The eye means more to Alain Saverot than to anyone else. He lives through his eyes. He creates through his eyes. He understands through his eyes. His insatiable eye knows how to see and to learn. (Are you not happy for Alain Saverot?)

Wish I’d thought of this — news.com has interviewed one of the two lawyers that first spammed the Net. Really interesting stuff, and a sketch of a man bemused by his place in history.

A bit early for April Fool’s, but I just love this RFC too much to wait. (Did I just admit I read RFCs for fun? Oh for God’s sake. I really am not fit for decent company these days.)

So I’ve had my first full day of intensive Macintosh exposure in quite some time. As I sit back and contemplate the galaxy of straightened paperclips twinkling on my desktop, I have but one question for the Macintosh users in the audience: ARE YOU PEOPLE FREAKIN’ MASOCHISTS?!?!?!? Now, send me letters telling me how wonderful I am for not tossing that crashy heap of silicon attitude out the freakin’ window.

Definitions for a new economy: Hiat-list (hy-AIT-list), intrans.v. where writers in limbo take their bylines while they find out whether a particular magazine lives or dies: “Wool Socks Weekly loved Chester’s article pitch on ‘Top Ten Argyle-Wearing Celebrities,’ but he’s been hiat-listed while the publisher begs investors for another round of funding.” (Etymology “hiatus” Am.Eng “indefinite cessation with frankly unpromising promise of return” + “waitlist” Am.Eng “I sure know a lot of folk in this situation; feels like college admissions all over again”) Spread the word!

Why the First Amendment isn’t already dead: Because teenagers say the darnedest things. More power to ’em.

The latest from SatireWire: Rich people are confused by poor people. Of course anyone who’s ever been to a magazine editorial meeting knows that…

Seen in a friend’s .sig file (so I thought I’d inflict it on you): Why does information want to be free? Why not cupcakes?

Here’s an interesting item, in which a writer with a major vested interest in a story criticizes another newspaper for having a vested interest in the story. Not that I’m rushing to the defense of the Seattle Times here (the story was terrific, but the Blethen family, its owner, is an evil pack of union-busting bastards) but… the Wall Street Journal op-ed page? If Ms. Landro had any information proving the story was false or flawed, wouldn’t she have run an article in the far more reputable WSJ news section? (UPDATE 7 April 02: Salon’s on the case.)

Maybe I’m being slow today, but this article… it says here that the magnetic North Pole is on the move and drifting… north. North of WHAT? (Okay, no, I get it, but it did give me the willies there for a moment.)