Finally, my Picturephone, so cool! And ho-hum.

September 9th, 2012

I am a child of the future.  When I was young the future was going to be great! In fact every few years they held World’s Fairs to tell us about the future (and show us quaint glimpses of distant peoples and big corporations).

One of the perennial staples of this future was the Picturephone. (Notice, only one uppercase letter in the name, we were more tasteful then.)

AT&T Picturephone

AT&T Picturephone

AT&T spent many millions of dollars on it, and it failed.  They persisted, but it failed.

I did once get to try a real Picturephone.  There was a bank in downtown Minneapolis that had a fancy corner spot with a very early model ATM.  In addition to the ATM, there was an AT&T Picturephone on which one could talk to a human teller, and I tried it out.  The teller was very nice, I could see her, she could see me, it was cool.  We didn’t have much to talk about, so it was a short conversation.

Now it is here.  Yes, it has been here for awhile (Skype, for example) but I mostly never got around to making video phone calls because it was not really that compelling.  That was one of AT&T’s problems: Cool at it was, was a Picturephone really good for anything? Good enough to justify the bother and expense?  No, it was not even worth the desk space.  Certainly not worth the confusion.  And don’t even think about the toll charges that would have been necessary circa 1970.

But this morning I was doing a video chat between Boston and Los Angeles, in living color, on speaker (itself something from the future), and my mind was blown away to contemplate it.

Nexus 7 Tablet

Nexus 7 Tablet

The goll-darn future was finally sitting on my kitchen table!

For a geezer like me, who was raised on the future, to compare the promise with the reality, was stunning.

Amazing quality, easy to use, and free.  That last part, free, is a really big point.  No, a Nexus 7 is not free, nor are the wifi access points in my house (need more than one, need good coverage at home!), nor the DSL service to connect me to the internet.  It all costs a lot, but this infrastructure is there for other reasons.  Doing video calls is just a side-feature, so it gets to ride along for free.  I might go for months before I have occasion to make another video call, so it is a good thing I don’t need to use video chatting as the justification for all this expense.

The Future Isn’t What it Used To Be

So much of The Future that was shown at all those World’s Fairs was technically doable, but somehow not practical and stubbornly resistant to becoming reality.  Consider the robots that would soon clean our houses. Now, 40+ years after the heyday of The Future, the best we have along these lines is the Roomba!?  The Future has resisted happening.

Yet, that doesn’t mean the world hasn’t changed over these years.

“Data Processing”!

The World’s Fairs had computers, but they were oddly off to the side.  Something to marvel at, but outside of business and science, not obviously useful.

I remember as a teenager learning about early hobby computers and realizing that a computer was a universal machine that could do anything!  Well, anything that had to do with well defined logical operations, but still, what else is there!?  (I was a geek.)

Industrial vs Information Age

The clichés about how the information age changed the world are true.  (Does anyone still remember the “information age”?) But the way it changed the world wasn’t by just using electronics to build new single-purpose appliances, that was an industrial age perspective. No, it was by taking advantage of the universal properties of storing, transforming, and transporting information.  (Miniaturization, plunging costs and power consumption, and increased speed were also important.)

Consider the cell phone.  It started out as a carphone.  Your house had a phone line, your work had a phone line, so for fancy people, why not get a phone “line” installed in between, in your car?  Cool!  But, powerful as that was, it wasn’t worth it for most people.  Over a few years (thanks to miniaturization et al) the phones shrunk until they could fit in a purse or even pocket.  They became less specialized (more general purpose) and so more compelling.  People, not locations, started to have phone numbers.  It was big.  But kind of only the warm-up act.

Enter the “smartphone”. By putting a powerful computer in your pocket instead of just a telephone, things really change.  Yes, my Galaxy Nexus is an impressive “phone”.

Galaxy Nexus

Galaxy Nexus

I use it constantly. But I hardly ever talk on it.

General Purpose

What do I use it for? Everything! Well, Twitter, but lots of other stuff, too.

It is a “transistor radio”, camera, weather station, pocketwatch, newspaper, shelf of paperback books, atlas and world-wide street map, impressive reference library, wire-service news printer, stock ticker and trading terminal, calculator, flashlight, compass, artificial horizon (really: fly your small plane in bad weather), “cassette player”, calendar, address book, chess set, somewhat odd TV set, mail order catalog, bus and plane schedule, airplane arrival screen, GPS receiver (for you time travelers from 1970: “GPS” is a really fancy version of LORAN or Omega; it uses satellites!), constellation/sky map, dictionary, notepad, magazine rack, (small screen) movie player, video recorder, audio recorder, restaurant directory and reservation making machine, credit card, real estate directory, alarm clock, and more.

It does e-mail.  And, as long as I have it with me anyway, it will do video calls.

But sometimes I go for days without actually talking on this “telephone” of mine.

It is the general-purpose nature of this device that makes it compelling.  Most of the things it can do would not be worth putting my pocket, not alone, but the fact that it can do all that stuff, all from the same pocket, that is what makes it worth it.

The teenage geek in me was right, computers can do anything, particularly if you give them really cool sensors and many, many billions of dollars worth of support infrastructure, installed all around the world.

Before we all forget about the “information age”, stop to realize it happened, it is here.  No, you didn’t get a flying car (probably not a pony either), but an astounding change has come over our lives and I think it is damn cool.

Google’s Project Glass: Dies at the Hands of a Smart Watch?

August 23rd, 2012

As I am trying to understand Google’s Project Glass, yesterday I did something disturbing. As I was leaving work, wondering what temperature I would find as I left the building, I started to look at my watch.

Uh, oh: A “smart watch” might take important wind out of the sails of Project Glass’s acceptance.

Usually when I want to know the temperature I look at my Android phone. Weatherbug keeps the temperature displayed at the top of my screen. I don’t need to unlock the phone (I have a long unlock code, secure but tedious), I just turn it on, glance, also see the time and any alerts, and turn it off again. Works great. But when I am carrying stuff it is easier to glance at my watch and that is what I mistakenly started to do yesterday. (My watch doesn’t know the temperature. Not yet.)

What does this have to do with Project Glass? I am not certain, but it could be bad.

Some people will buy a Glass device for use when jogging, and that’s the only time they will use it.  I don’t think that is Google’s plan here.  I think Google hopes that this product will disappear into eye wear and become part of our lives; they hope we will wear it all the time.

As I mentioned in a previous post (http://borg.org/?p=435), for normal people to keep Glass devices on their faces, there will have to be good reasons.  For focused activity, pulling a phone from my pocket is worth it, and for many focused activities, a phone will be as good or better than a Glass device.

Over the course of my day I might have several predictable activities that would be improved with a Glass device, but will I bother to put it on each time it is useful?

Some might suggest that I leave it on all the time but they are ignoring very real costs to doing so:

  • First, there is the cost of buying a Glass device in the first place, but let’s ignore that.
  • Second, lots of people wear eye glasses occasionally.  I am near sighted and I put on my glasses when I drive, watch a movie, need to see something else at a distance–otherwise I take them off.  My glasses are stunningly light and I still prefer to not wear then.  Conversely, other people are far sighted and put on reading glasses only when they need to see something up close.  We already have a pattern of putting on and taking off eye wear, there are real costs and practical issues in a Glass device trying to get in the middle of this activity.
  • Third, the first version of these devices are said to have a camera and microphone always there and possibly always recording.  There are lots of locations in our world which will not want us recording all before us and will require we take off a Glass device.
  • Fourth, there will be a cyborg geekiness that will dissuade potential wearers.

I suspect that if Google is to motivate us to wear these things all the time it will be for all-the-time tidbits of information.  This is the kind of information that some people in the past have gotten from a pager: financial data, sports scores, breaking news, notification of communication from other humans, etc.

These are asynchronous events that I can’t schedule, they disrupt someone a little to notice them, they might happen while I am using a Glass device for a focused activity, or maybe when it it otherwise idle: but they are not focused activities.

The killer app that maybe makes wearing Glass devices worth it, the thing that makes us keep them on our faces when we aren’t actively using them: asynchronous information tidbits.

Enter the killer Smart Watch.

A wristwatch is really well suited to display tidbits of information.  Traditionally this has been restricted to the time because that is what the watch could economically know.  But if you have a Bluetooth-capable phone in your pocket, a smart wristwatch can relay nearly any information from that phone.  A watch can also quietly vibrate an alert and be felt in a noisy room, phones vibrating in pockets or purses are not always felt.

People used to carry pocket watches, and they worked.  But we moved on to a wearable technology, wristwatches, because they were handier than reaching into a pocket, more convenient than having to have a suitable pocket, and maybe easier than remembering to put the watch in my pocket.  Also, the was no big downside.  Maybe some traditionalists scoffed for a time, but they have been forgotten.

If you want to keep track of the play-by-play of the day-game while at work, a smart watch could do it. It is a bit distracting and rude when someone constantly checks his watch, but only a bit.  Depending on the circumstances I can possibly moderate myself and maybe not keep looking at my watch while my boss is talking to me. It is not as rude as holding a video camera in his face, and that is what a wearer of a Glass device is virtually doing.

If Apple wants to kill Project Glass its best move might be to add an “iWatch” to its product line up.  Similarly, Google would be well advised also add a watch tie-in to Android’s notification system.

What’s Left?

If my logic holds water, there is still room for Glass devices to serve specific, focused activities, but they will have to be powerful and compelling.  But also, build us a good wristwatch.

-kb, the Kent who likes his current watch, but wants more.

© 2012 by Kent Borg

Understanding Google Glass

August 19th, 2012

Excited by Google Glass, I have been looking for some good analysis on the internet on what it means. Lots of people are willing to say “The possibilities are endless!”, but I am looking for more subtlety than that.

I guess I have to write my own analysis. This is a start at that effort. It is from the perspective of an wannabe early developer trying to understand the technology.

So what good is Project Glass?  I suspect there is some interesting thinking going on inside Google, but so far all they will say in public is “It takes pictures!”. (And, the auto-diary possibilities are certainly intriguing, if also scary.)  And?

Luckily, it is a fascinating question.

It looks like the technical features of initial Project Glass “Explorer Edition” are planned to be a lot like my Galaxy Nexus phone, though in a different form-factor and without any cell connection, and maybe not sharing any system software with Android. Anyway, theoretically my phone can do anything the first Glass can do, more or less, so thinking about smart phones is not completely misleading. [Prediction: To help early developers in need of expensive and rare on-your-face hardware, Google will release a Glass simulator that runs on Android phones.]

Google has said nothing about what a wearer sees, so let me try to understand Project Glass by thinking about information display first. Information display is a nice organizing principle. Here is my list of some interesting items, not everything will fall neatly into one category or another but I hope to cover all the stuff anyone will ever use a Glass device for. Or some of it.

Displaying off-topic information that has nothing to do with the location of the wearer.

This is traditional, low-bandwidth material. These are things that will fit in a “page”. (Remember “pagers”?  Not that long ago people used to carry them around, some doctors still do.)  New e-mail has arrived, stock prices, the ball score, breaking news from far away — or breaking news from around here (which starts to shade into having a local location aspects, where was that bank robbery?).

This can be important information (worth carrying a pager), information worth reaching into a pocket and looking down, but if I am already wearing a Glass device, more trivial status information can be offered. Because battery life is a concern probably the display is not on all the time, something notable will have to happen before it is worth burning the battery and interrupting the wearer.

Assuming that one is already wearing a Glass device and don’t need to reach into a pocket, the effortless availability of really small amounts of status information might be very valuable. Sports fans, market watchers, Twitter addicts, and news junkies are obvious beneficiaries, but normal people might might appreciate it, too.

Reality augmentation, information specific to the wearer’s location.

Examples (these are fun to dream up by the hundreds): Honey and the kids are still in line at Magic Mountain, over there, and will be for another 5-minutes; this place sells good grass-fed burgers and has public bathrooms; the Washington Monument is 555-feet tall and was completed in 1884; the bus is expected in 7-minutes; there is available parking in the garage on 7th (turn right at the next corner); the water is 12-feet deep here; the new Bond film has showings at 6:50 and 7:30; your gate is 36B, down that-a-way, you have 15-minutes, but you are boarding group D so no big rush; those raindrops you feel shouldn’t amount to anything keep weeding.

Where the first category was pager-era, this is smartphone-era information. Some is practical on a phone but much of it is again cumbersome (your hands are full as you get off the plane) or rude (we are eating a nice meal here) or illegal (but officer, I was looking for a parking space–Google is certain to design a reduced distraction mode for use while driving).

Because these are occasional uses (how many times in a day does any one person get off a plane looking for the next gate?), other than tourists sightseeing, it isn’t obvious to me that these uses are compelling enough to make it worth buying and wearing Glass devices. These uses might only be supporting players in the Glass ecosystem.

A technical note: For all augmentation ideas, remember that the first model Glass devices will not have a full overlay display. The display is high and to the side of one eye. There are a ton of good reasons for Google to embrace this compromise, they did the right thing.

Displaying orthogonal, alternate reality augmentation.

There will be a lot of cool games using Glass devices. Expect to see people out in public who are seeing mythical and imaginary things as they walk down the same street as you do. These games will be more social and physical than most current games. Think Wii with less precise motion sensing but a much bigger playing space.

Displaying unrelated, different universe, rich information that has nothing to do with the wearer’s location.

This seems like a variation on the first category, off-topic information, except that earlier category is for old fashioned, low bandwidth information. This is for things that take advantage of the motion sensors and heads-up display. For example, Glass devices could be used as a way to interact with an avatar robot in the office for telecommuting. Gesture left somehow (look left, nod left, point left, paw left–something) and the robot looks or drives left.

Think what Street View could be like with a Glass device interface.

Communication, two-way, with other humans.

We use the cameras in our phones to send pictures to others, and that is pretty easy. If we already have Glass devices on our faces, we might be even more tempted to do so. Live video from phones is just now starting to happen, if the bandwidth holds out, the immediacy and hands-free aspect of video from a Glass device would be pretty cool. This will also be a big evangelizing avenue as others see video from Glass wearers and think “Wow, that Glass thing is cool! I’m getting one!!”

This category of use is not necessarily a clear contrast to my other categories here, but communications is important to humans so it is important to call-out. Every technology gets perverted for communications (radio was for industrial purposes, right?). Communication will creep into everything Glass devices are used for, but also expect to see people wearing Glass devices standing in front of plate-glass windows talking and gesturing to their reflection as they use their reflection in a picture-phone mode.

Crafted vertical applications.

A lot of people have work to do, and could that work might be helped with an app customized for the purpose. For example, the other day I saw two men working with a bucket truck and a power pole. The man up high was reading a long number off a transformer (or something) and yelling down what he read, and the man below was yelling back the number for the man above to verify. I don’t know what they were doing, but I am guessing they could have done it better with Glass devices on their hardhats.

This isn’t the sexy side of Project Glass, but it might be the hidden engine that makes it all work. You might not find tracking the temperature in Paris and Facebooks’s falling price to enough reason to wear a Glass device all day, but if is part of you doing your job and is supplied by your boss and approved for use at work…that is a win.

Writing these apps will include learning about specific vertical needs, but it might be a great way to make money while saving others tons of money and getting the electricity back quicker after that big storm.

Do enough of these and maybe you will anticipate the Big One…

The Big One: a general purpose “Killer App”.

A lot of businesses use desktop computers without any custom applications: spreadsheets, word-processors, databases, web browsers, etc., address what they need without any custom software. I am guessing there will similarly be some general purpose apps for Glass devices that many will find compelling. Who knows what they are, but expect them.

Cloudy Coordination.

I doubt there will be many Glass-only apps. There will almost always be phone, tablet, desktop, or TV set aspects, because there will be data that is easier to input or organize or consume on a Glass device or a non-Glass device, or the other way around. Some cloud-like communication probably glues it all together. Maybe your server, maybe Google’s, maybe Apple’s.

Cross Platform.

Apple’s cloud??  If these eye-wear computers really happen, expect competition. Expect Apple to try more lock-in than Google will, have fun making it all work together. (Will Apple prohibit use of any cloud-backend but theirs?)

Adoption.

We still don’t know that there is a market for this. There are big problems (technical and social). People need to have sufficient reason to pay for and put up with these things. Wearing something on my face is pretty intimate. Will it be worth it?

Those of us in line to buy an Explorer Edition from Google might feel fortunate for the opportunity, but it is Google that is really breathing a sigh of relief that we are interested.  They need some really cool apps available on day-one of retail sale for there to be any hope of these things be worth wearing by regular people.

Objections and Prohibitions.

There are a lot of places where taking pictures is not welcomed. Just wearing a Glass device might make people assume you are recording them. Want to use a Glass device to help you with your grocery shopping?  Many grocery stores do not allow the use of cameras. (I’ve been questioned at Whole Foods for carrying a clipboard; I was using it for my shopping list that day, I think they were afraid I was doing retail espionage.)

In a world where we are on camera in public nearly constantly, using our own cameras, ironically, is not always approved. There are many quasi-public spaces where those in control of those spaces will object.

Consider an airport, let’s pick Las Vegas. People will not want to be photographed on the slot machines, the security check point will object, fly in from a foreign land and customs will object to our recording their work, the restaurants and retail establishments might have the Whole Foods-objection, the newsstand that also sells travel books objects to someone photographing excerpts from travel books instead of buying them, the bar doesn’t want you recording who is drinking, and walking into the bathroom while taking pictures presents more problems.

Even when one is in public and photography is completely legal, people have gotten in trouble with police or security guards from adjacent buildings who object because they think they should.

Google might want to implement some kind of ostentatious lens-cap feature that makes it obvious the wearer is not photographing.

And taking pictures is not the only problem. In the US making an audio recording without the knowledge of others violates federal wiretapping laws. Certainly phones can take both pictures and record audio, but phones spend much of their time in pockets where such recordings won’t accomplish much. If Glass devices are to be used for more than focused activities and worn like eye wear, audio concerns, too, will have to be overcome.

This is not impossible. It depends on the order in which Google does things.

Consider lithium-ion batteries on airplanes. These things are dangerous!  They pack a lot of energy in a small place, and occasionally catch fire. If an inventor had made one and asked the FAA for clearance to carry them on passenger flights, the answer would have been NO. Instead, laptop computers slowly insinuated themselves into air travel, often carried by important and powerful people. Only years later were the original nickle-cadmium batteries finally upgraded to lithium-ion. Try to ban them now and the outcry would be too great.

If Google can get powerful and affluent people addicted to Glass devices, those who object will have to decide between permitting Glass device wearing customers or doing without that business. I don’t know whether Google has this figured out, I suspect they have some strategies but are mostly playing it by ear because predicting these things is really difficult.

Conclusion

“The possibilities are endless!”

This sure is going to be interesting to watch.

-kb, the Kent who is glad he went to Google IO this year.

© 2012 by Kent Borg

FOX4 Mobile: Man misfires gun in Walmart checkout line

July 24th, 2012

http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/

Reaching for his wallet, wounds four.

More guns. For safety.

Nexus Gripes: Very Few

July 14th, 2012

I have a new Galaxy Nexus phone and a new Nexus 7 tablet.

The Nexus name is for Android devices that have Google’s version of Android software, without and other add-ons by manufacturers or phone companies.

In the case of these two devices, they did a good job, I recommend them.

My gripes are minor:

  • The power jacks are on the bottom edge of each, but one is flipped from the orientation of the other. The plug should go in the same on both, and it does not.
  • The speaker on the phone is not as loud as on my old Nexus One phone. I sometimes use the phone like a transistor radio of old, but it is too quiet.
  • It would be nice if the battery on phone lasted longer than it does, but the phone is nicely thin and doesn’t weigh too much, so I am getting demanding now.  And, unlike a lot of phones, the battery is replaceable, I can carry a second one.

Very nice gizmos. Very pleased with them.

-kb

Why the Obesity Epidemic? My 3-Part EXPRESS Explanation

July 11th, 2012

Many have been puzzled over this.  Well, it is becoming clear.  Here is my express explanation, in three easy steps.

These three things came together:

  1. A guy at the University of Minnesota (the inventor of the K-Ration) made a persuasive–but incorrect!–argument: the cholesterol clogging our arteries is caused by eating cholesterol.  Seems reasonable.  Instead of meat–and particularly animal fats–he told us we should eat carbohydrates. If we must have butter, have margarine instead. If we want lard, have Crisco instead.  Turns out this was all very wrong.  Large quantities of refined starches, and particularly refined sugar, are very bad for us.
  2. President Nixon and Agriculture Secretary Earl Butz changed US agricultural policy to encourage grain production, particularly corn production.
  3. Industrialization reached its logical conclusion. This aspect is two part:

First, industrial food was invented. (“Industrial food”, isn’t that an oxymoron?) Clever people looked for something to do with all that cheap corn.  We don’t prepare our own food anymore so we don’t what we are eating.  Notably, high fructose corn sugar was invented, and was cheap.

Second, we don’t labor anymore, electric motors and internal combustion engines do our physical work, and most of us are now sedentary. But we are a species designed to move; getting a lot of exercise will forgive a lot of sins.  For example, a bike messenger is not going to become obese and get type 2 diabetes, no matter what s/he eats.  Heart disease, maybe, but not obese.  Unfortunately very few of us are bike messengers.  Some of us go to the gym, but we drive to the gym, when we get around to it.

That’s it.  Yes, there are other factors (for example, Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle set us up to want to believe the worst about meat, and particularly lard), but those three factors were sufficient.  Don’t believe me (as you reach for your non-fat, fructose sweetened yogurt). Start investigating, maybe Google some of the tags attached to this post.

-kb, the Kent who resents that he was lied to when assured that a big plate of pasta is a healthful meal.

Nothing Wrong with Being Colored

June 22nd, 2012

There is nothing wrong with being colored. I don’t think so at least, it was a polite term, but I guess I am wrong, because we had to change the name.

There is nothing wrong with bring Negro. Martin Luther King was a Negro. But what do I know? We had to change the name.

There is nothing wrong with being black. Right?  But, again, I am just little me, and we seem to be suffering over changing the name again.

There is nothing wrong with being African American. Oh, but I might be mistaken here, too.

There is nothing wrong with being a person of color.  Right?  We’ll see.

Why the name changes?

Actually, there is something wrong with being in a group that has to keep changing its name. If merely using a name for a few years makes it tarnished, there is a problem.

Conversely, you can tell when a group has arrived and is comfortable with its circumstance: when it quits changing its name.  The fact that we are being a bit sluggish in these last two name changes is a good sign. Maybe we are finally coming out from the shadow of that horrible crime of slavery.  It clearly isn’t behind us, but maybe this is the beginning of the end of slavery.

I am an optimist.

Marriage a Civil Right? No, not for opposite-sex couples either.

June 21st, 2012

Is same-sex marriage a civil right?  No.  But I don’t think different-sex marriage is a civil right, either.  It is a practical matter.

The institution of marriage is a human invention.  It started out as a property deal, for people with property.  Poor people need not apply, though eventually the idea spread and “common law marriage” came to be, and even formal marriage.  (Yes, the definition of marriage was expanded to include poor people.)

People do pair up, usually opposite sex, sharing property, and frequently having children.  Sometimes there are problems, often they are quite familiar age-old problems.

This pairing up happens.  It has consequences for society, it makes sense for society to recognize it and stamp a name on it, “Marriage”.  Once it has a name it can be easily be referred to in laws and regulations–so much easier than dealing with each case on its unique merits, because face it: most marriages are the same in so many ways.  It makes sense to take what we learn from one marriage and apply it to other marriages.  Instead of having to invent laws that deal with things like divorce and child custody issues, from scratch, every time a marriage fails, it is only practical to send the feuding couple to a court that is already experienced with feuding couples, and sort it out with well settled case law.

One can imagine a world without the institution of “marriage”, but it seems an inefficient place.  People are going to do some predictable things that have predictable consequences, it makes sense to have an institution ready for them.

Enter same-sex marriage.  A few years ago it seemed ludicrous that there could be such a thing, yet now it is inexorably becoming obvious to everyone.  Why?  Because the closets opened and different-sex couples have become commonplace.  They are everywhere and are being accepted as existing.  (Like them or not, call them “normal” or not, they very clearly “are”.)  And as with different-sex couples, it is merely practical to have a shorthand way to deal with them, too.

So dang it, let them get “married” it will make all our lives so much easier.  It is a practical thing.

What about the slippery-slope worries?  If we let same-sex couples marry, what about people marrying their horses?  Well, if human-horse pairings become common, then we can figure out how to deal with that. In the meantime, same-sex couples are falling pretty neatly into the same pattern as different-sex couples, so let’s treat them the same.

It is not a civil rights issue, but it is sensible and practical and humane and fair.

Hollywood has the term “magic negro”, but how much magic do we expect from this mortal man Obama?

May 3rd, 2012

I heard on news this morning about reactionaries doing well in Greece, and I remember to note the general swing to the right in Europe: this is valuable perspective.

Obama has been very disappointing to those on the left, but remember the environment he is in. Who in the world has resisted swinging way right in this environment?  Mostly everyone is charging right.  At least Obama is resisting.  And he is resisting.

While I am defending the man, remember another disadvantage he has.  Not only did George II destroy both our government’s and our country’s finances, and not only did he try to make most of the world hate us…

He also did a damn good job of gutting the federal work force.  Good people were driven out, quit, and retired. Rightist incompetents were hired at every opportunity.  The people Obama has under his employ include a lot of terrible people who want to do bad things, people who are dolts and crooks.  People who now have civil service protections.

When Obama’s history is written his work to rebuild the basic functioning of our government will be a big item.

I am looking forward to reading It’s Even Worse Than It Looks, just out by Thomas E. Mann (Brookings) and Norman J. Ornstein (American Enterprise Institute).  There is an argument that Washington is not its most broken ever, that it was more broken just before the US civil war.  Wow, what a low bar.  Just before the war where we killed 700,000-plus fellow Americans, we were worse off than we are now.  We are in a very bad place.  My mother is right about that.

Hollywood has the term “magic negro” for a swath of characters with mystical powers, but how much magic do we expect from this mortal who is badly constrained by a reality that is trying to crush him and our country?  He is doing one hell of a good job.

-kb

©2012 Kent Borg

I Felt Like I Kicked a Dog

December 30th, 2011

I went to see The Ides of March.  I am visiting Los Angeles, we went to the Laemmle Playhouse 7 in Pasadena.  I listen to KCRW on the internet, I hear references to Laemmle theaters, they sound great. Or, maybe that is an unfortunate way to put it.  The sound was a problem.

There was a 60Hz hum throughout the entire film, and for about half the film there was a twittering, like a bad, theremin-inspired, jazz improvisation on a crappy electronic piccolo.

My mother-in-law didn’t notice, but her hearing is not up-to-snuff. My wife, however, leaned over and whispered “What’s that noise?”, I muttered a short expletived-phrase.

When it was over I exited through the lobby so I could complain.  I looked for the most senior-looking/manager-looking person available. I chose the salt-and-peppered guy at the ticket-taking podium.

I told him the problem and he listened.  And he took it.  And he responded “Okay.” (I think it was) and there was a pause, and I said something like “That’s not right.”, for emphasis.  And he took it. More silence.  I stared sincerely for a moment, and I left.

It was not surprise to him: the customer was complaining, and he didn’t talk back.  He has heard it before.

Then I figured it out: I am in LA, Movie Capital of the World.  On a regular basis some jerk in The Business goes to a retail movie house and complains bitterly that it isn’t as good as the screening room back at the studio or posthouse or the jerk’s house.  (Or so I figure.)

And these jerks complain that their eight-dollar ticket doesn’t buy the same quality.  And they complain righteously.  (Or so I figure.)

I’m not in The Business (I don’t even have a home theater back in Boston) but complain is what I did.

And I felt like I had kicked a dog.  And he took it.  And that I kicked him again.  For emphasis.  And he took it.

Postscript: Across the street and a couple blocks down, for roughly twice the price, is an Arclight theater: and they do sound right.  A couple days earlier we saw the narrow-screen, black-and-white, foreign-made, Oscar-rumored, silent film The Artist, and for a silent (that actually has plenty of sound, just very, very little dialog), Arclight did a better job.

I suspect the jerks in the business, when they go slumming, go to the Arclight.

Movie theaters are in a pickle, they need to compete with not just each other but with home.

-kb, the Kent who, if he is going to be a jerk, feels a bit proud to momentarily feel like a Hollywood insider version of jerk.

P.S.  I complain in Boston-area theaters, too, when projectors are out of focus or flicker and go dark or the sound can’t be heard right.  I have discovered that, for some reason, theaters in Montreal are much better.