Tuesday, May 25, 2004
Tuesday, April 27, 2004
Wednesday, April 14, 2004
If you have any doubts about an email you've received, check here. You may not find the exact scam, but you'll likely see something similar. Many phishing scams are very well done, despite the poor Engrish. These Citi-bank scams send you to Citi-bank's site but, there's a pop-up window over the top that isn't from Citi-bank; the "litlle winddow". I had another a few days ago that was a very well done replica of a Paypal page (Similar to this scam.) on a Korean webserver. That one, as a finishing touch, sends the victim off to the Paypal.com 404 page after grabbing the info. In short, be suspicious of what comes to your inbox!
_Dear Citi-bank Cardholder,
This Email was sentt by_the_ _Citibank serevr to verify _your_ E_MAIL adrress.
You must complete this process by clicking on_the__link beloww and entering
in the litlle winddow your Citi_Bank _Debit card_number and PIN that
_you_use on local_Atm_Machine. This_is _done_ for_your protection becaurse some of our
members members have access to their _e-mail_ adderss_ and we must verify it.
http://citi-bank-online.org/?385586164247
To verify your_ EMAIL_ addres_ and akcess _your_ _citibank
account, klick on__the_link beloww.
I've sure that it was much more convincing in the original Russian.
Tuesday, March 09, 2004
The subject was President Bush whacking California's share of Federal aid for housing illegal aliens in the prison system. John was, predictably, fit to be tied at the development. I called to point out that there's really no political reason for Bush to go out of his way to spend money on the Golden State. We thumbed our noses at him "big time" in 2000. As I recall, he lost by roughly 1 million votes. He's gonna lose again this year. Spending Federal dollars on our prison system isn't going to win him any Electoral College votes out here. That money is going to go to "Red" States; not this bright Blue one!
Tuesday, February 03, 2004
Tuesday, January 27, 2004
Tuesday, January 13, 2004
Wednesday, December 31, 2003
Sunday, December 21, 2003
Saturday, December 20, 2003
It is as true to the original story as is possible for a film to be. The original was never intended to serve as a screenplay; Tolkien himself doubted that it could be adapted. But Peter Jackson and his crew did the impossible. They took a great story and put into a filmable form without losing the charm of the original work.
Thursday, December 18, 2003
Wednesday, December 17, 2003
I was reading an account on the NY Times site of last night's early showing of the movie. The Times has an entire page dedicated to the Lord of The Rings. A review of the new movie is there as well as of the two preious movies. But I scrolled down the page and found that they have re-posted their book reviews for the novels starting with Anne T. Eaton's 1938 review of The Hobbit.
After the press screening, I overheard several critics complaining about “the Neverending Movie” and “the Movie with Seven Endings.” (They’ll probably hate this “neverending review” as well.) There seems to be an inexplicable disconnect between some people and Tolkien’s style of tale-weaving. (One woman complained that she still couldn’t tell the difference between “Merry and Trippy.” Go figure.) I have no explanation, just sadness that their skepticism stands between them and so many rewarding metaphors and characters. Did they at some point outgrow fairy tales, deciding that they are valuable only as charming flights of fancy for the naïve?Off on a tangent, I suppose that what makes blogs so interesting is that they generally are written about subjects that the bloggers appreciate. No blogger feels as though he or she was dragged off to a "neverending story".
Overstreet gives ROTK an A+. He too laments the loss of such story elements as The Scouring of The Shire, but he also points out that much of the Lord of The Rings doesn't translate well to film. In addition, Overstreet notes that Tolkien had his doubts about the success of a screenplay adaptation of LOTR.
Tuesday, December 16, 2003
Is there more than one George W. Bush?
Bush Says He Could Support Ban On Gay Marriage
Posted by 11th Earl of Mar to Akira
On 12/16/2003 5:26:11 PM PST #10 of 10
Bush Appears to Open Door to Same - Sex Unions
Posted by KantianBurke to goldstategop
On 12/16/2003 5:26:08 PM PST #5 of 5
Jay Wrolstad at Newsfactor.com writes that Microsoft is reorganizing key Windows groups. Specifically, various engineering groups are being united under a single VP to advance the next version of Windows, codenamed "Longhorn". Longhorn is scheduled for release in late '05 or early '06. Analyst Laura DiDio of the Yankee Group is quoted as saying "The message from Microsoft is, 'We will do what we have to do to blunt the spread of Linux' ". However, one cannot help but wonder if MSFT will actually try to engineer a solution to the Linux problem (i.e. build a better product), or if they'll simply try to engineer better FUD.