Dept. of GAAAH

ManBabies. SFW; it’s just photoshop swaps of heads between dads and babies, but that sentence in now way communicates precisely how weird and creepy the results are.

Dept. of Ongoing Bush Fuckery

We just got a push-poll call from Health & Human Services clearly intended to scare us into supporting abstinence-based sex education. “We want to know what you think about teens having SEX!”

Microsoft FAIL

MS’s Xbox.com web site shunts me off to the Japanese version when I visit using Opera, presumably because of a flaw in their stupid browser-sniffing script. oops.

Return to the King

When I was in junior high and high school, twenty-odd years ago — and let me tell you, they were very odd years, yuk yuk yuk — I read everything Stephen King had written. I started with an “oops” book club edition of Christine my mother had lying around the house, but before long I’d devoured many, many more, from both his by-then back catalog plus every new one to come down the pike until I finished high school or thereabouts, and stopped — briefly — until his magnum opus popped up again, in new and improved and expanded form, in 1990. (I’d read the original ’78 text before, on the suggestion of a friend from church (no, really), and was blown away.) Here was King working at a fundamentally different level than he’d ever shown before, or since in standalone work. I heard him say once, on a talk show, that “half these things sound like jokes until I get a’hold of ’em,” and that’s true — Hello! Haunted Plymouth, anyone? — but there’s nothing at all funny or even particularly abstract (at least in post-9/11 America) about the premise of The Stand. Here was a work head and shoulders over the rest of his output, and King’s own commentary about his fans suggests I’m not alone in this assessment. It’s an achievement of a novel that has been criminally overlooked outside genre circles these last 30 years. Even a weak TV miniseries conveys at least a minor part of it scope (aided, no doubt, by strong casting — it featured Gary Sinese, Rob Lowe, Ruby Dee, Miguel Ferrer, and a then-unknown Jamie Sheridan).

For whatever reason, though, I never touched King’s next major effort, his Dark Tower cycle. Perhaps this was partly because I didn’t think it could be worth my time — my tastes changed in college, and became less willing to entertain what, by the mid 90s, had become somewhat formulaic output from King. Having written and revisited The Stand, and made many millions besides (who knew Rowling would eventually eclipse him, with a little help from exchange rates?), what motivation did he have to produce more demanding work? Perhaps, too, it was an early manifestation of something I joked about here only last year, when Robert Jordan shuffled off this mortal coil without completing his 12-volume Wheel of Time cycle: don’t start reading a series until you know the author will live long enough to finish it. So for whatever reason, I quit reading King, and never touched his own song of Roland. (I was very nearly, and tragically, vindicated; King finished the Tower only after his roadside brush with death).

So I left it alone until two weeks ago. I have a weakness for plot-driven fiction on the road, and God knows I’ve been on the road this spring. Figuring it’d be worth at least a couple hours — and knowing that King had, finally, finished the series in 2004 — I picked up the first volume of the Dark Tower (The Gunslinger)on the Saturday before a 4+ hour flight to Seattle the next day. My flight’s arrival into SeaTac was delayed just enough to prevent me from hitting a Barnes & Noble upon my arrival, which vexed me greatly, as I’d consumed the first book whole and was desperate for more. After my first day on site with the client, I drove to the nearest bookstore and picked up the next two (The Drawing of the Three and The Waste Lands). As I write this, I’ve just finished #3, and will crack #4 before I rest my noggin tonight.

Let me say this, less than halfway through this seven book series: It makes The Stand look like illiterate pulp. King is working on a whole different level, and is clearly maturing and gaining expertise as he goes along. The new, expanded editions include a forward explaining this from King’s point of view; the first bits were written very early on (initial stories were published in ’78, and written even earlier), but he only came back to the cycle relatively late in his career (book 3 didn’t show up until 1991).

It is in this third book that he really hits his stride. Book one sets the stage, and establishes important facts about the Gunslinger (Roland of Gilead) and his world. Book two establishes the relationship, sort of, between Roland’s world and ours, and the peril that faces both. Only in book three do we see where King may go, and what parts of our shared literary tradition as well as his own not-inconsequential mythos he incorporates, and in the best possible ways. Consider this passage, from late in book three (I don’t think this is spoiler-y; most King fans know what little is revealed here):

“Call me Fannin,” the grinning apparition said. “Richard Fannin. That’s not exactly right, but I reckon it’s close enough for government work.” He held out a hand whose palm was utterly devoid of lines. “What do you say, pard? Shake the hand that shook the world?”

Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name. The name’s not the same, but the initials sort of, oh, I dunno, STAND out, don’t you think?

Granted, the reintroduction of a popular (and clearly eternal) villain isn’t always a good thing, but the themes King builds on, and the ways he builds them, make the Dark Tower — at least so far — the most thrilling work I’ve read in some time. King is working on levels both literal and postmodern; he transposes elements of traditional fantasy into a modern (or, again, postmodern) setting without becoming contrived or cute, and he does so while maintaining his own inimitable, compelling, and compulsively readable voice. If you thought The Stand hinted that King possessed gears he wasn’t using in his more traditional horror output, The Dark Tower is your clearly affirmative answer. A professor of mine, in ’90 or ’91, suggested the epic was a dead form; a student colleague offered that “Stephen King thinks he’s writing one.” For my money, he was right.

Granted, it’s a daunting idea for some to consider the sheer volume of pages involved here, I admit. Make no mistake; he’s working like Tolkein did. The gap from one book to the next is like the gap between chapters in a regular story. It’s a seven volume novel, and dwarfs his previous efforts; my paperback of The Waste Lands alone runs to 588 pages. However, if there were ever a story you wished wouldn’t end, you’ll understand why, not even midway through, Chief Heathen is thrilled with the idea that he’s got four books to go.

As St. Webb might say, my friends, pick up on it.

Spolsky isn’t always right, but this time he is

The Geeky Heathen will want to go forth and consume Architecture Astronauts Take Over, in which Joel Spolsky speaks capital-T Truth about the tendency of well-funded corporate engineers to create solutions to problems that nobody wants:

It was seven years ago today [ed: Spolsky ran this 5/1] when everybody was getting excited about Microsoft’s bombastic announcement of Hailstorm, promising that “Hailstorm makes the technology in your life work together on your behalf and under your control.”

What was it, really? The idea that the future operating system was on the net, on Microsoft’s cloud, and you would log onto everything with Windows Passport and all your stuff would be up there. It turns out: nobody needed this place for all their stuff. And nobody trusted Microsoft with all their stuff. And Hailstorm went away.

I tried to coin a term for the kind of people who invented Hailstorm: architecture astronauts. “That’s one sure tip-off to the fact that you’re being assaulted by an Architecture Astronaut: the incredible amount of bombast; the heroic, utopian grandiloquence; the boastfulness; the complete lack of reality. And people buy it! The business press goes wild!”

The hallmark of an architecture astronaut is that they don’t solve an actual problem… they solve something that appears to be the template of a lot of problems.

This is so true it hurts. He concludes:

…between Microsoft and Google the starting salary for a smart CS grad is inching dangerously close to six figures and these smart kids, the cream of our universities, are working on hopeless and useless architecture astronomy because these companies are like cancers, driven to grow at all cost, even though they can’t think of a single useful thing to build for us, but they need another 3000-4000 comp sci grads next week. And dammit foosball doesn’t play itself.

There’s so much to love about this we don’t know where to start

From DFW:

A man has been accused of attempting to pass a $360 billion check, which he claims was given to him by his girlfriend’s mother to start a record business, Fort Worth police said.

Charles Ray Fuller, 21, of Crowley, was arrested on April 22 on an accusation of forgery, police said.

Police responded to a report of a man attempting to pass the check about 4 p.m. that day at the Chase bank in the 8600 block of South Hulen Street, Fort Worth police Lt. Paul Henderson said.

The personal check was not made out to Mr. Fuller and when the bank contacted the check owner, the woman said she did not write a check for $360 billion.

Mr. Fuller was also accused of unlawful carrying of a weapon and possession of marijuana, Lt. Henderson said. He may also face a theft charge in Crowley.

Lt. Henderson said he did not know if Mr. Fuller and his girlfriend were still together.

Elsewhere on the web…

It appears we missed some sort of set-to in re: Miley Cyrus’ pix in Vanity Fair. The whole thing is confusing as hell, since obviously the Mileys (like the Birtneys before her) sell at least partially on sex appeal, aspirational and otherwise, but whatever.

Thankfully, Defamer is on the case. Allow us to summarize their excellent summary of the whole affair, and the proper reaction thereto:

ZOMG111!!!!!!1 TEENAGERS FUCK!!!!! HORRORS! Meh.

Thank you, and good night.

The Future According to Clay Shirky

Clay Shirky’s “Gin and the Cognitive Surplus” is really an amazing summary of at least one way of looking at where we are, now, societally, and how interactive, collaborative media is on the cusp of radically changing the societal landscape.

In this piece, Shirky talks a lot about how TV sort of came to the rescue of a suddenly (relatively) idle public in the postwar expansion, a public that never before had much in the way of “free time” to deal with. The sitcom was born, and we all watched, and we watched for decades, and people continue to spend a lot of time in this one-way medium. In so doing, we consumed, for a while, an enormous cognitive surplus. Instead of creating something new, we watched a shitload of TV.

Anyway, he continues to relate the story of an interview with a TV producer who wanted to see if he was suitable for the show in question. In answer to a question about what sorts of “interesting” things he was seeing online, he talked a bit about the flurry of activity around the Pluto Wikipedia page as the astronomy community shifted its categorization from “planet” to “nonplanet thing,” expecting the follow-up questions to be about authority, participation, collaboration, and the like. The TV producer’s response? “Where do people find the time?”

And I just kind of snapped. And I said, “No one who works in TV gets to ask that question. You know where the time comes from. It comes from the cognitive surplus you’ve been masking for 50 years.”

So how big is that surplus? So if you take Wikipedia as a kind of unit, all of Wikipedia, the whole project–every page, every edit, every talk page, every line of code, in every language that Wikipedia exists in–that represents something like the cumulation of 100 million hours of human thought. I worked this out with Martin Wattenberg at IBM; it’s a back-of-the-envelope calculation, but it’s the right order of magnitude, about 100 million hours of thought.

And television watching? Two hundred billion hours, in the U.S. alone, every year. Put another way, now that we have a unit, that’s 2,000 Wikipedia projects a year spent watching television. Or put still another way, in the U.S., we spend 100 million hours every weekend, just watching the ads. This is a pretty big surplus. People asking, “Where do they find the time?” when they’re looking at things like Wikipedia don’t understand how tiny that entire project is, as a carve-out of this asset that’s finally being dragged into what Tim calls an architecture of participation.

It’s about participation, and how any level of participation — LOLCats! — is more engaging, more important, and fundamentally more interesting than what people have been doing with that time since “I Love Lucy” showed up. It’s not all LOLCats, though. Social networks are already powerful and interesting, for example. If we use some tiny percentage of our TV time to do something participatory, something collaborative, something interesting and creative, how long before one of those somethings dwarfs Wikipedia and social networking in net value? Of course, TV people don’t want to hear any of this, but it’s almost certainly true.

Shirky ends with a fantastic anecdote that has this as its punchline:

Here’s what four-year olds know: a screen that ships without a mouse ships BROKEN. Media that’s targeted at you but doesn’t include you may not be worth sitting still for.

WORD.

(Warren Ellis has the video here, which is worth watching.)

Smartphone Smackdown: RIM v. Apple

This NYT covers a somewhat surprising development in the smartphone market: it’s now a fight between relative newcomer Apple and corporate darling Research In Motion (i.e., the makers of Blackberry). Stalwart Palm and Microsoft’s Windows Mobile are at best also-rans, and tiny Symbian never really had a chance.

The key bit, which could fortell hard times for RIM, is this:

(RIM co-CEO) Mr. Balsillie thinks that R.I.M. is in the best tactical position for the coming fight. He points to its close relationships with 350 carriers around the world — like Verizon and AT&T — that sell, often at steep discounts, BlackBerry phones and the accompanying monthly e-mail service.

Apple and Google, on the other hand, are vocally trying to dislodge the carriers from the nexus of the North American wireless market. Unlike other phone makers in the United States, Apple sells iPhones from its own stores and has negotiated relatively stingy contracts with the carriers, in exchange for limited periods of exclusivity. Google, for its part, unsuccessfully bid for wireless spectrum this year in an effort to force carriers to be more open to allowing various handsets and Internet services on their networks.

R.I.M. makes its alliances clear. “We are sort of polite and amiable and we gently interrelate with the carriers and try to find compatibility,” Mr. Balsillie said. “It may be a better strategy to fight the carrier. We may be wrong. The carrier may get disintermediated, in which case we fade with them.”

In other words, R.I.M. is content to please carriers, not actual customers. Apple has turned that whole ecosystem on its ear by creating a phone that has literally made AT&T’s year, financially, because people wanted it People actually LIKE it. On the other hand, people with Blackberries are typically folks who have never touched another smartphone, and who use what their IT drone tells them to use. Of the non-corporate BB users I know, most have switched to the iPhone for sheer ease of use and lack of hassle.

It’s important to note that the Blackberry system is dependent on R.I.M.’s servers to work, even for private, ISP-based emails (unless you just use the browser to access a webmail account); the iPhone forces no such Rube Goldberg mechanism on its users (though neither do the offerings from Palm, WinMo, and Symbian). Up to now, R.I.M. was also the only real game in town for centrally-controllable mobile email; a lost Blackberry can be wiped remotely, over the air, by an administrator. This summer, that feature — along with holy-grail native Exchange support — comes to the iPhone, which means Apple is seriously bringing it to what has been R.I.M.’s essentially uncontested territory.

What we talk about when we talk about llamas

In a brief phone call with Mrs Heathen, we discussed how many llamas there are named “Dolly.”

Mrs Heathen suggested that, while it’s true that expressing it as a percentage of the total llama population does neatly sidestep the need to know exactly how many llamas exist, llama population distribution also influences name statistics. If llamas are mostly in large groups, then there will be more names used less frequently; a llama farmer is unlikely to name two of his own llamas the same thing. On the other hand, if llamas are mostly in smaller groups, each such group could have its own “Dolly Llama,” and the overall percentage of Dollys is likely to be higher.

None of this, however, properly accounts for any large-scale industrial llama husbandry, where we presume the llamas aren’t named at all, though if we stipulate that we’re discussing only the universe of named llamas, we’re back on solid ground.

Things Worth Considering

Travel a bunch? Consider signing up with Dopplr, which — in addition to being yet another victim of the vicious web 2.0 anti-E hysteria — helps you figure out whom you may know who’s also travelling to the same places.

Magnatune, Take 2

BoingBoing points out that one record lable, Magnatune, is doing quite well selling DRM-free music, and that in fact its classical division is growing by leaps and bounds in a market where conventional classical sales are in the toilet. We’ve got a couple of their releases, and they’re amazing. Check ’em out.

In which we go all geeky about whiners somewhere else

The Consumerist is great fun, but sometimes they, or their commenting public, kind of miss the mark — as they do in this story about a declined check at a K-Mart.

S. wrote a check at Kmart earlier this month and it was denied. No reason was given—just “denied.” It turns out a separate company, Certegy, made the decision, so S.—who writes, “I’ve never had a bounced check”—tried to track down someone at Certegy who could tell her what was wrong with her checks.

Cry me a river. First, you’re writing checks in 2008? Seriously, WTF?

More seriously, though, what the whiner ran into was a risk-based turndown. This post describes something that’s pretty common in the check verification industry. I used to work in software development for Telecheck, but it’s been a long time. The basics of the business are probably unchanged, though.

Back then (late 1990s), TCK had two main products for merchants:

  1. Their flagship guarantee product; and
  2. A verification-and-collections product that was cheaper.

Guarantee cost a percentage of each processed transaction, but it meant that if TCK issued an approval code, then the merchant was covered — if the check went bad, Telecheck paid him anyway, and collected the money plus the bounce fee on the back end.

Verification-and-collection was just what it sounds like: they’d run checks at POS, and approve or deny against the same database (with some differences), but bad checks were just bad checks. The merchant would only get paid for them if TCK managed to collect, minus a commission.

So, when a check is run through the system, the first thing that happened was a search for any actual negative data. For TCK, you’re negative pretty much only if you actually owe TCK money and/or the bounce fee. People who bounce checks and then pay TCK later after a paper notice are TCK’s favorite people (think about it), so neg-data turndowns only happened if you had an open item; that turndown was called a Code 4. Owe Telecheck money, or owe a Telecheck verification client money? No checkwriting for you. Don’t? No neg data. Knock yourself out.

That was the end of the story, as I recall it, for verification customers.

However, with guarantee, actual risk analysis turndowns came into play for people without neg data. As a boss of mine used to say, there are two kinds of bad checks: people borrowing money, and people committing fraud. The former are collectable, and the latter aren’t. The trick is knowing which is which.

To try and eliminate fraud, they used scorecards. There used to be a single checkwriting scorecard, across all SIC (essentially, type of merchant) codes, published by (I think) Fair-Isaacs. TCK developed a whole bunch more, since it turns out that LOTS of factors correlate to the relative riskyness of an unknown checkwriter, for example:

  • Men are riskier than women
  • Younger people are riskier than older people
  • New accounts are riskier than established accounts
  • Low check numbers are riskier than higher check numbers
  • Checks written at the end of the day, or in particular Friday afternoon, are riskier than checks from earlier in the business day/week.
  • Etc.

Obviously, too, some merchandise is riskier than others. Subwoofers are risky. Carrots aren’t. All this intelligence — and there was a half a floor in Houston full of very smart people doing the analysis behind this — came into play only for guarantee customers, since it was actually Telecheck’s money getting risked there.

Getting a risk-based turndown from TCK meant you looked too dicey for them to say, absolutely, we’re gonna cover this check for the merchant. The merchant could, of course, decide to take it anyway (but would get no guarantee), and will certainly suggest another form of payment, but TCK just doesn’t want any part of it. For Telecheck, the risk turndowns were Code 3.

Now, back then, some other companies were trying to also do risk management turndowns, but they’d do stupid things like simple velocity turndowns (“no more than N checks in Y period of time”), which is mathematically indefensible, or even simple cumulative price limits (also stupid). TCK had LOTS of years of actual POS data to draw from to create valid predictive models, which is what made them the higher-end provider back then.

So, at the end of the day, risk turndowns are just that: risk management. I don’t know anything about these new companies in the check verification market, and (as I said) my TCK insider knowledge is a decade old, but back then the whole code 3 thing wasn’t surprising or weird to me. It seemed like good business based on the inherent riskiness of checks and the inventive product (for the time) that TCK was selling (guarantee). Sure, people whined about it, but TCK wasn’t and isn’t in business to make checkwriters happy. They’re in business to make sure POS checks are as safe as possible for their clients.

Endnote: Since college, I’ve never written POS checks, even when I worked for TCK. Too much trouble. Amex uber alles.

Dept. of We Told You So

Microsoft has announced that they will be shutting down the servers that authenticate music purchased through MSN Music or related services, which means anyone with media purchased from those outlets is screwed if they ever want to move said media to a new computer, or upgrade the computer’s OS. This, by the way, is MS’s famed “PlaysForSure” music store.

This is what happens with DRM every. single. time. You don’t own the music. They do. And at the end of the day, they don’t care about you.

More developments

Some bits:

  1. I’ll put a link on the side, but comments here will accept formatting in something called Markdown; hit the link for a summary. You’ll find your paragraphs separating as you’d expect automatically, though.

  2. I’ve finally fixed the permalinks and census/archive links over at the old site, though I don’t have stats for Jan-April 08 owing to the hosting debacle. I thought about fixing the script to do the math, but then I realized that no one gives a shit, so you monkeys will have to be content with plain-old links to those months.

  3. We’re playing with something called Typo here, which is built on Ruby on Rails. Don’t worry if you don’t now what any of that means. Mostly, it just means I had to hack shit for a couple hours to make an immature framework and poorly documented blogging system sit up and play nice.

It’s shocking that there are still NO decent and easy-to-set-up blogging systems. MoveableType is an absurd hodgepodge of PHP, Perl, and God knows what else, plus it’s a resource joke. WordPress is a giant flashing “please hack my server” sign (the front page of their blog notes two critical security problems in the last six months alone). A hosted service is Right Out. In a word, GAH.

  1. Expect the template to keep changing as I figure out how to make it do what I want.

  2. Comments are officially BACK. Enjoy.

Well, that’s disturbing

This NYT story points out that while the US accounts for only 5% of the world’s population, we have nearly a quarter of the world’s prisoners. China, with a population far greater than hours, has about half as many prisoners. We incarcerate ONE PERCENT of all American adults.

This cannot be good.

This is an experiment.

Everything is subject to change. You can, however, now comment again. Archives are still back at the old site for now. Everything subject to change, and obviously we won’t be putting up with a lame-O canned theme for very long. Inshallah.

You want new? I got new.

I’m piloting the next version of Heathen here; look there for new content, but n.b. that I’m not completely making the move yet, and some things aren’t quite configured properly yet. Even so, it’s promising.

Dept. of Geeky References

I totally didn’t notice until it was pointed out to me, but on Friday’s Battlestar Galactica, four characters meet clandestinely in “weapons locker 1701D.”

ZOMG!

What? You don’t get it? Ah. I forget, sometimes, that not all the Accumulated Heathen are orthodox geeks. Naming the locker thusly was a deliberate shout-out to that oldest of geek tribes, the Trekkies. Every iteration (well, except one) of the Star Trek “Enterprise” has been numbered some variant of “NCC-1701.” Wikipedia helps us with the lore (no, not the Lore):

Missing from this list is the version captained by the dude from Quantum Leap in the wholly forgettable and blessedly short-lived Enterprise series; since there are no letters before “A,” even in the Star Trek universe, that ship was the Enterprise NX-01.

Old but worth reading

A little while ago, this essay about working on the Donkey Kong Atari port surfaced online, and since then it’s been sitting in an unread tab in my browser. I’m in allergy hell today, though, so I’m cleaning house, which means I’m finally posting it here. Enjoy, my geekly brethren.

Dept. of Pow’rful Nostalgia

Merlin Mann has posted video of an early R.E.M. appearance that happens to also be the first time I saw them. It’s from a Nickelodeon “teen talk show” called Livewire in 1983.

I remember watching this on a big console TV sitting in front of the couch at the house I grew up in, mesmerized, but didn’t have the presence of mind to write down the band name. It wouldn’t have mattered; the cultural backwater that was pre-Internet south Mississippi didn’t have any shops that would have stocked Chronic Town anyway.

Three years later, I found Fables of the Reconstruction, though, and that was that.

Supporting Our Troops, Private Ryan Style

What they didn’t include in the movie is that apparently Private Ryan and his family lost all military benefits because he got pulled from combat. From the AP:

FRESNO, Calif. – Forced to leave the combat zone after his two brothers died in the Iraq war, Army Spc. Jason Hubbard faced another battle once he returned home: The military cut off his family’s health care, stopped his G.I. educational subsidies and wanted him to repay his sign-up bonus.

It wasn’t until Hubbard petitioned his local congressman that he was able to restore some of his benefits.

Via JWZ, today’s bizarre quote

Someone shouted “OH SHIT, it’s coming back!” and pointed up the street. I looked, to see a monstrous pit bull galloping down the street, full-tilt. I remember thinking that it looked just like one of those things from “Ghostbusters” as it leapt, soaring through the air and shoulder-checking the man with the OE cans, sending him flat and the cans scattering.

The dog then grabbed a can in its jaws and bit down hard, puncturing the can and shaking it like a baby — which sent streams of malt liquor shooting out of the holes around its fangs and straight down the monster’s throat. It spat the mostly-empty can out into the street, covered in drool and malt liquor and wagged its tail, happily burping.

The man picked himself up and yelled “motherfucker, what did I JUST TELL YOU,” and grabbed the dog by its neck and belly, clean-and-jerked it and threw the thing like a soccer ball as far as he could. It hit the pavement and skidded, snarling and growling and ran straight for him, knocked him down again and grabbed another can.

This cycle had been iterating for a little while.

(More)

“He liked you all greased up, like a porkchop.”

JWZ is on a roll with the weird text:

“Motherfucker was crazy,” says Gloria Daniel, a girlfriend he kept on the side for forty years. “It was the drugs.”

One night in the summer of 2001, after he’d slathered her in Vaseline (“He liked you all greased up,” she says. “Like a porkchop”) and wore her out trying to come, he gave up and left the room, and Gloria dozed off. When she woke up, Mr. Brown was standing at the foot of the bed in a full-length mink coat over his bare chest, a black cowboy hat, and silk pajama pants with one leg tucked into a cowboy boot and the other hanging out. He had a shotgun over his shoulder and a white stripe of Noxzema under each eye. “I’m an Indian tonight, baby,” he announced. “C’mon, let’s let ’em have it.” Then he dumped a pickle jar of change on the floor, told her to get a machete, and went out to the garage. He took the Rolls, drove ten miles to Augusta, weaving all over the road, clipping mailboxes, smoking more dope, and screaming about being an Indian. Gloria kept thinking she should flag down a cop, say she’d been kidnapped.

Like she says, motherfucker was crazy on drugs.

Spot on

Nerve and IFC have teamed up to produce a list of the 50 Greatest Comedy Sketches of All Time, and it’s a doozy. Longtime Heathen faves The State are well represented, including “$240 dollars worth of puddin'” and “Porcupine Racetrack,” among others. Don’t miss SNL’s “Gerald Ford is Dead” skit, either.

Their entry for “Porcupine:”

39. Porcupine Racetrack – The State

Is “Porcupine Racetrack” the best musical of the ’90s? I wouldn’t argue against it. A parody of Broadway musicals played so straight it’s almost an homage, it packs in class consciousness, an aborted tap breakdown, syrupy melodrama (“So God if you’re above / And it’s orphans / That you love / Then help the porcupine I chose”) and the triumph of the human spirit (in the form of Thomas Lennon wearing a giant porcupine outfit) into less than three minutes. It’s a marvel of performance and production design on a budget — the manic energy of the cast selling every last ounce of the willfully bizarre premise. Conceived by Mr. Lennon and set to music and performed by Teddy Shapiro, who wrote most of the incidental music on the show, it’s a tour de force of brightly colored absurdity — performed with loving care, all the way down to the checked suits and newsboy caps. –R. Emmet Sweeney

Oh, THIS is a good idea

US research into foot-and-mouth disease, once a serious scourge of American agriculture, has heretofore been done on a remote island. This makes sense, as a biohazard mishap there probably can’t screw up our food supply.

In a move worthy of some sort of bizarre satirical skit, the Bush Administration wants to move this research to Kansas. WTF?