The ROKU Player
Cornerstone of my strategy to dump cable is using the Roku player to stream premium content online. The Roku N1050 is a small (6" x 6") set-top box. This is an odd device; there's nowhere to jam a disk, no display... there isn't even an off button. (The latter needs to be rethought; I've had to power cycle this thing once or twice.) The Roku player streams online content from online service providers. That means that it downloads videos over the Internets.
Features and Benefits
Primarily, Roku is marketed as a way to see your Netflix instant queue videos on your TV set. This alone makes the Roku worth the $79.99 price; you can stream high quality DVD content at will over the internet. You won't get access to much recent content, but there's still plenty of good stuff out there.
For the more recent stuff, go to Amazon. You can buy season passes to popular TV episodes and new releases. My wife and I recently became fans (obsessed) with the Tudors. Seasons 1 and 2 were available on Netflix. Season 3 cost $22 on Amazon. Also, even though I can get House over-the-air on the local Fox channel, it's much better to view it at my convenience off Amazon On-Demand.
One of the benefits of the Roku player is that it conforms to our viewing habits. In all, there are very few shows that we derive real pleasure from. We've never seen the benefit of shelling out money for HBO, Showtime, Cinemax or Starz. Across the rest of cable, there are really only two shows worth watching: Mad Men and Caprica. Again: available via Amazon or Netflix.
Control Issues
It's important that I discuss the Roku's remote control. It's elegant - only 9 buttons, all neatly laid out. It's also somewhat exclusive. Newer smart-remotes such as the Harmony 510 (and higher) can operate most features, but the 'Home' button is apparently a Roku remote exclusive. So, the moral of the story is... don't lose that remote.
How to Politicize the SCOTUS
When the founding fathers established the framework for Supreme Court of the United States, the sought to insulate it against politicization as best they could. Judges are appointed for life by the Senate. The Senate itself was politically insulated by virtue of its Senators being appointed by the legislatures of the States which they represent. That changed in 1913, when the 17th Amendment was ratified allowing - indeed mandating - the popular election of Senators within each State. (The justification given was that the election of Senators had become mired in corruption, with bribes being paid in some cases. By the time of passage, many States had already begun to elect Senators by popular vote with the Legislatures merely rubber stamping the candidates papers.)
Since the famously "Borked" nominee of President Reagan, it has become common practice for politically motivated Senators to turn nominees for the SCOTUS into punching bags to score sound-bytes for the 24 hour news cycle or to wring concessions out the opposition. Legal scholarship is now less important in choosing a nominee than superficial qualities (race, gender, passing certain litmus tests like abortion or gay rights, et al).
The last crack in the edifice of comity afforded the SCOTUS occurred at Obama's 2010 State of the Union speech when Obama challenged the Supreme Court en corpus, making politically charged assertions which have not been shown in fact. The particular yoke born by the SCOTUS is that while they don't have to campaign for their office, neither are they afforded much opportunity for public discussion of their actions whereby they can present their side of the record. The only output of the SCOTUS is in the opinions they issue.
Obama can taunt from the bull pulpit of the Oval Office in a sick cross between Chicago-style thuggery and playground name-calling. Congress can stand around and cheery maniacally as if the House of Representatives have become the Sanhedrin. It makes for great TV, but it sure as hell is not good government.
Either because he felt he had to, or because he would have otherwise done the same but not been noticed, Chief Justice John Roberts responded to the whole unpleasant affair in a forum with law students at the University of Alabama. Normally a blog rehashes what was already written. I posted a link. If you're not too lazy to click on it, you may be enlightened.
And One More Thing…
Last night a student was fatally shot outside his apartment on the GSU campus. This morning, some fool started shooting up a shoe store across from Kell Hall.
I wanted college cred, not street cred.
Cable and Hyundai – Stopped on a Dime (+ Quitting Skewl)
I've been officially separated from cable for a week now. There have been no withdrawal symptoms. In fact, I only remembered when I remembered I didn't need to pay the bill. More on that in another post... I really only wanted to pop on and say that I drive a Hyundia... so I don't have to worry.
Sarah Palin is not Presidential. I really, really like her, but she's not fit for the office. At least not yet- 2012 is two years away and a lot of transformation can take place in that time. Besides, we've already elected one amature with no experience, so Palin would be an improvement.
En epiphany hit me yesterday. President Becker at Georgia State University stated that one of the measures proposed to deal with the State Budget cuts to education would mean that GSU may have to admit 1,000 fewer students. I've long said that GSU does not have a customer-facing view with respect to its students, and in a strange way this has solidified that view. Basically, GSU has said "we're losing future revenues, so we're going to fire $2,000,000 worth of customers to offset that revenue." The only rational reason for doing this is that the cost of servicing your customers exceeds the revenue they bring in. Students bring in revenue in two ways: the first is direct payments of tuition and fees. The second is in grants from the State through the University Board of Regents. Those payments are proportional to tuition in that it's based on credit hours registered for. In all, 64% of GSU's revenue is derived from students. So by firing 1,000 future students, you reduce overhead costs and lean back on the other 36% of your revenue stream.
I'll do GSU a favor and leave. I have to say it's not been a particularly good school. Robinson College is a bright spot, but otherwise Georgia State has shown little concern for students who aren't trust-fund babies. And the truth is that the Bachelors Degree has become the High School Diploma of our time. Easy government grants coupled with fly-by-night accredited institutions have made bachelors degrees plentiful. School names no longer matter because other than a few published rankings, nobody knows the difference between your school and any other tier 2 or lower school. You might as well save your money for where the real payoff is - a masters degree. Or, stop at an associates. Those two have long had the best ROI.
Antenna Adventures
The cable company would have you believe that you're paying for more then 200 channels. But when you look closely, 130 of those channels are music or pay-per-view. I have about 70 channels of programming. I can subtract the six religous channels I never watch, another five shopping channels, another six spanish-language channels, the TV guide channel and channel 1 (doesn't exist on US televisions), and the count is now down to 51 channels. You know what, let's start with a count-up of channels I watch; History, Discovery, National Geographic, Fox News, Fox, Spike and Sci-fi. Maybe more... I would guess I watch about 10 channels. For this, I pay $50/month.
The slope of my roof is 45 degrees, which is actually pretty steep. My roof is as old as the house and will probably need replacing six or seven years; the grit is already coming off the shingle and washing down my gutters. At 45 degrees, I cannot get a grip on the roof, so climbing up to mount my antenna proved potentially hazardous to my health. I would not be proving any point about the cost of cable if I slid off my roof and face planted in the flower bed.
Just as I was making plans to rent a 40-foot ladder, my wife pointed out that I could mount the antenna in the attic. She's right of course - radio signals easily penetrate the roof and walls of your house. As long as you don't have a metal roof, you'll only lose about 3db of signal - the same amount of loss as a splitter. While it's a shame that noone will see my really cool high gain UHF antenna, that's not really not the point of it. About that 3db of signal loss - if you count that with the 3db from the splitter we invariably run into when have more than one TV in the house - then it's a wise investment to buy a $15 signal amplifier.Remember, +/- 3dB is either a doubling or halving of your signal strength; 6dB of signal loss is about 25% of the original signal. A good 10db amplifier is equal to a 10-times increase in signal, which will more than make up for mounting your antenna in the attic then splitting the signal up to three ways.
With the antenna mounted, the signal amplifier in line and the digital TV converter set up, I get 22 channels. There's the local ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox affiliates. We also enjoy two public tv stations: Georgia Public Television and Public Television of Atlanta. There's also the CW and a local movie broadcast station called Peachtree TV. Then there's the religious and Spanish stations, which add five. Now if you're any good at math, you've only counted 13 so far. Where are the other 9? That's the beauty of HD programming - each channel has up to three sub-channels. For instance, WJSB the local Georgia Public Broadcasting affiliate has their normal broadcast on channel 17-1. On channel 17-2, they have PBS kids all the time. On 17-3, they're broadcasting documentaries. These are all being broadcast in HD, though the source might only be standard definitions (SD). However, because it's all digital, even the SD broadcasts look great. And the price is an agreeable $0.
Equipment
- Antennas Direct Mo 43XG, NewEgg: $78.99 - $20.82 (savings) + Free Shipping
Easy to build, but the instructions are misleading on the box. Use the sheet on the inside. Overall very high quality construction. Compact design allows it to be mounted in the attic and out of the way. Very directional - only use all of your stations are within about 15 degrees of each other. Not a problem if you're in the suburbs. If not, you'll need a multi-element antenna array. You'll have less gain, but you won't need it. - Apex DT150 Digital Converter Box, WalMart: $44.88
Good overall performance. Guide is difficult to read on a 19" tube television. Remove feels flimsy. The power LED goes red when the unit is off, and is obnoxiously bright. Black electrical tape quickly fixed that problem. This is not necessary if you a TV with a built in ATSC tuner. - RCA 10dB Video Signal Amplifier, WalMart: $16.74
If you're running the wire directly to your TV and not splitting it in any way, this won't be necessary. Otherwise, it's a good investment. And by the way - a signal amplifier won't make up for a crappy antenna. If you're not getting signal, then there's nothing to amplify. Also, if you're only running on TV off of a high gain antenna, you might overdrive the input on your TV/converter box.
In our next episode, I'll talk about the joy of my Roku player.
But At Least He’s Not Sarah Palin
I had written several days ago about how certain Administrations (not just the Presidents that they center around) have been a pivot point to a wholesale changeover in government. One issue I had touched on is that the right person has to be on the lever. What we lack at present is that "right person" to make for a revolution.
The CPAC conference for 2010 is over, and with a surprise "bang". The straw poll at this conference is seen as the most prescient barometer of conservative sentiment. The results of this year's straw poll show some interesting things: first, that students are more active in conservative politics than ever before, accounting for 48% of attendees. Those student, when asked to choose between individual liberty, traditional values and national security, chose overwhelmingly for individual liberty (80%). A very strong 98% disapprove of the job the President is doing. Size of Government, Government Spending and Taxes where the three most important issues to attendees. An overwhelming majority saw gains in Congress for the 2010 elections, with one-third predicting that a Republican majority will be restored. But the most surprising thing is the winner of the Presidential Straw Poll. It wasn't current media-spotlight darling Sarah Palin. It wasn't even former Presidential candidate Mitt Romney. It was someone you haven't likely heard of for more than a few years: Ron Paul.
When you think about the demographics, it makes sense. 54% of attendees fit into the 18-24 age category with 73% being under 40. This is also the age range of the Ron Paul Revolution, and the top issues at CPAC this year are issues that Ron Paul has been crowing about for years.
Sarah Palin came with a paltry 7%. Most pundits would seem to think that she is the most electable of the three given her ability to make major inroads in the last few years. They also forget that youth are the driving force in politics today, and that the age group that elected Obama on the probable belief that he was going to govern from the center and end the acrimony in Washington politics are now realizing their own gullibility. Their passions, once invested with Ron Paul, are returning to the perennial candidate.
One thing Ron Paul has in common with Sarah Palin; they're not electable. Sarah Palin hasn't taken control of her own image, and by the time she was able to define her own public image, she had already been painted as a right wing whackjob. Ron Paul, on the other hand, has masterfully controlled his public image, but failed to control his army of acolytes, most of whom are whackjobs. The pendulum has swung in his direction, however. We'll know better after 2012 if Ron Paul is the lever this country needs.
Lets Dump Cable!
My cable bill is one hundred and fifty dollars per month. According to Sally Struthers, that could feed a hungry child in Bangladesh for like... three years. (Of course, if cannibalism weren't considered taboo in polite society, Sally Struthers could also feed a starving child in Bangladesh for three years.) My problem with this is that (a) I'm never home to watch it, and (b) when I am able, there's nothing worth watching on TV. There's a reason that channel surfing is an American past time - there's nothing worthy of focusing our attention. In the early 90's, Bruce Springsteen wrote a terrible song (why do we call him "The Boss" again?) called "57 Channels and Nothing On." Since then, we've more than quadrupled the number of channels, and there's still nothing on.
I will not waste my money any longer. This is about my plan. Briefly it goes like this...
HD TV
In the good ol' days, getting your TV meant buying a pair of 'rabbit ear' antennas and watching either ABC, NBC or CBS. This was free. However, the programming was limited, and if you weren't within 50 miles of a major market, you didn't get much reception. In rural areas, Cable TV was the delivery method. And to make it worthwhile, there were extra channels. I remember that in 1984 I had 35 channels including MTV, CNN and Nickelodeon. Back then, cable was about $20 per month. Expensive, but doable. Given the alternative, cable quickly became the leading option for television entertainment, and the antenna became passe. Then something happenned. HDTV.
HDTV is actually better by antenna; cable can only deliver about 6mb/s of bandwidth. But a UHF signal can deliver nearly 60 mb/s of bandwidth, which is more than enough to provide true HD quality. The only other option is a Blue Ray / HD DVD. If you subscribe to cable, you cannot get true 1080 resolution HDTV. If you have satellite you can, but you will be paying for it. Flash back to the good old yagi antenna we used to mount on our houses to get VHF and UHF tv broadcasts; an antenna you may already have is sufficient to receive high quality HD broadcasts from local stations for free. If you dont' have one, you can get an antenna for about $60.
You'll also need a TV capable of receiving HD digital broadcasts. The standard for these broadcasts in the us is called ATSC - as opposed to the old NTSC standard. But if you have a TV which is not digital read, you can purchase a converter box for as little as $50.
Internet TV
A remarkable revolution has occurred in the last ten years, particularly in the past 5. The ability to deliver high quality video content over the internet has seen a revolution. There are sites like YouTube, BrietbartTV, Break.com, Vimeo and more which serve up user-created content. If you want access to movies and hit televisions shows, you can download them from Apple's iTunes store, Hulu or Amazon On Demand. And the new standard for DVD rental, NetFlix, offers streaming options for over-the-internet delivery of premium content.
DVD
I remember when DVD's first became available to the average consumer. A DVD player might cost hundreds of dollars. Today, I paid $30 for one at WalMart. Again, you can either own or rent DVD's to play.
My Plan
So here goes: for live broadcast entertainment, I've purchased a high gain antenna and an HD converter. I have a subscription to NetFlix and can stream certain movies from netflix as well as purchase other shows via Amazon OnDemand. In order to stream this content to my TV, I have purchased the Roku player. Since my cable provider will not allow me to have high-speed cable internet without also having cable Tv, I am switching to DSL.
Since this is an experiment, I will keep you - my faithful audience - apprised of my progress.
Obama Is The Second Coming… Of Carter
During the campaign, while ol Mac was showing us how not to run a campaign, pundits started to note that the rise of Obama was taking on messianic tones. These observations reached the height of ridiculousness (yeah, I wrote that) when Obama's election-night acceptance speech was given in a stadium on a stage featuring greek columns. The Obama camp was ready to play up the imagery of Obama as the second coming, and Newsweeks Evan Thomas (kool-aid drinker!) even went as far as to remark that Obama was "like God"1.
The bloom is now fully off the rose. Far from the second coming of Christ, Obama now appears to be the Second Coming of Jimmy Carter. More on that in a moment. First, I want to focus on the change in tenor in politics. Obama has inadvertantly heralded a new animosity in American politics. This is not his fault; mens rea cannot be established. Indeed, I can definitively show that if Obama had intended to making politics more divisive, he would have failed miserably. My proof? Health care, economic recovery, jobs, the War on Terror™, Climate Change™, the Chicago Olympic Bid... I could go on. The man has been Agenda: Fail. However, the 'new tone' in politics these days is one of chicago-style thuggery, aggression and personal animosity. And unlike Dick Cheney's "go f*ck yourself" of lore, this is a consistent pattern of acrimony2.
I got off track with my point above. Let me re-align: Obama has failed, let his core grass roots down and now the kool-aid drinkers are pissed. Pissed I say! We have Roland Martin of CNN telling Obama that he has to "go gangsta" on the GOP3. Bloomberg's David Reilly says that Obama needs to "crack some heads". As an impassive observer (which I'm not normally, but for the sake of argument, I can fake it), Obama has shown an executive style that can be best summed up as "talk loudly, and carry a wiffle-bat." Tough talk from Obama on the speech trail has not been backed up by tough action out of the Oval Office. Attempts at political retaliation Chicago-style have been like rubber bullets off of a tank. The complete and utter failure of Obama to implement his aggressive and radical agenda is underscored by the dramatic waffling of his focus after the electoral victories of Republicans in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts. Obama is effectively like a neutered cat at this point.
Which brings me to the headline... Obama is very well the Second Coming of Jimmy Carter. The parallels are clear:
- Inherited a bad economy and did little or nothing to improve it;
- Made health reform a campaign issue, then failed to implement it due to an ability to worth with his own majority party;
- His inaugural speech was an apology to the world in which he talked about an America in terms of "limits" and it's own selfishness;
- He failed to show strength in his Presidency and turned a blind eye towards aggressor states that threaten to or actively destabilize their neighbors.
The next important thing to point out is what happens after a Carter Presidency. Or for that matter, a Buchanan, Hoover and elder Bush Presidency. For all of these Presidents, the theme was "It's the Economy, Stupid4." In each case the result was a turnover in power in the Executive branch. Obama's milk-toast5 leadership and the continued levels of high unemployment underscore a fundamental incompetence and lack of leadership.
These elements do not guarantee a victory for Republicans in 2012, mind you. For starters, there is a viable third party movement - the TEA Party movement - which is just as sour on Republicans as it is on Democrats. If the GOP does not get it's act together, the TEA Party may field a candidate that will draw away support from a GOP contendor in 2012, leaving Obama the possibility of winning by default. Further, a GOP victory can only be guaranteed by a second coming of Ronald Reagan (that's Ronaldus Magnus to you, worm). The only personality in politics that has the Reagan "total package" is Sarah Palin, but she is still marginalized as a personality by virtue of having allowed the McCain campaign to handle her and shape her public image early on (as well as some serious - but not alltogether unrecoverable - flubs of her own).
Election 2012 is still two years away, but the campaign will begin ramping up this spring as the mid-term elections start to set the stage for upset. (Incidentally, the parallel for these mid term elections are the 1994 mid-term elections which saw the Republicans overturn four decades of Democratic rule in the legislative branch with leadership by Newt Gingrich and the Contract with America.) For now, most people will have their eyes on 2010, and the only thing they'll be thinking of for 2012 is whether the world will end as the Mayan calendar runs out. (I use a Gregorian Calendar, which goes on indefinitely; I'm not worried.)
1. Note to Evan: The only thing that God and Obama have in common is that neither of them are able to produce a birth certificate. The difference is that God is not under the impression that he is Obama. (Sub Note to Obama: Just produce your birth certificate and shut all these Birthers up, will you? They're as annoying as the Truthers.)
2. Note to Dick: Even without the open mic, dropping F-bombs on the floor of the Senate... c'mon man, you're above that!
3. Not advisable: Republicans are the ones who have supported gun rights for the past 234 years. Imagine Cheney busing some NWA on you with the lyrics "I gotta shotgun, and here's the plot: taking judges out with a flurry of buckshot." And if that wasn't wasn't proof enough of how hard-core Cheney's hood-cred is, the guy he capped apologized! Fo' real, do.
4. Buchanan's turnover was slightly more complex. The overall economy wasn't going terribly, particularly if you were involved in the cotton trade in the south. The expanding nation was resulting in a dramatic increase in resources from the West. In the North East, the jobs market was in tatters with cheap labor from Europe driving down wages and employment security. Where the similaries come into play is that Buchanan was utterly ineffective as a leader, instead opting for compromises that satisfied nobody.
5. Actually spelled milquetoast, the phrase implies one who is indecisive and therefore incapable of effective decision making. I will tell you right now that the thing I hate most is someone who lacks moral courage and leadership. As we used to say in the Army "do something, do anything, even if it's not the right things just do it!"
Orca 1, Shark 0
Here's a rare encounter from the folks at Nat Geo. Some eco-tourists were observing Orcas when a White Shark came on the scene. It would appear that the shark headed for the Orcas. What happenned next is a turn-of-events rarely seen in the animal kingdom: the Orca owned the shark.
Finding humor in death, as I always do, I'd like to point out that the amiable Orca offered first dibs to the tourists.
Sharks, the feared apex predator of the seas, aren't safe from being knocked out themselves. They do have to fear our aquatic cousins. Reports of dolphins attacking sharks are woven into sailors lore. And stories of Dolphins and Orcas protecting humans from sharks stretch from ancient Greece to 20th century California (link).
February 8, 2010
I spent much of the weekend busying myself with things ranging from household chores and homework to playing with the kids. Consequently, I didn't even stare in the direction of the treadmill. I'm okay with that though; three hours of playing legos with the boy is far better for the hear than a few minutes on a treadmill.
Today, however, was a different story. After a 30 minute session of high-intensity interval training on the track, I did some power yoga then followed with a little bit of core training.
A word to the ladies: some excercises require appropriate clothing as well as appropriate venues. For instance, if you're in a tank top, and you want to do a shoulder stand, you might consider a device known as a "sports bra". And to the horribly embarrassed young lady in the green shorts: I'm married, so I promise I didn't see a thing. I swear.