I never knew I could use my middle mouse wheel to close Firefox tabs! I love finding new shortcuts.

link to this | comments (2) | File:  Tech 

Everybody has car trouble now and then. It's just part of owning a car, right? But knowing that doesn't make it any less painful when you're having a shitty car day, or in our case, a shitty car couple-of-months.

C and I have a Volkswagen. Her name is Carmen. In general we love her. But occassionally we hate, hate, hate her. (I'm so sorry, Carmen, but you know that sometimes you are a fickle, fickle girl.)

Carmen has a gutsy V6 that gets us from stop to go with a satisfying efficiency, and a seductive growl that takes hold of your heart . . . and your groin. More than just regulating the flow of gas to the engine, her accelerator can even quicken the libido, regulating bloodflow to vital body parts. Even despite the multiple dings and dents from living in a city like DC, Carmen's still a sexy beast.

Driving Carmen, you feel comfortable making that left turn across four lanes of traffic into oncoming traffic. You feel comfortable downshifting while doing 65 out on some two-lane highway west of Tucumcari, and passing that line of eight cars stuck behind the slow-moving RV.

She's got heart. She's got guts. She's got chutzpa, and she's got it where it counts. But in all those smaller, seemingly less important places, she's got a nasty habit of falling apart. She's like a hall-of-fame running back in that way. The breaks don't keep her from scoring touchdowns during the big game. But when the game is over, it leads to more time in the bath, more attention to wounds, more TLC.

And did I mention giving TLC to a VW is an expensive proposition?

For instance, the spark plug wire replacement we had to make earlier this month was a whopping $450. Part of the reason for the high price tag was that spark plug wires, as it turns out, are just plain expensive. But the other reason is the labor. Here is a general law of the VW universe: Any repair on a VW is a time-intensive endeavor. VW seems to pay their engineers to find the least convenient mode of assembly, the apparent goal being to make the proper repair of any given part, no matter how small and insignificant, require the dismantling of the entire car first.

I first discovered this when I casually gave the nod for Alexandria VW to fix the glove compartment door latch a couple of years ago. How expensive could it be? Turns out it could be as expensive as $300. The glove compartment door hinge? A friggin' piece of plastic? What the hell?

When you own a VW, not only are you sure to pay a hefty sum for any cosmetic repair involving broken plastic pieces, but you're also sure to pay that sum to a certified VW dealer, because no other mechanic knows the secret forumula for re-assembly.

Back in February, the automatic window mechanism broke and, due to a set of circumstances out of our control, we could not bring it to a dealer for repair. It was wet, it was late, and you don't leave car windows open in our neighborhood or you wake up the next morning with no car stereo, and a funky smell in your back seat. No, we didn't want to wait until the next day to bring it to the dealer, and besides, the other mechanic, who was open late, said he could fix it. And, well, we were stupid enough to believe him. To make a very long story short, we wound up bringing the car back to this mechanic three times and the window never operated correctly after any of the repairs he made. Not only did he not repair the window, he actually caused physical damage to the door in trying to get to the broken part. Then he tried to simply cover up the damage he caused with duct tape, as if we wouldn't notice or something. Finally, we had to break down and bring it to the dealer to get it repaired correctly. They basically had to re-do all the work the other mechanic did, at the same great price of $400. (We were able to get some of our money back from the other mechanic after filing a contest with our credit card company.)

What really gets me is when you need to make some routine replacement on a VW, like a battery, or a headlight, you will weigh your options and usually decide it's easier and will cause less mental anguish if you just bring it to the dealer, even though these are technially things that you should be able to do yourself under the shade of a tree somewhere. But this rationale all falls apart when you discover the most direct way to achieve either of these tasks is to remove the entire engine first.

We knew we were going to have to replace one of the headlights this weekend, and ignoring every alarm going off in our heads C and I were actually going to attempt it ourselves. We'd done it once before, amazingly. Sure, it took us two hours, but we got a lot of satisfaction out of doing it ourselves instead of paying VW $35 to do it. But this time we had a secret weapon: Al. Al has a way with mechanical things. And he has the remarkable, superhero ability to flatten his hand down to the thickness of a piece of paper. He was able to replace the headlight in under twenty minutes, which I'm pretty sure is a world record.

I could go on about Carmen. And on. But I'm already exhausted just thinking about it. I will mention that the other thing we had to do yesterday (so that we could get out to superhero Al's secret location in the first place) was replace our rear passenger tire, which had a neat little gash in the side of it, either the result of a knife, which would be distressing, or some internal defect, or possibly just from hitting it against the curb one too many times.

Even changing the tire was an epic ordeal because, due to the type of metal used on VW's and Audi's the wheel sometimes gets fused to the axle and doesn't just come off nicely. We discovered this after removing all the bolts and pulling on the wheel only to find it caused Carmen to wobble precariously on the jack. Luckily my brother had AAA and we called a guy out who had a better, more secure jack. He was able to slide under the car and pound on the tire with a hammer without the fear (or with minimal fear, anyway) of the car crushing him. Carmen now has a lovely brown wheel on back. Hopefully we'll get her old wheel back later this week, but we've already spent enough time fixing Carmen this month.

I mean I love her. Our car. Carmen. I really do. But she's definitely high maintenance.

link to this | comments (2) | File:  Carmen 

Hilarious interview of Eleanor Holmes Norton on the Colbert Report. My favorite quote (from Colbert): I'm color-blind when I talk to other American citizens . . . or people from Washington DC.


link to this | comments (0) | File:  DC 

Time has really embraced new media and blogging over the last several years, recruiting a-list bloggers like Andrew Sullivan and Ana Marie Cox to write editorials for the magazine, and incorporating The Daily Dish into Time.com. Now, they've promoted AMC to Time.com's Washington Editor. Congratulations, Time for being that smart. And congratulations AMC for being that good.

link to this | comments (0) | File:  Media  Blog 

In 1996, I was just graduating college and embarking on a cross-country camping trip that would take me from Virginia to Las Vegas and back. And the Internet looked something like this. (via kottke)

link to this | comments (0) | File:  Ho_Hum 

Last December, I posted about how much I hate snail mail, how the simple act of opening a few letters can send my day catapulting into a dismal hell. Well, my sense of dread over snail mail comes from more than just the economic bad news that surely awaits me. It has to do with the awareness that I will spend an obscene amount of time ripping up all the crap that has my name, address, and other personal information printed on it. I resent the hell out of having to do it. I didn't want the mail in the first place, and I have to waste my time tearing it up? What kind of BS is that?

Well all that has changed. Yes, we have a new understanding, snail mail and me. Snail mail now understands that I have the ability to shred it to little bits faster than it can say 'identity theft.' I have a new weapon, and it goes by the name of 'Paper Shredder.' Not a unique name, mind you, but very . . . descriptive. This thing does indeed shred papers. And it isn't one of those cheap-ass, two-sheets-at-a-time numbers. This baby can take eight pages of junk mail into its tummy in one eye-opening gulp. I now send credit card offers, unopened, through its unforgiving jaws. It even has a separate slot for actual plastic credit cards, which it hungrily devours like so many potato chips. What of staples, you wonder? Go on, send it through, man. A mere staple is little more than an annoying bug for this puppy. It's got an appetite, I tell you. And my prayers go out to anybody who stands between it and its papery vittles. The amazing part is that, even with all that eating, this shredder still minds its manners. Never so much as a burp, belch, or a little spittle. It makes me so proud.

Thanks to Paper Shredder, I've reclaimed my domain over snail mail. I now anxiously await the ceremonial opening of the mail, er . . . feeding of The Shredder. I almost tingle with anticipation.


link to this | comments (6) | File:  Ho_Hum 

I'm getting old. My joints hurt. And I was just thinking, "If I have to walk another day on these damn concrete sidewalks, somebody is going to get hurt, and it might just be me." Thankfully, somebody in DC has heard my cries. It looks like rubber sidewalks may be in our future. My back feels better already. Oh, and it's good for the environment, too!

link to this | comments (0) | File:  DC  Environment 

I've been investigating project management solutions lately, both for myself and for a client. Of course, the big player in this field, and a favorite among Digerati, is 37signals' Basecamp product. It's adored. Venerated. Worshipped. However, a new contender entered the field about a month ago called activeCollab, and it's attracting fans and stirring up the pot a little bit.

activeCollab is only in 'alpha' release, so there are obviously some kinks to work out, but it's definitely usable and people are already putting it in production environments. Take a look at some of the buzz. It has 1459 Diggs. Some people are refering to it as a 'Basecamp Clone' as well as a 'Basecamp Killer.' I'm not sure either of these labels really fit the bill. First of all, even though activeCollab shares a lot in common with Basecamp, the creator, Ilija Studen, has definitely taken his own approach to the functionality, making the 'clone' label a little unfair. As 37signals' Jason Fried himself points out, "[Calling activeCollab a clone] would imply it had exactly the same features, design, and implementation. That's obviously not the case. This is competition."

As for being a 'Basecamp Killer,' I think it's a little too quick to be using words like that. There are going to be audiences for each product. Not to mention that, at this point, Basecamp is a superior product. It is more stable and offers more functionality than activeCollab. (In my installation of activeCollab, a couple of features don't work, including uploading files and sending email. But part of this may be because I'm installing on IIS, which isn't recommended.) So Basecamp still has an edge on activeCollab, but it's also a product you have to pay for. And the fees are not inconsequential.

activeCollab is still under development and, while what has been released so far is excellent, there is much more work to be done. Still, there are two things that separate activeCollab from Basecamp which could make it desirable to many users. First, you can install it on your own servers. Second, a fully-functional installation is free. For people like me, these are Great Things. I like anything that I can run on my own servers. (Call me a control freak. It just feels better when I host things myself.) And the fact that activeCollab is free, well that doesn't hurt much, either. Let me be clear, if activeCollab sucked, I wouldn't even mess around with it, regardless of whether or not it was free. But activeCollab doesn't suck. It's pretty freakin' good already, and will probably only get better. I'm willing to pay for quality products, and I will gladly donate to activeCollab when a working 1.0 version comes out.

So, for my own use, I'm leaning on the side of activeCollab. I can do with the minor technical glitches, and while I like Basecamp in general, I've always felt 37signals' pricing was a bit high. That said, I'd still recommend Basecamp to anybody who needs greater functionality and can afford it, or for whom installing the activeCollab code is either not possible or not desirable. For those people, Basecamp will continue to be the way to go, probably for a while to come.

Right now, 37signals can get away with inflated pricing because they have something helping them out called 'hype.' But products like activeCollab will help balance all that out. Now, what would really stir things up is if Basecamp released code that developers could install on their own servers (and use for free), and if activeCollab offered fee-based hosted accounts. That would make things pretty interesting.

link to this | comments (2) | File:  Web_2_0  Tech 

Things to help protect from cancer. The two I need to work on: Get more sun and eat more fiber.

link to this | comments (0) | File:  Health 

Photos are up from Philadelphia and Montréal. They've actually been up for a week, but I forgot to mention them, probably because I was too busy writing an incredibly long-winded post about publishing and scanning of books. I realize rule number one in blogging is to keep posts to a length where the reader does not need to break for meals. Oh, well. I say, just make the 'meal' a glass of wine and it will go much quicker.

Also, as an interesting follow-up to the last post I mention, an author named Blake Schwendiman has put a full electronic copy of his book online for people to download . . . for free. Interesting move. Why is he doing it? From the author:

I'm putting this full-length novel online and encouraging you to read it, send it to your friends, blog about it, distribute it on your blogs, etc. and we'll all see what happens. Maybe nothing. But maybe ... something. In fact after weighing the pros and cons of doing this, I can't find any actual downside.

(link via Seth Godin)

link to this | comments (0) | File:  Writing  Travel  Publishing  Photography  Books 

As somebody who enjoys reading a good book, but who also spends a vast amount of time online, I'm interested in the debate over whether or not Google (or anybody else) should be allowed to scan all of the world's books and make them searchable online. Recently, there were two opinion pieces written in the New York Times about the subject, one by Kevin Kelly, 'Senior Maverick' at Wired and the other by iconic American author John Updike. Both address a possible scenario where the printed book disappears in favor of the digital. For Kelly, this will mark the end of the economy of printed copies. For Updike, it will destroy literature as we know it. In my opinion, neither viewpoint is entirely correct.

Kelly's article, called 'Scan This Book!' expounds on the virtues and benefits of a 'universal' online library in which all books - all writings, in fact - are digitized and archived online so that their texts can be made searchable, linked, tagged, and . . . well you get the gist. The article is good, though kind of long-winded. Ironically, the full text can no longer be viewed by the general public on the NY Times Web site, though I was able to find a special URL (above) to the full text version from Kelly's Web site. If we didn't have that, though, we could, if we were so inclined, pay NY Times for a full copy.

In his article, Kelly paints a very different picture of the 'economy of publishing' from the one we have now. He envisions a true democratization of the written word, one where ideas and texts are freely available to everybody, regardless of physical location or income. Instead of the hard copy becoming the thing of value, Kelly writes, "Now relationships, links, connection and sharing are." He goes on to say, "Value has shifted away from a copy toward the many ways to recall, annotate, personalize, edit, authenticate, display, mark, transfer and engage." I think he's right on target here. One of the frustrations I have with reading anything offline anymore, including novels, is the fact that I cannot link directly to a passage and comment on it. Sure, I can cite the passage and then link to the book on Amazon, but this won't provide people with the surrounding context for whatever remark I have. For me, there is, increasingly, value in being able to access things online, comment on them, and link to them.

Kelly goes on to say that we are beginning to see a new business model for publishing, where "Authors and artists can make . . . their living selling aspects of their works other than inexpensive copies of them." What he's referring to are things like public speaking engagements or advertising on blogs. Certainly, if an author is popular enough and had the blogging skills, he could probably draw a decent income off of Google Ad revenue. The point is that there are many ways, aside from the copy itself, that an author can make money. These offer him more ways to 'profit' from his work, or simply from his 'celebrity' (if he is so inclined).

But I'd have to disagree with Kelly's suggestion that the value of the 'copy' could be supplanted altogether. I think there will still be value in a 'hard copy,' not just because it serves as an 'artifact' but because text is still easier to read on paper. The difference between selling 'copies' today and selling 'copies' in the future is that the author will have greater control over those copies, and will see a greater percentage of sales. 'On demand' publishing will reduce overhead and cost of copies to the end user, but shouldn't necessarily decrease the amount an author could earn per copy, as less will go to the hands of others. The trend is already happening. The real democratization of the written word lies in the power of the author to publish his own work and do his own grassroots marketing.

In Updike's article (currently still live), he finds many things wrong with the digitizing of books, including, as the title indicates, "The End of Authorship." The article is filled with alarmist rhetoric not unlike the kind of talk made by the music recording industry over digital file swapping: In my day, we didn't have any stinking 'Internets.' And we liked it! (Because we made money that way.)

Sorry, I don't mean to show disrespect. I mean this is, after all John Updike we're talking about, creator of Rabbit Angstrom, and one of The Important Writers of our time. Personally, I like his writing (I love the story Gesturing.) But he just misses the point. To say that he doesn't 'get it' is, I suppose, a bit of a cheap shot. After all, the man has made his living selling books the old-fashioned way. It's something that has worked for him, and for many others like him. But that's why I think publishing Updike's response to Kelly's article was kind of an odd choice for the NY Times: these two guys are not speaking the same language.

Updike's main point seems to be that the move away from the printed word is a move away from intimacy:

In imagining a huge, virtually infinite wordstream accessed by search engines and populated by teeming, promiscuous word snippets stripped of credited authorship, are we not depriving the written word of its old-fashioned function of, through such inventions as the written alphabet and the printing press, communication from one person to another - of, in short, accountability and intimacy?

The Internet inhibiting communication from one person to another? I don't know, Mr. Updike. I'm confused.

Lack of accountability? Do you mean lack of linking? Of identifying sources? Again, I'm lost. What Internet are you talking about here?

Has any other medium fostered so many one-to-one (and one-to-many, and many-to-many) discussions, debates, conferences? Has any other medium offered individuals the ability to personally communicate with one-another with such ease? People have the ability to interact with media in ways they never could when it was being force-fed to them by media giants telling them what was good, what they should be watching, reading, or listening to. Today, the people are deciding what is good. Via YouTube, via podcasts, and via blogs. Of course, perceptions can still be manipulated, but in general I think people will develop a much greater resistance.

But according to Updike, "content on the Internet is egregiously inaccurate, unedited, unattributed and juvenile." Granted, there is a good deal of shit out there. I'll give you that. But there's also some great stuff. And isn't having the freedom to find both and make your own judgments about it great? I'd say that sort of personal choice spells more intimacy not less.

I do agree with Updike when he says that, "[t]he printed, bound and paid-for book was - still is, for the moment - more exacting, more demanding, of its producer and consumer both." The bound book is more demanding, both in terms of time and economy, on the part of the writer and the reader. Because of this, people who read books are, increasingly, more selective in what they buy. And here's one of the great things about where publishing seems to be heading: instead of people being swayed to purchase books based on marketing and propaganda, they could be turned on to books through their own reading, or by receiving recommendations from people they trust. The merit of a book, or a CD, or a movie, is becoming less about which press published it, which label recorded it, or which studio filmed it. (And how many marketing dollars those agencies put behind it.) Instead, and here's a shocking concept, merit is beginning to be based on whether or not average people like something. Plain and simple. If a book takes off, it will do so from word-of-mouth, where 'word-of-mouth' has truly global proportions. Grassroots marketing will be King. Already, Amazon is giving its top-rated amateur reviewers advance copies of books. Power is being taken away from the traditional 'great' review sources - like the NY Times, for example.

But not only is the way literature marketed and sold going to change. Writing itself is going to change, has got to change, if it is going to spread. Just as 'the novel' of today is not 'the novel' of the 17th century, we will discover a new definition of 'the novel' one that integrates other forms of media, perhaps, or one where the reader takes a more interactive roll. And the authors who are able to invent this new way of writing are going to be the ones who are remembered (even if they aren't compensated well for it). What I found most disappointing about Updike's article was that he almost seemed more concerned with the economy and status of literature than about innovation and expression.

The debate over the scanning of books will ultimately quiet down. Books will be scanned. Period. It will be a non-issue. Eventually people won't want it any other way. But to say the economy of 'copies' will disappear with it, or because of it, is silly. I don't think we have to worry too much about Kelly's dream or Updike's nightmare. A new economy will emerge for the printed copy, one that is more efficient, more targeted, perhaps better, but most certainly different.

link to this | comments (1) | File:  Writing  Publishing  Chewing  Books 

An interesting discussion proceeds this post about the DC housing market pushing creatives to the burbs. I'm not sure if I totally agree with the argument, but I do think developers have gone way overboard with 'luxury condos.' I think the new marketing pitch for a post-housing bubble economy should be 'nice and affordable.'

link to this | comments (0) | File:  DC 

A new name for Gen Y is being adopted by certain media establishments: Echo Boomers. I kind of like this name, actually. It kind of reflects the fact that a lot of this generation were Baby Boomer's 'Echo' children, third or fourth in line, conceived during the Boomer's comfortable mid-life (and potentially during the Boomer's third or fourth marriages.) Link via MPPS

link to this | comments (0) | File:  Media 

There are a number of possibilities as to why DC might be experiencing an upsurge in crime this summer. I'll add one more to the mix: swamp butt. Walking around in this city in the summer months, when the heat and humidity is at it's worst, makes your clothes cling to you in uncomfortable ways, makes breathing a little harder, and makes regions of our body that don't often see the light of day, well, swampy. The result? Quicker than usual tempers, making people do inexplicable things, like yell loudly for no apparent reason. Yesterday I saw a guy scream angry, though ultimately unintelligible, obscenities at an empty bus. I've also noticed louder and more frequent horn honking, sometimes when there are no other cars on the street. And, unfortunately, there is the apparent spike in violent crime.

It's senseless. Inane. And it proves that we should never underestimate the power of swamp butt. It's no coincidence that New Orleans, a city with swamp-like conditions most of the year, had a murder rate that was 10 times the national average before Katrina.

So here's a thought: instead of increasing the police patrols, maybe DC should invest in large powerful fans, air-conditioning units, and misting tents.

link to this | comments (3) | File:  Environment  DC 

DC is hosting it's first annual Fringe Festival. I'm not a fan of the name, but I like the idea.

link to this | comments (0) | File:  DC 

As a frequent DC pedestrian I can attest to the fact that we are often a pretty obnoxious lot.

link to this | comments (0) | File:  DC 

Lionel Richie headlined the fireworks show in Philly. We missed the live show, but we were dancing on the ceiling back in our hotel room.

link to this | comments (1) | File:  Music  Travel 

If you notice me reeking of garlic in the near future, this is why. via fark

link to this | comments (2) | File:  Health 

What better way to spend Fourth of July than in our Nation's Capital, right? Right. Well, we've already done that. Twice. So this year C & I are heading to nearby Philadelphia, the 10-year 'temporary' U.S. Capital while things were being moved from New York to DC. Neither one of us has ever been to Philly and we're excited, in a stars and stripes sort of way, not only because we'll be able to see things like Independence Hall and the Liberty Bell, but also because we can run (or walk) up the steps of The Philadelphia Museum of Art. You know, like Rocky. And when it really comes down to it, isn't that what America is all about? Hot dogs, apple pie, and Rocky IV? Queue up Eye of the Tiger in the iPod. I'm rising up!

After Philly, when we've had quite enough of being patriotic, we're getting the hell out of the States and driving to Canada, where the drugs are cheap and the beer is Molson, eh? Unfortunately, we will have just missed Canada Day celebrations. However, we will be just in time for wedding celebrations. C's cousin is getting hitched, and we would never miss a family wedding in Montréal, where C & I had our own wedding about six (crap! six?) years ago. Should bring back some memories. Speaking of memories, Thursday night, I will probably be complicit in a bachelor party somewhere in Old Town, administering some karmic payback to the aforementioned cousin for the rough time he wrought upon me six years ago in that same city for my last night of bachelordom. Ahhh. Sweet revenge.

link to this | comments (0) | File:  Travel  Family