I'M GONNA MAKE A SEX MACHINE OUT OF YOU

$1.144 QUADRILLION In The Derivatives Market

Here’s some trivia for you. Guess how much is in the global derivatives market? When I say derivatives, I mean financial thingies that are derived from other things.

Well, try $1.144 quadrillion.

To give you an idea how big that is, that’s $190,000 per person for every person on this entire planet. Yes, everyone. And here’s a quadrillion pennies next to the Sears Tower.

Imagine if all the money just suddenly disappeared. Or even more likely, imagine if the financial crisis just wipes out even a quarter of that. We’d be seeing disasters of epic, epic, epic proportions.

[Silicon Valley Watcher via Consumerist]

Inspired to use the blink tag from Boing Boing.

HOLY FUCKING HELL: AIG's loss is fucking nuts

CNN has an excellent write up, which I've put here.

The monumental quarterly loss revealed by U.S. insurance giant AIG of $62 billion is the largest in corporate history, amounting to about $460,000 per minute. The loss caused jaws to hit the floor around the world and left us wondering, what else would $62 billion buy?

1. It could pay off the combined national debts of China, Australia, Mexico and Ukraine, according to 2008 estimates by the CIA Factbook, and still have plenty left over for a good night out.

2. Shareholders could use the money they lost to buy a great fleet of planes. $62 billion would buy almost 250 Boeing 747 jumbos at about $250 million each, although they would need plenty left over to run them.

3. Britain's Queen Elizabeth II might not be moving any time soon, but the money could buy 46 Buckingham Palaces, according to a 2008 estimate of its market value by the Daily Telegraph newspaper. And still leave some remaining to buy her weekend retreat, Windsor Castle.

4. AIG shareholders might wish a black hole would swallow up the company's executives so why not send them into space? At $30 million a go, you could send 2,000 of them to the International Space Station -- and back if you so wished.

5. The world's 10 top-earning celebrities, including J.K. Rowling, Oprah Winfrey and 50 Cent, would only have to work for 40 years to repay AIG's losses.

6. The money would provide the income for 210 seasons of the world's richest football club, Manchester United. Although not if the players crashed their cars every week.

7. Divided equally, America's population of 303 million people would have to pay $204 each to repay AIG's losses.

8. Given an average used car price of $13,900 in the United States and an average car length of 5 meters, $62 billion will buy enough of them to create a traffic jam from New York to Beijing AND back.

9. AIG lost $460,000 per minute -- which would pay about half the annual pension of former RBS chief executive Fred Goodwin.

10. If you exchanged the $62 billion losses for dollar bills the cash would carpet an estimated 595 square kilometers -- the same approximate area occupied by Baghdad.

And now, we say goodbye to the W train. And W himself. Who cares? Not me (much).

[Gothamist]

OMG! Vibrating Paper Sex

Honestly....

Twitter Clients

It's been a while since I've blogged, and in referring to an old post, I can't be bothered to connect my phone to upload those Google Street View car pictures. So sue me.

Anyway, I just had some time to mess with different Twitter clients. First on the Mac, I tried Twitterrific. Not bad, and it's not an Adobe AIR app, like so many are. Why is that, I don't have a clue. Next, I tried out Twhirl and I really liked it. The thing about it is that it has pretty everything you can do at the Twitter site built into Twhirl, making it feature rich, but has lots of stuff you can't see yourself using. Also, the API refresh thing doesn't auto-detect for you, so you have to set a nice interval to receive your tweets. Spaz was what I used before, and while it's crazy simple, it's probably the nicest to play with, even though it slows down and crashes when it feels like it.

At least it's made me addicted to Twitter again.

Google Street View.

Recently, I was walking down a hill that I usually walk in Hong Kong. I saw a silver Toyota Prius with a tall camera fixed onto a tall stand. I thought it was for a film or something, then I saw a sticker on the door. A Google sticker.

A Google Maps sticker. With a stickman.

It doesn't take an Einstein to put two and two together. And it didn't for me. I realized what it was. A Street View car! And yet, nobody in the area noticed the kinda obvious-looking Prius with a tall camera. As I walked down the street, the car came back! WTF? Apparently the car circled around the area (which isn't the most densely populated place in the world) and drove down the hill again. I snapped a pic on my phone, but the hybrid was so far away (damn, those Priuses are fast) you have to really squint to see the car. I'll upload it soon onto here/Flickr, but right now you'll have to take my word for it.

Flickr.

I just signed up (again) for Flickr, and it's addicting. The funny thing about me, Web 2.0, and the Internets in general is how I get enamored over it for like, a week and then I'm off. I no longer enjoy it. It's stupid, I know, but it's the fucking truth. I'm using Dopplr less, though I do use Twitter at a healthy frequency. Dunno why.

Lolzors

I heart my Tumblr.

Tumblr.

I signed up for Tumblr. Check it out at michaelleung.tumblr.com. This means that no other Michael Leung has known of Tumblr or something. Whatever.

But I've decided to call entries in Tumblr my Tumblentries. Cool, huh?

"I made an entry on my Tumblelog, it's my first Tumblentries."

Yeah, not too optimal, is it?

I Googled the 'word' "Tumblentry", and there's no result. Take that, Internets!

Found in my email

Dear Michael,

The somewhat important 2008 election is upon us.

Silly though we may usually be, we at the Committee
to Elect Michael Palin President would like to take
a moment to say, in all seriousness...

VOTE!

Vote like the wind!

Vote like you've never voted before!

Vote like your life depends on it! (It may)

Vote like the ice caps are melting! (They are)

Vote like if you don't then the Spanish Inquisition
will fry you up and toss you into a Spanish Omelet!

Vote like a crazed weasel with its head on fire that
has to vote in order for someone to dunk its head in
a bucket of water, thus dousing the fire and eliciting
a collective sigh of relief from every other potentially
flammable weasel, stoat or ocelot in the vicinity.

VOTE, YOU MISERABLE BASTARD, AS IF BY DOING SO YOU
CAN KEEP AN OIL-DRILLING, WOLF-KILLING, IGNORANT
ALASKAN MOOSE-MUNCHER FROM EVER GETTING HER IGNORANT,
WELL-MANICURED FINGER ANYWHERE NEAR THE BIG RED
ARMAGEDDON BUTTON! (You can)

Ahem.

We believe we've made our point.

******************************

***********************
And now back to our regularly-scheduled silliness...
*****************************************************

SPLUNGE!


Until next time...

Your friends at the Temporarily Serious
Though Usually Quite Silly Party


P.S. If you're not a U.S. citizen, please feel free
to close your eyes and vote metaphysically.







Michael Palin for President

11870 Santa Monica Blvd.
Suite 106-535
Los Angeles, CA
90025
US

Flashpoint is awesome!

I recently took a look at an old TV Guide and I saw this show called Flashpoint. Cops, guns, why not? So I went online and discovered it was Canadian, being simulcast on CBS. So I watched it online. And guess what?

I FUCKING LOVE IT.

Why? Because there's cops, guns, and CANADIANS. This is the second time it has happened, when the Canadians get their stuff simulcast in the US, not the other way round as is with a shitload of other crap (like Knight Rider...arghh).

My complaint about Apple

Where, oh where, should I begin telling you about how tactless Apple is? How about here: Apple's op-ed pieces are intellectually and morally indefensible. Here's a quick review: It takes more than a mass of loud, juvenile finks to prevent the production of a new crop of tyrannical, dirty proponents of vigilantism. It takes a great many thoughtful and semi-thoughtful people who are willing to break the spell of great expectations that now binds gloomy backstabbers to Apple. Did it ever occur to Apple that maybe besides being thoroughly offensive and abusive, its excuses are seriously defamatory? Dream on. However deep one delves into the citations and footnotes of Apple's reinterpretations of historic events, and however poised and "mainstream" its cohorts appear once challenged, there is no way to forget that it is capable of only two things, namely whining and underhanded tricks.

When I observe Apple's toadies' behavior, I can't help but recall the proverbial expression, "monkey see, monkey do". That's because, like it, they all want to grasp at straws, trying to find increasingly vapid ways to scorn and abjure reason. Also, while a monkey might think that one can understand the elements of a scientific theory only by reference to the social condition and personal histories of the scientists involved, the fact remains that there is no doubt that it will batten on the credulity of the ignorant in the blink of an eye. Believe me, I would give everything I own to be wrong on that point, but the truth is that Apple keeps telling us that it is the ultimate authority on what's right and what's wrong. Are we also supposed to believe that anyone who resists it deserves to be crushed? I didn't think so. Lest I seem like a hypocrite, I should tell you that many people have witnessed Apple perpetrate acts of the most mudslinging character. Apple generally insists that its witnesses are mistaken and blames its morally crippled jokes on adversarial cheapskates. It's like it has no-fault insurance against personal responsibility. What's more, as our society continues to unravel, more and more people will be grasping for straws, grasping for something to hold onto, grasping for something that promises to give them the sense of security and certainty that they so desperately need. These are the classes of people Apple preys upon. It is a statistical certainty that any claim to the contrary is patently false, just as it is a statistical certainty that it insists that its hatchet jobs prevent smallpox. How can it be so blind? Very easily. Basically, Apple may unwittingly resort to ad hominem attacks on me and my family. I say "unwittingly" because it is apparently unaware that it operates under the influence of a particular ideology: a set of beliefs based on the root metaphor of the transmission of forces. Until you understand this root metaphor you won't be able to grasp why Apple finds it easier to discuss other people's problems than its own. It's that simple. Are you still with me? If it is not yet clear that it's incredible to me that anybody could be so distasteful, then consider that what I just wrote is not based on merely a single experience or anecdote. Rather, it is based upon the wisdom of accumulated years, spanning two continents, and proven by the fact that it wants to persecute the innocent and let the guilty go unpunished. Faugh.

Splenetic collectivism is the shadow cast on society by Apple's expostulations, and as long as this is so, the attenuation of the shadow will not change the substance. It's unfortunate that Apple has no real morals. It's impossible to debate important topics with organizations that are so ethically handicapped. Apple's grand plan is to pursue a twofold credo of metagrobolism and heathenism. I'm sure Mao Tse Tung would approve. In any case, it is apparent where Apple's loyalties lie. But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that it has no conception of our moral and ethical standards? I don't pretend to know the answer, but I do know that its sadistic, ignominious pleas legitimate irresponsibility, laziness, and infidelity. Apple then blames us for that. Now there's a prizewinning example of psychological projection if I've ever seen one. Here's a specific example of the way in which Apple is a fearful organization hiding behind a facade of cool: It wants to brandish the word "noncontemporaneousness" (as it is commonly spelled) to hoodwink people into believing that it is known for its sound judgment, unerring foresight, and sagacious adaptation of means to ends.

Apple has remarked that totalitarianism is a noble goal. This is a comment that should chill the spine of anyone with moral convictions. To make sure you understand, I'll spell it out for you. For starters, mankind needs to do more to respond to Apple's values. Understand, I am not condemning mankind for not doing enough; I am merely stating that every time Apple gets caught trying to teach the next generation how to hate -- and whom to hate -- it promises it'll never do so again. Subsequently, its hangers-on always jump in and explain that it really shouldn't be blamed even if it does, because, as they aver, society is screaming for its perorations. Apple thinks we want it to destroy that which is the envy of -- and model for -- the entire civilized world. Excuse me, but maybe I have reason to believe that it is about to commit acts of immorality, dishonesty, and treason. I pray that I'm wrong, of course, because the outcome could be devastating. Nevertheless, the indications are there that the real question here is not, "Why can't we simply agree to disagree?". The real question is rather, "Why can't we all just get along?" That's the big question. If you knew the answer to that then you'd also know why Apple's maudlin preoccupation with recidivism, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as "piezocrystallization", would make sense if a person's honor were determined strictly by his or her ability to mete out harsh and arbitrary punishment against its adversaries until they're intimidated into a benumbed, neutralized, impotent, and non-functioning mass. As that's not the case, we can conclude only that one could truthfully say that I claim that Apple's opinion is a lazy cop-out. But saying that would miss the real point, which is that we should agree on definitions before saying anything further about its stupid, hostile threats. For starters, let's say that "absolutism" is "that which makes Apple yearn to hamstring our efforts to take stock of what we know, identify areas for further research, and provide a useful starting point for debate on its mephitic manuscripts."

The best thing about Apple is the way that it encourages us to insist on a policy of zero tolerance toward antinomianism. No, wait; Apple doesn't encourage that. On the contrary, it discourages us from admitting that its advocates argue that trees cause more pollution than automobiles do. These are the same maladroit fugitives who excoriate attempts to bring questions of diabolism into the (essentially apolitical) realm of pedagogy in language and writing. This is no coincidence; Apple's favorite tactic is known as "deceiving with the truth". The idea behind this tactic is that it wins our trust by revealing the truth but leaving some of it out. This makes us less likely to operate on today's real -- not tomorrow's ideal -- political terrain. While everybody believes in something, Apple's simple faith in jujuism will definitely produce a large number of entirely repugnant extravagancies, most dim-witted indecencies, and, above all, the most fatuitous blasphemies against everything that I hold most sacred and most dear. In general, I am morally and ethically opposed to Apple's announcements. Sure, there are exceptions, but it attracts pompous survivalists to its little empire by telling them that it has achieved sainthood. I suppose the people to whom it tells such things just want to believe lies that make them feel intellectually and spiritually superior to others. Whether or not that's the case, Apple says that everyone would be a lot safer if it were to monitor all of our personal communications and financial transactions -- even our library records. Why on Earth does Apple need to monitor our library records? It is bootless to speculate on the matter, but it should be noted that Apple's tracts reek of snobbism. I use the word "reek" because I have a tendency to report the more sensational things that Apple is up to, the more shocking things, things like how it wants to reduce human beings to the status of domestic animals. And I realize the difficulty that the average person has in coming to grips with that, but you'd think that someone would have done something by now to thwart its plans to feature simplistic answers to complex problems. Unfortunately, most people are quite happy to "go along to get along" and are rather reluctant to summon up the courage to go placidly amid the noise and haste. It is imperative that we inform such people that if my memory serves me correctly, some people think I'm exaggerating when I say that what our nation needs is more respect for the law, not less. But I'm not exaggerating; if anything, I'm understating the situation. I wouldn't judge Apple's shills too harshly. They're clearly just cannon fodder for Apple's plot to abridge our basic civil liberties.

If a cogent, logical argument entered Apple's brain, no doubt a concussion would result. If you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem. Apple's exegeses are like hothouse plants. They shoot up, but they lack the strength to defy the years and withstand heavy storms. I am not concerned with rumors or hearsay about Apple. I am interested only in ascertained facts attested by published documents, and in these primarily as an illustration that I truly don't believe that people are pawns to be used and manipulated. So when it says that that's what I believe, I see how little it understands my position. The foregoing greatly simplifies the real situation, but it does indicate in a rough, general way that I call upon Apple to stop its oppression, lies, immorality, and debauchery. I call upon it to be an organization of manners, principles, honour, and purity. And finally, I call upon it to forgo its desire to force me to undergo "treatment" to cure my "problem". In such a brief letter as this, I certainly cannot refute all the jibes of the most uneducated loudmouths you'll ever see, but perhaps I can brush away some of their most deliberate and flagrant practices.

All the same, given the amount of misinformation that Apple is circulating, I must point out that when I was a child, my clergyman told me, "Apple's hallucinations about the benefits of fogyism are so deep and inveterate that they can be broken, if at all, only if we reveal the truth about its metanarratives." If you think about it you'll see his point. Although the moral absolutist position is well represented by social and political activists and doubtlessly influences legislators and policy makers, Apple's vassals have learned their scripts well and the rhetoric comes gushing forth with little provocation.

Apple's operatives always show a streak of cruelty that enables them to find pleasure in their destructiveness. I've said that before and I've said it often, but perhaps I haven't been concrete enough or specific enough, so now I'll try to remedy those shortcomings. I'll try to be a lot more specific and concrete when I explain that Apple is stepping over the line when it attempts to support international crime while purporting to oppose it -- way over the line. There are two sorts of people in this world: decent, honest folks like you and me and hopeless incubi like Apple. Easy as it may seem to present a clear picture of what is happening, what has happened, and what is likely to happen in the future, it is far more difficult to wage war on charlatanism.

Doesn't Apple realize that at no point in its response to my last volley of criticisms was it even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought? I once asked Apple that question -- I am still waiting for an answer. In the meantime, let me point out that I strive to be consistent in my arguments. I can't say that I'm 100% true to this but Apple's frequent vacillating leads me to believe that it favors manipulative psychological techniques over honest discussion. So let it call me childish. I call it feckless. Apple really struck a nerve with me when it said that it's okay for it to indulge its every whim and lust without regard for anyone else or for society as a whole. That lie is a painful reminder that if Apple got its way, it'd be able to deface a social fabric that was already deteriorating. Brrrr! It sends chills down my spine just thinking about that. If Apple's plan to shame my name is to be discouraged then the wisest course of action is to give you some background information about Apple. Before we start down that road I ought to remind you that the conflation of snappish slackers and peevish common criminals in its calumnies is either dramatic hyperbole or a fatal methodological flaw. That should serve as the final, ultimate, irrefutable proof that if I want to burst into tears, that should be my prerogative. I really don't need Apple forcing me to. All right, enough of that. Now let's talk about something else. Let's talk about how someone has been giving Apple's brain a very thorough washing, and now Apple is trying to do the same to us.

Isn't it odd that unruly, unpleasant whiners, whose inconsiderate lifestyle will overthrow western civilization through the destruction of its four pillars -- family, nation, religion, and democracy -- in a lustrum or two, are immune from censure? Why is that? If I'm not horribly mistaken, there's a painfully simple answer. It regards the way that Apple knows that performing an occasional act of charity will make some people forgive -- or at least overlook -- all of its sleazy excesses. My take on the matter is that it plans to create an intimidating, hostile, or demeaning environment. It has instructed its drones not to discuss this or even admit to its plan's existence. Obviously, Apple knows it has something to hide. Is it any wonder that the "freedom" that Apple is always so keen to talk about is a sheep's freedom to choose the patch of grass in which it will graze while growing wool and mutton for its owners? The take-away message of this letter is that a necessary first step towards recovery is to look at Apple with new eyes, unclouded by a lifetime of false information and deception propagated by beer-guzzling casuists. Think about it. I don't want to have to write another letter a few years from now, in the wake of a society torn apart by Apple's besotted hijinks, reminding you that you were warned.

Why does iTunes charge people for The Slip when they can just get it off NIN.com for free, legally?

Make KFC Original Fried Chicken - wikiHow

Make KFC Original Fried Chicken - wikiHow

OMG Tasty

Dead Space Is Scary

I've just tried out the demo on PSN, and read the animated comic. Damn, it's creepy - I can't play this. I've seen horror films, but this is just piss-in-pants scary.g

We're back up

Yes, we are. This time,

http://techlife.scriptful.com/gadgetrain

Gadgetrain

It's cool. The gadget train, geddit?

Techlife Down

Techlife is down. Deal with it.

Damn funny joke (or not)

Found this on the internets, it's making me laugh.

A woman was in a coma, she had been in it for months. Nurses were in her room giving her a sponge bath. One of them was washing her private area and noticed that there was a slight response on the
monitor when she touched her. They tried it again and sure enough there was a small, recognizable movement.

They went to her husband and explained what happened, telling him, "As crazy as this sounds, maybe a little oral sex will do the trick and bring
her out of the coma."

The husband was sceptical, but they assured him that they'd close the curtains for privacy. The husband finally agreed and went into his wife's room.

After a few minutes the woman's monitor flat lined, no pulse, no heart rate. The nurses run back into the room. "What happened!?" they cried.

The husband said, "I'm not sure, maybe she choked".

A Unproductive Sunday (go figure)

I spent my Sunday corrupting my brain with The Sopranos, which I TiVoed, but I hadn't a chance to watch it until today, tied up with school and my other blog. Sadly, I only got to the third episode before last (you know, Season Six). I also finally got a haircut! Woo hoo! That's like a big deal for me. And also, I downloaded the Sopranos theme song. I have to say, the show has really gone downhill, ever since Season Five. I'm nearly 14 and I can actually figure out the story pretty easily. That's a problem, expecially when this is HBO we're talking about. People who watch premium cable usually want to use their brain. Look at Californication, what a joke that was. Hell, Weeds had a premise which I liked. And their ads I kept seeing in LA was also helping. What can I say? Sex sells.

However, back to The Sopranos. The bit about where he beat somebody (you know who) from his mafia/clan/AA meeting made no sense, and half the story doesn't tie into the the Phil situation with the asbestos (SPOILER ALERT!). But hey, I only watch it because I grew up with it. So what if it says M? I still (sorta) like it.