From the good folks at the AP: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4400653/

I'd like to see more written on RSS, so the general surfer will be as comfortable with it as they are with email or site URLs (please nobody say that an RSS feed lives at a URL too, I know that ).  Perhaps, though, we should solve the RSS vs. ATOM debate first.

OK, not really the top ten, just the first random ten.  I read a blog yesterday (sorry,can't seem to find it now) about doing a playlist of all tracks in your music library, randomizing it, then listing the first 10 no matter how embarrassing.  I decided I'd do it too.

Here are the first ten music files in my list:

1. Track 3, Disk 1, La Boheme
2. Track 18, Disk 2, Bach St. Mathew Passion
3. Track 2, Mozart Requiem K, 626 in D Minor
4. Dances of the Corps de Ballet and Dwarfs, Swan Lake AIII, S2
5. Schindler's Workforce, Schindler's List Soundtrack
6. Dead Man's Hill, Swamp Ophelia, Indigo Girls
7. Track 12, Disk 3, Bach St. Matthew Passion
8. Drug Ballad, The Marshall Mathers LP, Eminem
9. I'm Goin' Home, Cracked Rear View, Hootie & the Blowfish
10. I Just Can't Wait to Be King, The Lion King Soundtrack

I think a more useful bit of info is my most listened to tracks.  Here's the top ten according to Windows Media Player 9.  This does not take into account the play count for tracks listened to on my Nomad.  The play count is in parentheses.

1. The Plagues, Prince Of Egypt Soundtrack (85)
2. A Love Before Time [Mandarin], Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon Soundtrack (71)
3. A Love Before Time [English], Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon Soundtrack (70)
4. Once Upon a December, Liz Callaway, Anastasia Soundtrack (70)
5. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon Soundtrack (69)
6. Theme from Schindler's List, Schindler's List Soundtrack (68)
7. I Could Have Done More, Schindler's List Soundtrack (67)
8. Once Upon a December, Deana Carter, Anastasia Soundtrack (67)
9. Track 10, Back Brandenburg Concertos (64)
10. Track 9, Back Brandenburg Concertos (64)

The vile referral spammer is at it again.  Remember our chat last week, Mr. Kerry?  This voter still does not appreciate your disrespect for his property.  He's appalled that a “man for the people” will continue to engage in such marketing techniques.

I've read a fair amount these last few weeks on two issues - performance of same gender marriages in San Fransisco and Mel Gibson's new movie The Passion of Christ.  My intent here isn't to discuss either topic specifically, but rather to discuss some of the debate that is associated with them.

Based on my non lawyerly understanding of the subject, here's what happened in San Fransisco: in 2000, the majority of the citizens of the state of California voted in favor of not allowing same gender marriage.  The mayor of San Fransisco gave permission for same gender marriages to be performed.  Such marriages were performed.

I don't want to discuss whether such marriages should or should not be legal at this time.  What I'm alarmed about is the disrespect the mayor had for the law.  He brushed the law aside (and the votes of the majority of the citizens of the state of California) and consented to the granting of marriage licenses to same gender couples.  Whatever moral high ground he wants to claim for himself in defense of his action, I think he loses by not respecting and obeying the law.

Does our law not provide for people to voice their opinions?  Does it not allow for them to petition the government to address specific issues?  Does it not provide a court system to examine the legality of existing laws?  Does it not provide a means to elect a new government more favorable to one's personal views?  Yes, in every case, it does.

One of the duties of a citizen of this nation, especially of an elected official, is to uphold the law.  In many cases that means to uphold laws with which we, personally, do not agree.  One of the foundational pieces of doctrine of the church in which I am a member is this statement: We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.  (12th Article of Faith)  I do not support breaking the law.

I am appalled at the actions in San Fransisco for several reasons.  First, the mayor broke the law by permitting illegal actions to occur.  Second, justices of the peace and other government officials sanctioned the mayor's actions.  Third, citizens took advantage of a situation and themselves participated in breaking the law by being married.  I understand that the specific issue here is a very personal one.  However, I find it very hard to be persuaded to condone actions like this.  To me they are saying that their personal needs are more important than the laws of the state and country in which they live.

In conversations regarding the issue of gay marriage, several people have talked about legislating morality, pushing beliefs on people, and intimating that to not approve of [insert social issue here] implies hatred.

A few weeks ago, I blogged generally about a conversation I had with a close friend of mine.  One of the things we discussed was the set of events in San Fransisco.  He made the comment that it is impossible to not legislate morality and that all those who accuse the conservative right of such actions are themselves performing or advocating such actions.  Said a bit more plainly - if a religious man passes a law that outlaws adultery, he is legislating morality.  If another man passes a law legalizing adultery, he is also legislating morality.  One one side is restriction, on the other is the lack of restriction.  On both sides is a belief system codified into law.  If laws are passed that legalize same sex marriages, those laws legislate morality just as much as the Defense of Marriage Act legislates morality.

In like manner, many, who are in favor of defining marriage as a union of one man and one woman, are accused of pushing their beliefs on others.  Quite obviously, those who are in favor of defining marriage as the union of any two people are also pushing their beliefs on others.  There's an old saying “it takes two to tango.”  It applies here.  Both sides are pushing their beliefs on the other.  Both sides are trying to legislate morality.  There is nothing wrong with doing either.  That is what freedom of expression, democracy, and representative democracy are all about.  However, they are also about abiding by the laws that have been passed by that same process whether or not yours was the side that won.

The issue of “disagree with me implies you hate me (or the group I'm defending)” is very often just a bit of rhetorical hyperbole.  My personal stance on homosexuality is that it is wrong.  That said, I have more than one friend in the gay or bi community.  I try to practice the “love the sinner hate the sin” ideal.  I try to accept other people where they are and for who they are.  Accepting them doesn't imply that I sanction everything they do.  It also doesn't imply that I burn down their homes or beat them to a bloody pulp in the streets.

It is important to me to accept people for who they are for many reasons.  One of the main reasons is justice.  I am not a perfect person by any standard.  I quite often do not live up to the ideals in which I believe.  I'd rather not add hypocrisy to my list by pointing fingers at others, while I have many faults of my own.  That said, I do not expect (or even desire) that people accept my faults.  I hope they accept me for who I am and help me become better, but I do not hope they embrace my faults.

I lumped Mel's movie into this post, because of some of the criticism I've heard regarding his movie.  Many have accused him of being anti-semitic.  On that matter I say this - I believe there was a man named Jesus Christ who lived about 2,000 years ago, that many of the Jews of that time hated him and conspired to have him killed, and that the Romans of that time tortured and executed him.  None of those actions justify me in attacking anyone of Jewish or Roman descent.

Indeed, as a Christian, I should follow the instructions of Him in Whom I profess to believe and forgive those men of long ago.  I believe that Jesus sacrificed Himself as a result of His great love for all mankind.  Shouldn't I follow His example and do all I can to love them as well...even if it means loving those who harmed Him?  Yes.  Absolutely.  If I attack some poor Jew on the basis of the actions of his ancestors of 2000 years ago, I'm worse than those who conspired to kill Jesus, for I knew and promised to live the law of Christ, yet I reject it in my actions.  Once again, love the sinner hate the sin.

Since this is a personal blog, I quite naturally will talk about things that I've experienced and people that were involved in those experiences.  I've decided that if anything could be considered incriminating, I'll not post about it.  I won't name people unless they have web sites where they name themselves.  If they don't want to announce their existence to the Internet population, it's not my place to do so.  Finally, if people post using aliases, I won't reveal who they are or acknowledge that I know who they are.  Again, if they don't want to announce their existence to the Internet, it's not my place to do so.  I'm sure I'll slip up on this from time to time, but this is the standard I'm aiming for.

It's snowing again?!  The warm (relatively) weather of the last few days and the rain of today nearly removed all the winter's snow.  I suppose an hour or so ago, the sky decided the ground was ugly and decided to repaint in white.  I wish I had my snowblower working.

I started a new class today.  OK, the class really starts tomorrow (Thursday), but I began a day early.  It's a Java class.  I got the latest Java SDK (didn't that used to be called a JDK?) and also nabbed NetBeans.  In times past, I wrote pure Java using J++ 6 (contrary to Sun's claims it is very possible to not use the com.* classes and remain 100% pure), but I figured I'd try out Sun's IDE.

Wow.  If my NetBeans experience is any indicator, I can see very clearly why there are few client apps written in Java.  It feels just as slow to me as it did 5 years ago.  And the memory footprint?  100 MB!  100 MB so it could help me edit two text files.  Pathetic.  Needless to say, I'll write and test my apps for this class in J#, then compile them via command line to hand in.  Although J# only supports Java SDK 1.1.4, that is quite sufficient for my needs.  I suppose I didn't give NetBeans much of a chance, but it was far too clunky to deserve one.

In case you missed it, I added search funtionality to the blog earlier this morning.  It currently does single keyword searches of content on this blog.  When dasBlog 1.6 is finished, I understand that search word highlighting (a la Google searching), among other things, will be added.

For those of you using dasBlog 1.5, adding search to your blog is very easy.  Here is the macro you need - <%newtelligence.search()%>.  Just add that to your .template file and, poof, you'll have search.  Since dasBlog's info seems to live in three different places, the hard part about adding search, was finding the name of the macro.

Last July was insanely hot in Utah (about three weeks or so off 100+ degree temperature).  Air conditioning was great, but it didn't feel too efficient to me.  I decided on a different approach.  I hopped on eBay and bought trees.  25 trees.  OK, 15 trees (5 maple, 10 willow) and 10 shrubs (burning bushes).  The willows promised to grow very fast and get tall enough to shade my two story house.

On 26 December 2003, my trees were buried.  We got a foot and a half or so of snow that day.  During the next week, we got about that much again.  My poor trees have been buried for nearly two months.  Thankfully, the temperature is rising (last months average temperature was 22 degrees) and I can see my trees again.  I only hope the deep freeze didn't kill them.

From a typical February month perspective (28 days), my blog has been up and running for a month.  Here are a few tidbits I've learned during that time.

Almost nobody has heard of RSS, or ATOM, or news aggregators in general.  There are bloggers, who don't even know what these things are.  One of the many things that we as an industry need to work on is simplifying the adoption path of new technologies.  I'm not sure I have great ideas on how to do that, but I'm convinced of the need.  One helpful item, I think, would be to reduce the ridiculous format competition (for most people, is there really a need for whatever goodness ATOM supposedly offers?).  We take something already complex for non tech people and make it more complex.  Bad move, I think.

The Internet is as unreliable as ever.  Referral hits don't always mean someone is linking to you.  Email notifications don't always arrive.  Stats tracking software falls asleep sometimes.  Google's ranking algorithm is more fickle than a 2 year old deciding what to eat (or not eat, or throw on the floor, etc.) for dinner.

Most importantly, blogs allow me to communicate with many people.  According to my logs, I'm regularly read by folks from at least 10 different countries and at least two major software companies.  It is interesting to think that my voice is heard by so many (though very few compared to many other bloggers).

The Kerry campaign doesn't want the truth to be known.  They've spammed me, and when I bring it to their attention, they give me and give me more spam.  When I drop the spam on their doorstep, by posting on their forum, they delete the threads.  I see the respect they have for other people's opinions.  My account - GrrGrrGrr - is now subject to moderation.  All of my threads have been deleted, and I can only create new threads if they allow it.  The funny part is that, since I linked to my previous entry in the threads I created, I've received several hits.  At least some of the Kerry entries in my referral log will be legit now.

I'm annoyed.  A few days ago, Mr. Kerry sent his first bout of referral spam to me.  Today, he sent a bit more.  If he were reading my blog or linking to me, that'd be fine.  Spamming me, though, is not OK.

I visited his website, found the “Contact Us” link, and expressed my opinion of his tactics.  I stated they were not acceptable and that I'd never consider voting for him if he had no respect for me and my property (e.g. my domain and my weblog).

What was the result of that display of displeasure?  He spammed my email account!  Did I plan to vote for him?  I was considering it.  Will I vote for him, if he continues to push his message and himself on me against my will?  Not in a million years.

Mr. Kerry and anyone else who wants my vote or my business, respect my property, my time, my rights, and myself, or get no satisfaction, political or financial, from me.

A good friend of mine, Jeremy Young, is now engaged.  I wish you and Lauren all the best!

Thanks to Mario, I've discovered there's a newer version of dasBlog.  I just upgrade from 1.4 to 1.5.  Everything seems to be working correctly to me.  Please let me know, if you have any problems.

It seems that Whidbey beta 1 will be out in June. (courtesy Scott Guthrie on Chris Garty's blog)

intraVnews is not high on my like list today.  You see, I decided that rather than take up 200 MB of blog posts in the .pst file where my email, contacts, calendar, etc. reside, I'd make a special .pst just for blogs.  I moved the intraVnews folder from the mail .pst to the new “for blogs only” .pst, and all was well.  OK, all was well in appearance.  A few hours later, I realized I'd received no new blog posts.  I checked my feeds, and intraVnews couldn't find any of the folders for the feeds.  Ugh.

On further investigation, I discovered the problem.  Rather than store a path like \\blogs\intraVnews\Microsoft Employees\Dare Obasanjo\ (blogs is the name of my “for blogs only” .pst), it hardcodes the Outlook folder ID.  So, if you rename the folder, it's OK, because the only important thing is the ID.  If you move the folder (in the same .pst) all is OK, because of that folder ID.  If you move to a new .pst, then all bets are off and all feeding is stopped.

To solve the problem, I exported my OPML, unsubscribed from all my feeds, imported my OPML, and let the feeding begin.  Since all my state was lost, I had to manually reset that.  Also, since the OPML did not reflect the folder categories I had created (it reflects categories by wherever the feed's folder first lived, changes are not reflected in the OPML grr), I had to move folder around and do some renaming.

All in all, it is still a better experience than I had with SharpReader, but the a bit of brightness has worn off.  I should also mention that I tried NewsGator again, and it still doesn't behave the way I want it to for NNTP.  Until it can handle NNTP as well as Outlook Express, it isn't worth its price tag (since the free OE and intraVnews cover the same functionality).

It's amazing what you find on the Internet looking for something else.  Yesterday, I had a small dispute with my friend regarding the date of Kurt Cobain's death.  I claimed spring 1994 (April or May), and he claimed it was in the fall.  As soon as I remembered we had talked about that, I google'd a bit to find the date.  As it turns out, Kurt was found dead 8 April 1994.

That's what I was looking for.  What I wasn't looking for was the notes of a private investigator implicating Courtney Love in Kurt's murder.  I'm not sure what to think about his statements, and I find it very curious that the PI is selling his case file.  I know, though, that I'm sad once again thinking of Kurt's death.

He and I weren't exactly best buds.  I was just one of a few million other fans who had never met him but could feel like I knew him through his music.  It was an raw, emotional, eternal, eerie music.  I once thought I knew exactly how Kurt felt.  Probably not, since I didn't partake of any of his lifestyle (no grunge, no drugs, etc.), but I was just a dumb teen fan back then.  Still, he was one, whose music I could relate to as a teen.  I suppose, perhaps, thinking again about Kurt's death is like thinking again about John Lennon's death for those a generation or so older than I.

The last 24 hours or so have seen a good deal of conversation with me and a close friend.  We talked about all sorts of things, including but not limited to the role of the United States in Iraq, the meaning of liberty with respect to US citizens and non-US citizens, judicial review, gun control, and several religious topics and doctrines.  Oh, we also talked about the age of oceans, string / brane theory, and the birth of the universe.  In fact, it is for this reason (the lengthy discussions), that I didn't blog yesterday.

My point in saying all of this is that my friend is a very smart man and I'm glad he challenged my beliefs on several fronts.  Thanks to his willingness to share his ideas with me, many of which are contrary to my own, I have a lot to think about.

Korby points to an article by Steve Gillmor, which makes an unsupported, in my opinion, attack on the use of comments on blogs.  Gillmor says:

Take blog comments—please. The CTOs of the various campaigns defend their use as a simple user interface for casual involvement by newbies. But converting the undecided into active offline participation involves more than just the harvesting of good ideas. Comments destroy the signal to noise ratio of blog brands, trading the appearance of democratic participation for muddied messaging and vulnerability to comment spamming. (emphasis mine)

He has a point regarding comment spam, however, I think the good outweighs the bad.  If blogs are to be an interactive communications medium, then blogs for everyone (which is possible, of course, but doesn't occur in practice) or comments are required.  If I have knowledge that can expand upon what the author of a post has said but can't do so because comments are disabled, then part of the usefulness of that blog is now gone.  Not only can I not add to the author's content myself, but I can't learn from others who can add to the author's content (and neither can the author).

Some will say, and I understand that Dave Winer is one who says this, that everyone should just get their own blog and spout if they so desire.  That's a nice idea, but very impractical.  First, many who read blogs, don't want to write them (I fell into this category until just a few weeks ago).  Second, that's like trying to have a conversation with several people via email, where every email sent only goes to a portion of the recipients.  Each person in the group has a different idea of what is being said, which speaks volumes about the quality of this conversation.  To have a real conversation, you need to reduce, as much as possible, the obstacles.  Personally, I think that comments are a bit too removed.  Eliminating them altogether is a huge step backward from what blogs offer.

My problem with comments is this - if I am the author of the blog, the blog engine likely notifies me when comments are posted.  However, it won't notify those who left comments.  This makes ongoing conversation difficult.  It's not like a newsgroup, where many can post and every time you login, you see the new posts.  It's like (exactly like) non-RSS enabled websites.  The only way I know if there is new content is if I go back to the site (or if my aggregator supports commentRSS if I refresh the feed and return to the post to check for new comments).

In brief:

• Comments enable communication with the blog author.
• Comments enable fostering of a community of readers.
• Comments enable readers and the author to interact.
• The quality of this interaction is bounded by the lack of notification for non-author comments.

Rick Schaut wrote a list of rules for comments:

1. Be nice. The shrill voice that passes for public discourse these days is, to my sensitive ears, far more offensive than the content. I believe it’s possible to say anything you want to say, including providing critical feedback, without being a jerk. Name-calling, personal attacks and obscenities aren’t necessary for well-reasoned public discourse.
2. Stay on topic. Comments are not a forum by which you can express your opinions independent of the issues being discussed relative to a particular post. If you want a forum for expressing your own opinions, then start your own weblog.
3. Be concise. Comments are not the place for lengthy treatises. If you want to respond to a number of points that I raise in a particular article or post, then the right thing to do is set up your own weblog, and compose a response with the appropriate links.
4. Have fun. If reading my weblog leaves your blood boiling, if you don’t learn anything, if what I have to say doesn’t get you to think at all, then you should probably unsubscribe. Life is too short to not spend our time toward constructively positive ends.

I'm not quite sure why this post struck me as funny.  Perhaps because they ring so true?  Perhaps because I've been the aggressor more than once in an online forum?  Not sure which, but I'm glad I have a blog for my own expressions.

Korby paraphrases Dave Winer's visit to Microsoft early this week.

'If there was any doubt that the television media controls who gets elected President [of the US] before this year, there's certainly no doubt any more. It's pretty clear to people across the political spectrum that the television executives killed Howard Dean's chances of winning the Democratic nomination.' 

I very much disagree with this.  Considering how much press Dean had prior to his less than stellar performance in Iowa, one would think the media one the election for Dean.  I can't even count how many in the media essentially pronounced Dean the nominee if not the president months before the primaries and caucuses began.  After all, he had the most money, he was pioneering with technology, he had Gore's and others support.  Dean was a shoe-in.  Oh, but wait, that was just what the media was painting.  Nobody had asked the people what they wanted.  It's the people, who are speaking now, in my opinion, not the media.

Then again, perhaps if I had heard Dave's comments in context, I'd have a different opinion.

Korby Parnell has given me a few things to think about this week.

I wonder... how do you think democratizing technologies like blogs might someday manifest themselves in the television medium?  Can television (or radio for that matter) be “democratized“? Or is it an inherently command and control medium?  For instance, is it completely insane to imagine a world in which people create and consume personal TVBlogs?  Might I someday be able to switch from the MSNBC news feed to the Slate news feed to the Dave Winer news feed?  Is it completely inconceivable that I might someday receive popup-style alerts on my home television (ala Outlook 2003 or SharpReader.NET) that a friend has posted to her blog while I'm watching a sitcom on NBC or ESPN?

I think such a thing is very possible. TV is already being incorporated into PC usage via Media Center PCs (among others).  Benjamin J. J. Voight was talking about video blogging a few weeks ago.  I can easily see text, audio, and audio/video blogs in the future co-existing with “professional” articles, radio shows, and TV shows.  I could also see some RSS-like technology, perhaps attached to a Media Center PC or Tivo, allowing for easy subscription and aggregation of those unprofessional and professional works.

In the last few days, I've received two or three copies of any emails that were processed by my Outlook rules.  After not working too hard to solve the problem, I had a brilliant idea - restart Outlook.  Actually, I think I had already done that.  What I didn't do previously, though, was check Task Manager to see if any other Outlook processes were running.  Surprise, surprise, there were two outlook.exe processes running after Outlook had closed.  I killed those processes, reopened Outlook, and sent a test email that a rule would process (one which previously gen'ed 3 emails during previous tests).  Happily, I only received one copy.

My thought is that each process was processing incoming email and had access to the .pst.  When they got to the “move to folder“ part, I'm guessing they each deleted the object they had in memory (I'm guessing new email stays in memory and not on disk, until the rules have finished processing) and each created a new object in the appropriate folder.  It seems to me that my .pst should have been locked by one of the processes, but this is the best theory I have right now.  I'm hopeful that I won't see this annoyance again, and leave the hardcore debugging of the situation to the Outlook team should they ever see this problem in their labs.

Someone recently asked me how to break into the IT industry.  Meaning, how do you get started?  I answered:

I think the most important thing to do is develop (and nurture) an insatiable love for knowledge in your field of choice.  That is what will get you in many doors, will put you in contact with people who can teach you and who can hire you, and will get you to the point where you are worth hiring/training/etc.  I'd never hire someone with a passing interest in coding.  I have hired people with aptitude and desire, but with little experience.

Another person asked me how I got started.  I answered along these lines:

neowin supposedly reported this, but they are down at present.  Yikes.

Update: CNet has a little bit more info.

Update: Betanews also has some things to say.

Last update:  Washington Post (thank n4cer for the link) says it's the real deal.  It's only partial, but this is still a very sad thing.

On Tuesday, I installed what every patches Windows Update was handing out.  On Wednesday, every email I received that was processed by one of my Outlook rules, came in threes.  That is, I received three of the same email.  I'm not sure if this new behavior is related to any Tuesday patching.  Since this behavior doesn't seem to occur at the mail server and I didn't make any other modifications (that I can remember) to my system, I'm looking at the patching as a prime candidate.  Has anyone else seen this or know how I can stop it from happening?

A few other thoughts - a few times I've only received 2 instead of 3 copies of each email.  Also, I wonder if intraVnews has anything to do with it.  Other than my virus scanner, it's the only Outlook addin that I have.

I've had a few biting smart application experiences lately.  About a week ago, I was editing some .acx files in FrontPage.  Why FrontPage and not Visual Studio, you ask?  I don't really have a good answer for that.  It was a convenience thing.  VS takes forever and a day to get itself back in physical RAM after my laptop has hibernated.  FrontPage comes up much, much faster.  Since I was doing some non code edits (CSS and HTML stuff) and some site maintenance stuff (deleting orphaned files, backing up the site, etc.), I used FP due to its lower memory overhead.  Hmm, looks like I had a good reason after all.

Anyway...the non blog portion of lparky.com is composed of a few user controls to construct the header, footer, menu, meta info, include the style sheet, etc.  At least three of the controls have broken tags (the open or close but not both).  Well, FP decided it wanted to be uber helpful, and it generated the missing tag part for me.  This resulted in less than satisfactory HTML (my HTML was well formed).  Despite telling it in no uncertain terms that I knew what I was doing, it insisted on “helping” me.  Finally, I opened them as plain text, and FP left them alone.

I had a similar experience yesterday sending previews of HTML email to one of my clients.  I've not yet figured out how to directly edit the HTML source of an outbound email from Outlook (if it is possible, please let me know how), so I used Outlook Express.  (In retrospect, it would have been easier to just write a script to send them, but I didn't realize that OE was going to “help” me so much.)  I copied the full HTML into the email and sent it.  I unhappily discovered that OE wanted to be as helpful as FP.  It removed a few quotation marks, added a few tags (my HTML was well formed), it butchered my spacing, etc.  I was less than pleased.  Finally, I sent my client links, so he could view the emails online instead.

These are issues that don't do a lot of damage, but they waste time.  They take control over my content.  Microsoft Office XP started in the right direction with Smart Tags (do you want to turn off this behavior?).  Options like these (I've just changed this for you...do you want me to keep doing that, or what you rather I leave you alone?) need to be more prevalent.

Joshua Allen and Dare Obasanjo are discussing metacrap.  I think the scenarios Joshua mentioned are, at present, very unlikely, and I don't see much reason (he surely has not given any) to expect things will be much different in the future.

First - people need to have information capturing devices / applications.  Second, those devices / applications have to capture good metadata (time, date, position, etc.).  Third, that information needs to be related to the other data of the user.  Fourth that data needs to be associated with the data of other users.

I think it is a huge leap to even say that a large number of people will get to the first step.  I'm a relatively gadget getting geek, but I don't have a digicam yet.  I use Outlook, my cell, and my PDA like nobody's business, but those don't share data too well.  Yes, there are models that reasonably well, but mine are dumber models.  So, the first step is a huge leap...people need to have smart devices and applications.

The second is also a huge leap.  Many people have cell phones, but how many have smart phones?  How many cell phones will willingly share useage data, address books, call timers, etc. with others .  Even smart phones, so far as I'm aware, will only do address book syncing.

Presupposing that the first and second steps are met, we can depend on the holy grail of Longhorn's WinFS to automatically create relationships between the data (and metadata?) points.  Step four, well, I don't know of plans regarding this.  I suppose p2p networks are a good foundation...so, we'd have secure (?) personal data sharing via p2p networks?

I'm not sure that I buy any of this as close to feasible or conceivable in the next few years.

Dreams.  Lately, my dreams have been intense.  I don't remember what they've been about, but I remember the feelings I have.  They are the type that one would experience in severe tests of character, or tests of endurance, or tests of ability.  It's as if, even in my sleep, I can't escape the obligations of my waking life.

Stress.  I decided almost a decade ago that I wouldn't have stress.  I was an all honors or AP student and was surrounded by grade mongering “I'm going to the Ivy League!” fellow all honors or AP students.  I decided that there was more to life than where I went to college, and there was far more to life than whatever grade I happened to get in economics.  It's final.  No stress for me.

That worked for a few months, perhaps even a few years, but life is different now.  There's a driving “you need to be more than you are now” feeling in me.  I need to be a better programmer.  I need to be a better financial planner.  I need to be better elder.  I need to be a better brother.  I need to be a better friend.  I need to finish my degree with a 4.0.  (Those are listed in no particular order, by the way.)

I haven't discovered a resolution strategy or even a mitigation strategy for this drive that satisfies.  The issue isn't stagnation.  I'm anything but stagnant.  I'm constantly improving my skills as a programmer.  I'm constantly seeking ways to improve my financial position.  I'm constantly seeking to improve my relationship with God.  I suppose it is best to leave judgment on where I stand on the friend and brother question to those to whom I am friend and brother.  As for the degree, it's a 4.0 now, and I don't see that diminishing.

A few years back, I produced one satisfying financial stress mitigation strategy - I was eating six months ago, I'm eating today, and I'll be eating six months from now.  Whether I own one house, two houses, or live in an apartment, I'll still be OK.  I'm in a state of OK'ness now, and in the future I'll be at least as OK as I am now.  Breathe.  OK, now, get back to work and stop worrying.

Distractions.  Distractions are probably my best mitigation strategy thus far.  For instance, I just wrote a somewhat difficult email to a close friend of mine.  Rather than fully grok the situation, which I'm not prepared to do right now, I blare some Russian pop music to provide a distraction and proceed to write as much as I can at present.

Another for instance is this blog.  Rather than consider how far away I am from the large number of people I consider close friends, I've created a distraction...my blog.  It enables me to feel, to some degree, that I'm keeping up my end of the friendship with respect to communication, and it gives my mind something to do other than think about the distance between me and my many friends scattered all over the world.

The blog, of course, has other advantages.  If I can manage to distract myself from introspection, I'll post about the technical issues I meet as a .NET developer.  Eventually, I expect to be drawn into the mix of the better known tech bloggers, thus increasing my ability to learn from them.  This will directly affect my “become a better programmer” and “become a better financial planner” stresses.

It's interesting that the introspective me, which is probably what I'd prefer to expose to my friends is in opposition to the technical me, which I'd probably prefer to expose to the Internet in general.  Thus, these two blog focuses are distractions to each other.  I expect that they will both aid me in succeeding in the other by not letting me focus on it too much.  Lol, that's quite a paradox.

There are times when I think I know myself pretty well.  One of those times was last week, when I played an honor game.  By stating that I'd blog about dreams, distractions, and stress, I obligated myself to do it.  I try to be a man of honor, so, now that I've made that statement, it's very likely that I'll actually write those entries.

This honor game is one of several motivational games I play.  I find that external factors don't always appear when I need them, so sometimes I have to create my own.  Yes, I certainly could just go and write the entires, mow the lawn, prune the trees, etc.  However, I acknowledge that I'm often less than desirous to engage in such activities.  As a result, I must exploit my strengths to overcome my weaknesses.

OK, I feel like Doogie Houser.  He always wrote little cryptic explanations of whatever he learned on the show that week.  My last entry reminds me entirely too much of Doogie style blogging.  (I think Doogie predates even Dave Winer in the blogosphere.)

I thought I'd go a bit transparent with this blog.  It seems that my attempt at transparency obviously needs a bit more work.  No, that doesn't mean I plan to clarify my previous entry.  The entry is certainly true in it's own right, and I think I'll leave it at that.

Anyway, sorry about that Doogie moment.  I'm sure I'll have a few more, but I'll work on phasing them out.

I used to think that I didn't have a conscience.  Perhaps it is because I almost never did anything wrong as a kid.  Perhaps it is because I did so much that was wrong that I was numb to guilt.  At any rate, recent experience seems to be telling me that my conscience is alive and well.  Notwithstanding discomfort from time to time, I'm happy about this.

Yes, the title of this entry is (untitled).

For the first time since I started reading blogs back in October, I'm current.  I've learned about a wide range of topics and met some interesting people.  My current blog count is 153, and I think I'll keep it around this number.

While thinking of patriotism, I'm drawn to a somewhat similar concept...nationalism.  I hate nationalism.  I hate it.  In my mind, it is at least as vile as any other stereotype or prejudice.  It's worse than anti-semitism, racism, or religious persecution, simply because it typically excludes more people than any of those.

I define nationalism as “my country is better than yours.”  Even when my country is clearly doing something wrong, my country is still better than yours!  It justifies current bad deeds based on good deeds long past (we helped the French 50 years ago, so they should bow to our will now).  It blinds our minds to the virtues of others and the faults in ourselves.  It is an insidious evil that poisons our reasoning, our political view points, and our ability to be true patriots.

I define patriotism as doing what is right irrespective of circumstance.  A patriot will sacrifice for the greater good (a father for his family, a soldier for his country).  A patriot is an enemy of tyranny and a friend of freedom.  He doesn't lend his good name to support evil causes.  He does lend his hand to help those who accept his help no matter their citizenship.

I think this is just what Gordon B. Hinckley meant when he said, “I think there are many good people everywhere. And our appeal is to those people. We don’t down grade any Church. We don’t speak disparagingly of any Church. We simply say to people of other Churches, bring all the good that you have and come and let us see if they if we can add to it. Now that’s all there is to it.”  (see http://www.abc.net.au/compass/intervs/hinckley.htm)  A patriot, religious or otherwise, simply says, let me see if I can help you.  Teach me what you know, and I'll teach you what I know.  A nationalist (I'm from the US, therefore I'm the best.  I'm from Texas, therefore, I'm the best.  I'm white, therefore, I'm the best...) is too proud to admit that he can learn from anyone.

Today, I watched President Bush on Meet the Press.  I have conflicting feelings now.  Last March, I was annoyed with those who openly attacked and demonstrated against the war even while our brothers, sons, fathers, sisters, and daughters were being attacked.  Even if the war was unjust, I reasoned, I should support my family.  The head of my family might be wrong, but I shouldn't abandon the rest of them for his mistakes.

I find it harder and harder to maintain that point of view.  I find it harder and harder to not speak against a president, who I feel has betrayed me.  What I wonder is this - how is the country best served?  By venomous words?  By turning a blind eye and saying nothing?  By quietly going about my business believing in what's right even as my president leads my country to do that which is wrong?

I'm a fan of truth and a fan of honor.  I defend my position vigorously, but I try to always adapt my position, if I discover it is flawed.  I think that criticism for the sake of criticism is not worth much, but criticism for the sake of helping and making better is a good thing.  I could argue that venom spat at a vile leader could be considered constructive if the leader died and were replaced by one better.  I'm not sure that I could swallow my own argument though.  If I couldn't swallow that, which I'd consider to be an extreme case, can I swallow it in a lesser case?

So again, what do the patriots do to right the wrongs of their country?

Infragistics has released their latest component suite.  I started using NetAdvantage about a year ago (2003 vol. 1).  In fact, the menu on this site (well, all of this site, but the blog) is an UltraWebListBar.

It seems that for all the talk of xcopy deployment of ASP.NET applications, I always have to do a good deal of tweaking.  Take this for example -

I wrote a relatively small app in pseudo n-Tier fashion.  I deployed it on an intra net.  I made modifications on a test server.  I uploaded them to the intranet server.  Suddenly, everything was broken.  I'll have to remember the errors I get (nice big, breaking errors!) some other time.  Here are the steps I always seem to have to perform to deploy a new version of an existing ASP.NET app -

1. Remove the vdir as a registered application in IIS.
2. Kill the ASP.NET worker process.
3. Delete the former app's directory in Temporary ASP.NET Files.
4. Copy the new site over, replacing any existing content (.dlls, .aspxs, etc.)
5. Reset permissions on the directory.
6. Recreate the vdir as an application in IIS.

It seems that if I don't do all of these things, the requests bind to the old version of the site (which is why I delete the content in Temp ASP.NET Files, and to delete them, you have to remove IIS's lock) or something similar.  These are problems I never had in the world of ASP (other than when using custom COM components).

In the world of ASP, I'd simply copy the new pages and all would be well with the world.  This has me thinking that I might abandon the code-behind style of coding ASP.NET sites, so that I can have real xcopy deployment again.  I can still have custom .NET components (just not the site itself).  The only troubling thing, that I can see, is the lack of IntelliSense in Visual Studio.  I'm coming very close to thinking that it is worth giving that up (which, of course, won't be an issue in Whidbey), so that I can decrease my deployment time.

Really, I was.  About 10 years ago, I thought I was T.S. Elliott.  Well, actually, I was Elliott about nine years ago.  About 10 years ago I was, um, well, I was in search of an expressive outlet.  I did a little prose and I did a little poetry.  All total, I think I wrote 20-30 poems and 3-4 decent prose pieces.  (No, I won't post my works, but if you somehow find them, you'll learn another reason that I feel some sort of connection to Em's lyrics.)

I never quite fancied myself as a writer, but I did consider myself one with many ideas.  I tried several styles - ultimately favoring imagistic.  I was a teenager in search of a means for expression.  (Here's a little known fact - I even did contemporary dance, arguably, for a short time.  And, no, I won't admit that if you see me outside of my blog.)  The problem with most of what I wrote, not surprisingly, was that nobody understood what I was writing.

One of my friends of that time, a fellow AP English student, gave me a bit of literary critique in my senior year book.  (Forgive me for not getting your permission, Keith, but I can't seem to find you.)  He said:

Concerning your poetry (which I believe you intend to continue), I think you have an amazing ability to manipulate diction, syntax, etc.  However, I think you must avoid making it too much of a personal thing.  Art is an expression of yourself, but it will never have an impact on others if you hide behind personal expressions/feelings.  It must be made more universal so you don't alienate your readers.  I'm sorry to critique your poetry in a high school year book, but I assume that you appreciate something intelligent and of worth in here.

Oddly enough, about one month after he wrote that, I stopped writing.  Well, I stopped writing the type of stuff I wrote before.  I decided that my path in life was not professional writing.  I figured that whatever I wrote in the future would be a personal thing and not part of my career.

Almost a decade later, I look back and wonder whether my writing style has changed at all.  I can't seem to write a poem to save my life now.  I write little prose pieces (even if they are just blog entries or newsgroup posts) all the time though.  Keith's question still remains in my mind ...is my writing merely a private cathartic outlet, or do others benefit from my words?  (For the record, that's not a lure for comments.)

I'll add a post about Keith some later time.

When I wrote “Rules of Engagement” a few days ago, this is the type of thing I was looking for.  I think the only one with which I take issue is - Write Tight.  I, um, don't optimize my writing.  If I'm in the mood, I'll proof for grammar, punctuation, and spelling.  I typically don't go to the trouble of doing short and sweet.  I don't take issue with Relax, but I don't think it's too likely that I'll do it.  Speaking of relaxing, I need to write about stress.

I guess I don't miss it too much.  I can't even remember what it was called.  I think it was Musli, actually.  I'm sure Jake, errrr, Jack will correct me on that. 

Anyway, I miss it.  I just had a pleasant bowl of Cap'n Crunch, and it was OK, but I'd love to have the crunchy, chocolaty, so German but in the middle of Moscow Muesli.  (The thing that I'm trying to describe is like a granola cereal with chocolate chips.  It was very good and I ate it quite often toward the end of my mission.)  Mmmmm.

Cereal aside, I was thinking of posting about dreams, distractions, and stress in the near future.  Look forward to them in the next few days.

If I ever find myself cursing the C# compiler for doing something I don't like, I need to remember this moment.  Whatever quirkiness C# has, it has nothing in C.  I'll quite whining now and get some more useful blog posts up a bit later.  I just realized that I haven't had breakfast (Yes, I know it's 7pm and I've been up for like 12 hours...I was busy.)

Thanks Dare for this link to President Match.  I had the unfortunate experience of discovering, according to the site, that I'm 100% aligned with George.  Ugh.  I'm sure there's a bug.  Here's a bug - I want the Patriot Act repealed.  He wants it to be in force perpetually.

Could it be that as much as I have no desire at all to vote for George, than none of the other candidates have what I'm looking for either?  That's a very unpleasant thought.

Back in the day, I used to be quite a “music affects your mood” kind of guy.  I think I still believe that a lot.  The question for me is this - how exactly does it affect my mood?

For the last few months, I've been listening to a hefty amount of random classics - Brahms, Beethoven, Bach, Tchaikovsky, etc.  I even scaled back on Collective Soul, because it was too hard.  Hmm.

Well, today was one of those try my patience days.  I didn't do too well.  I found myself getting less than happy about silly little things.  Finally, I decided I'd had it with Enya.  Her soothing Watermark clearly wasn't soothing my mind.  What replaced her?

Eminem.  Perhaps it's one of those projection defense mechanism things.  By the time I got to “When I was just a little baby boy, my momma used to tell me these crazy things...” (Kill You on Marshall Mathers LP), I was nice and calm and making (hopefully) two of my clients happy.

Em and I have a curious relationship.  I don't like a lot of what he says.  I don't like the fact that I listen to him.  I do, though, like that fact that I'm much less angry when I listen to him.  I just don't get it.  How does one of the angriest men in the pop music world calm me down?

I'm learning (or forcing myself to accept) that I can learn things from even the most unlikely of places.  Going through horribly written code, I can still learn a function or two that I've never seen before.

Pinging Weblogs.com failed: Thanks for the ping, however we can only accept one ping every half-hour. It's cool that you're updating so often, however, if I may be so bold as to offer some advice -- take a break, you'll enjoy life more.

You may not be so bold!  Besides, I was over half an hour by 13 seconds.

I've been thinking a lot about interviewing lately.  I've been interviewed and I've been the interviewer as well.  Here's my take on it.  (I should also add that when I was the interviewer, I was employed by small companies.)

When I interview someone, I've never been too interested in any of the material things (tie color, shoes, etc.).  In fact, I only remember that the interviewee is not outlandish in appearance.  What interests me is the conversation.

I ask about what they know.  I ask how to apply things they know.  If they don't know something, I explain a concept and ask where it would apply and why or why not.  My goal is to gauge aptitude.

I always browse over resumes, but I never pay them too much attention to them.  Resumes can be made to say almost anything.  The most important thing for me is what a person knows and is capable of knowing, not how well they can express that in a resume.  I'd prefer to not have to be so formal about an interview, but if I've never met the person before, I don't have much choice.

I think it's been three years since I was last interviewed.  I think I had that job wrapped up before I walked in the door though.  My future employer found me at a conference Microsoft held in Salt Lake.  During Q&A, I argued with the presenter over the capabilities of ASP.NET server controls.  He said, you can't do that, and I said, yes, you can, I've done it.

He and I faced off again over whether Windows 2000 was truly a .NET Enterprise Server.  I argued that it couldn't be, since it was released in February, and .NET wasn't announced until June.  Whatever Microsoft said on the matter, throwing Windows 2000 in the mix just didn't make sense.  As I recall, the audience supported my answer (the question was to name all the .NET Enterprise Servers), so I got the copy of Office 2000 Premium anyway.

As soon as the conference was over, this stranger (my future employer) came up to me and asked for my name and number.  We talked for a little bit about web development.  I think due to the Q&A of the conference and this five minute “interview,” he decided to hire me.

As I think about being interviewed again, I wonder how I want to present myself.  I think that I want my employer to know what I can do and to know who I am.  If I'm not a good match for the company or the company isn't a good match for me, it makes little sense for us to hook up.  Rather than play what I consider silly resume or interview games, I'd much rather be straightforward about it.  I'd rather my future employers read my blog and get inside my head a little to know if I'm what they are looking for.  (Perhaps that means I should talk a bit more about the kinds of projects I've worked on.)  If I'm not, then all the resume and interview skills in the world shouldn't land me the job.

One of my favorite bloggers, Rob Mensching, broke his vow of silence today.  He writes some good technical stuff, if you're into understanding the innards of MSI.  If not, his personal writing is very good too.  Thanks for sharing yourself with us, Rob.

I see that KC also reads Rob.

I misspelled the codename of the next version of the .NET Framework.  It's “Whidbey” not “Whidby.”  I'm sorry if I led anyone astray with my ignorance.

I doubt you or anyone else in your family is reading my blog yet, but, oh well.  Everyone...let's give a big Potato Man cheer for Andrew Borrowman!

To read a blog.  To blog.  To be a blogger.  Don't bug me, I'm blogging!

A year ago, I thought that blog (short for web log) was something that web server software generated...a text file of HTTP requests.  I thought the word was rather silly, but now I use it in my everyday speech.  Hmm.

Another word “grok” has wandered into my reading lately.  I think this is a foolish word too.  Why not just say “mull over,” “think over,” “think about,” or “ponder” ?  I wonder if I'll grok my acceptance of the word “grok” a year from now.

I just started a search.  I set it up very nicely in advanced options.  I then decided that I need to look through “Any type of Outlook item.”  annoyingly, Outlook decided it needed to reset all my other search parameters.  That's down right not user friendly of it!

I just did a full system virus scan (102, 222 files).  Not surprisingly, none were infected.  I live behind a hardware firewall in my router and a software firewall on my laptop.  I use Automatic Update for Windows XP to keep me patched.  My anti-virus software auto updates itself as well.  So, I have to do almost nothing to stay pretty well patched and secured.

Additionally, though, I don't open things that look odd.  If I get an email that (especially with attachments that get through my Outlook security) that I'm not expecting, I hope over to Symantec's web site to see if the subject line or filename matches a new worm.  So far, I've never been infected.  I've also never fallen prey to a hoax (delete the Java debugger, because it's some evil spyware/malware app!).

I suppose I'm more tech savvy that many, so this isn't too surprising.  Not to be too arrogant, let me say that most people I know in the tech industry are far more tech savvy than I.  Still, even on the low end of tech savvyness (I wonder if I can use “savvy” a few more times in this post), there are a good number of people who just don't have a clue.

CNet asks what more can be done about it.  Here's an idea...remove the problem from those who don't have a clue to those who do have a clue.  Is it easier for a few hundred million users to update their AV software or for ten million trained admins to update the AV software on their public servers?  If every public SMTP node on the Internet had current AV software, how would an email borne worm like MyDoom spread?  That's right, it couldn't.

This wouldn't address the issues with Slammer or Blaster, but it would have prevented Melissa, ILOVEYOU, SoBig, MyDoom, and many others from spreading.  I'm appalled that so much focus is on educating the non tech masses and so little is on educating the “educated” admins.  To make it a little easier on the admins, Exchange, SameTime, sendmail, and any other widely used mail server should bundle in self-updating AV software.  It's the least you can do for your customers.  It's the least you can do for yourself.

I have a few thoughts on port worms like Slammer and Blaster, but I'll save them for another day.

What I'm wondering is this - am I off base here or are a good number of admins really as lazy (or cash strapped to buy/install/update AV software) as I think they are?

I've read several blogs in the last few days about posting using Word or OneNote.  I tried w.bloggar and Zempt last week.  In the end, I've decided to stick with the web based dasBlog entry editor.  At some point I'll probably check out Word or OneNote and do the email to blog.  My reservation with this is the typically horrid HTML that Word generates.

I only have three items tagged for follow-up in Outlook right now. 

I'm first on Google for the moment. 

Click on the image to enlarge.

That almost sounds like one of Shinji's lines from Neon Genesis Evangelion.  It's not though.

I blogged yesterday about losing all my read blog state.  Well, for the last little bit I've been trying to reclaim that state.  This involves going through the 100+ blogs I read and marking read what I've already read.  Long story short (too late!), I came across an entry from Brian Loomis, to which someone had responded thusly:

Considering the number of poorly written and researched articles in popular tech magazines and sites, I don't see that they have anything on blogging. I've seen far more accurate information on Microsoft products from Microsoft bloggers than I have seen from CNet, eWeek, etc.

I thought, yeah, I agree!  Well, of course, I agree.  BobSmith (that's me) wrote it.  I'm glad to see I agree with myself.

No offense, but I'm not looking to learn about scandals, pr0n sites, or how to free Cuba.  However, such sites are appearing in my referrer log.  Perhaps those who want to free Cuba also want to read my blog?  Yeah, I don't think so either.

So, here's the problem:  my referrer log is full of sites that don't have links to my blog.  How then, do those site appear in my log?  Is there some browser bug munging the referrerUrl in the HTTP request?  Is someone practicing some bizarre spoofing technique, so I won't discover where they are coming from?  Is there a DNS snafu somewhere?  I'm at a loss on this one.

Any ideas?

I am a bit surprised by this.  lparky.com came online in March.  I've been involved with other stuff, so I haven't done all too much with it.  Still, it managed to get visitors...and I don't mean friends of mine, whom I persuaded to check it out.

Here are the unique visitor stats from the last few months:

For the last few months, I some incredible growth (measured by percentages).  Most of January's numbers come from hits to the blog.  Wow.

While I'm thinking about it, is there anything specific that the readers would like to hear about?

This gave me a laugh.  In the first few days, I'd edit an entry several times.  Now though, I only do corrections for formatting or link errors.  I'm generally good about grammar and spelling too, but when blogging, it just doesn't seem as important.  Blogging is more of a stream of consciousness thing than a well thought out thesis.

Yesterday, I switched to intraVnews.  Today, I read Harry Pierson's blog about switching to intraVnews.  I thought I'd repost here the comment I just left there.

Here's how I solved the new blog entries vs. new email issue.

1. Right click on "Unread Mail" and select "Customize this Search Folder"
2. Click Browse.
3. Clear all check marks, then check Inbox.
4. Now, the "Unread Mail" search folder will only contain mail items and not blog posts.

To create a folder for blog posts...

1. Right click on Search Folders.
2. Select New Search Folder.
3. Select Unread mail.  (by default, it will search for mail in Personal Folders, we'll fix that in a sec)
4. Click OK.  (Outlook will create the folder and start running the query.)
5. Now, right click on the newly created search folder, probably called "Unread Mail1"
6. Select "Customize this Search Folder"
7. Click Browse.
8. Uncheck Personal Folders.
9. Check intraVnews.
10. Click OK
11. You can then name this something like "Unread Blogs"

Now your email and blogs are completely separate.