An Apple a Day
September 27th, 2006 by VinnyI don’t know how, but I imagine it was at least partially due to the fact that I was getting ready for a flight to LA, but I somehow missed the premiere of the show Heroes. Thankfully, iTunes (as I expected) had the premiere up last night so I bought it. It was well worth $2 to have something I could watch on my iPod on the flight.
I have to say… I make no bones about my love for Apple and their products. I’ve always been an Apple fanboy. Hell, I was reading Macworld long after I didn’t have my iBook (still the biggest computer mistake I’ve ever made; when I sold it). The truth is, however, that Apple has done a brilliant thing with iTunes.
I readily admit that I don’t buy all my shows from iTunes. I’d be broke if I did. Most of the internet attainment of television shows, for me, involves heading to any one of a bunch of newsgroups and grabbing the episodes then transcoding them so they’ll play on my iPod. Unfortunately, this wasn’t an option this time because I just didn’t have the time to wait for a DivX / Xvid version to transcode even on my relatively speedy iMac desktop (or my Macbook for that matter). So, I spent the big two bucks, got a perfectly encoded copy and watched it today on the plane.
People can lose their minds over Apple and their “closed” system all they want, but nothing beats the ability to grab a television show very easily, throw it on your device, and move on with your life.
Apple has done a masterful job of turning the iPod from a music player to an all-around entertainment unit. You can enjoy your television (or at least a lot of it), Movies (Disney and their subsidiaries only, but if you think that’s going to last, you’re nuts), Games (which are quite fun and excellent time-passers), Music, Podcasts, and even Music videos. Also, your content isn’t limited to your iPod. You can enjoy it on your computer, or hook your device up to a television and enjoy it there.
Oh sure, I’m not saying anything new here. In fact, I realize that I sound so much like many other fans of Apple. I just can’t help but think that all the critics would go nuts if someone else were to come up with the same idea.
For example…
Microsoft’s Zune. I’ve written enough about it here to fill a book both here and on other sites. The Zune will not play Plays for Sure media as of right now. Zune is the representation of Microsoft closing off its system much in the way Apple has been taking heat for doing since iTunes was released. The criticism from the Apple critics, most of them Microsoft fanboys, are non existent for their Zune. They’ve conveniently forgotten that the Zune is a single manufacturer, single online store, single operating system, single storage size device.
The iPod, while being a single manufacturer device comes in 3 styles (Shuffle, Nano, and Video), 6 different sizes, and every price range from $79 to $349.
The Zune store will work on Windows.
The iTunes Store works on Windows and the Mac.
For all the criticism Apple gets for not opening up its store, it would certainly seem that one thing they’ve gotten right is the one thing Microsoft used to use as its selling point.
Choice.
Sure you only have one manufacturer with Apple, but you have a hell of a lot more choices and the next time you want to take a flight and realize you missed a premiere of a television show, you could get it for free and spend 40 minutes to an hour transcoding it…
…Or you could just download it for $2 in about 5 minutes and be on your way.
Like I said, I’m not about to start buying shows exclusively on iTunes, but when I’m in a hurry it’s a much better option and thanks to Apple (and NBC who saw the potential of digital distribution through iTunes first) I didn’t miss a show I really wanted to see and passed 40 minutes of a 5 1/2 hour flight.
Gazing at Navels
September 27th, 2006 by VinnyIt really started right after 9/11. Then again, that’s probably most likely when I noticed it and it was happening much longer than that.
Many after 9/11 wanted to know what we did to bring 9/11 upon ourselves. To a degree, that’s a good valid question, but when pushed to the extreme it’s almost a device for ignoring things going on in the world. After all, when you think about it, despite the claims that it’s harder to look inward, it’s much easier because it affords you the ability to bring the blame inward and not focus on what’s going on.
Balbulican made an outstanding post on Stageleft yesterday. In it, he describes the various form of hatred that seem to pop up every now and then. He runs down a littany of excuses given and then goes on to explain his annoyance at them, even giving examples such as the folks who say, “moderate Muslims need to say and do more about terrorism and the extremists in their midst.” Balbulican’s problem, of course, is that he completely dismisses that criticism as hate and he moves on about chastising those who say it while completely ignoring the grain of truth encapsulated in that type of thinking.
In his example he explains how he had a conversation with a commenter on his blog who made such a statement, to which he replied that Moderates were fighting back against these types of folks. He went back and forth with the commenter who, at every point of evidence, disclaimed Balbulican’s proof as “not enough.” Balbulican eventually stopped trying to get through to the commenter and just accepted the fact that this guy wasn’t going to change his mind at any point.
The argument was over. The commenter wasn’t enlightened in anyway, and Balbulican was offended by his exhibition of ignorance.
And in the meantime, one of the nuggets of truth that existed throughout the whole thing got lost.
One of the great things about this brave new world is that people have the power to publish “news” as they see fit. In fact, some of the best news sources out there aren’t alphabet networks or dead-tree media. They’re the men and women writing thoughtful commentary on blogs and messageboards around the world. Oh sure there’s a low signal to noise ratio in the blogosphere, but for the most part, things are quite good for people seeking out the truth these days. You have all points of views and all nationalities fairly equally represented and most of them just one click away. Hell, you could start at a center-right blog like mine, click through to a leftwing blog like Stageleft, and end up at at some moderate blogger in another country.
It’s a brilliant time.
Back to Balbulican’s commenter fight.
Inside that commenter’s argument is a truth that, while probably articulated poorly and overly attacked by Balbulican is still a truth. Muslim moderates are not doing a good job of getting the message out there that they don’t support the terrorism that the extremists among them are engaging in.
Now before you see red and dismiss me as just another kook, you need to hear me out.
If the good kook, er, Reverend Phelps had something to spew about. Let’s say how God hates fags, and we were attacked on 9/11 as punishment from God for not stringing up all the gay people in the country by their pinkies, do you think he would have a problem getting that message out? Do you think, as kooky as he and his enraptured followers are, they have a message dispersal problem?
Of course they don’t. In fact, they’re so good at getting their message out and getting under people’s skins, that Congress was trying to act to get these kooks to stop spreading their hate outside the funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. They use the web, they play off the media’s morbid fascination with them, they give out flyers, make phone calls, have a television show (in the midwest) and so on and so forth. When they have a message, they make sure you’re going to hear it.
The commenter Balbulican was arguing with had a point, but it wasn’t the point on the surface. It was the grain of truth underneath. Muslims may have that message, but it’s not getting through and they’re not doing a good job of getting it out there.
Maybe they do hate the extremists, but when you have to dig for the people who do, and at the same time you can find those who hate plastered all over the news, then you have a serious PR problem that you need to work out.
That’s the problem, as simply as it could possibly be stated.
But that problem is part of my larger point, not my entire point.
Balbulican is right to say that a lot of the arguments in the vein of what he got are based on hatred. In fact, it’s probably fair to say that a lot of people who say that most muslims agree with terrorists are driven by either blind rage, ignorance, or a combination of the two. There are some thoughtful people who have also arrived at those conclusions from time to time, but I don’t think thoughtful people believe it as an absolute and are open to the opposite view.
This is where Western conditioning comes in.
I believe we of Western cultures are inclined to believe that we’re loaded with hatred and disrespect than they are to believe it exists in others. In fact, the pondering over 9/11 is a perfect example. “What did we do to bring that about?”
Why does it have to be a case of us doing anything? What if 19 terrorist scumbags, funded by a huge terrorist network decided to kill Americans because they don’t like Britney Spears? What if people like Osama Bin Laden, when they release those video tapes, just say anything on them to justify their actions? After all, rationalization isn’t uncommon around the world and we certainly don’t have a monopoly on it in the United States.
What if that’s as deep as the reason goes and it really has nothing to do with something we “did?”
I don’t think Western guilt will allow us to accept that answer, and intellectuals’ heads would start exploding if they heard people widely start accepting the point of view that not everything bad that happens is because we “deserved” it.
I started thinking about various events in our history, especially recent ones, and how many things we automatically take the blame for to the point where the root cause (two words I hate seeing together to begin with) of everything is something we did, something we deserved, or something we could have prevented if we had just INSERT REASON HERE.. I mean, is this really the way we want to start seeing the world? I for one, don’t.
Balbulican’s argument amounted to calling the commenter’s remarks hatred. That’s fine, and I’m in no position to disagree seeing as I can’t stick myself inside people’s minds that well (although I’m working on it; if you hear me rattling around in there, please be nice). However, while Bal’s approach of presenting examples was a good one, his conclusion was lacking because the point the commenter was making, no matter how repugnant it may have been, probably could’ve been examined better.
Instead, the hate card is dragged out, and in an almost typical fashion, you could sense that the blame was on the commenter for thinking what he did, and for us as a society for not recognizing the obviousness of the faleshood he presented.
Hmmmm…
It’s almost as if some Western guilt was blocking the fact that there might even be a grain of truth to the remarks. We simply can’t believe that because it’s lowbrow. It’s offensive. It makes us uncomfortable. Choose your reasons; they all lead down the same road in one way or another.
We in the West typically feel guilty for everything. We feel guilty because the climate is warming to the point where we ignore any natural reasons that may explain it also. We feel guilty because, despite warnings, people sat in their living rooms as Katrina flooded their homes with 3 feet of water. We feel guilty because a kid in the Middle East lives under a respressive government that steals its money while we feed millions of dollars in aid to them, and their leaders live in palaces the size of cities. We feel guilty because bombers bombed trains in Madrid and in London, supposedly in response to a war in Afghanistan in Iraq that was provoked by an attack on the World Trade Center which we feel guilty about for creating the situation that fomented the terrorism that brought the whole thing about.
We’re caught in an endless chain of guilt.
The worst part of it is not the guilt itself, though. Getting over that simply requires a concerted effort to examine the issues better and follow the issues down the highway even when there’s an exit on that highway that says we did something wrong. That’s merely an exit, but you can’t continue on the highway of discovery if you take the first exit that allows you to call the problem solved and the situation understood. It’s no more valid to drop everything at the “we’ve done bad and deserve it” than it is to drop it at “all muslims act that way,” but the problem is that it’s a hell of a lot more acceptable to call guilt the problem and look inward then it is to look outside of ourselves and not just say “we’re to blame for everything.”
I know this post is going to set off some arguments, and I fully hope it actually stirs up a little bit of thought. Occam’s Razor states that the simplest answer is usually the correct one, but that doesn’t mean that the simplest answer to arrive to is correct, only the one that’s the least complicated. We’d be wise to examine both our tendency to take a hit and our unwillingness to dish one out. I have a feeling if we do that, we’ll have a much better society for it, and discussions like Balbulican’s wouldn’t end up with one side thinking the other is just loaded with visceral hatred and the other thinking that he was arguing with a typical leftist kook who dismisses everything as hate.
What do you think? Do you think we in the west are more prone to guilt than other cultures / parts of the world? Or do you think it’s something that’s only employed in certain situations (ie: racism, bigotry) real or perceived?
I for one am tired of shallow analysis on both sides. Not every criticism of a group is hatred, and not everyone who dismisses your argument as hatred is a kook.
Now that we’ve gotten that out of the way, let’s have some real discussion on the issues.
I’m all ears.
Technorati Tags: tolerance, guilt, hatred, balbulican, stageleft
Just a reminder…
September 27th, 2006 by VinnySlobokan and I do a podcast. We’ve been religiously doing it weekly. Why do I bring this up?
Well, because I’m proud of it. I’m proud of what we’ve done. I’m proud of how far we’ve come. Most of all, I’m proud to have taken my blog to another level by producing an accompanying podcast with one of my best friends.
Every week we talk about all kinds of stuff. Our topics range from television to various geekery to popular stories around the blogosphere. Chances are if the topic is discussion worthy, we’re talking about it at some point.
I also bring it up for a different reason. We need listeners. Not just disengaged people who happen to catch an episode or two and listen passively, but active engaged listeners who want to participate in the dialog. We’re looking for story suggestions, letters to the hosts, e-mails with hate mail… Whatever. We’re in the process of moulding this podcast into something great and we want you to be a part of it.
If you have a suggestion for the show, please use the contact form in the upper corner of my sidebar to throw it my way.
And listen to the show. You may be surprised with what you hear!
Finally, we’re always open to the idea of having a sponsor other than Secondratehosting.com (our hosting company and generous bandwidth provider) so if you would like to hit our audience, you can contact me at that address and we’ll see what we can work out. This is your big chance to get in on the ground floor and get a little publicity for your blog / product at the same time.
You can check out the podcast at http://www.informationsalad.com
Technorati Tags: informationsalad, information salad, vincent ferrari, michael barrett, slobokan
links for 2006-09-27
September 27th, 2006 by Vinny-
What happens when you post a personal ad from one city onto Craig’s list to another city? Hilarity, of course. NOT SAFE FOR WORK.
-
The title says it all.
-
Stored for later reference at the request of Balbulican
links for 2006-09-26
September 26th, 2006 by Vinny-
HOLY CRAP IT’S HAPPENING!
-
Pay attention, Microsoft.
-
Jeez…
-
The voice of Megatron speaks! I hope they get him for the movie!
-
You mean eating two bowls of cereal and a regular dinner won’t make you lose weight? I’m stunned.
-
Indeed we should. Steve Safran is right on the money.
-
NY to allow birth certificate changes. Common sense prevails.
-
Cindy Sheehan is retarded. Plain and simple. And so are the sheeple that worship her.
-
So Streep doesn’t pretend to be her character. Woopdeedoo… I suppose now you’re gonna tell me Tom Cruise doesn’t fly F-14’s?
Something I Really Can’t Stand
September 25th, 2006 by VinnyThere’s always one. One old broad who can’t bear the thought of walking 10 feet to the store. One who thinks that because she was there when the Grand Canyon was simply “The Large Pothole,” she only has to follow laws when they’re at her convenience.
Such is the case with this spectacular example of human inconsideration.
1. She parked in a handicapped spot without a tag on her mirror or without the plates, either of which is required in New York State.
2. She parked well outside the boundaries of the actual spot she’s not supposed to be in, blocking at least partially the ramp for the handicapped people who need it for their wheelchair, etc.
3. She parked at least 3 feet from the curb and left the rear of her car sitting in the aisle where cars need to pass.
And most notably, as far as I can tell, she got up out of the car and walked into the store.
Why do people think it’s okay to do this kind of crap?
Anyway, it’s all well and good. Maybe a little internet shame will change this waste’s ways.
Technorati Tags: handicapped, disabilities, inconsiderate, inconsideration, disgrace
What does $1200 get you?
September 24th, 2006 by VinnyA whole lot of lens, apparently… Check out these shots I took in Tarrytown and these shots I took of my parents’ cat, Tom. Oh, and don’t forget this one of my in-laws’ Rosh Hashannah table.
Wow…
I really really want that lens… Returning it to the place I rented it from is gonna suck…
Technorati Tags: photography
Best Licensing Agreement Clarification Ever
September 24th, 2006 by VinnyLicense Information
VisualHub’s license allows household use. Any computers within or controlled by the members of a standard household are allowed to share the same license. A user may install the software and license on their home and personal work computer.
Your uncle Phil from Oregon is not in the same household as you. The cute girl in Accounting’s computer is not your personal work computer.See the Users Guide for full license details.
Seen as I bought VisualHub, which is simply the best video conversion software I’ve ever used. Oh, and it’s Mac only.
Sorry Winders heads.
links for 2006-09-23
September 23rd, 2006 by Vinny-
After doing it for years, now Bush seeks approval for what’s been happening already. I love the way these folks works.
Babs’ Boobs
September 22nd, 2006 by Vinny
The Problem With Breastfeeders
September 22nd, 2006 by VinnyThey’re usually a bunch of self-important bitches who think that because they want to take their boob out in front of the world, everyone else should be okay with it.
Take for instance this story from Gothamist:
“I was at a Petco and they told me to go to the bathroom because it was making the customers uncomfortable,” said Jessica Pierre, 30. “I told them, ‘You don’t eat lunch in the bathroom and neither will my daughter.’”
Not for nothing, stupid, but I don’t eat lunch out of your tit either.
As I said this is the inherent problem. It’s not breastfeeding in itself. Most women are quite respectful when breastfeeding their kids. They do it calmly and discreetly (check out the United Airlines story in the same post) and go out of their way to make other people comfortable. In direct contrast, you have someone like Jessica Pierre who has to draw a comparison between an adult eating a burger and a baby suckling a tit. In her mind its the same thing.
No one should be harassed for breastfeeding their kid.
However, people who breastfeed should also realize that what they’re doing, while perfectly natural to themm, may actually make other people uncomfortable. It’s a simple fact of life and I’ve always been taught you should, within reason, try not to makke other people uncomfortable.
Maybe I was just raised different.
Technorati Tags: breastfeeding, annoying, stupid
Some people are just flat-out stupid.
September 22nd, 2006 by VinnyWhether or not you think you’re right, when a police officer says to get out of the car, don’t be stupid. Get out of the damned car.
Now you know why cops have those video cameras on their dashes.
via Tammy Bruce
Reason For No Federal Shield Law? Terrorism, of Course!
September 22nd, 2006 by VinnyAhhh yes terrorism. Our good friend. The be-all end-all catch-all excuse for everything. In this case, it’s the be-all end-all catch-all excuse for the Bush administration to oppose a federal shield law for reporters.
The Bush Administration Wednesday again asserted its strong opposition to a federal shield law that would protect reporters from having to reveal information about their confidential sources.
A majority of states have such a law and journalists have been pushing for federal protection, arguing that the government is clamping down on more traditional means of gathering information, like FOYA requests, in the name of national security.
At a Senate Judiciary Hearing, the fourth hearing the committee has held on shield legislation, Senator Patrick Leahy said that a half-dozen journalists have been fined or jailed for not revealing sources in the past year, while the bill has been blocked from passage by some Republicans
But Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty countered that “There is not one shred of evidence supporting the notion that the Department of Justice is out to get the media.”
Invoking national security, McNulty argued that the bill would “put a thumb on the scale in favor of the reporter’s privilege.”
He argued that if the government “cannot confidential source information unless it first proves that the harm to our national security would outweigh the public’s interest in maintaining the free flow of leaked information.
“Our national security is too important to be subjected to these standards and burdens.”
Notice the difference between what Leahy said and how McNulty responded. Leahy presented statistics about how many journalists had been jailed. McNulty, in a rather defensive fashion, asserted that the DOJ was not “out to get” the media. Well, that’s all well and good, but that’s not what Leahy said. Leahy said that while Republicans in Congress dragged their feet on the shield law, people who would’ve been protected have been making the trip to jail quite frequently.
Secondly, McNulty’s assertion that the bill would tip the scales in favor of reporters is ironic considering as of right now the law is lopsidedly on the side of the government and governments have started invoking strange and stupid justifications for pursuing journalists like the funds used to purchase a city’s police car being partially federal gives the federal government the right to pursue vandalism of those cars as if they were federal property, and the courts, as lackeys of the government are allowing this specious logic to continue.
But don’t darer ask the President or Vice President to disclose anything. Then it becomes an instant constitutional issue, resulting in a lecture on executive privilege. McNulty’s assertion that the scales would be tipped presumes that they aren’t already tipped toward the Oval Office / White House.
What’s stranger, however, is that McNulty seems to be obsessed with the burden all these free reporters are going to create and at the same time he apparently missed some Congressional testimony, particularly by William Safire:
When asked at a July 2005 hearing by Leahy (D-Vt.) whether the privilege should be absolute, New York Times columnist William Safire said no. “If a national security crisis is about to occur, as citizens, reporters have to help. But journalists and reporters are not the fingers at the end of the long arm of the law.”
This is exactly the same argument that Josh Wolf has made time and time again while the government pursues its ludicrous and unfair case against him. In that case, he argues that forcing him to turn over footage he shot at a protest would be like making him into an unpaid law enforcement officer, even though California has a shield law (which, of course is overruled by the standards and burdens of the federal government).
I would love to see a federal shield law for journalists. It would prove that the government is willing to stand behind the Constitution and protect the rights of journalists and at the same time encouraging people with something to say that may be in the public good to talk to the press with impunity.
I won’t hold my breath waiting for this to happen, but I’ll continue to hope for it.
via Lost Remote
Technorati Tags: journalism, shield law, government
Why I Continue To Love Bloglines
September 22nd, 2006 by VinnyFor those of us who rely on and love Bloglines Mobile while on the go, here’s another reason to dig it. Bloglines has now integrated Skweezer technology to optimize web pages for your personal handheld mobile device’s viewing pleasure.
Skweezer is fricking awesome, and Bloglines is equally awesome. Well done guys on adding yet another great feature to a service that, to this day, is 100% completely free.
Source: Bloglines News
Technorati Tags: skweezer, bloglines, freedbacking, freedback
Maximize?
September 22nd, 2006 by VinnyOne of the first things a person switching from Windows to OSX notices is that there is no “maximize” function, or at least not one as they’ve become accustomed to in Windows.
In Windows, you click the square thing and the active window takes over the whole screen. If the window is that of a document inside an MDI (multiple document interface) program, the document takes up the entire inside of the application. Pretty straightforward, and it’s the way most people understand “maximizing” windows.
On the Mac, if you click the green plus, the window also almost maximizes. When I say almost, I mean it expands to the optimal width and height (heightwise, it usually goes all the way) for the content inside the window. So, for example, when using something like Garageband, the + makes it take over the entire screen. When browsing the web, Firefox will take up the entire height of the screen but will only expand about 2/3 of the way across the screen.
This, of course, leads most ex-Windows users to think that OSX is “broken” in the way it handles maximizing, but when you think about it, it’s not broken, just different. And, on top of it, you get used to it.
ForeverGeek has a poll asking for reader preferences. For me, I don’t really care either way. I’m not a maximizer. I like being able to click apps open so I tend to run a bunch of non-maximized windows right on top of each other with a little bit of each visible. On my Mac at home, I use dual monitors, so I can get even more open windows visible at the same time.
I don’t particularly think either Windows or OSX’s way of handling windows is inherently more efficient than the other. The truth is, I like both and it’s not something I think about. Just something I use. It’s like being a carpenter. You use a hammer to hammer in a nail, but you don’t sit and debate the shape of the handle while you’re doing it.
Technorati Tags: apple, macintosh, osx, microsoft, windows, ui
links for 2006-09-22
September 22nd, 2006 by Vinny-
Tagging movies, etc. made easy for the Mac.
-
And it’s free!!
-
No more guessing “how big is that?” anymore. Neat idea for a site.
-
Wal-Mart about to make prescriptions really cheap for people. What bastards they are.
-
Someone get that broad a Schick.
-
I wonder if they included the bullet hole and leaking brain?
-
Equal access to public facilities… Sounds nice anyway…
-
How dare an oil company defend itself!
Outrage over nothing…
September 21st, 2006 by VinnyThe libs are all aflame with the idea that a gubernatorial candidate is pro-Intelligent design.
Republican gubernatorial candidate Dick DeVos says he supports giving local school districts the option of teaching the theory of intelligent design in science classes as an alternative to evolution.
Intelligent design, the belief that the complexity of life is evidence of an intelligent cause behind it, for years has been a source of debate in courtrooms and among some who say it deserves a place in science classrooms and those who contend that it’s thinly veiled creationism.
“I would like to see the ideas of intelligent design that many scientists are now suggesting is a very viable alternative theory,” DeVos told the Associated Press during a taped telephone interview on education. “That theory and others that would be considered credible would expose our students to more ideas, not less.”
Fine. So what? He’s running. If people want it, they’ll vote him in. If they don’t, they won’t. How much more democratic could it be?
Oh wait… I guess if we’re talking Democratic, that means this guy should not even be allowed to run…
Technorati Tags: dick devos, intelligent design, evolution
Chromakey taken to the next level…
September 21st, 2006 by VinnyWhat happens when you paint your skateboards completely green and then key out the green in your video editing software?
via Clip-a-Day
