Right, that's it, Boing Boing has officially jumped the shark and dolphin love-in. Bloglines, unsubscribe!

I have decided that Boing Boing is, in fact, a government run food safety program. With that in mind, I am horrified at the way this place is being run. When was the last time you folks inspected a chicken slaughterhouse? How are we supposed to know that the tomatoes we buy in the store are safe? OH MY GOD!!1 The tomato contaminations -- all Boing Boing's fault! These people should be sued! What a disgracefully run food safety program. Surely just another indication of the Bush administration's incompetence.

For shame, Boing Boing. You are not living up to the high standards that I set for the type of organization that I imagine you are.

"A driver found the chicken bomb who called the cops"

The chicken bomb called the cops? What, was it a suicide chicken bomber?

And just a few posts back we had Cory's "bring a bag of months into a theater." We don't need no stinkin' editors!

It's all very shocking, but given the articles focus on the sins of Americans, wouldn't it be more powerful to know how their 27% waste compares to the rest of the world? If, say, the EU countries average 10%, this is huge news. If they EU countries also average 27%, it's a different story with different implications.

-1 for sensationalism without documentation.

I love the scare quotes on feet. I, too, have "feet" which keep me from tipping over.

Well, that was an epic fail. They neglected to note that many people like innovative and unusual music, which makes their "most unwanted song" an exemplar for something that people actually *want*. Oops.

Sweet, I knew I was a wino, but am I also a huffer for enjoying the nose of a tasty wine?

I am *so* glad I grew up in the era when it was still legal to enjoy something.

The great thing about obscenity laws is that they don't define "obscenity", so the only way to know whether you're guilty or not is with the jury's verdict. It's not like you can say "well, this particular act is illegal to show, so I won't include it."

Wouldn't there have to be some threshold for how much value one has to add for it to be fair use? And then wouldn't that turn into a subjective and thorny issue?

Suppose I take a classic CD, like Sgt. Peppers'. And here in my home studio I re-equalize it to make the bass punchier and more car-stereo friendly, and maybe speed it up 3% or so (with pitch correction, of course) to make it a little more lively. Surely I've added value, as it will be more enjoyable for some people. But should that really be fair use?

If this argument holds water, wouldn't it be the case that any cover band that sounds "too much" like the original would need a master license to perform?

Seems like an odd and not-entirely-desirable outcome if cover bands are effectively required to not sound "too much" like the original, whatever that means.