This brilliant video from Australian TV tells it like it is–too many countries owe too much money to each other. Well worth a watch.
Via Dean Whitbread
At an Avatar-related junket today, someone asked James Cameron what he thinks of Glenn Beck. It turns out, we have fairly similar views:
“Glenn Beck is a fucking asshole. I’ve met him. He called me the anti-Christ, and not about ‘Avatar.’ He hadn’t even seen ‘Avatar’ yet. I don’t know if he has seen it.”
Cameron was apparently referring to Beck’s reaction to his 2007 documentary, “The Lost Tomb of Jesus,” which casts doubt on the resurrection of Jesus Christ and makes the case that the ancient “Tomb of the Ten Ossuaries” belonged to Jesus’ family.
Cameron later backpedaled a bit and said “I think, you know what, he may or may not be an asshole, but he certainly is dangerous, and I’d love to have a dialogue with him.”
And when asked by THR what it is that makes Beck dangerous he says:
“He’s dangerous because his ideas are poisonous,” Cameron answered. “I couldn’t believe when he was on CNN. I thought, what happened to CNN? Who is this guy? Who is this madman? And then of course he wound up on Fox News, which is where he belongs, I guess.”
And all I can say to that is amen. Glenn Beck is an alarmist and a monster, not to mention a psycho. In fact, he’s the same psycho who said on his radio show last week “I beg you, look for the words ‘social justice’ or ‘economic justice’ on your church website. If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words.” Right, because Jesus wasn’t ultimately preaching about social justice… You can listen to the full clip here:
Glenn Beck responded James Cameron’s words on his show with this smug and smarmy response:
The beginning of the clip is hilarious because he shows a list of the people who hate him. Oh Glenn, that list is far, far too short.
James Cameron trashes Glenn Beck
Glenn Beck responds to James Cameron (video)
It’s no big secret that Google and China have been on the outs since the search giant was hacked in December, with most believing the hack originated from the Chinese government.
Okay, let’s be honest, who else would pull together “a coordinated effort to target specific human rights advocates not just in China but around the world, and to do so by attempting to infiltrate some of the world’s most advanced computer networks belonging to some of the world’s largest companies“?
Google responded to the attacks on their system with a new party line: no more censoring search results in China. Naturally that won’t work for the Chinese government, so today David Drummond, Google’s Chief Legal Officer, unveiled their new plan for servicing China.
So earlier today we stopped censoring our search services—Google Search, Google News, and Google Images—on Google.cn. Users visiting Google.cn are now being redirected to Google.com.hk, where we are offering uncensored search in simplified Chinese, specifically designed for users in mainland China and delivered via our servers in Hong Kong. Users in Hong Kong will continue to receive their existing uncensored, traditional Chinese service, also from Google.com.hk. [...]
Figuring out how to make good on our promise to stop censoring search on Google.cn has been hard. We want as many people in the world as possible to have access to our services, including users in mainland China, yet the Chinese government has been crystal clear throughout our discussions that self-censorship is a non-negotiable legal requirement. We believe this new approach of providing uncensored search in simplified Chinese from Google.com.hk is a sensible solution to the challenges we’ve faced—it’s entirely legal and will meaningfully increase access to information for people in China. We very much hope that the Chinese government respects our decision, though we are well aware that it could at any time block access to our services. We will therefore be carefully monitoring access issues, and have created this new web page, which we will update regularly each day, so that everyone can see which Google services are available in China.
It’s creative, it’s legal. I love it. They’re not perfect, and I’m still afraid Cory Doctorow’s Scroogled will one day become a reality, but today it feels like Google took a step back in the direction of not being evil.
A new approach to China: an update (via Ars Technica)
According to True/Slant, Perez Hilton may have violated a federal obscenity law when he posted a pornographic clip on his website this week.
In the post, Hilton fingered Chuy Bravo, the sidekick of comedienne Chelsea Handler on her late-night talk show, “Chelsea Lately,” as a sometimes adult film performer. To prove it, he posted the explicit box covers of an adult movie, “Chuy Then and Lately,” and a hardcore video clip featuring what appears to be Chuy. But, in doing so, Hilton may have run afoul of obscenity laws that strictly dictate the terms under which pornographic content can appear online.
According to AVN.com [NSFW], the online home of Adult Video News, the adult movie industry’s trade publication, Hilton’s March 15 post, “Chuy Is an Official Porn Star!” [NSFW], does not follow 18 U.S.C. § 2257 guidelines. The code requires websites that post explicit sexual content to comply to various regulations and rules, including a link to a “2257 compliance statement containing the name and address of the custodian of records, who is required to keep records relating to the age and identity of the performers in the content, as well as other information,” writes AVN.com’s Tom Hymes. Hilton’s post doesn’t.
Given that he’s the ultimate troll, I’d love to see this mean the end of his hateful site. That’s probably too much to hope for but a girl can dream.
Did Perez Hilton violate a federal obscenity law? (via BoingBoing)
Remember how France passed Hadopi, the “3 strikes and you lose your internet access” law, to deter French citizens from online piracy? Looks like that didn’t quite work out. I know. I’m shocked too. (Now, where’s that sarcasm mark when I need it?)
“Proponents of the new law claimed that the law would convince millions of people to stop downloading copyrighted content through file-sharing networks. Most critics, however, doubted the effectiveness of the system and pointed out that there are many ways to circumvent the law.
A new study published by the University of Rennes shows that the critics are indeed right. The researchers looked into the habits of downloaders before and after the law was implemented. They found that instead of reducing piracy levels, the piracy rate actually went up by 3%.”
Piracy Rises In France Despite Three Strikes Law
NYT reports that General Motors is shutting down its Hummer division after a deal to sell it to a Chinese manufacturer fell apart.
I’m sure no one will cry about there being one less brand of overpriced gas guzzlers for sale but I do feel bad for the people who will lose their jobs over this.
G.M. to Close Hummer After Sale Collapses
The Telegraph is reporting that we may soon be able to compost plastic:
Researchers at Imperial College London have managed to transforms sugars found in fast growing trees and grasses into a large molecule, known as a polymer, that can be used to make plastic.
Although there are already plastics on the market made from natural materials like corn, these do not biodegrade quickly.
The new discovery would not only cut down on the use of oil, that is usually used to make plastic, but potentially enable people to compost plastic at home.
This is excellent news since current recycling processes are still energy-intensive.
Scientists develop new plastic made from sugar that can be composted (via Fast Company)
KABC from Los Angeles aired a report yesterday that former Scientologists are suing the Church of Scientology for (alleged) abuses like beatings, forced abortions, human trafficking and more.
Hopefully this case will end in a way that means reporters won’t have to use the word “alleged” ahead of “abuse”.
Ex-Scientologists to expose alleged abuse
Remember Charlie Wilson, the politician who helped get funds to Afghanistan freedom fighters so they could get Russia out of the country and was later played by Tom Hanks in Charlie Wilson’s War? He died of a heart attack yesterday at age 76.
Charlie Wilson, lawmaker of movie fame, dies at 76 (Via The Stranger’s Slog)
Michael Geist, Cory Doctorow and Cameron McMaster have recently spoken out about the CBC integrating with iCopyright, described by Doctorow as “the American copyright bounty hunters used by the Associated Press.” Doctorow also says:
iCopyright offers “licenses” to use taxpayer-funded CBC articles on terms that read like a bizarre joke. You have to pay by the month to include the article on your website (apparently no partial quotation is offered, only the whole thing, which makes traditional Internet commentary very difficult!). And you have to agree not to criticize the CBC, the subject of the article, or its author. Thanks for fostering a dialogue, CBC!
(I would quote McMaster’s original article but he appears to have taken it down.)
The CBC has responded to these criticisms on their blog.
A few weeks ago the CBC introduced a licensing system that allows users to legally post all of parts of CBC News articles on their own sites – at a hefty fee. The price for posting one article externally for one month is $250.
“We’re not doing anything we haven’t always done. People can make use of excerpting or linking, that’s always been free of charge,” CBC spokesperson Jeff Keay said on the phone this afternoon. “But what we’re really doing and what we’ve always done is to protect our brand from inappropriate use.”
McMaster still has concerns because iCopyright functions in terms of American copyright laws and not Canadian, but I want to know where they’ll draw the line. What exactly is the inappropriate use they want to protect their brand from? Is it available for commentary so long as it’s positive? Is it okay to just copy, paste and present? Hopefully we’ll see some clarity.
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation signs up with weird American copyright bounty-hunters (BoingBoing)
CBC and iCopyright – CBC responds (Cameron McMaster)
CBC’s New Licensing System Causes Anger (Inside the CBC)
