Founder's Notes

Alien Space Ship Saves Earth!

Lauren — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:17:44 GMT

Okay, so I'm going to go 'all political on you' as my son would say.... He sometimes accuses me of going 'all logical' on him when I try to sit quietly and watch what the Discovery Channel tries to call science shows these days... like 'Ghost Hunters' that has folks run around haunted houses with a bunch of equipment trying to catch ghosts on tape - hoping, I suppose, that someday a specter will accommodate them and sit down for a full interview. Anyway, they always come up with nothing (surprise) but end the show with all of them agreeing that they weren't sure but there just might have been something but they just didn't catch it.   Week after week the same.

They do the same thing with real science, like a recent Discover Documentary on the Tunguska event. Tunguska was a massive explosion that occurred in Russia in 1908 flattening everything for miles, caused by a meteorite (big one).   Just the kind of cool exploding thing that my son loves - that and Myth Busters blowing up cement trucks.

This kind of thing is a perfect set up for the sort of pseudo science that the Discovery Channel likes to exploit. It was long enough ago and remote enough that there wasn't anyone there, so no actual witnesses to muck things up with facts. And because it's a desolate area of mosquito-infested bogs and swamps in a hilly taiga, reachable only by being dropped in by helicopter or a long hike, not a whole lot of people went to go check it out for a long time. It's perfect for 'you can't prove me wrong, so I'm right' science. It's the kind of science that my teenager is currently very fond of... in fact it's the kind of argument that he and a whole of politicians love to make about nearly anything that will a: get them out of trouble, or b: prove their argument.

The Tunguska meteorite completely blew itself (and lots of other stuff) into a bazillion pieces, leaving, well, not much. So, as a result, and despite a whole lot of subsequent science, numerous fringe theories have come up - and with the help of the Discovery Channel, continue.   These suggest that it was either: a black hole, b: the biggest lightning bolt you've ever seen, c: a piece of anti-matter, or d: and I love this one best - the exploding nuclear power plant of an errant space vehicle belonging to extraterrestrials (Kozo Kowai).

I mean I give Mr. Kowai huge credit for creativity.   And I forgot to tell you the bit about how 'independent thinkers' like Kowai, added that the reason the spaceship was there in the first place was that it was short of water for it's nuclear powered plant and was actually aiming for lake Baikal, the largest body of freshwater in the world.

There are a whole lot of questions that remain about Tunguska - how big was it, what was it made of, how exactly did it explode.... Lots of things. And don't get me wrong science doesn't solve things right away, or always correctly at first.

Anyway, the point to all this is that science does its thing, no matter what nut jobs are out there, just give it time. And I think that real science is way cooler than made up stuff. Check this out. Whatever hit the earth in 1908 was huge - I mean the biggest thing in a long time, kind of huge, 40 megatons of TNT huge.   It's the largest thing to hit the earth that anyone has ever found. So big and so fast that part of it may have broken off in the explosion and bounced back to space, like a stone you've skipped across a flat lake.

But the 'independent' thinkers still don't like this, and you can always corner a good scientist if you ask 'are you 100% sure?'. Any scientist worth his or her salt will always say, 'Well the theory is the best we have, but we can't ever be 100% sure'. At which point the independents go all postal and say 'See! I knew it was spaceships!'

Now I'm all for spaceships mind you. My grandmother used to say that she always kept an open mind and would certainly offer her tea in her best tea service should they come by to visit. But, it can be harmful in the wrong hands - and by 'wrong hands' I'm talking about politicians.

So, back to politics... politicians do the same thing as the Discovery Channel. Take the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for example. Everything points to defeat. No matter how you look at it everything from the cost, the culture, past history, the impact on world terrorism, lives (ours and theirs), everything.   Every fact you look at, and there's plenty to look at. Just one? - no one in recorded history has ever won in Afghanistan.

But the facts don't make it interesting, nor do they win elections. Facts get in the way of possibly suggesting that the loss of lives was in vain. Facts get in the way of making us out as any better than them, or our style of government, or religion, any better than theirs. Facts get in the way of patriotic fervor that lets our youth and their parents think it's okay to go off to kill and be killed.

Just think what it would be like to have to look at the Iraqi mother who had lost her son, and without resorting to platitudes about peace or terrorism, explain to her what collateral damage was.

So, now you know how to do this yourself. Here's what you do. You take the idea you want to get across (This time we can win in Afghanistan). Attach it as an alternative conclusion for another event (The Russians didn't win their battle in Afghanistan because they were the bad guys) - don't worry about the facts. Then simply add an emotional reason why people should believe in yours, (We need to spread Democracy around the world) and call all others short sighted.

On that downer, I'll leave you with the continuation of the alien spacecraft theory. Turns out that it started in 1946 when a Soviet author named Alexander Kazantsev wrote a science fiction story about a nuclear powered spacecraft from Mars on a visit to collect fresh water from Lake Baikal, had exploded, showering the area in radioactivity. Well, as I noted above, a well-known soviet scientist, took that and ran with it - fellow named - Alexei Zolotov. His story, despite much enthusiasm on his part, died down after no one found any radioactivity that couldn't be counted for by nearby atomic bomb tests, until 2004. In August of that year, another Russian expedition led by Yuri Labvin went to the site and has claimed to have recovered an "extraterrestrial device". This story was carried around the world in Pravda, wire services and other press outlets as credible "Reported new claim that a UFO had been involved in Tunguska".

Labvin, had elaborated a bit on the original story and now believes that it wasn't an alien ship that crashed, but rather, the aliens had in fact saved earth by blowing up a huge meteorite that was on a collision path with us. They used a nuclear missile to do it.

British reporter said it best: It's a rather sad commentary on the current state of anything goes attitudes among some science correspondents that such blatant rubbish is being reported."

Like I said, no one has ever won in Afghanistan.

Bighand Thornyhead

Lauren — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 20:08:45 GMT

Okay, so color me cynical, but I'd love to do what the G8 leaders did and get applauded for it, just like they did. And, what did they do you ask? They said that the world should halve emissions blamed for climate change by 2050.

2050? That's 42 years away! Hell, I could do that. That's four generations in dog years! It's like Snoopy saying that the smog will be half gone by the time his great grandson grows up. What were they thinking?

And the fun part? The part that shows the world that they might just be a tad out of touch with public opinion? They thought this was cool enough to put in a time capsule. The capsule will be buried at the Windsor Hotel - the luxury hotel in the mountain resort of Toyako in northern Japan, which held the summit (what's with the British name?). The capsule will be opened in 100 years, on July 7, 2108. It will go along side a monument in honor of the eight leaders in a planned new, $1.5 million dollar park. The shape of the monument? Chunk of ice that's melting. A spokesperson for the hotel said that it would act as a message for future generations to take care of the Earth. By the time they open it, they'll probably have to use scuba divers to get to it.

Most peer reviewed science research says that we're toast if we don't cut emissions by 40% in something closer to 10 to 15 years. And that's not even counting the fact that China and India aren't even part of the G8... which makes it kind of pointless.

Fellow named Paul Collier calls the emerging world's ever growing population (including China and India) as the 'Bottom Billion'. A population that is now getting access to wonderful new devices called cars. Take, for example, India's Tato Nano, the under $3,000 car due out this year. According to the estimates, it will make it possible for some additional 30 million people in India to own autos. Up till now they've had to resort to riding bicycles or walking, what fun is that?

Let's see, how much additional pollution is that? Well, 30 million more cars sitting in India's one lane jammed roads for an hour a day, times such and such gases produced an hour is, let's see, uhmm, a lot.

And, knowing that there would be no way that with all these extra cars running around that they'd even come close to meeting the G8's air pollution goals both China and India declined to go along, saying that since we (the 8) had made the problem, we should fix it.

We certainly can't stand on any moral high ground on this argument, or on any other in fact, based on recent history, but it would be nice if we could all join hands and sing a chorus of Kumbya, my Lord' and figure it out.

And you gotta' love this - after being criticized for their somewhat less than stellar agreement the G8 leaders have been saying it's a milestone, why you ask? Well as Canadian prime Minister Stephen Harper and other G8 leaders said it as an important breakthrough because it was the first time U.S. President George W. Bush has accepted the need to set targets for cutting carbon emissions. What? That reminds me of Brent Miller.

Brent was the class bully in my 8th grade public school who regularly stole my lunch money. Actually a lot of kid's money. Well, finally after enough kids went hungry for a semester or so, the principal found out about it and talked to his father. And after some behind the scenes 'persuasion' Brent did stop taking the money, and was forgiven. So we now just got kicked as he walked by. Somehow this reminds me of Bush.

In the irony department:

British Prime minister Gordon Brown fell into the 'failed to see the larger picture' category when, after noting that the global food crisis was top on the G8's agenda he made a wonderful little speech in which he urged the world to reduce the "unnecessary demand" for food and called on British families to cut back on their wasteful use of food.

He unfortunately followed this comment by sitting down to enjoy a six-course lunch and followed that with an eight-course "blessings of the earth and the sea social dinner". In total, the Prime Minister was served 24 different dishes during his first day at the summit, and the press found that a bit ironic, can't imagine why.

Just for those that might wonder what they missed out on, here's the menu for dinner:

Dinner Menu

Corn-stuffed caviar
Smoked salmon and sea urchin "pain surprise" style
Winter lily bulb and summer savoury
Kelp-flavoured cold kyoto beef shabu-shabu, asparagus dressed with sesame cream
Diced fatty fles of tuna fish, avocado and jellied soy sauce and Japanese herb "shiso"
Boiled clam, tomato, Japanese herb "shiso" in jellied clear soup of clam
Water shield and pickled conger dressed with vinegar soy sauce
Boiled prawn with jellied tosazu-vinegar
Grilled eel rolled around burdock strip
Sweet potato
Fried and seasoned Goby with soy sauce and sugar
Hairy Crab "Kegani" bisque soup
Salt-grilled bighand thornyhead with vinegary water pepper sauce
Milk fed lamb from "shiranuka" flavoured with aromatic herbs and mustard
Roasted lamb and cepes and black truffle with emulsion sauce of lamb's stock and pine seed oil
Special cheese selection, lavender honey and caramelised nuts
G8 fantasy dessert

Wine list
Le Reve grand cru champagne
Japanese saki
Corton Charlemagne 2005
Chateau Latour burgundy
Ridge California Monte Bello 1997
Tokaji Essencia 1999 from Hungary

Oh, in case you were wondering you could have purchased about 200,000 Tata Nanos for the cost of the G8 summit.

And, in case you were wondering, a Bighand Thornyhead is a fish.

I'm going green- buying a Hummer

Lauren — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:53:08 GMT

Arrgh.... just when you thought it was simple: Good Guy? The Toyota Prius. Bad Guy? The Hummer. Easy. Or at least it was until people make you start thinking about it.

Now, I'm from California, so except for our Governator who, at last count, had several Hummers, most folks scoff at them. We can't even look at their owners in the eyet when they pull up next to us at the gas station. We just look down and pretend to be lost in thought while we fill up our BMWs.

So, I'm going along just fine, then this group decides to do a cradle to grave analysis of the two cars. This report, called 'Dust to Dust' is cool. This is what is does - it finds the total energy necessary to:

Plan, build, sell, drive and dispose of a vehicle from initial concept to scrappage. This includes such minutia as plant to dealer fuel costs, employee driving distances, electricity usage per pound of material used in each vehicle and literally hundreds of other variables.

How cool is that? Suddenly my life is simple again. Just read the report, then I'll know just what car to buy. To make it simple the good folks at the research place translated all the research into what they called the dollars per lifetime mile. That's the energy cost per mile averaged over the lifetime of the car (full report here). So, lower cost = good car, higher cost = bad car.

They researched 280 different cars and SUVs. Lowest cost per mile? SMART, Ion, Focus, Cavalier and Wrangler. All at about .65 per mile. Highest? Rolls-Royce, Phaeton and Maybach at about $14.00 per mile (what the Hell is a Maybach?). Prius was number 140 at $2.29. The Hummer H3 was number 155 and costs $2.32 per mile. And, surprise, surprise the Honda Accord Hybrid comes in at number 263 at $4.22 per mile, surpassing the biggest Hummer and about every other huge SUV. In fact all the Hybrids - Camry, Highlander and Mariner came out worse.

(for those that are counting there are 139 car owners that are currently being looked down on by Prius owners that can lift their heads high)

The major reason for the Hybrid's poor showing is the batteries, and the pollution associated with their production and disposal. Apparently almost all the nickel that goes into the Prius' batteries comes from a plant in Sudbury Ontario. In fact, the plant has caused so much environmental damage to the area around it that it's 'dead'. So dead that NASA that can use it to test moon rovers with no fear of running into a living thing.

It's bad enough that the nickel is apparently killing everything around the plant but it's then shipped off in container ships to Europe to be refined. Then it goes to China for some more processing, then to Japan. Finally the finished batteries are sent to the United States. How environmentally friendly is all that?

Now granted you've got to pick your foes. The Hummer costs way more at the gas pump. And maybe we should buy the Prius since we can probably depend on the Nickel coming from Canada whereas who knows about the oil from Saudi Arabia. Or, maybe we shouldn't buy the Prius at all because it's not American. Trouble is there's too much to think about, and what with all the politicians mucking up the water with one-liners, it's just a mess. Bottom line? Buy a three-year-old Honda Accord, or hitch hike to work.

On that note I'll leave you with something entirely off topic.

This is a video submitted to a Colbert Report video contest. The challenge was to take blue screen footage of a rather boring McCain speech and see if you could make it amusing. My vote? Whoever did this has way too much time on his or her hands

First Kiss..

Lauren — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 23:05:47 GMT

Okay, so I've been writing about serious stuff for a bit, let's change to something 'completely different' as Monty Python likes to say. Your First Kiss. I put that in caps because Ann Landers says it's important. She wrote back to an impatient 13-year girl that she should wait for just the right person, since it is something that she would remember for the rest of her life.

I'd like to know: A. Where was Ann Landers when I was 13? and B. It's true but for very different reasons than Ms. Landers would have you think.

First of all, there was zero chance that I would have written to Ann Landers to ask the question. I didn't read a paper, much less have the patience to write to her and wait for a reply. I can't imagine some current teen sitting on her bed one day saying, "Oh, I know, I'll write to Ann Landers, wait a month or two and see what she says".

So without the benefit of Ms. Lander's insight, my information on the dos and don'ts of the first kiss came from my fellow 13 year olds - Henry Rathjen, Ron Simmons and Jack Teider. In retrospect one would have thought that you'd look outside your immediate circle of brain developmentally challenged friends to find an answer, but that would have been a bit too obvious, so I went on gut instinct. I didn't realize until years later, the full consequences of that night.

I grew up in a rural New York town called Rhinebeck. One main street, one high school, one drug store, and one hay ride planned by the school as part of a school dance. Nighttime, sitting on hay, back of a horse drawn wagon, moonlit sky, next to Susan Sanders - 'Susie'. Various other guys and their dates scattered around, none of which I even remember - my focus was totally on Susie' - knowing that there was a good chance for that first kiss.

Susie and I were in the honors classes together in school, she was thin, cute, athletic, shy and wore braces - as I did. I went on the date that night because her best friend, Michelle Pavey, future Prom Queen, had arranged it - she had gone to each of us and said that the other wanted to go on the date, so on the date we went, feeling a bit flattered and nervous.

So, we bounce gently along for a bit, it's dark, warm, and a perfect setting. I sit close and let the occasional bounce bring me closer - then in a move that I don't remember I leaned over and kissed her. I don't actually remember too much about the kiss, accept that our braces met, and that she was very nervous - shook a bit as I recall.

Anyway, not much happened after that, except that I did see her after school the next day, and she was very upset. She found me walking home from school and in a shy voice, asked why I didn't like her. And before I could answer her that I did in fact like her, but didn't know how to act, she asked be the question that has stuck with me for life. She asked me if it was because her chest wasn't big enough.

Now, before you go jumping to any conclusions, you should know that I had no real first hand knowledge of her anatomy - only a brief sort of passing touch as I reached around to hold her on a bouncing wagon. So the question caught me completely off guard. And, and this is the important part, there's no right answer to this question. There never has been and there never will be. This is a boy - girl dynamic thing that is as old as Eve asking Adam if the snake makes her look fat. It's the same question as 'Is this dress too tight?', or 'Does my new haircut make me look old?'

Susie and I parted ways a few months after our first kiss, with no acrimony that I remember, just sort of parted. I've now been married for over 20 years to a wonderful woman, a woman that I fully expect and hope is the last person I see on this earth, and, I still get nervous every time my wife asks me questions like this.

When you first know someone you never ask these kinds of questions, you each assume you look great, and to each other you do. Then a couple of years later it moves to Stage 2. and she will, one day, ask you what she looks like and you'll say 'You look great'. This answer comes easily and is taken without question, and everyone is happy, no matter what she really does look like.

After a few more years, Stage 3. starts and you now expect honesty from each other, so you'll answer truthfully and sometimes hurt your partner's feelings, but at least, you think, she is spared being seen in public wearing ill-fitting dresses. Some years later, Stage 4. begins and you back track and start saying something like 'You always look good to me', and you're both okay with that small cover up.

But now, after 20 years, in Stage 5. my wife won't let me say any of these things. I'm supposed to be absolutely honest - none of this Pablum 'you look great' stuff - if she looks fat I'm supposed to say so, if the purple dotted dress looks like a tablecloth for a teddy bear picnic, I'm supposed to fess up to it.

The trouble is the system is set up for failure. Because of the first years of automatic compliments she doesn't believe me if I'm flattering, and she'll say 'Come on what do you really think?' and I'm forced to come up with a false criticism or we'll never get out of the house. And because she can still remember her hurt feelings in stage 3. she's upset with me if I say something critical - there is no middle ground.

And this all started with that first kiss, and Susie's first question to me. I stammered an answer out that day to Susie - something about no of course not, I'm sure her chest was just the right size, but that no, I hadn't really noticed, but by that I didn't mean her chest was to small to notice, I just meant I hadn't any first hand knowledge, not that I would ever do that, not that I didn't want to, that no, what I really meant was..

Crude Oil Companies

Lauren — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 22:23:05 GMT

Okay, let's see if we can figure out why you're now riding an old beat up Schwinn bicycle to work instead of driving your SUV. That same Chevy Suburban LTZ you so lusted for a year ago, and bought, but that now costs you over $75 to fill up with gas

Some say the increase in gas prices is from the rising cost of 'crude' and blame it on all those #$%^@ oil companies.   In 2004 it was $45 a barrel, and now it's around $135. Incidentally, whenever I hear a newscaster say 'Oil is now 1 bazillion dollars a barrel' I always envision the kind of barrels used by the those poor fools who went sailing over Niagara Falls in the early 1900's in hopes of promoting themselves (turns out drowning has a way of limiting your success along these lines).

Anyway, the feds claim that up to 70% of the price of a gallon of gas IS from the cost of crude. 'The rest is a complex mix of factors' - that phrase alone should set you at ease. Let's see if we can follow the old 'Texas Gold' from its origins, and track the costs.

Oil gets pumped from the ground, that part's easy. Now, once out of the ground, it can either be sold to a refiner, or to what's called a 'spot market' - that's where oil companies and distributors buy and sell to each other. Once it goes through the refiners it can be again sold on the market or to wholesalers who sell it to their own stations or to other retailers.

So, who sets the price of crude oil you ask? Sad to say, it's not the oil companies. I say sad, because that would be easy, and I could end the essay here, and we'd all go off with a good villain in our minds - incidentally those oil company guys should really consider a fashion makeover, or maybe hire a stand in, a woman, a young vogue model, someone, anyone but themselves - when you see them on network television answering questions from Senator Kennedy on Capital Hill, it's really hard to find much empathy anyway, turns out the price is set not by them, but by the open market.

By 'open market', we mean here, a bunch of guys betting on what the prices are going to be, not the actual cost of the stuff. This is played out in the form of something that are called 'futures' contracts traded on various exchanges around the world. Sometimes you'll hear them say that the cost of July crude oil futures was such and such a price. That means someone is promising to pay that amount come July. But no one at any of the exchanges ever actually walks over and slaps down $135,and drives off with a barrel of oil. Instead, they sell it off to oil companies to refine.

Titania Jones, helped me out here:

The traders decide what the market price is based on whether they believe demand is increasing or decreasing. However, because the number of contracts aren't really based on "supply and demand" but on the "funds trading as commercial traders", there is no way for traders to "gauge the real supply and demand market". In other words, it's gambling.

Here's a quick overview so far. Of the current $4.00 you spend for a gallon, 40 cents is federal and state taxes, cost to deliver it from the refinery to the gas station is 27 cents, refining is 40 cents, cost of crude 2.90 and the local gas station makes perhaps 20 cents.   The local guy doesn't make much, and in fact is struggling a bit to break even.

Titania continued (thinking she could actually help me out here)..

The breakdown for gas can be located at the California energy commission website. The refiners have had low profit margins since the oil went up. Right now, they've increased them, because they are playing catch up; they've actually lost money as refiners, in "the actual business of refining".   That doesn't mean they've lost money as producers, if they do that also, since this is only part of their balance sheet, if you see what I mean.

Thank you Titania, I sort of get it.

California Energy Commission Web site.

I wouldn't really click on that link if I were you, because if you do you'll only discover things like the 'State Underground Storage Tank Fee (it's a penny per gallon by the way).

So, the major cost for a gallon of gas is the cost of crude. And who makes money on crude, you ask? Two people: those that get it out of the ground, and those that bet on what the price is going to be in the future. On the getting out of the ground side, it depends on whether you are an oil company that actually has all the equipment to take it from the ground. If you are (think EXXonMobil) you post record profits, if you aren't, (think Sunoco and Tesoro) you might even loose money (they did this last quarter).

That leaves all those folks who buy and sell the 'futures'. This from Titania:

Brokers are making the most money in trading commissions, on exchanges such as ICE, and other investment, trading firms and exchanges. The money is distributed or withdrawn daily from the margin accounts. If the price is always going up, the investment banks are the one's making the most money. But that's not the problem, the problem is that they are pushing the price up, while profiting a lot less, and is that worth sinking the entire global economy? So, while they make say a few hundred thousand a day, the effects throughout the world of this price increase are a few hundred billion? (just a guess), and it's all us consumers who have to pay for the price increases.

Okay, so now you know that more than half of the cost of a gallon of gasoline is the cost of crude, and that cost is set by gamblers betting on what the price is going to be, not what it is. And what do the gamblers base their guesses on? Well, according to the National Petroleum Council, the last quick raises in gas came in response to crude oil shortages caused by the Arab oil embargo in 1973, the Iranian revolution in 1978, the Iran/Iraq war in 1980, and the Persian Gulf conflict in 1990. Seems to be a pattern here.

Now, of course, you can heave a huge sigh of relief because we now have world stability ever since we arrived in Iraq okay I lied, the war in Iraq, our seemingly endless suggestions that something has to be done with, or to, Iran, and the whole region's less than glowing regard for the old U.S, has probably been one, if not, THE, major factor in the recent jump in prices.

This is all in spite of the fact that currently Americans, for probably the first time, are demanding less gasoline (mostly because if you're unemployed you tend to buy food before gas).

On the upside? That new SUV you've wanted? Yours for a song, just run on down to your Chevy dealer - granted you'll probably cancel that trip you planned to the Grand Canyon based on the cost of gas, but it will at least look cool in your driveway this summer.

Here's the ironic part. Back in 2004, one of the unspoken reasons for going into Iraq was to stabilize the region and the cost of oil. Even in liberal California, where the war was never popular, you could hear the occasional 'well, at least gas will be cheap' conversation. Well, those same countries are now making more money on their oil than ever before, we're beginning to see a crack in the U.S. as the only world power, the area is less stable than ever, and we're dipping into our retirement funds at the gas station.

Oh, by the way along the way I discovered that according to the creationists all the world's oil was produced when the flood (2350 BC) swept away all the trees, vegetation, and animals (including humans), and covered them with sediment and squished them into oil. Personally I like to think that the geologist's guess of 60+ million years is better, since humans weren't around, and I don't have to visualize the oil of humans squirting into my car's carburetor as I drive to work.

Sources:
AP story

10 things

Lauren — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 23:40:30 GMT

I've always thought I should do 10 new things every day, 10 things that were worthwhile, fun, educational, or, well, at least marginally worthwhile anyway. Things like find a new book author, learn something new in a field I know nothing about, listen to a new musician, walk backwards drinking a good merlot, whatever... turns out you end up in a rut after a few days just trying to think of a different 10 things (to say nothing of being mocked by your family).

I mean, it's easy to do 10 silly new things a day, but that gets a little old after a couple of days. I'm talking 10 decent, remember them later sort of things, things that you might even mention in a conversation with someone you didn't know very well sort of things. Things that you could do anywhere.

This qualification puts a bit of a challenge to it, unless, of course, you're easy with saying things like, "No, I didn't know flying quarters could be lethal' to the lady grocery clerk after having just missed catching a new personal record of 24 quarters that I had balanced on my elbow (my son made me do it).

So, I decided I needed a little help and turned to the web, thinking that someone, somewhere must have come up with a list of like a 1,000 new things to do - you know the web, full of 'niche' markets, surely this would be one of them. After all, there are books like '100 places to see before you die'; someone must have put together a nice long list of cool things that would keep me busy. It would be great, I'd have this journal in my pocket that I'd carry around, a kind of birder's list that I would keep to record all the new things I was going to do (for you that don't know, avid birding fans keep a lifetime list of all the birds they've seen).

So, off to the web, I typed in "10 new things a day" into Google. The top search resulted in this list from a fellow in Denver:

1. Make list of daily tasks and define the Main Project for the day
2. Check and respond to emails & voice messages
3. Tidy up my desk and do administrative tasks (invoicing, late payment notifications)
4. Write a post to my blog
5. Take a break for 30 minutes, including checking Google Reader, MacNN, and other favorite sites like Woot.com
6. Check my clients website ranking with my Rank Tracker software
7. Work on a website design mock in Illustrator for 1 hour
8. Take a 40-minute lunch break

etc.

No kidding, this was the top search result, what's that about?

Well, knowing the web, and how important it was to get the search words right I decided to backtrack and simplify. So, I typed in just the words '10 things'.

And here's the top results from that search:

1. 10 things you didn't know about Tim Pawlenty
2. Boys' Private Parts: 10 things Every Girl Should Know
3. 10 things I hate about you
4. 10 things you shouldn't buy new
5. 10 things our ticket broker won't tell you
6. Us 10 things girls really do love us some Canadians
7. 10 things I hate about commandments

Now, while some of these are amusing lists, they were hardly going to help me out. I did, however, take a side road and click on each one just so that I could pass them along to you:

1. Tim Pawlenty is apparently a potential running mate for John McCain.
2. This comes from a site titled 'Acclaimed abstinence-only education program for girls. Its first listing was: "Unlike your girly privates, which are internal, boy privates are external. God knew that nobody wanted to see all our lady mess, so He pushed everything up inside you"
3. This is a movie (never seen it).
4. First on the list was Books. Seems a bit odd that something like 'auto' or 'boat' didn't show up first, guess my new BMW is okay.
5. This site never really got around to listing anything.
6. This was a bit more interesting, written by someone named 'Stephanie' it's 10 things to be thankful for, seems to have a large flickr following, lots of photos. Kinda cool, but not what I was looking for..
7. This is a clever video parody on Youtube of old flicks..

Then I had a thought and typed in 'Life Lists' into Google. Well, that, I'm afraid, ended my search - there were 19,800,000 results, and nearly every one of them had the words 'inspiration, meaningful', or 'objectives' in them. So, I've decided to go back to the beginning and just see if I can catch those quarters, and leave it at that.

Bumper Stickers...

Lauren — Fri, 16 May 2008 19:37:16 GMT

Bumper stickers, you gotta' love them. They're a sort of the zeitgeist for our country, and, just when there wasn't a really good reason to plaster them on your SUV, along came the Iraq war which has led to a bonanza of vinyl statements - both pro and con. By the way, if you're going to put one on your car, please, for the sake of those of us over 40 that want to be amused, please use ones whose lettering is at least 1" high. It's very embarrassing to have to tailgate someone just to read the punch line.

Anyway, I thought it might be fun to see which bumper stickers are currently popular, so I went on the web, asked around, and did what passes for journalistic research to bloggers. I give you the following somewhat amusing summary. Take the truth of these findings for exactly the value of the one hour's worth of investigation that it took. Also, in the spirit of being honest and open about any personal bias, I tend to lean toward wit and humor.

First, I did the old high level google stats thing. If you put in 'Pro War Bumper Stickers' into Google's search box you get 283,000 search results. If you put in 'Anti-war Bumper Stickers' in, you get 535,000 results. So, this means that there are about twice as many web sites that talk about Anti War Bumper Stickers as there are sites that talk about 'Pro War Bumper Stickers.

This ratio held up when I went to the top bumper sticker sites themselves and did a rough count of the number of pro versus anti stickers. Now, comes the hard part - try to figure out why. You could rack up the disparity up to the 'it's always fun to pick on the big guy or status quo' syndrome (the big guy in this case being the government) but it seems more than that. You could say that there are more anti war people on the web than pro - and there are a number of media types that would agree, but I don't think so. I think it might be that the anti war crowd is just funnier. I mean it's a little bit of a stretch to be funny if your pro war, not a lot of great humor there.

To check this idea out, I went back to the sticker sites and did a rough count of popular bumper stickers that I assumed were supposed to be amusing. The test here was would I send this along to a friend. If yes, then it was amusing, if no then it failed. I found that in this case there were 4 times as many amusing anti-war stickers, as there were pro-war. I'm guessing this is because if you're against the war, there are lots of potential areas you might go after - from funding, to cost, to incompetence etc. The pro war, or support the war stickers, all seemed to share just a couple of themes - either it's just a patriotic thing to do, or your freedom depends on it. There was a third theme which is a bit outside either of these - it's the kind of John Wayne, we're bigger than they are, we've got lots of power, so let's use it sort of thing. But this, I don't think, fits into the normal pro or anti war camps, it's more of a long-standing American cultural sentiment, which reaches back to our nation's birth. This is the 'Don't Tread On Me' or I'll blow the crap out of you idea. This can be said anytime you can't think of a reasonable argument, and anyway they're pissing you off.

In the end, although there were times I felt like chuckling (and crying) I decided to leave my bumper naked. I realized I'd have to put a good number of them on to represent all the feelings I had about the war, and besides, my son says that if I get to put a sticker on, there is some teenage rule that says he gets to add one for some Swedish DJ name Basshunter who sings about a robot named Anna.

oh, and by the way, the Santa Clause thing wasn't a bumper sticker, or about war, just seemed to fit in...

Cost of the War?

Lauren — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 22:39:57 GMT

So, my teenage son returns from school and asks, "What's the Iraq war cost?" Now, me being an Internet sort of fellow, I said no problem, I'll just go find out. So, I went on the old 'internets' as my son calls it (the cool teenage word for it) to see what I could find. With all the numbers flying around from the politicos I thought it might be hard to find facts you could trust, but it's not all that hard. The hard part is to try to put it into some sort of perspective. So, with a nod to 'Harper's Index' I put together a list of costs - dollars, people, that sort of thing.

Then I showed it to my son.

The first words out of his mouth were 'Jesus Dad, What can we do about it all of this?'

Somewhere along the line, as I went merrily around the web looking at statistics for the number of deaths, orphaned kids, billion dollar contracts, refugees, and soldier suicides due to the war, I had completely turned off connecting with what it really meant to all the people involved, something my son, without the callousness that comes of over exposure, had seen instantly.

The best I could do was tell him 'We'll figure out something', and in his world ranting doesn't count (as it shouldn't).

So, having taken all the fun out of it, I give you the following. Feel free to let me know what I should do.

Number of wars more expensive than the Iraq war: 1 (WWII)
Ratio of cost of Iraq war to Cost of Korean War: 2:1
Ratio of cost of Iraq war to Cost of Vietnam war: 3:2
Ratio of cost of Iraq war to Cost of WW1: 2:1
Estimate by Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz of total cost of war in 2002: $60 billion
Current projected cost: $3 Trillion (missed it by that much)
Cost per week of the war: $3.5 billion
Percentage of this spent on the troops: 10%
Percent spent on war contractors: 50%
Value of Halliburton contracts 2003 - 2006: 17.2 Billion
Number of private contract employees in Iraq: 180,000
Amount per week spent on "death gratuities" (payments to families of troops killed in action: $2.4 million
Money spent by Iraqi and Kurdistan Governments on lawyers, lobbyists and consultants to represent them to the U.S. Government: $22,000,000
Increase in cost of a barrel of oil attributed to the war in Iraq: $10
Amount this has increased the cost of the war: $50 billion
Cost of a barrel of oil in March 2003: $33.51
Cost of a barrel of oil on March 17, 2008: $105.68
Sales by ExxonMobil,Shell and BP of petroleum products to the Pentagon from 2003 to 2007: $14.9 billion
Percentage increase in value of ExxonMobil stock from 2003 to 2008: +254%
Iraq population: 27,000,000
Iraq civilian deaths: 142,000
Iraqi insurgents deaths: 55,000
Number of Iraqis who have left the country since the start of the war: 2 million
Number of Iraqis 'Internally displaced' (nice word for lost their homes): 1.9 million
Percentage of Iraqi refugees that are children: 50%
Number of Iraqis granted U.S. refugee status since the start of the war: 800
Number accepted by Australia: 16,000
Number of U.S. orphans: 115,000
Number of hours Baghdad homes have electricity per day: 5.6
Number before the war: 20
Increase in rate of Iraqi malnutrition since the start of the war: 9%
U.S. Military killed since beginning of war: 4492
Iraqi police and soldiers killed: 8,145
U.S. soldiers killed that under 25 years old: 2200
Number of Iraqi civilians killed under that age: 35,000
U.S. Military wounded: 31,590
Non-combat related wounded: 60,000
Number of times the 3rd Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment has been sent to Iraq: 5
Number of Iraq war veterans seeking care for mental health disorders, not included in official wounded reports: 120,049
Percent change in insurgency strength since 2003? +460%
Global increase in yearly jihadist attacks outside of Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003: 30%
Percentage in world survey of 26,000 people that disapproves of the U.S. handling of the Iraq War: 73%
Percentage of Iraqis who believe coalition forces are responsible for improvement in security: 1%
Out of 10 Americans number who want U.S. to stay in Iraq: 4
Number out of 10 Iraqis who do: 3
Percentage of Iraqis that think that U.S. presence is "provoking more conflict than it's preventing": 78%
Amount U.S. gives in developmental aid to foreign countries per day: 22 cents per person
Percentage of GDP that U.S. gives in foreign aid: .16%
Percentage given by Denmark, Sweden, Luxembourg, Norway and Netherlands: .7% (that's about 4 1/2 times as much as the U.S. just in case you cared)

Brookings Institute
Dean Baker, Co Director Center for Economic and Policy Research.
Center on Law and Security NYU School of Law
FY 2008 Global War on Terror Pending Request Office of the Secretary of Defense
(CIA World Factbook)

Fading Away

Lauren — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 23:46:54 GMT

Okay, so the following might seem a bit sentimental, so both forgive me and get ready for it. The get ready for it part, refers to you probably going through this yourself someday, if you're lucky enough to have your parents live long enough.

Simply stated my mom is fading away, but let's back up a bit. My mother is now 88, in good health, walks everyday, has had a good long live, has four kids who respect and love her, and is, from her own admission, happy. Problem is, when your body begins to fail, all of it, from your muscles to your eyesight fails together and that includes your memory.   In my mother's case her short-term memory is getting worse every week.

When I call we always chat for a minute or two. Having grown up in an era when the phone was to be used only as a tool to get something done or for emergencies, she's never gotten used to just idle chat on the phone, so conversations are short.

She'll ask me about the family and I'll tell her Julian (my 16 year old son) is doing fine and is in a school play. Not more than a minute or two later she'll ask about Julian and what is he up to. This happens with everything. If you tell her you're coming to visit, she'll ask the date, and the time several times. Then at the end of the conversation she'll ask when she's going to see you. She'll most often have forgotten by the next day and you'll have to remind her again.

A year or so ago, when she was doing this rarely, I found myself getting a little upset with her, like she just wasn't paying attention. Later, I found myself forcefully trying to be patient, trying to be sympathetic, but still impatient. It wasn't until I heard her talk about the disappointment of getting older and forgetting things that I finally relaxed and accepted it. We've now gotten to the point where I can take pleasure in telling her the same good news twice in the space of a few minutes because I know that she'll be genuinely pleased each time.

But a while ago as her memory got worse I concentrated on 'cures' - typical boy thing to do. First we had her checked out by a brain doctor, then we figured out helpful memory reminders - duplicate calendars, large electric wall calendar clocks, carefully labeled pillboxes etc. Meanwhile the family continued to have its gatherings, my mom at the head of the table where she'd always been. But what was happening slowly was that she was fading away, each time becoming a bit more invisible. Where as in the past, dinner table conversations would have centered around her, she was now in the background, only occasionally speaking up, and heard only by the people sitting next to her.

I'm sad to say that even into my 50's I looked forward to talking with my mother about my life and all of its struggles - family, career, children, whatever. I could always count on her to listen, and listen carefully. She was understanding, and thoughtful in her response, and always made me feel better. She'd been doing this since I was little.

In my days right after college, for example, I found myself unemployed and a single parent. When I drove the few hundred miles to see her for a weekend, I looked forward to talking to her about my life. The thing was, I still remember the feeling that I knew I would end up feeling better after the weekend. I think it was partly knowing that someone who cared would listen, but it was more than that. She always gave this very real, strong feeling that everything was going to be okay - and not the sentimental, Hallmark Card sort of way, but in the 'I know about life' sort of way. She always felt, and could get me to believe, that no matter what was going on, life was way too wonderful and important to ever let small things get in the way. And by small things, she meant just about everything. She had the talent that I think the best comedians, blues players or writers have. They know about the downside of life, and create better because of it.

Well, it was at one of the family dinner parties this year that I realized I wasn't going to have a conversation like this with my mother again. I'm sure her heart would have been willing but her mind just wasn't up to the task. Now mind you, I should be old enough to get on with life on my own, and by and large I do.   And my wife, bless her heart, has tried her best to 'understand' me. But, wives aren't supposed to be their husband's mothers, and while wonderful in the short run, I think this substitution would be rather disastrous in the long term.

So, my mom continues to fade. I think that the worst part is that I don't want to remember her this way. I want to remember her as the full of life, wickedly humorous woman she was. The one I had to shop for a coffin with when her second husband died.

I was a teenager then and the only one at home for that summer, so I, as the man of the house, had to go with my her to the home of our small town's funeral director, to choose an appropriate box. In those days, and in many small towns in the east, the funeral director's house was the funeral parlor.

The white-gloved director welcomed us and ushered us into this heavily draped, dark front room full of caskets, their lids propped opened to reveal plush interiors. He, with a serious face, showed us each one, and was particularly pleased to point out the ones that had paintings on the silk lid linings. An 'eternally wonderful' feature he said, these sporting scenes of hunters, fishermen, or golfers would, for only a modest cost, 'Comfort my step father in his eternal rest'.

Well, the director got to the one showing a golfer swinging away at the ninth hole, labeled, I do believe, with something like 'The Eternal Shot' and my mother suddenly put her hands to her eyes and looked like she was sobbing. She asked the director to leave us alone for a bit. Well, the instant he backed out and closed the double doors behind him my mother broke out in hysterics.   She, through her laughter, tried to tell me that the idea of her 'George' a 275 pound librarian, stuffed into that ridiculous box, swinging a golf club was just too muchfor the next few minutes I laughed with her about as hard as I've ever laughed. George ended up in a simple wood box.

So, that's the way I want to remember her, and I will do my damnedest to make sure I do.

What top blogs?

Lauren — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 21:39:21 GMT

Okay, I'll bet you always wanted to know the top blogs on the web. You know the absolute best, most read, most talked about, most everything blogs. And, I'll bet you thought they were about earth shattering topics -life, love, death, and the pursuit of happiness, that sort of thing?

Well, it's my sad task to tell you that of the top 10 blogs, by number of fans, all but one is about technology or making money on the web. The 10th is actually kind of interesting. It's the one by a fellow who gets post cards sent to him, from people all over the world with secrets on them. The cards are sent anonymously, and they can be funny, sad, scary or just plain silly. He then posts them on the web, puts them in a book, and runs around the country doing book signing lectures and showing them off. Fellows name is Frank Warren, and if you've got a secret you too can become famously anonymous.

Now, if, instead, you rank them based on 'authority' which is the number of links into a site, then surprise, surprise Arianna Huffington's news site comes out number 1, followed by all those technology blogs, a political blog or two, and one about cat photos.

What's a bit odd is that Arianna is one of only a few women (and some Republicans dispute her sex) to reach the top. That's strange because women now make up more than half of the web surfers, and, according to the latest Internet wisdom, are more likely to read and write blogs. But, it's not so strange when you realize that the vast majority of the online mainstream audience don't have access to blogging tools. And by access I mean a sort of psychological access - don't know what websites to go to, don't really trust it all that much, and are discouraged to find out that the tools are all a pain in the neck.

So, for now we'll have to suffer through reading all about the latest technology by a bunch of white guys. By the way, want to know the 100th blog, the last one, the one with nowhere to go but up? It's called VentureBeat and it's about venture capitalism.ooh, that's fun.

Just so I don't leave you on a downer, or have y ou believe I can't include the cute thing, here's the cat blog -cat pictures with captions.

I mean mainstream media gets criticized for not being more relevant, sure can't ding the blogosphere

Too much gourmet food..

Lauren — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 22:24:07 GMT

Now, I generally don't take on 'heavy' topics, not because it isn't fun, but because, well uh, it isn't fun. So it is with this sense of enthusiasm I give you The Great American Health Care Debate (caps are mine). Oh, and by the way, the reason for the gourmet food title, won't make much sense until the end, at which point, it may make no sense.

Other than knowing we are all #$%@#ed when it comes to health care, I don't pay much attention to all the political debates about the topic. I just pay my bills, complain, and look with envy at countries like Canada and France. Countries that didn't even register on the map for me as having something cooler than stuff we have here.

So, it all starts with the presidential candidates having to take a stand on things, and health care is a big one for the old U S of A. So, let's jump in on one of the candidates and see if we can summarize their plan here goes, this is John McCain's.. pay attention here, it's really long and involves lot's of fixes:

Eliminate a tax break for employees who receive health insurance from employers and replace it with a tax credit of up to $5,000 per family for the purchase private coverage.

Okay, I lied about the long part, and, actually the fix part.

And, just to make sure, that if you were an administrator at a national health care provider, and you were listening to his speech, and you didn't get what he was saying he went on to say that his plan doesn't require health insurers to accept applicants with pre-existing medical conditions, since as McCain put it, that would "be mandating what the free enterprise system does." That's like saying we're not going to require firemen to put out your house that's on fire, because, that's like, way too expensive.

McCain goes on to say, not realizing that the audience was beginning to grumble, that the proposal would strengthen the private health insurance market and make coverage more affordable for many low-income families.

Let me get this right. Insurance companies don't have to take anyone with pre existing conditions, they can charge what they want, and we'll rely on their honest nature not to all raise rates together. And, as a result all middle and low income families can now rest easy.

Okay, so I'm not the only one that realized that this wasn't a really brilliant scheme - 'brilliant' here meaning every middle class and poor family in the country who isn't married to a governmental employee might as well give it up and buy the Boy Scouts Medical Manual, a large box of Sponge Bob Square Pants Band-Aids, and some anti-depressants.

Elizabeth Edwards, the wife of former Democratic presidential contender John Edwards, chimmed in and said that she and John McCain had one thing in common:

"Neither one of us would be covered by his health policy. Under McCain's plan, insurance companies wouldn't have to cover preexisting conditions like melanoma and breast cancer,"

(McCain has been treated for melanoma, the most serious type of skin malignancy. Edwards in 2004 was diagnosed with breast cancer). (LA Times)

Well, thanks to her going public with this kind of obvious remark, the public acually woke up for a minute and started asking questions. So McCain's group ran around and came up with a short, witty, well thought out addendum to his original plan:

McCain has said that he might help residents with pre-existing medical conditions through a:

"special provision including additional trust funds for Medicaid payments or high-risk pools.use savings in Medicaid to finance additional tax credits for residents with pre-existing medical conditions - the amount of the credit hasn't been determined, the possibility of extracting enough savings from Medicaid is debatable, and it is unclear whether a credit would be enough to persuade an insurance company to accept a person who would be likely to have large medical expenses," (The Globe).

Oh, that sounds like it wouldn't take more than oh, say, five years to set up, administer, find fault with and can.

For my money, all the candidates, from both sides will spend endless hours discussing health care over the coming months, and in the end, nothing will happen, except a token bill or two which will be revealed with much fanfare in front of an adoring crowd then forgotten.

So, what I'm recommending for all Americans is the following - buy at least $100 of lottery tickets a month, putting your winnings towards your own personal health care plan, start the 5-7 year task of getting a Canadian Visa, get a government job, or marry a governmental employee, and stay as healthy as possible.

Barring that, buy a membership in a Hawaiian Resort Club that I read was sued by one of its guests for 'supplying too much gourmet food and too much sex', and plan on spending your final days on a beach towel drinking lots of drinks with funny names all with umbrellas in them.

Up Close and Way Too Personal

Lauren — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 20:20:34 GMT

Today's politicians have to be a little careful, and it's all because of a bunch of nerds. Those nerds are the ones that started up sites like YouTube, Blip.tv, and a host of others that now boast videos posted within minutes of any presidential candidate sneezing in public. Not only do we get to see the candidates themselves, but we are treated to photos and home movies of their spouses, kids, friends, and pastors. And then, just when you start to get bored, we are then treated to what mainstream media does best - obsessing.

Incidentally, I recently ran into a friend of mine, who said that if mainstream media were a person, and that person walked into any shrink's office in the country, they'd be diagnosed as obsessive / compulsive and be put on antidepressants in a heartbeat.

But, as part of the new media 'movement', I'm hoping that some enterprising web 2.0 type will take this a bit further and put together a site that details every minute of every day of every candidate. And not just the candidate, but videos of every person they come in contact with.

The point is so that we can delve into the lives of every taxi cab driver, hotel clerk, and restaurant server that comes within 6 feet of the candidates. And the whole point of this, is, so that we can get something pithy out of one of them, like "Of course, I believe in Satan, he is like the coolest underdog there is ". We can then write about the candidates support of Satanism, and follow that up with four Satan 'experts' explaining what this all means to The American Way. You gotta love it.

Anyway, just to show some of the tidbits that get posted on any one day, on the old WWW, I give you the following videos. I really think there's a reality show in here somewhere....

No, really, we did it to save you

Lauren — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 04:59:41 GMT

Okay, so the U.S. Navy just blew up an orbiting satellite (one of ours) with a missile fired from the USS Erie, bobbing around in the ocean. Satellite going 17,000 mph, missile going 5,000 mph, missile 140 miles up, and the size of a bus - nice shot.

The satellile was falling to earth and had a tank of toxic fuel aboard, so the Navy was worried it would end up hitting a populated area and harm folks living there, so they blew it up.

Now the fun part starts. If this weren't the era of the internet the story would pretty much stop there- which was pretty much the full content of the AP story, but no, thanks to lots of people who know bits and pieces about lots of things, and care about such things, and the interent we get a different story.

What the best of the internet has to offer so far.

1. It was a spy satellite
2. The chances that it would hit anything or anyone were slim to nill
3. The government had organized a number of hazardous materials teams, under a cool code name 'Burnt Frost' to be flown anywhere in the world to take care of the sensitive debris.
4. In addition to the guys in white suits there were six additional federal response groups positioned across the country - alerted but not activated.
5. President Bush himself made the final call
6. The hazardous material - frozen fuel aboard the satellite would probably have burnt up on entry. In the remote possibility that it didn't, it would almost certainly have landed somewhere remote. On the also remote chance that it landed in a populated area, it would have contaminated an area the size of two football fields with stuff like ammonia.
7. The cost of the shot? $60 million.

So why spend this kind of money, send teams all over the planet, and blow up something that would probably have burnt itself up on reentry?

Current conclusion by the blogging world? Probably something aboard the satellite that the gov didn't want to get in the hands of others - and why not just show the world that we're top dog in the old blow stuff up anywhere department.

Be fun to see this story over the next few days...oh, and in case you don't know about fark.com here's their headline, which you've got to love:

US Military successfully shoots down satellite containing the Ark of the Covenant, the actual JFK assassination documents, and that secret baked bean recipe the dog was supposed to guard.

Kenny G and his Sax

Lauren — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 04:46:29 GMT

So we're down at NAMM in anaheim california. So what's NAMM stand for, and what is it you ask? Weirdly enough what NAMM stands for seems to be a secret. It's not mentioned in their materials, not on the 30 foot high banner that covers the convention hall entrance, in fact, it's not mentioned anywhere.... but what it IS, is the largest music industry convention on the planet. Everyone who sells anything that makes noises of any kind is here, and it includes the people who use those things to make noises... all the biggest names in recording - singers, drummers, guitar players, keyboardists...everyone.

So here's Kenny G, probably the best known, and to you out there who aren't into it, the only known, saxaphone player you can name.

He's suave, good, and all in all a very nice fellow. Turns out he's designed a whole new line of saxaphones - some for the professional lot and some for the kids. What you didn't know (and I include myself in that bunch) is that it takes years - in this case two - to design a new saxaphone. AND, it takes all the right folks - people who can describe the kind of sound they want 'rich, with depth', and people who can make that happen, people who can inspect each and every one of the instruments as it comes off the line, and a way to market them, no small task.

Kenny G (not sure when he started to be called by his first name followed by is last initial, I'd be Lauren E - something we forgot to ask) talked to us about what makes these different - turns out you can't hit high sax notes without 20 years or so of training. So what he did with the new designs was add keys that let you do just that. Then they added a way to hold the instrument without making your wrist give out, something that apparently happens to kids all the time.

All in all looks pretty cool. And on top of that, in case you're inclined to thing that he's just a mercantile capatalist... he's started a non profit group that supports getting kids into music - all around a good sort of fellow.

We'll have the full interview with him up on KidsTalk Radio in a few days but I thought you might like to hear a little bit of a track that will be on his new album - to be called Rhythm & Romance on Feb 5, 2008. It's being released by Concord records and Starbucks. Strange how a coffee place is now a major music distributor... oh, well... oh, and in case you're wondering, there is rumored to be a starbucks coffee named after Kenny G - something that picks you up and calms you down at the same time....

oh, by the way, just to drive a nail through the old, 'i'll drop out of school and become a rock star' idea - he had straight 'A's in school, and practiced hours and hours and hours to get where he is...still playes two hours a day, every day...to keep in shape.

The Joys of Citizen Journalism

Lauren — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 01:50:28 GMT

This has got to be the most fun I've had in a long time..

A friend of mine has a daughter that's a player on the Stanford University Volleyball team. She happens to be one of the best in the country - woman named Cynthia Barboza. So I went to the NCAA Collegiate Women's tournament in Sacramento California to watch Stanford compete against Penn State for the title of National Champion. But the best part was that I went as part of the press, how good is that?

Now, I'm not the most versed in Volleyball, and I'm not a professional photographer, but the NCAA trusted me enough to add me to the media list and in I went.

The event actually started the night before at a ceremony the best national players - players from all over the country who had come to be given awards and recognized for their play.

I sat at a table next to a very friendly woman who turned out to have been on the first women's volleyball team from the University of Hawaii back in the 70's, she was now a director of the program. She was my mini education into volleyball. I learned things like there's basically no life for a player after college - we have only one national team.

During that evening I heard stories from the parents, from the coaches, and from the players - all talking about how they got there, why they like to play, how the family routinely traveled across the country when they could to watch a game, that sort of thing.

The game itself was played the following night. The setting was Arco Arena in Sacramento California - it's huge, designed for professional basketball. Picture this thing filled to overflowing with college players and fans from four teams (whittled down to two by the time I went in), and all the families of the players. It was one of the loudest crowds I have ever heard, and most colorful if painting your body your college colors counts.

I walked in, got checked through security and found my PNN place card at the appropriate place in a long table that runs the length of the court. The press was there - ESPN, API, everyone of note in the volleyball world.

First thing I had to figure out were the journalistic protocols - you can sit here, but not there, you can't stand there and take a photo, you have to wear a special badge to get over there to take photos from the end of the court, etc.

Fortunately, I was very lucky to have two kind journalists from the Seattle Times sitting next to me. They took pity on me and gave me the basic rundown; they even managed to get me a photographer's pass to shoot from the prime position at the end of the court.

Here, you're about 10 feet away from the players and the action. You kneel on the floor behind a low cushioned barrier that has been put there to protect the players who can come flying into it and you, trying to rescue a long shot.

So, here's how it goes, five games make up a match, each game played to 30 points. If a fifth game is necessary then it is played to 15 points. That's all you need to know.

The game started and right away I realized that this isn't the volleyball we used to play as kids on the beach - we're talking balls being slammed at 60 miles per hour (ESPN had radar guns there) players diving for balls no matter what the personal cost, and an infectious enthusiasm that was hard to beat. And, we're talking players all over 6 feet tall, with incredible talent.

Frantically I tried to remember all the basics for shooting indoors - things like fast shutter speeds, high film speed settings, turning on 'vibration control', white balance setting, holding the camera steady and trying to guess where the action was going to take place.

All of the camera settings were a piece of cake compared with that last bit. You see, you need to have the camera zoomed in to get a good shot, and when you do, you lose sight of what's going on, which makes guessing where the next shot is going to be made from very difficult.

All in all, I ended up taking around 400+ shots, 200 of blank volleyball nets, and a whole number of something very blurry, but I did manage to come away with maybe 20 decent shots (you can judge for yourself).

Penn State won the first two games.. the crowd groaned (somewhat biased California crowd).... Stanford won the next two games.. the crowd roared... last game started, the crowd went momentarily silent, but couldn't stay that way. Penn state won the last game and the match and the crowd went wild (for the volleyball fans amongst you can go to my official reporting site and see the shots here).

I can't remember when I was at an event that had that genuine feel of honesty. Seems like an odd word to use, but it fits. The kids (apologies to the players but if I'm old enough to be your father your 'kids') were great - enthusiastic, intense, skilled and all for the game itself. They weren't playing for huge professional contracts, or about to be signed for a million dollars by some national team, they were playing for the fun and skill of it.

My experience with the mainstream press was a good one - I think we co-exist quite well, and should - good stories or good photos are good stories or good photos no matter where they come from. My only criticism was the questions asked in the final press meeting held after the game.

What happens is that, and you've all seen them on TV, there's this small room in the bowels of the building that is full of 30 or so chairs for the press. At the front of the room is a dais behind which sits the coach and two or three of the star players. The losing coach and players come in first, followed after they exit, by the winning coach and players.

Before the coach and players have come in someone representing the media has told you all to behave, turn you cell phones off and limit your questions. By then most of the press has placed their portable audio recorders up on the dais to get their own audio tracks.

Well, most of the questions were, to my mind, silly - for some reason we always want to hear things like 'Sally, how do you, as a player, feel losing for the fourth straight year, and being a senior not being able to ever compete again in the world ever, and having to go home and live with that knowledge for the rest of your life'. Okay, so it wasn't quite like that, but close.

These kids had played so well, and either side could have won, that to me the point wasn't who won the last game by 4 points, it was that they had played, and been part of something rather extraordinary, and they'd do it again in a moment. They'd do it again despite all the hours of practice, the travel, the loss of private time, the having to study on buses and in airports, and the inane questions of a few reporters.

I heartily recommend being a citizen journalist. What better way to learn about something new, to hear wonderful stories and to get outside ourselves for a bit.