Well, I’ve finished The Illuminatus! Trilogy (the novel, at least — I’m still working on the appendices), and in honor of that dubious accomplishment, I present this photograph of the Chet Holifield Federal Building in Laguna Niguel:

Pyramid-shaped federal building, Mt. Saddleback in the background.

Snapped last week while trying to locate the movie theater showing Donnie Darko, just down the road from Pepsi and Wolverine.

It really makes me wish we’d had the better camera with us, though. We got a cheap one we could leave it in the car and have it for unexpected finds like this, but the image quality really is pathetic.

This tree's turning brown

One interesting thing about Southern California is that there’s far less difference among the seasons than there is in other areas. Sure, temperature may range from 40° F to 100° F, but it’s not enough for some imported trees. And so trees that, in their native habitat, will shed their leaves in the fall, may stay green halfway through winter.

Last Friday on my way to lunch, I spotted a number of trees like this one, that seemed to have given up figuring out when fall was, and decided, “Heck with it, I’m ditching these leaves now!”

Time to add an “outrage” category. This is just insane: A church panel has invalidated a girl’s communion because she can’t eat wheat (original article here).

The girl has celiac disease, which means any amount of wheat can cause her serious health problems. A local priest was willing to let her use a rice-based wafer, but higher-ups declared it was invalid — that if there wasn’t wheat, it didn’t count. She can either take the communion with a wheat-based wafer, or not take it at all.

For all intents and purposes they’ve excommunicated this girl because of a medical condition.

Good thing I’m not Catholic and the sacrament doesn’t involve peanuts.

I wonder if the church would be willing to pay for emergency room visits (or funerals) resulting from this kind of situation?

Some people think it’s a great idea to block spam by having their email system automatically reply to any unfamiliar address, forcing the sender to jump through hoops that spammers presumably won’t bother with.

About half an hour ago, the IEEE Communications Society sent out a call for papers on its mailing list.

So far I have gotten three challenge-response requests, two out-of-office notices, and a response to one of the CRs.

I expect to see more when I get back from lunch.

Update 2:30pm: Four more challenges, another vacation autoreply, and four more responses. No sign yet of any discussion, complaints, or even (as I half-expected) a rash of misdirected “unsubscribe me” messages.

I’ve been meaning to post this for weeks, so I’d better do it now while it’s still timely.

Does anyone else find it odd that the Olympics are starting on Friday the 13th?

Actually, does anyone know if Friday the 13th has any significance in Greek culture?

We were having a discussion last night about the specifics of copyright law on derivative works, sparked by a ridiculous flamewar discussion thread on fan-made music videos. While it’s generally known that posting fanfic and fanart is illegal, we were speculating on when exactly these creations become violations of the law. Is it when you distribute the work? When you show it to a stranger, whether they get a copy or not? When you show it to your spouse? Turns out that unless you have specific permission from the copyright holder to use the specific work involved, it’s not legal to create fanart or fic at all, whether you show it to anyone or not.

This runs up against a belief of mine that I’ve termed “the Six-Year-Old Doctrine:” if, in order to fully enforce a law, authorities would need to prosecute a fair number of unwitting six-year-olds, that law is in need of changing. With respect to copyright and derivative works, every first-grader who draws a picture of Dora the Explorer or Barney or Bugs Bunny is technically in violation of copyright law. Realistically, no one is going to issue C&D letters to a classful of fans, or sue their parents for damages. Sadly, the owners of the depicted property do have that right.

Copyright law is quite black and white, but feels incredibly gray. And no wonder, with the fineness of the dividing lines between legal and illegal. Continue reading

»All pages site-wide with this tag