Obama as the conservative choice?

In 2004 I blogged a lot about the presidential election. I thought (and still do think) Mr. Bush not up to the demands of being a president. This time around I haven't had quite the same impetus to be vocal.

This article, which I assume to be Professor Bacevich's personal opinion, suggests that for "true" conservatives electing Obama is clearly a better outcome than McCain. His primary factor is McCain's statements that he would keep us in Iraq indefinitely. Obama, in case you've been in hiding for a year, is intent on getting our troops out. This defines my support for Obama, as well, though I believe McCain to be overall better qualified.

What I find most surprising is his admission of the legion ways the Bush administration has failed the American people. Professor Bacevich is obviously no fan of the so-called "neoconservative" movement. Well, neither am I. On matters he deems truly conservative I find little disagreement except in his desire to have conservative values prevail in American society. I don't want or need anyone to tell me how I should act. Apparently conservatives think they know better. But, if that's their only flaw (and while I don't plan to negotiate away my personal freedoms and choices), I may just be able to live with that.

I have always characterized my views as fiscally conservative but socially liberal. I believe in the social contract we have to ensure our children are well educated. I believe as a society we can afford to care for our poor and our aged. No one should go hungry or be denied decent medical care. As Americans we all work so very hard to make things better; can't we also take care of our own, as well?

I am aware my social views are at odds with a more traditional conservative view, but where the staunch conservative might want to rely on the "kindness of strangers" to fund certain social programs, my view of human nature isn't quite as optimistic. But I can certainly agree that we need to put our own house in order before we can even begin to hope we have a solution for others' problems.

Vote your conscience in November, but before you do go ask the mother or father of an American serviceman (or woman) how they feel about the current Republican agenda. I already know how my wife (whose son is in Iraq right now) feels.

Let's bring them home, OK?

Someone will go to jail for stealing a Bonebiter

Here's the relevant quote:

You may have heard about a guy who recently was convicted of murdering a man during a dispute over a rare, valuable sword. That sword that was not made of metal or anything solid, but rather of 1s and 0s inside a computer hundreds of miles away. It was a sword he had won in the MMORPG Legend of Mir 3.

Insane, right? I mean, let's say our friend John has his Bonebiter (one of countless powerful weapons in WoW) and a man steals it somehow. Should the thief be convicted of a crime and punished in the real world? Did you snort with laughter at that question? Why?

Let me see if I can sort this out. Possession is nine-tenths of the law. By extension virtual possession is nine-tenths of virtual law. Let's consider the difference between the virtual and the real worlds.

In the real world you can steal my (real) sword and lock it up in your garage. If I break in to get it back, there are laws in the real world that will deal with me. But then, there are laws in the real world for dealing with your initial theft. How is this different from a virtual theft?

In the virtual world my sword, regardless of how much time and money I invested to acquire it, is just 1's and 0's in a computer. It's a record in a database. So, we'll say there are laws (virtual laws) to deal with virtual theft. Correcting the wrong stemming from the theft is easy: simply change the sword's owner back to me. Problem solved. If I have been "damaged" by the virtual theft in some way, recompense me virtually. Take virtual property away from the thief and award it to the victim. It's stupidly simple.

The article's authors attempt to draw an analogy to the "theft" of digital music. Note the quotations I have applied, because this "theft" is really just copyright violation, not theft. They do point out that no one is deprived of the song when it is copied, but in reality the theft of a virtual sword doesn't involve deprivation, either. We can simply correct the computer's records and everything is back the way it's supposed to be.

We don't need laws to protect virtual goods, regardless of the means people will go through to get them. When virtual activities spill over into the real world, then real world solutions should be pursued. For the same reason virtual "crimes" should be remedied by virtual "punishments."

Here I will proffer an analogy of my own: What if we recognized someone's "heart" as a valuable item. Certainly we worked hard to obtain it. I dated my wife for three years (and supported her for about two of those years), and let's not forget the emotional investment I made to ensure I "owned" her heart. Work with me, here.

Let's say someone came along who was better looking and rich (not hard to imagine). Now my amour sees him as more suitable than me, and elopes to Las Vegas to marry the cad. I can pine away over my "loss" as much as I want, but if I don't then go and physically accost the man (or the woman, as the case may be) then there is no one who will stand by me in my hour of loss. I mean, get real--we even use the same terminology to describe it.

Notwithstanding that we may have once had laws "protecting" things like promises to marry and all that, there still isn't any reason to now go and enact laws to protect things that do not exist in the real world. Sure, argue all you want that a person's heart (ostensibly something in their brain) has a physical component, it's not much more physical than magnetic bits on a disk drive, somewhere.

That's the way I see it. Your mileage may vary.

Newbie ZIP code database mistake ... see if you can guess what it is

So, what happens when you put a novice in charge of defining your database schema? You get ZIP codes (really, postal codes) defined as integers. And what do you think happens when a downtstream consumer gets the data (formatted as a string)? CT starts looking a lot like MN, or some other place whose ZIP code doesn't start with a zero.

Oh, and they propagated this error all the way up through their outwardly-facing interface, too. I guess I'm just glad we don't have any Canadian or European customers.

A Guide to Scientific Expressions Used in Everyday Conversation

Oh, just remember this came from McSweeney's. Somewhere between National Lampoon and The Onion. Words to ponder (among many):

Occam's Razor

"Occam's razor" is an expression used to convey the opinion that the simplest explanation is usually right. For instance, one might be tempted to explain a certain recent turn of events by thinking, "Most likely, Wanda just needs some time to think over how much I mean to her, and is ignoring my phone calls and saying she has a new boyfriend so that her meditation on my virtues will be uninterrupted by visitors." In actuality, a much simpler explanation is probably correct, such as "She is a total hussy," or even "I no longer have a reason to live."

Enjoy.

So much for new speakers ...

Lately I've been hearing some buzzing/distortion from the right speaker on my home computer. OK, I think, my speakers are about 4 years old and it may in fact be going bad. Of course, I did not actually switch the offending speaker to the other side to verify that it was causing the problem.

Now I know. I went to my favorite online merchant Amazon.com and bought a pair of M-Audio AV 40 speakers. Now, these are a "2.0" setup. I had been using a "2.1" (2 speakers and a woofer) setup: Altec Lansing MX5021 speakers. And guess what? The buzz/distortion followed me to my new speakers. When I switched the right and left channels (the AV 40's have dual RCA jacks for left and right, making this trivial), the buzz switched to the other side. Argh!

The AV 40's are pretty good, certainly not embarrassing as far as small (6 x 6 x 8) desktop speakers go. In fact, after quite a bit of messing around with the EQ and Jammix Enhancer on WinAmp, I was able to obtain a decently balanced (treble vs. bass) sound quality from them. Initially they sounded muddy and the midrange was very indistinct. But even with a lot of "sound enhancement" therapy, they simply do not compare to the MX5021's. Not even a little bit. The MX5021 speakers are so much cleaner and clearer, it's hard to understand how anyone can listen through anything else. Of course, they cost over $200 when I bought them, originally. And they're worth it.

So I went back to Amazon.com and bought a new sound card, a Creative Sound Blaster Audigy SE. I didn't spend a fortune on it ($13.95 after a $15 gift certificate) and I realize I may be taking somewhat of a chance, but if I thought the OEM sound card (an SB Live!) that came with my Dell 8400 seemed pretty good before, the new card should sound noticeably better. We'll see.

So now I have this primo pair of M-Audio Studiophile AV 40 speakers that I don't really need.

Google Calendar and Daylight Saving Time

This is blowing my mind, right now. It's making me twitch, because I cannot possibly fathom how some (normally smart) developer could have possibly thought this was a good idea. Here's the real WTF:

I put in a haircut appointment for myself, to occur on March 29, at 10:30 AM. Because, that's when it is--10:30 AM. Of course, we transition to Daylight Saving Time between now and then. I know this, but ... and here is the kicker ... Google Calendar thinks my appointment should be entered at 11:30 AM, because, well ... you know, because there's a time change.

Uh, huh. I'm stupid, and I don't know that 10:30 in four weeks is really 11:30 now. But of course, I'm not really confused because I know my hairdresser expects me to come in at 10:30 on that date. I have a little card that says so. It doesn't matter if it will be 10:30 AM EST or DST, it's still just 10:30 to us.

But Google, being much smarter than I am, really wants me to know that it's going to be 11:30 AM. I suppose that would work if I don't change my clocks, but we all know I will be changing my clocks, don't we?

This deserves to be posted on The Daily WTF, but I think I'll just keep this joke to myself. I posted a note to the "Users Troubleshooting" forum at Google, and we'll see what kind of reply I get. I can't wait for someone to tell me I did it wrong, because, like, you know, it's got to be all my fault.