Opinari - Latin term for Opinion. Opinari.net is just what it seems: a cornucopia of rants, raves and poignant soliloquy.
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
My Unwanted Tech Support Hat -
One of my many I.S. hats, besides that of developer, analyst, and project manager is that of occasional tech support. Tech support, needless to say, is not my favorite hat. Today's tidbit probably illustrates why.
A lady called me this morning, frantic, because she had a dialog window that she couldn't get rid of. She was frustrated that she couldn't do her work. I remoted into her machine and saw that an MS Access macro had stopped and gave her an error message.
The message had one button on it that was usable - HALT. So this being Christmas and all, I respectfully clicked the HALT button. She was blissfully thankful and proceeded to complete her work as if nothing had happened.
So, Santa, if you're reading my blog, do me a favor. Instead of giving me a gift this year, take something back. This stupid tech support hat. It just doesn't seem to fit very comfortably.
A few random thoughts this morning about college football’s BCS:
Note to Michigan – how does it feel to be screwed? Think Peyton Manning in 1997. Yeah, that Heisman thing? We know how you feel. That doesn’t mean it is warranted, but we feel your pain nonetheless.
Let’s get something straight. College football will continue to suck as long as there is no settlement of the “national championship” on the field. Is Florida better than Michigan? Who knows. More deserving of the title game berth? I believe so, but that’s not relevant. What is relevant is that a team lost a single game by 3 points on the road to the #1 team in the country, and they are left out of the title chase. At least they’ve proven what they’re capable of. Florida has done nothing but play close games against great competition week in and week out. Top strength of schedule means something, at least this year.
See, that’s what’s frustrating about popularity contests like Heisman Trophies and AP Polls. The criteria changes. The “goalposts” move. Florida won the poll vote because they happened to be playing that week in a conference championship game. Michigan had already finished their season. Rest assured that if OSU-Michigan had been the first game of the season, and if Florida’s loss to Auburn had come in November, the Wolverines would be playing a rematch game with the Buckeyes in January. That’s just how the system is structured, and it’s flawed.
Which leads me to the following conclusion: it is time for a playoff. Now. Everyone wants one. Fans. Players. Coaches. Everyone except the ones who control the system. The time has come to implement a playoff. It can be done. Administration types need to quit whining about how much they care about the players, and how their delicate schedules can’t possibly manage a “second season”. They added a 12th game this year. I’m pretty sure that wasn’t to benefit the players.
Here’s what college football should do. Take the existing bowls, tie them into a playoff, and let the best team win. Top 4. Top 8. Top 16. However you want to do it. Just do it. Imagine a playoff round with Ohio State, Michigan, Florida and LSU. The top two teams from the top two conferences. I drool just thinking about it. Or go a step further. Throw in Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Louisville, and Boise State. First round sites could be at the Capital One Bowl, the Cotton Bowl, the Fiesta Bowl, and the Rose Bowl. Semis could be held at the Orange Bowl and the Sugar Bowl. And heck, play the championship wherever you want to.
Would that it were so.
As Pat Forde said on ESPN, “you've got to love a sport that reduces its championship to a politicized popularity contest/guessing game.” It’s time we moved into the 21st century and made it otherwise.
Because we deserve it, don’t you know? So saith Louisiana governor Kathleen Blanco about her state’s LSU Tigers.
"Anyone who follows college football knows this has been a successful year for LSU and we Tiger fans are some of the most passionate fans in college sports," she said Thursday. "Our team deserves a BCS berth."
If ANYONE knows this, then why beg for a spot in the championship? Shouldn’t the record speak for itself?
I should say that I actually agree with Governor Blanco. I believe that LSU deserves one of the BCS berths. I also believe they deserve it enough that the state executive doesn’t need to grovel for a spot in the Rose Bowl.
Milton Friedman died today at the age of 94. I’m not an economist, but I have studied the discipline a bit. I consider Friedman to be one of the most important people of my lifetime. He popularized the phrase “there’s no such thing as a free lunch”. In fact, it was the title of one of his many books. His economic philosophy was rooted in the free market. He was an obvious influence on the policies of both Reagan and Bush 43.
I’m inspired today to find a copy of “Capitalism and Freedom” and read it. I only wish more of our elected officials would too. I’m sad to hear of Mr. Friedman’s passing, and I can only hope that his ideas don’t die with him.
What does this tell the voting public? This tells us that the Republicans learned nothing from the 2006 midterms. This tells us that the Republicans are not taking their constituents seriously. This tells us that we’re more for “business as usual” than “reform and regroup”.
It is these exact types of things that could lead the GOP to exile in the political wilderness for some time. They need to wake up and see that Americans are tired of the corruption, the earmarking, and the willful ignorance of the electorate. Voting for establishment-types like Lott shows they have learned nothing.
It appears that the first public pissing contest within the Democratic Party since the 2006 election is going to be for House Majority Leader. Murtha, of course, is an outspoken detractor of the Iraq War and no friend of the Bush Administration. Hoyer is known as a more moderate Democrat, and claims to have more support from his peers, particularly the “Blue Dog” Democrats.
What makes this interesting to me is that Nancy Pelosi claims that her regime is going to be the cleanest, most ethical of our time, yet she inexplicably forgets that Murtha carries baggage of his own. Remember Abscam? Well, most people probably don’t, and I’m guessing Pelosi is banking on the electorate’s notorious short term memory. However, if you’re purporting to be the antithesis of institutional government corruption, why would you start off the new Congress by appointing a tainted official?
MORE:
RedState.com points to the WaPo where we learn that Jane Harman is being passed over as chair of the Intelligence Committee, likely likely selecting impeached former federal judge Alcee Hastings.
Let’s recap. Two qualified candidates without previous blemish are passed over for a scandal-involved individual, and an impeached former member of the federal judiciary by a House leader who swore her tenure would see the most scandal-free, cleanest legislature in modern history.
“Stop asking what you have done wrong. Stop it! They're slaughtering you like sheep and you still look within. You criticize your history, your institutions, your churches. Why can't you realize that it has nothing to do with what you have done but with what they want."
It will take a wholesale change of Western attitudes, with apologists and Bush-haters alike getting on board before our free societies will look at extreme Islamism as what it really is – a desire to eradicate Western culture and indoctrinate it with theocratic, totalitarian ideals rooted in a perverse interpretation of Islam. Hopefully, we won’t see thousands of innocents die before our leaders come to that conclusion.
KnoxViews Randy Neal asks “how (last night’s election) will affect our lives this year, next year, and going forward.” That’s an interesting question.
Since the margins of the majorities are pretty thin, I have to think that they won’t affect me as much as they would otherwise. I don’t foresee many policy initiatives getting through that would be considered ultra-liberal (read: socialized medicine, etc.). However, there will likely be some affect.
Will my taxes increase? Almost assuredly. They already have, since Congress failed to extend the deduction for state sales tax. I’m all for reining in fraud and waste, but I believe cuts in marginal rates and capital gains tax rates are anathema to economic growth, and the economic conditions of the last several years prove that.
Social Security will always be a hot button issue for me, but I’m also resigned to the fact that the public doesn’t have the will to deal with the problem. I believe that I can better decide for myself how to handle my retirement. I already do so with a pension fund, a 401k, and an IRA. I believe I should be allowed to do so with the percentage of my income that the Feds already take in the form of Social Security taxes. I agree that Congress shouldn’t be raiding the Social Security coffers and borrowing money for other programs, but I’d also point out that every Congress since the inception of Social Security has done so. I’d even wager that the next Congress will too.
How about prescription drugs and Medicare? I would have to agree that it is an absurd entitlement program in its current incarnation. Retirees that I know didn’t even bother to enroll because it would affect their private insurance benefits. Those that did enroll have found it to be cumbersome and inefficient, not unlike most government mandated programs in our country’s history. So how will a Democratic Congress fix it? Beats me. I haven’t heard any ideas from them except to say “I’m not Bush”.
I know one thing though. I don’t support mandating that private companies negotiate lower prices with the government. That’s against every free market principle I know, and I’m not amongst the folks that think pharmaceutical companies are “gouging” consumers. Drugs cost money to make. Research. Development. They require incoming capital. Mandatory lower pricing leads to less innovation and companies will exit the marketplace.
I’m going to also issue an agreement on the issue of VA benefits with Mr. Neal. Veterans should get the benefits they have been promised. Period.
Democrats and the environment? Well, historically, I’d say there has never been a government program they didn’t like, so regulating power producers certainly would be expected. Along with that, expect increases in energy rates, while the environmental impact will be marginal at best. Think Kyoto and a 0.7 degree Celsius benefit by 2050.
CAFÉ standards? I’m agnostic about this, although any such regulation will certainly affect the manufacturer’s bottom line. Will the Dems pursue this as a centerpiece of their energy policy? Probably. They most certainly won’t open ANWR for exploration, and alternative fuels aren’t yet cost-effective, nor will offshore drilling or refining capacity increase. Look for gridlock where energy prices are concerned.
Medical insurance? Well, hopefully, HillaryCare will stay off the docket. But how will the Democrats address skyrocketing health care increases? I’ve yet to hear anything substantive on this matter from them. I don’t have the answers to this one, nor have I claimed to. But mandated insurance coverage on the backs of the taxpayer isn’t the solution.
No Child Left Behind? Please. Should we get rid of it? Absolutely. It accomplishes nothing but lowering the bar and “equalizing” the outcome of each child’s education. One has only to look at the reduction and elimination of gifted and AP classes to see evidence of this. Will the Democrats get rid of it? Not likely. After all, it’s a government program. Look for more tax credits for the “working poor” so that they can fund post-secondary education. Real reform, like school choice, is set back years under this Congress.
Raising the federal minimum wage? Why not? Most states have a higher minimum wage than the federal minimum anyway. I believe this will be one of the first things Congress will push for, and I believe that it will pass. Should it? Who knows? This just isn’t an issue I care much about.
The war? Here is the major uncertainty. We don’t yet know the direction the Bush administration is going to go after the resignation of Rumsfeld today. We don’t know the degree of conflict the Democrats are willing to inflict upon the executive branch. Will they fund the war effort? Murtha probably wouldn’t were it up to him. It all depends on whether the liberal hawks or the doves win out in the interparty posturing for power. I’d like to think America will fill the vacuum in Iraq until the Iraqis themselves are capable of doing so, but at this point, even a wholesale evacuation of the Middle East wouldn’t surprise me.
As I review what I’ve written and what others have written, I think that mostly, when we aren’t blinded by partisanship, we all want the same thing. Prosperity. Freedom. Security. We just disagree on how to achieve those goals. No matter who is in power, we know America is great, and we’re proud to live here.
I’ve had about as much post-election coverage as I can stomach in the last few hours. Other than the things about which I have already remarked, what has struck me has been the tone of conversation coming from Republicans in comparison to what we heard throughout 2000, 2002 and 2004.
The standard Republican mantra today has been “the American people have spoken”, or “let’s learn from our mistakes, and regroup for 2006.”
The common Democratic position in past elections was “Bush cheated” or “Diebold!” or “I’m taking the first flight to Paris and never coming back.”
In other words, we have “here’s what we did wrong” as opposed to “here’s what they did wrong.” In my estimation, in the limited time of my life in which I have followed politics closely, I have to say that, while I shudder at the thought of dealing with liberal governance, I also believe that Republicans make better losers than Democrats. And maybe that means the bile emanating from Washington will be less prominent. Or, maybe that’s just wishful thinking.
One thing I want to be clear on is that this isn't the apocalypse and al-Qaeda is not going to take over the Middle East in 2 years but that they will make a great deal of headway there if the US is emasculated in the interim as a result of domestic politics, particularly if the legislative branch now treats the executive as though it is part of an enemy state.
I’m very interested in how cooperative the legislative and executive branches are going to be regarding foreign policy in the Middle East. “Creative redeployment” is obviously not going to deter terrorism worldwide or despotism in the region. Yet, as far as I can tell, that is the only policy alternative I have seen from the Democrats.
I’m hearing the John Murtha will be heading the committee for Military Appropriations. Knowing his personal beliefs about the war in Iraq, will this mean that the House will simply refuse to fund any initiatives by the Bush Administration for the war? As the post above asks, will the President simply be treated as a hostile enemy, or will there actually be some effort to win this war instead of running away from an obviously volatile, and historically important event in the history of our civilization?
It is encouraging to hear this morning’s post-mortem Republican rhetoric about such things as “limited government”, “reducing spending”, “immigration reform”, etc. It’s a shame they didn’t see this coming before now. I equate the Republicans right now to an undisciplined preschooler. They know what’s fundamentally right, but they do the wrong thing until they get spanked.
Well, consider Election night 2006 a metaphorical form of corporal punishment, administered by the electorate. Maybe now they will sit in their room, sob a little bit, pick themselves up, and return to the principles they’ve been so eloquently espousing this morning.
While I am thinking about it, congratulations to former Vol quarterback Heath Shuler, who won a House seat in North Carolina yesterday. And may he do better in Washington as a statesman than he did as a football player.
There is something to be said for an opposition party. Quite plainly, one party rule is dangerous, and pulls the country too far in one direction – at least the electorate expressed this view yesterday.
In the House, look for Pelosi and company to start the anti-Bush ball rolling at some point. Get ready for “All Impeachment, All the Time”
If GOP had governed with the principles upon which they were elected, I believe they would still be holding majority rule. Inexplicably, conservative governance went into extended hibernation between 2004 and 2006. They have only themselves to blame.
Ironically, the Democrats had to recruit moderate to conservative candidates to put their liberal leadership in power.
Maybe we’ll actually see a few vetoes issued from the Presidential pen.
Maybe the Democrats in Congress will now divulge an actual plan for governance that isn’t “we’re not Bush”.
Note to Republicans: the sun still rises in the East. Learn from your mistakes. Return to your original ideals of limited government and low tax rates and you’ll be back in power in no time.
Note to Democrats: don’t get cocky, and don’t overstep your bounds. You still were given only a narrow legislative majority. If you learn anything from the last few years, it’s that political capital only goes so far.
If anything, the next two years, at least for political junkies, should be quite interesting.
Apparently in Kentucky, you have to vote for at least one candidate in every race, or else you’ll get punched out by an election worker.
Oh, and Britney is leaving Kevin. Surely this is the October… er, November surprise we’ve all been waiting for!
And finally, if embryonic stem cell research isn’t enough for you, how about cross-species stem cell research… as in crossing the bovine species with Homo Sapiens? Now there’s an issue Michael J. Fox can get behind!
I’m a pretty solid political junkie, so normally I’d be home watching cable news and following returns on Election Night. Tonight though, I have a softball game at 9:15 CT. What to do? Well, since I have a mobile device, I can go to http://mer.ap.org. Voila, instant election results in the palm of my hand.
Since Election Day is tomorrow, I’ve been pondering a few things, one of which is voter fraud. Allegations surface almost every election now, and I’m sure they will in 2006. Two primary issues seem to be the root of the distrust of the system – black-box voting, and lax voter registration laws.
Detractors of black-box voting claim that there is no proof that one’s vote was logged correctly. They also complain about the platform dependence of the software, and the ease that the software can be hacked. I believe those folks are right to have such concerns.
Advocates of stricter voter registration laws believe that one should not be able to vote unless one can prove one’s identity, and such proof should consist of a photographic ID. Opponents claim that this is tantamount to racism, disenfranchisement, and all sorts of other similar types of vote suppression. The fact is votes from ineligible people should be suppressed. Period.
As I see it, these two issues seem to be the ideal place where Democrats and Republicans can arrive at a strong compromise for voting reform. Why not propose the following?
Require any software used for voting machines to provide a receipt for one’s vote. Allow for changes in case one’s vote was incorrectly recorded. Establish a voting software commission that audits source code without requiring the developers to publicly disclose their intellectual property, and allow the same commission to recommend changes both in the process and in the software. On the registration front, require all voters to have indisputable identification, with no exceptions. Limit or eliminate same-day registration. Provide a streamlined (maybe even a taxpayer-subsidized) means for poor individuals to acquire the necessary identification needed to be able to register to vote.
Establish identity. One vote per eligible person. Provide traceability and validation. Such ideas only make sense if we’re truly trying to count all votes correctly. It’s not about counting only the votes that will provide your favorite party victory. In a representative democracy, it’s about making sure the right representatives are selected by the right people. Surely, even in today’s partisan environment, we can agree on that.
I’m not one for much political prognostication, but I thought I’d give it a shot in 2006. While the media believes (or hopes) that there will be a massive Democratic onslaught, I’m inclined to believe the following:
The economy is generally good and that affects most people.
The war in Iraq is an inflammatory issue, but most people aren’t as riled up about it as the Democrats would hope.
Illegal immigration is an inflammatory issue, but Republicans fear Speaker Pelosi far more than they fear Julio and his six offspring crossing the Rio Grande.
“Politics is local,” and a great many folks like their representatives while abhorring everyone else’s.
In Connecticut, the independent candidacy of Joe Lieberman will help Republicans by bringing out more Republican voters who dislike the idea of Ned Lamont winning.
There will be SOME exceptions to rule #4.
So where does this leave my predictions? Santorum and DeWine are sure losers. Cardin probably wins, and I believe that Corker and Allen will win too. Chafee is a likely loser (which won’t hurt my feelings in the least). Missouri, New Jersey and Montana are too close to call. Nonetheless, I believe the Republicans will hold onto the Senate.
As for the House, I don’t see how the Republicans hold onto it, but I don’t believe they will lose it by much. In fact, I don’t believe the Democrats will own a governing majority in the sense that there will be too many conservative Democrats to allow much of a liberal agenda to proceed. I’m predicting a 15-18 seat pickup for the Democrats, including former Vol QB Heath Shuler in western Carolina. However, I don’t believe that the Dems will pick up the CT seats (Shays, Johnson and Simmons). I’m predicting that all three seats stay with the GOP. I’m also predicting a Texas split with Lampson winning Delay’s old seat, and Henry Bonilla retaining his.
And one more pick – the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative passes, and by a wider than expected margin.
It all depends on turnout, and, despite the unconditional hatred for President Bush, I’m not sure that’s going to be enough in many places to turn the tables toward the Democrats.
I'm still bumming about the loss to the Bayou Bengals. Great game as a fan. Bad game as a Vol fan. I'm still convinced that Russell fumbled on that last drive. I have no idea why there was no review of the play. Anyway, at least this season isn't near as bad as last. And I keep telling myself - at least I'm not a fan of Georgia, 'Bama, or Michigan State. Now THAT would suck.
From a bench in Bushnell Park, or a spot overlooking the Connecticut River, or from the living room of a house in Blue Hills, Hartford residents can now access the Internet through a wireless - and free - municipal network.
But the very next sentence says otherwise.
Mayor Eddie A. Perez plans to announce today the launch of a $1 million pilot program to test the service, along with a push by the city to sell inexpensive computers to residents.
How is that free? One million dollars is not free. A more truthful statement would be “no cost to lower-income users”. This program is only free if you ignore the fact that the taxpayer is funding this program. (The article isn’t clear about the origin of the funding, but it’s most certainly not a private gift to the municipality.)
Furthermore, does Hartford really need a wi-fi network when only 25% of its townspeople even own a computer (and how many of those are wireless-capable)?
The article goes on to say:
(S)tarting in March, only the first 20 hours of access per household will be free; after that, residents will have to buy unlimited access for $12 to $17 a month.
Ah. The fine print.
So, in truth, Hartford is making available low-cost, subsidized wireless internet access to its citizens at a discount. That’s a far cry from “free”.
I’ve often told interested parties that my wife and I have a fertility secret: relocate. Each time we’ve moved from place to place (first Georgia to Connecticut, then Connecticut to Texas), we’ve also discovered that we’ve managed to create a new child in the process. We’re two for two in this process so far.
Since we have two in diapers, we’ve decided to stay in Texas in hopes that it will keep her fertility in check. However, I think I’ve managed to do one better:
Heavy use of mobile phones may damage men's fertility, a study has suggested. Researchers found those men who used a phone for four hours or more a day had fewer sperm and those they had moved less well and were of poorer quality.
So, let’s recap. Relocate and get pregnant. Use your mobile phone (in my case, my Treo 650) for four or more hours per day and reduce your sperm count.
That's what comes to mind after watching again the melee between FIU and Miami. Both schools should be utterly embarrassed. Both schools should go further than one game suspensions for the players involved. And ALL players involved should publicly come forward and individually apologize for their actions. And the players who were slamming each other with helmets and stomping on other players should be dismissed from the team. Period. Rest assured the NFL wouldn't condone this. Just ask Albert Haynesworth.
From Wired Magazine comes this handy guide for converting YouTube video to iPod video: 1. Add the Greasemonkey extension to your Firefox browser. 2. Go to www.userscripts.org and install the Download YouTube Video script. 3. The next time you watch YouTube, you’ll see a Download Video option beneath the screen. Click it to save the file to your desktop as QaQw9V4Upj4.flv or whatever. 4. Install and launch the free Super video converter (www.erightsoft.com). 5. Select Apple – iPod from the Output Container option, and then the output video codec H.264/AVC. Set size to 320 x 240. If you get an error message when converting, unclick the Use DirectShow button. Otherwise, drag the converted file into iTunes and it’s ready for viewing.
Portable video. It’s the wave of the future… er, present.
Mobile ESPN was a bad idea, a niche market within a niche market. Techies and sports don’t always mix – I’m proud to claim myself as a fan of both. Techies who are willing to fork out bucks to carry around on-demand sports content are few and far between. Even I didn’t succumb to the Mobile ESPN craze.
So what would have drawn me to a Mobile ESPN subscription? How about allowing me to view the content on my choice of mobile device? I certainly was not willing to buy a broadband phone when I already have a Treo 650. Perhaps podcasting Sportscenter for a subscription fee? I already listen to some ESPN podcasts, such as PTI. I might pay a small fee for a portable version of Sportscenter for me to watch in the morning. But exorbitant pricing coupled with forced conversion to new hardware? That’s just a bad business model. And that’s why I didn’t buy into ESPN Mobile, and thousands of other sports fans didn’t either.
Georgetown University Hospital suspended a trial program with an electronic prescription-writing firm last week after a computer consultant stumbled upon an online cache of data belonging to thousands of patients, Wired News has learned.
The leaked information included patients' names, addresses, Social Security numbers and dates of birth, but not medical data or the drugs the patients were prescribed, says Marianne Worley, a spokeswoman for the Washington, D.C.-based hospital known for providing emergency care to the nation's most powerful political figures.
The hospital had securely transmitted the patient data to e-prescription provider InstantDx. But an Indiana-based consultant accidentally discovered the data on InstantDx's computers while working to install medical software for a client.
{…}
The consultant responsible for the discovery, Goshen, Indiana-based Randall Perry, says bad security practices contributed heavily to the incident. Perry says he accessed the data using a password he discovered hard-coded into a popular medical practice application, where any moderately skilled user could retrieve it.
"This is just security through obscurity," says Perry. "My home network is probably 10 times more secure than what they have set up over there."
Our IT shop has strict rules about hard-coding any connection strings, DSNs, etc. DON”T DO IT. Period. Everything must be contained in a config file, whether it’s the web.config file in ASP.NET or an ini file for a Windows-based application.
Of course, this applies only to future development, as we recently discovered a client/server app that pushed the admin passwords out as ASCII text to the client PCs. Obfuscation? Nah. Encryption? Pshaw. Who needs it? This is the attitude of many developers. Fortunately, our in-house dev group is paranoid about such things. Apparently, the medical records industry could use a dose of such paranoia.
Today is the fifth anniversary of the terrorist attacks on the United States. Most of the world has some sort of remembrance of that day today. Even the enclaves of anti-Americanism overseas have remembered the day, but as a celebration of sorts. But do the bright guys at Google have anything to say today? Any logo celebrating the heroism of America’s firefighters and policemen? Any graphic lamenting the loss of nearly three thousand people that day? Nope. Just the good ol’ Google logo.
Now don’t get me wrong. I don’t believe everyone has to jump on the bandwagon of sorrow. Life goes on, and all that. But this is the same company that gives us yearly logo changes of such things as Secretaries Day and Earth Day. But no 9/11 memorial?
So, as of today, I’ve had it with Google. I sold their stock a long time ago when they became complicit with the oppressive Chinese government and became their official content filter. I’ve stopped using them for anything except web search. I haven’t even checked my GMail account since 2005. Today’s oversight is the last straw. I’m swearing off Google.
UPDATE: Just for posterity, let's look at some other popular search engines.
MSN:
Yahoo:
Dogpile:
And of course, above, we have good ol' Google. I guess at Google, they would hate to offend the theocrats and totalitarians of the world, and all that.
Five years ago, I was on my way to work in Connecticut when I heard on the radio that a "small aircraft" had run into the World Trade Center in New York City. The local disk jockey (on WTIC-FM) promised updates soon, as programming continued.
When I got to the office, I pulled out a TV and turned on ABC, which was the only channel available on the set. It was then that I realized what was going on. A commercial airliner had hit one of the towers. Rampant speculation commenced on the air about what could possibly be going on.
I remember vividly watching the set as the unexpected happened - another jet hit the other tower. It was then that I realized that we were under attack by someone, something. They were using our technology, and our freedoms against us. And we were wholly unprepared.
But we were also unprepared for what happened next as we found out about the Pentagon in flames, and the hijacked airliner, later made famous as Flight 93. Our world became chaotic, uncertain, and confusing. My coworkers and I watched in shock as events unfolded.
Still, it wasn't until what happened next that I recall feeling first helpless, then betrayed, then angry. That moment was when the first tower collapsed. I knew it wouldn't be long before the second one did the same, and it fell shortly thereafter.
Five years later, that day still is rooted in my memory. We have gone from a united nation to a polarized one. Blame is tossed around like recreation. Fingers are pointed. But the events of September 11 still are constant.
Regardless of ideology, political bent, or party affiliation, we must be vigilant in rooting out those who perpetrate this sort of violence. We must realize that there is an element of evil that wants to destroy Western culture, without compromise. We must accept that there is evil in this world, and that it must be confronted. And we must never forget what happened that day. Never.
Steve Irwin, the Crocodile Hunter, as everyone knows by now, died in a freak accident over the weekend. Read a great story about him here.
One thing I didn’t realize about Irwin was that he was a political conservative, and was a staunch supporter of John Howard in his native Australia. Apparently he was a favorite guest of talk show host Laura Ingraham. One of his quotes from Laura Ingraham’s website:
I have no fear of losing my life. If I have to save a koala or a crocodile or a kangaroo or a snake, mate, I will save it.
Politics aside, the world will be a bit emptier without the Crocodile Hunter as a part of it.
If you’re thinking about selling your old PDA without doing some major memory cleanup, think again:
Selling your old phone once you upgrade to a fancier model can be like handing over your diaries. All sorts of information can pile up inside our cell phones, and deleting it may be more difficult than you think.
A popular practice among sellers, resetting the phone, often means that sensitive information appears to have been erased. But it can be resurrected using specialized yet inexpensive software found online.
Since I am a Treo user, I was most interested in this:
Palm Inc., which makes the popular Treo phones, puts directions deep within its Web site for what it calls a “zero out reset.” It involves holding down three buttons simultaneously while pressing a fourth tiny button on the back of the phone.
But it’s so awkward to do that even Palm says it may take two people. A Palm executive, Joe Fabris, said the company made the process deliberately clumsy because it doesn’t want customers accidentally erasing data.
Read about the zero out reset here. Basically, it involves holding Power, Up, HotSyncing, AND pushing the reset button. In other words, a single person is very challenged to try this maneuver without some intervention from a second party, just as the article says. Still, it’s better than giving someone your personal or corporate proprietary data.
I've not followed much about the "secret holds" story in the news lately, but I see that Senators Stevens and Byrd, two of the most pork-loving legislators in history, were behind it.
Now, it seems to me like such tactics take the tyranny of the minority to a new level. What bothers me more is that these public servants chose to hold up a bill that would make the public trough more visible. To me, this isn't a left or right issue. This is an issue about how we are governed, and there is nothing wrong with transparent governance... unless someone up there on Capitol Hill is afraid of being accountable. And that's probably why they are so afraid of S. 2590 anyway.
I’ve been looking for a good solution for my IT department that would provide push email, but I’ve been reluctant to embrace the Blackberry hardware. I’m not that happy with any Blackberry device I’ve ever used. I prefer the ubiquity of software available for the Palm OS. The Palm OS interface is much more elegant. The Palm APIs are better understood by our programmers. In sum, I need Blackberry functionality without the Blackberry. So, today, when Palm announced its agreement with Cingular Wireless today to provide Blackberry Connect access for Treo 650s, I was intrigued right away since I am both a Treo 650 owner and a Cingular customer. We have a corporate Blackberry server, and our IT staff can (but does not presently) have access to it. So it seems like a perfect match.
However, I’ve investigated further, and I’m not sure that I am willing to add $44.95/month per user plus voice costs to the bottom line just for push email. A more cost-effective solution would be ChatterEmail EX and Exchange 2003, which has Outlook Web Access (OWA). Chatter reads OWA nicely; I’ve tested it, and I like the functionality. However, we have a nasty little security feature in place called SecurID, and Chatter does not support SecurID authentication.
Our present solution is VB code that calls MAPI and sends attachments and forwarded emails to external IMAP accounts. However, that isn’t the most elegant solution, and it doesn’t provide Blackberry-like access to calendars, contacts, and tasks. But it is definitely the most cost-effective. All it requires is a $39 email client, our Exchange server, and any number of free IMAP accounts in existence.
As much as I like the idea of going with Blackberry Connect for Palm 650, until I can see a real business need for real-time access to non-email items, I’m going to have to stick with the VB/MAPI solution.
As I sit here at midnight central time, I hear a cacophony of children playing relentlessly at our local private park. The question begs to be asked: why are these children playing outside at such an hour?
These aren't teenagers, mind you. They are tiny kids, not much older than my spry 2.75 year old. Our rural subdivision is quiet by most standards, so the presence of youth outdoors at this time of day tends to stand out. I keep wanting to step outside and ask "where's Mommy?" I can't imagine why a parent would allow their kids outside this late, especially young ones.
Do they value sleep at all? Are they naturally nocturnal? Perhaps they are secretly vampires feasting on unknowing inhabitants who just happen to stroll through the park. There has to be some supernatural explanation, because common sense dictates that 4-8 year olds should be IN BED AT MIDNIGHT.
Maybe this explains why kids these days are generally ornery and sassy, since, if this is the norm, they cannot possibly be well-rested. I'd be ornery and sassy too if I needed to sleep 10 hours and my irresponsible parental unit(s) left me outdoors into the wee hours.
In fact, since I'm sitting here listening to the neighborhood play date outside, and since my physical self likes to be asleep well before midnight, I can detect an ornery and sassy streak manifesting itself in me right about now. If only I had the authority to discipline any and every kid in the neighborhood...
Wait, what's that? Silence outside? Crickets and a slight breeze is the only audible thing out there? It's about time.
Off to bed I go. Finally. And I guess I won't have to get Child Protective Services, the Sheriff, and Homeland Security involved.
UPDATE: There appears to be a straggler still out there. Give 'em an inch, and they take a foot.
Tonight at a local IT managers meeting, I noticed something very strange that I've noticed before tonight. Whenever, in a room full of people, if one person exhibits some form of change in their posture or position, someone else seems to adopt it shortly thereafter.
Let me explain. During one of the technology segments, I decided to shift my weight and sit with my arms folded above my head, to relieve stress on my back. Seconds later, a man adjaent to me did the very same thing. And then. So did a man behind him. So then, I decided to lean forward and fold my arms across the table. Sure enough, within a minute, another man near me did the same thing. It's as if there is some kind of suggestion happening subliminally.
I don't get it, but it seems to happen quite often. But then again, there are only so many poses one can adopt in a seat. So who knows. Still, it's weird.
As news stations maintain their 24/7 coverage of the discovery of JonBenet Ramsey's killer, we also read about a couple who planned to blow up a Transatlantic flight using their baby's bottle as a suicide bomb.
I bring up both of these instances because they involve children, and because of this simple fact: Evil exists in this world.
It's time we stopped trying to find root causes, and accept the fact that there are bad people in this world. God help us if we continue to rationalize evil behavior.
My previous post noted why I don’t believe Ned Lamont will prevail in the Connecticut general election for United States Senator. I’d like to elaborate on another point – Ned Lamont’s candidacy might actually hurt the cause of the Democratic Party.
Imagine that the left decided to target all moderate Democratic candidates in other states, such as Nebraska’s Ben Nelson. Let’s suppose also that a more liberal candidate was able to win in the primaries in those states. Let’s also then suppose that those candidates, detecting the anti-war schism in their party, decided to also run as independents, just like Joe Lieberman is doing. Unless the election is being held for an office in a generally liberal state like Massachusetts or Oregon, the odds are that the independent incumbent would succeed in retaining their seat. This is, of course, a supposition on my part, but my gut feeling is that the moderate electorate would see through the efforts of the left and vote for the more moderate incumbent.
If these assumptions held true, the Democrats could actually lose several seats in Congress even though Democratic incumbents would remain in office. Would that affect the party caucuses? It depends. Loyalty only holds true for so long. Would you vote as a bloc with a party that shunned you during the election season? I’m not so sure every candidate would. In fact, it would seem being an independent incumbent would be license to actually think for oneself and vote based on some set of principles instead of on allegiance to a group. That would be great for America, but terrible for the Democratic Party.
So maybe the best thing that could happen would be for the Kossacks to infiltrate the Democrats, divide them, and purge themselves of politicians like Joe Lieberman. Maybe we will even see the advent of a legitimate third party. Whatever happens in November though, if the Democrats continue to move to the left, and if moderates continue their exodus from the party, it will definitely hurt the Democrats in the long term.
Connecticut is rich in Democratic presence. Conservatives, and hawks especially, are in the minority there. But the majority of voters there are not Democrats, but are actually registered as independents. Independents exceed both Democrats and Republicans, and rival their numbers when the two are taken in aggregate. And party affiliation is required for the primary season. Thus, Independents vote for in general election, and not in the primary. Ned Lamont, who defeated Joe Lieberman last week, did so by a wafer thin margin of 4 percentage points. But how does Lamont fare with Republican and, more importantly, Independent voters?
Lieberman leads 75 - 13 - 10 percent among likely Republican voters, and 58 - 36 - 3 percent among likely independent voters, while likely Democratic voters back Lamont 63 - 35 percent.
Those are huge margins, suggesting that Lamont needs somehow to appeal to those voters. However, an agenda of “I’m not affiliated with Bush like my opponent is” and “let’s bring our troops home now” without much else to offer isn’t going to sway anyone outside the sphere of influence of Kos and the like. Unless something major happens between now and November, Senator Lieberman will remain Senator Lieberman, and Ned Lamont will be a historical footnote.
Loop 49 is a little highway project that will eventually connect I-20 with our little metropolis here in Smith County. That will also cut drive times to Dallas by 45 minutes.
One of the novel things about Loop 49 is that it will be without toll booths. Systems will be in place to scan each license plate, and those drivers without toll tags will be sent a toll bill in the mail. Those drivers will also have to pay an additional charge ($1 vs. 75¢).
One of the disappointing features of the new loop is that it is going to be only two lanes, at least at first. I'm not sure what benefit there will be if traffic is slowed to the lowest common denominator. Eventually, the road is supposed to be widened to four lanes (two each way), but the estimated time to completion on that is unknown.
The complete loop from greater Smith County to I-20 will not be operational until 2010. Until then, we'll still have to live with the arduous drives out to the main highway. Hopefully, the tolls being placed on Loop 49 will accelerate its development. Certainly, I would drive more to Dallas if I had a more direct route, and Loop 49 should provide that.
East Tennessee readers might remember that Dollywood used to be called Silver Dollar City. Before that, it was known as Goldrush Junction. Apparently, the owner of Goldrush Junction was none other than Art Modell, of Modell's Sporting Goods fame, and owner of the Cleveland Browns - not the new ones, but the ones who left Cleveland for greener pastures in Baltimore. Modell also was known to use many of his players as summer employees at Goldrush Junction. And to think I learned this little bit of trivia from a Dallas newspaper, and not one in East Tennessee.
I buy about 3-4 e-books per month and I will never again buy a paper book unless it is just not available in electronic format. If you value quick delivery, portability, and search functionality, I highly recommend e-books.
However, if it says Sony on it, and it in any way involves digital rights management (just like Bubba mentioned in the post), then I'd stay away from it. Much like Apple with their iTunes scheme, Sony limits portability to other devices. After the Sony rootkit fiasco, I know I won't soon be touching another Sony product anyway.
I prefer to get my e-books from eReader, and I read them on my Treo device, although, I should add, I am not limited to the Treo. I can read eReader books on my desktop PC if I so choose. Also, the extra functionality of PDF, RSS, MP3, HTML, etc. is already there (in addition to MP4, W4V, DivX, MPG, and a host of other media formats).
I wasn’t aware that the Sony device has such a huge lag with turning pages, or that it suffered in the battery department. Those are two bugs (or are they features?!) that would drive me away from the device too. And why pay $400 for a device with such limited functionality?
My assessment: Sony fumbled the PDA ball when they stopped making the Clie, and they haven't been able to enter the music device arena successfully yet, so this is their attempt at linking portable devices to DRM-enabled content. While this business model makes tons of money for Apple, I don't see it being the same for Sony. Chalk this device up in the same genre as the Betamax. Dead on arrival.
Now there’s a headline that will probably sell a few thousand papers.
So now, allegations (and let’s keep in mind, they are only allegations) have ruined reputations and stained careers. In the real world, image and public relations, unfortunately, matter as much as reality. Anyone who doubts this can look at how propaganda is used during wartime to see the effect.
The most disturbing part of the mess is what I am going to focus my comments on. The following is a snippet from the KNS article:
Whatever the outcome of the investigation, Kallenberg will not return to Powell High School, Oaks said.
"The superintendent has determined that given the nature of the allegations and the nature of the atmosphere in the building, that it would be in the interest of everyone for Kim Kallenberg not to return to the building," Oaks said.
Just so you understand what’s going on, we live in a society where someone can allege something about someone else and effectively ruin them. Ms. Kallenberg will now be removed from a school where she has worked for nearly a decade. Mr. Smith, regardless of his success on the football field or in the classroom, will now be dubbed the “kid who got it on with the teacher”. Well, that’s just great, ain’t it? That sure makes me want to go into the teaching profession.
Listen, maybe these allegations are true. But they are only allegations. Allegations happened all the time when I was in high school. Any hot-looking teacher we had (and there were very few, sadly) was supposedly having sex with the quarterback or the point guard. The difference between 1986 and 2006 is that we never sought out a lawyer to publicly accuse an instructor of such impropriety.
If the accusations against those in question are true, shame on them. If they aren’t, shame on the accusers. And shame on a system that stigmatizes someone before their guilt is proven. And, not to be left out, shame on a sensational media whose sole goal in life is not to report news, but to sell newspapers or advertising. What a sad situation, with no winners, except the News-Sentinel and their circulation department perhaps.
We all have what are hot-button issues to us. War. Terrorism. Bush. For me, it’s the freedom to choose. Not the choice that NARAL trumpets, but the freedom to choose how to spend my money, how to worship my God, and how to raise my kids.
So when I read about things like this, I get pretty angry:
Juvenile court Judge Jesse E. Demps has ruled that the boy must undergo chemo as prescribed by his doctors, and that his parents were being neglectful by supporting his decision, so they must continue to share custody with the county Social Services bureau.
God help us if I have to delegate every choice of responsibility to the state.
I’m not really sure how I would handle that, because I am so infuriated when people or institutions tell me how to care for my children. Like the parents referenced above, I am very responsible where my kids are concerned. I want the best for them. The problems arise when what I think is best conflicts with what the state thinks is best.
So allow me to put myself in their shoes. Would I force my son to endure chemo if his improvement was nominal at best? Not likely. Would I introduce him to alternative treatments? Probably so. I know of several. What would my response be? I don’t know really, but I’d likely bolt from Virginia before they made a decision to rescind my God-given parental rights.
This story makes me angry at Americans for allowing the state to assume so much control over their lives. It makes me angry at bureaucrats who consider themselves omniscient and infallible. And it makes me sad that a loving family has been fractured and demonized by a flawed system.
I keep trying to tell myself that even our Founding Fathers noted that certain rights are given to us by God. Apparently, Virginia (where many of the Fathers were born, ironically) thinks parenting isn’t one of them. That is a travesty that I can only hope an appellate court will rectify.
Today’s idiot former athlete award goes to former Gamecock D-lineman Moe Thompson. Read and laugh.
Former South Carolina defensive end Moe Thompson has sued the university for $300,000, claiming officials thwarted his chances of transferring -- and consequently a shot at the NFL -- after he was suspended from the team in 2005.
Thompson is serving five years probation after he pleaded guilty in October to two counts of attempted first-degree burglary and two counts of petit larceny. He and teammate Kevin Mainord went into dorm rooms in February 2005 and took TVs and a DVD player belonging to female students.
Thompson tried playing for Grambling State, but academic problems prevented him from taking the field.
Let’s recap. Moe plays for S.C. and decides that a future in the NFL isn’t enough, so he cases the girls’ dorm and makes off with some electronic gear. Moe gets caught, and, no doubt due to his status as an athlete, gets probation. Moe leaves Columbia and tries his hand at playing for Grambling, where they decide he can’t spell his own name, so that’s that.
Moe’s Take: I couldn’t help it. This is really not my fault. None of this would have happened if S.C. hadn’t been so mean to me.
My Take: Two words, Moe. Personal. Responsibility. It’s time to ‘fess up, admit that you have issues, and place blame where it belongs. With you. Then and only then can you get the help you need to get your life back on track. Until then, you will remain the poster boy for dumb jocks who think society owes them something.
My wife on her blog rants about gun control and, more to the point, the need to base ones conclusions on actual data instead of on one’s perception of the facts.
Michelle Malkin writes about the New York Times and their decision to blow the cover on yet another secret operation. This time, it’s about Israel and the US delivery of precision-guided missiles. Now, some people might think that all information needs to be disclosed publicly (which would pretty much destroy all covert operations, but who cares, right? WE NEED TO KNOW!) I, of course, believe that national security issues should be kept out of the sight and mind of the public. That includes the NSA wiretapping program, and the global financial tracking program which the Times have already so dutifully exposed.
Many pixels have been spent by other bloggers detailing these programs and their virtues, so I won’t bother with that. I would, though, like to offer a solution to the problem that is the New York Times. If a few well-placed “sources” would plant rumors about some supposedly insidious government program, especially if it would ostensibly smear the Bush administration, one would have to assume the Times would jump right on the story. Allow them to print the piece, and then witness the aftermath once the Times finds out that the “leak” was actually false. It wouldn’t take too many of those types of incidents to cause the Times to lose what is left of its already dwindled credibility. I’m surprised there hasn’t been some sort of Rovian scheme to do just this very thing.
There’s lots of rhetoric flying around regarding the Lebanon situation. Certainly, I don’t find it useful to consult the mainstream media for information or useful opinion. But one man who has earned the trust of this reader is Michael Totten, who has been blogging from Lebanon for quite awhile now. What does Michael think about the current crisis?
The people of both Lebanon and Israel have my deepest sympathies. The Israelis do not deserve to be bombed by Hezbollah, and the Lebanese do not deserve to be bombed because of Hezbollah.
Hezbollah, though, deserves every last bomb that lands on their heads. There is a special circle in Hell dedicated to terrorists who hijack countries and use civilian populations as human shields. Hassan Nasrallah is using some of my personal friends as human shields, and for that I hope he dies twice.
Lest we start to believe the meme that Israel is a mean bully who responds disproportionately to a measly couple of soldiers being kidnapped, keep in mind who they are fighting with and why. Israel is not the bad guy. Lebanon is not the bad guy. Hezbollah and Islamic terrorism is.
Watching the morning talk shows, I get the feeling that some Congressional members want to pin the Israel/Hezbollah situation somehow on the Bush administration and their lack of diplomacy. If you subscribe to the theory that diplomacy can solve the situation in the Middle East, then perhaps you can make an argument that the administration hasn't done enough to bring a solution to the problem. However, if you listen to the rhetoric of groups like Hezbollah and states like Iran and Syria, you know that a diplomatic solution just isn't possible. If the goal of a group or state is the final annihilation of another, where is the diplomatic solution? Only the eradication of the Jewish state will please these terrorist groups. Once Western governments admit this truth, they will have to admit Israel's right to defend themselves. And it would mean that they would have to admit the existence of evil and purveyors of evil. And those admissions will not happen anytime soon. So, expect continued pushes for "talks" and "negotiations", and expect the Jewish nation to continue to wear a target on their back. Until the world unites to call out the foursome of Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran and Syria and demands that they leave behind their ambitions of destroying Israel, this cycle will continue indefinitely. And neither Bush nor diplomacy will change that.
A funny thing happened to my office mate as he was “doing his business” this morning. As he was redeploying his trousers, his wrist became entangled with his belt, resulting in his entire mobile phone and its sheath dislodging from its perch. While this was going on, my friend was engaging the flushing mechanism on the toilet. Now, gravity being as it is, and the trajectory of the falling digital communication device being as it was, there was no way to avoid the inevitable entry of the gadget into the basin. My co-worker therefore stood by, pants in hands, watching his communications lifeline slink away into an oblivion of aqueous sewage. His phone was no more.
I’ve been trying for months to come up with a way to avoid useless tech support calls. I think the above method is the best I’ve seen yet.
Reading Michael Silence’s roundup of blog commentary about the bombings in India, I noticed that Preston thinks what everyone else seems to think, that terrorist Muslims were behind the attacks:
Just another day at the office for the Religion of Peace™.
My first reaction was that he is right, but now I'm not so sure this is the work of TROP™. An Indian co-worker of mine has suggested that Shiv Sena is behind the attacks.
From the Wikipedia entry for Shiv Sena:
"On July 9, 2006, irate Shiv Sainiks blocked roads at Dadar in central Mumbai and damaged a police outpost after some unidentified miscreants allegedly desecrated the statue of Meenatai, the late wife of Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackeray."
My co-worker thinks that Shiv Sena are instigating violence and using the desecration as a reason to do so. I guess we'll know more in the coming days.
What is it that makes so many people react with such voracity and anger on blogs, primarily political ones? I find this to be true for both commenters and posters. I have some theories as to why this has become the norm for many blogs.
I think for some people, anonymity allows them to say things they wouldn’t otherwise say, and act in an irrational manner. This is why it is far easier for me to drop a note into the anonymous “Dialog” box telling my boss how horrible his decision-making process is, as opposed to confronting him directly. Anonymity provides cover in the form of removing any consequences of one’s actions.
Others are drawn into such behavior simple because they respond to how others around them are acting. This would explain why a few comments on the Democratic Underground can morph into a verbal free-for-all wishing death, pestilence, and disease upon anyone labeled by the mob as a neocon.
Still others feel compelled to post vitriolic comments because they feel like they belong to an intricate online community, and directing such things at the “other side” is an act of affirmation to them. This is somewhat an extension of the previous theory. (Maybe the two should be morphed into a single theory, but I digress.)
Another reason such bile gets spewed forth in the blogosphere is a really simple one: quick trigger fingers. I firmly believe that a great many people type and post before they think. They do so in a knee-jerk reaction to something that angered them, or perhaps they figured that what they had to say would surely never lead to a posse of hackers finding their IP address and directing a DoS toward their website.
Finally, there is the distinct possibility that the poster really believes what they are saying. God help us if this is the case with those who frequent the DU.
I recall one time trying to engage in a discussion about the privatization of Social Security, which I happen to support. All I wanted was a rationale for confiscating a large percentage of my income for redistribution; what I got was labels, and anger, and frustration, and even a threat or two. I changed no one’s mind, and no one changed mine.
This discussion occurred in a forum-type atmosphere, one where participants were masked behind anonymous nicknames. I’m reasonably confident that, had this discussion taken place at the local bookstore, most of what was said would have remained unsaid. (At least, I’d like to think so!)
The truth is that the desire for civil discourse is eroding, even in the “real world”. The name-calling, the insinuations, and the verbal barbs solve nothing, and contribute nothing to the debate. Many blogs tend to make the situation worse, not better. And I guess that’s just human nature.
POST-SCRIPT: I should add that, despite my citations of the popular site Democratic Underground, the phenomenon I discussed above is not exclusive to one party or ideology. There is enough anger to go around, it seems.
Olbermann uses his podium to attack his non-liberal media competitors, especially FNC host Bill O’Reilly, whom Olbermann disparages as "the big giant head" or "Ted Baxter," the dim anchor from The Mary Tyler Moore Show. O’Reilly has been a target 42 times; in contrast, Olbermann has only badmouthed Saddam Hussein twice, most recently on Friday after learning that the ex-dictator’s "hunger strike" actually amounted to skipping only a single meal.
O’Reilly 42. Saddam 2.
When you air a segment ingeniously entitled “Worst Person in the World”, you really should consider your nominees better, even if your audience is mostly liberal.
Powerline Blog on the Star-Tribune and the liberal media double standard::
A DFL-endorsed Congressional candidate has publicly applauded cop-killers: Not a story!
Rush Limbaugh takes Viagra: Story!
Keep that in mind next time the liberal media self-righteously tell you that they have to blow the cover on the administration's anti-terror efforts because they're so concerned about the privacy rights of Americans.
The most special time of my day is evening time, when I put my oldest son to bed. Each night, we read a few of his favorite stories, usually Clifford, Bob the Builder, Me and My Dad (my personal favorite), etc. Then we pray, usually for our family, his grandparents, and sometimes someone unexpected, like the dog, or an uncle.
Following that, we sing songs. "Jesus Loves Me" is almost always selected. This week, he started singing it himself, and he knows almost all the words, although he inevitably begins the song singing "Jesus loves me, yes and no." Heh. Then I put him down, cover him up, and tell him that I love him.
I don't know if other people have as much fun putting their kids to bed as I do mine. If they don't, that's too bad, because I always walk away smiling. It seems to make the stresses of the whole day melt away.
Ironically, I used to pray that God would give me the wisdom to show my son how to be a good Christian. It turns out that in reality, my son is showing me how to be.
My wife and I are committed to homeschooling our kids. Our reasons for doing so are beyond the scope of this post. I bring up our intentions so that I can properly convey my anger at this article.
Read the beginning:
“In today’s Belgian newspaper Gazet van Antwerpen Bob Van de Voorde, the spokesman of Frank Vandenbroucke, the minister of Education, says:
“One of the conditions [for homeschooling] is that the homeschoolers must sign a document in which they promise to rear their children along the lines of the UN Convention on Children’s Rights. These parents have not done this. This is why the ministry has started an inquiry.”
The parents Mr Van de Voorde is referring to in the paper are my husband (TBJ editor Paul Belien) and myself. The “inquiry” is a threat to prosecute us.
Homeschooling is a constitutional right in Belgium. We have homeschooled four of our five children through high school. Only the youngest is still being homeschooled because the others are already at university. And yet, as if they have nothing better to do, the Belgian police and judiciary are conducting an “inquiry” into our homeschooling to see whether we “rear our children along the lines of the United Nations Convention on Children’s Rights.”
A promise to rear the children as per government declaration. As I assimilated that sentiment, I became incensed. How dare the EU intervene in the lives of these parents and make such ludicrous demands? This is a compelling reason to never live in the EU, and a more compelling reason for the US to avoid signing any international treaties espoused by the UN.
You see, if the USA were a signatory to this policy, no doubt American homeschoolers would be under similar fire. Never mind that I object to much of what is taught to school aged kids today. The fact that an international body can make such a demand infuriates me. Read further and you will learn how homeschoolers are treated in Germany:
Since Adolf Hitler prohibited homeschooling in 1938, Germany is the worst place for homeschoolers in Europe. Many parents have already been fined, and even sent to jail. Last March a court in Hamburg sentenced a German father of six to a prison sentence of one week for homeschooling his children, while the children were forcibly sent to school by the police, who pick them up each morning. The father, a conservative Christian, had previously been sentenced to a fine of 1,500 euro, but this did not persuade him to stop homeschooling. The court did not imprison the mother, but said it would not hesitate to do so if the parents continue violating the law. The bill prohibiting homeschooling is one of the very few Nazi laws that are still on the books in Germany. Today other countries, such as Belgium, seem intent on copying Germany’s Nazi system, whilst invoking the UN Convention.
All of this is just a means to and end, that being the state maintaining control over as much of its citizenry as possible. Since homeschooling is anathema to statism, the end result is coercion and intimidation. In the US, in 2006, this would never happen. In the EU, it is apparently the norm.
There is a lot about the US and its current cultural and social climate to which I object. However, reading articles such as these make me grateful that I live in this country.
So we have a remote site in Alabama. They have a production schedule that ties into ours. Their production front-end application ties into our SQL Server. Hundreds of units per hour run through this system.
Our network requires both Novell and Windows authentication. Novell serves as, among other things, the controller for the domain. Remove Novell from your client machines, and you cannot access the network, ergo the database, ergo the production schedule.
For some unknown reason (I’m blaming some sort of religious epiphany), the sysadmin at the remote site, someone who obviously is overpaid and underqualified, decides that Novell is taking too much space on the client machines. So he/she/it removes the Novell client.
Bye, bye, network access.
Sayonara, database access.
Arrivederci, production schedule.
Idiots. If you can’t trust remote sites with desktop support, who can you trust? If this person was my son, and this was how he drove my car, I would lock the vehicle up in the garage and bury the keys in the backyard. Hell, I might even consider locking my son up in the garage.
Sigh. Today has been a day of repairing other people’s mistakes. The end of the day cannot come soon enough.
There are very few things I miss about Connecticut. My friends, the memories I have there, and my old job are just a few. One of the non-personal things I miss about the Nutmeg State is Joe Lieberman. Lieberman has never been one to give fiery motivational speeches. His antics are largely subdued and matter-of-fact. His politics sometimes lean more to the left than I would like.
However, I trust him as a statesman. I believe he has good, sound, rational judgment. I believe we need more Congressmen like him in Washington, even if they vote in ways I wouldn’t.
Today, Senator Lieberman voted against both of the Senate bills designed to establish a timetable for withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. The Senator did so despite being in the extreme minority of Democrats on the issue. Furthermore, he did so all the while knowing his political future could be in jeopardy. Lieberman is being challenged by a pacifist candidate this election year. Many of his supporters are even trying to convince him to run as an independent because they fear he may lose the Democratic primary.
Still, Joe votes against the conventional wisdom of his party.
“I fear this amendment would not just underline the message the Iraqi leadership has clearly already received, accepted and shares - that America's military commitment to Iraq is not open-ended and unconditional. I fear that it would also send another message to our terrorist enemies and to the sectarian militias in Iraq, that America is not prepared to see this fight through until the Iraqis themselves can take over.
The war in Iraq, whatever one thinks of how we got there, is now a war of necessity, a war we must help the people of Iraq win or the security of we the people of America, our children and grandchildren, will be gravely endangered.”
Were I still residing in Connecticut, I would most certainly vote for this man. And, I believe that the citizens there would do themselves a great disservice if they do not re-elect him. Truly, the Congress needs more Liebermans and less Kerry-Feingold-Kennedys.
As a public service, I am posting today about something that has seemingly taken over my employer. It is something that has taken over the hearts and minds of many of the staff members. It has affected both hourly and salaried, both American and international, both male and female. And it has shown no signs of being stopped.
But, today, here on this blog, I am going to announce to all the world how to avoid similar situations in your office. I am going to outline a process that could very well save your sanity.
So what is the “something” you may ask. Well, if you did ask, I’m glad you did. Here’s the “something:
The Reply to All Button.
Yes, thousands of emails are sent annually to people who don’t want them, don’t need them, and would love to avoid them. And why? Because some less than brainy individuals decided that it would be a good idea to reply to EVERYONE on a corporate mailing list. All it takes is one stellar individual to mistakenly Reply to All, and that spawns several more stellar individuals responding with such sentiments as “Please remove me from this mailing list” and “Stop sending these emails.” Before you know it, hundreds of myrmidons are hurriedly clicking, you guessed it, Reply to All, and tossing in their own commentary. Thus, we have an internal spam attack on our hands caused by the ineptitude of the wonderful user.
Five divisions. Dozens of central operations. Vendors and subcontractors in all fifty states, and seven countries. These are the destinations of the menacing emails. Just in the last two hours, twenty-three of these doozies have been sent from none other than Monterey, Mexico.
I beam with pride knowing how sophisticated our users are. I am tempted to respond to the sinister note myself by explaining how long it will take to clean up our already overworked Exchange servers, but that would be feeding the beast.
So, today, I am offering you this insight in hope that you can avoid such a debacle in your own organization. Simply do this. Do not click Reply to All. Ever. Under any circumstance. It is evil incarnate. Avoid it. The minuses far outweigh the plusses. And, if you’re feeling especially charitable, lobby your CIO/CFO to allocate extra funds for more Exchange servers. Odds are, if you have users like these, you’re going to need the hardware.
That sure sounds like a good mantra for reining in profligate spending in Washington, doesn’t it? Who can argue with the logic that you shouldn’t spend it unless you have it? Well, most Americans would agree with that in theory, but not in practice. If we did, very few people would own automobiles, and even fewer would own homes. We spend more than we make on a daily basis.
But instituting steadfast rules would surely limit how much the federal government can spend, right? Well, not according to a Wall Street Journal editorial:
.. in practice all they really do is constrain tax cuts, not new spending.
That's because paygo rules apply only to new or expanded entitlement programs, not to those that already exist and grow automatically with user demand. Thus spending for Medicare, growing this year at an astounding 15% annual rate, would continue to run on autopilot. Ditto for Medicaid. So-called "discretionary" programs (education, Defense) that Congress approves each year are also exempt. Democrats somehow forget to disclose that those notorious "earmarks" stuffed into spending bills are also exempt from paygo.
The real game here is to make tax cutting all but impossible. Under paygo, tax cuts must be offset with either other tax increases or entitlement cuts. This usually means pitting tax cuts against cuts in the likes of Medicare, which is a very hard political sale. Paygo rules are one reason the 2001 tax cut was so paltry and phased-in and thus economically ineffective. Had paygo still been in force, the 2003 tax cuts that have done so much to spur growth and increase federal revenues would never have passed.
Now, on a personal level, I can certainly limit what I spend on discretionary items, but if I chose to exempt some area of expenditure, I’m not really addressing the problem. The same holds true for the federal government. I’m all for paygo rules, as long as they are uniformly applied and enforced. As history tells us, they aren’t, nor will they be.
Well, since I’m a Texan now, I was really pulling for the Mavs to pull it out, but it didn’t happen. I’m simply going to make a few remarks about the series and then leave it at that.
First of all, the NBA will never, ever, allow a Mark Cuban owned team to win a title if it can prevent it. I just believe that to be true. The guy says what he thinks, takes his medicine (fine), and goes on from there. Many in the Lone Star state are embarrassed by Cuban. I’m not. I think he has a point, and it’s frustrating not to be heard.
Which gets me to my second point. How badly does the NBA want Dwyane Wade to be the next MJ? Badly enough that he got every possible call in the series. The number of foul shots this guy got was not only insane, but downright scandalous.
Pat Riley. I’m not sure how great a coach he is, but I know one thing. He knows how to play the system. His offensive scheme is lethargic, and predictable. But that translates to wins in today’s NBA, especially if you can get to the line disproportionately.
One final observation. I don’t really follow the NBA. I only watched a few games this season, and the NBA finals showed me exactly why I no longer watch. Not since Bird and Magic, The Doctor and Moses have I cared to watch much of what is called professional basketball these days. If only we could go back to that era.
A funny thing happened to me on the way to work this morning. Alongside the highway, there was a large pile of roadkill of some sort, probably a deer. As I moved into another lane to avoid it, I glanced up and saw what was freakishly similar to the scene in “The Birds” where Tippi Hedron ducks into a phone booth to escape the avian onslaught. Making a beeline for the breakfast venison was a large crow, obviously famished to the point of distraction. His focus on his entrée was such that he failed to notice a rather ample sized pickup truck being guided by none other than yours truly entering his airspace.
Before I knew it, my windshield was introduced to the feathered beast. The scene was initially unnerving, seeing a creature collide with my window at a speed of at least 75 MPH (accounting for the fact that I did not even attempt to slow down, and the bird likely had a WTF moment and tried to slow down or swerve my vehicle). After regaining my composure after a few seconds, I looked back to see the crow launch into the air limply and plop down directly on top of his intended meal.
I checked the windshield, and there was no visible damage, so I continued on my way. A mile or so up the road, some cracker in an SUV decided to honk at me and give me two thumbs WAY UP. I can only assume making crows look like idiots is some sort of sport in these parts.
Have you ever been listening to the radio and wondered “What’s the name of that song?” Or maybe thought “I wonder who sings that tune?” Well, mobile users can now access a WAP application at mobile.yes.com. You can even search back in time for a prior song. My wife determined that her ride home consisted of “Girls, Girls, Girls”, “The Joker” and “What it Takes”. Of course, the mobile app doesn’t account for musical taste. Heh.
An aside: My wife doesn’t want my oldest to know about the content of the aforementioned Motley Crue song, so she refers to it as “Squirrels, Squirrels, Squirrels”. She says my son likes the motorcycle revving during the intro. I found her choice of nomenclature to be quite amusing.
Funny how we can treat Muslim prisoners decently and get chastised in the media, but nary a peep comes from them when two of our fighting boys are found dead and visibly tortured. I’m so sick of moral equivalence, and even sicker of a complicit media.
No thinking person can equate “atrocities” at Gitmo and Abu Ghraib with the antics of the barbarians who capture, torture and kill soldiers, and who seek refuge behind their women and children. How our media and the American left can continue to make such comparisons is beyond me.
Ever since the advent of iTunes, I have stayed away from them like the plague. Why? Because I hate being locked into a proprietary medium, and I hate that I cannot use the purchased product as I choose. For example, if I want to view my iTunes video on my Treo, I have a real problem.
In the past, I just used bitTorrent to download DivX files and watch them on the PC. I could use Kinoma Producer to encode them into compatible formats for my Treo’s Kinoma Player, and I would be set for trips. The problem is that I don’t like wasting hours ripping files into MP4 format. I should be able to download an iTunes MP4 and watch it on my Treo without the hassle. Right?
Well, now I’m one step closer.
I broke down and downloaded two iTunes videos, South Park’s “manbearpig”, and CNBC’s Jim Cramer (who I find utterly entertaining) for viewing on my PC. However, I flat refuse to buy a video iPod, and I have a perfectly good Treo 650. So I decided to try a little app called TuneBite to record my iTunes into a DRMless MP4. The CNBC podcast is already DRMless, so I was one step ahead of where I wanted to be.
Then the trouble came.
It turns out that iTunes is encoded in H.264, which is not part of Kinoma Player, which means, yes, I could not view my MP4 files in what I thought was a perfectly good MP4 viewer.
And here is where I went against the grain again. I normally avoid open source apps, simply because I have had bad experiences with them. But I decided to try a little Palm OS app called TCPMP and it puts the proprietary Kinoma software to shame. More importantly, it contains an H.264 codec. Not only that, but I can watch DivX/XviD/M4V files to my heart’s content.
So if you are a Treo owner like me, and you would like access to iTunes content without requiring a second device, I highly recommend TuneBite, TCPMP, a high capacity SD card, and an external card reader.
Now, I’m off to lunch with my wife and kids. I think I’ll watch South Park while I’m waiting on them. (
There is an interesting discussion going on in a Knoxviews post about Al Gore’s new flick, “An Inconvenient Truth”. Now, I’m no climatologist – of course, neither is Al, but that’s not stopping him, however, that’s beside the point – but it seems to me that the debate shouldn’t be about the presence of global warming.
Although, there is ample evidence that the global climate has changed in the last several decades, the more relevant question is how much of that change is anthropogenic, and how much is related to solar activity. Environmentalists instinctively want to blame the Western world for all of the ills of mankind. Some even want to blame the Bush administration, as the Katrina hysteria showed. However, I think that the jury is still out on how the industrial lifestyle has affected climate. In fact, I seem to recall a study that was done not too long ago that directly correlated sunspot activity with mean global temperature. (I’ll link to it if I can find it.) If that is true, it seems to me that man’s contribution to climate change is minimal at best.
My point is that even decades of data aren’t enough to satisfactorily answer the question of anthropogenic versus solar contribution to global warming. In fact, the absence of unqualified proof of anthropogenic global warming is enough for me to be dead set against initiatives such as Kyoto. With such uncertainty, there is no reason for us to ruin global economies just to gain what are assuredly nominal changes in carbon gas emissions. And there is no reason for sensible people to give Al Gore a platform for his environmental policies.
"See those fans, Daddy... Like those fans at our house!"
"See the truck. It's dirty!"
"Daddy, we're going to Lowes!"
"Daddy, last night, the silence wake me up!"
These are the phrases of my oldest son, on Father's Day. And today, I couldn't be happier.
Most people blogging about Father's Day are probably writing about their dads in some way. Well, today, instead, I'm going to write about my kids.
My oldest keeps growing, maturing almost daily. He sees things around him that fascinate him that most of us would see as mundane. Yesterday he watched a spider subdue an ant. He learned firsthand about the order of nature. These are things I would have never looked at before. My son makes me see things differently. He can be both fatiguing and energizing. He has required more of me than anything I have encountered prior to now in my life.
My youngest is but a babe, a wee one in the midst of larger humans. He is loud, just like his brother. He has an insatiable curiosity, just like his brother. He possesses the same ironic feature as his older sibling - he both motivates me, and drives me to tears.
And you know what? I love them infinitely, and wouldn't trade where I am now for anything on God's great earth.
Because of them, Father's Day is the most special day of the summer to me. It reminds me that I have been given a gift, and a responsibility. It reminds me that I have more fortune in two tiny lives than I could ever have in money, or fame. It reminds me of how grateful I am that I met my beautiful wife, and how blessed I am to have watched her give birth to these little boys.
On this Father's Day, it isn't about me, the father of my sons. It is about them, Ethan and Aidan. To them, I say "Thank you for being my boys. I love you both."
And to those of you out there who are fathers, I hope you realize how lucky you are. So go find your kids, if they haven't found you already. Give them a hug, and tell them how much you love them. Remember, without them, you wouldn't be a father in the first place.
Another thing about these SQL Server classes... They aren't cheap. For 5 days, the tuition per seat is close to $3000.
So anyway, there's this kid next to me, a self-proclaimed "network analyst", who has done nothing but play Solitaire and Minesweeper.
$3000 for a day of time-killers.
I'm sure his employer would be proud that their money was spent so effectively. (Interestingly enough, his employer is in the public sector. Somehow, that doesn't inspire confidence in taxpayer-funded institutions.)
This week's work agenda has consisted of intensive SQL administration training. One student in particular just makes me laugh out loud.
One exchange with the instructor:
Student: So I was wondering what effect load balancing would have on my production servers.
Instructor: I cannot answer that without knowing more about your servers.
Student: Oh.
- pause -
Student: Well, I was just wondering what effect load balancing would have on my production server.
These conversations have happened daily. You can see the frustration on the instructor's face. The student just cannot understand that the instructor cannot, or will not, answer his question. I keep hoping that the instructor will give him a convoluted response just to satisfy him.
Student: So I was wondering what effect load balancing would have on my production servers.
Instructor: Yes! In fact, it might even save you money on your car insurance!
Student: Wow! Really? That's the best news I've had all day.
Maybe that sort of answer would be sufficient, because obviously "I don't know" isn't working.
