Thursday, February 23, 2006

The Only Abstinence Campaign That Will Ever Work

Abstinence makes sex better; the longer you wait, the better it will be.

It's true, and it will work.

Tuesday, February 21, 2006

RIAA Bullshit: Again

I heard that the RIAA's trying to pull some new shit.

In essence, their new plan is to secretly insert an inaudible frequency inside each song on a CD. This frequency will be unique to every CD they press.

It's an interesting idea and sounds rather scary. Because they would be able to track where each CD was sold, they could figure out where the original buyer of the pirated CD purchased it and narrow down the original distributor's IP by relating the two. However, consider the following.

1) The RIAA is still not a law enforcement agency. They still can't subpoena.
2) If you were listening to pirated music on an MP3 player, they can't sieze the device and check if the music is pirated.
3) They can't search your house for pirated CDs.
4) It's not illegal to have a burned copy of a CD. Because a burned CD is not necessarily pirated, they can't do shit about it.

Once again, the recording industry is a whale, the tides of time are changing, and it's been left ashore. A blubbery-ass beached whale, that's all they are.

(Notice how this, once again, devolved into an unintelligable tangent.)

Profile Worthy Conversations

This list will be amended with time.

Do Lusoc Culi: (btw, you wouldn't happen to know the integral of (sinx + cosx)/tanx would you?)
Do Lusoc Culi: brb
visus vastina: mmm damn made me think you little shit... x changes... so a full perimeter would be 2*Pi, sin
x and cos x are repeated, so sin x and cos x is 2*pi, under this tan x is pi, and so under algebraic
expression sin x + con x = tan x [2*Pi], Pi divided by Pi is Pi... reasonable answer would be 2*Pi, which is
also a valued perimeter
Do Lusoc Culi: back
Do Lusoc Culi: what?
Do Lusoc Culi: Pi/Pi doesn't equal Pi?
Do Lusoc Culi: And how could 2Pi be the answer if it isn't a definite integral?
visus vastina: do the maths man... 3.14/3.14=3.14
Do Lusoc Culi: hmm... calculator says 3.14/3.14 = 1

Monday, February 13, 2006

The Letter "E"

The letter "E" is a diminuitive. Of the vowels of the English language, it is the shittiest. The sound produced by "e" is always weak, or even silent.

If you've forgotten from phonics, vowels have two sounds. There's the long "e," which sounds like the "name" of the letter, and there's the short sound, in this case sounding like an "eh." Long "e" has a very whiny sound, say it aloud. Don't you feel whineeeeeee? Short "e" on the other hand is the "eh," sound, the sound someone makes when something exceeds their strength, and their effort fails. "Eh, I drop my books because I'm a weak ass."

Let's take a look at some words with the "e."

In the word "weak," it produces an onomatopoeia.

The name "Ernie" is the peak of whiny "e." "er" is another weak noise that "e" produces, and in conjunction with the long "e" at the end, it sounds like someone is crying every time they say the name. ERRRRnIEEEEEEEEEE.

"Weenie" is a word that also epitomes whine as well, but not quite like "Ernie." It is also an onomatopoeia.

There are exceptions to this rule, I admit it. For example, take the word "terminator." It begins with an "er" vowel sound. Notice, however, the conclusion with "or," a very ominous sound. The "ter," at the beginning, seems to be terminated by the "ator" at the end of the word. Awesome, huh?

What about the word awesome? It has an "e," yet is so awesome. It has two, infact. This brings up another sound the letter "e" makes, silence. Although it's the most used letter in the English language, most of the time, it doesn't even produce it's own sound. It just changes the sounds of other vowels. The "e's" in "awesome" do not even produce sounds, thereby allowing for awesome to maintain its awesomeness.

So, if you want to sound awesome, avoid the letter "e." But if you want to be a little bitch, whine a lot.

Sunday, February 12, 2006


It seems that everyday sucks more than yesterday, and it's oscillating towards some epitome of suck, somewhere. I don't know if this epitome is an asymptote of suck, or a sharp plateau or what, but it's going to suck a lot.

Here are some different models for suck:

s(x) = 1/x
In the asymptotic model of suck, suck gradually increases, day-by-day, with the present amount of suck =s(x). The ultimate suck moment occurs at 0, where in everything sucks infinitely, and it sucks so much that it neither sucks nor doesn't suck. After the instance of ultimate suck, things rapidly climb up, increasing in suck again, but never sucking as much as before.

s(x) = x
In the linear model of suck, suck gradually increases, at a constant rate, forever. The increase in suck becomes so redundant that you kill yourself before you get very far on it. The torture! There is no instance of ultimate suck here, the whole thing just sucks. There is, notably, a moment of suck-genesis at (0,0), where all suck is born from negative suck.

s(x) = -x^2 + S
In the parabolic model of suck, suck rapidly increases throughout one's life, although is not noticed until it exceeds zero. S is the amount of suck at the instance of ultimate suck, which really sucks. I don't think this model's very realistic.

s(x) = tan(x)
In the tangental model of suck, suck has an asmptotic increase in suck every n*PI+PI/2=x. This sucks a lot, but there's not much that can be done about it. Each of these instances of suck is an ultimate instance of suck, where after things suck less until they rapidly approach zero, and once they cross the zero line again, things head right back up the path of sucking again.

s(x) = sin(x)
In the sinusoidal model of suck, things suck steadily, and then steadily drop off. I don't like this model quite as much.

s(x) = ln(x)
In the logarithmic model of suck, suck begins to increase at birth. At x=1, things start to really suck and continue to do so until you die.

All of these models suck. I think you would agree. Suck sucks too much to be modeled with sucky models. Math sucks too. School sucks. Robots suck. I suck. Life sucks. Earth sucks. Space sucks. Black holes suck. Prostitues suck. The whole universe sucks.

This sucks.

Tuesday, February 07, 2006


Some people don't use their hands. They use their feet and they scribble with pencils, but they've never used their hands; they've never put anything together.

Once it comes to putting things together, they think they know what they're doing because they've scribble scribble scribbled so much, and everyone thinks they know what they're doing because they've scribble scribble scribbled. Then, because they use their feet, they are, therefore, "well-rounded."

Everyone is wrong. Scribbling and feet-machen mean nothing, because unless you've put something together, and it has broken, you will never be able to put something together.

They don't see beauty in obtaining the solutions, only the solutions, and there they see no beauty, only a task. Their lives are burdens, and they themselves burden everyone else.

Numbers made these people, but not just those. The acceptance of numbers as a standard, a bar, and making comparison of numbers the only standard has brought these cold people to life. They have no hearts, only blood. They have no minds, only brains. It takes a mind to make something, but a mind has never been built.

Words to them are solutions, not a process. Greyface has them by the balls and throat. Poetry is an analysis, not a state of mind. They may make an essay, but it's a purpose. It's dogshit.

I hate them. I hate them all. And because they're the Gods of Numbers, they always win. Fuck 'um.