Like I have that kind of time.

Four minutes at 100% did the trick just fine. What's with their anal retentive cooking times?

“The reason is, I want to regain my First Amendment rights,” Schlessinger said. “I want to be able to say what’s on my mind…without somebody getting angry.”

Um, the first amendment doesn't say anything about being able to say what's on your mind without somebody getting angry. It just says you can say it. And guess what? Other people can say what they think about you as well.

Yet another right-winger that thinks that constitutional freedoms apply only to them, and not to people who disagree with her. Gosh, those conservatives have awfully thin skins.

They're going to make a lot of hay out of the President's remarks on a proposed mosque and Muslim community center in New York City blocks away from "ground zero" [a particularly interesting take on this is here] — especially the Tea Baggers, who constantly trumpet about the consitution, which few of them seem to have read and even fewer understand. Guess what, guys? Our President swore to protect, preserve and defend the constitution, and he is absolutely right. In fact, he was so right that I am sort of pissed off that he then backed off his comments because he didn't want to get embroiled in the controversy caused by so many stupid idiots. I wish he would say anything nearly as forceful about same-sex marriage or the rights of gay and lesbian citizens.

With the logic being displayed by the know-nothing bigots of this world, I'm sure they would be happy to ban all Catholic churches from within a 4-block radius of schools.

The rhetoric I have heard from the right over the last couple days is nothing short of astonishing, but not as astonishing as the fact that no one seems to be calling them on it. I mean, these people are actively claiming that fundmental rights do not exist. That there is no right to free speech, that there is no right to assembly, that there is no right to religion. Except, of course, for their own. This is a hallmark of the right wing, that everyone is equal... except people that aren't just like them.

When the Bush era finally began to stink like rotten fish and people started to come out of their bizarre snooze, I hoped that things would get better. Instead, the right has gotten more and more crazy, more insane, more totally bonkers. So bonkers that they had to spin off a crazy new group so that they could go even farther into the bizarro world they inhabit. No is yes! Land of the free! Except you and you and you! We love the constitution! Except for this part, let's rip that out, and while we're at it let's add some amendments to take rights away from people.

Power corrupts, and in the case of the right wing at this juncture in history, the quest for power corrupts absolutely.

At any rate, the inference of anti-gay hostility drawn by the district court is manifestly false. It defames more than seven million California voters as homophobic, a cruelly ironic charge given that California has enacted some of the Nation’s most progressive and sweeping gay-rights protections, including creation of a parallel institution, domestic partnerships, affording same-sex couples all the benefits and obligations of marriage.

Is it just me, or did they just say that homosexuals should be happy because we have made a separate but equal system just for them? Or to put it more succintly, They have their own water fountain, what's their problem?

Another thing that bugs me is this insistence by the fundamentalist nutbags that same-sex couples get "all the benefits and obligations of marriage"... but not marriage.

So, it's not equal, is it?

Of course, you can keep breaking down their illogical arguments, and push it until they start saying "Why do the gays have to use the word marriage?" Seriously? Is that what they're getting worked up about? A word?!

Somehow I don't think so. But it certainly shows how flimsy their arguments are.

First, he denied a Prop 8 injunction that would have immediately allowed same-sex marriage to continue in California. He decided that the defenders of Proposition 8 should be heard. Biased!

Despite finding that Prop 8 was unconstitutional, Judge Walker put a stay on his decision, again blocking same-sex marriages in California so that the Prop 8 supporters could have another chance. Tyrannical!

Judge Walker, having heard from all sides — including the Republican governor and Democratic attorney general of California, ended the stay. But he then put a hold on that decision for a further week so that the opposition can be heard from yet again, once more keeping same-sex marriages from happening. Judicial activism!

Yes, this Judge is just another total left wing hippie, trampling all over the will of the people to force the homosexual agenda onto the moral, Christian people of California.

"Let's make a film in 48 hours!"
"It should be a musical!"
"We can do a production number on Vespas!"

"Let's start a film festival!"
Huh?
"We'll call it DC Shorts!"

And here we are, seven years later, with one of the most successful fests in DC, described by Moviemaker Magazine as "one of the most influential film festivals." That's the result of Jon's massive rolodex, his magical way of talking people into things, and a lot of hard work — by a lot of people. There is an army behind the scenes at DC Shorts, from the judges who start their work in the spring watching hundreds upon hundreds of films, to the volunteers who do everything from selling tickets to accomodating visiting filmmakers in their homes.

My little piece of this undertaking is creating the actual shows — mastering and compressing the films, setting up our custom computerized projection system, and creating the various graphics and titles.

And all the while, Jon is the eye of the storm, swirling around and producing dangerous, high-speed winds. (Is that the right metaphor?)

If you've never been to DC Shorts, I highly recommend it. If you're a filmmaker (or even an aspiring one) it's a great learning experience. You'll meet filmmakers from around the world and across the country, and there are Q&A sessions after selected screenings. Not a filmmaker? Then experience the fun of watching 10 films in a row, none more than 20 minutes. If you don't like the one you're watching, just wait a moment and you'll get something entirely different. You'll even get to vote on your favorite films for the Audience Award!

Don't want to wait for the movie? Check out the Screenplay Competition. Actors will read screenplays for as-yet-unmade films; the winner will receive a grant and a guaranteed slot in next year's DC Shorts. (That competition happens October 17.)

DC Shorts begins September 9 and runs through September 16 at the Landmark E Street Cinema and the U.S. Navy Memorial Theater. Learn all about the fest and purchase tickets at http://www.dcshorts.com. See you there!

Turns out I can't find biodiesel here in San Jose; at least, not in the percentage specified by VW.

In the last week, a bunch of alternative fueled vehicles were triumphantly introduced here in San Jose at the convention center. Among them were the Nissan Leaf and the Chevy Volt, both contenders in the race for my driveway.

The Volt, which seems like it was promised to us 20 years ago now, is a sort of "plug-in hybrid." It drives entirely on an electric motor, but has an extended range because it carries its own generator — a gasoline generator. So, you can drive about 40 miles on batteries alone, then the gas kicks in; not to power the engine, but to charge the batteries so they can keep going. It makes sense, kind of, but it still means gas and emissions and doesn't really change the equation from a Prius or other hybrid unless you drive less than 40 miles a day. (Which I generally do.)

The Leaf is a genuine electric-only vehicle — you know, like the ones they had in the 90s before California chickened out and rescinded their clean air requirements and manufacturers took them back and crushed them. Leaf goes about 100 miles on a charge.

But here's the thing:

1. If one doesn't own a home with a garage or other convenient charging point, why would one buy a car like this? If I were to buy one tomorrow and then next year I lose my house and move to an apartment, then what? Run an extension cord from my window? While pretty much everyone in my neighborhood has a garage, I'd say that only a paltry 1 in 10 use them for their car. Where would they charge it? Out in the driveway? What about all the apartment buildings around us with common parking garages or lots?

2. People have an aversion to buying a car with a limited range. This is seemingly addressed in the Volt because it carries its own onboard generator (the gas engine). Even I find myself thinking about this issue (and I tend to be more analytical than emotional on these things) and immediately worry about going too far out of range. The reality is that I drive FAR less than 100 miles per day — hell, I drive less than that in a week. But I couldn't drive this to Disneyland. I could probably drive it to, say, Stockton, but then do I need a special charger when I get there, or does it plug into a regular outlet?

Cars hold an emotional connection in American society because they represent freedom to go anywhere, anytime. No one wants to think about where they are going and how they are going to use energy to get there — which, of course, is why we are in the petro-fueled mess we are in today. We have never "thought" about it, and now that we have to, we don't like it. Even me.

There are plenty of arguments for the drawbacks of being single, especially from a governmental standpoint: because I am one person who has no children or dependents and owns a home in Proposition 13 California, I pay much higher taxes than those who have kids (deductions) and two people to pay the mortgage and property taxes. I'm paying for everyone else's kids to go to school.

For the most part, I don't mind paying for that — an educated citizenry is desperately needed around here these days. But why should parents pay less of that burden? Why am I subsidizing their procreation? The world is geared toward pairs, companies and governments encourage couples by prices, and singles like me are getting the raw end of the deal by subsidizing them.

Anyway. As I stumble through my days lately I realize that there are a lot of other reasons being single is a pain in the ass right now.

At the moment, my days and nights are taken up with work — my day job, my freelance work, a film festival, and iPhone app stuff. It's a lot of work, and still it is difficult to make ends meet, to pay for a tiny house which is now worth far less than I owe; so many everyday chores are shunted to the wayside for lack of time — cleaning the kitchen, doing dishes, maintenance and gardening. I have to take my car in for servicing, but when? I have to drive from one corner of Silicon Valley to the other to pick up packages, but when? Diego needs to go to the vet, but when? If I go on vacation with my friends, they have two people paying for one hotel room, but I'm paying full price for mine. I'm paying for one half of the vacation, they're paying one quarter each.

The reality is that these things wouldn't be quite so difficult to deal with with another person around. Two incomes paying for the house, twice the number of manhours available to accomplish daily chores, property taxes effectively cut in half.

I see where I've been wrong all along. I should never have been looking for the love of my life. I should have been searching for an assistant.

People scrambled for every bit of leaked information, bloggers even committed crimes to snag one. Consumers stood in line to purchase it. And Apple marketed it as the most perfect object of desire ever. Therein lies the rub.

Listen, I'm a huge Apple devotee. Have been ever since I first gazed upon that Asian woman combing her hair on the screen of the very first Macintosh. But even I am getting a little bit perturbed at the ridiculous level of superlative that marks the stage debut of an Apple product.

I love my iPhone, and have since version 1. But no phone is perfect, and especially so on an imperfect network. Apple’s current marketing strategy seems to be based upon the idea that iPhone is perfect. It ignores the physics of radio propagation and the less-than-stellar AT&T network. And by doing this, Apple invites criticism.

That criticism is, in my opinion, as over the top as Apple’s marketing. A sign of times, the criticism begins as blog comments from rabid anti-Apple trolls, is fanned into flame wars, then is picked up by mainstream media (who are always a bit behind the curve and obviously reading the most inflammatory blogs to pick up possible controversy).

The media has learned, as Greenpeace did years ago, that the word “Apple” in a headline guarantees eyeballs. And the current brouhaha is following the same lines as Greenpeace’s vaunted campaign did. That one went something like this:

Apple was among the most environmentally conscious computer makers in the world. They were very progressive in eliminating dangerous chemicals and reducing packaging, and while not perfect they were far ahead of their competitors. Still, Greenpeace realized that if they were to target, say, Dell or HP for a green campaign, no one would care. So instead, they created a campaign taking Apple to task for their environmental policies, ignoring far worse offenders. It got publicity for Greenpeace, but did it help the planet?

Consumer Reports seems to have gotten the idea. They blasted out to the blogosphere the results of what appears to be a totally unscientific test, claiming that the antenna on the iPhone 4 is defective and they can't “recommend” the phone. The next day, they announced that the iPhone 4 is the best smartphone. Well, which is it? Why didn't they make a big stink about whatever smartphone was worst, and post all over the internet saying they can’t recommend that one?

‘Cos the internet would respond with a yawn.

Apple gets attention. They've carefully cultivated that attention by being secretive, simple, and quiet in a bold way. But in today’s world of 24/7 communication and internet commenting, they’ve left a vacuum that is being filled with trolls.

Millions of iPhone 4s were sold in one weekend. Are there millions of complaints? No. But a handful of squeaky wheels are driving this — the vocal minority.

For the record: I have an iPhone 4. My signal indicator at home drops to nothing when I cover the “death spot.” But I’ve never gotten reception in my house, with any phone. Out in the world, it works as advertised. I tend to believe that Apple (with AT&T’s collusion) deliberately calibrated the bars on the phone to make it appear that the signal is stronger than it is. More bars in more places, right? Frankly, I think that holding my hand over the antenna is just showing me the real network strength.

Apple press conference tomorrow. Interesting thing to ponder: Microsoft just released then discontinued a phone within the space of 6 weeks. Did anyone care? Did they demand a refund, a recall, or a press conference?

]]> tag:genecowan.com,2010:blog/1.6021 2010-07-03T22:20:04Z 2010-07-03T23:23:05Z Gene Cowan gene@genecowan.com This morning I finally tired of it — the dropped calls, the inability to get a call out, the total uselessness of the AT&T Wireless network here in my house. One too many failed attempts at making my usual Saturday morning call to my Dad got me up and driving to the AT&T store.

Ah, the Microcell. The magical little box that puts a cell tower in your house. But not for free.

You see, even though you pay a decent monthly fee for the AT&T network, there’s no guarantee that it will be where you are. Your living room, for instance. I’ve noted before that the wireless networks are concentrated on highways and the like, but never seem to work indoors. But if you have a spare $150 — and a broadband internet connection — the Microcell device gives you a private cell tower in your home with a full 5 bars.

It is as if there’s one network for the rich, and one for everyone else. Pay the $150 charge and you get the privilege of routing your calls over your own broadband connection instead of AT&T’s overloaded network. So, I'm suddenly finding myself paying AT&T so that I can make calls over a device I had to pay for, using Comcast’s broadband network (which I’m also paying for). One phone call requires me paying a whole bunch of different companies.

Simply put, AT&T expects customers to put up with a certain level of crappiness. If you want a higher level of service, just pay more.

By the way, the Microcell works wonderfully. I have gone from zero bars to five, everywhere in my house, and calls are much clearer — and louder.

The best cell phone call money can buy, I suppose.