Normally I’d tweet something this short, but I wanted a chance to give a SPOILER WARNING for season 1 of Dexter. More after the “more” thing.
Category Archives: Entertainment
I understand that journalists need to write catchy headlines in order to trick the public into reading their stories. Take today’s leading headline, for instance: “Obama’s first 100: Now comes the hard part” seems to promise some kind of poignant analysis of what’s to come, when really it’s just a rehash of all the Obama news we’ve seen this year coupled with commentary on why Obama’s acknowledging his 100th day at all.
Furthermore, I understand that news outlets often use headlines to misrepresent the content of an article just to get you to click. For example, “What I learned about my husband in bed” is not the soft-core CNN porn you’re hoping for.
I’m pretty flexible with my news and I enjoy reading a variety of news sites each day. But given that flexibility, I do not understand why Fox News has resorted to using lol-speak in it’s titles.
(The image in it’s original context is below)
Photographs via Fox News on the Interwebz.
A quantum of creativity and fun in an extremely busy time of life can keep me going through stress. So, I’d like to introduce a personal project that I’ve been using as a way to keep balanced between ‘work’ and ‘other’. It’s a website that catalogs Barack Obama’s Presidential neck ties and other neck wear. Enjoy.
Last year at Zandperl’s Halloween party we were playing “The Coachride to the Devil’s Castle” (aka Die Kutschfahrt zur Teufelsburg), and we spontaneously came up with the following definition of “Pearl Harborer”:
In the Card Game “Die Kutschfahrt zur Teufelsburg” (“The Coachride to the Devil’s Castle”), a Pearl Harborer is someone who is surreptitiously hiding the “Schwarze Perle” (a.k.a. “Black Pearl”) card.
Brian’s going to declare victory this turn, unless he’s a pearl harborer…
It was rejected. Superficially, that’s not a big surprise, nor do I care.
What surprised me, initially, was that it took so long for them to get back to me. I submitted the entry on October 27, 2008, and received my “entry not published” email three days ago.
Peer review is known to take ages, but still I could not imagine why the rejection would be so slow (compared to Wikipedia rejections, which can happen within minutes). But the real surprise here is that Urban Dictionary has standards at all. The rejection letter came with a link to Urban Dictionary’s publishing guidelines (you may need to sign up to see the link):
As an editor, you decide what gets published. Use these guidelines while you make your decisions.
- 1. Publish celebrity names but reject friends’ names.
- 2. Publish racial and sexual slurs but reject racist and sexist entries.
- 3. Publish opinions.
- 4. Publish place names.
- 5. Publish non-slang words. Ignore misspellings and swearing.
- 6. Publish jokes.
- 7. Reject sexual violence.
- 8. Reject nonsense. Be consistent on duplicates.
- 9. Reject ads for web sites.
- 10. Publish if it looks plausible.
So anybody can sign up to be an editor, and some consensus of arbitary/random editors decides which entries get accepted and which get rejected. According to these guidelines, my entry should have been published. However, whichever editors saw it disagreed, probably because they didn’t “get” the definition, so now it’s lost to the world forever.
The sad part is that this isn’t so far off from academic peer review. Sometimes you discover or create knowledge that you know is right, and you try to put it out there but the people reading it don’t think it should be seen, and they reject it, often with little or no explanation why. If it’s this hard to publish in the haphazard, anything goes environment of Urban Dictionary, imagine how hard it must be to publish in a journal, where entries theoretically have consequences.
Last weekend was the 2009 MIT Mystery Hunt, and it was a grand old time as usual. I don’t have anything extremely insightful to write about it for a general audience, so I’m going to go list format for highlights:
- We wrote a national anthem (bootleg version).
- We built a spaceship/robot.
- I was reminded again how bad I am at solving puzzles*.
- I *saw* a lot of cool puzzles that I didn’t get to participate in because I was too busy on something else.
- I had a lot of trouble sleeping Friday night… I think it’s because I gave up coffee in mid-December and one D+D medium was enough to keep me going until 4AM.
- There was a puzzle that required having an XBOX live membership looking up XBOX Live achievement data.
- The hunt was HUGE — well over 100 puzzles… Can anyone confirm how many there were?
- Our team (Grand Unified Theory of Love) is composed of a lot of cool people that I wish I saw much more often.
- I have a tendency to have very little forgiveness for people not doing what they’re asked with respect to team organization.
- Tony’s coverage.
- Zandperl’s coverage.
- Jeremy’s Intro and Wrap-Up.
* Does anyone have any suggestions for how to fix this?
I was very happy overall, and glad to bring Paul and Sniperbunny along with me.
Turning to the week, I realize that for a long time I’ve been saying “I’ll get to that as soon as the hunt’s over” for a lot of important to-dos on my list… More importantly I haven’t really started cracking at my recent resolution, which is an indicator that I haven’t personally accepted the gravity of my research deficit.
A scifi meme, via geekylibrarian.
According to the Science Fiction Book Club, these are the 50 most significant SF & Fantasy Books of the last 50 Years, 1953-2002. Bold the ones you’ve read, strike the ones you hated, italicize the ones you couldn’t get through, asterisks for the ones you loved (more asterisks, more love), exclamation points for the ones you own.
- The Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien!
- The Foundation Trilogy, Isaac Asimov
- Dune, Frank Herbert
- Stranger in a Strange Land, Robert A. Heinlein
- A Wizard of Earthsea, Ursula K. Le Guin
- Neuromancer, William Gibson
- Childhood’s End, Arthur C. Clarke
- Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, Philip K. Dick
- The Mists of Avalon, Marion Zimmer Bradley
- Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury
- The Book of the New Sun, Gene Wolfe
- A Canticle for Leibowitz, Walter M. Miller, Jr.
- The Caves of Steel, Isaac Asimov
- Children of the Atom, Wilmar Shiras
- Cities in Flight, James Blish
- The Colour of Magic, Terry Pratchett
- Dangerous Visions, edited by Harlan Ellison
- Deathbird Stories, Harlan Ellison
- The Demolished Man, Alfred Bester
- Dhalgren, Samuel R. Delany
- Dragonflight, Anne McCaffrey
- Ender’s Game, Orson Scott Card**
- The First Chronicles of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever, Stephen R. Donaldson
- The Forever War, Joe Haldeman
- Gateway, Frederik Pohl
- Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, J.K. Rowling
- The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, Douglas Adams
- I Am Legend, Richard Matheson
- Interview with the Vampire, Anne Rice
- The Left Hand of Darkness, Ursula K. Le Guin
- Little, Big, John Crowley
- Lord of Light, Roger Zelazny
- The Man in the High Castle, Philip K. Dick
- Mission of Gravity, Hal Clement
- More Than Human, Theodore Sturgeon
- The Rediscovery of Man, Cordwainer Smith
- On the Beach, Nevil Shute
- Rendezvous with Rama, Arthur C. Clarke
- Ringworld, Larry Niven
- Rogue Moon, Algis Budrys
- The Silmarillion, J.R.R. Tolkien
- Slaughterhouse-5, Kurt Vonnegut
- Snow Crash, Neal Stephenson!***
- Stand on Zanzibar, John Brunner
- The Stars My Destination, Alfred Bester
- Starship Troopers, Robert A. Heinlein
- Stormbringer, Michael Moorcock/li>
- The Sword of Shannara, Terry Brooks****
- Timescape, Gregory Benford
- To Your Scattered Bodies Go, Philip Jose Farmer
Yeah… I wish I had read a lot more of these. I tried the lord of the rings but didn’t make it too far. I may try #49 on recommendation from my advisor.
“That’s so gay” has been around for a while, and I feel like recently it’s reached an equilibrium point where people know it’s messed up to say it, but they say it anyways with a smirk as if saying something while knowing that it’s offensive makes it all better. Kinda out of nowhere, Hillary Duff calls this behavior out:
What do you think of this ad? Is it a message that will get through? Or is it saying something that’s already known, and therefore won’t make a difference? This reminds me of Illdoctrine’s “No Homo”.
UPDATE: 3 down, 47 to go.