The Internet Is Watching

I’ve lived in this city for 15 years and I never ate at a nearby Hardee’s until a couple weeks ago. I’ve dined at McDonald’s, Wendy’s, Burger King, and perhaps one or two other fast-food franchises I can’t recall at the moment, but never at that nearby Hardee’s.

Then recently I bought a meal there and something surprising happened. It shouldn’t have surprised me, but it did.

I have an Android phone that gives me notifications that pop down from the top of the screen. A few days after I ate at Hardee’s, my phone sent me a notification from Google asking me to help them by rating that Hardee’s restaurant.

So my immediate thought was, how does Google know I ate there? Then I remembered I had paid for my meal with a credit card. The credit card company knows I ate there and somehow that information was communicated to Google. The two companies probably have an “agreement”.

Our lives are stored in marketing databases. Corporations have access to these databases and constantly update them to keep them current. They collect information about you, your family, your friends. Information about me. Information about everyone. These databases are being updated every day, every hour, every minute. I can search Google for an item I’m thinking about purchasing, and the very next website I visit will display an ad for that item. It works that fast. I’m sure we would all be amazed at everything the databases know about our lives.

George Orwell wrote a novel titled 1984, of which Wikipedia says: “The novel is set in the year 1984 when most of the world population have become victims of perpetual war, omnipresent government surveillance and public manipulation.”

Perpetual war? Government surveillance? Public manipulation? Does any of that sound familiar?

Considering that the book was published in 1949, I think Orwell was a bit of a prophet. Novelists write dystopian novels in the hope that we can avoid the future they describe. Have we avoided 1984’s dystopian future?

Perhaps you’re worried about government surveillance. I don’t know what lies at the bottom of government surveillance. Terrorism and crime prevention, probably. Political manipulation, maybe. Control of the populace, hopefully not but I wouldn’t rule it out. On the other hand, what lies at the bottom of corporate surveillance is surely money. In this case, money may be the lesser evil.

Money and profit may be the goal of collecting so much information about us, but when a lot of information about a lot of people is collected and made accessible, there is a danger of misuse—and this collected information about all of us is always for sale. 

In the world of surveillance, I suspect the government wishes it had the surveillance network that the Internet has become. Wiretaps are time-consuming and have legal hurdles. Monitoring every keystroke on your computer and every website you visit and every request for information you make with your phone has become effortless. The network is in place. The technology is working day and night.

Perhaps I’m overstating the pitfalls of having so much of what we consider our private information available for purchase. Or perhaps I’m understating the pitfalls. To paraphrase John Philpot Curran, “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” Before you use a search engine, before you “Ask Google,” before you say “Alexa, help,” you might pause a moment to consider what you are revealing about yourself. If you don’t care, then ask away.

Space Nuts

Why is it that in sci-fi films in which humans land a ship on an alien planet, the crew of the earth ship is as weird a collection of nut-jobs, oddballs, whackos, and delayed-development semi-delinquents that, on earth, would be hard to round up anywhere outside a frat house? (Excluding the Star Trek franchise, of course.)

“I’m taking my helmet off! Whooo!” says one mush-for-brains standing in the alien atmosphere. So much for following orders. So much for adhering to the mission plan. Is anybody in charge? Yes, but they’re back on the ship and don’t know what their screwball comrades are doing.

Then a bozo sticks his helmet-less head into an obviously living alien “pod”. “Hey, look at this—I wonder what’s inside!” Bingo! People start dying or having their brains sucked out or getting turned into zombies.

I’ve seen a number of sci-fi flicks and stupidity is a recurrent theme. I get tired of watching twits who are supposedly on a trillion dollar expedition to another star system acting like drunken frat boys on an expedition to steal another fraternity’s pet goat mascot. Who vetted this crew?!

One could argue that if all the crew members behaved as they should on an alien planet, then nothing exciting would happen. That’s not true, of course, but I admit it’s easier to generate drama when the characters are being stupid. It’s like those horror films where the entire audience knows that what the teenage girl is about to do is a bad idea. “Don’t open that door!” they yell at the screen. But the girl opens the door and the zombie jumps out and brains get eaten.

When a film gets to the part where the characters begin to act like boneheads, I turn off the movie. If I want to see boneheads in action, I’ll drive to Wally World and ask to buy potatoes. (And no, I’m never going to let them off the hook for that story. It’s too good.)

Summer Afternoon Shower

The tornado siren blares its shrill warning. The weather radar displays an ominous blob of orange approaching from the northwest. It materializes in the sky above my city, though not in the colorful green and yellow shown on the radar. This storm arrives in shades of gray. The sky darkens and the wind rises. Heavy rain begins falling. Five minutes later, the wind abates to a humid stillness, the rain stops, and the sun pokes from behind clouds in the western sky, beaming on treetops and casting shadows into yards and streets. It is a little scene that lately has become a daily occurrence. I like these afternoon showers. They water my yard, wash out the gutters, and cool the air from a toasty 90° to a tolerable 80°. Then they move on. The show is over for a while. I’d like the rain to take tomorrow off so I can mow my yard, but it’s out of my hands. The rain deities will decide if I can mow tomorrow. If my grass gets too tall, it’s on them.

Migration

Humans migrate. They always have. Refugees from the Syrian Civil War number about 11 million. About half of those are displaced inside Syria, and most of the remainder are residing in neighboring countries. Some have returned home, but less than half have access to water or health services. Some have become displaced a second time.

When faced with a refugee crisis, what should we do? Do we have a moral obligation to do anything? Is it a moral act to turn them away? Is it a moral act to send them home when they are fleeing threats to their lives?

The U.S. played an inadvertent role in creating the refugee crisis on its southern border. The MS-13 gang was founded in Los Angeles. When these gang members were caught by police, they were deported by the thousands to Central American countries such as El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. There, the transplanted gangsters created new and powerful gangs. The gangs obtain money through criminal activity and by threatening to kill people unless they pay the gangs. People who cannot pay or refuse to pay are killed in some brutal manner, such as being hacked to death or burned alive.

In Richmond, Virginia, Amanda Morales-Guerra, 30, and her two children ages 11 and 2, have sought sanctuary at a church instead of reporting to Immigration and Customs Enforcement for deportation. She said the father of her child left behind in Honduras has threatened to kill her and her other children. If she returns to Honduras, she will have to leave her children behind. This scene is playing out in churches across America.

Do we have a responsibility to open our doors to these desperate people? For Jews and Christians, the Bible has relevant verses:

You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. (Ex.22:20)

You shall not oppress a stranger, for you know the soul of the stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. (Ex.23:9)

The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as one of your citizens; you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. (Lev.19:34).

Turning our backs on people in dire need has consequences for us. Giving them refuge also has consequences. If we have to choose, let's choose consequences that flow from an act of compassion rather than consequences that flow from an act of indifference.

Big Head Todd and the Monsters

The song of the day is Bittersweet from the 1990 album Midnight Radio by  Colorado rock band Big Head Todd and the Monsters. The song was also the debut single from their third album, Sister Sweetly. This performance was held in 2008 at the Red Rocks Amphitheater ten miles west of Denver.

Burger King

It has been over a year since I ate at Burger King (and blogged about it here). I didn’t use the name “Burger King” in that post. I called the place “Burger Tycoon”—an obfuscation that even today has my readers puzzled. Probably.

After a series of disappointing meal experiences I resolved not to eat there again. And I didn’t for 16 months. But then I decided to give BK another try. After all, people change and places can change, too.

I ordered a Whopper, a Spicy Chicken Sandwich, and small fries. Actually, the small fries are the very same size as the medium and large fries; it’s just the amount you get that varies in size. They should clarify that. (Kidding.)

I decided to eat the Whopper and fries then and there and take the chicken sandwich home to eat the next day.

The food was not disappointing. The whopper was tasty. The sandwich and especially the fries could have and should have been hotter. They were warm, which is acceptable at the beginning of the meal. But even a fast eater is going to finish the meal with room temperature food. That was my only gripe about the Whopper and fries.

The Spicy Chicken Sandwich was another matter. I took it home and put it in the fridge overnight. I took it out the next day to warm up. I opened the bun and removed the fillet to warm separately from the bun. Here is a picture of the sandwich from the BK website. Note the golden-fried, breaded chicken fillet, and the large, thick slice of tomato, and the ample-size lettuce leaves that don’t quite fit the bun. Note the mayo lathered on the top and bottom halves of the bun. Yum!

Now let’s examine the actual sandwich I saw when I opened the bun. (To paraphrase from Simon and Garfunkel’s Sound of Silence, “Hello disappointment, my old friend.”) Note the anemic slice of tomato resting on arguably the world’s smallest lettuce leaf with a hint of mayo. Note, also, that the fillet appears overcooked with breading on top that apparently hasn’t been touched by hot oil. If you’re not bothered by the differences, then order the chicken sandwich and bon appétit.

Meanwhile, the Whopper is still a tasty sandwich.

Brave New Future

There’s a ruckus brewing in the land, as ruckuses are sometimes wont to do. U.S. border patrol agents are separating undocumented children from their undocumented parents and sending the parents to jail. The children go to exotic playground resorts with fancy names like “Tent City” and “Casa Padre” (formerly known as Walmart). Donald Trump says he has to do this because of Democrats. I wanted to get to the truth, so I interviewed a top government official for my blog. He insisted on remaining anonymous, so I will refer to him as “Mr. T”.

Me: “Mr. T, you’re the most powerful man in government. Can’t you end this separation policy and allow these families to stay together?”

Mr. T: “I’d like to but I can’t. My hands are tied. Blame the Democrats.”

Me: “But Mr. T, both houses of Congress and the White House are controlled by Republicans. What do Democrats have to do with it?”

Mr. T: “That shows just how clever these Democrats really are. They’re the minority party and yet they control everything.”

Me: “The U.S. attorney general quoted from the Bible and implied that God approves of separating children from their parents. Do you really think that breaking up families who are trying to escape violence and poverty is moral?”

Mr. T: “What does morality have to do with government policy?”

Me: “Good point. I guess there’s only one way to keep these families together. We must charge the children with crimes so they can go to immigration jail with their parents.

Mr. T: “We can’t do that. If it becomes known that these kids are fed three meals a day, they’ll all want to come here. Besides, we don’t know if those kids are really kids. They could be midgets. Terrorist midgets. We have to check that out.”

Me: “I think you mean little people.”

Mr. T: The term little people is offensive. They’re midgets. Sometimes you bloggers are completely insensitive.”

And so we push onward into a brave new future wherein we sometimes have to attack another country even though we don’t want to, and sometimes we have to use “enhanced interrogation” even though we don’t want to, and sometimes we have to break apart parents and children even though we don’t want to do that, either. Sorry, a little whiff of nostalgia just hit me. Our country hasn’t taken a wrong turn. It’s just “evolving” down a new and very different path.

Candied Bacon

While looking for something else, I ran across this advertisement.

Candied bacon? Why would anyone do that to perfectly good bacon? Why would anyone add chocolate and cinnamon and nuts to bacon? I think bacon tastes damn good just as it is—fried in a skillet. And I bet most people will agree.

There’s a saying: a good artist knows when the painting is finished. That means when the painting is finished, stop painting. If you keep painting, you will only screw up what might have been a nice piece of art. The trick here is to know when the painting is complete. With art, that’s not always easy.

However, it’s very easy with bacon. You fry it. Or you bake it. Or you microwave it. It gets crisp. It tastes good, the way bacon should. At that point, stop. Don’t put junk on it. You can’t improve the taste of bacon by making it taste like something else.

MOMO

The Trump-Kim talks have reached what I call the “Moment Of Maximum Optimism”, or MOMO.

MOMO occurs after tentative goals have been exchanged between the two sides and everyone is saying, “Ok, we can do this, we just have to work out the details.” And you know the old saying: the devil is in the details. It’s the fine print that has screwed up many a deal.

I was going to include a list of treaties and non-proliferation agreements that North Korea has acceded to and then broken, but it turns out the list is already available on the Internet. If you want to peruse the list you can find it here at armscontrol.org. It’s a long list.

So once again we’re getting on the merry-go-round. Perhaps this time the stars will align and we’ll be able to grab the brass ring. But considering the number of times this merry-go-round has flung us into the weeds, you’ll understand why I will be curbing my enthusiasm. As the old-timers say, “The proof of the pudding is in the eating.” And I haven’t seen any pudding yet.

Beautiful Bodies

There is a movement afoot to not show women’s bodies on TV, as though the human body has become obscene. Miss America contestants won’t have to wear swimsuits; instead, they will answer essay questions. The biggest brain wins. The World Surf League is urging cameramen to not shoot close-ups of female contestants wearing bikini swimsuits (which they wear voluntarily for comfort and practicality). Women’s beach volleyball will be next. The Tour de France is getting rid of its “podium girls” (a voluntary job that is well-paid and sought-after) despite the fact that current and former podium girls defend the job. How will women’s bodybuilding competitions be judged when all the female contestants are wearing burkas? For that matter, how will men’s bodybuilding competitions be judged when all the men are required to hide their muscles? Or is this “cover-up the body” movement restricted to women?

Come on, people. The human body is beautiful and has been celebrated in art for as long as humans have been creating art. Are we to hang tarps over the ancient Greek and Roman statues of naked men and women? Are we to drape curtains over the Renaissance paintings that depict the nude human form? If a body is beautiful, what is the problem? I say, good for those who have a beautiful body. I wish I had one, too.

In the name of “protecting” women—including women who don’t want our so-called protection—is it possible we have overreacted? Has the pendulum swung too far the other way? Have we become somehow ashamed of the human body and feel sympathy for those people who parade their bodies proudly on a stage?

There has always been an undercurrent of prudishness in American society. This present-day movement to protect women from showing their bodies is a manifestation of that prudishness—an echo from the Puritans—come to life in the 21st century. Prudes assume that a woman wearing a bikini is embarrassed and ashamed of her body and is being victimized by cameras. The idea that women can be proud of their bodies is an idea they cannot grasp.

Meal Plan

It is 3:15 AM. I just ate breakfast: turkey sausage heated in the microwave, and a rocks glass of plain yogurt. I’ll return to bed for a while and see if I can get a few more hours of sleep. When I get up again at 8 AM, I’ll eat “second breakfast”—like a hobbit. Second breakfast will be a large slice of supreme pizza from Wally World, heated in the microwave.

When lunchtime arrives, I’ll be going traditional with a Korean-style beef frozen dinner. It’s the only frozen dinner in my freezer and it’s been there so long that the box has actually become frozen to the freezer shelf. I think I can pry it off with a spatula. It should be edible though probably a bit desiccated.

Halfway through the afternoon I’ll get hungry so I’ll return to the freezer for some frozen stir-fry veggies and frozen beef strips which, like the frozen dinner, have been in the freezer for far too long. They’re probably dried out too, but the addition of stir-fry sauce and soy sauce will take care of that. I’ll thaw them in the microwave and stir-fry them on the stovetop. Yum.

Supper is a puzzle at this point. The pantry is almost exhausted. I could eat another slice of ‘za. Or a can of soup. I have eggs in the fridge and I have biscuit dough. Maybe I’ll bake biscuits. I can scramble a few eggs, butter a biscuit, and add some grape jelly. Sounds like a reasonable meal plan to me. I have no idea what people in the real world eat. Probably food from Mickey D’s.

The weather dude says it’s going to rain starting this morning and every day for the next week. I’ll be out of food long before the end of the week. I refuse to get drenched going to the grocery store to buy food. I'll just not eat. I need to lose weight anyway. On the other hand, if I run out of alcohol I’ll have no choice but to go to the store. Some things you can live without; some things you can’t.

Pardons

I know everyone must be burnt out reading and talking about Donald Trump’s assertion that he has the absolute right to pardon himself, but I always think about these things a little bit deeper, because that is the way my brain works.

I understand what Trump is doing. This isn’t only about presidential pardons. Trump takes the position that he has the power to do anything he wants to do unless someone—the courts, the Congress—pushes back and tells him he doesn’t. He claims absolute power until outside forces take back that power.

If Trump really has the power to pardon himself and his, uh, henchmen (it’s the word that comes to mind) then let’s speculate on how far this power extends.

If Trump sent a squad of henchmen to murder the justices on the Supreme Court and then immediately pardoned them, would that be legal? By “legal” I mean could he execute that crime without being prosecuted?

If Trump sent a squad of henchmen to nail shut the doors of Congress and arrest our senators and representatives and send them to Gitmo, could he pardon everyone involved for that crime?

Can Trump pardon himself for any and all future crimes he may commit as well as any and all past crimes (which he vehemently denies having committed). That would seem to cover all the bases. When Trump is no longer president and someone offends him, he could pull out a pistol and kill them on the spot. When the police arrive he could tell them, “You can’t arrest me, I’ve already been pardoned—by me.”

The point of this speculation is not that Trump is likely to do any of these things because I really don’t think he would (though it wouldn’t shock me if he did); rather, it is to explore a legal concept by applying reductio ad adsurdum to see how far the concept can be extended before we all see the absurdity. For if Trump has absolute power to pardon, then why can’t he send someone on a mission to commit a crime and then pardon that person and himself for participating in the crime? “Absolute” means without limits.

Trump could violate every legal and moral principle embodied in the Constitution and simply pardon himself. If Trump has absolute power to pardon himself as he asserts, then he could do all these things without consequences. Is this what the framers of the Constitution intended?

The obvious answer to all these suppositions is to recognize that the president’s power to pardon is not “absolute” as he contends. There must be limits on it.

There is a fundamental legal principle that asserts you can’t be the judge in your own court case. By claiming absolute power to pardon himself, Trump contends that principle doesn’t apply to him. It appears Trump wants to be king more than he wants to be president. It is the responsibility of We the People to ensure that doesn’t happen.

Contact Us

If you’ve ever tried to contact a corporation through their website (“Contact Us”) or provide feedback about your experience (“Customer Satisfaction Survey”) then surely you know that no one at the corporation gives a damn about what you have to say. Though the website form demands to know your name, email address, and phone number, you will never hear back from these corporations. They probably sell your contact information to a marketing firm and that is the end of it.

I’ve wondered if my communications to big companies are read by anyone. My belief is that these communication channels are entirely one way, from my desktop to a virtual wastebasket. Maybe, maybe, if a website visitor mentioned to them that there may be a bomb hidden in their building, they might be interested in hearing more about it. But probably not.

So, if you’re not happy with your shopping experience, don’t bother with the “Contact Us” form. It’s just there to drain away some of the phone traffic. Nothing will come of it. If you want to be heard, you have to phone the company with your complaint and/or suggestions. You have to interact with a real human being. Tell them you expect a letter that addresses your concerns. But don’t tell them you might not shop there again. You’ll be wasting your breath. They really don’t care.

Walmart, are you listening?

Freedom of Speech

I want to explain the First Amendment to Americans, many of whom seem confused about freedom of speech in America.

The First Amendment to the Constitution prohibits Congress from passing a law that restricts free speech, and it guarantees certain other rights. The First Amendment does not guarantee that you won’t lose your job, get sued, be shunned, have your TV show cancelled, or suffer similar consequences because of what you say.

I write this because after ABC pulled the plug on the Roseanne sitcom, people complained that ABC was infringing on Roseanne Barr’s first amendment rights. That is not the case at all. The Roseanne situation has nothing at all to do with the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects you from our government punishing you for your words. You are free to express your thoughts and beliefs, but you can be criticized, laughed at, or despised for your words. Ironically, everyone has a right to do those things because of the First Amendment. It works both ways.

Rain at Night

I went to bed at 3 AM today. Rain fell for hours. I raised my phone to my open bedroom window and recorded a minute of rainfall. This is how it sounded. Kinda nice.

The Vespers

The song of the day is Better Now from the 2012 album The Fourth Wall by American folk/roots band The Vespers. The band consists of two brothers and two sisters.

Butt Brain

I read an interesting article in the Charlotte Observer today. It said that humans have two brains. One is in your head and the other is in your butt. I’m not kidding. Read it here if you don’t believe it.

I’m sure some people won’t believe that humans have a brain in their butt, but I believe it. It makes sense. It explains a lot about human behavior. Some people are intelligent and thoughtful. Some people are assholes. It just depends on which brain is in control. Sometimes it’s the top brain, and sometimes it’s the butt brain.

No doubt we’ve all let our butt brain take over on occasion. Sometimes it seems there’s a tug of war going on—a struggle to determine which brain is going to win control. Have you ever been driving peacefully on the highway when some butt-wad cuts you off and makes you slam on your brakes to avoid an accident? You can respond in one of two ways. You can take a breath and utter a peaceful, “It’s okay, brother, have a good day.” Or you can let out a primal “Asshole!” and shoot them the middle finger. That’s when you know which brain is in control.

The article also states that scientists believe the butt brain is the older of the two brains. That means humans started out as assholes and evolved to our present condition of semi-assholes. One day we’ll be fully evolved humans. In the meantime, give others around you a little slack when they act like assholes. They can’t help it; their butt brain is in control. They’re still evolving.

The best thing each of us can do—especially when something upsetting happens to us—is to remember that we have two brains. Try not to let the butt brain take charge. It really doesn’t know what it’s doing.

Big Red Warning

How do you know you’ve found a good YouTube video? You know it may be good if it has this big red warning at the beginning.

Of course, the warning that it may be disturbing to some viewers doesn’t guarantee you a good video. Disturbing, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

There are many videos showing cops fatally shooting people. These videos are fairly routine. There’s a lot of shouting (“Stop!”, “Get on the ground!”, “Drop the gun!”, “Drop the knife!”, “Drop the screwdriver!”), then there’s a volley of gunshots and the perp falls down, then it’s over. It’s instructive to see just how quickly you can die by refusing to cooperate with the law but, on the excitement scale, these rank slightly above cat videos.

Next up are plane crash videos. I don’t root for anyone to die, but it happens. Regardless of that, the videos are fairly entertaining. But maybe that’s because I like airplanes. In fact, I like airplanes so much that I once took flying lessons. So I’m biased about airplane videos. Still, I rate plane crash videos above shootouts.

Next up are car crash videos. There are an endless number of them on YouTube. However, after a while you’ve seen all the significant ways that people wreck their cars. Many times you can predict what will happen because, you know—someone is making a right turn from the left lane, or a left turn from the right lane, or a U-turn on a busy highway, or driving too fast on an icy road, or trying to overtake five cars and a semi all at one time—these are the videos where you know something bad is about to happen. Then it happens. Sometimes a driver or passenger comes spinning out of the wreckage like a human Frisbee. You don’t want to know that person is dead. “He could be okay,” you tell yourself.

Then there are train videos in which a locomotive smashes into something. Sometimes it’s a fully loaded semi truck stalled on the tracks. An explosion of debris blasts out of the trailer. These videos can be interesting to watch—for a while—but there is a sameness to them that gets old quickly. I advise avoiding these videos, because sooner or later you’ll see something you can’t un-see. You’ll see a locomotive hit an automobile full of people. Despite red crossing lights flashing and locomotive horns bellowing, a car drives directly into the path of a train. In an instant, a family is killed. These videos are not fun to watch—they’re sobering. They show how ephemeral is life. Do one stupid thing at the wrong time—texting while driving, racing a train to the crossing—and the lives of you and your loved ones are snuffed out. Now that is the kind of video that deserves the big red warning.