Weekend Edition: Internet Memes

In an effort to better educate our readers about nonsensical references to idiotic internet fads and viral videos, DFTC proudly offers some of the source material for the best of the interwebs. We will try not to bombard you with too much all at once - it might break your brain.

To begin, please enjoy a news report which started (or was at least on the front edge of) the phenomenal success of "autotuning" on Youtube. 

Both the original: 

And the autotuned version: 

A Timely Rant about the Netflix/Qwikster Debacle.

I woke up this morning to an email from the CEO of Netflix. He and I are on a first name basis, so this isn't altogether surprising. If you happen to subscribe to Netflix, you probably have the same email in your inbox right now. Whether you have taken the time to read it (or will later) is entirely up to you, but maybe I can save you the time. Here's the nutshell version of Netflix latest communication:

"We recognize that we could have handled the recent change in pricing structure better and that many of you (or perhaps we should say the few of you still left) are none-to-happy with us. We are not going to change the prices back (well, we're going to spin it like we're doing you a favor by not increasing prices yet again... at least not yet). Rambling about business justifications for splitting the two services. Oh, btw - from now on your DVD service will be called "Qwikster." The name "Netflix" will be reserved for our streaming service. There will be two separate billing items on your credit card, and two separate websites for you keep up with to manage your queues if you continue to subscribe to both services. Have a great day, and please hang in there with us as we continue turning the screws.     -Reed"

Let's back up for a moment to the halcyon early days of Netflix. What a fantastic concept. DVDs by mail with postage paid return envelopes. An incredible library of entertainment delivered right to your door for what I think we could all agree was a more than fair monthly subscription. Blockbuster had no answer - it tried to play the instant gratification card, but unless you wanted a recent blockbuster (no pun intended) or a recent straight to DVD release, their brick-and-mortar stores really didn't have anything to offer. As evidenced by their nosedive into bankruptcy, the margins on their video game rentals were not enough to offset the losses Netflix caused.

As time wore on, and video rental stores became scarcer and scarcer, there was still some demand for instant video gratification - just not enough to justify the rent on a 3000 square foot store front. Enter video-on-demand services, Redbox, and eventually Netflix streaming. Coming out of the gate, Netflix streaming was something of a novelty. It was cute, really. Not a lot of offerings, but they also weren't charging customers anything for the privilege. This was probably for the best, since most people without the tech-savvy to hook their laptop to their 50 inch plasma screen aren't going to watch a two-hour movie on a Dell sitting in their lap. If they won't use the service, they won't pay a lot for it.

But slowly, Netflix was added as a bonus feature on higher end electronics - PS3s, Blu-ray players, and some dedicated devices were rolled out to allow Netflix to stream straight to your television. Business boomed, and suddenly there was a small, but noticeable charge for the feature on your monthly bill. This was to be expected. Netflix had to pay for the right to offer these movies and shows, so we needed to offset that costs.

Then came the pricing structure change. Netflix split the services altogether, increasing the overall cost to have both a physical DVD service and a streaming service. This pissed a lot of people off. Personally, I was annoyed, but I had at least seen it coming unlike many customers. This change wasn't entirely Netflix' fault - studios had finally gotten wise to how lucrative streaming could be and realized it wasn't a passing fad, so each contract renewal with content providers was costing Netflix exponentially more and more money. What was Netflix' fault was the way it was rolled out - abruptly - and the size of the increase relative to the overall subscription for those of us on the bottom tier of their customer base (who presumably make up a sizable fraction of that base).

The backlash was pretty phenomenal. Short of Gamecock football games and national elections, I can't think of any other single event that has taken over my Facebook news feed quite this way, and it was overwhelmingly negative. Lots of people talked about leaving. Some actually did. Enough, presumably, to get a half-assed email apology from the CEO today.

And what does that apology amount to? Our bad. Here, try juggling two different websites instead of one integrated service. We thought that would be more convenient for you.

Thank Netflix. I really love your service. Really, I do. And at the end of the day, it is still a pretty affordable option. But thanks to your bone-headed customer service and PR campaigns, I have to wrestle with whether or not you, and your Star Trek reruns, are worth it.

A Word About our Title

I’m pretty sure I addressed this in the first iteration of DFTC (yes, I just abbreviated my own blog - can you stand the pretension? Can you?) but sharing with you the origin of our blog title is good filler, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with babies, pregnancy, or parenting, thus fulfilling a goal I set for myself when returning to blogging - to give a sh** about something other than my own tiny universe. Yes, I’m psyched about the baby, especially now that she's finally here. Yes, parenting is a big deal. Yes, nearly everyone we know is in this boat with us. But not everyone, and we at DFTC (there it is again!) care about all our Constant Readers, not just the ones that care about us back. Moreover, filler is good, as our readers will note with dismay (or apathy) that posts on this blog have fallen off of late, in rough correspondence to the weeks since Olivia has graced us with her presence. I'm sure there's no connection.

Anyhoo, as the picture in the header indicates, I stole this title from graffiti - specifically, graffiti in the garage outside my freshman dormitory.




… Did you expect more?

I could leave it there, but that would make for a pretty crappy post.

The phrase was probably scrawled by a drunken frat-guy who considered the thought deeply philosophical, but I thought it was a fairly decent motto for that year of my life. College was good to me. I had come from a high school experience that was less than ideal to the “big city” of Columbia and was busy coming into my own. Far from feeling like an outsider, as in high school, I immediately found a circle (several circles, really) of like-minded geeks. I lived with a roommate who never slept, in a room with fake vulture and a light-up reindeer named Lupus. (If you immediately heard Hugh Laurie’s voice saying “It’s never lupus,” you are in the right place my friend)

Classes were challenging, but not ridiculously so (I assiduously avoided science and engineering in favor of business classes - hence my less than taxing course load), and as a result I enjoyed a high degree of free time for wrecking the toy aisles at Wal-mart at one a.m., LAN battles on Unreal Tournament, rolling twelve sided dice (yeah, that’s right), and consuming an unreasonable amount of Waffle House. It was a chaotic time, but in the best sense of the word - unpredictable, exciting, spontaneous. I certainly can’t say it was the best time of my life - I’ve been blessed way above my pay-grade in the years since then - but it was a good year, and the writing on the wall summed it all up pretty well.

But subsequent years have also been well summed up with this phrase, in good ways and bad. (This is me getting deep, so try not to get your ankles wet.) Life is not orderly, nor is it meant to be. We forget the chaos at our own peril, since the chaos is life happening.

Or it’s just a piece of graffiti that struck my fancy. Whatever.

Requiem for my video games

Hmm...I wonder if this qualifies as "fair use"...

I doubt very much that I will ever permanently put aside all of the stupid, addictive, time-wasting, mind-sucking video games I have wasted my life on over the past three decades. Childhood indoctrination is just too difficult to overcome, and, damn but it feels good to crush a Goomba after a long day.  That said, my wife's patience with me sitting on my ass and asking for "just one more level" before I load the dishwasher or change our daughter's diaper is likely to wear thin in the very near future. Probably that lack of sleep thing. Whatever.

In any case, for reasons that might once have been somewhat in my control but are no longer, most of my time wasting addictions have to be largely set aside for the next ten or twenty years. Maybe only four if I can get Olivia interested in a two-player game. ("Sweetie, that is the chainsaw. It's the weakest weapon.You'll want to find a shotgun quick before Daddy snipes you from behind. M'kay pumpkin?")

It felt appropriate to pay a brief tribute to some of the greater offenders with which I have wasted a measurable fraction of my life. I should note before posting this list that, where video games (...and music...and movies....hell, pop culture in general) are concerned, I more or less stopped paying attention in the mid-2000s. There are no current-gen console games on this list. But here they are, in all their outdated splendor, starting with...

Final Fantasy VII - I could easily just say FFVII-XII, excluding XXI (monthly fee for FF? Yeah, right). VII was the first I ever played, and I've played it through several times. Arguably one of the top five RPGs of all time, VII was a soul-sucking time vacuum. How many hours did I spend breeding chocobos so I could get a golden chocobo, so I could get Knights of the Round, so I could defeat all of the Weapons, none of which actually contributed to resolving the principal storyline of the game. Damn you sidequests! And I still never fought enough battles in the early game to see Aeris final Limit Break (has anyone outside of Japan actually had the patience for that?). Between the various incarnations of Final Fantasy and the replays I've done, I'd estimate anywhere from 600 to 1000 hours of my life were stolen by Square Enix. In terms of my current profession, that's half a working year. Damn. That's just depressing.

Heroes of Might and Magic III - One, two, and three were all fantastic games. Four is better off forgotten, and I hear great things about five, but my current computer is not what one would call "fast" or "good," so I can't speak directly to the merits of the latest game, or the sixth version due out shortly. These are great strategy/tactics titles, where you accumulate resources, build castles, recruit creatures borrowed from various mythological and fantasy traditions, and try to accomplish different goals (or just kill the other guys if you aren't into the campaign games). Maps come in various sizes, and the length of any given game corresponds roughly to the size of the map. Excellent in both one player and multi-player modes. I can't even estimate the hours I have lost to this game. Probably a few hundred just waiting for Dave to finish his turn so I could whoop his ass.

Civilization - I probably lost more time to III than any of the other titles, but the Sid Meier gaming franchise is pretty solid all the way around. This is a world-building strategy game in which the player, appropriately, plays the leader of a civilization from 5000 B.C. until the modern era, or until a competing civilization wipes him from the globe. Really great game. The only real downside is the mid-game lag, where if you are not actively engaged in military conflict you are really just pressing Enter about three hundred times per turn. That, and the sheer length of any given game. Playing for an hour or two a day, a single game can take days.

Bloons 4 - Damn, dirty apes. Bloons is my modern Tetris, or Snood if you prefer. A fairly simple tower defense game where monkeys throw darts at "bloons." I don't know why the target balloons are called "bloons," but they are. This is a stupid game. I admit that. The only saving grace I can argue for it is that it isn't a Facebook game.

Unreal Tournament - Haven't actually played this in a while (again, see my lamentations regarding my current computer), but I did lose many nights in college to LAN battles on Unreal Tournament. It's a first-person shooter, much like Doom before it and Modern Warfare since, but with aliens, space age weapons, low-gravity battle arenas, and a pretty sick multi-player mode. The updated Unreal Tournament (I believe it was out in 2004...yeah, I know how out-of-date that is) added vehicles into the mix for larger boards and absolutely devastating weaponry. The Goliath was a beast. That is all.

I kind of expect by the time I have the free time to enjoy video games on a regular basis again I will (a) have other hobbies, or something more pressing to do, and (b) none of my favorite games will be easily available anymore on any platform I have access to. Much like King's Quest from the stone-age of the computer era, technology will leave these obsolete favorites in the dust. What games have cost a chunk of your life?

Teachable Moments

"Turn me around. The game is on."

One of the things I have looked forward to most about being a parent is the opportunity to share my wisdom and warped perspective on the world with my young, impressionable progeny.  As evidenced by previous posts, I have probably spent more time than is strictly healthy envisioning ways to turn my child (or should we be so blessed, children) into a veritable nightmare for the poor teachers she will one day be assigned to learn from. You poor, poor souls....

Even though my daughter is not yet old enough to retain any of my wise instruction, I am trying to get in the habit early of finding and utilizing “teachable moments.” The phrase “teachable moment” is a popular buzzword (buzzphrase?), which I can really only tolerate using with a healthy dose of irony and/or sarcasm. Since virtually all of my instruction to my daughter is laced with irony and/or sarcasm, I think I’m safe.

Over this Labor Day weekend, we encountered a few teachable moments. During the first quarter of the USC v. ECU game, I was able to instruct Olivia on the definition of a “piss-poor effort.” Spike TV’s Star Wars marathon allowed us to observe an “overly simplistic paradigm of good and evil.” On Sunday, we were fortunate to have a few people over to play cards, and we learned all about inside straight draws, bluffing, and throwing good money after bad. Not that there was any actual money involved. Ahem.

And my obligatory Labor Day weekend yard work and grilling allowed us to expose her to early olfactory associations: sweat, fresh cut grass, charcoal smoke, grilling meat = daddy.

The weekend was also full of teachable moments for her parents. The things I learned:
1. Nothing starts your day quite like a triple helping of spit-up in your boxer clad lap.
2. Four hours of uninterrupted sleep is a blessing beyond dreams of avarice when you have a three-week old infant.
3. There is a nexus of cuteness at which some adults will voluntarily cease all higher brain function in favor of making “squee!” noises. Mostly this effects the female of the species (not to be sexist, but it does), but there were a few males who lost all reasoning, too. In case you are wondering, the equation for this appears to be 2 human infants + 1 kitten weighing less than one pound crawling on said infants = 1 cretinous mass of adults.  
4. Until daddy grows mammary glands or the baby is bottle-trained, he is nearly always the wrong person to hold her, even when she’s not actually hungry. Conversely, if she is not actually hungry, nearly anyone with boobs seems to have the ability to keep her happy.
5. Our baby’s bladder control is inversely proportional to the newness of the clean diaper. To put a finer point on it, there is a 50% chance that any given new diaper will be soaked through before we pick her up off the changing table. That’s talent.

All in all, a very instructive weekend. Hope yours was just as good.

Preseason Hype!!!

I am a late convert to college football. I attended games as a kid with my uncle and cousin, but truth to tell I wasn’t terribly interested back then. It could have been that, never having played football, I didn’t completely grasp the game beyond the obvious “run the ball in that direction” object of the sport. It could have had something to do with the fact that, throughout my formative years, the South Carolina Gamecocks - very definitely “my team” despite my ambivalence about football - were downright mediocre. Sometimes terrible.

If the fact that my ten year old self was a little “meh” about a team I only saw win at home about three times total makes me a fairweather fan in your eyes, then fine, I’ll own it. My wife thinks I still am, when really I just have a self-preservation instinct. If I don’t turn off the television after Stephen Garcia’s second pick in as many possessions, my blood pressure will literally explode my head. But I digress.

The fact is, it was really grad school before I finally started following college football with anything approaching genuine interest. The Gamecocks were less mediocre by then, certainly, or at least more consistently not-terrible. But I also think the sport as a whole had become more interesting, or at least better marketed, than it was when I was a kid. The BCS, for all it’s loathe-worthy crapitude, has at least made the entire football season an incredibly lively affair. Every week matters in the national title race, which makes for compelling entertainment, even for someone like me who grew up with nothing but a great big shrug for most professional and collegiate sports.

I enjoy watching college football, and I’ve enjoyed watching the (relative) success of the Gamecocks over the past several seasons. I particularly like watching some of the Gamecocks’ recent all-stars in action: Marcus Lattimore and Alshon Jeffery most notably. These guys are phenomenal athletes, and the individual accolades they have received are certainly deserved in my humble opinion. Moreover, unlike so many college athletes, they and several other recent recruits appear to be decent human beings. Laying aside Stephen Garcia’s off-field shenanigans (and why shouldn’t we? After this off-season, how hard can we really be on a legal adult for drinking?) the current crop of Gamecocks appear to be a high calibre bunch... in the greater scheme of NCAA athletics at any rate.  

All of that said, the recent article by The NY Post picking USC to win the national title is a bit of a stretch for a team with single digit post-season wins. I’m not saying it can’t happen, and I certainly would love to see it happen, but lets take this thing one goal at a time?

The pick has gotten a lot of coverage, both nationally and locally. That’s exactly what The Post wanted. If The Post (not noted for its extensive sports coverage as far as I can tell) picked Oklahoma or Alabama, who honestly would have noticed? How many extra issues would they have sold of that issue?

South Carolina makes some sense as a black horse pick. They are favored to win the SEC East this year, and the winner of the SEC (not the East per se, but hey...) has won the national title pretty consistently in the past several years. There’s just that little matter of actually winning the East. Then winning the SEC. Then winning the title. I will say that I don’t remember a time in my life where such a string of event was more likely. Which is not the same as saying it is likely.

But, then again, anyone who picked Auburn to win the title this time last year would have been laughed out of town by most supposed experts. And at this point in the season, everyone has the same record, and the same shot at the crystal football. That’s one of the joys of college football. You never know. I'm looking forward to seeing how much of the hype we can live up to.

Death Star v. Borg Cube Redux. Subtitle: Lawyers are big damn nerds

A friend of mine who shall remain nameless (for his own protection) shared my original Death Star v. Borg Cube blog post with an American Bar Association listserv for lawyers in solo practice and those interested in solo practice issues (appropriately names Solesez). I found the responses to be very entertaining, and it more or less confirmed everything I've ever thought about lawyers being big damn nerds.  I’ll let their points speak for themselves or this post will go on forever, but suffice it to say I agree with conclusion that the Firefly-class ship Serenity (with, at a minimum, Mal and River Tam on board) would soundly defeat both the Borg Cube and the Death Star, probably by turning them on each other. Browncoats are just too pretty to die.

I have edited the thread to protect the geeky and to save space. Specifically I deleted some of the more generic posts, and those that don’t bear on the argument at hand. Please enjoy.

Forwarded conversation
Subject: Deathstar v. Borg Cube
------------------------
From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 1:30 PM
To: solosez <SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org>

http://dontforgetthechaos.blogspot.com/2011/07/celebrity-deathmatch-death-start-versus.html

A buddy of mine posted this on his blog and I wanted to see what this collective said about the Deathstar v. Borg Cube debate.

From:[edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 1:44 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

Oh, Borg Cube. Setting aside his bias, I agree with his analysis.
[OMG - did I just post on ST / StW in a public place?]

-----
From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 2:09 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

Hands down. It is well established that Kirk's ship had planet busting
abilities.  Picard's ship was more powerful than Kirk's. The Borg cube
was vastly more powerful than Picard's ship.  Simple A > B, B > C, thus
A > C, the Borg cube is more powerful than Kirk's ship.

The Lucas contraption required a veritable planetoid to reach planet
busting power. It wouldn't stand a chance against the Roddenberry.

Unless their agents cut a deal.

----

From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 2:16 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

Resistance is Futile!   Borg Cube in the first round!

----

From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 2:18 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org


You know you're a geek if you read through the whole thing (and get past the
cute how I met my wife part of it).

Before reading I said "Borg - no contest."

Nanu Nanu.

----

From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:02 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org


Oh, please, this is simply SO silly.  First, I never did care for any of the
star treks after Kirk: just never saw the point behind Captian Jean Luc
Picard.

And, obviously, EITHER ONE (deathstar OR the borg thingie) wouldn't stand a
chance against a General Systems Vehicle (and that's not a Larry Niven
General Products ship, that's a Culture ship as the real geeknoscenti
recognize).  Bah.

----
From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:38 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org


Really, it's a silly question. If a rag-tag bunch of rebels with
crappy ships can take the death star how could it possibly stand up to
the Borg?

----

From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:51 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org


An X-Wing is NOT a crappy ship! You take that back!

Besides, Data defeated the Borg ship by basically emailing them to go to
sleep via Locutus-Picard.  The Borg unquestioningly started their
"regenerative cycle" triggering a power cascade blowing up the entire ship.
 The collective was the weakness. If you're going to penalize the Death Star
for having an achille's heal, at least apply the standard consistently.

----
From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 4:01 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org


I can't imagine the Borg wouldn't have learned the weaknesses of the Death
Star. I mean, seriously, we are talking about the Borg.  Between the
in-fighting on the Death Star and the inevitable vent holes which lead to
it's downfall, I'm sure the Borg are plenty ahead of the game.

This is fun.

----

From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 4:19 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

Deathstar all the way. But rules of engagement are necessary here. Is it a
standoff? Sneak attack?

Even in the blog post, it says death star with no Jedi's, sith or otherwise.

Well how about a borg ship with no Borg on it then.

----

From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 4:22 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

Many Bothans had to die in order for the Rebels to learn the Death Star's
weakness.  They were willing to sacrifice themselves for the greater good of
the Rebel Alliance but would not have done so for the Borg.  No Bothan
sacrifice, no knowledge of weakness.

The Borg win because they're the Borg is kind of circular logic.  What makes
them so all powerful?

----
From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 4:33 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

I think ground rules would have to be stated.  The Borg might not attack the
Death Star directly--all they'd have to do is get a few Borg inside and
start assimilating the crew.

----

From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 4:41 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org


Objection, assumes facts not in evidence, e.g. that Borg teleportation
technology is not disrupted by shields generated by a small base on the
forest moon of Endor.

----
From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 5:48 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

The Borg would have the death star for lunch and the Borg Queen would dance on the emperor's head. Resistance is futile!

----
From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 6:13 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org


Ahh but what about mind control and suggestions on the borg?   Are they, due
to being a collective with no individual thought,  as weak minded as
stormtroppers and thus easily persuaded to bow to the situation bidding?

----
From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 6:22 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

Yeah I thought about that as well and my thought is it wouldn't work on the Borg because of the collective. Don't think any Jedi mind tricks would work on several billion collective minds.

----
From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 6:40 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org


Fascinating.
Initally, I would have gone with the Death Star because, as is pointed out
in the blog post, "It's the Death Star." I find it hard to see how a Borg
Cube could withstand firepower on that magnetude. I would also point out
that even the Borg haven't destroyed entire planets, and Species 8472 (or
whatever it is) was able to destroy hundreds of cubes with what appeared to
be less firepower than can be mustered by the Death Star.
However, the poster's comment about the lack of maneouverabilty is
persuasive. If the Death Star can't target the Cube, it's firepower is
irrelevant.
Then again, we all know that the Borg tend to ignore anything they don't
interpret as a threat.
So, round 1, in almost all scenarios (Death Star vs. Borg Cube, surprise or
no surprise) I'm going to say Death Star, easily.
Subsequent rounds will undoubtedly go to the Borg, as would a long
protracted confrontation. The Empire could not possibly win a war of
attrition against the Borg.
Regardless, all talk of Jedi's, Siths, Emperors, and mind tricks, etc is
foolish. We all know that stuff isn't real.

----
From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 6:45 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

The borg can shoot better than stormtroopers.    The borg actually hit their
targets.

----

From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 7:02 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

When the Rebel Alliance comes out of hyperspace against the second Death
Star, they "witness the firepower of [the] *fully* armed and *operational
battle station" **as it picks apart Mon Calamari cruisers with its planet
destroying laser.  Enough with the Death Star couldn't hit the Cube
argument.*

I can't believe I'm still engaged in this thread instead of finishing my
response to a MSJ due tomorrow. Damn you geek gene!

----
From: [edited[

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 8:01 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

Oh, for Pete's sake, people!  Move on!

Serenity over Deathstar.
Serenity over Borg Cube.

Hutzpah beats overwhealming odds
like scissors beat paper.

----
From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 8:09 PM
To: [edited], SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

You have a point.  Serenity has River...and we really don't know what she is capable of.

----
From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 8:27 PM
To: [edited]

Cc: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

River hmmph.   Serenity has Captain Tightpants who always comes up with a plan that works -- eventually.    Zoe who kicks ass - literally.   Jayne and his arsenal.   Kaylee who can sweetalk that ship into doing anything.   And Wash who can fly that ship places it shouldn't be flown once Kaylee sweettalks her.   (In my world, the BDM never happened).

----
From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 8:44 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

Yeah, I think Serenity has it, I mean look at what they did just to get
around the reavers!
And I'm pretty sure the Tams could take out they Death Star AND the Borg
before they even knew there was a fight :)

----

From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 8:55 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org


two words ... Kobayashi Maru ... pfffft!!!

Live Long & Prosper!!

----

From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 9:35 PM
To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

Batman always wins.

----

From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 10:18 PM

To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

My money would be on a fully operational Deathstar, provided rebel forces are not a factor.

----

From: [edited]

Date: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 11:03 PM

To: [edited]

Cc: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

Oh yea, River Tam rocks.  But then so does the whole crew.  Of course, better script and acting helps a lot too.

The Serenity crew and Mr. Universe (aka Charlie Epps) [and maybe a few "dolls"] could make short work of the a Borg Cube or a Death Star.  Probably turn them on each other and make us all laugh in the process.

----

From: [edited]

Date: Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 7:51 AM

To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

Of course the Borg teleport onto Endor before heading towards the Death
Star. Yes, they first assimilate the small oddly Wookie like looking chub
chub peeps which name escapes those of us who really didn't retain to that
level of detail... chub chub. ♪

----
From: [edited]

Date: Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 10:22 AM

To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

That would be, methinks, the adorable teddy-bear-like Ewoks.

What an interesting mental image ... Borg Ewoks....

----

From: [edited]

Date: Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 10:40 AM

To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

At the risk of belabouring the obvious, and on the heels of a "Kobayashi
Maru" reference upthread, it really comes down to who's show it is. I
mean, hell, Dazzler beat Doom in her first ish. Point being, what makes
this sort of thing fun is seeing the underdog win, be it the Rebel
Alliance, Kirk, Captain Tightpants, whomever.

It makes sense that lawyers of all professions are drawn to this sort of
fantasy. First, our business all too often manifests pretty much the
opposite scenario: Little guys crushed by big guys, evil getting off on
a technicality, innocent men hanging that jurors might dine. Second, and
possibly more important in the collective psyche, our very system of law
is premised on the story of David and Goliath. It is founded on the
notion that God will not let an unjust cause prevail, although in our
modern state we have substituted "the System" for "God".

In fantasy (science or other) the writer plays God and, generally, we in
the reading and viewing audience require our heroes to "Never give up,
never surrender!"

----
From: [edited]

Date: Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 10:49 AM

To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

Borg Ewoks--highly useful for a Borg assault on the Muppets or Sesame
Street.  "Hi kids, the word of the day is . . . assimilate."

----

From: [edited]

Date: Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 11:59 AM

To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

Borg Bert & Ernie?  That would bring the Borg world to its knees.

----
From: [edited]

Date: Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 12:09 PM

To: SOLOSEZ@mail.americanbar.org

I really love this thread! It is making a very long week much more bearable.
It is also enabling some very serious Friday morning procrastination.

My vote is for the Borg. It's a completely biased vote due to my love of
Star Trek. (But my dog, Poppins, looks just like an ewok. We almost named
her Wicket.) I do think that the Borg as a villain are more unique than the
Empire. More of a political or societal concept than pure "bad guys" with a
cool weapon, which makes their defeat more challenging. I agree with most of
the blog poster's analysis of the two technologies.

The blog post reminds me of one of my favorite Star Trek/Star Wars
comparisons, which is from Lene Taylor, one of the duo behind the "Look at
His Butt" podcast, a Star Trek/William Shatner podcast that I've been
listening to for years. She has a proposal for a talk to give to a local
cynics group about why Star Trek is the more appropriate fandom for cynics
because much of Star Wars is based upon belief in the "magical" power of the
Jedi, whereas in Star Trek, the heroes usually triumph due to their human or
human-like qualities and science. I think that it's a great debate to get
into, especially with devoted fans of each franchise. The belief in some
sort of magic is one of the bigger differences between most of science
fiction and the rest of the fantasy genre. I love both!