Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Rants’

Holy man, this blog is ugly.

January 22nd, 2009 2 comments

… and I hate it.  I’ve had an item on my TODO list for upwards of six months now to revamp the look and feel of it, but I simply do not have the time, nor the desire, to devote to such an undertaking.  Each time I’ve opened up Photoshop and started playing with some ideas, I either get distracted, or simply frustrated, and walk away.

Why is this?  I consider myself fairly decent at avoiding the demon of procrastination, and have set up multiple systems to prevent myself from falling into that trap.

From various articles I’ve read, I think I can determine why it is that this task keeps getting pushed back.  Simply, I don’t like design.  I don’t enjoy doing it, I’m slow and inefficient at it, and although I believe I have an eye for aesthetics, I’m much better at evaluating something in front of me, rather than putting together something appealing from scratch.

In the GTD world, the way you deal with things like this is simple.  You pay someone to do it for you.  This may sound crass, wasteful, and rooted in the past decade’s economic debt-driven excess.  But it’s not.  This is simply an indication that in the long run, it will cost me much, much more time wasted procrastinating and working inefficiently than it will to simply pay someone to take on the work and complete it quickly.

There’s just one problem with this approach.  I’ve got no money.  Bay’s currently in school pursuing her MBA, and that means that money is tight while I work to support us both (I’m not complaining!).

How did we even end up with such a crappy looking blog anyhow?  Well, upgrading from Movable Type 2.x to MT 4.x meant a lot of large changes.  On Davin’s (good) suggestion, I simply did a full install, imported the old entries, and then chose a template from those that were available.  The templates… work.  But they’re not pretty.  The one currently set for this blog is meant to be a panoramic view of Portland, Washington.  Lovely city, ugly blog template.

So, where do I go from here?  Well, I basically winge about it for quite a while without doing anything.  If anyone is interested in free advertising, you can drop me a line and help me with this work, and I will gladly advertise that the design is courtesy of yourself.  If there’s anyone needing some project management on a project, or some other kind of assistance that I can offer, I’m certainly willing to go quid-pro-quo.  And if no one is interested, then let’s hope that you’re all reading this blog through an RSS feed reader, and avoiding the ugliness altogether.

More Canadian DMCA

June 20th, 2008 No comments

My friend Graham just sent me this link to Boing Boing, detailing a story about how the Canadian Minister Jim Prentice (responsible for the new reaming we are likely to receive in the form of the new copyright bill, C-61) finally gets interviewed on CBC’s radio search engine.
The guy sure comes off as a liar, and there’s an MP3 link to the whole thing. Definitely worth a listen to, provided you have some ice to get your blood back down to a normal temperature after hearing.
See the article (and MP3 link) here.

Tags:

Stupid people running stupid companies..

April 23rd, 2008 3 comments

– Update –
Davin just sent me a similar link that someone wrote as a way of explaining to his Dad what is happening. I find the guy’s tone a little bit acerbic and arrogant, but I’d be a hypocrite if I complained about that too much. Said link is here.
Lately, I’ve been ranting endlessly about how annoyed I get when companies punish the very consumers that buy into their products.
I love good TV shows, and when I find a show that I really like, I can watch it over and over. I like to study the details, the humour, and the minutae, and really figure out why the show compels me. Is it the timing? Why is that particular line so funny? How come I’m willing to accept it when George Costanza does one thing, but I absolutely despise it when Ray Romano does the same thing?
Given this mini-obsession, I own a sizable DVD collection, and push those DVDs into the player fairly frequently. It is a constant source of irritation having to sit through three different warnings and a host of advertisements, everytime I turn on my TV to watch the DVD that I have legally purchased (they’ve done us the service of disabling our skip functionality now so don’t accidentally skip over the whole warning). Most ironic of all is that the three warnings are all sledge-hammering into my face that it is a crime to pirate and illegally copy the DVDs. Come on people! I frickin’ bought the DVD! Can’t we just relax a little and at the very least let me fast-forward through this junk? Especially frustrating is the fact that I can just go online and download the entire season without any of this chaff added in.
Digital Rights Management (DRM) is the ongoing attempt by companies to lock down digital content, and prevent us from doing things like copying music files. There are two schools of thought on this: One, that you need to stop people from illegally copying your intellectual property (eBooks, music, movies, tv shows), and, two, that you don’t have the right to stop people from making legal backups of the media that they have legally purchased.
I’m not a fan of DRM, as I think that it takes an approach that attempts to lock down and repress what the changing technology is becoming capable of doing. What we really need to do is shift our paradigm and develop new ways of thinking about technology, intellectual property, and the ownership of that property. The digital world is an approximation of the analog one, but that does not mean that our laws governing one can be neatly shifted across and overlayed on the other.
One recent example of Microsoft (commonly criticized, but fairly – they’re a large proponent of DRM) boning people that have legally bought music from their online digital store can be found here. The long and short: people that have legally purchased music from Microsoft’s online store have until August 31, 2008 to finalize the five computers that they wish this music to be playable on. Once that date has passed, no new computers can be added, and no media can transferred. What does this mean? Well, for one, if you upgrade your computer, your music is gone. For another, if you want to upgrade to a new hard-drive, you’re losing your music.
Just one more example of the DRM people getting things wrong, and in the end, disenfranchising and alienating the consumer base that supports them. This isn’t unprecedented, and is in fact just one more item in a long list of bung-ups. Recently consumers have reported problems with Windows Vista, whereby the expensive monitor that they bought won’t play at full resolution, because Windows Vista cannot confirm that the device falls in-line with its DRM-policies. As a result, it downshifts the resolution and plays a crappier image. See below for a more complete explanation of what is going on here.
DRM sucks. I agree that artists, authors, and other people generating creative content deserve the right to some kind of ownership of that content, but the manner in which this is being implemented seems entirely driven by companies that don’t have a whole lot of affiliation with these people (if you know anyone that actually records music, ask them how much money they gotten back from the levies that we pay on blank media here in Canada), nor with the consumer’s that they are punching in the sexy bits.
The up-side to all of this is that there will always be mavericks out there that create media players that ignore consumer-boning rules like this, decrypt media files and allow you to convert them to open formats, and that do not do things like downgrade the quality of the video. The only real result is that Vista and its ilk make the consumer work harder to play the files they’ve already paid for.
* Once you move content from an analog format (TV’s, for example, up until recently) to a digital one, you make it much easier to grab and manipulate that content. Typically the way to prevent people from making copies of digital media (illegal or otherwise), this has been restricted at the level of the media player you use to play your content, as well as the file format that it is stored in. If you can encrypt the media file, and then make it so that only your special media player knows how to decrypt that file, you’ve got a pretty decent way to stop people from copying your data, because now you can also add a requirement into your media player that it only play this video if it’s on machine X.
There’s a new wrinkle involved though. Typically, once the special media player plays our special encrypted media file, the unencrypted digital signal is then sent to the monitor, which displays that signal. Horray, I’ve got a movie – I bet you I still have to sit through some bullshit guilt-trip about my kid stealing because he saw me stealing cable. Because the output that goes to a digital monitor is unencrypted, I can theoretically take a device that tells the computer that it is a monitor, but is really just a box that records that unencrypted signal. Now all I have to do is play my video using the special media player once, capture the output with my magic box, and then save that new file. Now I have an unencrypted file that I can transfer to any of my other computers, store for backup, or, give to my friends. In order to counteract this, Windows Vista will downgrade the quality of your video when you are outputting to monitors and other devices that it does not recognize and know as “following appropriate DRM policies”.

Tags:

Switch to our mobile site