Given the latest link about the history of the Amen break, thought I'd shoot you an interview with one of my favorite dnb acts, Noisia. Kind of a funny look into what goes on behind the scenes. Just three blokes living out on a farm making beats.
RE: YouTube - Video explains the world's most important 6-sec drum loop
Topic: Electronic Music
7:59 pm EST, Feb 15, 2007
Decius wrote:
This fascinating, brilliant 20-minute video narrates the history of the "Amen Break," a six-second drum sample from the b-side of a chart-topping single from 1969. This sample was used extensively in early hiphop and sample-based music, and became the basis for drum-and-bass and jungle music -- a six-second clip that spawned several entire subcultures. Nate Harrison's 2004 video is a meditation on the ownership of culture, the nature of art and creativity, and the history of a remarkable music clip.
RE: The Politics of the Man Behind '24' | The New Yorker
Topic: Society
12:44 am EST, Feb 14, 2007
possibly noteworthy wrote: What Would Jack Do?
“24,” by suggesting that the U.S. government perpetrates myriad forms of torture, hurts the country’s image internationally. Finnegan, who is a lawyer, has for a number of years taught a course on the laws of war to West Point seniors —— cadets who would soon be commanders in the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan. He always tries, he said, to get his students to sort out not just what is legal but what is right. However, it had become increasingly hard to convince some cadets that America had to respect the rule of law and human rights, even when terrorists did not. One reason for the growing resistance, he suggested, was misperceptions spread by “24,” which was exceptionally popular with his students. As he told me, “The kids see it, and say, ‘If torture is wrong, what about “24”?’ ” He continued, “The disturbing thing is that although torture may cause Jack Bauer some angst, it is always the patriotic thing to do.”
Gary Solis, a retired law professor who designed and taught the Law of War for Commanders curriculum at West Point, told me that he had similar arguments with his students. He said that, under both U.S. and international law, “Jack Bauer is a criminal. In real life, he would be prosecuted.” Yet the motto of many of his students was identical to Jack Bauer’s: “Whatever it takes.” His students were particularly impressed by a scene in which Bauer barges into a room where a stubborn suspect is being held, shoots him in one leg, and threatens to shoot the other if he doesn’t talk. In less than ten seconds, the suspect reveals that his associates plan to assassinate the Secretary of Defense. Solis told me, “I tried to impress on them that this technique would open the wrong doors, but it was like trying to stomp out an anthill.”
Good read.
I talked about this a couple of weeks ago here, not in so many words. It was my comparison of the Andy Griffith show to 24. A few decades ago, we had a positive role model on TV who spoke about things like "due process." Now the popular show is this ultraviolent tripe.
I saw one episode of 24 over a year ago at someone else's house and was turned off by the whole torture aspect. To me, that's not something good guys do, even if the ends justify the means.
News Alert to all your 16 and 17 year olds out there: You can bang, but you cannot take pictures of it.
Looks like they were using this to set an example. They were convicted not necessarily for what they did, but for what they might have done. There was no proof of intention, but I guess the court saw an opportunity to set a precedent.
Minority opinion:
The critical point in this case is that the child intended to keep the photographs private. She did not attempt to exploit anyone or to embarrass anyone. I think her expectation of privacy in the photographs was reasonable. Certainly, an argument could be made that she was foolish to expect that, but the expectation of a 16-year-old cannot be measured by the collective wisdom of appellate judges who have no emotional connection to the event. Perhaps if the child had as much time to reflect on these events, she would have eventually concluded, as the majority did, that there were ways in which these photos might have been unintentionally disclosed. That does not make her expectation of privacy unreasonable.
I tend to agree.
I wonder if/how the judgement would have come down in the following scenarios:
1) Two underage people are married. 2) One underage person and one underage person are married.
Compulsory vaccination has a legitimate place in our health care system. But why should the government restrict its vaccinations to the victims? Why not include the carriers?
To the Editor:
I was surprised to see how quickly you expressed support of the proposed mandatory HPV vaccination policy in Texas, stating that the Merck vaccine is “highly effective” (editorial, Feb. 6).
The vaccine has not been proved to reduce cervical cancer. It is moderately effective at preventing certain pre-cancerous changes. There is no long-term safety or effectiveness data.
Most deaths from cervical cancer in this country are in women who are not adequately screened (with a simple Pap smear). In Texas, underscreening in African-American and Hispanic women probably accounts for their disproportionately high rates of cervical cancer.
These adult women need access and coverage for screening. Unfortunately, there is no lobby for the Pap smear.
Deborah Kamali, M.D. San Francisco, Feb. 6, 2007 The writer is an associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive sciences at the University of California at San Francisco.
