Giving up on Twitter working with my blog. See you in a few months.

From Bush’s State of the Union address:

Our nation’s health care system, like our economy, is also in a time of change. Amazing medical technologies are improving and saving lives. This dramatic progress has brought its own challenge, in the rising costs of medical care and health insurance. Members of Congress, we must work together to help control those costs and extend the benefits of modern medicine throughout our country.

From today’s news:

President Bush’s 2009 budget proposal, which comes out Monday, “will virtually freeze most domestic programs and seek nearly $200 billion in savings from federal health care programs,” a senior administration official told the Associated Press.

That includes $17 billion in cuts for the Medicaid program, the state-federal partnership that provides health coverage to the poor.

Testing this blog thing.

You know those stories people tell about how they caused a big blackout? "I hit the light switch in my room and the whole Northeast went out!"

Anyway, I just crashed Twitter. I haven’t logged in in months, but today I did. (I’m thinking about adding a ‘microblog’ to my blog, and I wanted to see if I could use Twitter’s tools to do that.) I was in for all of five seconds when I get the Twitter Screen of Death:

So, um, sorry.

Crashing Twitter, apparently.

Thinking of adding Twitter to my blog.

Many of you know that I wrote a… thing a while ago called “Legal Rights of Photographers” that outlines when it’s OK to take a photo and when it isn’t. There are a lot of people who have the wrong idea –e.g., they think you can’t take a photo of a minor, or when on private property, and so on, without permission.

Cops are not immune from inventing laws in their heads. People have posted about troubles they’ve had — cops who claim “It’s illegal to shoot this or that,” citing security or 9/11 or the Patriot Act or some other nonsense.

But here’s where I need some help. Bert Krages has a terrific guide called “The Photographer’s Right” that talks a lot about what your rights are when confronted by private citizens (e.g., security guards) who want you to stop taking pictures. But he doesn’t talk much about dealing with cops.

Here’s my question: Can anyone out there give advice for dealing with the police when you know you’re in the right? I know the obvious stuff, like “be polite”; I’m looking for more detail from someone who knows police procedure.

For example, if a cop demands that you turn over your camera, you can legally refuse. But just because you can doesn’t mean the cop knows that, and he’s the guy with the gun. So what can you say that will actually resonate?

Can you ask him to radio someone? (One person told me that he was detained briefly by the police at a scene, but when they contacted the local DA’s office, they were told to let him go.)

If he threatens to arrest you for taking pictures (which he can’t do), how can you stop him or at least give him pause? Should you ask him what law you’re violating? Or will he ignore you?

If he demands to see your photos (and you don’t have to let him), what can you say without being a jerk that will convince him he’s going down the wrong path?

In short, I need someone who knows cop-speak, police procedure, or both who can tell me what ‘magic phrases’ a photographer can use when confronted by police for taking legal pictures — something that will hopefully result in the cop grudgingly letting the photog go about his business.

Lots of people have ideas and advice, but I really need someone who has an ‘in’ of some sort — someone I can cite, or who can point me to a resource I can cite.

Thanks!

So, with that little CSS thing fixed, suddenly the site looks fine in Internet Explorer. (Better in Firefox for the most part, but still good in both.)

It has me wondering, though. That error must have been there a long time — weeks or months. Considering that most visitors are using IE, that means most people were seeing the ugly, broken site.

Now, with folks willing to tell me I’m fat and ugly, you would think that someone would have said, "And your site’s ugly, too." But no.

So Firefox users won’t see a change, but IE users are probably thinking, "Wow, he redid his site and it looks pretty good now."

At least I hope.

[Update: Resolved. See comments.]

Something’s gone wrong. In fact, it may have been wrong for a while. Some of this site’s CSS isn’t working properly in Internet Explorer.

Here’s what I see in Firefox (click to enlarge if you like):

But here’s what it looks like in Internet Explorer:

For some reason the boxes on the home page aren’t appearing in IE, nor is the text within those boxes being formatted correctly.

CSS users, help!

The full CSS file is here. Here’s what I think are the relevant snippets:

This creates the box:

.box
    {
    border: 1px solid black;
        font-size: 100%;
    background-color: #cccccc;
    padding: 0 8px 4px 4px;
    margin: 0 0 6px 0;
}

And this formats any H3 tags within a box:

.box h3
    {
    font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, Helv, sans-serif;
    font-weight: bold;
    font-size: 16px;
    line-height: 14px;
    color: black;
    background-color: transparent;
    letter-spacing: -1px;
    margin-bottom: 4px;
    margin-top: 12px;
}

Any ideas why those boxes aren’t showing? And why the text inside isn’t being formatted the way I expect it to?

HELP!

Today was fiddle-with-the-car day. Specifically, to clean out my engine (and my wife’s) using Sea Foam.

Every now and again I get to reading various car-enthusiast boards, especially if a Check Engine light comes on and I need to find out what to do to fix it.

One product that kept coming up was Sea Foam.

It’s sold as one of the many, many engine cleaners in your local auto parts store, but this is one of the few that people really, really like. So I figured to try it.

It works at least three different ways. You add a third of a can to your gas tank to clean out your fuel injectors and such. You put a third in your crankcase (i.e., your oil), where it removes the various kinds of crap and sludge in your engine. (Drive a little while, then change your oil.) Finally, you can find the correct vacuum hose and pour a third of the can into that, which gets sucked into your engine and cleans out valves and the like.

Even that last part is pretty simple, although it sounds complex. More important, though, is the effect it has.

Once the Sea Foam gets sucked into the vacuum hose and starts working its way into your cylinders, it burns off, taking a lot of gunk with it. This results in huge clouds of white smoke coming from your tailpipe, which (hopefully) has the effect of alarming your neighbors.

Some people on message boards report neighbors rushing over to put out what they assume is a fire. One guy on a Chevy board said he would only do it late at night in case some Ford owner drove by and thought his car was burning oil. (Seriously.)

This was indeed the case, first with my car, then with Karen’s. My engine was warm, thanks to the trip to AutoZone, so I revved it for a bit and let everything burn off. Quite a lot of smoke came from the tailpipe, much to my amusement. I cackled in case any neighbors were watching.

Karen’s car, though, I only ran for a little bit. The rest will come off during her James Bond-style drive to work tomorrow, when people behind her are engulfed in a cloud.

And if I didn’t tighten the drain plug, she’ll even lay down an oil slick. Sweet!

Check out Woonz, which bills itself as "the audio search engine." Enter a song title or artist, and it provides you a list of matching MP3 files (and, I believe, other audio files) on the Net.

You’re presented with a list of files. For example, I got this when I searched on "Hootie":

(Click to enlarge.)

You can then click download, where you’re redirected… somewhere. Wherever it is, you’re given the standard browser download box. And moments later you have your song.

If you’re like me, you say, "Huh?" That… that can’t be legal. And indeed it’s not.

Woonz explains in its FAQ that it is simply a search engine targeted at MP3s that other folks have put online — something like doing a Google search with "filetype:mp3" added. Except that Google doesn’t support MP3 searches — just .doc, .xls, .pdf, and a few others.

There’s a disclaimer at the bottom of the page:

No files are cached or stored on Woonz servers, all data comes from thier various sources on the internet. Do not download copyrighted material without permission. Woonz is a search engine designed for LEGAL entertainment purposes only. This search engine is in no way intended for illegal downloads.

All well and good, except that Woonz doesn’t tell you where it’s getting the file! It’s kinda like Barry Bonds’s trainer giving him an unmarked pill and saying, "Don’t take any illegal drugs."

It feels like Woonz is on the right side of the law, but only barely. It’s just a search engine, and holding it liable for what it searches for might be a tough nut to crack.

But the argument "Well, it’s up to the user to determine whether he’s downloading legally" may not work when Woonz doesn’t give said user the information necessary to make that call.

Can you imagine the discussion?

"We can’t put it in quotes if someone didn’t say it."

"So what do we do?"

"Find someone to say it. How about Willie?"

"But he’s just the mailboy!"

"Doesn’t matter, as long as someone says these exact words. Otherwise we have to reprint all the boxes."

I was curious, so I went looking. Found this 20-or-so-second clip that’s a slightly longer version of what was on New York magazine’s site. No audio, though.

I wondered — still wonder, actually — why the folks at Swiss Army Brands haven’t started to offer a carry-on-friendly "knife." I’m thinking of one without a blade, but with other useful tools that would get past those frakking TSA jerks security.

Oddly, it was Florsheim, the shoe maker, who ran with the idea. The company is now offering "airport-friendly" shoes that don’t have steel shanks and can thus don’t need to be removed.

H/T to, and a shot of the tag on the shoes at, bloginfosec.

I’ve touched on this before, but I need to grab it and shake it this time.

I am sick of people who whine about things with their mouths, while simultaneously causing the very thing they’re whining about.

In other words, the idiots out there need to get a fast, hard lesson in consequences and dominos. Cause and effect, people — pretty basic stuff.

You can’t whine about manufacturing jobs going overseas and then go shop at Wal-Mart. People shop there — and other discount places — because they’re cheap. Period. I can’t imagine many folks enjoying the leaning–toward-redneck atmosphere. But Wal-Mart has great prices, so why not save a few bucks.

Forget the whole business of how they treat their workers. Wal-Mart offers low prices because it has tremendous clout with the manufacturers. It demands low wholesale prices, and it gets them.

So how to manufacturers offer low wholesale prices? By cutting costs — and the easiest cost to cut is labor.

So when you’re in line at Wal-Mart whining to your friend about the local factory or mill or assembly plant closed, turn your word-of-the-day calendar to "hypocrite."

You can’t whine about big, bad corporations and then demand better returns from your mutual funds and stocks. Why do corporations behave badly? Why do they lie, cheat, steal, bilk, and all those other things? To make lots of money.

Sure, some of that goes to line the CEO’s pocket, but the major reason these companies sell their collective souls to the nearest demon is to keep the stock price up. Price goes down, shareholders get cranky.

And the shareholders are us. We who either own stock directly or through mutual funds, or through 401(k)s and IRAs. We demand better performance, so the companies we’re invested in do whatever they can to give it to us.

So next time you’re bitching about Exxon-Mobil or Chevron or whomever at the gas pump, filling up your I-need-to-compensate-for-something SUV, either go home and move your investments into something socially responsible, or shut the hell up.

You can’t whine about the crap on (and success of) Fox News and also whine about finding something offensive. The way it seems today, being "offensive" is a crime. Pull it off the air. Apologize. Fire people. Change things so as never, ever to offend anyone.

You know what you get with attitude like that? Crap. Bland, useless content. Take the Howard Sterns and Don Imuses off the air and you’re left with inane Clear Channel prattling.

Punish kids for daring to do anything that someone finds offensive is to guarantee them a life of mediocrity.

Fox News understands that. It doesn’t care that its highly partisan slant on news offends people. It doesn’t care about the crap that comes out of the mouths of its commentators, because it knows that it makes Fox stand out. Sure, it offends people, but look what offending people has gotten it: success.

Ann Coulter is the kind of person who ought to be gang-raped, beheaded, and dumped in an unmarked grave. She offends anyone with a triple-digit IQ or a sense of decency. But she doesn’t care — and she sells a lot of books.

During the recent race for Virginia Senate (Allen vs. Webb), I had some wonderful information about some things Allen had said. But I was told not to use it because "it might offend Allen supporters." It didn’t matter if it was true or not, just that it might offend people. The story was that much blander as a result.

So next time you feel like complaining about some "offensive" content somewhere, shut your trap, go home, and eat some white bread dipped in water first. At least get a taste blandness before you inflict it on the rest of us.

More, I suspect, to come.

Go, Giants! (Rather… Going, Giants!)

…for every car and truck on the road.

I’ve been getting a lot of "legit" spam lately. By that I mean junk e-mail from companies I have never done business with, offering products I don’t care about, but that are real companies. We’re talking about seminars, audio courses, and the like.

These people give an 800 (or 877) number to call, and an 800 (or 877) number to fax for more info.

I plan to take advantage of them. (I tried the unsubscribe link in the e-mail, but it generates a message "Unable to connect to database server. Please try again later.Host ‘healthcareaudioinfo.com’ is not allowed to connect to this MySQL server."

So here’s the plan: I’m going to fax them a letter telling them, politely, how I feel. Politely, and detailed. And, just to be sure they can read it, I’m going to send it in a large font. Sure, that may add some pages, but I want to be sure they get the message.

And, so they understand why I don’t like this, I’ll include the full text of the CAN-SPAM act (also in large print). And to be extra sure, I’ll include translations in several languages.

This is no problem for me because I’m just cutting and pasting into a Word document that I’ll send via WinFax overnight. (Gosh, I hope I don’t screw up with WinFax and accidentally send it over and over. But it’s been a while since I dusted off my fax-modem.)

Finally, as I can’t receive faxes, I’ll make sure the transmit ID on the ones I send is a working number: That of another spammer. Let them keep one another busy.

If you’re interested, here are the phone and fax numbers of these spammers:

Phone

800-223-8720 (multiple spam)

800-474-1994 (multiple spam)

800-561-5736

Fax

800-508-2592 (multiple spam)