"Hi! Would you mind watching my bag for me while I run to the bathroom?"

On Monday (4/15/13) I watched a show on the Science Channel called Scam City.  The gist of the show is that the host travels to some of the most scam-ridden cities and shows you, a potential tourist, how not to get taken by being taken himself.  This episode focused on Rio de Janeiro.   In one of the scams, a local comes up to a tourist on the beach and asks them to watch his stuff while he goes for a swim. 

Unbeknownst to the tourist, while they are focused on this guy's stuff (that he's now entrusted them to watch) his partner is looting their wallets, camera, bags, etc.

This morning, I awoke from an awful dream that mixed this show with a bit of the horror from Boston.  What if, instead of dropping a bag with explosives, the bomber(s) simply asked a stranger to watch their bag for them?  I've had this happen myself more than once and have seen it happen several times to others:  A stranger, who doesn't want to take their stuff somewhere (frequently the bathroom) turns and asks you "Hey, can you watch my stuff for me while I run to the ...?"   Almost always, people say "Sure".    It's an odd interaction.  You have suddenly been entrusted with someone's belongings.  Someone that doesn't know you but somehow trusts you.   When will they return?  What if I have to leave before they get back?
Most people being honest, almost feel a sense of loyalty to this persons' belongings, which is why the Rio scam works so well.  You're focused on their stuff, more than your own. 

This well known phenomenon is also behind this well known Aly Bank Commercial

My point is this: someone dropping off a bag and walking away is very suspicious as is an unattended bag in a public place.  Someone asking a stranger to watch their bag and walking away, isn't.  And to other people around the bag(s), nothing appears odd because there is no 'unattended' bag.  While I have no evidence this happened, my sleeping brain seems to think this is what happened in Boston. 

So the next time a stranger asks you to watch their bag(s), you're going to have to ask them to open the bags and show you what's inside. 

Or maybe just tackle them and scream for the police.

Remember - The Peon Pulpit Called It First

Remember back in 2008 when I made my first stock market prediction and was somewhat amazed that it failed to even come close to being accurate? At the time I suggested that perhaps the Fed was covertly purchasing stocks to prop up the market artificially:

It does seem like every time the market makes some huge drop (like 11/13/2008's -554.11 drop) it makes a remarkable close up the next day (11/14/2008's 324.88

Could it be bargain hunters? Or could it be the Treasury/FED monster propping up the dead?

Either way, you heard it here first.

Well it appears that now I'm not alone in my suspicions:

The Death Of (Online) News

Rupert Murdoch announced that all of his News Corp business will being charging for content. Let me be the first to say goodbye to News Corp.

The Financial Times is also floating the same ballon that within the next 12 months "news agencies" (Read: The Financial Times) will begin charging for content as well. At least the FT had a 120 + year run at it. I, personally, am looking forward to watching the prestige and power quickly and quietly drifting away from any news organization who walks this path.

What does all this talk of charging really mean? I think means that news agencies are realizing that the internet bubble of 2000 actually ended. It also means that the current financial crisis is bringing their empires to an abrupt end....and we've just caught a glimpse of the hand they're holding. If they're losing too much money, why not just shut the site down and avoid the embarrassing fade to insignificance? I have a theory....

First, lets take a look at the brief history of news:

1. First there was gossip/rumor
2. Then there was government controlled 'news'
3. Then the free press got in on the game to help form public opinion and foment revolutions...somewhere around the time of the American Revolution (with their pamphlets and all....)
4. Then people started charging pennies for pamphlets to cover their printing costs
5. Weekly/daily newspapers started popping up in populated localities, usually charging enough to cover the business costs
6. Advertising was introduced as a way to "make money" in these newspapers
   
7. Radio came along with no way to charge so the profit/expenses were all covered by advertising (and payola).
   
8. TV came along with the same problem, so the news was given for free (just like radio). It was done at a loss that was made up for by advertising on the 'entertainment' side of the business. This was done because the networks realized the news gave them leverage to use against the government. As a result, TV networks (and to a lesser extent, a few newspapers) gained power as the unelected mouthpiece of a nation, forming public opinion as they wished.
   
9. This bloody internet thing came along (to upset everything) and the established media saw it only as a way to extend their TV/newspaper reach.
10. Magazines and Newspapers get into the game thinking they can charge the same price for their electronic product as their paper product (and it costs almost nothing to distribute). It fails miserably (with few exceptions).
    
11. Everybody is happy with the results until the Great Depression of 2008-?
12. All the established news organizations realize they're going bankrupt because advertisers can't afford to pay the fees anymore. Desperation sets in.
13. People like Murdock float the idea that they'll begin charging everyone for what they used to get for free.

Sounds like a great plan in the midst of a massive global economic depress..err..recession. Day-dreaming of the good the old days won't help the bottom line of News Corp or any of the other faded, fat, greedy news media. If Murdock goes through with his promise, News Corp will quickly be reduced to insignificance.

I predict however that they will quickly change their mind, much like an airline trying to raise airfares by itself, when their page hits drop 99% [On a side note, I can't wait to see the look on a Fox reporter's face when President Obama answers one of the (last) Fox News questions by starting with "You can tell you 15 readers - it is 15 right? or did you guys get a new subscriber in the last week ?- that the reason..."]

But it won't happen, because charging won't happen. Because after all, what mass media is about is power. The power to sway opinion. And it's a power people like Murdock are willing to pay for, even if they have the audacity to try charging you for it.

Rupert and Friends would be smart to remember the Encyclopedia Britannica. Once a proud source of knowledge, for over 200 years, now relegated to a dark, seldom visited corner of the internet/library.

That all happened after this site showed up just 8 years ago: Wikipedia - Much maligned, but still triumphant.

Just wait until you see what the plan is for your kingdom. The free ride might be over, but that doesn't mean people will pay to ride. They might just go back to walking.

An American MP Scandal?

Looks like the Wall Street Journal is trying to follow in the footsteps of the Daily Telegraph in pointing out the misuse of taxpayer money by politicians. Let's see if the spark catches.

Don't Look Now...But The UK Is About To Catch Fire

If you haven't been following the growing scandal in the UK, now might be a good time to get acquainted with it. What's happened is a common product of when the easy money get's tight: All the fraud is exposed like coral at low tide.

Just like the Bernie Maddoff scandal here in the US, the Daily Telegraph has set alight a fire in England. The Telegraph leaked expense documents for Members of Parliament which show they were abusing their privilege of tax write-offs and government funded expense accounts. Some of the abuses border on criminal. But what did the Labor Party government of Gordon Brown do? They indicated that they would prosecute the person who leaked the documents! Never mind that it was the public's money.

Then the tide suddenly turned. Suddenly the MPs started to worry about the real possibility of pitchforks and bonfires. Now they're sheepishly announcing that they're 'paying back' the money, but all the while still claiming it was all on the up-and-up. Clearly it's not. And since when was agreeing to give back stolen goods enough to just walk away from a theft? I suspect Gordon Brown and the Labor Party will not recover from this one. Keep an eye on this, it might erupt into street violence....who knows these days.

Every day more details leak out. I wonder how long it will be before the same happens in this country?

I'm Calling Aiko The Robot A Hoax

Everyone is covering this robot story now, it's even on CNN. But I'm going on record and calling this thing a hoax. The thing that really looks fake is when the Aiko's "creator" Le Trung holds up a sheet containing a hand-written algebra problem and the robot provides the answer.

Also the name AIKO apparently translates to "Love Child" (?).

Fake.

The Treasury Just Gave Away 1/2 Of Everything Produced In This Country Last Year

Wow. We're now up to $7.7 Trillion??? And to top it all off, much of this money is being given away in secrecy with no oversight.

The TARP program is in danger of becoming the largest financial fraud in history....

Everyone! Make An Orderly Line At The Trough!!

Uncle Sam is giving away cash! Actually, he's giving away your cash. CNN is reporting that AIG is the latest recipient of a government gift. A mere $85 billion "loan" (apparently that's what you call it when you give it to a compulsive gambler who's luck has temporarily gone bad). In return the government gets an 80% stake in the company. There's something strangely ironic about an insurance company that made money hand over fist for assuming risks then -when things go bad- they pop their golden government parachute. Kind of like discovering that Mili Vanili didn't really record that album you bought (....you know it's true).

And this brings up an interesting question. Why are we still angry at Fidel Castro? We're nationalizing the private sector faster than he ever dreamed of. In 1997 dollars, he only nationalized $6 billion in US assets in 1960. We're way beyond $6 Billion just this week. So much for the free market, eh? Maybe the US should get into the automotive, airline and home construction businesses too.

These giveaways currently add up to a total of $900 Billion in giveaways in less than a year. And man, Paulson's just getting started! It's interesting to note that Paulson has close, personal ties with China. Maybe he's the economic Manchurian Candidate?

But to be fair, it was our friends and neighbors (and perhaps "us"?) who got us into this mess. The True Believers who thought the housing market could only go up. and up and up. So why not take out that 3rd home equity loan and take a 6 month tour of Africa? We can't lose!

So, in the next few weeks, I'm sure the sound will get louder and louder....The Giant Sucking Sound of the American Dream being foreclosed upon and the collapse of America's free market facade.

It's True: Hollywood Secretly Hates The Environment

In a reprise of my earlier post Peon Pulpit Tips To Save The Environment I thought it might be good to see what the movie industry has done to curb their oil burning, tree cutting behavior in pursuit of the almighty dollar. As I noted in my earlier post, the DVD industry produced approximately 214,289,319 lbs of plastic in 2005. We now have new numbers for 2007. In 2007, Hollywood produced 431,114,394 lbs of plastic! Hollywood has increased their plastic dumping by more than 100% in just TWO YEARS!!! That's 195, 550 metric tons. An average car weighs about 1 metric ton, so imagine the weight of 195,550 cars and you have an idea of how much plastic Hollywood produces. So much for the love.

PRODUCTION OF PLASTIC FOR DVD'S
Year	# Of DVDs with Cases Produced	Weight Of Plastic (grams)	Weight (LBS)	Gallons Of Water Used (2.4 gal/lb)	% Change
2005	1,200,000,000	97,200,000,000	214,289,319	514,294,365
2007	2,414,200,000	195,550,200,000	431,114,394	1,034,674,546	101.18%

Did The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints Just Get "Swatted"? Uh-Oh

It looks like the phone call that initiated the CPS raids at the Texas polygamist ranch (aka, 'compound') might have been a hoax. Swatting, as it's called, is when someone spoofs a caller ID number pretending to be someone calling from a specific location. Usually the result is a SWAT team descending on some unsuspecting victims. However, there have been a couple of cases where CPS was called, so this wouldn't be the first time.

Is the Texas Polygamist ranch just another victim of swatting? After reading about the court 'room' debacle in trying to get the kids their '5-day' hearing, I really hope not. I guess the publicity of this practice might be enough to stop this practice (Swatting) once and for all. People who do it need to go to prison for a long time.

Australasian Journal of Clinical Environmental Medicine - Complete Bullsh*t ??

- My two second review: Wi-Fi may in fact be bad for your health, but this study is so bad it appears to me to be a hoax.

A few weeks ago the news was abuzz with a story that linked wi-fi radiation with autism. At first I couldn't find the journal that the study was published in, but then a helpful reader pointed me to a PDF version. Originally I had intended to read the study "Wireless Radiation in the Etiology and Treatment of Autism: Clinical Observations and Mechanisms" and provide a layman's analysis of the study's methods and findings.

After reading it, I have to agree with the anonymous commenter to my original post. This study is such a huge steaming pile of pseudoscience. To save you from having to read the 5 pages of overview and pseudoscience blended with garbled scientific mumbo-jumbo, I will provide you with my brief notes:

This study looked at clearing of heavy metals from subjects. Study claims that exposure to heavy metals have been implicated as a cause of autism. Primary subject is diagnosed as autistic, and for the last 7 years has had "...a long history of difficulty in clearing metals...." (Whatever that means. Did they feed him heavy metals and see if he excreted them? How did they know his exposure level? And SEVEN YEARS of exposure?)

The idea was to measure heavy metals excreted in hair, feces and urine and determine if excretion increased in an electromagnetic frequency (EMF) free area. The hypothesis is that EMF causes heavy metals to be trapped in cells, thus leading to toxicity which presents itself symptomatically as autism (??? Nice theory, but why? Oh yes...the Thiomersal debate)

So the researches try to construct an EMF free zone by removing all wireless devices from "the building", requiring cell phones to be turned off (! What about the cell tower's radiation?...oh just wait....), installing EMR filters on electrical circuits and appliances, and (my personal favorite) the application of "...body worn sympathetic resonance technology, energy resonance technology and molecular resonance effect technology" WTF? is THAT?!? I had no idea what that was, so I looked it up.

It would appear that the "sympathetic resonance technology" they refer to is the Qlink, as they use that same phrase in marketing material. What is Qlink you ask? It's a fancy 'high-tech' version of a new-age 'crystal'. It appears at first glance to be, oh, complete and utter pseudoscience. It not only protects you from the dangers of electromagnetic fields, but it will also improve your golf game (I wish I were kidding, because that's freaking funny...My favorite quote from the golf video "No one ever thinks, hey you know what, this might be in my head"...uh ...yeah.)

The "molecular resonance effect technology" appears to be some sort of 'energized water' and something of the sort is patented! Energy resonance technology appears to be....ugh..some other crap I don't have time to wade through.

The bottom line, this study looks to me to be complete BS. It seems to prove nothing, other than the fact that the media will run with a story that they think will sell, regardless of its veracity.

It's a good reminder, that when you read that "A study has linked...blah blah blah" Unless you actually read the study, you never know what kind of morons might have 'conducted' it.

Here's more on this ridiculousness, and if you want to waste your life reading the study, have at it(PDF)

Electronic Voting Machines Suck

So says the Ohio Secretary of State according to the New York Times. But then again, who didn't already know that? These machines make 'hacking' an election so easy that changing a 1 to a zero in an Excel spreadsheet is all that is needed. Not that corruption of elections is anything new, but the rush by states to use electronic voting machines left out critical security concerns. Paper receipts would be a start, but so much more needs to be done.

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

My Matrix Theory - Circa 1999

Neo is the "one" alright...just not the "one" you think.

"Every thing that openeth the matrix in all flesh, which they bring unto the LORD, whether it be of men or beasts, shall be thine: nevertheless the firstborn of man shalt thou surely redeem, and the firstling of unclean beasts shalt thou redeem."

- Numbers 18:15

*Written Circa April 1999, this version is mostly unchanged from a version I posted on the Warner Brothers website during the first week of the movie's release. Unfortunately, the original post is gone as the website is no longer there. However, most of my original post was captured on USENET (and thus preserved) by a Polish reader in July 1999. I will clean up/edit this as time permits.

I saw the Matrix a few nights ago...and was amazed. It was a great film, but what I've since found even more amazing is that my view of the symbolism in the film is in the minority (even though to me...it seemed obvious). In fact, I've only found a couple of people on the internet who've posted anything about the perspective I took. So...for your dissection, here is my theory (and don't let me step on your toes if you think this is a Christian film, I mean if a film means that much to your faith, maybe you should recheck your faith):

Neo is the Anti-Christ. Everyone seems to have picked up on the religious symbolism in the film, but it's my opinion that everyone's got it backwards. I think it's easy for people to assume that Neo is a "Christ" figure since he is battling an obvious evil (the machines). The machines are clearly acting in the role of God, as they are creating, nurturing and completely controlling humans in every conceivable way. They control humans to the point that "they" (or more appropriately, "it") has completely and totally created their universe and can completely control everything that happens within it. Sounds a lot like God, doesn't it?

But who is to question the methods of God? Isn't the saying that God moves in mysterious ways? And what if God really was a machine that was sucking out the energy from us? Would that necessarily contradict what we know of God? The amazing trick of this movie is that it stacks the cards against the audience by not portraying God as the 'old man with a beard' most secretly imagine "he" is.....and instead portrays God as something a little less cuddly. At the same time, it presents the story through the eyes and viewpoint of the Anti-Christ

Symbolism

The first event symbolic of the "evil" of Morpheus (and thus, Neo later on) is his offering of the two pills to Neo. He presents Neo with a red and a blue pill. The blue pill represents ignorance. The red pill is the forbidden knowledge (of the matrix). He tells Neo that if he chooses the blue pill, he goes back to his regular life....with nothing changed. Choose the red pill and you will know the truth about the Matrix but there is no going back. To me, this is clearly symbolic of Satan offering humans the forbidden fruit from the tree of knowledge. Playing the role of Satan is Morpheus. And while the Bible does not specify the type of fruit in the Garden of Eden, the most common interpretation is that it's an apple. Most people think of apples as being red, thus the red pill is symbolic of the apple.....and Neo chooses it.

When Neo awakes on the ship, take note of the following dialog:

Neo: Why do my eyes hurt? Morpheus: You've never used them before

A simple line you may have missed, but one that links directly the biblical story of the fall of Adam and Eve. Once Adam and Eve had eaten the forbidden fruit, the Bible notes that "the eyes of them both were opened" as if for the first time, to realize they were naked. As was Neo.

The next symbolic event is when Morpheus shows Neo the "real" world. It is a burned out shell with blackened skies. Clearly the presentation of the "real" world is hellish. No one would choose to leave the relative sanctuary of the Matrix, even if it's a lie, and live in this "real" world. But that's exactly what Morpheus wants to do....he wants to destroy the Matrix (world) and give them this nightmarish world in exchange. Morpheus states that "no one really knows when the world was changed like this (so it could conceivably be since the beginning of time...and not, say, 30 years ago). He does state that it was "us" that scorched the sky. Could humans have made it that way due to their eviction from the Garden of Eden? Morpheus wants to destroy the Matrix (world) but he cannot do it himself. Like a Christian prophet, he too is waiting for "the chosen one" who will foment the apocalypse. He believes that Neo is the "chosen one"....not Christ, but the Anti-Christ who will battle God (the machine) in hopes of destroying it.

It's important to note that Morpheus is not Satan, but a later follower of him. Morpheus mentions the Satan character later on when he notes:

When the Matrix was first built there was a man born inside that had the ability to change what he wanted, to remake the Matrix as he saw fit....When he died, the Oracle at the temple of Zion prophesied his return and envisioned an end to the war and freedom for our people. That is why there are those of us that have spent our entire lives searching the Matrix, looking for him.

And since Morpheus has been looking for Neo, he must therefore be the second coming of this original "man", i.e. the Anti-Christ figure.

The ship's name, Nebuchadnezzar is symbolic of Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon who besieged Jerusalem , destroyed all of its temples and enslaved the Jews - God's chosen people.

On the ship Neo is told by Tank that he and Dozer were born the old fashioned way in Zion. When Neo asks where Zion is, he is told that it's deep within the Earth near its core, where it's still warm. To most people, a "warm" place at the center of the Earth is symbolic of Hell.

But probably the most obvious symbolic confirmation of my theory is when Agent Smith tells Morpheus that the there was an earlier version of the Matrix (this is during Morpheus' capture and subsequent beating). He tells Morpheus that the first Matrix was perfect, but that humans couldn't accept that it was perfect and were always looking for flaws. They (the machine/God) had to redesign the Matrix to include suffering because humans measured their existence by suffering. To me, this is clearly an allusion to the Garden of Eden (the perfect Matrix) and thus the Machine's position as God.

Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world? Where none suffered, where everyone would be happy. It was a disaster. No one would accept the program. Entire crops were lost. Some believed we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world. But I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery. The perfect world was a dream that your primitive cerebrum kept trying to wake up from. Which is why the Matrix was re-designed to this: the peak of your civilization.

In that one section of dialog, it is confirmed that the Machine is God (thus Neo is Anti.) and also explains why God allows suffering to exist in the world following the failure of Eden. Doesn't the reference to 'crops failing' seem oddly out of place?? In such a high-tech setting, Agent smith makes reference to something more akin to an ancient agrarian world. Of course it makes sense if you consider God's curse on Adam during the fall of man "cursed is the ground for thy sake".

Some Other Things To Consider

How would Neo appear to someone in the Matrix? He has supernatural powers and kills others with abandon (especially cops). Would he appear to be "good" person or an "evil" person? A Christ figure or a Satanic figure?

It's interesting that the machine's people are referred to as "agents", since it sounds so similar to "angels", which according to my theory, they are.

When Trinity sees Neo dodge bullets, she tells him that she's never seen anyone move like he does...and that he moves like the Agents.

Trinity: How did you do that?
Neo: Do what?
Trinity: You move like they do . I've never seen anyone move that fast.

Of course Neo can move like they do. He is a 'fallen' agent (angel) and that's why he is more like them and less like the others.

Come on, doesn't Morpheus just *look* evil in his trench coat and sunglasses??

When Tank tells Neo about where Zion is, isn't it interesting that he uses the expletive "God Damn!" for no apparent reason. There are multiple examples of this throughout the movie.
Trinity Says to Neo as he prepares to enter the Matrix to save Morpheus:

No? Let me tell you what I believe. I believe that Morpheus means more to me than he does to you. I believe if you are really serious about rescuing him, you are going to need my help. And since I am the ranking officer on this ship, if you don't like it... I believe you can go to hell. Because you're not going anywhere else. Tank, load us up.

What do you think? I'll have to see the movie some more to see if I can come up with anything else to support my theory. Ecce signum.

Why Valet Parking Is A Really, Really Bad Idea...

As I mentioned in a previous post, valet parking should be avoided at all costs. Unless, that is, you think the convenience is worth handing over one of your most expensive possessions to a high school drop-out-stalker-serial-killer who's name you won't even bother to get.

Of course it's not just the car that's being handed over, but some fools also hand over their house keys (for an hour or more). And almost everyone hands over their registration/insurance information (in the car, of course) which usually contains the owner's home address. If you're lucky, maybe the valet will just do a little joyriding with your car or use it as a taxi. Of course, he might be a really good person, but you'll be leaving that up to chance, won't you?

Now, if you've ever read the back of your valet ticket, you know that if pretty much anything happens to your car, it's not their fault. Here's a few choice lines from a real valet ticket:

"Cars driven by our employees solely at owner's risk. Not responsible for fire or theft."

That pretty much sums up the relationship you have with these people. You pay us to park your car, and YOU, not us, are responsible for anything that goes wrong. Which is (dis) comforting, because while you might take time to park your car in a good, well-lit area or avoid slamming the car into a curb/poll/ and/or parking in someone's private driveway where it might get towed, the valet is more worried about quickly parking your car and getting back to park/pick-up another car to get paid. And as far as theft goes, many valets keep the keys in the parked car or in an unwatched key box. They're not too worried about it of course, because, after all, it's your problem. So if your valet forgets to set the parking brake and your car rolls out into the street, or they accidentally rip up one of your $1000 rims and a $400 tire on a curb, well, that's your "risk" coming back to haunt you.

And it's usually right after something like that happens that you are forced to read your auto insurance policy only to find out that your auto insurance company won't cover damage caused by a valet. "What? my insurance company won't cover my $40,000 BMW just because I let a high school drop-out-stalker-serial-killer guy who had his driver's license revoked for 3 DUIs (and, of course, I don't know his name) drive my car into a wall? Unbelievable!"

So now you're stuck dealing with the super reputable valet "company", who thoughtfully and fortuitously put that liability waver on the back of your claim ticket. More likely than not, the valet company will refuse to pay, either claiming that the damage was there before you arrived (How will you prove it wasn't?), or by claiming that you didn't identify the damage before leaving (if you find after you leave the lot, you're definitely on your own). Seems like a whole lot of risk for a very little 'convenience', doesn't it??

Oh, and if your car has nice rims, always check to see that your spare tire hasn't disappeared while you were eating dinner (Particularly if it's a rental car). It's valuable and easy to steal because people don't even think about it until they have a flat (months or years later). Who would bother to check that??? Well the rental car company will when you return the car...and guess who will get to pay for that?

Yup - you will.