Archive for the 'Technology' category

Why We Split Up: The Terrible Toad That Led To A Difficult Decision

May 14 2013 Published by under Apple, iOS, Technology

After a long, complicated relationship, autocorrect and I have parted ways. It was a very difficult decision for both of us, but in the long run we’ll be happier.

I know autocorrect has been seeing a lot of other people, and has developed a rather sketchy reputation. But that’s not why we split.

We just realized that we don’t see the world the same way. When I type its, i mean its. I grew tired of constantly being told that “it’s” was a possessive. It’s not.

Perhaps the final straw was the constant bickering over autocorrect’s constant efforts to make me use “we’ll” instead of “well”.

Oh well!

We tried a number of things to make life better. For a short time, manual shortcuts worked to jumpstart our relationship. In the end it just wasn’t enough.

I wish autocorrect well, and hope it finds someone special.

Comments

Open-Source vs. For-Profit Tech and Activism

Feb 19 2013 Published by under Apple, Politics, Technology

So last wek I made a point in my Spectator piece that the GOP has a tech problem, but it’s a tech problem that can be addressed through a significant investment in money and culture.  As I argued, you can address a lot of tech shortcomings if you invest in being better, smarter, and bringing people to the table that have the skills and letting them run with those skills.

My former colleague Patrick Ruffini, on Sunday, seemed to take issue with at least part of that when he chided Stuart Stevens – Romney’s brain trust – for suggesting that money can solve our tech problems.

What really troubles me about Stevens’s comments is his dismissive statement that “technology is something to a large degree you can go out and purchase.” No, it’s not. Technology is not about the tools. It is about people. It’s about creating a culture that drives metrics over hunches and BS “message of the day” fire drills.

Stevens will be the last general strategist of his kind not because he didn’t tweet, but because he thought of technology and data as some cool toy you could buy, not as the very foundation of a strong organization.

I would actually challenge Ruffini on that to a degree.  If poor tech is the problem, you can, in fact, invest in better tools.  But part of the GOP’s problem is it has not recently invested heavily in tools.  The period when it did (roughly 1996 through 2006) was marked by a significant improvement in tools.  The RNC database that eventually led to Voter Vault and microtargeting, and scared the Democrats into stepping up their game, was a result of that investment.  The GOP Team Leader program, the Bush re-elect effort, and many, many wins at the state and federal level were all a result of that investment – better data, better tools, better ideas.

Like the hare that naps and lets the tortoise win the race, however, the GOP got complacent.  It seemed to believe the headlines after 2004 that said the Dems may never be able to catch up with our data and microtargeting supremacy.  Those same headlines are being written now about the Dems, and I find them absurd. No party has a lock on tech, ideas, or success. Tech, especially, is a fickle beast and steer erratically between the latest good idea.  The GOP began to learn that when the 2008 Obama campaign took what the right had done and built on it.

So do I agree with Stevens that we can simply spend our way to competitiveness?  The answer to that requires a bit more framing.

We need to think of our problem differently. In politics, like technology, there are two camps. One, we’ll call it the open-source approach, creates a larger more vibrant community (of either activists or technologists).  The other, for-profit model is still perfectly legitimate, but doesn’t invite as many to participate and becomes much more expensive to maintain.

Think of the left’s activism as Linux, MySQL, and Drupal and the right’s as Microsoft or Oracle.  One innovates faster and has a larger community, one is limited in functionality to what they’re willing to invest in, rather than what the crowd can come up with.

There is nothing that says the right cannot compete with a Microsoft model.  They can, quite reasonably, invest huge sums of money in closed platforms, and be competitive.  That was Stuart’s point, and I agree that it is a viable – though certainly not the best - option.

One way or another – whether we follow the Stevens model, or something much more open and inclusive – the right must undergo a major attitudinal change.

If we want to follow Stevens model and closely guard the source code and hardware for GOP 16, then the donor culture on the right still needs to stop thinking in two-year cycles of TV ads and invest heavily in organizations that will be continually innovating, continually coming up with new, but still largely proprietary products.

What you cannot do, in Stevens model, is what the GOP has done for the last six years. You cannot release Windows Vista and expect it to keep you viable for a decade.

We would need to follow something more closely resembling the Apple model – a locked down platform that meets the needs of 90% of consumer (jailbreakers excluded), but one that still guards the source.  Voter Vault, in many ways, originally took that approach.  It protected the kernel while still meeting the needs of the users.  The problem is the GOP didn’t innovate when the needs of the users began to change.  Rather than enabling Voter Vault to be integrated with state, county, local, and issue advocacy campaigns through tools that would connect to the data, and share the benefit of all that data collection – Voter Vault became the iPhone without the ability to add apps.

Would it be possible to succeed with a tool that is still a walled garden, but one that meets the needs of its users?  Just ask Facebook.  They have made a huge business from that model.

So while I respect Patrick’s view, and agree with him that a more open model would be better, I disagree that there is absolutely no other option.  The Stevens approach could be successful, but it would still require a major cultural shift, and would be less likely to produce good outcomes.

Comments

The Trouble With Dem Messaging Against Romney

Jun 12 2012 Published by under Elections, Government, Greentech, Messaging, Technology, The President, Waste

David Roberts, who writes for leftist enviro rag Grist, has a recent post looking at the message challenges facing the Democrats.

In order to inoculate themselves against attacks on Solar Trust of America, Bright Source, Solyndra, LSP Energy, Energy Conversion Devices, Abound Solar, A123 Solar, UniSolar, Azure Dynamics, Evergreen Solar, and Ener1 (collectively, let’s call these “Obama’s green failure or OGF for short), the Dems have been using a “them too” attack that says Romney supported green tech, too.

That very act, says Roberts, is a bad move for the left.

When Konarka is called “Romney’s Solyndra,” I suspect political elites do not hear “Romney’s civic-minded attempt to support clean energy.” They hear scandal and vulnerability. They hear that funding clean-energy companies is a dark secret to be embarrassed about; that government support for clean energy is always cronyism; that solar is not a viable business, even with subsidies. [emphasis mine]

Roberts is exactly right on that point. The left has, with its rebuttal attacks, done two things.  First, it has authenticated the hits on OGF.  It has acknowledged that Obama has bet big on big losers and cost the taxpayers a staggering amount of money.  It gives full-throated support to the idea that they have tried to pick winners and failed.

Second, and perhaps more importantly, as Roberts suggests, it has made greentech investments by government the poster children for government waste.  It sets such investments up as a shining example of how both parties have pursued that idea, and both parties have failed.

If anything, Romney supporters (not the campaign, mind you) have a huge opening to make the case that Romney’s is the right message – “I tried greentech and found it wanting, so my position evolved into opposition.”  The President and his minions, however, will double down on the idea that more, not less, government dough should be dumped into the wastebin that is solar.

There is a big opening for Romney to focus on the laundry list of OGF. His supporters, in the meantime, could use the very investments Obama has attacked as a sign of a wiser, and more experienced politician – one who learns from his mistakes rather than doubling down on failure.

One of the biggest criticisms the left had of Bush was his insistance on staying the course in the face of abject failure.  Romney’s backers would be wise to make that the rallying cry against Obama’s tenure as well.  OGF are a great place to start.

Comments

Morons, Your Bus Is Leaving for EFF’s Crystal Prison

May 31 2012 Published by under Apple, Craziness, Gadgets, iOS, Mobile, Stuck On Stupid, Technology

“Morons, your bus is leaving!”

That line from Groundhog Day pops into my head every so often when I hear something so truly stupid it takes only a second to fully realize how stupid it is.

On Twitter, @AdamThierer points to such a stupid idea posited in a post by the Electronic Frontier Foundation titled “Apple’s Crystal Prison and the Future of Open Platforms.” EFF claims to be “defending your rights in the digital world”, but in reality they are clueless about as often as they are right.  This post is no exception. The gist of it is this:

Apple’s recent products, especially their mobile iOS devices, are like beautiful crystal prisons, with a wide range of restrictions imposed by the OS, the hardware, and Apple’s contracts with carriers as well as contracts with developers. Only users who can hack or “jailbreak” their devices can escape these limitations.

First, the notion of a phone as a prison is a little ridiculous.  Why?  Because there are only about a million of them to choose from. Don’t like Apple’s limitations? Go Droid, or BlackBerry, or Windows, or…

Get the point?  There are so many options there is no reason to choose Apple unless you actually want it.

That brings me to the second point.  If you buy able, you are probably aware that it is a restricted platform.  Either that or you have not been paying attention to the PC/Apple skirmishes of the last three decades.  All of Apple’s devices are restricted in some way or another.  That’s part of how they maintain their reputation for “it just works.” They limit your options because most people, given the ability, will eventually f**k it up.

That brings me to my last point.  EFF notes that Apple is restricted unless you can “jailbreak” your phone.  Google it!  I’ll wait…

That’s right, there are almost as many places that will show you how to jailbreak your phone as there are options for other phones.  If you decide to jailbreak it, the courts have even said that is perfectly legal.

However, they have also said that Apple is perfectly within its rights to refuse your warranty if you f**k up your phone.  You see how that works?

Just like with my car, if I take out the factory engine and add a nitrous system, I can’t exactly be surprised if Chevy will no longer honor my warranty.  This works exactly the same way.

Nobody would say your ability to tinker with your car is impeded, but they would also not claim Chevy is responsible for fixing everything some halfwit breaks.

Yet EFF expects Apple to hold itself to a different standard.

 

Comments

10 Song Lyrics Featuring Outdated Technologies

May 30 2012 Published by under Music, Pop Culture, Pop Music, Technology

I was listening to the radio on the way back from lunch, heard a song on Sirius featuring a throw away line that made me think about all the songs that reference technology and quickly become champions of the obsolete.  So hear here, without further adieu, is a list of ten such songs, and the technology that makes them so awesomely outdated.

10.Bawitdaba – Kid Rock  (1999)

The candid freaks, cars packed with speakers
The G’s with the forties an’ the chicks with beepers.

9. Listen to the Eight Track – Ian Hunter (1981)

Oh get out into the car park, sitting in my own Buick Skylark in the dark
Oh, ‘n I’ll listen to the eight track

8. I Like That – Richard Vission and Static Revenger (2009) – (a double whammy for outdated audio and camera tech)

Oh let me shake it shake it
I’ll polaroid it shake it  …

I like that 8-track
It takes me way back

7. Mix Tape – Brand New (2001)

This is the first song for your mixtape.
And it’s short just like your temper,
but somewhat golden like the afternoons we used to spend before you got too cool

6. Casette Tape – Katie Costello (2011)  – (the newest song to make the list, it uses outdated tech as a metaphor, but much of the audience it would appeal to has either never heard of casette tapes, or long forgotten them)

I wish there was a social excuse to make you a cassette tape
I’d teach you all about my life from side B to side A
Fast forward, rewind…Whenever or never mind

5. Technologic – Daft Punk (2005)- (another double whammy for including both faxing and formatting, which although not strictly obsolete is not nearly as common in usage as it once was thanks to WYSIWYG directory navigation like Finder and Explorer)

Name it, rate it, tune it, print it,
Scan it, send it, fax – rename it,
Touch it, bring it, Pay it, watch it,
Turn it, leave it, start - format it.

4. Video Killed the Radio Star – The Buggles (1979) - (this is included not just for it’s unspoken reference to a time when MTV actually played music, but for the specific mention of VTR)

In my mind and in my car, we can’t rewind we’ve gone to far.
Pictures came and broke your heart, put the blame on VTR.

3. I’m My Own Walkman – Bobby McFerrin (1984)

When you’re walking down the street
And you got your walkman and you’re walkin’ to the beat
And you got your walkman and you’re walkin’ to the beat
Say what?

2. 45 RPM – The Alarm (2004) – (45 RPM, for younger readers, was the speed at which vinyl singles like these spun when played on a turntable. If I have to explain turntables, why are you reading this?)

a spiral scratch
gave me my life back
a vinyl solution
ended my confusion
I heard a voice in the noice pollution
45 rpm

And last, but certainly not least, my number one pick.  It is especially ironic because it was about outdated technology, but featured outdated technology.  Remember portable CD players?

1. AM Radio – Everclear (2000)

Wanna Get Down In a Cool Way?
Picture yourself on a beautiful day
Big bell-bottoms and groovy, long hair
Just a-walking in style with a portable CD player – No!
You would listen to the music on the AM radio

Comments

Older posts »

Livefyre Not Displaying on this post