Month: May 2013

I’ve mentioned before how insanely useful it is to know something like the [NATO Alphabet][1] (where people say “Alpha Bravo Charlie” instead of ABC). Sometimes you forget a letter, or are just too slow to feel comfortable saying it, well fear no more [there’s now an app for that][2].

No clue how useful this will be to people, but I downloaded it.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_phonetic_alphabet
[2]: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/spelling-alphabet/id499351638?mt=12

[Mat Honan, for Wired, on what Google’s Island “is”](http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2013/05/on-google-island/):

> I was thirsty, so I drank the electrolyte solution down. “This is delicious,” I replied.

> “I know,” he {Larry Page} replied. “It also has thousands of micro sensors which are now swarming through your blood stream.”

> “What… ” I stammered.

> “Your prostate is enlarged. Let’s go hangout now. There’s some really great music I’d like to recommend to you.”

It’s everything I feared it would be…

[James Martin slamming the always changing world of web apps][1]:

> Why are web apps worse than native apps? Because they encourage you, big-shot startup entrepreneur, to experiment on me instead of thinking through the job that I’ve hired your software to do.

For the most part I really cannot stand to use non-native applications. If there is a native app — and it is even reasonably decent, yeah I’m using it. Just about the only web app that I use everyday is Fever, and that hasn’t changed its look since it was launched (as far as I know).

Martin’s article got me to thinking about iCloud and how Apple approaches changes to web apps: very slowly. Bugs are, and should be, fixed and pushed as fast as possible. But new features, design changes, these types of things are typically brought all in one fell swoop with Apple. There’s a good reason for that: Apple likes to let testers be the testers and users, well, use working software.

*(Side note: I love Martin’s last sentence, so perfect.)*

[1]: http://jamesmart.in/notes/2013/05/16/going-native.html

When I first [saw a post][1] about hacking *The Onion*, I didn’t think much of it. But when I saw [David Sparks post about it][2] I immediately thought: this is a software problem that should be fixable.

My first thought was to jump into Keyboard Maestro and create a macro that would show you the link you clicked on before anything actually opens the link.

But I couldn’t figure that out…

Then I thought — Applescript? Maybe, but I don’t know how to do that.

Next I thought about a whole system implementation where we create an App in Automator that is set as the default browser, shows you URLs clicked on, and opens the URL if you want. Not only could I not figure this out, but holy shit that sounds like a horrid solution.

So my thought now is rather simple: someone should write a plugin for Mail.app that is a link checker. All it does is shows you a dialog when you click on the link — this dialog exposes the full URL. If you want to open it, hit return, or a button — otherwise you don’t have to open it.

(Also this plugin should fix the flaw in Mail.app whereby Mail will not open links in the background.)

Anyways, if someone wants to build that I would be glad to test it — if it works I’ll promote it (hell everyone should).

[1]: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2013/05/13/syrians-the-onion
[2]: http://macsparky.com/blog/hackingonion

[Paul Ford gets to the bottom of why I don’t like CMSs that have no difference between editing and published][1]:

> Not only do web pages need to look good for readers, but since any bit of code is now a potential document, they need to work for writers and editors too. I was recently using a website built along these lines—a blogging platform where there’s no difference between the composing view and the published view—and while it was a beautiful experience, I missed the ability to switch from the homely text box to the official “published” view. The beauty was confusing; every paragraph felt permanent as I wrote it.

I think that sense of permanency is what really bugs me.

This is a great post so be sure to read it — especially if you work in design or development.

[1]: http://www.printmag.com/featured/paul-fords-interaction-elegy-for-the-text-box/

Today, Amazon announced the launch of [Amazon Coins][1], a new Amazon-specific “currency” for buying apps, games, music, and other items from Amazon.

I’ve never been interested in schemes like this, for a number of reasons. First, why should I give money to a company for them to invest when I could be making even the smallest amount of interest in a chequing account. Second, there’s no guarantee the company I have purchased this type of currency from will continue to accept it indefinitely. And third, what happens when I’ve got $100 in Amazon coins and am a few bucks short from paying my rent?

I don’t see any value for consumers in a system like this. As [Garrett Murray][2] put it:

We already have money, it’s called money.

[1]: http://www.amazon.com/coins
[2]: http://log.maniacalrage.net/post/50374973629/amazon-coins-a-terrible-idea-for-consumers

I have, thus far, managed to avoid reading any review about Google Glass — mostly because I think the product is *fucking horrible* on many levels. But, for what ever reason, this article by [Jan Chipchase was in my queue][1]. In the article Chipcase poses this interesting thought (then he digressed and I stopped reading), but he says (in the beginning):

> As a product that is both on-your-face and in-your-face, Glass is set to become a lightning rod for a wider discussion around what constitutes acceptable behavior in public and private spaces. The Glass debate has already started, but these are early days; each new iteration of hardware and functionality will trigger fresh convulsions. In the short term, Glass will trigger anger, name-calling, ridicule and the occasional bucket of thrown water (whether it’s ice water, I don’t know). In the medium term, as societal interaction with the product broadens, signs will appear in public spaces guiding mis/use1 and lawsuits will fly, while over the longer term, legislation will create boundaries that reflect some form of im/balance between individual, corporate and societal wants, needs and concerns.

Debate? We need to debate this? Give me a fucking break, there is *no* debate. Here’s how you know when Glass is inappropriate: anywhere you would not feel comfortable whipping out an SLR to take a photo without permission, is a place where Glass is inappropriate.

Yeah, I see you, guy in the corner trying to take a sneaky picture of the hot girl at the bar with your iPhone — put that shit away. Oh you are so clever pretending to take a picture of your friend, but really taking a picture of that hick wearing the ironic t-shirt. In both situations you don’t want to get caught, because you know what you are doing is socially not acceptable — maybe illegal.

With Glass, Google gives stealth photo ability to any [idiot][2] with $1,500 to burn.

The only debate to be had is if we wait for the product to flop, or make it illegal right now. My vote: pass a law that would force Google to have a red LED on the damned things when the camera is active — I mean you already look like a douche wearing them. ((If you like Google Glass, please stop reading my site.))

[1]: http://allthingsd.com/20130412/you-lookin-at-me-reflections-on-google-glass/
[2]: http://www.siliconrepublic.com/new-media/item/32540-robert-scoble-wears-google/

The other day, on App.net, [I wondered][1]:

> How long before news stations switch from helicopters to those little quadracopter drone things.

My thought was that [quadrocopters][2] seemed more able to get into areas discretely, cheaper to operate, and well easier to deploy quickly. They seem to make a ton of sense in journalism — though I certainly don’t like the idea of this from a privacy standpoint.

Well it turns out (tip of the hat to [Gil][3]) there is a [Missouri Drone Journalism Program][4] here’s how the program describes itself:

> Drones tend to have a negative connotation in today’s media. The public mostly hears the word drone when associated with war and destruction. However, drone technology can be used in many other aspects, including field reporting. Part of this project’s goal is to discover how best to utilize this technology in the field of journalism.

I may not like the idea, but WHERE WAS THIS CLASS WHEN I WAS IN SCHOOL?

[1]: https://alpha.app.net/benbrooks/post/5572554
[2]: http://www.quadrocopter.com
[3]: https://alpha.app.net/benbrooks/post/5572554
[4]: http://www.missouridronejournalism.com

One of the most interesting fields in technology right now is navigation. Navigation systems have truly taken the world by storm: Almost every American now relies on some form of computer navigation system to get from point ‘A’ to point ‘I’ve-never-been-there-before’. We now live in a world where people blindly follow navigation instructions from computers, even if they defy common sense. Party hosts often note if there’s a turn you should override your GPS guidance on — even though we all know we’ll obey the voice in the box.

The thing is, I don’t really ever *need* full blown turn by turn directions — and I suspect you don’t either. In fact, most of the time I just need a little help. I usually know how to get to the general area of where I’m going, I just don’t know exactly which building it is on the block, or exactly what street to turn down.

What I could really use is a system that says: “head toward the place that cuts your hair. I’ll let you know when you need to do anything differently.” If you think about it, our cars and cellphones already know the places we frequent: the places that we don’t require turn-by-turn directions to get to.

So why shouldn’t these systems allow us to just focus on driving (a daunting enough task for most) and only interject when we need to by taken off the path that we already know.

A lot of the places I go to are located in an area I’m familiar with: I know *roughly* how to get there, rather than how to get to the *precise* location.

Give me Siri guidance that says: “Head towards Tacoma Boys. It’s a block or two past that — I’ll let you know when you’re close.” And then, when I get close, turn-by-turn kicks in to make sure I get to the exact spot.

90% of the time, I can get 90% of the way to anywhere I’m going. Give me a navigation system that only helps for the last 10%, so that I can concentrate on driving instead of being annoyed by the bitch-in-the-box for the entire journey.

[Farhad Manjoo on the maddening issue of dogs being fucking everywhere in the U.S.][1]:

> But here’s my problem: There’s now a cultural assumption that everyone must love dogs. Dog owners are rarely forced to reckon with the idea that there are people who aren’t enthralled by their furry friends, and that taking their dogs everywhere might not be completely pleasant for these folks.

I find people who brings dogs everywhere with them — including into the office — to be rude. I can’t stand having dogs everywhere. You know where dogs belong? In your fenced yard at home. Not your purse. Not my office. Not my building. Not on your fucking lap as you down your tenth Venti-Non-Fat-Extra-Whip-Frapp.

[1]: http://www.slate.com/articles/life/a_fine_whine/2013/05/i_hate_dogs_they_re_lounging_in_our_offices_and_licking_us_at_our_cafes.single.html