And of course:
http://icanhascheezburger.com/2008/04/30/funny-pictures-liberty-medical-delivers/#more-47985

OMG A STEAMPUNK [insert any object, literally any object at all, I don't see why this is so bloody fascinating]

There, now we have a topic.

Personally, I see the whole basis of the evolution 'problem' to have nothing to do with the science at all. There's simply too much to lose, biblically if the Garden of Eden is a Creation Myth and not hard fact. If that tale is in fact an allegory, then Original Sin is out the window!

Original Sin is the ultimate marketing tool; you can walk up to a pillar of virtue and tell him he's a sinner because of Eve. Original Sin means EVERYONE needs your product! Original Sin is why Jesus' 'sacrifice' means anything at all! It's the core of Catholic guilt and evangelical recruiting, and it's the single reason why so many people aren't cool with "Well, what if God just created evolution?" If that were true, it'd still be doubtful there was ever an Eden, an apple, or a serpent.

And of course, without the Eden myth, you lose the primary Christian justification for oppressing women! If Eve wasn't made from Man, then she's not 'woman,' literally 'of man.' Man may have come from a woman, just like the 3.3 billion other men on this earth. And since there may not have been an Eve to eat the apple, it wasn't a woman that made the virtuous man 'fall.' No more biblical justification to treat women badly, keep them from the priesthood, etc. etc.

Darwin doesn't matter for beans compared to the Christian marketing and control schemes that stand to be lost.

I got 'wrong text' too.

You know who's just like Nazi Germany?

Joseph Goebbels!!

*nods sagely*

Yes, telling a kid and his parents "YER A CRIMINAL" is going to be such a great preventative measure. Just like now, where we tell the 'dumb' kids that they're stupid all day and don't pay attention to them. Then, surprise! They're not very bright and don't want to try to be.

One more thing that humanity can cross off the list of things to do before it dies.

Splendid

It's a good thing we don't have any kind of mental health system any more, or any sense of societal oblgation to help people that live damaged lives.

Instead, we consider any suggestion of needing 'help' as an accusation, an extreme attack that says 'Yer crazy!!!!'

We believe we have no right to even allege that someone's way of life is unhealthy.

This is a quandary that bothers me a great deal; I'm very 'live and let live,' I'm very much against legislating morality or telling people who or what they can have sex with, eat, watch, etc.

But yet, I do believe that there are behaviors that are quantitatively damaged, not because they go against some old book written in Hebrew, but because the person creates a prison for themselves that needn't exist. Behaviors that can offer no possible benefit to anyone, and have the potential to do harm.

If I have no right to condemn someone's way of life, I have no right to offer to help them, because there's nothing to 'fix.' And yet I believe that some things are objectively broken.

Excessive wealth is frowned on by the Catholic Church?? Wow, membership really must be declining!

They should add 'Being Relevant in the 21st Century;' that's one thing we can be sure they'll never do.

It's not a question of supporting your country, it's a question of when that support is appropriate. The whole point of the ride is to say "look at everyone, we're all cool in our own way."

Now imagine that a big chunk of the ride is one guy yelling "I'm the best! I'm the best!"

It'd be kinda like the pastor at your wedding going on about how great America is for twenty minutes and then saying "Oh yeah, and these two kids here are nice too."

Detroit is such a strange place, because in some areas it's just utter urban blight, but in others, it's been left alone long enough that it's starting to be reclaimed by nature. I remember feeling that if that abandoned lot would just stay abandoned a little while longer, it would repair all the damage that was done to it and just be green grass.

A reason I see all religions as essentially the same is that they are all a form of magical thinking; that is, you can make something up and have it be true. I can't think of a single faith that doesn't do this, and it's the hallmark of all religious thought. What the actual beliefs are don't matter much, since they can all be subject to being ignored/revised at any time, for any justification.

...or else Pizza is gonna send out for you!

*hides*

As someone who hasn't really followed this epic struggle, is everything he said true, or is this a dire prediction of a world that's yet to come?

Cory,

I did indeed read the article, although it mainly seems to address a different question:

Can file sharing/p2p be stopped, and should it be?

The stance taken is clearly 'No,' which I think is reasonable. File sharing is in the same department as gun control now; unless brutally dictatorial methods were in place, anyone that wants a gun can get one with little trouble, and said methods wouldn't work all that well anyway.

What I'm asking is, as someone trying to break into a field, is embracing the new system actually going to help me? If I go and make something like a graphic novel and release it under the new system, is the herd just going to mosey over, consume, burp, and move on without me seeing a cent?

For the most part I see the new system being embraced by musicians, who can physically distribute their music by standing up in a concert hall/bar/venue and belting out songs. Free downloads means more interested folks equals more ticket sales. Very smart.

But I can't perform a graphic novel, and it generally is not a repeatable experience. The prime value of a book is in not knowing the story, and once it's known, someone won't return to it for a long time, if ever.

The limited ways to interact with it is also a snag; even if people download music, a live show offers something that no MP3 can provide. A graphic novel has limited delivery; at the moment either print or screen, neither of which offers more narrative content. I can't give away one and expect that the reader would want the other.

I could cripple the content of one version (log on to our subscription site to get Color!), but I don't want to do that. People shouldn't be paying me money to get around a punitive weakening, they should be paying because they like the novel.

In any case, don't take me as a money-grubbing sell-out. The work is being done, the ink inked and the story released whether I make money or not. I'm just asking questions.

A question I have over this whole kerfuffle is how beginning artists/writers/etc are ever supposed to become more than guys that spend a couple hours a day on their craft, if making money from it is so evil. If I write a book, I'm supposed to put it up on my website as Creative Commons, right? If I make a song, I'm supposed to put it up and give it away or I'm siding with the RIAA?

Clearly established bands and writers can do these things without putting themselves in any danger. If, for example, they were making money with ads on their site, famous authors could just say 'Hey, I wrote a book, it's on my site' and be so deluged with traffic that they'll be just fine with an AdWords sidebar and a tip jar.

But for someone trying to break into a field, there's two major demons; distribution and time. If I'm working full time while I create my graphic novel, it's going to move _slow as dirt._ 'Bout the only chance in hell I have of making the thing in less than ten years is by getting a publisher to pay me to make it, or to save up money, quit my job, and crank the sucker out.

Point of all this is, if I do manage to finish my novel and just gave it away, I'd have no way of achieving what I want for myself; to make graphic novels all day. If I gave it away and you liked my work, you might get two or three books in my lifetime, at a snail's pace. If I was being paid a living wage to make stories, you'd have bunches more of them.

So that's my question; I've read this blog for a long time and always come away feeling that if you want money for your work, you're some sort of ghoul. And honestly, I wouldn't even care if I got rich doing what I like. I just want to be able to feed myself while I do.

How do we reconcile this?