| |
mebweblog
Mike Bedan's Radio Weblog
|
Saturday, August 02, 2003  |
|
|
|
|
(SOURCE:"jonu")- Fueld by blogs, wikis, RSS, etc. a document-centric, XML world will prevail in 5-10 years I predict. Right now the XML database tools are crude and only for early adopters (and production systems for most people probably will stay with relational databases and the like) but not in the long term. <QUOTE> It's possible that developers will want to stay within an XML abstraction for all their data sources. I've been living that experiment for a few months. My last few O'Reilly Network columns (1, 2) describe an XML-oriented approach to data management that I am continuing to find fruitful -- even without the capabilities that XML-savvy databases bring to the table. When you think about how long it took for SQL to become an established discipline, it helps put SQL/XML hybridization -- the subject of this InfoWorld story -- into perspective. It could take a decade or more for this stuff to really start to sink in. Along the way all sorts of new opportunities will emerge, and I find the whole thing terrifically exciting. </QUOTE> [ Roland Tanglao: KLogs]
|
|
|
|
(SOURCE: The Death Of The Webmaster: Why Weblogs Bring A True Revolution To Internet Publishing - Robin Good' Sharewood Tidings)- Word!<QUOTE>So, you can see how the advent of weblogs, was masqueraded on the surface by the "bloggers" fad, and completely misunderstood by those who would be most benefitting from the advent of such technology-based opportunities. We are ushering into an era in which things are changing at an increasing faster pace, and where ever more frequently we are looking at reality with an outdated pair of glasses, so it is difficult for me to anticipate with greater detail what the appropriate understanding and ethical exploitation of the above will exactly bring about. What I can say with some amount of safety, is that I cannot recommend enough the use of weblog/CMS based technology for both traditional business applications as well as for those organizations entrenched in publishing methods that require a seven-day tour before the content even makes it to the test server. The learning curve for these powerful CMS technologies is basically none and the cost-effectiveness is several orders of magnitude better than when working with a full-time webmaster or with an IT/Information Publishing department that wants to "webmaster" everything you do.</QUOTE> [ Roland Tanglao: KLogs]
|
|
|
|
CIA veteran Bob Baer talks about the censored 9/11 report, why al-Qaida is still cozy in the house of Saud -- and why Osama is winning. [ Salon.com]
|
|
|
|
| Sunday, July 13, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
Free online MelissaData Lookup: http://www.melissadata.com/Lookups/index.htm
U.S. Addresses
Lookup any U.S. address and get the ZIP+4 code, area code, time zone, county, address type, street detail and more.
Business List Counts
Use free list counts to discover new markets. Find more customers like your best customers.
Campaign Contributions
Individuals that have contributed $200 or more to federal campaigns by ZIP Code.
Nearest Post Office
Locate the 10 closest post offices to a ZIP Code that accept bulk mail.
Worldwide Place Names
Get location information on over 5,000,000 geographic names worldwide
2000 Demographics
Gain access to the latest data available on 46,455 counties, states, cities and places in the U.S.
Income Tax Statistics
Income tax information by ZIP Code. Includes average AGI, number of returns, average refund, filing status, age and more.
And More.
|
|
|
|
| Thursday, July 10, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
| Sunday, July 06, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff, 7/4/2003
 nnoyed by the prospect of a massive new federal surveillance system, two researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology are celebrating the Fourth of July with a new Internet service that will let citizens create dossiers on government officials.
The system will start by offering standard background information on politicians, but then go one bold step further, by asking Internet users to submit their own intelligence reports on government officials -- reports that will be published with no effort to verify their accuracy.
''It's sort of a citizen's intelligence agency,'' said Chris Csikszentmihalyi, assistant professor at the MIT Media Lab. ...
|
|
|
|
| Friday, July 04, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
This is totally kick-ass! GIA showed me more in 30 seconds about my local representatives that I could have found myself in a couple of hours of web searching. I'd love to see some of our state judges put in here. We've got a few loonies on the bench that need airing. Sunshine has a way of chasing out the rats.
Government Prying, the Good Kind. The government has endless ways of keeping tabs on Americans and what they're up to. Now the Government Information Awareness site turns the tables, letting you keep an eye on your government officials. By Michelle Delio. [Wired News] [ b.cognosco]
|
|
|
|
| Thursday, June 12, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
"...the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought. In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. ... The revolution will be complete when the language is perfect." - Syme, from Orwell's 1984
I saw a few things on the internet (see below) that made me think we are in an age of newdoublespeak. My next thought: Will humans ever exist in an age with newspeak or doublespeak.
|
|
|
|
| Sunday, June 08, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
| Tuesday, June 03, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
As consumer advocates deplored changes to media ownership rules, investors bought shares of the biggest media companies. By David D. Kirkpatrick. [ New York Times: NYT HomePage]
|
|
|
|
As soon as most people see the words “duopoly,” “cross-ownership rules,” or “FCC” in the headlines their eyes glaze over. But not my friend and many people’s hero, Bob McChesney. Bob eats memos about telecom regulations for breakfast. He has campaigned tirelessly, along with John Nichols, Mark Crispin Miller, Jeff Chester, and others, for reform of our nation’s media regulatory apparatus. But I just had a... [ In These Times]
|
|
|
|
| Sunday, June 01, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
Gets Ready to Roll the Media Dice. Theories abound over what it will mean if the rules restricting media outlet ownership in the United States are relaxed. By Jonathan D. Glater. [ New York Times: Politics]
|
|
|
|
| Saturday, May 31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
I have seen a variety of information related to the FCC ceding more control to the large corporate media companys:
|
|
|
|
"... WHY DOES this matter? Because, in a democracy, the media isn't just another business. Instead, it's what we turn to for the ideas and information that make it possible for us to perform our duties as citizens, such as voting and being involved in community issues. Furthermore, I don't think media control should be concentrated geographically--which is what happens when local owners are bought (or forced) out by media monoliths that aren't part of the communities their properties serve. " [Source: AnchorDesk at ZDnet.com]
|
|
|
|
| Sunday, May 18, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
American Civil Liberties Union : Support the Freedom to Read! .
With the passage of the USA Patriot Act, the FBI gained the power to search your library and book-buying records without probable cause of any crime or intent to commit a crime. Furthermore, librarians and others who are required to turn over records are not allowed to say that the search has occurred or that records were given to the government.
This means that average Americans could have their privacy violated wholesale without justification or proper judicial oversight. Questions from Members of Congress to the Department of Justice about the use of this power have gone unanswered or have received a superficial response.
In response to these un-American and dangerous powers, Rep. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) has proposed the "Freedom to Read Protection Act" (HR. 1157). This act would restrict the key provision of the USA PATRIOT Act -- by exempting libraries and bookstores from the laws that allow the FBI to conduct these searches of personal records.
Take Action! Urge your Representatives to support the Freedom to Read Protection Act! [Privacy Digest]
Supporting the Freedom to Read Protection Act is a good idea but here's something else you might want to think about doing as well. Radically diversify your reading choices. Order something at the opposite end of the political spectrum from your usual fare. Check out something at Loompanics or Paladin Press, or ChristianBook.com. Create patterns in your data that don't add up and can't be categorized.
There are two desirable features to this strategy. First, if enough of us do it, we can overwhelm these silly systems with white noise in the data. Second, if we actually start to read and think about viewpoints that radically differ from our own, we might actually start to get smarter as individuals and as a society. There isn't much point to protecting our freedom to read if we don't bother to exercise it in the first place. [ McGee's Musings]
|
|
|
|
| Sunday, May 11, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
| Sunday, April 27, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
I was amazed about the protests related to the Dixie Chicks making a 15-word statement about being ashamed that Bush was from Texas. I believe people should have a right to express their views against some one who is expressing their views against someone. But I also heard some people threatened the members of the group, including saying they should be dropped over Iraq. Take a chill pill people! Some other views...
What is Censorship?. When we discuss censorship in the context of American, or un-American, behavior we should keep the intent and scope of the First Amendment in mind -- that is, we are protected from government censorship. What Jim, J.D., and the Boss are talking about below may be intolerant, even rude, but it isn't censorship and it isn't un-American. The government has made no claim here and exacted no penalty. A citizen of the United States may speak freely, within certain bounds, and be free of government interference. But the Constitution does not guarantee an audience or provide protection from consequences. There are all kinds of restrictions on our speech in private areas, and all kinds of consequences for violating those restrictions. There is another basic premise of American freedom at play here, economic freedom. We are each free to use our economic power in the furtherance of our own interests. We are not compelled to further private interests with which we disagree. Such coercion would also be un-American. But here's where it gets a bit sticky. In our system corporations have much the same economic status as individuals, that is, they can buy or sell from whomever, whenever they please. It's the basis of our quasi-free market system. There are certain restrictions that (hopefully) stop them from doing harm to others, but there isn't any mandate to provide economic support for specific causes or actions. Such mandates would also be un-American. What we are left with here is a simple conflict of multiple independent parties exercising their rights, and turning to the market for a solution. That sounds pretty American to me. But there is a real problem in that corporations also wield very nearly the power of Governments. In this case, we have errantly divided up the frequency spectrum into private fiefdoms, and created huge private spaces where none should exist. A corporation doesn't, and shouldn't, be told who or what to broadcast. But a single corporation shouldn't "own" all the spectrum, either.
Springsteen on the Dixie Chicks..
Springsteen on the Dixie Chicks Here's a courageous statement from Bruce Springsteen on the plight of the Dixie Chucks, who are suffering boycotts of their work by the pro-war jingoists (including faux-patriotic corporate interests) throughout the land:
The Dixie Chicks have taken a big hit lately for exercising their basic right to express themselves. To me, they're terrific American artists expressing American values by using their American right to free speech. For them to be banished wholesale from radio stations, and even entire radio networks, for speaking out is un-American. [...]
Bruce Springsteen
[from JD Lassica's New Media Musings ]
Good to see that some people get the basic premise of free speech. If you don't like or agree with what they say, say something else in rebuttal. But don't engage in forms of attempted censorship. The whole point of free speech is to permit ideas that the majority don't agree with to be heard. [...] [McGee's Musings] [ b.cognosco]
|
|
|
|
| Sunday, April 20, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
As the 300th episode of The Simpsons is broadcast today read how it became the world's best TV programme. [ Guardian Unlimited]
300! Man, where has time flown? How can the writers of the show keep it going?
|
|
|
|
| Friday, April 04, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
As coalition forces push toward Baghdad, they are preparing for possible attacks by chemical weapons, which Saddam Hussein's forces are known to have used in the past. By William J. Broad. [ New York Times: Politics]
>>> Did we go to war to prevent Saddam from using chemical weapons **defensively**?
|
|
|
|
Steven Brill talks about his new book, "After," and America in the "September 12 era." [ Salon.com]
|
|
|
|
| Saturday, March 29, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
| Sunday, March 23, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
Summary: Wars are the result of collective laziness and irresponsibility. To stop war, stop being irresponsible.
Responsibility
Life is about making choices. The choices we make every day can build up to have tremendous long-term impact on others. Suppose that before embarking on his research, Alexander Fleming had decided that a career in research was too difficult. Or suppose that he had decided early on to retire when faced with a personal tragedy. If Fleming had not discovered Penicillin, how many millions of people would have suffered and died before someone else eventually made the discovery?
Fleming is a great example, because his contribution to mankind was "accidental" in many respects. Most of life's choices are made in the context of conditions over which the individual has no control. There are countless factors which can't be changed or chosen, but that does not diminish the importance of making good choices in those areas which the individual does have a choice. If Fleming had ever decided to quit, he wouldn't have known the tremendous potential that he was throwing away - his discovery was "accidental", after all, so there is no way he could have predicted that his work would lead to such fantastic results. Yet the fact that his decisions were made without knowledge of their consequence does not in any way diminish the awesome societal consequence that those decisions ultimately had.
For every Alexander Fleming who resists the urge to give up, there are many potential contributors who take the easy way, and never unlock fate's rewards. Look at it another way: Fleming's work saved millions of lives, but he undoubtedly suffered the occasional discouragement and poor decions that we all do. Perhaps he might have discovered a cure for heart disease if he had been able to overcome his occasional discouragements and give just 1% more. Perhaps an extra 1% of effort on his part could have saved millions more lives. Unlikely of course, but so was penicillin, and since it didn't happen we will never know.
Now, any intelligent reader will be able to retort "if he had put in an extra 1%, he might just as likely have caused an accidental epidemic that killed millions of people, so his laziness was very ethical" or "if he had taken up kites, maybe he would have discovered something that saved more lives than penicillin, so his venture into research may have been a net loss for humanity" This is all true: since my entire argument rests on hypotheticals, we can never really know whether it is correct or not. But to say that this absolves individuals of all responsibility for their choices is to say that all choices are fundamentally equal. This might make an interesting position for sophomoric argument, but humans know that some choices are better than others. We don't always know which choice is better, and sometimes one is no better than another, but we undeniably have the capacity to judge. Ever since we ate from the tree, we have known that some decisions are better than others.
War
War is senseless. War labels people, puts borders between people, and turns brother against brother. But wars happen. And when people go to war, they don't do so out of laziness or "shirking duty", but quite deliberately. Individuals fight because they believe it is the "right thing to do", perhaps with deeper conviction than any other decision that occurs in human endeavor. This is important, because it demonstrates how hopeless it is to try reasoning with parties who have come to the point of war. When the situation has reached the brink of war, it is evidence that many people have already decided that fighting is the moral thing to do from their individual perspectives.
On the other hand, every war is precipitated by a long sequence of missed opportunites and individual failures for which all humans share responsibility. War is the terminal result of a long, steady slide toward an increasingly zero-sum situation where individual survival can only be guaranteed by ensuring someone else's destruction. By the time societies begin to consider conflict openly, the situation has already deteriorated and the slide is gaining momentum.
Changing people's attitudes at the brink of war involves challenging and redirecting their deepest values, while prompting people to behave like Fleming involves only combating their inaction and spurring them to pursue values that they already hold. Which do you think is a more responsible use of your energy? The more that we all behave like Fleming, the better we avoid ending up in the place where wars happen. In my opinion, that's the best we can hope to accomplish, and is therefore the only practical anti-war strategy. [ Better Living Through Software]
|
|
|
|
| Saturday, March 22, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
Paul Berman, one of the most provocative thinkers on the left, has a message for the antiwar movement: Stop marching and start fighting to spread liberal values in the Middle East. [ Salon.com]
|
|
|
|
10.45pm: 'Saddam ally killed' in Najaf· Explosions in main cities· Four US soldiers killed· Journalist dies in car bomb· Gen Franks outlines US aims [ Guardian Unlimited]
|
|
|
|
Critics of the war against Iraq are not reserving their anger exclusively for President Bush. Some also blame the news media. By Jim Rutenberg and Robin Toner. [ New York Times: Politics]
|
|
|
|
| Thursday, March 20, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
Mike Bedan: post from groove... Mike Bedan | Re: This is a test2003-03-25 10:15 This is a test response...
|
|
|
|
| Tuesday, March 18, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
Washington says it will go into Iraq to disarm it even if Saddam Hussein leaves the country. [ BBC News | Front Page | UK Edition]
>>> Can't they make up their mind? First, there was an ultimatum of 48 hours. Now it doesn't matter if he leaves.
|
|
|
|
| Monday, March 17, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
1.30pm: France reiterates veto threat · Putin argues for 'peaceful' approach · Weapons inspectors told to quit Iraq [ Guardian Unlimited]
|
|
|
|
| August 2003 |
| Sun |
Mon |
Tue |
Wed |
Thu |
Fri |
Sat |
| |
|
|
|
|
1 |
2 |
| 3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
| 10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
| 17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
| 24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
| 31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Jul Sep |
Topics TOC
testRoll
 | Info |
 | My Name is Mike |
| I live in Denver, CO, USA. |
| I work at CH2M HILL, Inc. |
| Environmental Risk Scientist |
| 9+ years |
| I play at Info Solutions |
| See 'My Webs' |
| My Webs |
| Other Webs |
|
|
comment [] - See Also: xml
