Yeah, yeah, I know. I'm copping out by doing ANOTHER one of these dumb ol' embedded songs. But I dusted off a Ryan Adams album today at work (Cold Roses), and I am pretty enthusiastic about my re-discovery of my love for alt-country.
I know I've gone on and on about how much I like Ryan Adams's multiple personalities in prior blog entries. It seems you never really know what to expect: borderline punk, twangy and full-fledged country, or quiet folk. I think I like his edgier material a little more (see "To Be Young"), but this is good stuff too, especially the instrumental section starting at about 2:45.
Hopefully ya'll don't mind and at least halfway like the songs I put up here...
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Sunday, May 17, 2009
JoshCast #6 - Shout
I'm frustrated with imeem -- the website I've been using to embed these songs into my stupid blog. Probably 90% of my attempts have been thwarted, because if you embed certain songs, only a 30-second snippet will play. Hence the hiatus of my JoshCasts, as the more established artists tend to place this restriction on their tracks. (I'm looking at you, Robert Earl Keen.)
Not these guys, though. Just heard this from one of the free CDs I get with each issue of Paste Magazine. There's something appealing about it. Can't really go wrong with a song whose name is an action verb. "Shout", by De Novo Dahl.
Not these guys, though. Just heard this from one of the free CDs I get with each issue of Paste Magazine. There's something appealing about it. Can't really go wrong with a song whose name is an action verb. "Shout", by De Novo Dahl.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Truthiness
It's true, I do love The Colbert Report, as well as his discovery of the word "truthiness", but that's not quite what I'm talking about today. Be prepared, I'm gonna start rambling into some kind of philosophical hodgepodge, as best as a computer science major with no such background can do.Take a look at this article about Shane Fitzgerald, a Dublin University student who fooled the press using one of my absolute favorite inventions, Wikipedia. To paraphrase, he fabricated a "poetic but phony quote" by recently deceased French composer Maurice Jarre and placed it on Jarre's Wikipedia page. Apparently, media outlets all over the world found the false quote and used it in blogs and newspapers' websites.
After a whole month, nobody came forward to declare the quote a fraud, so Fitzgerald stepped forward and informed the media that they had "swallowed his baloney whole." Said Fitzgerald on the fiasco, "I am 100 percent convinced that if I hadn't come forward, that quote would have gone down in history as something Maurice Jarre said, instead of something I made up. It would have become another example where, once anything is printed enough times in the media without challenge, it becomes fact."
Scary, no? I have to wonder if something like that has happened before.
I'm reminded of the presidential campaign last year (which I wrote about), when ardent followers of both candidates began to believe outrageous claims degrading their opponent, just because those things were said over and over again and they wanted those unforgivable things to be true, until they became "facts" in their minds.
A corollary: Napoleon once said, "History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon." No doubt the actual truth of certain historical events gets lost in the textbooks on the rare occasion, because (1) the actual truth was lost in translation, or (2) it isn't aligned with the ideological standards of the society in which the textbook was printed (although that thought makes me resemble a conspiracy theorist more than I would like). Instead, stories that approximate the truth as best we can get published, and over time, that's what's learned. Just as a story passed on vocally over the generations changes like a game of telephone (you know that game you played as a kid where you whispered phrases, one after the other, and at the end the phrase was totally different), history evolves.
I was watching House the other day -- which always seems to bring up interesting topics of discussion, psychology, and philosophy -- and he touched on a related subject. Roughly speaking, I believe truth to be well-defined (that's the mathematician in me talking), but generally it seems to me that morality is far more nebulous. That's one of the reasons why we fight wars; we have different interpretations of morality (among other things). It's difficult to define boundaries to moral issues. In the aforementioned episode of House, he is treating a rape victim, and in his infinite wisdom (after all, he's on TV), makes the following statement:
"The problem with exceptions to rules is the line-drawing. It might make sense to kill the ass that did this to you, but where do we draw the line? Which asses do we get to kill, and which asses get to keep on being asses?"
It seems to me that this axiom applies to many, many moral issues, which I will not discuss here, because that's a different problem. Morality is not hard and fast like truth, but it's more like Mr. Colbert's notion of "truthiness". I will draw the line on a controversial issue in one place (or maybe even argue that no line should be drawn at all), and 99.999% of the people in this world will draw the line somewhere else.
I guess everyone's ability to get along is directly related to the ability of people to respect one another's opinion. But there are certainly some issues where you can't just passively take this position (e.g., the Holocaust, which obviously required swift action to stop it). So where do you draw THAT line? I feel like I'm defining the word "is" by using the word "is".
All intended only to provoke thought. Because somebody has to take on Hulu, whose advertising campaign unabashedly admits its plot to take over the world by speeding up the brain-to-tapioca process by giving us free on-demand TV. Fight the power!
Where Awesome Commercials Happen
I don't know about you, but as I'm watching these NBA playoffs, I'm really enjoying the commercials for the NBA playoffs. Samples:
Bird steals the ball:
Dirk being Dirk:
And even better, I love this spoof that so aptly derides how the Mavs got screwed by the ref's no-foul-call against Denver in Game 3:
Dramatic. I wonder if there's one out there for when I hit three 3's to (almost) beat St. Mary's back in 8th grade church basketball...
Bird steals the ball:
Dirk being Dirk:
And even better, I love this spoof that so aptly derides how the Mavs got screwed by the ref's no-foul-call against Denver in Game 3:
Dramatic. I wonder if there's one out there for when I hit three 3's to (almost) beat St. Mary's back in 8th grade church basketball...
Sunday, May 3, 2009
7 Things I Think I Know After (Almost) The First Round Of The Playoffs
I'm too impatient to wait until the first round is completely over (Heat/Hawks will be over in less than an hour). I'm sure you'll forgive me. But, I feel like pretending I'm an NBA columnist again.
1. The Boston-Chicago series is the most entertaining playoff series I've ever seen.
And that includes the epic seven-gamer between Dallas and San Antonio in '06. Which was pretty damn epic.
I mean, four overtime games, two of them double overtime, one in triple overtime? Are you kidding me?? What a ridiculously entertaining playoff series. The number of iconic moments in this series was unreal. Rose versus Rondo in game 1. Ray Allen's clinching 3 in game 2. Ben Gordon's crazy tosses towards the basket that spared him an earful from his coaching staff only because they happened to fall through the net. Joakim Noah's breakaway dunk (I didn't know he could do that, did you?) in Game 6.
This was the first time a playoff series intruded upon my usual nighttime schedule simply because the games kept going. And going. I remember two nights last week where I was going to do productive things -- like laundry, jogging, whatever -- and instead ended up watching 2 hours of 4th quarter/overtime basketball (and the countless advertisements that come with it). But alas, it's over now, and Boston probably won't survive their upcoming Orlando series without Kevin Garnett.
But there's one thing I've learned: Rajon Rondo is my hero. He gives short, wiry, scrappy guys like myself a little hope. I think next year he'll break into that elite point guard category that includes only Chris Paul and Deron Williams.
(And by the way, that Derrick Rose guy may not be too far behind, either.)
2. They need to find a different song to play in arenas when someone fouls out.
You know how some songs were written just to be played in sports arenas? Like "Welcome to the Jungle", "Another One Bites the Dust", or the Hey song. Well, let me present to you a golden opportunity.
I saw plenty of players get fouled out in that Boston-Chicago series. It happened three or four times in a couple of those games. In both arenas, what did they play? "Hit the Road, Jack." And it's not just this series, either; that's the only song I've ever heard an arena play when this happens. Now, I like Ray Charles as much as the next man, but I think we can expand our horizons a bit and find something new, at least to the point where "Hit the Road, Jack" doesn't monopolize the foul-out music slot. This is a capitalist society, right?
So here's your opportunity. Step 1: Come up with one of those tailor-made, corny arena tracks for this situation. Step 2: Make millions of dollars.
3. Announcer Kevin Harlan needs some edu-ma-cation.
I'm not saying he's a bad announcer or anything. No doubt he's got the enthusiasm. Remember last year's call when LeBron posterized KG in the playoffs? "LeBron James with no regard for human life!"
That throaty voice ain't too shabby, either -- although it can't hold a candle to Johnny Most: "Oh, there's a steal by Bird! Underneath to DJ, lays it in! WHAT A PLAY BY BIRD!!!". But he annoys me to no end, for one reason: All he does is give you statistics. Listen to him one game. All he'll tell you is what field goal percentage both teams are shooting. What both teams' biggest lead is. And that's probably because he's got a computer in front of him telling him what to say.
Again, he's not bad. To me, it just seems like he has little knowledge of the game of basketball, so he compensates by spouting statistics. Send him to basketball 101, then I'll give him a chance.
4. The Portland Trailblazers will sit atop the Western Conference in two years.
Bold, no? OK, they quietly bowed out to Houston in the first round this year. But, they have all that athletic talent, a big man, one of the best home courts in the league, and youth that will keep them competitive for years and years.
Only one piece is missing from this franchise: a serviceable point guard. Steve Blake is pretty good, but I don't think he can fill that starting point guard role. He's more of a two-guard who can space the floor with his shooting. If Jason Kidd opts to leave Dallas in free agency (heaven forbid), he could bolt for Portland in a sign-and-trade and lead this team to the top, even next year. Or better yet, they could bring a much younger and very promising point guard, D.J. Augustin (Longhorn!), from Charlotte. Or, if none of that works out, maybe underachieving rookie Jerryd Bayless develops and can fulfill that need -- except he's more score-first than pass-first, I think.
I'm a believer in Portland. Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldrige (Longhorn!) are young, all-star caliber players. If they get Greg Oden healthy and contributing, and they keep a strong, energy-filled bench (with the likes of Travis Outlaw, Rudy Fernandez, and Sergio Rodriguez), they will be a team to be reckoned with for a long time.
5. The playoffs aren't the same without Steve Nash around.
Poor guy. One of my all-time favorite players is out of the playoffs for the first time since 2000. As much as I hated the Suns for dispatching the Mavericks twice earlier this decade after Nashy left, I really hope they get things turned around in Phoenix, just so Nash can have another shot at a title he deserves. Either that, or he gets the opportunity to join a contender elsewhere in the next year or two.
6. Mavericks-Nuggets will be an excellent second-round series.
First, let me say what a relief it was to see my Mavericks blast the Spurs in 5 games. They did what they've historically been unable to do for so long: close a team out while they're done. They couldn't close out Miami in the '06 Finals. And they've made a habit out of letting a team back in the game early in the 4th quarter (and sometimes lose), when the opposing team had no earthly business even making it competitive.
But I think all the pieces are mixing together. The leadership and basketball IQ of Jason Kidd. The renaissance of Josh Howard. The quickness and sharpshooting of the unassuming J. J. Barea, who keeps reminding me of some kind of wind-up toy. The toughness of Antoine Wright.
And then there's Dirk.
J.J. and Josh were the reasons Dallas beat San Antonio so handily in round one, and I think they can be the reason they beat Denver in round two. Josh Howard is obvious -- if he jump-starts the Mavs by scoring 14 in the first quarter and keeps making key defensive plays.
Everyone says Barea won't play much in this series, since he doesn't match up well with Denver. This reminds me of a couple years ago: remember when Dallas played Golden State in the first round and decided to pull center Erick Dampier from the starting lineup, because he "didn't match up well" with Golden State? I remember the throngs of Mavs fans who chastised coach Avery Johnson for doing this. After all Dallas was the far superior #1 seed; why should they bow to Golden State's game plan? If they had kept with their winning formula, who knows what could've happened?
Same with J.J. Barea. You could say that Barea can't match up with anyone on Denver's squad. But let me ask you, who on Denver's squad can match up with Barea? If Dallas keeps doing what they've been doing with Barea, and they get steady contributions from their key players (Dirk, JET, Josh) along with an unlikely hero in a couple of the games (James Singleton comes to mind), they can win in 6 or 7 games.
And then lose to L.A.
Sidebar: My ideal situation for this series is for them to be up 3-2 going into Game 6, where they could clinch at home. If that happens, I'm buying a ticket to Game 6, costs be damned, just so I can chant "Beat L.A." with the masses a la the Boston Garden in the 1980s.
7. Cleveland rocks.
Nobody's stopping LeBron this year. Yeah, yeah, I predicted Boston over L.A. early this year. But that was before Kevin Garnett tore up his knee, and there's zero chance Boston beats Cleveland (if they even get that far) with Glen Davis starting at the four. There's just not enough defense, which was the reason Boston won it all last year.
Instead, it'll be LeBron versus Kobe in the Finals in what would be a virtual stalemate of a championship series. Cleveland's ridiculous home court advantage (where they went 39-2 during the season) will ultimately be the difference, and LeBron will win his first championship -- his last as a Cavalier, since he'll jet for either Europe or Madison Square Garden when he becomes a free agent in 2010. At which point he'll have to wear a jersey made of Kevlar when he visits Cleveland.
But it's all moot, since that'll be after the swine flu wipes out humanity anyway.
1. The Boston-Chicago series is the most entertaining playoff series I've ever seen.
And that includes the epic seven-gamer between Dallas and San Antonio in '06. Which was pretty damn epic.
I mean, four overtime games, two of them double overtime, one in triple overtime? Are you kidding me?? What a ridiculously entertaining playoff series. The number of iconic moments in this series was unreal. Rose versus Rondo in game 1. Ray Allen's clinching 3 in game 2. Ben Gordon's crazy tosses towards the basket that spared him an earful from his coaching staff only because they happened to fall through the net. Joakim Noah's breakaway dunk (I didn't know he could do that, did you?) in Game 6.This was the first time a playoff series intruded upon my usual nighttime schedule simply because the games kept going. And going. I remember two nights last week where I was going to do productive things -- like laundry, jogging, whatever -- and instead ended up watching 2 hours of 4th quarter/overtime basketball (and the countless advertisements that come with it). But alas, it's over now, and Boston probably won't survive their upcoming Orlando series without Kevin Garnett.
But there's one thing I've learned: Rajon Rondo is my hero. He gives short, wiry, scrappy guys like myself a little hope. I think next year he'll break into that elite point guard category that includes only Chris Paul and Deron Williams.(And by the way, that Derrick Rose guy may not be too far behind, either.)
2. They need to find a different song to play in arenas when someone fouls out.
You know how some songs were written just to be played in sports arenas? Like "Welcome to the Jungle", "Another One Bites the Dust", or the Hey song. Well, let me present to you a golden opportunity.
I saw plenty of players get fouled out in that Boston-Chicago series. It happened three or four times in a couple of those games. In both arenas, what did they play? "Hit the Road, Jack." And it's not just this series, either; that's the only song I've ever heard an arena play when this happens. Now, I like Ray Charles as much as the next man, but I think we can expand our horizons a bit and find something new, at least to the point where "Hit the Road, Jack" doesn't monopolize the foul-out music slot. This is a capitalist society, right?
So here's your opportunity. Step 1: Come up with one of those tailor-made, corny arena tracks for this situation. Step 2: Make millions of dollars.
3. Announcer Kevin Harlan needs some edu-ma-cation.
I'm not saying he's a bad announcer or anything. No doubt he's got the enthusiasm. Remember last year's call when LeBron posterized KG in the playoffs? "LeBron James with no regard for human life!"
That throaty voice ain't too shabby, either -- although it can't hold a candle to Johnny Most: "Oh, there's a steal by Bird! Underneath to DJ, lays it in! WHAT A PLAY BY BIRD!!!". But he annoys me to no end, for one reason: All he does is give you statistics. Listen to him one game. All he'll tell you is what field goal percentage both teams are shooting. What both teams' biggest lead is. And that's probably because he's got a computer in front of him telling him what to say.
Again, he's not bad. To me, it just seems like he has little knowledge of the game of basketball, so he compensates by spouting statistics. Send him to basketball 101, then I'll give him a chance.
4. The Portland Trailblazers will sit atop the Western Conference in two years.
Bold, no? OK, they quietly bowed out to Houston in the first round this year. But, they have all that athletic talent, a big man, one of the best home courts in the league, and youth that will keep them competitive for years and years.
Only one piece is missing from this franchise: a serviceable point guard. Steve Blake is pretty good, but I don't think he can fill that starting point guard role. He's more of a two-guard who can space the floor with his shooting. If Jason Kidd opts to leave Dallas in free agency (heaven forbid), he could bolt for Portland in a sign-and-trade and lead this team to the top, even next year. Or better yet, they could bring a much younger and very promising point guard, D.J. Augustin (Longhorn!), from Charlotte. Or, if none of that works out, maybe underachieving rookie Jerryd Bayless develops and can fulfill that need -- except he's more score-first than pass-first, I think.
I'm a believer in Portland. Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldrige (Longhorn!) are young, all-star caliber players. If they get Greg Oden healthy and contributing, and they keep a strong, energy-filled bench (with the likes of Travis Outlaw, Rudy Fernandez, and Sergio Rodriguez), they will be a team to be reckoned with for a long time.
5. The playoffs aren't the same without Steve Nash around.
Poor guy. One of my all-time favorite players is out of the playoffs for the first time since 2000. As much as I hated the Suns for dispatching the Mavericks twice earlier this decade after Nashy left, I really hope they get things turned around in Phoenix, just so Nash can have another shot at a title he deserves. Either that, or he gets the opportunity to join a contender elsewhere in the next year or two.6. Mavericks-Nuggets will be an excellent second-round series.
First, let me say what a relief it was to see my Mavericks blast the Spurs in 5 games. They did what they've historically been unable to do for so long: close a team out while they're done. They couldn't close out Miami in the '06 Finals. And they've made a habit out of letting a team back in the game early in the 4th quarter (and sometimes lose), when the opposing team had no earthly business even making it competitive.But I think all the pieces are mixing together. The leadership and basketball IQ of Jason Kidd. The renaissance of Josh Howard. The quickness and sharpshooting of the unassuming J. J. Barea, who keeps reminding me of some kind of wind-up toy. The toughness of Antoine Wright.
And then there's Dirk.
J.J. and Josh were the reasons Dallas beat San Antonio so handily in round one, and I think they can be the reason they beat Denver in round two. Josh Howard is obvious -- if he jump-starts the Mavs by scoring 14 in the first quarter and keeps making key defensive plays.
Everyone says Barea won't play much in this series, since he doesn't match up well with Denver. This reminds me of a couple years ago: remember when Dallas played Golden State in the first round and decided to pull center Erick Dampier from the starting lineup, because he "didn't match up well" with Golden State? I remember the throngs of Mavs fans who chastised coach Avery Johnson for doing this. After all Dallas was the far superior #1 seed; why should they bow to Golden State's game plan? If they had kept with their winning formula, who knows what could've happened?
Same with J.J. Barea. You could say that Barea can't match up with anyone on Denver's squad. But let me ask you, who on Denver's squad can match up with Barea? If Dallas keeps doing what they've been doing with Barea, and they get steady contributions from their key players (Dirk, JET, Josh) along with an unlikely hero in a couple of the games (James Singleton comes to mind), they can win in 6 or 7 games.And then lose to L.A.
Sidebar: My ideal situation for this series is for them to be up 3-2 going into Game 6, where they could clinch at home. If that happens, I'm buying a ticket to Game 6, costs be damned, just so I can chant "Beat L.A." with the masses a la the Boston Garden in the 1980s.
7. Cleveland rocks.
Nobody's stopping LeBron this year. Yeah, yeah, I predicted Boston over L.A. early this year. But that was before Kevin Garnett tore up his knee, and there's zero chance Boston beats Cleveland (if they even get that far) with Glen Davis starting at the four. There's just not enough defense, which was the reason Boston won it all last year.Instead, it'll be LeBron versus Kobe in the Finals in what would be a virtual stalemate of a championship series. Cleveland's ridiculous home court advantage (where they went 39-2 during the season) will ultimately be the difference, and LeBron will win his first championship -- his last as a Cavalier, since he'll jet for either Europe or Madison Square Garden when he becomes a free agent in 2010. At which point he'll have to wear a jersey made of Kevlar when he visits Cleveland.
But it's all moot, since that'll be after the swine flu wipes out humanity anyway.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
