Posts Tagged ‘times’

Obey Shepard Fairey: Start Buying “Obey X” Levi’s on October 29th, 2009

Monday, October 26th, 2009

You know Shepard Fairey from his Barack Obama Hope posters of last year and of course his related legal troubles from this month, right? (Always remember, when you borrow from others, it’s “fair use” but when others borrow from you, it’s cease and desist time for the infringing ”parasites“ - inn’t that right, Shepard?)  

Anyway, brace yourself for this Thursday when Shepard and our corporate overlords at Levi’s team up for the debut of the “Obey X Collection.” See?

“The highly-collectible Obey x Levi’s® capsule collection will be carried exclusively at select Levi’s® Store locations in New York City, San Francisco, Chicago and Santa Monica and at Levis.com.  A limited number of pieces will also be available at www.obeyclothing.com.  The collection will be available beginning October 29 and will range in price from $34.50 to $148.   To commemorate the launch of the collection, on October 29 Fairey will unveil a series of four new poster designs at a live art installation outside The Levi’s® Store in New York City’s Times Square.  Once Fairey completes the installation, he will meet-and-greet event participants while autographing free museum-quality reproductions of his new posters.”

It’ll look like this. Just $37.78 for a grey T-shirt:

obey-levis-2009-fall-winter-collection-5 copy

But there’s more:

“The series of four limited-edition Shepard Fairey posters will be given away as a free gift, while supplies last, with the purchase of any item from the Obey x Levi’s® collection in the following Levi’s® Store locations: Times Square and Soho in New York City, Union Square in San Francisco, Santa Monica and Chicago.  The front side of each of the four double-sided posters features artwork that exists as a stand-alone piece.  The reverse side of each poster also includes one piece of a oversized mural image specially designed by Fairey.”

obey-levis-2009-fall-winter-collection-3 copy

That’s not dirt, it’s paint from all those nights you’ve spent tagging:

obey-levis-2009-fall-winter-collection-4 copy

“Think & Create” and “Paint and Destroy”:

obey-levis-2009-fall-winter-collection-6 copy

Is Obey “the new Ed Hardy,” or something? One thing’s for sure kids – quality will be higher and the cost cheaper compared to what Shepard normally offers.

See you at the Union Square Levi’s (300 Post Street) this Thursday!

Remember, Obey.

p1080089 copy

S.F. is 40 years old. (40 going on 28, or 17, or something.)

All the deets after the jump.

(more…)

See How Much Every Last Bay Area Government Worker Makes, Courtesy of the CoCo Times

Sunday, August 30th, 2009

Oh, it’s on. The Contra Costa Times went and done it. They went and  asked every bay area governmental agency they could think of (from “A” for AC Transit to “W” for the City of Woodside), “Hey, how much do all your employees make?” So now, tout le monde, can see how much you (a city, county or other regional government employee) makes in salary by clicking here.

The search screen looks a little like this:

Untitledffs copy

What’s that, you work for the state?  Well then the Sacramento Bee has you covered right here.

Is all this disclosure legal? Hells yes! Why? Because International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 21, AFL-CIO v. Superior Court of Alameda County was a 7-0 vote in the California State Supreme Court. Does that mean that you can look up the Supreme Court Justices’ salaries? Yes. Ha! (But they don’t care if you know, srsly.)  

Did some ”public health care district” hospital administrator in the East Bay pull down over $800,000 in a year? Yes.

Why? Why not? And, since women only make 59 cents for every dollar men make, shouldn’t her take have been adjusted up 69% to $1,486,000 per year or something? Why not? After all, her job is described as “difficult.”

And her assistants only get paid “from $372,555 to $407,065.”

That’s all.

Bill-copy

See some of the cities covered, after the jump.

(more…)

At Long Last, Pedestrian Signals Installed on 19th Avenue in the Sunset

Thursday, June 18th, 2009

Don’t get out much to this part of the Westside Fog Belt, so this is the first I’ve seen of pedestrian signals at some intersections of 19th Avenue, aka State Highway One.

Of course, this improvement comes a little late for some

IMG_7164 copy

Look for them, tirelessly counting down 24/7, on Park Presidio and the Sunset District part of 19th Avenue.

Hurray, I suppose.

The Rule of Three: Counting People at an International ANSWER March

Monday, March 23rd, 2009

The A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition organizes a lot of protests here in the Bay Area, as is their right. And they seem to consistently exaggerate the number of souls who participate in their marches, as is their right. O.K. fine. But Saturday’s march down Market Street on the sixth anniversary of the start of the Iraq War had such small numbers compared to the big antiwar marches of 2003 that a person could have easiy tallied up an accurate estimate, if only to see how much the ANSWER Coalition exaggerates.

The “answer” is this: they overestimate by 200%. It’s the Rule of Three, just like in the movie American Pie 2. So, take the “official” estimate of 4000 marchers, divide by three to get 1333 and there you have it. Bingo bango.

Here’s Saturday’s march from above. The 440 or so people marked with white circles represent a third of the total number. (It took about 4 minutes to tally this shot and another ten minutes to tally folks in other photos.) Click to expand:

(Of course lots of people want to give President Barack Obama some time to have a chance to deal with matters, and it was raining, and yada yada yada. The point is that it shouldn’t be so hard to say that the crowd was slightly bigger or smaller than last year – there’s no reason to lie about it, is there? Moving on…)

Kudos to the Socialist Worker, which came a bit closer with an estimate of 2500 people. Perhaps they use the Rule of Two.

Double kudos to local journalist and photographer Josh Wolfe, who came in with “maybe 1000 people” as his honest estimate. Bay City News kept it conservative with “hundreds,” which is literally true, but that word could also suggest 200 or so. Oh well. The San Jose Mercury News played it safe with no estimate at all.

And SFGate / San Francisco Chronicle? Well, they originally went with “massive” as a description of the masses (which was particularly inappropriate given that similar marches six years ago had numbers about 50 times greater), but then pulled back a bit later to just talking about the “crowds.” All of this is ably documented by Robert B. Livingston here on the IndyBay.

Check it, before:

And after:

Originally posted by Mr. Livingston, I presume.

Robert Livingston is also correct in stating that writers Heather Knight and Steve Rubenstein produced a bit that was “well composed, accurate, and captured much of the essence” of the event, so that’s a good thing. It’s not clear who came up with the boner “massive.”

Chronicle Editor-at-Large Phil Bronstein has recently opined on these kinds of issues – here’s a re-hash of a count controversy back in 2003.

Anyway, the correct estimate is 1330 marchers, mas o menos, depending whether you include the cops, the undercover cops, the people who didn’t have the chance to march because they were setting up in Civic Center, the people who left early, the people who arrived late, the marchers without signs who happen to be on the sidewalks, the photographers, the videographers, etc.

The Rule of Three has been tested and proven. Would certain people have more credibility if they didn’t spin so much? Yes, yes they would.

Jessica: “If a guy tells you how many girls he’s hooked up with, it’s not even close to that. You take that number and divide it by three, then you get the real total. OK, so if Kevin is saying it’s been three girls it’s more like one or none.”
Vicky: “None?”
Jessica: “The rule of three. It’s an exact science. Consistent as gravity.”

LA Times Says No to Compact Flourescent Light Bulbs, Yes to $8000 Chairs

Tuesday, January 6th, 2009

Oh my. Comes now the Los Angeles Times Newspaper discussing “Bad Design Trends We Hope Die in 2009.”

“CFLs: To be green, you do not need to suffer with compact fluorescent bulbs, a light source that does not render color or texture and only turns on and off. Instead, do the planet a favor by using a combination of a halogen bulb, which does not use mercury or rare earth phosphors, and a dimmer. If you dim a halogen bulb to 50%, you will save over 40% energy and your light bulb can last more than 10 years.”

Let’s take a quick inventory of the allegations against our huckleberry friend, the Compact Fluorescent Lamp.

via fangelman’s photostream

1. “suffer with compact fluorescent bulbs”

Some people can handle CFLs with ease. Why not try? Some people love them.

2. “only turns on and off”

Nope. Dimmers are available, don’t cha know?

3. “halogen bulb, which does not use mercury”

Halogen bulbs have a few issues with mercury too, don’t cha know? Arguably, more issues.

4. “If you dim a halogen bulb to 50%, you will save”

Why in the heck would you run a bulb at 50% all the time? Wouldn’t you just install a bulb with half the power?

Here in Northern California, we still believe in CFLs. As does the PG&E. How unfashionable of us!

And what should we buy, per this article in the Times?

Ralph Lauren chairs.

That’s right. $8000 Ralph Lifshitz chairs.

See you in Hell, LA Times.