atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,

#1940: Rewrite started!

I did 12 pages last night. Even better, the story has captured my interest. That means I've got to write more, because that's the only way I'll find out what happens.

(Okay, yes, I already know the plot for the entire story; that's been established since 1982. It is the journey, not the destination, which interests me.)

My favorite author is working on a new book--why shouldn't I be pumped?

* * *

So what happens? The blog-o-sphere is chock full of stuff I want to comment on, when all I really want to do is go get a hamburger and dive back into my rewrite.

I'm tempted just to slam all the links down in front of you and let you figure it out. You're smart, right?

* * *

Car and Driver magazine adds to the anti-Toyota stupidity here. Here's a thought: maybe these problems are actual problems and not due to people who don't like the same things you guys do.

These guys hold all cars to a single standard. In order to be a "good" car in their view the car must meet certain expectations. Problem is, these expectations only fit one kind of car.

A sports car is usually expected to provide the driver with enough tactile input that he can tell how much grip his tires have, how much braking he can safely manage, and so on. This is vital to someone who is hooning a car around a racetrack.

For going to the grocery store, not so much.

You don't need "road feel" when you're driving a grocery-getter. You need the brakes to do what you tell them to. In a race car, antilock brakes can be counterproductive. In a grocery-getter, they're a safety feature.

The average driver may not be able to guide a car through turn 3 at Indy at 200 MPH, but I'm sure he's smart enough to tell the difference between brakes that are not working correctly and the application of ABS.

* * *

Remember how George Bush and Dick Cheney wanted to eliminate your civil rights? Remember how the Patriot Act was a dastardly attempt to strip people of their constitutional rights to due process, freedom from search and seizure, etc?

Now the Obama administration wants to use your cell phone to track where you are and what you're doing, without a court order.

Remember the fooraw over the "warrantless wiretaps"? That was aimed at tracking calls from foreign suspects. This crap is aimed at domestic sources. If the FBI or the local police decide they want to find you, they don't need a search warrant or a subpoena or anything--they just have to mosey on over to your wireless provider's local office, show their badges, and say, "Track him down."

It is a violation of the fourth amendment.

...and all this will do is teach the smart criminals to turn off their cell phones when they're not using them. Have them on only for certain short periods to make or take phone calls, and shut them off otherwise. (And make sure to turn them on only when several miles from home or base of operations.)

A little convenience for the FBI is not worth weakening the fourth amendment.

* * *

It's not just Biden. The Obama White House is trying to take credit for success in Iraq.

...for George W. Bush's success in Iraq.

* * *

Some muslims are saying that the whole-body scanners used for airport security checks violate islamic law. Probably by making suicide bombing harder.

* * *

Filibustering George Bush's judicial nominees was constitutional. Now we have to do away with the filibuster because it's standing in the way of Democrat plans.

* * *

Read Obama's lips: no new taxes, except for all the new taxes he wants.

* * *

Ah, it's time to write something nifty. But first:

You break these rules
God help you, fools!
You got Mr. T to fear!


  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.