My Blog

Controlling Your Public Apearance - Apophenia

lux — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 18:13:51 GMT

From the Apophenia Blog: http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2007/09/07/controlling_you.html In the last month, I've received almost a dozen panicked emails from people who had commented on my blog at one point or another and were horrified to find that their comment was at the top of Google's search for their name. In each case, I have respectfully altered the comment to an anonymous name. I prefer not to remove these comments because this leaves holes in my blog, especially when others' comments are based on those earlier comments. Unfortunately, most of these people do not understand how Google's cache works and write back in rage that it's not fixed. I politely try to inform them that Google's cache can take months to update and I cannot do anything to speed this up. When people bitch about MySpace and Facebook being walled gardens, one of the positive things that I offer in return is, "at least those teens' profiles aren't in Google's cache." With Facebook's opt-out decision, this is no longer the case. As I mentioned yesterday, I'm a bit terrified of what this might mean long-term. As a teenager, I was petrified of my mother finding my Usenet posts. It's not that I said much on Usenet that would've upset her (although the Bad Religion tirades are a wee bit embarrassing), but I didn't want her to see my political or topical commentaries. (Sidenote: I left the sexuality exploration discussions for IRC which ::crossing fingers:: weren't recorded.) I used various handles, most of which are not findable by anyone other than my brother (and even he can't find all of them). That's not to say that there's not a lot of embarrassing material online - I've been blogging for over ten years and I've definitely posted things that would be drudged up if I were to run for office. The best thing about being an active blogger is that stuff gets buried by repetitive blogging. My new stuff goes to the top of the search engines, my old stuff fades away. And we have a name for anyone who goes out of their way to find that old stuff: stalker. And we don't really wanna work for, date, or befriend genuine stalkers. If it's public, but not easy to find, it's creepy that you went out of your way to find it. (I'm fascinated by the creeps... and journalists... who go through courthouses and other public records places to drudge up tax records, legal motions, housing details, etc. It's all public, but c'mon now...) We've all heard that privacy is dead, but you can still control your public appearance and it's really critical that you start doing so. Don't whimper about how Google is destroying your reputation. Take control! So here are some suggestions, for adults and teenagers: * Create a public Internet identity. I strongly recommend blogging, but even a homepage will do. Have a genuine all-accessible identity online that you're cool with grandma and your boss reading. Don't make it uber drab, but do provide context for who you are, what you do, what you're passionate about, etc. Think of it as a digital body and dress it up as if it were going into a job interview. Blogging is especially good because you can keep updating your identity over time in a way that shows that you think. It's much easier to get a sense of someone through their commentary on public affairs or life around them than through a static page. * Say NO! to Facebook's public search option. Click "privacy" - "search." Under "Who can find my public search listing outside of Facebook?" uncheck both boxes. Be proactive about this. You might not think you care now, but having your Facebook profile at the top of a search for your name might not be what you want when you're looking for a job. * Expect unexpected audiences. Your profile on Facebook and MySpace might be "private" but when you join the Los Angeles Network or when you accept someone who knows someone, you might find that the audience viewing your profile is not who you expected. Are you prepared for this? Make sure that profile says what you want it to say, even to those you don't expect. If you want to be a porn diva and make it in Hollywood, put up that slutty photo, but if you want to be a lawyer, you might regret that photo a few years from now. Of course, I'm sure there are porn stars who later became lawyers, just like there are actors who became governors. * Write blog comments as though you're writing your own blog. The more popular a blog, the more likely the comments from that blog are to show up high on Google's lists. If you write inflammatory shit on those blogs just to piss people off, it will come back to haunt you. (It depresses me that a huge chunk of the comments on BoingBoing's new comment system are extremely negative.) Personally, I don't think that you should be anonymous on a blog. I think that you should stand by your name, but write articulately. And blog on your own blog so that the comments are not at the top. * Treat video and audio just like text. Right now, video and audio aren't searchable, but they will be. Don't think that you can say or do anything you want on a video and it will never come up. That Neo-Nazi video you made and put up on YouTube cuz you thought it was funny will eventually be searchable and associated with your name. Are you really ready for that to appear at the top of a Google ego search? (If you have other suggestions, add them to the comments.) But above all else, seriously, create a public Internet identity, maintain it, link to it, build it, love it, hug it, and call it George. I can't tell you how important this is. I used to say that a LinkedIn profile would do, but now that they're so locked down to people who don't pay, they don't provide that value any more. If you don't want to go through the hassle of registering a domain and figuring out HTML, just make a Blogspot account and make the Title your name. But keep it up-to-date so that when people want to look up who you are, they're going to see that page and go, "wow, she's really interesting." Yesterday, I was talking about this uber smart college frosh to one of my colleagues. His name is about as generic as it gets and he shares it with a few celebs - "Sam Jackson" - so I wasn't expecting much when I threw his name into Google. Much to my pleasure, his college blog comes up as #4 on Google. Here is a newly minted college freshman who put together a blog about applying to college when he was in high school, has commented on others' blogs in an articulate and engaging manner, and is genuinely actively engaged in thinking about the world around him. He's attracted the attention of all sorts of folks and I have no doubt that people who wish to hire him (or admit him) have looked at this blog to get a sense of who he is. He makes it clear that he understands this medium and how to present himself accordingly. Hell, I intend to hire him precisely because he gets it. Carefully crafting and cautiously managing one's public image is a critical aspect of living in a mediated public world. Every advice column I've read warns people of the dangers of living online. I think that this is idiotic. People need to embrace the world we live in and learn to work within its framework. Don't panic about being public - embrace it and handle it with elegance. [PS: I've said a lot of this before in the Harvard Business Review.]

Stephen Colbert on the vigilent US border patrol

lux — Thu, 23 Aug 2007 23:00:31 GMT

The Colbert Report does a bit on the Canadian psychiatrist who was permanently barred from entering the US because he took LSD in 1975 and wrote academic articles about it. http://www.ifilm.com/episode/22227 This is absolutely brilliant.

Tony Wilson, RIP

lux — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 22:44:12 GMT

Tony Wilson, founder of Factory Records and co-ownder of the Hacienda in Manchester, died at age 57. http://www.slate.com/id/2172341/nav/tap3/ Thanks for the good times, Tony.

Talking about Controlled Substances Online

lux — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 19:40:49 GMT

"People think that Web sites are more private than they are. This is just another tool for us to use." - Sheboygan County District Attorney Joe DeCecco, after prosecuting a myspace user who posted cannabis pictures to his profile Some things to keep in mind: Tribe.net is an open forum. Almost all messages are currently viewable to anyone with an internet connection, with or without a subscription to Tribe. Tribe.net is Google indexed and searchable. Look at this link: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=n0Z&q=buy+dmt+site%3Atribe.net&btnG=Search Anonymous profiles provide only a thin layer of security. Any law enforcement official who was seriously interested in finding out who you are would probably be able to do it in relatively short order. What risks are you inviting other people to take? For example, if you post a topic saying "Please help me find ketamine in Dallas" and someone replies, they may well be technically guilty of committing a criminal conspiracy. Publicizing good vendor sites draws attention to them. "What's the worst that could happen? No one's going to search my apartment for talking about having smoked a joint." Probably not. Of course, people talking about manufacture or supply are much more likely to be at risk. http://www.fultonsun.com/articles/2007/01/18/news/347news01.txt http://www.techaddress.com/2007/03/15/wis-teen-busted-for-posting-pot-pics-on-myspace/ Law enforcement is primarily interested in learning about networks of supply and manufacture. They may not be interested in your personal use, but it gives data points that may be traced along the network. Speaking casually in a public forum about illegal behavior encourages bad practices. People begin to take it for granted that you can talk about whatever, whenever. Suggested Principles: 1) NEVER EVER EVER provide identifying information about ANYONE ELSE'S sensitive behavior. If you want to take risks for yourself, that's your right, but you do NOT have the right to jeopardize other people. 2) Always speak in the general, e.g. "I was reading an extraction tek and I didn't understand the last step" is much better than "Help! I can't get the crystals to precipitate!" 3) Speaking of that friend of yours only goes so far. Would any reasonable person have any doubt about what you were saying? 4) Always (correctly) assume that you're speaking in a crowded room, that your posts are not ever going away, and that they could be traced to you.

the DEA and Medical Marijuana

lux — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:35:46 GMT

On the same day that the House voted on an amendment to block the Justice Department from raiding medical marijana dispensaries, DEA agents served warrants on 10 dispensaries in Los Angeles. House Vote: http://www.mpp.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=glKZLeMQIsG&b=1157875&ct=4203359 The raids also happened to coincide with an LA City Council meeting discussing a moratorium on licensing new dispensaries: http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Jul25/0,4670,MedicalMarijuana,00.html DEA spokesperson Sarah Pullen said the timing of the bust and the city's action was "purely coincidental." Seems pretty clear to me that there's a conflict of authority going on here, with state and federal legislation conflicting with DOJ policy. The DEA is responding by asserting its authority in a predictably cop-like fashion - that is, with the belligerent exercise of force. In related news, the DOJ's own judge complains that NIDA will not provide marijuana to FDA-approved studies. So much for NIDA's neutrality regarding policy. http://www.aclu.org/drugpolicy/medmarijuana/30942prs20070725.html

The Silver Apples of the Moon

lux — Mon, 21 May 2007 03:57:06 GMT

Though I am old with wandering through hollow lands and hilly lands, I will find out where she has gone, and kiss her lips and take her hands; And walk among long dappled grass, and pluck till times and times are done the silver apples of the moon, the golden apples of the sun. - William Butler Yeats

my new favorite experience report

lux — Wed, 09 May 2007 02:19:31 GMT

http://erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=8088

drugs vs. meditation

lux — Thu, 19 Apr 2007 06:02:24 GMT

I'm interested in similarities between psychedelics and meditation, but I've become wary of trying to compare them. It almost always ends with ecclesiastical pronouncements of the superiority of meditation, but in my view they're very different things and are hard to compare. Are the insights derrived from reading a book of greater value than the insights gained through watching a movie? It depends, on the person and the movie and the book and the insight. I've seen movies that have changed my entire life. I've read books that have changed my entire life. Sure, there will be those who insist that books are better as a matter of principle. I can only shrug and say "whatever", and go back to my Scorsese film.

Erowid needs your help

lux — Wed, 18 Apr 2007 05:56:29 GMT

Since 1995, Erowid has worked to provide accurate, unbiased information on psychoactive plants and chemicals. Over 50,000 visitors stop by each day, from heads and college students to clinical toxicologists and drug counselors. Erowid’s choice to forego advertising revenue or a pay-for-access format in favor of a free-and-clear editorial voice makes it reliant on the generosity of its visitors. As a consequence, things can get tight for us at times. This is such a time. If Erowid is something that you believe in, or if it has been useful to you, please consider making a contribution so that we can continue providing access to fresh content that millions have come to rely on. And keep in mind that almost half of our annual funding comes from gifts of $50 or less. For details on how to contribute and what contributions support, please look below…. Thank you so much, Lux and the Erowid Crew ********************************************** We gratefully accept donations here: http://www.erowid.org/donations/donate.php?mid=69 Members can get our print newsletter, t-shirts, books, mugs, molecule jewelry or handblown glass molecules! ********************************************** Another way to support Erowid: Anything you buy through Amazon (including electronics, toys, DVDs, etc.) or ABEbooks can help us with our work. All you have to do is go through our shopping portal and Erowid receives a percentage of the purchase price. If you're buying a new iPod or computer that can really add up, but again, any contribution helps: http://www.erowid.org/donations/donate.php?mid=69 What your contribution helps support: Members and supporters help us maintain the site and generate new content. In the last few months some of our costs have included housekeeping chores like switching over to a new main server (100+ hours), and content generation, such as building new pages on pharmacology (100+ hours), placebos (6+ hours), and CIA projects involving LSD (100+ hrs). We have also given entire sections of the site a facelift in addition to working daily to keep up with a steady stream of submissions, questions, photographs, experience reports, book reviews, and corrections. Note about tax deductions: Erowid.org is recognized as a non-profit in the state of California, but is not currently a 501(c)3 organization (though we are in the midst of the application process!). Thus donations are currently not tax deductible. If you are interested in making a larger donation and would like to talk about funding conduits that are tax deductible, please contact us at donations@erowid.org.

from Aldous Huxley's Doors of Perception

lux — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 23:37:35 GMT

I am not so foolish as to equate what happens under the influence of mescalin or of any other drug, prepared or in the future preparable, with the realization of the end and ultimate purpose of human life: Enlightenment, the Beatific Vision. All I am suggesting is that the mescalin experience is what Catholic theologians call "a gratuitous grace," not necessary to salvation but potentially helpful and to be accepted thankfully, if made available. To be shaken out of the ruts of ordinary perception, to be shown for a few timeless hours the outer and the inner world, not as they appear to an animal obsessed with survival or to a human being obsessed with words and notions, but as they are apprehended, directly and unconditionally, by Mind at Large--this is an experience of inestimable value to everyone and especially to the intellectual. For the intellectual is by definition the man for whom, in Goethe's phrase, "the word is essentially fruitful."

Crazy Cloud

lux — Sun, 31 Dec 2006 06:37:51 GMT

why is it all so beautiful this fake dream this craziness why? - Ikkyu

we're in a bad situation

lux — Mon, 11 Dec 2006 19:26:23 GMT

from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/maia-szalavitz/cruel-and-unusual-25-yea_b_35781.html In a mind-boggling act of sadistic legal legal buck-passing (I can't bring myself to glorify it with the word "reasoning"), the Florida District Court of Appeals upheld a 25 year mandatory minimum sentence for a Florida man convicted of "drug trafficking" for possessing his own pain medication. Richard Paey is a wheelchair-bound father of three young children. He has no prior criminal record-- in fact, he's an Ivy League law school graduate. He has not one, but two extensively documented and excruciatingly painful chronic disorders: multiple sclerosis and chronic back pain due to an injury suffered in a car accident that was treated by a surgery that made matters worse. (This surgery was so egregiously misguided that TV exposes and numerous large malpractice judgments resulted). Paey has already been in prison for three long years. In prison-- a place not exactly known for medical kindness-- he has been given a morphine pump, which now daily gives him similar or higher doses of medication than he was convicted of possessing illegally. So why is he serving 25 years? Tipped off by a pharmacist ignorant of pain management, Florida authorities decided that the doses of painkillers he was receiving were so high that he had to be selling the drugs, not taking them. They found no evidence of this, however, even after putting him under surveillance for months. But they did manage to convince his New Jersey doctor-- who Paey claims authorized his prescriptions-- to testify that, in fact, Paey was forging them. The doctor was told that he would face a similarly lengthy prison sentence for trafficking if he'd authorized such high doses for a patient who had moved from New Jersey to Florida. (See here for why he had reason to fear, despite prescribing legitimately and appropriately). To add to the exquisite ironies of the case, the reason Paey qualified for such a lengthy sentence was due largely to his possession of acetaminophen (Tylenol), not opioids. Paey was taking pills that included acetaminophen and oxycodone-- but the state counted the weight of the acetaminophen towards the weight of illegal drugs when it determined the charges that led to his sentence. In upholding his sentence, the majority argued that it was not so "grossly disproportionate" as to be "cruel or unusual" under Florida's constitution. It is the legislature's role, they said, to determine the appropriate laws based on harm done by drugs to the community and prior case has law upheld lengthy mandatory minimums for drug crimes. Essentially, since Paey's sentence wasn't death or life without parole, it was OK, even though it was a nonviolent first offense committed by a person suffering extreme pain without evidence that he was actually planning on selling drugs. Paey's family-- who had been hoping he'd be home for Christmas-- will have to wait. The bottom line, for the majority, was that the law had been applied appropriately. Because the outcome was unjust in this particular case, Paey should seek clemency from the governor, not appellate court relief. Noting that the facts of the case "evoke sympathy" for Paey, they concluded that "Mr. Paey's argument about his sentences does not fall on deaf ears, but it falls on the wrong ears." The only glimmer of hope was the thundering dissent by Judge James Seals. He gave hypothetical examples of situations in which an innocent person could be similarly convicted of drug trafficking by dint of simple possession of large quantities of drugs. He then concluded: I suggest that it is cruel for a man with an undisputed medical need for a substantial amount of daily medication management to go to prison for twenty-five years for using self-help means to obtain and amply supply himself with the medicine he needed... I suggest that it is unusual, illogical, and unjust that Mr. Paey could conceivably go to prison for a longer stretch for peacefully but unlawfully purchasing 100 oxycodone pills from a pharmacist than had he robbed the pharmacist at knife point, stolen fifty oxycodone pills which he intended to sell to children waiting outside, and then stabbed the pharmacist... It is illogical, absurd, cruel, and unusual for the government to put Mr. Paey in prison for twenty-five years for foolishly and desperately pursuing his self-help solution to his medical management problems, and then go to prison only to find that the prison medical staff is prescribing the same or similar medication he had sought on the outside but could not legitimately obtain. That fact alone clearly proves what his intent for purchasing the drugs was. What a tragic irony. In a letter to the governor requesting clemency, Paey's attorney, John Flannery, wrote, "In more than thirty years of practice as an appellate law clerk in the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and a federal prosecutor and as a practicing appellate and trial lawyer, I have never seen an opinion such as this in which the Court agreed the sentence was wrong but could not agree on how to correct it." This is a sorry time for justice in America-- and an even sorrier time for the media, which continues to ignore the ongoing disgrace of our drug laws and their enforcement. (For more information and to help support Paey and others caught up in the war on pain doctors and their patients, visit the Pain Relief Network.)

Best Chick Track Parody EVER

lux — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 20:26:48 GMT

http://www.ishkur.com/articles/trancecracker.php An oldy but a goody.

LA Times: Cocaine Laws in Bad Shape

lux — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 18:12:00 GMT

Take another crack at that cocaine law http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-sterling13nov13,0,5109884,print.story By Eric E. Sterling, ERIC E. STERLING, president of the nonprofit Criminal Justice Policy Foundation in Silver Spring, Md., was counsel to the House Judiciary Committee, principally responsible for anti-drug legislation, November 13, 2006 ONE OF OUR MOST infamous contemporary laws is the 100-1 difference in sentencing between crack cocaine and powder cocaine. Under federal drug laws, prison sentences are usually tied to the quantity of drugs the defendant trafficked. For example, selling 5,000 grams of powder cocaine (about a briefcase full) gets a mandatory 10-year prison sentence, but so does selling only 50 grams of crack cocaine (the weight of a candy bar). Working for the House Judiciary Committee in 1986, I wrote the House bill that was the basis for that law. We made some terrible mistakes. Those mistakes, aggravated by the Justice Department's misuse of the penalties, have been a disaster. Conventional wisdom is that the 100-1 ratio needs to be repealed. But that's an inadequate fix. On Tuesday, the U.S. Sentencing Commission — the independent agency that gives sentencing guidelines to federal judges and advises Congress — will hold hearings on this issue. If logic prevails, in the next Congress we may finally see an end to one of the most unjust laws passed in recent memory. And that might correct the biggest mistake of my professional life. We still cling to 20-year-old ideas that crack is somehow uniquely harmful: It is instantly addictive; it makes you especially violent; it causes women to abandon their babies; the babies of crack users will be basket cases. None of these are true. Also, because crack is no longer a big news story, people mistakenly believe our anti-cocaine policy has worked. Not so. There is no scarcity of cocaine. Since 1986, the price of cocaine has fallen and the quality is better. Cocaine deaths have increased. The number of crack users is basically unchanged. Drug sentences are on the national agenda again because civil rights supporters are justifiably outraged that almost all federal crack prosecutions involve people of color. And indeed, for years no whites were prosecuted for crack offenses in many federal courts, including those in Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, Denver, Dallas or Boston. Because of that, the myth developed that Congress intended to punish blacks — believed to be the crack users — with long sentences and let the white powder cocaine sniffers of Hollywood and Wall Street get away with light sentences. But that's not the case. Congress was trying to remedy a problem it believed afflicted the black community. A second myth is that Congress chose a 100-1 ratio because it determined that crack was 100 times worse than powder cocaine. But the weights chosen (5 and 50 grams, versus 500 and 5,000 grams) weren't based on a comparison of the two drugs. Congress had no clear understanding of drug trafficking — or the metric system — and thought those weights indicated significant trafficking activity. In fact, tons (millions of grams) of cocaine are shipped to the U.S. by the leaders, organizers and financiers of the international drug trade. The law was flawed, but the Justice Department still could have used it to target high-level traffickers. But research from the U.S. Sentencing Commission shows that three-quarters of the federal cocaine defendants — powder and crack — are just neighborhood dealers or couriers. Congress should do what it tried to do in 1986 — make the Justice Department focus exclusively on high-level cases because state and local law enforcement cannot. There are three elements to fix the problem: Raise the quantity triggers for all drugs to realistic levels for high-level traffickers, such as 50 or 100 kilos of cocaine, and end the crack/powder imbalance; Require the attorney general to approve prosecution of any case involving less than 50 kilos of cocaine; Analyze federal drug cases district by district to identify agents and prosecutors who waste their time and our money. If only high-level dealers were being prosecuted by the feds, no one would have cause to complain about the race of the defendants. A promising sign is that a few months ago, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), a former U.S. attorney, introduced legislation to address the problem. Action on his bill is unlikely before Congress adjourns, but it had bipartisan support — a good sign that a political fix is viable. The 20-year-old mistake of tiny quantity triggers has distracted both the Justice Department from the proper cases and reformers from the proper fix. For a generation, anti-drug policy has been built on factual mistakes and tough-sounding rhetoric. The American people simply need an effective policy. Truly, that would be tough enough.

Revelation

lux — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:09:38 GMT

If in the beginning the Daime's power was revealed to me at once, I believe I could not have taken its force and the intensity of its beauty. Revelation only can come when we are ready for it. Sometimes we surround ourselves with beautiful things that dominate all the landscape, and we wait for celestial messangers to reveal the contents of an old manuscript while angels and cherubim play gold trumpets. We do not realize that the revelation is life itself, in the nature of God and in the alignment of our external reality without inner experience of the divine. Thus, we will not know truth until we lose the fear of knowing ourselves. - Alex Polari de Alverga