If you’ve ever watched The Maury Povich Show, you’d know that over half of the women on there are all about getting child support payments. While they’re completely shallow (and naming their kids Camerion or Dar’Tayveus – c’mon, that’s a car and a Star Wars character, for chrissakes!), they are entitled to this money to help their child. Now, the Ontario Government agrees with them.

They have recently launched the site goodparentspay.com, a place to shame negligent parents who’ve skimped on their child support. Go ahead and browse through the fine selection of deadbeats. Based on the photos, nature has made the fuckwads obvious. Regardless, though it smacks of opportunism – there’s an election coming in the fall, doncha know – the internet seems to be the best way to communicate with the largest audience. However, is this really the best way, especially from an official government site? Or is a trip to New York’s Hotel Pennsylvania a better bet?

Internet hunting. It’s been around for a couple of years now, and is the sickest thing I can think of this side of kiddie porn or Jack Thompson. Basically, it involves users picking out a harmless animal on a webcam that’s just sitting in a pen, and with a click, someone standing by the pen kills the animal. The original “justification” for the enterprise was to allow disabled hunters to get their murderous rush vicariously. I’m not sure how this even became a reality, but I suppose there are enough weirdos out there that this actually requires the attention of legislators.

Recently, Connecticut finally passed a bill prohibiting such senseless crap. Thank you to all the states that prohibit such things. As a Canadian, I know I have a lot to be ashamed of in this department, but at least we have the balls to kill things ourselves. For anyone who’s considering opening a business like this or patronizing them with real money, go screw yourself. Bambi’s mom will hunt you down and eat your soul.

[via Houston Chronicle]

I’ve been working with Windows Vista, and other than a few niggly, minor problems (a number of downloadable casual titles aren’t compatible, but I’m not about to drop bombs like that when an OS is under a month old; we’ll talk in five months or so) it’s been running quite fast and clean. Imagine my surprise when it told me that an update was already available. I’m pretty used to seeing this in XP, but never in Vista. So I did a little research.

According to PC World, the patch isn’t really a patch. Well, it is a patch, but not really. Yeah, existential. Deal with it. Anyway, the biggest update – there are 12 of them, 11 of which are marked “critical” – is a part of the Microsoft malware detection code, rather than being an update of the underlying engine. See? It’s not that Vista’s messed up. However, given the fact that Vista was supposed to be bulletproof, it’s interesting that a vulnerability was caught so early in the OS’ lifecycle. Does this mean we should be worried yet? *duhn duhn duuuhnnnn!* (yes, that’s the scary music cue)

[via PCWorld.com]

Sitting somewhere between “What the flying motherf&%^er!!!” and “Bend over… just a little bit more…” comes word that Canadian copyright groups want to re-instate the ridiculous $75 levy that was placed on sold-in-Canada MP3 players a few years ago, but was repealed because, well, it’s bullshit to have it on them. Let me briefly explain: back in the 1980s, when cassettes were the tools of piracy, musicians (rightly) asked for a cut of sales of said cassettes. Ditto for blank CDs. After all, they might as well make a buck as a result of the illegal activities they know you’re going to do anyway. However, MP3 players are, at their hearts, hard drives or flash drives. Therefore, the same levy doesn’t apply, because their storage is integrated as part of the device, and isn’t really removable as CDs or tapes are from their respective players. Thus, the argument ensues.

The reason the levy for MP3 players is bullshit is simple: DRM. Because of the draconian measures many companies (okay, primarily Apple, but the rest are pretty bad) they’ve already got control of how you can play and move your virtual property. I can play my CD on any CD player, as many times as I want. Remove the DRM (and possible spyware – Sony) and I’d be glad to fork over the 99 cents. But right now, I hate iPods – long story – and I don’t want to be a part of the DRM movement until they get it right. If the levy is re-instated, expect a number of Canadians flocking to northern U.S. stores.

[via Canadaeast.com]

We all should have seen it coming. YouTube, the bastion of all things video and user-created, is now becoming a medium for extremist propaganda. Recently, some Islamic terrorist (truly an oxymoron for people who know better) groups are uploading their anti-American and anti-Western videos to YouTube for a larger audience than the marginal websites they used to be hosted on. I don’t want to go into a ton of detail here – I don’t need to repeat their messages more times than necessary - but the original article gives enough disgusting examples of hate. It’s a tough fight for YouTube, as a statement from the company states, “YouTube has clear terms and conditions which prohibit, amongst other things, hateful content. Our community has been highly effective in policing the site, and YouTube removes videos if our community flags them as inappropriate.” Basically, they’ll only do something if someone else complains first.

Therein lies the only problem with internet and free speech. On the one hand, we’re free to see six-year olds singing Phantom of the Opera or monkeys throwing feces at each other. (Note: I pulled these examples out of my ass and proceeded to look on YouTube for them; it took all of a minute and a half.) Hell, as our sister site Destructoid likes to say, you can see “also cocks” if you’re so inclined. However, this freedom is extended to those who would do harm or promote hatred. Should YouTube be formally policed? Or worse, who would police the police? (Sorry for the overly-serious tone, this is what you get when you’re recovering from teh SARS.)

[via Forbes Online]

There’s a name at Microsoft that you’ve likely never heard of. His name is Bryan Lee, a corporate vice president in Microsoft’s Entertainment and Devices division. He came on board in 2000 to help create the Xbox. His latest project? The Zune. Therefore, it is with little surprise that we hear he’s stepping down from his post.

According to the Associated Press, the move is strictly for personal reasons, and “absolutely not” related to the fact that the Zune was as warmly-received as a sack of moldy oranges wrapped in barbed wire. I don’t know, call me pessimistic, but I think I hear Gunpei Yokoi turning in his grave. (too soon?)

[via Globe & Mail Technology]

After the horrific laptop incident and madness, we’ve finally got a new laptop in the house (which means I have my computer back). After a little research and some luck, we picked up the Toshiba U200 ultra-portable (the computer in the linked page is a generation or two behind what we got; it’s really cutting-edge-ish). It’s a sweet little thing, I’ll tell ya. We were asking the folks at the shop - a reputable one, I assure you - if it was Vista-capable, and sure enough it was. When we booted it up, we got quite a surprise.

To our shock (and possible chagrin and dismay) Vista Home Premium was pre-installed. At least we knew it really was Vista capable. But how capable is Vista?

(more…)

You learn the darndest things when you go to wedding shows. I got married about nine months ago, and when I went to register for china at William Ashley – the biggest china shop in Toronto – I had to tote around a clipboard for writing down what I wanted. In fact, one time I was holding a brown clipboard, and the manager at the store got his panties in a bunch because it wasn’t the transparent plastic kind, and it looked uncouth. Seriously.

Fast-forward one year, and William Ashley has grown by leaps and bounds. Rather than a clipboard, they’re using the Nokia 770 internet tablet. You can write down what you want and it automatically updates your registry in real time. While you wait for your spouse-to-be to stop ogling the silverware, you can check your e-mail and surf to your heart’s content. I wouldn’t suggest looking at porn, lest your future marriage partner get as angry as a bull in a… well, you know.

With Windows Vista’s imminent arrival tomorrow, the Toronto Star has an article discussing all the legal fine print in the Vista Service Agreement’s terms and conditions. If half of what the author states is true, we’ll all have traveled 23 years back in time, all the way back to 1984.  I wish I were making these up, but here are some of the lowlights of what the terms and conditions give Microsoft:

- “… granting Microsoft the right to regularly check the legitimacy of the software and holds the prospect of deleting certain programs without the user’s knowledge”

- “ … (granting) Microsoft the right to revalidate the software or to require users to reactivate it should they make changes to their computer components.” Like when you install that DirectX 10 video card that they want you to own.

- “Windows Defender (Microsoft’s own anti-virus/adware software) will, by default, automatically remove software rated ‘high’ or ’severe,’ even though that may result in other software ceasing to work or mistakenly result in the removal of software that is not unwanted.”

The article tells of other insidious details. The devil truly is in there. If what John Carmack says is true about DX10, count me out of Vista for a long time.

I was at the National Bridal Show in Toronto this weekend, helping a friend with her photo business (she’s really good; she shot my wedding last April). At the end of my row in the convention hall, there was a company calling themselves “i-Cakes,” complete with mega-lit spinning sign. (Sorry I don’t have a photo; I was working in a booth, and didn’t think to have a camera.) Intrigued, I went over to their booth to take a peek. Sure enough, they were pushing themselves as “i-Cakes.” However, upon further perusal – and a good old-fashioned Googling – they are actually “Irresistable Cakes.” Yeah, that’s all the “i” stands for. No reference to the fashionable “i” thing, and certainly nothing that resembled the sign they displayed at the show.

There are two things that strike me about this whole thing. One is that they weren’t advertising themselves as “irresistible” with the “i” in real life. They’re only trying to gain business through the “i” caché. What’s more interesting – and perhaps more important – is how ubiquitous the letter “i” has become. Apple really hit on something major with that one vowel. In a completely unrelated industry, some people are still capitalizing on that same success. I think I’m going to try to start copyrighting things with the letter “o.” There are only four vowels left!*

*Y only sometimes counts.