Municipal Wi-Fi is a bad idea

Every now and then a city will announce plans to provide free Internet access points around the city, and there will often be praise from the hi-tech community.  Or a state will move to ban such initiatives and heaps of scorn will be heaved on top of them and the local cable and DSL provides.  That's a mistake.

While I realize folk love to hate their cable companies (often with good reason) and the woeful state of broadband in this country, having the cities provide the access is worse idea.

Once municipal broadband is wide spread and available at no additionl cost than the taxes people are already paying, then the rational, individual decision is to stop paying Comcast or someone else for Internet access.  With enough people doing that, residential broadband from private companies will eventually go away.

That may be fine, assuming the municipalities allow free and open Internet access, but I'm not convinced they will. There are many great things on the net, but there are many foul ones as well.  We already see debates in favor of blocking undesirable websites at libraries and schools.  Will a vocal minority really allow the city to make such content available in homes?

Obviously the first target will be block already illegal or obscene content. I can't imagine many city councils will oppose a determined group of citizens who want to prohibit the city from "supplying" child pornography.  You can already imagine the campaign ads.

So what's next? Should the city be in the business of sending regular pornography into homes? Can't children see it then? Is that how we want to use tax money?

Porn is an easy target for those who want to restrict access to content. And a city blocking such content from it's own service may not be in the business of censorship.  After all, it's not like their banning the content.  They're simply choosing not carry it on a municipal service.

So what's next?  In many places, it's probably hate speech.  Should the city be facilitating content that is racist or misogynistic?

There are extremes on both the right and left of our political landscape that would like to see certain content go away.

Many would argue that the city should block sites that enable violence -- perhaps content related to building explosives and fighting a government force.  But what about sites that promote non-violent political unrest?

At this point I think it's safe to say that no city would ban a legitimate new site's content from it's service.  But then who is determining  the legitimacy of a new site?  I think CNN and Fox would be safe from calls to ban it from the city's service, but what about Al Jazeera?

In the recent uprisings in the middle east, one of the first things dictators try to do it cut off 'net access for the people. Can we count on local governments there to not do that if pressed?

The Internet is a powerful tool because of both the good stuff and bad stuff that's on it.  And I trust the users of the Internet, and, yes, many of the private party ISPs out there, to deliver a free 'net experience much more than I trust a city council trying to stand up to a vocal group of citizens barking their vocal call to, "Think of the children!"

Choose: Strip Search or Molestation

Do you want to be strip searched by the Back Scatter X-Ray or molested with TSA's "Enhanced Pat Down" at Seatac?

TSA is now installing the strip-o-matic machines at the North Satellite security check point. These machines use back scatter X-Ray technology to conduct a virtual strip search of passengers.You can see samples of these strip searches by doing a simple Google Image Search.

Some might say the images aren't so bad. Afterall the agent seeing them will never see the passenger being screened and will not be allowed to have any recording equipment in the room where they view the strip searches. Which, of course, confirms their explicitness.

TSA also claims the machines can't record images.

From the Seattle PI:

Regarding privacy, Parker said images from the machine go to a separate room, where a screener can radio back to the checkpoint if there's something suspicious. She said the screeners who see the passenger never see the image, while those who see the image never see the passenger.

The machines have no capacity to store imag [sic], and the screeners in the room may not have any cameras, cell phones or other recording devices. The TSA also applies a "privacy algorithm" that makes the images less explicit.

The don't appear to be segregating the machines and screeners by gender. You can't be sure who's looking at you and your kids.

Of course the claim that they don't store the images offers little reassurance. It's only a policy decision not to do it. It's not a hardware limitation.

In fact, the US Marshals service used similar machines in Florida at a courthouse.

From CNN:

The U.S. Marshals Service is confirming that it has stored more than 35,000 "whole body" images of people who had entered a U.S. courthouse in Orlando, Florida.

The images captured by millimeter wave technology are more ghost-like and far less detailed than those produced by "backscatter" machines commonly used by the Transportation Security Administration at airports nationwide.

Do you trust TSA to be more respectful or airline passengers than the US Marshals are of courthouse visitors?

Of course, it's entirely "optional." If you don't want TSA member virtually undressing you from a hidden room, you can opt instead for an Enhanced Pat Down. What is that like?

From The Consumerist:

"To call it a pat-down is a euphemism," said a spokesman for the ACLU in Massachusetts. "They really go for it."

He says that -- unlike the antiquated pat-down, which required TSA screeners to use the back of their hands when searching sensitive regions of your person -- the enhandced pat-down allows them to use their palms and fingers to feel and prod passengers.

One traveler who got the deluxe treatment at Logan sums it up thusly: "If anybody ever groped me like that in real life, I would have punched them in their nose."

From the Boston Herald:

Logan airport security just got more up close and personal as federal screeners launched a more aggressive palms-first, slide-down body search technique that has renewed the debate over privacy vs. safety.

For now, you can avoid this disgusting choice at SEA by not using the North Security Checkpoint. You can access all gates by clearing security at any checkpoint.

From the Seattle PI:

Starting Sunday, Sea-Tac Airport will close the North Security Checkpoint while the TSA reconfigures the layout to include the new scanners. Officials expect the closure to last approximately two weeks but say it should not cause delays because TSA will open extra lanes at the other checkpoints and have extra staff on hand to guide travelers.

So for you now, those who pay attention to the farce that is TSA do not have to make that choice at SEA. The only people subject to the strip search or TSA molesting will be those non-frequent travelers who are not familiar with the airport.

This insanity needs to stop. Treating everyone like they are being arrested is not going to help aviation security.  It's not making us safer.

And it is certainly not protecting our freedoms.

Copywriting the right way?

I saw this product at Macy's in downtown Seattle the other day.  It's a "Dual Event Timer" from the "Martha Stewart Collection."  I guess it's a neat idea.  It let's you have more than one timer in your kitchen, which is great when you want to time both the bagel bites in the oven, and the coffee steeping in the french press.  But I wasn't too keen on the name.  This is how my though process went:

"Dual event timer? That's stupid.  How pretenscious.  Is that because it's from the Martha Stewart collection?  They have to make it fancy?  That's just obnoxious.

It doens't need to be that fancy, people.  It's a simple product.  Just give it a simple name. Just call it the...

well....

Hmm.  What should the call it?

It's a kitchen timer.  Well, I guess you can use it outside the kitchen, too, so maybe there's no need for that word.  And 'dual kitchen' doesn't make sense anyway because most people only have one kitchen. But I guess it should mention that it support two different 'activities.'  Or maybe 'events' which may be simpler.

It's two timers in one, so the number two should be in the name.  Or the word 'Bi.' (Maybe not bi -- too controversial).  Or 'duo.'  That might work.  Or how about 'dual?'

So that's it.  Why didn't those stuck up writers just call it something simple like 'dual event timer' instead of 'dual eve...'

Oh.

I guess they did a good job afterall."

So after I managed to swallow my populist outrage, I had to admit to myself that the name they came up with was pretty good, and that copy writing is hard.

And that maybe, just maybe, thinking to myself in parenthetical expressions is over doing it just a little bit.

Geek Culture Part 01: w00tstock poster

Seeing the various Geek Culture posts I've done over the past year, it's time it gets its own title category.

This weekend, I finally got around to hanging my w00tstock poster.  I picked it up at this show in San Francisco last month.  After a nearly 3.5+ hour show, the performers stayed around so everyone who wanted to could meet and chat with them.  My poster has autographs from:

• Paul and Storm
• Kid Beyond
• Molly Lewis (think Sarah Vowell with a ukulele)
• Adam Savage
• Wil Wheaton

So it's a great keepsake from the event.

Despite meeting with hundreds of fans, everyone was genuinely nice and friendly.  They all still had the energy to talk to people.

I made a point of mentioning to Molly how much I enjoyed "Our American Cousin," her song about the Lincoln assassination.  She said that even though you're not supposed to pick your favorite child, it's probably her favorite too.

I chatted with Adam Savage about how much I enjoyed Mythbusters and appreciated the way they constantly illustrated the whole control/experiment structure. He said they weren't actually trying to do that.  All they wanted to do was tell good stories. Adam was all about telling stories, and that was really interesting.  If it wasn't for the press of the line behind me, I think I could have gone on chatting with Adam quite a while without crossing over into annoying fan.  He really seemed to enjoy talking with everyone who came up to him.

So there was plenty of awesomeness all around.  While my Paul and Storm, Kid Beyond, and Wil Wheaton anecdotes aren't quite as interesting to tell, they were also great with the fans.

So I framed the poster, which was the point of this post.  And now it's hanging on my wall.  I picked up a "cheap" discontinued frame at Aaron Brothers, and paid $25 for it.

What's with the framing consortium?!  I know custom framing is expensive (hundreds of dollars for a decent size puzzle), and I'm sure that stuff requires great skill.  I'm not saying it's not worth it, or that it's easy (I spent many hours making frames for puzzles and Special Olympics medals as a child). At that same time though, it's crazy.

My poster cost $5 and the autographs cost some Sharpie ink.  Okay, the autographs now make it awesome and priceless, but still.

It just seems wrong to spend 5 times as much on the accessory for something as I do on the thing itself.  What is this? Printer ink?


***Update: for thoughts on w00tstock 2.0 in Seattle, and videos from the show, please see this post.***

HWY 99 potential collapse

Seattle has an elevated roadway that runs along the downtown water front.  It was contructed with state of the art budgets decades ago.  That means it's loud, ugly, and dangerous.  It sustained serious damage in the 2001 Nisqually Earthquake and, while it's still open to traffic, it needs to be replaced.

Seattle's pathetic track record on civil engineering continues to rear it's head.  After the quake, everyone agreed something needed to me done. It's not just the Viaduct at stake, but also the seawall that prevents downtown from flooding.

So the people of Seattle and the state of Washington talked about it.

And talked about it.

And talked about it.

And reached a decision.

And talked about it some more.

Finally, it looks like the decisions are in place, but what to do about those decisions is once again popping up in the Mayor's race.

What it comes down to is you can't get real, quality infrastructure in place with the excessive democracy we have in this city.  Somebody needs to stop listening to the people and just build something.

I favor the expensive tunnel option of a few years ago, and even the new, smaller tunnel option that is the likely replacement.  It's not worth it to cheap out.  And by building now, in a recession, labor and material are cheaper.  Financing for the city  cheaper.  Now is exactly the time to spend on infrastructure.

But if that doens't happen, I'll be satisfied if we just take some action already.

Our Light Rail system is years behind schedule, not because of the bureaucrats can't run it effectively, but because we have to keep stopping and revisiting already made decisions.  Our Monorail project won in three elections in the space of 7 years, and was cancelled in a fourth election because I guess we weren't Really Really Really sure.

What the coolest thing to come out of this civic paralysis?  The DOT makes awesome disaster simulations. They did this for the SR520 floating bridge (pretty much the same rant).Here is their demonstration of what will happen to the Viaduct in the next earthquake.

Why do I watch CSI: Miami

Note:  Ranty SPOILERS ahead.  If you haven't watched the latest CSI: Miami, and don't want to know what happens, stop reading now.







I tend to get compulsive about certain things.  Once I start something, I feel the need to see it through to the bitter end (which may be why I'm still with Entrecard, but that's another matter altogether). I have trouble walking away from things like TV shows, projects, and more until they're done.

And once CSI: Miami cancelled is I'll likely be relieved.  I don't defend this show. It has some comic moments, and the over the top mellow drama is mildly entertaining.  And David Caruso gives the show some flair, but on balance, it's a bad show.  The story lines are way too convoluted.

Tonight's episode was a good example.  Three guys died on a beach volleyball court in a way that would make Rube Goldberg shake his head in shame.  The killer followed these steps:

1. Cut the heads off golf clubs.
2. Tape a bunch of headless golf clubs together to make a long lighting rod.
3. Attach the rod to a shack on the beach. 
4. Run a cable from the rod, under the sand, down hundreds or thousands of feet of beach to the volleyball court.
5. Fray the end of the cable for maximum exposure.
6. Spread copper sulfate all over the beach sand to make it more conductive.
7. Wait for a lighting strike on a sunny morning.

And wouldn't you know it? Lightening struck only once, and only during the game (not in the hours leading up to it).  It struck just when the right folks happened to be standing there.

When the cops investigate, the see a cable, and what to they do with this visibly frayed cable in the middle of the crime scene?  They pick it up.

And of course no one tripped or fell over the cable in all that time leading up to it.  Even in the heat of a Volleyball  match.

I'm sorry, but this is too stupid to even appreciate on the level of silliness.

And yet, I'll keep watching this thing until CBS has the good sense to shoot it.  Surely they can replace it with something better.  How about another Criminal Minds?  Or even a new Friends spin off called Central Perk West featuring Gunther moving to Seattle?

Micro Grid versus large utility

In the current issue of Fast Company, they have a fascinating article about the Micro Grid.

It's focused on small, local power generation technologies -- things life roof top solar, home based wind power, smart meters and related technologies. Increased use of the local, small scale power generation means there is less need for large, cross country power transmission lines and less reliance on on more carbon hungry large scale power plants.

It seems like a great idea in theory, but we have heard plenty of stories arguing it's not a viable solution because of cost, scale, home owners associations, etc.

But one thing I hadn't heard about before was the active opposition of traditional utilities worried about losing business.

Ed Legge of the Edison Electric Institute, the lobbying organization for the utility industry (and leader of the national effort to oppose federal renewables targets), is surprisingly frank on this point: "We're probably not going to be in favor of anything that shrinks our business. All investor-owned utilities are built on the central-generation model that Thomas Edison came up with: You have a big power plant and you move it and then distribute it. Distributed generation is taking that out of the picture -- it's local." This attitude is understandable. After all, if utilities don't own it, they can't bill for it. And with close relationships between power companies and state regulators, they can and do throw up a variety of roadblocks to see that rooftop-solar programs and the like remain tiny.

...

The tactics utilities deploy to protect their profits can make a reasonable person's head spin. "In Arizona a couple of years ago, we got a renewables incentive passed," says Adam Browning, executive director of Vote Solar, a national advocacy group. "A local utility proposed that it collect money for all the electricity that you didn't buy from it. The argument was: We've got fixed costs associated with maintaining the transmission and distribution grid. So if you don't buy from us, we want to charge you for your 'fair share' anyway," which it reckoned as everything but the avoided fuel costs -- the oil that you don't burn by choosing renewables. So regular customers would pay 11 cents a kilowatt-hour, but customers with solar panels on their roofs -- not even using the utility -- would still have to pay 6.8 cents an hour. "We hired a lawyer contesting this, and eventually we won," says Browning. Today, Arizona has decent, though not finalized, net-metering rules.

...
Jim Rogers, Duke Energy's CEO, told Fast Company he's a fan of putting solar panels on his customers' homes and businesses -- he just thinks Duke should own them. "I believe at the end of the day, we'll be able to do it cheaper and better than everybody else." But Urlaub says, "We know that's not true," pointing out that Duke recently submitted a public bid for a utility-owned 20-megawatt rooftop-solar program and came in higher than several independent, nonutility solar companies.

...More

There are more stories in the article.

Utilities are trying to prohibit private generation and local energy project that threaten their business. Or they are trying to use the law and Public Utility Commission to make it cost prohibitive. Instead of encouraging entrepreneurship, innovation, new business, and job creations, they are putting up road blocks to progress.

Now, I don't expect the private ones to aid local power generation (though incentives for them to buy power from private generators might be a could idea).

But to actually use the law to prevent these types of projects is disgusting.

We need a new approach to the grid -- one that blends local, micro generation with large plants and utilities. One that uses a combination or resources -- some clean coal, some nuclear, some hydro, some wind, some geo-thermal, etc. New innovations in battery technology and power storage should round out our electrical plan.

It's a fascinating article and well worth the read.

Warning! This post contains words.

This post seems a bit Jay Leno-y to me, but I'm gonna do it anyway.

I picked up a bag of peanuts at the local QFC. Sure, it was an impulse buy, and I didn't read the label carefully. Then again, I didn't need to. I don't have a peanut allergy, which is why I don't look for warnings about peanut allergies.

So I picked up this.



And on the back, I saw this:




Now, I understand that peanut allergies can be deadly, and those unfortunate enough to suffer them must be very careful in their dietary (and even atmospheric) choices.

But if you are smart enough to be able to read the warning, YOU SHOULD BE SMART ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT PEANUTS CONTAIN PEANUTS!

Was there actually some sort of law suit that inspired this? Did someone actually think these were peanut-free peanuts, and therefore okay? The kind of stupidity that requires such a warning is mind-boggling.

At the same time these warnings seek to encourage caution, they actually do the opposite. The more pointless and stupid warnings I see, the less likely I am to read them. Manuals for electronics today start with several pages of warnings that I completely ignore because when I do read them, they are tell me things like "don't put you TV in the bath tub," or "don't hit someone in the head with your computer" because someone might get hurt.

This endemic stupidity hides actual caution information by burying it under pointless tips that seem to be an attempt to discourage the culling of the human herd.

If I do get injured because I missed the 1 valid warning among the 137 idiotic ones I guess I'll just have to sue the lawyers.

LIfe in the Garden Part 16: Friendly visitors

If I'm not careful, gardening posts may surpass book reviews at Cromely's World. I guess that's the challenge of Spring.

The GF loves zucchini. She can't get enough of it. But I'm gonna try. I'm growing two plants this year.

Zucchini has a reputation for being easy to grow in the garden. And it produces lots of fruit, which is a good thing. On the continuum of home garden crops that ranges from hard to grow to easy to grow, zucchini climbs right on into easy to grow.

And then it keeps going. It gives off enough zucchini and then gives off more. And then some more. It starts out by producing and abundant crop for the gardener. It then continues to do this for the gardener's family. Then the gardener's friends.

After the gardener's friends no longer answer the door, for fear of being showered with more "free" zucchini, it keeps producing, and the gardener has to start sneaking the gourds into the mail carrier's pouch.

This fall, you will be held up at airport security by some desperate gardener who has shoved surprise zucchini's into the carry one luggage of random business travelers.

"Sir, you are only allowed 3 ounces of obnoxious vegetables. You are trying to get on the plane with 32 pounds. And don't try to blame it on your neighbors...It's off to Gitmo for you."

This summer, when your Facebook friend sends you a zucchini through the Internet? It's not for your (Lil) Green Patch that somehow magically saves the rain forest. No, they are shoving the actual fruit straight down the 10/100 cable.

Or so I've heard.

The point is I am growing zucchini from seed. I moved the plants into their permanent pots, but the nights are still a little chilly (45 degrees) for me to move the pots outside.

Which is why I was so surprised to see this guy (or gal, I suppose) the other day.

I'm not sure how the Lady Bug got into my apartment. It's a little high up, so it must have hitched a ride on some groceries or something.

I don't generally like bugs in my apartment. They're creepy and they eat my plants. A few years ago, people would ask if I had any pets.

"Yes. Aphids."

For some reason, folks don't stick around to talk to me.

I did not care for the aphids. And yet the ASPCA and Humane Society wouldn't come pick them up for adoption. Eventually I went to war with them. We came out to a draw when the summer ended and they'd had enough of my basil. I haven't seen them in years.

But Lady Bugs are okay. They eat aphids, which gets them a nod of approval from me. I should probably become a fan of them in Facebook. I'm sure Lady Bugs have a fan page. It's seems every stupid mundane thing out there has a fan page.

I'm still not keen on them flying around inside the house when there are no aphids however. So I scooped her about and showed her the door.

How does the song from the playground days go?

Lady Bug, Lady Bug
Fly away home
Your house is on fire
And your children all alone

(We sang some disturbing nursery rhymes as kids)

Life in the Garden Part 15: Fake Herbs

This year my garden is growing.

Okay, well, I guess every garden grows. Unless it's dead. Then it's just dirt. Or it's a Bosch painting.

But I'm not demonstrating the descent into Hell. My garden is all about herbs.

And it's growing bigger -- taking up more space, more pots, and more herb names.

I decided to try Tarragon. I have my bean seeds, basil seeds, zuccinni seeds, strawberry seeds, three kinds of tomato seeds, tyme seeds, sage seeds, rosemary seeds, leek seeds, seeds of revolution, scallion seeds, mint seeds, and seeds of an idea.

Tarragon seeds, however, alluded me.

The nursery? No.
Wal*Mart? No.
Target? No.
Lowes? No.
QFC? No.

Finally, after scouring seed racks from Lynnwood to Tukwilla -- I found them.

There they were with the rest of the herbs -- waiting for me at a Home Depot I rarely visits. Of course I picked up two packs of the Start Smart Tarragon (Artemisia Redowski).

I went home and planted them in my little peet pots of bloom. The seeds quickly sprouted. Soon I had healthy leaves and had to thin all my sprouts.

Tonight it was time to move them into their permanent pots. I pulled out the book to check how far apart they should be planted, dropped the book on my foot, picked it up, and flipped to Tarragon.

Uh oh.

Did you know there are two types of Tarragon? French Tarragon is a wonderful culinary herb that provides a rich flavor to chicken.

Russian Tarragon is a weed.

Well, maybe not quite a weed. It's is a hardy, tough plant with relatively little flavor. It doesn't bing much to the table.

Guess which one I hunted, stalked, captured, planted, and tended?

Yeah.

It turns out Russian Tarragon has very little to do with French Tarragon. In fact, French Tarragon doesn't even produce seeds.

We've got hundreds of thousands of words in the English language. The 26 letters give us a mind numbingly broad selection of potential new words.

And yet someone needs to reuse the word Tarragon? They couldn't come up with something else? You know, if they are out of words, and it's time to start reusing them, how about using them someplace?

1 Plant named Tarragon and 1 Car model named Tarragon = Good

1 Plant named Tarragon and another Plant named Tarragon = Stupid

So this weekend, it's off to the nursery for some Tarragon starter plants.

Anyone want some Russian Tarragon seeds? Or plants?

Retirement is just around the corner?

At least according to T Rowe Price.

I got this notice in email today.

Now, I understand the importance of saving for retirement. I've been doing that since I was 25. I know I shouldn't plan on Social Security being around. It probably will be, but there's no guarantee. And I can easily see myself working past 65 or 70, not by necessity, but by choice.

But even so, I'm only 27 37 today. And retirement is just "a few years away?" Really? Do they think people retire at 40? Or maybe 45?

Seriously, these people at T Rowe Price have my age and time with the company on record. What are they thinking? Do they know something about my career prospects that I don't?

In the best of times, you can't assume that 99% of those under 40 are just a few years from retirement. But now? With more people losing their jobs with minimal savings, they think people in my age bracket are about to retire?

With 401Ks and traditional pensions taking huge hits in the stock market free fall do they really think retiring on these nest eggs makes any kind of sense? Have they checked the market lately?

Is someone at T Rowe Price just trying to artificially create opening for their own college graduate kids who are now looking for jobs?

Retirement is not just a few years away. It's a few decades away. I think that's a reasonable assumption to make for most people in their thirties. And, yes, we should all be planning for it, but that is long range planning.

If T Rowe Price has such shoddy financial planning that they think the majority of those under 40 are just "a few years away" from retirement, then perhaps I shouldn't trust them with my retirement savings.

Or perhaps someone needs to teach them how to filter and appropriately direct their broadcast emails.

"retirement just a few years away." Yeah. I have my doubts.

Bond issues and the economy

In Seattle, as in most parts of the country, there are bond issues on Tuesday's ballot. In our case, they are for expanding the regional public transit/light rail system and for refurbishing Pike Place Market.

In other parts of the country, they may be for parks, roads, court houses, firehouses, bus routes, etc.

States and municipalities put these things on the ballot before the recent Wall Street melt down. Now, polls are showing less support among the electorate. There is a sense that with declining tax revenues and a weaker economy, the governments should not spend money on infrastructure. They should conserve funds as much as possible.

Nonsense.

Now is exactly the time cities and states should spend this money. If these projects made sense 6 or 12 months ago, they make even more sense now.

1. In a strong economy, building materials and labor costs go up. Everyone is building and competing for the same resources which drives prices higher. Municipalities that build now will find that costs are lower.
2. In a similar vein, building in a strong economy means that municipalities compete with private industry for limited resources. This drives up costs for both parties. In a really strong economy, that can mean industry can't do some projects because resources are absorbed by the municipalities.
3. Putting people to work in a down economy is a good thing -- especially when they are working on real projects and not just "make work" projects. It blunts the impacts of private industry layoffs.
4. Municipalities normally pay for these projects with long term bonds. In other words, much of the cost for these programs won't hit the citizens in the year they are built, but over the course of several years -- in weak and strong economies.
   
5. Putting off projects until the economy is stronger will make them more expensive. Besides the fact that they will be competing with industry, those costs will also be higher due to regular inflation.

If the projects makes sense in a strong economy, they makes even more sense now. They are cheaper to build in a down economy and have the added benefit of putting people to work. And putting people to work -- real work -- is a key ingredient in bringing an area out of a recession.

Hotel TVs and HD

Wide screen and HD TVs are the newest feature hotels are promoting to draw travelers in. It's great...in theory.

But they take these new TVs and then run a standard signal to the TV. To make things worse, they set the TVs to widescreen mode, even when the signal is a standard 4:3 signal. They do this so people don't have to see bars on the side of the screen. Of course, this screws everything up because the stuff on the screen in s stretched and squashed terribly.

And then they disable the settings so someone who knows what they are doing can't even fix it.

So not only do they not take advantage of the cool HD hardware, they make sure that the picture looks worse than it would on a 20 year old RCA.

Has anyone else noticed this?

Letterman on McCain

On Wednesday, McCain claimed he was suspending his campaign because of the challenges facing the economy. He felt he needed to go to DC to work on the issue. Of course, as the Obama campaign pointed out, their candidate can multitask, which is really what a President should be able to do.

But as part of this suspension, McCain decided to cancel his appearance on the Late Show with David Letterman. According to Letterman, McCain canceled so he could rush off to DC. Of course, he didn't do that. He went to an interview with Katie Couric instead.

But Dave's reaction to McCain Wednesday night made headlines. Dave went on one of the funniest rants I've seen in ages. You can see the video here.

Dave made two points. First, he showed how the McCain staff way lying to him about rushing off to the airport.

But on the bigger question of suspending the campaign, Dave pointed out that if McCain had to run off to DC that's fine, "but you put in your second string quarterback." You don't quit.

Why didn't Palin step in and campaign? Why didn't she take on the high profile McCain appearances?

It seems like McCain would rather suspend the campaign in this tight, important race than trust it to Palin. How can he claim to trust her to be President, if he won't even trust her to run the campaign in his absence?

This is from a Thursday article that appeared in the Seattle PI:

Letterman unloads on McCain for not showing up

Letterman called McCain "a true American hero" but told his viewers: "This is not the John McCain I know, by God. It makes me believe something is going haywire with the campaign."

Instead of suspending a campaign, Letterman said, a presidential candidate should go to Washington to deal with a crisis and let his running mate shoulder the burdens of politicking.

"That's what you do. You don't quit. ... Or is that really a good thing to do?" Letterman said, a reference to McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. "What's the problem? Where is she? Why isn't she doing that?" he asked.

...

McCain told the CBS show that he was immediately flying back to Washington, Letterman told his audience. Then Letterman showed a TV feed of McCain being made-up for an appearance on news anchor Katie Couric's "CBS Evening News."

"Doesn't seem to be racing to the airport, does he?" Letterman said. "This just gets uglier and uglier."

... More

This whole campaign suspension was handled terribly by the McCain campaign.

Thoughts on Radiohead at the White River Amphitheater

You know what's depressing? When you are staying at a hotel so you can get a good night's sleep instead of doing a long drive home, and you get back to your room late at night -- due to traffic -- and the USA Today for the next morning is already there.

I saw Radiohead at the White River Amphitheater tonight. I planned some more in depth comments, but that was before the traffic.

The opening act (The Liars) came on promptly at 7:30 and played for 35 minutes. At first I hated them because they had this goth-y/emo-y/angst-y/overly self important attitude in their music. But as the set went on the lead signer began doing weird rythmic things with his guitar. I don't think he was making a parody of his genre but I can't be positive. Regardless, he stopped taking himself so seriously, so I grew to respect him. I still didn't care for the music, but that's another matter.

Before he started his last two songs he told people to go get their popcorn and snacks now so they wouldn't miss Radiohead.

Radiohead came on at 9:05 and played for almost an hour and a half. Then they did two fake encores (more on fake encores in another post). They played all the way to about 11:05.

The light show was awesome, relying on LEDs, LASERs, and Fiber Optics. It wasn't just slapped on the show. It was an integral and impressive part of the music. The light show is reason enough to see the show. Here are some lousy pictures I tried to take.







The sound quality was excellent. It wasn't too loud, or at all muddled, which is impressive in an outdoor venue.

Unfortunately, the experience leaving the venue tainted the entire show for me. It also nearly guarantees I will not go to another show at this facility. The traffic was appalling.

Whoever desinged the traffic flow and plan for the White River Amphitheater should be ashamed on them themselves. It's truly disgusting.

I was in the car by 11:50 PM. It took until 1:30 AM to exit the facility.

Then they dumped us on to side roads in the area and directed people to follow specific roads to get around. Traffic still sat there. At about 2:15 I decided to ignore their ridiculous directions and take some back roads. If I hadn't made that decsision I would probably still be stuck in traffic instead of ranting here.

So in summary:

Radiohead = good
White River Amphitheater Civil Engineers = bad

Seattle can't be a real city...

...because I can't order Chinese food for delivery.

I don't understand this. I live in First Hill, a densely populated neighborhood near hospitals that run all night, just a few blocks from the busy downtown core, and a few blocks from the shiny nightlife on Broadway. There's a major university no more than a 20 minute walk from here.

And I can't find anyone who delivers Chinese food to this neighborhood.

Seattle is a great food city, and we have Asian food available on every corner. Most major instersections have a Starbucks, a Tully's, a Thai place, and a Pho place. In the International Disctrict, we have some fantastic Chinese restaurants.

But no one delivers Chinese food to my neighborhood.

What's the problem? Maybe it's that the Chinese food in Seattle is too authentic. The stuff you can get delivered in any real city is, I'm sure, thoroughly Americanized. I'm pretty sure you can't get the typical NYC Chinese delivery food delivered to your house in Beijing or Guangzhou.

But you should be able to in Seattle.

Even in Boise I could get real, American Chinese food delivered.

Seattle can't be a real city until cheap, Americanized Chinese food is availble anywhere in the city to someone who just picks up the phone.

I'm half tempted to open my own Chinese food delivery restaurant on Madison. Maybe replace that new check cashing place that just opened.

Afterall, who know more about opening a Chinese food delivery business than an Irish-Catholic kid from Queens?

Millennials and professional credentials

I found this article from the Dallas Morning News on Fark today.

Millennials need to get real about work world

Millennials. Can't live with 'em. Can't live without 'em.

That's what many employers tell me about the youngest generation in the workplace.

Advertising executive Owen Hannay, for one, has placed a moratorium on hiring people fresh out of college unless they've done a work-related internship or have an advanced degree.

Despite being one of those crotchety old Gen Xers, I'm not one to complain about "these kids today." It seems that every generation has predicted the complete and utter destruction of civilization will be the fault of the younger generation. This has been going on for thousands of years and isn't going to change anytime soon.

I'm sure there was an older generation talking about how useless the new generation will be because they were raised on affordable movable type, or because now that the New World had been discovered the next generation wouldn't have to do anything, and so on.

But this is my favorite part of the article:

He turned to Dallasite Cathie Looney, a nationally known speaker and generational expert, to help him understand this age group, the oldest of whom are 27 and just entering the workforce.

He's still not hiring them, but she's teaching him and his largely Gen X and late boomer staff how to work better with the younger folks.

"The biggest thing she does is help us understand where these kids are coming from," Mr. Hannay says. "Their orientation is so different from Gen Xers, who were the latchkey kids and are self-starters. These kids are fabulous at building teams, but they're challenged by responsibility and accountability."

All true, says Ms. Looney, a certified reality therapist and retired director of children and family ministry at St. Michael and All Angels Episcopal Church. And many employers are backing away from hiring them because they're so high maintenance.

...

Ms. Looney holds degrees in elementary and secondary education from the University of Mississippi and a master's degree in counseling from the University of Arkansas. Her certification comes from the William Glasser Institute of Reality in California.

Ms. Looney sees the humor in both her name and her certification. "I chose reality therapy because I'm from Mississippi, and there is no reality in Mississippi. So I thought I might find out a little bit about it."

But she's serious about her mission and her message. "Reality therapy is about taking responsibility for your own actions. You can't change other generations. They are what they are. All you have control of is how you deal with them."

A certified reality therapist? Isn't that just an impatient landlord or those silly clerks at the grocery store who actually expect you to pay for food? I've heard of Wayfinders before, but this just sounds kind of silly.

This raises key questions.

• What is reality therapy?
• Is this an Episcopal thing?
• Was there some great schism in the Reality/Fantasy therapy movements that brought this on?
• Are there so many lousy reality therapists out there that they needed to create a certification process to professionalize the profession?
• Does she not care that she just alienated the entire state of Mississippi?
• If you were creating and Institute for Reality, or seeking one out as a customer, would you really want it in California?
• Do I not care that I just alienated the entire state of California?
• If you are going to be a therapist why wouldn't you change your name to something other than Looney?

Maybe this will all make sense after more coffee.

Panic at the Fed

From CNN:

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Even though the Federal Reserve slashed its key federal funds rate by three-quarters of a percentage point in an emergency meeting Tuesday, Wall Street is still betting that the central bank will lower rates again next week.

The Fed will hold a two-day meeting that wraps up on Jan. 30. And according to futures listed on the Chicago Board of Trade, investors are pricing in a 100 percent chance of at least a quarter-point cut, to 3.25 percent, and a 66 percent likelihood of a half-point cut, to 3 percent.

"There is a legitimate chance of another cut next week. The Fed wants to stay in front of things and at this stage, they'd rather err on the side of having rates be too easy than too restrictive," said Jack Ablin, chief investment officer with Harris Private Bank.

... More

I haven't been too worried about the economy. Sure, the markets have been falling, but that's what they do. They move one step backwards and two steps forward. Especially since we've seen a run up in recent months, it's to be expected. Perhaps the economy could use a recession to reset itself and prepare for stronger growth in the future.

Further, I'm in the market for the long term. I've got some time to recover from any losses.

But then the Fed cut rates. Now, I'm am not so sure.

There is a fine line between bold moves to demonstrate leadership, and flailing panic.

Cutting rates by an amount not seen in 15 years, and doing it a week before you were planning to cut rates anyway, strikes me more as the latter.

Further, out latest economic woes occurred in part because it's been too easy to get credit. The country's consumer economy is balanced precariously on mountains of credit card debt that has in recent years been turned into mortgage debt.

People who historically could not have gotten mortgages for normal priced homes were able to get short-term cheap mortgages on absurdly priced homes.

Now, as the country starts to wake up with a hangover from the heady mortgage and credit card policies on the recent years, what does the Fed do?

Does it have the country eat a healthy breakfast?
Does it have the country drink a bunch of water?
Does it make us pop a couple of aspirin? ]
Does it crack open a packet of Alka-Seltzer?

No.

The Fed has the country slam a bottle of Tequila.

You know, if a big part of our problems were caused by too much cheap credit in the economy, maybe, just maybe, dumping a whole bunch more cheap credit into the economy, might not be the best long term solution.

On the other hand, may the credit card companies will start sending me 0% balance transfers again, and I once again play at credit card arbitrage.

TSA Slammed in Times OPED

It's reassuring to know that more people than ever are becoming aware of just what a sham TSA really is. Here's a recent OPED piece in the NYT taking TSA to task for its ludicrous liquids ban.

Screening Dreams

By Clark Kent Ervin

If you are someone who suspects that what is billed as “aviation security” is often more show than substance, you are not alone. In fact, you are part of what Nixon aides used to call the “silent majority.” The security bureaucracy seems to think that as long as it is seen as doing something, and so long as another terror attack does not occur, the public will at least feel secure enough not to insist that it do whatever needs to be done actually to make us secure.

...More

The author is not just a frustrated traveler. He is part of the Homeland Security industry:

Clark Kent Ervin was the first inspector general of the United States Department of Homeland Security, where he served from January, 2003 to December, 2004. He is the Director of the Aspen Institute’s Homeland Security Program and the author of “Open Target: Where America is Vulnerable to Attack.” He lives in Washington.

And remember -- the "attack" that started this whole liquids fiasco never would have succeeded, anyway. I ranted about that last year.

If TSA really thought those liquids were dangerous and explosive, then maybe, just maybe, asking all passenger to dispose of their liquids in a trash can in the middle of a crowded security screening area isn't such a good idea.

If they're dangerous, don't pile them all up together in the middle of a crowd. That's stupid. If they're not dangerous, then let me take my Mountain Dew through security. And quit confiscating the gel insoles from my shoes.

Simplicity versus Sensitivity

From CNN.com

President Bush, who on Thursday pledged federal aid to rebuild the bridge, will visit the disaster site Saturday. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters said $5 million was being made available immediately to pay for traffic flow adjustments and debris removal.

Earlier today, NPR also reported that Mrs. Bush will visit the site of the bridge collapse during a previously scheduled visit to the Twin Cities.

Senators from MN also made a point to visit the collapse site.

I am not criticizing the President here. Any President would likely do this. And it's stupid.

During a difficult and complex recovery and investigation effort, the people at the site now have their work disrupted by Secret Service and their time taken up by VIPs who want to show how much they care.

Even during the Katrina operation, Bush was criticized for not personally going to New Orleans soon enough. While there is plenty to criticize in the Katrina disaster, having the President physically stay away is probably one of the best decisions the administration made.

For some reason, we value sympathy and that physical presence of our VIPs over the smooth and quick execution of a rescue or recovery operation.

Perhaps it's our cultural celebration of victimhood that drives these visits.

And maybe I am being insensitive to the needs of the families to see VIPs to know the country cares.

But really, the President, Mrs. Bush, the Senators, and the other VIPs don't contribute anything by physically going to the site. Their staffs and security can only cause disruption. Unless they are putting on dive suits for a full day shift in the river, they should just stay away.