In a few weeks (Feb 5), we’re going to have the closest thing this country has ever had to a national primary. Dubed “super duper Tuesday“, nearly half of the delegates to the two conventions will be selected. Within the few weeks after that, several more states will vote, and by the end of February, it is likely the races will be all but decided. Two days before “super duper Tuesday” is the super bowl, an event whose advertisements are watched more closely than the game itself. I am surprised that I haven’t heard about a political campaign using the super bowl for advertising. The buzz alone would probably be worth the 2 million. I realize that to pull this off the commercial would have to be different – a run of the mill attack ad wouldn’t go over well with super bowl audiences. But can you imagine the buzz it would create if, say, Mike Huckabee ran a funny ad (perhaps even with him delivering the punch line) in a super bowl ad? Everyone would be talking about him! It probably isn’t worth it for the front runners, so McCain and Clinton (who is still the front runner despite winning fewer delegates than Obama) won’t do it, but for everyone else – especially on the Republican side where everyone is trying to differentiate themselves from the large pack, this could be something that would put a candidate’s name in everyone’s mouth.

Note to campaign advisers: please send me the check via certified mail, thanks.

According to the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse a total of 217 million data breaches have occurred since the beginning of 2005. Since the population of the US is about 300 million, this means that a significant portion of the American population has had a data compromise. Admittedly, many of the records are duplicates, and many are likely for people whose information has changed (credit cards expire) or have died, but it is still likely close to 50% of the population.

I would wear this shirt except that I don’t really wear T-shirts anymore, and I’m kind of afraid that getting beaten up by a group of Chabdnicks would be the worst humiliation ever.

Our car was the subject of some “unauthorized access” over the weekend. (There are some serious security vulnerabilities in the car itself, and unfortunately while I’ve done as much as possible to minimize the impact of a security breach by leaving nothing valuable in the car, there are few mitigating controls which can be reasonably put into place that will reduce the vulnerability level). The attacker decided not to take the car itself, and after pawing through the glove compartment and middle pocket (my glasses were taken out of the case but not taken), the attacker made off with some spare change and the jumper cables that were in the trunk. (As I said we make a point of not leaving anything in the car – now you know why). No forced entry, no broken windows, no major damage. Could have been a lot worse.

On the way home from work today (which didn’t happen till about 8:30), I had what can best be described as a “very west Philadelphia day”.

IMG_0137

Originally uploaded by fox3613

A coworker of mine just returned from a business trip to China. This is one of his pictures of the Shanghai skyline. That is not fog you’re seeing. That is mid-afternoon smog.

In a bookstore aptly entitled “giant book sale” a few days ago, I stumbled across this book by A.J. Jacobs. In it, a comedian (at least, that’s how he described himself on the book jacket), tried to live biblically for a year. He claimed he was going to follow all sorts of “wacky” rules like not wearing clothes of mixed fibers, and not shaving the corners of his face. It reminded me of an open letter to Dr. Laura I had read a long time ago. (and managed to dig up). In it, someone who clearly thought themselves to be funnier than they actually were, asked Dr. Laura about various other biblical laws they clearly thought were outdated in an attempt to show Dr. Laura that castigating gays because the bible does so is clearly wrong. While I have no interest in defending Dr. Laura, a woman who views religion in purely political terms (and even went as far as to convert for political reasons), I find the two humorists reactions to religion, and religious people in particular as odd.

I wonder if at the outset either of them knew that there are people who actually do follow those “absurd” rules they try to use as humor, and that all those questions humorously put to Dr Laura, are in fact real questions to many of us. The title of my post is somewhat of a misnomer – I realize that many people find my behavior “funny” and have no problem with that. Many people think it’s unusual that I keep my head covered, or that I claim to be a native Philadelphian without ever having tried a cheesesteak. What I do find interesting, is that some people seem to be shocked when they discover that there actually are people who follow the bible. The reaction seems to me to be something along the lines of “well you can believe that stuff if you want, sure, and plenty of religious people act in a particular manner, but I can’t believe you would base your actions on the bible itself. That’s 5000 years old – why can’t you find a nice good modern day cult to base your actions on instead?”

Since I mentioned the writer’s strike in the last post, I might as well put down my thought on the issue. Although it’s easy for me to simply be anti-large corporation, I am also not usually pro-striker (especially when the strikers are making large sums of money anyway, as in the case of the baseball strike a few years back), and I think I have a good clear take on the issue. (By my standards at least – I’m usually hobbled by indecisiveness and that awful ability to see both sides of an issue).

Although there are several issues being raised by the writers as reasons for the strike, one of the big ones is new media. Simply put, writers are usually compensated when things they have written are shown on “old media” (like television or radio), and want that same compensation to apply to internet TV, video phone downloads, content on demand, etc. To me this is almost a no-brainer. The media companies have always been incredibly resistant to adopt new technologies, and usually have to be dragged into the next wave of technology kicking and screaming. They opposed VCRs, MP3 players, television over the internet, tried to scare off TiVo, and only embraced HDTV when congress pretty much forced them to. They still don’t think of “new” media as being a viable method for content distribution, and instead consider it to be for promotional purposes, which is the excuse they use for not compensating the writers when content is viewed over “new” distribution networks. The truth is, whether the media companies like it or not, the world is changing, and these “new” technologies won’t really be new for very much longer. There is no reason why watching TV over the internet might not become standard practice in a few years. Trying to claim that internet episodes are still only promotional is either a poor excuse that should be seen as a clear deception, or a true expression of the media industry’s inability to grasp a changing reality. Either way, the writers are entirely correct – new media should count the same way old media does.

The second big issue is the percentage of money they get from DVD sales. The WGA negotiated a system in 1988 whereby they got approximately 0.3% of the cost of a VHS tape when it was sold. Since then, manufacturing costs for home videos has dropped dramatically. DVDs cost next-to-nothing to manufacture and take almost no time to produce. The cost of home videos has also dropped (in 1998, a home video cost between $40-$100). The writers have found themselves getting less money for the same level of sales. On the other side, DVD sales are now a major source of income for the studios, and are a major factor in considering the financial viability of content, rather than just an afterthought. (As can be seen by Family Guy’s return to the air). Again, this is simply an issue of new technologies needing new economic calculations. If writers do indeed deserve to be compensated whenever their content is paid for, then the home video market, which is now a huge factor in earnings, should count too. The only problem is, as the New York Time pointed out, the movie studios have already given away much of the money to their star actors and directors, but that is there own bad business decision, and the writers should not suffer for it.

If you want more one-sided propaganda, see the WGA’s video on the subject.

If you disagree with me, please let me know why – I’m curious to hear a logical and well thought out anti-writer argument that doesn’t simply boil down to “I’m jealous of the writers because they get paid more than I do”.

moth

Originally uploaded by bachrach44

So I’m not entirely certain if this is a moth or a butterfly (it has some features of each), but I do know this – It started as a caterpillar which found its way into the entrance hall of the apartment building, and ensconced itself in a pupa a few feet from the front door. (The pupa is immediately below and to the right of it in the picture). After emerging from the pupa, butterflies and moths need to unfold their wings and wait for them to dry before they can fly away. This one appears to have died before it could take the opportunity to do so. (Which made it an ideal candidate for photography). After hatching, most butterflies and moths excrete excess dye, which is what caused the stain which you can see below it in the picture.

For some reason, there has been a lot of alcohol consumed in our apartment over the last few weeks. The picture here is actually from two shabbats worth of consumption. (In all fairness, although Lydia was here for one of those weekends, she contributed shockingly little to the cause).

In case anyone is curious, here are my wine reviews. Starting on the right, the two chardonnays were decent, but not really memorable. (In part I’m not a huge chardonnay fan, so I can’t really judge them so well). The Tishbi chenin blanc is really one of my favorite cheap white wines, and I will continue to buy it. (Although the non-mevushal version you can get in Israel is obviously much better). Sforno and Amiad are becoming two of my favorite brands of wine. Sforno makes an excellent Godello (pictured) and their tempranillo is a very good, earthy white. (Don’t believe what you see on kosherwine.com – it appears that one reviewer simply has a poor opinion of the brand and has entered multiple reviews to skew the average.) The Amiad merlot was good, although not as good as the Amiad cabernet (which, pending a second tasting to confirm, is one of my favorite red wines, bar none). Lastly the Joseph Zakon cabernet was the second pleasant surprise in a row from a winery I hadn’t expected to produce much of value. I don’t think it makes my top 10 (not that I really have one), but you can’t beat it for the price.

During the last few weeks when I haven’t posted at all, I’ve had a bunch of posts floating around in my head that for some reason I never bothered to write down. I’m just going to make them all rapid-fire in the next 2 days or so. You have been warned.

For some reason, an unusually large amount of alcohol has been consumed in my apartment over the past 2 weeks. (More on this later – I have pictures). This has lead me back to the CRC liquor list. Although there are many things there which are interesting (the issue of scotch alone is worthy of a lot more than I care to write), the issue of sake caught my eye. Sake is brewed by fermenting rice, in a process similar to that of beer (which most people agree does not need hashgacha). One potentially problematic difference is that with beer, the enzyme used to convert the starch into sugar (which can be fermented) comes from the beer itself. Sake uses the protease enzyme which comes from the aspergillus oryzae fungus, although there is now an artificial source as well. (For the record, I just learned this all on wikipedia about 10 minutes ago. I don’t know how I used to live without it).

The CRC clearly states that sake needs a hashgachah

Only recommended when bearing a reliable Kosher symbol.

The star-K on the other hand, disagrees:

Based on our understanding of industry practice, rice wine (sake) does not require kosher certification.

Surveying other people, the MK copies straight from the CRC. The Seattle vaad agrees with the star-K, saying that all unflavored sake is okay. Few other people have independent opinions, in part I’m sure because sake has not yet become a widely consumed product in North America.

Now of course comes the big question: who will I go by? I don’t see a clear reason why sake isn’t just considered the same as beer, but then I also feel like I really wish I knew the CRC’s logic before I simply dismiss their opinion. There is also the issue of consistency. Although I feel like the star-k’s opinion makes more sense, I go by the CRC’s opinion when it comes to scotch because that makes more sense to me as well. (By more sense, I mean that I like Rb. Moshe Feinstein’s take on the issue). I can’t simply pick and choose my sources based on who is the more lenient opinion in each case (or can I?). This is yet another case where I wish there were more openness in the kashrut organizations to allow consumers to make a more informed decision.