the trailer for “Serenity” is here.
some day i’d love to write an article about the derivative nature of the whedon canon — derivative, i say again, is good, essential, and ubiquitous. whedon & crew’s derivations are a fine, fine example of building-upon, tweaking, mixing, improving, mashing, and processing mythology, pop culture, science fiction, and many other sources thru a personal visionary sausage grinder. a process involved in all creation, but so rarely done well, and even more rarely done with graceful consciousness of the derivative nature of the work; deft handling, respect, and respectful criticism of the raw materials …
[this post was inspired by photomatt on serenity and on da vinci crock]
related posts: yippee yippee 2
And geneticists are using DNA to uncover relationships in populations all the time. Jobling’s colleague, Turi King, profiled the Y chromosomes of 150 men with random surnames and compared them with 150 men who shared surnames. Unexpectedly, she found that sharing a surname means you are highly likely also to share a Y chromosome.
— Alok Jha, The Adam and Eve of genetics, Salon.com Technology, 2005/4/29
Okay, what am I missing here? Isn’t this, well, obvious? Maybe with extremely common surnames (Smith, Garcia, or Chang/Zheng) the expectation is that there is virtually no relationship at all among those so named, because the names independently developed multiple times. But surely it’s statistically likely that Juan Garcia is more closely related to Tomas Garcia than to, say, Leon Martinez? And in the case of less common surnames, passed down patrilineally, in almost all cases with the actual Y chromosome, wouldn’t we really expect to find a high concordance of common Y chromosomes?
support your local coffeeshops with the starbucks delocator. [citing trail from wendy seltzer legal tags to Boing Boing to stay free!]
and hey — a word to the San Francisco Art Institute: using a trademark to describe, criticize, or compare to the referenced entity is trademark fair use. look it up.
Texas bans gay foster parents. now, if only they can figure out a way for people to know their own sexuality. [link from misc heathen 4/22]
update: ping analyzed the so-called research on ‘homosexual’ foster parents
and jon stewart’s The Daily Show aired the solution to knowing if you’re gay or not (or dangerously bisexual): Texas has initiated a quiz for prospective foster parents:
Fill in the last lines of this quote:
At first I was afraid; I was __________.
- I don’t know.
siva calls out the folks who keep on talking to men in the public interest tech community & ignoring the women who’ve laid the groundwork: SIVACRACY.NET: Siva Vaidhyanathan’s Weblog: Y (Chromosome) the Same Old Faces? [thanks to copyfight]
and an nyu student demonstrates to j. antonin scalia understand that the private sex practices of consenting adults ought to be, well, private. (at a Q&A at nyu, the student asked j. scalia about his position regarding Lawrence, and dissatisfied with his response, followed up with the question: “Do you sodomize your wife?”) [page 6 in the nypost and Eric Berndt, the student questioner, explaining why he did it] [thanks to copyfight AGAIN] i wonder if j. scalia got the point? or did he merely console & distract himself by feeling outraged that someone would be so rude & inappropriate? ‘you can disagree with someone’s politics, but that doesn’t give them the right to verbally assault you in public!’ does he think it would be more appropriate & less embarrassing if asked by a prosecutor or judge in a courtroom with the coercive threat of prison and/or punitive fines and/or registration on ‘sex offender’ databases behind the question? [rewritten 5/5]
5/5: oh yeah. and did i mention how curious i found the blog commentary on this incident? on so-called liberal / progressive blogs, commentary seemed largely critical. ‘He did our cause a great disservice; how dare he be so rude & uppity’ with only a small minority defending the kid. [See, e.g., daily kos 4/12] And on the right-wing blogs I read that day I saw more commentary & debate between people who thought it was rude & people who got the point about individual rights & privacy! [I will try to remember which blogs those were - maybe volokh conspiracy.]
Andrea Dworkin has died. As Susie Bright points out, she was a significant influence on most feminists, and the starting point for the sex radical movement. Susie Bright said anything I could have wanted to say about Dworkin.
We already knew this, but Chuck D. is pretty cool:
LL Cool J has come out in support of the US music industry’s legal threats music downloaders. LL was speaking to a Senate committee investigating whether the industry has been too heavy-handed .
“My question is, if a contractor builds a building, should people be allowed to move into the building for free?” he told senators.
But fellow rapper Chuck D, of Public Enemy, said people should be allowed to swap songs on peer-to-peer sites.
“P2P to me means power to the people,” said Chuck D. “I trust the consumer more than I trust the people at the helm of these (record) companies.”
The rap star later added: “LL’s a staunch American…but when you solely have an American state of mind, you’re increasingly becoming a smaller part of the world.”
— LL Cool J – Supports RIAA Actions : DanceFrontDoor Dance Music [2003/Oct/1]