The Roaring Lyon

Fear of Web 2.0

2008-04-04T09:40:00.000-07:00

It's uncommon to go more than a few days without seeing new statistics released detailing corporate adoption of Web 2.0 technologies. Usually the numbers demonstrate that rates of adoption are overwhelmingly underwhelming. Articles generally discuss how most executives don't even consume social media, let alone participate.

Headlines are rife with decision makers - ranging from managers to CIOs to CEOs - banning their employees from using networking sites such as Facebook and Digg, and even those executives' own LinkedIn profiles - more often than not created by tech-savvy assistants and to the ambivalence or outright duress of the executive himself - languish in an unupdated, unleveraged state of being for months at a time - assuming they're not forgotten outright. If you don't read blogs, it stands to reason that you'd probably have a harder time appreciating the value of writing a blog. If you've never been notified of an important event or met someone great through Facebook, you're unlikely to understand its value.

Most recently I read this article which offers more of the same: CIOs are afraid of social media and they shouldn't prohibit employees from utilizing Web 2.0 technologies. I absolutely agree with this. Unfortunately, the vast majority of this vein of literature - this post included - fails to pull the trigger on how that is to happen. The important thing to note from these unimpressive trends of (non)adoption of social media is not the numbers themselves, but on what causes those numbers to be so lackluster. Not the fear itself but the causes of those fears.

People are afraid of things because they don't understand them. Executives don't know what they should be doing with or about Web 2.0 technologies so they do what comes naturally; ignore them and focus on the more traditional tools that they know. While this may be a soothing short-term approach, it will scarcely suffice in today's rapidly evolving marketplace that rewards openness, collaboration and innovation - the very pillars of Web 2.0.

It is far too easy to dismiss these fears as the irrational and unwarranted paranoia of a bygone generation of fuddy-duddies. Rational or not, it is a key barrier to Web 2.0 adoption. The tools are usually simple and intuitive to use, many of them are free but for the temporal opportunity cost and they are proliferating at a more rapid rate than ever before.

That having been said, it is not a difficult barrier to overcome. As social media practitioners and even some savvy vendors have long purported, the solution is education. The more that these decision makers know about Web 2.0 technologies with regards to how they're being used, what they are being used for, who is using them and how the company can employ them to achieve real business goals, the more open to the use of these technologies within their organization they will be. True, it would be ideal for them to drink the cool-aid themselves, but until then it would be an enormous leap forward merely to quell their fear-mongered opposition to social media.

Knowledge is power.

Beijing Olympic Dreams - Going Down in a Blaze of Glory?

2008-03-25T10:53:00.000-07:00

This morning I read three more articles about San Francisco's hotly-contested decision to allow the 2008 Olympic torch to be toured through The City.

At their most benign, the complaints regard the recent decision by a sub-committee of San Francisco's Board of Supervisors to reject language that would have condemned China for its human rights abuses - particularly in Tibet.

Two out of the three Supervisors on the sub-committee voted against the resolution - preventing it from being considered by the full Board.

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom - who supported the sub-committee's decision - stated “If folks want to beat up China, beat up China but don’t beat up the spirit of the Olympics.”

While I agree with the Mayor's words, I don't believe that they encapsulate the question at hand. As the only American city to host the Olympic torch, San Francisco is in a unique position to at least express its concern with the human rights violations of which China is guilty in Tibet and elsewhere as well as with China's contribution to the atrocities in the Darfur region of Sudan.

Let me be clear. I do not believe that the city of San Francisco should insist that the Olympic torch not be taken through its streets. I think that the people who have planned to protest against San Francisco's decision to hold a parade featuring the torch would do better to use the increased media attention to protest against the Olympic games themselves.

A balance needs to be struck.

Just as boycotting the games is too extreme a measure - and one that would ultimately punish the athletes who have devoted their entire lives to Olympic dreams more than it would punish the Chinese government - failure to mention the myriad concerns regarding China's human rights record is too extreme in the opposite direction.

We must strike a balance. France is in the process of doing this as the first nation to publicly consider attending the games but boycotting the opening ceremonies.

One of the basic tenets of social media is engagement - and engagement requires give and take. You can't have a conversation with someone if you refuse to acknowledge them them. Similarly, once they're engaged, you need to be able to leverage that engagement to accomplish goals. Otherwise one entity dominates the conversation. What started out as dialog becomes monologue and ideas are no longer exchanged.

This may not always be a terrible thing. Perhaps a one-sided conversation is okay because the other side has nothing to say. When egregious human rights violations are involved, however, an imperative emerges.

Refusing to engage China is a mistake. The Olympics represent a celebration of something that is greater than any one nation or conflict. They acknowledge that it is more honorable to outrun, jump, swim or throw someone than it is to kill them. That having been said, after someone has been engaged, failure to exercise that engagement in order to make a statement that must be made is wasteful and makes the engager indelibly - if tacitly - responsible for the consequences of that failure to act.

By hosting the Olympic torch, we have engaged China. San Francisco should make it clear that it is hosting the Olympic torch out of respect for the hallowed tradition of the Olympic games and the honorable ideals for which it stands. Just as Mayor Newsom said that people should feel free to beat up China but not the Olympics, San Francisco should make it clear to the world that by hosting the torch, it is the Olympics that it supports and not the Chinese government and its actions.

Healthcare 2.0

2008-03-20T17:51:00.000-07:00

I was at the hospital the other day because I was experiencing a pain in my right foot that my doctor said might be a stress fracture from overtraining. As it's only a few blocks away from my apartment, I opted to go to St. Mary's Medical Center.

They have a pretty clever advertising campaign on the streets near the hospital where the theme is a quote that you would hear right before someone is about to do something dangerously stupid, for instance "The expiration dates is just a guideline, right?" Followed by information on how to make a quick appointment.

They also have a pretty catchy slogan of "get in. get better. get going."

They make it remarkably easy to make an appointment, if you don't feel like spending hundreds of extra dollars unnecessarily by going to the emergency room. Not only can you go to www.docin48hours.org to book an appointment, but you can send an email to getadoc@chw.edu and expect a speedy response.

In addition to a contact phone number to book appointments, you can text, that's right, send a text message that says "SEEME" to 89183 and book an appointment that way.

I was impressed. Even when they flaunt their hipness with the following: "P.S. We may be 150 years old, but we're very Web 2.0. To see what they're saying about us on Yelp.com, search the keywords, "St. Mary's Medical Center."

The hospital's advertisement of its Yelp presence impresses me. By directing patients and potential patients to Yelp, the hospital is entrusting its reputation to the only people that it makes logical sense to entrust their reputation - their patients.

This also happens to be a group of people who - with few exceptions (IE having a baby) are probably extremely unhappy to be at the hospital and whose negative experience of injury, sickness, death, etc. can't but have a negative effect on their experience and thus likely their review.

Even the best restaurants receive the occasional poor review from an unimpressed or offended Yelper, but that doesn't keep Yelp from being an extremely positive force for most restaurants that pay attention to what its customers are saying - both at the restaurant and online. The same applies to St. Mary's Medical Center.

By directing us to Yelp, they implicitly advertise that they have confidence in their facilities and quality of service and urge us to discover their quality from other people's first hand experiences.

With Yelp, they're saying "Bring it on."

Pi Day and Johnny Cash

2008-03-14T23:12:00.000-07:00

First off, it was a pretty good Pi Day. I was forced to make do with a slice of pizza pie this afternoon although I spent nearly an hour traipsing about the financial district looking for a bakery that sold pie - either by the slice or the whole thing - without success.

I found this vignette of a couple who decided to name their baby Pi, because of the "infinite possibilities" he will have in his life.

Although part of me thinks that Pi is a pretty wonderful name for a kid, I can't help but think that he will experience infinitely more harassment and verbal abuse because of it.

I'm reminded of the great Johnny Cash song, A Boy Named Sue.

Mark's Myopia

2008-03-14T15:28:00.000-07:00

Mark’s view of blogging as it relates to journalism is a myopic one.

His proposed alternative to NYT blogs – regarding so-called RealTime Yankees, City Hall, etc. – fails to address one of the most intrinsic and valuable elements of blogging. Yes, the ability to break and update events in near real-time is part of why people are increasingly turning to blogs for their news. When evaluating the merit of journalistic blogs, of equal or greater importance to real-time news updates is the ability of readers to respond to that news.

Blogs not only allow readers to respond to news items with their own updates and opinions, but readers can submit their own news items as well. Rather than being passive consumers of content, blogs enable a conversation that allows readers to focus on issues and events with which THEY are concerned.

Mark’s point of “brand equity” being diminished as a result of the user-generated content relies on the misconception that blog content will be indistinguishable from the rest of the site. This is obviously not the case. With a clear delineation between what is and is not UGC and guidelines and permissions, this basis for opposition disappears.

This two-way flow of information provides the blog’s host with valuable insights into its audience and – more importantly – engages the audience to an extent that wouldn’t be possible without the interactivity, accessibility and empowerment of blogs.

Far from diminishing the NYT “brand equity,” the NYT’s willingness to truly engage in conversation demonstrates its awareness of the importance of conversation and the wisdom of the crowds.

The Beatles are Bigger than Jesus

2008-03-14T11:33:00.000-07:00

It's official, according to Twitter anyways.

Uploaded with plasq's Skitch!

I Prefer Pi

2008-03-14T10:29:00.000-07:00

(A palindrome)

Happy Pi Day!

To go to the official Pi Day website, please click on the wonderful Pi limerick (Pi-merick?) below:

If, in a circle, a line
Hits the center, and runs spine to spine,
And the lines length is D
The circumference will be
D times 3.14159.

Hillary's (mis)use of email

2008-03-12T17:14:00.000-07:00

From TechPresident.

This seems to be a poor way to approach email for a few reasons:

1- Many people don't have images enabled. Even if I'm not worried about the safety of the images from the Hillary campaign, it's much easier for me to go onto my next piece of mail than it is to enable them.

2- As long as they're using images, they may as well actually use them well! Although they say that a picture is worth a thousand words, a picture of words is worth no more - and in this case, less - than the words themselves. It seems that the Hillary campaign is using images instead of text for some shortcut - whose benefit is still unknown to me - rather than fully utilizing the strength of the medium.

3- You can share data more easily when it is in text form than when it is an image. This is especially important given the proliferation of such quick and informal information-disseminating venues such as blogs, Twitter and myriad instant messaging platforms. Even if you have images enabled, someone has to take the time to type out whatever information they want to share using those tools. With a text-based message, you can simply copy and paste. Simply put, information in text form has better legs than information in image form - particularly appealing/viral pictures aside.

Sin 2.0

2008-03-11T11:44:00.000-07:00

From the Vatican.

In a yearly proclamation, the Catholic Church announced updates to its list of what constitutes sin and should thus be avoided. Failure to comply will result in damnation - or at least further punishment in purgatory.

Pollution, mind-damaging drugs and genetic experimentation were added to the list, as was social injustice such as the exacerbation of the gap between the rich and poor.

There was a particularly interesting quote from Monsignor Gianfranco Girotti - the head of the Apostolic Penitentiary, the pontifical office that deals with matters of conscience and grants absolution:

"If yesterday sin had a rather individualistic dimension, today it has a weight, a resonance, that's especially social, rather than individual.

Essentially, the Pope is embracing the underlying tenets of Web 2.0. The connections between people are gaining importance in the Church's eyes because they are beginning to catch on to what marketers and social media practitioners have espousing for years: even individuals do not exist in a vacuum.

Will we begin to see Hail Marys on Twitter? Probably not. But this is still an interesting development whose progress will be interesting to follow.

Further coverage of the story here.

Environmental Harm from Video Games

2008-03-11T10:36:00.000-07:00

Arguably the most social of media, video games are coming under scrutiny from Greenpeace due to their "frivalous" energy consumption. Read more about it here.

Hillary Campaign's Response to Obama's "Monster" Comment

2008-03-07T15:27:00.001-08:00

"I'm willing to club a baby seal to make a deal."

Does anyone else remember that scene from the Weird Al Yankovic movie, "UHF"?

In an advertisement for a sale, a crazed use car salesman has an adorable baby seal on the hood of a car. He is brandishing a baseball bat and is screaming at the camera that unless 20 people come down to his lot and buy cars within the next 15 minutes, he is going club the baby seal. Presumably to death.

This email that I received from the Hillary campaign reminds me of that:

Uploaded with plasq's Skitch!

It's hard to take any of the literature I get from the Hillary for President people seriously when the suggested response to everything is, "So you should give us more money."

When she won states, she asked for money.

When she lost states, she asked for money.

And now, when the other guy says something mean about here, she's asking for money.

I am not ignorant of the importance of money to political campaigns, I just think that the people whose support she is counting on are smart enough to know that different actions ought elicit different responses. There are more logical ways for people to respond on Hillary's behalf like writing letters, making phone calls, etc. to the Obama campaign, both tying up valuable resources and letting Obama know the extent of their ire.

Perhaps Hillary supporters or the Hillary campaign itself could make a YouTube video spoofing Michael Jackson's Thriller or something around the song "Monster Mash." That would be an appropriate and proportionate response.

I guess it's not so much that the campaign is asking for money, it's that the request is couched in the inaccurate and I think at least marginally demeaning - to the intelligence of anyone who received the solicitation - idea that donating money will prevent it from happening again in this election or future elections.

Hillary's people should just say that those sorts of ad hominem attacks ought make us - the potential donors - so angry that we should donate money to demonstrate our outrage.

I think that would be a more honest, compelling and ultimately successful request.

A(nother) Dark Side of Social Media Networks

2008-03-07T15:21:00.000-08:00

Social networks are being used to recruit for gangs.

I suppose that it's not terribly surprising, given that the majority of people that view my LinedIn page are recruiters of some sort. Although this is no laughing matter, it is at least somewhat funny to imagine someone listing their CV of mayhem and destruction in the formal LinkedIn or Facebook format:

Interests: Petty vandalism, violence, drugs, alcohol.
Previous (gang) experience:
Prisons served time at:

Thanks to Mukund for the tip.

The Straight Talk Express Runs Both Ways

2008-03-06T11:59:00.000-08:00

From Techpresident

Approximately 50 comments were posted on Hillary, Obama, and McCain's blog and the only ones that were allowed to remain visible were those posted on McCain's.

I like that.

This is exactly what I was talking about earlier in terms of conversation and the importance of reciprocity. Social media is rewarded for its authenticity, and censoring all but positive feedback results in something that is blatantly inauthentic.

Not only does that silence important voices of dissent, but it serves to devalue the content that is left on the site - both in terms of posted content by the blogger(s) as well as the comments that have obviously been vetted and found to be satisfactory.

The mindset behind this censorship indicates one of two things:

1) That the people censoring comments think very poorly of their audience. Their censorship suggests that they believe that the people are unable to critically evaluate and synthesize information in order to form an opinion. Instead, they must be force fed meticulously crafted and vetted content without deviation.

Or

2) That the censors are so insecure with regards to their candidate's stances on issues that they can't afford to let people comment freely.

Either way, why would someone want to vote for that candidate?

Blogging and the Fourth Dimension

2008-03-05T16:04:00.000-08:00

The fourth dimension being time, of course. The most important thing about comedy.

In this case, it is certainly an important element of blogging - but certainly not the most important. Far and away the most important element of blogging is the quality of published material. Whether it's a recipe, a personal experience, or commentary; engagingly and well-written content will help your blog to be successful.

Obviously timing plays a role in that.

A recipe for Christmas cookies in April, or for a Thanksgiving Turkey in February will not be viewed as particularly salient or timely and thus as unimportant.

A personal experience will probably be conveyed with more clarity and emotion if it happened this morning than if it happened 20 years ago - however much you were able to ruminate upon it in the interim.

Commentary - unless a novel take on a historic event - is also unlikely to turn heads if the event is no longer interesting.

I think that there is an important caveat to that third point. There are some blogs, by virtue of persistence, luck, or what have you, are newsbreakers. They get their hands on a story immediately and share it with the world. The other newsbreaking sites - if they haven't already received the information from the source, will quickly take your hint and repurpose it for themselves. There aren't a whole lot of sites that can do this.

For example, if five minutes from now, aliens landed in Detroit and started having conversations with people on the street (let's assume that they have vocal chords capable of producing a range of sounds audible to humans and that they have somehow learned English and that the atmospheric conditions of Earth are not fatal to their alien biologies, etc.).

People would go to CNN, MSNBC, Fox, etc. for their news. They would also go to the equivalently well-regarded online news sites. News-seekers would also likely pay attention to a blogger who credibly claims to have spoken to the aliens or was there when it happened. Perhaps he is even Twittering his encounters in real time from his cell phone.

The point is that you either have to have pre-existing credibility, the product of consistently breaking meaningful news in a timely manner, or you have to have an amazing angle.

That was an extreme example.

Let's say that there is an acquisition that has been in the works for nearly a week. It is no longer extremely new when it finally occurs, but it is still being discussed because it real. It has manifested. This is like being inundated for weeks by the scientific and trivial explanations of an upcoming lunar eclipse. It's not particularly novel but people write about it the next day anyways.

As I said before, it takes a certain degree of credibility to break these stories, both new and "old" news. Credibility that many of us - myself included - lack.

The best thing that we can do is to comment on the commentators. React to the reactors. In short: blog the bloggers.

By commenting on the blogs and articles of credible sources, you add to your own credibility - assuming, of course, that your comments are meaningful.

Doing this puts yourself and - more importantly - your ideas in front of the influencers and the people being influenced. If your ideas are valid, that audience might be convinced to go to you first. Gradually your role will change from a commentator to more of a reactionary.

In a sense, this evolution is a testament to the conversational - that is to say - reciprocal nature of new media. The readers not only determine what is written, but who writes it and from what perspective.

Power to the people.

The Internet is a Series of Tubes

2008-03-01T12:04:00.001-08:00

Truly.

While most people are quick to write off Senator Ted Stevens' comment as testament to the inability of doddering old fuddy-duddies to understand the technological advances we see as commonplace, Senator Stevens' metaphor is far more apt than people give him credit.

The internet is a series of tubes. Great metaphor. Not just in an infrastructural sense but also in a deeper, metaphorical sense of which I only became aware recently while reading "Mousepads, Shoe Leather, and Hope," a wonderful book written/compiled/fostered/nurtured by Zephyr Teachout that examines the role of the internet - and effectively social media - on the Howard Dean for president campaign of 2002 and 2004.

The internet is a series of tubes for the very simple reason that it moves something from one place to another. In the case of the internet, what is being moved happens to be data and the carrier is distributing electric pulses. In this very primitive sense, the Senator was right on.

In a deeper sense, he is even more correct and his metaphor holds even more water (pun intended).

The internet is a series of tubes because it provides the infrastructure to connect two complementary but disparate things: haves and have-nots.

The example about which Teachout's revelation came was in the case of a website being used to connect people in dire need of legal counsel with lawyers who wished to help needy members of the community.

Crowdsourcing is another great example of this. Many children dream of becoming astronauts. Unfortunately, most of these children become astro-nots and grow up to have everyday jobs like you and me (unless there are astronauts that read my blog about whom I am unaware). A crowdsourcing program at the UC Berkeley Space Sciences Center provides a venue for us wannabe astronaut types to contribute to man's understanding of the cosmos.

The enthusiastic people eager to contribute their time and energy to science was there. As was the need of scientists for enthusiastic, eager, and not necessarily PhD-posessing assistance. The internet provided the tubes or pipes to transmit the resources of an enthusiastic work force to the exact place those resources would be best taken advantage of.

This is why social media is such an amazing medium. Instead of being reliant on our geographic surroundings, the mass media, and those people with whom we come into direct contact for the appropriate tubes into which to channel our passions, we can go out and find them online - or create them ourselves.

Ning is a great example of this, as are Facebook groups and I'm sure many other outlets.

Tubular.

Crowdsourcing in Space

2008-02-22T12:42:00.000-08:00

Whether being used to locate billions of dollars in gold for savvy mining companies or tracking online contributions to Barack Obama’s campaign it appears that my esteemed colleague Chris was correct in dubbing 2008 the year of the crowd.

I was so intrigued by the idea of successfully enlisting random strangers to do important and interesting things that I did what I do whenever something incites my cat-like curiosity. I looked up “crowdsourcing” in wikipedia.

I was surprised to see that there is an unprecedented crowdsourcing program in action at the UC Berkeley Space Sciences Lab. My running buddy, Ryan “The Brain” Ogliore, works there, and he was kind enough to offer some insight into his project, AKA, Stardust.

<

Would you tell me a little bit about yourself and what you’re doing?

I'm a postdoctoral scholar at UC Berkeley's Space Sciences Lab. I work on NASA's Stardust mission: a comet-return from a Jupiter family comet called Wild2.

What is Stardust?

The Stardust mission captured cometary particles in a low-density material called aerogel. Before the rendezvous with the comet, the opposite side of the collector was exposed in a part of space where a stream of interstellar dust travels through our solar system. This material has been viewed astronomically before, but never has a solid sample been returned to the lab for study.

What does the Stardust crowdsourcing project entail?

The interstellar dust particles that were collected by Stardust are microscopic, and they make very tiny tracks in the aerogel. To scan the entire surface of the detector would take many person-years of microscope-searching. The detector containing the interstellar tracks was photographed digitally. The logical thing to do, then, would be to program a computer to scan through these digital images and find the tracks.

This turns out to be a very difficult if not impossible problem, because the aerogel contains many imperfections and cracks that would fool an image-recognition algorithm. A person, however, with minimal training, can identify these particle tracks with high accuracy.

So Stardust@home was created as a way to have hundreds of volunteers search the microscope images and identify particle tracks that interstellar dust made in the detector. Using test images randomly given to the volunteers, or "Dusters" as they've called themselves, we determined that they were very good at this task.

The volunteers are extremely dedicated, abundant, and talented. Unlike other projects, like SETI@home, which are essentially a large, distributed electronic computer, Stardust@home is a network of human brains doing something that (at this point in time) only human brains can do extremely well.

How long has the program been in place and what have your results been so far?

The project has been going on for a year and a half and we already have something to show for it: last week, three of the candidate interstellar particles, found by our volunteers, were extracted from the detector.

The project's success is dependent on the work of the volunteers -- this is real science, unique and exciting, that was made possible by the "crowds" of passionate people, eager to be involved with the science.

I think this kind of cool space stuff appeals to a lot of people, and the opportunity to actually search for an interstellar needle in a haystack is something people jumped on: every time you log in you can see a piece of never-before-seen galactic material.

Is there anything else you’d like to share?

The Stardust@home approach has proven successful and could spawn another image recognition project: instead of looking for interstellar dust, trained eyes can search for hominids.

Thanks a lot, Ryan!

(End of Interview)

Even aside from all of the amazing things that are being accomplished with crowdsourcing, I am constantly impressed by the underlying sentiment from which these projects emanate. More than anything else, I think that crowdsourcing highlights the willingness of people to pitch in and selflessly donate their time based on their desire for excitement, a challenge, or simply to help in whatever manner they are able. As much as crowdsourcing can accomplish for the original sourcer, the fulfillment and sense of purpose it provides the crowd should not be overlooked or undervalued.

To quote Bill Nye – science rules!

Typical Obama Type

2008-02-22T12:39:00.000-08:00

Forgive me for the pun.

This article discusses - or should I say psychoanalyzes - Obama's decision in type-face.

Definitely watch the embedded video.

Mobile Search

2008-02-15T15:31:00.000-08:00

An enlightening simile from an article on iPhone:

"Searching on a computer, he said, is like going to a store, where the customers sees every product displayed, and can make comparisons, touch the products, even try things on for size. Doing the same search on a mobile, he said, but like trying to shop in the same store but "through a drive-up window." No matter how much stuff is in the store, you can only find out through the cashier at the drive-up window."

"The dilemma, left unsolved by the panelists, was how to squeeze the user through that window, past the cashier, to sample all the things in the store, without guilt, while still feeling grateful to the cashier who seemed, all along, to be standing in the way."

Movie Review. Shoot 'Em Up

2008-02-15T12:17:00.000-08:00

This is the first celebrity guest blogger we've had on TheRoaringLyon and I hope it's not the last.

I present to you a movie review by SnowMongoose:

Film Review: Shoot 'Em Up

This movie delivers. The title fully expresses what the film is about: over the top, out of control gunplay. Carrot toting bum Smith (Clive Owen) (And yes, he does quote Bugs Bunny) is sucked into a mysterious tumult of bullets and death, obtaining (delivering!) a newborn and ending up at odds with the sadistic and ruthless Hertz (Paul Giamatti). Monica Bellucci reprises the role of ‘hooker with a heart of gold,’ providing extra impetus for Owen as his conscience forces him to protect her and baby Oliver every turn. (More importantly to the plot, Bellucci’s specialty in the world of prostitution is defined by her lactation, making for an atypical heroine)

Owen touches on familiar territory, as an aggressive, very angry, one-lining version of his character from “Children of Men,” and as Smith, he can be summed up in one line: He cuts Oliver’s umbilical cord… with a bullet. Come on, how badass is that?! Seeing Giamatti in such a bizarre role, after growing to appreciate his work in “Sideways” and “Cinderella Man,” was a treat, and provided much of the initial draw for me to see “Shoot em Up” in the first place. (And incidentally redeemed the damage he may have done to his reputation incurred by his role in “The Nanny Diaries”) Combining cold cruelty with quirks (a scarily analytical mind, a brief brush with necrophilia, and recurring cell conversations with his nagging wife) has been seen in the past, but not with the feel that Giamatti accomplished here.

The tempo never wanes, staying redlined for the vast majority of the movie, with only an occasional detour for halfhearted attempts at plot turns. (Intrigue involving the firearms industry, presidential candidates, and harvesting bone marrow, to name a few)

My only regret involving this film is that I only watched it with a handful of buddies, at home… I feel that the combined oohs, ahhs, and “Oh my god, that just happened” type laughter from a full theatre would have been worth every penny of my eight or so dollars. Only if one decided to view this film without taking the title seriously, or had an overt sensitivity to violence could one walk away from it with a bad taste in their mouth: in either case, no amount of changes could have redeemed the experience. I’ll give this one an easy 8 out of 10, crisp, brutal-yet-playful action, inventive shootouts, a uniquely evil villain, and an interesting spin on the obligatory hottie costar.

IKEA Taking a Poke at Lasse Viren?

2008-02-13T11:42:00.000-08:00

It may be coincidence.

It may be that after naming hundreds of thousands of affordable Swedish furniture, food, and nick-nacks, the branding people at IKEA are at the end of their ropes.

But naming a toilet brush/holder after four-time Olympic gold medalist Lasse Artturi Viren whose past is spotted with allegations of reindeer milk and more troubling accusations seems a little too ironic.

Then again, the universe has a way of making sure that these kinds of coincidences happen...

Evolution of Tech Company Logos

2008-02-07T14:10:00.000-08:00

Logos.

Very cool.

Here's a little trick I learned in the CIA...

2008-02-07T11:23:00.001-08:00

On YouTube.

Get the full article here.

It's not surprising that the intelligence community is monitoring user-generated content for important intelligence. While some people might think that monitoring such seemingly innocuous lines of communication is a waste of intelligence dollars, I would simply point out that gambling on the average human's stupidity is usually a good bet and that there is probably some extremely sophisticated screening and searching technologies and techniques available to these analysts to separate the wheat from the chaff in regards to credible intelligence.

I wish there was more information on how exactly the CIA is leveraging social media in the intelligence war on terror.

Lies, Damned Lies, and...

2008-02-07T10:08:00.001-08:00

This graph on Valleywag would be far more informative if it indicated how large each of those markets is.

Uploaded with plasq's Skitch!

While Google search is clearly dominating the Australian market, because the graph doesn't tell us the size of the market, we don't know if Google's far smaller market share in Japan is in fact a less substantial market for it.

I'm not saying that the graphs isn't useful and interesting. It is extremely important to know how much of the market each company controls and it is one of the only objective ways to tell which search company is "winning" in those places. I'm simply pointing out that the raw numbers are essential to a full grasp of the relationships between Google, MSN and Yahoo.

I will try to find the raw numbers as to the size of these markets and post them later...

Off-Brand iPhone

2008-02-05T13:44:00.000-08:00

Thanks to TechCrunch for the tip:

Get them while they're hot...

Super Tuesday Nerdiness

2008-02-05T12:48:00.000-08:00

Even if you don't have Twitter, this mashup is flipping sweet.

SF City Politics

2008-01-30T12:53:00.000-08:00

This is a fairly interesting article about the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.

It comments on the salaries for the Supervisors (a mere $37,858 before legislation in 2002 bumped it to it's current $90,000) as well as the frequency with which they meet.

It struck me that one of the recently disgraced and now former Supervisor Jew's advisors made a particularly poor choice of words when she - describing the emptiness of City Hall during the holiday season - stated, "You can shoot a gun down the hall, and you wouldn't hit anyone."

Her connection to Ed Jew aside - that is a really awkward way to emphasize her point.

She may as well have said, "It was so empty that Supervisor Jew was able to shake down tapioca-drink vendors for tens of thousands of dollars right outside his office."

Or

"City Hall was as empty as Supervisor Jew's alleged residence in the 4th District."

Either one works.

Lions and Tigers and...

2008-01-30T12:30:00.000-08:00

Chimpanzees?

I was reading an article on the city of San Francisco's response to the tiger attacks that occurred on Christmas day last year and came across this interesting excerpt:

"Animals whose escape would be rated a "Code 1" danger include lions, cougars, tigers and chimpanzees, Mollinedo told Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier in answer to a question."

The article explains that a "Code 1" danger would call upon use of a new siren system as well as the planning and coordination of emergency responses by police, firefighters and zoo staff.

I'm just curious as to why chimpanzees are considered in the same category as lions, cougars and tigers.

Is flying feces really that dangerous?

Political Campaigning - Bringing Families Together (and money)

2008-01-25T11:48:00.000-08:00

Because Hillary Clinton was one of the most powerful First Ladies in recent political memory, it shouldn't come as a surprise that Bill has been pushing the envelope of spousal advocacy for his wife's presidential run.

I think that President Clinton would probably be supporting Obama if he didn't have such an obviously vested interest in Senator Clinton's campaign and while it's obvious why he is exerting his massive influence in her favor, I can't help but think that his behavior is somewhat ignominious for who should be such a distinguished member of the Democratic Party. While it is fine - and expected - of him to endorse a candidate, I do not think that he should be out shilling for one as tirelessly as he is for his wife.

As much as I like Bill Clinton and wish that he could run again - damn you, 22nd Amendment! - I do not think that a Hillary presidency will be tantamount to a Bill presidency. Voters need to realize this fact and that - matrimonial pacts aside - Bill might very well support another democratic candidate.

That was a lengthy digression...

I was very surprised to find out that the families of candidates are sometimes reimbursed for their "services."

From PurpleMinded.com

"Records show that Joe Lieberman’s presidential campaign paid his wife, Hadassah, at least $22,000; his son Matthew received about $34,000 and his daughter Rebecca about $36,000. The Bush-Cheney re-election campaign paid Vice President Dick Cheney’s daughter Mary about $81,000."

Is that even legal use of campaign monies? If so, what would/do political contributors think about their donations being used to line the pockets of the families of their chosen candidates?

Don't you wish that you'd studied Latin in school...

2008-01-24T08:42:00.000-08:00

...Not so that you could - as Vice President Dan Quayle desired - to speak with people from Latin America, but so that you could understand websites like this:

Uploaded with plasq's Skitch!

I came across this today and was driven to Wikipedia for an explanation as to why this is so commonly used by web designers as a placeholding text.

According to Wikipedia: "In publishing and graphic design, lorem ipsum is common placeholder text used to demonstrate the graphic elements of a document or visual presentation, such as font, typography, and layout. It is a form of "greeking".
Even though using "lorem ipsum" often arouses curiosity due to its resemblance to classical Latin, it is not intended to have meaning. Where text is visible in a document, people tend to focus on the textual content rather than upon overall presentation, so publishers use lorem ipsum when displaying a typeface or design in order to direct the focus to presentation. "Lorem ipsum" also approximates a typical distribution of letters in English."

If you were curious, it is from Cicero and it reads: (According to H. Rackham's 1914 translation)

"Nor again is there anyone who loves or pursues or desires to obtain pain of itself, because it is pain, but because occasionally circumstances occur in which toil and pain can procure him some great pleasure. To take a trivial example, which of us ever undertakes laborious physical exercise, except to obtain some advantage from it? But who has any right to find fault with a man who chooses to enjoy a pleasure that has no annoying consequences, or one who avoids a pain that produces no resultant pleasure?"

Pretty cool - and a very interesting internet factoid - but how many people who use it are aware of its origin? It is interesting to think how many things are done simply because they were done before without any additional thought as to why they're done and whether they ought to be perpetuated.

This is probably a problem in most companies. New hires are taught how to do things the same way that the people who hired them were taught and unless feedback is explicitly solicited, it is unlikely to be divulged. So rather than constantly having the processes by which an organization is run fine-tuned and refurbished through repeated and perpetual evaluation, these companies stagnate and are forced to spend enormous sums of money on consultants and so forth.

It's not so hard to ask the Deming-esque questions without having to pay a "TQM consultant" thousands of dollars to prompt you.

Just stop every now and then and ask, "Why?"

Facebook Users Should be More Like My Dad...

2008-01-23T17:02:00.001-08:00

...Paranoid.

After much cajoling from my brothers and I, my father finally relented and created a Facebook account. With nothing but the most basic information in his profile, he sent me a message saying, "Ok, I have facebook... now what?"

I told him that now he needs to put up a picture and search for old friends.

He responded the next day with the following: "A picture? I don't think so. I don't think this was a good idea."

My father promptly disabled his account - presumably never to access it again.

Okay, so if more Facebook users were like my dad they wouldn't be Facebook users for long. I DO think that they should be MORE like my father in his awareness of the awesome - and potentially terrible - power that Facebook has to share information.

For example, I do not use any third party applications. From the moment they came out I steered clear. Generally this is pretty easy to do. I have no desire to SuperPoke someone when a good old fashioned poke will suffice. Nor do I feel the need to have a graffiti wall, or a specific bookshelf (after all, my favorite books are listed just above) and I certainly don't want to compete in an online Rocham-bull competition - although I'm remarkably good at the game for it's supposedly being a game of luck.

Even the one application that has seriously tempted me, Scrabulous, is being taken care of by Hasbro and Mattel.

Why am I so loathe to allow myself the simple pleasures of third party applications?

Because I don't want third parties mucking around with my profile and information.

This article validates my paranoia.

The vast majority of Facebook applications take your data - with Facebook's permission - to their own servers unnecessarily. They don't need much - if any - private data and yet cull the entirety of your Facebook profile for their diabolical purposes.

What are those purposes specifically?

The multitude of hypothetical answers to that question is why I don't use third party apps.

I've gotta run, my dad and I are going to play a game of REAL Scrabble...

Top 20 Images from Google Maps/Earth

2008-01-14T14:17:00.000-08:00

Here

Zion I at The Independent - 1/12

2008-01-14T13:36:00.000-08:00

On Saturday night I went with a couple of friends to see Zion I perform at The Independent.

Let me first say that I've only recently begun listening to Zion I, but from the moment I first heard the seductive and catchy tones of "The Bay" I was hooked.

I was incredibly surprised that one of my friends was able to buy a ticket to the show at the door at 9:00 the evening of the show. I'd purchased my ticket in advance thinking that the show would almost certainly sell out. I thought that $20 was a pretty reasonable price to pay but perhaps Zion I doesn't yet have the name recognition to demand that sort of price.

I thought that the show would be especially popular because Zion I is himself from the Yay Area (Oakland).

The Independent is a pretty great little venue. I've seen a couple of shows there now and have not yet been disappointed. I've always been able to enjoy the show without worrying about it being too crowded, loud, dirty, etc. My first of only two complaints about the venue is that the men's room was pretty poorly kept.

The other complaint - which is more of a comment, anyways - is that there was a group of four young gentlemen who stood in the middle of the floor for the entire show smoking joint after joint. It was like Jesus' miracle with the 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish... only with weed!

Each time they'd finish smoking one joint, one of the guys would pull another one out from his pocket, light it and start passing it around.

Moreso than by the veritable cornucopia of marijuana that was contained in their hoodies I was amazed at their brazen consumption of an illegal psychoactive drug.

Nobody seemed to mind particularly and it may even have added to the authenticity of the event.

The opening acts were both pretty good with my personal preference being the first performer whose name I've forgotten. He had a line that was something akin to: "Fools think they can step to this but I've been kicking these rhymes since I come out the you-ter-iss"

Pure magic.

The second opener - who was by no means bad - was a group called Honor Roll. These guys were better performers than the first act but not as talented rappers.

Zion I was amazing.

I was going to write more about Zion I's performance but I'd rather just encourage everyone reading this to attend one of his upcoming shows. He is smart, funny, and puts an incredible amount of thought and energy into giving his audience the best show that he can.

My next trip to the Independent? The Simpsons Movie on Monday night. Free with purchase of two drinks.

It doesn't get much better than that...

Free to be You and Me...

2008-01-10T11:46:00.000-08:00

I really enjoyed this article from Wired magazine.

As someone who recently got an iPod Touch - and thus is dependent upon mooching off of free wireless networks nearby - network security is an important issue to me.

From my apartment I can view as many as 17 separate wireless networks but only two of them are not password protected. And my connectivity is sporadic at best. It's even worse at the laundromat where I'm forced to spend hours defending my clothes. Here - the Washing Well, if you're curious - there are no fewer than 22 separate wireless networks within range ONLY ONE OF WHICH IS OPEN. Talk about Tantalus...

Obviously I support the freeing of wireless networks but I think that this article evaluates the issues very thoroughly and logically.

I can only hope that my neighbors are convinced...

Online Action and Real Life Results

2008-01-07T10:06:00.000-08:00

I found this extremely interesting article on techpresident.

Although I've only played WoW for about 15 minutes in my life (I had an orc warrior) I have friends who do little else. Some of them play WoW so much that their personal, professional and academic lives suffer as a result. I can't even count the number of times I've implored my friends to come see a movie, to dinner, to a bar or to the park only to hear the reply, "I can't. My guild is raiding ___ dungeon tonight."

"Well, how long will that take?" I ask, knowing full well that I will have completed my plans and gone to bed long before the raid is complete.

"I dunno... maybe 5 or 6 hours?"

Game. Set. Match.

I do not believe that my friends are unique in their attachment to this game. I'm sure that many of the 9 million other WoW users are similarly devoted/addicted/hooked.

Their online time is precious. They pay $15 a month for their account and they plan to get the most out of their investment. When some of my friends have quit their jobs and stopped going to class in order to play more WoW, I came to the conclusion that their online lives are more valuable than their real lives.

Now, what does this all mean in the context of hundreds of Ron Paul supporters holding a WoW rally online? I think that this may indicate that Paul's dungeon-raiding online supporters are even more zealous supporters than the Paulies who attend rallies and debates in real life.

While this sort of display doesn't necessarily manifest in votes on election day, it certainly calls attention to the dedication of Ron Paul's supporters as well as the need for more tech-accessible ways of interacting with the political process.

Twitter

2008-01-02T17:38:00.000-08:00

Interesting discussion of Twitter today on Techmeme.

This article in particular.

Why Startups Cost Less

2008-01-02T11:16:00.000-08:00

Here is an interesting article that quickly summarizes why so many startups are born each day.

It's interesting that even though there has been considerably more scrutiny into the viability of startups since the late 90's, the severely decreased cost-to-entry has acted as a counterweight to that force. The result is that even without VC backing, companies are able to spring into existence. This is why we see startups flopping left and right and yet more and more keep coming. The ideas aren't necessarily better, the stakes are just smaller.

Balance.

Clean Up the 'Nets

2008-01-02T09:05:00.000-08:00

The earwax eating Australian Prime Minister who I wrote about a couple of months ago is now pursuing a massive internet censorship campaign.

There are a few thoughts I had while reading the article.

The first was that it was an opt-out censorship rather than an opt-in censorship. That means that an Australian internet customer must call their provider or - even worse - someone in the government and request that their pornographic websites be unblocked. This seems like it could raise privacy issues somewhere along the line.

My other thought was regarding the fact that blocked sites must be manually logged into the filter for them to be blocked in this censorship system. Even if you're able to filter all of the dirty sites one day, the filter wouldn't stop the most inappropriate site on the planet the next day as long as it was created - or its web address was altered - after the filter's original calibration. This means that someone's job (or some peoples' job) is to browse the net looking for newly minted porn sites and logging them into the filter.

Those would/will be tax dollars hard at work.

Blatant Advertisement

2007-12-28T11:41:00.000-08:00

So I thought I'd toss up a couple ads that have come up on my site that caught my eye for one reason or another:

Uploaded with Skitch!

There's something of a Ying/Yang balance going on in that advertising bar.

This advertisement has no such balance:

Uploaded with Skitch!

Oh boy! A free weekly column from Ann Coulter! While you're at it, do you think you could rip open my hard drive and defecate inside? Or perhaps you could just sprinkle some anthrax inside the fan box and then give me a blood transfusion from an ebola-infected monkey...

And finally:

Uploaded with Skitch!

These are almost certainly a result of my post about POLITICAL coverage. Why don't these advertisers use negative keywords like "political" and "campaign" and save themselves a few bucks and from annoying people by bombarding them with insurance ads?

HandBrake

2007-12-28T11:17:00.000-08:00

I was given an iPod Touch for Christmas!

However, instead of posting about the iPod touch (there are hundreds of websites extolling the virtues of the product) I'm going to talk about an awesome program for creating content to put on the iPod Touch.

HandBrake

Uploaded with Skitch!

"It is an open-source, GPL-licensed, multiplatform, multithreaded DVD to MPEG-4 converter."

I've used it to rip some DVDs to my computer and load onto my Touch. It's worked like a charm so far. In addition to having presets for easy export to various mediums:

Uploaded with Skitch!

HandBrake allows you to choose how large you'd like the resultant file to be or choose the degree of quality. This is a huge boon for a number of reasons:

1- It allows you to create files that can be easily burned onto a CD.
2- Because the iPod Touch's screen is small, you don't need DVD quality to enjoy a movie... so you can decrease the file size accordingly.
3- Alternately if you're watching anything by Peter Jackson or If you have an iPod to TV adapter, you can choose much higher video quality for when you plan to view it on a larger screen.

Number two is a big one for me because I have the 8 gig version and want to conserve space. I also enjoy watching documentaries which generally don't rely upon stunning visual effects. I'm still experimenting with how low of video quality I can choose before it becomes unwatchable.

Any suggestions on applications or modifications for my new toy?

Study on Partiality of Political Coverage

2007-12-26T16:16:00.000-08:00

From TalkLeft

I was surprised to read the results of this study:

Uploaded with Skitch!

First off, I think that it's only to be expected that Hillary is the focus of much of the political punditry. She has been campaigning as the political frontrunner for months and continues to do so in spite of her statistically tenuous claim to that distinction.

I was also struck by the lack of explanation into the methodology of the study. What is "scientific content analysis" and how can it determine what constitutes positive and negative coverage? If a member of the media says "critics believe ____" in some cases, that person is merely couching their own views in the amorphous third party of "critics" or the even more ephemeral, "some people." In other cases, the person is using the construct of "critics" or "some people" to raise a legitimate point and to attempt to further explore or explain that candidates point of view.

How does the scientific analysis determine which is which?

Running Strong

2007-12-26T11:31:00.000-08:00

Although I still have a stress fracture in my right foot that is preventing me from running, it does not hinder in the least my consumption of running-related media. I found this article on LetsRun and thought it was a good reminder of how - health benefits of actual exercise aside - marathons actually prevent deaths.

God Save the Queen!

2007-12-26T11:06:00.000-08:00

The English Monarch's annual Christmas Day message was broadcast live this year - as usual - but was also subsequently posted to YouTube by the royal administration a short time later.

At the time of this posting, the number of people who viewed the speech on YouTube (900,000) was almost thrice that of the number of people who tuned in to watch it live.

Other governments should embrace the use of YouTube for disseminating their messages in an easily accessible, reviewable medium.

For more information, click here and/or here.

Quick Follow Up Re: Doping

2007-12-26T10:55:00.000-08:00

This blog really started to get whatever traction it currently has when I wrote about my displeasure with a New York Times article whose presentation - not content, mind you - compared Bannister's alleged use of performance enhancing drugs with that of Marion Jones.

I just wanted to note that the recent press regarding Marion Jones' malfeasances is making those comparisons - however diluted by caveat - horribly inappropriate.

I'll say it again: Marion Jones is a disgrace to her sport and country while Sir Roger is exactly the opposite.

I did enjoy this somewhat dated piece in the New York Times about Dr. Bannister's accomplishment.

Wii Can Do It!

2007-12-24T22:07:00.000-08:00

So, as I'm inclined to do pretty much every day, I was reading Techmeme a few days ago. I came across this article about the "physical benefits" of playing video games on the Wii system as opposed to on a generically controlled console.

The following statistics were among the only sited by this article:

Project Gotham Racing 3: 125.5 kJ/kg/min
Wii Sports bowling: 190.6 kJ/kg/min
Wii Sports boxing: 198.1 kJ/kg/min
Wii Sports tennis: 202.5 kJ/kg/mi

The study concluded thusly that Wii gaming: "was not of high enough intensity to contribute towards the recommended daily amount of exercise in children... In a typical week, active gaming rather than passive gaming would increase total energy expenditure by less than 2 percent."

I find it very hard to take seriously the results of a study that basis its conclusion on data that suggests that a person playing Wii Sports tennis expends more energy than a person playing Wii Sports boxing.

(For the sake of journalistic impartiality, these videos both were among the top 10 videos found with a YouTube search of "Wii Tennis" and "Wii Bowling," respectively. I also opted to use amateur footage because I thought it would necessarily be less contrived than professional footage made to illustrate how easy the Wii is to use.

I have a Wii. I've played both and it's not even close. To quote Jules (Samuel L Jackson) from Pulp Fiction, "it ain't the same fuckin' ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same fuckin' sport..."

Well, obviously it's not the same sport. At the end of a typical Wii boxing game I am generally pretty darned tuckered out - and I consider myself to be in better shape than the general population. Wii Tennis, on the other hand, simply involves a flick of the wrist. I can't imagine that minute for minute, the amount of energy expended while playing Wii Tennis even begins to approach that used for Wii Boxing. In short, Wii Tennis requires far less effort than Wii Boxing.

Based on that alone, I question the validity of the study. But even aside from that, even if playing the Wii is only - according to the hard scientific data - slightly better for ones' health than another gaming system, it's still better.

Furthermore, there's the chance that playing a Wii Sport may encourage someone to go outside and play its real counterpart. Before you scoff at this justification, at least stop and think about the fact that emulation is at least an option with Wii Sports. It's not like someone can decide to go out and play Halo in real life.

And Wii gains even more props for actually inquiring whether the gamer would like to take a break to go outside and play. No other system encourages you to do something other than play it.

So while playing Wii is certainly not as healthy as many activities, as far as video games go, it's close to the top.

Though RockBand gives you a pretty sweet workout as well... groupies too...

Last Minute Christmas Present? (Or really late Chanukah present)

2007-12-20T17:41:00.000-08:00

As the recent report from the Pew Internet and American Life Project found, most people are narcissistic enough that they would likely love to receive something from this site for Christmas.

Hypocrisy, Thy Name is David Gregory

2007-12-20T16:48:00.000-08:00

After all his talk about how the internet is to blame for political polarization and that blogs are effectively polluting the public discourse, David Gregory has the stones to be a part of this pollution:

And again:

Words fail me...

Thanks to Think Progress for the tip(s).

Krugman on Presidential Experience

2007-12-19T11:32:00.000-08:00

From TalkLeft.

In response to this article in the Boston Globe, Paul Krugman posted the following on his blog:

"This story gives a lot of context to the debate over health reform now. Obama clearly sees himself playing the same role as president that he did as a state legislator — as a broker among groups, including the insurance industry, as someone who can find a compromise solution that’s acceptable to a wide range of opinion.

My thoughts: being president isn’t at all like being a state legislator, Illinois Republicans aren’t like the national Republican party, 2009 won’t be 2003, and the insurance industry’s opposition to national health reform — which must, if it is to mean anything, strike deep at the industry’s fundamental business — will be much harsher than its opposition to a basically quite mild state-level reform effort.

The point is that if national health reform is going to happen, it will be as the result of a no-holds-barred fight of an entirely different order from what Obama saw in Illinois. The president’s role will have to be far more confrontational, involve far more twisting of arms and rallying of the public against the special interests, than Obama’s role as a state legislator in the Illinois case. And it will take place against a backdrop of fierce attacks not just from the industry but from Republicans who fear, rightly, that any kind of reform will move the country in a more liberal direction.

My worries about Obama are that he doesn’t seem to understand this — that he thinks that in 2009, as president, he can broker a national health care reform the same way that as a state legislator, in 2003, he brokered a deal that mollified the insurance industry. That’s a recipe for getting nowhere."

I think that Krugman's point that Obama's experiences in the Illinois State Legislature haven't prepared him for the Presidency misses the target. I don't think that the target even existed to begin with.

Of course Obama's experiences in the Illinois State Legislature are dissimilar to what his experiences would be in the White House. This argument loses its credibility because it can be applied to any candidate's previous experience.

Among the democrats, a huge amount of attention has been paid to "experience" and how X candidate is the only one with the requisite experience for the job.

The Presidency is unlike anything else. I'll gladly agree with Krugman on that point. However because there is no experience that can identically simulate the experiences of a President aside from holding the office oneself, candidates are forced to present themselves - and the electorate is forced to evaluate those candidates - on the basis of actual experience.

While this is obviously an imperfect method of evaluation, this process of analogical comparison is the only one we have.

Being a Southern Baptist minister is far less comparable to being the President of the United States, but that doesn't mean that Mike Huckabee's experiences as a Southern Baptist minister wouldn't influence his presidency.

Being held captive for years in a POW camp is (hopefully) not like being the President of the United States but that experience has certainly contributed to who John McCain is and how his presidency would be.

I realize that my argument is approaching hyperbole so I'll simply return to my original point.

Being a Governor is unlike being the President. Being a Senator is unlike being the President. Being a House Representative is unlike being the President.

Being the President is like being the President.

Because none of the candidates - on either side - have been President of the United States, none of them have perfectly applicable experience of which to boast. As such, we must evaluate them on the basis of what their experience have been and how we believe those experiences have prepared them for the presidency.

Analogies are almost always imperfect, but they remain the best way of comparing two dissimilar things.

Krugman should realize that.

The Internet: The Cause of Polar Politics?

2007-12-13T18:23:00.000-08:00

At a National Press Club event a couple of weeks ago, NBC White House correspondent David Gregory argued that blogs and the internet were to blame for the polarization of today’s political arena. He specifically pointed to the phenomenon of "people try[ing] to divine or assign [the press's] motives" for asking certain questions at White House press briefings.

First, let me make it clear that I don’t believe that there’s anything wrong with the press being subjected to high levels of public scrutiny. Just as political institutions within a democracy ought be transparent, so too should the media that reports on them. While I agree that a journalist's job, first and foremost, is to obtain and disseminate news rather than pursue a private agenda, I am aware that any substantive report will reveal something of the reporter's predisposition. Whether it is a blatant indication of prejudice or a subtle nuance indicated by who the reporter chooses to interview or the use or omission of certain adjectives, there is almost always something to be divined.

Secondly, I would like to address the claim that blogs and the internet are to be blamed for political polarization.

In his book, Marketing to the Social Web, Larry Weber writes that, "You might have noticed that consumer opinion on the Web tends to split widely over books, movies, music, indeed, most products. Look at the Amazon book reviews; they tend be written by people who either absolutely loved the book or loathed it. Someone who is simply indifferent won’t bother to say anything. It's people who have an interest one way or the other who are going to take the time and energy to voice their opinions -- that’s evidence of community." The expression of political opinion mirrors that of consumer opinion.

To modify the old adage: if you don’t have anything nice or naughty to say, you're unlikely to say anything at all. As a result, people who take the time to participate in blogs, forums and other forms of social media are by and large people who possess strong opinions.

Rather than ask why the internet and blogosphere are polarized, a more fundamental question is to ask why the polarization of politics has been blamed on the internet and blogs.

Politics – especially during an election year (and really, what year isn’t an election year these days?) – is inherently polar. Each party is trying to distinguish itself from its rivals, as is each candidate. Even after the voters on both ends of the political spectrum have made up their minds to vote for whichever candidate wins their party’s nomination, politics becomes a game of those nominees subsequently picking wedge issues and positions. These positions slowly but inexorably chip voters off of the block of undecided voters in the middle, and add them to each candidate's flock. Ultimately - one side wins and the other side loses.

People’s views are forced into this binary function in part because they must vote one way or the other. It should not come as a surprise that this electoral dichotomy is reflected in the political discourse that addresses it.

Unlike the internet, this is hardly a modern development. Political polarization and factionalism were identified by our founding fathers more than 200 years ago. In Federalist 10, James Madison –as Publius – wrote "…a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community."

This is a fair description of practically any established online community. Looking back, the debate between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists was just as polar a debate as can be found on any modern political message board or blog. While the debate between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists was waged between elite members of American colonial society with quills, parchment and printing presses – the modern debate is far more egalitarian, accessible to anyone with a keyboard and an opinion. Although the medium for the debate and the debaters themselves have changed, the underlying sentiment has not.

It is true that far more consideration went into the writings of Publius and Brutus than a typical blog post. The ease and speed with which anyone can become a pundit is both a boon and a bane because it allows for vehement expression without one of the quill era's crucial hurdles: forced deliberation prior to distribution. Two-hundred years ago, the very labor-intensity of writing and disseminating a message necessitated that the content be thoroughly vetted for worth before it was published.

This is an inescapable byproduct of technological advancement. The printing press allowed things to be widely published far more easily than they could as hand-copied documents. The advent of television decreased journalistic deliberation even further. The internet’s enabling of nearly real-time discussion of events is simply the next step in the evolution of media.

Just as faction was both loathed and lauded within The Federalist Papers, so too does it play a positive and a negative role in the modern political process. By allowing freedom so that faction can be made to combat faction, the universal accessibility of the internet can facilitate the balance of these seemingly diametric views. These opinions exist whether or not they are expressed and cannot fairly be attributed to any particular medium.

Simply because the internet and blogs are the battlefield doesn't mean that they are to blame for the battle.

While it is easy to focus on the harshest and most extreme comments on any issue, the internet provides a forum for airing and discussing these difference in order to find common ground. In this sense, the internet is a far more powerful uniter than it is a divider.

Ultimately, the polarization of politics predates the internet by eons. While the internet – like all new technology - adds new dimensions to existing problems, it almost invariably provides new solutions as well. David Gregory’s comments focus myopically on the former element of the puzzle and attempt to scapegoat the internet for one of the most basic proclivities of mankind: having and desiring to share opinion.

David, don’t shoot the messenger.

I Will be Retiring Shortly...

2007-12-04T14:57:00.000-08:00

Because I am now independently wealthy. Check out the email I just got:

Uploaded with Skitch!

I'm out. If you need me, I'll be at an elegant villa somewhere, sipping wine and showering beautiful women with diamonds and hundred dollar bills...

Pomonkeying Around

2007-12-04T13:32:00.000-08:00

Students of Pomona College - next door to my alma mater of Claremont McKenna College - protested the possibility of a speech from Alberto Gonzales.

Alameda Shoutout

2007-11-29T22:31:00.000-08:00

I really like this game, and I like it even more because ALAMEDA is a word on it.

Uploaded with Skitch!

www.freerice.com

Feed some people.

Spam Prevention

2007-11-29T13:15:00.000-08:00

I had never seen this method of spam prevention before.

Uploaded with Skitch!

Generally the site prompts you to enter in the characters that are distorted in a picture file (the bots can't identify what the picture is of even though it's a picture of text). I've never liked these because it's often very difficult to tell the difference between a zero and an oh and so forth. Sometimes they're even case-sensitive and that creates a hash of problems with V's, X's, and other letters for which the only difference between upper and lower case is size...

2007-11-28T12:51:00.000-08:00

Interesting Article About Facebook

2007-11-27T09:56:00.001-08:00

Here

California's DMV is Hip

2007-11-26T13:20:00.000-08:00

California's Department of Motor Vehicles has a YouTube account and a Myspace profile to educate drivers of all ages about traffic safety.

I think that this is smart.

Thanksgiving Recap

2007-11-26T09:57:00.000-08:00

I spent a wonderful and relaxing Thanksgiving up in Redding California.

I tried to go for a run after resting for a week only to discover that my foot still hurt. Diagnosis: stress fracture.

So 6-8 weeks of biking and swimming are in my future.

I got a membership to the Embarcadero YMCA which is an amazing facility. For $49 a month (and a $25 registration fee) I get access for 16 hours a day to a gorgeous facility with all of the usual weights and cardiovascular equipment and a 25m swimming pool. It even has a beautiful - if a little oily - view of the Bay.

I biked for an hour this morning (30 miles) and got in a quick lift before heading to work.

A blog post of mine is on my work's website and can be found here.

Potential Australian Prime Minister's Chances at Winning - Do They Wane or...Wax?

2007-11-20T16:22:00.000-08:00

(Watch the gentleman to the left of the speaker)

I honestly don't think that this will harm Kevin Rudd's chance of becoming Prime Minister. If anything, it humanizes him in such a way that will endear him to the Australian people. Bear in mind that I know nothing of Australian politics or - more importantly - Australian voters, but in that eating things that one has picked out or off of one's body is universal, so too are certain sentiments held by voters.

Therein lies the dualistic hypocrisy of the political process.

People always lament how they want our elected officials to be "a regular gal/guy." Then when that gal or guy does something wrong - regardless of how benign or unrelated to their professional duties - they are judged against a higher standard than any regular person would be. The reason for such a dualistic application of 'justice?' They're the ___________ (insert their official title here)!"

Meaning that of course they should be held to a higher standard.

There are a few reasons why this might be reasonable.

I read a book in college - and I'll try to find it and post the title and author - in which the author argued that elected officials should be held accountable for indiscretions that are unrelated to their official duties for a couple of reasons. First is that in so far as an office is imbued with any symbolic importance - as is certainly the case with the Presidency but to a lesser extent other offices as well - any actions taken by the person in that office reflect upon the office's symbolism.

The phrase, "The Presidency is bigger than any one man" (which is a hackneyed phrase whose knees might be replaced if Hillary wins next year) highlights the validity of holding the President to a higher standard. For example, if the President is an alcohol-abusing-coke-head, that reflects poorly upon the office. Furthermore, because the President is the national figurehead, such behavior also reflects poorly upon everyone in the country - whether they voted for him or not.

Engaging in illegal or embarrassing acts also makes elected officials susceptible to being blackmailed. This is a more logically compelling reason.

There was a third reason but I've forgotten it.

Anyways, like I said originally, I don't think that this is going to harm Rudd's chances of being elected.

Quantum Suicide

2007-11-19T13:48:00.000-08:00

http://science.howstuffworks.com/quantum-suicide.htm

Pretty cool stuff.

Walking to Work

2007-11-19T08:40:00.000-08:00

http://local.theoildrum.com/node/3224#more

Pretty interesting blog.

I might write more when I've had some time to read it.

Right now I've got to check some RSS feeds.

Canadian Supreme Court Rules Against Granting Asylum to American Deserters

2007-11-17T13:45:00.000-08:00

I think that the Canadian Supreme Court is right to rule against providing asylum to deserting American soldiers. Although I almost certainly would have dodged the draft by traveling to Canada if I had been of age at the time, there has been no draft for the Iraq conflict/occupation.

There hasn't been a draft since 1973.

I realize that socioeconomic factors prevent the United States armed forces from being totally voluntary. I realize that because of this, underprivileged minority groups make up more of our armed forces than their proportion of the population would suggest.

That having been said, the thousands of soldiers that are deserting to Canada at one point made the decision to become soldiers. They may have made that decision long before any of the current miring conflicts in the Middle East had even been considered, but they still made it. In many cases, through ROTC scholarships and other imbursement programs, these soldiers have been provided tens of thousands of dollars for tuition in exchange for their service.

Even discounting the advance payment of soldiers in the form of scholarships and tuition reimbursement, soldiers are paid for their service. Although warfare certainly a more serious instance, it can be likened to any other professional refusing to do their job. Although I've never enlisted or undergone basic training, I would imagine that it is made explicitly clear that as American soldiers, they will be expected to deploy wherever the commander in chief chooses.

The third of the three primary areas of responsibility as outlined in 10 U.S.C. § 5063, originally introduced under the National Security Act of 1947 is that the marine corps is responsible for "Such other duties as the President may direct."

Furthermore, the oath of enlistment sworn by soldiers in all branches of the armed forces is:

"I, (state your name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. (So help me God)."

(Note that the last sentence is not required to be said if the speaker has a personal or moral objection, as is true of all oaths administered by the United States government)

At least with the case of 1st Lt. Ehren Watada, he remained at his post and refused to be deployed rather than deserting. Lt. Watada made the argument that it was his duty to oppose the war. Whether or not you agree with his reasoning, he is fulfilling what he sees as his duty as a soldier.

Soldiers that desert can make no such claim.

For a more full discussion of this topic, take a look at the thread on TalkLeft

"Late Night" with Reed

2007-11-15T22:33:00.000-08:00

Normally at this time on a weeknight, I'd be asleep. Lame, I know, but I run every morning at 6, so I try to go to bed at around 10:00 p.m.

This morning I didn't run because I think I'm developing or have developed a stress fracture in my right foot. The top of my foot hurts considerably when I run or walk. My plan is to take a few days off and see if it gets better. If not, I'll go to the doctor and take some time off from running and just swim.

But back to why I'm up so late.

It's not that I'm not tired. I'm exhausted. I'd like to go to sleep. I can't.

I have a pie in the oven.

It's a pumpkin pie that I'm baking for an office pie-baking competition being held tomorrow. This is actually the second pie I've baked tonight but I was afraid that I'd ruined the first one so I started making the second before the first was done baking. I didn't realize that the "easy-bake" pie filling that I'd bought already had water mixed into it so I added more milk than was needed. As a result, the pie filling was the consistency of soup rather than of custard.

As it turns out, it turned out. The first pie was delicious. Oh well, I guess that means my coworkers get one pie and I get the other!

Anyways, I know that the following quote has already been thrown around the blogosphere more than a few times today, but I thought I'd add my two cents:

"The fact is that (Moulitsas is) not a journalist in terms of someone who knows how to do reporting, someone who reflects balance in what he portrays. To the contrary, he engages in the kind of hyperbole and extreme statements that are represented by that crass and I think offensive statement that he made about those dead people. But you know what? I think that’s just what’s going on in journalism. I think that there’s more and more opinion, less and less people who know how to do the job. All you gotta do is shout, say something on the blog that offends and attacks the other side and suddenly you have the credentials and you’re said to be a journalist. I think it’s a great lie.”

- "Liberal" FOX news commentator Juan Williams

I got it from Talk Left (www.talkleft.com) It was linked there from (http://www.newshounds.us/2007/11/15/dailykos_smeared_again_on_hannity_colmes.php)

All I want to say is that even if that's what blogs do - which is an enormous concession - shouting something on a blog, even if that something offends and attacks the other side, allows the other side to respond. There is reciprocity. I don't know whether or not it makes you a journalist, but what is a rose by any other name? Would the discussion be not as enlightening? Would the issues raised be not worthy of consideration? And would each side not gain insight into the other?

I don't think it matters if you call the person a journalist, blogger, or something in between. All that matters is the advancement of the public discourse.

Blogging is a conversation and - in my opinion - is the most effective way to achieve that level of discourse. Although I have enormous respect for most of the journalistic community (and hope perhaps one day to join it) journalism isn't necessarily a conversation. Most journalists are far harder to reach than most bloggers and thus it is more difficult to have a conversation with them.

That doesn't mean that both journalists and bloggers, even if they merely "offend and attack" the other side, can't start the conversation. Even if they don't themselves listen to the responses, others will. And so we can stand on the shoulders of giants (or perhaps of giant assholes).

Irony, Thy Name is AdWords...

2007-11-15T09:34:00.000-08:00

Yesterday after work I was messing around with the various customizable features offered by Google Blogger. It is that experimentation you have to thank for the link to my YouTube videos, my bio, and some news feeds to the right of the blog. On a whim, I signed up to host some "highly targeted ads" powered by Google's AdSense - lauded to be the best thing to happen to advertising since the Budweiser frogs.

Receiving notification this morning that my page had been approved to host ads, I scrolled to the bottom to find this carefully targeted, highly topical advertisement.

Uploaded with Skitch!

Well played, Google, well played. Although unless Marion Jones is checking the blogosphere on articles about herself, I don't expect many click throughs...

Doping in Sport Article in the New York Times (Part 3)

2007-11-14T12:17:00.000-08:00

My response to Susan Wessling:

Dear Susan,

Thank you very much for your prompt reply.

I am aware that Professor Wailoo's essay referred to a cloud being cast over Sir Bannister's achievement. Indeed, given that the four-minute barrier for the mile was believed by many to be beyond the ability of mortal man to break, it is not surprising that some people believed that Sir Bannister could not have accomplished the task without the aid of enhancements. As you point out that Professor Wailoo's essay states, the cloud dissipated quickly. I do not disagree with that fact - or with the fact that such a cloud existed. My contention is - and was in my original letter - that while such doubts may have been raised regarding the accomplishments of both Sir Bannister and Marion Jones, those were recently proven in the case of the latter. Sir Bannister was quickly exonerated a half-century ago while Marion Jones is currently being forced to relinquish her ill-got Olympic medals. It is the case of Marion Jones to which I was referring when I made reference to "obliterating the sun" in my original letter.

As I am certain you are aware, one of the dangers of attempting to make comparisons between two potentially similar instances is that characteristics and elements of one story will doubtlessly be applied to the other, even if they are factually outside the realm of similarity. While both athletes' careers may have been clouded, Marion Jones was proven to have used performance-enhancing drugs, disgracing herself, her sport, and her country. Sir Roger Bannister, on the other hand, went onto a "distinguished medical career" and continues to be a champion of the importance of athletics and a role model to athletes around the world. Their pictures should not have appeared together beneath that caption.

While it is refreshing that you "credit readers with enough sense to understand that if they look at only a few parts of a package -- if they don't translate the shorthand by reading the article itself -- they're getting only part of the story," I believe that you are forcing them to shoulder what is ultimately the responsibility of the New York Times - to construe the facts of a story clearly, impartially and without insinuation. By emphasizing the specious similarity between Marion Jones and Sir Roger Bannister in spite of enormous incongruity between their stories, I do not think that you fulfilled your journalistic responsibility. Forcing your subscribers to carefully read the article in order to dispel the false parallels suggested by the accompanying pictures and captions - carefully selected by the New York Times - is an open invitation to misinterpretation and the spread of misinformation.

Best,
Sanchez

------------------------------------------------------

I'll continue to update as the correspondence progresses.

I've also forwarded these letters to Professor Keith Wailoo, the author of the essay and a professor of history and public health at Rutgers.

Doping in Sport Article in the New York Times (Part 2)

2007-11-14T12:15:00.000-08:00

The New York Times' Reply:

Dear Mr Sanchez,

Thank you for writing. How to accurately and fairly illustrate an article is something we consider every day. We are certainly aware that a newspaper page can be read as a form of shorthand -- a headline with few words, a small selection of photos, a caption that has little room for detail. Our goal is balance among all those elements, but we also credit readers with enough sense to understand that if they look at only a few parts of a package -- if they don't translate the shorthand by reading the article itself -- they're getting only part of the story.

In this case, we are comfortable with the balance of elements. In a story comparing past and present, combining similar historical and current photos is a natural choice. And as much as we can, we depict people who appear in the article, so that the caption and the story can work together to tell the full story.

And Mr. Wailoo does, in fact, refer specifically to accusations against Roger Bannister, not just later runners who broke the 4-minute mile: "The cloud over Bannister's achievement dissipated quickly; he brushed aside the charges as ridiculous and went to a distinguished medical career. In 1959, the A.M.A. study concluded that there was little evidence to the specific allegations." So a caption that mentions a cloud over Bannister's feat is both reasonable and accurate. And as you can see, Mr. Wailoo was quite careful to finish the tale -- to make it clear that, as you say, a cloud did not obliterate the sun.

Regards,
Susan Wessling
Assistant to the Editor, Science
The New York Times

Doping in Sport Article in the New York Times

2007-11-14T11:48:00.001-08:00

I was reading an article about a client in the New York Times. In case you were curious, the company's name is Daptiv and the article can be found here: (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/13/business/media/12adnewsletter1.html)

After I read Stuart Elliott's article on Daptiv's rebranding, I noticed an article titled "Old Story, Updated: Better Living Through Pills." (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/13/health/13essa.html)

This normally wouldn't have grabbed my attention, but beneath this headline were pictures of Sir Roger Bannister (the first human to run a mile in less than four minutes) and Marion Jones (who recently tested positive and then confessed to years of doping and is being forced to return her ill-got Olympic medals. All five of them!).

Needless to say, I was shocked.

Rather than recapitulate my feelings here, I'll simply post the email I sent to the New York Times.

Uploaded with Skitch!

My Letter:

New York Times Editor,

As an avid runner and former collegiate track and field athlete who ran the 1500-meter race (the metric mile) I was shocked and upset to see a picture of Sir Roger Bannister prominently displayed beneath a headline regarding athletic drug use. Thinking that there may be substance to the story, I immediately opened and read the article to find that it did not claim that Sir Bannister doped. Nor did the article suggest that Sir Bannister was suspected of doping. Rather, Professor Wailoo's article cites the slew of runners who broke the four-minute mile barrier in the three years AFTER Bannister's monumental achievement as evidence of potential doping.

I do not believe that Professor Wailoo's article was meant to suggest that Sir Roger Bannister made use of performance enhancing drugs. I believe that the New York Times' presentation of the article misrepresented both doctors.

First, by placing that picture of Sir Bannister - one of the most famous in track and field history - next to the story's headline and above the picture of a proven doper, the New York Times effectively imbued the article with the message that Sir Roger Bannister used performance enhancing drugs - something for which there is no proof. A subscriber who neglects to fully read the article will simply assume that Sir Bannister doped.

The second and far more vociferous method by which the New York Times skewed the subject was by the photo's caption, "Drug questions clouded the feats of Roger Bannister in 1954 and Marion Jones in 2000." Beyond the fact that Wailoo's article makes no such claim, there is no evidence that Sir Bannister doped. Even allowing for the flexible nature of the verb "clouded" there is an enormous difference between casting a cloud and obliterating the sun. Evidence has proven that Marion Jones is a dirty athlete. No such evidence tarnishes Sir Bannister's athletic accomplishments and the New York Times should not use misleadingly placed photographs and overstating captions in an attempt to do so.

Yours,

Sanchez
3:56.44 Personal Best time for 1500 meters. Drug free.

Groovy CDs

2007-11-11T12:48:00.001-08:00

A musical mullet, of sorts. Old school on top, new school in the rear. Will CD/LP Hybrids save the compact disc?

http://blog.wired.com/music/2007/11/vinyl-cds-groov.html

Pretty cool, huh?

When the first CDs rolled off an assembly line on August 17, 1982 with a copy of Richard Strauss' Alpine Symphony, most people thought that it knelled the death of the eight-track, LP, and pretty much every form of music that had preceeded it. The obvious caveat to this death is - of course - live didgeridoo performances. Man, you haven't lived until you've heard a tribe of Australian Aborigines go to town on their didgeridoos.

But I digress.

At first sniff, they were right (the people who thought that the CD knelled death, not the Australian Aborigines). The success of the first static CD players in the fall of 1982 was augmented by the launch of Sony's first Discman two years later. By 1986, sales of CD players eclipsed those of record players, and two years later, CD sales outpaced record sales.

But the CD was not perfect in spite of its astronomical rise. Just as the CD had kicked the LP's metaphorical teeth in, so too were the CD's seemingly superhuman, teeth kicked in by the kryptonite-toed boot of the internet in the form of P2P filesharing programs.

Beseiged by Napster and subsequent companies like Kazaa, Limewire, iMesh, Morpheus, and BearShare, sales of CDs peaked in 2001 at 712 million, around the time that peer-to-peer file sharing services became widely popular. Within five years, sales dropped nearly a quarter.

You'd think that would be it. As Ramirez from Highlander said, "there can only be one." It is assumed that once a form of media has asserted itself as the alpha dog, the other dogs will no longer be used to play music. For instance, you don't see many people nostalgically holding onto their eight-track players. So you'd think it'd be the same thing with the even more archaic record players, right?

Wrong.

To quote a master who has straddled the divide between the LP and CD worlds, "Don't call it a comeback, I've been here for years."

That having been acknowledged, LPs are making a comeback for a number of interesting reasons.

1 - You can't mix/scratch with CDs without some really nifty and even more expensive equipment and software.

2 - LPs actually sound better. For an extremely technical explanation of how this is true, see this link (http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=375592) but let me offer at least part of the answer. The tonal range in the music on most CDs is compressed so that it can be played loudly without sounding distorted. This is great if you want to keep your neighbors awake all night, but in terms of a complete aural experience, CDs fall short.

To come back to the article that inspired this post (as well as to the question raised in this post's title) I think that the CD will be around for at least a few more years. More car stereos are equipped with CD players than jacks that allow people to plug in their mp3 player. Also, the short-term focus of the average consumer will opt to continue to buy CDs for their existing home audio system at the cost of $10 or $20 a pop rather than investing hundreds of dollars in a system capable of playing the music they get online.

Still, the CD/LP hybrid is a cool idea and I would definitely buy one from any of my favorite artists if it meant the ability to listen to a "hidden track." And remember, because you can play them forwards and backwards, that means that there's twice the hidden goodness in every disc!

Now, if I can just find a record player...

Where's the nearest antique store?

Vignette

2007-10-03T11:03:00.000-07:00

I passed a homeless man this morning that forced me to smile. He was – like many members of the transient community – wearing many layers of clothing. In this instance, he was wearing more than a dozen t-shirts. On the outermost layer, stretched tight over the mass of the many shirts beneath, was a shirt featuring a jack-o-lantern wishing me a happy Halloween. While a festive shirt can be reason enough to smile, what forced me to smile was the thought of how many other holiday shirts he had on beneath and if he just cycled through them as dictated by the time of year. For instance, how many Christmas shirts did he have on? How long before Christmas would he begin to wear them? How soon after Christmas must one cease wearing Yuletide apparel? Is it – as is the case with Christmas lights – a week after New Years? Or can he take a few extra days or weeks before rotating his Valentine’s Day shirt to the surface? With all of these questions racing through my mind, I wanted to stop and ask him. Alas, he was asleep.

Inaugural

2007-09-25T00:32:00.000-07:00

Let me first thank you for taking interest in what I have to say. As of this moment I do not know what the focus of this blog will be - or even if I will update it regularly. I know that I loved to write when I was a student and I hope that this blog will afford me the opportunity to continue to take pride in synthesizing ideas in such a way that my recapitulation is more than just a regurgitation of information that I have absorbed. More than anything, I want to contribute something unique to the online community and the world at large - even if that is simply my own personal experiences and opinions.

Even if my blog takes shape into something far more structured than anything that I could hope for at this moment, I intend to sprinkle it with updates about events in my life. From a particularly good or bad run to an interesting encounter I had with someone on the bus, or maybe even just a picture I took of which I am particularly proud, this blog will be in part a reflection of my life.

Scary thought, but I hope you'll bear with me.