05.17.06
Posted in World, Architecture at 12:32 am by Administrator
I have in the past been critical of some of the weird skyscrapers that have been built in (usually) foreign cities. These buildings may be ugly or at least strange looking; but I actually like that they are there. Wouldn’t it be boring if, no matter where you went in the world, the skylines all looked the same?
Examples:
Taipei 101 - Taipei, Taiwan
Taipei 101 is one of the ugliest skyscrapers in the world. If it had been built in view of my house, I would seriously consider moving. That being said, seeing this building would definitely remind you you’re in Asia. I would prefer the world’s tallest building to be in the US, but at least it’s in free market Taiwan and not communist China.
Burj Dubai - Dubai, United Arab Emirates
When completed in 2008, Burj Dubai will be the tallest building in the world (see statement above). I actually find this building attractive (in an Emerald City of Oz sort of way). Still, I think it works better in the UAE than it would in the US. It just wouldn’t fit in with the other buildings in Chicago or New York.
Incidentally, the building bears superficial resemblance to Frank Lloyd Wright’s proposed Mile High Illinois tower. It’s too bad I have no other reason to visit Dubai. This is one skyscraper I must see.
Construction Photos (http://www.burjdubaiskyscraper.com/)
Kingdom Centre - Riyadh, Saudia Arabia
I suspect Kingdom Centre is the result of a bet between architects as to who could design the strangest structure and con someone into building it. I’m not sure if it won (There are some strange buildings out there.), but it is definitely a contender. This may be the strongest evidence yet that money can’t buy taste.
The building looks like some kind of carpentry tool. It would be fun, however, to fly a plane between its “claws” or bungee jump off the sky bridge.
Shanghai World Financial Center - Shanghai, China
I wouldn’t actually mind the Shanghai World Financial Center’s design if it wasn’t for that stupid hole. What were they thinking? Construction of this building began in 1997, but was suspended due to the Asian financial crisis. Work resumed in 2005 and is expected to be completed around 2008.
Permalink
05.14.06
Posted in Politics, Law, Pyrotechnics at 10:02 pm by Administrator
This recent flap about the government “spying on Americans” caused me to recall a letter I got about a year ago from the Department of Justice. You can find a scan of the actual letter here.
In case you didn’t read it, here’s a summary:
Dear [administrator],
We’ve been going through the pyrotechnics companies records. Therefore, we know you’ve been ordering chemicals that can be used to make fireworks. How dare you! These things are dangerous. Don’t you know you could poke your eye out?
If we catch you selling fireworks, we’ll send you to FPMITAP for a very long time. We can’t prove you actually did anything illegal, but remember: We’re watching you!
Sincerely,
[some pantywaist in Washington]
In the first place, you little pissant: I bought those perfectly legal chemicals to make perfectly legal rocket engines. Ever seen October Sky? In the second place: there are lots of legal fireworks I could have made with those chemicals if I had wanted to. In the third place: This is supposed to be the land of the free. What business is it of yours if I make an M-80 or two anyway? Where in the constitution does it charge you to protect me from my chemistry set? If it’s not in the Sacred Document, it’s not supposed to be any of your business. (Read the Tenth Amendment.)
The eventual demise of freedom in this country will not have been the result of NSA datamining operations or the like. It will have been the result of us putting up with thousands of little nanny-state infractions like this. On the subject of the cell-phone records, Kim du Toit offers a pretty good explanation here.
I think I’ll go make some cherry bombs now…
Permalink
05.12.06
Posted in Art & Drama, Humor, Philosophy at 7:02 pm by Administrator
This hilarious one act play was written by Murray Rothbard and performed at his birthday party in 1986. I stumbled across it while searching for Ludwig von Mises Institute documentaries. (It takes a little while to load.)
Mozart was a Red
I think it is readily apparent to whom the play is referring. If you need an explanation, the full script and a commentary are available here. Sorry L.P., sometimes the truth hurts. (It can also be funny.)
I think Bismarck’s quote about laws and sausages also applies to books. You may not want to meet the author.
Permalink
Posted in Humor, Movies & TV, Clothing & Fashion at 2:17 pm by Administrator
I’m in the midst of the most profound sort of personal crisis.
It has long been my cherished belief that the so-called “messenger bag” has no place in a self-respecting heterosexual man’s wardrobe.
If that’s the case, then what the hell is Jack Bauer doing with one?!? I had previously been evading reality by telling myself (and others) that Bauer kept all his weapons and gear in a “duffel bag,” a “laptop bag,” or some other such delusion. However, I just read on Blog4Bauer that Bauer’s actual bag is being sold on Amazon.com and they call it [gasp] a “messenger bag.”
(Actually, they call it a “Heavyweight Classic Messenger and Travel Bag — Unisex.” The word they seem to be groping for is “manpurse.”)
How can this be? Jack Bauer is the quintessential symbol of manliness for the 2000s. Messenger bags are not manly. If he wears a manpurse then nothing is sacred. Will he start getting most of his intel by listening to gossip at the nail salon? Will his primary tool of torture be a hot curling iron? Where does it end?
Perhaps I’m overreacting. Maybe Bauer, being the pragmatic sort, realizes that the messenger bag is simply the best tool for the job and uses it despite its implications. Remember how he kept it hidden away until he absolutely needed it? The War on Terror requires sacrifice after all.
No. I’m simply deluding myself again. He chose that messenger bag. I’ve seen his work and I refuse to believe that Jack Bauer is some sort of closet metro, hipster, or emo. This can only mean one thing. I must have been wrong about messenger bags.
They do have a certain utility to them. They allow quicker access to their contents than backpacks. They allow for the concealment of larger items than pockets. They keep all necessary equipment in one place (”Damn! I have the plastique, but the detonators are in my other pants!”). They also have a long strap that can be used to strangle terrorists.
Does this mean that messenger bags are now manly? Maybe they are. Then again, maybe Bauer chose to wear one specifically so he would appear harmless.
I don’t think so though. Even when undercover, Jack Bauer never loses his “man on a mission” look. Therefore, I must conclude he considers the messenger bag to be part of his overall self-image. Remember: Image is everything.
Where does this leave me? Do I abandon my original notion and embrace the manpurse just because Bauer says it’s ok? Or do I hold out and stubbornly cling to my original notion of manliness?
Oh, screw it. Where’s my credit card…
Permalink
05.10.06
Posted in Law at 10:15 am by Administrator
Here’s an interesting (hypothetical) legal question for you:
Suppose there are two hit-and-runs in a town on a certain night. The police apprehend two suspects and are able to prove that each suspect hit someone that night, but they can’t prove which victim belongs to which suspect.
Now suppose there are two shootings at opposite ends of a large building at the same time. Everyone in the building is tested and two people have powder residue on their hands. Again, police are unable to connect either suspect with their respective victim. There is also no evidence of conspiracy between the suspects.
Both situations are fundamentally the same. In each case, it’s obvious that each suspect is guilty of one of the crimes; but it’s impossible to know which one. (This assumes both suspects keep their mouths shut.) My question is: could the DA get any convictions at a trial? Wouldn’t the existence of the other crime create a reasonable doubt that the defendant was involved with the crime in question?
I don’t know.
Permalink
05.08.06
Posted in Art & Drama, Humor, NIU at 2:32 pm by Administrator
Here’s a typical example of NIU’s silly outdoor sculpture:
I suspect it’s some sort of portal to another universe. So far, however, I haven’t been able to turn it on.
The sad part is: Compared with some of the other sculpture here, this piece is actually not that bad. It doesn’t say anything particularly meaningful; but it’s well done for a (chopped up) rock with a hole in it. Note the Picasso imitation in the background.
Maybe it really is a portal. I wonder if they have lots of Zeppelins on the other side.
Permalink
05.06.06
Posted in Art & Drama, Architecture at 1:50 pm by Administrator
After almost five years, they’ve finally begun pouring the foundation for Freedom Tower. The final design doesn’t look half as bad as it did, but I still wish they would have gone with the Twin Towers 2 concept. [Insert Donald Trump quote here.]
The symbolic power of the original WTC towers was obvious. Why do you think the terrorists attacked them twice? By replacing two big towers with a single smaller tower, we’ve essentially said: “We give up! If we rebuild them they’ll just knock them down again.”
Much more troubling to me than the Freedom Tower, is the design and content of the proposed World Trade Center Memorial. Some of the planned exhibits could even be interpreted as justifying the attacks. Back to skyscrapers though.
The recent burst of activity on the Chicago skyscraper front is encouraging. The current emphasis is on hotels and residential units rather than business structures.
The construction of Trump International Tower in Chicago is proceeding nicely. I tend to prefer square corners in skyscrapers designed for offices, but I think the rounded corners of Trump’s building are somehow more appropriate for its residential nature. Don’t ask me why. (How much do you think the condos on the top floor will cost?)
Also under construction in Chicago is the Waterview Tower, a Shangri-La luxury hotel. It won’t be quite as tall as the Trump International Tower, but it’s website promises traditional Asian hospitality. Sounds good to me. The building isn’t unattractive either.
On the other hand, Fordham Spire, a proposed residential skyscraper for Chicago looks like it’s been heated by a blowtorch and twisted with a pair of pliers. I don’t think it’s ugly per se; I just don’t like it. Maybe I’ll get lucky and the deal will fall through.
Whatever the case, this trend of residential skyscrapers will make some Bryan Larsen paintings a little more realistic. (How cool it would be to live in a place like that!)
More on this later. I’m looking for submissions for a “World’s Ugliest Skyscrapers” list. Let me know what you think. (I’m pretty sure the top prize will go to the Taipei 101. )
Permalink
05.04.06
Posted in General, Art & Drama, Philosophy at 1:51 pm by Administrator
The Post Office may be an inefficient, monopolistic, government run bureaucracy; but they sure do sponsor some nice stamps. Nick Gaetano’s art deco style is perfect for a postage stamp featuring Ayn Rand.
My sheet finally got back from the framer and she did a great job as usual:
I decided to hang it in my office. My business involves a lot of mailing so this is a perfect addition to the room.
Despite a few good ones, most of the stamp themes the Post Office issues are rather boring. Therefore, I’ve compiled a list of some new stamp themes for the Postmaster General to consider.
- Robert A. Heinlein (The background has some interesting possibilities. Think “I Will Fear No Evil.”)
- Recent Hubble Photos (Not that stupid “Constellations” set they issued last year.)
- U.S. Small Arms of WWII
- Pulp SciFi Paperback Covers from the Sixties
- Frank Loyd Wright Buildings (I’m in the process of buying the stamps featuring his face.)
- Shock and Awe
- Famous Pills (Aspirin, Valium, Prozac, Viagra, etc.)
- U.S. Wartime Propaganda Posters
- B-Movies
- Rocky and Bullwinkle
There are so many possibilities.
Permalink
05.02.06
Posted in Politics, Money & Finance, World at 1:06 am by Administrator
Apparently as a sort of May Day celebration, Bolivia’s socialist president Evo Morales has decided to nationalize the country’s natural gas production. Declaring, “The looting by the foreign companies has ended,” Morales sent troops to occupy gas fields tapped by multinational companies such as Exxon-Mobil and BP PLC. Unless the foreign companies agree to sign new (extortionary) contracts within six months, they will be evicted.
This is not altogether surprising. Bolivia is the most recent in a long list of countries to have been “returned to the natives,” and “the natives” always seem to do the same thing.
I suggest that ALL the foreign companies pack up and leave NOW (Burning their infrastructure would probably be too much to ask). It would be a short term loss but a long term gain. It’s likely Morales plans to seize them anyway as soon as the state owned gas company is ready to take over production. Compliance by the corporations would encourage every other Mugabe and Castro to try something similar (not that they don’t already).
It will be interesting to see if the existing companies choose to put up with this sort of extortion. I suspect they’ll go more by the numbers than by any sort of principle. Any bets as to the effect total nationalization would have on Bolivia’s natural gas production?
Note: Bolivia has not yet nationalized production of its most popular export, so the supply will likely be unaffected. Whew.
Permalink
05.01.06
Posted in General, Politics at 1:16 am by Administrator
Is there such thing as an anti-holiday?
Permalink
« Previous entries · Next entries »
