My blog has been gathering considerable dust over the past several months. But the lack of morality in the US Government must end. This is a letter I am sending to Senator Robert Menendez for his approval of torture. Even though I realize this may assist a Republican candidate, I am morally outraged and cannot select the "lesser of two evils" since such a stance condones evil.
Dear Senator,
I was shocked and appalled when I read this morning’s New York Times article titled “Democrats See Strength in Bucking Bush” in which I learned that both you and Senator Lautenberg voted for a blatantly immoral, un-American, and likely unconstitutional bill that allows for torturing suspects held in American custody. You sir, have now lost my support and I will not be voting for you in the upcoming November election.
In the 12 years I have been eligible to vote in New Jersey, I have never even hesitated to pull the lever for a candidate under the Democrat line but your "pro-torture" vote is completely unconscionable. As a member of the 13th District, I have voted for you to represent me in the House of Representatives and I had every intention of continuing that support. But your immoral act should have consequences and the only recourse available is to withdraw my support for you. Sadly this stance may enable the greater of two evils to succeed, namely your opponent Thomas Kean, Jr., but my morality cannot allow Democrats to be apologists who disregard their Constitutional duty.
As Americans we should staunchly believe in dignity even for the worst criminals, as our treatment of them is a reflection of our own humanity. Take a step back from the vitriol in calling these suspects “terrorists” which merely serves to dehumanize them; instead remember that our Founding Fathers established basic principles in our Declaration of Independence that established we “are endowed by [our] Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” I encourage you to re-read this document as it birthed the once Great Nation that has fallen into the hands of unwise and morally bankrupt men.
September 11, 2001 was the biggest tragedy of this generation. I was halted in traffic among my fellow Americans on Route 139 in Jersey City that morning, dismayed and tearful as the towers collapsed before my very eyes. Since that traumatic experience we have lost our values as a nation, and my once beloved Democratic party provided no counter-weight to the corrupt but powerful Executive branch along with their henchmen in the GOP.
Mr. Menendez, you have failed America by caving into political expediency and cowardice. This is not the way to lead our country and you do not deserve your post as a US Senator from New Jersey. My only hope is that you one day realize the error of your ways and remember what it means to be an American and to represent America. Righteousness comes from upholding the Rule of Law and our sacred Constitution. Please remember, Mr. Menendez.
Cordially,
Aurous, Proud Citizen of the United States of America
Friday, September 29, 2006
Thursday, March 23, 2006
ajaxWrite Ain't Right
I came across the latest Michael Robertson project (of MP3.com and Lindows/Linspire fame) and was intrigued: ajaxWrite. He introduced it on his blog stating:
My initial impressions: this is a very basic beta. I don't want to judge it too harshly but Robertson is not ready to back up his claims. First, the site doesn't seem to have adequate bandwidth so the 6 second launch is way off the mark. In my few attempts at launching the program, it takes several minutes to load up over a very fast link (90 Mb). The ping times averaged over 100 ms whereas pings to Google and Hotmail were averaging 7 ms and 2 ms respectively. Unfortunately the sluggishness makes it hard to objectively compare this to a desktop application like Word.
Opening Word documents was therefore a little painful... In my tests they rendered ok although not exactly as I expected. More complex documents (with lots of formatting and tables) didn't successfully complete although I suspect this to be a bandwidth problem again.
I also note that Mr. Robertson's comparison to Office is disingenuous. As ajaxWrite is only a word processor, it would more closely compare to the standalone version of Word which retails for $229. I'm sure there's a suite of applications in the works, but it'd be nice to see a more honest comparison.
In the end, I think there's room for improvement but the premise is faulty. Desktop software might be considered "bloated" but there are distinct advantages. For the same reason most people prefer Outlook over the certainly capable OWA, I've yet to see a browser-based application that properly and fully replicates the desktop experience.
That said this has some promise for casual word processor users. Unfortunately most of those users probably find programs such as WordPad just as acceptable...
What if there was alternative for Microsoft Word that would install and open in 6 seconds, read and write Microsoft Word .doc files and run on Macintosh, Microsoft Windows or Linux computers? And oh yeah, it was FREE so consumers didn't have to pay $499 for Microsoft Office. I'm excited to announce that day is here.That's definitely news. Considering all the alternatives Microsoft Word has withstood all challengers over the years. Granted it's not a fair fight since Microsoft is a convicted predatory monopolist but regardless Word still stands as the benchmark word-processor application.
My initial impressions: this is a very basic beta. I don't want to judge it too harshly but Robertson is not ready to back up his claims. First, the site doesn't seem to have adequate bandwidth so the 6 second launch is way off the mark. In my few attempts at launching the program, it takes several minutes to load up over a very fast link (90 Mb). The ping times averaged over 100 ms whereas pings to Google and Hotmail were averaging 7 ms and 2 ms respectively. Unfortunately the sluggishness makes it hard to objectively compare this to a desktop application like Word.
Opening Word documents was therefore a little painful... In my tests they rendered ok although not exactly as I expected. More complex documents (with lots of formatting and tables) didn't successfully complete although I suspect this to be a bandwidth problem again.
I also note that Mr. Robertson's comparison to Office is disingenuous. As ajaxWrite is only a word processor, it would more closely compare to the standalone version of Word which retails for $229. I'm sure there's a suite of applications in the works, but it'd be nice to see a more honest comparison.
In the end, I think there's room for improvement but the premise is faulty. Desktop software might be considered "bloated" but there are distinct advantages. For the same reason most people prefer Outlook over the certainly capable OWA, I've yet to see a browser-based application that properly and fully replicates the desktop experience.
That said this has some promise for casual word processor users. Unfortunately most of those users probably find programs such as WordPad just as acceptable...
Monday, February 13, 2006
Will P2P Bear the Blame On This Too?
In the past 5 years of the music industry's assault on file sharing services, they've gone quite a few lengths to blame piracy for their sales woes. I've always felt that piracy was an effect rather than a cause of the problems. The biggest issue is that music just doesn't have the personality and cachet that it once did. The latest example: last week's Grammy show ratings were lower than a popular amateur music show, American Idol.
That should be a good lesson for the music biz. File sharing may be partly at fault for dwindling sales, but the Grammy show is a good indicator for the health of music that should be unaffected by pirated content. They've had ratings issues for a little while now and one quick explanation comes to mind: published music doesn't inspire people anymore.
That people would rather watch a bunch of amateurs vying for pop-star medals over the most established names in music is telling for the depth of the music industry's problems... I wonder how long before the RIAA puts out a press release blaming it on P2P.
That should be a good lesson for the music biz. File sharing may be partly at fault for dwindling sales, but the Grammy show is a good indicator for the health of music that should be unaffected by pirated content. They've had ratings issues for a little while now and one quick explanation comes to mind: published music doesn't inspire people anymore.
That people would rather watch a bunch of amateurs vying for pop-star medals over the most established names in music is telling for the depth of the music industry's problems... I wonder how long before the RIAA puts out a press release blaming it on P2P.
Thursday, February 09, 2006
Joanna Glasner Needs An Education
I came across this Wired.com column yesterday entitled "Digital Music Biz Ain't Booming" at work and thought "wow, Ms. Glasner is to the music biz as a vegetarian is to the cattle industry." Now I should disclaim that I work in the industry she loves to discount. Do I have problems with the music biz? Yeah, a lot of them. But those are all sitting as Blogger drafts so nothing substantial is really posted yet. But I must protest her commentary about a business she has no real appreciation for.
At any rate, Dear Ms. Glasner:
Here's the deal. Records do cost money. All your friends that think they're finding 1 in a million artists are likely attached to some label (independent or Big Guys). That means there's an entire network of people working behind the music. This costs money, whether you're a staff of 5 or a couple hundred.
Now don't get me wrong. Maybe the economics aren't there to have the staffing that is currently required. But even so it still costs a lot of money to get artists and their latest works into the public. Buzz, even by word of mouth, is oftentimes started by people working in the business (whether they work at a label, concert venue, or publication). How else are you going to hear about the great new artists, even if their contracts aren't equitable? If you want to really get a living from music, you can't just expect MySpace to get you there without blood, sweat, and tears. Plus the agents who also think you're talented and want a million people to buy your CD.
Again, this costs real dollars. I'm not rich by any means but I do really love my job. I won't even consider another place to be. But I also want to get paid because I'm an IT guy, not a starving musician. You might think it's selfish, but my efforts help sell millions of records and everyone that helps make that magic happen deserve their share.
Remember that you may not be a lover of music but I can't imagine life without it. For many people, music is a drug and those artists who inspire us should be patronized. Those artists who comprise your life's soundtrack, conveniently in your iPod-sized palms, should be able to pay their rent, taxes, and get white picket fences too. Again, these dreams cost real dollars.
In short, while it's really easy to beat up on the music business because of bonehead RIAA lawsuits and SonyBMG's DRM-turned-virus debacle, there are many good hard working people who dedicate their lives to selling music. Just because the moral relativists successfully convinced the public (who didn't really need too much help) that music should be free doesn't mean it costs nothing.
Ms. Glasner, I appreciate some of your arguments but you really need to take a larger look at how music gets from the artist's mind to the public's hands. Even if you personally don't value music, there are very real costs of production involved. Perhaps an overview economics class would have been in order before writing such misinformation on a rather respected publication.
At any rate, Dear Ms. Glasner:
Here's the deal. Records do cost money. All your friends that think they're finding 1 in a million artists are likely attached to some label (independent or Big Guys). That means there's an entire network of people working behind the music. This costs money, whether you're a staff of 5 or a couple hundred.
Now don't get me wrong. Maybe the economics aren't there to have the staffing that is currently required. But even so it still costs a lot of money to get artists and their latest works into the public. Buzz, even by word of mouth, is oftentimes started by people working in the business (whether they work at a label, concert venue, or publication). How else are you going to hear about the great new artists, even if their contracts aren't equitable? If you want to really get a living from music, you can't just expect MySpace to get you there without blood, sweat, and tears. Plus the agents who also think you're talented and want a million people to buy your CD.
Again, this costs real dollars. I'm not rich by any means but I do really love my job. I won't even consider another place to be. But I also want to get paid because I'm an IT guy, not a starving musician. You might think it's selfish, but my efforts help sell millions of records and everyone that helps make that magic happen deserve their share.
Remember that you may not be a lover of music but I can't imagine life without it. For many people, music is a drug and those artists who inspire us should be patronized. Those artists who comprise your life's soundtrack, conveniently in your iPod-sized palms, should be able to pay their rent, taxes, and get white picket fences too. Again, these dreams cost real dollars.
In short, while it's really easy to beat up on the music business because of bonehead RIAA lawsuits and SonyBMG's DRM-turned-virus debacle, there are many good hard working people who dedicate their lives to selling music. Just because the moral relativists successfully convinced the public (who didn't really need too much help) that music should be free doesn't mean it costs nothing.
Ms. Glasner, I appreciate some of your arguments but you really need to take a larger look at how music gets from the artist's mind to the public's hands. Even if you personally don't value music, there are very real costs of production involved. Perhaps an overview economics class would have been in order before writing such misinformation on a rather respected publication.
Thursday, February 02, 2006
Google Music?
I've been mulling the idea of Google acquiring Napster as reported a few days ago. The first thought I had was "why?" because this is a space where there are hundreds of competitors worldwide. Not to mention that the deals are setup such that the labels who own the copyrights retain the lionshare of income. As P2P has aptly shown, music may be much in demand but nobody's paying.
But it dawned on me today that it's a pretty simple concept. Google relies on advertisements for the bulk of their revenue. AdSense and AdWords have been hugely successful as evidenced by offerings like Gmail and Blogger. Bringing AdSense to a music offering seems exactly like something Google would want to do.
Streaming music over the Internet like Pandora or Last.fm seems like an integration waiting to happen. And if you're going to acquire a licensed music firm, why not nab the one with a big name? Napster certainly is ripe for the taking, with heavy competition with Real's subscriber-leading Rhapsody.
And since it's Google, I'd envision a basic streaming service that is free with downloads or portable device transfers to cost. That would make things very interesting for digital music if that happened...
But it dawned on me today that it's a pretty simple concept. Google relies on advertisements for the bulk of their revenue. AdSense and AdWords have been hugely successful as evidenced by offerings like Gmail and Blogger. Bringing AdSense to a music offering seems exactly like something Google would want to do.
Streaming music over the Internet like Pandora or Last.fm seems like an integration waiting to happen. And if you're going to acquire a licensed music firm, why not nab the one with a big name? Napster certainly is ripe for the taking, with heavy competition with Real's subscriber-leading Rhapsody.
And since it's Google, I'd envision a basic streaming service that is free with downloads or portable device transfers to cost. That would make things very interesting for digital music if that happened...
AT&T Jumps In On Extortion Games
To extort is "to obtain from a person by force, intimidation, or undue or illegal power" according to Merriam-Webster. While mainly used as a term for organized crime, communications providers have been ramping up their lobbying power to get the government's approval for charging content providers extra for the privilege of using their infrastructure. AT&T latest efforts are detailed in this Financial Times article: AT&T chief warns on internet costs.
Great, more fake rhetoric about ROI and who bears the costs. Let's be frank: telcos who think they shouldn't pay for their own infrastructure maintenance and upgrades should not be in business. This entire debate is ridiculous when you consider that these ISPs don't just charge end users for DSL or cable. Content providers also pay hefty rates for serving content in terms of T1, T3, and higher bandwidth. Google, Yahoo, and others don't just serve their webpages free over AT&T's pipes. Much of their business expenses include capital investments in server farms and connectivity.
If AT&T can't profitably maintain their network, they have every right to raise their rates for customers (whether they be the DSL or DS3 type) - any new fees are analogous to power companies getting a percentage of Dell's computer sales since you could argue that Dell is getting a free ride using all this electricity to make their hardware functional.
Plain and simple, ISPs are lobbying the US government for no other reason than to line their pockets. What's next, charge me for having this blog?
Great, more fake rhetoric about ROI and who bears the costs. Let's be frank: telcos who think they shouldn't pay for their own infrastructure maintenance and upgrades should not be in business. This entire debate is ridiculous when you consider that these ISPs don't just charge end users for DSL or cable. Content providers also pay hefty rates for serving content in terms of T1, T3, and higher bandwidth. Google, Yahoo, and others don't just serve their webpages free over AT&T's pipes. Much of their business expenses include capital investments in server farms and connectivity.
If AT&T can't profitably maintain their network, they have every right to raise their rates for customers (whether they be the DSL or DS3 type) - any new fees are analogous to power companies getting a percentage of Dell's computer sales since you could argue that Dell is getting a free ride using all this electricity to make their hardware functional.
Plain and simple, ISPs are lobbying the US government for no other reason than to line their pockets. What's next, charge me for having this blog?
Thursday, December 29, 2005
King George Must Go
I'm disgusted and saddened by the state of American politics. Instead of being the bastion of Liberty and Freedom, the once proud USA is in the clutches of a fascist president who was appointed by the Supreme Court. With control of both houses of Congress, the GOP has shamefully refused to hold their king accountable, despite the fact that there's been alarmingly many pieces of evidence.
During our last president's term, Bill Clinton was dogged by an independent prosecutor who essentially found no real illegal acts. Digging through dirty laundry, quite literally, Ken Starr finally was able to drum up charges of perjury through a semen-stained dress. Incredulously, the world watched as a partisan House of Representatives voted to impeach the President over consensual, albeit extramarital, sexual contact. Those same Republicans calling for impeachment were screaming about the Rule of Law violated by the Commander-in-Chief.
How quick we as a Nation have forgotten those clarion calls. Compare to King George, a man who admitted to wiretapping his own citizens, lead us disingenuously into a war that has killed or maimed tens of thousands of our young Americans, and whose administration illegally leaked the name of a covert CIA agent. Rather than citing the Rule of Law, Bush's apologists insist that we have more to fear from Terror than unchecked power.
Unacceptable. To the members of Congress: stand up for the Constitution and for our Republic. Have courage and punish this executive branch for their absolute corruption and cronyism. Impeach and indict the President and his minions for their Crimes against America. Such an act would restore America's credibility and give citizens faith that the Constitution, and not fear mongering, is our guide to governance.
During our last president's term, Bill Clinton was dogged by an independent prosecutor who essentially found no real illegal acts. Digging through dirty laundry, quite literally, Ken Starr finally was able to drum up charges of perjury through a semen-stained dress. Incredulously, the world watched as a partisan House of Representatives voted to impeach the President over consensual, albeit extramarital, sexual contact. Those same Republicans calling for impeachment were screaming about the Rule of Law violated by the Commander-in-Chief.
How quick we as a Nation have forgotten those clarion calls. Compare to King George, a man who admitted to wiretapping his own citizens, lead us disingenuously into a war that has killed or maimed tens of thousands of our young Americans, and whose administration illegally leaked the name of a covert CIA agent. Rather than citing the Rule of Law, Bush's apologists insist that we have more to fear from Terror than unchecked power.
Unacceptable. To the members of Congress: stand up for the Constitution and for our Republic. Have courage and punish this executive branch for their absolute corruption and cronyism. Impeach and indict the President and his minions for their Crimes against America. Such an act would restore America's credibility and give citizens faith that the Constitution, and not fear mongering, is our guide to governance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)