James Jay Lee has taken hostages at the Discovery Channel in an attempt to force them to change their programming to reflect his Malthusian worldview.  Apparently, Discovery’s programming about child birth has led to a heretofore unknown baby boom which will overwhelm our planet with “parasitic human infants” and “filthy human children”. Instead, we need to worry about “The Lions, Tigers, Giraffes, Elephants, Froggies, Turtles, Apes, Raccoons, Beetles, Ants, Sharks, Bears, and, of course, the Squirrels.”

Of course. The squirrels. Can’t forget them.

Mr. Lee was previously found guilty of disorderly conduct for a protest outside Discovery headquarters where he threw thousands of dollars in the air.

Mr. Lee continues to demand that “all human procreation and farming must cease!”

Those were the demands and sayings of Lee.

Update: Mr. Lee has reportedly been shot by police, and 3 hostages freed. No word on Mr. Lee’s condition

There are no doubt many children born in vehicles each year. Just recently a friend of ours welcomed their new child into the world in the back of an ambulance. It is undoubtedly much rarer, however, when the mother is driving the vehicle while giving birth.

Amanda McBride was at work when she realized the birth of her third son was imminent.  She drove home to get the baby’s father, who is unable to drive due to a seizure disorder, and then proceeded towards the hospital. On the way, her water broke. The Bemidji Pioneer reports

“She yelled at me to grab the wheel,” Phillips said. “And then, all of a sudden, I heard this little waaa (cry).”

Amanda said she had managed to pull down her pants after her water broke.

“And then the baby just came right out,” she said. “I was just sitting on the seat and he just slid out. It really wasn’t bad at all.”

Really wasn’t bad at all! We know there are many methods of birthing; underwater birthing has been trendy of late. But we hope that Ms. McBride’s endorsement of DWB, Driving While Birthing does not spur a new fad.  Congratulations to the parents, but, next time, please call a taxi.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Woman Has Baby While Driving (patspapers.com)
• Mom gives birth while driving to hospital (msnbc.msn.com)

In my previous post, I lamented the death of journalism as displayed through a terribly biased and unprofessional article by Jennifer Dobner of the Associated Press.  The AP is now altered the article on their website and make no mention of any correction.

The original article contained the following quote

Lydia Kalish, Amnesty International’s death penalty abolition coordinator for Utah said her organization opposes the state’s effort to see Gardner executed. But despite Utah’s strong religious roots – it’s the home of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – most here support the use of the death penalty.

“I think in Utah, when it suits their purposes, they go back to the Old Testament and the ‘eye for an eye’ kind of thing,” Kalish said. “These people may be the worst of the worst, but if the best we can do is repeat the same thing, it’s so obviously wrong.”

That quote has now been replaced with

About 20 anti-death penalty protesters demonstrated in the courthouse rotunda before the hearing.

“The firing squad is archaic, it’s violent, and it simply expands on the violence that we already experience from guns as a society,” said Bishop John C. Wester, of Utah’s Catholic Diocese.

This is an unacceptable alteration of the record. Longstanding journalistic practice demands that corrections be noted. The Associated Press is a dinosaur which sweeps unpleasantness under the rug and pretends it never existed.

In the credit-where-credit-is-due-dept, I should mention that the New York Times’ Eric Eckholm has written an article on the same topic which merely reports the facts objectively and dispassionately. Without interjecting opinion.  The way journalism is supposed to be done. Ms. Dobner and the AP would do well to learn from Mr. Eckholm and the New York TImes.

UPDATE: The AP has silently removed the offending quote. This just strengthens the point: Journalism is dead at the AP.

There has been a bizarre flurry of outrage today as convicted murderer Ronnie Lee Gardner opted, as is his right under Utah law, to be executed by firing squad as opposed to the more commonplace lethal injection. Gardner murdered an innocent bystander(why are bystanders never guilty?) as part of a failed escape attempt.

Though I do not share their opinion, I respect those who have principled objections to the death penalty, and understand their positions.  That is not what we see here.  Death penalty opponents have adopted a disingenuous strategy of attacking each method of execution as cruel and unusual, in an effort to achieve a de facto elimination of the death penalty when they do not have the political or judicial support to achieve an actual elimination.

Judging by the quotes from death penalty opponents, it is far more civilized to be bludgeoned to death with the plowshare of the sterile surgical implements of lethal injection, than to be stabbed by the sword of the military firing squad.

One quote was particularly incomprehensible.  The AP reports that

Lydia Kalish, Amnesty International’s death penalty abolition coordinator for Utah said her organization opposes the state’s effort to see Gardner executed. But despite Utah’s strong religious roots – it’s the home of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – most here support the use of the death penalty.

“I think in Utah, when it suits their purposes, they go back to the Old Testament and the ‘eye for an eye’ kind of thing,” Kalish said. “These people may be the worst of the worst, but if the best we can do is repeat the same thing, it’s so obviously wrong.”

The AP’s reporter, Jennifer Dobner, begins by stating that support of the death penalty is in contradiction with religiosity.  Upon what basis this statement is made is unclear. It is possible that this is indeed true of Ms. Dobner’s own religious tradition, but her audacity in extrapolating it to others is shocking.  It is typical of a peculiar sort of moral relativism, which allows only for those moralities of which one personally approves.  She attempts to support her statement with an incomprehensible quote from Ms. Kalish, a “death penalty abolition coordinator,” who begins by impugning the piety of Utah residents who apparently only adhere to their religious traditions “when it suits their purposes.”  She continues on to equate the cold-blooded murder of an innocent bystander with the punishment of an evil murderer after 25 years of due process.

Though Ms. Dobner references “a debate over what critics see as an antiquated, Old West-style of justice,” she manages to complete her article, a fine specimen of objective reporting, without including a single quote from a supporter of the firing squad as a method of execution.

There are those, myself included, who lament the impending death of the newspaper. Articles like this one are the necrotizing flesh on the dying body of  the journalistic enterprise.

Though I support the death penalty, I would not be particularly concerned should it pass from the law of this land as the result of reasoned arguments and consistent positions.  Man’s capacity for logical thought is the foundation stone upon which civilization was built, and upon which it persists.  It is paradoxical that those who would tell us that the death penalty must be abolished as an uncivilized relic of a bloodthirsty time would assert their claim as an appeal to man’s basest instincts. The case must be made as an appeal to reason, or not at all.

Despite the best efforts of the Federal Goverment and the Do Not Call List, the proliferation of VOIP and cheap telephony has led to the recent surge in phone spam.  Unsolicited calls spoofing caller ID, and using auto-dialers with pre-recorded messages trying to sell you extended auto warranties, debt relief, home security systems and other things you probably don’t want or need.

Several months ago, we received a new phone number, and almost immediately began getting incessant calls of this nature, sometimes as many as 6-10 per day.  Asking to be removed from the list was ineffective. Hanging up was ineffective. Profanity was ineffective.  We had essentially run into a situation where the cost per phone call was so negligible that the callers had no incentive to optimize for response.

We thought about it for a bit, and decided the one cost we could influence was the amount of time a human spent talking to us.  This had a real cost for the caller, and we suspected that if our phone number were noted as particularly unprofitable, we would see a decline in the frequency of phone calls.  We created a new game, to see how long we could keep a human being on the phone with us.

It worked. After a couple of 30 minute conversations, the frequency of these calls decreased to 1-2 per month. Along the way, we had many laughs at the expense of the hapless salespeople.  A particular favorite was the person, responding to our assumed Slavic name, who asked whether our first or last name was easier to pronounce. We expressed to them our outrage at their insulting our proud Slavic heritage, and got a delightful backpedal.

On another, more recent occasion, we adopted a clingy, worried persona that was freaking out about the safety of his Toyota.  Finally, when the first agent tried to transfer us, we informed him that we didn’t do well with change, were just getting comfortable with him, and begged him to stay with us. He didn’t.

The most surreal conversation, however, was with a young woman trying to offer us a “free” home security system last week.  She told us that she needed to us to verify that we were speaking to a human being and not a recording. We were confused that she was unsure of whether she was human or not and told her so. We expressed sadness at her existential dilemma.  She hung up on us.  We hope that somewhere, out there, on this big blue ball, that she has found the answers to her deepest questions and has come to terms with her mortal existence.

We urge all of you to adopt our approach and eliminate this scourge. What was your funniest conversation with an evil phone spammer?

Amorous couples would do well to take heed: a dumpster is a poor choice of venue for a romantic interlude. Though one would think this warning would be unnecessary, a Wichita couple learned this lesson the hard way recently.

Apparently not bothered by the stink of garbage, or by its slimy texture, the couple’s coitus was interrupted by the appearance of two men armed with a knife who proceeded to rob them of shoes, jewelery and wallet. Luckily for the couple, their belongings were recovered a short time later. No word on whether their mood likewise returned, hopefully in a more appropriate location.

In the first case, 17 year old Jacquelyn Lockard noticed $2.2 million extra in her bank account. She informed the bank of the error, and the bank credited here with $125 worth of interest the deposit had gathered while it was in her account.

In the second case, Microsoft overpaid the severance of some workers it laid off, and asked for the money back. This was met with general outrage that Microsoft would expect the money back. Microsoft has since agreed to let the affected employees keep the money.

We are struggling to find the fundamental difference here. In both cases, a corporation mistakenly gave people money they were not entitled to. In one case the expectation is that it should be returned, and in one case not. Some possible distinctions:

The Amount Of Money Involved
It’s possible that this is a question of magnitude. A multi-million dollar error is so clearly egregious that it must be returned. An error amounting to mere thousands is a cost of doing business. This is an unsatisfying answer because the magnitude of the error should not affect the moral calculus.

The Size of the Corporations Involved
Perhaps we have more sympathy for a small credit union then a huge multinational corporation, especially when the small company has made a huge error. This is likewise an unsatisfying answer. Stealing from the rich is as wrong as stealing from the poor.

Who Discovered the Error
Perhaps the difference is that in the case of the credit union, Ms. Lockard reported the error to them. She is therefore portrayed in a sympathetic light, as someone who made a choice to do the right thing. In the case of Microsoft, the company contacted the employees and asked for a check back, causing it to be perceived as a bully. We hesitate to accept this explanation, as we are fairly certain nobody would object to the credit union asking for $2.2 million back from Ms. Lockard.

How Sympathetic the Person Who Was Overpaid Was
Being that these were severance payments and Microsoft had just laid these employees off, Microsoft already appears in a negative light towards them. Nobody has sympathy for the bully boss, firing employees. These are unemployed people in a terrible job market and our sympathy naturally goes towards them. Asking for money from them, appears to us to be adding insult to injury. In the case of Ms. Lockard and the credit union, there is no perceived wrong done to her. She may be a nice person, but there was never any expectation that she should receive this money.

Morally, there is no difference between the two cases, but in both customer service and interpersonal relationships, being right is not enough. Especially when dealing with a public image, corporations need to take a step back and look at how their action will be perceived and not just at whether what they are doing is legalistically correct. Microsoft’s cost was far greater than the $125,000 they overpaid here.

Perhaps Chris Cummings can give us an example of this from his deep experience.

In addition to sharing a love of each other, Troy Cobb and Lacey Williams share a deep love of all things LEGO. Cobb arranged for a sign saying “Lacey Will You Marry Me?” to be added to the Vegas Strip model at LEGOLAND. Lacey obliviously walked past the sign twice before Troy finally got down on one knee and presented her with a LEGO box containing a traditional ring. No word on whether a LEGO Elvis will be conducting the ceremony.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Man Proposes At Legoland [Proposals] (i.gizmodo.com)

One hundred fifty feet below the Earth, in an unused section of a limestone mine, one might be forgiven for not knowing what to expect. A mad scientist’s evil lair? A massive bomb shelter? Whatever fanciful speculation one might have, it would not be as incongruous as the booty stored in such a cave by O’Shea Ltd.

O’Shea stores over one million sealed game cartridges for the Atari 2600 and 7800 including titles such as Ms. Pac Man and Pole Position. GameSetWatch recently interviewed Bill Houlehan, O’Shea’s president. Houlehan spoke about the circumstances of O’Shea’s initial purchase of three million games in 1990, about the trends in sales, and recent price change.

We still have a working Commodore 64 in our closet, but if we had a 2600, this would be quite a temptation. Remaining games can be purchased from O’Shea’s website for $5 each.