Life in Idle

I'm not dead, just busy!

2008-12-18T09:35:00.007-05:00

Oh my goodness, it's been a while hasn't it? Apologies to anyone who's been checking back to see if I posted anything new (might I suggest signing up for the RSS or e-mail updates? That way, new posts find you). The last month or so has been crazy, with school and holidays and all of that. I'm sure it's the same for most of you.

The biggest time sink, lately, has been my classes. In the last three weeks I've written two papers (one was actually a story that clocks in at over 3000 words), and put together two rather involved (for me) PhotoShop projects. I had a lot of late nights and early mornings, but I'm happy with the results and don't regret going back to school for a moment.

You can see the first of my big PhotoShop projects to the right. I'm extremely happy with it; I put in a lot of time and effort and I really think it shows. The instructor, Mr. Bell, liked it enough that he's going to use the original PhotoShop file as an example to future classes!

Something similar happened in my English II class. This paper, an analysis of Billy Collins' poem "An Introduction to Poetry" is going to be used as an example of poetry analysis for future classes. Mrs. Payton is going to edit and alter it a bit, but it'll basically be my paper showing new students how it's done. Booyah!

...that sounded kind of cocky, didn't it? Oh well, I've spent so long questioning myself and my abilities, that I think I'm entitled to a little self congratulation. It's what keeps me going.

Head on over to my other site, JClarkOnline.com, to see most of my stuff from this quarter. What's not there now will be soon. I'd appreciate any feedback you may have. In particular, I could really use some constructive criticism of this story here, which I will be revising over the Christmas break.

Show me Your "O" Face!

2008-11-06T14:35:00.005-05:00

Unless you've been living in a cave, or you're from another country (and probably not even then), you know that on Tuesday Barack Obama was elected as the next President of the United States. Now that I've had a few days to take things in, I have a few thoughts.

This is the first election that I've participated in that went the way I wanted it to. The first presidential election I got to vote in was in 2000, when George W. Bush began the first of his two terms. At the time, and even more so after the 2004 election, it felt like things were just getting worse, and things would never go my way. I'm a liberal, I feel no shame in saying that (though I don't ascribe blindly to the Democratic Party, more on that later), and it seemed like all around me the country was getting more and more conservative. As the war progressed, our rights were threatened, and the government grew powerful in provocative and ominous ways, I never lost hope, but it did worry me greatly.

Finally, this time around, enough people seem to have become fed up with how things are going that a tidal change occurred. Obama didn't just win, he won decisively. He won in states that haven't voted for a Democrat in decades. And he won in the largest voter turn out in US history. If that's not a clear mandate, I don't know what is. A map that was awash with red only four years ago is now equally blue. This overwhelming support will allow Obama to do things that Bush and even Clinton (who enjoyed wide popularity while in office) could only dream of. It could also back fire terribly.

After the two year campaign, the tension and drama of the last few months, and the amazing outpouring of support - much of it from first time voters - if Obama fails to deliver, he'll be eaten alive. What Obama needs to do is what he's been promising all along: Carefully considered but bold moves designed to benefit the greatest number of people. He can't be afraid of being labeled a socialist, that was tried and the people chose him anyway. His easy celebrity must be used to the greatest effect, since that is what got him where he is. He can't be afraid to admit he is wrong and to take the advice of the experts, he can't afford to act out of hubris. If he turns out to be a lame duck president, or if his policies crash and burn, so will his chances of a second term come 2012, and so will the progressive tide (and rightly so, having been tested and failed, just as Bush's neo-con policies have).

I hope I've been right all along. I hope a bold, progressive, intelligent leader is what we need. I fear what will happen if I'm wrong.

Switching gears a bit now, what of McCain? I've spoken well of him in the past, citing both him and Maine's Senator Olympia Snowe as examples of conservatives I hold in high esteem. Over the course of this campaign, however, we watched him sell his soul to win the GOP nomination, and then descend into the depths of nasty politics in an effort to win. He had truly been a maverick; someone who did what he thought was right and who actually admitted when he was wrong. The “maverick” label was commercialized and packaged alongside policy ideas and campaign promises designed to placate the Republican base. It became just a word without meaning, and by and large the voters knew it. If the 2000 election had been McCain against Gore, or if 2004 had been McCain against Kerry, I'm fairly certain I would have voted for McCain. Not this time. Not after what he'd become, and especially not after picking a whack-job like Palin as his running mate (I'm all for a female vice president, or even president, just not her).

Then came McCain's concession speech. It's like the old McCain, the one I respected and admired, was back. It was a great speech, filled with respect and humility, and delivered with what appeared to be honest feeling. A sign of how divergent the real McCain had become from his supporters came when this speech was booed by the crowd in attendance. I don't think I've ever seen that before. There were hints of the real McCain now and then - such as when he corrected a woman about Obama being a Muslim(the implication being that he was a terrorist sympathizer and he was booed then as well - but the mean little troll always came back with vigor. Hopefully, now that the election is over, the real McCain will be back to stay. I quite possibly would have voted for him if he'd been running.

I don't care who you are, that's funny right there!

2008-10-23T12:40:00.004-05:00

This is one of the greatest web videos I've seen recently, and I just had to share it.

EDIT: The original video disappeared, so here's a link to the same video on YouTube (in case it goes away again, it's a video of Obama and McCain having a dance off. It was done by digitally overlaying the candidates' faces over those of dancers. It was really well done):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMpcv2t6Er8

That's some pretty slick work, pasting the candidates heads onto the dancers bodies like that. And I love the expressions they picked for them, they actually fit well with the dance styles of each.

Man oh man. Major kudos.

...wait, did I really just quote Larry the Cable Guy in the title? Crap...

1st Photo Composite: Zombies!

2008-10-21T00:41:00.000-05:00

I haven't mentioned it on this page yet, but I've recently gone back to school. I've had an Associate's Degree for almost eight years now, and in that time I've learned two things: I need a Bachelor's Degree to get where I want to be, and I don't like the field I'm in. Don't get me wrong, drafting is fine (and I'm good at it), but the career path ahead of me has me becoming an engineer, or a project manager, and I simply don't want either of those for myself.

So I decided to go back to school, but not just any school, I wanted to go to art school. When I graduated from High School I had a choice, art or drafting. I went with the safe choice then, and I don't think it was the right choice. Oh well, lesson learned, so this time I'm doing what I want to do. I'm two weeks into my first quarter at the Art Institute of Atlanta in the Media and Animation program, and I'm loving it. I went with animation because it neatly combines my interest in art, with my love of computers, and my desire to be a story teller. Who knows if I'll become an animator, but it seems like a good place to start. After all, several people I admire greatly started out as animators (Tim Burton, Terry Gilliam, and Brad Bird come to mind).

My classes for this quarter are English II (I placed out of English I due to my prior degree), and Digital Photographic Production, which is basically an intermediate Photoshop class (also because of my previous education, I took a Photoshop class to finish off my degree). I just completed my first photographic composite, and I'm thrilled with the results:

That's actually five photos combined into one. One of the background (a Catholic cemetery in South Portland, Maine), one of Eric (on the left, from his wedding reception actually), and one of myself that I took just for this. Photos four and five are close-ups of my teeth, which allowed me to create the torn cheek. My favorite part, by far, is Eric's shirt. It's amazing what you can do with the burn tool.

I'm going to be re-doing my hub site (www.jclarkonline.com) as a gallery or my work as I progress through school. I might be making some big changes here as well, but we'll see.

Now I can't wait until Thursday to see what everyone thinks of this, and to see if anyone manages to upstage me this time (like they did for our first in class exercise, darn it).

Let's see how long it takes the PC makers to copy this one...

2008-10-14T12:38:00.004-05:00

Whoa. The new Macbooks and especially the new Macbook Pros are insane.

Here's what excites me about these:

The track pad is huge, supports multi touch gestures, and the whole thing is a physical button (kind of like the "click wheel" on the iPods). It's also made of glass, which is odd, but I suppose that would make them durable (glass is actually very tough in the right application), and judging by my iPod Touch it'll feel nice when doing the gestures. I've actually been saying, for years, that they should mount the track pad on top of the button. Seriously. I like the big buttons that Apple's laptops have had for some time (hunting for the tiny ones on some PC laptops is quite annoying by comparison), but of course a larger track pad would be a good thing, so it seemed like a no brainer to me. I'm guessing it's the iPhone's touch screen technology that finally make this feasible.

The new graphics cards sound great, which will help with things like Photoshop (when I can finally afford one). I don't think I've mentioned this here yet, but I'm an art student now, and Photoshop (and other programs like Flash, Illustrator, and eventually even Maya) is going to be a big part of that. Eventually I'd like to get a laptop that can handle all of that (my trusty old iBook, alas, can not), and these are a step in the right direction.

The new manufacturing process is amazing. I can't be the only person who's held a Macbook Air and marveled at how light and, well, solid they feel. The fit and finish is unparalleled by anything else on the market. Now that's been brought to the Macbooks and Macbook Pros, and I couldn't be happier. My only complaint about the last three Apple laptops I've owned is their fit and finish, which looks nice, but doesn't feel as solid as I'd like. Problem solved, from the sounds of it.

Finally, the prices. As far as I can tell (the store is down now, and the news reports are a bit frantic and off the cuff at the moment) nothing has gone up in price, and a few things have gone down. There's still a plastic Macbook that sells for $1000 now, so there's a cheaper option even if it doesn't have the great new fit and finish. And it sounds like the $1300 Macbook might be just what I'm looking for. A follow up to the 12" Powerbooks (I had one once... it didn't end well, through no fault of Apple or the laptop itself). Booyah!

Of course, all of this will have to be confirmed once the store is back up, and as usual early adopters should beware. Luckily (?) I won't be able to afford a new laptop for some time, so I'm covered!

Shouldn't a "Moderator" be a Moderate?

2008-10-01T17:29:00.003-05:00

I've been looking forward to tomorrow's Vice Presidential Debate for some time now. Personally, I'm hoping that Biden shows Palin for the know-nothing she is (I'm pretty sure that I could beat her in a debate). Unfortunately, there's a new wrinkle that might spoil all my fun.

Gwen Ifill is going to be moderating. Gwen Ifill is also openly pro-Obama. Rats.

In this case it doesn't matter that I agree with her, what matters is that she has an obvious bias at all. Even if she performs perfectly, and with absolute fairness, this opens the debates up to doubt. It also gives anyone wanting to cast stones after the fact a target.

I know that Ifill is a competent and respected journalist, and I'm sure she'll do fine, but couldn't they have found someone who won't raise such an obvious question mark?

This aggression will not stand!

2008-09-21T14:49:00.000-05:00

I was going to write a post about my take on the politics of the moment.

I was planning to point out all of the falsehoods and outrageous allegations, and the fact that a man I once admired, John McCain, has lost all integrity he once had in the name of winning (he has turned his back on every "maverick" ideal he once championed, that's not opinion, it's fact, look it up), including nominating the most frightening VP choice since, well, Dick Cheney (she has done nothing but lie about her record and hide from criticism behind the claim of sexism, not to mention her rather medieval ideas on morality and justice).

Instead, I'm going to quote from an Op-Ed peice in today's New York Times:

"GET ANGRIER! Call them liars, because that’s what they are. Sarah Palin didn’t say “thanks but no thanks” to the Bridge to Nowhere. She just said “Thanks.” You were raised by a single mother on food stamps — where does a guy with eight houses who was legacied into Annapolis get off calling you an elitist?
And by the way, if you do nothing else, take that word back. Elite is a good word, it means well above average. I’d ask them what their problem is with excellence. While you’re at it, I want the word “patriot” back. McCain can say that the transcendent issue of our time is the spread of Islamic fanaticism or he can choose a running mate who doesn’t know the Bush doctrine from the Monroe Doctrine, but he can’t do both at the same time and call it patriotic. They have to lie — the truth isn’t their friend right now.
Get angry. Mock them mercilessly; they’ve earned it. McCain decried agents of intolerance, then chose a running mate who had to ask if she was allowed to ban books from a public library. It’s not bad enough she thinks the planet Earth was created in six days 6,000 years ago complete with a man, a woman and a talking snake, she wants schools to teach the rest of our kids to deny geology, anthropology, archaeology and common sense too? It’s not bad enough she’s forcing her own daughter into a loveless marriage to a teenage hood, she wants the rest of us to guide our daughters in that direction too? It’s not enough that a woman shouldn’t have the right to choose, it should be the law of the land that she has to carry and deliver her rapist’s baby too?
I don’t know whether or not Governor Palin has the tenacity of a pit bull, but I know for sure she’s got the qualifications of one. And you’re worried about seeming angry? You could eat their lunch, make them cry and tell their mamas about it and God himself would call it restrained.
There are times when you are simply required to be impolite. There are times when condescension is called for!"

This is such an important election, we simply can not afford to let the falsehoods stand. Obama already has on display the intellect, the charm, the vision, now we need to see the passion! Not blind rage and hatred, but steady and forceful anger at what has been done to him, and to this country.

As the passage says, so what if he appears angry? He has reason! I am both angry and frightened at the prospect of a McCain victory based on lies and deceit. McCain is going to win a Rovian victory, and when the country goes even more to shit — and it will, McCain has shown that he is no better than Bush — everyone's going to wonder why. That is, unless Obama stands up and calls a pig a pig.

They've handed him the knife, all he has to do is have the nerve to drive it home, and then twist the shit out of it.

The election is his to lose.

PS: I sent the Obama campaign an edited version of this post through their contact page. I know, the odds of anyone of consequence seeing it, or caring even if they do, is slight, but I feel like I have to do something.

Why do we need [new tech]? [old tech] is good enough!

2008-08-03T10:37:00.004-05:00

Earlier today. this story popped up on Slashdot: "Toyota Announces the Winglet, Wannabe Segway Killer"

Reading through the comments, I came across this inevitable (and very, very tired) refrain:

Or you could just oh I don't know buy a bicycle. As much range as you have energy for, fits almost the same places a segway does, doesn't use gas, cheaper, and get this, is actual exercise. Something most people in the places that can afford one of these things can use more of.

While I don't totally disagree with this sentiment, I see it bandied about all the time, almost always in reference to new technologies. The people who make these arguments always do it with an air of superiority, as if they've spotted the underlying truth that no one else has noticed, because we're all too dazzled by the "new shiny". It's a modern sort of pop cynicism that bugs the shit out of me.

While this argument is, on its surface, valid, it usually doesn't hold up if you look at the larger picture. You might as well say "Why watch TV, why not read a book? Cheap, portable, doesn't require electricity or gasoline, and you actually have to engage your brain, something that most TV viewers could use more of." Again, there's a lot of truth to that, but that doesn't make it the win all argument. Television has proven itself to be a powerful medium for communication, education, and entertainment. There's a lot about TV that's not good (don't get me started on people who whine that there's "nothing good on TV"), but there's a lot of good there as well. If nothing else, television has shown people that there is a world beyond their own horizons, and that's a powerful and worthwhile thing.

Let's try another one: "Why drive a car? Horses will get you anywhere you want to go, they require only food and a bit of grooming, it just takes a bit longer to get where you're going. Plan ahead and you don't need a car." Seeing how this argument is just as valid as the ones above, are you going to get rid of your car and get a horse? Probably not.

Interestingly, these kinds of arguments were leveled against cars and TV in the early days (not to mention cell phones, DVDs, light bulbs, power tools, computers, the internet, the printing press, etc.). It wasn't valid then, and it's not valid now. In fact, if people had employed this "reasonable argument" consistently, we'd still be living in caves and hunting with really big rocks because they were "good enough". And that's only if someone was able to suggest that really big rocks would work better than wrestling food to the ground without being shouted down by the clan's resident nay-sayer.

I'm not opposed to debates or questions about the validity of any new technology (I encourage and highly enjoy them, in fact, so long as everyone's willing to debate, and not simply be "smarter" than the other guy). I'm not arguing that "progress" is always a good thing. I'm just asking that people take a moment and examine their own argument before putting down a new technology because what we already have is "good enough". Think before you bash, and don't for a moment believe that you're the smartest person in the room just because you came up with a pithy, cynical critique. Odds are, you're not, you're probably just the furthest behind the curve.

What a Summer for Movies, and it's Not Over Yet

2008-07-22T21:26:00.003-05:00

A quick look at some of my favorite big summer movies:

The Dark Knight: Holy awesome movie, Batman! A crime drama of the highest order, and a fantastic comic book action movie to boot. I can't say enough good things about the story, the spot on direction, the relentless pacing, and especially the Joker. I know that some people are all about Heath Ledger since his death, but in this case it's totally deserved. He gave himself over to the character so completely that I still can't believe it was him. There are a few problems, of course (the bat voice, for example), but they're minor at worst. If this movie isn't at least nominated for a few awards, it'll prove how hopelessly broken the system is.

Hellboy 2: Possibly the most brilliantly imaginative, and visually stunning movie I've seen in years... If not ever. Brilliant puppetry and well restrained CGI, engaging performances, and mouthwatering cinematography make up for a thin story. Also, despite what others have said, I though the villain was fantastic. He has a regal bearing, but a barely contained rage, and just a touch of sadness that makes him a compelling and tragic character in my eyes. But I guess that's just me. I did find that the primary characters were a lot better this time around as well. The action was top notch too. All around, one hell of a good flick (pun intended).

Wall-E: Beautifully animated, heart warming, full of personality, Wall-E is the best of everything that makes Pixar's movies so wonderful. Just go see it, and don't let the right wing nuts discourage you, it isn't preachy, it's wonderful, and possibly important (hey, you never know).

Iron Man: This seems a bit like standard fare after those last three, but that doesn't change the fact that it's one of the highest quality, slickest, and smartest super hero movies ever made. Robert Downey Jr. is fantastic as Tony Stark, and the special effects are some of the most seamless I've seen. The suit alone is a thing of beauty, managing to look just like the comic, while looking like it might actually work.

Other great summer movies have included Speed Racer (I liked it), Kung Fu Panda, The Incredible Hulk, Hancock (not great but good), and Wanted. In fact, the only real disappointment this summer has been Indiana Jones, and even that was a good time. And there's still the new X-Files movie this weekend, for which I have high hopes, and others still to come.

Man oh man, I can't remember the last time I've been this happy with so many movies in such a short period of time. Actually, I can. The year 1999 saw the release of The Matrix, South Park, American Beauty, The Sixth Sense, Fight Club, and Magnolia, Office Space, The Blair Witch Project, American Pie, Star War Episode 1, and others. I was wondering if that kind of concentrated awesome would hit mainstream movies again.

If you haven't been to the movies in a while, do yourself a favor and check something out this weekend. You'll thank me.

Posted with LifeCast

A Moment for the Late Great George Carlin

2008-06-24T09:00:00.000-05:00

I distinctly remember a night, probably fifteen years ago, when a friend was over for the night. We found a Carlin stand up show, and spent an hour or two literally laughing ourselves silly. I don't remember laughing that hard before that night, and only rarely since then.

In addition, Carlin's comedy had a way of making you think and questions your preconceived notions while entertaining you. That's a rare gift. There was no one quite like him. He will be missed.

George Carlin's Two Commandments:

Thou shalt always be honest and faithful to the provider of thy nookie.
Thou shalt try real hard not to kill anyone, unless of course they pray to a different invisible man than you.

Indiana Jones and Speed Racer, together again for the first time!

2008-06-01T19:26:00.000-05:00

A few quick movie reviews while I try to get settled in here in Georgia:

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

It's finally here, the Indy movie we've waited almost two decades for, and it's... well... it's not terrible.

To be fair, I did enjoy myself when I saw this. It's got some fun set pieces, Harrison Ford is charming as always playing Indy, and Shia LaBeouf was actually quite good (once we got past his annoying intro scene). However, it's just not quite an Indy film. If it had been called something else, and the main character had been named something other than Indiana Jones, I think it would have worked better for me. It really is a good film, but it's far from being a great one. I have a few thoughts as to why I feel this way:

There's too much CGI, for one thing. Way, way too much. It's obvious that a lot of the stunts were done "for real", and that many of the sets were real, but most of what exploded, fell down, flew around, or whatever had a disconcerting weightless feel to it. There were a few moments when large objects came to rest in a completely unnatural way that really stood out to me. There are also CGI bugs, and landscapes, and monkeys. Yeah, the did CGI monkeys, and the results are questionable as you can imagine. The original films did everything the old fashioned way, and they were better for it. Just because the technology exists now doesn't mean it has to be used.

The story is muddled, at best. Incoherent at worst. I'm not even talking about certain elements that a lot of people are complaining about, the step by step progression of the plot itself just doesn't work in places. Things jump around horribly, and what should be big moments are often glossed over as if they are racing to get to the next big action scene. The discovery of the crystal skull (it's in the title, so it's not much of a spoiler), for example, comes way too early, and just kind of happens. The prop itself doesn't look right either, it looks like plastic, and the way it's being handle makes it obvious it doesn't weigh as much as that much crystal should (remember, crystal is a mineral, as in a rock, it's quite heavy). After so much time, Spielberg and Lucas should have been able to put together an elegant and interesting story. Not so, it seems.

**BIG SPOILER WARNING**

Finally, there are the aliens. My friend Eric, a huge Indy fan, said to me a few weeks ago "I'm looking forward to the new Indiana Jones movie, but I'm afraid there are going to be aliens in it". Well, he was right. There are, literally, aliens in this movie. Greys, to be exact. The crystal skull? It's an alien's actual skull. Turns out they have skeletons made of crystal, that attract gold like magnets, and frighten bugs, and awaken psychic powers in humans, and remain sentient long after the actual alien has died and rotted away and will talk to you (and possibly drive you mad) if you stare into their eyes. Really. The X-Files movie didn't have this much alien content, for Pete's sake, and at least Chris Carter knew when to stop giving you answers and leave things a bit mysterious (usually, anyway). This movie just doesn't know when to quit.

I've seen a lot of comments to the effect of "the Ark of the Covenant is OK, but aliens aren't?" Well, yeah, that's right. The Indiana Jones movies have always been fantasy, with strong religious overtones. They were about the wonder of unanswerable questions. They were not science fiction, and this part of the plot seemed completely misplaced. Maybe if they had shown the flying saucer at the end (yeah, there's one of those too), and maybe even the skeletons, but had NOT shown an actual living breathing alien it would have been better. Maybe. There are also some really odd plot points here as well. Why did the Russians need the Roswell alien, when it had nothing to do with anything plot wise? Why do the crystal skulls attract gold and other metals (gold is not magnetic, which is actually mentioned in the movie but never really addressed)? Why did they collect artifacts from around the world, only to destroy them utterly when they left? And so on, ad infinitum.

**End of Spoilers**

Like I said, it's not a terrible movie, but it's not a great movie either. Thinking about it, I'd say it's barely a good movie. In the end I feel the same way about this that I felt about Die Hard 4: I kept thinking "this is almost great, I really should watch the real movies again, since those actually are great". I get the terrible feeling that movie producers think that modern movie audiences are stupid, and need everything to be bright and shiny, and watered down, just so long as it's loud. The fact is that we loved the original movies for a reason, we don't need the updated versions to be any of those things. That they think we do it the worst part.

Speed Racer

The irony of moving on from a comment like that, to then review a movie that is basically nothing but bright, shiny, and loud - and giving it a positive review - is not lost on me. So be it, I loved this movie.

Oh sure, it's campy, and the plot is quite thin, and a few times it get a little too animated for its own good, but this was a good time. A visual feast that, surprisingly, had a good deal of heart as well. Basically, Speed Racer (that's actually the main character's name, his father's name is actually "Pops Racer") grew up idolizing his racing brother. After allegations of dirty tricks, his brother is killed in a rally race, and Speed grows up to carry on his legacy. A business tycoon offers Speed a sponsorship, and when Speed turns it down informs him that racing is rigged and that he's just ruined his only chance at being a champion. Now, with the help of his parents, his annoying little brother, a monkey, another guy whose place in all of this is never quite explained, and the mysterious Racer X, Speed is going to change the world by driving really, really fast.

Yeah, sure, whatever. It's all an excuse for some mind boggling sci-fi racing, and even a few great martial arts sequences. The only parts that bugged me involved his little brother, and an emotional scene with... some guy (who works for his father, I guess?)... that totally was not earned by that character at any point in the movie. This is a cartoon, plain and simple. The acting is hammy, though it's obvious it's supposed to be that way, and the action is wild, and that's good enough for me.

By the way, this movie also features Christina Ricci looking about as adorable as it's possible for a human being to look. I had kind of given up on her after she did a series of scuzzy and morally bankrupt roles, but here she is in a wholesome part once again. I hope this sets her career in a new direction. She's better than her most recent roles.

Another Example of Why Less is Often More

2008-04-22T13:53:00.000-05:00

Whoa, the last three weeks have just flown by. Packing, organizing, painting and repairing, it’s been crazy. I’ll get back to my list eventually, but here’s something completely different to pass the time.

I’m looking in to buying a new digital camera in the near future. I’ve been slowly working my up from super cheap cameras into better and better ones as time goes on. My current camera is a Canon Powershot A630. It’s an 8 megapixel camera with just about every manual control you could expect from a point and shoot. It’s a great little camera, and it’s never let me down. The only thing I could ask from it that it doesn’t have is image stabilization (though the face detection, and even smile detection, that I’ve seen on some new cameras is neat). So why do I want a new camera? It’s not so much that I want to replace or upgrade this one, rather I want to take the next step and get myself a DSLR.

An SLR is what you might call a “real” camera. They’re the ones that have lenses that come off, allowing you to buy better or more specialized lenses. There are also some differences internally that allow SLRs to take much cleaner, sharper images. I won’t get into the details here, suffice it to say that if you are a pro, or aspire to professional level work, an SLR is what you want. A DSLR is simply a digital SLR, to differentiate it from a film SLR camera (I’ll just use “SLR” from here on out to mean “DSLR”).

My budget is quite limited (more than ever, now that we’re moving), so I am looking specifically at the entry level models offered by Canon and Nikon, the leaders in the field (though Canon is, far and away, the current camera juggernaut). In the case of an SLR brand is important, as lenses designed for one brand will not work with any other. Since lenses can potentially cost many times what the camera costs, this is a big deal.

Looking at the current offerings from both Canon and Nikon left me with the following options:

Canon Digital Rebel XTi - $590 on Amazon.com, 10.1 megapixel, lots of manual controls and special features (including dust reduction), comes with a mediocre 18-55mm kit lens (soon to be replaced by the XSi, which will retail for closer to $900 with a lens, too much for me)

Nikon D40 - $480 on Amazon.com, 6.1 megapixel, lots of manual controls but fewer features (no dust reduction), comes with a basic 18-55mm kit lens (the D40x is basically the same camera with a 10.1 megapixel sensor and a few minor additions, but it retails for $800 with a lens)

On paper it looks like the Canon is the clear winner. For about $100 more you get more megapixels, dust reduction, and some nice features. The only advantage the Nikon appears to have is a nicer kit lens. Still, I think I’m going to get the Nikon, and it’s not just because it’s cheaper. Ultimately, it comes down to the quality of the image captured, which is the most important thing after all. From what I’ve seen, the Nikon simply takes better pictures in real world situations.

You might wonder how a 6MP camera can best a 10MP camera, and I wouldn’t blame you. I still wonder that myself from time to time and have to check again to make sure I’m not remembering it wrong. The fact is, the size of the image captured has less of an effect on image quality than you’d think. Realistically, the average photographer, taking pictures of family and friends, doesn’t need any more than 6 megapixels. Really. A 6MP image can be printed at 12” x 8” and still look good. I doubt most people print their photos even that large. With a clear photo and a deft hand with the software, you can go even larger without a problem. More pixels gives you more freedom to crop, of course, but my point is that resolution above a certain point isn’t the most important factor in getting good looking photos.

What about sharpness, you ask, isn’t sharpness a direct result of resolution? No, it isn’t. Sharpness is a function of the quality of the lens and the sensor. Everything comes down to light. The better your lens, more more light will get in and the less diffused it will be for having passed through the lens. The better your sensor, the more of that light it will read, and the better job it will do interpreting it. This actually leads to a counter-intuitive phenomenon where a camera with a lower resolution but the same sized sensor will take better pictures. The reason for this is simple: All things being equal, a sensor of a certain size will have a certain amount of light hitting it. The more pixels that sensor is cutting the light into, the less light there will be for each pixel, leading to less light for interpreting by the camera.

I’ve had basically this discussion with several people recently, and I don’t think they believed me. That’s OK, I wouldn’t have either. The proof is in the pudding, as they say, so now I present my proof. Below are several pictures taken from the sample galleries found on DCResource.com, a fantastic site for high quality, unbiased reviews. Obviously these photos were not taken under controlled conditions, or even anywhere close at to the same time. These are far from definitive, but they are enough to prove my point, and to justify my choice.

These photos are especially important to me, since one of the reasons I want a better camera is the ability yo take low light photos without a flash. These images are crops taken from the center of larger photos. They were resized to fit inside my browser window, and the cropped area was exactly the same size on screen,

First, the Canon Digital Rebel XTi:

Next, the Nikon D40:

Already you can see that the D40 looks brighter and sharper, with more detail and less lens flare. Next we have crops taken from the center of these same images, but displayed at full size. Again, the crop area was exactly the same on each (note that the XTi creating a larger image accounts for the size difference).

First the Canon Digital Rebel XTi:

Next the Nikon D40:

Ridiculous. That’s what I think when I look at these together. The older camera, with lower resolution, takes a much better picture in low light. It’s plain to see, not subtle at all. It’s worth noting that this isn’t Canon’s fault, Nikon’s higher resolution cameras do this as well. It’s also worth noting that the Nikon photo is taken using the kit lens (the one that comes with it), while the Canon photo was taken using a Sigma 15-30mm lens, which retails for about $700 (bringing the price comparison for this photo to $480 vs. $1290 in favor of the Nikon).

For comparison, here’s the same picture taken using a Nikon D80, the latest version of the D40 (also using a more expensive lens):

Just look at the grain, that’s directly a result of the same sized sensor being used to create a larger image.

For further comparison, here’s the same picture taken with Canon’s top of the line point and shoot (non-SLR), the Powershot G9, which is about as nice a point and shoot as you can get right now (note that the G9 is a 12MP camera, thus the larger size):

The lighting is different (or is it really just picking it up that differently?), but I think the differences are still valid. This is why you use an SLR in the first place. Even with half the resolution, the Nikon D40 takes a much better picture (and actually costs less to boot).

When I look at these pictures, the choice is clear. Sure, I’d love to have dust reduction, bracketing, more autofocus points, and a bunch of other features, but it’s the image that matters most. Given that what I really want to do is set up, and then take pictures on the run (so to speak), the D40 should be exactly what I need. It’s going to take me a little while to save up enough to get the D40, a case, a good sized memory card, and the other random bits and pieces you need, but it’s definitely on the affordable side, so that helps. I’d love to have one of these before moving down to Georgia, to chronicle the journey, but I just don’t see that happening.

My birthday is tomorrow though, if anyone’s feeling especially generous…

It's Official

2008-04-01T19:24:00.000-05:00

It’s official, we’re moving to Georgia the second week in May. This is both exciting and terrifying, and boy do we have to move quickly to make that deadline.

Anyone want to buy a house in rural Maine?

PS: To the Realtor who commented earlier, or anyone else who knows the Roswell GA area, I’ve been told by a few people that it’s great, but the rampant racism is a real turn off. I’ve also been told by others that racism isn’t an issue there, so much as in Atlanta itself, and the more rural areas. I’ve never had to deal with that personally (maine, despite being the whitest state in the nation, is really quite socially progressive), and can’t stand it myself, so it’s a concern. Of course, we’re committed, but I’d like to know that to expect.

A Quick Update

2008-03-31T13:14:00.003-05:00

Well, the leaky pipe got fixed ($99 later, not too bad all things considered), and the furnace is going to be serviced some time this week. Of course once that was all over I noticed that the gaskets are going on our water pump, so it's leaking a bit. The thing is old and loud and probably not very efficient, so I've already purchased a new one that just has to be installed (oh, what fun).

As for the other thing, Laura got to her interview fine and no one seemed upset at all. It was a fairly informal meet and greet, and everything went well. She also got back here with no problem, though she did sleep for about 15 hours on Saturday night, understandable after that whirlwind day, followed by less than 6 hours sleep and another full day of work.

The big news, though, is that this morning she was offered the position officially. They gave us specifics on pay, benefits, relocation assistance, and times frames. Mostly it's what we expected, but less than we'd hoped for. We have to go over it all tonight and decide, for keeps this time, if we're going to go through with this. If so, we've got to get our butts in gear and get moving on this right away.

What a Day...

2008-03-28T11:53:00.000-05:00

I have the next few items in my list all ready to go, but I’m taking a break today because, well, there’s way too much going on. Blogging helps me to organize my thoughts and process things, and I could use some of that today.

Big Doin’s Down South

The biggest news is that my wife, Laura, is in Georgia today (I’m in Maine, where we live). Specifically, she’s in Roswell Georgia, and she’s there for a job interview. She works for a company that sells medical equipment for veterinary use, where she does technical support. A subsidiary located in Georgia is looking for a phone and field support person who already knows the equipment. They sent out an internal inquiry, she responded, and today they’re flying her down for a face to face interview.

If she gets the job, assuming that the pay is enough (it should be, based on the pay range and her experience), and given that they offer some relocation assistance, we will be moving to Georgia. Needless to say, this is big. Life altering big. Over the past few weeks we’ve gone over all of the implications, doing our best to look at it from every angle and weight the good against the bad. If we move, I’ll probably have to give up on my own business for a while (the reason it works here is that I already have contacts within the local industry) and get a normal job. I will also have to give up on my school plans for at least a year so I can get in-state tuition rates. It also means moving away from family and friends and virtually everything we know.

In the end we decided that this was an opportunity that we just couldn’t pass up. We’ve been talking about moving elsewhere for years, and here’s a chance not only to do that, but to get some help with it, and to have at least one job already lined up on the other side. Georgia isn’t our first choice, but from everything I’ve read Roswell is a nice place. The crime rate is low, it’s a bit cooler than Atlanta, and not as horribly built up. Given that we’ve spent the last few weeks fighting the rapidly expanding lake in our driveway due to all the melting snow and ice that has nowhere to go because the ground is still frozen (and there’s still a good three feet of snow out there), the idea of not having a real winter for a few years is a nice one. Also, living in a place where we wouldn’t have to drive more than 10 miles to get pretty much anything we need is very seductive (we live 25 miles from what most people would consider a real town, and almost 40 from any reasonable shopping, colleges, etc).

She’s there right now, talking with them, deciding our future. So far her plane was delayed (due to snow on this end, of course), and she got lost on the Atlanta highways, but she knows her stuff and she’s good at first impressions. So here’s hoping.

Meanwhile, Back at The Ranch

The biggest problem with moving is going to be selling this house. It’s small and needs a lot of work, and the market stinks right now. We’re hoping to be able to sell it quickly by pricing it low, but there’s a limit to how little we’re going to be able to walk away with. We’ve already contacted the realtor we used to buy this house, and I was supposed to meet with her today, but we had to cancel due to the snow. Even if we don’t go to Georgia, we’re going to try to sell this house and upgrade within the year, so what better time to start the process? We’ve been doing some cosmetic work, and cataloging what’s wrong with this place. Unfortunately, things seem to keep piling up.

Our furnace needs to be serviced, it keep turning itself off for no apparent reason, but we’re a bit strapped at the moment. Just this morning I went into the basement to turn the stupid thing back on and found that a pipe, the one that takes water from the pump to the furnace, had sprung a leak and was merrily spraying down half the basement. Turning off the valve leading to the leak meant completely turning off our water, and our heat. So now I’m cold (space heaters can only do so much), and I can’t even take a shower of do the dishes. When I get done here I’m going to go down and start moving things around so the repair guy can get to it easily. I’m also going to frantically clean upstairs so we don’t look like complete slobs.

Needless to say, I haven’t let Laura in on any of this. She’s got enough on her plate already.

So, when does the fun part of home ownership, and adult responsibility in general, start?

A Short List of Stupid Things People Believe In, #2: The Secret and Other Modern Mythologies

2008-03-27T12:09:00.000-05:00

Important Subtitle: “Stupid” Given current evidence (a good skeptic is always ready and willing to change their mind if reliable evidence is brought to light)

2: “The Secret” and Other Modern Mythologies

If you haven’t heard of this, count yourself lucky. Basically, the claim made in The Secret, and other such works, is that the world can be shaped and manipulated to your whim if you just think happy thoughts and will it to be so. In other words, it’s magic, plain and simple. It’s also hopelessly banal, as the authors suggest using this awesome power to get that promotion you’ve been angling for, or to win the state lottery. If that’s the best you can come up with when given the ability to literally rewrite reality, you don’t deserve it. And let’s just look at what this says about people in general. Dying from cancer? Lose your leg in battle? Clinically depressed? Homeless? Blind? Left handed? Orphaned? Well, obviously you’re not thinking positively enough! Get over it, heal yourself (if you can re-write reality, growing back that leg, or some new parents, shouldn’t be a problem, right?), and then go get that middle management position you’ve always dreamed of!

There are also, of course, the massive logical problems with this idea. For one thing, if we all exist within a reality of our own making, how is it that we interact with others who are apparently experiencing the same reality that we are? And once you master this power, how is it our now divergent realities can coexist? Seriously, if I go flying down the street in my reality (in which I can fly, of course), and you can waltzing up the street in your reality (in which all people have become large, super intelligent slugs… hey, anything is possible with positive thinking, right?), what happens when we meet? Why, for that matter, has no one ever mastered the ability to fly, or to melt things with lasers from their eyes? The only way I can see this working is if none of you are real. In that scenario everything makes sense, since the world is exactly as I envision it, including being stuffed with six billion fake people, many of whom have been rude or even violent towards me, and who do things that I wish they wouldn’t do. Yeah, that makes tons of sense. Either that, or you’re the only real person, and the only reason I exist in your world is to call you an idiot. Hmm…

Here’s a little test I’d like to put to anyone who claims to have mastered “The Secret”: Allow me to strap you down (so you can’t do something sneaky and non-magical like ducking), and then use your powers of positive thinking to prevent me from punching you in the face. Several times. Or, we could put you in a car with no breaks and send you rolling down a cliff. Or, to be really fair, we could simply ask you to get a great job without actually going out and looking for one (the instruction given always includes actively working towards your goals, which is how these things happen in the real world, no magic needed!).

As was pointed out in a recent article on Cracked.com, the authors of this book obviously want you to buy this book. Since they are presumably masters of this magical thinking thing, we should be easily bent to their will. Not buying the book therefore proves, decisively, that it is bullshit.

So why am I so vehemently against this sort of thing? Not simply because I don’t believe in it, I can deal with that. No, it’s the fact that when people start believing in magic, when they believe that some greater force is going to save them from the world, they stop trying to make the world a better place. Worse, they start to look down on people who are having a hard time. The fact is that we all have to make our own way in this world, and some people have a harder time of it than others, whether because of certain flaws in their person, or simply circumstances. It’s a lot easier to believe that these people are simply lazy or willfully ignorant than to get down off your high horse and lend a hand.

A Quick Interlude

2008-03-26T08:48:00.001-05:00

While researching some of the items on this list, I came across this page, it’s on a near death Web site and claims to be about debunking what they call “pseudo-skeptics”. They take the tired old point of view that a “real” skeptic can’t possibly take a position on any issue for which there is no absolute evidence. They even hint at the laughable notion that the first thing a skeptic should question is their own skepticism.

It’s an old saw, an attempt to cause critics of their ideas to self destruct. First of all, I don’t give a rat’s ass what the Greeks thought a skeptic should be. A “real” skeptic respects the current evidence and bases their conclusions on the current consensus. A true skeptic does keep an open mind, but open to evidence, not to baseless supposition and anecdotes. As for being skeptical of being skeptical, anyone who’s a skeptic has already gone through that exercise. That’s what being a skeptic means, that you’ve decided to live your life searching for truth and seeing past the bullshit, you’ve already decided that being skeptical is the right thing to do. Of course, if you’re ignorant enough to think that you can never come to a solid conclusion if you’re a skeptic, it’s easy to see how you could miss that.

Moving on to the meat of that site, it’s not that skeptics completely reject the notion of an afterlife, it’s that none of the evidence so far presented has held up to scrutiny. In fact, a real skeptic won’t have a position on the afterlife itself, merely on the evidence and phenomena so far advanced as “proof”. Ghosts, for example, are logically suspect for a number of reasons, as are out of body experiences. There has never been any conclusive evidence of either, and so both phenomena are unproven. That’s not a blanket rejection of the idea of an afterlife, merely e refutation of the evidence presented thus far. What they’ve done on this page is construct a straw man argument. It’s easy to knock down a so-called skeptic who has already made up their mind and won’t budge, but that’s not what is happening in reality. The list of poor arguments they give is a good list, but it doesn’t apply to people like James Randi, whom they love to pick on.

As for the specific examples they give (numbered 1-4 on the bottom half of that page):

The page they link to pretty clearly shows that the effect was due to researcher bias, so I’m not sure why they think it bolsters their view. In any case, it shows that trying to prove something with so many potential variables (which system of astrology to ascribe to, what qualifies someone as an athlete, or general, or artist, how to account for cultural effects, etc.) is difficult and open to interpretation.
This item, which by the way is simply homeopathy (which has been thoroughly debunked), links to an eBook, not a published study. End of story (though the phrase “The researcher complained” is a give away too, painting themselves as victims is a classic pseudo-science trick).
The Million Dollar Challenge is a legitimate challenge, complete with legal frameworks in place that compel the JREF to hand over the money if their conditions are met. All that’s required is that a supernatural power be demonstrated in a controlled environment. No one has pulled it off yet. As for Randi’s alleged comment, site your source or keep it to yourself.
I’m not sure about this one. If it all checks out then it is, indeed, compelling. Though I wonder if this is like that guy who tested John Edward, and claimed that he’d kept Edward isolated from the subject. The problem is that a video of the tests clearly shows Edward peeking through the curtain separating them, among other problems. Or like that researcher who was convinced he’d found kids with psychic abilities, only to have it revealed that those kids had been trained (by none other than James Randi) to fake it. The thing is, not once did he even ask them if they were using slight of hand, he just assumed that he knew better, which he did not. In fact, they bring up John Edward as part of their proof. Edward, as I’ve already mentioned, is an outright fraud.

Looking into this a bit deeper, apparently the experiments in question are the same ones I mentioned above involving John Edward. Here’s an analysis of the experiments, along with a response to that analysis by the experimenter, and a response to the response. At this point, I think it’s pretty clear that those experiments are not to be trusted (just look at the guys idea of a “double-blind” study, here’s a hint: double-blind means that the researcher doesn’t know the answer either, and he fails in this regard). Ooh, and here’s yet another analysis, it’s quite readable and cuts right to the heart of the problems. It also includes this revealing screen cap:

To add insult to injury, they close the page with a supposed quote from Carl Sagan:

“Probably a dozen times since their death I’ve heard my mother or father, in an ordinary conversational tone of voice, call my name. They had called my name often during my life with them … It doesn’t seem strange to me.” - Carl Sagan

This was taken from an essay by Sagan titled “Wonder and Skepticism”, originally published in Skeptical Enquirer Magazine. Unfortunately, they edited it to make it sound like Sagan believed he was hearing his parents from beyond the grave. For shame. They didn’t even get the parts that they left in right. The correct quote means the exact opposite of what this version implies.

Here’s the actual quote, without the creative editing (my emphasis):

I have, maybe a dozen times since my parents died, heard one of them say my name: just the single word, “Carl.” I miss them, they called me by my first name so much during the time they were alive; I was in the practice of responding instantly when I was called; it has deep psychic roots. So my brain plays it back every now and then. This doesn’t surprise me at all; I sort of like it. But it’s a hallucination. If I were a little less skeptical, though, I could see how easy it would be to say, “They’re around somewhere. I can hear them.”

Nice try, assholes.

A Short List of Stupid Things People Believe In, #1: Psychics and Other Imaginary Creatures

2008-03-25T23:12:00.001-05:00

Important Subtitle: “Stupid” Given current evidence (a good skeptic is always ready and willing to change their mind if reliable evidence is brought to light)

I’m going to be posting a number of these over the next week or two. It may get a bit controversial, but whatever, it’s not like anyone really cares what i think. I mean, who am I right? I’m posting these as much so I’ll have a reason to put these thoughts down in an organized fashion as anything else. Enjoy!

1: Psychics and Other Imaginary Creatures

I think this pretty well sums it up (from XKCD):

Somehow though, people still believe in this.

Here’s a simple question to ask yourself: If these types of powers and abilities really exist, why has there never, not once, been a verifiable and reproducible demonstration of these powers in a controlled setting? Some people believe there has been, but they are mistaken. Let’s look at a few of the examples people often point to as “proof”:

Uri Geller - You know, the guy who could bend spoons and keys with the power of his mind? He’s a hack, a slight of hand magician, and not even a very good one. Johnny Carson, with the help of James Randi (both are experienced magicians, and well versed in methods of trickery), once put him to a simple test. He presented Geller with a number of objects and asked him to demonstrate his powers. He refused (previously, Geller had supplied his own materials). Here’s a video put together by James Randi about Geller and his trickery (he also tackles Peter Popoff).

John Edward - John Edward’s show Crossing Over was a big hit, and I’ll admit that I was suckered by it at the time. The fact is, he’s just a cold reader, and not even a very good one (notice that, both examples so far are highly charismatic yet not terribly skilled in a technical sense, people just want to believe someone they inherently like). If you watch the show with a skeptical eye, you’ll notice that he flounders quite a lot. There’s a reason he warns that he may only be able to come up with initials or sound-alike names, this opens up the pool of potential hits. You’ll also notice that most of what he actually says - by that I mean the things he says before getting help from his targets, who invariably fill in the specific details - are very general and non-specific. Here’s a detailed, step by step explanation of how he does it. And another one, less detailed but shorter.

Sylvia Brown - I can’t believe anyone still believes in Sylvia Brown, but apparently they do. Brown is not only a charlatan, she’s a bad person too. The whole Shawn Hornbeck debacle is her most well known blunder, it’s also well documented. If you want more, watch this, or this, if you can still stomach her.

Police Psychics - Don’t believe it. Most of those who claim that they’ve helped the police can’t substantiate those claims. I’d like to see some statistics that actually show some sort of reliability. I don’t think such a thing exists.

These examples don’t prove that psychic phenomena aren’t real, of course. But bear in mind that these are the best examples, the shining lights, and they’re frauds, every one. Similarly, research has been going on for centuries without coming up with anything definitive. You can’t prove a negative, but no one has even come close to proving a positive on this one.

If you still insist on believing, or worse, insist that you’ve experienced psychic phenomena first hand, do yourself a favor: Go to your local community college or continuing education center and sign up for a psychology class or two. Or at least crack open a few books on that subject, as well as science, critical thinking, and skepticism (anything by James Randi or Carl Sagan would be a great place to start).

Sound and fury, signifying nothing

2008-03-13T22:36:00.000-05:00

To AutoDesk, the makers of AutoCAD, the program which supplies my livelyhood:

The autosave feature is a great idea, I just wish it worked. Not only does it interrupt me while working - by taking control of the program and unceremoniously canceling any other command or operation I have in progress to do it's thing, something that a program should never, ever, ever do - half the time it doesn't even do what it's supposed to do. I just lost several hours worth of work because your program locked up. Turns out the autobackup was just making a lot of noise, but doing nothing of benefit. It's late and I need sleep, and now I have to redo all of that drafting while quelling a murderous rage.

Get your fucking act together.

My grammar is stronger than your grammar!

2008-03-07T19:05:00.000-05:00

Apparently March 4 was Grammar Awareness Day. Who knew? In honor of that day, Grammar Girl posted her Top Ten Grammar Myths.

Being a mild grammar nazi myself, I always find these things to be interesting, usually because they remind me how little I actually know about truly proper grammar. However, in this case I was gratified to see that her number one grammar myth was "You shouldn't end a sentence with a preposition". I've been trying to convince people of this for years. Really, I have.

In her words:

1. You shouldn't end a sentence with a preposition. Wrong! You shouldn't end a sentence with a preposition when the sentence would mean the same thing if you left off the preposition. That means "Where are you at?" is wrong because "Where are you?" means the same thing. But there are many sentences where the final preposition is part of a phrasal verb or is necessary to keep from making stuffy, stilted sentences: I'm going to throw up, let's kiss and make up, and what are you waiting for are just a few examples.

Booyah! In your face!

When I Think About You, iTouch Myself...

2008-03-06T16:18:00.000-05:00

I finally got my hands on an iPod Touch.

*Glee*

Answering a Burning Desire

When the iPhone came out I wanted one so badly it hurt, but my contract with Verizon wasn't up for a few months, and $600 was too much. A few months later my contract was up and the iPhone had dropped to $400, but AT&T's coverage around here is even worse than Verizon's (which is, itself, terrible), and the extra $20 per month for the iPhone data plan brought the eventual cost to $880 (with a two year contract), so I still couldn't justify it. I renewed my (and my wife's) contract with Verizon, and got a MotoKrzr. It's an alright phone, and I love being able to use a bluetooth headset, but the internet functions are terrible, and everything else it does it does worse than the iPhone, or for additional monthly cost (damn you for locking down all of the great features, Verizon), or not at all.

I got a fantastic deal on a Palm Tungsten E2 some time later and liked it well enough, and it sated my desire for a super portable device that would hold my contacts, calendar, notes, etc... at least for a while. After a few months the little issues got to be too much (the mail program didn't work, it constantly re-formatted phone numbers, addresses, and even contacts' names, it added numerous empty contacts for no reason, the syncing was clunky overall and as often as not it failed due to some mysterious problem, etc.), and it stopped syncing contacts altogether (I think it's an incompatibility with Leopard). With regret I realized that the Palm just wasn't going to cut it. I'd really come to like having that sort of device at hand though, it helped both personally and professionally.

By this time, Apple come out with the iPod Touch, essentially an iPhone without the phone (or camera, or bluetooth). Initially it looked nice, but it didn't do e-mail, notes, or a couple of other things the iPhone did, and that I needed or wanted. Then Apple updated the Touch with Mail, Notes, and more. With the iPhone/Touch SDK on the horizon, it looked like the Touch had finally become a viable PDA replacement. It did what I needed already, and held the promise of doing more down the line. Then the 32GB version came out, and I knew I had to have it.

Also by this time I'd become self employed, so I had a new tool at my disposal: business expense deductions. If I can justify something as a business expense, and if the business itself can afford it (using money left in the business account for this purpose), then I can get it and claim it as a deductible expense come tax time. The rule of thumb seems to be that you get somewhere between 25% and 30% of a business expense back in tax savings, assuming you are profitable (though it helps even if you aren't). Since I'd been using the Palm mostly for business, it's reasonable to call its replacement a business purchase. I already had a business line of credit with Amazon.com, and enough in the bank, so I went for it. I even got one of the clip-style iPod Shuffles for free with it. I've always been a fan of the Shuffle (I still use my 1st Gen Shuffle regularly), so I figured why not?

Thoughts So Far

I'm really happy with the Touch. It looks fantastic, the interface is responsive and fun to navigate, and it syncs flawlessly with Address Book, Mail, iCal, iTunes, iPhoto, etc. The WiFi internet feature works beautifully, and has already proven itself. While I was out and about the other day, I realized that Id forgotten to make an important online bill payment. I pulled into the parking lot of a restaurant that offers free WiFi, and using my iPod Touch logged in and made a payment in just a few minutes. A few minutes later I received an e-mail confirmation, also on the Touch. I used the time in between to send a few emails I'd been meaning to send. Brilliant.

Of course, it's not all roses. The Notes feature is nifty, but it seems oddly hobbled. It doesn't seem to sync with anything, even Mail's notes, which I think are the same thing (they even look identical, graphically). You can e-mail yourself a note, but it would be handier to have them automatically sync both ways. Also, the iPod Touch is apparently incompatible with my Harmon/Kardon Drive+Play. Harmon/Kardon says it should work, but it keeps shutting itself off when I try it (I've sent them an e-mail, we'll see if there's any way to make it work). It also doesn't work with the Logic3 dock/speakers I have on my desk. Well, it works, but it makes strange sounds over the music. I've tried it with other, newer speakers and they work without problem. To be honest, I've been looking at replacing it anyway, but it is annoying. Oh, and I really wish it wouldn't scale photos down so much when it brings them in from iPhoto. It has this beautiful interface for zooming, panning, and exploring photos, and then it scales them down until they look terrible even when zoomed to fit. Meh.

Web Apps, SDKs, etc.

Most of what's available for the iPhone and iPod Touch, for additional software, comes in two varieties: web apps, and apps you install after "jail breaking" the device. I don't have any interesting in jail breaking - I'm neither adventurous nor desperate enough to try it - which leaves me with web apps, for now. There are actually some pretty good ones. So long as I'm in a WiFi area, I have access to currency converters, loan calculators, detailed weather, Sudoku, phone directories, FedEx package tracking, etc. And all from the Touch's home screen, thanks to the ability to rearrange and add to it. It's pretty cool, but having to be in a WiFi area reduces its usefulness. Some I've found are "data URLs", which apparently means they can work offline. Cool, but most of those seem to be very simple so far.

What I've been more impressed by are some of the ways people have found to enhance the web browser using the bookmark function. I have an app called 1Password, which stores passwords and allows you to use them by remembering one master password. It's handy, and actually works quite well. The latest version includes the option to export your passwords to an iPhone (or Touch). The cool part is that it allows for autofilling. Go to a page you want to access, then pull up your bookmarks and select the "1Password Logins" bookmark. A small window pops up asking for your master password, once you've entered that it fills in the necessary fields. Very cool, and very useful.

Even more interesting (to me) is a Bookmarklet called "Tabulate". Hitting this bookmark while on a page gives you more options for opening links. Rather than simply opening in the current tab (or a new tab if the link is programmed to open in a new window), a window pops up giving you three options: Open in this tab, open in a new tab, or save for later. Save for later will collect links, then open them all at once when you tell it to. This dramatically eases web browsing for me, especially on news site, when I will typically open a number of new tabs while still browsing the original page. Major props to the people behind Tabulate.

As for the SDK, it looks like that will be a little ways off. Oh well, there will be third party apps eventually, and right now the Touch does all of the important things I need it to do, so I'm OK with that. That being said, here are a few apps to make if you want my download, or even (if it's really good) my money:

1. A solid task management program, preferably one that's streamlined, has a desktop component, and that syncs with iCal.
2. A program that lets me view full sized photos on the Touch, or at least much larger ones than I currently can, but using the same interface as current photos.
3. A wireless syncing program, even if it only syncs Contact, Calendars, Mail, and Bookmarks, so I can sync over my home WiFi without even being in the same room.
4. A way to sync notes with something on the desktop computer. It's stupid that they're stuck in the Touch like they are (Megaphone looks nice, but I think I'll hold off to see if someone comes up with an even more integrated solution).
5. Some fun little games would be nice, the Touch is practically made for point and click adventures, and simple shooting and puzzle games.

Garfield minus Garfield

2008-02-28T10:17:00.000-05:00

I know this has been everywhere recently, but I love it so much that I have to mention it here. Garfield minus Garfield is best described as it is on the site:

Who would have guessed that when you remove Garfield from the Garfield comic strips, the result is an even better comic about schizophrenia, bipolor disorder, and the empty desperation of modern life? Friends, meet Jon Arbuckle. Let’s laugh and learn with him on a journey deep into the tortured mind of an isolated young everyman as he fights a losing battle against lonliness and methamphetamine addiction in a quiet American suburb.

It's an idea that's equal parts brilliant and insane. I mean, who would ever have the thought "I wonder what this comic would be like if we took out the main character?" It works though, in its own bizarre way.

The results are usually hilarious:

Often non-sensical:

Occasionally worrying:

And, more often that you'd suppose, poignant:

Major, major props to whoever does this (I can't figure out who it is from the Tumblr page). Now I'm curious what other comics, or even movies or TV shows would b like, if you removed one of the characters. I wonder what Batman would be like without Robin, talking to himself, occasionally saving himself from danger...

A few Oscar predictions

2008-02-24T20:33:00.003-05:00

Just thought I'd pop in before things get too underway to make a few quick predictions. I'm not actually watching the proceedings, and I've only seen about half of the nominated movies, so I'm probably just as qualified as most to comment on this.

Best Picture, Directing, Supporting Actor, Cinematography, Sound Editing, Adapted Screenplay: No Country for Old Men
It would take one heck of a movie to best this one. It's big and epic and nearly perfect in execution, just the kind of thing the Academy eats up. The sound design is brilliant, hauntingly quiet for the most part, savagely loud where appropriate. It's also brilliantly adapted from the novel, nearly word for word in places, and different only in ways that I feel improved it (at least for a movie).

Best Actor: Daniel Day-Lewis
I may not have "gotten" this movie fully, but Day-Lewis gave the definition of a powerhouse performance.

Animated Feature: Ratatouille
Really, is there any competition? It may not be Pixar's best, but Pixar's worst is better than the best most other animation studios can do. Honestly, they should just call this "The Pixar Award".

Achievement in Special Effects, Sound Mixing: Transformers
I may not have liked the movie much, but the special effects were phenomenal, and a big part of that was the sound. I haven't seen many of the others in these categories, but they'd be hard pressed to be better than this.

And that's all I'm sure about. I either haven't seen enough of the nominees in the other categories, or I don't have much of an opinion. In the morning I'll check it out and see if I was right about any of these. Why am I not watching? First of all I'm busy watching 24 on DVD, second of all I have one last prediction:

The Show Itself will be Long and Drawn Out
The Oscars specialize in being self important, and self congratulatory, even if the host this year is an awesome choice. Besides, I'll be able to see the good parts on YouTube tomorrow.

UPDATE: Well, I called Best Picture, Director, Supporting Actor, and Adapted Screenplay for No Country For Old Men. Danielle Day-Lewis got Best Actor as I predicted. Also, predictably, Ratatouille took best animated feature. Other than that, well, I was wrong. There Will Be Blood was a fine looking movie, so I can understand it taking Cinematography. I'm thrilled that Once took Best Song. I haven't heard the competition so I wasn't going to make a prediction, but the music in that movie really was great. I'm curious about the Sound Mixing, Sound Editing, and Film Editing awards going to The Bourne Ultimatum. I can see editing, but I don't remember anything terribly special about the sound. Maybe that's why it won, though, by making itself invisible to casual observation.

Tough Guy

2008-02-22T14:06:00.001-05:00

Tough Guy, originally uploaded by wireguy.

CAPTION: It's hard to act like a tough guy when you are riding the Merry-Go-Round, but some guys gotta try.

This makes me laugh every time I see it. I've had a long week and really appreciated the lift. I figured I'd spread some of that joviality, just in case.

One Dollar Challenge Presents: CAPTCHAed!

2008-02-20T00:22:00.000-05:00

Time for another One Dollar Challenge!

This time the dollar goes to the first person who can explain to me why in the hell what I've entered into this CAPTCHA field is invalid:

To head it off, the "p" is not supposed to be capitalized, and the "T" is not supposed to be lowercased. I tried all four combinations of those to no avail.

While we're at it, let's take a moment to ponder the utility of security schemes that keep the good people out. On another site recently (can't remember which one), I ran into a CAPTCHA that was so distorted and scrambled that for the life of me I couldn't figure it out. That's a good way to ward off potential users, if that's your goal, but I don't think it is. Are there any solutions that balance usability with security? I'm somewhat a fan of math CAPTCHAs (random "what is 3 + 8" type problems), and "common sense" CAPTCHAs make a lot of sense too (these will ask something like "is fire hot or cold"). Has anyone seen anything better?

By the way, the audio CAPTCHA link doesn't work, so I guess Digg will have to do without my input tonight.