The velcro. The velcro!

My favorite is him getting chased and hiding behind the car.

I know what he looks like... Like a dumbfuck.

I KNEW IT WAS YOU

Besides the drunk bros whose location I can't place, this is all Portland. What really sucks is a lot of this is on my daily commute too. I wanna be surveillanced.

You guys need to go record HIM when he's out on a mission.

OR buy him a beer and join him.

The Internet is like a prison with no locks, but a buffet full of drugs and sex. I think by 2050 most people will get tired of drugs and sex and simply leave. Only its addiction gives it power, and so only addicts will have no privacy.

*Life* is like a prison with no locks, and only if you're lucky do you get a buffet full of drugs and sex. Why would people give up their only shot at soma? The internet's not going anywhere, not unless the entire grid comes down.

Just you wait, meme, fifty years time, everyone but you will be an addict, and they'll call *you* The Savage. They'll stick you in a lighthouse for helicopters. You'll try to stay pure, you'll try to reject the system, but they'll turn your hermitage into a zoo, and eventually you'll have no choice but to hang yourself in order to get away from the sex-drugged crowds.

The reason I asked is because I read a really depressing business/op-ed piece this morning:

http://www.niemanlab.org/2010/06/parsing-panera-could-a-name-y our-own-price-model-work-for-news/

There's a lot wrong with that article, but the key point, specifically in regards to this topic, is the consequence Ms Garber's proposal would have on privacy, were it to be adopted by businesses. I've long been interested in the possibilities of PWYW schemes as a way of promoting voluntarism, combating centralization, and empowering consumers by giving them more direct democratic control over market prices, control which they've lost since the rise of industrialization and the death of price negotiation ("haggling"). Unfortunately, Ms Garber's proposal pretty much torpedoes any hopes we might have of PWYW being a force for "good": to summarize briefly, her argument is that businesses should offer consumers PWYW schemes *in exchange for* the consumer's right to privacy! In other words, you may pay whatever you want, just so long as The Panopticon can show the entire world your economic behavior.

It's not hard to see how this can go wrong, especially in a world of "publish this purchase on Facebook!" style zombie-advertising, rampant uncompensated data mining, and PWYW vendors implementing mandatory "minimum donations", which is Newspeak for "we set the price as always; you're too dumb to realize the con".

Who said I wouldn't be at the drugs and sex buffet? I might want to be an addict too! No point arguing that the outside world of not-prison is a lonely horrible place that only people you disdain such as myself would end up, you're only trying to make yourself feel better about chugging your soma and amphetapep.

Why do you feel so guilty?

Tune out, turn off, and buy in. Or not. In fifty years we both might be dead, then what will it have mattered either way?

The world isn't so bad when you stop mourning the world that never existed.

I hope soma doesn't come in that chalky ass cherry flavor.

Interesting read. I also like the picture in the "about" section. Dreadlock guy is not too pleased about girl with the pink iPhone.

But that's just it: we needn't feel guilty. The soma's not the problem. It's all the hoops we have to jump through to *get* the soma that is the problem! Or rather, it's all the hoops the Johnny-come-lately soma vultures want us to jump through, because really, there is no earthly reason why we have to pay for the party, at least not like this.

Jake the Dog would be rolling over in his grave, if he was dead, and if he were real. We've got all this amazing technology that can show us such beautiful things, but now along comes the big red dudes to stick us all back in our boxes, where we belong. It's a fucking shame is what it is.