Archives

People Who Still Have Blogs:

  • Me

Archives

May, 2017
March, 2017
December, 2016
November, 2016
August, 2016
July, 2016
April, 2016
January, 2016
December, 2015
November, 2015
October, 2015
June, 2015
May, 2015
April, 2015
February, 2015
January, 2015
December, 2014
September, 2014
August, 2014
July, 2014
June, 2014
May, 2014
April, 2014
March, 2014
February, 2014
January, 2014
December, 2013
November, 2013
October, 2013
September, 2013
August, 2013
July, 2013
June, 2013
May, 2013
November, 2012
October, 2012
September, 2012
August, 2012
July, 2012
June, 2012
March, 2012
February, 2012
January, 2012
December, 2011
November, 2011
September, 2011
August, 2011
July, 2011
June, 2011
May, 2011
April, 2011
March, 2011
February, 2011
January, 2011
December, 2010
November, 2010
October, 2010
September, 2010
August, 2010
June, 2010
May, 2010
March, 2010
February, 2010
January, 2010
November, 2009
October, 2009
September, 2009
August, 2009
July, 2009
June, 2009
May, 2009
April, 2009
March, 2009
February, 2009
January, 2009
December, 2008
November, 2008
October, 2008
September, 2008
August, 2008
July, 2008
June, 2008
May, 2008
April, 2008
March, 2008
February, 2008
January, 2008
December, 2007
November, 2007
October, 2007
September, 2007
August, 2007
July, 2007
June, 2007
May, 2007
April, 2007
March, 2007
February, 2007
January, 2007
November, 2006
October, 2006
September, 2006
August, 2006
July, 2006
June, 2006
May, 2006
April, 2006
March, 2006
February, 2006
January, 2006
November, 2005
October, 2005
September, 2005
August, 2005
July, 2005
June, 2005
March, 2005
January, 2005
December, 2004
November, 2004
August, 2004
July, 2004
June, 2004
May, 2004
April, 2004
March, 2004
February, 2004
January, 2004
December, 2003
November, 2003
October, 2003
September, 2003
August, 2003
July, 2003
May, 2003
April, 2003
March, 2003
February, 2003
January, 2003
December, 2002

Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional
Valid CSS

Culinary Conundrum

So I just finished reading the book Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer. Normally that'd be a hyperlink, cuz, we're on the Internet right now and that's kind of how things are done. But in this specific case it isn't, because I'm honestly not sure I want anyone to read that book because of me.

The good about the book is that it convinced me that my previous obsession over the point of slaughter was missing the point, that's the deal farm animals have with us.

His point was that our side of the deal was to ensure that the animals had a better life than they would have had in the wild, and he argues that up until the invention of large scale farming, we held true to that, but at this point it would be very difficult to argue that 99% of the animals are being raised in anything resembling non-cruel conditions.

It is one of the few nuanced and sane points he makes in the book, which is otherwise filled with many very gross details which don't inform a debate on the ethics of large scale food manufacturing, and the consumer's responsibility when business makes the logical step of not giving a shit about what the animals feel anymore.

Rather than go on about my current potpourri of dietary do's and don't I've acquired, and rather analyze this last bit more. In one section of the book he points out that part of the reason we've begun large scale mechanization of animal husbandry is that we finally just got the technology to do it. We finally got to the point where it was possible to control the ventilation, feeding, lighting, medicating and watering of animals on a large scale.

Before this, it was in the best interest of the farmer to keep his animals happy and healthy, since they were just less work that way.

While the author didn't say it completely, it reminded me of the Stanford Prison Guard Experiment. Where we suddenly found ourselves able to have total control over animals, and that it is simple human nature that amoral behaviors begin.

For much of my life I thought much of the evil of the world was concentrated in the concept of corporations allowing a thousand people to do a thousandth of a bit of evil. If one man murders another, he is charged and brought to trial. If hundreds of Walmart shoppers stampede a worker to death for Black Friday deals, no one is charged.

After reading that bit, it occurred to me that, yes, corporations are often tools used in that manner, but underlying it is a clear human desire to dominate and subjugate.

The reason I even bring this up, is because I've been having a hard time understanding exactly what is going on with the Tea Party movement at the moment. At many points I just wrote the entire thing off as unvented racism with no other outlet. But once I worked out that it is an innate human trait for those with great power to act with evil intent towards weaker ones, I could no longer rule out the idea that Government itself could be both used, and viewed as a thing of concern.

So, whlie I disagree with who exactly is at the top of the food chain, I at least understand the concern some Tea Party members might feel. One party controlling the Legislative and Executive branches sounds scary, they've been passing a lot of hyped laws that sounds sweeping. If I hadn't been following just how real the checks a few Senators in the Senate have been wielding these past years it might scare me too.

The ending of the book is anti-climatic. He kind of kicks some stones around and mentions that "being vegetarian" is just easier, which is an annoyingly vague conclusion for a book that shredded what I find palatable at the moment with some off-hand gross out factoids which I don't have the stomach to fact check further. However, he does also mention that one solution to ending cruelty it that shame is a powerful tool. That there needs to be both a complete vacuum of power and privacy for truly unspeakable things to happen.

And while I very much doubt that cameras are going to be allowed on factory farms any time soon, I think the last point is an important one for our other affairs that are not wholey conducted within giant metal boxes with artificial suns.

I don't see a lot of easy political solutions for a lot of our problems, but if one thing is capable of democratizing shame, I still have faith in the Internet. While right now it is being used for people to simply reaffirm their own opinion biases, I have faith that the pendulum will swing back, that we'll find a way to shine light in the embarrassing corners of evil done under either corporate or government skirts.

I dream of the day where earth shattering scandals and unearthed skeletons are no longer be dished by men in dark parking garages, but by a comic picture of a cat with a pithy but eviscerating caption.

Video Games

So here is some neat stuff I saw at PAX:

Solace

Jason and I stared at this game for about a full minute, and had no idea what it was, or what was going on, but we understood it to be beautiful.

It was then pointed out to me that it was actually a top down 2d shooter game, but like the food surely served in dog heaven, it makes it's own music and beauty as it is played.

In any case, it is free, magnificent, and short.

Spy Party

By far the bell of the indie ball was the game Spy Party. An ingenious player vs player game where one person plays a spy mingling in a 3d cocktail party, trying to blend in with the dozen or so NPCs, the other player plays a sniper with a view from across the way, who is trying to sort the spy out from the computer people. A reverse turing test with a laser sight.

It is just a really clever concept with very intense gameplay, intense concentration and perception on the sniper's part and forced casual patience on the spy's part. No playable demo yet, but with all the excitement about this game I wouldn't be surprised to see it get picked up by a big publisher.

Portal 2

Pretty much the only thing I waited in line for, and it was amazing. They demo'd the 2 player co-op, and it looked like a lot of fun. Best moment was when one of the two robots did something that killed the other, after a new robot was dispensed the demoer insisted they hug and make up so they could trust one another again. Sounds like the sequel be a more respectable length, and they've added a lot of fun new level tools. Very excited about this game, expect it Feb 2010.

Civilization 5

While I didn't actually go to their booth, I played it last night with the wife. We've been playing Civ together since Civ 2 Gold, and are both hardcore Sid Meyer's junkies. If CPS takes our kid in the next month you know why.

That said, the game is solid. I had a few arched eyebrow moments where some basic mechanics from the franchise have been removed (e.g. Gold/Science slider), and while I thought I enjoyed fiddling with that sort of stuff, the truth of it is is that I enjoyed doing everything else in the game more.

They've done away with the "switching civics", and instead you now construct your own civics piecemeal from a buffet of options. This is a great example of game designers learning from human psychology, the old system of having to accept a negative to gain a positive interacts directly with the risk bias most people show, retooling it to be all completely "good things" you choose between feels much more like a belly rub and each opportunity to add one feels like christmas morning and less like a 10 hour budget balancing session on CSPAN.

The new combat system is fun, although we've really only been in simple skirmishes with barbarians, and we hadn't quite gotten the hang of the fact that our units can now just go walk on the water when they want to travel someplace, but for now it is just a solid Civ game.

And while the game crashed immediately when I tried to play it in the recommended DirectX 10 mode, it chugged along fine with DirectX 9 instead, which is a marked improvement over the launch of Civ 4.

In closing, if you want an antidote to most games, give Pigeons in the Park a try. It is free, takes about 5 minutes, and is an interesting take on what games could be like.

Search