Jim’s Brain Online

Posted by Jim at February 6th, 2004

Claiming to be a parody of Google, a search engine called Booble specializes in searches for pornography.

Google is not amused and appears to be suing them. Their case is essentially that Booble is not really a parody, but actually a pornography search engine disguised as a parody.

Why does this sound like an Ally McBeal episode?

Tangents aside, I was thinking about the whole idea of a pornography only search engine. Does the world really need one?

Pornography seems easy enough to find when you don’t want it. Ever try to look for the Whitehouse’s site and mistakenly type “.com” at the end? Let me just assure you that you won’t find very much politics there.

More annoyingly, porn sites appear to buy up domain names in order to drive more hits to their sites. I once clicked on the link to what I thought would be the website of an actor who worked on Babylon 5 only to find a website with much more skin and fluids than I anticipated–not to mention the roughly one zillion pop up adds that opened every time I closed a window.

Even innocuous searches can turn up new and unanticipated results based on some incident. Example: Try to find out if there’s a Hilton in Paris sometime.

Even if none of that were true, I can’t help but think that it’s probably fairly easy to find pornography with the real Google.

Not that I’ve tried, mind you.

Posted by Jim at February 5th, 2004

When George W. Bush candidacy for president was first announced, I found it a bit bizarre. Knowing a little bit about his history, I found him a strange mixture of Bill Clinton and Dan Quayle.

Like Clinton he had skeletons in his past. Unlike Clinton, the skeletons were of substance abuse (alchohol and possibly also cocaine) rather than sex. Like Clinton he claimed that they were in the past. Unlike Clinton, the alchoholism appears to actually be in the past.

This is a good thing for him. America likes a reformed sinner.

Unfortunately for him, he also had the military record of Dan Quayle. Son of an influential family, he was able to serve in the National Guard rather than go to Vietnam. Not only that, while Quayle apparently actually showed up for duty, Bush may have taken a year off without leave (or punishment).

I was slightly (but not entirely) surprised that people didn’t make a big deal out of it. Gore’s record was only slightly better. Unlike Bush he volunteered to serve in Vietnam, but similar to Bush (Gore’s father was a senator) he wasn’t assigned to exceptionally dangerous duty.

Kerry’s record contrasts wildly with Bush’s. Despite being from an influential family he went to Vietnam, served heroically, came home and then protested the war.

I’ve got a feeling we’re going to be hearing a lot about Bush’s military record this time around. If the charges are true, he definitely deserves to take the heat.

I hope that Bush’s opponents will have more to say than just that, however. I much prefer a positive vision for a presidency than a vision limited to beating the other candidate.

UPDATE: I particularly like this perspective on how willing people are to attack or defend Bush on this topic without bothering to ask, “What is the likelihood of this charge being true?”

Posted by Jim at February 5th, 2004

By new words I’m not referring to new words children say, I’m referring to words parents get to use more often than they did before children.

Today’s word: encrusted

Usage: Abby’s chair needs to be cleaned because it is encrusted with an unknown substance.

Posted by Jim at February 3rd, 2004

In thinking about sequels, I have one basic observation: Sequels often suck. When they don’t, it’s generally because it wasn’t so much a sequel as a pre-planned continuation of the first story. It’s still possible to screw that up of course.

Roger Zelazny manages to err in a way that allowed me to enjoy the books, but not enjoy the overall effect of the story on my understanding of Amber’s universe.

Here’s what he did right:
1. He didn’t retrofit the plot this time around. The first Amber series was supposed to be a trilogy. The Courts of Chaos was supposed to be the third novel. The third and fourth books are massive plot retrofits with a change in tonal emphasis from epic fantasy to mystery. Not that this is all bad, but it’s messy–particularly when Zelazny has to change certain facts (like whether Random was Corwin’s full or half-brother).

2. Word choices. Every so often, the phrasing and word choices in the first couple books of the first Amber series yank me out of the story. This doesn’t happen in the second series.

3. The second series is different enough from the first to have it’s own identity, but similar enough that it feels connected. It doesn’t rehash old ideas, but touches on points in the original series and goes off in different directions.

Were it not for one problem, I’d think that it was that rare sequel that doesn’t continue the same story, but somehow works.

What’s wrong? Basically one thing: Metaphysics.

In the first series, Amber and the Courts of Chaos were different from each other. Amber’s Pattern somehow ordered the universes between it and Chaos. Chaos, through Brand, attempted to bring everything back to the universe’s original state.

In the meantime, the unicorn was mysterious and intriguing.

In the second series, the Pattern and the Logrus (Chaos’ ever-changing anti-Pattern) are sentient, using the Courts and Amber as pawns. The unicorn and Chaos’ Serpent are two more players in a game of intrigue. Everything that occurred in the first series is explained as little more than a piece in a continuing battle between two forces.

By the end, the Courts of Chaos and Amber both feel very similar. This is not all bad. Manipulative, competing royal families can be the stuff of great stories.

What is not good is that the Pattern and Logrus (the concrete manifestations of order and chaos) come off as the same. Worse, they are portrayed as both petty and as having concerns so abstract that its hard for the reader to connect with them.

That’s a problem.

But it’s not the main problem. In explaining the “real” reason behind the first series’ events, it makes the first series (as well as the current one) seem insignificant–not a good thing. Part of the reason people probably read epic fantasy is because it does feel significant.

That’s only part of the problem. The other part, however, is a real doozy. Part of what was cool about the Courts, the Pattern, the Logrus, and the Unicorn was the mystery that surrounds them. When you strip it away, it no longer tugs at your imagination.

To put it another way: Midichlorians. You didn’t really want to know how the Force worked, did you? This is exactly the same problem.

Unfortunately for the reader, the Pattern and the Logrus’ machinations are so wrapped up with the plot that they are very hard to ignore.

This leaves you with a choice, you can deny the existence of the second series or you can try to concentrate on the parts that you do like.

I choose the latter. Zelazny was one of the major figures in science fiction’s New Wave movement. He was one of the writers who brought inventive writing techniques into science fiction/fantasy. Even imperfect Zelazny still contains interesting situations, amusing characters and the occasional bad pun.

It’s nice to know someone of his stature in science fiction screws up every so often.

Posted by Jim at February 1st, 2004

So far, Babylon 5 is the only television series that I have bothered to buy a copy of. I have four of the five seasons on DVD. The fifth will be coming out in April. I plan to order it soon.

At core what I like about it was the attempt to tell one story over the pre-planned, 5 year run. There are multiple storylines, in depth subplots involving one or more of the main characters, but in the end there’s one story.

Even better (in my view), things that the characters did actually affected them in later episodes. Characters make choices and it changes their lives. Characters are multi-faceted, some being both heroes and villains in the course of the series (Londo Mollari being a particularly good example).

If you want to watch the series, you can find the genesis of storylines long before (sometimes seasons before) the story actually appears. This is something I noticed because of the way that I first watched the series.

Though I’d seen several episodes during its first run, I didn’t see enough to really understand the series. Friends of mine, however, actually taped every single episode plus the movies. I got to see them all in a row over the course of roughly 6 months.

You really get to appreciate the connections between the episodes that way.

Unlike certain trilogies (say Star Wars or The Lord of the Rings), I’m unlikely to be able to get friends into a room and watch them all in an intense, marathon session. It is theoretically possible, mind you.

Figure 5 seasons of 22 episodes at 45 minutes per episode and you could theoretically watch all of them in five, 16.5 hour sessions. This assumes no food or bathroom breaks. It also assumes that we skip the movies.

Sound like fun?

No?

Sigh…