This week Anthropologist Gabriella Coleman tells us about the internet’s original Dislike Club, Anonymous. Biella has spent the last eight years hanging out with Anons both on IRC and in IRL. Her new book “Hacker, Hoaxer, Whistleblower, Spy: the many faces of Anonymous”  is the definitive book on the topic, nothing else comes close.  Biella also gets me to watch V for Vendetta, something I have refused to do out of my fanboy respect for writer Alan Moore (who refused to watch it or put his name on the movie). I wish I could un-see it already.  Also: Commodify your dislike!

The factors at play in the moments a police officer chooses to shoot—or not shoot—a person.

These are the songs I would pick as the best tracks of 2014 if I had an ounce of courage.

They all say something fascinating about the state of music in 2014. They are masterpieces of production, vocal ability, and lyricism. They are also not typical choices for the best track of 2014 — they are in the wrong genre, or not unanimously loved, or even almost unanimously disliked.

There are some songs I could pick for the best of 2014 that would fill me with slightly less shame, but it's important to earn all our pleasures, guilty and otherwise. So here are five songs that I could have picked as the best of the year, but was just too embarrassed to admit I loved. (Please ignore that I am doing so right now.)

"Girl in a Country Song" by Maddie & Tae

Maddie & Tae's subversive, catchy as hell commentary on the state of bro-country didn't top any charts this year, but it was one of the best country songs out there. It's a melodic jam that lulls you into complacency with all of the easy chord changes and twangy guitars of typical country — and it has a great twist.

"We used to get a little respect," Maddie & Tae sing, "now we're lucky if we even get to climb up in your truck, keep our mouths shut, and ride along, and be a girl in a country song." It's a direct hit on songs like "Cruise" by Florida Georgia Line that turn women into just another decoration for a pickup truck with lines like, "this brand new Chevy with a lift kit/Would look a hell of a lot better with you up in it."

The singers put out their first EP this year, but "Girl in a Country Song" made its home among plenty of other feminist country music anthems this year, including my personal runner-up in the ultra-specific category of "feminist country anthem," "Quarterback" by Kira Isabella, a song about high-school rape and its repercussions. But "Girl in a Country Song" takes the title because it's so fitting for 2014, a year when so many women raised their voices as loud as they could.

"Fancy" by Iggy Azalea, feat. Charli XCX

Yeah, you've heard of this one. You probably hate this one. But hear me out!

Hating the song of the summer because it's overplayed ("Call Me Maybe") or terrible ("Blurred Lines") is a year-end tradition. This year's Song of Summer, "Fancy," is perhaps one of the most criticized of all time. Is Iggy Azalea appropriating a culture that's not hers? Almost definitely. Is this song still catchy as hell? Absolutely.

Part of the reason "Fancy" can be just catchy enough to overcome those accusations of Azaelea's appropriation is that it's incredibly self-aware, almost in spite of itself. The opening statement,"First things first I'm the realest" is, as Chris Molanphy wrote for Slate, "a statement laced with either unwitting irony or sardonic self-commentary — probably both."

In fact, the best parts of Azalea's "Fancy" — the chorus and bridge — aren't even sung by her; they're sung by pop star of the future Charli XCX, whose next album comes out Monday. The hook on this song is so catchy that those first three beats became one of the most recognizable lead-ins of the year. "Fancy" is catchy, fun, and really well-produced. It could easily be the Song of the Year.

"Inside Out" by Spoon

Spoon's 2014 album They Want My Soul was lauded by lovers of traditional rock everywhere. The groovy, guitar-heavy tracks are easy to listen to, but sadly just as easy to forget. On the whole, They Want My Soul is an album with songs that are mostly passable not because they are great songs, or even good songs, but because they were released on an album that said SPOON at the top of it. But, yeah, the album got fantastic reviews. Picking a track from this album as best of the year wouldn't be controversial; admitting that it's one of the few off the album I even like would.

Still, it's true. By far the standout off They Want My Soul is "Inside Out," a mellow, dreamy rock song where lead singer Britt Daniels multi-tracks his voice into layers of calming, grooving jams, instead of the catchy, lyric-heavy, piano-backed songs Spoon is famous for. (Think "The Way We Get By.")

But I could only go so far as to place this song on this list. Picking a Spoon song for its production in a year where we had incredible productions from rappers like FKA Twigs and new pop stars like Rita Ora would be a step too far.

"Flawless Remix" by Beyonce feat Nicki Minaj

It's almost heresy to pick a remix of Beyoncé over the original Beyoncé, but here we are. Despite my deep and abiding love for the spoken word portion of last year's "***Flawless," where Chimamanda Ngozi Adiche reads from her now-famous TED Talk about feminism, those words are even more powerful when placed at the start of the song, as they are in the remix.

So, yeah, I'll take Beyoncé's do-over, instead of her first take. This song is more varied and interesting than the original, and the bridge, instead of Ngozi Adiche's spoken word, is Nicki Minaj rapping, "The queen of rap slayin' with queen B. If you ain't on the team, you playin for team D."

But this one's also worth considering because of what this artist meant to 2014. Beyoncé had some moments this year. She performed "Drunk in Love" with Jay-Z at the Grammys, and stood in front of a full wall display of the word "FEMINIST" at the VMAs. Amazingly, she feels like an even bigger star than when she dropped Beyoncé, the album the original "Flawless" featured on, around this time last year.

"Good Kisser" by Usher

"Good Kisser" came out to a slew of mixed reviews, but I loved it. The full album that backs up this track has yet to appear, but "Good Kisser," released in May, is a knock-out of a song. When I relistened to all (64) of the songs I thought could be picked as the best of the year, I stopped on "Good Kisser" every time, because it's so diverse, musically and technically, and so shimmeringly smooth that it's an easy song to fall in love with.

The uptempo R&B song pairs Usher's soulful, well-ranged vocals with the backing beats of EDM. It feels like equal parts retro vinyl-pop hit and '80s smash hit. It's a feel-good song in a year where those were often far too hard to come by. But the song's timelessness also might be an argument against it. The best song of the year should have some sort of ineffable 2014-ness to it, and "Good Kisser" lacks that.

Plus, come on, picking an Usher song is a 2004 move. This is 2014, an era when we must stand boldly for the songs we loved that others hated.

Come back every day of December for Vox's picks of some of our favorite pop culture of 2014.

invaderxan:

Broccoli MRI

How far out will humanity explore?

Nowhere, Thomas Alleman

tastefullyoffensive:

Bill Nye explains why he always wears bow ties. [video/image via jakealc1]

---

Gasoline prices in the United States have fallen to their lowest level since 2010. And the reason for that is pretty simple — global oil prices are crashing. But why are oil prices crashing? That's a more complex story, as we explain in the video above.

(GasBuddy.com/Vox)

Further reading

Oil prices keep plummeting as OPEC starts a price war with the US

What the huge drop in gasoline prices means for America

How far do oil prices have to fall to throttle the US shale boom?

Right now is a perfect time to raise the gas tax

Protests continue in several cities over the killings of unarmed African Americans by white police officers. Amid charges of racism, a look at new efforts to assess and revamp police procedures.

Reports that Grumpy Cat, a real cat who is internet famous for looking really unhappy all of the time, has made $99.5 million over two years are "completely false" owner Tabatha Bundesen told the Huffington Post. She did not clarify how much Grumpy Cat has made.

UK newspapers the Telegraph and Express originally reported the figure, crediting the cat's appearances at places like South by Southwest and her on-air special "Grumpy Cat's Worst Christmas Ever" for the earnings.

To get an idea of how astronomical the (untrue, as it turns out) earnings are for a internet cat celebrity, here are the most recent yearly incomes for six major stars:

• Gwyneth Paltrow made $19 million last year.
• Will Smith made $32 million.
• Angelina Jolie made a paltry $18 million.
• Scarlett Johanson made $17 million.
• Jennifer Anniston made $31 million.
• Kim Kardashian made $36 million.

These totals are only a single year's income according to Forbes, and they are estimates.

Here's a graph created by @JodySie:

Correction: A previous version of this article reported that Bundesen had made $99.5 million off of Grumpy Cat. The piece has been updated.

Ровно 20 лет назад, 5 декабря 1994 года в Будапеште был подписан меморандум о гарантиях безопасности в связи с присоединением Украины к договору о нераспространении ядерного оружия. Подписали его Россия, США, Украина и Великобритания



После развала СССР возникли сложности с крупнейшим в мире ядерным арсеналом, который оказался разбросан на территориях независимых теперь государств, в том числе в Казахстане, Белоруссии и Украине. В Украине на момент распада СССР хранилась треть всего ядерного оружия, что делало эту страну третьей крупнейшей ядерной державой мира. Оружие, физически находящееся на территории Украины, контролировалось, однако, из командных центров в России.

В 1994 году после долгих переговоров был подписан Будапештский меморандум. Согласно нему Украина брала на себя обязательство удалить со своей территории ядерное вооружение и присоединялась к договору о нераспространении ядерного оружия как страна участник, не обладающая ядерным оружием. К 1996 году обязательства Украины были выполнены.

Россия, США и Великобритания брали на себя обязательства уважать независимость, суверенитет и существующие границы Украины

Ниже полный текст меморандума (выделения мои)

1. Российская Федерация, Соединенное Королевство Великобритании и Северной Ирландии, Соединенные Штаты Америки и Украина,


2. приветствуя присоединение Украины к Договору о нераспространении ядерного оружия в качестве государства, не обладающего ядерным оружием, учитывая обязательство Украины об удалении всех ядерных вооружений с ее территории в установленные сроки,


3. отмечая перемены в мире в области безопасности, в том числе окончание "холодной войны", создавшие условия для глубоких сокращений ядерных сил, подтверждают следующее:


4. 1.Российская Федерация, Соединенное Королевство Великобритании и Северной Ирландии и Соединенные Штаты Америки подтверждают Украине свое обязательство в соответствии с принципами Заключительного акта СБСЕ уважать независимость, суверенитет и существующие границы Украины.


5. 2.Российская Федерация, Соединенное Королевство Великобритании и Северной Ирландии и Соединенные Штаты Америки подтверждают свое обязательство воздерживаться от угрозы силой или ее применения против территориальной целостности или политической независимости Украины и что никакие их вооружения никогда не будут применены против Украины, кроме как в целях самообороны или каким-либо иным образом в соответствии с Уставом Организации Объединенных Наций.


6. 3.Российская Федерация, Соединенное Королевство Великобритании и Северной Ирландии и Соединенные Штаты Америки подтверждают Украине свое обязательство в соответствии с принципами Заключительного акта СБСЕ воздерживаться от экономического принуждения, направленного на то, чтобы подчинить своим собственным интересам осуществление Украиной прав, присущих ее суверенитету, и таким образом обеспечить себе преимущества любого рода.


7. 4.Российская Федерация, Соединенное Королевство Великобритании и Северной Ирландии и Соединенные Штаты Америки подтверждают свое обязательство добиваться незамедлительных действий Совета Безопасности ООН по оказанию помощи Украине как государству-участнику Договора о нераспространении ядерного оружия, не обладающему ядерным оружием, в случае если Украина станет жертвой акта агрессии или объектом угрозы агрессии с применением ядерного оружия.


8. 5.Российская Федерация, Соединенное Королевство Великобритании и Северной Ирландии и Соединенные Штаты Америки подтверждают в отношении Украины свое обязательство не применять ядерное оружие против любого государства-участника Договора о нераспространении ядерного оружия, не обладающего ядерным оружием, кроме как в случае нападения на них, их территории или зависимые территории, на их вооруженные силы или их союзников таким государством, действующим вместе с государством, обладающим ядерным оружием или связанным с ним союзным соглашением.


9. 6.Российская Федерация, Соединенное Королевство Великобритании и Северной Ирландии, Соединенные Штаты Америки и Украина будут консультироваться в случае возникновения ситуации, затрагивающей вопрос относительно этих обязательств.


10. Настоящий Меморандум будет применимым с момента подписания. Подписано в четырех экземплярах, имеющих одинаковую силу на английском, русском и украинском языках.


11. г. Будапешт, 5 декабря 1994 г.

Весь документ с преамбулой

Upd: в 1994 году в законодательстве РФ не было положения о ратификации международных договоров. Документ вступил в силу с момента подписания.

JoeyRox writes: The publicized goal of Tesla's "gigafactory" is to make electric cars more affordable. However, that benefit may soon be eclipsed by the gigafactory's impact on roof-top solar power storage costs, putting the business model of utilities in peril. "The mortal threat that ever cheaper on-site renewables pose" comes from systems that include storage, said physicist Amory Lovins. "That is an unregulated product you can buy at Home Depot that leaves the old business model with no place to hide."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Oh, this guy is deadly.  When he compares our cops to South Africa’s—I just want to pull a paper bag over my head.  I’m going to Denmark next year.  Maybe I’ll tell people I’m from Canada.

naturemetaltolkien:

Attestation of Vegvísir in the Huld Manuscript.

The Huld Manuscript is the name given to the book of collected Icelandic staves and spells, compiled by Geir Vigfusson in the 19th Century. Huld is the name of a völva in the Ynglinga and Sturlunga Sagas, who practiced Seiðr magic. A later Icelandic tale by Snorri Sturlusson tells us that she was a mistress of Odin, and mothered two demi-goddesses by him, who were named Þorgerðr and Irpa. If we look at the etymology, “Huld” means “Hidden” or “Secret” and is derived from Old Norse “Hulda”.  This root is seen in many other words in Germanic lore.

Iran launched airstrikes in recent days against Islamic State forces along its border with Iraq, an effort to exert more military influence in the region in the face of America’s resurgent role.

POW

1. Sweden's center-left government is on the verge of collapse today, according to the BBC.
2. The proximate cause is that prime minister Stefan Lofven can't secure a parliamentary majority for his proposed budget, which includes tax hikes to finance new spending on jobs.
3. Lofven's coalition is the largest bloc in parliament, but only holds a minority of seats.
4. Lofven has only been in office three months.
5. In Sweden, like most parliamentary democracies, the "collapse" of a government means new elections not a period of anarchy.

Stefan Lofven's problematic minority government

The root cause of Lofven's troubles is the difficult manner in which he won the most recent Swedish election. His coalition of left-of-center parties secured more votes and parliamentary seats than the previous governing coalition of right-of-center parties. But neither coalition secured a majority of seats. Instead, the populist anti-immigration party Sweden Democrats pulled 13 percent of the vote.

Neither main group of parties was willing to join the Sweden Democrats in a coalition, so the prime minister's job fell to Lofven. But actually getting bills passed in parliament required the cooperation — or at least passive accommodation via abstention — of one of the opposition parties. That's a recipe for instability. So while it's mildly surprising that Lofven's government is collapsing it's not exactly shocking.

A sensible approach to gridlock

Americans may be familiar with the specter of a head of government being unable to secure a legislative majority for his key policy ideas. The Swedish solution to this dilemma — new elections which may resolve the gridlock — seems to have a lot of advantages over the American system of executive orders and repeated political crises.

Further reading

• David Schleicher on party polarization in the US versus Europe.
• Juan Linz on the advantages of parliamentary democracy.
• A deeper look at the Sweden Democrats from the BBC.

Op-ed: Outbreak forecasts sometimes wrong because they work

t-ii:

Civil rights attorney/MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Bloom points out that Darren Wilson’s cross-examination was a joke

A few months back, I joined in for an episode of a podcast called the Disciplined Investor. The host Andrew Horowitz and I were chatting about money, raising children, stock market crashes and so on, and then this question popped out of the void and really surprised me:

 

 

For some reason, the question stirred up so much stern enthusiasm in me that I had to loosen my collar to let some of the steam shoot out. There were so many wrong but telling assumptions behind it. It was asked from such a well-meaning but self-defeating position.  I quietly took a deep breath and did my best to explain that this is exactly where the path of the Sucka Consumer divides from that of the Mustachian.

More recently, this lifestyle you and I share showed up in New York Magazine, which brought us a good amount of new attention. The writer Annie Lowrey seemed to get the idea pretty well, describing Mustachianism as a thing people (even rich people) aspire to by choice, rather than a wacky  thing that some extremely warped people are doing because that’s all they can afford. Economist Ezra Klein mused on Twitter that frugality might now be becoming a status competition that replaces clueless consumption. I sure hope so.

Unfortunately, the article was capped with a flashy but  misleading headline*:  Meet The Blogger Who Wants You To Spend Like You’re Poor.

 Another version of the same article was given the label “This Tightwad is Trending“.

Those were probably calculated phrases, because the goal of any headline is to capture attention and draw in readers. The problem is that too many of those readers still aren’t getting it. You end up with comments like,

 

So let’s break it down real quick so brand new Mustachians will know what this shit is about, while the old timers can stand in the back and sing along.

This is not about being cheap, minimalist, or extreme.

It’s about using logic and science to design a Slightly Less Ridiculous Than Average Lifestyle in order to live more happily.

The Mustache family does not lead an “extremely frugal” lifestyle by any stretch of the imagination. I mean, holy shit, we are a multimillionaire family living in an expensive house with a stream of luxury goods, services and food shooting at us from all directions.

Not only do we bathe daily in this spectacular river of affluence, but we even walk casually away from it a few times a year in order to ride in Jet Aircraft which allow us to sample other unnecessary parts of the world. The total bill for this nuclear explosion of consumption is an outrageous $25,000 per year, which would be closer to $40,000 if you accounted for mortgage interest or rent on a comparable house. The life we lead in this rich part of a rich country is extreme, but at the other end of the scale than that suggested by the critics.

The only unusual part by American standards is that we could afford to spend many times more, and yet somehow we choose not to do it. This is a lifestyle of choice, not a sacrifice we make just because we don’t want to have to go back to the office. And therein lies the reason this blog is of any use to anyone:

 Learning to separate “happiness” from  “spending money” is the quickest and most reliable way to a better life.

The side-effect of this is that your life will become much less expensive and you will therefore become much wealthier very quickly.

But it’s not about the money, and as long as you think it is about the money, you’re still fucked.

 So I explained to the man in the interview that if we wanted to go to Disneyland, we would go to Disneyland. Hell, we would live inside the park or perhaps one of the Disney-owned cruise ships if we saw fit. We just happen to find that tourist traps like Disney are a pretty pale and distant second place compared to the fine places that Mother Nature has built for us.

We don’t use our bikes for transportation and hauling instead of our cars, even in the dark and even in the middle of winter because it saves us a few dollars of fuel. We do it because it’s an awesome way to connect with your own town, stay in proper condition, adapt naturally to your own climate, and live like a real human instead of a sanitized, flabby car clown.

I don’t swim and and paddle kayaks and canoes all summer because I lack the funds to buy a twin-engine motorboat. I do it because when it comes to recreational pastimes, muscle wins over motor every fucking time.

I’m not expecting my son to earn his own living early in life and pay for his own higher education because I’m a tightass or because it would break the bank to fund a Harvard doctorate. I set out this challenge because pampering your kids only encourages a dependence on Pampers, while giving them the advantage of working for their own rewards is the best possible gift. I will give him unlimited time, guidance, and access to knowledge, and teach him how to amass an embarrassingly large fortune in a short amount of time. It will then be his choice how to put this knowledge to work.

We spend most of our time at home, a place which I built from the ground up with the valuable helping hands of a few friends. We do our own cooking and cleaning and of course maintenance. Entertaining, creating things, stories and music and hosting a neverending stream of fun guests. Even my gym, workshop, and office are right here in the same spot.

None of this is done because this is a cheap way to live, but because it’s a rich and efficient way to get in touch with all the things that make a human happy. We could go out and get faint approximations of these same services by driving around constantly to various cities and manage to spend more, but why the hell would we do this?

Oddly enough, it hasn’t always been this way. At age 21, I had a fairly materialistic life planned for myself: perhaps a 4500 square foot luxury home in the best neighborhood and a reasonably flashy car like an Acura NSX. Maybe a vacation house or two later on, once I made CEO.

But over the years, this has changed. Even after retirement, our costs have continued to drop even as our income has increased. The choices are no longer based on saving money, but rather on doing our best to live a good life. This was a pleasant surprise to me, but it seems to be an incomprehensible incongruity to the average consumer.

I told the man that my family’s lifestyle was not designed from the top down, starting with a restrictive budget and chopping off important activities based on their cost. Instead, it is a work in progress where we learn as much as possible about the entire planet and the various lifeforms therein, and do whatever we feel is most worthwhile given our limited time aboard this fine ship. Nothing is off-limits based on cost, because making money is fairly easy at this point. We do whatever we want, go wherever we want, and buy anything and everything we feel is worthwhile.

And as for that New York Magazine headline, no, I don’t want you to Spend Like You’re Poor. To me, that would imply car loans, processed food, hair salons, restaurants, lawn care companies, housekeepers and all the things that people get when they follow the standard script of a people who are starved for free time and chasing material comforts as a replacement for happiness.

I want you to spend like you are the richest person in the world, a person who has so much happiness and balance in your life that you can’t imagine anything you could buy that would make you any happier.

 

* Annie has since confirmed to me that writers for most magazines don’t get final say on their own headlines. I think you need to fix that, NY Magazine. If you’re going to hire people to write for you, why go in and subsequently mess with their shit? These are artists, and you get a better product if you don’t run in with a can of spray paint to make little adjustments after they finish their creation. Otherwise you’ll find an empty desk waiting for you as soon as they reach financial independence themselves.

 

 Further Reading: New people might enjoy this list of frequently complained questions, which I wrote a couple years back after a similar media incident. Glad you’re here!

PBS NewsHour published this comprehensive, easy-to-understand analysis of witness statements in the not-so-grand jury proceedings over Darren Wilson's fatal shooting of Mike Brown. (more…)

POW!