Letters to the Editor
Tideswimmer
Published Letters: 456 Editor's Choice: 47
-
Thanks. Garry, for settling it
[Read the article: Who are you, Anonymous?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I know you declared yourself the winner here, mainly by the prodigious volume of your own postings, but I think many people have offered valid reasons for keeping the anonymous option. A solution has also been offered that could cut down on the confusion caused by having several different people using the anonymous option: Assign each anonymous an identifying number. Voila, your second objection has disappeared. Another good option that I have liked immensely is placing the author name at the top of the posting so a reader could have the option of just skipping past it.
By the way, you would gain more credibility for your viewpoint with me if you weren't so belligerent with so many of your own postings. Complaining about "Sibyls," many of whom offer well-reasoned and thoughtful opinions (they are not all hit and runners), would be more valid if you didn't so constantly slip into sniper mode yourself.
-
Very funny
[Read the article: Tom the Dancing Bug]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]And so true. Ah, the many ways a young man's fanciful plans fail to live up to reality. This strip captures that perfectly.
-
That's the spirit!
[Read the article: Opus]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That's the spirit, Opus. Gotta love that penguin; never afraid to fail in a whole new way.
-
From Sad to Serious
[Read the article: Airbrushing the baby]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Some of the examples are not so bad. Normal color correction, etc. But some of the "enhancements" are truly horrifying. What kind of parent would change their lovely flesh and blood children -dark eye shadows and all -- for the mutant, plastic, glass-eyed freaks that result from some of the website's "enhancements." Who could open up the package from the company and not emit an involuntary shriek of horror? And yet I'm sure that there are plenty of parents who couldn't put the horror up on the mantelpiece fast enough.
If you dig deep enough into the sample photos, you'll come across a sample that says "From Sad to Serious." On the left is a young girl trying to effect an unnatural and awkward glamor pose. She looks miserable, probably because she feels unnatural and awkward and would rather just be left alone. Perhaps she senses that mom and dad would be happier if she was a beauty queen. So she looks sad, but no problem! Just send the photo off to this service, and all her inner unhappiness is made irrelevant and retouched away.
Appalling.
-
I don't understand this
[Read the article: Eminem sues Apple for copyright infringement]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think we need more information; I don't understand how this works. To me, it seems to be as follows:
Boy signs deal with record company allowing them to distribute music.
Record company signs deal with distributor to release music online.
Boy sues online distributor for making deal with record company instead of boy.
But what kind of deal could online distributor have negotiated? Doesn't the music belong to the record company? Who owns those tracks? How did Metallica keep their music offline all those years? Better contract? Did they own their tracks?
All I have are questions. There is so much that I haven't seen discussed yet.
-
Propaganda coverup
[Read the article: There was no "coverup"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Consider the source. More lies. Always lies.
No coverup, so they say, but they sure milked it to their advantage for all it was worth.
It was not good propaganda, it was not reliable propaganda, but as Rumsfeld can tell you, sometimes you just go to propaganda with the half-assed story that you have.
What does it matter anyway when the media can only follow any given story for about a day and a half before some fresh new horror rears its head.
Why aren't these sick evil bastards cooling their heels in prison by now?
-
What shade of purple?
[Read the article: The K Chronicles]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]We had neighbors once who were a nice shade of lavender, and they were not bad. But the royal purple kind, however, you gotta watch them like a hawk; they'll steal anything that isn't nailed down.
But the green people, some of my best friends are green, though they prefer to be called "Chartreuse-Americans."
-
Dang! Typesbad beat me to it.
[Read the article: Quote of the Day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Answering the question as "My sons are over 18 and able to make their own decisions" is a perfectly valid and reasonable answer.
But equating campaigning in Iowa with a tour of duty in Baghdad is an answer that is so snotty and arrogant that he should be forbidden from running and forced instead to assist soldiers through rehab at Walter Reed.
Really, how dare he make such an odious comparison? How can he make it and not be hounded from the list of candidates?
-
Universally stupid
[Read the article: Universal decides to unlock its music (except on iTunes)]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Universal's logic simply does not make any sense at all. So many other stores are Windows only. Gee, guess I'll just sell my Mac so I can buy a few crappy songs without DRM attached.
The piracy excuse doesn't make sense either. If I wanted to pirate files, I'd buy the CD and pirate the hell out of it. What are they talking about? It literally makes no sense!
The part about trying to take Apple down a peg or two is probably the real agenda, but it doesn't make sense either. With plenty of competition (although limited, seeing that I am barred from entry in so many of the other stores, see above) Apple clearly seems to be the most successful by virtue of coming up with the best combination of price, selection, availability (Windows and Mac both welcome), interface and player.
But Universal, as the labels have all along, still insists it can push consumers where they do not want to go. It's insane.
Universal, it's very simple: Me, conusumer. You, provider. Me have dollars, you want? Then meet my terms! I sure as hell am not going to jump through endless hoops to meet YOUR terms. Me not jump, you not get money.
Quit being so goddamn moronic. Grow the hell up! Make your product available and I will buy it. Or don't, and I will not buy it. That's the transaction we're talking about. Why do you keep trying to outsmart such a simple thing?