b.cognosco
Where leaping to conclusions is my primary form of forward motion.
Most Popular
- Historical Yearly Average Gasoline Prices
- Outlook 2003 Message-ID Insanity
- Real-time Sand Animations
- Adobe Acrobat 7
- Adobe Announces Name Change and New Product
- Largest Technology Boondoggle in Public Education History
- Yahoo! Buys del.icio.us
- Skype - Disruptive, Not Compelling
- Aluminum Christmas Tree Museum
- Network Printing Hell and windoze XP
Book Reviews
Recently
RIAA -- Guardian of Universities and Higher Education
Farscape Reruns
Conversations with Dina
Media Bias
History of War
Friday, April 4, 2003
Babylon 5
Great lines from science fiction characters:"What do you want, you moon-faced assassin of joy?!" -- Ambassador Londo Mollari to his assistant Vir, when interrupted during a session with a Centauri concubine (or one of his wives). Babylon 5
RIAA -- Guardian of Universities and Higher Education
I feel so much better now. That bastion of decency, that benchmark of balance, that defender of the rights of the abused and oppressed, the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) has filed a lawsuit to protect the networks of our universities from the dreadful scourge of students who run P2P networks.According to this press release, the University networks have been usurped by hardened criminals flouting the rights of artists worldwide and dragging network performance down to the point that simple e-mail is no longer available to poor, honest students.
This is a travesty! A travesty, I say!
As the trade group representing America's only legalized extortion racket, no one is better suited than the RIAA to recognize evil doers, or to bring them to justice. Thank God they are on the case. I will sleep better tonight.
[...] Because of the sophistication of the technology and the expertise needed to install and manage such systems, Napster network operators can't help but be aware of the copyright infringement they facilitate. Indeed, each of the accused operators has seeded his services with hundreds -- and in some cases, thousands -- of copyrighted works. And in fact, they often monitor the infringement and, in several instances, have publicly bragged about it.Given their bandwidth and high-speed connections, college computer networks are a frequent haven for illegal file-copying. As a result, many have become so clogged -- often because of file-copying by users from outside of the college community -- that such legitimate uses of the network as email or academic research have dramatically slowed. [...]
Farscape Reruns
SciFi seems to have begun showing the first season of Farscape again, running each night at midnight EST. Don't know how long they'll run it, but at least I can catch up on some of the earlier episodes I missed.Wednesday, April 2, 2003
Conversations with Dina
Great new weblog from India-based qualitative researcher Dina Mehta. It's filled with interesting insights and links to unusual sources for understanding cultural and social patterns. Dina has an ability to bridge cultural gaps and put complex patterns into understandable terms. Good stuff. Go grab her RSS feed. You'll be glad you did.
'Karass' or' Granfalloon' ... you choose.Neat piece by Steven Johnson in the April 2003 issue of Discover. Talks about two types of networks - the self-organising and social 'karass' and the more bureaucratic 'granfalloons', drawing examples from personal and corporate life. He goes on to describe the role of emerging social mapping software in detecting and mapping social networks - at the workplace in large organisations and in book-buying patterns at Amazon. Some excerpts :
"Karass is that group of friends from college who have helped one another's careers in a hundred subtle ways over the years; the granfalloon is the marketing department at your firm, where everyone has a meticulously defined place on the org chart but nothing ever gets done. When you find yourself in a karass, it's an intuitive, unplanned experience. Getting into a granfalloon, on the other hand, usually involves showing two forms of ID." [...] ["Conversations" with Dina]
Monday, March 31, 2003
Media Bias
Over the past two weeks I had a lot of time to watch television, particularly news. I don't often do that, since I get most of my news through my browser. And I have grown distrustful of the major networks and their news teams. But news television was a staple at my parents' home so I saw it a lot recently.Another staple at their house was Fox News. I don't often see Fox, since it isn't in my package of DISH Network channels, and I found it very interesting. In the heart of East Texas, where I'm originally from, Fox News is on in most every restaurant and business -- like CNN is here in Atlanta. I know the two networks are quite different, but it's rare to have an event of such impact and import as the Iraqi incursion -- an event that allows direct, long-term comparisons between the two. So one night I decided to perform an experiment. I sat down for an hour and watched both networks, switching approximately every five minutes between the two. What I saw was surprising. Here's a sample of what I saw as I ping-ponged between the channels:
Fox News (FN): Americans locate 100-acre fenced base, possible weapons plant CNN: American supply lines slowed FN: US soldier handing food package to small Iraqi child CNN: Rag-tag Iraqi civilians outside bombed building FN: Live-fire camera action of Americans outside some Iraqi building CNN: Wounded Iraqi children
The networks were covering two different wars. There was almost no way to connect the two events by watching the two channels. Major stories on one network received not a mention on the other. I assume both were reporting actual events (that is, I don't think anything was being manufactured) and both were doing so in what would seem to be a reasonable and factual fashion. Only in comparison did the startling level of bias become clear.
Recently Ed Cone has written extensively about a public perception of liberal bias in the mainstream media, mostly in attempts to debunk it. Ed's a pretty smart guy (except when it comes to sports) but he's got this one wrong. There was a palpable, tangible, permeating bias to the news reporting of both Fox and CNN, exercised through the yoke of editorial control. Both showed only what they wanted you to see, and only in the way they wanted you to see it. One focused almost entirely on successes, the other almost exclusively on death, mistakes, and inaccuracies. After comparing the two for an hour I felt like a pabulum-puking idiot. I think the exercise literally sucked IQ points right out of my head. For what it's worth, the Fox news team did seem to reign in their own editorializing more than the CNN folks, and over the course of a few days I grew particularly disgusted with CNN anchor Aaron Brown, but this was small consolation.
There is an unapologetic bias in the mainstream media today -- at this point it is simply unavoidable. What Ed cites as counter-evidence of bias is plain incompetence. And incompetence, whether practiced by a whining liberal or a warmongering conservative, is still incompetence. The scariest part of all this is that seemingly millions of Americans are letting these buffoons set their views and opinions without any real discourse. I wish I knew how to make it better, but right now I'm at a loss. The only thing I know for certain is that I ought to be hiding the fact that my degree is in journalism if I expect anyone to respect my education.
History of War
This morning I learned that two of my neighbors have lost sons to the Iraqi military conflict. I cannot say whether this incursion is just, or even justifiable, and I will try not to write about it again here. But there is something obscene, repulsive, and profoundly disturbing about the historically ignorant and malformed "reporting" coming from CNN.Reasonable people can certainly debate whether this conflict should be happening, why it began, and who is to blame. They can also debate potential outcomes and consequences. But for professional CNN journalists Aaron Brown and Peter Arnett to make blanket statements about how the US Military has failed, and to promote it as "news reporting" is offensive.
To begin, the reports are factually incorrect. No military force in history has moved so many so far, so fast, with so few casualties. Within days the Iraqis had lost 70 percent of their territory and thousands of soldiers to surrender, desertion, or death. By any statistical, historical, rational measure the action was a military success. Merely moving 300,000 heavily armed, highly stressed men and women across the desert at high speed statistically warranted more deaths from transport accidents than we suffered in total casualties.
None of this makes the conflict "right", none of it means we have to silence our objections. But I'll be damned if I'll tolerate pompous, self-aggrandizing cowards getting on national television and belittling the valor and competence of our troops, and doing so in the name of "news".
Whether this conflict is "a good thing" or not is an entirely different matter from whether or not our young men and women are doing a good job. Like it or not Aaron Brown, my neighbor's sons died in the belief they were protecting your right to be a smirking jackass on national television. Like it or not, Peter Arnett, my neighbor's sons died in the belief they were protecting your right to make an international fool of yourself. The least the two of you can do is take your pathetic political whining off screen and show a little respect for their sacrifice.
Syndication
Contact
Presence
This Page was last updated: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:06:57 GMT
