No Idea

Showing all posts tagged commentary:

In her essay,
The price of America's quest for an external enemy
Morgan Godvin makes a pretty good point.

We can use this as a catalyst for positive change. Instead of constantly searching for threats from without, this is an opportunity for introspection. Healing comes from within.

Along the way she points out some fairly basic facts of the American Experience.

American history class, after all, is used to promulgate a particular and pre-approved world view.

We are far more experienced at chasing boogiemen than we are at actually protecting American life.

Of course, America will do nothing. Because we can not agree on the facts of anything anymore. The voices shouting about placing blame on China will be reported as if they were the majority when, in fact, they are the minority. The voices trying to move the giant health care industry away from private insurance will be derailed in their fight because of a million little things.

America will not change because we, as a country, can not pause for honest introspection. We are a country of us versus them, of right vs wrong, good vs evil. We are a country that does not believe the fact that the world is not divided along a line.

Okay. Interesting point from Patrick Rhone.

Counterpoints:
1. Analyze Obamagate without being divisive
2. Analyze Stay at Home without being divisive
3. Analyze the importance of the USPS without being divisive
....
n. Analyze any hot button issue in our national discourse without being divisive

Summary of Obamagate as far as I can follow:

The DOJ decided to drop the charges against Flynn - who plead guilty to the charges. After that decision, there are allegations that surface that top Obama administration officials requested, or somehow otherwise knew Flynn was the person colluding with Russia for the Trump campaign. The argument now is that any information that was found during the investigation into Flynn is worthless because senior Obama administration officials requested, or knew if was Flynn? Also, since the FBI didn't tell the Trump campaign it was investigating the Trump campaign for collusion with Russia the information and evidence of collusion are worthless because the FBI didn't tell Trump that his campaign was being investigated.

If this summary is correct then all I can say is that the GOP is looking for a reason to explain away the DOJ dropping charges against a person who plead guilty to the charges and the only way the GOP knows how to explain anything is to yell, "Obama".

Patrick Rhone

If you love something digital — writing, journalling, a blog post, anything — and you want to preserve it for hundreds of years, you’ll print it on paper.
Nothing digital lasts. In fact, it has a proven track record of not lasting.

This is just masturbatory projection. I dislike this type of blanket statement of fact.

Paper doesn't last for hundreds of years if it's not cared for.
Who is going to care for your Hobonichi journal once you're gone?
Who is going to preserve the blog post you copied to 60 gsm paper and meticulously calligraphied to look like an old time bible Okay if it looks good enough some one might preserve this

The idea that you have to save and preserve your ramblings and thoughts and tasks and goals and whatever you use your notebook or blog for is just ... well, pedestrian. Your thoughts on productivity, what Apple should release, how Google is horrible, or whatever your writing about will most likely not impact anyone in 10, 20, or 100 years. No matter what format you use.

It's not like we're all looking to some random Roman baker for ideas on how to live our lives now. What ideas are we stealing from The Enlightenment? Not Sherry's recipe for crow pie. It is a select few who get to echo through the ages and let's face it, you're blog about Apple probably isn't going to resonate with anyone soon.

But, hey, I could be wrong and your blog about minimalism is the one that people find in a future that has no idea about Stoicism or the ancient human cultures that birthed the philosophy and you become the new Marcus Aurelius.
Do you care?
You won't be there to see it.
You won't be there to direct it.
You won't be there to shape it.

No, my friends, seek not to preserve your writing for generations to come. Write for yourself and if it gets saved then count it a blessing. But, do not fret about trying to preserve your words. Do not think that you have to preserve your words.

I'm sorry, but, if it only takes one commercial for a company to ruin a beloved movie then you didn't really love that movie.

Advice is hard to give when you are speaking generally; not to a specific person on a specific issue. It's bold to say you should do this to achieve that; especially with little to no nuance.

I think that C.J. Chivlers falls into the generality trap when talking about scheduling time to avoid anxiety:

Sometimes you don’t have the agency to control all of your time. Again, this is not a calendar problem. Your calendar is just reflecting the truth of your agency – fix that.

If you don't have the time in the day to do what you want to do then you need to fix that is a great general idea. But, the specifics of that can vary greatly from person to person and situation to situation. There is no one way to fix that. There might not be a way to fix that.

But, the idea, the spark, that the advice springs from is a basic one: If you're not happy then change something.

Great advice in general. If you can use it.

Colin Walker makes a statement I personally profoundly disagree with when discussing social networks

With the best will in the world, and despite our best efforts to be authentic, we all play a roll online - just as we have to offline depending upon the circumstances we find ourselves in.

I do not play a roll online or offline. I am myself in both places. I may think more before I post online (sometimes) than I do when I speak to someone in person offline. But, I do not play a roll.

Of course, that's not to say people don't play rolls in life. It just says that I find it tiring and do not engage in that behavior.

Once again John Gruber shows he still doesn't understand why the Justice Department went after Apple for eBooks in 2013

Time for the Justice Department to investigate Apple’s music business.

The monoploy that the Justice Department sued Apple for was because they were price fixing ebooks in the iBooks store with the largest publishers, not because they had more customers for digital books than Amazon.

It is not serprising that Amazon can scale services better and faster than Apple; they have been doing that for years.

A whole lot of people don't like Google. Those people do generally praise Apple and see the worst in Google. The latest example is Genius claiming Goolge "stole" their lyrics.

K.Q. Dreger sums his thoughts up

But ultimately, this points back to Google’s enormous control over the traffic, and often financial wellbeing, of sites whose content it decides to scrape and surface via Knowledge Panels or Featured Snippets.

However, Google licenses the lyrics already so they can't be stolen in the legal sense. People don't click through to websites because the Featured Snippets load faster and better than the over bloated websites that hosts the info.

Better page loading isen;'t huge control, just better strategy.

A short summary of the timeline

The Wall Street Journal published Lyrics Site Accuses Google of Lifting its Content with an update on June 16.

The internet freaks out because "Look Google is stealing stuff!"

On Monday June 17 John Gruber at Daring Fireball shares his thoughts

It’s preposterous that Google is denying that they did anything wrong here. They truly were caught red-handed.

Of course Google is wrong because they're Google, they lie, cheat, and steal to try to beat Apple. <-- my summary of Gruber's thesis

On Tuesday June 18 Mike Masnick at Techdirt

There are plenty of reasons to be concerned about Google, but the fact that its properly licensed lyrics matches someone else's properly licensed lyrics, doesn't seem like one of them.

This is just a freak out because Google is always bad. <-- my summary of Masnick's thesis

Today Mike Masnick at Techdirt shared an update

But a totally misleading and ginned up story that does not accurately portray the situation or the law is not helping anything but the outrage machine.

My question is simple:

Will the outraged people accussing Google of stealing check their outrage now that Microsoft and Amazon are doing the same thing? Especially since they've legally licsensed the lyrics from the labels anyway?

My gut answer is simple:

I highly doubt it.