I was a little disappointed that Obama didn't bring out the big guns last night. He has the skills to devastate McCain verbally but he held himself back for some reason. However he did convey the clear differences between what he stands for and what McCain believes in. He emphasized how his philosophy focuses on protecting the common man, not just the wealthy and the special interest groups.
When the debate was over both candidates shook hands and I heard Obama say "Good job, John." Sort of reminded me of those courtroom shows where the opposing lawyers have coffee and pie together after a big case.
For the second Presidential debate, Obama needs to come out blasting. It's great to show everyone how well he and McCain get along, but there's a time to be nice and there's a time to play for keeps.
Now on to the VP debate. I'm going to go out on a limb here and predict Biden will demolish Palin. She will try to use some cheap tricks to win sympathy for herself, but she'll ultimately be shown up as the empty suit she is. There is no way, I repeat NO WAY, that Palin will be able win that debate. She knows nothing about anything, except attack politics and appeals to special interest groups. She may land a couple of blows on Biden, but he will deal her a knockout punch. Palin and Biden aren't even in the same league, and her days spent in Foreign Policy Cram School won't prepare her for the breadth and depth of Biden's knowledge and experience.
27 September 2008
21 September 2008
Falling in Touch
When you graduate from High School, you say goodbye to your friends, some of whom you've been with since kindergarten. You promise to stay in touch, and then you go off to college and your old friends recede into the past and pretty soon you don't think about them very much at all. Then you graduate from college and you promise to stay in touch with your friends...and eventually the same thing happens to them as your life changes again.
Staying in touch is more than an occasional phone call or email. It's the daily give and take, the casual remarks about insignificant things, the minutae that give texture to daily life. You might go to the same coffee shop every day and exchange pleasantries with a barista. The next time you see that barista, you can talk about something that recalls your previous visit, or you might point out something silly that you heard on the radio, which leads to a brief conversation on that topic.
Then you head home and tell your spouse about what the barista said. It's not important, it's just the rhythm of daily life. It's what you're thinking about today. Now imagine you get a phone call from an old high school buddy. He hasn't seen you in 20 years and he wants you to catch him up on everything since you last met. But all that you can think of is the conversation with the barista and whether you have an ironed shirt to wear to work in the morning. So you tell your buddy, "Not much, how about you?"
I always feel silly when that happens, which is one reason I stay away from alumni reunions. I just can't think of a thing to say. These are the things that make up life--in other words, "what's been happening." Grocery stores, working, getting to meetings, taking care of family, exercising, hobbies, books, computers. Those are the things that have been "happening." But you don't want to burden your buddy with all this mundane stuff because it's boring to anyone except the person it's happening to.
What always happens with me (and I hate this) is that I end up sounding like one of those Christmas "Family Updates" where I try to impress my old pal with how fascinating my life is. I'll tell about someplace I went on vacation, even though vacation comprises 2 weeks a year and the rest of the time it's mundane stuff.
Four years after the rest of the net discovered it, I finally got on Facebook earlier this year. I quickly found that lots of my high school and college pals were already there. Facebook has a place at the top of your home page that invites you to write a one-line status update: "What are you doing right now?" All your Facebook friends see what you write there, and likewise you see what they write about themselves.
These status updates are short, so you have to be brief: "Chillin," or "Standing in line at the movies," or "Ordering a coffee," are the kinds of things people post. It strikes me that this is the same kind of offhand comment that I might have made to the barista, or told Graham if he called me and asked me what I was up to. So in a real sense, Facebook is bringing friends with whom I'd lost touch back into the fringes of my life--that place where you have casual awareness of what others are doing. Facebook is letting me fall back in touch with them.
I wonder if the net generation that was born since 1990 will grow up and never lose touch with their friends. Maybe Facebook, MySpace, and their successors will bridge the gap between being a child living away from home at college and being a young adult fighting to find a way in the world. Maybe there will no longer be a need to ask "So what have you been up to for the last ten years?" There may never be a time when they aren't peripherally aware of what their whole social group is up to, what they think is important, what they discover about themselves and others. It's a strange thing to consider, but it seems like the precise sort of shift that leads to big changes in society.
Staying in touch is more than an occasional phone call or email. It's the daily give and take, the casual remarks about insignificant things, the minutae that give texture to daily life. You might go to the same coffee shop every day and exchange pleasantries with a barista. The next time you see that barista, you can talk about something that recalls your previous visit, or you might point out something silly that you heard on the radio, which leads to a brief conversation on that topic.
Then you head home and tell your spouse about what the barista said. It's not important, it's just the rhythm of daily life. It's what you're thinking about today. Now imagine you get a phone call from an old high school buddy. He hasn't seen you in 20 years and he wants you to catch him up on everything since you last met. But all that you can think of is the conversation with the barista and whether you have an ironed shirt to wear to work in the morning. So you tell your buddy, "Not much, how about you?"
I always feel silly when that happens, which is one reason I stay away from alumni reunions. I just can't think of a thing to say. These are the things that make up life--in other words, "what's been happening." Grocery stores, working, getting to meetings, taking care of family, exercising, hobbies, books, computers. Those are the things that have been "happening." But you don't want to burden your buddy with all this mundane stuff because it's boring to anyone except the person it's happening to.
What always happens with me (and I hate this) is that I end up sounding like one of those Christmas "Family Updates" where I try to impress my old pal with how fascinating my life is. I'll tell about someplace I went on vacation, even though vacation comprises 2 weeks a year and the rest of the time it's mundane stuff.
Four years after the rest of the net discovered it, I finally got on Facebook earlier this year. I quickly found that lots of my high school and college pals were already there. Facebook has a place at the top of your home page that invites you to write a one-line status update: "What are you doing right now?" All your Facebook friends see what you write there, and likewise you see what they write about themselves.
These status updates are short, so you have to be brief: "Chillin," or "Standing in line at the movies," or "Ordering a coffee," are the kinds of things people post. It strikes me that this is the same kind of offhand comment that I might have made to the barista, or told Graham if he called me and asked me what I was up to. So in a real sense, Facebook is bringing friends with whom I'd lost touch back into the fringes of my life--that place where you have casual awareness of what others are doing. Facebook is letting me fall back in touch with them.
I wonder if the net generation that was born since 1990 will grow up and never lose touch with their friends. Maybe Facebook, MySpace, and their successors will bridge the gap between being a child living away from home at college and being a young adult fighting to find a way in the world. Maybe there will no longer be a need to ask "So what have you been up to for the last ten years?" There may never be a time when they aren't peripherally aware of what their whole social group is up to, what they think is important, what they discover about themselves and others. It's a strange thing to consider, but it seems like the precise sort of shift that leads to big changes in society.
14 September 2008
The Brooks B-17 Bicycle Saddle
If you grew up in the 60s or 70s you might remember how different bicycles were then. About the only thing they have in common with today's bikes is two wheels. One difference was the fact that bikes used to have leather saddles. If you were a kid, you probably had a simple and inexpensive bike and the saddle was a cheaply-made leather seat that cracked and split after you left it out in the rain once too often. For us kids, a padded plastic seat was actually more desirable than a leather saddle, and as we grew up in the 80s, we looked on the development of gel saddles as the obvious evolution of the bicycle seat.
Meanwhile, over in England, the Brooks company had been turning out high-quality leather bicycle saddles pretty much unchanged since the late 19th Century. I never heard of Brooks until I bought my first Raleigh in 1979. It was a green 5-speed with hand-painted gold pinstripes on the fenders, manufactured at the Nottingham factory in England. It had a Brooks saddle with springs under the seat, and I still remember how comfortable it was.
Now it's 2008 and everything Raleigh manufactures comes from China, including the saddles. However the Brooks Saddle Company is still hand-building leather saddles in the West Midlands of England. There has to be a reason why bicyclists continue to buy these saddles in the face of such brutal competition from Asian imports. The answer, in part, lies with the Brooks B-17 Saddle.
This simple, unsprung leather seat is Brooks' perfect saddle: the inspiration for countless essays, testimonials, product endorsements, and religious wars. What is it about a seat for a bicycle that can rouse such passions? I don't fully understand it yet, but I will. I just took delivery of one and have been riding it for three days.
This saddle is not soft and cushy like today's gel saddles. The first time you ride it, its hard shiny surface makes it seem like its slipping and sliding out from under you. It's not instantly comfortable like a gel seat. And here's the kicker: it doesn't ever get soft, no longer how long you ride it.
So why would something that is literally a pain in the *** hold such a devoted army of followers? I don't know yet, but I believe it has something to do with the fact that you earn the right to have a comfortable ride with a Brooks saddle. According to the overwhelming majority of things I've read about Brooks, after you break the saddle in, it becomes the most comfortable saddle in the world! Why? Because the saddle molds itself to the rider, making it the perfect match. (Some say you mold your backside to the saddle, but I digress.)
By enduring the pain and suffering of the break-in process, the rider shows himself worthy to join the ranks of Brooks owners. People treat these saddles like precious keepsakes. It's not unusual to find people who keep their Brooks for decades, transferring them from bicycle to bicycle. I read in one forum a guy's post where he said he had a Brooks on his bike and another Brooks in storage to protect himself against the company ever going out of business. People really love these things.
I'm still in the "ouchie" phase of Brooks ownership. This isn't the same springy comfort saddle of my youth, and I daresay I've got a few more miles on me than I did during my first Brooks encounter. But I think this B-17 saddle might have promise. I went for a ride on my old gel-seat saddle after a couple of days on the Brooks and the bike felt like a drunk on roller skates.
I still have some adjusting to do. Unlike the gel seat, there's one place and one place only where you can sit, and moving the saddle forwards and back tends to mess up the seating geometry. Writing about the best way to find the right tilt of the seat could fill a page. And the height of the seatpost has to be changed because the B-17 is not padded, so you sit lower on the bike. Every one of these adjustments affects the other ones, and the only way to test them is to ride after every minute change. It's going to be days before I get this thing dialed in just right. I'll post updates from time to time.
Meanwhile, over in England, the Brooks company had been turning out high-quality leather bicycle saddles pretty much unchanged since the late 19th Century. I never heard of Brooks until I bought my first Raleigh in 1979. It was a green 5-speed with hand-painted gold pinstripes on the fenders, manufactured at the Nottingham factory in England. It had a Brooks saddle with springs under the seat, and I still remember how comfortable it was.
Now it's 2008 and everything Raleigh manufactures comes from China, including the saddles. However the Brooks Saddle Company is still hand-building leather saddles in the West Midlands of England. There has to be a reason why bicyclists continue to buy these saddles in the face of such brutal competition from Asian imports. The answer, in part, lies with the Brooks B-17 Saddle.
This simple, unsprung leather seat is Brooks' perfect saddle: the inspiration for countless essays, testimonials, product endorsements, and religious wars. What is it about a seat for a bicycle that can rouse such passions? I don't fully understand it yet, but I will. I just took delivery of one and have been riding it for three days.
This saddle is not soft and cushy like today's gel saddles. The first time you ride it, its hard shiny surface makes it seem like its slipping and sliding out from under you. It's not instantly comfortable like a gel seat. And here's the kicker: it doesn't ever get soft, no longer how long you ride it.
So why would something that is literally a pain in the *** hold such a devoted army of followers? I don't know yet, but I believe it has something to do with the fact that you earn the right to have a comfortable ride with a Brooks saddle. According to the overwhelming majority of things I've read about Brooks, after you break the saddle in, it becomes the most comfortable saddle in the world! Why? Because the saddle molds itself to the rider, making it the perfect match. (Some say you mold your backside to the saddle, but I digress.)
By enduring the pain and suffering of the break-in process, the rider shows himself worthy to join the ranks of Brooks owners. People treat these saddles like precious keepsakes. It's not unusual to find people who keep their Brooks for decades, transferring them from bicycle to bicycle. I read in one forum a guy's post where he said he had a Brooks on his bike and another Brooks in storage to protect himself against the company ever going out of business. People really love these things.
I'm still in the "ouchie" phase of Brooks ownership. This isn't the same springy comfort saddle of my youth, and I daresay I've got a few more miles on me than I did during my first Brooks encounter. But I think this B-17 saddle might have promise. I went for a ride on my old gel-seat saddle after a couple of days on the Brooks and the bike felt like a drunk on roller skates.
I still have some adjusting to do. Unlike the gel seat, there's one place and one place only where you can sit, and moving the saddle forwards and back tends to mess up the seating geometry. Writing about the best way to find the right tilt of the seat could fill a page. And the height of the seatpost has to be changed because the B-17 is not padded, so you sit lower on the bike. Every one of these adjustments affects the other ones, and the only way to test them is to ride after every minute change. It's going to be days before I get this thing dialed in just right. I'll post updates from time to time.
09 September 2008
Hurricane Ike Decision Tree
Let's say Ike hits the Valley in a few days. If it's...
Category 1: Charge batteries, buy propane, fill car tank, ride it out
Category 2: Everything in Cat 1, plus boarding up windows, clearing lawn furniture out of yard
Category 3: Cat 2 preparations, plus making phone calls to relatives. Hunker down.
Category 4: Cat three preparations, plus getting cats together, preparing to leave, praying
Category 5: VAMONOS
06 September 2008
More Tweets, Fewer Blog Posts
Lately I find I'm posting fewer and fewer blog posts. It's not that I have lost interest in blogging but that I have started Facebooking and Twittering. Those services, along with a few other social web sites, seem to be capturing my interest much more these days.
Before, when I wanted to share a link to something interesting I'd read, I would incorporate it into a blog post. This means I had to, you know, actually think of something to write, which is sort of, um, like work?
But on Facebookm if I want to share a link, I just post the link on my profile page with a one-line comment. This takes much less time and also keeps me from having to write something original. Now, I can just act as an echo chamber for something that catches my fancy. Much less work for my brain, and for those of my readers. Lets me save those precious neurons for later, when I might have to think a thought or something.
Twitter is a microblogging service where you have to condense your most complex ideas and discussions into posts no longer than 140 characters. I'm embarrassed to say that most of my blog posts can be converted into Twitter "tweets" with room to spare. Absolutely no problem. It's mortifyin'.
Between Twittering and blogging, I'm finding that my posts are getting both shorter and longer. My tweets are short, and my blog posts, when I actually get around to posting a blog entry, are getting longer and longer. What's disappeared are one or two paragraph blog entries that I used to dash off commenting on something of other.
Before, when I wanted to share a link to something interesting I'd read, I would incorporate it into a blog post. This means I had to, you know, actually think of something to write, which is sort of, um, like work?
But on Facebookm if I want to share a link, I just post the link on my profile page with a one-line comment. This takes much less time and also keeps me from having to write something original. Now, I can just act as an echo chamber for something that catches my fancy. Much less work for my brain, and for those of my readers. Lets me save those precious neurons for later, when I might have to think a thought or something.
Twitter is a microblogging service where you have to condense your most complex ideas and discussions into posts no longer than 140 characters. I'm embarrassed to say that most of my blog posts can be converted into Twitter "tweets" with room to spare. Absolutely no problem. It's mortifyin'.
Between Twittering and blogging, I'm finding that my posts are getting both shorter and longer. My tweets are short, and my blog posts, when I actually get around to posting a blog entry, are getting longer and longer. What's disappeared are one or two paragraph blog entries that I used to dash off commenting on something of other.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
