YouTube - real choctaw stickball
This is really an amazing video. I simply didn't know that it was played any more. This is the sport that lacrosse grew out of.
If you don't have time to watch this, just think about lacrosse mixed with a gang fight with everyone armed with sticks :)
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Monday, October 22, 2007
Taming Baby Rage: Why Are Some Kids So Angry?: Scientific American
Taming Baby Rage: Why Are Some Kids So Angry?: Scientific American
At least this makes more sense than, "the darn video games made my boy kill" protests. Saying that video games or other media cause people to commit violence is simply not supportable. All of the studies that I've seen merely correlate violent media with acts of violence (and they don't even do this well). All that says is that people who are violent like violent media. Anyone with an ounce of research savvy can tell you that this means very little. Correlation and causation are very different, with the latter being very difficult to substantiate.
So, before you start bad mouthing the media, it might be a good idea to think about parenting, genetics, or other explanations that also correlate with violent behavior.
Be careful of the band wagon.
Dan
At least this makes more sense than, "the darn video games made my boy kill" protests. Saying that video games or other media cause people to commit violence is simply not supportable. All of the studies that I've seen merely correlate violent media with acts of violence (and they don't even do this well). All that says is that people who are violent like violent media. Anyone with an ounce of research savvy can tell you that this means very little. Correlation and causation are very different, with the latter being very difficult to substantiate.
So, before you start bad mouthing the media, it might be a good idea to think about parenting, genetics, or other explanations that also correlate with violent behavior.
Be careful of the band wagon.
Dan
Thursday, October 18, 2007
OUseful Info: How to Build Your Own Facebook App
OUseful Info: How to Build Your Own Facebook App
I can't believe that Facebook doesn't make it easier to embed widgets on your profile, but with a little elbow grease, you can make your own Facebook apps.
There are some great suggestions in this posting, with the most intriguing on being Popfly's tie in.
Dan
I can't believe that Facebook doesn't make it easier to embed widgets on your profile, but with a little elbow grease, you can make your own Facebook apps.
There are some great suggestions in this posting, with the most intriguing on being Popfly's tie in.
Dan
Friday, October 12, 2007
Why I bought the Radiohead album
R A D I O H E A D
Before today, I hadn't bought an album (DVD, CD, tape, record, 8-track, etc.) for the last 5 years and now that I think about it, it might have been more like 9 years ago--when I bought Radiohead's OK COMPUTER. Don't go jumping to conclusions based on this confession. I haven't been illegally downloading music either.
I had a large 200+ CD collection prior to the MP3 revolution. I ripped those years ago and now they are packed away in my parents attic. Maybe I'll put them out at family occasions in 20 years for laughs. However, that CD collection gave me a sizable MP3 collection, though it wasn't growing with the times.
Around the year 2000, I stopped buying CDs altogether. At that time, I discovered the growing number of online radio stations. It was at that point, when I gave up on "owning" music. I could legally and guiltlessly listen to just about any music that I wanted to: new, old, those that I know well and those that I'm discovering for the first time.
At that time, I had no MP3 player and everywhere that I was on a computer, I had an Internet connection. With that in mind, why buy? Times have changed though. I got my own MP3 player a little more than a year ago and I'm hooked. I primarily listen to podcasts, but I also like to flip through my music collection (most of which fits on the player) occasionally. Internet radio no longer serves my purposes.
However, I still refused to buy MP3's online. The DRM (digital rights management) got in the way of my moving files around to multiple computers and even multiple MP3 players (I use one just for the family stereo--mostly children's songs these days). When I first got onto iTunes, I was excited to buy music. I tested the waters with one of their free downloads and it took me a while to figure out how to get the damned thing on my player. DRM got in the way. I decided not to buy anything from iTunes, though I had (and still have) a $15 gift card collecting dust on my desk.
With iTunes now selling un-DRM'ed tracks, I might venture back. The problem is that I still see iTunes as part of the problem. Their proprietary files and services are walling me in and restricting my ability to interact with the content. This is not just true of music, but video and podcasts as well. Not to mention that the iTunes store is really a hulking mess of software that eats my memory and takes forever to complete tasks in (and I won't even mention the awful library functions---oops, I just did).
This is where I finally get to the new Radiohead album In Rainbows (linked to in the title). There has been plenty about this in the media (at least tech-media), but you might not have seen too much about it. They are a popular group with a very large fan-base and they decided to forgo the music companies and even the might iTunes store and sell their album on their site WITHOUT DRM. This isn't so surprising, but what is is that they let the buyer choose their price. Buyer could choose to pay nothing for the album (45p processing fee though). I really hope that this is the direction that media will be going in. I'd even be in favor of sliding scales depending on sales volume (low demand, low price; high demand high price).
So, did I buy the album because I wanted another folder on my computer full of music? NO. I bought the album because I want to support the movement. Actually, I probably paid too much, though a lot less than an (legal) album in Korea.
Now, I want to address the recent "controversy" over the possible reasons for releasing and the quality of the album. MTV news (http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1571737/20071011/radiohead.jhtml) reports that people are upset because of the 160 kbps bit rate. Give me a break! iTunes is at 128kbps and sells songs for much more than you can potentially buy them here. Even with their new DRM-free songs at 256kbps, what's really the difference? I haven't owned speakers bigger than those next to my computer for years. Might I hear the difference otherwise, possibly, but all of my listening in either on my computer, MP3 player, or in a car.....NO DIFFERENCE!
The article also bring up possible statements by their management saying that this was a way of helping them sell CD's....GREAT! Good for them. I love the effort. I hope they sell lots. However, they never would have sold one to me had it not been for this move.
Overall it's good for the fans and good for the industry as a whole (maybe not the big guys--change or die fellas)
By-the-way, I just finished listening to the album near the end of this post. It's really good as a whole. If I were to buy it song by song, I probably would have only taken 3 or 4 of them. With that in mind, maybe 2-3 pounds would be a good price to pay.
Dan
Before today, I hadn't bought an album (DVD, CD, tape, record, 8-track, etc.) for the last 5 years and now that I think about it, it might have been more like 9 years ago--when I bought Radiohead's OK COMPUTER. Don't go jumping to conclusions based on this confession. I haven't been illegally downloading music either.
I had a large 200+ CD collection prior to the MP3 revolution. I ripped those years ago and now they are packed away in my parents attic. Maybe I'll put them out at family occasions in 20 years for laughs. However, that CD collection gave me a sizable MP3 collection, though it wasn't growing with the times.
Around the year 2000, I stopped buying CDs altogether. At that time, I discovered the growing number of online radio stations. It was at that point, when I gave up on "owning" music. I could legally and guiltlessly listen to just about any music that I wanted to: new, old, those that I know well and those that I'm discovering for the first time.
At that time, I had no MP3 player and everywhere that I was on a computer, I had an Internet connection. With that in mind, why buy? Times have changed though. I got my own MP3 player a little more than a year ago and I'm hooked. I primarily listen to podcasts, but I also like to flip through my music collection (most of which fits on the player) occasionally. Internet radio no longer serves my purposes.
However, I still refused to buy MP3's online. The DRM (digital rights management) got in the way of my moving files around to multiple computers and even multiple MP3 players (I use one just for the family stereo--mostly children's songs these days). When I first got onto iTunes, I was excited to buy music. I tested the waters with one of their free downloads and it took me a while to figure out how to get the damned thing on my player. DRM got in the way. I decided not to buy anything from iTunes, though I had (and still have) a $15 gift card collecting dust on my desk.
With iTunes now selling un-DRM'ed tracks, I might venture back. The problem is that I still see iTunes as part of the problem. Their proprietary files and services are walling me in and restricting my ability to interact with the content. This is not just true of music, but video and podcasts as well. Not to mention that the iTunes store is really a hulking mess of software that eats my memory and takes forever to complete tasks in (and I won't even mention the awful library functions---oops, I just did).
This is where I finally get to the new Radiohead album In Rainbows (linked to in the title). There has been plenty about this in the media (at least tech-media), but you might not have seen too much about it. They are a popular group with a very large fan-base and they decided to forgo the music companies and even the might iTunes store and sell their album on their site WITHOUT DRM. This isn't so surprising, but what is is that they let the buyer choose their price. Buyer could choose to pay nothing for the album (45p processing fee though). I really hope that this is the direction that media will be going in. I'd even be in favor of sliding scales depending on sales volume (low demand, low price; high demand high price).
So, did I buy the album because I wanted another folder on my computer full of music? NO. I bought the album because I want to support the movement. Actually, I probably paid too much, though a lot less than an (legal) album in Korea.
Now, I want to address the recent "controversy" over the possible reasons for releasing and the quality of the album. MTV news (http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1571737/20071011/radiohead.jhtml) reports that people are upset because of the 160 kbps bit rate. Give me a break! iTunes is at 128kbps and sells songs for much more than you can potentially buy them here. Even with their new DRM-free songs at 256kbps, what's really the difference? I haven't owned speakers bigger than those next to my computer for years. Might I hear the difference otherwise, possibly, but all of my listening in either on my computer, MP3 player, or in a car.....NO DIFFERENCE!
The article also bring up possible statements by their management saying that this was a way of helping them sell CD's....GREAT! Good for them. I love the effort. I hope they sell lots. However, they never would have sold one to me had it not been for this move.
Overall it's good for the fans and good for the industry as a whole (maybe not the big guys--change or die fellas)
By-the-way, I just finished listening to the album near the end of this post. It's really good as a whole. If I were to buy it song by song, I probably would have only taken 3 or 4 of them. With that in mind, maybe 2-3 pounds would be a good price to pay.
Dan
Thursday, October 11, 2007
YouTube survey
SurveyShare YouTube Survey
Hi all. This is a survey that Curt Bonk is conducting on the use of YouTube in education/training. It's a quick (10 min) survey that includes watching 1 short education/tech-related video. Go help him and fill it out.
You can help me too. If you refer someone, you get some free time in the pro account for SurveyShare, so drop my email address in there (danielcraig@hotmail.com).
Dan
Hi all. This is a survey that Curt Bonk is conducting on the use of YouTube in education/training. It's a quick (10 min) survey that includes watching 1 short education/tech-related video. Go help him and fill it out.
You can help me too. If you refer someone, you get some free time in the pro account for SurveyShare, so drop my email address in there (danielcraig@hotmail.com).
Dan
Teleport? No. Telecopy? Yes.
Beam me up: Just how close are we to teleportation? - CNN.com
Come on! This is just too cool.
I've heard rumblings of this experiments for a while, but this is the first article that I've seen with a good explanation for what's going on.
I have humble dreams of being teleported from Seoul to Chicago for birthday parties and anniversaries. This would give a new meaning to weekend getaways!
Unfortunately, this is not necessarily teleportation; it's more like telecopying. None-the-less, it's still very cool. At a minimum, just think of telecopying basic compounds from earth to bases on other planets or even from areas with to those without. Water in the Sahara anyone?
Read the article.
Dan
Come on! This is just too cool.
I've heard rumblings of this experiments for a while, but this is the first article that I've seen with a good explanation for what's going on.
I have humble dreams of being teleported from Seoul to Chicago for birthday parties and anniversaries. This would give a new meaning to weekend getaways!
Unfortunately, this is not necessarily teleportation; it's more like telecopying. None-the-less, it's still very cool. At a minimum, just think of telecopying basic compounds from earth to bases on other planets or even from areas with to those without. Water in the Sahara anyone?
Read the article.
Dan
Monday, October 8, 2007
The New Rules Of Technology VC
The New Rules Of Technology VC
This isn't what I normally post on, but I find myself more and more interested in what it takes to launch a startup these days. The barriers to development and overhead seem to be crashing down. What is to stop someone with a good idea and a couple thousand bucks from running with an idea? Even if you can't code, outsource it. Heck, even college students are making a couple extra bucks coding. Just snag a couple outside some computer science class and make an offer they can't refuse.
According to this post, that's essentially what VC firms are finding out too. The competition has increased because lower investment requirements have enabled smaller funds to change the rules.
I bet there are thousands of folks out there who could get some site or service off the ground with just $20-30K. Seems like it could pay off better that the multi-million dollar crap tosses of old.
Dan
This isn't what I normally post on, but I find myself more and more interested in what it takes to launch a startup these days. The barriers to development and overhead seem to be crashing down. What is to stop someone with a good idea and a couple thousand bucks from running with an idea? Even if you can't code, outsource it. Heck, even college students are making a couple extra bucks coding. Just snag a couple outside some computer science class and make an offer they can't refuse.
According to this post, that's essentially what VC firms are finding out too. The competition has increased because lower investment requirements have enabled smaller funds to change the rules.
I bet there are thousands of folks out there who could get some site or service off the ground with just $20-30K. Seems like it could pay off better that the multi-million dollar crap tosses of old.
Dan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
