home | archives

Opinari.net

Opinari - Latin term for Opinion. Opinari.net is just what it seems: a cornucopia of rants, raves and poignant soliloquy.

Tuesday, March 30, 2004

I remember when buying a domain name was $70 for 2 years. Back when I ran a computer repair business on the side (ifixpcs.net), that's what it cost. But... well, I just bought Opinari.net for $5.99 per year, using 1and1.com.

Too bad cybersquatting isn't what it used to be. Heh.

Labels:

.: posted by Dave 6:27 PM


I have yet to register my two vehicles in Connecticut. This is by design, as I am unsure that I will even keep one of them. Another is due to expire its current registration in June. Will I register it here? I don't know.

It's bad enough that they hit us with property tax on the vehicle (does any other state tax vehicles as "property"?). The problem I have is the absurd rule of testing for emissions.

Now, before anyone says that I don't support emissions testing in some form, I should clarify. The vehicle in question is a 2002 Tacoma truck. The odds of there being an emissions issue with my truck are zero to small. Statistically speaking, 99.99% of all newer model vehicles could be said to be emissions friendly. If you believe that assumption, you should also see the fallacy in requiring every vehicle to be tested. Why should I test a vehicle with 40K miles on it for emissions? I shouldn't have to.

Add into the mix the fact that the state has already admitted flaws in the existing program, the fact that testing is done by repair shops (does anyone see the conflict of interest there?), and the fact that most of Connecticut's pollution comes from other states (has anyone heard of prevailing winds? We have those, and they come from the west) and you have, quite frankly, a wrongheaded solution for the state's growing air quality problems. Should something be done? Perhaps. But programs such as these are not the answer.

Labels:

.: posted by Dave 5:26 PM


Connecticut state "leaders" (the term is used loosely) want to give homeowners in Hartford a $75,000 tax exemption for their homes. Some even want to extend the program statewide. This is in response to a 60 percent property revaluation for the coming fiscal year. So far, the bill has not gotten enough votes to get it out of committee. Let's hope that it doesn't escape.

For all their effort, the legislators are missing the point. It is admirable to want to relieve some of the tax burden for homeowners. I am a homeowner, and I would love to pay less property tax. Right now, nearly 25% of my mortgage is property tax. However, passing the burden to someone else, especially to businesses, is flawed.

Why? There has already been an exodus of businesses to other towns. Lower property tax rates will inevitably draw more businesses, thus providing more local jobs. A more simple option, one which is displeasing to political types, is to lower expenditures.

Sorry, lawmakers. You can't continue to plunder the public largesse. It's time to cut expenses, and quit robbing us blind.

Labels:

.: posted by Dave 4:59 PM


Future Lady Vol Candace Parker wins the McDonalds' Slam Dunk Contest. The best part? She was the only female in the contest:

She won with aplomb, too, darting down the left side of the lane, covering her eyes with her left arm and flushing home a right-handed dunk. At 9:06 p.m. CT, Parker sparked a raucous ovation, chest bumps from her teammates and officially launched herself as the female answer to LeBron James.

Parker, who will play for Tennessee next season, stands just a shade under 6-feet-4 and can play all five positions on the floor. The first two-time winner of the Naismith National Player of the Year award, Parker already was billed as the most ballyhooed women's high school athlete ever. That's before she joined James, Carmelo Anthony and Vince Carter on the list of McDonald's Dunk Contest winners.

The next four years for the Lady Vols should be interesting, maybe even more so than during the "3 Meeks" era.

Labels:

.: posted by Dave 4:33 PM


Sunday, March 28, 2004

First Libya, now Syria.

SYRIA has appealed to Australia to use its close ties with Washington to help the Arab nation shake off its reputation as a terrorist haven and repair its relations with the US.

[...]

Australia's close relationship with Washington, and its much higher profile in the Middle East, have prompted Syrian Foreign Minister Farouq al-Shara'a and parliamentary speaker Mahmoud Al-Ibrache to appeal to Canberra to help bring their country back in from a US-imposed diplomatic freeze.

[...]

The overtures to Syria are seen as a response to the West's determination to confront rogue nations that may either pose a threat themselves or pass on weapons to terrorists.

If Syria is trying to mend diplomatic fences with the United States, then we must be doing something right.

Labels:

.: posted by Dave 8:48 AM




This is an interesting tour of one of the world's most notorious ecological disasters, Chernobyl. The young lady who created this website documents her trip into "Ghosttown", and shows us, with vivid photographic detail, the remnants of the region.

I have always found it interesting that Chernobyl, in Ukranian, means "wormwood". For those of you who may be students of Biblical eschatology, see Revelation 8:11 (NKJV):

And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter.

I remember Chernobyl very well. When the disaster occured, the Soviets weren't willing to share pictures like these. The true magnitude of the Chernobyl incident will never be seen by the outside world, but rest assured, the Ukranian people will never forget it.

Labels:

.: posted by Dave 8:18 AM


Saturday, March 27, 2004

Barry posts:

We've spent a week almost on these hearings and haven't seen anything that makes me feel lessons are being learned that will help us in the future. Republicans, you spent 8 years ridiculing and condemning Clinton. Because of those attacks Democrats are retaliating with unrelenting attacks on Bush. Each side is blind and so consumed with hatred and the desire for revenge nothing else matters - oh, they pay lip service to current affairs, but really it's just us vs. them -- me vs. you -- an eye for an eye and screw anything else.

Grow up.

Then gets grilled.

Then rebuts:

I truly and sincerely want people to listen to each other, and not make fun of each other. That's all - just be adult about things and fight for the right reasons. If you don't like Bush - fine, but don't disagree with his policies automatically because you think he and those policies are by default corrupt. This is the most important time in the life of the US since the 40's and we can't afford the distractions. Just think about it.

The vitriol spewed forth from one side to the other gets to be childish sometimes, but especially when emotions are part of the equation. Some people genuinely disagree with Bush. Others simply loathe him. Some adore his charisma and brashness. Still others dislike him, but like his policies. If they are like me, they like some of his policies, dislike others, but like the guy. That's my right, just as it is for others to feel the way they do.

The misfortune is when people take it so personally that they begin to "flame" each other (which is benign and innocent comparatively), or, worse, when physical assault is involved. It would be nice if we could just "get along", but I think the 2000 election set the tone for what we now see. As a consequence, I fear the dialogue in the coming months will continue to degenerate into personal attacks, and policy discussions will get lost in the mix; and that, to me, is a shame.

Labels:

.: posted by Dave 10:44 PM


Friday, March 26, 2004

Shameless Plug:



I decided to liquidate some of my spare computer and home electronic gear. The items are available on eBay. They include a Toshiba laptop, and a brand new Sony Ericsson GSM phone. Click here if you want to bid.

Labels:

.: posted by Dave 12:49 PM


Thursday, March 25, 2004

Marginal Revolution writes about blogs being blocked in China. The RTB's own American-cum-Chinaman, Brian Ruckle, writes:

More censorship here on the mainland. This time all TypePad and Blogs.com weblogs are blocked on the mainland and we fear these services have gone the way of Blogspot. This is really sad. If any of you use these services please let me know in an e-mail. The TypePad sites which have their own domain are also blocked leading us to believe they blocked the IP.

It's nice to know that free speech (in the form of blogs, in this case) is so influential, and even feared, in some places.

Labels:

.: posted by Dave 9:19 PM


Rant Alert:

I need to take a moment to vent about something. This morning, I was turning left onto a main highway where children were boarding their school bus. The line of cars behind the bus was staggering. Twenty, perhaps thirty patient vehicles waited as the bus proceeded to the next stop, which was... THE NEXT DRIVEWAY!

Can someone tell me when our children got so lazy, or parents became so demanding, that the bus has to stop at every DRIVEWAY? This is no exaggeration. For two blocks, this bus stopped SEVEN times.

When I was in school, the bus kids caught their ride at a specific stop. It could be hundreds of yards away from the house. Heck, it might even have been out of the line of sight. After all, it was far easier for the bus to pick up kids at a single point than at dozens.

This has to stop, because it is unnecessary. The bus is not a taxi cab. It is a transport for many kids to one place. Gather them all on one corner, and let them board there. Save commuters the headache of stop and go traffic, and expedite the process. Everyone is happy (even the kids that MIGHT have to walk an extra 1/8 mile).

One other thing before I end this. If a parent can sit at a corner in their mini-van, watching their child stand at the corner, what stops them from DRIVING the kid to school themself? Sometimes, things just don't make any sense.

Labels:

.: posted by Dave 8:41 PM




T-Shirt of the Week, courtesy of the ITPAA (of which I am proudly not a member).

Labels:

.: posted by Dave 8:27 PM


Joanne Jacobs posts that computer science is losing students in academia:

Undergraduates in U.S. universities are starting to abandon their studies in computer technology and engineering amid widespread worries about the accelerating pace of offshoring by high-technology employers.

A new study, to be published in May, shows there was a dramatic drop-off of enrollment in those fields last year -- 19 percent -- and some educators warn about the potential consequences for America's global competitiveness.

Enrollment in undergraduate computer-science courses continued to grow after the collapse of the dot-com bubble until the sharp decline in the 2002-03 academic year, according to the Washington-based Computing Research Association. The number of newly declared majors in computer science also showed a sudden 23 percent plunge last year.

Speaking as a developer, I can say that it is far easier to teach someone who knows your business how to program than it is to teach a programmer your business. Companies who want to offload work to India and other places are free to do so. But it is difficult to ensure that those types of programmers are going to be able to create the robust, useful applications that business end users need.

Software must accomplish a task to be relevant. To make the software relevant, the developers must understand the problem domain. This is the reason why I believe that this outsourcing issue is going to prove to be cyclical. It really isn't like manufacturing, where a repetitive process can be done by someone with little or no training in the business.

Given that, I believe American programmers in large part are ill-equipped to produce meaningful software, because they learn how to code without learning how to produce code. Does it do any good to know the interworkings of PERL and C++ if you can't elicit business requirements from the user? Software engineering skills are sorely lacking in the workplace. Potential CS students would be well-advised to follow a little advice. Learn skills in a way that will make them practical, and relevant. And learn more software engineering skills.

Labels:

.: posted by Dave 3:57 PM


Had a .NET app crashed on a Windows machine, Slashdot would have been all over this one:

Scott McNealy, CEO of Sun Microsystems, was delivering a keynote speech to a full room at CTIA Wireless 2004 when his Linux machine, running Sun's Java Desktop unexpectedly became completely frozen.

He had to reset the machine and they quickly switched to a pre-recorded standby video presentation.

In the words of our on-the-floor journalist covering the event for LXer, "it was embarrassing."

For the uber-crossplatform programming language, indeed, it is embarrassing. Some people on the LXer message board keep wanting to make it appear that Linux went awry, but I don't see how a Java window manager crashing could be confused with a Linux crash (although, again... if Java crashed on Windows, causing a need for a reboot, I can hear the Slashtrolls now, crying about how unstable Windows is, even for the JVM.

Labels:

.: posted by Dave 3:27 PM


Wednesday, March 24, 2004

9/11. Was it Clinton's fault? Was it Bush's fault? The debate rages this week. Right wing pundits accuse Clinton of ignoring opportunities to capture or kill Osama bin Laden. Left wingers assault Bush for not heeding the recommendations of some top advisors.

Honestly, blaming each other is going to get us nowhere. The time has come to realize that we all are, in some ways, culpable. How? Because, as a people, we did not have the will to pursue terrorists in their own backyard. Even Reagan failed to do this to a reasonable degree. Before 9/11, no one would have dreamed pursue Islamic terrorists. Domestic threats were perceived as minimal by the public, even as security advisors were presenting hawkish positions.

Let's assume that President Clinton, or President Bush, had pursued bin Laden in Afghanistan, and killed him on the spot. Would America have breathed a sigh of relief? Hardly. Such a move was simply not politically advantageous. Clinton, ever the politician, would never have betrayed the polling data. Nor would have Bush... that is, until September 11th.

The events that day changed everyone to some degree. Without question, the political climate was altered. Now, instead of assailing the intelligence and defense departments for their perceived largesse, their detractors are asking "why wasn't anything done?"

Blame Clinton? Sure. Blame Bush? If you wish. Blame Bush, pere? Reagan? Carter? Yes, to all of the above, for various reasons. However, the blame should really go to us all, as an electorate. We failed to demand that our leaders fulfill the Constitutional mandate to defend our interests. Synoptically, we maintained that it was "the economy, stupid", instead of our national security. Economies ebb and flow. Fiscal policy is a consideration for electing leaders. But it isn't on par with defense. The blinkered view that the world will love America if it just will stop behaving as it does is simply foolish when considering the simple fact that a segment of its inhabitants, whether justified or not, will stop at nothing until Western society is eradicated. No amount of diplomacy or appeasement will change that.

Which leads us back to today. Global terrorism in the name of Islam, or whatever other fringe cause can be contemplated, is now a hideous reality. We, as a people, are now too painfully aware of this. We can continue this silly partisan blame game that has erupted on the Hill, or we can realize that we need to do whatever it takes, even if that means an offensive policy of pursuing terrorists where they breed, to ensure that September 11th stays where it is - a not-so-distant memory.

Labels:

.: posted by Dave 2:26 PM


Monday, March 22, 2004

Today's best website comes courtesy of the Wall Street Journal, which points out this gem:

http://www.bugmenot.com

What does it do? It allows you to "bypass compulsory web registration", as the site says. This is a wonderful idea for people like me who just HATE to register for websites.

For anyone who reads the Knoxville News-Sentinel online, try transvestite@snet.net as a username, and dress as the password.

Maybe someday, these idiots will realize that they are not getting any reliable demographic information from forced registration. Maybe they will see how much of a time waste it is.

Labels:

.: posted by Dave 7:05 PM


Open Source According to Marc Andreessen:

Internet whizz Marc Andreessen took the 3rd annual "Open Source in Government" conference by storm last week, at George Washington University in Washington DC, when he came up with his personal top twelve reasons for why open source will boom over the next 5-10 years.

The 12 reasons Andreessen came up at the conference with were as follows:
  • "The Internet is powered by open source."
  • "The Internet is the carrier for open source."
  • "The Internet is also the platform through which open source is developed."
  • "It's simply going to be more secure than proprietary software."
  • "Open source benefits from anti-American sentiments."
  • "Incentives around open source include the respect of one's peers."
  • "Open source means standing on the shoulders of giants."
  • "Servers have always been expensive and proprietary, but Linux runs on Intel."
  • "Embedded devices are making greater use of open source."
  • "There are an increasing number of companies developing software that aren't software companies."
  • "Companies are increasingly supporting Linux."
  • "It's free."

    So these are the reasons OSS will be successful - the Internet, security, altruistic respect, status, cost, and ubiquity. All of this sounds nice when you're preaching to the choir, but there are several issues to consider.

    Security - I'm not yet convinced that an open source product will be more secure than a proprietary one. The OS has to be designed with security in mind. And as OSS continues to grow, the viruses that attack it will, too. Microsoft suffers from some poor design flaws, to be sure. But it also suffers from being the big kid on the block. Lots of script kiddies out there try daily to see what hole they can expose next. Being closed source, though, is not their problem. Also, if users patch their systems, they remain largely secure, as much as can be expected. Who is to say that the average user will maintain their Linux distro, when they seldom do for their MS install? Systems are only as secure as the user or administrator makes them.

    Cost - Let's not pretend Linux is "free". The RPMs and source code are. However, support is not. Maintenance is not. Development is not. Customization is not. These are the same issues that proprietary software has.

    Ease of Use - You're fooling yourself if you think Linux / FreeBSD / etc. is more user friendly than Microsoft, or Mac. The average user doesn't care about security (and I am talking about the enterprise user, too). As long as the equivalent OSS alternatives (OpenOffice, etc.) remain buggy and lack the robust features that proprietary systems have, they will lag behind.

    All in all, Andreessen offers platitudes, and generalities for touting OSS, but he doesn't convince anyone, other than those who are already convinced, that OSS has the positive outlook which he foresees.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 10:52 AM


    Saturday, March 20, 2004

    I haven't had time to fully peruse the Iraqi constitution, but article 14 stands out to me:

    The individual has the right to security, education, health care, and social security. The Iraqi State and its governmental units, including the federal government, the regions, governorates, municipalities, and local administrations, within the limits of their resources and with due regard to other vital needs, shall strive to provide prosperity and employment opportunities to the people.

    Is this what government should provide to its constituents? Is it really? I know thousands of people would like to think so, but how does a government monolith accomplish this? By taxing the top earners, and funding the programs for the bottom earners, that's how. Am I the only one who has a problem with removing the incentive for work? (Why should anyone work who has everything provided to them by the government? Conversely, why should anyone try to maximize their earnings when high marginal rates are implemented?) Look no further than the social programs in Europe to see their cost of implementation.

    I'm a fundamental proponent of states' rights. I believe that a weak federal government which serves only the common interests of the states (READ: national defense, and the preservation of the Bill of Rights) is what was intended by the founding fathers. That being said, if states want to implement higher taxes, a plethora of entitlement programs, and myriad social guarantees, that should be the right of their citizenry. It should also be the right of other states to choose the opposite path. I would like to see a return to this governmental philosophy in the U.S. Because of the ethnic diversity in Iraq, I believe such an implementation would serve them well also.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 5:59 PM


    Wednesday, March 17, 2004

    WaPo is doing RSS now. I hope more news becomes available via aggregators.

    The Post says about my favorite RSS reader:

    SharpReader (Win 98 or newer, free at www.sharpreader.net) also relies on the .Net Framework, although it wasn't as slow as RSSReader. It feels unfinished in some ways: Instead of an installation routine, you have to unzip a downloaded file, then move that folder into your Program Files directory. On the other hand, it supports Atom as well as RSS and offers the most attractive, simplest interface of any Windows newsreader.

    Atom support and simplicity is why I chose SharpReader to being with. And to the developer, Luke Hutteman, I say this - some of us out here prefer "xcopy deployment" to *.msi deployment. Don't change a thing.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 8:41 PM


    A little demagogery about a dangerous "chemical" can go a long way:

    ALISO VIEJO - City officials were so concerned about the potentially dangerous properties of dihydrogen monoxide that they considered banning foam cups after they learned the chemical was used in their production.

    Then they learned that dihydrogen monoxide -- H2O for short -- is the scientific term for water.

    "It's embarrassing," said City Manager David J. Norman. "We had a paralegal who did bad research."

    It's sad that anyone would fall for this hoax, since it has been around for awhile.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 8:36 PM


    A fellow blogger loses his parents in Iraq. Helping rebuild the infrastructure in Iraq is something I cannot imagine any of my family doing. These were great people, and they surely will be remembered as such.

    NOTE: Anyone who would like to contribute can send a check made out to "The International Mission Board" with the designation, "Larry and Jean Elliott Memorial Fund" or simply "Elliott Fund" somewhere on the check to:

    The Larry and Jean Elliott Memorial Fund
    c/o The International Mission Board
    P.O. Box 6767
    Richmond, VA 23230

    I hope someone sets up a tip jar for this worthy cause.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 8:29 PM


    The Periodic Customer Service Rant:

    I've had it with customer service. It's all I can do to keep from screaming anytime I have to deal with them.

    This week, Goodyear Tires is the subject of my ire. Not once, not twice, but thrice, they have exhibited idiotic behavior. It is infuriating to go into a service center, where half a dozen employees are sitting around, doing nothing, ask for an oil change, and be told that I "need to make an appointment". For what? So you can call in an extra grease monkey to stand around?

    And what's the first thing the "new guy" does when we show up to get a scheduled oil change? He unapologetically charges us $15 MORE than any previous visit. Why? "This is a difficult truck to service. We need to add an extra fee. Is this OK?" OK? Hell, no, it's not OK!

    And, here's the real travesty. In an attempt to try to pay a bill online, I am inadvertently charged to the wrong paying account. Can this be rectified? "No, sir. We're sorry. If you had scheduled the payment for a FUTURE DATE, you could have avoided this, but since you paid it ON TIME, you have already been charged." What? So where's the confirmation screen? Didn't your IT people learn anything about good USER INTERFACE DESIGN?

    I've had it. Goodyear. Be gone.

    Now, if I can only get AT&T/Cingular to send me a freakin' INVOICE instead of these stupid SPAM messages, trying to sell me RINGTONES...

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 3:00 PM


    This makes me sick.

    A jury has convicted a man of raping a 9-month-old girl and leaving her for dead in the woods.

    Jurors on Friday rejected Randolph Standifer's insanity defense and found him guilty of kidnapping, sexual battery of a child younger than 12 and attempted murder in the second degree.

    Standifer, 23, will be sentenced to life in prison, the only penalty allowed by law when a child younger than 12 is raped.

    What infuriates me even more is this:

    During the trial, mental health experts testified that Standifer as a child was repeatedly molested and shocked with a cattle prod by a neighbor.

    So the hell what? I don't care what misfortune this animal had in his life. He raped a 9 month old child! As a society, we need to stop apologizing for evil deeds with rationale. There IS no rationale. This man perpetrated a traumatic, awful act on an innocent BABY! I don't even care if this maniac is entitled to a fair trial. Presenting the evidence without prejudice is fair. Making excuses for his behavior is not.

    A life sentence is too good for this sick bastard. He should be incarcerated in a maximum security prison and be subjected to whatever punishment the inmates have in store for him. After all, criminals are criminals, but no one, even criminals, likes a child rapist. If you don't feel as angry about incidents like this as I do, have a child of your own. Look into their innocent face. Then imagine them going through a similar trauma as the infant in this story. Then come back and tell me you wouldn't cut this monster from gullet to gizzard given the chance.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 2:51 PM


    Monday, March 15, 2004

    Most people by now have heard of the lunatic in Fresno named Marcus Wesson, who killed nine family members, and was allegedly involved in incest and polygamy, among other things. In typical journalistic fashion, those covering the story have tied this maniac to the Seventh Day Adventist Church. This snippet from the UK Daily Mirror is typical:

    Blood-stained Wesson was arrested after a stand-off at the house where the bodies were discovered in a twisted heap among a pile of clothing. Detectives are investigating whether the Seventh-day Adventist had established a cult.

    Of course, this harkens back to Waco, when the press linked the Branch Davidians to Adventism. This was an absurd link, in that groups such as the Shepherd's Rod, and the Branch Davidians are NOT Adventists. I repeat this for clarity. Groups such as the Shepherd's Rod, and the Branch Davidians are NOT Adventists.

    This post is not intended to be a theological rant, nor will it be. I simply have to step forward and emphatically stand up for the Adventist church regarding this sort of thing. I attend an Adventist church. So does my wife. We are substantially involved with the Adventist Church. One of my dear friends is a nurse in an Adventist Hospital in Fresno. Most of the staff there are also Adventist. It is not a stretch to say that at least one staff member attends each SDA church in the area. My friend is as incensed as I am at the association of this monster with anything Adventist. Her quote: "The SDA church believes and follows the ten commandments. The sixth says 'Thou shalt not kill.' Let's not forget 'Thou shalt not commit adultery.' Besides this, the SDA church does not promote incest or polygamy."

    Why does this touch a nerve with me? Because, had this man been Jewish or a Catholic, his religion would never have been mentioned. Many in the mainstream insist on associating the Adventist Church with cults. It incenses me when this happens in the guise of journalism. It is disingenuous to make this correlation every time some wacko loses his bearings. The first thing the press looks for is any tie to any cult. Thus, the Adventist link is established. Perhaps a better idea would be to leave religion out of the equation, and simply call this what it is - evil.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 10:41 AM


    Spaniards turned out in droves (to the tune of 77 percent) to vote against the Popular Party of Jose Maria Anzar, apparently in response to the shocking subway attacks in Madrid last week. The new PM, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, has vowed to pull Spain's 1300 troops out of Iraq as early as July, unless the UN has taken control of the Iraqi situation by then.

    Can this be viewed as political opportunism? Perhaps. Americans are a bit jaded towards politicians and their motives. Zapatero is plainly taking this victory as a mandate toward moving away from the US position in Iraq. Indeed, with these election results, it is the right of his government to do so. Spaniards are fearful, just as Americans were 2 1/2 years ago.

    But what does this mean for the coalition in Iraq? Not much really. Anzar is a staunch ally of the US, and losing him will be detrimental. But 1300 troops is a small percentage of the military burden, and Spain was more of a symbolic participant anyway. The greater danger comes in the symbolism of the move by Spain. While it could be argued that, perhaps, Zapatero is reallocating the country's military resources to better combat domestic terrorism, this is not evident in his speeches.

    More likely, this move by the Spanish will embolden purveyors of terrorism, who now have been given reason to believe their tactics will pay dividends. If attacking Spain will cost America an ally, which country will be next? Spaniards, and Zapatero, will hopefully realize that this is a global problem that will not go away by ignoring it, or by blaming those who choose to combat it before it gets out of control. In the meantime, we should reserve judgment, and see exactly how Zapatero and his government respond in the coming months.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 9:29 AM


    Friday, March 12, 2004

    From this morning's WSJ:

    Madrid now joins Bali, Baghdad, Najaf, Karachi, Istanbul, Mombasa, Jerusalem, Riyadh, Casablanca and of course New York and Washington in the lineup of terror targets. With several months having lapsed since the last such carnage outside Iraq, we have sensed a complacency developing in some circles that perhaps the worst is over. The late-night comedians have begun to make fun of the "orange alerts," the Patriot Act is being assailed by liberals and libertarians, and voices in Congress are once again daring to propose less defense spending.

    The danger is that we will once again return to the "law enforcement" mindset that dominated the world's handling of terrorism before 9/11. This view assumes that, however awful, terrorism is an endurable tragedy that can be prosecuted after the fact, like a murder in Chicago. John Kerry has been explicit in recommending this kind of policy.

    This temptation is understandable but dangerous. Fighting a war, even one like the war on terror that is often in the shadows, is expensive and hard. It's not surprising that many Americans would like to return to the Roaring Nineties when terrorism was something that happened to other people -- in Israel or somewhere far away. But that vacation from history ended on September 11.

    The Madrid bombings are a reminder that terrorism remains the largest single threat to Western freedom and security. It threatens every country that refuses to cower in fear and dares to take the battle to the terrorists. We've made large strides in this war since 9/11, thanks in part to friends like the Spanish. Their current grief should inspire America's renewed determination.

    Renewed determination, and then some. Let's not lose focus on the threats that continue to loom large on the world horizon.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 10:43 AM


    .NET development on Linux. Honestly, I should have seen this coming, but didn't.

    The Mono project has a clear goal: to become the first-choice platform for Linux software development. Considering that Mono is an implementation of Microsoft's .NET framework, that goal might sound particularly audacious to many Linux fans.

    I have a Mandrake 9.2 machine that is just begging to try Mono. I admit being intrigued by the idea, but, as the author of the linked article asks:

    The licensing status of Mono is of immediate concern to most would-be adopters. Isn't Mono at risk of being wiped out by Microsoft patents?

    That is the question I had, too. Apparently, the implementation has separate API stacks for ECMA-standardized APIs (leaving out the Windows specific proprietary ones), and another for Mono-specific APIs. This abstraction will allow for eventualities, such as having to pay Microsoft licensing fees for using their proprietary APIs which have not yet been submitted to the ECMA.

    So when is Mono scheduled to be released?

    Getting Mono to its 1.0 release is the focus of the Mono team right now. This release is planned for June 2004, and will contain the .NET 1.0 and 1.1 APIs and an implementation of C# 1.0. By the end of the year, another release will add C# 2.0, .NET 1.2, and version 2.0 of Microsoft's ASP.NET and XML technologies.

    Although I would prefer some implementation of VB.NET, this is still an exciting prospect. Somehow though, I can't see Microsoft sitting back as developers move to a competing platform without putting up a fuss, especially once ASP.NET, Windows.Forms, or ADO.NET are included in the package. I would look for them to enforce any licensing contracts to the letter of the law, especially those that do not fall under the ECMA spec. And I will be skeptical that the MS-centric technologies will be included until I actually see them.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 10:28 AM


    Thursday, March 11, 2004

    Lean Left talks about the Kerry tax plan.

    Despite what the Republicans would have you believe, if you earn less than $200,000 per year, you will pay the same or less in federal income taxes as you do right now. No matter how you spin it, that's not a tax increase for most people. And if you earn $200,000 per year or more, your taxes would revert to what they were under Clinton -- an increase from current levels, yes, but not beyond what those income taxes were in 2000.

    [...]

    For the vast majority of us, Kerry will not be raising income taxes. For the few who remain, Kerry will merely be undoing a fiscally irresponsible cut.

    First off, let me preface my statements by saying that I will likely never be one of those who eclipse that $200K plateau. I am middle class, and content to be so.

    That being said, there is something inherently wrong about taking money away from one class of people and giving it to another. There is something inherently wrong about using a bureaucracy to administer "compassion" where the incentive for that administration is not to remove people from dependency on said programs, but to enable them, and encourage them to remain dependent. Many of us who fall into the middle class are full of compassion and understanding when it comes to helping others. This is why I give to organizations like the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, for example. I want private agencies to be successful. I want to enable THEM, instead of an inefficient bureaucracy.

    What does all of this mean? It means that I do not want money to be taken from people wealthier than me, and given to a government leviathan. What I would like to see is a tax proposal that makes the Bush tax cuts permanent, eliminates the dividend tax entirely, and significantly raises the level on the AMT liability. Is this because I am enamored with George Bush? No. It is because I think it is the RIGHT thing to do. This is why many middle class people support Bush - because he will do what is fiscally moral, and has proven that he will do so. His opponent has said plainly that he intends to roll back the Bush tax cuts. The fiscal irresponsibility to which Kevin refers is not the tax cuts, but the profligate spending, of which BOTH parties are guilty.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 8:55 PM


    From Walter Mossberg in today's Wall Street Journal:

    Not only that, but members of the techie class that runs these industries, and the IT departments at big companies, have been quoted recently as blaming the security problem on average, nontechnical users. If only these stupid users wouldn't open e-mails with hidden viruses, the techies say, the trouble would go away.

    Well, I have a word for these contemptuous techies: Save your energy for solving the problem instead of blaming its victims. Mainstream users shouldn't have to be IT experts to operate their computers.

    Bull. That's just utter nonsense, Mr. Mossberg. You don't have to be an IT expert to know not to execute an unsolicited attachment in your email inbox. While I agree that programs to protect users could be more robust, the problem really stems from thousands of unsophisticated users who persist in this behavior. We techies aren't being contemptuous. We're being honest. This is another instance of third party reliance vs. personal responsibility. I opt for the latter.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 2:25 PM


    The caption for a picture in the AJC reads, "Baseball commissioner Bud Selig testifies before a Senate committee. Sen. John McCain issued an ultimatum on steroid testing."

    A quote from the article reads, "McCain said sports such as baseball are 'aiding and abetting cheaters' with a weak testing policy."

    So our senators are now concerned with cheating in league sports? Please tell me why the Senate is involved in this issue. This is NOT a government matter. As I understand it, the substances some players use are not only legal, but available OTC.

    The MLB, NFL, et. al. are not government agencies. The senate has no business issuing ultimatums to them.

    *end of disjointed ranting*

    *steps off box*

    Ranting courtesy of my wife, Ami, who really should do more posting.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 11:11 AM


    Sen. McCain Open to Being Kerry's VP

    Wishful thinking on the part of the "anything but Bush" crowd. Why?

    "It's impossible to imagine the Democratic Party seeking a pro-life, free-trading, non-protectionist, deficit hawk," the Arizona senator told ABC's "Good Morning America" during an interview...

    The implausibility lies really not in McCain's positions, but his ability to stick to a position, and Kerry's propensity for deviating from, well, any position. How do you mesh a principled candidate with one who vacillates with the wind of opinion and polls? You don't. Kerry will be much better off picking a chameleon candidate much like himself. Bill Clinton would be perfect, were it not for a little thing called the Constitution.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 11:04 AM


    WTF?

    Typing the world's most famous curse word into the search engine on johnkerry.com yields four pages containing the F-word, online gossip-monger Matt Drudge reported yesterday.

    [...]

    Type in another famous curse word (Hint: It usually precedes the words ``storm'' or ``fight'' or ``happens.'') and you get five sites containing the expletive, including an article from the Harvard Crimson and the Douglas Brinkley biography ``Tour of Duty.''

    A check of Dubya's Web site turned up no bad words.

    A spokesman for Kerry said he believed the Web site was struck by ``a virus'' yesterday. He then promised to get back to us with a better story, but never did.

    Look, I don't care what F-words Kerry uttered in interviews. I'm certainly not going to complain about it. But what kind of fool do these people think we are, to say that a virus attacked their website and inserted F-words?!!

    Idiots.

    Hat tip to Says Uncle.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 10:05 AM


    The so-called "Cheeseburger Bill" passed the House by a 2-1 margin. The Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act is designed to protect food outlets from frivolous lawsuits by people who have incurred health problems due to their own overindulgence. It's a common sense proposal, but some Congressional democrats disagree:

    But Democrats called the bill a Republican political ploy aimed at hurting trial lawyers and helping the multibillion-dollar food business.

    Democrats argue that most obesity claims have been dismissed in court, anyway.

    Last year, for example, a federal judge in New York dismissed two class-action suits blaming McDonald's for making people fat.

    "It protects an industry that doesn't need to be protected at this particular point and we're dealing with a problem that doesn't exist," said Rep. James McGovern, D-Mass. "The problem that does exist is that we have an obesity problem in this country."

    Yes, Congressman. There is an obesity problem. But it's not because people are being forced to eat fat foods. It should be a matter of personal responsibility. Any sensible person would agree. Where is the harm in encouraging personal responsibility? Is it the fact that trial lawyers are a large constituency of Democratic donors? No, Congressman. That couldn't be it.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 9:54 AM


    Quoth John Kerry...

    "Let me tell you, we've just begun to fight. We're going to keep pounding. These guys are the most crooked, you know, lying group I've ever seen. It's scary."

    Have there been any personal attacks of this sort from Bush or Cheney? Can someone cite one instance where the president or vice-president have slung mud at Kerry? Have they questioned his policies? Sure. His voting record? You bet. His patriotism? No. Never has anyone from Bush-Cheney accused Kerry of being unpatriotic (although some would try to convince you that, by questioning the logic of Kerry in, say, voting against funding the Iraq War, they were, by extension, calling Kerry unpatriotic... which is nonsense.)

    The fact is that Kerry was caught on tape when he thought he was off the record. This is understandable when one accepts the notion that politicians on both sides of the aisle pander to their constituents. What isn't understandable, though, is Kerry's refusal to offer a mea culpa. If Kerry wants to resurrect the "politics of personal destruction", he can do so. But it won't win him the election.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 9:44 AM


    Why do media outlets have a problem with the term "terrorist"? Why are these ETA whackos being called "separatists" instead? Iberian Notes asks the same question:

    (CNN calls) ETA the "Basque separatist group" when identifying them, but then they point out that the US and the EU both list ETA as a terrorist group, so I guess that's fair enough. I'd still prefer to see the word "terrorist" rather than "separatist", though. As idiotic as they are, Esquerra Republicana and Pepelu Carod-Rovira are merely separatists--they want Catalonia to separate from Spain--and not terrorists. Same with Eusko Alkartasuna. Terrorists are non-lawful bearers of arms who use violence and murder people for political ends. That definition sure fits ETA in my book, and not these other legitimate though wrongheaded political parties.

    There should be a standard rule to "call a spade a spade". ETA is no separatist group in the sense that, for example, Quebec residents are for secession from Canada, or the townspeople of Killington are for ending their relationship with Vermont. These people, and many like them, are simply evil. They use terror as an end to an unreachable means. They should be identified as such, instead of calling them something that is more likely to illicit empathy.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 9:28 AM


    Wednesday, March 10, 2004

    The Boy Scouts lose their Supreme Court appeal.

    The Supreme Court rejected an appeal from the Boy Scouts of America, which had claimed to be a victim of discrimination after the state of Connecticut said the group couldn't participate in a charitable campaign because it doesn't hire homosexuals.

    The court's rejection comes amid intense focus on gay rights and in particular same-sex marriage, an issue that eventually could reach the high court.

    In 2000, the Supreme Court had ruled 5-4 that forcing the Boy Scouts to accept gay troop leaders would violate the group's First Amendment rights of association and free expression. But officials in Connecticut moved to drop the group from a list of charities that can receive donations through a state-employee payroll-deduction plan, saying its policy violated the state's antidiscrimination law.

    In petitioning the Supreme Court for review, the Boy Scouts claimed that the Connecticut case raised constitutional issues, in this instance whether a state's laws may exclude otherwise eligible organizations from such programs. The Boy Scouts contended they were excluded "solely because of Boy Scouts' constitutionally protected and membership policies." But the justices turned down their arguments without comment.

    Personally, I agree with the Boy Scouts' right to choose their membership. But, the state has established these guidelines, as is their right to do. Is it discriminatory? In a practical sense, sure, just as it is, in a practical sense, discriminatory of the Boy Scouts to maintain their exclusivity. Limiting membership is not a wrong idea, but it is also not a publicly embraced idea. Instead of fighting it, perhaps the Boy Scouts should just get out of the public fundraising business altogether.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 1:02 PM


    I love my dog. I would take him anywhere... well, nearly anywhere:

    For the first time in 10 years, Mary Wilkinson went to church one Sunday in January. She sat in a back pew at St. Francis Episcopal Church in Stamford, Conn., flipping through a prayer book and listening intently to the priest's sermon.

    What drew Ms. Wilkinson back into the fold was a new monthly program the church introduced -- Holy Communion for pets. As part of the service, the 59-year-old retired portfolio manager carried her 17-year-old tiger cat to the altar, waited in line behind three panting dogs to receive the host and had a special benediction performed for her cat, Purr Box Jr. "I like that the other parishioners are animal people," Ms. Wilkinson says.

    With pews hard to fill, a small number of otherwise-traditional clergy are welcoming animals into the flock. Some are creating pet-friendly worship services, while others have started making house calls for sick animals. Some are starting to accompany pet owners to the vet when they euthanize a beloved pet. Occasionally, clergy are even officiating at pet funerals and group "bark mitzvahs." Congregants at temple Beth Shir Sholom, in Santa Monica, Calif., have an animal prayer sung to the tune of "Sabbath Prayer," a song from "Fiddler on the Roof": "May our God protect and defend you. May God always shield you from fleas."

    Pastor: "Do I hear an Amen!?"

    Congregation: "Meow!"

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 12:50 PM




    $1.72 is the average price of gas in New England right now. In Connecticut, however, the average is $1.78 (although it seems much higher to me). I just saw my first $2.00 per gallon signs this week. I would expect that it will continue to climb.

    This would be a good time to plea for the allowance of exploration into ANWR, so we can lose our dependence on anything OPEC-related. And while we're at it, can we get rid of gasoline additives that only increase the price, and do so for a negligible gain?

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 12:46 PM


    More Connecticut Gun Law Nonsense:

    State busybodies are at it again.

    Gun owners would be required to report the loss or theft of their weapons to the police within three days under a legislative proposal aimed at stemming the flow of firearms to criminals.

    The measure is aimed at those who purchase guns legally, then sell them to people who are ineligible to own a gun. When police recover such guns in connection to a crime and trace them to the legal owner, they often hear the same refrain: It was stolen.

    Law enforcement officials told the judiciary committee Monday that the lack of a reporting requirement provides a loophole that disreputable gun owners can exploit.

    Does the law provide for not knowing your weapon was stolen, like when you return from vacation, or a business trip? Not at this point in the debate, although "those concerns probably can be accommodated."

    How nice.

    I have a novel idea. If you want me to be able to know the location of my gun at all times, perhaps allowing me to CONCEAL AND CARRY it would afford me that level of omniscience.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 12:30 PM


    Those evil corporations:

    So who is paying the bulk of the taxes in my hometown?

    Lego Systems Inc. leads the list with $64 million in taxable property, dwarfing the runner-up, Hallmark Cards Inc. with $36 million.

    The top-10 list is rounded out by a well-known insurer, three large retail properties, a clothing conglomerate, an old factory turned apartment complex and two public utilities.

    They are: Phoenix Home Life Mutual Insurance, $34 million; Enfield Square LLC, $27 million; Casual Corner Group Inc., $23 million; CL&P, $18 million; Gateway Conn. Properties, $13 million; Northland Investment Corp.'s Bigelow Commons Ltd., $12 million; SEA Enfield Commons LLC, $11 million; and The Connecticut Water Company, $8 million.

    Together, the top 10 taxpayers make up roughly $246 million of the town's $2 billion grand list, or just over 12 percent.

    And this is just the local tax on real property. 10 entities, 12 percent of the tax burden, and, most importantly, providing hundreds of jobs with benefits to residents of the metro Hartford/Springfield area. I would say they are "paying their fair share".

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 12:22 PM


    Kerry nonsense:

    Repeat something often enough, and people will believe it. This is apparently John Kerry's presidential strategy:

    "If you add up the true costs of this president's economic policies, you get a 'Bush Tax' of higher property taxes, higher fees, higher health care costs -- at the same time middle-class incomes are going down," he said. "The Bush Tax can take $3,500 or more from the pockets of America's middle class. And they can't afford that price."

    The Bush Tax. Isn't that catchy? I'm trying to figure out what the hell he's talking about. From my tax returns, I can see lower outlays for taxes, not higher, and by a double-digit percentage. So obviously, the direct taxation canard won't fly for Kerry, so he's trying to implicate Bush indirectly.

    So let's look at the four accusations directed against Bush:

    1. Higher property taxes. Bull. If you want to blame someone for high property taxes, blame town councils and politicians who cannot, or will not, cut spending. (Note: I am not happy about Bush's spending in its own rite, but that topic is a wash, because the Democrats have historically led the way in terms of spending.)

    2. Higher fees. What fees would these be? Can you just make an accusation without any specifics, and expect it to stick? In Kerry's world, you can.

    3. Higher health care costs. This is a laugher to the n-th degree. Kerry's own party embraces government administered health care. Analysts have shown that Medicare has led to a misallocation of medical resources, both in terms of availability (specialists won't enter a field where they will not receive due compensation), and price (spending caps lead to higher prices for "paying customers", which lead to higher premiums).

    4. Lowered middle class incomes. This is a bizarre accusation. Is Kerry saying that, per capita, the middle class is making less than during the Clinton administration? Per capita income for the whole population has gone up consistently, whether it was Clinton or Bush in office. So Kerry must be accusing the wealthy class (of which he himself is a member) of stealing money from the middle class. But how is the wealthy class accomplishing this? Kerry, as usual, isn't specific. Kerry knows full well that the upper class are the capitalists who reinvest in companies (often their own), creating jobs, and productivity.

    I know this much. If I had to take a 10% pay cut, or if I saw a 33% increase in my insurance outlays (which I did in 2004), or if my auto fees went up (which they did in 2004), or if my property taxes were increased (which they were in 2004), I wouldn't blame it on Bush, nor would I have blamed it on Clinton in the 90s. Unfortunately, as Kerry mentions these "points" ad nauseum, they will be believed by more and more people.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 12:16 PM


    The anti-climax:

    President Bush... crossed the necessary threshold of 1,255 delegates to wrap up the Republican nomination, according to an Associated Press count.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 11:32 AM


    From Arianna Huffington's website:

    Arianna's campaign tips. Arianna Huffington offers John Kerry six things
    he needs to do to win in November. I'll recap the main points below, but read the whole article.

    1. You may share JFK's initials, but you need to campaign with RFK's passion... 2. Don't pick a VP by looking at the map...

    3. Don't fall back on the tried-and-untrue swing voter strategy that has led to the prolonged identity crisis of the Democratic Party...

    4. Don't run away from your voting record. Don't run away, as you did in the New York debate, from being called a liberal. Embrace it, and define it as the foundation of the great breakthroughs in American history...

    5. Remember: He who controls the language defines the political debate. Bush Republicans' control of certain magical words, starting with "responsibility," has been a key to their success. You need to take back "responsibility" from the grossly irresponsible GOP...

    6. Strike a new bargain with the American people. Tell them, "Let's put an end to the tyranny of low expectations. You can expect a lot more of me, and I will ask a lot more of you"...

    What, exactly, is the "I will ask alot more of you" part? Money, maybe?
    In the form of higher taxes? That can't be right, though, because they never take money from "The American People", only the evil rich, who obviously don't COUNT as American People.

    I would add a #7. Never take campaign tips from a woman who dropped out because she knew she was going to lose and didn't want to look bad.

    This rant brought to you by my wife, who seems to despise liberalism the more we live in the midst of it.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 10:20 AM


    Tuesday, March 09, 2004

    It's nice to see the attention that the RTB is getting in the Knoxville press. I guess I would have read more about it were it not for the annoying registration required by the Knoxville News-Sentinel.

    ASIDE: I would much rather pay a nominal fee for access to content than pay for it with pop-up ads, and annoying email. This is why I willingly pay $6.95/mo for the Wall Street Journal. Registration sites really tick me off sometimes.

    End of semi-rant.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 11:38 AM


    I decided to join Barry's Fantasy Baseball league... I hope more RTBers decide to join us.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 11:31 AM


    Sunday, March 07, 2004

    The REAL problem with Memogate:

    (Memogate) began in June 2001, when Sen. Jim Jeffords's defection from the GOP put control of Judiciary back into the hands of the Democrats, under the chairmanship of Sen. Pat Leahy. Mr. Leahy promptly fired the Hatch IT staff and hired his own computer techies, who neglected to erect a firewall between GOP and Democratic users of the shared Judiciary server. This made it possible, Mr. Miranda says, for any staffer to click on the "My Network Places" icon on any Judiciary computer and call up documents stored on the shared drive. Some staffers stored nothing on the shared drive; others took the precaution of setting up passwords for their files. All were advised to keep sensitive documents on their hard drives. Classified material was stored on discs and kept under lock and key.

    The key point here is that Mr. Miranda wasn't the only one who knew about the computer glitch. He found out about it in June 2002, when a co-worker handed him a stack of Democratic memos. The young staffer, who has since resigned, had discovered in March or April that he could read many Democratic files on the shared drive. The Hatch IT staffer was also aware of the problem -- at one point hosting a lunchtime demo for colleagues. A computer-savvy intern for GOP Sen. Charles Grassley had made the same discovery in the fall of 2001. At some point, the Leahy IT staff learned about the glitch, too, but didn't bother to fix it.

    Idiots. They deserved to have their strategy documents shared with the rest of the world. And this is supposed to be the big theft everyone is talking about? Give me a break. If you and I were competitors, and you dropped a memo in the middle of the road, would I be negligent if I picked it up and read it? Further, would I be wrong to express outrage if you were plotting to besmirch me and my cohorts publicly? I don't think so.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 5:52 PM


    This would explain why my T68i is getting such poor reception lately.

    I use a Bluetooth connection with my Palm. That is the ONLY reason I bought a AT&T phone. The replacement phones? None of them are Bluetooth.

    Damn AT&T. Damn them.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 5:09 PM


    For once, I actually agree with a teacher's union:

    Repeating the refrain he has uttered hundreds of times, teachers' union President Timothy Murphy pleaded with the school board to make suspensions or expulsions requirements - rather than an option - when students fight or defy teachers.

    The small band of teachers who came with Murphy to carry signs and show support said the change is necessary to keep students and staff safe.

    "Kids need to know the consequences," said John Grande, a physical education teacher at the Hartford Transitional Learning Academy, a school for special education students who need a therapeutic setting.

    Where I come from, fighting or defiant kids knew what they had coming. The problem is that most of the troublemakers didn't care about being suspended or expelled. Many welcomed the early vacation. That's why I would go even farther. Kids in elementary schools need to learn discipline and respect early. Corporal punishment is obviously not an option these days, and would probably best be left to parents (who seem to ignore this form of discipline themselves, but that's another topic). So maybe they should give these kids tasks that would embarrass them (a la the "dunce cap"), or demand other things from them, such as cleaning the school premises.

    What disappoints me is the next statement in the article:

    "We need to stop appeasing them. ... Administrators have to understand what we need is a zero-tolerance policy."

    With this, I disagree. Too many instances of ZT have run amok, like kids being suspended for carrying GI-Joe toys, or shop tools. Common sense should prevail, and discipline should be strict, swift, and commensurate to the misdeed. Once schools learn this, the kids will respond.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 4:22 PM


    OK I understand the desire to ban cellphone use in a moving vehicle. I don't necessarily agree with it, but I understand it. In California, the legislature is trying all sorts of things. The leading candidate for passage is a bill that will ban cellphone use in vehicles by teens. However, this proposal is just ridiculous:

    Sen. Kevin Murray, D-Culver City, head of the Senate transportation committee, has introduced a broader bill, SB 1800, imposing an extra traffic fine for drivers who were engaging in any of various distracting activities while driving unsafely.

    Those activities include: Using a cell phone or personal electronic device, adjusting the radio or CD changer, smoking, eating, drinking, interacting with passengers, such as children or animals, reading, writing, or doing grooming, such as combing hair or applying makeup.

    Under the bill's wording, police are not allowed to stop a car simply to determine "whether a driver is engaging in a distracting activity."

    Will government ever learn that it cannot pass a law for everything? Just the fact that they are even debating this is a waste of the taxpayers' resources in the Golden State. If they want to earn their salaries, why don't they actually repeal some stupid laws and regulations? Idiots.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 4:07 PM


    The SAT has added a written essay section to the exam. This section will be worth 800 points, making the cumulative perfect score 2400. While I agree that more attention needs to be given to writing skills, I'm not sure I like it being part of the standardized exam. The other sections of the exam are well-defined, and have only one "best answer". An essay is highly subjective. The essays will ostensibly be graded by two "moonlighting or retired teachers", which gives some credibility to the process. But, again, it's subjective. Will they be analyzing content, diction, vocabulary, style? What is the criteria for assessing writing skill on the new SAT? Moreover, many schools require a written essay anyway. Is it necessary to incorporate it into a standardized test, too? Call me cynical, but this seems like a way for the College Board, Kaplan, etc. to benefit financially. After all, longer tests mean higher fees, not to mention jobs for the graders, and any tutors that will be in demand.

    The new version will add about 30 minutes to the current three-hour test and will boost the fee, which is now about $28, by $10 to $12.

    Yep. More fees.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 2:14 PM


    In Enfield, the town government and certain other interested individuals are trying to decide what to do with local EMS services. This seems like a fairly straightforward proposition to me, really. Just meet publicly, outline intentions, vote, and move forward... at least this is how I envision local government. Apparently, some officials have a problem with the publicly part:

    The man who is leading a group to craft a plan for EMS service insists that he will do whatever he can to keep the public out of the group's meetings.

    "At this point, having the press and the public involved is going to be counterproductive to the process," said Enfield Fire District Chief Edward Richards Thursday. "There will be no open dialogue if you guys are there, so what will happen is we'll take steps to make sure it's not a public meeting.

    "We will make it so that it won't be a public meeting based on who attends, if that's what it takes, because the process is jeopardized," Richards said.

    So why is this such a problem? These are elected officials, right? They represent the public, and there are "sunshine" laws in place, as well as the Freedom of Information Act. So, there is precedent in publcizing meetings such as these.

    Well, here's the rationale for secrecy:

    Richards - who commissioners say heads the working group but doesn't always attend its meetings because of teaching conflicts - pointed to the recent EMS commission as a public body that got bogged down by the public.

    The commission "just spun their wheels for a year and a half and chased their tails around the place because they wouldn't be frank with one another," Richards said, blaming public participation for the lack of honesty.

    "All [the press] would be is a detriment to the process," he said. "That's the name of the tune. There's a time and a place for opening things up to public scrutiny, and we aren't there yet."

    We aren't there yet? As far as I am concerned, ANY use of my tax dollars mandates that I be allowed to view the proceedings. No one is asking for participation, but I am certainly entitled to know what is being planned. As to the issue of frankness, that is disingenuity of the elected officials, and, thus, no one's fault but their own. The public wants people in office who will be forthright, and truthful. (Or are these people not listening to the public outcry regarding Governor Rowland's dealings?)

    It's pretty simple. Be truthful, be open, and proceed.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 1:58 PM


    After two+ days offline, due to a complete home computer upgrade, I am finally back. The PCMCIA slot on my laptop went kaput, so I decided to make a server out of the old laptop, and buy a new one. I settled on a Dell Inspiron 1100, 2.4 GHz, with 512 MB RAM, which only cost me slightly above $900. I refuse to pay over a grand for a computer these days. Call me cheap. Anyway, I didn't like the bloatware that came preinstalled, so I installed XP on the main partition, and 2000 Professional on the second one. I have a third partition for all data, and a fourth one that will house Linux, probably Mandrake 9.2. I still have to reinstall all of my development tools, so this upgrade is going to be long and arduous. In the meantime, I guess I will blog later tonight, after I finish some Sunday housecleaning, and assembling my son's crib. Anyhow, it's good to be back, and with some added computing "uumph".

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 11:56 AM


    Friday, March 05, 2004

    I've decided that "team" meetings are largely useless and boring. Why? Because one or two dilweeds think they know more than everyone else. That is the beauty of mobile blogging... I don't need to pay attention.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 10:00 AM


    Thursday, March 04, 2004

    McDonald's Corp., battered by criticism of its fatty foods, said it would eliminate Supersize french fries and soft drinks by the end of the year, part of a swing toward pleasing health-minded customers and simplifying its menu.

    McDonald's Supersize option, which includes a 7-ounce carton of fries and 42-ounce fountain soda, has been targeted by critics as contributing to a growing obesity crisis in the United States where more than half the population is considered overweight or obese.

    Of course, we all know it was McDonald's fault that the public demanded larger portions of fries and soda, and they responded to market conditions by giving the public what they wanted. We also should know that McDonald's is also at fault for providing us the larger portions. Don't blame me for eating it. Blame them for providing it.

    That sound you hear is personal responsibility being flushed down the toilet.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 12:19 PM


    Proud to live in Connecticut...

    MIDDLETOWN, Connecticut (AP) -- A woman charged with causing a fatal car crash in 1999 says that she couldn't have been behind the wheel because she was performing a sex act on the driver at the time.

    Heather Specyalski, 33, was charged with second-degree manslaughter in the crash that killed businessman Neil Esposito. Prosecutors allege that she was driving Esposito's Mercedes-Benz convertible when it veered off the road and hit several trees.

    But Specyalski claims that Esposito was driving, and she was performing oral sex on him at the time, said her attorney, Jeremiah Donovan. He noted that Esposito's pants were down when he was thrown from the car.


    No commentary necessary.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 12:13 PM


    When tax revenues are thin, be sure to send the entire town council to Washington on a junket:

    The Enfield town council will be in Washington starting this weekend for an opportunity to meet municipal leaders from around the country and sit down with the state's federal legislators.

    Nine of the council's 11 members will attend the five-day conference, presented annually by the National League of Cities.

    The council members are invited to take courses on municipal management as well as sit in on panel discussions with political personalities.

    I suppose my tax dollars are paying for this.

    Travel and lodging are covered by the town, and councilors typically pay for their meals, Tallarita said.

    Yep.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 11:36 AM


    Choice and Tyranny of the Majority:

    Choice should be the focus of every individual in America (religion, school, property, social security, etc.) There is a clear disconnect by the two political parties from the public as a whole, in that the parties have chosen specific issues which they deem worthy of allowing "choice" to individuals, yet they hypocritically violate the same ideals when the choice does not suit them.

    An individual should not live in fear that a "group" will make choices for them. This means that, as an individual, I should not fear a town council raising the mill rate by 10% in the name of socializing school-age children. Similarly, I should not fear that a government might outlaw my choice to be in a same sex relationship, if I so choose. This axiom should apply to all forms of choice.

    Now comes the Connecticut State Supreme Court ruling that has extended the law of eminent domain to private development. Thus, if a developer can convince a town that its proposal will increase the tax base, and/or employment in the town, any property that is needed for such a venture can be seized. This is a clear violation of the principal of individuality. No government, be they local, state, or federal, should have the right to decide what I do with my own land, as long as the use in question does not violate the rights of others.

    Confiscating property in order to increase the local tax base might be good for the town coffers, but it is a violation of individual rights.
    This philosophy is yet another illustration of the trend toward group identity rather than individual identity, creating a perceived dependence on government (read: "we know what is better for our constituents than they do"). Ironically, it is easy for groups of individuals to ignore this confiscatory practice until it happens to one of them. Slowly, individual rights to choose how to live their own lives are eroding in this country.

    It would behoove every American citizen to support all rights to individuality, even if they do not support the choice. In other words, you may abhor gay marriage or abortion. You may find public displays of religion, or questionable art offensive. Aside from forcing federal funding of such things (which is a clear violation of principles of choice, in that there is no mechanism for dictating how one's tax dollars are allocated), the prudent thing to do is to respect the individual right of others to make substantive decisions for themselves. This should include, among other things, private property rights and land use. Once an individual's sovereignty over their property is taken away, the slippery slope toward tyrannical rule cannot be far behind.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 11:33 AM


    Killington, Vermont, the swanky ski resort town, wants to secede, and join the Granite State. Talk about this has been going on for weeks but it's just now getting national exposure.

    Why the desire to secede?

  • Vermont - sales tax, income tax, property tax.

  • New Hampshire - no sales tax, no property tax, more equitable property tax.


    • Do they really need any more reason than that?

    Even though the measure passed in the town, it still requires action by both Vermont and New Hampshire. It is doubtful that Vermont would allow millions of resort town tax dollars to flow out of their coffers and into a neighboring state. But, it's a nice idea.

    UPDATE: I'm not sure about precedence in other areas of the country, but apparently, town secession has happened before in New England. In fact, Enfield and Suffield, Connecticut (where I live) in 1674 and 1680 were considered Massachusetts until they seceded in 1750 to join Connecticut.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 11:13 AM


    Tuesday, March 02, 2004

    Regression in education:

    UConn is recruiting the "top" students for its university. They are offering discounted tuition and scholarship money to valedictiorian and salutatorian graduates of Connecticut high schools.

    In and of itself, there is nothing to criticize about the plan. However, I parenthesize "top" for this reason:

    For Connecticut students, the Presidential Scholars Award will translate to a $2,800 reduction in tuition. The award is renewable every year for those who keep a 2.5 grade point average.

    Say what? A 2.5 is what you expect from your "top" students? When I was in undergrad (not THAT long ago), a 3.25 was expected, and even then, you weren't guaranteed scholarship renewal. Granted, this was in Tennessee, where expectations of student performance is apparently higher than that of the Nutmeg State. If this is all that we can expect from our best students, we're in trouble as a society.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 11:13 AM


    The Metro North railway is getting some new rail cars, if a $60 million proposal passes the Connecticut legislature. It will be funded from $25 million in bond sales, and another $35 million set aside by the state Transportation Strategy Board.

    The refurbishing is long needed, to which anyone who rides the MN Rail can attest. However, I'm still not sold on the idea of using tax revenue and public debt to finance this venture.

    Here's what really irks me:

    (Governor Rowland's) proposal to increase rail fares by 5.5 percent has angered many rail passengers, especially coming at the same time that service worsened, said Jim Cameron, vice chairman of the Metro-North/Shore Line East Rail Commuter Council.

    "Commuters are angry. They're being overcharged, getting lousy service and starting to abandon the trains and take back to the roads, worsening an already horrible situation on our highways," he said.

    I will agree that the greater good is served by using the railway as an alternative to navigating the I-95 corridor. However, I have no sympathy for commuters who whine about the cost of using a transit system, while assuming that taxpayers should foot the bill. Is the service lousy? Sometimes. It has good days, and bad ones. Are people being overcharged? That's a matter of opinion. But the fact remains that someone has to pay for the costs, and expecting commuters in other parts of the state who don't use the commuter rail to pay for the refinements is wrong.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 11:06 AM


    Monday, March 01, 2004

    Acronym Alert:

    Well, it looks like no posting tonight. My PCMCIA slot went FUBAR. I'm going to have to switch over to a USB WiFi NIC. But, tonight. I remain MIA.

    In Geekspeak, that is to say BBL.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 8:54 PM


    Techie Alert, Evolution of the Circumvention of Bureaucracy:

    One of the things that infuriates me about my employer is that I cannot use a .forward file to send my mail to my POP3 box. I can't always dial into the network, so an autoforward is a nice, elegant solution to my business problem.

    Outlook has the ability to forward email using rules. However, rules that run on the client side do not perform as intended. No matter how many permutations of a "forwarded email" rule I have tried, they have failed.

    So, enter the Outlook object model. I decided to write a routine that will check the MAPI folder and forward the email to whichever address is given in the Recipients.Add method. Below is the code:

    Private Sub Application_NewMail()
    Dim objItem As MailItem
    Dim objMailItem As MailItem
    Dim EmailAddress As String
    Dim Subject As String
    Dim Body As String

    Set objItem = Application.GetNamespace("MAPI").GetDefaultFolder(olFolderInbox).Items(1)

    Subject = objItem.Subject & " From: " & objItem.SenderName
    Body = objItem.Body

    Set objMailItem = Application.CreateItem(olMailItem)

    With objMailItem
    .Subject = Subject
    .Body = Body
    .Recipients.Add "email@server.com"
    .Send
    End With

    Set objMailItem = Nothing
    End Sub

    It worked well, except for one thing. Read receipts. Anytime I received a Read receipt, the program crashed. Error 13. Type mismatch.

    What to do...?

    Check Outlook object model again. Nothing about identifying message types. Managed to find the MessageClass object, but nothing in the documentation about how to explicitly identify message types. (Stupid documentation!)

    Proceed to plan B. Ask everyone you know. Nothing.

    Plan C? Well, maybe there's something in the Exchange documentation. Indeed there is. It turns out that "REPORT.IPM.NOTE.IPNNRN" and "REPORT.IPM.NOTE.IPNRN" identify the two different types of Read receipts in MAPI. So I added a single If - Then statement after the Set object statement:

    If UCase(objItem.MessageClass) = "REPORT.IPM.NOTE.IPNNRN" Or _
    UCase(objItem.MessageClass) = "REPORT.IPM.NOTE.IPNRN" Then
    Exit Sub
    End If

    Eureka. Now email is automatically forwarded to me.

    The moral to this story?

    1. Bureaucracy sucks.
    2. MS documentation (aside from .NET) sucks.

    Life as an IT pro. Take it, or leave it.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 2:53 PM


    I just received my BloggerCon invitation. Adam Curry is among the participants this year. It will be interesting to hear about his stint in Iraq with the troops. I plan to go, if possible, and do some real time mobile blogging. April 17th is just around the corner. From what I recall, the Bay area is beautiful in the spring.

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 11:25 AM


    What a Joke:

    That's all I can say about my company's IT infrastructure. If you want to run robust applications, you have to make the investment in updated equipment. For goodness' sake, they are relying on outdated servers and desktop systems to run SAP. Do you have any idea how memory and bandwidth intensive SAP apps are? Well, if you said "no", then you would be a prime candidate for our IT decision-making group.

    Here is the spec for our company-wide laptops:

  • INTEL Mobile Pentium III 650 MHz chip
  • 128 MegaBytes (MB) of EDO Random Access Memory (RAM)
  • A 14.1-inch extended graphics array (XGA), thin film transistor (TFT) 1024 x 768 active-matrix
    Color Display Screen.
  • A 12 Gigabyte (GB) Hard Drive


    • There are other items not worth nothing. My complaint is this: how can a high tech company justify saddling their users with these inferior laptops? Now, let me say that any user that is simply interested in email and word processing is going to be just fine with a PIII 650, but your app development group? Your SAP administrators? Your tech support people? This machine wouldn't last 3 days in my graduate classes, let alone in the "real world".

    Sadly, some CFO out there has convinced some CIO that it is perfectly okay to give out several thousand laptops of this genre to end users. "Adhere to the bottom line." That mantra is getting old.

    And one other thing. The company goal for the next five years in IT - to reach CMM Level 5. For those who may not be familiar with CMM, it is the IT equivalent of 6-Sigma, or ISO for manufacturing. I've only heard of one company ever attaining CMM Level 5, and I doubt they stayed there long. Call this the "No Child Left Behind" act for IT professionals. CMM 5 is not a relaistic goal, especially for these "gurus".

    Labels:

    .: posted by Dave 11:23 AM


    Need ASP.NET, VB, VB.NET, or Access development?

    Contact me through Guru.com.




    Opinari Archives


    Recommended Reading


    Blogroll Me!

    Proudly blogging on a Treo 650 using Vagablog 1.9.
    This page powered by Blogger, and yours should be, too!