2014 probably is a good time for me to publish a story collection. Consisting of various things I’d written over the years – which I never got around to collecting. It’s funny; I have been so busy with life stuff and Personville stuff that it’s easy to delay finishing major writing projects and tossing older stuff into various collections. This ebook will be titled Minor Sketches and Reveries — I’m still trying to decide upon a pseudonym.
This fun thing is something I published in 2000 on my old site — and has since become dead. A mixed review of a famous book on programming prompts a reply from the author and a friendly
discussion about book reviewing
My Original Review (August 2000) about the book Mastering Regular Expressions by Jeffrey Friedl
I haven’t read the book from cover to cover but have read parts of it. I don’t deny that it is informative and occasionally helpful (especially if you come from a perl background). But the book as it stands is not appropriate for someone starting out in regular expressions. Instead it provides a lot of depth as far as how regular expressions are used in specific tools and all the different standards for regular expressions.
But a lot of this information on regular expressions is not relevant or necessary for composing plain vanilla bash regular expressions. I suspect that the majority of readers will find a few chapters helpful, but will skip over at least a few chapters that have no bearing on their work. To spend so much time in a book talking about the different implementations of regular expressions is to beg the question about whether you should read a general book or instead read a book about the implementation of r.e. specific to your computer language.
I have two complaints. First, the book does not try to teach you the art of writing regular expressions (it assumes a certain level of familiarity already). As a learning book, it may not be satisfy your needs. The second complaint is that the book doesn’t include an adequate reference section or at least a section you can refer to when trying to write your own regular expressions. I found myself flipping back and forth from pages to try to find the aspect of regular expressions I need. A more methodical reference chapter or appendix is sorely needed.
Don’t get the impression I am not recommending this book. It is a fine book; only be sure that you thumb through it at a bookstore to make sure that the kind of material it presents is what you are looking for. For me it was not. The best teaching book I’ve found to explain regular expressions is Practical Guide to Linux by Mark Sobell. It’s old, but it explains regular expressions, sed, awk and grep better than any book, including this one. This book presented the clearest examples of any computer book I have encountered.
The Author Responds (December, 2001)
This evening I noticed your review of my book “Mastering Regular Expressions” on Amazon. I’m sorry that you didn’t get out of it what you desired of it. Perhaps if you had more of a need for advanced regex use, it would have been more valuable.
In your review, you make two specific complaints. The first, “does not try to teach you the art of writing regular expressions”, makes me wonder what book you’re revewing. Teaching that art is the heart of the book, and the 100 or so pages that make up chapters 4 and 5 do nothing but teach that art. Perhaps they were part of what you didn’t read (you don’t learn an art by flipping around and reading tidbits like it’s a Reader’s Digest 🙂
You also comment “(it assumes a certain level of familiarity already)”. Well, the later chapters assume you read chapter 1, which starts out from scratch.
I find your comments puzzling because as you said yourself, you haven’t read more than “parts of it”, so how can you make any claim about what it doesn’t do? Sure, I know it can’t be all things to all people, but you really knocked it right where I’m the most happy with it.
You’re right about your second complaint, though (needs a better reference section). My original thought was that I wanted to teach the thinking of regular expressions, and leave most tool-specific stuff to your tool’s manual. Why would someone want to pay for a copy of what they already have? But I find it’s a common desire, so in the 2nd edition I added 25 pages to Chapter 3 (which is really the lost child of the first edition), with a much expanded use of the “=> XX” page references that make the page flipping (which you can never eliminate) much more bearable. Anyway, I do hope that the book is able to prove its value to you sometime.
I Respond to the Author (December 2001)
Thanks for your reaction. It is an honor to receive something from the author himself!
I write reviews of Oreilly books very often, and actually I request review copies from them every so often.
The first thing I should say is that I consider myself a nonprogrammer, and it’s quite common for me to write reviews of subjects about which I know absolutely nothing. I’m a technical writer and I focus more on the “readability” and organization of the book.
So I am writing as a nonexpert. And to be honest, I haven’t used regular expressions much, although I imagine that the time for that will come.
I remember reading the first few chapters (perhaps a little too breezily , I’ll admit), and enjoying them and finding the information useful. The examples were also very good. I just found the detail about the different engines overwhelming and not really relevant to my current needs. (For some people, this information may be the best part of the book,I”ll admit).
With programming books, one’s reaction to them changes over time. Some books I initially think are horrible, and then I find myself referring to over and over. With others, it’s just the reverse. Sometimes I feel I should write “updates” on amazon about what a numbskull I am.
So please don’t get the impression that I was panning the book.
Regex is such a broad subject, and every programming language seems to have their own quirks. The changes you mentioned sound interesting and could probably make an excellent book even better.
On another note about not reading,etc. An anecdote. My friend (a professional book reviewer) often would choose books to review on the basis of how little reading was required to actually write the review. On some books, he wrote the review while barely opening the book! While this seems dangerous, sometimes initial impressions can be helpful.
The Author Responds to my Response (Dec 2001)
I’m not so sure that one should consider an email from me to be an honor — most of my friends procmail me away 🙂
I appreciate your detailed reply, Robert, though I still feel that your review is unjust. It’s not that it says negative things (for certainly, any book can’t be all things to all people, nor even do what it intends to do perfectly). It’s that I feel that *had* you used the book as it was intended (and as the preface — the book’s instruction manual, so to speak — suggests), your concerns would have been answered and your review would have more accurately reflected the contents and usefulness of the book. (Such a review certainly may well have included negative comments that came with your deeper knowledge of what you were were reviewing — I know that the book is far from perfect.)
I’ve seen a few negative reviews of my book over the years that have basically said “I wanted to book to be X, and it wasn’t!”. In every case, “X” was something that the book was not intended to be, so while I wish the reviewer had had a better experience with the book, such a review does serve a purpose to clarify to the reader of the review what the books does and doesn’t do.
I guess what it comes down to is that if one feels the needs to begin a review with “well, I’ve not really read this book”, I feel one probably shouldn’t be offering a review at all. I realize that putting out more reviews gets you brownie points at Amazon, but it’s really not fair to me or to your readers. At least, that’s my feeling.
Regex is such a broad subject, and every programming language seems to have their own quirks.
Ha, if you still have a copy of the book, see the first sentence (and footnote) of the last paragraph of p62 🙂
If you thought my book was “excellent”, your review very much does not give that impression. It gives the impression that the book is very bad at doing exactly what I belive the book is best at doing (bringing a novice up to speed, and teaching the *art* of writing a regex). As it’s written, I belive your review does a disservice to me and to all the readers of your review.
I’m aware that there are people who do their job poorly. It’s sad, in any field, and all the worse when it hurts others. I try not to do mine here at Yahoo poorly, nor mine as an author. (My overriding principle when I’m writing was given to me by an author friend who said “you do the research, so your readers don’t have to”. People are paying *their* *money* for my book, so I’ll be dammed if I’m going to give them anything but my very best effort.)
The 2nd edition concentrates mostly on the popular scripting languages (VB and other .NET Framework languages, Java, Perl, Python, Ruby), and less on the old Unix tools (awk/sed/lex). If it happens to land on your desk, I hope you find it useful.
A Friend Makes a Very Valid Point (Dec 2001)
Bobby, this is very interesting/amusing to read. I don’t recommend responding to him again, but perhaps you might have clarified that the books I choose that “require the least reading” are either 1) books with very little text to read, 2) reissues of books I’ve read before, 3) anthologies of literary material that I’m often already familiar with, or that only require a sampling of stories to be read for a broad impression, or 4) reference encyclopedias that are not meant to be read cover to cover, but which have certain important entries. He might think I idly try reviewing technical things I have no knowledge of. Actually, it’s my prior knowledge of a subject that enables me to review certain books quickly without much effort.
I Become Philosophical (August 2002)
I am very sympathetic to this author’s defensiveness about his book. One has only to look over the hundreds of rave reviews on amazon to realize that the book is one of the most praised books on publishing today. As Andy Oram writes, “Yet Mastering Regular Expressions came out and became an instant hit. The Perl community (where regular expressions had taken hold most strongly at the time) treated Friedl as a hero. His talk at the first O’Reilly Perl Conference filled a large hall right up to the back doors. We sold out all copies of his book at the conference, even though it had released six months before, and brought in another batch of copies that were promptly sold out as well. Five years after publication and 22 years after the death of McLuhan, the first edition still sells several hundred copies per month and is continually recommended on mailing lists and in journal articles.”
During the year 2000 I reviewed lots of books that I only half-understood (or at least wouldn’t be able to really understand until I tried it out myself). Often one’s gut instincts about a book are right; sometimes they are not. Sometimes a book which didn’t seem user-friendly at first turns out to be exactly what you need. Conversely, some books which look useful may in fact be too simple or too esoteric to be useful.
So I went back to the book and read a few more chapters, afraid that I had seriously misjudged this book. Well, surprise, surprise! I not only stood by my previous opinion, I found myself justifying my original decision to review a book I hadn’t read all the way. To review a technical book requires, in all fairness, that you read the book from start to finish. That seems like an obvious point, but it is completely wrong. It overlooks the fact that reviewing is often about reporting what the book contains and doesn’t contain. With technical books, how do you criticize? You are reading a subject that you are probably a novice at, and the author is certainly an expert. Aside from pointing out technical errors (and from what I’ve heard, all technical books seem to have their fair share of them), the critic can talk about writing style, logical approach to the subject and whether the book covered the subject in a way that newbies could understand. My original review was not delivering harsh criticism to the book really; it was merely suggesting some reasons why this particular book might not be useful for some people.
As a matter of fact, Friedl has a nice breezy writing style that is a delight to read. And indeed, it looks like a novel—the book is full of prose. Chapters 4 –the real crux of the book–gives a step-by-step guide to solving problems using regular expressions, explaining the syntax and showing some great examples. Chapter 5 is about optimizing, and the rest of the book hovers on the topic of Perl. My main problem was and still is that I couldn’t find what I needed whenever I picked it up! In contrast, whenever I wanted help on deciphering or writing regular expressions, I found myself referring to the much simpler “ Practical guide to Linux” .The author admits as much in his initial response that the first edition lacked an adequate reference section, and it seems likely that the second edition will address that difficulty.
While Mr. Friedl has every right to respond to his critics, I have to wonder whether he is a shade too indignant. No book can win over everybody. Even if a book comes close to achieving that, it will no doubt attract a crowd of critics eager to deflate the hype, to burst the bubble, to rain on the parade. Of course, I intend to do no such thing. But amidst a chorus of lavish praise, the temptation of a critic to inject a modicum of dissent becomes irresistible.
Strangely, it is getting difficult to view RSS feed information from a web browser . A few years ago, you used to see syndication icons everywhere, but it never really caught on. As a blogger and regular reader of RSS feeds on feedly/Mr. Reader, the crucial detail I want to know is whether a website is syndicating the partial feed or the full feed. From the standpoint of a person checking feeds on my Feedreader in a place without wifi access, it is crucial that I only add full feeds to feedly instead of partial feeds. Partial feeds may serve a purpose, but for the most part they are useless to me. The methods described below don’t always tell you directly whether the feed is full or partial, but once you know how to view the feed in “raw” mode, it’s pretty easy to figure out.
As far as I know, only Safari and the Chrome extension lets you view the raw feed.
Firefox has 2 methods for detecting RSS methods. Either one works. The second method puts a shortcut on your toolbar for easy permanent access.
- Right click anywhere on the web page and choose Page Info and then the Feeds tab. It will show all available RSS feeds (and sometimes more than one!)
- View –> Toolbars –> Customize and then choose the icon for Subscribe/Feeds and drag it to your Firefox toolbar. (This assumes that the menu toolbar is already visible. If not, right- click on the top of the browser and make sure that Menu Bar is checked.)
Internet Explorer (IE)
Tools –> Feed Discovery –>(see if a feed exists). If it does, IE will display it and give you some queries and options for subscribing and filtering. (If you don’t see the Tools toolbar, right-click on the top toolbar and make sure Menu Bar is checked).
At the time of this writing, the best way to discover RSS feeds in Chrome is to install an extension called RSS Subscription Extension. After installing it, you will see an orange feed icon on the URL bar. Pressing it will reveal more information about the RSS feeds on that particular URL. In Chrome after you go to the “pretty” view of the RSS feed, you will see a link on the right side of the browser labeled simply “Feed.” If you press this, Chrome will show you the complete feed as XML source code. (i.e., the raw view).
The URL toolbar at the top will display a small blue rectangle with the letters RSS whenever a RSS is detected at a URL. When you click on this button, the full feed will display within the browser, along with some tools for filtering.
Here’s a literary obituary and appreciation of Ohio author Jack Matthews who died on November 28 at the age of 88. I’ll probably write a more personal tribute later. Also, I finally posted the audio of the erudite 45 minute interview I did with Jack in 2010.
A lot is going on at the moment in my life (and plus there’s a lot of half-finished pieces lying around). I need to find a job pretty quickly, so that’s on my front burner now. I post fairly frequently on my Google Plus account –— which I’m not particularly enthusiastic about, but certainly like better than Facebook (here’s why).
More: I’ve had a pretty good correspondence with Jack Matthews over the four years I knew him. We definitely were on the same wavelength about lots of things. I am not sure, but there’s a good chance that I might have received the last email ever written by Jack Matthews (I had asked him to write me a brief reference for me — which he did). (Update: After talking with his daughter, I have learned that it was certainly not the LAST but one of his last). His mind was still sharp, but he fatigued quickly, and emails are such effort (for me as well as him).
Here’s a late-night email I sent him last April. The first paragraph is an excerpt from his book Collecting Rare Books for Pleasure and Profit. It’s a quirky and interesting book with lots of fun parts, although his essay collections which he published in the 1980s are much more important.
Sunday, April 07, 2013 1:05 AM
It is a similar silliness to pretend that buying books “as an investment” is incompatible with scholarship or the true love of literature; Quite the contrary; it is the man who divides his love of literature from the material life who is the true heretic, using only the public library or the niggardly functional paperback for the leavening of his sensibility, and investing his money in Ford Motor Company and AT&T stock. What a dreary divarication is this, and how schizoid and truly mercenary is the man who plays such a nasty game against himself! To invest in books does not imply that the collector intends to sell them; he merely buys them with the conviction that his taste in honoring them will be validated by posterity and that – with effort and know-how comparable to those of other investors – this validation will have a dimension of financial profit. The investment aspect of collecting is utterly fascinating, for it carries with it the excitement of competition in skill, expertise and taste. Often, too, there is the added excitement of the chase, in the auction room, the book fair and in the “field,” tracking down literary manuscripts, letters or rare titles. (CRBFPAP, p 6-77)
A really fun passage. Even though I quoted it before in one of my essays, I just now enjoyed the language and style of it (“true heretic””AT&T stock” “leavening of his sensibility”, “divarication” etc. ). It is one of the sad ironies of time that it takes so long while for even diehard fans to catch up with enjoying the subtle artistry’s of another author’s language — to say nothing of scholars and general readers. I pick this passage for no particular reason, merely to remind myself that long after you have bitten the dust, I (and hopefully others) will be admiring (and chuckling over) oodles of similar and yet-to-be-discovered passages, but be unable to send these trivial late-night notes of appreciation to the living- and-breathing composer of them.
That, I guess, comprises the silly comedy of the writer’s profession……
A few decades ago, a high school student sent surveys to well known writers and asked them how conscious were they about symbolism and interpretation for what they were writing. The answers were varied and interesting.
Here’s my perspective as a fiction writer and editor. “Symbolism” is much too strong a word, but I would guess that most of my fiction writing friends would say that they are conscious of at least 95% of the resonances/imagery/parallels in their language and details. Sometimes you need to think this things out if only to keep things consistent. Suppose you were writing a story or novel with Christian overtones; you’d want to make sure that any imagery identified with Christianity (crosses, bread, wine, etc) be used consistently with the overall theme. Sometimes, writers go out of their way to make their imagery inconsistent or misleading or ironic if only to make things fun. Often storytellers like to write allegorically, so allegories definitely can be applied to many different situations. See for example all the crazy interpretations of Wizard of Oz. Poetry is a completely different matter because poets go out of their way to use words and phrases which have multiple meanings and resonances, leaving it to the reader to decide at what level the work ought to be grasped. Finally, the question itself seems to be an artefact of psychoanalysis, which heavily influenced that particular generation of writers. If you asked a bunch of writers the same questions today, I doubt that many of them would attribute such an important role to the “subconscious” for their writing.
In September 2008 I was visiting distant relatives in Ireland. The topic of conversation was “Sarah Palin.” All the Irish people at the table were genuinely worried about her. “We can’t afford to have another Bush Administration — that affects many people not just in America. This Sarah Palin seems formidable. Why on earth didn’t Obama pick Hilary Clinton to be vice-president?”
I had to smile at this reaction. Obviously, as an American I saw things from a different perspective. I got to see how insiders viewed McCain/Palin and Obama. I knew that many Americans had considerable enthusiasm about Obama, and many people were sick of a Republican in the White House. I knew that McCain didn’t generate as much enthusiasm, didn’t accept federal election funds, had several out-of-touch scandals and had several mishaps. No matter how great Palin was, (and I knew that she was not by that time), these were insurmountable obstacles.
I had that same sort of feeling after Romney nominated Paul Ryan as his running mate. Romney was smart and capable, but he was very domineering in political debates; he also had the arrogance that came with wealth. During the primary to prove his conservative mettle Romney took on some pretty hardline positions, and I knew that would come back to bite him. Paul Ryan has always seemed to be a dishonest politician, but in TV appearances, he seemed sincere and focused (two very good qualities for a presidential ticket). Tactically it made sense to pick him, but it ended up making Romney and Ryan seem out of touch with mainstream America. Even after that first presidential debate fiasco, I knew that demographic trends favored Obama; it wasn’t that Obama won the election, but that Republicans lost it spectacularly.
I realize that it’s too soon to talk about 2016, and I find the premature talk of it to be amusing. I don’t know who will win or who will be nominated, but I know who will NOT be nominated.
- Ted Cruz. Sure, he’s a rising star, but he has irritated many people inside his party and out. That’s not how presidents get started. He may get campaign contributions (and often this kind of money goes to show support of a position rather than an individual), but he will burn out pretty quickly. I think his positions are too extreme for the country, but I don’t even think that will matter.
- Rick Perry. He’s good at raising money and politicking (and I mean that in the most cynical way) But he has bungled so many things in Texas (I mean major scandals), really doesn’t understand national issues and really has not faced a major challenger in Texas. He’s also a lousy debater and he refused Medicaid funding. That might play well in Texas, but almost nowhere else.
- Hilary Clinton. Too old, and Americans have tired of the Clinton brand by now.
- Elizabeth Warren. I love Ms. Warren’s spunk and advocacy, but she is too old and doesn’t really have a track record as a politician. Also, although she has the gift of gab and good political instincts, you can’t get to know the American political landscape by teaching at Harvard.
- Joe Biden, Howard Dean, Kathleen Sebelius. Too old.
- Rick Santorum. Too ideological.
- Kirsten Gillibrand. Probably a good candidate, but too young and if Cuomo were to run against her, he would probably win (Gillibrand worked for him at HUD).
- Mike Huckabee/Sarah Palin/Pete King/Jan Brewer/John Bolton. Too strange, even for Republicans.
- Chris Christie. Although his numbers look good now from the recent jerryrigged election and he polls well with the Bubba vote, he is too abrasive, doesn’t really show a mastery of policy and the fact that Romney didn’t want him in 2012 speaks a lot.
- Bobby Jindal. Probably a competent and articulate Republican, but Louisiana is a puny political base to start from, and Jindal is too young. On the fence though; Jindal has made it a point to get involved in national issues, so I wouldn’t count him out yet. But Louisiana is too small a pond to test your political mettle (at least with a state like Maryland, you are dealing with DC and more national media)
- Rand Paul. He has brand name, youth and cachet with the Tea Party. He also has the tendency to say crazy things and get involved in all kinds of minor scandals. I think his positions are really too crazy even for Republicans. Still, he’s the nicer version of “Ted Cruz” with more heart and passion for social issues. But as his policies become better known, he (like Paul Ryan) may find his popularity declines.
- Scott Walker. Occasionally a politician who stirs national attention for being intractable is rewarded politically (especially if he survives intact), but in this case he will serve as a lightning rod for hostility (just like Rick Perry). Although he survived a recall challenge, the visuals of having been so vigorously opposed by students, teachers and labor unions should help him in the primary, but not in the national election. I could be wrong on this, and certainly he is not the laughing stock like Perry. Reagan had enemies too, but he also had a Hollywood background and lots of charisma, something Walker doesn’t have the benefit of. Ultimately the key litmus test for whether a Republican can win a general election is whether you accepted Medicaid expansion. Opposing the expansion wins you points in the primary, but not in the general election (unless Obamacare has major setbacks, which I do not expect).
This still leaves a lot of people: Andrew Cuomo, John Kasich, Martin O’Malley, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan. Aha, I see no woman on my list. As I said, Warren would be my top choice if she ran, but she doesn’t really have a deep command on policy issues outside of banking and finance.
I am predicting that Obamacare will not be a train wreck and that governors who blocked it for their state will face inherent difficulties winning the general election. That leaves two Republican governors who accepted expansion (Bush and Kasich) and senators who can oppose it rhetorically but never had to block it in that person’s own state. That gives Marco Rubio a built in advantage.
On the Democrat side, I would love to see candidates make one or two issues their own (rather than just pointing to executive skills as governor). We may say that Ron Paul or Bill Bradley or Dennis Kucinich had very small chances of winning, but they had major platform differences with the leading candidate. I would love to see a candidate seize on climate change as an issue. Maybe a top tier candidate won’t do this (Cuomo?) but a second tier candidate probably would, and frankly, none of the potential Democrat candidates have treated climate change as anything more than just another issue. I would love to see an outsider like Sheldon Whitehouse, Alan Grayson or Bob Inglis run for president, but that’s what the Green Party is for.
Postscript: I should add that I don’t think I’m demonstrating “ageism” by saying that candidates are too old. It’s just that it has to do with energy level, “passion” and the ability to campaign tirelessly for 2 presidential campaigns. I suppose a 70 year old with a well-managed schedule could do these things (the Senators seem to have no problems, and a lot of them are 70 and older). What really gets you though is all the travelling. I think Hilary and Elizabeth Warren could manage it, but barely. Both woman (and especially Hilary) are supremely qualified and competent. But asking them to campaign in 50 states and then to jaunt to Europe and Asia every two or three months seems to be torture for anyone (much less a person over 65).
Postscript 2. If pressed to predict, I would say Martin O’Malley for Democrats and Marco Rubio for Republicans.
Postscript 3 (one year later in November 2014). Looks like Rubio totally misread climate politics, giving me the impression that he’s not really ready for the national scene. Cuomo and O’Malley haven’t seen to have risen in prominence, and Rand Paul seems to be winning the “Likable Tea Party candidate” race. I think Kasich, Bush, Walker and Paul would be 4 strong Republican contenders with moderate policies, crossover appeal and no real skeletons (well, except Scott Walker). I would love to see Clinton win as president (and the liberal agenda needs her to succeed), but a Republican with a fresh face and a moderate climate change policy could pose a strong opposition. Despite the fact that the 2016 Senate races are tilting Democrat, it seems that the Republican presidential candidates have executive experience.
Postscript 4 (July 2015). There are really only 6 Republican Candidates in this race. Walker, Bush, Kasich, Cruz, Perry and Rubio. Out of those, I would knock out Cruz (too extreme to be electable), Rubio (lacking in political leadership though a great VP pick) and Perry (lots of baggage and unexpectedly poor in fund-raising). That leaves three candidates: Walker, Bush, Kasich, each with their own minuses: Scott Walker (might be too extreme), Bush (too lightweight and reminds people of his brother) and Kasich (people don’t know or remember him). Of course, Bush has already won the “money primary” (His campaign is raising $760,000 PER DAY). With a fundraising record like that, is it any wonder that Republican candidates oppose entitlements for the mooching class?
Looking back at how things turned out (and keep in mind that the race doesn’t really begin until the first debate), I didn’t expect that Bush would lead would have so much money. Also I didn’t expect that climate change was actually going to be a front-burner issue (horray!) or that the nepotism issue of Bush would be offset by Hilary, so now we’re even steven. I still think Kasich has a chance, but how on earth will he overcome the disadvantage in fund-raising?
Postscript 5 (October 2015). Well, Hilary Clinton seems to be the most viable candidate on the Dem side. The GOP side has been too weird for words. Walker is out, Trump and Carson are near the top, the superficially impressive (but ultimately unelectable) Carly Fiorina is still in the race, and a lot of Republicans who have no chance of winning are still in the race for vanity reasons. I still think we’re going to end up with Bush, Rubio and Kasich and one of the 3 extremist populist candidate (i.e., Trump, Cruz, Carson). I think the question boils down to whether the GOP voter wants a candidate who is “authentic” (but not politically correct) or “politically savvy.” (By the way, I would put Clinton into the “politically savvy” camp). So far the “authentic” voices have been dominating the debate and few of them have paid any political price for their untoward words. I find it interesting that the GOP really hasn’t tried to co-opt the climate change issue — one might expect politicians from Florida to be attuned to polls on the subject. Ultimately the GOP message depends on the voter’s susceptibility to the “lower taxes” meme. Right now, that does not seem to be a big issue (especially when Democrats are counterprogramming by raising the issue of “tax fairness.”)
Postscript 6 (February 2016). I’ll admit it. These past few months have been fascinating for presidential politics. I’ve been pleasantly surprised at the popularity of Bernie Sanders. I suspect many Americans are receptive to his overall message and just want to hang their hopes on a non-Hilary Democrat. (He is also helped by the GOP concern trolling). It’s ironic that someone who rails against money in politics seems to have have attracted so many (grassroots) donations. I hate to say it, but the Republicans really don’t seem to be playing any issues except foreign policy. While it’s perfectly ok to criticize Obama/Clinton on foreign policy, it overlooks the fact that 1)Obama’s foreign policy overall has been run very deftly, 2)Clinton has an in-depth knowledge of the subject (not to mention personal relationships). Really, all the Democrats need to do is point out how shrill the GOP positions seem to be about any foreign policy issue. Strangely, Trump is the only person who spends any time talking about the “business” aspects of globalism. (Cruz does it very eloquently, but he seems more worried about UN encroachment on US sovereignty than anything else).
I still think that this race is Hilary’s to lose, but perhaps a winnowing of GOP candidates might allow a credible GOP candidate to inject values without sounding like he’s grandstanding. Interestingly, in the last week the attention seems to have drifted to the ex-governor candidates, which I would argue is a good thing. Kasich/Bush/Christie all seem to have “leadership qualities” missing in the junior senators. While Bush and Kasich fight over the remaining slot for moderate, I’m convinced that there simply can’t be two candidates from Florida; both pose existential threats to the other. So right now, it looks like a Trump vs. Bush vs. Cruz matchup.
The more I follow this race, the more convinced I am that Mitt Romney would have been the ideal candidate for this cycle. (I am feeling a lot of Romney nostalgia right now). Against Obama (who I regard as the type of leader who appears once in a lifetime), no Republican could have beaten him. But Clinton is beatable. Reflecting on the presidential race, I just realized that the most likely matchup will be HILARY CLINTON/JULIAN CASTRO vs. JEB BUSH/NIKKI HALEY. That would be a remarkable matchup because 1)both sides would consist of a man and a woman, 2)both sides would consist of 1 Caucasian and 1 person with a mixed ethnic background. Even though the MCCAIN/PALIN team was seriously defective, I think it’s a good template to have for a leadership team. Obviously there’s a fine line between inclusiveness and tokenism, but I expect that from now on, having a coed presidential team will be the norm rather than the exception.
The flaw of libertarian economics is that it overlooks or discounts the predatory aspects of power. You can say that we should get government off our backs or that taxation is an unjust burden or that the free market provides an optimal creation of wealth. But without oversight or interference, more powerful businesses can easily avoid compliance with contracts and avoid compensating people who have been harmed by their behaviour. Libertarians refer to the court system as correcting major injustices and disparities between parties, but it ignores the fact that justice is often very slow and many victims are rewarded only after considerable waiting (and suffering). A few months ago I complained that it took the multi-billion dollar company Comcast more than four months to refund me $20 which it already admitted that it owed me. Comcast, like many Fortune 500 companies, has the legal infrastructure to fend off legal claims about such malfeasance, allowing it to nickel and dime the American consumer to death with impunity. A well-crafted regulation, if applied uniformly with adequate phase-in time, can be easy and inexpensive for companies to implement; it can also correct injustices promptly and minimize drawn out court battles between parties with unequal power. I understand that unchecked public agencies can sometimes handicap legitimate business activity without good reason, but at least they are accountable to public pressure.
The laissez faire policies advocated by libertarians enable the private exploitation of public resources with the potential to cause pernicious effects. Libertarians often paint the struggle as government agents encroaching on the house and property rights of an individual, but the more common scenario is a giant company whose injuries to others avoid public scrutiny by virtue of its economic might, with government agents (woefully outmatched and underfunded) unable to figure out if the company has done anything wrong.
Mexican poet Octavio Paz once wrote that capitalism is efficient at creating wealth but wretched at assigning it a purpose. Wealth creation for its own sake is not really a public good if citizens fear for their safety and economic well-being and if investment in “social capital” and public resources is minimal. It is not enough for Chevron to pay to build a public park or Walmart to support food kitchens. There needs to be an entity committed to managing this “social capital” at all times regardless of whether it helps a company’s bottom line at a particular moment. This entity needs to be accountable to all Americans and needs to have an organizational framework dedicated to treating all people equally and fairly. This entity is called a government.
Related: see my piece on libertarianism and the health care system (which touches upon a lot of general issues about how to measure libertarianism as a philosophy) and an excellent book which argues for “soft paternalism”: Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth and Happiness by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein (See the Nudges blog).
Postscript: Here’s an interesting question to pose to libertarians: “do private contracts always take precedence over liberties?” Can a prostitute sell her obedience for a price? Can an intern enter a contractual arrangement where he or she receives no compensation but has to follow the contract’s obligations? If I bought a piece of property with the intent to exploit its mineral rights, are those mineral rights unrestricted and perpetual regardless of what any later government decides and regardless of any later safety findings? Libertarians believe that the ability to make contracts is a sign of liberty, but at some point, this contract can threaten the liberty of one of the parties (or even a third party, as with the case of environmental harms). By their philosophy, the liberty claims can be pursued only after the damage or taking has taken place, making redress impossible for the aggrieved party. You can’t on the one hand grant one party the right to damage another’s life or liberty and at the same time admit that it is impossible for the damaged party to seek redress. That is tantamount to admitting that one party has the absolute right to deprive the party of liberty. The success of the free libertarian state depends on the ability for weaker parties to receive protection from stronger parties. But if you admit that no such protection exists, you are admitting that liberty no longer is an absolute right in your system.
(The problem behind this rant has been mostly solved. See bottom).
(This is Rant 1 of 2. In a few days, I will post my rant about Smashwords)
I’m really mad — no furious — at how crappy your ipad app is for reading Kindle files. Crazy/unpredictable output.
- Your $#$#$# Kindle Previewer on Windows 7 doesn’t render a preview for ipad after it converts it to azw. (more) It registers nothing but a blank page on Kindle Previewer. How on earth do you expect me to test that?
- If your rendering of azw is so pathetic, don’t you owe it to publishers and authors to document its quirkiness in the Kindle formatting guide?
- Why doesn’t the Kindle Formatting Guide give an example of a CSS media query that can hide/display things on ipad/iphone? (more)Why don’t you at least update the ios app so that it is even capable of supporting a media query for ipad/iphone?
- Why on earth doesn’t the Kindle app for ipad support KF8 (or heaven forbid epub)? Don’t you realize how much extra work you are creating for publishers? And how much crappier design you are dictating?
Thank you for taking a dump on my ebook design. Up until now, you have done a lot of things right; for example I really appreciate your rollout of KF8 onto K4 and K3 devices. You have some great resources for authors and publishers.
But your ipad app is so terrible that it is almost embarrassing to even open it. Up until now, I have relied on the ipad app to read some Kindle books I have bought. I always knew that the ios app wasn’t up to par. It is only now — at 4 AM while trying to produce an ebook on a deadline – that I realize how abominable it truly is – for everybody involved.
Up until now, I have assured friends with ipads that you can just read Kindle files on your ipad. I truly was suckered in by your usual propaganda about Kindle-on-all-platforms. Clearly now it is obvious that you are abandoning any pretense of supporting Kindle on ipad. Your ipad app makes the publisher look bad, the author look bad and most of all it makes you look bad.
Get with the program, guys! Either improve the ipad app or just remove it from consumers altogether.
Postscript: Your KDP Community forum is now offline. Wow, that’s icing on the cake!
Postscript 2: Let me be clear. I know how to create designs for Kindle Fires and K3s. That’s because you have provided adequate documentation about how to do that. I am even vaguely aware of how to design for K1 and K2. (it remains a distant nightmare in memory). I know how to degrade gracefully. What I can’t do is design for an undocumented platform without a good testing tool.
Postscript 3. Ok, I may have exaggerated the extent of the problem. The formatting guide hints that using a media query for the older mobi7 format might do the trick. I can definitely deal with that, so I will try that now. The problem is that nowhere does it say that the ipad app actually renders things in a mobi7 way.
Postscript 4. Well, it’s not a problem I can solve by making a mobi7 media query. I need to confirm that I haven’t done anything stupid, but if this is the case, then it looks like I’m going to have to toss out the design and use a bare bones one. (Sigh!)
Postscript 5: Here’s the publisher’s note I included on the title page:
Viewing Tips: For a Kindle, this ebook is best when viewed by any Kindle device produced in 2010 or later (or any Android device which has the Kindle software app). For Nook, this ebook is best viewed on any Nook device (or on any Android device which has the Nook software app). Please turn the PUBLISHER DEFAULT setting (on the font size menu) ON. For iPad or iPhone, the book is best viewed if the ebook file itself is imported into iBooks (which can be done if you open it as an attachment from within the iPad).
Postscript 6: Wow, Amazon.com claims that you can email the .azw file to your ipad device, but when I tried, I got this error message:
The following document, sent at 12:10 PM on Mon, Nov 04, 2013 GMT could not be delivered to the Kindle you specified:
The Kindle Personal Document Service can convert and deliver the following types of documents:
Microsoft Word (.doc, .docx)
Rich Text Format (.rtf)
HTML (.htm, .html)
Text (.txt) documents
Archived documents (zip , x-zip) and compressed archived documents
Postscript 7. I am happy to report that the problem is not as bad as I originally thought. The ipad kindle app actually has decent rendering of the KF8 format. However, my method of sending a kindle file to the iPad was producing a kind of Frankenstein ebook which was neither Mobi 7 or KF8. I used the method of emailing a .mobi file via Personal Docs to the ipad app. Apparently the only acceptable way to test the file on the iPad was to sync it through iTunes. You could email a .mobi file to the Kindle app on the iPad, but Amazon would not do the proper conversion to make this file readable. I was vaguely aware that testing via Personal Docs had its issues, but never in my wildest dreams could I imagine that they would be this bad. Of course, this would never have been a problem with better documentation, automatic conversions to AZW on the cloud or native support of epub to begin with. But there is no point in bitching about it any longer — the problem has been solved!
A few months ago, Facebook did something so shocking and stupid that it left me no choice but to leave Facebook. For good.
Up until that time I have enjoyed Facebook for what it is. It’s a great way to keep up with friends from school and work and overseas. Frankly, I have avoided these kinds of social media web apps, but the first tipoff that FB was actually useful came when Texas uberblogger Gary Denton announced that he was abandoning his Easter Lemming blogs in order to focus on Facebook. Amazing! Soon, too, I found a lot of the same link-sharing which I normally did on my blog could be done just as easily on Facebook — and more people would read it too. I also found that I was learning about lots of new URLs and essays through Facebook which I’d normally learn about through bloggers. Suddenly FB was a better source for content than bloggers were.
If you think of it, Facebook is nothing more than a microblogging platform with a little bit of messaging and relationship management thrown in. It’s not rocket science, and for news junkies and readers, you could follow lots of people and content sources by RSS feeds. But most Americans never paid attention to RSS feeds, plus you had lots of news sources not allowing full feeds (a real pain for readers). Even when things started moving into mobile platforms, few people used naked RSS readers, instead obtaining their content by “Liking” things on Facebook or using an intermediary like Flipboard to browse through cool stuff.
I could talk about some things which annoyed me about Facebook. (such as everchanging privacy controls, unsafe third party apps and difficulty suppressing trolls and promiscuous posters). But for the most part FB was doing many things right. More importantly, 2 or 3 years ago Facebook introduced a personal archive of your data which you can download for safekeeping.
Swell. Every two or three months I would request another personal archive to be made, and shortly thereafter I would receive via email a link to a zip file containing my data in html form. This is a case where everything worked exactly as expected. All my data was there and easy to find offline. I could easily refer to it and look things up on it. I found that I did that often. I posted some of my things onto Facebook just in case.
But around June 2013, I began to notice that the latest zip of the FB archives was missing stuff. At first, I attributed it to a bug. Facebook is a gigantic system always in flux, and I had read reports that the archiving feature was causing problems for many users. Give it time, I thought.
Then, I noticed that my latest personal archive no longer included the URLs to the links I was making to my facebook posts. Let me explain. One “trick” about Facebook is that when you paste a link into the posting space, FB will automatically discover the Title, Summary and preview image of the link in question. In fact, you can even delete the URL you posted and Facebook will still keep the link in your wall post. It’s a really cool thing, and if you think about it, why does the tiny wallpost form need to include URLs when you already have the preview as a hyperlink?
I had been embedding links into Facebook wall posts that way for over a year now. But now I discover that not only were my personal archives missing comments from others, Facebook had also stripped out every single link I had added. It had also removed all my friends’ comments by friends to my posts as well as my own comments. Bastards!
The Old Facebook Archives
Here is what the old Personal Archives used to look like for my wall. In this particular screenshot you don’t see comments by others, but in fact, specific posts in my archives do include comments by others (depending on their privacy settings).
The “New and Improved” Personal Facebook Archive
Stripped of all my links, none of the posts make sense, and my own comments are removed.
My original descriptions are there, only the links are nowhere to be seen!
There is a way to keep the URls so that they can (for now) be included in personal archives. That is to leave the URL’s in the status bar. But even when you do this, the links themselves will no longer be “clickable.”
Furthermore, comments are removed totally from the archives. I can understand not showing comments by OTHERS (if it conflicts with a user’s privacy settings). But I do not understand why it has removed MY OWN COMMENTS to MY OWN POSTS!
Again, the personal archive from last year did EVERYTHING perfectly. Now let’s look at the monstrosity that motivated FB to ruin its own archiving capability.
Facebook Activity Log: Disaster in search of a problem
Facebook introduced something called the Activity Log. I don’t know why they did it; I’m sure there is some crass commercial motivation behind it; never mind about that.
The fig leaf behind this function is that it’s supposed to make it easier for users to look up past posts. This is a worthy goal; Facebook has always been horrible about having to look up anything older than a week old. I have probably spent hours continuously clicking the More button just to find some link I posted a few months ago.
But here’s the thing. When FB introduced the Activity log, it seems that that they also crippled the personal archive.
Now let’s look at that some post I made about the presidential debate in the Activity Log.
Everything is posted in unthreaded reverse chronological order without including user comments, making it practically impossible to understand the context of the original remarks.
That means: if you posted on a controversial topic on Friday and on Tuesday someone makes a comment on that same thread (or maybe you do too), any of your other activity in the intervening time will be mixed in with it.
Facebook has a helpful table describing exactly how they are screwing you. Here is the relevant listing of what from your wall posts they will be saving:
What’s the Alternative?
Facebook is where everyone is at, so we can’t just leave Facebook willy-nilly, can we?
Or can we?
Google Plus is a newer and cleaner alternative to Facebook. It is not as full featured as Facebook (and doesn’t have 1/10 of the users), but it has some other cool features. Plus, you can’t beat it as an integrated solution.
More relevant to today’s post, Google has made a full commitment to data liberation. Here’s what they say:
For this reason, we always encourage people to ask these three questions before starting to use a product that will store their data:
- Can I get my data out in an open, interoperable, portable format?
- How much is it going to cost to get my data out?
- How much of my time is it going to take to get my data out?
The ideal answers to these questions are:
- Nothing more than I’m already paying.
- As little as possible.
Google Plus has a free service called Google Takeout which lets you export ALL of your data out of the web application. That includes not only Google Plus, but also Google Docs, Blogger, etc. I haven’t played that much with Google Takeout, except that it does exactly what it says it does. I noticed that Google Plus archives are exported as individual html files. So your archive will accumulate dozens (if not hundreds) So each individual post is a separate html file. That is inconvenient, yes, but at least I’m not losing any data here. Sure, it’s not as easy to search through in offline mode, but a single grep command in linux or a good text editor could probably help you find what you want easily.
For me as a writer, I want to keep a record of as much as possible. I never gave free web apps the right to hide my own data from me. It no longer makes sense to use Facebook if I can no longer know for sure if I can export my data outside of Facebook.
The Post-Facebook and Post-Google-Plus Era
I jumped pretty quickly onto blogging and other web services. Probably in about 2006-8, things changed. Smart phones came and with that came producing and receiving content from your phone. Then Facebook came — which managed to straddle both desktop and mobile devices.
Now we are entering a phase where we want to repurpose content into other platforms. You may have noticed that many people automatically re-publish their twitter posts or blog posts to facebook or to twitter. (To say nothing of instagram, etc). I used to find that very annoying — especially because things reposted in Facebook seemed ill-formatted or inappropriate for it. For example, I wouldn’t want to repost all my blogposts onto Facebook (although I feel differently about doing so on Google Plus).
I don’t heavily use Evernote, but the concept is alluring: it can keep archived versions of certain web pages as well as your own content. Couldn’t I just store all my content streams there?
I have discovered two services which deal with cross-posting things onto multiple platforms.
First, there is HootSuite, a tool online marketers use to republish content onto multiple platforms. Which only raises the question: if you are creating your content originally in Hootsuite, how do you archive your Hootsuite content?
Second, there is IFTTT (short for If This, Then That) which lets you create or use different recipes to convert and publish your content from one platform to another. It basically lets you set up notifications too. Everything seems to be RSS-based, and sometimes the various platforms have special rules and restrictions which make it hard to import/export stuff. Sometimes just browsing through the known recipes can help you figure out a solution; sometimes you need to use a search engine to find what you want. Here for example is a good way to create feeds out of your Google+ posts which then can be scooped up by Facebook.
Note: this solution isn’t recipe is hosted on a third party site, so it is not likely to last too long. But for now it is the only solution I know of.
The ultimate goal for a blogger like me is to post at one place where I have full control and high confidence (like my blog) and then use customized RSS recipes to re-post certain things where relevant.
Don’t count out blogging software. With blogging software you remain in control over data; you own it, and then you simply use intermediary tools to connect things to another. I’m not sure that there’s a clean solution for replicating or backing up comments (though Disqus makes a compelling argument for outsourcing it altogether).
Of course, you need to take into consideration the specific characteristics of each platform and the nature of the audience. But I am finding that it is no longer necessary to depend on or live inside these social applications as much. Sure, I stop by Facebook. It’s certainly nice visiting old friends, but I certainly wouldn’t want to park there and create content ONLY for Facebook.
The flaw with Facebook (and other community sites) is that they succeed only with good content and mindshare. But when the good content can be found elsewhere (or anywhere!), suddenly there no longer is a compelling reason to park there. Suddenly that mindshare — which seemed to have so much self-sustaining momentum — seems to disappear. The time will soon come when more people will be reposting onto Facebook than posting. And that will be a good thing.
Postscript: Making the Blog Cool Again
A few years ago Virginia Heffernan remarked that with Facebook and Twitter, suddenly it was no longer cool to be blogging anymore. At the time I thought she was mistaken, but over time I had to admit that my blogging output was significantly less after Facebook came along. I was spending more time on longer articles, less time on casual blogging and linkdumps.
Intermediaries like IFTTT make it possible to have content originate in WordPress. But that does not solve the problem at all. Here are the issues that initially jump out:
- How can a personal blog or website feature both short content and long content without making the site itself unusable? (The theme would have to do this, you’d need better front page management and you’d need to have separate content types probably).
- What are the rules for displaying short content on the various platforms? What images show up? How many characters? Does the link show up, etc?
- How do you make it easy for people on one platform to see comments people have made on other platforms?
About the first question, bloggers have typically made linkdump pages on a daily/weekly basis, but does that solve the problem? One thing fun about FB/G+ is that the posts are really short. There’s really no elegant way to repurpose a linkdump post onto facebook. I need time to think this through…..
I’m sure I see these kinds of articles regularly (Economist had a cover story a few years ago about California vs. Texas). They annoy me because they are one-dimensional. I think they compare it to California or NY — which probably is burdened by more paperwork and has a state income tax. But overall, California and NY and Mass provide a lot more startups than Texas, and Texas doesn’t innovate a whole lot (except for medical, which they do pretty well in). Probably the best known non-fossil fuel business to come from Texas is Dell, but Dell has always taken pride in NOT innovating but simply running a more efficient suply chain.
- Texas acquired their wealth through ample land and mineral depletion. Many local economies are still dependent on defense and oil and gas. These are ephemeral signs of wealth.
- Texas is VERY vulnerable to climate change, and per capita CO2 emissions are very high. Its pollution is also very high; the whole state would be a smokestack were it not for the federal Clean Air Act.
- Texas has pitiful social services, and its safety net is abysmal. Many people fall through the cracks. Also, we have a significant underground economy from undocumented workers. Who knows? That probably means that the GDP of Texas is bigger than estimated, but the important point is that they operate on the outskirts of the law (minus worker protections, etc.)
- Lack of zoning (I assume he’s talking about Houston only) has some consequences. It becomes impossible to do any urban planning, and as a result mass transit is practically impossible. From that you become a car-dependent city with all sorts of social stratifications.
- A lot of companies choose Houston or Dallas as their headquarters, but I think it has to do with low taxes and low real estate than anything else. Many companies assume that they can find workers from other cities or out-of-state to work for their jobs.
- One thing rarely mentioned in talk about Texas is commute times. I have never seen such a high percentage of workers (in Houston and elsewhere) be willing to spend an hour or more commuting each way to work every day.
- Texas does have cheap college tuition options, but secondary schools have a great deal of inequality which almost makes that point moot.
- Texas does have a lot of cultural dogmatism. Remember, 76% of Texas voters voted to ban gay marriage. It is absolutely suffocating to any educated person (even in a “liberal bastion” like Houston).
- Texas has a very fickle judicial system. Election of judges, “tort reform” and political influences on judges.
- Housing prices are relatively cheap because land is plentiful; what else is new? Significantly, the biggest political contributors to the state GOP have been housing developers; as a result, you have homeowners without much legal recourse in the event of disputes.
- One reason innovation is fairly lacking in Texas is the mediocre education system for a state its size. We have a lot of big companies move to Texas (to take advantage of cheap labor and lack of regulation and cheap land), but our startups are not as bold as in California or Massachusetts for example. If you need some PHDs in Math or Comp Sci, Texas is not the best place to go. (Well, except here and here) On the other hand, if you need minimally educated Americans to provide phone support, Texas can’t be beat!
- Creative types in Texas (and especially Houston) tend to be snapped up by the fossil fuel sector or the military. The tragedy here is first, much of this innovation does not transfer easily to other fields. Second, this innovation does not really better humanity in a way that a product manufacturer or enterpreneur might. As the years go by, the stigma of working in fossil fuels will only increase.
- I have mentioned it already, but Texas consumes more fossil fuels than any other state in the US. If Texas were a nation, it would be the 7th largest emitter of greenhouse gases. Electric plants in Texas (population 25 million) emit as much CO2 as electric plants in the COMBINED states of New York, California, Florida, Massachusetts and Oregon (population: 86 million). Texas has made the decision to couple its state economy to the carbon consumption and generation. But other states have decoupled their economies from carbon and still have strong growing economies. From a standpoint of risk, sticking with fossil fuels for living and for growing an economy doesn’t seem wise in the long term.
In Houston (where I live), a large percent of the economy is dependent on the fossil fuel industry — either directly (with drilling, pipelines etc) or indirectly (IT support, financial services related to energy futures). Many of these services relate specifically to oil and gas and don’t transfer that easily to renewable energy or any other industry. Anyway, the profitability of fossil fuels in Texas eclipses the opportunities presented by renewables. Houston tried to diversify after the oil bust in the 80s, but from what I can tell, it just shifted away from domestic drilling to global exploration & logistics.
Here is Forbes’ list of most innovative companies and Fortune’s ‘ Best Companies to Work for in Texas and Forbes List of Fastest Growing Companies . I realize that not every state can have a Google or Microsoft or Facebook or Amazon, but I think it’s notable that Texas doesn’t really has an industry leader (outside of fossil fuels) which it can call its own. Rackspace and Texas Instruments and Dell are distinguished companies, and Cowen’s article mentions TinyTexasHouses (which also seems great). With these notable exceptions, Texas is where established or rising companies go to expand.
I’m in the process of writing an ebook about music collecting. I’ll probably add some book excerpts on my blog. This URL will regularly be updated with new information, so feel free to check later.
Two years ago I wrote about great ways to learn about free creative commons music. Since that time, a lot has changed. Jamendo continues to grow bigger, Free Music Archive has grown larger too.
But most people are more interested in learning about pop music by emerging artists who have risen somewhat above amateur status. These artists agree to share a lot of music even though this music is still copyrighted and isn’t creative commons. Often these free downloads are available only for a limited time, so once it stops being free, you may have no choice to purchase it. You can amass a large and wonderful collection with samplers alone (though it would be shallow).
Before I start listing things, I want to mention that most of these free sites provide links to high quality downloads. In the past, the thinking went, “we should make available low quality music samples for downloads” in the hopes that later the consumer will buy a high quality version. That strategy no longer seems to be popular, and fortunately most of the free download sites listed here are now distributing high quality audio with the correct metadata.
South by Southwest (SXSW) Music Bit Torrent contains music tracks by bands who participated in SXSW music fest in Austin. Starting in 2005, a 5-9 gigabyte bit torrent was released each year (Total = 45 gigabytes!) These artists explicitly allowed these tracks to be downloaded from the sxsw.com, and the torrent simply assembled everything together for permanent archiving. Torrents are released in early March of each year, generally in two parts. Available: permanently. As of 2013, a lot of the music distributor sites are also featuring SXSW samplers –and often they include additional tracks not in the torrents.
CMJ Mixtape is a monthly download of 20+ songs from College Music Journal. The link says you need to “subscribe,” but that’s not true; all you need to do is to click the link and you should be able to download all the music in single zip file. CMJ is “College Music Journal,” a wonderful mag primarily for college radio stations. I subscribed to it in the 90s, and one highlight was the sampler CD which each issue contained. Samplers in the 90s were wonderfully eclectic and international; Mixtape seems a little more selective and possibly with an Eastern/urban bias. Available: one month only.
Live Jazz Lounge is a blog linking to 200+ zip files of various live jazz performances. There looks to be an average of 2-3 free releases per week, so a lot is here! These zip files are hosted on their own website, so they are likely to be available indefinitely (I think).
American Songwriter has an irregular sampler which contains more acoustic/country/folk songs by singer-songwriters. So far, once every 6 months. Available: until the next sampler is released. Because it’s infrequent, you should sign up for their mailing list to be notified about new samplers. Available: until the next sampler comes.
NPR’s Heavy Rotation surveys a lot of DJs and asks them to recommend some tracks each month. Their list of recommended downloads appears in batches of 5 or 10, at the rate of once or twice a month. Unfortunately the download link is somewhat easy to miss (it’s at the bottom of the song description), and you have to download each song individually. On the plus side, NPR is more likely to get tracks by well known artists. Available: several months, or until the artist decides to make the download private again.
Denovali is a German-based online seller of electronic/ambient/jazz music. They publish a lot of free albums and tracks including samplers. I count at least 5 full samplers of really remarkable stuff. (You can listen/download them from Soundcloud as well). Available: indefinitely I think.
Chandos/Classical Shop sends out a monthly newsletter which offers information about a free downloadable classical music album. Chandos is a UK label which publish a range of high quality recordings, including the always interesting and excellent Brilliant Classics series of low-priced recordings. Notably, these albums also include album notes. (You can buy these mp3s on amazon or emusic). Unfortunately, you need to know the newsletter URL to be able to find the download link, but they seem to stay online for about two months. (Still working downloads can be found on an older newsletter and a newer newsletter, but I would be ready for either link to go dead at any time. )
Music Retailer Sites
Many of the online music retailers sites provide a lot of free samplers for members. Most will be specific to one label and specific to that distributor.
Amazon has by far the greatest number of samplers, although the quality of them is not particularly high. It depends on the sampler and the label obviously. The top free album list is here. Unfortunately there’s no way to sort by release date, so you just have to check it often. The best thing about these samplers is that it goes directly to your Cloud Player; you can opt not to download until you have figured out which songs are worth keeping. The Tunecore samplers have been good. Here’s a search for free samplers. Look for samplers by established labels: Subpop, 4AD, Merge Records . Also, look for Tunecore samplers.and CDbaby samplers. Tunecore (like CDBaby) is for a lot of indie unsigned bands; quality varies, but these samplers are almost always interesting. Available: mostly permanent (with a few exceptions). I’ve noticed that Amazon has retired some Tunecore samplers, which I hope is not a trend.
Emusic doesn’t have as many samplers as Amazon, but the ones they have are more interesting. Often in fact, they coordinate a label’s sales with the release of a new sampler. Unfortunately it can be cumbersome and time-consuming to find these samplers. A blogpost from 2 months ago linked to their most significant samplers although it’s already out of date. Go here first to see articles about samplers which will inevitably contain links to the downloadable samplers as well. (Update: Here’s another search result for free albums but unfortunately about 40% of the albums actually cost money, so be careful!). I almost always love emusic samplers. You may have to sign up for (non-free) membership to download the samplers, but it almost always is a good deal. Even if you sign up for only 1 month at $6, you can usually find deals, plus Emusic typically gives new members a $25 credit to buy new music. (Here’s a list of my latest musical finds – which are usually priced low). Available: permanent. Note, there is also a free song of the day for members. I only started downloading these things recently, and so far it has been totally noncrappy.
Google Play has free downloads although not really free sampler albums. That of course will change as Google Play becomes a stronger distributor of music. When you first sign up for Google Play, you are allowed to download a certain number of free songs by very well known artists. When I signed up, I was able to download 800 individual preselected songs. I seem to remember that you had to download the songs individually. Google Play features freebie songs on a daily basis, but I found keeping up with this more trouble than it was worth.
Bandcamp has a number of respectable bands and lots of interesting music. Here’s a list of all their free albums by popularity and by release date. A fair number of these free albums are creative commons, so you might also be able to find them on jamendo and Free Music Archives. Some of the free albums require that you give them an email; the link for the free albums also lists “pay-what-you-want” albums, so you will inevitably have to give your credit card and make some sort of token payment.
Although I wanted this article not to be about creative commons music, (I’ve already written about that) I wanted to mention 2 special aspects of archive.org.
- Live Music Archives list recordings of a lot of live shows by musicians. Many musicians have several concerts recorded here. A lot of these recordings are bootlegs; some are band-approved, but generally if it shows up here, that usually means that the band tolerates recording. Generally the landing page gives a list of the most recent uploads and staff picks. I confess, although I have listened to 2 or 3 concerts here, I have not even scratched the surface of what is here.
- IUMA Archives. IUMA was one of the earliest music hosting services popular in the late 1990s and early 200s. A lot of this is hit and miss, but there are some hidden gems to be sure. Here is a list of its most downloaded and recently reviewed.
Although I’m not going to point to specific artists, Soundcloud and ReverbNation have a tremendous amount of free downloads. Soundcloud in particular has a lot of extended mixes — although now that I check my favorite artists, I see that items which I downloaded earlier are no longer available for free downloading. Like Bandcamp, even if you cannot download a track for free, you usually can stream them for free.
I really don’t know if these music promotion sites which offer daily freebies are worth the effort. Clicking individual songs can be tedious — both on Google and Amazon. My guess is that many of these are from the bigger labels and for tracks which might be included in free albums eventually, so these freebies may not be particularly high quality. If you’re just clicking to add them to the cloud, then it’s not a problem, but how do you know whether to actually download them. Nonetheless, it’s time to start a list.
- Songzini provides links to free 5-10 Amazon songs each day. It’s a good idea, but it’s tedious to do. Still, there’s a good mixture of well-known and unknown singers, so it might add up. But watch that hard drive space! Update: It’s still around, but it is really time-consuming to download individual songs — especially when a lot of them are in free albums you may be able to find on amazon’s search engine. Also, Amazon emails you a receipt for EVERY SINGLE SONG so it will clog your email with receipts — yuck!) Update 2: I have finally gotten around to listening to all the random songs I downloaded using Songzini. It is terrific! As long as you make sure that the song doesn’t come from a free album which you downloaded already, you’ll be fine. Update 3: Although the site is still up, it seems to be totally nonfunctional. Oh, well.
Quirky Music Download Blogs
By now there are quite a number of blogs which unearth lots of overlooked bands from previous years. Often the blogger will upload the digitalized content onto a file downloading site, and the site visitor can download the zip file of mp3s by clicking on a link to the third party file hosting site. These blogs are great for discovering old bands; on the other hand, 1)downloading from these places may not be exactly legal by US standards and 2)the hosting sites frequently remove content or go out of business, so the download links may stop being valid fairly quickly. The quirky download blogs generally try to share music which hasn’t yet been digitalized or that is so obscure that there’s no way people would have heard about it otherwise. A lot of these bands are simply defunct and so it’s impossible to purchase these tracks anyway. Generally those blogs will take down the download URL if the band contacts them, and so to that extent, they follow copyright law, but I think these kinds of bloggers are more interested in rediscovering and in making compilations of overlooked tracks. And the bands generally don’t seem to mind (if they still exist). Hint: a lot of these blogs don’t include the download link in the blog post itself but in the comment section, so be sure to check the first comment at least.
- Willfully Obscure is probably the best example of the quirky music blog genre, with lots of commentary and background information about each new download. He emphasizes a lot of raw punk and garage bands from the 1980s, with occasional self-made compilations. I think this blogger probably rips his own CDs, and each week has about 2 or 3 downloads, plus a “mystery download” every Monday. More importantly, this blog links to a lot of other quirky music download blogs on the right column.
- I hate the 90s blog features a lot of 90s music. I confess I have not really followed it, but I wanted to mention that the left column includes links to 6 different compilation zips to download.
- Bloggio Odio Overplay blog features a lot of unusual content. A large number are creative commons, and Katya, the woman who runs it also curates music at FMA and runs a site collecting kid’s music. Recently she has taken an interest in classical, but she also digs up a lot of novelty music, lounge stuff and vintage European stuff.
- 11 Incredible Albums You Can Download for Free! (My pick of the best jamendo albums, plus interviews with them).
- Robert’s Musical Finds on Emusic. I have a one year subscription to this.
Recently the Houston Public Library switched over to a new cataloguing system. One nice feature I discovered was the ability to create custom RSS feeds out of search results. So I decided to create a table of permanent RSS feeds for the music CDs for quick reference. This is a work in progress (and actually, I probably need to refine these things and add more categories). But this is good to start with. Everything is sorted by publication date from MOST RECENT to OLDEST. Publication date doesn’t refer to when it was originally published but when the purchased CD was actually produced. So the 1966 Beatles album, Revolver, might be listed as 2009 because the remastered edition was re-released in 2009.
|By Language/Country||By Time Period||Other Criteria|
|Chinese Language Music||Pop Music 2011-2020: N American Pop/rock, Country Music, Spanish/Latino Music,||Jungman Branch Music CDs|
|Russian/E. European Music Excludes most classical)||2001-2010: Country Music, American Pop/Rock,||Soundtracks/TV/Musicals|
|Arabic Language Music||90s Rock Music||Jazz|
|Music in Multiple Indian Languages (Includes soundtracks, classical)||Electronic/Dance/House Music|
|Africa: 2011-2020, African Pop/Folk (generic)||Rough Guide Music Series|
I normally don’t watch TV dramas or procedurals. They are dull and predictable. I started making exceptions for supernatural sexy teen angst shows like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, but really the entire series is silly.
I have done some binge watching of TV shows — I once watched 20 episodes of Lost in 26 hours. That show is well-executed and produced, and I really don’t mind the supernatural aspects of the show even though the flashbacks are mostly dull. Recently I’ve started re-watching episodes of Lost — skipping through the flashbacks and taking notes on what worked well and how the show managed to be what it became. There’s a lot to hate about the story, but for certain scenes, I just think the writers must think TV watchers are idiots.
Take this example:
Season 3 opener features a group of scientists doing all kinds of suspicious research (medical and otherwise) on an island. They hear and see a jetliner heading for an inevitable crash on the island. Under these circumstances, how would the scientists react? Do they:
- send out some of their people to the crash scene to offer assistance?
- ignore the crash entirely and return to their normal business?
- Send out some of their own people to pretend to be crash victims so they can spy and report back?
If you chose option 3, congratulations! You have the limited imagination of a TV writer.
Even if you assume that these researchers from the Dharma Initiative are semi-evil or hostile or reluctant to socialize, having them pretend to be crash victims is pretty much the dumbest thing you can do under the circumstances. Yet it’s necessary for the plot. It makes me realize that the show I’m watching is essentially silly and manipulative and that hours of Bergman and Sembene Ousmane are still waiting to be watched.
I sometimes enjoy escapism and shallow conflicts and characters. I just want it to make sense.
Can you imagine the same Lost show if 1)there were no guns, 2)all the main characters were uglier and older, 3)people weren’t always dying at someone else’s hand? and 4)people weren’t always trying to remove bullets with silverware or their hands? How strange that we watch such silly shows when our own lives are already packed with turmoil and frustrations. Don’t underestimate the dramatic or comic potential of our mundane lives.
It’s unfair to compare a book to a TV show, but being stranded on an island offers a lot of drama already. How do you find food and water? How do you handle health and hygiene? How do you not get depressed or bored? How do you use your creativity or ingenuity to fix things and come up with stopgap solutions? That is exciting stuff– and that’s why Robinson Crusoe was such a great read.
Contrast that with Lost where you have to throw in evil scientists, psychotic killers, imaginary predators, time travel and the fact that everyone is boinking everyone else as indiscriminately as a porn film.
Later, I will try to explain the things about Lost which actually work well. For now though, let’s marvel at how gullible most TV shows think we are.
“That fish has been fried” is a slang phrase used in the context of an Internet thread. It expresses (in a terse & colorful way) the speaker’s opinion that a thread is growing tiresome, tedious or repetitive and that the speaker is leaving it for that reason. In no way does it imply that the speaker believes that the issue has been settled or the previous commenter’s argument was correct or should prevail. Often it’s quite the opposite. A person who utters this phrase may be convinced that his viewpoint is still valid or logically unassailable, but may simply be tired or weary of arguing.
Although I believe the phrase has negative connotations, I don’t believe it should only have negative connotations. The phrase should remain ambiguous enough to retain a neutral meaning. Here are some possible connotations:
- Both sides have already presented their respective opinions in some detail, and past this point, the only rational thing to do at this point is to “agree to disagree.”
- One side has simply not done their research or is making too many unproven assertions.
- One side is unusually shrill or derogatory, and rather than trying to engage, the other side has decided that it’s best just to leave the thread alone.
- One side is too tired or has more pressing matters (Like living, working, etc). I’m a writer and if I have strong feelings about a subject like capital punishment, I’d rather write a long blogpost to express my opinions than continue some unending Facebook thread about the topic.
- The time it would take for one side to disprove the misconceptions of the other side would be considerable.
- The context of the thread makes it inappropriate to continue this debate. It may be off-topic (i.e., a capital punishment debate on an Elvis Costello forum for instance). Or the discussion may just involve too many arguments or people or vantage points to allow for a coherent debate. Even in a context where the person threw out the question in the first place, the forum itself may not be particularly well-suited to longer and more sustained arguments. Who wants to read something with 400 responses?
I have written before that it is often difficult for reasonably educated people to disengage from Internet conversations.
How to use this phrase correctly:
Because this neologism is still new, I think the best way to use it in the context of a thread would be to simply write the phrase with a hyperlink:
- That fish has been fried. OR
- That fish has been fried. http://www.imaginaryplanet.net/weblogs/idiotprogrammer/2013/06/that-fish-has-been-frieddefinition-and-explanation/
It’s not my intent to create extra web traffic to my site. But since I coined the phrase and defined it most thoroughly, it would be easier for people just to link to this page rather than to explain what it means.
Of course, when one person declares that “this fish has been fried,” others may disagree with this assessment. So others may choose to continue this thread. But it broadcasts a message to others that the thread might be ready to end. Rather than encouraging censorship or suppressing speech, my hope is that the expression of this phrase will simply create initial momentum for people to move on and get on with their respective lives.
I debated several variants to this phrase. “My fish has been fried” “The fish is fried, etc.” I like “that fish” (rather than “my fish” because it is objectifying (i.e., depersonalizing) the discussion and “has been fried” because there is no point in trying to fry the fish again.
Anyway, world, here it is! Hope it helps!
Postscript: I will know that this idiom will have finally entered the vernacular when people start using it on me….
Postscript 2. It probably is impossible to force a slang word into vernacular. Challenge accepted!
Postscript 3. I just realized that my neologism is a snowclone with endless variations (“That banana’s been stretched,” “that kernel’s been popped,” “That bone’s been chewed,” etc). The customizability of this phase attests to its flexibility and usefulness.
For better or worse, the Affordable Care Act (the new health care reform law) has been dubbed “Obamacare.”
Here’s another neologism: Perrycare. It is is defined as health care inside a state which has refused Medicaid expansion despite generous financial incentives to do so. It is characterized by skyrocketing health care premiums and overall costs for individuals who fall below 138% of the federal poverty line. Named after Texas Republican governor Rick Perry.
Here are some other characteristics:
- The population between 19-26 have the highest level of poverty. On the other hand, they are still eligible to be on their parents’ plan (that is, if their parents have a plan!). In general, people in this age range are healthy and would require care mainly for emergencies (or giving birth).
- The population between 26 and 30 have high rates of poverty. They are no longer on their parents’ plan; on the other hand, it is assumed that their income will have risen a bit depending on how long they have been in the workforce. Females are particularly at risk here because these are generally the child-bearing years.
- The population between 30-65. More likely to have savings, but on the other hand, more likely to have serious conditions and require several visits.
The Kaiser Foundation has prepared a health care rate calculator. Note that it provides two estimates: the estimate under Obamacare and Perrycare. According to the site’s FAQ, “The federal poverty level varies by family size. In 2013, it is $11,490 for a single adult and $23,550 for a family of 4. The poverty level is estimated for 2014 based on Congressional Budget Office projections of inflation.”
On a positive note, medical underwriting will be prohibited on Jan 1 2014 under Obamacare, so very low-income individuals will be able to purchase a plan without having to go through underwriting; they just won’t be able to afford it!
Update: Here’s a cost estimate from Kaiser about just how much money Texas is not going to spend and not going to receive:
TEXAS (population: 26 million)
Without Medicaid expansion, between 2013-2022, feds would spend 228 billion and TX state would spend 159 billion on Medicaid for Texans.
With Medicaid expansion for 2013-2022, feds would spend 305 billion and TX state would spend 168 billion on Medicaid for Texans.
In other words, spending 9 billion dollars more on Medicaid in Texas will prompt the feds to spend 77 billion more dollars on health care for Texans over the next decade.
New York (population 19 million)
Without Medicaid expansion for 2013-2022, fed pays 468 billion, and NY state pays 451 billion for New Yorkers.
With Medicaid expansion for the same time period, feds pay 553 billion, NY state pays 433 billion for New Yorkers.
In other words, because NY already pays a greater amount into Medicaid, Obamacare will cause New York to spend 18 billion dollars less on Medicaid, while the feds will spend 85 billion dollars more on health care for Medicaid in New York.
A Rand analysis estimates other effects from deciding to opt out of Medicaid expansion.
If 14 states decide not to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act as intended by their governors, those state governments collectively will spend $1 billion more on uncompensated care in 2016 than they would if Medicaid is expanded. … In addition, those 14 state governments would forgo $8.4 billion annually in federal payments and an additional 3.6 million people will be left uninsured… “State policymakers should be aware that if they do not expand Medicaid, fewer people will have health insurance, and that will trigger higher state and local spending for uncompensated medical care,” Price said. “Choosing to not expand Medicaid may turn out to be the more-costly path for state and local governments.”…
Researchers also outline how failing to expand Medicaid could have more than financial consequences. Based on earlier research showing that past expansions of Medicaid has led to decreases in deaths, the study estimates that an additional 19,000 deaths could occur annually if the 14 states studied do not expand Medicaid.
My rough ballpark estimate is that Texas accounts for a third of the population of those states opting out of Exchanges and Medicaid expansion. Therefore, applying the Rand’s data to Texas, we could say that Perry’s decision not to expand Medicaid will cost Texans somewhere in the range of $300 million and result in 6000 more deaths.
Houston Dining Index by Mike Riccetti (2013), Tempus Fugit Press.180 pages.(Author Website)
Summary: great restaurant review book with lots of useful lists (such as restaurants near Metro Rail stops), but it is somewhat difficult to browse by neighborhood or region.
The author is a Houston native who has been reviewing Houston restaurants for a long time. He and I went to high school in Houston together, and I have fond memories about his taking classmates to an obscure and crazy Asian jazz restaurant where he ordered all kinds of crazy and delicious things for the table. Mike’s enthusiasism for food and fine dining is evident in his book which collects lots of information about Houston’s amazing restaurant scene. In addition to writing regular restaurant reviews for the Examiner and Houston Press, Riccetti has already written one Houston culinary guide. This volume updates and improves upon the previous one.
The book seems to be targeted to the out-of-town traveller. He gives three dollar figures under price: average dinner cost (including 20% tip), entrée price range and average entrée price. Also, he begins by talking about restaurants in areas frequented by out-of-towners (the airports, downtown), I have looked up about 30 restaurants I know very well and found that his reviews are succinct, fair but not overly positive and good at capturing what is unique and interesting about the restaurant in question. Most of the listings include its neighborhood and/or its culinary type, but this is not always done consistently.
The excellent introduction gives an overview about Houston restaurants and trends. This book has some incredible “extras”: a listing of local pubs and microbreweries, a review/list of Bistros (I didn’t know Houston had so many!) a review/list of restaurants in hotels, a listing of restaurant without walking distance of the Metrorail (! — this will be even more useful after Metrorail is expanded even further in 2014). There is a section for “restaurant rows” (small pedestrian-friendly areas full of restaurants). Perhaps the oddest section was “Seen on TV” (restaurants which were reviewed or featured on various food shows).
I like the fact that this book covers a lot of budget restaurants and that it contains a lot of lists (Late Night, Sunday Brunch, Uniquely Houston Restaurants). Its coverage of Vietnamese restaurants was particularly good. But it can be hard to browse the book by location. The book highlights certain areas (e.g., “West Houston — Energy Corridor and Katy”) but for the most part you have to browse by culinary type and then look at individual listings to see where they are located. Also, there was not a special section for Galleria (where I live, a common destination for visitors). There is not an index but a section for “Location” near the end (which is useful but easy to overlook). It would have been even more helpful for the Location section to actually link to the place in the book where the restaurant was reviewed. As a practical matter, you will have to use the ebook search feature to find a specific restaurant. One tip I have is creating ebook bookmarks for the most useful sections (which I found to be “Metrorail”, “restaurant rows,” and “Locations” ) so you can access them later more easily.
This raises question about whether restaurant books still matter in an age of Yelp and B-4-u-eat. Although raw feedback from review websites are great, they can overwhelm you with extraneous information In contrast, restaurant guidebooks like this are more practical and concise and give you a better overview of what’s here. Houston has some incredible restaurants, and books like this help the visitor and longtime residents to discover new and wonderful places.
Disclaimer: Mike and I were high school classmates. More on Disclaimers and Reviewing