The Future's Pretty Funny

Earlier, I failed to mention the most obvious overestimated visions of a future now past. The date is even in the title:

2001: A Space Odyssey.

It's 2007, Dave, what's the hold up? Answer - Shut up, Hal.

The only technologies presented in the movie that we actually have in the year 2007 are classical music, bone clubs and monkey suits. Some folks over at jacksfilms have done a great send up of this epically confusing movie. It gets funnier as it gets going.

(via milkandcookies)

Marvelous

Sometimes it takes me a long time to put 2 and 2 together. After years of reading comic books, I noticed this little button in an old X-Men comic that said "IN THE SENSATIONAL FANTASTIC FOUR STYLE". It made me realize that somebody got lazy over at Marvel when they created the original X-Men and the Fantastic Four.

Let me I'll break it down.

1. Captain Alliteration
Both teams are led by a guy with an alliterative name (Scott Summers as Cyclops and Reed Richards as Mr. Fantastic). Personality-wise these guys are both in the same boring boat. Being abandoned by fathers who went of into space or the future probably was responsible for that.

2. Mystery Lady
Marvel Girl and The Invisible Woman have very similar psionic powers. Frequently found in the role of the damsel in distress, they both fall for and marry the leader of the group and have a child with world shattering superpowers.

3. Working Class Brawler
The Thing and the Beast sure have similar names and similar difficulties dealing with a world in which they are so visibly different. Basically, they're both toughs that specialize in slamming into enemies. The Thing is yellow and the beast turns blue.

4. Elemental Boy
The Human Torch and Ice man. Hot and cold versions of the same thing.

Which leaves Angel. Got nothing for him. Again, I'm not saying that these two comics are carbon copies just that someone got lazy.

Media Blitz

Thanks to the new Bill Moyers documentary "Buying the War" the diamond monocle of the nation's elite is turning back to the media's role in promoting the Iraq war. It's another great opportunity for the media bigwigs to hem and haw and make up some nicery about how they couldn't help but act as a mouthpiece for the Bush administration instead of realizing the fact that they could see the president's shriveled unit might imply that he wasn't wearing clothes.

On the bright side, we have gotten to hear some great voices of opposition, such as Glen Greenwald of Salon, calling the media to task . Check out his regular column/blog.

Some media dude today on Dianne Rheim offered some BS excuse that you can't expect the media to be "ahead of the opposition party." You have got to be kidding me. Does he realize how stupid that sounds? Apparently, instead of investigating claims made by Bush Co., the media should simply report what they're told because the Democrats haven't brought up any points in opposition. Without Democratic support, their hands are tied. Give me a break. In the real world, Democratic support existed in the form of a favorite punching bag Ted Kennedy (who at the time was downright prophetic) but was completely ignored.

Since when is the media constrained to representing a political party? Since when is reporting the truth and pointing out falshood considered political speech? Since when is it the role of the media mediate between the controling parties of government?

(The picture is "Join, or Die" by Benjamin Franklin via USFlag.org)

News Anyone?

Here's a recent article on sexual differences and wages. Every year, a study like this one comes out and every year the results are reported as if it's news. Or rather as if it's new. new news. whatever.


Yes. Women make less money than men. Even when they have the same experience and do the same job. The dismal science, economics, says that this is impossible outside of blatent discrimination which should only be temporary in a true market economy as wages are set by productivity which blah blah blah.

I hate economics. Turning instead to my everpresent compangion, anthropology, we learn that a major factor in setting wages is the perceived social standing of the job and the people who tend to do it. Women as a group have a lower social standing than men in this country so they will get paid less even if they're doing the same thing. In general, you get paid what you're worth in a social sense as much as you do in an economic sense. You can copy and paste that idea to apply to race and age.

I'm not saying it's right. Just don't expect it to change when people refuse to admit that it even exists. For example, Fark.com tagged this news as unlikely.

Backtracking a bit, I wouldn't put too much stock in the study sited in Reuters article alone since it comes from a private organization that hasn't published it's findings in a journal of any kind and direct access to the study is not freely available. But, there's plenty of other sources that have gotten the same results. The best compliation of theory, evidence, and discussion can be found at echidne of the snakes. This should be required reading for anyone with a high school education.

(The Picture is by Ann Rosener via American Memory. The caption with the photo reads: Women in war. Machine gun production. With swift, deft movements, this young worker, one of 2,000 women employed in a Midwest war plant, assembles barrel carriers of machine guns. It's a job requiring constant attention, speed and judgement; a job for which women have proven themselves better fitted than men. Site: a Midwest plant.)

These Aren't the Droids Anyone is Looking for

Did you know that George Lucas owns rights to the word droid? I had no idea. Now, I have to send him a quarter just for this post. I guess that I'm getting off easy; Carrie Fischer sends him ten bucks every time she looks in the mirror.

Caption Contest #1

In a feeble attempt to encourage reader participation, I do hereby declare the first The Bedford Hillsian Caption Contest (TBHCC) underway. Warm up your brains and sharpen your tongues because here's the first photo:


We got Pinkerton on the right, Lincoln in the middle, and McClernard on the right. For a more detailed version of the photo go here. Leave your entries in the comments. Oh, and some rules. Leave as many entries as you want. For the caption, you can make any or all of the characters speak or just describe the scene (I put the speech bubble over everyone as an example don't let it constain your fertile mind). Good luck, all.

My entries:
#1
Pinkerton: You want a piece of Lincoln? To bad, cuz you gettin a piece a PINKERTON!
#2
Lincoln: The ladies love the top hat and Lincoln loves their bottoms fat.
McClernard: YES, SIR!

(Photo by Alexander Gardner via Library of Congress)

Shut Up and Die

I'm firmly planted in the anti-marketing/anti-advertising market which, as many of you advertising schlocks and Bill Hicks fans know, is a huge market. Advertisers would love to get there greedy little paws on this group. It must be the delicious taste of ironing found in the anti-marketing market that tempts the PR crowd so.

Advertisers see any popular group activity and think to themselves, "What would a commercial parasite do?". It's one thing to wait patiently for someone to ask for information about your product and/or service and it's quite another to stuff it into any and every available space where it fits. The latter seems to be the more ubiquitous trend in the world of ads.

I bring this up because some dude left scattered comments all over my blog the other day which solely linked to some crap clearinghouse ad site. Curse you spam robots!

Anyway, here's another Bill Hicks clip and even though he died before the current manifestation of the Iraq war, he was right on.

Future Days of the Past

I admit that when I was in middle school I used to play this great game, "Where in Time is Carmen Sandiego?". The game was later turned into a kid's tv game show featuring the vocal talents of Rockapella. Ah, the halcyon days of nerdery.

There is one thing about the game that bothered me though. In the intro, the game referred to the year 1990 by which point time travel will be used to commit and solve crimes. The game was created in 1989 and by the time I started playing it '90 had come and gone. Every time I played, my still forming brain was dumbfounded how far off these people's predictions were about the future.

Turns out that this is a common mistake in the world of future prediction. Images of the future often diverge enormously from where the actual future turns out to be (Recon has beaten me to the punch with some 1900 postcards of 2000). The speed of progress can be easily overestimated. For futurists, time travel, growing human organs and robot butlers always seem to be just around the corner. Fictional series from Buck Rogers to Star Trek jump this gun again and again.

But, of course, my favorite version of the past as seen by the even paster is the '68 Godzilla movie "Destroy All Monsters. Let me see if I can sell this movie to you by saying: If you only see one Godzilla movie in your entire sad life (and it will be sad indeed if you only see one), let it be this movie. Here's the beginning.

You can watch the entire movie on youtube. It's worth every penny that you don't have to pay. Rating $3.

(Picture via consoleclassix)

Lightning Strikes Twice

In an earlier post, I talked about the team goal of Brazil in the '70 World Cup as being one of the best in the history of the tournament. Well, the best goal created by one player alone has to be Maradona's goal in the '86 tournament.

That goal needs little commentary but I would like to say that Maradona's style is 90% left foot (not many players rely on one foot so much and especially not the left).

The reason I bring this up now is because of Lionel "The Flea" Messi. Many people (including Maradona himself) have compared this young player to his fellow Argentinian and just the other day he scored a goal that is nearly identical to '86 World Cup goal.

Messi still has a long career ahead of him to measure against the great Argentinian. Unfortunately, Maradona has been hospitalized for the last week or so for acute hepatitis related to alcohol.

Not Just Hillary's Daughter

There are other places besides Brazil that make football great.

Take the international makeup of Chelsea for example. Chelsea is a team with a fine English pedigree starting with it's formation in 1905. It has a Portuguese coach and is owned by a Russian. The team itself has a core of great English players but also includes strong players from the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Portugal, Ukraine, the Netherlands, Ivory Coast, and Ghana. Also on the squad, but not as dominant on the field are players from Israel, Italy, Sweden, Cameroon, and Nigeria. Notably absent since the departure of Hernan Crespo are the South Americans. But a globetrotting squad nonetheless.


Another great thing about Chelsea is that the team is as successful as it is diverse. Just this weekend they defeated Blackburn Rovers and move on to face Manchester United in the FA Cup final. Since the League Cup is already under their belt and they have high standing in both the premier and champions leagues, they are in contention for a hitherto unheard of quad (the treble having only been accomplished once before by Ajax Amsterdam).

Chelsea is far from the only international team these days though. I picked it in particular because it happens to be one of the more successful ones. In European club football, this tends to be the norm. I myself happen to be a big fan of Arsenal.