I initially posted this blog last year. In light of last nights perfect game robbing error, thought reposting it would be timely.
A reminder why instant replay is bad for baseball
Posted by Adam Fischer on June 3rd, 2010 | No Comments »
Filed under Uncategorized
Culture of Death
Posted by Adam Fischer on May 16th, 2010 | No Comments »
I’ve been reading The Difference God Makes by Francis Cardinal George. It’s a fantastic read. If you don’t have it pick it up, pronto. In it he references John Paul II’s Evangelium vitae extensively in the first two chapters (as that’s all I’ve been through). JPII talks about the “Culture of Death” that permeates much of society, including the US.
While I’ve heard of this reference before, Cardinal George really does a great job of drawing it out and it ended up helping me put words to observations I’ve had myself. Specifically, how much of what we see on television is about violence, murder, and death. So I did a little research and went through the primetime lineups of the Big 3 broadcast networks (ABC,CBS,NBC).
All told they program 45 hours of primetime Monday through Friday. I ended up looking at all of their primetime programming and looked at programs where murder was at the heart of the plotline for the show. For this research I actually looked at the plot synopsis for the show as listed in the directv.com channel guide. These results also include 20/20 and Dateline, as those two shows were planning on shows about murder.
All told 31% of all primetime broadcasts (14 hours) deal with murder. If you make death a broad term and add in medical dramas which often deal with patients dying, that number goes to 35% (16 hours).
If you single out the 9pm CST hour, where 15 hours of “dramatic” programming is found that number jumps to 40% (6 hours) For 9pm the percentage is 53% when factoring in medical dramas (8 hours).
Don’t forget these numbers don’t include shows that deal with other extremely violent situations such as rape (there were two other hours of Law and Order and an episode of Medium that dealt with rape). When you start to add those shows in over half of what you see on the big 3 in primetime deals with extreme criminal violence and murder. Those numbers are incredibly eye opening.
In defense of Apple on Flash
Posted by Adam Fischer on May 16th, 2010 | No Comments »
I feel like Apple has taken a beating in the blogosphere over their lack of inclusion of Flash in their iPhone OS (iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch). I’m here to defend their decision.
There is a certain tone and tenor to most blog posts who are against Apple’s decisions. They seem to all say some of the same things. There seems to be two crowds here. The “flash is ubiquitous, therefore you should support it” crowd. And there’s the “Apple has no right to control what goes on my device” crowd . Here’s my response to both crowds.
Having been a Mac OSX user for over two years right now I can tell you, flat out, Flash on Mac OSX is terrible. Patently, patently terrible. It’s a resource hog. It’s a powerhog on my MacBook. And it’s buggy as all get out. And I experience this on high quality, high viewership sites.
Flash is ubiquitous, you say. I need it on my (fill in Apple OS device here)! True, flash is ubiquitous. But why? The fact is one large need for Flash can really be traced back to IE’s dominance in the late 90′s and early 00′s. Internet Explorer set the web back many, many years. IE was slow to adopt new standards, and the ones they did adopt were often implemented poorly. However, Flash also did fill holes that web standards didn’t really have the capability to implement. Among them are: Site animations and interactivity, web video, and Flash specific applications, be they games, uploaders, etc. HTML 5 and Javascript (including open source JS libraries like JQuery, JQueryUI et al) are allowing developers to easily add slick animations, transitions, and awesome functionality to their UI’s without using Flash. HTML 5 also now has really slick support for video and audio. And, as far as Web “applications” are concerned, well on mobile devices native App’s are boss, leaving that last segment unnecessary for someone like Apple and the iPhone OS. All told Apple’s bet on HTML5 and JavaScript to provide the functionality and user interfaces that users have come to expect is smart, savvy, and feeds right into their “just works” mantra. Apple customers have come to expect to be able to open up their browser and watch a web video. When Flash underwhelms on Mac OSX the general public doesn’t say “man, Flash really sucks on Mac” they say “My Apple computer doesn’t allow me to watch web videos.”
There are very real growing pains however. Right now for Apple, the Flash problem is a real problem. It’s going to take a while for the general public to update their browsers to HTML 5 browsers, and even those browsers that do fall into that category, their support still isn’t where it can, and needs to be. So while the first, second, and maybe even third generation of (say) the iPad will experience some severe growing pains, Apple betting on open standards is definitely understandable and an incredibly smart bet. Not only for the end user, who will have an experience based on open standards, but for a developer as well. The fact is, it’s not cheap developing in Flash. It costs anywhere between $500 and $2000 to own all the Adobe software you need to properly develop in Flash (note I said properly. Yes there are other IDE’s out there, but they’re nowhere near Adobe’s). Everytime the IDE changes, and a new CS release happens, you have to re-up on that investment. For those who want to develop using open standards, that cost is zero. Zilch. Nadda. It costs NOTHING for developers to program using open standards. But developers experience growing pains too. Sure, they can go HTML5 and JS but, what happens when 70% of their site’s traffic is using IE6? Or FF2? Flash, for now, does provide great cross-platform convenience, but how long should this go on? In Apple’s mind, the time is now. And oh, they’re carrying an installed base of 70 million users. So those worrying about market share, well Apple is already making a convincing case there.
Of course there’s that other crowd. That crowd that screams “Apple shouldn’t have control over my body device! I should get to choose!” Well, Apple DOES have control over your device, period. And in doing so, it’s a consumer friendly and smart move. They want their devices TO WORK. Again, Apple lives by the mantra “It just works.” Let’s be clear here friends, Adobe has yet to ship a clear, good, and reasonable full mobile version of Flash. Apple already sees the miserable performance of Flash on Mac OSX and they’re simply saying “No, our consumer laptops and desktops can handle this, but our mobile devices can’t.” And I think it’s absolutely the right move. It’s annoying when Flash causes a browser crash in OSX, it’s going to be downright maddening when it brings down your entire phone OS. Ultimately no one is FORCING you to buy an Apple iPhone. Or an iPad. Or an iPod Touch. If you don’t like Apple’s decision, then let your money do the talking. But don’t claim this is about openness, because it’s simply smoke and mirrors. Web standards are open, paying a company hundreds of dollars to develop on their platform every 3 years IS NOT OPEN. Period. Apple is not saying “we don’t want users to view web videos on our device” That would be closed. They’re saying “when a user views a web video on our device, we want it to be a seamless customer experience”
And you know what, Apple has every right to do that. As designer, developer, and producer of the hardware they’re well within their creative right to decide what can get baked into their OS. They also have the market and intellectual capital to make this decision as well. Let’s face it, I think most people in the blogospehere have a short term memory what cell phones were like before the iPhone revolution. Do you remember trying to get on the internet via your phone? No? You couldn’t? Well do you at least remember what it was like to do simple tasks, like syncing your contacts to your computer? Couldn’t do that either?
The fact is Apple was the first one to do mobile browsing correctly. I trust that that is what guides this decision, and I fully support it. Deal with the growing pains now, and the mobile web will be better for it.
Filed under Apple, Technology
Breaking down Nicholas Kristof’s NYT Op Ed
Posted by Adam Fischer on May 2nd, 2010 | No Comments »
I recently got into a debate about Nicholas Kristof’s Sunday NYT Op Ed about the Church. There was some Catholic people who I greatly respect who happened to agree with him and see nothing wrong with his piece. I, however, found it deeply offensive and smug. So I figured I would break it down and really analyze what he wrote. I’ll have a counter-point soon, but wanted to do the groundwork a bit first.
Below are passages that I really just think are all out offensive (emphasis mine):
Maybe the Catholic Church should be turned upside down.
Jesus wasn’t known for pontificating from palaces, covering up scandals, or issuing Paleolithic edicts on social issues. Does anyone think he would have protected clergymen who raped children?
Pretty self-explanatory as to why this is pretty offensive.
….notable not for the grandeur of their vestments but for the grandness of their compassion.
There’s an implied sense that the Pope, Cardinals, and other Vatican members are essentially self-righteous hypocrites. Unfortunately later you’ll see he doesn’t quite have the courage to say that out right, but rather do so in veiled language.
As I’ve noted before, there seem to be two Catholic Churches, the old boys’ club of the Vatican and the grass-roots network of humble priests, nuns and laity in places like Sudan.
There’s just this overwhelming sense, going back to his earlier comment about protecting child rapists, that all the Vatican really is are a bunch of chauvinistic NAMBLA members who just want to make sure children keep getting raped.
No organization has done more to elevate the moral stature of the Catholic Church in the United States than The Boston Globe.
This is just, well it’s just silly.
Catholic kids are safer today not because of the cardinals’ leadership, but because of The Boston Globe’s.
Again, completely silly. Did the Boston Globe start Virtus? Did the Boston Globe open up support groups for victims of ANY type of sexual abuse, not just clergy? In a recent conversation I had with Cardinal George, he mentioned that many of these support groups were initially meant for those who were victimized by clergy, but it turned out those who have been abused in other circumstances (families, school, etc) would show up because they would claim there was nowhere else to go.
It may be easy at a New York cocktail party to sniff derisively at a church whose apex is male chauvinist, homophobic and so out of touch that it bars the use of condoms even to curb AIDS.
Again, he just doesn’t have the courage to come out and say these things, he uses hypothetical conversations to say it.
Anybody think he’s a self-righteous hypocrite?
This is the quote I referenced earlier. He uses the great example of a preist doing good work to basically call the Pope a self-righteous hypocrite.
Sister Cathy would like to see more decentralization in the church, a greater role for women, and more emphasis on public service. She says she worries sometimes that if Jesus returned he would say, “Oh, they got it all wrong!”
It may be slightly unfair to put this on Kristof, considering it is from Sister Cathy’s mouth, but considering he provides a summation of her stance, without providing any quotes to back up what she might have really been saying I’m still going to rack it up as a bit of an “attack.”
She would make a great pope, too.
Mr. Kristof may be many things, but stupid is not one of them. He has to know suggesting a woman become Pope is simply just being petty and provocative.
I understand why many Americans disdain a church whose leaders are linked to cover-ups and antediluvian stances on women, gays and condoms
Again, self explanatory, but again reeks of cowardice. Why place this feeling on Americans? Why not just come out and say it?
And unless we’re willing to endure beatings alongside Father Michael, unless we’re willing to stand up to warlords with Sister Cathy, we have no right to disparage them or their true church.
It’s just really insulting to say “this is the true church.”
All told there are about 17 paragraphs in this piece, and the quotes above are from 9 of them (or about 52%)
Filed under Faith, In the news, Uncategorized
Great writeup on Pope Benedict’s response to clerical abuse
Posted by Adam Fischer on April 22nd, 2010 | No Comments »
Filed under Uncategorized
ESPN dropping the ball on Big Ben
Posted by Adam Fischer on July 22nd, 2009 | No Comments »
A very interesting debate is going on in the blogospehere about QB Ben Rothlisberger’s Civil sexual assault lawsuit and ESPN’s (lack) of coverage:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/07/21/last-word-on-espns-civil-lawsuit-policy/
Filed under Uncategorized
Rick Reilly finally wrote a relevant column for ESPN
Posted by Adam Fischer on July 22nd, 2009 | No Comments »
He rips Tiger a new one. I love this column!
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?id=4347419
Filed under Uncategorized
Michael Jackson’s media coverage
Posted by Adam Fischer on June 26th, 2009 | No Comments »
One thing keeps sticking out to me the more I watch coverage of the death of Michael Jackson: Pure and complete awkwardness.
Usually when a legendary celebrity dies the first thing media outlets do is trot out friends, family, and anyone who has somehow been in the orbit of the departed for their “heartfelt” reaction.
That was all well and good, but the problem is this wasn’t an honorable, well-beloved, non-controversial celebrity. This was a man who had been accused of (and acquitted of) some very heinous crimes against children. This was a man who was obsessed with his appearance in such a way that he literally disfigured himself into the version of the man whom we have come to see and know over the last 25+ years.
And if you’re a respectable media outlet, there’s no way around talking about that. But if you’re a good host to your guests how do you conceivably bring that point up without it seeming in incredibly poor taste? How do you bring it up without the audience cringing with a “too soon” feeling?
So we’re kind of left with this incredibly awkward coverage of a man who was as infamous as he was famous. What an incredibly strange legacy for one to leave.
More soon on some final thoughts on the whole thing..
Filed under Uncategorized
Rethinking 3AM
Posted by Adam Fischer on June 23rd, 2009 | 1 Comment »
Back in the democratic primary Hillary Clinton aired a now infamous campaign commercial that questioned the strength and resolve of Senator Obama. Clinton questioned Obama’s ability to swiftly and forcefully deal with a threat to America should he be on the other end of a fateful 3AM phone call to the White House.
At the time I thought it was a terrible ad. Then again at the time I was wholly opposed to Hillary Clinton’s candidacy. However I thought the ad was tacky, corny, and more importantly I did believe that Obama would have the strength to make the tough decisions….
“The Iranian people are trying to have a debate about their future.” A debate…..?
This is the president who pledged to bolster America’s moral standing and leadership in the world. The president whose message was heard by throngs of those in Europe and in the middle east who crowded squares and streets to hear him speak.
And yet here we are, in what can only be described as the most significant moment that many of us may ever experience in our lifetimes and our president is falling completely on his face.
His statements today were barely strong. Barely. And mind you, he’s had a week to strengthen them. As both he and the woefully incompetent press secretary Robert Gibbs (tangent: how could a president who is such an amazing communicator pick the worst press secretary in the history of that post?) have stated that the Iranians are in an enthusiastic and “vigorous debate.” Mr president let me just remind you of something:
People.
Are.
Dying.
This isn’t vigorous debate. This is the voice of people crying out for freedom. For justice. Who are literally begging us (why else are their protest signs in English?) to simply say that we STAND WITH THEM. Note that Mr Obama has only dared convey those words in written form and not actually speak them with force and strength.
Now Vice President Joe Biden and then democratic candidate once said that when Obama gets into office, he will be tested. Again, this was a campaign tactic that I didn’t quite agree with and thought it was a desperate attempt by a deperate candidate. And yet North Korea has made some of its boldest moves yet. And we have still come back with soft rhetoric and a nearly cowardly tone…
And so here it is, a week after the Iranian election and we have a statement from the president that barely comes close to promoting liberty and freedom, and still does nothing to honor the courage of those who are protesting in Iran at the risk of their very lives.
A week.
It makes me wonder and maybe fear what happens when Mr Obama and his speechwriters don’t have the luxury of a week or even 15 minutes. It makes me wonder what happens when those who threaten us – whether radical jihadists, or nuclear threats like Kim Jong Il– do something that makes that phone ring. Maybe this isn’t the man I want to be on the other end of the line after all…
Filed under Uncategorized
First Impressions: Wii Motion Plus (Tiger Woods PGA Tour 10 for Wii)
Posted by Adam Fischer on June 10th, 2009 | 2 Comments »
My first impression of the Wii Motion Plus was “so that’s it huh?”
I took a few swings as Tiger, my swing was faithfully represented and I was on my way through my first three holes.
“Feels good, plays good but what’s the big deal”
It wasn’t until I actually stopped and thought about it did I realize really how amazing Wii Motion Plus was … oh and until I switched over to Disc Golf.
See the Wii Motion Plus does what the Wii should have ALWAYS done, or at least, what we all thought the possibilities would be. Instead the last few years the Wii has languished in the land of the waggle. Developers realized they couldn’t get the levels of precision out of the hardware, so they crafted their games in such a way that a simple waggle would achieve the desired result. Case in point: my 4 year old nephew can do amazing things with Wii Sports Bowling simply by waggling the remote in a certain way. There’s no precision to what he does, just a brute amount of force and voilla, he’s bowling like a champ (and yes, maybe some of this is sour grapes for his consistent ability to kick my ass)
But the Wii Motion Plus finally gets it right. It’s fluid, smooth, and works amazingly well. I remember back to when I first played Wii Sports and said to myself “Man I can’t wait until EA gets their hands on this, imagine what they’ll do with Tiger Woods, baseball, and the like” But after playing the first two incarnations of the titles I was seriously unimpressed with the control. This year, this year is amazing.
While the swing feels great (and so does putting by the way) you really don’t realize how great Wii Motion Plus is until you try out the disc golf. You see developers have also gotten good and “guessing” what the Wiimote was doing. Sure it wasn’t faithful 1:1 movement, but developers (the good ones anyway) realized how to gloss over the shortcomings of the hardware and still make it seem like everything “just worked.” Often times this was the case in Tiger Woods, until you actually tried to swing the wiimote like a true golfclub, in which case you may have already sold your wii already – because it was awful.
But after spending about 60 seconds with Disc Golf, I was truly amazed at the precision of the Wii Motion Plus. Disc golf shows a transparent hand holding the disc to throw. When you use Wii Motion Plus it literally feels and looks like your hand has somehow reached into the television (or wall for those of you who are cool like me and have a HD projector) and is moving around in free space. I then detached the Wii Motion Plus, and the change immediately noticeable. What once was a perfect representation now made me look like I had some form of severe and crippling disease.
Seeing, and playing, is believing with this accessory. And it brought me back to a few years ago when I thought “Imagine the possibilities” with the Wii except now, they actually can become a reality. But then I got smacked upside the head with reality: This is an ADD ON accessory. I really fear that developers will be FORCED into developing their motion controls for gamers with and without the accessory (as of right now only one future release will require the accessory, that’s Red Steel 2). This is obviously going to cause some problems as developers may never be able to realize the full potential of the hardware as they will still have to craft their games to “gloss over” the Wiimote sans Wii Motion Plus.
So I still stand here thinking “Man, imagine the possibilities” and I still have that same fear that they may never truly be realized in this console generation. I suppose only time will tell.
Filed under Uncategorized