Before we all rush out and embrace this "new" internet jounalism, maybe we should consider the strange case of Apple Computer vs. Podcastready.com. The story has been buzzing around all the tech blogs and podcasts, and was supposedly broken by Wired Magazine's Listening Post Blog. According to the blog, Apple Computer, maker of the Ipod music player, had sent a "cease and desist" letter to a company called Podcastready.com claiming that their use of the term "Podcast Ready" infringed on certain Apple trademarks. The blog made the further assertion that, in effect, Apple Computer was claiming ownership of the word "Podcast".
Of course, sensational news like this spread quickly through both the blogosphere and the more mainstream enthusiast/tech news sites as well; sites that I've always thought spent way more time reading each other's sites than actually breaking real news. Is posting links really journalism, or is that what we now call the "new" journalism?
Anyways, back to this Apple vs. Podcastready.com thing. Like I said the story broke and all the blogs and tech news sites were linking to it, and pretty soon you had people claiming all sorts of crazy things like Apple was going to trademark the word "pod" or that Apple was going to start suing podcasters for infringing their trademark. I'll admit, I've done a little podcasting myself so the news certainly made me sit up and take notice.
Only trouble was, it wasn't true.
It seems in their rush to get this story onto their news sites these so-called tech "journalists" and "editors" decided to skip the time-consuming process of actually verifying their facts. Just read it on the net, say a quick "Omigod!", post the link, and call it "the news".
Well that's all well and good, but when a skeptical Adam Curry (host of the very popular Daily Source Code Podcast) heard the "news" he immediately had his doubts, and stated on his podcast that he wouldn't believe it was true until he read the actual "cease and desist" letter, apparently something that all the reporters and news sites carrying the story never thought to do. The owners of Podcastready.com heard the podcast and they and their lawyer sent Adam Curry a copy of the letter, which he then read and discussed on his Podcast No. 468.
The discussion is rather long and I won't bore you with the details, but the gist of the matter is that the original blogger completely misinterpreted and exaggerated (deliberately perhaps) the contents of the letter. Listen to the podcast for yourself (with the caveat that the Daily Source Code is not exactly family-friendly), read the blog posting, and see what you think. It seems pretty clear to me that the letter does not tell anyone to "cease and desist" anything or prohibit anyone from using the word "podcast", except in the limited sense discussed in the podcast.
So what are we to make of all this? If it is the role of the bloggers to keep the mainstream media accountable, then whose job is it to keep the bloggers accountable? I think there is this self-deceptive view going around among bloggers that he openness of the blogging community keeps each of us accountable, and yet how do you explain a story like this? By the time someone like Adam Curry actually gets around to checking the facts, the story has already been seen and read and linked by billions of people around the world. In fact, many people on the net still talk of this story as if it were true, and the fact that it isn't seems sadly irrelevant.
The worst part of this whole affair, though, is the carelessness shown by the enthusiast news sites who, despite their self-proclaimed professionalism, have shown themselves to be just as lazy and sloppy as the amateurs. I mean, if you read something on my blog and actually believe it then that's your problem. Sheesh, what did you expect. But if you're going to represent yourself as a journalist or your site as a news site, then you have to meet a higher standard. If not, then why bother.
(Please feel free to link this to this blog and pass it around to all your friends)
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Thursday, September 14, 2006
I Didn't Want to do a 9/11 Post, So Here It Is
No doubt about it; it's been a very strange war. Just the whole way it's been marketed has been strange; sort of the no-mess, no-fuss war.
"Got a terrorist problem? Tired of sacrifice and hardship and all those messy, hard-to-use wars you've used in the past? Then you should try our new 'Terror-B-Gone' anti-terrorist cleaner. With it's patented 'Hi Tech' ingredients, 'Terror-B-Gone' will both clean and disinfect those nasty terrorist hotspots. No more scrubbing and no more unpleasant smells. Just spray it on and wipe it off, and you're through. 'Terror-B-Gone' not only kills the terrorists, it's special formula also gets those nasty insurgencies that terrorists can sometimes leave behind. Try new 'Terror-B-Gone' today. (Now in the convenient nation building size)."
Yeah, just because there's a war going on that doesn't mean we have to stop partying, does it? At least that's what this administration seems to be saying. "Now don't be showing any dead soldiers coming back from the war. We don't want to upset the public, especially at dinnertime."
Of all the strange things that have come out of this war, though, I think the strangest has to be the TV footage I saw of the German Army deploying in the deserts of Afghanistan yesterday. I'm not trying to imply anything here, but when I looked at those pictures I just got this really weird sort of deja-vu type of feeling. Does anyone remember Rommel? The Afrika Corps? I know it's totally different circumstances now. It just struck me as strange.
Anyways, that's all in the past. Our new threat, or so we're told, is this thing called Islamafascism. I'm not exactly sure what that means, but I'm guessing that they're telling us that just as the European fascists once threatened the world and started the Second World War, now it is Islamist fascists that are threatening the world and bringing us to the brink of World War III. Well, that's what the current administration believes, and no one could ever accuse this current administration of being alarmist or trying to panic the public two months before a midterm election.
So I got to thinking about this whole thing and, you know, to me it just doesn't seem to scale. Let me explain what I mean. According to Wikipedia Al-Qaeda has somewhere around 20,000 members worldwide. In WWII, the Wehrmacht numbered over 18 million. Not quite the same in my book. At it's peak, the Third Reich occupied France, Belgium, The Netherlands, Norway, Finland, Poland, Croatia, Serbia, Albania, Montenegro, Greece, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Czeckoslovakia, Austria, Western Russia and parts of Northern Africa. Al-Qaeda currently occupies a few bases and remote outposts in Northern Pakistan. Again, not quite the same. The Third Reich had one of the most advanced and well-equipped armies in the world, as well as a modern airforce and submarine fleet. Al-Qaeda has explosives and some suicide bombers. Deadly, yes, but not really a threat to overrun Europe.
And yet we act as if they are. Why is that?
The way I see it, if terrorism is about scaring the enemy into irrational actions, then Al-Qaeda has certainly succeeded. America, it seems, has taken this group of 20,000 or so fanatics and created this enormous bogeyman that's going to bring us to the brink of WWIII. That's what happens when you're panicked with fear--you inflate the threat until it becomes this monstrous thing that's living in your closet and is going to eat you up as soon as you fall asleep.
Instead of panicking, maybe what we need to do is step back and do a little reality check. Yes, there is a danger, but how big a danger is it really? I don't have the statistics in front of me but I'll bet you that you're far more likely to die from that cheeseburger and fries you had for lunch than you are from a terrorist attack. If you put things in their proper perspective and don't overreact, then it's easy to tell the difference between prudence and paranoia. In fact, isn't overreaction a big reason we're in the mess we are right now. The more they provoke, the more we react, and the more they are able to use the energy of our reactions to grow and gather strength. Isn't that what people call "feeding the fire".
I think it works something like that.
And just to change the subject, can we please stop calling every difficulty that arises in life a "crisis". Geez Louise. Of course it's the news people who are mostly responsible. Seems you can't have a news show if you don't have a "crisis" to start things off. Got to keep the viewers from changing the channel, you know. That's why when the local 7-11 runs out of ice cream bars, the evening news sends a crew out and calls it "Crisis in America's Dairyland". Geez Louise...
So anyways that's my 9/11 post. All the other bloggers were posting about it so I thought I'd chime in too. Hardly seems worth the bother.
"Got a terrorist problem? Tired of sacrifice and hardship and all those messy, hard-to-use wars you've used in the past? Then you should try our new 'Terror-B-Gone' anti-terrorist cleaner. With it's patented 'Hi Tech' ingredients, 'Terror-B-Gone' will both clean and disinfect those nasty terrorist hotspots. No more scrubbing and no more unpleasant smells. Just spray it on and wipe it off, and you're through. 'Terror-B-Gone' not only kills the terrorists, it's special formula also gets those nasty insurgencies that terrorists can sometimes leave behind. Try new 'Terror-B-Gone' today. (Now in the convenient nation building size)."
Yeah, just because there's a war going on that doesn't mean we have to stop partying, does it? At least that's what this administration seems to be saying. "Now don't be showing any dead soldiers coming back from the war. We don't want to upset the public, especially at dinnertime."
Of all the strange things that have come out of this war, though, I think the strangest has to be the TV footage I saw of the German Army deploying in the deserts of Afghanistan yesterday. I'm not trying to imply anything here, but when I looked at those pictures I just got this really weird sort of deja-vu type of feeling. Does anyone remember Rommel? The Afrika Corps? I know it's totally different circumstances now. It just struck me as strange.Anyways, that's all in the past. Our new threat, or so we're told, is this thing called Islamafascism. I'm not exactly sure what that means, but I'm guessing that they're telling us that just as the European fascists once threatened the world and started the Second World War, now it is Islamist fascists that are threatening the world and bringing us to the brink of World War III. Well, that's what the current administration believes, and no one could ever accuse this current administration of being alarmist or trying to panic the public two months before a midterm election.
So I got to thinking about this whole thing and, you know, to me it just doesn't seem to scale. Let me explain what I mean. According to Wikipedia Al-Qaeda has somewhere around 20,000 members worldwide. In WWII, the Wehrmacht numbered over 18 million. Not quite the same in my book. At it's peak, the Third Reich occupied France, Belgium, The Netherlands, Norway, Finland, Poland, Croatia, Serbia, Albania, Montenegro, Greece, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Czeckoslovakia, Austria, Western Russia and parts of Northern Africa. Al-Qaeda currently occupies a few bases and remote outposts in Northern Pakistan. Again, not quite the same. The Third Reich had one of the most advanced and well-equipped armies in the world, as well as a modern airforce and submarine fleet. Al-Qaeda has explosives and some suicide bombers. Deadly, yes, but not really a threat to overrun Europe.
And yet we act as if they are. Why is that?
The way I see it, if terrorism is about scaring the enemy into irrational actions, then Al-Qaeda has certainly succeeded. America, it seems, has taken this group of 20,000 or so fanatics and created this enormous bogeyman that's going to bring us to the brink of WWIII. That's what happens when you're panicked with fear--you inflate the threat until it becomes this monstrous thing that's living in your closet and is going to eat you up as soon as you fall asleep.
Instead of panicking, maybe what we need to do is step back and do a little reality check. Yes, there is a danger, but how big a danger is it really? I don't have the statistics in front of me but I'll bet you that you're far more likely to die from that cheeseburger and fries you had for lunch than you are from a terrorist attack. If you put things in their proper perspective and don't overreact, then it's easy to tell the difference between prudence and paranoia. In fact, isn't overreaction a big reason we're in the mess we are right now. The more they provoke, the more we react, and the more they are able to use the energy of our reactions to grow and gather strength. Isn't that what people call "feeding the fire".
I think it works something like that.
And just to change the subject, can we please stop calling every difficulty that arises in life a "crisis". Geez Louise. Of course it's the news people who are mostly responsible. Seems you can't have a news show if you don't have a "crisis" to start things off. Got to keep the viewers from changing the channel, you know. That's why when the local 7-11 runs out of ice cream bars, the evening news sends a crew out and calls it "Crisis in America's Dairyland". Geez Louise...
So anyways that's my 9/11 post. All the other bloggers were posting about it so I thought I'd chime in too. Hardly seems worth the bother.
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
I've Seen the Future and It's Slow - Very Slow
I'll admit that sometimes it's hard to know how to pass the time. Having too much leisure can be as much a curse as a blessing. Better to stay occupied and busy than let dullness and torpidity drain life of its vigor. Stimulation, that's what the human spirit needs, a sense of action and purpose.
So with that in mind let me tell you about the "Unbox" online video store that Amazon.com launched last week, because believe me, if you're the type that can be endlessly entertained by the slow creep of progress bars then "Unbox" will never leave you bored again. Oh, you haven't heard of the Amazon "Unbox"? Well then, let me explain.
For about the past year those Ipod folks have had it all over us poor Windows Media types. Although our devices could play music just like the Ipod and play video just like the Ipod, there weren't any Windows Media stores on the Internet where we could legally purchase video content that would play on our devices. The Ipod crowd could purchase videos from their Itunes Music Store, but the rest of us were left out in the cold.
That sort of changed earlier this year when Starz launched their Vongo service, but unfortunately that service only had support for 2 devices. Great if you happened to own one of those devices but not much use to anyone else.
Last week, however, Amazon.com launched their highly anticipated "Unbox", and for the first time the majority of Windows Media device owners had what the Ipodders merely took for granted; a place to shop for video downloads. Of course, as the owner of a Windows Media device (Creative Zen Vision:M) I signed right up, downloaded the software, and got right to it. Here's what I found.
First of all, the service works. For around 10 or 15 dollars you can download a movie and either watch it on your computer or transfer it to your portable device. Unfortunately, that's all you can do with it. You can't burn it to a DVD and watch it on your home theater like you would with a DVD purchased at the store. It either plays on your computer or your device. Period.
Well, they say there's one born every minute, but even a sucker like me can't get too excited over a deal like that. Why would I pay the same price online as I would in a store for something that's so limited in its use? Interestingly, Apple Computer also announced a similar sort of limited use movie download program today, and you have to believe that it isn't the technology companies that are trying to kill the online video business--it's Hollywood. I'm sure that Amazon and Apple would like to keep their customers happy by offering movies that can downloaded and owned and used just like any other purchased movie, but it appears that Hollywood is never going to let that happen. Instead, their real goal seems to be the destruction of the whole download model, which they must see as a threat to the current DVD/cable/pay-per-view model that's earning them such handsome returns.
Oh well, it goes without saying that I won't be downloading any movies from either Amazon or Apple anytime soon. However, I was interested in some of the TV shows that Amazon had for sale so I gave it a try, and here's where it gets interesting. Now of course there have been "Unbox" horror stories circulating around the net about broken downloads and licensing nightmares and all the sorts of thing you have to expect that from a brand new service. All I can say is that I downloaded a show to my computer and it played fine, and then I transferred it over to my device and it played fine there too. No horror stories from me except...
Before I go any futher I should also explain that Amazon.com touts their TV downloads as "DVD quality", which is good if you like quality, and bad if you've only got a limited time on this earth and want to experience something of life before you die. I can personally vouch for the quality of the videos. They look fantastic on both my computer monitor and on my media device, and look much, much, much, much, much better than any of the videos I've downloaded from Itunes. On the other hand, how does a 852 Megabyte download for a 40 minute show strike you? And you can forget about broadband or fast connections 'cause Amazon's servers don't care. At least they didn't care last weekend, and it took me at least 90 minutes to download a 40 minute video. If you do the math you'll see that comes out to about twice as long to download it as to watch it.
Luckily, Amazon will let you start watching the video as soon as you have downloaded enough to fill the playback buffer, so that cut the time between the start of the download to the point where I could start watching the show to about 1 hour and 5 minutes. Did I mention that this was a 40 minute show? Then again, when the video finally arrived it looked really good. The show looked so good, in fact, that I went ahead and ordered the rest of the season. I don't know what I was thinking but I figure that with only 23 more shows in the series to download I should be finished by around Christmas.
And they'll look really good.
Anyways, if you have a Windows Media device and you want to buy some video for it what other choice do you have? Just be patient and make sure you have plenty of room on your hard drive. At 850 MB per show you're gonna need it.
So with that in mind let me tell you about the "Unbox" online video store that Amazon.com launched last week, because believe me, if you're the type that can be endlessly entertained by the slow creep of progress bars then "Unbox" will never leave you bored again. Oh, you haven't heard of the Amazon "Unbox"? Well then, let me explain.
For about the past year those Ipod folks have had it all over us poor Windows Media types. Although our devices could play music just like the Ipod and play video just like the Ipod, there weren't any Windows Media stores on the Internet where we could legally purchase video content that would play on our devices. The Ipod crowd could purchase videos from their Itunes Music Store, but the rest of us were left out in the cold.
That sort of changed earlier this year when Starz launched their Vongo service, but unfortunately that service only had support for 2 devices. Great if you happened to own one of those devices but not much use to anyone else.
Last week, however, Amazon.com launched their highly anticipated "Unbox", and for the first time the majority of Windows Media device owners had what the Ipodders merely took for granted; a place to shop for video downloads. Of course, as the owner of a Windows Media device (Creative Zen Vision:M) I signed right up, downloaded the software, and got right to it. Here's what I found.
First of all, the service works. For around 10 or 15 dollars you can download a movie and either watch it on your computer or transfer it to your portable device. Unfortunately, that's all you can do with it. You can't burn it to a DVD and watch it on your home theater like you would with a DVD purchased at the store. It either plays on your computer or your device. Period.
Well, they say there's one born every minute, but even a sucker like me can't get too excited over a deal like that. Why would I pay the same price online as I would in a store for something that's so limited in its use? Interestingly, Apple Computer also announced a similar sort of limited use movie download program today, and you have to believe that it isn't the technology companies that are trying to kill the online video business--it's Hollywood. I'm sure that Amazon and Apple would like to keep their customers happy by offering movies that can downloaded and owned and used just like any other purchased movie, but it appears that Hollywood is never going to let that happen. Instead, their real goal seems to be the destruction of the whole download model, which they must see as a threat to the current DVD/cable/pay-per-view model that's earning them such handsome returns.
Oh well, it goes without saying that I won't be downloading any movies from either Amazon or Apple anytime soon. However, I was interested in some of the TV shows that Amazon had for sale so I gave it a try, and here's where it gets interesting. Now of course there have been "Unbox" horror stories circulating around the net about broken downloads and licensing nightmares and all the sorts of thing you have to expect that from a brand new service. All I can say is that I downloaded a show to my computer and it played fine, and then I transferred it over to my device and it played fine there too. No horror stories from me except...
Before I go any futher I should also explain that Amazon.com touts their TV downloads as "DVD quality", which is good if you like quality, and bad if you've only got a limited time on this earth and want to experience something of life before you die. I can personally vouch for the quality of the videos. They look fantastic on both my computer monitor and on my media device, and look much, much, much, much, much better than any of the videos I've downloaded from Itunes. On the other hand, how does a 852 Megabyte download for a 40 minute show strike you? And you can forget about broadband or fast connections 'cause Amazon's servers don't care. At least they didn't care last weekend, and it took me at least 90 minutes to download a 40 minute video. If you do the math you'll see that comes out to about twice as long to download it as to watch it.
Luckily, Amazon will let you start watching the video as soon as you have downloaded enough to fill the playback buffer, so that cut the time between the start of the download to the point where I could start watching the show to about 1 hour and 5 minutes. Did I mention that this was a 40 minute show? Then again, when the video finally arrived it looked really good. The show looked so good, in fact, that I went ahead and ordered the rest of the season. I don't know what I was thinking but I figure that with only 23 more shows in the series to download I should be finished by around Christmas.
And they'll look really good.
Anyways, if you have a Windows Media device and you want to buy some video for it what other choice do you have? Just be patient and make sure you have plenty of room on your hard drive. At 850 MB per show you're gonna need it.
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
I Love You California
Greetings from California, where the Labor Day weekend is behind us and election day is just around the corner. In case you forgot that the elections are coming the President made sure he reminded us with his biennial "terrorist scare" speech today. "We are not safe" he told us, "so let fear be your guide when you go to the polls and cast your vote." (Ok, he didn't say that second part, but the subtext was clear)
Honestly, I don't know how long the Republicans can keep playing the pre-election terrorist card before voters start to catch on. Geez, now they've got the public so panicked that there are people out there actually worried that someone is going to bring down a 747 with a tube of toothpaste. Could happen, I guess, but seems a little farfetched to me.
Instead of panicking everyone I think what the airlines should do is take a page out of Great Britain's playbook and install security cameras in the airplanes. And I mean everywhere. Every seatback, every aisle, and every bathroom should have a little cc-camera watching the action. That way, a security officer in the front of the plane can scan all the activity in the cabin, and as soon as he sees someone pull out a bottle of water or reach for a Ipod (BAM!) two goons come running down the aisle and wrestle him to the floor. Pretty good idea, huh? And you won't need to stand in some long security line anymore. Just get on the plane, find your seat, keep your hands in plain sight where we can see 'em, don't make any unnecessary movements, and we'll all have a nice, safe, comfortable flight.
But that's not what I wanted to talk about. I wanted to talk about the elections. We're in the home stretch here in California and I think even the Democrats have given up on poor old Phil. Not completely, mind you, but there just doesn't seem to be much enthusiasm over in the blue camp for the Angelides campaign. I've blogged about this before and I don't want to beat a dead horse. Let's just say...
You know what he reminds me of? He reminds me of a career bureaucrat. In the commercials they try to make him look commanding and purposeful, but no matter how you try to package it he still has that aura of a supervisor at the DMV. You know what I mean?
"Hey Phil, you got change for a dollar?"
"Sorry, I can't do that. I'm not allowed to handle money."
"Huh?"
"I can't do that. If you want change for your dollar you'll need to fill out Form TTDCL998-R at the information desk and take it over to window 97."
"Window 97? You mean you can't just give me change. I've got to go to Window 97? The one where the line goes halfway out to the parking lot?"
"No. You need to fill out the Form TTDCL998-R at the Information desk and then you go to Window 97 to get your change."
"Form what? TCD898 dash what? Where am I supposed to go?"
"TTDCL998-R. You get it at the information desk. Is there anything else I can help you with?"
"No, you've been a great help. Thanks a lot, Phil. You know all I needed was a couple of quarters for the parking meter."
"Window 97. I'm sorry, but rules are rules."
Judging by the number of TV ads being run, the real election issue out here in California seems to be the Proposition 87 oil production tax. If you want me to explain it I can't, although I can give you this link if you want to read it. Basically, what the proponents want to do is put a tax on oil production that will pay for research on alternative fuels. Prop 87 also provides that the cost of the new tax cannot be passed on to consumers. In other words, a real win-win situation for California. We get controls on the price of gasoline and we also get to beat up on the oil companies at the same time. Why didn't Secretary Bodman think of that?
Unfortunately, I'm not buying it. The problem, it seems to me, is that making gasoline refined in California more expensive only provides an incentive for gasoline distributors to buy their gas somewhere else. Why pay more when you can go out of state and pay less? That's usually what happens when you try to implement price controls, and I'm not saying Prop 87 has real price controls, but it comes awfully close. It's been my experience that when the government tries to tell an industry what they can charge for their product what you get is shortages and pent-up demand.
But who knows, maybe this'll work. It certainly has a lot of voter appeal and a Field Poll that came out last month had it well out in front. Either way, regardless of what happens elsewhere, I expect gasoline in California will remain expensive for some time to come. Which will all lead us to where we should be going in the first place anyways, i.e., more fuel efficient cars. There's a novel idea. Maybe that should be on the ballot. Prop 289 - The "If Your Sick of High Prices then Quit Driving that Gas Guzzler" Initiative.
Well, with all this turmoil going on it's going to be an interesting election this time around. Don't be suprised if there's another terror alert or two before election day either. You know, it would be great if we Americans finally got involved in this war of ours and actually showed up on election day and voted. Wouldn't that be something? Instead of going down to Walmart and buying a flag or little yellow ribbon bumper sticker to show our commitment, this election could be a national referendum on the Iraq War and all the various factions could finally hash out just where we stand on the Middle East and America's conduct of the War and our whole foreign policy in general. Yeah, rather than surrender control of the government to the left and right wings of the respective parties, wouldn't it be great if everyone else got involved in this democracy too and showed up on election day and cast their vote and really made a statement about where this country should be headed?
Alright, just kidding. I know, I know. I hope they don't preempt Big Brother for more of that stupid election coverage too. Sheesh. Who cares.
Honestly, I don't know how long the Republicans can keep playing the pre-election terrorist card before voters start to catch on. Geez, now they've got the public so panicked that there are people out there actually worried that someone is going to bring down a 747 with a tube of toothpaste. Could happen, I guess, but seems a little farfetched to me.
Instead of panicking everyone I think what the airlines should do is take a page out of Great Britain's playbook and install security cameras in the airplanes. And I mean everywhere. Every seatback, every aisle, and every bathroom should have a little cc-camera watching the action. That way, a security officer in the front of the plane can scan all the activity in the cabin, and as soon as he sees someone pull out a bottle of water or reach for a Ipod (BAM!) two goons come running down the aisle and wrestle him to the floor. Pretty good idea, huh? And you won't need to stand in some long security line anymore. Just get on the plane, find your seat, keep your hands in plain sight where we can see 'em, don't make any unnecessary movements, and we'll all have a nice, safe, comfortable flight.
But that's not what I wanted to talk about. I wanted to talk about the elections. We're in the home stretch here in California and I think even the Democrats have given up on poor old Phil. Not completely, mind you, but there just doesn't seem to be much enthusiasm over in the blue camp for the Angelides campaign. I've blogged about this before and I don't want to beat a dead horse. Let's just say...
You know what he reminds me of? He reminds me of a career bureaucrat. In the commercials they try to make him look commanding and purposeful, but no matter how you try to package it he still has that aura of a supervisor at the DMV. You know what I mean?
"Hey Phil, you got change for a dollar?"
"Sorry, I can't do that. I'm not allowed to handle money."
"Huh?"
"I can't do that. If you want change for your dollar you'll need to fill out Form TTDCL998-R at the information desk and take it over to window 97."
"Window 97? You mean you can't just give me change. I've got to go to Window 97? The one where the line goes halfway out to the parking lot?"
"No. You need to fill out the Form TTDCL998-R at the Information desk and then you go to Window 97 to get your change."
"Form what? TCD898 dash what? Where am I supposed to go?"
"TTDCL998-R. You get it at the information desk. Is there anything else I can help you with?"
"No, you've been a great help. Thanks a lot, Phil. You know all I needed was a couple of quarters for the parking meter."
"Window 97. I'm sorry, but rules are rules."
Judging by the number of TV ads being run, the real election issue out here in California seems to be the Proposition 87 oil production tax. If you want me to explain it I can't, although I can give you this link if you want to read it. Basically, what the proponents want to do is put a tax on oil production that will pay for research on alternative fuels. Prop 87 also provides that the cost of the new tax cannot be passed on to consumers. In other words, a real win-win situation for California. We get controls on the price of gasoline and we also get to beat up on the oil companies at the same time. Why didn't Secretary Bodman think of that?
Unfortunately, I'm not buying it. The problem, it seems to me, is that making gasoline refined in California more expensive only provides an incentive for gasoline distributors to buy their gas somewhere else. Why pay more when you can go out of state and pay less? That's usually what happens when you try to implement price controls, and I'm not saying Prop 87 has real price controls, but it comes awfully close. It's been my experience that when the government tries to tell an industry what they can charge for their product what you get is shortages and pent-up demand.
But who knows, maybe this'll work. It certainly has a lot of voter appeal and a Field Poll that came out last month had it well out in front. Either way, regardless of what happens elsewhere, I expect gasoline in California will remain expensive for some time to come. Which will all lead us to where we should be going in the first place anyways, i.e., more fuel efficient cars. There's a novel idea. Maybe that should be on the ballot. Prop 289 - The "If Your Sick of High Prices then Quit Driving that Gas Guzzler" Initiative.
Well, with all this turmoil going on it's going to be an interesting election this time around. Don't be suprised if there's another terror alert or two before election day either. You know, it would be great if we Americans finally got involved in this war of ours and actually showed up on election day and voted. Wouldn't that be something? Instead of going down to Walmart and buying a flag or little yellow ribbon bumper sticker to show our commitment, this election could be a national referendum on the Iraq War and all the various factions could finally hash out just where we stand on the Middle East and America's conduct of the War and our whole foreign policy in general. Yeah, rather than surrender control of the government to the left and right wings of the respective parties, wouldn't it be great if everyone else got involved in this democracy too and showed up on election day and cast their vote and really made a statement about where this country should be headed?
Alright, just kidding. I know, I know. I hope they don't preempt Big Brother for more of that stupid election coverage too. Sheesh. Who cares.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
