When In Doubt, Tax It
One of my big problems with our wonderful United States government is the way it deals with technology. The problem, as I see it, is not necessarily with a particular party, but rather with the mentality of our fearless leaders in Washington, D.C. The House and Senate are filled with people who remember a time when TVs didn't exist, and can vividly remember buying their first VCR (though they still don't know how to program it). These are the same people who are now trying to pass laws (mostly thanks to well-timed contributions from lobbying groups) regarding how technology should be used when they don't even understand the first thing about the technology they're legislating. Case in point: they now want to tax iTunes downloads.
This may be cliche since I say it so much, but you've got to be kidding me. Why don't the folks in Washington get their act together, balance the budget, and stop spending money we don't have instead of trying to tax every venture that makes money. It seems that whenever something is very profitable, the government pops up and says, "gimme." Why be fiscally responsible when you can just tax the hell out of services that are moving our economy forward?
Stuff like this makes me so frustrated. Everytime the government gets involved in the direction and future of new technology, something bad is bound to happen. We have all the telco's going to court with the cable systems for control of the nation's information infrastructure, both want to create a tiered Internet, separating the country into haves and have nots. When will this madness end?
The New Spam Harvesters: Personals
People are getting smarter about giving out their email addresses so spammers are seeking out other ways to get them. The normal sequential email generation still works for stuff like Hotmail and Yahoo addresses, but what about for people who have their own domain names or use small Internet service providers? And how can you make sure the email address you get is valid and therefore worth money? The answer: get us to email them voluntarily.
Now I know what you're thinking, you'd never email a spammer just to say hi. You're right. That's why they have to trick you into doing it. And the way they do that is to play on the weakest organ of them all: the heart. They now troll personals sites, sending messages to the weary singles of the world that go a little something like this:
Hi! I came across your personal and thought you sounded interesting. I've never done this before, so I'm not sure what I'm supposed to say. I'm 23, 36-24-36, 5'6 with blonde hair and blue eyes. My friends say I'm attractive and that I should model...I can send you photos and you can tell me yourself. I'm not really looking for a relationship right now, just someone to spend time with and maybe get a little intimate without a commitment (I think that's called friends with benefits?).
So, I'm looking forward to hearing from you. Oh, please email me directly at myspamtrapforyou@somewhere.com, since I don't check this site very often. Can't wait to hear from you.
Missy
Nicely done huh? The poor guy (and most guys' fantasies do include having a hot girl that they can sleep with without commitment) is seemingly having his dreams answered. It's enticing, it's exciting, it sounds too good to be true...that's because it is. If you email this "girl", you'll find yourself deluged with spam for the rest of your life.
The key to this type of hoax (also used quite successfully for calling up $5-a-minute hotlines) is that the note doesn't contain anything specific to you or your profile. It doesn't mention any of your interests, your photo, anything that is uniquely you. Most of the time when people respond to personals, they say stuff like, "I really like your quote about life, Socrates is one of my favorite philosophers too!" Very simple, but very specific. Anyways, consider this your warning. Don't feed the spam monster your email address unwittingly, no matter how hot the girl sounds.
You’ve Got To Be Kidding Me
Over the past couple days around here, there has been a lot of talk about a 6-year-old suspended from school for sexual harassment. While the details of the offense are being kept quiet, the sexual harassment policy for the elementary school is described in the article:
The Brockton school district's student sexual harassment policy, drafted in January of 2004, prohibits "uninvited physical contact such as touching, hugging, patting, or pinching."
Is it just me, or does that pretty much make sexual harassment out of everything elementary school kids do? Part of being at the age of 5-10 is acting silly, testing boundaries, etc. Pinching, hugging, patting, and touching have zero sexual intent or understanding at that age, so how can someone say they are guilty of sexual harassment? These kids have no idea what the term "sexual harassment" means, nor should they.
Since sexual harassment has come into existence, it seems to be pervading some of the most ridiculous places. I must harken back to the wise Chris Rock, who once said, "if a man says to a woman, sleep with me or you're fired, that's sexual harassment...and that's the only thing that's sexual harassment." The fact of the matter is that sexual harassment has exploded to the point where it's not even the victim who decides that the act violated them sexually in some way, it's institutions, teachers, passers-by, and others who are really in no position to be making such proclamations.
Did this boy do something inappropriate? Probably. Little boys and little girls don't always know to keep their hands to themselves. But I doubt it was anything with sexual intent and it probably should have been addressed by talking to him and explaining that you must not touch other kids. But suspension? Absolutely ridiculous.
I’m Really Not That Dumb
Some of you may have seen the infamous "expired domain" message when trying to access this site. Immediately you think, "is he so busy writing that he forgot to renew his domain?" The answer is no. I actually transferred (or tried to transfer) this domain to GoDaddy back in November since it was cheaper to renew with them. Without my knowledge, the transfer never went through (I wasn't notified) and poof! No domain name. I'm in the middle of trying to figure out what went wrong, but in the meantime I've re-upped with my current (really expensive) provider, Network Solutions, though there may still be outages from time to time. Isn't this fun?
Is It Really Necessary?
I like Christmas as much as the next guy, but is it really necessary that every television program from now until December 25 be a "special Christmas episode"? I don't watch these shows to make me believe in Santa Claus or the indominable human spirit during the Christmas season. I watch them to escape reality for just a couple of hours each day. But what do I get? Special Christmas episodes! Here's a list of things I'm really tired of seeing on television shows this week:
- Something "magical" happens that couldn't have possibly occurred. This is the "could Santa be real?" moment in the show.
- Someone hates Christmas because once upon a time something horrible happened on Christmas, so they've never celebrated it. This is, of course, leading up to the moment that their cold heart warms and Christmas is celebrated for the first time.
- Someone loses faith in humans but finds it again during Christmas.
- Some people are decorating the tree when it coincidentally starts snowing outside. The main characters run out to embrace in the falling snow.
- Some Christmas carol is played very slowly to indicate that someone is lonely on Christmas.
- Someone who's used to spending Christmas alone realizes how wonderful it is to spend Christmas with someone.
Does that about sum it up? Kudos to those shows who have avoided these traps. To the others, please spare me any more of this. It's bad enough that Christmas music starts being played before Thanksgiving, do I need to experience the same plotline on every show I watch?
On Google Print
Seems like everyone and their uncle has opinion on Google Print, Google's plan to index massive libraries of books and make them searchable through the Internet for free. As a published author, I feel like I can speak with some sort of purpose towards this issue.
First and foremost, let's review what has people so up in arms. It's copyright law, plain and simple. The publishers don't like the idea of someone giving everyone access to their books' contents (simplifying a bit, but this is their basic argument). They say that it violates their copyright on books and Google has no right to do it. Further, they state that Google will be making money off of this search while they will not, and that makes them angry. They say that Google is effectively copying their works without permission and using it for profit. I think this is a stretch.
I'll probably incur the wrath of writers and publishers everywhere for saying this, but I think Google is in the right here. Are they being overly arrogant about it? Yes. Should they have discussed their plans with publishers before they started? Yes. Is what they're doing illegal or in violation of copyright law? I don't think so. Here's my rationale.
Copyright law is intended to protect the copyright holder from someone else copying and either giving away or selling their intellectual property thus affecting sales of the original. I can't photocopy a Harry Potter book and resell it; that would be copyright infringement. The publishers' main complaint seems to be that Google is copying an entire book without permission. The difference is that Google isn't giving away the book or selling its contents, it's indexing them so that others may search through books. You cannot print out a copy of the entire book through Google Print, which may actually entice you to buy the book outright.
There's even mention in copyright law about how it is legal for a library or archive to make one copy of a work so long as it is freely available to the public and not for sale. One could argue that Google Print falls under this exclusion.
The other argument from the publishers is that Google will be making money off of this but the publishers will not. Arguably, the publishers will because people will know that their book contains information they need, and therefore they must buy it. And why shouldn't Google make some money off of it? They've spent countless man hours, written software, and set up servers to handle all the traffic they will get. Don't they at least deserve to make some money for the service they're providing?
Overall, I think that the publishers are mostly upset that they didn't think of the idea first. I'm sure both sides can see the benefit of working with the other, as this could turn out to be a hugely useful research tool for people and a very successful marketing program for publishers. I mean, no more using that crappy search engine that most libraries across the country have? Sounds like a bright future to me.
Rudeness…
It's been a while since I last ranted, but now that the time has come! I have this theory, and those of you who know me well already know this, that people are rude because society has become too politically correct. Seems counter-intuitive, I know, but hear me out.
We are living in an era where people are taught to "mind their own business." We're so afraid of offending someone, that people stand by and watch guys beat up their girlfriends and step over homeless people in the streets. It's not my fault, I'm just minding my own business. Likewise, because they don't get involved, they also expect that when they do something, someone else won't get involved.
How often do you sit in a movie theater and grumble under your breath because the person behind you is kicking your chair or talking too loud? Why don't you say something? Certainly, it's not rude to ask them to please stop disrupting your experience. Yet you don't. Why?
My theory is also that if more people stood up and did something about everyday situations, we'd leave a much more respectful society behind. If the problem is that no one is telling people to stop doing certain things, then if we all start telling people that they're being rude, ignorant, or downright cruel, maybe things will change. This is why I am the one to turn around in the movie theater and ask people to be quiet, I am the one to stop and offer a hand if someone needs it.
So what brings on this rant? As I was pulling onto my street today, a woman was trying to cut across to get into Dunkin' Donuts. Since I was the only car coming down, and since traffic on the other side was backed up, it would have been fine for her to wait for me to go by. Instead, she starts to pull in front of me, then slams on her brakes and gives me the finger as I drive by. Now, this is a middle-aged woman, driving alone in her car giving me, a 27 year old male, the finger. Does that sound like the smartest thing to do? What if I was one of those psychos who hunts and chops up people who give him the finger? As it was, I just stopped my car and looked at her with a perplexed expression, trying to say "you know what, save that type of anger for something important." I'd never wish ill will on anyone, but sometimes I think it would be beneficial for certain people to have a run-in with psychos, if for no other reason than to scare them straight.
Celtics vs. Celtics
I used to be a huge NBA fan. If there was a game on, I'd watch it. Now with the NBA Finals in full swing, I find myself not caring so much. Perhaps it's because I've seen my beloved Celtics fall from grace so far so quickly. I remember watching Larry Bird, Kevin McHale, and Robert Parish playing the way the game was meant to be played. Now all these brash young players with their "gimme the ball" attitudes drive me nuts. But in any event, looking at the current NBA Finals teams, Detroit and San Antonio, it pains me to see what the Celtics could've been.
Consider that when Rick "Give Me Millions And I'll Bury Your Team" Pitino took over the organization, he did so knowing full well that he'd have two lottery picks in the next draft and since the Celtics had had the worst record, they'd have the best chance at grabbing the number one spot to draft the much-wanted Tim Duncan. Many believe this was the only reason Pitino took the job. As luck would have it, the Celtics didn't get the first pick, which went to San Antonio who drafted Duncan and is now looking at a third championship since that time. Strike one for the Celtics.
The Celtics ended up with the third and sixth picks that year, which they used to draft Chauncey Billups and Ron Mercer, respectively. I'm sorry who's that? Oh yeah, last year's Finals MVP Chauncey Billups. Why can't we get players like that? Well, because Rick Pitino was an impatient guy, he traded Billups away a year later. Strike two.
You know the Spurs' Bruce Bowen, the guy that everyone says is the best defensive player in the league? He was on the Celtics the same time as Billups. Once again, he wasn't seen as a part of the Celtics future and his contract was allowed to lapse. Strike three.
The Celtics also had a guy come in for a try out one year. He was undrafted but was 6 feet 9 inches tall and looked like he could be a player. They tried him out as a guard, but it just didn't work and he was cut before training camp. That guy was Ben Wallace, named the Defensive Player of the year for the second time and member of the Detroit Pistons. Strike four.
Could you imagine if the Celtics had a starting five that saw Duncan in the middle, Wallace and Bowen as forwards, and Billups at point? Sounds like a championship contender to me. Thanks a lot Pitino.
E-C-Dub, E-C-Dub
One of the worst kept secrets about me is that I'm a huge professional wrestling fan. Yeah, make your jokes, go ahead. I've paid an obscene amount of money to go to Pay-Per-Views and to see both Raw and Smackdown live as well as having been to see smaller regional, independent wrestling shows that seat only about 500. I can't help it, I'm a wrestling junky.
That being said, I think the decline in the quality of WWE's product is severe and noticeable since WCW went under. But most of all, I miss the ECW Pay-Per-Views, which were some of the best I've ever seen. That's why I was thrilled when WWE decided to have an ECW reunion Pay-Per-View, which was last night.
I must say I was pleasantly surprised. I was scared that this would turn into a WWE show and be really boring, but they actually kept most of the show to the traditional ECW style, right down to the return of Joey Styles at the announce booth and cheezy television graphics. Plus, the action was excellent; I really wish it had been four hours long. I hope the quality of this show really makes WWE open its eyes to what true wrestling fans want: wrestling!
Posting To A Forum
As I've become more and more a target of "how do I" questions relating to JavaScript, I've more and more been forced to send people to forums such as those at WebDeveloper and p2p.wrox.com to save my e-mail inbox. I visit both regularly and try to help out when people are having trouble. But man, a little forum etiquette would be nice.
Most of the forum postings are one of several things:
- I need to have something that (fill in weird behavior here). Can someone give me the code to do this?
- I can't seem to find why this isn't working (followed by the complete source code that's 100 lines long). Can someone debug this for me?
- I'm trying to do xyz but it's not working, anyone know why? (no source code included)
What's worse is that many of them ask to e-mail them instead of posting to the forum. Why should I take the time to answer your question if you don't even have the time to visit the forum and read the answer?
For these types, I usually don't reply. It seems like people are often using these forums as a crutch. I can't tell you how many times I see a post that says "urgent". If you need a solution that functions at your work and your deadline is close enough to go into the forum with an urgent request, you obviously aren't the person that should be writing this code. And if you're going on to say "I need code to do this" you should be looking into how to do that, not expecting someone to copy and paste a solution for you (or worse, write it themselves).
So here's a few tips on how to get good developers, including myself, to answer your postings in one of these forums:
- Before posting, look for a solution online. Do a search using your favorite search engine or pick up a book. Then, search the forum itself. If you still can't find something, then post.
- Use a descriptive subject (i.e., don't just say "newbie needs help", something like "popup window won't open" works much better).
- Don't paste your entire source code into the posting. If you have trouble with only 5-6 lines of code, post those. If you must include all the source code so someone can test it, add it as an attachment.
- Clean up the code you're sharing. Take out any of the stuff that is irrelevant to the issue at hand.
- Subscribe to your forum posting so you can be notified when someone replies. Don't expect people to e-mail you their responses. The purpose of the forum is to share your information with a lot of people, not simply to help one person with one problem.
Follow these simple rules, and watch how your response rates improve!
