t's been a good year to be NetFlix. The online DVD-renting and video-streaming service has continually posted increases in profits each previous fiscal quarter, sometimes gains as much as 88%. Despite claims that increasing postage prices and the difficulty of obtaining streaming content may hinder future profit reporting, NetFlix continues to make big money while offering less to subscribers than in previous plans. The announcement of higher-priced plans, the separation of DVD rental/streaming packages, and setting limitations on streaming devices have all been designed to offset any future losses and increase profits, but today NetFlix CEO Reed Hastings announced it wasn't enough, and has made a bold proposal to raise subscription prices on people who use neither service.

"NetFlix is facing a struggle in the future, to continue to bring high-quality entertainment to our loyal subscribers, those who rent traditional formats by mail or watch via our state-of-the-art streaming service, we need to increase our income," Hastings announced from his undisclosed location in the NetFlix bunker in California. "I see no reason to further burden our faithful customers with the costs. Which is why I am enacting a daring new plan to increase subscription costs to those who do not subscribe to us."

Under the new NetFlix plan, subscribers to the DVD-rental service will pay $7.99 for 1 DVD at a time and $11.99 for 2, while the unlimited streaming-only plan stands at $7.99, and those who choose not to watch movies in either format from NetFlix only pay $2.99.

"At long last, starting in November, NetFlix is bringing the thrilling experience of a recurring NetFlix charge that our subscribers have long enjoyed to all those who have not yet become NetFlix customers," said Hastings.

Response has been mixed from non-customers and consumer watchdogs alike. Nell Farthingford, a spokesperson for the consumer advocacy group Wait/What, said of the new NetFlix price increases, "Wait? What?"

Farthingford clarified why consumer advocates like her are concerned about the new plan.

"I'm not math expert, but it does sound a lot like people who don't receive any service from the company are being forced to pay them for nothing." Farthingford did concede, "However, if I'm already paying them $2.99, it's only another five dollars to get unlimited streaming content on my PS3, X-Box, Wii, iPhone, iPad, or NetFlix-ready device. That's not a bad deal."

Outrage swelled around the internet on message boards, where outrage is born and nurtured, with some people complaining that the media company is exploiting those who do not patronize them to increase their already-large profits. Following price increases in November 2010 and June 2010 on people who actually watched movies, tempers run high for those who are unhappy with NetFlix. As always, though, a few responders could see the business sense of the deal.

"It's only a three dollar increase from what you were paying before," said MovieLuv.net forum user rhAsTings. "Quit your cryin. If you don't like it, you don't have to not use it. Just subscribe today."

Stockholders have already exhibited excitement of over the potential gain of $2,574,000,000 in the third quarter, and insiders at NetFlix are reportedly shitting themselves wet at the prospect of increasing their presence overseas, raising their number of non-subscribers to an estimated 6 billion by the end of next year.

Hastings said, "I see no reason a simple hut-dweller in Botswana should not be afforded the same luxury that a meager trailer-dweller without internet will soon enjoy—the joy of becoming a NetFlix bill-payer. Today we have the United States… tomorrow, we take the world!"

Upon receiving news of the NetFlix proposed price plan, Amazon.com founder and CEO Jeff Bezos dramatically smashed a china cup against his Kindle and bellowed, "You will bow down before me, Reed! You… and your heirs!"

Turkey to Block Offensive Websites; commune Offers Pre-Emptive “Fuck You”

Obama to Change Spelling of Name to oBAMa for Maximum Impact

Oasis, Killers Combine Forces to Ruin Sgt. Pepper’s for Everyone

Global Warming Poses Threat to National Parks, Says WWF’s “Machoman” Savage

Last issue's tome on the metric system inspired more reader mail than any column since the My Friend Polio where Omar Bricks offered to sell naked pictures of my sister to the highest bidder. This time, however, readers weren't asking if I could beat Omar's price. They wanted to know how in the hell we came up with our current non-metric system of weights and measures in the first place. Good question.

Imperial weights and measures (known in modest England as "English weights and measures") range from the feet, gallons and pounds we're all familiar with to hundreds of freakish and forgotten variations that sound like whimsy straight out of Lord of the Rings. The next time somebody asks you for a chalder of coal or wants to know if you can spare a groat, you'll know you've either time-tripped into some medieval hell or else you're at the Renaissance Fair. Either way you're screwed. Likewise if someone offers you a minim of soy sauce or four roods of swampland. And if some wiseacre tells you you're twelve scruples overweight or uglier than a perch of limestone, punch him in the face first and ask questions about his outdated terminology later.

The system of Imperial weights and measures is not one defined by cold logic or mathematical nonsense, rather it's an innately human system based on how one innate human, King Edward I of England, thought things should be measured. Having grown up poor, Edward was the kind of insecure nuevo-rich king that insisted everything be named after him and that potatoes should only be grown in his likeness.

In England, length was originally measured by a unit known as the dork, which corresponded to the king's, uh… royal tackle. Later, more prurient factions within the country pushed to have the measure changed to the more family-friendly foot. Edward relented after being convinced that everybody knew what it really meant, and that nobody thought he had big feet.

The yard was developed as a unit of measurement based on the distance from the door to the backyard fence in the king's boyhood home, which indicated a home run if cleared on the fly by a batted ball. Anyone who pointed out that Edward grew up with a damned small back yard was immediately beheaded and taken off the king's Christmas card list without benefit of legal council.

An acre was originally defined as the area an ox could crap up in one morning, though over time oxen fell into disuse due to the scarcity of uncrapped land in England. In time the acre was known as the smallest area of land you could leave to your heirs without them coming to ox-drop on your grave after you'd passed.

Edward was also obsessed with barley, which at the time was known as "edwardly." The king spent much of his spare time counting grains of the stuff, and was keen on showing off his barley-counting prowess by having the standard measure of weight in England be equal to 7,000 grains. This unit was nicknamed the "pound" because that amount of barley was usually sufficient for bribing the dogcatcher to return your wayward pooch. As is still true today, the English of Edward's times were unusually fond of their dogs, though back then they didn't eat them.

The mile was defined as the longest distance Edward had ever walked without being carried, when as a boy his manservant died suddenly of a heart attack while carrying Edward to the beach and the king-to-be had to walk very far to find some ice cream. Similarly, the hour corresponded with the longest time Edward had ever had to wait in line, from the time when he was at the king store and there was a run on poofy velvet capes.

Naturally, the Imperial system was refined in the years after Edward's passing, the most notable addition coming when London blacksmith Mike Inch's ex-girlfriend Lydia immortalized his unimpressive tackle by lobbying that its length would be a perfect way to divide the foot into twelve segments. Lydia was so unflagging in her badmouthing crusade over the years that the inch eventually became a national standard of measurement, providing a powerful example that hell hath no embarrassment like a woman dumped for a slutty bar maid.

If the history of weights and measures teaches one lesson, it is that terminology and unit sizes will come and go over time, but human pettiness is an undying standard that will always remain universal.

º Last Column: Fuck the Metric System
º more columns

I return from a pretty fun weekend here, folks. The Divine Miss C has just finished her very first DVD commentary, and I can say without fear of contradiction (unless one of you dildos has actually done a DVD commentary for a film you've been in, which I very much doubt) that it was a great experience.

The film was Li'l Poachers, the fantastic adventure film where the six kids get lost in the Florida Everglades and have to fend for themselves against animals and sub-human Cajuns. It was a lot like that Lord of the Flies movie but without all the depressing kid-on-kid violence and half-naked boys. Like if Disney had done that movie. If you remember loving Li'l Poachers and are saying to yourself, "Hey, wow! Clarissa Coleman was in that movie?" Eat me. Yeah, I was in the movie. You know what else, nutsack? I'm in the commentary, too. So there. You can't keep me down.

The DVD production staff got all six of us kid stars back for the commentary—me, Tim T. Toolkitty, Jeffy Smurtz, Franz Golgannis, Pockets O'Shannon, and Dina Frazell, who played the tough girl back then because you couldn't have lesbians in movies. All of us were reunited for the first time in 15 years. It was too bad the director Chummy Styron couldn't have been with us, but as you probably know he shot himself (to death) shortly after the film opened at number one at the box office. Funny, I guess—despite all that success he still said in his suicide note he had lost hope there was any good in the world.

Once we got re-acquainted with each other and knocked back a few brewskis (would you believe only I thought to bring a case of Coors?) we started on the commentary. We had to stop and start over a few times, believe it or not. It looks (or sounds) so easy when you're listening to the commentary at home, when those two or three guys who do that do it, but it's a lot harder than it seems. It took me a while to get the hang of it. Here's some quick tips I learned.

It's not considered good commentary when one of your fellow actors comes on the screen and you say, "Man, you've gotten fat, Jeffy." Also unacceptable: "You looked better as a kid for sure, Franz." I would almost say that my early attempts at commentary made me unpopular with my co-stars, but I eventually got the hang of it.

The proper way to do commentary, they said, is to let the audience in on how the movie was made. So I made several revelations in my next attempts at commentary, things like, "We weren't really in the Everglades at all," and "I think the director had to do this movie because his gambling problem had become so expensive he couldn't make art films anymore." I had other behind-the-scenes information, too, like when I said, "There's the pirate they put in the movie because the studio wanted to make a clone of The Goonies." Apparently, though, discussing the salary everybody got for the movie is some kind of big fat taboo.

I tried "stories," too, little interesting tidbits that the general public doesn't know. I pointed to a tree on the screen and asked Pockets, "Remember when we used to get really high back there before we had to shoot scenes?" Or telling them, "There's where Dina made a pass at me. I was very flattered." Nobody seemed to like my commentary, truthfully, they kept saying they might have to edit a few things out, but you learn to like getting edited in the entertainment biz, at least if you've been edited as much as I have. I bet more than half of the brilliant things I've said off-script have never been used. Or all of them.

As a bonus tip, they really don't like it when you shout out every time you're on the screen, "There I am! Look!" They also really hate it when you're not on screen and you keep asking, "Wasn't I in this scene? Where am I? Why aren't I in this scene?"

In the end, though, despite the fact my commentary might not even make it onto the disc, I would highly recommend doing a DVD commentary for the experience alone, should you ever get the chance. Yeah! That'll happen.

º Last Column: The Child Star Collector's Guide
º more columns