Archive for the ‘Conspiracy Theories’ Category

From Harper’s

May 6, 2010

I’ve been absent, again!  This is because I’m currently a resident of My-Job-Is-Hell Land.  Don’t fight me on this, because I will win.  Though I hope all the children have been following the Saga of Fred and Venera!  In fact, I’ll post the whole thing tomorrow so you can see.  It’s quite exciting.

From Harper’s magazine:

[Schemes]

THE FRENCH CONCOCTION

From a list of adventures offered by Ultime Realite, a French business that specializes in creating live-action psychodramas “inspired by your dreams, your nightmares or by a film or book.”  A basic four-hour kidnapping costs $1,226.  Translated from the French by Elena Ciocoiu.

KIDNAPPING

Kidnapped while you leave a restaurant or in the parking lot of your supermarket, then handcuffed and tied up, you will experience the violence and terror of a real kidnapping –– a psychological shock you won’t soon forget.

BOUNTY HUNTER

For two days, experience the craziest hunting of your life.  As prey, you’ll hear the barking of dogs unleashed to chase after you.  You’ll have only your gun, and at night you’ll try to fall asleep scared out of your wits that they might catch you.  Or experience a more elaborate scenario: first kidnap your prey, who will escape, and then manage a team of hunters.

GOFAST ADVENTURE

Take the place of a drug trafficker aboard a speedboat.  Your mission will be to transport a cargo by sea.  Or you might participate in the unloading of merchandise from a helicopter on a moonless night, lit by the headlamps of a four-wheel drive, scared because one of our security teams patrolling nearby might catch you!

SPAM

April 19, 2010

Every once in a while I putz around my Spam folder in Gmail to see what the Google Gods have determined is bullshit.  Now clearly I know none of this is true, what I’m wondering is what IS the truth behind it?  Is there really a Venera from Russia?  If I responded to her personal email address, what would happen?  Could she, in fact, visit me?  Do people fall for this shit?  How does Google know immediately that it’s Spam?  If there is some legit Venera who wants to pimp herself out to an American man who has not the wife or children, how did she end up writing to a twenty-five year old female with little-to-no bisexual leanings?  Technology just makes everything more blurry in the end, doesn’t it?

Subject: Life is Life           (How great is that, btw?)

Hello My Friend!
I write to you the letter, and I hope to receive the answer from you.
My name is Venera.
I the young woman, me of 29 years, I the blonde live in Russia, city Vologda.
My city is in 479 km from Moscow.
And if you wish to get acquainted with me, I shall be very happy to answer your letter.
And I would like to tell why I write to you.
The matter is that in 2 weeks I shall visit the USA.
But I have no friends or relatives in the USA.
And while I at all do not know what state better to visit.
In WHAT STATE OR COUNTRY YOU NOW LIVE? We could have our meeting?
Tell to me more about your country or state? What interesting?
I shall have the tourist visa, and I can visit your country.
But main my purpose, it to find the good friend for me.
The man for serious attitudes and if you are now alone?
You have not the wife or children I ask you to write to me the letter.
And we could learn better each other.
I have not boyfriend, and I have not children.
To write to you the letter, I have addressed in agency of acquaintances, and to me give yours e-mail.
It not a spam or other bad things. So, please, answer me!!!
My letter, this offer to acquaintance and to learn better each other.
In my letter I send you my photo!!! I hope my photo well?
And I would like to receive your photo too.

Please, answer only my personal e-mail: VeneraHaihello@rambler.ru

The best regards,

Venera

THE BEST regards!   It’s unfortunate for her that her name will most likely remind English speakers of one thing…

Update on Buzz

February 18, 2010

After I wrote the letter to my friend who worked at Google, people began alerting me to other people’s disapproval of Buzz, Google’s new and unannounced feature. Such as this woman, who was suddenly being automatically “followed” by her abusive ex-husband:

“Fuck you, Google. My privacy concerns are not trite. They are linked to my actual physical safety, and I will now have to spend the next few days maintaining that safety by continually knocking down followers as they pop up. A few days is how long I expect it will take before you either knock this shit off, or I delete every Google account I have ever had and use Bing out of fucking spite.

Fuck you, Google. You have destroyed over ten years of my goodwill and adoration, just so you could try and out-MySpace MySpace.”

This woman writes the blog http://fugitivus.wordpress.com (woo WordPress!) and this article can be read in full http://gizmodo.com/5470696/fck-you-google.

And guess what, everyone? Google heard our cries!

From the Los Angeles Times on V-Day:

Google Makes More Changes to Buzz to Address Privacy Concerns

Google Inc. issued a mea culpa Saturday, saying it had made mistakes in how it launched its new social networking service Buzz. In response to a sharp backlash from users and watchdogs, the Internet giant apologized for escalating concerns about the privacy of the product.

“We quickly realized that we didn’t get everything quite right,” Google product manager Todd Jackson said in a blog post Saturday. “We’re very sorry for the concern we’ve caused and have been working hard ever since to improve things based on your feedback. We’ll continue to do so.”

Jackson said Buzz would no longer automatically have users follow the posts of frequent Gmail contacts. Instead, it will suggest people whom users might want to follow. Google also will put a Buzz tab in Gmail settings to make it easier for users to turn it off. Buzz will no longer automatically connect Buzz to Picasa photo albums and Google Reader items, the company said.

The changes, which will take effect over the next few days, were the latest Google had made to Buzz since it launched the product inside millions of Gmail accounts less than a week ago.

Controversy erupted as Buzz popped up in inboxes. Users complained that Google automatically signed them up to follow some of their Gmail contacts and exposed their contacts by making their follower lists public.

Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said Friday that the way Google handled Buzz was a major blunder and a rare one. In the past, Google has been more careful to give users control over privacy settings. Rotenberg said his group would file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission

~Jessica Guynn

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2010/02/google-buzz-privacy.html

From a Concerned Citizen

February 12, 2010

Dearest YDN (Friend who works at Google),
First of all, let me say hello, and ask you how you are?  It’s been ages!  Part of that is because I’m down in Miami half the year (already in the role of Jewish grandma) and so have not been around when you’ve been out to visit NYC.  I miss you, though, and hope you are well and munching on good organic Californian froyo.  I’m hoping to get out to San Fran at some point in the next year (this may be wishful thinking, as I have little money and time)…regardless, we’ll cross paths at some point, I have no doubt.

I’m writing on behalf of the Citizens of Gmail, which, as you well know, is pretty much everyone in the world at this point.  For the most part, we’re happy with our governing body, pleased with your benevolent mandates and clear, concise laws.  You treat our children well, and skirmishes, few and far between, almost never end in fatalities.  However, an outcry has arose across the land over the past twenty-four hours.  You see, many Gmail peons feel they have been thrown into a whirlwind of confusion by a strange and unexpected addition to their worlds known as BUZZ.  The overall consensus, from what I’ve gathered (and with which I agree), is that Google did not properly inform us of the nature of this Buzz feature, nor were we explicitly asked if we wanted the Buzz feature in our browsers.  One person did state that she was given the option, but many, many others voiced feelings running the gamut from irritation to downright enmity.

I myself went to a Google Help Page and looked at the instructions for Buzz, but they did not include a section on how to get rid of it (not how to make yourself invisible, or how to make Buzz invisible to you, but how to EXTERMINATE THE BUMBLEBEE.)  So naturally when I was prompted to answer whether or not the page was helpful, I said no.  A box for text popped up, and I wrote that I wanted to get rid of buzz, but have you ever seen the movie Blindness, with Julianne Moore and Mark Ruffalo?  It’s not that good, so don’t Netflix it, but at one point, all the citizens of Any City afflicted with the blind illness are rounded up and incarcerated in an old hospital, and they give them one phone “for emergencies only,” and Julianne Moore keeps calling but eventually they figure out no one is at the other end.  So yeah, that’s kind of what it felt like to send a note to Google, Inc.

Google is great.  We really do love you for the most part, but people don’t want things sprung on them, you dig?  It makes them feel violated, or ignored.  If you have any idea how to get rid of Buzz, I will pay good money for that info, or if you have any sway with the high ups in Google (is it an egalitarian microcosm by now?) please communicate to them that their citizenry is discontent, and close to staging a coup.  Lock up your women, cause we about to rape and pillage.

Seriously, though, I miss you.  Hope you’re well.

Love,

ID

Cry For Help!

February 5, 2010

I’m listening to unaccompanied Bach partitas and watching Halloween III on mute and watching a Superbowl blimp float outside my window.  HELP ME!

Re: Lost Last Night

February 3, 2010

Prescription.  From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

“Kierkegaard styled himself above all as a religious poet. The religion to which he sought to relate his readers is Christianity. The type of Christianity that underlies his writings is a very serious strain of Lutheran pietism informed by the dour values of sin, guilt, suffering, and individual responsibility. Kierkegaard was immersed in these values in the family home through his father, whose own childhood was lived in the shadow of Herrnhut pietism in Jutland. Kierkegaard’s father subsequently became a member of the lay Congregation of Brothers [Brødremenighed] in Copenhagen, which he and his family attended in addition to the sermons by Bishop J. P. Mynster.

“For Kierkegaard Christian faith is not a matter of regurgitating church dogma. It is a matter of individual subjective passion, which cannot be mediated by the clergy or by human artefacts. Faith is the most important task to be achieved by a human being, because only on the basis of faith does an individual have a chance to become a true self. This self is the life-work which God judges for eternity.

“The individual is thereby subject to an enormous burden of responsibility, for upon h/er existential choices hangs h/er eternal salvation or damnation. Anxiety or dread (Angest) is the presentiment of this terrible responsibility when the individual stands at the threshold of momentous existential choice. Anxiety is a two-sided emotion: on one side is the dread burden of choosing for eternity; on the other side is the exhilaration of freedom in choosing oneself. Choice occurs in the instant (Øjeblikket), which is the point at which time and eternity intersect — for the individual creates through temporal choice a self which will be judged for eternity.

“But the choice of faith is not made once and for all. It is essential that faith be constantly renewed by means of repeated avowals of faith. One’s very selfhood depends upon this repetition, for according to Anti-Climacus, the self “is a relation which relates itself to itself” (The Sickness Unto Death). But unless this self acknowledges a “power which constituted it,” it falls into a despair which undoes its selfhood. Therefore, in order to maintain itself as a relation which relates itself to itself, the self must constantly renew its faith in “the power which posited it.” There is no mediation between the individual self and God by priest or by logical system (contra Catholicism and Hegelianism respectively). There is only the individual’s own repetition of faith. This repetition of faith is the way the self relates itself to itself and to the power which constituted it, i.e. the repetition of faith is the self.

“Christian dogma, according to Kierkegaard, embodies paradoxes which are offensive to reason. The central paradox is the assertion that the eternal, infinite, transcendent God simultaneously became incarnated as a temporal, finite, human being (Jesus). There are two possible attitudes we can adopt to this assertion, viz. we can have faith, or we can take offense. What we cannot do, according to Kierkegaard, is believe by virtue of reason. If we choose faith we must suspend our reason in order to believe in something higher than reason. In fact we must believe by virtue of the absurd.

“Much of Kierkegaard’s authorship explores the notion of the absurd: Job gets everything back again by virtue of the absurd (Repetition); Abraham gets a reprieve from having to sacrifice Isaac, by virtue of the absurd (Fear and Trembling); Kierkegaard hoped to get Regine back again after breaking off their engagement, by virtue of the absurd (Journals); Climacus hopes to deceive readers into the truth of Christianity by virtue of an absurd representation of Christianity’s ineffability; the Christian God is represented as absolutely transcendent of human categories yet is absurdly presented as a personal God with the human capacities to love, judge, forgive, teach, etc. Kierkegaard’s notion of the absurd subsequently became an important category for twentieth century existentialists, though usually devoid of its religious associations.

“According to Johannes Climacus, faith is a miracle, a gift from God whereby eternal truth enters time in the instant. This Christian conception of the relation between (eternal) truth and time is distinct from the Socratic notion that (eternal) truth is always already within us — it just needs to be recovered by means of recollection (anamnesis). The condition for realizing (eternal) truth for the Christian is a gift (Gave) from God, but its realization is a task (Opgave) which must be repeatedly performed by the individual believer. Whereas Socratic recollection is a recuperation of the past, Christian repetition is a “recollection forwards” — so that the eternal (future) truth is captured in time.

“Crucial to the miracle of Christian faith is the realization that over against God we are always in the wrong. That is, we must realize that we are always in sin. This is the condition for faith, and must be given by God. The idea of sin cannot evolve from purely human origins. Rather, it must have been introduced into the world from a transcendent source. Once we understand that we are in sin, we can understand that there is some being over against which we are always in the wrong. On this basis we can have faith that, by virtue of the absurd, we can ultimately be atoned with this being.”

Lather, rinse, repeat.  Namaste!

Big Brother: Refugee Edition

January 31, 2010

ID: omg last night i wanted to text you last nightor, afternoonKC’s hairdresser and KC and i

were talking about how apparently (you may have heard this)
4:35 PM they’re parking this cruise ship that can house 300 at the pier in haiti? and either relief workers or refugees will live on it?
they disagreed on this last point
and said, “dude, they need to get cameras on that shit…reality show!”
4:36 PM and her hairdresser kind of looked at me like i was retarded
PS: hah!
that’s great
4:37 PM me: seriously
Real World Refugees
PS: “Carnival Cruise: Miami or Bust”
ID: Pier 5
ID: Find out what happens on the boat…cat fights, romances and malnutrition!”
4:38 PM Paul: “Stolen food, armed militias, topless women!”
ID: i could play this game for a LONG time

Another Underrated Movie

January 29, 2010

My boss is writing a script right now and reading over some scripts in order to “get into the mode.”  One of the scripts we have is I Heart Huckabees, which I know was a very polarizing film but I, as someone who finds existential humor probably way funnier than it is, freaking ADORED it.  Mark Wahlberg being funny=always great.  Like crashing parties.  It’s just math!

BACK TO: TOMMY AND ALBERT

TOMMY (SMILES):

What are you doing tomorrow?

ALBERT:

I was thinking of chaining myself to a bulldozer.  Do you want to come?

TOMMY:

What time?

ALBERT:

Like one o’clock.

TOMMY:

That sounds good.  Should I bring my own chains?

ALBERT:

We always do.

Fade out.

And some wisdom from aggressive yet funny man, director David O. Russell.

Q: News feels largely like entertainment at this point, doesn’t it?  I mean, that line between journalism and entertainment gets blurred more every day, and i feel like the incarnation we’re experiencing now began with teh first Gulf War, when CNN started with the graphics and theme music.  Now who can tell the difference between the news and Entertainment Tonight?

David: You should see the morning shows out here in LA, where the girls practically wear bikinis.  The most popular morning show has this guy who’s like 55 or 60 with these two super hot girls.  I remember seeing it after the Bush/Gore election, and I was like, Well, that’s why Bush won.  Just look at this morning show and it tells you everything you need to know about why Bush won.  It’s all in the little tops and the giggles and the subtext is, “No thinking or questioning.”  People used to think our totalitarian future would look like Orwell’s 1984 or Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 411 with an oppressive police state — but the mind control turned out to be more insidious than that — it looks like “Wild on E!”

A Formula for Success

January 28, 2010

A Formula for Success

If you find yourself with a runaway hit (book, movie, television show) on your hands, the key to serializing while maintaining artistic integrity and increasing profits is to try to be determine the number of installments in the series as early on as possible and inform the fan base of said number of episodes soon after you’ve decided.  This way the excitement to the finale BUILDS in proportion to time as opposed to fizzles.

Good examples of this type of success:

The Harry Potter series

Seinfeld

Sex and the City

Lost

The Twilight Saga (that’s what it’s called, right?)

Star Wars

Another rule: if you are involved in a hit television show, the popularity of which is waning, and writers discuss one of the central couples having a baby, DOCTOR K THAT SHIT IMMEDIATELY!

Good examples of this type of failure:

Growing Pains

Fresh Prince of Bel-Air (hello, Vivian Deuce was like, at least 50 when she popped Nicky out)

Full House


The Holidays Are Creepy

December 26, 2009

Text from an Unknown Number (Central Los Angeles), at 8:48 PM on Christmas Day: Jesus loves you unconditionally.

Me, at 8:53 PM: So I can do…anything?!

Unknown in Los Angeles, 8:57 : Yep!  Unless you’re gay, then you’re unlovable.

Me, 8:58: Kickass.

Me, 9:08: BTW, who is this?  I got a new phone…

Unknown in Los Angeles, 9:20: Jesus.

Me, 9:22: Oh great, your direct line!  Fuck praying, I’m calling you every time there’s a bump in the road.