Razzoo

"...that kind of a machine..."

As it happened (as it was supposed to happen), I ran across this _Breakfast of Champions_ audio MM posted.  I remember once reading this little cherry bomb of a book in one fell swoop, then needing to get up and look outside to see if the world was still there.  If I didn’t feel so raw just now, I might take the book down & reread it now, but I don’t think I can do it.  So maybe you should.  You’ll end up wiser.  Promise.

merlin:

92Y Podcast: Kurt Vonnegut Reads Breakfast of Champions - 92Y Blog - 92nd Street Y - New York, NY

I can’t believe I’ve made it this long without ever hearing this audio, described as Vonnegut’s “first public reading of the classic Breakfast of Champions, three years before it was published, on May 4, 1970 at the 92nd Street Y.”

Sounds just terrific in the air:

This is a world premiere of a book called, Breakfast of Champions. Not even my wife has seen it — I’ve simply passed the rumor around that it exists. So, here we go. It…uh…it’s a novel.

My name is Dwayne Hoover and I am an experiment by the creator of the universe. I am the only creature in the entire universe who has free will. I am the only creature who has to figure out what to do next and why. Everybody else is a robot.

I am pooped. I wish I were a robot too. It is perfectly exhausting having to reason all the time in a universe I never made.

When you hear Kurt Vonnegut reading this aloud you appreciate the necessity of science fiction; it’s a way we crazy people have of talking about the world without talking about the world. I didn’t always get that, but now I really think I do.

Listen to the whole thing. It’s poetry.

The Merchant of Page Views

mikemonteiro:

On Wednesday morning I got a panicked IM from a friend of mine. “Did you hear about the Twitter hack?” No, I hadn’t. He then sent me a link to TechCrunch. “I’m not clicking that.” I said. “No, please.” Fine.

He continued typing in the IM window as I read Michael Arrington’s post, and as I jumped between windows reading about Arrington’s “moral dilemma” my friend was telling me that he’d applied for a job at Twitter a while back. For reasons that are none of anyone’s business but his, he ended up staying at his job. He was now justifiably worried his boss would find out he’d been testing the waters elsewhere.

My friend has a family to support. He’s incredibly talented, great work ethic, and at the end of the day, goes home, has a beer and enjoys his family’s company. He’s not a public figure. And I assume he’s one of many such stories that were delivered into Arrington’s hands on Tuesday evening.

“He says he’s not publishing that type of stuff.”

“That’s a relief.”

That afternoon Arrington threatened to publish everything.

I’ve talked to enough people who’ve convinced me TechCrunch is within the law to publish this stuff. So fine. But having the right to do something doesn’t necessarily make it the right thing to do. Others have compared it to publishing a product leak. We love those, right? Pictures of a new iPhone model? Gimme. So, what’s the problem here? Are we just predisposed to hate Arrington because he behaves like an immoral petulant fratboy? Sure, that’s possible.

But I don’t think that’s all. Let’s go back to the product leak for a second. Usually the act of a rival company or a disgruntled employee, a product leak is business problem.

What Arrington stated he received in his mailbox was a hodge podge of data. Some personal. Some business. Some of it about a very high-profile startup, some of it about the high-profile officers about that startup and some of it about regular working people looking for better jobs, asking about insurance issues, having personal conversations, possibly even revealing medical information to trusted parties.

And Michael Arrington sifted through every one of those bits of data.

He made two piles, one to publish and one to keep in his back pocket and use as a threat.

I’d venture to say that a more ethical human being, even a journalist (look it up Michael), who realizes he’s come across personal data on non-public figures seals it shut and informs the victim of the theft about what’s transpired.

So, did he have a right to publish the business stuff? Sure, probably. (I’m not a lawyer.) That was his pound of flesh to play with. But he couldn’t get his pound of flesh without spilling a lot of blood, and a real journalist doesn’t get this bloody.