all crap, the performances are good but that just means I’m interested in the soundtrack and not the show, the gay jokes are wearing thin already and the clever one-liners are not enough to keep me hooked.

Web Comic - Can I Put You On Hold?

Can I put you on hold? by bulletproofheeb

Crossing The Line: Apple and the RI/MPAA

What is the last straw for you? What is the breaking point before you cut any ties to a company or organization and move on? I've been looking for this line in regard to some of the big businesses out there and it seems like the public just keeps pushing it back. There are two groups that I'm at the near breaking point for: Apple and the RI/MPAA.

Let's start with Apple. As a company I despise them. They champion the walled garden/closed system/big brother approach to everything and while this makes for a tight and stable product it is a system you are not allowed to interact with. Much the same way people say "At least Mussolini made the trains run on time," you can say that Apple makes a solid piece of software. The problem is anything that you run on a lot of their products is by their choosing. Sure, it may be nice but if it's not then it's already too late to look for competition. They have created a computer ghetto. It's a lovely community but you are stuck there whether it is to your taste or not.

The most recent slap in the face in terms of their operating procedure is the rejection of all Google Voice applications for the iPhone. If you were running Windows Mobile then you wouldn't notice what Microsoft thinks about an application; it's an open system that you're free to install anything you'd like on. If it was on Android (technically, it is since Google has their app in their own OS, but pretend we're talking 3rd party) then as long as it's not malicious is would stay in their app store. But with Apple they have this sliding scale of what can or can't be sold. If it's malicious it's out. If it's in poor taste it might be out at some point. If it duplicates a feature on the iPhone then it might be out. And if it produces competition to Apple or one of Apples partners then it will most likely be pulled.

Because Google Voice gives users many options that normal phone carriers don't it has been pulled. Apple says it's because it duplicates iPhone features but it doesn't. The iPhone has no feature that lets you switch numbers on the fly, send free text messages through your alternate number or transcribe your voicemail and forward it as an email. But since it has a number dialer it competes with the iPhone's dialer and that is forbidden. Bullshit. This is Apple trying to stifle competition for AT&T. With Google Voice you can jump carriers on a moment's notice and take your number with you without having to deal with a support line.

So now Apple is using the walled garden to stifle competition. And that's bad business. What's the motivation for improving products and services if you know that your user base is trapped. I'm not saying Apple is going to stop all updates but whatever they offer is clearly on their terms and not in response to demand. There's a demand for Google products. There is a freeze on the supply, however.

And now Google Voice is available for the iPhone free of charge but only if you have a jailbroken phone. I've been following the iPhone with a very close eye. Following the saying "hate the factory, not the machine" I recognized that the iPhone is an amazing piece of hardware run by a dictatorial company. With the iPhone 3GS I saw almost no reason to jailbreak other than for cosmetic purposes and came damn near close to getting one. But this has crossed the line. If a product has to be hacked and cracked and warranty-voided the moment you take it out of the box then there's something wrong with that product. In the case of the iPhone and Apple it's all software. But is that the kind of company you want to invest your time and money in? A company that will take out legal programs because it means more work to continue to innovate? A company that rather than participating in a creative dialogue with the user and 3rd party developers simply cuts the cord and forces its customer base to take whatever is doled out and no more? That is a broken system that will only breed dissent and stagnation. And that crossed the line.


Now we come to everyone's favourite villain: the RI/MPAA. The cartels that represent music and movies have taken the following stance:

"We reject the view that copyright owners and their licensees are required to provide consumers with perpetual access to creative works. No other product or service providers are held to such lofty standards. No one expects computers or other electronics devices to work properly in perpetuity, and there is no reason that any particular mode of distributing copyrighted works should be required to do so."

What that means is they think it's unreasonable to expect their products to last forever. Sort of. If you re-read the above you may notice that the statement (made by the lawyer representing the RIAA and MPAA to the Copyright Office) tries to make the concept of "product" and "service" interchangeable.

"We reject the view that copyright owners and their licensees are required to provide consumers with perpetual access to creative works."

No one is asking this of them. Books do not remain in print forever. Magazines close production or require you to renew your subscription. But what magazines don't require is for you to pay to keep access to the issues already delivered to your home. It's not a question of continued access to the creative works as intellectual property. It's the continued access to creative works in hard copy. Your music files should not expire after you have bought them. Your e-books should not vanish one you have legally purchased them.

Of course no one expects electronic devices to work "properly in perpetuity". That would require your warranty to never expire! But you can expect to keep the hardware forever. My friend had a laptop who's cooling fan died. Instead of the unit expiring I cracked the case, peeled out the innards and made a wi-fi equipped 14 inch digital picture frame. When the battery dies on your cell phone you still get to keep the phone and replace the battery (unless it's an iPhone). Corey Doctorow lists a bunch of "creative works" of various ages that still work for him:

I've got 78RPM records from my grandparents' basement that play just fine today -- and I've got Logo programs I wrote in 1979 that I can run today. I own a piano roll from 1903 that I can play back if I can clear the space for a player piano. I've got books printed in the 17th century that can still be read -- and if they can't be read, they can be scanned and the scans can be read.

I personally do work arching documents and converting them to digital form. We've done legal documents, museum catalogues, technical journals… and they all still work. I've opened books from nearly 100 years ago and not a single one ever demanded that I authenticate the most recent purchase of the rights to read the text. They were bought and they work. End of story. Unless you have a closed system like DRM that treats the legal customer with distrust and possibly contempt. It is not the responsibility of the customer to prove their self to the product. It is the responsibility of the producer to provide a product that proves itself worthy to the customer. And that, MP/RIAA, is how you've crossed the line from producer to extortionist.


In both cases you have the huge, deal breaking issues that are made simply because the company in question treats the consumer as a child at best and a criminal at worst. And in both cases the fair option to regain your consumer rights falls in what is now legally dubious territory. If you want your iPhone to work like a real computer product you have to jailbreak. If you want your music to actually play on all your devices, as fair use dictates, then you need to pirate DRM-free tracks after you have legally purchased the music. Is that piracy? Is that fair use? Today it seems to be both.

So what about you? What company or group has crossed the line you've drawn in the sand? What company is getting close? Or do you keep finding that you push that line back inch by inch, giving away more of your rights and a consumer, only to be left with crippled products?

DVD review: The Day the Earth Stood Still

A smarter remake would have been based on the political ideals of its predecessor: fighting against the cynical cold war mentality of the time and trying to find something inspiring that humans have to offer the world and beyond other than fear and destruction. Instead, this version assumes that we’re worth saving but never explains why. At one point an alien agent tells Keanu Reeves (played by Keanu Reeves) that he has found the human race destructive and dangerous; humans need to be killed. But also, he has decided he really likes us and wants to stay. Do you get it? Neither do I.

Other than a couple of inane scenes like the one I just mentioned there is very little else I can recall about this film. I know Jennifer Connelly is in it and she has an adopted/inherited child who’s a bit of a spoiled dick. I know they visit John Cleese who pokes huge holes in Klatu’s (Keanu Reeves’) plan and Klatu ignores him. I know that Gort, the robot, unleashes a swarm of matter-eating bugs. Then they go away and Klatu leaves Earth and then the movie ends. Also, Klatu has magical powers that pop up in order to make life very convenient for him and avoid any suspense.

After watching The Day the Earth Stood Still I’m left with the same feeling as if I had just read high school poetry: vague feelings of banality and awkwardness. It’s rare to have an action film that can balance dullness and lack of plot so perfectly that one is left without a gist of disappointment or spectacle. The Day the Earth Stood Still manages to reach that perfect balance and creates the sense of being gorged on nothing more than air.

On a scale of -5 to +5

The Day the Earth Stood Still is a -.5

A review of the EXPERIENCE of seeing Harry Potter and the Half-blood Prince

This is not an ordinary film review. I am not going to be reviewing the actual movie Harry Potter and the Half-blood Prince. Instead I will be reviewing the movie-going experience. And that experience was awful and just for a little context I’ll start with the good and work towards the bad.

The good is that most of the audience was your typical midnight premiere fan base. They laughed when there was a good joke, gasped when there was a scary moment (well, during the one scary moment) and cried when Dumbledor died. Oh, spoiler alert. But really, the book came out 4 years ago. I think that spoiler’s expiration date has passed.

The medium is the guy who was sitting on my left. I don’t blame him for this as it is a long movie, clocking in at around 2 and a half hours. He fell asleep. Twice. And for long stretches. The first time he started to breath a bit loudly and the girl he was with poked him. He woke up and watched the movie for about 20 minutes before drifting off again. He was quiet and didn’t move around. Overall it was more amusing than distracting. He was obviously there to make his girlfriend happy and was probably less fidgety than if he had tried to keep himself awake. The movie started late so it was actually over just after 3am. Dark room, early AM hours and a movie he’s not interested in. Can you blame him for quietly dozing off?

The bad. This one is the deal breaker and the real story of the night. This is the story of how I was nearly punched in the face and one man probably lost the respect of his child. During the film at some point there was a scene where Hermione is crying and Harry is trying to talk to her. It was at this moment that the man behind me and one seat to my right started making loud snoring/snorting noises because he was bored with character development. I turn around and see a man in his mid 40s sitting between his wife and child (I would guess to be around 13). I shush him. He leans down so his head is just above mine and starts snorting/snoring even louder to make some kind of point. I then tell him to “shut the fuck up”.

I thought that would be the end of the situation. Obviously he is here for his kid so you’d think he’d be aware that there’s at least one person in the theatre he cares about who wants to see the movie. Wrong. He kept making very loud breathing noises sporadically throughout the rest of the film.

The movie ends, people applaud and the lights come up. Everyone either stands to leave to turns to their party to discuss the movie. I look back and see father has been staring at the back of my head, honing the fine art of being exceptionally creepy. I turn to my wife and state “the movie was pretty good, except for the fucking mouth-breather behind us” and motion back. And then the real fun began.

He feels it’s his duty to inform me that “this isn’t your living room”. I am aware of this because if it were he’d be more likely to be tied up to a tree outside then let inside our living room. Instead I tell him that it’s not his living room either. He then goes into a small self-righteous speech where he complains that he makes one noise and gets shushed and this isn’t my living room and what the hell, it’s not my living room. Obviously his brain-needle has reached the end of his brain-record and is just repeating the last line he can think of. I respond by telling him it’s not his living room either however I did pay $10 so that should guarantee I can watch the movie peacefully. He points out that he paid $10 as well, but he should know since this isn’t his living room he doesn’t really have the right to ruin the movie for other people. He looks at me and asks “What do you want?” I say “I wanted to watch the movie. What do you want?”

It’s at this point that he turns to walk away. Every few moments, since the exit line is moving so slow, he turns back to make a threatening gesture here and a dirty look there. I look at him. I look at his kid. I say “Wow, great role model.” And just to prove my point he shoves past his wife and makes a lunge over the back of the row to punch me in the face. I see this coming and don’t flinch; thinking how spectacularly this will prove the point I’m trying to make. And his young son grabs his dad’s arm and is dragged forward as he tries to hold his dad back. This guy is the very definition of class. And this whole time he is trying to hit me I can’t help but marvel at the fact he thinks this proves that he is a good role model. That or he just doesn’t care about his family.

As he’s literally dragged away by his wife and son we all stare. He keeps making faux lunges and shouting at me to “come up here” (he indicates the row where his is, one up from us). I’m not looking at the rest of my group but my wife and I are staring at him agog. His son is still hanging from his father’s right arm this whole time. And I have to because it’s so ridiculous. I laugh. This just leads to him lunging again and being held back by his now very embarrassed wife and his son who looks to be on the verge of tears. This pretty much continues as he’s walked/dragged down the stairs towards the exit. My group is just sitting and staring. Other people are walking and starting. His wife keeps looking at us and shrugging. I don’t know if she’s confused why we said anything or if she’s apologizing so I just look confused (which I am) and shrug back. This whole time the father is shouting at me to do many things, sometimes contradictory. “Stand up and come over here!”, “Yeah, just keep sitting” and so on. And then he vanishes around the corner and is gone.

I was pretty shocked at this whole thing, both at the time and now. Yes, I know I could have kept my mouth shut and my head down but then someone else would end with him behind them at another movie, I’d venture to say at least at the next two Potter films. Someone else would have to endure him making obnoxious commentary through bodily noises. And he’ll never learn a goddamn thing about proper behavior. So instead I did open my mouth. And now his wife will be at the least worried and most likely embarrassed the next time they go to a movie together. And his son will probably not forget this for a very long time. So while I was nearly punched in the face at Harry Potter he emotionally scarred his son for years to come. I’m OK with that.