Author: matthew

Just in case you think the Hummer isn’t a big enough consumer vehicle for you, try one of these on for size. At over 9 feet tall and built on the same platform as commercial dumptrucks and concrete mixers, the HMV has met its match on the road.

However, manufacturers say they’re not interested in competing against the Hummer in the off-road market. They say this vehicle makes a statement.

I wonder what statement that is? Maybe “I enjoy wasting my money”.

Just when you think you’ve seen it all, you hear about The Last Starfighter: The Musical.

Favorite quote from the review:

…the production was aware that their means to represent the CG found in the movie was severely lacking. They played-up this fact and managed to inject some humor into the scenes that relied on these campy props.

Apparently it’s actually not bad. If I ever decide to go to Manhattan, seeing this show will be on my list, somewhere between visiting Lady Liberty and seeing “Cats”.

(Huh, wait, is Cats even showing anymore?)

Oh, and I heard about another review of it here: http://ascii.textfiles.com/archives/000059.html

And the web site of the theatre, though this link probably won’t reflect it since the show only runs for two weeks, is at http://www.stormtheatre.com/

—
Matthew P. Barnson

 - - - - Thought for the moment: "Why be a man when you can be a success?" 		-- Bertold Brecht

So the big Utah news of the day, warranting a front-page article in the Salt Lake Tribune is that Michael Moore, creator of Farenheit 9/11, spoke at Utah Valley State College last night.

Curiously, UVSC’s own news page doesn’t even talk about Moore speaking on their campus. I get the distinct impression that the college is embarassed by the student association’s decision to hire Moore to speak, and wishes to distance itself from the controversial action in order to preserve relationships with mostly-conservative alums that give the college most of it’s budget. But that’s just a guess 🙂 And, regardless of their own opinions on the matter, they did not interfere with the student council decision to have Moore speak — though they did buckle to pressure and schedule conservative commentator Sean Hannity to “balance” Moore’s perspecive.

For those of you who don’t understand what the hubbub is about, here’s the background. Utah County is the most conservative county in the country. The population is well over 80% members of the LDS church. It’s a singularly unique bellweather, because despite the presence of a major university (Brigham Young University) in its midst, it is still overwhelmingly right-wing.

The announcement that the student council of UVSC had spent $50,000 (including travel) of its diminutive budget to bring a single, extremely liberal speaker to the campus, made front-page news and caused a commotion the sleepy county hasn’t seen for years. Alumni began calling to revoke their pledge support. An individual in the county offered $40,000 to the student council to prevent Moore from speaking. Many conservative parents were up-in-arms, feeling that the funds of their children were being misused.

The amazing story within the story is the strength of the student council leadership in resisting bribery attempts, extortion, threats, and a lawsuit all in efforts to prevent Moore from speaking. I’m flatly amazed. And I’m even more amazed (in the opposite, “rubbernecking a car wreck” rather than “astounded at someone’s resilience” sense) at the response of county residents who went to such lengths in an attempt to silence someone whose opinions they disagreed with. It doesn’t seem to be a response befitting a free country… or a free county.

All in all, it’s been very, very fun to watch!

I’m interested in a transcript of the jokes told by Roseanne Barr, a Utah native, who appeared on the stage with Moore. Too bad the show was sold out within a few days of it being announced.

Anyway, here are a few of the many articles regarding the appearance:

• Moore speech at UVSC draws cheers, boos. This story briefly mentions the audience member that pointed an object at Moore and was escorted from the building.
• Moore War Creates Its Heroes
• Tears, Jeers, and Cheers: few in audience are neutral
• Moore: Voices
• The Sun Rises. There’s a notable quote in this one:
  

  The sun came up Thursday morning.
  Utah Valley State College did not fall into a hole in the Earth’s crust. Orem was not overwhelmed by locusts, frogs or, even, crickets.
  Michael Moore came, spoke, soaked up the applause, collected his well-earned fee and left for the next stop on his Slacker Uprising Tour. There he will don the locally appropriate baseball cap and again make the argument that some folks in Utah County had been warning us was treading the line of treason:
  Young people ought to get off their butts and vote.
  It’s hard to see why anybody has a problem with that.
  …Silly, pointless ideas, after all, don’t get a rise out of people. Only powerful ones do.

• Utah Saga of Moore Isn’t Over
• Wanting Moore? KRCL to replay speech. (Unfortunately, despite hunting around on KRCL’s web site, I was unable to find last night’s archive.)

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (also known as “The Mormons”) yesterday issued a press release supporting legislation and constitutional amendments which bar non-traditional relationships from acquiring similar status to legal marriage.

(See the Church’s press release at: http://www.lds.org/newsroom/showrelease/0,15503,3881-1-20336,00.html)

Utah’s Proposition 3, on the ballot for citizen ratification this November 2, would define marriage in Utah’s Constitution as the union of a man and a woman, and further prevent any other relationship from gaining the same or similar legal status as marriage.

According to critics, the LDS Church’s release so near to election day will almost certainly have an immense effect on the vote, as Church members account for nearly 2/3 of Utah’s population. The timing of this release, they claim, is tantamount to an endorsement. Church public relations spokespeople, on the other hand, deny the endorsement of any specific statute or amendment.

What are the ramifications of the LDS church’s statement, so close to election day, which appears to favor Proposition 3? The ballots will ultimately decide, but with support for the amendment hovering around 67% according to some polls (and as low as 25% according to polls sponsored by the opposition), it’s important for Utah citizens to examine the potential ramifications of the amendment.

Here is the full text of Utah’s proposed constitutional amendment:

Marriage consists only of the legal union between a man and a woman. No other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect.

In summary, detractors of this proposed amendment cite these primary reasons to oppose Proposition 3:

• The language is too broad, and will have substantial consequences on heterosexual couples
• It is the only proposed amendment in over thirty years to have completely bypassed the state’s Constitutional Revision Commission, thus avoiding oversight and analysis by that body;
• It will invalidate common-law marriage statutes, which marriages are not considered “legal unions”;
• It will bar common-law and same-sex partners from:
  1. Making emergency medical decisions for the partner;
  2. Receiving health insurance under a partner’s domestic partner employment benefits;
  3. Automatically inheriting property from one’s partner;
  4. It will prevent a partner from visiting her/his mate in hospitals;
  5. It will invalidate certain protections to persons under Utah’s domestic violence statute.

Detractors of the proposed amendment maintain that barring domestic partners from having tax and employment benefits similar to those of married couples is discriminatory, and analogous to racist legislation of the 1960’s and 1970’s. This amendment is unclear, unfair, and goes too far in prohibiting civil unions. Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and Governor Olene Walker, while both supporting a marriage amendment, say “just not this one”. Simple constitutions are best, and, according to Gov. Walker, “the specifics are left to statutes”.

Supporters of the proposed amendment cite:

• The second sentence of the amendment is necessary since the State of Vermont created a “civil union” status for unmarried couples of any sex, which is equivalent to marriage in all but name. Homosexual couples have filed suit in other states to have their civil unions recognized as marriage, in the absence of civil union definition in their chosen state;
• The People of California voted in a similar amendment in 2000, in response to which the legislature created domestic partner legislation in defiance of popular mandate;
• Marriages in common-law *are* legal unions. A man and woman must live together, assume marital rights, duties, and obligations, and hold themselves out as and have acquired a uniform and general reputation as husband and wife in order to assume common-law status;
• Even in cases of “common-law” heterosexual unions, obtaining a marriage license is trivial and inexpensive, which should be no barrier to gaining the license;
• Amendment 3 will not deny protection for individuals under the Cohabitant Abuse Act;
• It will not impact private health insurance from private employers who choose to offer benefits to domestic partners;
• It will not have any effect on wills, trusts, or legal instruments;
• It only limits the ability of the courts to redefine marriage;
• Utah’s Consitutional Review Commission is not required to review current and proposed constitutional amendments.

Proponents of the legislation, in summary, consider it a necessary response to current threats to marriage in the U.S. It would not constrain the legislature from granting medical authority, inheritance, or other benefits to same-sex partners. According to proponents, the only valid reasons to oppose the proposed amendment are because one wishes to redefine marriage to include same-sex couples, or wants to create an alternative legal status meant to have the same effect as marriage.

As for how I intend to vote on Proposition 3?

None of your business 🙂 But it’s fun to talk about! Which side do you think has a more compelling case?

Yes, folks, Dungeons and Dragons had its 30th Birthday yesterday.

I remember as a kid hearing all the weird news reports about how D&D was this horrible mind-altering thing, with kids dying and stuff. Yet my brothers played the game every week (or more often), and, well, they were nerds. They just sat around talking, rolling dice, and reading out of books to argue about combat minutiae.

I played my first game of D&D when I was eight years old. I remember it well. I was a magic-user. My brother Brian was… OK, so maybe I don’t remember it very well. My oldest brother, Jay, was the Dungeon Master.

And I died in the third room to a Green Slime. I cried, and never wanted to play D&D again. As a matter of fact, I don’t think I’ve played that particular game since then, though I’ve played a whole bunch of variants (I particularly remember many sessions of Champions), and enjoy the crap out of Neverwinter Nights, a video game that uses the D&D rules.

OK, maybe I have played it since then. Just not in the pristine pencil-and-paper format.

What about you? Was D&D your first introduction to role-playing games? Were you really into it, or hardly involved?

I get a small mention in a review of Rampant Games’ new title, Void War. They mention “family” being involved in developing Void War, and the little brother by name. Woot!

Motorist has a new excuse for speeding. Yep, time to add “faulty cruise control” to my list of potential excuses next time a cop wants to give me a ticket!

This little parable came in my email today. It was thought-provoking.

Two armies meet on a field of battle. There is no hope for surprise; the enemy has already fired the first shot.

The leader of one army goes to his officers and says, “I think we need to fight this battle and we need to win. Are you with me in fighting this battle?”

A battle-hardened lieutenant is among those who agree. “We need to fight this battle and we need to win. I agree with this. Go ahead.”

The General then says, “Okay, my plan is to send our infantry up into this box canyon.”

The Lieutenant says, “Wrong unit, wrong place, wrong time. If you send those units into that canyon you will be boxing them in where they will be in danger and can do little good. You make them sitting targets for the enemy.”

The General answers back. “You are being inconsistent. First, you say we should fight this battle. Now, you say ‘wrong unit, wrong place, wrong time.'”

The Lieutenant answers, “I am not being inconsistent,sir. We need to fight this battle, and we need to win. Marching that infantry into that box canyon without doing a lot of preparation is not the best way to fight and win this battle.”

“So, what would you do differently?” the General asks.

“Well, I think we should first meet with our allies so that we can coordinate our attack. We need to convince them that this is right and add their strength to ours. This will increase our chance of victory.”

“So, you want to give them veto power over whether we defend ourselves. You want them to decide for us whether we fight or run away.” says the General.

“No, not at all,” says the Lieutenant. “I want a coordinated attack by the largest army possible, not an isolated attack by a force that is smaller than it could be and, honestly, smaller than it should be.”

“Make up your mind, Lieutenant. First you say we should fight. Then you say “wrong unit, wrong place, wrong time.” Now you say we should go over there and ask those other Generals whether we should defend ourselves, after you have already said that we should fight. You are a mass of contradictions, Lieutenant.”

“Permission to speak freely, General.”

“Granted.”

“Either you are too dense to understand basic military strategy, General, or you have some ulterior motive for lying about what I am saying. If you are lying, then you are contradicting your own belief that it is wrong to bear false witness against thy neighbor, because you are constantly bearing false witness here against me.

“What I am saying, and what any reasonable person knows that I am saying, is that it is a mistake to move your infantry into the canyon unless you have an exit strategy. Make sure you take the high ground first, and make sure that you can get your units out again if you need them someplace else.

“Also, a winning strategy involves a coordinated attack by the largest possible force. This means getting together with our allies and working out a joint strategy. The soldier who arrogantly charges in alone is far weaker, and far more likely to get himself killed, than the soldier that participates in the coordinated activity of a larger unit.

“Certainly, some of those allies may disagree with our plans. We may need to negotiate. That is the price of having friends — you have to have a little give and take. A person does not dictate to and bully his friends. He negotiates with them. No friend is going to have veto power over whether I defend myself. But, if I want his help — if two is stronger than one — I may sit down at the table with my friend and work out a joint strategy that we both think has a better chance of defense. Maybe he knows something that I do not. Maybe he understands something important better than I do. Either way, we are stronger as a team, than we are as separate individuals.”

The general then shakes his head. “I have allies,” says the General. “I have four other generals fighting with me. In addition, I have this contribution from thirty other armies.” The General points to a haggard platoon of infantry in random uniforms.

“This is your alliance?”

“How dare you insult these people like that! These are good, loyal, and brave soldiers! You take that back!”

“General, I agree. These are good, loyal, and brave soldiers. But . . . this is all you cold get? I am not impuning their fighting spirit or their character, I am amazed at how ineffective you have been at forming alliances. Victory is best achieved by the strongest army possible, and this is all you can get?”

“You are out of line, Lieutenant. This is insubordination!”

“You gave me permission to speak freely. I shall, until you revoke my right to free speech. Is that right revoked?”

The general looks out among the crowd. “The right to speak freely includes the obligation to speak responsibly. By questioning my plan, you are undermining the morale and fighting spirit of this army. Who in their right mind would follow a person who says, ‘wrong unit, wrong place, wrong time’?”

“I expect people to react with the recognition that they are better off with a winning strategy than a losing strategy, and ‘wrong unit, wrong place, wrong time’ makes the case that I, at least, can tell the difference.”

“That’s it, Lieutenant. This discussion is over. Back in line. We are going to do things my way and anybody out there who says anything against my plan is guilty of treason. You are either with me, or you are against me, Lieutenant. There is no middle ground. Either I am right, or the enemy is right. I am certain that, given these choices, you will agree that I am right. So, shut up and follow orders.”

THE END?

—
Matthew P. Barnson
– – – –
Thought for the moment:
“Gee, Toto, I don’t think we are in Kansas anymore.”

As regular readers of barnson.org know, I’m a big fan of Vim, or “vi Improved”. It’s a text editor with great keyboard shortcuts, a zillion extensions to do everything from text editing to folding to email formatting. Very convenient. I even use it to format mail messages in Microsoft Outlook, the email program I must use at work due to corporate policy.

Well, I recently changed my back-end email provider for my personal account to gmail. I’ve been mostly pleased with the transition, as I get a ton of legitimate mail and gmail makes it much easier to index.

However, there are a few things missing that I’m used to from using mutt and Cyrus Mail:

1. Notification of new email arrival. Mutt would beep at me from its console window, but for gmail I’d have to look at my tab in my web browser, Firefox.
2. Being able to use vim as my text editor.
3. Automatically-appending witty sayings at the end of my messages. I’ve been doing this a long time using a short little bash shell script I wrote. Setting up a program to write your signature in mutt is a pretty easy thing to do.
4. Automatically wrap my text at 72 characters. It’s not a huge beef, but sometimes messages get formatted very weirdly if they don’t have a good text wrap, and I want to make sure that mine are eminently readable regardless of email reader program.

Finally, I couldn’t stand it anymore, and dug around for solutions.

1. For message notification, I found the Firefox Gmail Notifier. Now, Google has its own windows application to notify you when you have new gmail, but I wanted something that stayed in my browser window and would work on Linux or on Windows. Note: you also must use Mozilla Firefox, or the Mozilla browser suite, to use this tool. You should be using a Mozilla-based browser instead of spyware-infested Internet Explorer, anyway.

The solution to 2, 3, and 4 turned out to be the same thing: Using the Win32 version of Vim 6.3 (which, of course, I already had installed) combined with the Cygwin version of the “fortune” program. Since I already had Cygwin installed on my Windows box, this is a no-brainer. But from what I understand, there are native win32 versions of fortune that you can use instead.

The first thing I did was download another extension for Firefox: mozex, a Firefox plugin to allow you to run certain applications for certain types of objects on a web page. It’s pretty simple to install.

2006 update: You can download mozex for UTF-8 and compatible with Firefox 1.5 and later here! The extension is finally under development again! Yay!

Unfortunately, because the current version (as of this writing) doesn’t show up under the extensions manager in Firefox, I had to restart my browser and go to this URI: chrome://mozex/content/mozexPrefDialog.xul. This is a clickable link if you have the mozex extension installed.

Now, I have vim installed in c:\vim\, and cygwin installed in d:\cygwin\. So I wrote this shell script, which may need adaptation to your environment:

 #!/usr/bin/bash # # startemail.sh # starts my vim editor with my preferred signature, among other things.

echo " -- Matthew P. Barnson - - - - Thought for the moment:" >> $1 /usr/bin/fortune >>$1

/c/vim/vim63/gvim.exe -c 'set tw=72' $1 

What this does is automatically append a signature to mozex’s temporary file, and then launch my editor with my preferred text wrap setting, 72 columns. I named this script “startemail.sh”, and put this script in d:\bin\, so back in my mozex configuration panel, I put this into the “Textareas” field:

 d:\cygwin\bin\bash.exe /cygdrive/d/bin/startemail.sh %t 

Clicked “OK”, and now when I’m editing an email in Gmail, I just right-click on the text box, go to the Mozex menu, and select “Edit TextArea”. Up pops vim with the contents of the textarea for me to edit.

There are a few other obnoxious behaviors I’d like to correct about this setup, but for now it works better than a “raw” textarea:

• Once I finish editing, save, and quit out of vim, I have to click the textarea I was working in in order for mozex to paste my work back. Not a big deal, but an extra click at the end of my work.
• Navigating a right-click menu tree to launch my editor is annoying. I need to figure out how to set up a hotkey for it instead, like “CTRL-SHIFT-E”. That would be quicker, and since one of the primary benefits of using vim is that I don’t have to use the mouse to edit text, I could keep my hand off the mouse more. For now, the annoyance factor isn’t too huge, but it’s there.
• I run two monitors: one external CRT, and my laptop LCD. Firefox has had long-standing issues with dual-monitor setups, and unfortunately has a bug here, too. You can’t get past the first cascade level of a right-click menu in Firefox on the additional monitor. So I have to keep Firefox on my LCD (primary) screen if I want to use this functionality. Vim and Cygwin have no such bugs, but it’s still one more thing to remember when I’m working, that Firefox is quirky if it’s on the second screen.
• There’s a blank bash shell open behind my vim window. Even if I attempt to background the gvim process, it’s still there. I’m certain I could get rid of it if I just used the cygwin version of vim, but the win32 version of vim has some really nice integration with the Windows Clipboard that makes life easier, and it’s not running in a dos cmd window. On the other hand, instead of using a cmd shell to run bash, I could run it via rxvt and have decent clipboard performance. The only thing that sucks there is rxvt’s startup time on windows is horrid.
• Unlike mutt, I have to configure this same setup on every computer I want to use it on. Mutt, I install it once on my mail server and I’m done. As a plus, since I chose a cross-platform solution, it can work on my Mac, PC, FreeBSD, and Linux machines. But still, it would be nice to configure it once and be done with it, you know?

That’s it for my adventure using vim as my editor for gmail. I’m actually using the same setup to write this blog entry, after having deleted the signature at the bottom.

Aww, heck, here it is anyway.

—
Matthew P. Barnson
– – – –
Thought for the moment:
In Seattle, Washington, it is illegal to carry a concealed weapon that is over six feet in length.

In other news today, Florida approves an electronic ballot. I guess they got tired of the public lampooning they received last election for discarding thousands of Gore votes due to less-than-exact punches.