Not even Apple is immune from under-image reflection Photoshop disasters:
Side note: if you haven’t checked out the Photoshop Disasters blog, take a look. That this sometimes subtle but sometimes egregiously awful Photoshop work actually gets published is astounding!
Wired yesterday had a cool brief history of GPS. I learned a couple of cool things:
The GPS story starts with Sputnik, the first artificial satellite. The night after it was launched by the Soviet Union in 1957, researchers at MIT were able to track Sputnik’s orbit by its radio signal. And if you can track satellites from Earth, you can figure out how to locate objects on (or just above) Earth from the positions of satellites. […]
[Today,] GPS augmentation and precise monitoring techniques known as carrier-phase enhancement, differential GPS and relative kinematic positioning can now provide accuracy down to 4 inches.
4 inches! Incredible! Hmm, if I were 4 inches to the right of where I’m sitting now, I’d fall off the couch.
(Photo: Wired article via NASA)
If you can’t afford to convert your home to use all solar power but want to, perhaps you can at least power your iPhone with solar power. TUAW writes:
The case is essentially a lithium ion battery pack with a solar panel that doubles as a flip cover for the iPhone. The construction is said to be leather, however I cannot imagine this being very kind to Mother Nature. There is also an LED status indicator that informs you of the capacity of the case’s battery pack when charging and discharging.
The instruction manual notes that an empty iPhone battery can be re-charged in 3 hours when the included Li-Ion battery pack is full. When the battery pack is empty you can set the case to direct charge mode and get your iPhone recharge on straight from the power of the Sun itself!
This weekend, New Orleans Representative William Jefferson (D) lost a bid for a tenth term in Congress. About time. I wrote last month he was one of eleven Congressmen running for election while under investigation. He’s now the second name to drop off that list, with Uncle Ted Stevens being the first. Jefferson, of course, was found hiding $90,000 of cash in his freezer.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) list their report of the 20 most corrupt members of Congress. Here they are:
*Doolittle, Fossella, and Renzi retired; Pearce lost a Senate bid; and Feeney, Jefferson, and Stevens were defeated in their reelection bids.
Looks like with these deletions, we’ll be adding some more names to this list (or could it be that these were the only corrupt Congressmembers and there are no more to add to the list? Yeah, right, sadly). I was going to write we can now add NY Rep. Charlie Rangel to the list, but he’s already on there.
Ever since I attended an air show when I was young, I’ve been fascinated with military aircraft. While I regret not following aircraft development as closely as I used to, yesterday while reading Patrick Appel, filling in for Andrew Sullivan, I learned something new: the Pentagon has a new plane, the F-35 Lightning.
The stealth-technology-equipped F-35 comes in three flavors normal runway takeoff and landing, short takeoff and vertical landing (like the Harrier), and aircraft carrier takeoff and landing and is a little brother to the stealthy F-22 Raptor.
Scheduled to enter service in 2011, the F-35 is aimed at replacing the Air Force’s F-16 Fighting Falcon and the Marines’ AV-8A Harrier and aimed at complementing the Navy’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet.
The name “Lightning” is in honor of Lockheed Martin’s World War II fighter, the P-38 Lightning.
The F-35 Lightning:
The F-22:
In my excitement to see some awesome new military hardware, I did a little more poking around, and I learned the F-117 was sadly retired in April. The F-117 Nighthawk stealth fighter along with the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber are two of the most kick-ass aircraft ever developed. The former is an angular harbinger of doom; the latter is an uber-sleek, bat-like phantom of the skies.
The F-117:
The B-2:
A few more F-35 views:
F-16, F-35, F-22 comparison:
And finally, an interesting tidbit about the development of the F-35:
[The F-35, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)] evolved to an international co-development program. The United Kingdom, Italy, The Netherlands, Canada, Norway, Denmark, Australia and Turkey have formally joined the U.S. and contributed money toward the program. These partners are either NATO countries and/or close US allies, and peacekeeping and war fighting more recently have been done by coalitions. The reason to have all of these countries in co-development with the US is that there is currently a big difference in the type of equipment that they fly. Although some countries fly equipment similar to the US’s, others fly equipment that is less capable. With JSF, they can all fly the same airplane; as a coalition, they can all be the same. With this in mind, the U.S. invited these eight countries to participate in developing the airplanes. That is to say, they are not just participants to buy the airplanes. They will participate in the design, build, and test of the airplanes. This is a marked difference from past programs.
(Image credits: F-35 comparison and F-35 three-view from Aerospaceweb.org; all other photos from Wikimedia and the United States Air Force in the public domain)
Designed by: Saul Bass
Year: 1959
In talking about President-elect Barack Obama’s nomination of retired General Eric Shinseki to be Secretary of Veterans Affairs, James Fallows at The Atlantic said this:
Whenever he talks about this selection, Obama (plus his lieutenants) can describe it completely, sufficiently, and strictly in the most bipartisan high-road terms. They have selected a wounded combat veteran; a proven military leader and manager; a model of personal dignity and nonpartisan probity: an unimpeachable choice. Symbolic elements? If people want them, they can work with Shinseki’s status as (to my recollection at the moment) the first Asian-American in a military-related cabinet position, not to mention a Japanese-American honored for lifelong military service on Pearl Harbor Day.
As for the other symbolic element that Obama is elevating the man who was right, when Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Cheney, et al were so catastrophically wrong that is something that neither Obama nor anyone around him need say out loud, ever. The nomination is like a hyper-precision missile, or what is known in politics as a “dog whistle.” The people for whom this is a complete slap in the face don’t need to be told that. They know and know that others know it too. So do the people for whom it is vindication. And all without Obama descending for one second from his bring-us-together higher plane.
Well said, and classic Obama style: taking the high road while being oh-so sly about it.
After I said I was thankful for 20 January 2009, a former professor of mine sent me a link to a National Review article by Mona Charen. Whether from personal ignorance and total dismissal of anything positive or from skewed media and lack of coverage, I didn’t know this admirable thing about President Bush:
From the beginning of his administration, President Bush has pushed for more aid to Africa. Motivated perhaps by his deeply felt Christian faith (relieving poverty in Africa has become a major charitable push among evangelicals), the president has pressed for greater aid to Africa across the board. The original PEPFAR legislation (President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief), which passed in 2003, was the largest single health investment by any government ever ($15 billion). At the time the initiative was launched, only about 50,000 sub-Saharan Africans were receiving antiretroviral treatment for AIDS. Today, 1.7 million people in the region, as well as tens of thousands more around the globe, are receiving such treatment. PEPFAR has also funded efforts to prevent mother-to-child transmission of the AIDS virus, provided compassionate care to the sick and dying, and cared for 5 million orphans. One aspect of the program has been to reduce the stigma of the AIDS diagnosis in Africa.
In July of this year, the president requested that funding for PEPFAR be doubled to $30 billion. The new funding will be used to train 140,000 new health-care workers. It would also address other illnesses, like tuberculosis, that often complicate AIDS.
The president also backed a malaria initiative that has provided an estimated 25 million Africans with nets, spraying, and other prevention and treatment options. Separate from the AIDS funds, the president has tripled development assistance and humanitarian aid to Africa since taking office.
This victory and accomplishment for President Bush is, sadly, lost amongst his administration’s many failures and controversies. I am disappointed I didn’t know this. As my professor pointed out, “he’s not all bad.” President Bush certainly deserves some well-deserved credit here.
(Nod: DemConWatch)
I’m a little late, but it’s too good not to post it anyway. My parents were watching the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade on Thursday, and:
I was within listening distance of the TV and exclamed, “ah, they got rickrolled.” I had to explain what rickrolling is. How awesome was the parade, though. All of America got rickrolled by a live Rick Astley.
I still love this clip, too John McCain gets Barackrolled:
Ben Smith today adds some new facts I didn’t know about to the story I first learned about from Matthew Berger, guest-blogging for Marc Ambinder. The original story was Senator Hillary Clinton is constitutionally ineligible from accepting the Secretary of State job because of Article I, Section VI:
No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.
Emoluments defined as:
the returns arising from office or employment usually in the form of compensation or perquisites
So if the civil office received a pay raise while the representative or senator was serving in Congress, the person in question cannot take the job. In 2007, cabinet secretaries made $186,600, and in 2008, they made $191,300 (actually, their pay has increased every year as far back as 2003). Clinton, of course, was elected in 2006 to serve a six-year term, so the Secretary of State’s pay has increased while Clinton was serving her term, thus making her constitutionally ineligible from becoming secretary of state.
Does this matter? Technically, it does. The Constitution, after all, is the supreme law of the land. There is precedent, however, for this situation as Ben Smith points out:
It is not, however, an actual political problem, any more than it was when Sen. Lloyd Bentsen became Treasury secretary in 1993 or when Richard Nixon made Sen. William Saxbe attorney general in 1973.
Nixon’s lawyers used what’s now known (in very small circles) as the “Saxbe fix,” by which Congress re-lowered the salary for the job, deciding that that got around the constitutional issue.
The dodge actually goes further back than that, though: Taft’s secretary of state, Philander Knox, came through the same loophole; his salary was brought back down to $8,000 in February of 1909.
I’m no consitutional lawyer, but I’m assuming her resigning before she’s nominated wouldn’t matter because the clause in Article I, Section VI says “during the time for which he was elected.” So regardless of whether or not Clinton is a sitting senator, she was elected for a term from 2007-2013. The clause makes no reference to the represenative or senator being a sitting or former (retired, resigned) representative or senator.
But the best part of this pseudo-debate is the technicality to the technicality:
But one of the original troublemakers on this, Michael Stokes Paulsen who wrote a 1994 paper titled “Is Lloyd Bentsen Unconstitutional?” is holding the line, though he suggests Hillary could slip through on a different technicality: The constitutional clause refers to “he.”
While the “he” may be technically sufficient to get Clinton by Article I, Section VI, I think the reduction of her salary to the 2006 level should be enough. The clause was originally inserted to bar Congressmen from raising salaries in civil offices and taking the jobs for themselves in other words, to curtail corruption. Reducing the salary of the secretary of state avoids the reason the clause is part of the Constitution, and I don’t think anyone can argue Clinton becoming secretary of state is a result of some corrupt practice. I think we can, however, make the arguement that creating laws to sidestep parts of the Constitution we don’t like is a potentially dangerous precedent.
If you own a Mac and are tired of clicking the time in the menu bar to see the date, LifeHacker explains how to edit the menu bar to always show the date. No more clicking!
My parents, visiting for the long weekend, were watching one of the network morning shows today, and a representative from the Butterball Hotline was on the show. I was happily reminded of this string of scenes from The West Wing:
On this day of thanks, here are just a few things I’m thankful for:
I hope you had a safe and happy holiday and were able to give thanks for the things and the people you may be thankful for.
For a movie about burning books, this title sequence features no printed words. Genius.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1y0O6sbvoUDesigned by: Unknown
Year: 1966
If you’re searching for the perfect gift for the Mac lover in your life (or yourself), how about the Mac dock throw pillows?
Or how about the iPhone icon coasters?
Designed by: Kyle Cooper
Year: 1996
Where else can former Vice President Al Gore not only influence policy on energy and environmental matters, but actually draft and have an official, high-level, and direct engagement of policy other than as the head of the Department of Energy? The DoE website lists its five “strategic themes” as:
Sound like a good fit? I think so. You?
I was talking with a friend and former professor of mine (who is much smarter than I) the other day, and he disagreed with my proposal of Senator John McCain as Secretary of Defense in an Obama cabinet. He said McCain is too rash and represents too much of an old type of thinking. I agree, but I am still too attached to the now-cliched team of rivals idea to not believe in a Secretary McCain.
The rumors say, though, that current Secretary of Defense Robert Gates will stay on for an indeterminate amount of time. This does a couple things: it gives continuity in command during two wars (don’t change horses in mid-stream?); it gives Obama his discussed Republican in his cabinet; and it confirms something else: Obama likes the Bush 41 National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft Republican mentality a realist, pragmatic approach to dealing with the world.
But the question is, who comes after Gates? If not McCain, then I think it should be this guy.
Any thoughts?
(Nod: Talking Points Memo)
Typealyzer analyzes the words and sentences of a blog and guesses the personality type of the author. I’m a thinker:
The logical and analytical type. They are especialy attuned to difficult creative and intellectual challenges and always look for something more complex to dig into. They are great at finding subtle connections between things and imagine far-reaching implications.
They enjoy working with complex things using a lot of concepts and imaginative models of reality. Since they are not very good at seeing and understanding the needs of other people, they might come across as arrogant, impatient and insensitive to people that need some time to understand what they are talking about.
Fitting? You tell me. I love how the laptop their cartoon has is an Apple. :-)
(Nod: The Daily Dish)
Care for an Apple apple?
Might those be Macintosh apples? Check out the whole process.
(Nod: The Unofficial Apple Weblog)
Check out (and vote on how they should count) these examples of challenged ballots in Minnesota’s senate race recount. I suppose an argument can be made for why can’t people read and follow the directions on how to vote, but perhaps an argument can also be made for why can’t we develop a nationally-standardized, user-proof, and user-friendly ballot. One of the many things wrong with the voting process in this country.
(Nod: FiveThirtyEight.com)
Barack Obama has on countless occasions spoke of the need to heal the nation and bring divisiveness to an end. He has on countless occasions spoke of there not being red states and a blue states, but a United States and has stressed the need to come together and work together to forge a more perfect Union. If he truly believes what he says he believes, he will assemble not a team of yes-men and -women, not a team of people who agree with him, but, as Doris Kearns Goodwin put it, a team of rivals. Not a team of homogeneous political makeup, but a team of varying and diverse political philosophies. That team looks likely to include Senator Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, and it should include Senator John McCain as secretary of defense.
As former rivals to Obama, Clinton and McCain would do a great service for their country by serving in his cabinet. Obama spent many months critiquing Clinton’s policy proposals and calling McCain an extension of President Bush. Would his appointment of these two senators invalidate his campaign and mean he said these things simply to be elected? No. Having advisors who don’t necessarily share your opinion is necessary for healthy debate and should be encouraging for the rest of us that our leaders can set aside partisan and political differences.
Obama has spoken in the past about his interest in modeling President Abraham Lincoln’s cabinet, one consisting of a group of advisors who, previous to Lincoln’s election and subsequent nominations of them to their respective jobs, loathed him. He chose them not because he wanted them to like and admire him, which they eventually did, but because Lincoln thought they were the best people he could enlist.
With Clinton and McCain, the question isn’t why Obama would put rivals, two people he spent months demonizing, in his cabinet. It is a question of whether these former foes can place personal strife aside and serve the country. It is a question of whether they are willing to set asides their specific differences with Obama should he ask them to enact policy contrary to theirs. And can anyone argue neither Clinton nor McCain are qualified for their respective positions? After all, the two came extremely close to being elected president.
But would Clinton or McCain shirk responsibilities of serving the president and create foreign policies or defense policies, respectively, on their own and perhaps divergent of Obama’s? If they truly serve at the pleasure of the president, then no. They would be asked to leave or would be passive-agressively forced out, no doubt severely damaging what’s left of their political careers if not their legacies.
Does it matter that the three may not like each other? And again, does it matter the three have heavily disagreed on policies throughout the presidential campaign? Absolutely not. Because coming together, working together is putting country first. And with two wars, an economic catastrophe, and environmental, health care, and education crises, that is what matters.
The spotlight Perceptive Pixel has been given from the presidential campaign is amazing. Even though the Daily Show and Saturday Night Live are making fun of John King and CNN’s Magic Wall, the technology developed by Perceptive Pixel is now firmly entrenched in our lives, in part thanks to them.
ABC is reporting the CEOs of the big-three automakers traveled to Washington, DC, on their companies’ private jets to ask Congress for $25 billion. While arguing their companies are “burning through cash,” these CEOs are irresponsibly contributing to the problem. From ABC:
[GM CEO Rick] Wagoner’s private jet trip to Washington cost his ailing company an estimated $20,000 roundtrip. In comparison, seats on Northwest Airlines flight 2364 from Detroit to Washington were going online for $288 coach and $837 first class.
Okay, so perhaps one trip isn’t so bad, but in the case of Ford:
Ford CEO [Alan] Mulally’s corporate jet is a perk included for both he and his wife as part of his employment contract along with a $28 million salary last year. Mulally actually lives in Seattle, not Detroit. The company jet takes him home and back on weekends.
And:
Ford continues to operate a fleet of eight private jets for its executives. Just Tuesday, one jet was taking Ford brass to Los Angeles, another on a trip to Nebraska, and of course Mulally needed to fly to Washington to testify.
Doesn’t it seem prudent that the management of these ailing companies ought to make concessions themselves especially after the unions last year made their own concessions in a effort to ameliorate the financial situations of the big three? If these CEOs truly understand the situation and are committed to fixing it, they can demonstrate their understanding and commitment with visual, measurable steps to personally contribute, such as forgoing the private jet and taking a significant pay cut. Otherwise, for the CEOs to ask for tax-payer money while they frivolously spend their companies’ money is outrageous and insulting.
(Nod: Marc Ambinder)
