nihil architecture blogs

That’s the deal apparently in Germany I heard, and Australia too, forum admins can be held liable for the content users post on their fora, or forum owners I guess. I heard this on IRC so don’t quote me but it’s not all that relevant if it’s true or not for the argument at had, assume it be true for argument’s sake.

Many people’ll probably find this an insane idea, I find it a very reasonable one actually. I mean, what is a forum? A forum is a place the owner of some web space has set up there for people to publish ideas, and the forum owner lets them publish those without checking or editing them first. Well, the forum owner is the one that ultimately makes these ideas public and has the power to pull the plug, so I don’t see why he or she shouldn’t be responsible in the end. I mean, an analogy outside the digital medium means you can’t hold the owner of a paper that decides to print all things any person sends to that paper in it, including things like child porn or in Australia two sisters kissing. No idea why fora ever got so popular to set up as this is what it is, a place you host where random strangers can just insert their—potentially illegal—information into your database to that it gets published on the web, without you ever checking it, or editing it for facts, only after you published it, and then you can take it back if you have to, after some people may have already seen it? Of course, you place a big banner there saying ‘this is not our opinion, this is of our guests’, but really? Would that help a Newspaper if it just published illegal content people sent to it via some automated process without a human ever doing some reading? It’s the very same argument people keep putting forward against cigarettes. ‘It’s more dangerous than weed, and this is known for a long time, but you can’t take it away because it has become part of our lifestyle, if it were introduced today and all the risks where known, it would be illegal.’. So, if you used that argument, be a little more consistent and see it also applies to fora? It’s a medium to which any person can just send any content and some automated process publishes it to the world without any one checking it? You expect it to even be legal? If it is, of course people that start such a strange and risky service should be held liable if it goes wrong, it was their own damned stupid move to make. Which reasonably they made under the idea that they would not be held liable. Which makes the operation of fora very costly to nigh impossible.

Of course, this holds under the assumption that you live in a society which bans making publicly accessible or even ‘possessing’ certain information—what ever possessing information may mean…—which is even more stupid, but a reasonable consequence of that is indeed that fora are pretty risky environments. So see it as a reductio ad absurdum, to how stupid banning the possession and publishing of certain types of information really is, it implies these kind of things namely.

One invent a hamburger, make it as flavourless as possible, just some salt, little ketchup and pickles that really doesn’t taste like any thing at all. But that’s good, because then no one will really hate it. Then one launch a huge advertising campaign behind it and abacadabra, not only will people buy it, people’ll also magically believe it’s some how very high standard stuff. Of course, it has to be neutral and flavourless, you can’t have it that some porition of your target group finds the taste not to their very subjective liking. It’s called fashion-maffia, and it’s a viable tool in marketing.

So, let’s say one take an MP3 player, makes the design totally cl.. lacking in detail, just a plain white thing so featureless in design, so much lacking in any detail, that no one can possible find it a pain to the eyes. Then you launch a gigantic marketing campaign and you’ve some how made people believe that that featureless little thing devoid of any detail is ‘design’, by calling it clean, and every one swallows it, some evolutionary psychologists might say this is to do with people’s subconscious evolutionary desire to swallow the white cum of the alpha-male like Steve Jobs. I’d just keep it on human stupidity. And more so, people’ll start to believe it’s some how technically innovative.

No it isn’t, high end MP3 players used to be a niche market, but they were already there, they were targeted at technical geeks, not cool, stupid, brain dead people that crawl behind Steve Jobs. And iPod’s models aren’t very technical brilliant either. I’m not going to name any brands so the only way you can confirm this is just see if this exists (good exercise for the apple fanatics, to search) but what I’ve got for years has:

• 32 GB space (so 30 or some thing, but hey, it’s better than 28)
• SD card reader
• Microphone for memorecording
• FM radio
• Connects to any computer without the need to install software via a standard USB cable, the computer sees it as an external volume and you just copy your file to, or from the ‘Music’ directory. Keeps your file system-hiërarchy as it is.
• Plays videos, but not al lot of formats.
• Pictures
• Audio, but alas no FLAC or Ogg Vorbis
• Thinner than an iPod
• Smaller
• I’d call the sound a lot better
• A mantual hardware reset, you poke a paperclip into a hole and simply manually cut the power.

The equivalent iPod at that time had:

• The need to install iTunes for it
• Can only connect to one PC, you have to clean it out before you connect to another
• Pictures
• Videos
• And music of course
• 30.. 28 GB storage
• Why don’t iPods have a manual reset? If the OS is jammed a software reset is pretty useless, and it’s a common problem.
• Scratches, but only after a couple of hours, be patient.

And the iPod is more expensive, how? No, of course the iPod is more expensive, do you think advertisement is free? It adds to the production costs, but not to the quality of the product and Apple has to make it back some how…

Next on the line is the Macbook Air… you thought katana were lethal? Think again, this baby is so thin you probably need to own a weapon’s licence to take it to Starbucks because you’re so stylish you might kill people from agony. Naturally, hardware takes up volume. So you can kiss your DVD Drive and eighty per cent of all the things that came into computers since 1994 goodbye. It does have a whopping one USB port… damned, you can connect your CD Drive externally to it, kind of defeats the purpose of looking lethally stylish in Starbucks. But shit, you have to have your iPod on display to connected to it, what do you do then? You can’t double-front that USB port, so you have to bring in a hub to Sandwitch her. Oh basted curses… then you have three appliances already with wires between them where normal, not stylish people had one. It’s like a corset; oh: mouse.

And the iPhone, oh dear. The revolutionary most feature-rich phone one the planet, this pH-one will burn on the retinae of all your cool friends as the epitome of style. And indeed, it’s the one of the most feature-rich phone around I’d reckon, and expensive mobile phones are for cool kids remember? Except that if you simply call it a PDA; it’s the lousiest most over-expensive shit PDA around that only recently could copy-paste… it doesn’t even have an expandible keyboard. My mother has a better PDA she never uses and just got for her work, she’s profoundly technically illiterate. It’s not revolutionary, they just call a bad PDA a phone and wash it into their trademark ‘design’ and the fashionably stupid elite just goes for it like bees go for nuclear power plants. Because PDA’s are utterly nerdy and for geeks but expensive phones are stylish business for some reason.

It’s every where, even the layout of this blog has recently been updated to featureless white. Oh mother of all gods… Apple’s entire marketing technique seems to be based on trying to get once-geeky stuff to the masses under a different name and make them believe it’s 1: revolutionary and 2: ‘design’. I’d take Alienware design over this Britney McOscars shit any day. That’s true design, it has features and as any proper art it will displease a lot of people, if clearly go in a direction with your design, a lot of people aren’t going to like it. I don’t consider a flame on my eyes, they’re just… uninterestingly-looking. Throw a shitload advertising campaign behind it and you’ve created fashion.

Salvaged forum post:
——————————————

Okay, one of the things people need to realize is what a DVD really is. Or any thing like a CD or whatever.

It’s a formula a computer reads in which tells the computer how to generate the anime. The anime itself is light coming from your screen okay? Same with music, music is vibration in the air; a CD is simply a formula which tells your player how to generate that air vibration.

Of course, shit can’t come from nothing, so what does your computer use as raw resources to construct it? Power, yap, power. Power you simply pay your bill for.

So what’s happening is the equivalent of this:

- You find a recipe on the internet for some kind of expensive type of bread.
- You use that recipe to make that bread from your own resources. For personal use.
- You don’t buy the bread any more at the exclusive store.

And tell me, does any one here frown upon people that don’t go to McDonald but make their own McWhatever rom some recipe they found on the internet. Or have a machine that can do it based on that recipe? Because it’s almost machine like in McDonalds. Especially if all McDonald’s really did was just sell you the recipe to your machine and expect you to make it according to that?

Because concerts are the equivalent of going out to eat in McDonald’s. The Equivalent of buying a CD is buying a recipe from McDonald’s and have some machine that makes the food from it from your own resources.

Al right, I stumbled upon some utterly gay lyrics, durably archived here, extremely cliché and strange to think that this is Christian rock, it did made me wonder however…

It’s often asserted to be so that peers influence children and parents know better what’s good for children, but it’s still so that:

• Parents are from a different age-group.
• Parents are not to be chosen, friends are.
• Parents have power over children, friends do not.

From this data alone, it’s quite reasonable to assume that indeed, friends of teenagers do know those teenagers a lot better than their respective parents. From this data it would be extremely exceptional for a parent to know better what is good for a child than a friend of that child. But parents are adults, and adults shape the rules, shape the moral. And from assertion they can put for that parents know better, as they are in the position to put forth.

Parents seem to often think with sublime confidence that they have the fullest grasp of what is good for their children, from assertion, not from arguments. Sure, they’ve known their children their whole lives. But that’s hardly a significant factor in human personality if you simply do not match. After all, the children have known the parents for an equal amount of time. Also, I fail to see how a more advanced age really puts one in an advantage in these matters. Aren’t children less rusted in ideas, more able to adapt their mind, more flexible, more open to new ideas?

When such a situation as in those lyrics could be put forth. I’m actually not surprise that the first person might be right as stupid and selling-material those lyrics are. Friends most likely know their friends better than their parents do. What teenager after all tells parents the intimate details friends get to hear? But adults make the rules so they give themselves the power and spread propaganda that parents know best. Propaganda spread by parents… Stalin incarnate.

That different parents seem to come with vastly different ideas of similar children but their peers’ ideas are more homogeneous should probably be an indication of at least the lack of professionalism in the parents’ ‘expert opinion’ over that of peers… the essential rule, if expert opinions diverge a lot, they are hardly a manifestion of expertise.

It was a glorios day for the empire, a magnificent debate about abortion, again. Kind of ridiculously trite and overdone, and I saw the light when I made my argument which no one responed to:

If children under three years old generally do not pass the mirror test, show no sign of empathy, can’t solve maths problem, can’t speak, show no indication of the ability to process cognitive language or possess any other quality which supposedly makes humans sentient and other animals not? Why is it then allowed to butcher a pig for supper but not kill a two year old child. No let alone an embryo whose nervous system has yet to develop?

It’s probably one of the most unconventional arguments against abortion I’ve ever seen, also one of the most stigmatic and inapropriate ones as it sanctions the killing of babies, effectively. However it did make me see that in all those trite debates about the same subject, people always use the same arguments over and over while there exist countless more which are just as powerful, if not more. For instance the topic of euthanesia, often the people against it say that only God decide when life ends. No one ever says back ‘You have death penalty in your country, shut up.’, it’s not only a lot simpler than the ethical debats about suffering. It’s also a lot more powerful, one brings the oponent on the knees. Use said’s own words against itself. There is no escape, Bush is in favour of death penalty and says that only God may decide when life ends, it’s quite simple to assert that he doesn’t quite practice what he preaches.

Are even ideological debates the domain of boundless peer pressure then. Not only the pressure to believe certain things, but also the pressure to use certain arguments? Repeating an argument does not strengthen it, reading an unusual argument is all but the excitement of it.

So I stumbled across this and I shall cite out the relevant parts before ‘anybody’ edits them out, that means this post is licenced under the GNU Free Documentation Licence, oohhh.

Nostalgia for communism aside, I was reading that, my interest was dropping before the end of the former paragraph, but when I hit the bottom it turned to disgust for the ignorance of man:

Teonaht, winner of the 2007 Smiley Award, is a highly elaborated language, and many consider it one of the finest examples of an artistic language since the works of J.R.R. Tolkien. It is often cited, like Verdurian, as an example of the genre in articles on the world of Internet-hosted amateur conlanging.

It even has ‘reliable sources’ that claim that. These very reliable sources are:

1. A dead link (reliable, a dead link tells no tales)
2. Los Angeles Times
3. A blog (less reliable than this one, still reliable)
4. Some site from a ’smily award’ which seems to be webmastered and maintained by one person, very badly. Either knows how to work with .htaccess files and does it the wrong way, or lives in a conworld where they haven’t invented PHP yet, I’d go for the latter if you see the structural garbage in the source. Also, this one person doesn’t really know a lot about linguistics.

All right kids, who ever has been telling you that Tolkiens languages were brilliant was either trying to fool you, or lying. It happens every-where with journalism. Stephen Hawking said it right when journalists compared him to Einstein, he said that they didn’t understand his work, or Einstein’s, same case, people who don’t know crap but ‘report’ think Einsten is the greatest physicist ever because they have to. You have to say it, Tolkien’s languages, like this ‘Teonaht’ are an amateuristic attempt at conlanging, child’s attempt. The typical ‘I have constructed yet another member of the Indo-European language family’ effort. The five biggest languages in the world per terms of native speakers are Mandarin Chinese, Arabic, English, Spanish, and Khari Boli (I’m not going to call those four different languages), the first two aren’t Indo-European (IE), but in the west you never get to know them. The last three are but the last one has a grammar which will sound to most ignorant English speakers as coming from another universe compared to Teonaht, and that’s still the same language family. Imagine a completely different language family, and that’s the point Caves surely couldn’t. It’s trite and inspirationless how kids make languages, I agree with that smily award person that in art, rules are best ignored, not broken per se, just ignored, however he’s so blind that he picks about small things which indeed stem of ignorance of linguistics, not of rules, and fails to notice that Caves wasn’t ignorant of the ‘rules’ enough to make yet another language which is almost perfectly an IE language. If people found some scriptures in that language today and had no idea where it came from. Linguists would shout IE at first glance and later on realize there are some complications with that idea.

The seed for Teonaht was planted when Caves received her first kitten at the age of five. The gift soon inspired her to imagine a race of winged cats which she called “the Feleonim”. She began to create the Teonaht language for these cats at the age of nine, while she was beginning to learn Spanish. She was delighted to learn that adjectives follow nouns in Spanish, unlike in English, and made this the first rule of grammar in her language. Caves was further inspired when she read about Tolkien and his “secret vice” in her teens. The language developed further as Caves grew to adulthood and learned more languages. In the late 1980s she subjected her language to much clinical grammatical analysis, and developed such features as the “Law of Detachment” and the use of the zero-copula. The Teonim developed into their present human form, but maintained their feline deities.

Caves continued to keep her language a secret as she grew up, even after she began writing science fiction and teaching. In the 1990s, however, with the advent of the Internet, she hosted a webpage on the language and joined the CONLANG message group. The language took off there and has year by year held the interest of online conlangers and conlang aficionados.

Aside from Spanish, Teonaht has been influenced by the other languages Caves has studied-French, German, Old English, Old Norse, Old French, Latin, Middle Welsh, and Old Irish.

This is not how you design a language okay. This is how one seriously makes languages step by step:

1: I design the concept in my head without writing things down still, deciding first the syntax I will use to convey meaning, yeah, that’s right.. the majority of the languages I have made don’t work with ’subjects’, ‘objects’ or and ‘verbs’, don’t have ‘adjectives’, I don’t pick my ‘morphosyntactic alignment’ from a list of documented cases, I come up with a system which replaces the function of a morphosyntatic alignment, it couldn’t be evolved on earth, but hey, I break the rules. The most important part of this process is how it’s going to convey semantics, via what system I’m going to express meaning, I’m currently actually making a conlang which’ description has a ten page part by which it starts which trains the mind of people to use the semantical vesses the language has in an idiomatic way. I don’t give tables which translate pronouns and præpositions, I don’t have them in this language, if you ever want to learn it when it’s finished, you first go through ten pages which explain to you without even using an alien word, just English how the language should be best viewed. Some details about this grammatical structure where it differs from IE languages:

• It doesn’t have what I call construction to ‘identify’ concepts, it cannot assign a fixed name to entities, concepts like ‘car’, ‘tree’ et cetera do not exist, it has a very refined structure to ‘describe’ concepts. The language is thus completely fullproof against the common fallacy that people don’t realize that they talk in different definitions which they identify with the same word, happens more often than you think.
• It does not have a concept of ‘person’, though it’s best to see all simple sentences as third person, it’s vastly more complicated than that in the end.
• Naturally it doesn’t have such classes as nouns and verbs as they identify objects and actions respectively.
• The only closed classes are derivations in fact, what defines a derivation in this language in that the class it belongs to is closed.
• It of course doesn’t have a morphosyntactic alignment in the strictest sense, the notion of ’subject’ and ‘verb’ is very vague.
• Japanese has a distinction between topic and subject, well, this has a distinction between topic and perspective, I have no such as ’subject’
• No grammatical number, it doesn’t mean that words don’t change form with ‘plural’, it means there is no such and that if you speak the language you’re not going to notice, nor care about it as it’s irrelevant in the grammar.

What do languages do? They convey meaning, how do they tend to do that? With nominals and verbals? Pretty trite no? to keep conveying meaning with ‘object x performs action y on object z’, there is a postulation of the ‘inhærent’ genetic property of man to utilize these means if languages evolve on their own from dust. But it doesn’t take a brain to see it can also be another way, take a the languages by which you tell your computer what you want, you describe the layout of a page in HTML, doesn’t have nouns and verbs now does it? Could you describe a meaning with a similar syntax? My language has nothing to do with HTML by the way and neither is it that strict, sentences are actually quite ambiguous in my language, but just to give you an insight into the options.

2: All right, once I’ve made that, I will be making the phonology. That doesn’t mean I’m going to make any words, that’s means I’m going to set out the rules on how syllables may be formed in a language and how they behave next to each other. What many people don’t realize is that there is a difference between phonetic and phonemic, the former being how the sound strictly sounds, the latter how it mentally sounds in your mind. Point is that ‘phonemes’ in a language tend to have a very different ‘phonetic realization’ in different contexts, and this differs per language. I’m sure you’ve seen those nice ‘kh’ things appear in Indian transcripts, to most westerners, it just looks fashionable, to Indians it’s an essential part because they differentiate between ‘k’ and ‘kh’, these two sounds properly called the voiceless velar plosive and the aspirated voiceless velar plosive are actually in the same phoneme in English, skirt uses the former, king the latter, if you listen closely you notice. This is more systematic than you might think, in English aspiration isn’t phonemic in all plosives and it all behaves like that, steer is not aspirated, torn is. Also, why in plosives voicing is phonemic in English, (t/d are a different phoneme), voicing isn’t phonemic in fricatives (f,z,s,v,th), most English speakers fail to realize for instance that the ’s’ in ‘was’ is a ‘z’ in disguise, and that the difference between the noun ‘house’ and the verb ‘house’ is actually that like in most English verbs the fricative at the end is suddenly voiced, it’s written often with f/v, but not s/z. Funilly enough, Koreans do distinguish aspiration, but never voicing. So English people who aspirate the ‘k’ in ‘king’ aren’t understood in Korean, but just saying ‘gim’ there solves the problem as they don’t notice you voice it, and the ‘g’ isn’t realized as an aspirate in that context. Semetic languages often don’t distinguish between stops and fricatives to make matters worse, b/v, are the same phoneme there, and p/f is different. This sounds absurd to most English speakers, but you hear it in the conlang that they haven’t given it a single though, because the phonetics of those conlangs are always identical to English.

The art of making phonetics isn’t even to just go all mathy and technical about it, you design it in your head, and then you write it down in technical language so other people who want to get an idea can read it. There are few languages which have no allophony as this is called, and it only works if the phonetic nature of the language allows it which must be very simple. A language simply doesn’t work if you don’t have this fixed, of course you can just borrow the allophony of English and it’s going to be okay? And you can’t just randomly make sounds allophonic with each other, it’ll never work, you have to know what you are doing.

3: If you’ve done that, then you can go making your grammar hard, the reason that you first have to do phonemics is that you have to know if when you actually work out the details of your grammar like word order if it’s all going to be feasible with your phonemics. Word order is a detail, it’s the only real thing in which English and French differ grammatically, the same langauge family remember? Indo-European? Flipping adjectives and nouns around isn’t that much a concern, and that you have to see another language that does it before coming up with some-thing like that? Don’t care how young she was, I did it better than she does now when I was five. This is the part when you also give phonetic—or by now phonemic as the rest solves itself if you’ve done step 2 correctly—form to the closed classes of your language. The inflexions, the reason that you do this only now is that you don’t know what closed classes you’re going to have up until this point exactly.

4: The last part is to fill in the open classes, the classes of which it’s impossible to count how many words there are in and easily gain new ones. Like verbs and nouns in English, articles, pronouns and præpositions are closed.

Complete idiots like Tolkien tend to do this the wrong way around, first make the words because they’re noob and have AIDS, then think about what futile little shit they will invent on grammar like ‘Ohhh, my verbs can be conjugated to show the person of the object’. As for a grammatical on a sentence in my language:

opaque{internal | affected} gruesome{classifier | affected} {perspective} black{affected} rubbish{proximal | affecting } {topic} absurd{affecting} {towards} {affected copula} disgusting{internal | affected}

Lord of the Rings, the single most overrated piece of homosexuality-inducing, Jew-pardoning, genitive-killing rubbish that every-one just holds in esteem because they have to. This happens a lot with ‘art critics’ but this is the most spiraled-out-of-control example I have yet to live on the same planet with. It’s a children’s book, nothing more, it’s a fairy tail, it was written with children in mind, it was marketed towards children, it addresses themes children like, it has a weak story line sans any depth so children get it and it instructs children to live their live according to good ol’ family values like friendship, selflessness, bravery. Oh, the good guys win? So, to prove this to the outbreak of Varg-hippie ‘tr00, hey look at me, I’m so trying to fit into the black metal scene of indivuality’ I shall compare this piece of crap as subjectively as I possibly can to the story of a game in a remotely similar setting. Diablo II by Blizzard North, the definition of proper hack and slash ‘RPG’, (this is not an RPG because you don’t role-pay, no idea why these games are called ‘role playing games’), you just walk around and slay monsters with names like ‘Soulless devourer the ghoul void’, but it’s fun.

All right, the story line of Diablo II is not there for itself, it’s to make a background, it’s not the main attraction of the game. But due to the uncanny resourcefulness of Chris Metzen—at least in those days— even this side-element of it is countlessly superior to Lord of the Rings, and thereinso because of these reasons:

All right, who is the narrator of Diablo II, it starts with a cinematic, the narrator is a man named ‘Marius’ we soon learn who tells a story to some-one in which the player is a character. What is Marius? A balding old fragile human, he’s not even an anti-hero, he isn’t a hero at all, he’s a confused man who’s trying to save his own life, like all of us, do these characters have any role in Lord of the Rings? also, the player is the main character of the story. But the narrator who tells the story actually never meets the player, and Marius isn’t that important to the player, the player doesn’t even know of the existence of Marius. What you see as the player fills in the story Marius tells, or the reverse? But both characters do influence each other. This type of technique isn’t revolutionary, and Blizzard hasn’t invented it, but it’s a technique not suited for children, any story which requires the slightest amount of brain power to puzzle things out isn’t, Lord of the Rings is for mental retards or unchallenged minds with the same mental age.

Okay, the style of the plot, Lord of the Rings is compromised of larger than life characters, cheesy moments, glorious battles too brilliant to be real, this is a genre of literature called ‘the epica’, believe it or not, it’s Latinized Greek for some-thing like ‘the tops’, loses every-thing in the translation. I remember this just being called ‘cheesy’ in any setting that doesn’t involve elves, dwarves, calves,  wolves and all other things we now like to pluralize with a ‘v’ some-where. Diablo II doesn’t have larger than life characters, even the Archangel Tyriel is a pretty grumpy man, probably the only character that is larger than life is Tal Rasha, and he dies, ahaha. Tal Rasha dies, yes, the story is of course improbable, but it’s not improbably positive, shit happens all the time. Baal escapes, it ends on a bad ending which leaves open questions, and even if the expansion does correct a few things, it still ends with a ‘what’s going to happen now?’

All right nexton is character personality. I have to come back on a statement I always made about Lord of the Rings that the characters are one-dimensional, they aren’t. They are tri-punctual. I used to think all characters lie on one line from good to evil and none has any mixed qualities or evades any stereotype, but that’s too generous for this piece of artistic Auschwitz. There are no less, no more than three personalities spread over countless bodies, there is evil, good, and Gollum. Gollum the rebel who has his own style you know? These characters are completely faceless plot devices who have no development what so ever, they aren’t characters, they are robots with appearance, it’s completely predictable what they would do were you to give them a situation. And any character from that rank woul do the same in that situation in any plot related element, sacrifice yourself for your friends? Why not, we all do it. Double cross, torture, be evil? We all do it. Talk funny? I do it all. Even the most inimportant NPC’s in Diablo II had more personality crafted for them than fucking Frodo.

Kind of like the idea of multiculturalism, this is for a very simple reason.

Dutch food sucks.

Let me introduce you to the finest intricacies of Dutch cuisine:

Aardappelen met Vlees en Groente:

This quite literaly translates to ‘Patatoes with meat and vegitables’, our naming convention is as creative as our kitchen. If you think this is just præpairing vegitibles, meat and patatoes and putting them on a plate together, you are correct. If you were to ask if any of this has but any seasoning, I am inclined to answer with a negative. A meal fit for a Jewish king in Auswitch, next:

Boerenkool met Worst:

Translates to ‘Farmer’s Cabbage with Sausage’, this is just destroying some cabbage to a pulp with some kind of squashing device and then putting a sausage next to it which may optionally, like here,  resemble together some kind of wretched phallic symbol. More often than not, the sausage is just laid next to it. If you were to ask a patriot here if this has but any taste you would get some-thing like ‘Taste in food? How dare you, this is treason to Her Majesty, The Queen, Beatrix of the Netherlands, go away to your own country if you want to eat the derangedness of food which has taste…’, next on we have:

If you at this point realized that Dutch food is mostly just lumping various articles extracted from nature together which you’ve heated on one plate with no internal cohesion or thought, then you have paid attention. This fine abomination here is another traditional Dutch dish. Now, compare to a random dish brought into this country by some children of Attatürk:

Döner Kebab:

Or

Hot Pot, from China:

Roti, from Suriname:

I should add that Surinamese Roti is a bit different from the Hindustani one often appreciated in the Anglician world.

I think I’ve made my point quite adequately, and if some Imam does not want to shake the hand of a woman, who cares, I don’t shake hands at all and every-one forgives me because I don’t wear a beard and a turban.

So, I was at station Amsterdam Bijlmer lately, you know, the part of Amsterdam were aëroplanes crash on low-paid nigger-immigrant escaped-convicts. It has a station which serves as a transit for buses, tubes and trains. Our trains are better than British trains I’ll tell you that, children and low-paid nigger-immigrants go at half price, that includes me on the days I earn little. I was using the bus however there and took a transit to another bus, again full price as it’s in the weekends and my public transport card which I get for free for failing exams at the university doesn’t cover that—else it would be free.

So, naturally you have to wait a while in the cold, which is free as well. I forgot to mention at some point that plane crashes here are not only free, but you can actually get money from them if you play it well. So this random niggerless clearly homeless guy with a bad state of dental health came to me and asked for money, I gave him 10 EUR to which he proceeded to look amazed, most people give 1 EUR or some-thing, some half a euro, and some maybe two. Ten euros is quite an extremely generous donation for some-one who’ll spend it on drugs or plane crashes any-way.

But there were a lot of other people there, so why did this homo pentadens pick me out here, and, indeed get a lot more than would he pick others out. In fact, this happens all the time to me that they pick me out, they have extravagant senses it seems, I never have cash when I come back from pentadental hubs.

I don’t look extremely ‘friendly’, it was cold so I was wearing a long coat, some of my best friends have remarked that they’d be freaked out seeing some-one in that long coat if they didn’t know it was I.

So the answer is obviously that all pentadents are extraterestials who use this as a disguise to monitor our activity for the Obsidian Order.

Seriously. Jewel cases are a joke, a joke, nothing more, a cheap business decision of labels, the end. Mass produced, impersonal ready-made packaging. Just print some inlays in standard format, and people still complain about CDr’s… at least they’re almost as good as the original for a lot cheaper. But jewel cases.. then you’re really just cutting costs to get a lot less, probably man-hours too, jewel cases can be easily ordered by some mass-production company, pressed CD’s in them, little booklet in them which offer you little choice. The difference:

In the custom cardboard fold, the artists probably had some creative input themselves, the jewel case next to it is by some Dutch band, you are a disgrace to het vaderland you hear me? And people complain about Moroccans in this country when there are still black metal outlets who style all they make in Dutch, except their promptly Scandinavian name ‘Öde’, which is probably a leftover from some cheap arse Scandinavian-fanboyism phase ‘Vinterriket’-style.. yeah… your Norwegian name ain’t lookin’ so hot now when you have to evade questions from interviewers eh? I own a lot from Vinterriket by the way in—indeed—jewel cases…

And come on, the day two weeks have passed by in which I have not received a jewel case that was damaged by mail I’ll eat my e-peen, it’s hard plastic, it’s not durable, it’s not designed to be first dumped into a box with all the other packages, then driven in a bag over the country to some airport, then endure turbulence in a plane and than the whole story in reverse, regardless how many bubble wrap. They are designed to be bought at records stores, gently being lifted out of the rack with your manipulative digits and carefully taken home to be stacked in your CD tower. They’re pussies, they can’t handle some rough usages, totally un-black metal ya know whattem sayin’? We all know black metal chicks are masochists who can take a beating, not these sluts. They weren’t designed to be ordered per mail order in the first place. I’ve long given up keeping them in good state, I’ll just replace them when it gets too bad because you can, that’s the beauty of mass-made impersonal shit though.

Stop the fucking jewel cases, they are a disgrace to your music and a fine example of how the ‘black metal scene’—regardless of how obscure you might be, like De Tenetrarum Principio (Correct Latin grammar though, no way), Insinkt, and Total Holocaust Records—in the end still has evolved from a bunch of beer drinking savage metallers who came from some Beatles-listening pop music swine. A lot of these bands still list the contributing members based on what instrument they play… Jesus Christ. That many times I have simply not bought some-thing because of the thought ’sight.. again a jewel case, grow up.’, this problem seems to be solely a problem of the ‘black metal scene’ luckily.. well and all other forms of cheap arse pop music… my Kwoon CD is also in a jewel case but those I’ll just forgive. But the pain of that my entire Trancelike Void, Trist, Vinterriket, and what-not collection came in some-thing made of hard plastic laden with cracks, had some cracks when I opened the package in no small amount of the items. Take an example of Cyclic Law, all releases in custom made carboard folds, or that one release I just pre-ordered from Like Drone Razors Through Flesh Sphere, they’re pretty secretive about how it will look, but it’s 20 ltd. and all items are hand-crafted by the master himself and from what they do tell us it will look pretty elaborate. Takes some man-hours indeed. Take some dignity and respect for your music and say no to jewel cases. ‘black metal labels’ are usually pretty strange any-way.