An American Lion
Powered by Squarespace

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Rampage of the Innocents - My Historical Romance Novel (now, with more sex and violence for my teenaged readers)

Tags

 

Categories

An American Lion

The Monthly Archives

The Frisky Mole Boy of Groton

Norman Rogers recounts the summer he spent hiding from the stern love of his father and living as the world-famous “frisky mole boy” in the Groton, Connecticut sewer system.

An American Lion

Talking Smack About Sports

The Things I Do

I’m a Mommy Blogger

The Admiral Hassenpfeffer

Rachel Ray’s Magnificent Ass

Ghost Ride The Whip

I Love My Guns More Than My Children

The Republican Party

Safe For Work Hotties

Money

BlogWithIntegrity.com _______________________

Add to Google Reader or Homepage

Twingly BlogRank

Blog directory

Independent Political Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory

An American Lion - Blogged

Subscribe in Bloglines

Subscribe in NewsGator Online

Add to netvibes

blogarama - the blog directory

TAMAZU: About Me Blogs

add page

http://www.wikio.com

http://www.wikio.com/

This form does not yet contain any fields.

    Entries in Communications (22)

    Tuesday
    09Mar2010

    Careful With that Axe, Lars

    Lars Vilks and a depiction of “Mohammad” with the body of a dog

    A Swedish cartoonist tells the BBC that he has an axe in his home, should someone try to attack him for a cartoon that he drew several years ago:

    Seven people have been arrested in the Irish Republic over an alleged plot to kill a Swedish cartoonist for depicting the Prophet Muhammad, police say.

    The four men and three women are all Muslim immigrants, according to media reports, though a police statement did not confirm this.

    Cartoonist Lars Vilks had depicted the Prophet Muhammad with the body of a dog in the Nerikes Allehanda newspaper.

    Islamic militants put a $100,000 (£67,000) bounty on his head.

    Mr Vilks was quoted as saying he was unfazed by the arrests, which he said he thought could be linked to two death threats he had received by telephone in January.

    What a bunch of nonsense. If the basis of your religion can be shaken by what some Swede with pen and ink comes up with, your religion isn’t really based on anything except your own fundamentalist rage, now is it? The great religions cannot be threatened by cartoonists. Islam is a great religion; no cartoonist can make a “dent” in it with a half-clever scrawl.

    If you take a look at what is depicted above, how can anyone be offended? I could understand annoyed—what a waste of time. But, offended? Please.

    Tuesday
    09Mar2010

    Never Believe The Hype

    Is the Internet about to explode with massive new speeds and tremendous amounts of shared data, now possible because of a new evolution in technology?

    Cisco unveiled a new Internet technology Tuesday that it says will provide the ultra-fast data speeds necessary to stay ahead of users’ rapidly growing online video demands.

    The new technology, known as “CRS-3,” is a network routing system that will be able to offer downloads of up to 322 Terabits per second, according to the company.

    Translation: Well in Cisco terms, the router will be able to provide download speeds of 1 Gigabit per second for everyone in San Francisco, download the entire printed collection of the Library of Congress in 1 second and stream every movie ever created in less than 4 minutes.

    Cisco Chief Executive John Chambers acknowledged that many skeptics will say that those speeds and network capacity are not necessary, but he argued that the fast-growing media usage on mobile phones will ultimately demand it.

    “I know this is not that exciting to the average consumer right now, but it is the foundation for future speeds,” Chambers said in a Web cast Tuesday. “When it comes to mobile devices, I want to get any video, anytime and be able to share that on any device in your living room. The foundation of that is the CRS-3.”

    Someone is probably going to try to raise some money with this new information; someone else has to decide if they can afford it. Then, the assorted providers of Internet services will have to huddle and figure out what they can afford and what they can give consumers.

    The disconnect between what they can get and what they can give you is where we start to see reality seeping in. They can get some fantastic technology right now, such as the Verizon FiOS that I used to have; they can’t give you that because they can’t make money building out huge networks so that every home can choose whether or not to hook up to it. The costs are too prohibitive. If CRS-3 is all that and more, then I hope it comes with a very low pricetag. If not, by the time they can afford to provide it, the rest of the world will probably be on to something else. All of that content that moves through the ultra-fast bandwidth they want everyone to use—that costs money, too. And the days of free content won’t go on forever. I can envision a time when there are people with great capability and great capacity who won’t bother with the service because the cost of subscribing to NBC, CBS, and whoever else are too high to justify what they’re getting, which is overpriced content of low quality with little interest.

    Seriously, does anyone thing people will pay to watch the Evening News? Reality television? Half-witted comedies? In sufficient numbers to make money? So much for building a tool that can get us everything we want to see. By then, perhaps there won’t be anything worth watching, except the stuff we all already own.

    Monday
    22Feb2010

    He Doesn't Have a Record to Run On

    The operative term, though, is “yet.” President Obama doesn’t have much of a record yet, and he has accomplished so little, it’s easy to see why Democrat governors are beginning to panic:

    Democratic governors said Sunday they worry about President Barack Obama’s track record on fighting Republican political attacks and urged him to better connect with anxious voters. Some allies pleaded for a new election-year strategy focused on the economy.

    “It’s got to be better thought out,” Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell said. “It’s got to be more proactive.” And, he said, Democrats must hit back just as hard as they are hit by Republicans.

    Eight months before the first midterm elections of Obama’s presidency, most Americans are frustrated with - even angered by - persistent unemployment and gridlock in Washington. Democrats fear voters will punish the party in power.

    The titular head of his party, Obama has watched his own popularity drop over the past year. He will bear at least some responsibility for the outcome in November, and Democrats are looking to him for political fixes.

    In interviews at the National Governors Association’s weekend meeting, several Democratic governors faulted the White House for losing the communications war against Republicans over what Obama has accomplished in his first year.

    When you have a short list of actual accomplishments to cite in order to refute such criticism, you can effectively win the argument. I know there was a stimulus, I know there have been some other accomplishments, but everything of import has been fairly effectively stymied. It’s not entirely the fault of the President though. If there was an operating, functioning Democrat Congress, he’d have new legislation to sign into law on a regular basis.

    Somehow, President Bush got nearly everything he wanted for eight years. How is it, after over a year, this President can’t get anything, even though he has majorities Bush never dreamed of obtaining? It all makes you wonder what’s really going on, doesn’t it?

    Friday
    19Feb2010

    Tracing the Chinese Efforts to Hack into Google

    I have followed this story a bit less than I would like, and I think it comes down to an assessment as to whether or not it is possible for an information company to do business in China:

    The Internet attacks that may end up driving Google Inc. out of China originated from two prominent schools in the country, according to a story published late Thursday.

    The New York Times reported security investigators have traced the hacking to computers at Shanghai Jiaotong University and Lanxiang Vocational School in China. The newspaper attributed the information to unnamed people involved in the investigation.

    Google didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

    The company revealed on Jan. 12 that digital thieves had stolen some of its computer code and tried to break into the accounts of human rights activists opposed to China’s policies. The sophisticated theft also targeted the computers of more than 30 other companies, according to security experts. A security weakness in Microsoft Corp.’s Internet Explorer Web browser is believed to have created an opening for the hackers.

    The digital assault was serious enough to prompt Google to confront China’s government about censorship rules that weed out politically and culturally sensitive topics from search results in the country. Google says it’s prepared to shut down its China-based search engine and possibly shut down all of its offices in the country unless the ruling party loosens its restrictions on free speech.

    China is always going to be sensitive to the idea of dissent, and if your company has a tool that can allow a dissenting individual to get around the surveillance apparatus of the country and privately exchange information that the government is interested in, why would you be surprised to see that paranoid government going to such extremes? I haven’t been able to figure out if Google is really that offended or suprised by what happened with the Chinese. Were the Google people naive about what the Chinese were willing to do? The Chinese government doesn’t really care about public relations anymore (the Olympics are over, of course). They are not going to tolerate dissent; information becomes the currency in a standoff with people organizing against the government.

    Now, Google could acquire a lot of credibility (and a great deal of positive public relations coverage) by pulling out of China, but what would that do to tens of millions of Chinese who are still getting some sort of information or utility out of the Google suite of products? Given the relative lack of wealth in that part of the world, how do you say that Google is right to pull away from millions of users who cannot afford to pay for things like E-mail or blogs? How do you reconcile punishing a huge group of users just to make a point against the Chinese government (which doesn’t care, won’t learn, and cannot stop being paranoid)?

    This is where one can become quite the purity troll; certainly, punish Google if it doesn’t do the right thing. But, remember. Google has a rather difficult choice to make. Either it makes the freedom loving West unhappy or it makes a lot of information and technology-starved people very happy. Which is preferable?

    Wednesday
    06Jan2010

    Pandora Radio in a Car Under You?

    Livio Radio for Pandora

    Last year, when I was dictating to my staff the details of my burgeoning Internet empire, I told them that I might want to have a food blog, but I definitely wanted a gadget blog. My food blog lasted about a week. Some dingbat complained that I stole her recipe, but, under basic fair use rules, I was solid. I deleted the food blog. I truck no complaints from dingbats.

    I started gadjimatronics because I like to invent words. I came up with “widebody slapfaces” and “barfunked” and “skadiggety” and “bum scuffles” and a bunch of other brilliant words, but I think “gadjimatronics” is probably the best one of all. You’re welcome.

    When you have 20 or more blogs, and only spend about twenty minutes a day working on them, things tend to get a little loose. Don’t expect too many posts over there for a while. I have naps to take, and pictures of hotties to give the thumb up or the thumb down to. Byron selects ALL of the hottie pictures, and I sit on the couch, watching Sportscenter. He patiently tabs through them, and I give him an up or down, and then he crops them and organizes them. The boy is masterful when it comes to Internet pornography, I have to admit.

    Miranda drops in once in a while and changes the text below the title and then tells me what to write about. Some of this comes from her mother, my ex-wife, so I have to be careful.

    Anyway, the point of this post was to yap about something called Pandora Radio:

    Pandora Inc. has struck a deal with electronics maker Pioneer Corp. that promises to make it easier for drivers to listen to its personalized radio service in cars—bringing Internet radio one step closer to snagging a built-in spot on dashboards. The development represents a direct challenge to broadcasters of satellite and traditional radio, who have long dreaded the arrival of Internet radio in cars.

    Starting in March, Pioneer will sell a navigation and entertainment device that allows Pandora users who stream the service on their AppleInc. iPhones to easily access Pandora in their cars. The $1,200 navigation system, announced today at the Consumer Electronics show in Las Vegas, will detect iPhones and iPod touches that have Pandora installed, and put the consumer’s Pandora settings on the navigation screen. That will allow drivers to hear their favorite Pandora radio channels.

    Neither side paid cash to work with the other, said Ted Cardenas, director of marketing for Pioneer, who says he saw it as an opportunity to reach many of Pandora’s 42 million users. “This gives us the ability to talk to an entirely new group of consumers,” he said in an interview.

    At Pandora, executives hope the deal will help expand the way its fans think of the service. “Maybe a year ago people would have said Pandora is a computer thing,” said co-founder Tim Westergren. Now, “they’re beginning to realize that Internet radio is an anytime, anywhere thing.”

    Radio companies, long used to a relative monopoly on dashboards, have been nervously anticipating the era when they will lose their dominance in cars. They have been working hard on their own online radio services, which include streamed versions of their regular stations as well as Internet-only stations.

    Sounds like a wonderful innovation, but, correct me if I’m wrong—isn’t there supposed to be some way to interrupt regular radio programming for emergencies? How do you get breaking news of traffic and public safety information in a reliable way? Do you have to have subscriptions to local stations that would give you that? Do you have a way to shut down or interrupt streaming music? It would be rare that this would be an issue, but, in some areas of the country, the weather makes local radio indispensable. Some of these devices have been around since September, I see. Looks somewhat big and bulky, but I suspect that the device will shrink and change with innovation.

    Third Generation (3G) networks are already overwhelmed, especially in New York City. If you mean to say that, by adding tens of thousands of users of Pandora to an existing network infrastructure, you’ll be compensating for that by building up that infrastructure, all well and good. Where’s the plan? Where’s the money? And when will someone admit that the fees for Pandora would have to go up as network costs rise? What if the Internet slows or goes out altogether? Broadcast radio can be sent out from remote locations, powered by fueled generators, to devices run on batteries. Can the Internet radio do that? Or will the 3G networks collapse if the power is out for too long? I can tell you one thing—if the data networks don’t start increasing their capacity, consumers are going to revolt and abandon these services BEFORE they can start making a lot of money.

    What are the lobbyists doing to level this playing field? Major broadcasters ARE NOT going to stand by and do nothing. Laws and regulations are coming.

    It sounds wonderful, but usually, things that go bust sound like the cat’s pajamas. Satellite radio certainly sounded like that.

    Saturday
    19Dec2009

    Verizon Has More Greed Than Common Sense

    Consumers like to walk away from bad prices and bad service

    When you’re hell bent on angering your customers, always try to do it with a smile, not a sneer:

    Verizon Wirelessdefended today its recent decision to double penalties for smart-phone customers who leave their contracts early, telling federal regulators that it needed to do so to keep up with the rising costs of mobile devices that it is subsidizes for its users. Starting Nov. 15, Verizion Wireless smart phone customers were charged $350 for cancelling their contracts early, compared to previous charges of $150.

    The letter drew immediate criticism from consumer groups that said Verizon is unfairly charging consumers for costs unassociated with the phones. Such policies, they say, deter users from switching carriers even when they move to areas without service and can add up to hundreds of dollars of penalties for households that want to terminate service, even close to the end of their contracts.

    In a 77-page letter to the Federal Communications Commission, the nation’s largest mobile phone service operator said it makes up the costs of subsidizing phones like the BlackBerry Storm and Droid through service fees in one- or two-year contracts. When customers leave for competitors like T-Mobile, Sprint Nextel or AT&T,Verizon argued, it suffers losses from the discounts given for smart devices.

    And the ETF goes to recover other costs beyond the phone, Verizon said:

    Contrary to the implication of the question, the ETF is not limited to the recovery of the wholesale cost of the device over the life of the contract. As explained in response to Question 4, the ETF partially compensates Verizon Wireless for all the costs and risks of providing service, which include advertising, commission, store costs, and network costs.

    Those costs shouldn’t fall on the shoulders of its users, who aren’t buying their phones to pay for Verizon Wireless’ ad campaigns, consumer advocates said.

    The thing is, these phones are wonderful and all, but they’re really money traps. You’re not paying for a super cool device. You’re paying through the nose to be connected to a spotty network with severe limitations and expensive data rates. There’s a reason why a kid in California can run up a ridiculously expensive bill just by downloading a gig and a half of data over the wrong phone—the networks cannot handle it, and the fees are just one way to soak people. On my Verizon FiOS connection, I can download a gig of data, any time and any day of the week, in mere minutes. What’s a gig of data? To me, it’s a momentary thing that happens in the background. To someone with the wrong kind of phone, it’s like signing over six months of salary. Something is seriously flat busted broken out there. It’s been going on for years—anything for a buck.

    And what’s to blame? Well, the marketing aspect is partially to blame. The elitism that goes with having an iPhone has clearly put companies like Verizon on the defensive. They are now rushing to give consumers something that can compete with the iPhone, and the costs of marketing such a thing are hitting their profit margins. Instead of playing against the weakness of the iPhone, which prevents customers from having real choice, Verizon is now saying, ‘the cost of abandoning us is designed to spread a word of mouth that will ensure that no one will sign with us, because our draconian rules will scare customers into sticking with their iPhones.’

    Networks are expensive. Why bother even going into the communications business, then? Well, if every major telecom company joined with their brethren, and built out one comprehensive network that everyone could use, coverage would expand to most Americans. Where these companies would have to compete is on customer service, quality, and price. That’s why they won’t do it. They want their enclosed networks, their outrageous cancellation fees, and their exclusivity. In reality, there’s one simple way they could provide the consumer with great service and fair prices, and that’s by shared infrastructure investment and cooperation. You’re more likely to see them hiring better customer service personnel. I once had a conversation with a man at Comcast cable who, in his smugness and disdain for me, let slip that I was a drop in the bucket. Comcast’s bucket has sprung a leak in my area—their customers have abandoned them for Verizon. Is that because Verizon is such great shakes? Of course not. It’s because Comcast became too nasty to continue to do business with. This is why Direct TV, Dish Network, and everyone else are seeing a backlash from consumers.

    The draconian rules of having an iPhone have now been confronted with the draconian rules of signing up for whatever Verizon has to offer, and, dammit, you had better pay their price and sign over your choice to them. Common sense has always said, “give the people what they want.” If you can’t figure out how to make money from doing that, go out of business.

    Leaving things open, and giving the consumers the best product that a company can field, has gone the way of the analog pager.