Dean(ish)

“Every now and then I come up with a hypothesis that sounds correct and has the added benefit of being totally impossible to verify. That’s almost as good as knowledge.”

- Scott Adams

Comcast will soon (within a couple of years) offer download speeds of 150 Mbps with a new type of modem that’s made of unicorn blood and puppy dog tears. My question is: Do we really need 150 Mpbs?

Verizon offers a new broadband service called FiOS in select markets (they’re coming to my house soon!) which offers speeds of 50 Mbps, and has the capacity to go up to 100 Mbps with its current technology. Speed aside, the main reason why I’m interested in FiOS is the price. Cable internet with Comcast is running at $58 per month, whereas Verizon’s FiOS service is (from what I understand) only about $35; I only hope that FiOS doesn’t require a landline à la DSL.

Even if Comcast offers speeds of 150 Mbps, if I can get 50 Mbps for $23 less per month then that’s what I’ll go with. Granted, Comcast’s offering would be 3 times faster than Verizon’s, but does it really matter? At what point, and for what purpose, would I notice a difference? I, like most people (excluding businesses), use the internet for surfing the net and downloading music. That’s about it. If I can pull up a page in a fraction of a second, versus a fraction of a fraction of a second, does it really matter? If I can download an entire album in 30 seconds versus 10 seconds, does it really matter?

It’s bad enough that our court system is backed up so heavily, but what makes it worse is petty and frivolous suits that waste numerous resources - most importantly, time and money. You’d think that no one would know how wasteful these suits are more than our own judges, but one (dis)honorable Roy Pearson has crossed the line by suing a dry-cleaning business beyond reason.

It seems to be a fairly common mistake - a dry cleaner loses an article of clothing, in this case pants. The quick and easy solution - the dry cleaner pays for pants. That wouldn’t be enough for Pearson, though. Despite the fact that the pants were eventually found, and that the dry cleaners tried to settle out of court for 12 times the value of the entire suit to which the pants belonged, Pearon decided to take the cleaners to court anyway. The lawsuit is for $65 million so obviously, for a small mom-and-pop shop such as this, it’s ruining the lives of the defendants.

[T]he bulk of the $65 million comes from Pearson’s strict interpretation of D.C.’s consumer protection law, which fines violators $1,500 per violation, per day. According to court papers, Pearson added up 12 violations over 1,200 days, and then multiplied that by three defendants.

What an asshole. How could you be a judge - someone who is supposed to uphold the law and determine what’s right - and feel even slightly righteous, justified, or whatsoever vindicated in this case? He’s obviously taking advantage of his interpretation of the law for his own gain. And what is he ultimately going to gain? Does he really think that he’ll be awarded $65 million dollars for something that should’ve been settled out of court? The lidicrous nature of this lawsuit is what makes our country so flawed, though the ultimate flaw would be awarding anything other than a swift kick in the ass to this wacko.

The original story follows.

Read the rest of this entry »

There are a few songs that really rock on this album, yet there are others that (as much as I hate to say it) are just OK. The faster songs are the best but even some of the slower songs on this album are gold; however, this one really lacks the punch that drove the first album through to my heart. It’s a good album overall, but it just doesn’t reach the greatness of their first. If you can imagine a soundtrack performed by the Arctic Monkeys for Hawaii 5-0, this is it; unfortunately, it’s not as good as you want it to be. Here’s hoping that their third album kicks us in the nuts like their first one did.

(I know this is a short review. It’s the shortest I’ve ever written. It was actually a comment on Split, but I’ve wanted to add my two cents on the new album since it came out so here it is. )

The moment you’ve all been waiting for is here. That’s right, friends; Barbie’s back and, this time, she’s tech-savvy. Barbie 2.0, even. Prepare to ditch your iPods for the new wave of the future that is Barbie Girls.

So you’re probably asking yourself, ‘Why would I ditch my iPod for a Barbie?’ Well, the obvious answer is that Barbie Girls play MP3s! Duh! Like, for sure! Uh… ahem. Pardon me - I let the valley girl take over for a minute there.

Mattel is venturing beyond simple dolls and is placing bets on the digital age. With their new toy, called Barbie Girls, Mattel hopes to take away some of the thunder from the too-hip Bratz line of dolls. With Barbie Girl in hand, one can go to BarbieGirls.com *warning: turn your speakers off* and sign up for your own customizable online avatar (think Second Life for pre-teens.) From there, it works just like Second Life; you can buy things with virtual money and walk around on the screen with your avatar. Original.

Read the rest of this entry »