Top 22 Nicknames for Benedict Cumberbatch

Photo by Sam Hughes

22. King Of The Cumberbitches!

21. Cummerbund Bandersnatch 

20. Spongebob Squarebatch

19. Vorpal Blade Snicker Snack

18. Jinglebear Briarpatch

17. Sasquatch Pancakestack

16. Litterbox Slumber Cat

15. Grammy Pick Grandmaster Flash

14. Bandicoot Crash and Snatch

13. Turtleneck Dumbledore

12. Peregrine Bumpershoot

11. Parlortrick Chunter Prat

10. Boffin Dick Baby Match

9. River Styx Titan Clash

8. Bend-It-Like-Beckham Snatch

7. Bubble Tea Cabbage Patch

6. Benny Hill Camelsnatch

5. Thistledick Lumberjack

4. Bento Box Bumble Batch

3. Watercloset Chimneysweep

2. Bendy-Dick Cum-On-My-Baps

1. D'Brickashaw Ferguson

Note: "Bendy-Dick Cum-On-My-Baps" was an actual school nickname. If you don't know what "baps" are, ask a Brit.

Ayn Rand's Utopia

We all know that libertarians believe in drug legalization, the free market, free speech and freedom of religion.

But what everyone forgets is that libertarianism effectively prohibits pollution of any kind (air, water, noise, etc.). It doesn't just tax it or discourage it. It makes it virtually impossible.

Philosophers from Thomas Paine and William Godwin to Robert Nozick and Frederick Hayek have written much about libertarianism. But I'm going to quote Ayn Rand, as she is the modern face of libertarianism (and the woman for which Ron Paul named his son):

"The basic right of man is to live his life without being harmed by others. This implies the requirement to refrain from harming others as well, since all men share this most fundamental right."

Ayn Rand

This isn't just Rand's philosophy. This is the core tenet of libertarianism and laissez-faire capitalism. This is why libertarians are against taxing people to provide social programs. By using force to take someone's money, you are harming them and violating the "basic right of man".

However, modern Objectivists rarely point out that burning coal or pouring chemicals into a river causes harm to others in the same way that taxation does. And like taxation, pollution uses force to cause harm. According to the World Health Organization, air pollution from burning coal kills more than 1 million people every year, and causes physical harm and monetary harm (aka "theft") to many many more. In Rand's philosophy, pollution is the moral equivalent of robbery or rape.

So, what is the role of government when one individual (the owner of a coal plant) is causing harm to others against their will?

Modern "right-wing" politicians (aka "the Republican party") advocate that we should ignore these harms. The coal plant is providing electricity and creating jobs, and one could argue that this benefit outweighs the harm (to the society as a whole, if not to each individual). Despite what Paul Ryan and the Koch Brothers would like you to believe, this is not "free market capitalism". This is tyranny. This is what Ayn Rand calls "collectivism" -- the government using force to decide that the "needs" of the entire society are more important that the rights of any one individual.

Modern "left-wing" politicians (aka "the Democratic party") advocate that we should "regulate" these harms. This means using government force to reduce "excessive" pollution, and to tax the rest. If the scientists at the EPA decide that burning coal causes $100 worth of damage to every American, then left-wing politicians will levy a tax on coal burning equal to $100 per American. They could then turn around and give this money to each person that was harmed. However, more often, that money is used to pay for government programs that attempt to ameliorate that harm (e.g. health care) or reduce future harm (e.g. investment in "alternative" energy).

As with the Republican solution, the Democrat's solution is also "collectivism". It is the government using force to put the collective good ahead of individual rights.

Libertarianism holds that both the Republicans and Democrats are allowing (and even encouraging) a moral wrong. No one has a right to harm any other person without using the free market to reach an agreement beforehand. I can't just burn down your house because I feel like it, and then pay you $100 the next day because I feel that this is the "fair value" of your home. If you want to sell me your house, you are free to do so. But we must come to an agreement *before* I burn down your house.

In the case of pollution, this means that every single person harmed by pollution must agree to it beforehand. As one individual, I could decide that I'm willing to let a coal plant pollute my air if they pay me $100 each year. Every single person could reach this same agreement with the coal company. This is the free market at work: individuals determining how much something (such as clean air) is worth *before* they sell it.

It's even possible that everyone would come together and legally delegate a representative to negotiate on their behalf. This is what unions do, and it allows the workers to continue to do their jobs and live their lives while a fair market price is determined.

However, unions are voluntary organizations. If you don't want to work for GM, you don't have to. But breathing isn't voluntary. If you pollute my air, you are using force to harm me, and it is the legitimate role of any libertarian government to stop that harm (by using the courts and police force to physically prevent this harm from taking place).

As it is virtually impossible that 7 billion humans will all agree to have their air polluted, libertarianism and pollution are incompatible in the real world (unless the polluter finds a way to contain the pollution in a bubble built on private land, or to stop the pollution at the source -- but then it isn't really "pollution", is it?)

At this point, libertarians might choose to compromise their principles in exchange for efficiency. For example, I would like to be able to drive a gasoline-powered vehicle so that I can visit my family on Thanksgiving. Therefore, I elect a government that enforces my "right" to pollute, even though I am violating the rights of others. This is democracy. But it isn't libertarianism.

Saturday Morning Silliness

The One-Ton Offensive Line?

The NFL is getting out of hand. You can't play on the line of scrimmage unless you top 350 pounds. It's making the game less fun to watch and less fun to play. And leading to more injuries. But the worst part is that high school kids around the country think they need to weigh that much for a shot at playing in Division I in college -- and to have ANY shot at playing in the pros. And the sad fact is that they are right.

It's time to institute a 300-pound weight limit. At first thought, that seems unfair, even discriminatory. Research shows that the obese have trouble competing for everyday jobs, and now we're going to lock them out of the NFL?!?

But we all know that linemen aren't plucked from the ranks of couch potatoes. They are talented athletes that have added mountains of muscle and fat in high school and college just so they can compete. And there are other sports with weight limits -- like boxing, wrestling, weightlifting, and of course Tug-O-War.

I'd recommend phasing this rule in slowly. Start at 360 and drop it down by 10 pounds per year. If you announced it tomorrow, high school and college kids around the country would immediately be trying to get UNDER 300 pounds, so they could play in the NFL. It would do wonders for the 99% of these kids that never even make it to draft day and just end as fat guys in their twenties with sore backs and bad knees.

Dear Media, You Just Got Played

"Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations."           - George Orwell

Last week, Maker's Mark Whiskey announced that, because of such incredible demand for their product, they would be forced to add a "touch more water" to their 90 proof whiskey, lowering it's alcohol content from 45% (90 proof) to 42% (84 proof).

A week later, they claimed to abort this strategy because of overwhelming customer feedback. To quote the grandson of the company's founder: "We've been tremendously humbled over the last week or so. You spoke. We listened."

Both stories were covered by everyone was from Fox News to USA Today to NPR.

I call bullshit.

You may notice the similarity of the coverage from each "news" outlet, as if they each just cut and paste from the same press release.

This is the message that Maker's Mark got out to hundreds of millions of consumers in the last 7 days, for free:

1. Our product is of such high quality that our sales have far exceeded expectations.
2. This surprising popularity means we will have trouble distilling our whiskey to the exacting standings we have used for 3 generations.
3. Our customers care about quality. So much so that they demanded that we continue to produce the highest quality whiskey we can, no matter what it costs!
4. We care. We listened to our customers. We will continue to meet your demands for great whiskey, even if it cuts into our bottom line. Because ... we ... care.

One question for Maker's Mark. If your product quality is so high that it sells itself, and demand grows much faster than your ability to keep pace with production, why do you continue to spend $25 million per year on advertising that artificially pumps up demand?

I'm sorry for bringing additional attention to this scam. But hopefully it will shed light on this story for what it really is -- yet another company playing the media like a fiddle.

I'm not a whiskey drinker. If I need to get drunk, Bud Light does the job. If I'm thirsty and need a glass of water, Bud Light does the job.

But if you are a whiskey consumer, please take a minute to go to your locally owned spirits shoppe and purchase something from a manufacturer that puts their money into their product, instead of pumping it into advertising and deceitful PR campaigns.

Baseball Mogul 2014: New Uniforms

A very cool feature this year is new animations for the batter and pitcher. I realize that Baseball Mogul isn't about cutting-edge graphics. But it was pretty annoying that every single batter and pitcher was a white guy with bad posture and a dark blue helmet.

Old Animations

In case you were wondering, the old batter animation (and pitcher animation) was me. Filmed in my backyard, with a giant green tarp used as a green screen. There was snow on the ground.

So, this year features a new animation system, with the ability to change uniform colors and skin colors.

Examples of New Animations

The cool thing is that this feature is being added by an artist and another programmer, with very little effort on my part. So I get to keep working on the meat of the game.

Game Company Redesigns Chess

This week, "Hasbro Gaming" decided to redesign Monopoly in order to get some free publicity. They asked the internet which piece to remove (the iron) and what to replace it with (a cat - duh).

This caused us at Sports Mogul to think: "Hey, we
could use some free publicityare good at redesigning games!"

So, as a public service to the world, we've decided to bring the game of chess into the 21st century. With the help of the internet.

Step 1. We asked the internet to name their least favorite chess piece. The results:

Rank	Least Favorite Piece	Votes	Percent
11	The Knight	652,510	3.16%
10	The "Horsie"	998,602	4.50%
9	The Rook	1,257,993	6.65%
8	The Unicorn	1,400,590	7.98%
7	The Pawn	2,042,532	9.66%
6	Ringo	2,272,338	10.91%
5	Charmander	2,654,760	12.10%
4	The Queen	2,996,974	14.10%
3	The King	3,110,278	17.09%
2	Fluttershy	4,110,707	22.56%
1	The Bishop	4,169,452	22.70%

A lot of people didn't understand the question. Apparently, the internet is filled with morons. You learn something new every day.

First, I am pleased with how popular the knight is. The knight could easily beat Jeb Bush in 2016.

Second, we found that 12% of the internet loves the bishop "because it looks like a penis". However, 19% of the internet is "creeped out" by the bishop "because it looks like a penis".

So, the bishop is gone.

Step 2: We asked the internet what to replace the bishop with. Results:

Rank	New Chess Piece	Votes	Percent
10	Chloe Kardashian	1,266	0.03%
9	Justin Bieber	988,551	4.60%
8	Anything "invented by a mom"	1,021,080	5.65%
7	Nate Silver	1,678,915	8.81%
6	Ru Paul	3,042,532	15.46%
5	Colonel Meow	3,054,746	15.80%
4	Snow Penis	3,092,263	15.98%
3	Grumpy Cat	4,334,509	19.12%
2	George Takei	4,450,891	20.03%
1	소녀시대 (Girls Generation)	4,696,530	22.70%

I love the fact that we are essentially done with the Kardashians (Kim didn't even make the list). Yay for the internet!

We did have to disqualify Girls Generation, because they are a 9-member K-Pop band and we only have 2 bishops to replace. We could replace all the pawns with Girls Generation, but then we would have to leave out Seohyun, and she's my favorite (and the voice of Edith in the Korean version of Despicable Me). Also, pawns are more popular than Charmander, so they aren't going anywhere. (By the way, if you think everyone in Girls Generation looks alike, you are a racist).

Because the bishop was removed for its "penis-ness", we can't replace the bishop with a "snow penis", whatever that is. And if we add a cat, any cat, Hasbro will sue us.

So, we're removing the bishops because they look too much like penises. And replacing them with George Takei and Ru Paul. Irony?

Editor: Nate Silver predicted that Nate Silver would capture 8.67% of the electorate. Nate Silver was only off by about 20,000 votes.

Finally, "moving diagonally" is pretty boring in a world where 31% of our games involve killing zombies with rocket-propelled grenades. So:

Step 3: We asked the internet what "special power" we should give the new piece. Results:

Rank	"Special Power" For New Piece	Votes	Percent
8	SEO (Search Engine Optimization)	565,991	2.69%
7	"Purchase Vigara Levtira Cilias  --65% off! "	958,761	3.58%
6	Ban plastic water bottles	1,057,105	6.05%
5	"Remove Moles and Skin Tags Whilst You Sleep!"	1,340,901	6.98%
4	Repeal the 16th Amendment	2,140,018	9.23%
3	Petition the federal government to build a Death Star	2,422,982	10.11%
2	"Look great naked!"	2,766,339	11.89%
1	Impeach Obama (aka "Socialist Hitler")	12,415,007	44.10%

It's official. Another big win for President Obama! Even Karl Rove won't contest these results.

So, after 14 centuries, chess gets its first major makeover. The bishops have been officially replaced with George Takei and Ru Paul.

George Takei still moves diagonally (he certainly can't go straight), and he also has the power to impeach "Socialist Hitler" (as long as Hitler appears in the guise of a black man from Hawaii).

Ru Paul sits on the other side of the queen (that's pretty confusing) and has the ability to "Look great naked!" (but we knew that already, right?)

In other news, Baseball Mogul 2014 will be available in 6 weeks! More info soon.