Well I gave the journal the category of repost because I wrote about Zack and Miri Make a Porno when I saw it at the show. I now own it on DVD and watched it over the weekend, I didn't get to watch all the deleted scenes yet though, but that being said I think it was a pretty good movie. When I bought it at target it is just called Zack and Miri but I guess you can get the full cover art and have it signed . If I would have known I would have done the whole preoreder thing but with gift cards I didn't have to pay for it so that is cool. I haven't done so yet but I'm thinking if I get some extra cash to buy some stuff from the movie like the hockey hooded sweet shirt but I also kinda want to get some steelers 6 rings shirts also, so not sure. So I would say if you like dirty or raunchy comedy with a little love story thrown in go out and buy it or rent it, I think it is pretty good.

So today I went to the movies and saw Push. Yes it was only PG-13 but it still had a lot of action in it. What I liked about it was that it had a good story and good acting and a lot of actors you would know by face. Dakota Fanning was really good in it, I don't want to say that she did the best Job acting cause maybe some of it was her character but she was pretty convincing. I admit the movie wasn't what I was expecting. I thought known actors they will be all about fighting in some big US city and it will be all Bang Bang shoot them up. Yes there was some of that but it was more complex then that and there was a story and you had different people with different kinds of abilites or some might think of them as powers. The other part that made it interesting is that it takes place in Hong Kong and in some parts there are subtitles I think the entire movie was filmed there. I don't like to rate things but maybe 3 out of 4 or two thumbs up if you like action suspense sci-fi kind of movies. Before hand one movie that I saw a preview for looks really good, Crank 2. Yes they made a second one with the same guy and it looks just as crazy as the 1st one, that is why I liked it so much. If you don't know the shooting style I mean you have to watch it, to see how frantic it is. That takes me back to one thing about Push I liked. They had this effect of when the girl would see the future that was cool. But the other effect thing is that some times a movie can be to bright and crisp this looked like people where on the street, and in one scene it looked like the two people just walked into a real place with real people who didn't care the camera was there. Or at least that is how I see it.

First of all last night I learned one needs to be careful when they search for things On the internet. I found this page with video and yes it was very dirty and lets just say I saw someone fuck themselves. I kid you not it was very weird and I wonder what it felt like to him. I may never tell anyone to do that ever again since now I know it is possible, ha. Later last night on myspace I saw that some people I know are on facebook so I decided to Join. So far I do like it. I will admit I think it will take me some time to get used to how to navegate the pages but hopefully that will come with time.

For those of you who have read a couple posts back I wrote about how TV stations will change from an analog signal to digital. I do have some issues with the change my self. I also included and article about how it looks like the date of when TV stations will go digital is going to change. Well today I read an interesting article on yahoo about how that change might make things confusing for people. Even after reading that I think pushing the date to June might be a good idea. Here is the article

Some TV stations to end analog signal on Feb. 17 (AP)

* Posted on Fri Feb 6, 2009 7:38AM EST



NEW YORK - Television viewers who use antennas and were expecting a few more months to prepare for digital TV may not have much time left before their sets go dark: Many stations still plan to drop analog broadcasts in less than two weeks.

When Congress postponed the mandatory transition to digital TV until June, it also gave stations the option to stick to the originally scheduled date of Feb. 17.

That means the shutdown of analog signals, which broadcasters had hoped would happen at nearly the same time nationwide, could now unfold in a confusing patchwork of different schedules.

Lawmakers wanted to address concerns that many households that receive TV signals through an antenna are not prepared for the switch. They were also mindful that a government fund has run out of money to subsidize digital converter boxes for older TVs.

Dozens of stations around the country now say they are going to take advantage of the option to drop analog broadcasts this month.

Many others are on the fence. The total number is likely to be in the hundreds, a substantial chunk and maybe even a majority of the country's 1,796 full-power TV stations.

The House voted Wednesday to delay the mandatory shutdown until June 12. The Senate passed the measure unanimously last week, and the bill now heads to President Barack Obama for his signature.

The legislation means analog signals could vanish entirely in some areas but persist in neighboring regions. In rural areas, low-power stations will continue to broadcast in analog even beyond June 12.

On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission ordered stations that still plan to turn off analog signals on Feb. 17 to notify the FCC by Monday.

Acting Chairman Michael Copps said the commission could prohibit stations from making the switch if doing so is not in the public interest. For instance, if all stations in a market want to turn off early, that would draw FCC scrutiny, he said at a commission meeting.

For many broadcasters, delaying the shutdown is inconvenient and expensive. Many of them have scheduled engineering work on their equipment to make the transition on Feb. 17.

The Oklahoma Educational Television Authority, the public broadcasting network in the state, said Thursday that it planned to cease analog transmission from its full-power antennas at 1 p.m. on Feb. 17.

"We have four full-power stations all with 30-year-old-plus analog transmitters that are costly to maintain, putting out less than a quality signal," said Mark Norman, deputy director of technology at OETA.

"Sitting right alongside them are brand-new digital transmitters that have been running now for a few years. We just think it's counterproductive to continue to put money into the old ones."

Keeping the analog equipment in operation until June would cost the station about $200,000 at a time when the state is considering cutting its contribution to the budget, Norman said.

PBS spokeswoman Lea Sloan said about half of the 356 public broadcasting stations across the country will make the switch on Feb. 17. Many will do it for financial reasons. PBS said last month that if all its stations had to delay the switch, it would cost an estimated $22 million.

The Utah Broadcasters Association said the commercial stations in the state still plan to shut down analog on Feb. 17, while the public ones will wait until June.

In Wisconsin, at least two stations in Madison and five in the La Cross-Eau Claire plan to flip the switch on Feb. 17. In Minnesota, at least four stations plan to keep that date, along with five in Iowa.

Copps, the acting FCC chairman, said CBS, Fox, ABC and NBC and Telemundo had committed to keeping the stations they own broadcasting analog until June 12.

Together, they own 85 full-power stations, mainly in large cities. The rest of the stations that carry these networks are affiliates not owned by the network. ABC spokeswoman Julie Hoover said some of its stations may still go early if all other stations in their market do so.

Gannett Co. and Hearst-Argyle Television Inc. also pledged to maintain the vast majority of their stations on analog, Copps said. They own or operate 52 stations.

"These broadcasters deserve our gratitude. I encourage other broadcasters to join them," Copps said.

The transition to digital TV is being mandated because digital signals are more efficient than analog ones. Ending analog broadcasts will free up valuable space in the nation's airwaves for commercial wireless services and emergency-response networks.

In a few areas, including Hawaii, stations have already abandoned analog broadcasting.

TVs connected to cable or satellite services are not affected by the analog shutdown. But that still leaves a lot of people who could see channels go dark on Feb. 17. According to research firm MRI, 17.7 percent of Americans live in households with only over-the-air TV.

Most of them are ready for the analog shutdown, according to the National Association of Broadcasters and analysts at the Nielsen Co. Nielsen said Thursday that more than 5.8 million U.S. households, or 5.1 percent of all homes, are not ready.

At the Oklahoma public broadcasting association, Norman believes viewers are ready for the switch. The network has invited viewers to call in with transition questions on several nights. Each time, the number of callers has been smaller, Norman said.

"We really don't think it's going be as major of an issue as people anticipated," he said.

___

AP Television Writer David Bauder contributed to this report.

So for those of you who watch TV I'm sure you have seen all the ads about the conversion of An Analog signal to a digital signal. I think that it is a bad Idea for a few reasons. The first one is that I don't think a digital signal is better. Anyone who has Digital Cable knows what I mean. There is what is known as a digital glitch and maybe it is just me but it is way worse then a fuzzy or snowy picture. For those of you who watched the superbowl at (e:Drew)'s place there was a time when it happened for some reason and you saw how nasty it was. I have had that same thing happen when watching fox. The second reason I think it is a bad idea is that this hurts the poor. Yes people can get a rebate for $40 and get a box so they will be able to watch TV but the rebate doesn't cover the entire cost of the box. How is someone who doesn't have enough money for cable and can't get a new TV going to have money to do this. I think that this is a way to try and get the economy going. By the way has anyone even heard of any of these companies that make these boxes I haven't.

My biggest problem is all the wrong information that is being told to people. Time Warner by the way is full of shit. They put all these ads on saying if you have cable you are covered. Well that is a fucking lie and here is why. Remember when they had that dispute where you couldn't get anything on WIVB was that CBS and the CW. Lets say they get into a dispute with another station like NBC (yes that is coming up in the future) or ABC. What you would have done in the past was just use those old rabbit ears or go out and buy some new ones. But now with the digital conversion if NBC isn't carried and you have an old TV that won't work. I think Time Warner wants to get people not get the boxes so they have more power, I also think that there ads are misleading. They are telling people you don't need to get the box just sign up for us. But what happens if what I said earlier happens. Or what if you lose your job and cut cable how would you get any TV then well you wouldn't.

What I did was apply for two coupons and then I bought my second box today. Yes I do have cable. Here is the reason I did that. If one of the networks gets dropped by Time Warner with out the box I won't be able to get that station. With out the credit the boxes run from about $50-$80 it would cost more to get them then. The other factor is what If I lose my Job and then I don't have the boxes and I don't have the money to get them, then what? The one thing of Rabbit ears I do have is pretty old and connects with screws so I think I will have to get new rabbit ears if I need them.

I want to make it clear that I don't know about what the other cable companies are doing so that is why I didn't attack them Like I did my company Time Warner. Yes sometimes I like them and some times I hate them. Overall there has been lots of information about this through ads with websites and numbers people can call. That being said a lot of people still don't really understand what is going on with the conversion. I think that I understand it pretty well but do get why people are confused and things like HDTV and the fact that there is HDRadio and all kinds of terms just makes things messier. Here is article I found on Yahoo today about the conversion date being changed.

WASHINGTON - After weeks of debate, Congress is giving consumers four more months to prepare for the upcoming transition from analog to digital television broadcasting.

The House voted 264-158 on Wednesday to postpone the shutdown of analog TV signals to June 12, to address growing concerns that too many Americans won't be ready by the Feb. 17 deadline that Congress set three years ago. The Senate passed the measure unanimously last week and the bill now heads to President Barack Obama for his signature.

The change is being mandated because digital signals are more efficient than analog ones. Ending analog broadcasts will free up valuable space in the nation's airwaves for commercial wireless services and emergency-response networks.

The delay is a victory for the Obama administration and Democrats in Congress, who maintain that the previous administration mismanaged efforts to ensure that all consumers - particularly poor, rural and minority Americans - will be prepared for the switchover.

The Nielsen Co. estimates that more than 6.5 million U.S. households that rely on analog TV sets to pick up over-the-air broadcast signals still are not ready. People who subscribe to cable or satellite TV or have a newer TV with a digital tuner will not be affected.

"The passage of this bipartisan legislation means that millions of Americans will have the time they need to prepare for the conversion," White House spokeswoman Amy Brundage said in a statement.

Wednesday's vote came one week after House Republicans blocked the bill under a special fast-track procedure that required two-thirds support to pass. This time, the bill passed the House under a regular floor vote, which requires a simple majority.

Among Democrats, 241 voted for the bill, while 10 voted against it. Among Republicans, 23 voted for the bill, while 148 voted against it.

Speaking on the House floor Wednesday, Rick Boucher, D-Va., chairman of the House Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet, said a delay was needed to prevent the digital transition from becoming a failure.

"It is unfortunate that Congress had to take additional action on this issue, but the prospect of leaving millions of consumers in the dark was simply unacceptable," subcommittee member Edward Markey, D-Mass., added.

Opponents of a delay warned, however, that the move will confuse consumers, create added costs for TV stations that will continue broadcasting both analog and digital signals for four more months and burden wireless companies and public safety agencies waiting for the airwaves that will be vacated by the switchover.

"It's time for us to move forward on this and keep our word to the American people," said Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., calling for the transition to proceed on Feb. 17.

Democrats have tried to address these concerns by allowing broadcast stations to switch to digital signals sooner than June if they choose, potentially freeing up spectrum for public safety early. But it is unclear how many TV stations plan to take advantage of this option.

The Consumer Electronics Association, meanwhile, is warning that a delay could result in a shortage of converter boxes that translate digital signals back into analog ones for older TVs. Manufacturers and retailers have planned inventory based on a Feb. 17 transition date.

The new administration called for the digital transition to be postponed after the Commerce Department last month hit a $1.34 billion funding limit for coupons that subsidize converter boxes for consumers. The coupon program allows consumers to request up to two $40 vouchers per household to help pay for the boxes, which generally cost between $40 and $80 each and can be purchased without a coupon.

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration, the arm of the Commerce Department administering the program, is sending out new coupons only as older, unredeemed ones reach a 90-day expiration date and free up more money. The NTIA has more than 3.7 million coupon requests on a waiting list - and those people would not receive their coupons before Feb. 17.

A separate measure, part of the economic stimulus proposal working its way through Congress, would add $650 million in funding for the coupon program.

Democrats on Capitol Hill and at the FCC have also questioned whether the government has provided enough on-the-ground support to help consumers hook up converter boxes - or whether enough call center resources have been arranged to handle what could be an avalanche of requests for help.

"The country is not prepared to undertake a nationwide transition in 12 days without unacceptably high consumer dislocation," acting FCC chairman Michael Copps said in a statement. "We've got a lot of work to do, but we now have an opportunity to do it better."

The National Association of Broadcasters also welcomed the delay. The group said it will provide new television spots to promote the June 12 deadline, and work with stations to coordinate additional analog shut-off tests to raise awareness and help consumers prepare.

One other thing that is odd for places like Buffalo is that Canada is changing to digital also but they are doing it at a different date that I don't remember when it is. So for people who want to get those channels they need a box that can take both analog and digital signals I think that is called a pass through box but not sure about that.

So here is an interesting article About AP wanting rights or money or something over that famous Obama picture. The thing that is weird is someone from AP helped write the article. Go to yahoo and check out the story or if you don't want to here it is. That assumes that they don't sue me for passing the story along.

NEW YORK - On buttons, posters and Web sites, the image was everywhere during last year's presidential campaign: A pensive Barack Obama looking upward, as if to the future, splashed in a Warholesque red, white and blue and underlined with the caption HOPE.

Designed by Shepard Fairey, a Los-Angeles based street artist, the image has led to sales of hundreds of thousands of posters and stickers, has become so much in demand that copies signed by Fairey have been purchased for thousands of dollars on eBay.

The image, Fairey has acknowledged, is based on an Associated Press photograph, taken in April 2006 by Manny Garcia on assignment for the AP at the National Press Club in Washington.

The AP says it owns the copyright, and wants credit and compensation. Fairey disagrees.

"The Associated Press has determined that the photograph used in the poster is an AP photo and that its use required permission," the AP's director of media relations, Paul Colford, said in a statement.

"AP safeguards its assets and looks at these events on a case-by-case basis. We have reached out to Mr. Fairey's attorney and are in discussions. We hope for an amicable solution."

"We believe fair use protects Shepard's right to do what he did here," says Fairey's attorney, Anthony Falzone, executive director of the Fair Use Project at Stanford University and a lecturer at the Stanford Law School. "It wouldn't be appropriate to comment beyond that at this time because we are in discussions about this with the AP."

Fair use is a legal concept that allows exceptions to copyright law, based on, among other factors, how much of the original is used, what the new work is used for and how the original is affected by the new work.

A longtime rebel with a history of breaking rules, Fairey has said he found the photograph using Google Images. He released the image on his Web site shortly after he created it, in early 2008, and made thousands of posters for the street.

As it caught on, supporters began downloading the image and distributing it at campaign events, while blogs and other Internet sites picked it up. Fairey has said that he did not receive any of the money raised.

A former Obama campaign official said they were well aware of the image based on the picture taken by Garcia, a temporary hire no longer with the AP, but never licensed it or used it officially. The Obama official asked not to be identified because no one was authorized anymore to speak on behalf of the campaign.

The image's fame did not end with the election.

It will be included this month at a Fairey exhibit at the Institute of Contemporary Art in Boston and a mixed-media stenciled collage version has been added to the permanent collection of the National Portrait Gallery in Washington.

"The continued use of the poster, regardless of whether it is for galleries or other distribution, is part of the discussion AP is having with Mr. Fairey's representative," Colford said.

A New York Times book on the election, just published by Penguin Group (USA), includes the image. A Vermont-based publisher, Chelsea Green, also used it - credited solely to Fairey_ as the cover for Robert Kuttner's "Obama's Challenge," an economic manifesto released in September. Chelsea Green president Margo Baldwin said that Fairey did not ask for money, only that the publisher make a donation to the National Endowment for the Arts.

"It's a wonderful piece of art, but I wish he had been more careful about the licensing of it," said Baldwin, who added that Chelsea Green gave $2,500 to the NEA.

Fairey also used the AP photograph for an image designed specially for the Obama inaugural committee, which charged anywhere from $100 for a poster to $500 for a poster signed by the artist.

Fairey has said that he first designed the image a year ago after he was encouraged by the Obama campaign to come up with some kind of artwork. Last spring, he showed a letter to The Washington Post that came from the candidate.

"Dear Shepard," the letter reads. "I would like to thank you for using your talent in support of my campaign. The political messages involved in your work have encouraged Americans to believe they can help change the status quo. Your images have a profound effect on people, whether seen in a gallery or on a stop sign."

At first, Obama's team just encouraged him to make an image, Fairey has said. But soon after he created it, a worker involved in the campaign asked if Fairey could make an image from a photo to which the campaign had rights.

"I donated an image to them, which they used. It was the one that said "Change" underneath it. And then later on I did another one that said "Vote" underneath it, that had Obama smiling," he said in a December 2008 interview with an underground photography Web site.

___

Associated Press writer Philip Elliott in Washington contributed to this report.

I wonder how this will effect that site that has the Obama stuff you can get on T-shirts and stuff.