The Good Parts

Colin Firth taking the Oscar for Best Actor. The man is amazing. He has this understated charm that comes off as natural instead of overbearing (looking at hugh) and he is just a humble guy. King’s Speech may have been his best work yet, creating pity and sadness for one of the most entitled human’s to walk the earth. To top it all off, he was the only celebrity I saw last night who was wearing proper black tie attire, perfectly tailored and worn with British elegance. I understand its Hollywood, and everyone wants to shake the cage, but on a night when everyone else is wearing black suits (not tuxes) and black shirts/black tie, dressing properly is the way to get yourself noticed.

Randy Newman’s speech. The man is a living legend when it comes to not only soundtracks (TWENTY nominations) but to subversive yet cheery sounding music. Ever hear that song he did about a slave trader luring Africans to America? Or that one about short people? He has that charisma that I expect of all the celebrities in that building, but he was one of the few speakers that lived up to my standards.

A good “theme”. The past winners of awards such as Gone with the Wind, Titanic, Shrek, etc. were shown in that magnificent screen behind the stage. This was gorgeous.

An OVERALL less cheesy broadcast. It still had cheese a plenty, but compared to recent years, it seems they have heard the groans and tweaked the broadcast a little. THANK GOD they didn’t have that circle jerk they had last year (re: multiple old award winners coming out and talking about the nominees). The “inbetween” presentations, such as the memorandum and the song performances, were short and sweet, moving the show along at a quicker pace.

The Bad

Roger Deakins getting shafted on True Grit for Cinematography. The man has a lifetime achievement award for the ASC, and he has some of the most beautiful cinematography I have ever seen in a film. The problem with this Oscar is that is normally given to the most eye catching movie (Inception in this case), in which cinematography is only one piece of a enormous puzzle. If you took cinematography and separated it from all the CG, set design, and visual effects, you are left with a craft that requires nuance and invisibility. Deakins is a master of this, but alas, his strength is also his weakness when it comes to being noticed.

David Fincher missing out on Best Director. Though I loved The King’s Speech, I really though Fincher would take it this year. The man made Seven, Fight Club, Benjamin Button, AND the Social Network—all game changers in their own small ways. I know that momentum had shifted to The King’s Speech and it had to be given the trifecta (Best Director, Best Picture, Best Actor), but I think it could, and should, have been a split this year. Tom Hooper, you’re great, but Fincher needs some loving.

Alice in Wonderland winning anything. I know I’m biased here, but the movie was one of the most god awful movies I have ever seen ever in my life. There was no sense of coherence, which to me, is one of the goals of Art Direction, Costumes, etc.

The Awkard

James Franco being stoned out of his mind. My god, the pre show interview was equal parts hilarious and sad. A recap:

Reporter: So James Franco, blah blah host blah blah Academy Awards?

James Franco: Huh? Oh…hehe…cool.

Reporter: Um…okay…blah blah…nervous?

James Franco: No. Not at all. Imsohigh

Reporter: Right. Back to you, Mike!

Anne Hathaway on a Red Bull/ Cocaine overdose. Very pretty though. The hosts in general were not very entertaining. The opening sketch was decent, I suppose.

I THINK it was the winner of Makeup (need to check the broadcast again) who mumbled: “You better teach your lapdog some respect” when the music started rolling due to his particularly long winded thank you speech. Seriously guys, keep it short. You do makeup. Five names, tops. When you start talking about the PA’s…maybe stretching there. You are blathering on for five minutes, have some understanding when they pull you off the stage. This kind of angered outburst is just too much awkwardness to handle.

Kirk Douglas. I know I know. Living legend. But have you seen True Grit? You know the guy Jeff Bridges played that no one could understand? Yeah, it was kind of like that.

Susanne Bier sweating really really profusely. The winner of Best Foreign Language film showed that they really don’t know what anti-perspirant is in Europe.

The little kids singing at the end. I sound like the Grinch, but this was too much cheese. At this point I was hungry, and I just turned the TV off. Unnecessary.

Hope you had fun! Til next year.

-SV

Chapter One: Know Your Enemy

Separating Fact and Fiction

What exactly is an "otaku"? What makes them different from any other person? Is it black magic? Alien forces perhaps? Government experiment? While cynics insist that anime fandom is simply a "divergent cultural splinter", all evidence points to one thing—a condition caused by what scientists are calling "autosystemic semi-psychological airborne disease” (ASSPAD). An ASSPAD is a virus that replicates itself by changing brain and body chemistry through longterm psychological trauma. Much research is being done to discover the minutia of the ASSPAD process, but at present, little is known about how or why it functions or even how it came into existence. Scientists at the Center for Disease Control and John Hopkins University have discovered that these "otaku", as they are colloquially known, are affected by a condition called “anime fever”, which is caused by the first ASSPAD discovered: nihongocaucus viridae.

Nihongocaucus virdiae and “Anime Fever”

Source

Double-blind tests replicated in several campuses across the country have found that viewing images found in the style of japanese animation send signals to the brain that changes brain chemistry (similar to what happens to trauma victims) creating highly irregular seratonin and dopamine production, causing not only obssessive-compulsive brain activity and eating disorders, but the formation of nihongocaucus viridae in the bloodstream, saliva, and sweat. When an uninfected is exposed to the (rather rancid) smell of nihongocaucus virus, it lowers the brains natural defenses against “anime fever” making it much more likely that they will succumb to the disease themselves.

Symptoms

The process of changing into an "otaku" (as I will refer to them) is outlined as follows. Note that this change may take longer or shorter depending on the individual.

(The Dabbler)1 hour exposure to anime:

Mild changes in seratonin levels causes mild changes in mood, ranging from confusion to giddiness.

(The Interested) 4 hour exposure to anime:

Seratonin levels gradually begin to drop, creating obsessive compulsive behavior and starting a vicious cycle of addiction

(The Anime Fan)10 hour exposure to anime:

Seratonin either plummets or skyrockets depending on the individual, creating eating disorders, rage at the world and at others, and severe anxiety. Even at this point, the chemistry of the blood, sweat, and saliva of the infected begins to change, preparing itself to create the nihongocaucus virus.

(The Anime Club Member)200 hour exposure to anime:

Mild psychosis begins to take hold of the individual, increased dopamine levels contribute to a growing belief in an "imaginary world" where pigs fly, and elves walk with humans hand in hand, and demons are handsome creatures, and all japanese women are big breasted and blonde. It is at this stage that the virus begins to exit the body in hopes of continued reproduction, primarily through the sweat glands of the infected. Body odor gradually grows more and more pungent. 

(Conventinius horribilus: “Anime Convention Goer”) 500 hour exposure to anime:

At this point, the infected is immune to their own rancid odor and growing dementia. Severe schizophrenia and hallucinations begin to grip the infected, usually manifesting in the desire to use japanese phrases such as "kimochi" and "yatta" in casual conversation. The infected seek to find other similar infected, in order to maximize the chance that the virus will spread to other uninfected. They create groups called “anime clubs” which must be avoided at all costs.

(The Otaku)1000+ hour exposure to anime:

Final stage of "anime fever", the Otaku. Seratonin levels are permanentally lowered or elevated, and permanent damage has been done to sensory portions of the brain. Individuals usually believe they truly have actually become their favorite character, lashing out with anger at any who try to say otherwise. By now the individual has lost all sense of self-worth, forgoing grooming, contact with friends and relatives, and proper eating habits in order to increase their continual glut of japanese animation. All hope for cure is lost at this point.

Part Two Coming Soon

-SV

The number 1 is the Bruce Wayne of the mathematical world. It’s the first number we learn as a child, it’s the first birthday we have. You place first when you win. It parades itself around in the daylight as the big numero uno, the big shot of numeropolis. It drives around in the best bentley, driven by less popular numbers, perhaps number 6 or 8 (not 7, as he is in prison for eating 9). But at night, watch out criminals. 1 dons the cape of 0.999…(repeating decimal) they are one and the same. Don’t believe me? Check it:

x= 0.999…

10x=9.999…

10x-x=9.999…-0.999…

9x=9

x=1

Oh shit, it’s like I whacked Clark Kent’s glasses off in front of Lois Lane. Don’t worry number 1, we’ll keep your secret. Just hook it up with “69”, I hear she does crazy things in bed.

-SV

Buzzing Alarm Clock

Ring! Ring! Yawn, look at the clock! Oh no! I’m late for class…work…ninja training. It usually follows with brushing teeth, eating breakfast, walking to class.

I guess the thought process goes something like “what better way to start a story than at the beginning of a day?”. I do understand the necessity of showing the “ordinary world”, but this opening has really been done to death.

Alternative

What about showing the “ordinary world” by showing something with a little bit more action. Maybe the wannabee chef is chopping onions, maybe the hitman is cleaning his guns, maybe the student is getting drunk at a frat party…keep the viewer interested. Starting with a guy sleeping is going to send some subliminal messages that won’t help your cause.

Endless Walking

Walking down some random road for 3 minutes, or 5 minutes, or 10 minutes. BORING.

How can you think that anyone would ever want to watch this? Remember what Hitchcock said, “fiction is life with all the boring parts removed.” Create conflict, always.

Alternative

Have something happen. Maybe a bum asks him for change, maybe a stripper werewolf attacks him from the bushes, I don’t know. Just make SOMETHING happen.

Domestic Violence

Boyfriend: You mean there’s another man? Well here is another fist for you! Girlfriend: AHH! Please not again!

There is such thing as too much conflict. Domestic Violence, for whatever reason, is a very popular choice for creating something “gritty”, “dark”, or “artsy”. But it ends up being comedic, or just…very wrong. I think a major part of the success of such subjects on the big screen is having good actors and a very carefully written script. Keep it Simple Stupid.

Alternative

Try something more down to earth. Even the most mundane things can be interesting if seen from a unique angle. Writing and acting things that are more familiar to you create much more natural (and watchable) subjects.

Suicide

Narrator: But I was just getting started. A chair falls over and feet are hanging in the air.

Maybe it’s the growing popularity of Justin Bieber, or maybe its something in the water or atmosphere, but students are obsessed with this cliché. Something about taking one’s own life screams “ultimate conflict”, but like domestic violence it is very very rarely done right. It is either painfully pretentious and melodramatic, or it is almost comically bad. Actually, thinking about it, a comedic suicide story doesn’t seem that bad.

Alternative

Anything can create conflict. Losing a sock, a terminal case of chronic masturbation, a raging madman armed with a sack of oranges—the possibilities are endless. Try to choose something that doesn’t scream “I’m an emo teenager who found a video camera.”

Endless Dialogue

Guy One: Oh yeah, so the dog died…mumble mumble…but Petunia…she’s the best…mumble…that time we had those bottles up our…mumble…What do you think? Guy Two: Well, I guess it would start in my mother’s placenta…mumble…the Arabic conundrum…mumble…but then the girl opened her…mumble…pickles over her face.

My god, some students must think they are the next Shakespeare. Talking in films is overrated. Dialogue, for many novices, is a crutch. It allows them to “tell” a lot of story without “showing” it, which is one of the biggest no-no’s in any narrative art form.

Alternative

Show don’t tell. Someone crying is going to show much more story than a sad guy telling his friend how depressed he is. Use dialogue sparsely and only when necessary—see if you can show what you need to show without words first. If you turn the sound off and you can still follow the story…you got a keeper.

Hope these come in handy for your next student project.

-SV

I believe it was Robert Heinlein (great science fiction writer if you’re interested) who said “An armed society is a polite one. Manners are good when you may have to back up your acts with your life.” He knew what was up. Honestly, just as you can’t blame a keyboard for misspelling, you can’t blame a gun for doing bad things; it’s the person behind it. How do you expect someone to follow gun control laws, when people ignore laws on murder, rape, and theft? But that’s not what I’m here to talk about. We all know guns are weapons, but what other draws (pun intended) does gun ownership possess?

As a Hobby

I’m in the process of getting a Browning Buckmark .22 pistol(above) for the purposes of target practice (known as plinking). My goal is to be able to hit a moving target with 90 percent accuracy within 45 feet. I’m still not sure if it’s me trying to be the Punisher or Clive Owen from Shoot Em Up, but there is something satisfying about shooting holes into a paper target. It takes a lot of muscle memory, breath control and steady hands in order to be consistently accurate. Working towards goals like the one I have established make you feel accomplished as you see your shot spread diminishing, and it’s a little comforting that if there is ever some sort of zombie outbreak, you will at least have a head up on everyone else (or maybe, have their heads up in your scope? Haha! No? Too soon perhaps). I’d suggest going with a .22 at first because ammo is cheaper(500 shots for maybe 15 bucks as opposed to 50 shots for 20 on a 9mm). Just ignore the fact that you’ll look like a little girl with one.

As a Fashion Accessory

Now I know it’s not legal to carry around concealed firearms in Los Angeles, but as I like to say, it’s only illegal if you get caught. What stylish man wouldn’t walk around without his trusty sidearm? Remember the days when people carried their swords around their belt? That’s why men’s suit jackets button left to right, so that the sword wouldn’t snag as a gentleman pulled his sword out for a duel. People were just didn’t give a shit back then. Anyway, a gun in its holster makes a great fashion statement. Julius, one of the masters of Japanese leather, even has a gun holster accessory that, for whatever reason, people wear without a gun. Don’t be a pussy. Stick a glock 22 in there, and dare someone to make fun of your skinny jeans. DARE THEM. But really, nothing puts together a nice three piece suit than a “piece”.

As a Collectible

Guns have been around for more than a hundred years. In that time, they have gone through many aesthetic, ergonomic, and engineering phases. But one thing has not changed: their purpose. Killing shit. There is a rich history to be explored when looking at older “collectible guns”. There was a time when guns were filigreed and polished, they were weapons for a more “elegant age”. I guess those dukes and counts wanted to look good as they put a bullet into someone’s chest for stealing the last cheese sandwich. Even in more recent iterations, some pistols are made with that “special something”. Why not shoot something in style and pick up something like a polished Colt 1911:

As a Courage Builder

Are you a weakling who gets pushed around? Want to feel big and strong? Do you have a small penis, and rage at the world for not blessing you with an average wang? Guns can help.

Just firing a gun can make you braver. Holding that cold steel in your hands is like holding a gigantic robot penis, it becomes an extension of your own, flimsy appendage, except it is strong and fierce. As you squeeze the trigger, the first initial bang causes that duck and cover reaction, especially if you’re firing something bigger than 9mm. The kickback causes you to flinch, your body still in awe of the power you hold in your hand. The paper target becomes that sloping foreheaded bully who forced you to kiss the pavement as he shook your flabby belly, taunting you with his mongoloid sausage fingers, prodding you, spitting on you. The bullet flies through and you see a smoking hole in the target’s abdominal region. “Spit on that, Gerry,” you say to yourself as you blow the smoke from your gun. Suddenly, you feel like a man.

Just remember kids, if and when you do get a gun, follow safety protocol. Never leave a gun loaded, and always keep it under lock and key. Don’t ruin it for the rest of us.

Happy shooting!

-SV

Film is a relatively new medium, but it is the quickest changing—people still paint using pastels and oil, but it is a rare occurrence to see anyone filming on 16mm black and white any more. I believe that this is because film seeks hypnotic levels of immersion, and anything that allows audiences to forget that they are in a movie theater quickly becomes the industry standard. Couple that with the collaborative nature of film, and you have a dynamic and ever changing medium.

But even film has its fundamentals. Like iambic pentameter with poetry, film has rules and formulas that give some sort of structure to the narrative: the 180 rule, the Kuleshov effect, cross cutting…these are things that most filmmakers use to great effect in order to keep the audience from being confused and to help keep them engaged in the story. Why not take a night or two off this month and see an older classic film? Try to see if there is anything that seems to be “missing” in these older movies. [I’ll give you a freebie. You won’t see very much hand-held shaky cam]

These are a few of my favorites:

Gone with the Wind

One of my favorite older movies, Gone with the Wind was the “Titanic” of its generation. It won 10 Oscars, and it made one of the highest grossing films ever made (adjusted for inflation). It showcases superb acting from its leads, impeccably tailored costumes, classical cinematography…it is in many ways a perfect movie (except it’s a little long, at 3 hours 44 minutes).

Citizen Kane

If you want to see the beginning of modern era of film, look no further. This is it. In one of those “oops” moments, this did not win best picture in 1941, but there is no question, this movie changed cinema forever. Watch for deep focus (everything in focus), and low angle shots (these were difficult to film back in those days). Also, see if you can catch auditory links (continued dialogue through 2 different scenes) in the movie, this was one of the techniques pioneered by Orson Welles, the director.

Casablanca

Another timeless classic. Watch for dark, low key lighting, shadows, and silhouettes, all staples of film noir (maybe check out a more recent movie like Se7en and compare lighting). And Bogart in a trenchcoat. God damn.

A Streetcar Named Desire

This is a great movie to see if you want to see a great example of method acting. This was a style of acting pioneered by the great Lee Strasberg and her partner Stella Adler (who was Marlon Brando’s acting teacher). Watch the scene where Brando screams out for Stella, his wife, and you’ll see what I’m talking about. Also, a plus if you’ve seen gone with the wind, Vivian leigh plays a withered southern beauty (Hah! Tara must not have been good to her)

2001: A Space Odyssey

This is a more recent movie, but it is a game changer, nonetheless. The powerful orchestral soundtrack, the cutting edge special effects, and the uniqueness of its narrative all work together to create what many directors, such as Spielberg, Ridley Scott, and George Lucas consider to be one of the most influential movies made in the latter half of the century. Plus it has HAL, the killer robot, whose line” I’m afraid I can’t do that”, gave me the chills. Fun fact, Anthony Hopkins said that he used HAL as his model for Hannibal Lecter’s voice. Now that’s some creepy monotone. Watch for the elaborate backdrop of the first “ape-men” scene, which uses front projection, which is the precursor to the green-screen that is so loved (or hated) today. Also, if you’ve played Mass Effect, you can see where their space suit design comes from.

Happy Watching!

-SV

I know none of us have posted in more than 6 months. It happens. Lack of motivation, lack of momentum, warlock battles, etc. I’m not here to make excuses. But look at it this way–we all need a death before rebirth/resurrection. It’s part of the hero’s journey. This could be a physical death and resurrection (Jesus, zombies, zombie Jesus, etc.) or it could be a moment of catharsis, psychological or emotional release which leads to a new outlook, a realization. With the pass of the new year, we are reminded of the end of things, but also the beginning. We are reminded how much time we wasted eating chicken nachos or fighting oyster poachers or watching "Heroes" (trust me, this is the biggest waste of time I can think of). We are reminded of our limited time on earth and we vow to change. To become better. To be resurrected…to become a credit to the human race. Thus the New Year’s Resolution was born.

The New Year’s failure was created a few weeks later. Around today actually. Maybe that is why I’m writing today. I vowed to blog more this year. This is my first post.

So why do we fail? Why do we make promises that we know we won’t keep? Is it a coping mechanism to keep us from throwing ourselves off some tower?

One reason is that we don’t make specific goals, making it that much easier to fail. Hitler didn’t say "conquer the world" for his New Years Resolution, he said "Invade Poland" (Fact: This is the first solution suggested to every problem in European politics).

Here is some examples of how you can create more specific resolutions:

Bad Resolution: "Lose Weight"

This is a big one (haha, fat) that people make, but rarely achieve. Losing weight requires some very specific changes in order to be effective. You need to create a plan, and follow it.

Better Resolution: "Lower my caloric intake to 200 calories under maintenance, daily" "Begin a 5 sets of 5 increasing difficulty weightlifting program, utilizing squats, deadlifts, overhead press, bench press and rows" or "Call the lap band office and set up an appointment"

These are what David Allen called "actionable" goals. They are clear, specific, and you are able to do something about them.

Bad Resolution: "Get a job"

Bad. First of all, how about specifying what type of job? Hairdresser, accountant, ninja warlord, gynecologist to the stars…be specific.

Better Resolution: "Send out applications to Cost Cutters, CPA firms, Hirohito-san, and Bevery Hills Ob/Gyn Clinic"

Now I have specific goals that I can easily accomplish. You can replace these goals with other, achievable micro goals as you achieve them.

Don’t get too crazy with your goals, now. Make them achievable.

Bad Resolution: "Write more"

What was I thinking? Write more could mean anything. Technically, I have achieved my goal. Good for the short term, bad in the big, grand scheme of things.

Better Resolution: "Write 3 posts a week"

And so I shall. Still not where I want to be with my blogging, but it’s a start.

Here’s to new beginnings!

-SV

The iPad, for all its deficiencies (which are plenty), is a device that has caused all the major companies to follow in suit with their own tablet devices. But Apple has something that makes theirs different: complete fascist control over their closed system. Everything that runs on an iPad must be approved and stamped with Steve Jobs’ apple shaped seal. But in these times of growing technological complexities, the masses appreciate simplicity. It just works. After all, centagenarians, cats, and corgis naturally know how to use the device without reading the instructions. While critics can list page after page of missing features, the large number of iPad sales reflect how little the public truly cares. As long as it “just works”. But is it because Apple fans are simply sheep buying the newest toy, or is it something more? We must dig deeper. The words of Marcus Aurelius ring true: “Look within. Let neither the peculiar quality of anything nor its value escape thee.” Apple at its core seeks to simplify the user experience. It wants to take the headache out of computing. It wants to ensure that we are able to accomplish the essentials with speed, efficiency, and style.

But I hate Apple. I hate them so much. This whole Adobe/Apple war is getting out of hand. Apple is blocking Flash, and even Flash apps, citing that they are a drain on resources. While their arguments have some merit, their handling of the situation is becoming pretty infantile. Steve Jobs’ ego seems to grow daily, and it may only be a matter of time before efficiency gives way to heavy handed, corporate fascism. We can see this in both the restructuring of iPhone developer requirements and from its increasingly strict censorship of what Apple deems “inappropriate” apps (yet allows Safari to browse objectionable material anyway). Do you really want Apple to tell you what you can and cannot do with your device.

The growing number of Apple hipsters is getting a bit annoying. I don’t really care if you buy shiny toys, but don’t act like you are better than me because of it. Remember when people used to call their phone a cellphone? Now it’s an “iPhone”. Have you seen my iPhone? My friends always try to show off their latest app, their newest game, but never seem to be able to hold a conversation on the phone longer than 3 minutes because of dropped calls. Surprising how this smartphone can’t even make calls properly.

And don’t get me started on their god awful pricing. At times, they can charge upwards of 80 percent premium for similarly specced PC products. People tout the lowest capacity iPad as 499, but with 3G (to me, a necessity) it goes for 630, plus 30 dollars a month in fees. Not such a good deal, anymore (But hey, when you anchor 999 to an audience, 630 sounds like a steal). I’ll go over pricing in the future, and how Apple milks your purchase month after month (with a smile on your face).

Their products are becoming less and less innovative (the iPad? A big ipod, really?), which is predictable given their current position in the market. They are the top dog, eating up market share faster than a fat guy at Hometown Buffet. Why fix something that is obviously not broke. And out in the boonies, Microsoft has become the new underdog, trying to redefine the game through advancement in user interface and user experience. With it’s new Windows 7 Phone Series, and its rumored Courier tablet, Microsoft is becoming what Apple used to be—a visionary company that seeks to improve rather than to rehash. The tables have turned, and honestly, I have Apple to thank for it.

Competition is good. Even though I hate Apple, and will probably never buy any of their products (though I may consider it if the iPad gets a pressure sensitive pen stylus for drawing in the future), I have to thank them for waking up its competitors and beginning a new surge of technology that will shape our day to day lives. Either that or blow us all to hell.

When I refer to Generation Y, I like to think that it encompasses people under 30 as of today. This is in relation to the Baby Boom Generation (BB) 1945-1964 and Generation X(GenX) 1964-1980.

In my time working in retail, the food industry, and corporate offices, the same patterns began to arise: BB’s and GenX’s have similar work ethic, workplace practices and business models. But there was something odd to me: Even hard working GenY’s were being treated with condescension, great ideas not heard, and motivation was being wasted needlessly. It seemed to me that management as a whole has not discovered the way to fully tap GenY’s potential. Management’s hard headed loyalty to traditional motivators (punishment, simplification, bonuses) did not seem to work as well on GenY’s. To top it all off, GenY’s “blatant disregard” of the rules of conduct in the workplace deemed them incorrigible and inefficient. But I disagree. I believe GenY’s are an evolution of work—and management needs to learn how to properly utilize us.

The most successful companies (Google, Apple) are noticeably the exception to this, and it is my belief that some of this is due to their nurturing of horizontal structure, something GenY’s more heartily accept. Rather than going up the chain with an idea (put it in the idea box, Sam, if it’s good I’ll show my boss and take credit) they allow one on one conversations with higher ups (in pay only) and foster creativity and brainstorming. As a generation that has grown up with the internet, conversation and sharing ideas has become an innate desire. We long to have our voices heard (Twitter, Facebook, Yelp, blogs in general), and we are disheartened when we are shot down by red tape and bureaucracy. This fuels the self-fulfilling prophecy that management has placed upon us. We are shut down, then criticized for lack of motivation. Take a hint from 3M or Google: Our ideas are good, let us tell you them.

We can handle more work, if you’ll just let us. I’ve noticed that higher ups refuse to delegate responsibility because of lack of experience, or some snooty higher-than-thou attitude. Rather than make all it’s important decisions in upper management behind the large wooden doors of a boardroom, many successful businesses delegate their problems to their employees. Google’s famous twenty percent time. Google allows employees twenty percent of their work time to work on their own projects. This has allowed them to rectify many of the problems that users have voiced, all without having to hold a board meeting to fix the problem. Allow us the freedom to help solve your problems, and you will be rewarded for it.

our company better. The caveat here is: we don’t consider it “our company” if we have no connection to it. Is it any wonder why the best companies to work for are also the most successful? When we feel a connection to a company, we want to see it succeed. Zappos is known for offering a thousand dollar bonus to new employees if they quit. Why? They are looking for people who are committed to the job. Rare is the person who takes the offer, however. This is because of the environment Zappos has developed for their employees. It rewards creativity, and seeks to stimulate the workforce rather than whip it into command. For better or worse, technology has had its effect on GenY. The internet, video games, and television necessitate GenY’s need to have external motivation in order to function at their full potential. Rather than fight technology’s tangential effects on the workforce, embrace it. Make work a stimulating experience, and you will be rewarded with it.

GenY isn’t without its faults. We’re irreverent, bawdy, we come in late, we don’t like suits that much, we like to surf the internet. We’re not perfect. But we do have our strengths. We are creative. We can solve sophisticated problems.We can work well together. We want our company to succeed. The work environment will change eventually, like it or not. The question is which companies will be left behind in the archaic bureaucracies of the past and which will embrace GenY’s and their quirks and move forward into the future.

Is this right, and could it happen here in America?

Depending on your perspective on the nature and purpose of law, your answer would vary. Many people in this country would say, hell yes, this is right! Any form of child pornography, even virtual /animated, is immoral and therefore illegal. People who watch this stuff are pedophiles or pedophiles-to-be and deserve to be locked up before they can rape my children.

This is what I think: Banning virtual kiddie porn is against the spirit of American law, and should never, ever happen.

Disclaimer: Now before you call the popo on my ass, know this much. I don’t watch or support kiddie porn, real or animated. I think it’s sick and deviant, and anyone who watches it is pretty much a pervert. What, what, what??! Isn’t that psychotically hypocritical? Let me explain.

It is my belief that America is built on an amoral legal system. We are a disestablishmentarianist government, we do not believe in a state church and try to distance ourselves from meddling with religious affairs. This suggests that our laws cannot be based on a particular religion’s moral code, though admittedly, our legal system isn’t a perfect vacuum, so legislation with obvious moral color has, and will continue to be, passed. Though certain individuals, erm parties even, seem to believe otherwise, America was built on law that was amoral. The Constitution was structured loosely and broadly in order to encompass the ideas of all religions, nationalities, and ideas, as long as the actions taken by these individuals did not infringe on the freedoms of anybody else. This is where we can find support for my argument: In the use of palpable harm as a measurement of infringement of personal rights of individuals.

Palpable harm is a real harm: emotional or physical, that is caused by an action or event. Though there is some stretch to this measure (Did that naked guy running through the street really cause palpable harm?), there is definitely a limit to its use. Back in the crazy fucked up 80’s, we had the case of Bower vs. Hardwick, wherein two gay guys were busted for having sex within the confines of a home, with the curtains drawn and the door closed. They were charged with sodomy (illegal in that state). The Supreme Court upheld this fucked up arrest, saying that nowhere in the Constitution did it allow (paraphrased) “butt fucking as a universal inalienable right under the Constitution”. The Court underestimated the righteous fury of gay men scorned. Seventeen long years later, Lawrence vs. Texas overturned this decision. Pretty much the same case as before, two gay guys doing it in a room, except it was even more fucked up this time because someone called in a robbery (he fucking knew they were having sex) in progress, just to stop these gays from making butt love. In a stunning 6-3 decision, the Court stated under the 14th amendment’s due process and equal protection clauses, there is no legitimate state interest in banning sodomy, there is no palpable harm caused by consensual sex behind closed doors, and essentially: stop whining about mental images, you fucking pansies (I’m pretty sure he actually said this). Imagination does not create palpable harm. Yes, if the two gay guys were butt nekkid on the front porch with bright neon arrows pointing into their rectums, besides being completely psychotic, it would be illegal. Sex behind closed doors? Hey, let em do their thing. Imagined harm is not palpable harm. Just ‘cause I imagine two sweaty muscular dudes playing pocket pool with each other doesn’t mean they should be arrested. Now onto child porn.

First let’s talk about the difference between real child porn and virtual child porn. Real child porn causes palpable harm. How? Well, besides the little child getting abused in the video/picture, if you buy it, view it, give money to the person who made it somehow (advertisements etc.), you perpetuate abuse and create a real and palpable harm. Virtual porn, on the other hand, creates no palpable harm. No child is abused when pictures are drawn, and giving the hentai artist money won’t directly cause children to be hurt.

But Sally, what about those pedos who watch kiddie hentai, won’t this fuel their carnal desires to predate younglings? Well, the same can be said for violence, sex, and drugs in movies, video games, music, art…just because you see it, doesn’t necessarily make you more likely to do it. I love violent video games, but you don’t see me stabbing people with samurai swords.

If there is no one being physically harmed, and no one is being emotional harmed(no one is forcing you to view such objectional content), there is no palpable harm. We can’t punish the few in favor of the many cases that this decision would cause. Similar legislation has recently been overturned, so I am not alone in this. There are more complex ways of arguing the same point (rational basis, and strict scrutiny tests), but this is the simplest way I can put it.

Kiddie porn: bad. Banning something that does not cause palpable harm: also bad.

Hopefully you can see the broader implications of what this case means. E.g. Hey what else doesn’t cause palpable harm? *Smokes a J*