WHAT!!

I was in (digital) art class yesterday, and the professor advised us to buy the software while we were still students cause once we lost the student discount, we would be paying much more. One thing led to another and she mentioned that the software costs about $ 500 with the discount, whereas without the discount, it costs more than $ 800. One of my classmates took the words out of my mouth when he yelled out: WHAT!!

Now, I know things work differently here, and that there are copyright laws and yada yada yada, but seriously, WHAT!!

I was just thinking about it, and I really dont think it it costs the company even 1/5 of that to make the software and distribute it. Exploitation is what this is.

Frankly, that is not what this post is about though. I really dont care how much they charge cause if I didnt know before taking this course, I know now that art is not for me. The thing is, everytime we have trade representatives from the US and European countries visit us, they want copyright laws to be enacted and enforced. Honestly, good luck with that!

If there are talented people, who need this software to study and use their talents to be a little more productive, to make a better life for themselves, they would require this software. Under no circumstances would it be possible for them to buy the original software, which costs more than how much most people earn in a year! So, their only option is to get the pirated copy, which would not cost more than $50. There is so much talk about helping to modernize countries that are lagging in development, but all that effort is wasted as long as these huge barriers exist.

If multinationals and their governments really want to stop the piracy, they need to be able to provide a real alternative that is viable and affordable. It is not that people want to steal, but that they are forced to.

Acadamy Awards and Radical Clerics

I have noticed that once an actor wins an Academy Award, every time they are introduced, their name takes on the prefix of "Academy award winner" so and so. Win one award, and this seems to stick permanently. Whether its on talk shows, movie trailers or on the news, this almost always seems to be the case. Its like getting a doctorate after which you are permanently "Dr." so and so.

To me, there seems to be a parallel between naming Academy award winners and Muqtada Al Sadr. Every time Al Sadr is mentioned, his name is preceded by "radical Shia cleric". This seems to have become his permanent prefix, just like Academy award winners have theirs. I'm sure no one disputes the fact that winning an academy award is a prestigious thing, just like no one (at least, no one in the "Coalition of the willing") disputes the claim that Muqtada Al Sadr is bad.

The thing is, whether you won an academy award or are a radical Shia cleric, that seems to define the person, which clearly is not the case. Academy award winners, and radical Shia clerics are much more than just that, and I think it is important to understand that. Just like winning an Academy award is a journey, becoming a radical Shia cleric is too, and I'm sure both categories of people have worked hard to get there. Furthermore, just like winning academy awards carries prestige in America, so does I'm sure reaching the status of "radical Shia cleric" in Iraq. The fact that he is considered "radical" would mean nothing to a man on the street in Iraq, just like "Academy award winner" would mean nothing. He is seen to be fighting the US occupation and that makes him a hero and idol, just like an academy award winner might be in America.

In mourning

Its been some time since Ive posted. Its just that Ive been in mourning. I'm dead serious. Who wouldn't be mourning these days? Firstly, for the lovely Anna Nicole Smith who was a playboy playmate and married a 85 year old millionaire who died 14 months later leaving her the money. This is a tragedy, even forcing a minister of some Caribbean island to resign.

Then, there is the loss of Britney Spears' hair. Who heard of such a tragedy!! Its really unbearable to see bald Britney, especially after we still haven't recovered from "pantie less" Britney. There is also our boy wonder Danielle Radcliffe going "stripper" on a stage in London. The horror! How could he do such a thing? Incomprehensible is what it is!

In addition to all this, I'm mourning the fact that Barack Obama isn't "black enough" to be running for president. Why God? Why didn't you make him black enough to be president?

OK, I admit I'm kidding. However, there is a tragedy here. The first time I turned on the TV and saw that Anna Nicole Smith was dead, my reaction was "who the heck is she?". Of course, I'm not American therefore I wouldn't know, so I asked around and all people knew is the stuff already mentioned above. I just couldn't comprehend that someone would make it to the nightly news bulletin of mainstream news networks for that. Boy, was I wrong! She is still in the news and apparently a lot of dirt is being uncovered. Really! The woman is dead! Go find yourself a life and let her RIP. Then again, there is a deeper issue here which is that the networks wouldn't be covering nonsense, if the viewers wouldn't be watching it.

Its not only Anna Nicole Smith. The fact that Britney Spears has shaved her head and is selling her hair online is driving people nuts. It's getting a lot of news coverage too. I can't come to grips with the fact that she is actually selling her hair! Then again, she wouldn't be selling it if people weren't willing to buy it right?

Then there is the issue about Danielle Radcliffe, an adult, capable of making decisions for himself and living in a part of the world where people have free will to do so playing a part in Equus where he will be nude on stage. The fact that he would choose to do such a thing is bothering people, especially after he played such an innocent role in the Harry Potter movies. I would think that if it bothered you, you wouldn't watch it! There certainly is no reason to make a hue and cry about it.

To top all the craziness coming out of the news channels, there is a debate on about whether Obama is "black enough" to be running for president. I started laughing when I heard that but soon found that contrary to what I thought, the newscaster was not joking!

Whats going on? I know there is absolutely no lack of real news. Is it that the people responsible for bringing it to us have lost their way? Is it that the people who watch the news have changed their expectations? I mean, the people who are actually asking whether Obama is black enough should get their heads checked, but even more hilarious are the people who pay attention to such bullshit.

Is it just me, or is society getting increasingly shallow and superficial and more and more obsessed with inconsequential things? Is this the domino effect of society becoming more materialistic, of mass media, today's music culture, the exploitation of freedom, deterioration of values or is it all just a passing trend?

Whatever it is, I think this overemphasis on looking a certain way, acting a certain way, eating a certain way, living a certain way, making more money and having more stuff is taking a serious toll on society. We don't seem to value anything anymore and this I believe to be the real tragedy. This I think is something to mourn about.