Okay, that sort of worked. Now let’s see if a post that isn’t linked to LJ will work. I will try out the “more” thing again.

This is a test of my upgraded WordPress software. If it works, and if it posts to my Livejournal, I will be a happy camper.

Paragraph test! 

Courtesy of the Boston Herald:

Dunkin’ mints ’86 Mets coins but Sox fans get chump change

The 1986 World Series is a bad memory for die-hard Red Sox fans. But Massachusetts-based Dunkin’ Donuts is literally minting money off of it in New York.

The company, which has its headquarters in Canton, started selling commemorative coins celebrating the 20th anniversary of the New York Mets World Series win over the Sox at Dunkin’ Donuts stores in New York, New Jersey and parts of Connecticut two weeks ago.

The 1986 World Championship, while a sweet success for the Mets, was a bitter experience for Sox fans, who watched the series title start to roll away as the ball went between Bill Buckner’s legs.

The Mets promotion, which is still running, had some members of Red Sox Nation wondering yesterday if Dunkin’ Donuts would create a David Ortiz dime or even a Manny Ramirez nickel.

“When are they going to make 2004 ones,” asked Billy Neader, 51, of Florida, a Sox fan.

Gee, Billy, I don’t know. 2024????

I’m sure at least a few of you will have already seen this, but for the sake of those who haven’t I will refrain from describing this at all and simply encourage you to click on this ASAP, because this is hilarious. Although I should point out that this is not in particularly good taste and could offend some people. But, personally, I thought this was the funniest thing I’ve read in quite a while.

My eternal thanks to Catherine for this link!

I just read through this hilarious email exchange, in which a guy convinces an email spammer to carve a wooden replica of a Commodore 64 keyboard and ship it to him. Check out that link for the full emails and a ton of awesome pictures, including my favorite, and a hilarious twist ending. [Boing Boing]

After I finished reading it I navigated over to the site’s main page, which describes what they do (scam 419 scammers) and then I read The Ethics of Scambaiting, which describes why they do it. Wired Magazine writes about something similar.

In addition to being good for a cheap laugh, it’s a pretty thought-provoking topic–the perpetrators of these scams are impoverished people with few legitimate prospects, but they do completely unethical things at the expense of innocent (and usually not much wealthier) victims. On the whole, I side with the “scambaiters,” if only because they’re distracting 419 scammers from ripping off unwitting targets, but it’s certainly a weird and awkward issue (see the “we’re not racist!” disclaimer).

There are some really sad stories out there about people victimized by these scams. I believe what makes the stories so affecting is the fact that the scammers leverage their victims’ greed, their credulous eagerness to make a quick and easy buck. It’s not a big leap to thinking that it’s the victim’s fault–if he weren’t so gullible and didn’t let avarice control him, he never would have wired that money–but I think we really just recognize that, if we weren’t smart enough to see through the amateurish phraseology and the obviousness of the scam, we too would jump on the chance to turn $25,000 into $2 million (and lose it all, of course). And if we have to choose between acknowledging our own greed and looking down on someone who trusted the wrong person, we don’t tend to pick the former.

The NBA is introducing a new ball:

The color has been brightened slightly and the channels — the black grooves that segment a basketball — have been minimized. The ball is also crafted from a composite of different materials, not the traditional leather casing that the NBA has used for years, and is softer and provides a better grip. The new ball also has a sleeker Spalding logo and two extra NBA logos stamped on it.

Although the most reported news, as far as I can tell, is the change from leather to a composite, I think the more significant change is the replacement of the old eight-panel design–the new balls are formed from just two panels that interlock:

Click on the image for a closer look.

It seems to me like the change in the seams on the ball, were I an elite player, might actually make a big difference. I don’t know whether it would improve or reduce accuracy, but it sure does seem like a noticeable change. I wonder what the players will have to say about it.

The story I linked to is as much about marketing as it is about the ball itself–if you want the pure sports story, try this ESPN link.

Last night I saw a pre-release screening of Superman Returns. Here are my thoughts. (No significant spoilers ahead.)

Short review: the movie was well worth paying for. Go see it tomorrow.

Longer review:
Going into it, I was worried about this movie. Parts of the trailer seemed really cool, and Brian Singer (the director) did a great job with the X-Men franchise—you know, the one Brett Ratner just butchered? But, generally speaking, I find Superman to be an incredibly boring superhero. I mean, he’s basically invincible, except for some random substance they just made up so he could be put in peril. I enjoyed the first two Superman movies (with Christopher Reeve), but more for the depiction of Clark Kent than for Superman’s heroics. And Singer cast a no-name (Brandon Routh) in the lead role, a decision that would either make or break the film.

Without going into the plot at all, I’ll just say this: Brandon Routh did a very good job, although in some ways he didn’t do very much at all. He looks the part and can act both awkward (Kent) and self-assured (Superman), and that’s all you really need. Kevin Spacey (as Luthor) was very good, although I wish he had been given a little more to do. And his best line is completely ruined by its presence in the trailer. It completely died in the theater, and only because everyone had already heard it a hundred times. I hate when they do that, especially for movies that they know everyone will see no matter what’s in the trailer.

The action scenes varied from incredible (the first one, in which Superman Returns) to very good (the finale), and really only suffered from one flaw: sometimes the CGI was a bit… conspicuous. Not because it was terrible—even at its worst it’s very good—but because it was noticeable. It occasionally reminded me of the Matrix: Reloaded scene where billions of agents dog-pile Neo. In other words, fun to watch but difficult to accept as realish. But I think Singer did a very good job with the action scenes, because he limited their scope and he amped up the intensity. What I mean is, Superman didn’t spin the world around to reverse time—he saved a guy falling from a building. I mean, he did a lot more than that, but the scale was personal rather than colossal. While the conflict has global implications, it’s conducted on a relatively small stage. And unlike in previous Superman flicks, the action was at times quite visceral. People thumped into solid objects. Other solid objects fell onto other people. Basically, it didn’t feel like a series of no-risk pillow-fight stunts, and that makes a big difference.

Surprising minor role players: Who knew Parker Posey was in this movie? Not me, until the opening credits. She was good and funny, as she always is. James Marsden, better known to some as Cyclops, plays Lois’s boyfriend (sort of boyfriend, sort of fiancé, sort of pseudo-husband—it’s complicated). He was, in my opinion, very good at making a difficult role sympathetic. You’ll see what I mean. My favorite bizarre casting choice, though, is Kal Penn (you know, Van Wilder’s Indian assistant? Or maybe you remember him better as the Indian guy who wants to go to White Castle really bad?), who has, at most, two lines in the entire movie and is completely wasted in the role. Except that he got to be in the opening credits of a Superman movie, which I’m sure is good enough for him and his agent.

I won’t really comment in detail on the plot, except to say that it worked for me. It’s not complicated, but it’s intricate. It revisits prior films (Clark wants to tell Lois who he is; Lois tries to separate her professional relationship with Superman from her personal relationships, with Superman and others; Lex Luthor has global domination on the brain, etc.) and adds some new material, including a significant twist that I think most of the audience saw coming a mile away.

In sum: If I had to make one enormous blockbuster comic book movie, I would have Brian Singer direct it. The man knows what to do with enormous piles of money and cheesy dialogue. Superman Returns might have been a little bit too long, and some of the lines might have been a little bit heavy-handed, and perhaps the camera lingered on a few things too often (someone’s apparently very proud of their rendition of Superman’s boots, for example); but the movie really delivered everything we’ve come to expect from the franchise: state-of-the-art set action pieces, a bumbling Clark Kent struggling with his dual persona, Lois’s spunk and vim getting her in and out of trouble, and Lex Luthor’s sinister business plans. Oh, and Marlon Brando.

Four out of five red codpieces.

I didn’t watch the Italy-Australia match, but what I’ve read about it has led me to understand it this way: Australia outplayed Italy for the entire game, but an Italian player (surprise!) took a dive in the last minute of extra time to draw a penalty kick on what was, charitably speaking, an extremely controversial call by the referree. Italy, of course, converted the penalty kick for the game-winner and basically stole the game from the Australians.

I could take this post in a different direction by asking a question like “why can’t Italy try to win a game with athletic superiority rather than flopping around like asphyxiating carp?” But the more pressing question is: What’s up with the referees this year? Maybe I’m being naive, but I don’t remember the officiating being such a point of contention in prior Copas Mundiales. And I recognize that “the officials screwed us!” is the rallying cry of poor losers in every dark corner of the sporting universe. But seriously, how many matches in this World Cup have been sullied by questionable officiating? U.S./Italy; U.S./Ghana; Portugal/Netherlands; and surely at least a few I’m forgetting about. And I’m not talking about minor gaffes–for the most part the problem has been that the refs have been calling way too many fouls (especially in the penalty box) and issuing way too many cards for borderline fouls. Even the head of FIFA has admitted that an official deserved a yellow card for his performance this weekend.

There have been more cards assessed in this World Cup than in any other, and we just started the first knockout round. This is ridiculous!

I don’t really have a snappy conclusion. I just think that it’s appalling to see so many games end in so unsatisfactory a manner, especially since many of the cards that the refs are passing out have recriminations beyond the game in which they’re issued–players who get a red card or a second yellow are held out of the next game, if their team is lucky enough to get there. It dilutes the quality of the games to have so many starters on the bench because of poor officiating.

I’m not nearly the first person to wonder this, but: what is going on here?