by Kieran Healy on November 3, 2003
While reading Eric Muller’s defence of David Bernstein, I came across another of his posts:
bq. Is it just me, or does this speech by Janice R. Brown seem a little, well, unhinged?
(Allen Brill has a chronology if you want to know who Janice Brown is.) Several of Muller’s commenters assure him that it’s just him and the speech is “entertaining and thought-provoking.” Clayton Cramer comments that it’s “splendid and thoughtful.” Well, that clinches it for me.
Actually, “unhinged” is a strong word, and I don’t think Janice R. Brown is insane. Also, I’m not in an position to parse her views on the Lochner decision. But as to her more general social theory… Well, the speech is a heady and unstable mix of libertarian obiter dicta, Randian bromides, culture-war cliches and, um, Procol Harum lyrics. No, really.
[click to continue…]
by Brian on November 3, 2003
Chris’s post generated such an interesting comments thread that I feel I have to hop on the bandwagon. The following is a theologically revised version of a puzzle that’s been doing the rounds the past decade or so.
[click to continue…]
by Ted on November 3, 2003
If anyone knows of a position for an experienced, highly qualified technical writer, you could do no better than contact Ginger Stampley at immlass@yahoo.com.
If anyone knows of a position for a QA or CM position, and is looking for a bright, hardworking guy who had previously managed a project staff of fifteen (I believe), you will probably want to contact Michael Croft* at michael@whiterose.org. They would relocate for a good offer.
* Croft, not Stampley. I plead utter idiocy.
by Ted on November 3, 2003
by Chris Bertram on November 3, 2003
Simon Waldman’s tale of “how he discovered a special Homes and Gardens feature”:http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,3605,1076455,00.html on Hitler’s taste in decor is blogpspheric old news. But I’m linking just to note the reaction of IPC when he put up scans from a pre-war magazine on his blog:
bq. “This piece, text and photographs is still in copyright and any unauthorised reproduction is an infringement of copyright. In the circumstances I must request you to remove this article from your website.”
It turned out that they didn’t have copyright but asserted that they did anyway.
by Daniel on November 3, 2003
News in from Reuters that despite the French being Old Europeans, obstructionists, allies of Saddam Hussein and French, the American wine consumer has a touch more common sense than the American weblogger. According to the CIVB, the Conseil Interprofessionel du Vin de Bordeaux, there was a 77% increase in the value of Bordeaux wines sold to the USA in 2002-03. This is most likely because a) the dollar has fallen and CIVB measures in euros and b) the 2000 vintage has been released, and is by all accounts pretty sensational (christ knows it’s unlikely to be because of this cheesy marketing site), but even so, the Americans overtook the Germans this year as the biggest export market for the Bordelais.
Onivins, the state agency for the wine trade as a whole, confirms that this trend is being seen across the French wine industry. Although the volume of exports to the USA fell by 3%, the value increased by a healthy 35% in the first half of ’03, better than anywhere in the world except Australia. I suppose that you could rescue hysterical predictions made earlier in the year by claiming that the traitorous upper-class liberal transnational progressivists had upped their purchases of Lafite and Petrus because they hate America, while Joe SixPack had boycotted the unearhtly EU-subsidised hellbroth that pours out of Languedoc. But it seems pretty straw-clutching.
(Big up to Sadly, no! for sterling work on this story, by the way.)
[EDIT]: Oh god you’ve just got to check out the CIVD marketing website. It’s hysterical.