Page of Moss - Bloglet

So, finally, a year and a half after writing it, I have put the code for the BlogBot online. It's not very well (or even at all) documented, but if anyone's interested in an AIM bot to allow weblog posting through the Blogger API (or even without the Blogger API), written in Python, this should do the trick. Post by IM! (I'm trying to phrase this as many ways as possible, so as to be usefully Googleable. ;) ) _
respond?
10:23:06 PM, Wednesday 1 June 2005

Hurray! There's a big MetaFilter post about the Holy Modal Rounders! _
respond?
01:23:50 PM, Tuesday 31 May 2005

_
respond? (5)
01:41:46 AM, Monday 30 May 2005

Quote of the day goes to Patrick Nielsen Hayden for: "Meanwhile popinjays like Joe Biden desperately file their chins to razor-sharpness in the probably vain hope that the electorate, having sometimes demonstrated a preference for strutting phonies, will mistake them for one." _
respond?
09:22:55 PM, Friday 27 May 2005

Oh wow... Bram Stoker's Dracula, blogged according to its own calendar. _
respond?
03:53:13 PM, Friday 27 May 2005

Patashoqua's ongoing posts have got me doing it too:
Darth Xanga
Darth Bo Peep
Darth Bigboote
Darth Nancy
Darth Fruit Pie
Darth Thrad
Darth Elliot Smith
Darth Barth (who is shelved right next to...)
Darth Barthelme
Darth Balalaika
Darth Snit
Darth Go Gentle Into That Goodnight
Darth Darth Darth Darth Baked Beans and Darth
Darth Helvetica
and from Julia:
Darth Schiller
Darth Tardis
Darth Grrr Arrg _
respond? (14)
02:38:03 PM, Thursday 26 May 2005

The Miracle of Context
Julia: “Do all bananas have five sides?”
Me: “I don’t know. I meant to check at work today.”

_
respond?
02:02:10 AM, Wednesday 25 May 2005

Hey kid... you wouldn’t download a movie would you? Of course not. Then WHY are you stealing that old lady’s purse? _
respond? (4)
05:25:07 PM, Saturday 21 May 2005

Unbeknownst to the princess, but knowst to us, danger lurks in the stars above... _
respond? (5)
03:57:32 AM, Saturday 21 May 2005

Cry! _
respond?
10:04:16 PM, Thursday 19 May 2005

George Galloway's appearance before the Senate the other day (RealVideo link) was pure political theater, but it sure was fun to watch. _
respond? (1)
12:30:34 PM, Thursday 19 May 2005

So this afternoon my mind finally managed to condense the essence of what I’ve been trying to think about politics for some time now, which I’ll phrase a bit aggressively like this: the single biggest threat to democracy in America is the breakdown of civilized communication between political adversaries, and the single biggest threat to humanity is the breakdown of democracy in America.

The growing, aggressive factionalism of American politics means that our government is, at best, the reasonless mouthpiece of whatever ideology happens to have won the latest coin toss, and at worst, a weapon by which one ideology will win totalitarian rule. (This all seems pretty obvious to me right now, but if it’s not I can try to say what I mean more clearly). And in a world where America is the only effective military power, the breakdown of American politics must be a global disaster. This means that the most serious, practical political goal we can work for right now is to learn to see our opponents as reasonable human beings trying to aim toward some good, rather than as monsters to be defeated. It is more important than any particular question of law or of state action, because it is the only thing that can preserve the very possibility of law.

Which of course brings me to the same paradox that I hit again and again in different forms, in this case:

We must fiercely challenge our current political leaders, because their contentious partisanship makes real political conversation impossible.
We must not challenge our political leaders, because this would simply create one more faction.

It’s Jon Stewart on Crossfire again: speaking out against political theater becomes political theater itself.

Another version of the same thing, which came up again and again in the time leading to the war in Iraq:

Political discourse is impossible unless we trust that our opponents are acting in good faith—that the arguments they express are meant sincerely—because if we deny their sincerity there is no point in engaging them in argument, they can only be defeated or destroyed.
But trusting in our opponents good faith is impossible because this trust will immediately be taken advantage of by those who dress up base motives in pretty rhetoric.

I have no idea what the way out of this is, but I’m fucking desparate for one. I get the feeling it all came out as a bit of an incoherent ramble. Please tell me if this makes any sense at all. This is what keeps me up at night. Please.

_
respond? (12)
04:03:44 AM, Thursday 19 May 2005

The new yadis distributed identity system from LiveJournal is beautiful. _
respond?
09:55:58 PM, Monday 16 May 2005

The worst idea I have had today: carbonated coffee. _
respond? (3)
07:16:05 PM, Monday 16 May 2005

Sir John Eliot Gardiner is so indie that his shirt don’t fit.

_
respond?
04:22:01 PM, Monday 16 May 2005

Hobbes is down right now because of a power outage, hence the absence of teasmoke, ninjavampire, the tracker, etc. It should be back up soon. _
respond? (3)
12:06:47 PM, Sunday 15 May 2005

It's true! Blocks really do make a language more powerful and expressive! _
respond? (3)
02:37:48 PM, Tuesday 10 May 2005

I think I’ve fixed the bug Tania reported in the comments on the last post.

_
respond? (5)
04:00:13 PM, Saturday 7 May 2005

If you use my blog tracker, you should probably be warned that it will break when used with Google's web accelerator. (This is a result of some architectural compromises in my code, where I break rules for the sake of a more convenient interface.) _
respond? (7)
04:44:27 PM, Friday 6 May 2005

A pattern I see repeated again and again:

Someone on the internet posts a clever over-the-top satire of fundamentalism.
A number of people take the satire seriously, and respond with outrage.
Some saner reader points out that it was obviously satirical.
Rather than making an embarrassed apology, the Outraged Rationalists argue that their misunderstanding simply demonstrates how absurd fundamentalism is, by showing that it is indistinguishable from satire.

_
respond? (7)
12:20:46 PM, Friday 6 May 2005

Happy birthday to Tania, and PF, and Kierkegaard, and Marx! _
respond? (9)
04:12:14 PM, Thursday 5 May 2005

It's working! _
respond? (1)
11:38:17 PM, Monday 2 May 2005

_
respond?
11:11:39 PM, Monday 2 May 2005

_
respond?
11:07:50 PM, Monday 2 May 2005

_
respond?
10:38:21 PM, Monday 2 May 2005

_
respond?
09:19:37 PM, Monday 2 May 2005

_
respond? (1)
08:44:35 PM, Monday 2 May 2005

Okay, now that I'm home: if you have croquet pictures you want to put online, contact me and I'll hook you up with a gallery. _
respond? (11)
07:31:37 PM, Monday 2 May 2005

_
respond? (1)
06:05:54 PM, Monday 2 May 2005

I also quite enjoyed the Hitchhiker’s Guide movie.

_
respond? (1)
09:44:42 AM, Saturday 30 April 2005

Bother. Train's been delayed 25 minutes. _
respond? (1)
01:47:27 PM, Thursday 28 April 2005

_
respond? (5)
06:20:31 PM, Wednesday 27 April 2005

_
respond? (1)
02:08:48 PM, Wednesday 27 April 2005

_
respond? (3)
02:07:19 PM, Wednesday 27 April 2005

_
respond? (1)
01:45:32 PM, Wednesday 27 April 2005

_
respond? (3)
01:42:50 PM, Wednesday 27 April 2005

older entries