Food for Thought, or Why You Might Skip That Steak
3283
Anders Thomas Jensen's film about the cannibal business is neither high flying enough for the art house nor low down enough for the cult-video shelf.
27564
Avoid these stocks -- you may already own them.
88027
Options, beautiful options. How dost thou delay me?
541357
It offers more than you might have thought.
648467
First there was Yoplait's Go-Gurt, which sort of made sense -- sometimes you want calcium but can't spare time for a sit-down nosh. Skippy's Squeeze Stix were weirder, but we understood it: Peanut butter in a tube is basically just the traveler's take on PB on a spoon.
533529
Some five-star funds have a few stars too many. Choose carefully.
691641
Some nutrition experts think partial-whole-grain breads mislead consumers.
554641
Mostly, these lists give me an excuse to remind readers of good and great films that they may have missed. But in some respects, the actual list is the least of it.
462957
(National-NBC) Dec. 3, 2004 - The next time you enjoy a steak or a burger, you might want to think about how it could be effecting your joints.
89659
Got vegetables? The days of eating 200 pounds of meat a year may be on the way out.
607627
There's been a mostly fantastic discussion about fair use in this neighborhood for the last few days.  It started when a photograph of Lane Hartwell's was used in a video spoof of the Billy Joel song "We Didn't Start the Fire."  The first I heard of this was in a Twitter post of hers where she said she was turning off access to her entire Flickr collection because this picture was used without permission. A series of communications with the people who did the video resulted in the video being taken down. Later Mike Arrington, who is a lawyer, wrote a piece saying she didn't have right on her side, and that the video's use of her picture was probably fair use. I found Mike's piece compelling. Others took offense. It thought it was a useful part of the discussion. I understand Ms Hartwell's point of view. I hate it when people copy a whole post of mine and paste it into theirs. But then I grab bits of images and put them on my blog and people rarely complain. The blogosphere is built on being loose about copyright and fair use.  I'm doing a deal with a content company and all these issues are coming up. We haven't been able to write a contract that covers all the things they want covered and make it possible for me to do what I need to do, and they want my product to work. It's a real mess we're in. Bloggers are supposed to be radicals when it comes to fair use and copyright, but that generalization doesn't work with many creative people. Hartwell's position in some ways is like the RIAA or MPAA, who bloggers often dismiss as clueless. How can we have it both ways? How can some defend her position yet not defend the entertainment industry? There's a lot to discuss here, and a lot of the discussion on the blogs has been informative and respectful. Not all of it, but to an unusually high degree.  So, I am interested in doing an in person "flash conference" on the subject of fair use in a few weeks. I'd say next week if it weren't Christmas. Most conferences are so boring. I want to do a conf on a hot subject when it's still hot in the blogosphere. This may be a good subject for such a quickly organized conference. What do you think of the flash conference idea for this??
232885
A Foolish guide to making tough investing choices.
535812
Why do we gossip? Evolution may hold some surprising answers.
434734
With the pro football season in full swing, it's time again for a superfluous digression into the corollaries between investing and sports. I can already hear some of you groaning, but cut me some slack.
706526
Investors may think so, but this Fool disagrees.
255399
Don't let market pessimism about the casual dining sector discourage you from taking a look at this potential star.
576378
Comment is free: Madeleine Bunting: It's pointless to cut out meat and cars while having lots of children.