"The lurid circumstances of Phoenix's death boosted him into the headlines, but they also consumed his achievements. He is the forgotten man of late-20th-century film acting. Do the young fans of Leonardo DiCaprio, Tobey Maguire and Jake Gyllenhaal even know that there was an actor in the recent past who would make their idols look like bantamweights? At the time of his death, it seemed indisputable that his reputation would weather the scandal."

- Ryan Gilbey in a 2003 article in The Guardian that I came across tonight, asking why no one remembers River Phoenix anymore.  Five years later, I'm still wondering the same thing. 

The McCain camp seems to have a lot of reporters eating out of its hands since many journalists don't appear to grasp the basic distinction between strategy and tactics. I've even had normally sensible journalist colleagues forwarding me RNC press releases like they're passing on the revealed truth. McCain's campaign actually put out a statement claiming that Obama "has now adopted John McCain's position that we cannot risk the progress we have made in Iraq by beginning to withdraw our troops immediately without concern for conditions on the ground."

I've watched this campaign unfold pretty closely. And I've listened to Obama's position on Iraq. He's been very clear through this year and last on the distinction between strategy and tactics. Presidents set the strategy -- which in this context means the goal or the policy. And if the policy is a military one, a President will consult closely with his military advisors on the tactics used to execute the policy.

This is an elementary distinction the current occupant in the White House has continually tried to confuse by claiming that his policies are driven and constrained by the advice he's given by his commanders on the ground. There's nothing odd or contradictory about Obama saying that he'll change the policy to one of withdrawal of American combat troops from Iraq with a specific timetable but that he will consult with his military advisors about how best to execute that policy.

For the McCain campaign to put out a memo to reporters claiming that Obama has adopted McCain's policy only shows that his advisors believe that a sizable percentage of the political press is made up of incorrigible morons. And it's hard to disagree with the judgment.

The simple truth is that this campaign offers a very clear cut choice on Iraq. One candidate believes that the US occupation of Iraq is the solution; the other thinks it's the problem. John McCain supports the permanent deployment of US troops in Iraq. That is why his hundred years remark isn't some gotcha line. It's a clear statement of his policy. Obama supports a deliberate and orderly withdrawal of US forces from Iraq. It's a completely different view of America's role in the world and future in the Middle East. Reporters who can't grasp what Obama is saying seem simply to have been permanently befuddled by George W. Bush's game-playing over delegating policy to commanders.

Will another light-green bar, signaling a new world record, make its way onto this chart tomorrow? Will Joey Chestnut, the only American since 1999 to win the Mustard Belt, hold onto his title? He would make 1916 champ James Mullen proud. [via Waxy.org]

Related:
Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest Shortened to Ten Minutes
Photo of the Day: Patriotic Hot Dog from Nathan's

High-res version at Veracifier.com.

We used a spherical lens as a kind of control to look at depth of field and barrel distortion and the optical breathing you get when you rack from things really close to really far away. It gave us a chance to have something tangible. We used an Arriflex camera with Panavision lenses. We looked at lens flares and how to focus lights in the background. There’s that shot in the truck [his home] when EVE’s looking at the lighter for the first time from WALL-E’s POV and you see the bouquet stretched in the background. And this is the kind of thing we discovered doing those tests.

(Via Daily Kos.)

I'm a big fan of guerilla gardening - neglected or abandoned urban spaces can be pretty bleak, it's neat when people take the time to brighten things up. Heavy Petal Gardening has an easy recipe for Seed bombs - make sure you use seeds that are native to your area. (I especially like the way these look - people will think there have been dung beetles around.)

Originally posted by Patti Schiendelman from MAKE Magazine, ReBlogged by Jamie Allen on Jul 3, 2008 at 05:13 PM

Plaintiffs move jointly pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37 to compel YouTube and Google to produce certain electronically stored information and documents, including a critical trade secret: the computer source code which controls both the YouTube.com search function and Google’s internet search tool "Google.com".

Plaintiffs argue that the best way to determine whether those denials are true is to compel production and examination of the search code. Nevertheless, YouTube and Google should not be made to place this vital asset in hazard merely to allay speculation. A plausible showing that YouTube and Google’s denials are false, and that the search function can and has been used to discriminate in favor of infringing content, should be required before disclosure of so valuable and vulnerable an asset is compelled.

Plaintiffs also move to compel production of another undisputed trade secret, the computer source code for the newly invented "Video ID" program. Using that program, copyright owners may furnish YouTube with video reference samples, which YouTube will use to search for and locate video clips in its library which have characteristics sufficiently matching those of the samples as to suggest infringement.

The notion that examination of the source code might suggest how to make a better method of infringement detection is speculative. Considered against its value and secrecy, plaintiffs have not made a sufficient showing of need for its disclosure.

Plaintiffs seek copies of all videos that were once available for public viewing on YouTube.com but later removed for any reason, or such subsets as plaintiffs designate (Pls.’ Reply 41).

While the total number of removed videos is intimidating (millions, according to defendants), the burden of inspection and selection, leading to the ultimate identification of individual “works-in-suit”, is on the plaintiffs who say they can handle it electronically. Under the circumstances, the motion to compel production of copies of all removed videos is granted.

Defendants do not refute that the "login ID is an anonymous pseudonym that users create for themselves when they sign up with YouTube" which without more "cannot identify specific individuals" (Pls.’ Reply 44) , and Google has elsewhere stated:

We . . . are strong supporters of the idea that data protection laws should apply to any data that could identify you. The reality is though that in most cases, an IP address without additional information cannot.

Google Software Engineer Alma Whitten, Are IP addresses personal?, GOOGLE PUBLIC POLICY BLOG (Feb. 22, 2008), http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2008/02/are-ip-addresses-personal.html (Wilkens Decl. Ex. M).

Therefore, the motion to compel production of all data from the Logging database concerning each time a YouTube video has been viewed on the YouTube website or through embedding on a third-party website is granted.

No sufficiently compelling need is shown to justify the analysis of "millions of pieces of information" sought by this request, at least until the other disclosures have been utilized, and found to be so insufficient that this almost unlimited field should be further explored.

Therefore, the motion to compel production of all those data fields which defendants have agreed to produce for works-in-suit, for all videos that have been posted to the YouTube website is denied.

However, given that plaintiffs have already been promised the only relevant data in the database, they do not need its confidential schema (Huchital Decl. ¶ 8), which "itself provides a detailed to roadmap to how Google runs its advertising business" (id. ¶ 9), to show whether defendants were on notice that their advertising revenues were associated with infringing videos, or that defendants decline to exercise their claimed ability to prevent such associations.

Plaintiffs argue that the schema for that database will reveal "The extent to which Defendants are aware of and can control infringements on Google Video" which "is in turn relevant to whether Defendants had 'reason to know' of infringements, or had the ability to control infringements, on YouTube, which they also own and which features similar content." Id. 52 (plaintiffs’ italics). That states a sufficiently plausible showing that the schema is relevant to require its disclosure, there being no assertion that it is confidential or unduly burdensome to produce. Therefore, the motion to compel production of the Google Video schema is granted.

Defendants are prohibited by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act ("ECPA") (18 U.S.C. § 2510 et seq.) from disclosing to plaintiffs the private videos and the data which reveal their contents because ECPA § 2702(a)(2) requires that entities such as YouTube who provide "remote computing service to the public shall not knowingly divulge to any person or entity the contents" of any electronic communication stored on behalf of their subscribers and ECPA § 2702 contains no exception for disclosure of such communications pursuant to civil discovery requests.

Plaintiffs need the requested non-content data so that they can properly argue their construction of the ECPA on the merits and have an opportunity to obtain discovery of allegedly infringing private videos claimed to be public.

Read More...

Icy cold popsicles can be a welcome addition to hot 4th of July gatherings, even more so if you make them yourself in festive colors and interesting flavors to suit the occasion. While popsicle-making is a simple endeavor, the range of equipment options for making them is extensive.

Molds for Ice Pops

Tovolo Shooting Star Pop Molds, available at Amazon. My favorite commercial mold.

There are molds made specifically for this purpose that can be purchased this time of year at nearly every grocery, kitchen, and department store. They tend to be fairly inexpensive—usually somewhere between $1 and $20 for a set—and can be reused. Some models come with plastic sticks, which are almost always fitted with a cap that snaps in place over each popsicle cavity, holding the stick upright and in place and preventing prefreeze slops and spills.

After the ice pops made in these molds are frozen and unmolded, the cap-handles catch drips. And, because the sticks and handles are made from smooth plastic, there's no danger of splinters. The main drawback with these molds is that there's a finite number of stick-caps, usually one per pop compartment, so you can only make one batch at a time. Plus, the sticks almost invariably end up chewed and gnarled or just plain lost. (Though kids generally prefer the colorful plastic sticks that the kits come with, a serviceable remedy to the lost-stick issue is wrapping the filled compartments tightly with plastic wrap or tin foil, making a small puncture in the wrap with a paring knife, and then slipping a wooden stick in place through the puncture.)

Of this variety of mold, my pick for 4th of July pops is Tovolo’s Shooting Star Pop Molds (right) which yields a half dozen manageable-sized pops that are star-shaped in section.

The other main type of store-bought popsicle mold consists of a tray of popsicle cavities, generally with one slotted cap that fits over the entire mold and holds standard wooden popsicle sticks in place. These molds are less slop-proof, but they allow for the easy production of multiple successive popsicle batches (once one batch of popsicles is frozen solid, they can be removed and wrapped in parchment or wax paper, and the molds can be refilled and fitted with new sticks). The sticks don’t always stay perfectly vertical in these models, but I’ve found a few chopsticks or straight-sided butter knives to be sufficient stabilizers (above). Progressive’s Castle Freezer Pop Mold is my current favorite in this genre. Though the popsicles it yields are a little large for my tastes, its stepped-cylinder shape is great for making precise tricolor beauties like the Red, White, and Blueberry Bomb Pops featured in the recipe I provide here.

A few one-off notables include Lekue’s Silicone Ice Mold, for making stick-free push up–style pops, and Cuisipro’s Rocket Pop Molds, which combine the best of features from the two standard types of purchased popsicle molds—individually capped popsicle cavities that take standard disposable wooden popsicle sticks.

DIY Popsicle Molds

Use Dixie cups as a mold. Freeze your mixture, then simply peel away the paper cup.

While I appreciate the convenience of all of these purchased molds, most kitchens are rife with possibilities for ad hoc popsicle molds. Ice cube trays of all shapes and sizes and mini muffin tins can be employed to make diminutive pops. Silicon baking cups and molds work for larger pops, and Dixie cups make for inexpensive, albeit rather large, molds that double as disposable wrappers once the popsicles are frozen (shown at right).

Along those lines, with a little patience and know-how, you can easily make molds out of parchment or waxed paper (I’ve found parchment a bit sturdier). Aside from being inexpensive and adaptable for different sizes, shapes and occasions, these molds result in pre-wrapped pops, which melt more slowly in the heat (due to their snug, insulating wrapping) and make for tidy storage and serving. Origami books are a good source for ideas, but for the cone-shaped Red-White-and-Blueberry pop pictured with the recipe, I made parchment cornets (see the array below for details), which are a staple in professional pastry kitchens for piping melted chocolate and icing. I stood them upright in a loaf pan with the help of some rubber bands before filling and freezing. Because it takes a little practice to produce cornets so tightly made that their tips won’t leak, I suggest gently pressing each tip into a marshmallow or gumdrop, which makes the cones leak-proof and easier to stand upright during freezing. The candy can be removed before serving, but left, they make a cute finial for each pop and provide an extra little treat.

How to Make Parchment Cornets

Fold the paper in half and cut.

Fold the paper in half again and cut.

Fold paper along the diagonal and cut to make triangular pieces of paper.

Take one end of the piece of paper and curl it around the inside to form a cone shape.

Take the other end of the piece of paper and curl it around the outside.

Adjust the paper so that it forms a tight seal at the bottom.

To finish, take the outer end of the paper and fold it over the side into the cone. Seal the tip with a marshmallow or gumdrop if desired. Stick upright into rubber band-wrapped loaf pan.

You've Got Your DIY Mold; Now You Need Sticks

When it comes to handles for homemade pops, there are lots of options. Virtually anything that will fit in a given mold, is non-toxic and sturdy enough to hold the weight of the popsicle can be used, but my preference is for wood or paper options. Because these have a slightly rough texture and are somewhat absorbent, they tend to hold on to the popsicle better, preventing it from sliding down the handle as it melts.

The classic, disposable wooden popsicle stick is inexpensive and easy to find at most craft and department stores, and for many of the store-bought molds that don’t come with their own plastic sticks, these are the only handles that can be used. Popsicle mold manufacturers often sell these wooden sticks in small quantities, but the sticks are invariably more affordable, and just as well suited to making popsicles, when purchased in larger quantities from craft suppliers (just make sure they are labelled “non-toxic”).

Used Stained Sticks for an Extra Flash

Though wooden sticks are most widely available in their untreated, natural finish, I’ve also found them stained in bright nontoxic hues, good for adding a little zest to plain pops. Out of the package, the colored sticks tend to give off their dye, tinting the popsicles they’re used in and staining fingers along the way (above).

Through a little trial and error, I’ve found that this problem can be checked by soaking the sticks in hot water and lemon or lime juice (each color soaked separately) and then drying them on paper towels overnight before use. The colors will be less vibrant but far less problematic.

Stick Options for Small Pops

For smaller pops, like those made in ice cube trays, I prefer to use paper lollipop sticks or short sections of a wooden dowel or disposable chopstick. Toothpicks could also be used, but they tend to look disproportionate, lack sturdiness, and are difficult to grip.

Sticks for Large Pops

For larger pops, my hands-down favorite handle option is the wooden craft spoon (like the ones that probably came with little cups of ice cream in your elementary school cafeteria). Though slightly less common than regular wooden popsicle sticks, these are still inexpensive and generally easy to find wherever you can buy children’s art supplies. Wider and shorter than regular wooden popsicle sticks, they are easier to stand up straight in freezing popsicle liquid than other options, and their wide, tapered bases provide a good grip.

With so many options, there’s nothing stopping you from freezing up a batch of popsicle treats for Friday’s festivities or any other hot summer day.

Yesterday, in the Viacom v. Google litigation, the federal court for the Southern District of New York ordered Google to produce to Viacom (over Google's objections):

all data from the Logging database concerning each time a YouTube video has been viewed on the YouTube website or through embedding on a third-party website

The court’s order grants Viacom's request and erroneously ignores the protections of the federal Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), and threatens to expose deeply private information about what videos are watched by YouTube users. The VPPA passed after a newspaper disclosed Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork's video rental records. As Congress recognized, your selection of videos to watch is deeply personal and deserves the strongest protection.

The Logging database contains:

for each instance a video is watched, the unique “login ID” of the user who watched it, the time when the user started to watch the video, the internet protocol address other devices connected to the internet use to identify the user’s computer (“IP address”), and the identifier for the video.

Google correctly argued that “the data should not be disclosed because of the users’ privacy concerns,” citing the VPPA, 18 U.S.C. § 2710. However, the Court dismissed this argument with no analysis, stating “defendants cite no authority barring them from disclosing such information in civil discovery proceedings, and their privacy concerns are speculative.”

In a footnote, the Court references the VPPA, noting that the federal law “prohibits video tape service providers from disclosing information on the specific video materials subscribers request or obtain.” It is possible that the reference to "video tapes" in the VPPA was confusing. However, the Act is not limited to the technology available at the time of its enactment.

To the contrary, the act refers to “prerecorded video cassette tapes or similar audio visual materials.” A YouTube video may not be a videotape, but certainly qualifies as audio visual material. Thus, YouTube is a “video tape service provider” under the act, because it is “engaged in the business [of] delivery of … audio visual materials.” The VPPA protects “personally identifiable information,” which is defined to include “information which identifies a person as having requested or obtained specific video materials or services.” This is exactly what is in the Logging database.

Accordingly, pursuant to this federal law, the Court may not order the production of “personally identifiable information”:

in a civil proceeding [except] upon a showing of compelling need for the information that cannot be accommodated by any other means, if—

(i) the consumer is given reasonable notice, by the person seeking the disclosure, of the court proceeding relevant to the issuance of the court order; and
(ii) the consumer is afforded the opportunity to appear and contest the claim of the person seeking the disclosure.

Today’s court order made no finding that Viacom could not be accommodated by any other means, nor were the YouTube users provided with notice and an opportunity to contest the claim.

Instead, the Court focused on some statements made by Google on its blog:

We . . . are strong supporters of the idea that data protection laws should apply to any data that could identify you. The reality is though that in most cases, an IP address without additional information cannot.

The Court also stated that Google did “not refute that the ‘login ID is an anonymous pseudonym that users create for themselves when they sign up with YouTube’ which without more ‘cannot identify specific individuals.’”

As an initial matter, this is factually insufficient. If any single one of the YouTube users in the Logging database picked a Login ID that does identify that user (i.e. if my YouTube login was kurtopsahl), then the Logging database' information about viewing habits is protected by the VPPA, even if others pick anonymous pseudonyms.

Furthermore, even Google’s IP address statement only asserts that “in most cases” the IP address is not identifiable, certainly not in all cases. Putting aside whether a Google Public Policy blog's statement on an unrelated topic can waive the privacy rights of YouTube users, the statement means that at least some YouTube users are identifiable, and must be protected by the VPPA.

In any event, the court ordered production of not just IP addresses, but also all the associated information in the Logging database. Whatever might be said about 'an IP address without additional information,' the the AOL search history leak fiasco shows that the material viewed by a user alone can be sufficient to identify the user, even with neither a login nor an IP address.

The Court's erroneous ruling is a set-back to privacy rights, and will allow Viacom to see what you are watching on YouTube. We urge Viacom to back off this overbroad request and Google to take all steps necessary to challenge this order and protect the rights of its users.

Originally posted by Kurt Opsahl from EFF.org Updates, ReBlogged by Jamie Allen on Jul 3, 2008 at 09:18 AM

Tara Parker Pope asked 150 Healthiest Foods on Earth author Jonny Bowden for an updated list of foods most serious eaters aren't eating but should be.

The list isn't all that surprising, since it includes the oft-mentioned pomegranate juice and prunes (or what they're now trying to call "dried plums"), but I must admit I had no idea that turmeric had anti-inflammatory and anticancer properties.

Bowden's list is below. What do you eat to maintain health?

• Beets
• Cabbage
• Swiss chard
• Cinnamon
• Pomegranate juice
• Prunes (dried plums)
• Pumpkin seeds
• Sardines
• Turmeric
• Frozen blueberries
• Canned pumpkin

Moral of the story: If we wrap prunes with bacon, we get the best of both worlds.

First, they've got a few bonafide Republican elected officials who they raise money for by the normal rules of direct mail fundraising business. But then they've got a bunch of potemkin candidates for whom they raise insane gobs of money, almost all of which they keep for themselves.

Good work if you can get it.

The biggest moneymaker in this latter category -- though there's some competition -- seems to be Deborah Honeycutt (R-GA) who's running in the 13th district of Georgia. In 2006 Honeycutt lost to incumbent David Scott (D-GA) by an impressive 38 points. And since in this cycle her campaign has managed to spend only a measly $16,695 in Georgia, you might figure for round two against Scott, Honeycutt is just dialing it in.

But quite the contrary.

Look at her FEC filings and you find that Honeycutt is one of the biggest players in the 2008 cycle. With the help of BMW Direct she's managed to raise an astounding $1.7 million.

To give you some perspective, high-profile netroots-backed Darcy Burner raised only $1.37 million over the same period -- and that's a very impressive total.

So where's all the money going? Well, of that $1.7 million, $1.5 million went to BMW Direct and various affiliated companies. So we've been wanting to find out how happy Honeycutt was with BMW Direct raising insane amounts of money for her around the contrary which she gets virtually none of.

Well, it turns out they're pretty psyched.

Andrew Tilghman got a hold of Honeycutt's volunteer campaign manager Michael Murphy who says, "We've been very pleased with them. BMW Direct has been able to help us raise resources and tap into a thirst in the country for the principles and platforms that she stands on."

How about Honeycutt's campaign getting next to none of the money raised for them? "I just work with the resources we have ... All I can say is we've been very pleased with BMW Direct."

Homosexual eases into 100 final at Olympic trials
Tyson Homosexual easily won his semifinal for the 100 meters at the U.S. Olympic track and field trials and seemed to save something for the final later Sunday.

And on it goes..."On Saturday, Homosexual misjudged the finish in his opening heats...", "Homosexual runs wind-aided 9.68 seconds to make Olympics...", "Close call: Homosexual barely averts major flop in 100..." Fox News has applied the same technique to stories about suicide bombers...they changed all instances of that term to "homicide bombers".