Every once in while it's important to remember your rights.
It doesn't matter who you are or where you stand on the political spectrum, the only reason you have any right to voice your opinions in this country on tech, politics, business or the boss you hate is because a little over 200 years ago a group of very intelligent men grew tired of being told what to do by a government on the other side of an ocean.
These men very wisely set up freedoms for speech, the press and religion in their second attempt at a document to set up a new government here in the states.
If you want to learn more about those nice rights in the very first amendment please visit http://1forall.us/ Even Google, the largest search engine around, has a link to it on their homepage right now.
People bled so you can speak your mind. Know your rights, and this weekend on our country's birthday remember them.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Finding a niche
Technology and news are what I know.
I decided to attend the University of Georgia to study newspaper journalism. I have played and worked on computers since I was in elementary school. But for the past year, I have been struggling to find a way to use both of these skills to earn a living wage in against an economy with horrible unemployment rate and a failing newspaper industry.
I think I have found it. For now at least, I'm not going to be a tech guru and I'm not going to work in general news. I'm going to be a white water raft guide on the Big Pigeon River in Tennessee.
If you're anything like me, you are probably wondering what in the world being a raft guide has to do with journalism or tech. Rather than explain, I'll show you:
I did not do this particular video. However, I can make money with others like it. We also sell pictures. I plan on using my skills in computers to make fliers, videos and ads for USA Raft. I plan on using my skills in journalism to spread awareness of the company.
Both will make me money.
The point is a degree is just a piece of paper. If all goes according to plan, I will graduate from UGA in just a few days, but a job with a newspaper near me is not immediately available. So I'm going to use my skills as raft guide as well as a tech and media guy to make money while I wait.
Jobs are out there, you just have to know your niche and use it in ways that others can't or don't know about.
Oh and if you are wondering, yes, I did advertise for USA Raft on purpose. Now that you know about USA, maybe you will come rafting with us, which will make me money.
I decided to attend the University of Georgia to study newspaper journalism. I have played and worked on computers since I was in elementary school. But for the past year, I have been struggling to find a way to use both of these skills to earn a living wage in against an economy with horrible unemployment rate and a failing newspaper industry.
I think I have found it. For now at least, I'm not going to be a tech guru and I'm not going to work in general news. I'm going to be a white water raft guide on the Big Pigeon River in Tennessee.
If you're anything like me, you are probably wondering what in the world being a raft guide has to do with journalism or tech. Rather than explain, I'll show you:
I did not do this particular video. However, I can make money with others like it. We also sell pictures. I plan on using my skills in computers to make fliers, videos and ads for USA Raft. I plan on using my skills in journalism to spread awareness of the company.
Both will make me money.
The point is a degree is just a piece of paper. If all goes according to plan, I will graduate from UGA in just a few days, but a job with a newspaper near me is not immediately available. So I'm going to use my skills as raft guide as well as a tech and media guy to make money while I wait.
Jobs are out there, you just have to know your niche and use it in ways that others can't or don't know about.
Oh and if you are wondering, yes, I did advertise for USA Raft on purpose. Now that you know about USA, maybe you will come rafting with us, which will make me money.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
SEC learns they are watched.
Journalists are often called upon to decry the wrong-doings of public officials. That is what it means to be a watch dog, but stories like this one don't come around every day.
Technight usually avoids political issues, but this time we need to discuss what the Security and Exchanges Commission has done.
The SEC is tasked by the U.S. Government with overseeing the economy and business dealings. But probes by its own Inspector General, David Gotz, show many employees spend a vast amount of time at work looking at pornography instead.
This is a clear violation of ethical principles the government has set up for it's employees, but more than that, it's stealing.
The Associated Press covers this story and gives a thorough "he said, she said" review by the major players, but we need to look at something deeper.
These are Federal employees paid by the tax dollars. Some are reported to make over $200 thousand a year. That's a lot of money taken out of the pay-checks earned by those people who still have jobs after the economic down-turn.
That's a lot of money to pay someone to watch porn.
One of these employees got a 14-day suspension after refusing to plead in his defense.
That isn't good enough. That employee allegedly downloaded thousands of explicit images onto a government-owned computer hard drive by getting around firewalls. That is space that should have gone to databases, spread sheets, ideas to turn around the recession--you name it.
We suggest another idea. Network and server logs were used to determine that these employees were looking at porn instead of working in the first place, so they should be used to determine how long these people where getting paid to do so.
They should be fined an equivalent amount based on hourly income or salary plus expenses for computer repairs--porn sites often carry with them multiple viruses and worms that can seriously damage the functionality of the machines.
Next, information technology managers should be placed in offices to oversee internet usage and data trafficking. These people are there to work, not play. This kind of activity doesn't cut it in the private sector and it certainly should not in the public.
Oh and by the way, they should be fired.
Technight usually avoids political issues, but this time we need to discuss what the Security and Exchanges Commission has done.
The SEC is tasked by the U.S. Government with overseeing the economy and business dealings. But probes by its own Inspector General, David Gotz, show many employees spend a vast amount of time at work looking at pornography instead.
This is a clear violation of ethical principles the government has set up for it's employees, but more than that, it's stealing.
The Associated Press covers this story and gives a thorough "he said, she said" review by the major players, but we need to look at something deeper.
These are Federal employees paid by the tax dollars. Some are reported to make over $200 thousand a year. That's a lot of money taken out of the pay-checks earned by those people who still have jobs after the economic down-turn.
That's a lot of money to pay someone to watch porn.
One of these employees got a 14-day suspension after refusing to plead in his defense.
That isn't good enough. That employee allegedly downloaded thousands of explicit images onto a government-owned computer hard drive by getting around firewalls. That is space that should have gone to databases, spread sheets, ideas to turn around the recession--you name it.
We suggest another idea. Network and server logs were used to determine that these employees were looking at porn instead of working in the first place, so they should be used to determine how long these people where getting paid to do so.
They should be fined an equivalent amount based on hourly income or salary plus expenses for computer repairs--porn sites often carry with them multiple viruses and worms that can seriously damage the functionality of the machines.
Next, information technology managers should be placed in offices to oversee internet usage and data trafficking. These people are there to work, not play. This kind of activity doesn't cut it in the private sector and it certainly should not in the public.
Oh and by the way, they should be fired.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Not another iPad review
Forget another iPad review.
I'm not going to do one. The Internet is full of takes on the tablet and lists all the things it can or can't do written by people smarter than me. I'm going to talk about something else instead. I'm going to talk about marketing.
Apple knows how to market a product.
In 2001, Steve Jobs unveiled the iPod, and now iTunes virtually controls the on-line music industry. Jobs knows how to make an audience hang onto his every word, and he knows how to build up suspense for a big reveal.
The I'm a Mac commercials were classic in their simplicity and their humor. They also spawned mimic commercials from Microsoft which just seem lacking by comparison.
Even the closed-mouth approach leading up to the big reveal that Apple was developing a tablet computer had blogs like Mac Rumors and Apple Insider overloaded with fan boys and girls looking for some news about a device which might not even exist.
With all the build up, I was honestly let down by the press release Apple had back in January. You're welcome to read my review here on this blog.
Now I realize something, Steve Jobs didn't have to sell the iPad. Everyone from web-sites like Gizmodo and ones mentioned above to major news companies such as the New York Times and the BBC are doing it for him.
Three hundred thousand iPads sold on the first day, according to Apple, and the numbers will only go up from there as the 3G models and new functions become available.
I don't consider myself to be an Apple fan-boy. I like their products, but I can't afford them. I might as well look at an expensive sports car as an Apple computer since I can't afford one of those either.
Still, I have to hand it to them, Apple has achieved such brand recognition that media companies around the world do their advertising for them with stories and reviews about their products. Forget some touch screen tablet, that's impressive.
I'm not going to do one. The Internet is full of takes on the tablet and lists all the things it can or can't do written by people smarter than me. I'm going to talk about something else instead. I'm going to talk about marketing.
Apple knows how to market a product.
In 2001, Steve Jobs unveiled the iPod, and now iTunes virtually controls the on-line music industry. Jobs knows how to make an audience hang onto his every word, and he knows how to build up suspense for a big reveal.
The I'm a Mac commercials were classic in their simplicity and their humor. They also spawned mimic commercials from Microsoft which just seem lacking by comparison.
Even the closed-mouth approach leading up to the big reveal that Apple was developing a tablet computer had blogs like Mac Rumors and Apple Insider overloaded with fan boys and girls looking for some news about a device which might not even exist.
With all the build up, I was honestly let down by the press release Apple had back in January. You're welcome to read my review here on this blog.
Now I realize something, Steve Jobs didn't have to sell the iPad. Everyone from web-sites like Gizmodo and ones mentioned above to major news companies such as the New York Times and the BBC are doing it for him.
Three hundred thousand iPads sold on the first day, according to Apple, and the numbers will only go up from there as the 3G models and new functions become available.
I don't consider myself to be an Apple fan-boy. I like their products, but I can't afford them. I might as well look at an expensive sports car as an Apple computer since I can't afford one of those either.
Still, I have to hand it to them, Apple has achieved such brand recognition that media companies around the world do their advertising for them with stories and reviews about their products. Forget some touch screen tablet, that's impressive.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Thus passes a titan
Not many people know who Dr. Edward Roberts was, but his affect on your life is apparent by the simply fact that you're reading this on-line.
Edwards invented the first personal computer, the MITS Altair 8800, in 1975.
The Altair was little more than a switchboard with a few lights and no screen, but it inspired the likes of Bill Gates, the founder of software giant Microsoft to get into the software business in the first place.
Before the Altair, the personal computer, then called microcomputers, was something for hobbyists to build and tinker with in their garages.
Gates and his partner Paul Allen had bigger ideas. Commercial software was not an economically viable business, it was simpler for large mainframe owners to simply code their own since so few businesses owned computers.
"Ed was truly a pioneer in the personal computer revolution and didn't always get the recognition he deserved," Gates wrote on his website. "We will always have fond memories of working with Ed in Albuquerque."
Roberts' box was just what Gates and his partners needed to create their first product: Microsoft Basic. Anyone who has ever heard of Windows can figure out the rest of the story.
Roberts left the computer industry nearly 30 years ago to become a doctor, but his legacy has touched the lives of everyone who's ever used a modern computer.
We should be thankful for the contributions that men like Roberts and Gates have made to world. It is impossible to imagine what technology would look like today without early enthusiasts like them.
Roberts died Thursday, April 1, of pneumonia. He was 68.
Edwards invented the first personal computer, the MITS Altair 8800, in 1975.
The Altair was little more than a switchboard with a few lights and no screen, but it inspired the likes of Bill Gates, the founder of software giant Microsoft to get into the software business in the first place.
Before the Altair, the personal computer, then called microcomputers, was something for hobbyists to build and tinker with in their garages.
Gates and his partner Paul Allen had bigger ideas. Commercial software was not an economically viable business, it was simpler for large mainframe owners to simply code their own since so few businesses owned computers.
"Ed was truly a pioneer in the personal computer revolution and didn't always get the recognition he deserved," Gates wrote on his website. "We will always have fond memories of working with Ed in Albuquerque."
Roberts' box was just what Gates and his partners needed to create their first product: Microsoft Basic. Anyone who has ever heard of Windows can figure out the rest of the story.
Roberts left the computer industry nearly 30 years ago to become a doctor, but his legacy has touched the lives of everyone who's ever used a modern computer.
We should be thankful for the contributions that men like Roberts and Gates have made to world. It is impossible to imagine what technology would look like today without early enthusiasts like them.
Roberts died Thursday, April 1, of pneumonia. He was 68.
Friday, March 12, 2010
Wii Move
Well, they say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, if that's the case then Sony just paid Nintendo a pretty big compliment.
The press event held on March 11 by Sony entertainment unveiled a motion controller for the Playstation 3 called theWii Playstation Move. The device is slated for release this Fall.
The Playstation Move looks and functions like the Nintendo Wii-mote. The biggest difference I noted was that it's black, and apparently, at least partially dependent on the Playstation Eye USB camera to work.
The Move will feature two hand-held, wireless controls--one for on-screen movement and button tapping, the other for cursor navigation and an analog stick. Demonstrations on the Playstation web-site seemed somewhat lacking in specific detail.
Whether it features controls better than what are available on the Nintendo Wii remains to be seen.
Technight will feature a full review when the Playstation Review is released.
The press event held on March 11 by Sony entertainment unveiled a motion controller for the Playstation 3 called the
The Playstation Move looks and functions like the Nintendo Wii-mote. The biggest difference I noted was that it's black, and apparently, at least partially dependent on the Playstation Eye USB camera to work.
The Move will feature two hand-held, wireless controls--one for on-screen movement and button tapping, the other for cursor navigation and an analog stick. Demonstrations on the Playstation web-site seemed somewhat lacking in specific detail.
Whether it features controls better than what are available on the Nintendo Wii remains to be seen.
Technight will feature a full review when the Playstation Review is released.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
School goes too far
The more prevalent technology gets, the less privacy we all have.
One Pennsylvania student with a school issued laptop has allegedly been spied upon at home via the computer's built-in webcam and a program called boing-boing.
The story should disgust parents and students alike. The schools should have the right to monitor what a child does on their computers. It's their property. They should even have the right to monitor what children do at all times while they are at school--it's their responsibility.
Taking pictures of a child, at home, without his or her parents' consent, that is an invasion of privacy and a violation of the Civil Rights Act.
Stories like this one are only going to get more common as social media networking programs such as Facebook and Twitter continue to blur the lines between a person's public and private lives.
The student may have been doing something he wasn't supposed to on the laptop. That's not the point, there are other ways to prove that such as web search logs and cookies. What we do need to take note of is that what we do can be monitored.
Posting photos on the Internet, making comments on a friend's Facebook profile, tweeting--all of these things can be viewed by far more people than we intend.
Parents you need to inform your children that there is no such thing as true privacy on-line. Bosses and teachers can use it against you. The high school may have been in the wrong, but the trend of monitoring Internet behaviour isn't going to go away.
http://
One Pennsylvania student with a school issued laptop has allegedly been spied upon at home via the computer's built-in webcam and a program called boing-boing.
The story should disgust parents and students alike. The schools should have the right to monitor what a child does on their computers. It's their property. They should even have the right to monitor what children do at all times while they are at school--it's their responsibility.
Taking pictures of a child, at home, without his or her parents' consent, that is an invasion of privacy and a violation of the Civil Rights Act.
Stories like this one are only going to get more common as social media networking programs such as Facebook and Twitter continue to blur the lines between a person's public and private lives.
The student may have been doing something he wasn't supposed to on the laptop. That's not the point, there are other ways to prove that such as web search logs and cookies. What we do need to take note of is that what we do can be monitored.
Posting photos on the Internet, making comments on a friend's Facebook profile, tweeting--all of these things can be viewed by far more people than we intend.
Parents you need to inform your children that there is no such thing as true privacy on-line. Bosses and teachers can use it against you. The high school may have been in the wrong, but the trend of monitoring Internet behaviour isn't going to go away.
http://
Friday, February 12, 2010
It's snowing. Again.
Picture this, you are driving down the Shorter Avenue--a four lane road with gas stations, stores and neighbourhoods. All of the sudden, you see a snowflake, a single snowflake drift towards the earth and melt.
Boom! All 93,000 residents in the county crowd the local Wal-mart and buy up all the milk and bread. They act out of fear because of a blizzard that hit Georgia way back in 1993. Since then it has snowed only rarely in Georgia, and then usually less than an inch per year if any.
Because of that, I usually mocked the panicked masses while I threw my swimming trunks in the wash knowing I would probably get to use them soon. Not so this year. For the first time in my life, it has snowed--really snowed twice in Rome in a single year.
I feel like a penguin.
I have heard several people using our unusual weather to discredit climate change or prove it over the last several days. But the fact of the matter is, El Niño is to blame.
El Niño is a warm-weather pattern in the Northern Pacific Ocean that pulls rain East. Warm Weather, in the Pacific Ocean. The last time El Nino hit North America was in 1999. It brought an unusually rainy year followed by a drought season known as La Nina.
Both phenomenon are game-changers that screw up our weather for several years. The usually warm, mild winters of Georgia are just a nice dream while they are active.
What I want to know is why do people who get by without milk or bread for three weeks at a time need it now?
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
iPad: well, it's a tablet...
Apple CEO Steve Jobs introduced the tablet-format iPad to a group of journalists and media enthusiasts today.
Several thousand people tuned in to live blogs hosted by sites such as engadet or the New York Times, myself included. I was less than impressed.
The device sports a 9.7" screen, is .5" inch thick and weighs 1.5 pounds, according to Apple. Jobs described the iPad as being a mobile device meant to fill the gap between iPod's and Macbooks, but compared to Apple unveilings of the past, it didn't revolutionize anything.
The iPad has been described by onlookers as a "giant iPhone." But a better description would be a giant iPod touch. The ipad has no SMS text messaging and no off-line phone capabilities.
There were some nice features. The iPad can run any iPhone app unmodified out of the box. It will have its own version of iWorks for sell, has access to iTunes, the app store and a new feature called iBooks which seems to be Apple's attempt to break into the e-reader market.
However, it didn't show anything that hasn't already been done by other devices before--most of them from Apple. It does movies. So does the iPod. It does the Internet. So does the iPhone and iPod touch.
Like the iPhone, it still lacks Adobe Flash support. It also can't multi-task and has no slots for removable memory of any kind. Unlike the iPhone, it doesn't have a camera either.
The one thing that I do find impressive is the pricing. The iPad will cost $500-830 according to Jobs, depending on memory size and whether its 3-G capable. In addition an unlimited data Internet plan will be available from AT&T for $30 a month without contract.
The iPad probably has a future with people who use their iPhones for playing games and browsing the internet more than for a phone. I have no doubt that Apple fanboys will buy it, but I won't be lining up anytime soon.
Several thousand people tuned in to live blogs hosted by sites such as engadet or the New York Times, myself included. I was less than impressed.
The device sports a 9.7" screen, is .5" inch thick and weighs 1.5 pounds, according to Apple. Jobs described the iPad as being a mobile device meant to fill the gap between iPod's and Macbooks, but compared to Apple unveilings of the past, it didn't revolutionize anything.
The iPad has been described by onlookers as a "giant iPhone." But a better description would be a giant iPod touch. The ipad has no SMS text messaging and no off-line phone capabilities.
There were some nice features. The iPad can run any iPhone app unmodified out of the box. It will have its own version of iWorks for sell, has access to iTunes, the app store and a new feature called iBooks which seems to be Apple's attempt to break into the e-reader market.
However, it didn't show anything that hasn't already been done by other devices before--most of them from Apple. It does movies. So does the iPod. It does the Internet. So does the iPhone and iPod touch.
Like the iPhone, it still lacks Adobe Flash support. It also can't multi-task and has no slots for removable memory of any kind. Unlike the iPhone, it doesn't have a camera either.
The one thing that I do find impressive is the pricing. The iPad will cost $500-830 according to Jobs, depending on memory size and whether its 3-G capable. In addition an unlimited data Internet plan will be available from AT&T for $30 a month without contract.
The iPad probably has a future with people who use their iPhones for playing games and browsing the internet more than for a phone. I have no doubt that Apple fanboys will buy it, but I won't be lining up anytime soon.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Fanboys (and Apple stockholders) rejoice
Apple sent out invitations to reporters for a media event Wednesday, Jan. 27, in San Francisco.
The invitation says "come see our newest creation," according to a short New York Times article by Brad Stone.
Personally, I think its about time. The new product will almost certainly be the Apple tablet computer that has been the subject of every rumor-mongering web-site and Apple fan-boy for over a year, including one of my own.
I'll post again about this once I have a full features list and an idea on just what I think of this thing.
The invitation says "come see our newest creation," according to a short New York Times article by Brad Stone.
Personally, I think its about time. The new product will almost certainly be the Apple tablet computer that has been the subject of every rumor-mongering web-site and Apple fan-boy for over a year, including one of my own.
I'll post again about this once I have a full features list and an idea on just what I think of this thing.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
3-D T.V. Are you serious?
The 2010 Consumer Electronics Show which took place Jan. 7-10 in Las Vegas had a few interesting surprises, worst among them was the 3-D T.V.
There are a few reasons I believe this new platform won't work: timing, price and usability.
Timing:
Last year the government forced the switch to digital signal only broadcasts forcing many people to buy new T.V.'s or adapter boxes.
Not only will 3-D T.V.'s fail, but the move might doom other products that we're already enjoying some success such as Blu-ray players and high-definition (HD-T.V.'s).
Why would I buy a 3-D T.V. when I just bought an HD one in the last couple of years? High-definition televisions have only recently become popular and have yet to hit market saturation. On the other hand, why would I bother to buy an HD-T.V. if they're already obsolete?
Blu-ray players face a similar crisis. They survived the hurdles of coming shortly after the DVD players became popular, and competed with the now defunct HD-DVD format for use.
However, current Blu-ray players are will be replaced with 3-D capable ones by manufacurers such as Sharp leaving early adopters high and dry. This leads me to believe those same early-adopters may become angry and forego the upgrade.
Price:
High-definition T.V.'s have only recently come down to the $200 and up range. Now the manufacturers are expecting us to throw those still new boxes in the trash and spend yet more money for a 3-D upgrade. Samsung for instance quoted a price range of $7-12 thousand at the show.
As you will recall, the recession is still going on leaving few with that kind of cash.
Last week, the Associated Press reported that the unemployment rate was over 10 percent nation wide and closer to 17 percent if adjusted for the people who have simply given up on finding a job.
Usability:
Let's face it, this is where everything falls apart for this format.
3-D television sets will require glasses, several manufacturerers are working on proprietary designs, but they all work on the same basic principle--seeing an image with only one eye at a time to give the illusion of depth.
If you already wear glasses, like UGA student Jamie Diamond, 20, of Athens, Ga., this won't work.
"It would be horribly uncomfortable to wear 3-D glasses over my own," Diamond said. "I won't do it. It's stupid."
Another issue to worry about are epilepsy. The rapidly flashing images could lead to seizures, though the industry will probably find ways to make glasses that risk.
Finally, there is the vanity issue. How many americans will want to put on dorky head sets for a slightly better look at John Stewart's desk? I won't.
Whether the 3-D T.V. lives or dies will be determined in the next couple of years, but I wouldn't head to the store for one anytime soon.
There are a few reasons I believe this new platform won't work: timing, price and usability.
Timing:
Last year the government forced the switch to digital signal only broadcasts forcing many people to buy new T.V.'s or adapter boxes.
Not only will 3-D T.V.'s fail, but the move might doom other products that we're already enjoying some success such as Blu-ray players and high-definition (HD-T.V.'s).
Why would I buy a 3-D T.V. when I just bought an HD one in the last couple of years? High-definition televisions have only recently become popular and have yet to hit market saturation. On the other hand, why would I bother to buy an HD-T.V. if they're already obsolete?
Blu-ray players face a similar crisis. They survived the hurdles of coming shortly after the DVD players became popular, and competed with the now defunct HD-DVD format for use.
However, current Blu-ray players are will be replaced with 3-D capable ones by manufacurers such as Sharp leaving early adopters high and dry. This leads me to believe those same early-adopters may become angry and forego the upgrade.
Price:
High-definition T.V.'s have only recently come down to the $200 and up range. Now the manufacturers are expecting us to throw those still new boxes in the trash and spend yet more money for a 3-D upgrade. Samsung for instance quoted a price range of $7-12 thousand at the show.
As you will recall, the recession is still going on leaving few with that kind of cash.
Last week, the Associated Press reported that the unemployment rate was over 10 percent nation wide and closer to 17 percent if adjusted for the people who have simply given up on finding a job.
Usability:
Let's face it, this is where everything falls apart for this format.
3-D television sets will require glasses, several manufacturerers are working on proprietary designs, but they all work on the same basic principle--seeing an image with only one eye at a time to give the illusion of depth.
If you already wear glasses, like UGA student Jamie Diamond, 20, of Athens, Ga., this won't work.
"It would be horribly uncomfortable to wear 3-D glasses over my own," Diamond said. "I won't do it. It's stupid."
Another issue to worry about are epilepsy. The rapidly flashing images could lead to seizures, though the industry will probably find ways to make glasses that risk.
Finally, there is the vanity issue. How many americans will want to put on dorky head sets for a slightly better look at John Stewart's desk? I won't.
Whether the 3-D T.V. lives or dies will be determined in the next couple of years, but I wouldn't head to the store for one anytime soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)