Mr. Fish: This Just In

From his salubriosly sanguiferous blog, Clowncrack:

Mr. Fish: This Just In

From his serenedipitously sensifacient blog, Clowncrack:

Mr. Fish: Be A Cock

From Clowncrack, his blog of avian aesthesia.

Quote of the day: Journalists, pols, and penises

From the always perceptive journalist and screenwriter David Simon:

I told myself that I wasn’t in journalism to chase something so ordinary, so adolescent as other people’s sexuality, that I wouldn’t play this game, that there were better reasons to be a reporter, and there were better things for readers to consume.  I knew that one soldier opting out from such a lurid and exalted battlefield of the media wars meant nothing, but I did it anyway.  Fuck Gingrich’s divorces.  Fuck Lewinsky.  Fuck where Anthony Weiner found some happy online moments.  I’m not playing anymore.  I long ago ceased to even pretend to care.

The arguments about character?  That human sexuality isn’t the most compartmentalized element of our nature?  That if someone will lie about sex, they’ll lie about other things? Really?  No, sorry, fuck that tripe.  Character has become the self-righteous rallying cry of far greater hypocrisy than any cheating husband.  It’s the excuse that makes our prurient leer seem meaningful and reasoned.

Observe the process by which we remove some of the most essential American figures of the last century for having failed to corral their sexual organs in the marital bedroom:  Roosevelt, gone.  Eisenhower, gone.  Kennedy, gone.  Lyndon Johnson, gone.  Clinton, gone.  Martin Luther King, Jr., gone.  Edward Murrow, gone.   Follow the gamboling penis to an arid expanse of sociopolitical wasteland, where many of the greatest visionaries and actors can never tred, a desert in which only the Calvin Coolidges and Richard Nixons remain standing.   Anyone who looks at the history of mankind and argues that private sexual fidelity exists in direct proportion to political greatness or moral leadership is either a chump or a liar.

Read the rest.

Headline of the day: Hot times in Lake Woebegone

Where temperatures, like the children, are all above average.

From a Greg Mitchell post for The Nation:

My Son, Age 25, Has Never Been Around for a Cooler-Than-Average Month

And for some graphic proof of his assertion, here’s a NASA animation of global temperatures from 1880 through 2011, using 1950 as a baseline [more here]:

Mr. Fish: Paper Pulp Fiction

From his blog of disilluding diegesis, Clowncrack.

 

Headline of the day II: Call it class unconsciousness

From the Village Voice:

Mike Bloomberg And His 11 Homes Think New York Homeless Shelters Are Too Damn Nice. Homeless Disagree

Headline of the day: Barry’s friends in high places

From GlobalPost:

Global business executives love Barack Obama?

Yes, according to a survey by the Financial Times and The Economist that says Obama would be better for the global economy than Mitt Romney.

And a final wedding picture [we promise]

Daughter and mom embrace after the ceremony.

12 August 2012, Nikon D300, 40 mm, ISO 400, 1/60 sec, f8

Blast from the past: Groucho’s Fathers Day songs

On Dick Cavett’s talk show:

Headline of the day: Back to the drawing board?

From CNBC:

Hitchhiker writing ‘The Kindness of America’ memoir shot by motorist in Montana

Mr. Fish: The Un-Masquerade Party

From his happily hellacious blog, Clowncrack:

Quote of the day: The didn’t ‘Like’ it

Estonian journalist Priit Pullerits writing in Postimees via Presseurop. [Unlike the would-be mountaineers, most Estonian reject Facebook out of privacy concerns, he writes.]

Sometime ago, Alar Sikk, the Estonian mountaineer who rose to fame when he climbed Everest, was chatting with Estonian TV celebrity Vahur Kersna, about his expedition to Mount Kazbek [in Georgia]. Sikk remarked that many of the potential participants in the expedition gave up on the project when they learned that the journey would take nine days. For them, the idea of spending that much time away from Facebook was simply unbearable.

May Day 2012, in the spirit of a day for all of us

Mr. Fish: Room Service

From his deliriously delightful blog, Clowncrack.

A game of Monopoly: The digital book edition

Uncle Sam has finally taken notice that digital powerhouses are taking over the world of books.

The bottom line: Electronic publication is the wave of the future, and gatekeepers like Amazon and Apple have created a virtual monopoly, forcing bricks-and-mortar publishers to offer their authors’ wares at rock-bottom prices.

Not only do these policies impact the publishers, but they hit hardest at authors [esnl included], whose revenues from their works are based on a percentage of the sales prices charged by their publishers.

Amazon and Apple are the leading players in the digital book distribution, effectively forming a duopoly that aims to drive prices paid to publishers to rock bottom if they want their works distributed on the fastest-growing market for the [formerly] printed word.

Amazon has been a ferocious fighter in the drive to corporatize just about everything. Among other things, they tried unsuccessfully to claim ownership of “one click shopping.” Sometimes ally/sometimes ally Apple, in turn, has sued Amazon over their use of the term “app store.”

Now the fight over electronic publishing is headed to the courtroom.

From Brian Braiker of The Guardian:

The US government has accused Apple and five book publishers of colluding to fix the prices of ebooks.

A lawsuit filed in New York on Wednesday said Apple had conspired with publishers in response to Amazon’s success in selling ebooks for just under $10.

It said the alleged price-fixing came as Apple prepared to launched the iPad and was guaranteed a 30% commission on each ebook sold.

The publishers listed in the lawsuit include Hachette SA, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Penguin and Simon & Schuster.

Hachette, HarperCollins and Simon & Schuster settled their suits on Wednesday. Bloomberg News reported that Apple and Macmillan had refused to engage in settlement talks with the US department of justice, and will argue that pricing agreements between Apple and publishers improved competition in a field that had been hitherto dominated by Amazon.

Apple has not yet made a statement in reaction to the legal action.

Read the rest.

Macmillan wasn’t always Amazon’s BFF.

Apple Insider’s Stash Lane reported on an earlier battle two years ago:

Days after Apple CEO Steve Jobs introduced the iPad and implied e-book prices would go up, Amazon gave in to a standoff with book publisher Macmillan, raising prices to between $12.99 and $14.99.

This weekend, Amazon had temporarily ceased selling titles from Macmillan as a pricing dispute between the two companies found no resolution. But Sunday, Amazon conceded and posted an announcement on its Kindle Community forums.

Calling Macmillan one of the “big six” publishers, Amazon said the company “clearly communicated” that they want to charge between $12.99 and $14.99 for e-book versions of bestsellers and most hardcover releases. Though Amazon strongly disagrees with Macmillan’s stance, they raised the white flag.

“We want you to know that ultimately, however, we will have to capitulate and accept Macmillan’s terms because Macmillan has a monopoly over their own titles, and we will want to offer them to you even at prices we believe are needlessly high for e-books,” the announcement said. “Amazon customers will at that point decide for themselves whether they believe it’s reasonable to pay $14.99 for a bestselling e-book.

Read the rest.

Federal action puts Amazon in driver’s seat

Now that Apple and its publishing allies are headed to what promises to be a long and bloody legal battle, there’s already one clear winner: Amazon.

From David Streitfeld of the New York Times:

The government’s decision to pursue major publishers on antitrust charges has put the Internet retailer Amazon in a powerful position: the nation’s largest bookseller may now get to decide how much an e-book will cost, and the book world is quaking over the potential consequences.

As soon as the Department of Justice announced Wednesday that it was suing five major publishers and Apple on price-fixing charges, and simultaneously settling with three of them, Amazon announced plans to push down prices on e-books. The price of some major titles could fall to $9.99 or less from $14.99, saving voracious readers a bundle.

But publishers and booksellers argue that any victory for consumers will be short-lived, and that the ultimate effect of the antitrust suit will be to exchange a perceived monopoly for a real one. Amazon, already the dominant force in the industry, will hold all the cards.

“Amazon must be unbelievably happy today,” said Michael Norris, a book publishing analyst with Simba Information. “Had they been puppeteering this whole play, it could not have worked out better for them.”

Read the rest.

Publishers, writers hard hit by Amazon’s power play

While Amazon’s move saves readers a lot of money, it’s certain to cost publishers and writers dearly, since lower prices mean lower revenues for the publishers and reduced royalties for the folks who create the books.

Just how hard is Amazon hitting the publishing world?

Consider this from Amy Martinez of the Seattle Times:

The bad news came to McFarland & Co. in an email from Amazon.com. The world’s largest Internet retailer wanted better wholesale terms for the small publisher’s books. Starting Jan. 1, 2012 — then only 19 days away — Amazon would buy the publisher’s books at 45 percent off the cover price, roughly double its current price break.

For McFarland, an independent publisher of scholarly books situated in the mountains of North Carolina, Amazon’s email presented a money-losing proposition.

“It was the apocalypse,” said Karl-Heinz Roseman, director of sales

Apologies for slow post of late, under the weather

That is all. . .

Pix Parade: Boy meets [gar] goyle in Cologne

A few shots taken of the picturesque, picaresque creations adorning Cologne Cathedral. Click on any image to enlarge.

8 September 2006, Nikon D70, ISO320, 300mm, 1/400 sec, f5.3

8 September 2006, Nikon D70, ISO320, 330mm, 1/200 sec, f5.6

8 September 2006, Nikon D70, ISO320, 340mm, 1/125 sec, f5.6

8 September 2006, Nikon D70, ISO320, 145mm, 1/125 sec, f5

Barack Obama orders creation of a police state

This is imply the scariest thing we’ve ever encountered, a presidential order that gives the federal government power to seize control of all the nation’s resources.

Really. Just read it.

We’ll have more later, but here’s the order, issued Friday and posted at the White House website here:

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

March 16, 2012

Executive Order — National Defense Resources Preparedness

EXECUTIVE ORDER

NATIONAL DEFENSE RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (50 U.S.C. App. 2061 et seq.), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, and as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, it is hereby ordered as follows:

PART I  –  PURPOSE, POLICY, AND IMPLEMENTATION

Section 101.  Purpose.  This order delegates authorities and addresses national defense resource policies and programs under the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (the “Act”).

Sec. 102.  Policy.  The United States must have an industrial and technological base capable of meeting national defense requirements and capable of contributing to the technological superiority of its national defense equipment in peacetime and in times of national emergency.  The domestic industrial and technological base is the foundation for national defense preparedness.  The authorities provided in the Act shall be used to strengthen this base and to ensure it is capable of responding to the national defense needs of the United States.

Sec. 103.  General Functions.  Executive departments and agencies (agencies) responsible for plans and programs relating to national defense (as defined in section 801(j) of this order), or for resources and services needed to support such plans and programs, shall:

(a)  identify requirements for the full spectrum of emergencies, including essential military and civilian demand;

(b)  assess on an ongoing basis the capability of the domestic industrial and technological base to satisfy requirements in peacetime and times of national emergency, specifically evaluating the availability of the most critical resource and production sources, including subcontractors and suppliers, materials, skilled labor, and professional and technical personnel;

(c)  be prepared, in the event of a potential threat to the security of the United States, to take actions necessary to ensure the availability of adequate resources and production capability, including services and critical technology, for national defense requirements;

(d)  improve the efficiency and responsiveness of the domestic industrial base to support national defense requirements; and

(e)  foster cooperation between the defense and commercial sectors for research and development and for acquisition of materials, services, components, and equipment to enhance industrial base efficiency and responsiveness.

Sec. 104.  Implementation.  (a)  The National Security Council and Homeland Security Council, in conjunction with the National Economic Council, shall serve as the integrated policymaking forum for consideration and formulation of national defense resource preparedness policy and shall make recommendations to the President on the use of authorities under the Act.

(b)  The Secretary of Homeland Security shall:

(1)  advise the President on issues of national defense resource preparedness and on the use of the authorities and functions delegated by this order;

(2)  provide for the central coordination of the plans and programs incident to authorities and functions delegated under this order, and provide guidance to agencies assigned functions under this order, developed in consultation with such agencies; and

(3)  report to the President periodically concerning all program activities conducted pursuant to this order.

(c)  The Defense Production Act Committee, described in section 701 of this order, shall:

(1)  in a manner consistent with section 2(b) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2062(b), advise the President through the Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, and the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy on the effective use of the authorities under the Act; and

(2)  prepare and coordinate an annual report to the Congress pursuant to section 722(d) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2171(d).

(d)  The Secretary of Commerce, in cooperation with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and other agencies, shall:

(1)  analyze potential effects of national emergencies on actual production capability, taking into account the entire production system, including shortages of resources, and develop recommended preparedness measures to strengthen capabilities for production increases in national emergencies; and

(2)  perform industry analyses to assess capabilities of the industrial base to support the national defense, and develop policy recommendations to improve the international competitiveness of specific domestic industries and their abilities to meet national defense program needs.

PART II  -  PRIORITIES AND ALLOCATIONS

Sec. 201.  Priorities and Allocations Authorities.  (a)  The authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071, to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads:

(1)  the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm

Reminder: Gathering to highlight lab GMO risks

Just a quick reminder that the public meeting on UC Berkeley’s plans to open a second campus of its Department of Energy Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in nearby Richmond is coming up in 12 days.

Critics are concerned with the lab’s focus on genetic engineering.

The gathering will be held 29 March from 7 to 9:30 p.m. at the David Brower Center, 2150 Allston Way in Berkeley.and will be moderated by Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the International Center for Technology Assessment.

Speakers include:

• Nnimmo Bassey, Right Livelihood Award Winner [the Alternative Nobel Prize], Nigeria
• Ignacio Chapela, PhD, Professor, Microbial Ecology, UC Berkeley; Researcher, Center for Biosafety [Norway]
• Maria José Guazzelli, Center for Ecological Agriculture [Brazil]
• Becky McClain, Injured Workers National Network
• Jeremy Gruber, President, Council for Responsible Genetics
• Steve Zeltzer, California Coalition for Workers Memorial Day
• Jim Thomas, ETC Group
• Jeff Conant, Global Justice Ecology Project
• Dr. Henry Clark, West County Toxics Coalition
• Eric Hoffman, Friends of the Earth

Here’s the poster for the event. Click on the image to enlarge.

By way of background, here’s the lab’s video of the announcement of Richmond site selection, featuring, among others, campus bioengineer Jay Keasling, a serial entrepreneur who has started three genetic-engineering-for-profit companies [including the troubled Amyris] :