One year ago today: December 18, 2014, my $25 fuse, grrr.
Five years ago today: December 18, 2010, they’re not locals.
Nine years ago today: December 18, 2006, I owe $580.
Random years ago today: December 18, 2009, on deflation.
MORNING
The randomizer says that this morning I should talk about food or gossip. Too bad, since there isn’t any. Here’s some filler and loose ends. The new hot water tank works, but it is inadequate. Half a shower is realistic for now. Nonetheless, this small heater merely buys me some time to find a good used unit rather than shell out half a grand over at Homeless Depot.
This is the book, that is the author, and I remembered where I had seen what she had to say, almost verbatim. It was a youtube post of one of her similar book readings. If you watch the video, you will see mostly what I did, but be spared the weak audio. She touches on the beginning of life and
Muggy is the word of the day. So I took some time and traced all the unknown phone numbers on my call alert. The system, my friends, has become insufferable. Dozens of lines show up even in the Whitepages site as “withheld for security reasons”. Yeah, their security, but not yours. The phone as an offensive weapon. Where privacy is reserved for those who can afford it. Another good one is “suspected spam”. Guys, if even one person calls it spam, it is. What’s with this “suspected” horseshit? Spam is spam, DC.
My favorite is the political calls. Thousands of people report it as spam but the establishment is not clueing in. People don’t want unsolicited phone calls. But the bureaucrats are, once again, too stupid to listen to other people. Bureaucrats have their own, separate, reasons for what they do. At least, they think so. Please Mr. Trump, when you get in, outlaw political and religious spam. You’ve proven it is totally unnecessary (to use telemarketing) to get elected. Therefore, it is nothing but a damn public nuisance.
Or how about that “spam level” ratio? That’s Millennial-think, that spam has a level on a scale of 1 to 4. “This spam is level 3/4." It takes a special kind of dumb to come up with that kind of duh. I don’t know how I would solve the problem, but I would always side with the recipient of the call. If he does not want to be called, he should have that right. However, to enforce such a law, there could be no anonymous calls. I would not display the number by law, but I would display who is calling.
NOON
It is understood my stand on data abuse has not changed in years, a lot of years. You still get the thin-skulled people who cannot see the facts. So let’s go over it again for a moment. Why? Because there was a case in the news today of that Millennial who cranked up the cost of a parasite pill from $13.50 to $750. While that is not nice, I have to side with the guy, however unpopular, because I have seen no conclusive proof that he ever did anything wrong.
Shkreli is the guy, and while he probably did nothing illegal, he has been pilloried for the ultimate crime: using the establishment's own rules to make a fortune without paying his dues. He was charged not with running a Ponzi scheme, but for running his business “like a Ponzi scheme”. At least he’ll go down in history as one of the few men who had a law re-written specifically to nail him. That’s American history, folks. In Canada, they do such things all the time—and even vague-worded their right to do so into their pro-non-white Human Rights legislation.
The media has pegged Shkeli the most hated man in America. False. I can think of fifty people I hate worse than him. Starting with clone-brained reporters, columnists, and heads of non-elected government agencies. Note also, the media reports the drug in question was “used to treat AIDS”, which is a misleading low-blow. It is an anti-parasite treatment, and the lower resistance of AIDS people makes them more susceptible to the parasite. And it is pathetic that the media blow that connection up to more than it really is.
Back to data abuse. I am not against data and I recognize that eventually most people will be caught in a trap of their own making. However, I recognized this in my teens, not a few years ago like most people. Since I always knew you cannot avoid government snooping, the best option was to “spoof” the records. Let’s take an arbitrary date 30 years ago. By 1985 easily, I was warning people against filling out forms and entering contests where that information was disappearing into the system—and of course, the naysayers were already calling me “paranoid”. Look who’s laughing now.
Anyway, I saw into the future. I recognized that people were filling out forms full of personal information that could potentially be very harmful to their privacy and safety—and that of their children. But most people rationalized saying and/or thinking, “Everybody’s doing it.”
Well, it turns out, not everybody. The system in place today has one major presumption. It is that 30 years ago and before, everyone who filled out a form was self-righteously complacent. Like unsuspecting sheep, they put all kinds of highly accurate information in those little blanks, never questioning what it may be used for. So, you want to know something they don’t want to hear? Okay: I filled out many, many of those same forms. But I saw what was coming.
Other’s seemed blindsided by the populist attitude of the day. The media encouraged the mindset that the more times you got your name and information out there, the greater your odds of becoming famous or of winning these “contests”. The more accurate you filled out those forms, the better chances you had of keeping your records straight. It never worked on me and I laughed at those who fell for it. Putting your name on forms has always been the equivalent of writing your phone number on washroom walls. You never knew who would use it for what. But back then, most people really were that gullible.
Important: I feel, mind you, that the problem is more of people drawing attention to themselves. Only then does the system have the resources to start digging through that individual's background. There will be a non-too-distant day when such searches are mandatory.
But you still get asked for it (your phone number) at supermarket checkouts and Radio Shack is doing it again. The collectors of this data are merely talking out of the other sides of their mouths. Saying basically that since you are already so far into the system that it is useless to try to avoid just going along. You might as well use your real name to shop online and have even your food purchases monitored by strangers. What could possibly go wrong? It's just a phone number.
I created dozens of confusing versions of everything, from the schools I went to, my marks, my credentials. I’m one of the easiest people to look up on the Internet. But which version is the correct one? Nobody knows. I entered those shopping mall contests, comic book contests, job applications, and voluntary IQ tests all the time. But with the expressed purpose of getting an overwhelming volume of fuzzy facts into the system. I never lied, but I often got things wrong like my address, birthdate, middle initial, and other innocent stuff.
Update to now. Most people who do warrantless searches often stop after they find the first instance of records that seem regular and complete. Ah, now you see, the opposite of paranoid is over-trusting. If you are not one, you must be the other. Now, even if you struggle to remain anonymous, the records of your past activities are on file. One single lapse in your lifetime, even typing in the wrong password on your Google log-in, and it matches up to all the details you thought were lost in the swirl of history.
The only way to find out which version is correct is to ask me in person. And that is the way it is supposed to be, at least if you know the law. All they needed to set Shkeli up was his records. And I say, if the law requires that you keep records, keep many records. There are infinite versions of the truth. I suppose people who “did what they were told” still cling to the fantasy that they were being “good citizens”, but their laughter is so much fainter these days. Good citizens of what, I ask? A thriving and dynamic America? Now I’m laughing.
For clarity, the way the system sets people up today is based on the assumption that the records created long ago for a different purpose contain information that was given in earnest. People willingly strove to give accurate information, so (one supposes) their "raffle winnings" would not go to the wrong person, ha-ha. And when they won, they didn't have to brag because everybody would already know it was them. You think I'm kidding? Nope. I’m also saying it was not, repeat NOT, illegal back then to give out information that was by no means “in earnest”. Think about it. Measure/countermeasure, the game goes on. I knew I could not win, but I could at least play to not lose.
While we are on the subject, how would you like to know what tipped me off that there was danger in the works? I mean specific danger to personal privacy and freedom. It was the change in the way the law was functioning, changes that I saw in my own lifetime. When I was young, you fell off a ladder, that was your fault. But I noticed over time that even complete compliance with the law was becoming less and less of a defense if someone really wanted to get you. Modern law was being used to get after people who obeyed outdated law. It is called "progressive law enforcement".
Remember, I grew up in the era when people were being awarded millions over claims that the airport metal detector destroyed their psychic abilities or who scalded themselves by carrying hot coffee inside their cars. Idiots could win big court cases. Therefore, the system was allowing it to happen. I saw those asbestos workers able to make claims that reached almost ridiculously far back into history. And this was made possible by the use, or more often abuse, of easily callable computer data records.
There will always be the minority who will remain convinced I’m a conspiracy theorist. That bunch. But they must secretly weep when they realize I was right so long ago. They know the main thing they have against me is that it is impossible for them to go back and do the same, much as we know they would like to. Being a cog in the wheel makes you a part of the system, and once you joint the bad side, it is virtually impossible to quit. They’ll just keep a record of that, too.
So there, not a bad report for a day when little else happened. Remember, this blog is purely for entertainment. But face it, you can’t read this blog without getting an education in some way. And it’s a lot less painful than going to book lectures or evening school. It’s part of the popularity and staying power of these postings.
[Author’s note: the shrewd onlooker might notice, as I did, that the pills that Shkreli raised in price did not affect the cost to the paying medical patient. The price at the user level actually went down. The price increase was entirely made up from the amount he over-charged insurance companies. Did you get that? Shkreli was ripping off the biggest ripper-offers in town. No damn wonder he’s going to prison. You can’t be stealing money from the biggest thieves in America, you dumb little shit!]
NIGHT
That was Ray-B on the horn. He’s going to be in the area for a year and I cannot let him get away again without recording us as a duo. Folks, this guy’s development into the musician he is today parallels what I’ve done with duo work. For him it was new turf so he had high hopes, as I did when I began with duos. But now he’s talks like he’s got plenty of experience. Mainly, he can confirm that I was right about the dry solo act and the unrehearsed trio. Audiences that listen to such music are too old and too seasoned to be fooled.
As a solo, you either sing yourself raw in four hours, or kill time by chatting up the crowd. But that only fools the crowd the first time they see you. I call it “cheerleading”. The crowd-pleaser these days is the duo that arranges tunes so they sound like a bigger band. The music interweaves in such patterns that the audience gets a new perspective on it. This is vastly different than the way that the Hippie (or other groups) play “in unison”.
Speaking of the Hippie, he has been reported in Ft. Lauderdale, and seems in rough shape. The story is some kind of accident, but I’ve heard too many stories from that direction. I hope the guy is okay, but he never appreciated me as a bassist and as far as I’m concerned stuck with his solo act beyond what it was ever worth.
In total contrast, Ray-B has changed and evolved. I’m infinitely patient but also very familiar with the process. I know the stages that winners go through, I also well know the points at which guitar players stop and stagnate. The primary types are those that cease or even regress after they get a single show together. Like drunks in a bar, you can go back a lifetime later and they’ll still be sitting on the same stool hoping they’ll get back the magic.
It seems sad that so much time normally goes by between the time a guitarist can do a solo and the time he realizes that route has its own inherent limitations. It becomes like work and learning a single new song becomes a chore because it (learning a new song) rarely produces instant tips, so why bother? For the same old tip, play the same old song. The reality is that once the crowd gets used to your solo sound they can’t tell it from your other tunes. The alternative is to move from bar to bar, but you soon enough exhaust that local circuit.
Ah, then enter the bass player we’ve all been waiting for. Or, at least I like to think so. The fact is, even the introduction of the mistakes that will occur in a duo are an important part of the audience listening experience.
ADDENDUM
I propose a new term: NASA phase. This is where a field gets so saturated with mediocrity that changes, even major changes, no longer result in progress. It originates from the Shuttle program, but the effects would be instantly recognized by anyone who used products from MicroSoft or Hewlett-Packard. It’s akin to the effect of taking singing lessons—after the first month, are you really getting any better? Maybe I’ll define it better, but first let’s see if I use the term very often.
I then watched Crowe in that movie “Proof”, not that other movie “Proof of Life”. This movie was about a blind guy who thinks everybody lies to him. Be befriends a restaurant cook who eventually becomes very good at describing photographs. The plot is unique, so despite no car chases or gunfights, I’d recommend it as a good human character lesson. That, plus the lady lead looks reminiscently like my ex, but totally different personality.
Last Laugh
Return Home
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
