You may not talk like that . . .

Several weeks ago I passed this restroom door, which was located in a grocery store. Cannot?  Oh yeah?  That sign made me want to prove the sign wrong by carrying tons of merchandise into the restroom until it was completely full of merchandise. I don't know why the "can" vs. "may" error gripes me so much--perhaps it's because I hear and see this problem so often, and also because it seems that it would be so very easy to understand the problem and stop making the error.

Continue ReadingYou may not talk like that . . .

Final Cut Pro X + Izzy Videos = excellent videos

Until last week, I was using Final Cut Express 4 on my iMac. It took me quite a bit of time to get familiar with the many features of Final Cut Express--I struggled so much to remember how to access the many features that I created a single-spaced four-page cheat sheet. Then, just when I finally got comfortable with Final Cut Express, Apple released a new ground-up version of Final Cut Pro (version X). It has major improvements compared to FCE, including background rendering, re-design of the work areas, ability to tag and categorize clips and much more. The previous version of Final Cut Pro sold for $800, whereas the brand new Final Cut Pro X sells for only $300. I hesitated to buy the new version, despite the many improvements, because I didn't want to spend a lot of time training up on a new video  program (as I did when I ditched Adobe Premier Elements (on my PC) in order to move to Final Cut Express on an iMac). Nonetheless, I took the plunge last week, downloading FCP X from the online Apple Store (the only way to buy it). One factor in upgrading was the recommendation of Izzy Hyman, who offers first-rate video instruction at his membership-based site. In fact, Izzy now offers 25 free lessons on Final Cut Pro X at his site (Note: I've written about Izzy once before.).  His lessons cover each of the following topics, and each lesson includes high-quality screencasts: [More . . . ]

Continue ReadingFinal Cut Pro X + Izzy Videos = excellent videos

It’s REALLY Still the Economy Stupid!

By now, whatever stimulus effect the Obama Stimulus Plan has had is nearly gone or gone. It is certain that the approximately $200 million in Democratic Middle Class Tax Cuts are gone which was the price Republicans demanded as part of the re-authorization of the Bush tax breaks for the top 2% of wage earners near the end of last year. The states have spent all the federal monies given to them which allowed states to initially avoid laying-off police, firefighters, emergency medical technicians and teachers and now states are going through lay-offs in droves further depressing the economy. And see here. There were only 18% of the Stimulus Plan dollars which went to “infrastructure” and those dollars are gone, too. The economy was treading water, and now growth is slipping. More federal dollars for bridges, roads and schools are needed and proposed by President Obama but, Republicans apparently will not vote for anything but cutting federal spending or cutting taxes for corporations and millionaires. 15 year fixed mortgage rates for well qualified borrowers are approximately 3.375 % as of the writing of this piece. Some broker/lenders will quote lower rates if you buy points. What’s there for the merely “decently” qualified borrowers? You might get 3.5% for a 15 year fixed rate. But, there’s a way to get all of those amongst us who are current on our loans and the loans are owned by FHLMC (“Freddie Mac”) and FNMA (“Fannie Mae”) (recently combined into the FHLA), FHA and VA an immediate break which will stimulate the economy. [More. . . ]

Continue ReadingIt’s REALLY Still the Economy Stupid!

Telecommunications industry working overtime to misrepresent net neutrality

I don’t believe that money is speech, but I’ve repeatedly seen that money motivates dishonest speech, much of it uttered by paid “experts.” This money-motivated dishonesty is a recurring problem regarding many issues, including the topic of this article, net neutrality. On August 8, 2011, I was pleased to see that the St. Louis Post-Dispatch published my letter to the editor on the topic of net neutrality.  Here’s the full text of my letter:

Maintain neutrality We pay Internet service providers to move data from point to point. We don't pay them to steer us to selected sites (by speeding up access times) or to discourage us from using other sites (by slowing down or blocking access). Nor do we pay them to decide what applications we can use over the Internet. I should be free to use Skype even if it competes with the phone company's own telephone service. Giving Internet users this unimpeded choice of content and applications is the essence of "net neutrality," and it has inspired unceasing innovation over the Internet. The Senate soon may vote on a "resolution of disapproval" that would strip the Federal Communications Commission of its authority to protect Americans from potential abuses. If it passes, net neutrality would be at serious risk. Congress is under big pressure (and receiving big money) from companies like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon, who want to become the gatekeepers of the Internet. They would like to carve up the Internet so that it would become like cable TV, with tiered plans and limited menus of content that they would dictate. Phone companies should not be allowed to dictate how we use the Internet. I urge Sens. Claire McCaskill and Roy Blunt to support net neutrality by voting against the resolution of disapproval. Erich Vieth • St. Louis
I wrote this letter as a concerned citizen.  I have long been concerned about net neutrality.  I have seen ample evidence that increasingly monopolistic telecommunications companies have no qualms about forcibly assuming the role of Internet gate-keeper.  As for-profit entities, their instinct is to limit our Internet choices if it would make them ever greater piles of money. Call me a pragmatist based on America’s television experience; telecommunications companies want to control how we use the Internet much like cable TV companies shove users into programming packages in order to maximize profit. On August 18, 2011, I noticed that the Post-Dispatch published an anti-net-neutrality letter. Here is the text of that letter: [More . . . ]

Continue ReadingTelecommunications industry working overtime to misrepresent net neutrality

Corporate Communism

I've sometimes referred to the telecom industry as "communist." After all, if the AT&T and T-Mobile merge is approved, that bigger version of AT&T would have 80% of the wireless market. That means one player would dominate an industry.   If you don't like the phone service you're getting, don't have a phone.   Communism, whether the Soviet or the Capitalist version, stifles innovation and causes customer service to stagnate.  It also forces consumers to pay artificially high bills because there is no competition.  Dylan Ratigan has picked up on this comparison too:

Lately I have been using the phrase “Corporate Communism” on my television show. I think it is an especially fitting term when discussing the current landscape in both our banking and health care systems. As Americans, I believe we reject communism because it historically has allowed a tiny group of people to consolidate complete control over national resources (including people), in the process stifling competition, freedom and choice. It leaves its citizens stagnating under the perpetual broken systems with no natural motivation to innovate, improve services or reduce costs.
Ergo, we need to stamp out communism everywhere we find it, even when it exists in a capitalist system like the United States.

Continue ReadingCorporate Communism