OpenGeek

It's been a while!

2009-02-13T13:23:00.001-08:00

Life continues to improve! I'm happy for that. Happy enough that I am considering blogging again!

Gonna start with a minor league post about colors, old computers and such.

Content change

2007-09-20T01:36:00.001-07:00

The text of Open Geek will remain for some time yet. Other content files are no longer hosted here, due to some significant life changes happening.

For all of those who enjoyed audio samples, etc... sorry!

Can somebody explain to me how granting a few of us the ability to discriminate traffic creates a free market?

2007-07-06T22:52:00.001-07:00

Seriously!

This is a big regression that is gonna impact all of us in serious ways. Goddammit I hate --really just hate this administration!

Since we've had the Resident President, absolutely nothing that matters has been preserved or even improved. Guess the growing people powered politics movement has gotten some attention and needs to be neutered.

With this action, goes my broadband, you can count on it. It won't really be worth it, if I cannot engage in the communication that matters.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/07/06/ftc-abandons-net-neutrality/

DO make your phone calls. It might help.

They are gonna dangle faster movie downloads, video, etc... They will grant business whatever it thinks it needs, regardless of what we actually need or want.

IMHO, what is being done here is not creating a free market, but a market where large, established interests are free to do what they want, the rest of us be dammed.

Very Orwellian --just like the rest of the shit happening right now.

Blogworks! (and some other stuff)

2007-06-14T08:20:00.000-07:00

This is kind of a dual post. First, I want to comment about a significant evolution in blogging that's become a factor. I first noticed this with "Blog Against Theoracy". Excellent effort, spearheaded by Blue Gal (and she does appear to rock), this was your usual blogswarm, and was fairly successful. I participated in this and met some very interesting people. Good stuff all around.

Blog Against Theoracy is happening again this holiday weekend, with a topic surrounding the idea that seperation of church and state is patriotic. (it clearly is) I've some stuff to write, so I'll be there with my post along with a lot of others. Again all good.

Doing some digging on blogswarms, I find they are led by a few very active hub blogs. A hub is where significant attention has been cultivated. I've also noted a few that are starting to use mailing lists for notification. Sometimes people don't check back. I strongly suspect these two ideas are either being combined right now, or are about to be, resulting in kind of a subject based topical, recurring network of blogs all posting on topics at regular times.

Call this the Blogwork, and you probably read that here first! If so, please do spread it around. I don't get to coin terms anywhere near as much as I would like! (c'mon people, it's cool! You know it is, and I'm not ashamed.)

The blogwork is going to act like something like a TV network does. From one source, links, supporting information, framing, assets, etc... will be posted on a given subject, with said subject loosely following a more general topical bias. Examples could be, the environment, a political party, theoracy, geek matters, electronic voting, etc...

Instead of just aggragating all the content into a mega portal blog, like Kos, the content will remain distributed with the idea of introducing more people to more blogs, and of course, bloggers to bloggers. I think this is just cool enough to happen.

A blogwork is also significant in that it can resonate with the traditional media news cycle, yet can grab the attention of many people of different ideologies. For example, someone who is not religious could be following the members of a given blogwork that have that same bent, or bias, yet still be engaged in the topic as a whole. Someone who is deeply religious could do the same.

The key here is that the greater message is being heard on a regular basis; therefore, the central source can engage in some general advocacy through framing and focus on the topic at hand. IMHO, this is quite a powerful idea and one that is likely to continue to grow.

One other key thing is that passers by get snagged into the network via the very wide net cast. You here might be reading OpenGeek, and I thank you if you are, and decide to explore the Blog Against Theocracy blogwork more fully, or perhaps just look forward to regular updates.

To maximize this, participants really should preface their posts with an icon, tagline, etc... that differentiates their blogwork content from their ordinary blogging content that would have otherwise have been written for other reasons.

Lastly, this also encourages people to write on a regular basis. I like this too and think it might encourage more blogging that is focused and relevant. At the very least, taking a moment to gather one's thoughts on a regular basis just isn't a bad thing overall.

That's it. Google around a little. I didn't include links this time because I want to you just go look at a forming blogwork that's gonna have some impact. Have others? Do I have it wrong? You know where the comment button is, by all means use it!

Blog Against Theocracy

2007-04-07T13:13:00.000-07:00

I like this idea. So, here I am on a quiet Saturday afternoon. There is rain, and there is rain. What better time, than right now, to put up a few quick thoughts? Have thoughts of your own?

Great, use the comment form below, post on your own blog today, or maybe just to talk to a friend. That's what this little movement is all about. Do visit Freedom First on your way through this exercise as well.

Right out of the gate, I think it's important to note we all take some things on faith. That's everybody! As a race, we do not know our origins, nor do we have enough fundemental known absolute truths to be able to call the shots on beliefs in an authoritative way. In this, we are all equally ignorant. This, for me, is the core justification for our equality under the law, and for our government to be neutral on matters of faith.

If we lack these core truths, we also lack authority, thus placing our various beliefs on par with one another. It's perfectly ok to not share beliefs, advocate for specific ones, and act on our beliefs, provided we do not cause one another harm. This is freedom and it's a very good thing.

The tradeoff for this freedom to believe what we will, make our choices as we will and engage others as we will is tolerance. Without it, we cannot exercise our freedom as we would otherwise. We also then lack the means to have the debates necessary for all of us to benefit from greater truths as they are revealed through frequent and passionate discourse.

I believe this is what the founders wanted. I believe it is the only just and true way to govern because I do not believe living a lie is defensible.

Truth is, our freedom here has made us a very religious people! More Americans believe in a higher power than almost anywhere else! Those without this belief also exist here on par with those that do and all is good right?

Wrong.

Over the years, I've seen a strong movement toward defining what our official belief system should be. Many of the larger religious groups want their beliefs codified into the law --endorsed by government somehow thinking this will validate them, lend them credence, or maybe just suppress competiting ones. All of this is wrong, unless we've got some known truths from which to derive the authority for it --and we just don't right now.

If anything is true, it is that we just don't know where we came from, nor how it all happened.

Again, this demands tolerance, if we are to get along at all, and avoid having to live lives filled with lies.

It does not matter what you believe. When advocating it to others, it should be defensible however. My personal view is that your beliefs should also be consistant with your actions, but that's just me. YMMV.

Take this holiday and consider your beliefs. Better, take some time and consider somebody elses. Find out what drives them, where you might have common ground and let them know you both are able to have the discussion because of the freedom you both have. Think about the difference between conviction and real --absolutely known solid truth! Having more numbers on your side, or a law that favors your beliefs does not make them more true does it?

Why bother then? Why not consider advocacy and live by your beliefs, secure in the freedom to do so? If they are defensible, just and true, others will see this and want to share. If not... no amount of law, advocacy or anything else will change that. These things might make you feel better at the end of the day, but that will come at the cost of somebody else not being able to feel good about themselves too. This cuts both ways, and I see a lot of people not so worried about that, and they really should be, if they have the strength of character to be honest with themselves and others.

Think about your freedom and what it really means, then commit to preserving it for our greater good. Future Americans will thank you for it. Heck, your neighbor might just thank you for it. If nothing else, I thank you for it!

Open Geek Discussion

2007-02-14T21:39:00.000-08:00

I've had a request or two for better comment handling. This is it. Nothing special, just a clean and simple free discussion forum service.

Before I do too much with this, let's bang on it a bit. Go ahead, register a user account and post up some stuff so we can check this forum out.

Go to the Discussion Forum

How to save your cat!

2007-01-20T10:00:00.000-08:00

Well, this is how I saved mine at least.

Coupla things about cats, I didn't know:

-if your cat has a plugged nose, it will not swallow. They will breathe through their mouth when this happens. If you see this, your cat is in danger.

-if your cat cannot smell it's food, it won't eat it. The food must be known good food and this happens by smell and taste for a cat. Smell is obvious, but taste can be problematic as the cat must actually try the food in order to taste it. This is a chicken and egg type problem your cat will need your assistance with.

-cats can only go a coupla days without food and water before critical systems begin to shut down, causing other problems.

-Afrin type nose drops work well on cats. One to two small drops per day, one nostril only. Alternate nostrils daily.

Essentially what happened to me was my cat ended up with a very bad cold. Completely plugged it's nose and sinus. Some fever, but all in all, it really was just a stuffed head. I tried vapor, cleaning the nose, etc... Nothing worked until I tried the Afrin. (And I did look up the toxicity before. Just so you know, most human cold remedies contain highly toxic elements for cats. In many cases, the toxicity level is many times that for us humans.)

Life circumstances did not permit a big vet bill. Sometimes you gotta make choices and this was one of those times. So, it was up to me and the cat to see how this was all going to go.

BTW: I should put the standard disclaimer that by reading this, you agree to hold me harmless for anything that should happen. I'm relating a life story only, and I could not see a VET for a lotta reasons. Go see your vet if at all possible.

So I started reading about cats, and their picky nature. That's where I got the info tidbits above. One other thing is that the mechanical problems caused by disease that affects their head usually is what does them in, due to the fact they won't consume the water and food necessary for the other healing processes to work properly. If they can eat and drink, you've a high percentage chance of their body being able to fight off the disease itself. That's where the cat and I were at. Not pretty, but not impossible either. Better than nothing and a certian death for sure.

By the time I reached this understanding, it had been a coupla days. Clearly getting into the danger zone. I started with the Afrin, then had to give the cat water drop by drop, using a small syringe with a pointed nozzle. If you surround the cat, then nudge the nozzle in to the side of their mouth, you can do a small squirt and let the cat struggle through getting it down. I did this a lot, many times per day, for a couple of days. Sometimes I would take some broth and use that for protein. Watch the broth though, it can get sticky and cause other problems. Best alternate with water, then broth, etc... always end with water.

A great check for overall cat hydration is to scrunch up the skin at the back of their neck. When you release it, you learn something about how hydrated your cat really is. If it snaps back quickly, you are in good shape. If it comes back slowly and does not regain it's usual shape, then the cat is not properly hydrated.

After a few days of this, we managed to hold our ground on hydration, but were losing big on protein. I was puzzled after getting her nose clear enough to breathe. Thought I was largely home free, but the cat would not eat! I tried a lot of things, but nothing worked. She would look at it, noze it, lick it, and that's it.

So, time to really annoy the cat. Time to force feed. Another Internet search led me to a great technique that worked very well. The bottom line is the cat wants to eat, but needs to be convinced that it can eat and that the food is something it should eat. Not an easy task.

Surround the cat again. I did this by crouching over the cat, trapping it between my legs. Then put some baby food, on one forefinger. With your other free hand, squeeze where the jaw hinge is and the cat will open it's mouth. Quickly (and I mean quick!) scrape a small amount of the food onto the roof of it's mouth.

Too slow and you get chomped! Too fast and you don't get the food in. Good luck!

What's going to happen is the cat will taste the food. It's gonna be very upset at you putting it there, but it will eventually figure out that either:

-you are gonna keep putting food in and it realizes it is just gonna have to deal,
-it knows the food is good from taste,
-it realizes it can actually eat the food!

Eventually it will try to eat on it's own as that is much better than dealing with you doing the feeding. Sounds brutal, but it works fast! That's something positive at least. Trust me on the feeding, it's largely negative. Took my cat two times through this whole affair and it licked the food off my finger the third time, then tried the food on it's own the fourth time. Each time though I had to go the distance. Crouch 'n trap, get the food ready, squeeze the jaw, etc... The cat has gotta know this is just going to absolutely happen.

Amazing! Just fricking amazing how picky cats really are. Everything else I tried failed totally and completely.

Texture seems to play a big role. Anything gritty won't fly, so don't bother mashing up cat food. After working the baby food for a day or so, I tried various things. The winner ended up being frozen shrimp. Put a few of these on a plate and nuke 'em for long enough to melt the water off and or nicely warm the shrimp. Leave the water on the plate as it's tasty to the cat. Strip the tails, if there are any and chop the meat up into nice little bits. Mine would work though the shrimp slowly, then lap up all the water, then sleep for a long time.

It took a few days of the shrimp diet for the cat to recover enough to start just drinking and eating on it's own, but it did and is just fine today. If you reach this point, just keep offering moist food and watch your cat for signs of improvement. Make sure water is fresh and take it to the bowl often to see if it's ready to do it's own thing.

Ideally, you can see a vet. If you can, do! Of course, that goes without saying, but this is the Internet and you never know...

Hope you don't end up in this situation, but if you do, maybe some of this will prove helpful!

Computing is fun again!

2006-11-20T14:52:00.000-08:00

Ok folks, I've gone off the deep end. Here's the deal. I've come to the realization that I really enjoy either big computing or small computing. The average run of the mill PC computing scene is pretty stale where my interests are concerned.

I've already blabbed enough here about Unix, X and all the neato stuff that brings to the table. Nothing has changed really --still love that stuff and always will. Having said that, I've also been getting back into classic computing through the wonderful community at AtariAge. Wonderful bit banging, right to the hardware stuff. Great homebrew scene as well. It's hard to point to a core group with more talent than the movers and shakers at AtariAge have combined.

For me however, the focus is a bit narrow. I want to get to the metal, but also want some relevance too. Enter Parallax, stage whatever!

These guys produce a fine set of products that are both educational and very practical to boot. Just the thing to start off on some new directions, while feeding that down and dirty to the metal urge coming on strong right now. Please visit them at http://www.parallax.com.

I've jumped in and purchased a Propeller Demo Board. In a 3 inch square package that's just a shade over half an inch high, you get the following goodies:

-propeller CPU 8 32 bit multi-processing core @ 80Mhz for a total of ~160MIPS parallel thoughtput
-ps2 keyboard and mouse input
-audio input from on board mic
-composite (baseband) video output NTSC or PAL
-VGA output with resolutions up to 1024x768 (and that may not be the end of it)
-onboard 32Kb EEprom for program storage
-USB programming interface for use with your standard win32 PC
-8 free i/o pins, ground clamp and two power sources 3.3v & 5v

Aside from the small memory footprint, this little system is a very capable general purpose hobby computer. The included software tools feature an assembler and SPIN higher level language, along with a collection of core hardware drivers and source code.

Parallax has just released a DYI game system, called the Hydra, that is based on the demo board I've been learning on. It has Nintendo compatable game connectors, a controller included, 128K memory expansion and a host of other hardware elements that are more specific to gaming. I fully expect a thriving demo and home brew gaming and project scene to evolve around these two products within a year.

The tech is accessable, supported by a fun community of like minded people to be found at: http://forums.parallax.com. The necessary software tools are free for the download and open where it makes sense to boot. What's not to like?

Needless to say, I'm basically stoked! Plenty of speed, lots of hardware options in a small and portable package. I'll have more to say later on, but it's gonna be a fun ride.

Selling HD Radio: Building value perception and driving early adoption

2006-09-08T08:36:00.000-07:00

Well I ended up ranting about this again on PDXRadio. After all was said and done, it's a rant worthy of some clarification and expansion.

Checking in with HD radio means learning that early adoption is still flat-lined. People are buying them slowly, but not for any real solid reasons. Some like new toys, some need a new radio and have heard the (boring) promos, a few are checking out the "hidden stations", etc... The takeaway here is that radio still has no overall compelling value proposition that will drive HD forward. This post is the third one in an attempt to put some ideas out there I believe have the potential to change this.

Disclaimer: I feel as strongly about what you are about to read as I do about knifing the baby that is HD AM. HD FM needs to build first for there to be a pool of new radios from which HD AM might see some new listeners. Better to use AM-Stereo right now, today to capture those 15 percent of car listeners who can take advantage of the higher quality today.

IMHO, the biggest problem HD faces today is content. It has to be compelling if it is to get people to buy new radios. A secondary issue is the branding. Right now, we've got stations using their existing brand, combined with this whole HD2, HD3 mess. Additionally, those extra streams contain content that may or may not be relevant to the listener base attracted to the brand in the first place. This is stupid from a value perception standpoint. It's also a mess where managing expectations is concerned.

Let me suggest some changes then:

Brand the stations with one identity. KXXX becomes KXXX and KXXX-HD. Two streams, that's it. One is either listening to the mainstream on whatever radio or the new HD stream on an HD radio. Clean and simple. Going forward it's easy to manage expectations and add value to one brand, instead of devaluing it with other choices that do not reinforce it. Think about it for a moment. If the existing stations are so cool, why bother with the new HD ones?

One station identity, with two streams opens the door for a whole set of really new programming and presentation ideas. If there is one constant in radio, the shuffle type stations have taught us, it's that new does get some attention. Having it last is another issue involving people and another rant, but let's just take the new = attention bit and run with it for now.

Copy becomes easy and clear. Now the term HD means both new and reinforces the main station identity all in one nice and easy to understand package. We did this HD thing so existing broadcasters could maintain their existing brands and stature. If this were not the case, DAB would be playing here right now and we would be listening to CBS-4 or some goofy new thing. Why not leverage the effort then and see where it leads?

eg: "Coming up on KXXX-HD, a mini concert series that explores the history of U2", "You are listening to KXXX-HD, where the new music is always first.", "This special programming segment was first aired on KXXX-HD earlier in the week. Take a moment to listen and explore what you too can hear on an HD radio today."

Having two streams under one brand provides a vehicle for more clearly differentiating that which is new content that adds value and that which is anchor content listeners return for. Both streams reinforce the station identity and together add value and provide additional choice for existing listeners, thus you will have a higher chance at keeping them. We may also find they switch to the HD stream before tuning off to another station. That can only be a good thing right? Finally, new listeners might be attracted by the new presentation options the two stream approach brings to the table.

If you are the first station in your market to actually do this, you get to claim the high-ground forever! Promo after promo can be aired, from time to time, letting people know their favorite station was the first on the dial to bring you the best in class HD radio programming! Gentlemen, start your engines!

Radio is best done as a venue. Having the two streams gives you a venue --go use it!

Some examples of what becomes possible, with a little out of the box thinking: (If you find yourself wanting more, contact me and let's talk!)

Play special events, interviews, live in-studio band sessions, DJ hour long spins, new music, contests and other things on the secondary stream first. Promo these on the legacy stream and play some of them while taking a bit of time to let the analog only listener not only get a taste of what they are missing, but also slowly get the idea they are behind the times. Done right, this not only builds awareness for HD radio, but also builds strong value perception and the idea of "newness" at the same time. This also provides a shot at earning some revenue from the HD programming efforts, in that properly re-purposed content can attract all listeners, not just HD enabled ones.

Once the new branding begins, the legacy stream is delayed where new content is concerned.

Mini-concert multi-casts! Choose an artist that has appeal across both young and old demos. Then play to both demos at the same time, letting the listener pick and choose! Before the commercial free set begins, take a moment to plug the HD and explain what's going to happen. The beauty of this is that when somebody hears the intro for a tune they don't like, they can check out the other stream first, maintain program continuity, and check out the other selection, all before tuning to some other station!

A station here locally has a program where listeners provide contact information that is announced and tied to Internet content and offers delivered to them by the station. (Yes, I'm a KNRK Nation supporter.) So, announce these early on the HD stream and tie that to a biggie prize. Then follow up with the normal announcement and the usual prize.

live DJ chat sessions, during long sets. On the HD stream, people can choose to hear the music, or participate in the chatter / shout-outs, etc... This is a very interesting way to combine music and talk. More to explore here for sure.

Pre-concert band interviews, special tracks, etc... On the day of a concert, promoted by the station, air extra goodies on the HD stream. Band member chats, mini-concerts, etc...

Make time limited podcasts avaliable to HD listeners. Put an HD radio ad into the podcast, and allow access to it via a keyword, heard only on the HD stream. Watch as HD listeners e-mail, IM, and phone a friend to say "I heard it on HD, check this special thing out!"

Actually play requests on the HD stream, during request hour while your bland and totally researched day parts grind away. Listeners can then contribute to the research in a way that mitagates the risk associated with playing some requests. You will find your next local market signature hit that way. Promo the hell out of it on the legacy stream, once it happens.

Extended listener composed sets, with dedication or message of the day. "Here's a set from sally that speak to global warming..." "From Weyland to Marissa with "Expresso Love". This is an hour of the best trance local DJ freaky has to offer, live and in studio coming up in the next hour on the KXXX-HD.

Which is more compelling?

Additional stations between the ones already on the dial that may or may not have anything to do with one's station of choice, or more of your favorite content first on HD?

There it is. Do this, so I've actually got a reason to buy an HD radio please?

Want more? hd@opengeek.org

Taco Pizza

2006-07-29T22:21:00.000-07:00

Finding a Pietro's, where I live, is tough. Of all the pizzas they sell, the taco one is the one I remember best. After some fiddling around, here is a recipe that will do the pizza justice:

You will need:

Pizza Crust (buy one, make one, whatever --just make sure it's a deep dish style one)
1 can refried beans (or make them, your call)
Grated cheese (moz, jack, cheddar) (enough to cover the pizza all over 1/3 of an inch thick at least --maybe two and a half cups for a medium pizza)
sliced and chopped lettuce (2 cups or so --medium sized bowl)
sliced tomatoes (two tomatoes or 1 cup)
diced onion (1/4 to 1/2 cup, depending on how much you like onions --get the white ones though!)
Dorito's Nacho Cheeze chips. (1 bag)
1/4 pound ground beef for medium pizza
optional: Spicy Jack cheeze
some small amount of corn-meal to sprinkle on cooking sheet

Spread the refried beans onto the pizza crust like you would pizza sauce. Make sure it's about 1/4 inch thick everywhere.

Sprinkle some of your onions on top.

Add cheeze to taste, sprinkling remainder of onions into the cheeze.

Roll beef into little balls, no bigger than 1/2 inch in size and place on top of cheeze. If you want to pre-cook these, that's a good idea too.

Put the whole works into the pre-heated oven for about 12-15 minutes at 425 degrees. If you like corn meal, sprinkle a light dusting onto your cooking sheet before placing the pizza on it.

Pizza is done, when cheeze is well melted and beef is cooked and brown. Depending on your oven, you might have better luck pre-cooking the beef or just skipping it.

Remove cooked pizza from oven and cut it to your preference.

Sprinkle sliced and chopped lettuce on top, followed by about 1/2 cup crused Doritos. Finish with chopped tomatoes on top and it's all ready to eat.

Enjoy a very good Taco Style Pizza!

HD Radio: Digital Boondoggle? (Part 2)

2006-07-04T14:07:00.000-07:00

Here we are another few months into the HD Digital radio saga. Time enough to check in and evaluate where we are with HD Radio and complete my earlier thoughts on the subject as well. Regular OpenGeek readers know I'm no fan of Digital Radio. On AM, it's a mess. We need to knife the baby right now and reconsider how we want to move the AM band forward.

Hint: Am Stereo support in every receiver made from today forward --this plus the modern DSP technology found in the new HD Radios would make for a potent AM solution. We are gonna invest in the design of the new radios, why not cover out bets huh?

On FM, to be perfectly fair, the technology has some merits and brings with it a unique chance for the radio industry to do itself some real good. Things like this just don't come along every day. That makes this discussion worth it on those grounds alone.

Frankly, if FM HD Radio manages to make it, we might actually get to a place where solid improvements to the AM band become viable. That place includes IBOC, BTW for those who might be thinking I'm just another bring back the AM Stereo geek. Well, I am, but I'm also fair too in that I simply want better radio. That means embracing IBOC where it makes sense to do so. 'nuff said, onward and forward!

Here we are some precious months later and the only new buzz I'm hearing about HD Radio still comes from the industry itself. The spots tell me more about Crutchfield than they do about the value proposition HD Radio brings to the table. That's gotta be fixed ASAP.

New radios are not on the shelves for all practical purposes, expectations about the technology are still being managed downward, and fundemental decisions about how to best apply the technology are off the map at this point. Most importantly, the early adopters are not buzzing about this new tech like they normally would a viable tech. What does this mean? It means they don't see the value proposition. Given all of the above, who can blame them?

So, how to sell HD Radio?

In a nutshell, put content on there that is not otherwise easily obtained elsewhere. Secondly, set the right expectations for the new venue (I refuse to buy into the ideal that radio is just another stream delivery system!). And finally, leverage the Internet for both listener interaction and feedback and content cultivation and aggragation.

Let's go through these one at a time.

Content not otherwise easily obtained elsewhere

Right off this means content outside the usual channels. With all the new content delivery choices these days, it's pretty hard to call most of the established content new by any measure. Your average hit single appears in a video game, on iTunes, all over the P2P filesharing services, on a movie sound track, internet radio stations, streamed from the artist web site, through a CD music delivery service, on a ring tone, as part of a TV broadcast, your friends iPod, and it goes on and on and on...

What's worse, for this model, is the reality that we are living today where the overall impact of the mega hit single is dropping. Greater overall availablity of music on demand has allowed people to focus on niches they find interesting. This, in turn, highlights pop music for what it is.

All of these things, and others I'm sure, have sharply diminished the value that 'new' (as in just released by the majors) content has where radio is concerned.

I propose the following: Given the primary strength of terrestrial radio is it's ability to deliver live and local content to it's potential audience, an ideal testing ground for this is the new FM HD subchannels. Things like this do not come along every day. Every FM station, broadcasting a secondary HD stream has a largely risk free venue to promote new ideas and content, without seriously impacting the bread and butter mainstream programming!

The lack of person to person marketing surrounding HD radio is disturbing. The early adopters and talkers should be promoting this technology to their friends, if it's to be a successful tech at all, we need people at this stage in the game to be talking it up to their peers. One such group, ripe for the picking, are local people into the local music scene.

So put some of the more talented ones on the air! (With a mentor of course.) They are going to jump at the chance to do some radio and are also going to be very interested in others hearing their efforts for obvious reasons. Tie these things in with an HD radio availiabity program and you have the makings for some local buzz.

Some of these efforts are going to be great. Run those as promos on the mainstream channel, thus letting ordinary people know not only that there is HD radio and that it has extra channels, but that those extra channels carry something relevant to them. Stream the new content as well, thus giving it a larger potential audience than just those people willing to buy HD radios for local content temptations. Overall, that's a more solid value proposition that resonates on many levels.

Set the right expectations for the new venue

First and foremost, radio is a venue. Position it as such, so that people can easily differentiate it from the other delivery technologies. Of course, radio can be a simple delivery system too, but that's not going to pack the punch required for longer term growth and mindshare being a venue will. There is room for both honestly. This advocacy essay is aimed at building new (and ideally better) radio experiences, so please take it as such.

Another expectation to set properly is content, not quality. The way HD radio exists today means either one digital stream that sounds pretty good, or two that don't sound so good, with one that has no analog backup. Pushing the whole digital means quality thing is just bunk. The bitrates and codec technology we have today just are not enough to meet this expectation, so why even bother setting it. Welcome to entertainment quality audio people.

Digital means choice and in particular it means more of it, period.

Leverage the Internet

Today radio can easily be a whole lot more of a two way medium than it has been in the past. This means we can more easily bond with the people (assuming there are people) on the radio. Technologies, such as e-mail, instant messaging, hypertext (web pages), online streaming, etc... all allow for a much greater interaction with a potential audience than was possible just 10 years ago.

The Internet also represents a potential content source as well. The local content, I mentioned above, may well have sharp limits depending on a lot of factors. However, there will be content online that appeals to the locals, whoever they may be. This content can be aggragated and presented in the form of shows just like the ones that currently pound home the same 40 or so hits every fricking week. This is beginning to show up on television, with shows detailing Viral Videos and other goofy internet culture / content offerings.

That's it on this topic for a while. Again, I've put these ideas here in the hopes of getting better radio --take it or leave it.

Making the switch to Ubuntu: Dapper Drake --That's Linux for the rest of you!

2006-07-04T12:21:00.000-07:00

I've been living by a simple rule, where computing is concerned, for a while now; namely, only run win32 & win64 operating systems if somebody else pays for them.

That means Linux, or a Mac at home for personal computing. So far, I prefer Linux and an older SGI Irix machine for most of my computing needs. The SGI is more or less dedicated to a few tasks, the rest happens on my Linux machine and it has gotten a bit long in the tooth. Time for a new computer and some new Open Source Software!

Having been a very long time Mandrake user since about version 6, the idea of switching didn't hold much appeal. Despite being a fairly happy user, a couple of issues continue to nag at me. These are, package management and desktop functionality.

Enter Ubuntu. These two areas are a focus for this distribution right now and let me tell you, I'm a pretty happy user! Over the last few days, I've been installing some software, getting to know GNOME and generally just checking out the environment. The UNIXey bits underneath are somewhat unfamiliar, compared to Mandrake and it's SGI like structure, but the arrangement is sane overall and easily understood. That means just getting used to a few differences here and there. No biggie.

So far, the GUI controls for nearly everything but window focus behavior are more than adequate for my needs. (Somebody really needs to let these folks know what focus follows mouse means!) Multimedia support is easily added to the base software package as well. Core software included was properly configured and ready to use, making me productive right out of the gate. All in all a net positive.

Package management rocks, particularly with Easy Ubuntu added to the mix. I asked the system for a variety of emulators, editors, some development stuff, etc.. and it was all delivered and installed while I worked on other things. --Nice.

The only downsides I'm seeing right now are some cut 'n paste wierdness, the VMWare Virtual Player and Kernel not matching up, and problems playing DVD media. I don't depend on these things for my core computing, so I'll just work through them and that's it.

Oh, one other thing nagged at me too. The lack of a base development selection choice. Maybe there is one and it was just not obvious. Either way, I was frustrated with having to pick and choose lots of stuff in order to compile some classic game development software. Still having some issues in this area and I'm sure it's just me spoiled by the Mandrake development base. Really I should know better what I am using such that I can just pick it from a menu, but I don't! Guess that's gonna change a bit, probably for the better.

All in all, this has been a great move. My hardware works, including lots of USB stuff, my desktop is functional and productive, and the system runs fast without a hitch.

Nice job guys --appreciated!

If you are looking for a Linux to get started with, Ubuntu sets a nice high bar. Worth learning IMHO.

The %$^&#$! DMCA (Death by DMCA)

2006-06-04T13:55:00.000-07:00

This one hits home. Regular readers and fellow geeks all know what the DMCA is about and why it needs reform. For the rest of you, give this one a read and consider all the cool stuff you are missing out on. (And it's a growing pile of stuff!)

I own one of the wonderful ReplayTV products mentioned in the article. It's probably the best PVR made to date, all things considered. It works with your existing stuff, has the right features and does not get in your way. No PVR sold today does what this device does and the vast majority of owners are just trying to get the best experience possible from their (rather expensive) television programming.

The DMCA lies at the core of this and the matter comes down to this:

Should we allow content creators to also control content handling devices? Don't the creators need platforms for their content to thrive in? Haven't we gone along just fine with people having the freedom to rip, mix and share their content with others? (and you can be we have!)

As long as this law continues to evolve as it currently is, we will continue to be denied the results of innovators everywhere. That's a direct and provable harm to you and me the average consumer. (Or, should I properly say citizen!)

Still think your vote matters?

2006-06-04T13:16:00.000-07:00

Yeah, I know I just wrote about political issues being elsewhere. Let me clarify: Some political stuff will remain here. Just not the more frequent postings I've been wanting to make.

'nuff said on that.

This is an excellent piece that everyone should read. Our elections are a freaking mess. There is a part of me that is convinced this is not just a matter of circumstance. Messy elections favor those in power. Want to run this nation the way you want? Just muddy the will of the people and it's easy to say you are unopposed. Done, next.

Constructive change is needed. Almost all of us agree on that. The poor state of election affairs we are currently experiencing means we need solid numbers to exercise our check on the government, not just winning margins because the margin for error is now very high. Since the Supreme Court decided to select our president for us, a growing number of elections that matter have gone to the courts over ambigious election results.

That means pure numbers folks. Turnout is paramount if change is to come about!

This just in: We Don't All Suck!

2006-05-27T19:29:00.000-07:00

Got your attention huh?

I'm gonna change the focus a bit on OpenGeek.

Political issues are growing more important. Rather than bleet (ask the great YAK --Jeff Minter what a bleet is) on about that here, I've started writing at OpEd news for those issues on a more frequent basis. This will let OpenGeek continue to be diverse, and hopefully interesting, in the way it is now, while giving me a venue for other issues that is focused in the way it should be.

The core change will be more quick links to popular content here. Google analytics has shown me that a fairly large number of readers here dig through the archives only to leave frustrated. I'll work on changing that in the near future. Regular readers are also often frustrated with the lack of new content. This focus change will allow me to put more things of interest here, without having to worry about content focus clash. (Which has been a big worry as of late.)

As always, thanks for reading. Thank you to all who have sent me interesting e-mails over the years. I blog for this reason if no other! Writing and interacting on the Internet has shown me one core thing that really matters:

We don't all suck Dammit!

Damn good cheezy Popcorn

2006-05-18T13:33:00.000-07:00

Well officially moving sucks. I'm in the new house, but it's gonna be a mess for a while just yet. It's the usual, tech does not work after being moved (what kind of voodoo is that anyway?), can't find things, found new things, etc...

For some reason I ended up wanting some good popcorn. One thing lead to another and it all came together to jog my memory. Somehow the microwave popcorn ended up right next to the Kraft Mac 'n cheeze. A quick search led to the butter and all the elements were there for top-notch highly addicive cheezy popcorn. Nice. In fact, nice enough to blog here for those of you looking for a totally unhealthy but totally great geek snack.

OpenGeek Cheezy Pop Corn

1 Bag Microwave Popcorn

(You can basically use any popcorn, but I recommend the Theatre Butter flavor)

1 sacrificial box of Kraft Mac 'n Cheeze

(You want the cheeze packet)

1/2 tsp ordinary salt

1/4 cube butter

Preparing the popcorn:

Mix half the contents of the cheeze packet with the salt, set aside for the shaking process. Once you have an idea where your taste for cheeze and salt lie, prepare a larger quantity of this and store in a spare salt or pepper shaker for immediate use!

Pop your popcorn however you want to get it done. Once popped, shake in butter and cheeze / salt mix to taste. For your average bag of microwave popcorn, half a cheeze packet well shaken is more than plenty of that fine cheeze taste. Your milage may vary!

Pour into serving bowl and consume with napkins!

Beware of the cheaper Mac 'n cheeze knockoffs. Their cheeze mixes are not anywhere near the quality necessary for raw, on popcorn, consumption. Trust me, use the Kraft. Also a longer shake while evenly adding the ingredients results in a more even coating. This part of things, done too fast or with poorly melted butter, will give you lumps of butter cheeze that may or may not be as appealing as you think they might be.

By reading this post, you agree to hold OpenGeek harmless from any incidents that may arise from the consumption of the preparation detailed above. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!

Get bigger sound from your laptop speakers

2006-04-04T23:34:00.000-07:00

I've been listening to music on my laptop speakers lately. Yeah, I know don't ask. Obvious issues aside, if you are in a similar situation, you might consider downloading audio processors aimed at webcasters and radio broadcasters.

The problem all boils down to a limited bandwidth, namely the laptop speakers have very little of it! In this way, they are very similar to FM radio broadcasts. Laptop speakers are very bright, because of their small size. Simple equalization does bring out the lower sounds, but the dynamics leave the listener with a rough to endure sound with a very limited volume range.

This software FM radio processor, combined with some aggressive equalization, will solve these and other problems. The end result is more output from tiny speakers with a fuller overall sound that I find more listenable than I would otherwise expect. Of course, the real solution is headphones or some other respectable speaker, but in a pinch this is better than you think it is.

Visit the developers home page

Computer Science Students program Atari 2600 games, using Batari Basic

2006-03-20T20:09:00.000-08:00

I know that headline means almost nothing to most of you, but trust me it's cool. The 2600 is probably the most challenging programming environment around these days. The machine has no frame buffer, 128 bytes of system RAM and 4K of ROM space. Graphics must be constructed essentially line by line with the CPU and the overall code timing must in most cases be cycle perfect to sync with the Television for a stable image. No BIOS, just a cpu, some minimal hardware and that's it!

Fred Quimby recently managed to come up with a compiled BASIC language for the 2600 that allows people to program the machine without having to manage all the smaller details and timing normally associated with the machine. The resulting environment is minimal in terms of graphics variety, but runs real time. Programmers can mix 6502 assembly language with BASIC statements to program their game with a very limited set of graphical elements. Sounds messy and it is, but it's also quite fun to push your creativity on a video game icon.

Until recently, the 2600 authors club was fairly exclusive. A small, but talented group of assembly language programmers have continued to push the boundaries of what this machine could do, year after year. Amazing frankly. Batari Basic opened up the experience to others and it seems it's catching on with at least these students who programmed games for their computer science class. (How cool is that?)

Despite the limited environment, there are some good gameplay elements in these project games. If you are into emulation and classic games, IMHO these are worth a look.

Here are some screenshots of the games created!

You can find the student project page here.

Paper Ballots in New Mexico and Voting Fraud in Virginia

2006-03-05T16:01:00.000-08:00

Regular readers know just how I feel about Electronic Voting machines. Our democratic process demands everyone involve respect it and take it seriously, or it's just not going to serve us as it should. Our requirement that a vote record not be personally linked to the voter really is the driver behind this. If we eliminated this requirement, which I do not recommend, we could use decades of innovation surrounding traditional banking systems for voting and have a system that is secure but scary to use.

New Mexico claims it's on the leading edge of election reform. While I think their effort to utilize human readable ballots for votes cast, I remain conserned that the counting will be all electronic. Perhaps the right auditing requirements are in place and this will prove to be a non-issue. Failing that, exit polls should shake out any counting issues. Overall, this is a much better scenario than we saw in '04.

The scenario playing out in Virginia underscores the importance of taking our civic duties seriously. For anyone that believes we don't have significant vote fraud, consider just what is at stake and how polarized the nation currently is. I want my party (Now Democrat!) to win as much as anyone else does, don't get me wrong on that score. However, I want the most solid leaders elected first and foremost. Debating various approaches to our problems and how well they might work in our best interests would be a very welcome sight indeed, given what we have seen this last few years.

Regardless of how you feel about things, tell your friends and loved ones to vote early and take their civic duty seriously. It's the only way we are going to get America back on track.

Teacher Suspended over hard hitting MySpace Video

2006-03-03T08:23:00.000-08:00

From the AP story: (Linked to source)

"A lot of people are saying it is the best show they've ever seen the TV broadcasting class produce," student producer Neil Willoughby told the TV news. "It was really hard-hitting."

What! She was suspended for helping kids to not only think critically about their online environment, but also working hard to get the word out to their peers? You have just got to be kidding me. As a parent, I've been working hard to help my kids be safe online despite the influence of their peers. Getting kids to worry about these things is tough because they want to interact with their friends online. MySpace actually is pretty cool in this regard, but it's also very dangerous.

Another story has a statement from one of the students who produced this short 8 minute segment:

"The point of the presentation was to show that kids are being irresponsible when posting their profiles," said Neil Willoughby, 17, a junior at the school who helped put together the presentation.

I think this school needs to get the message loud and clear:

Let's ask to see the video!

A local TV station, WDIV-TV has the story. Why not ask them to help out and get this video online where other kids can see it? There is no reason why this teachers struggle should be wasted. We can get this video online and make the students work worthwhile and let them know we value critical thinkers who care about others at the same time! This is a good effort from our future leaders that should be rewarded, not punished.

You can reach the TV station feedback page here. Take a moment to fill out the form, let them know you want to see the video and possibly help your own kids.

MySpace has been in the news quite a bit lately as well. A simple Google News search more than justifies this video, in my opinon.

Wanna blow some serious time?

2006-03-03T00:26:00.000-08:00

Thought so, otherwise why would you be here right now reading OpenGeek!

Trust me, it's fun and you will spend longer than you think playing it.

Sadly No! Recommended.

2006-02-27T11:56:00.000-08:00

Thought I might start doing mini-writeups on sites I find interesting, rather than just stuff 'em in my blog roll. Bumped into this fine counter-spin blog from Crooks and Liars (always a fine experience, IMHO) and just love the style and passion. This post in particular really shines with both the right questions and short and to the point style. Like I said, recommended.

Visit Sadly No!

Voting issues roundup

2006-02-27T09:56:00.000-08:00

Folks, we are getting closer to some very important elections, yet little has been done to make solid progress on the ongoing issue of untrustworthy electronic elections. I've been following this issue intently since the advent and aggressive uptake of the new electronic touchscreen voting machines. My reason is simple: non-voter-verififed votes with electrons only cannot be trusted at this time. Honestly, I'm not sure they can ever really be trusted in the same way that votes on physical media can be trusted, but that's another story.

Here is a small grab bag of news stories and information that should give you a good grasp on the current state of things. Our last presidental election was decided with about 30 percent of our national vote being cast and counted on non-voter-verified electronic voting machines. Given the kinds of problems I've linked below, and the inherently untrustworthy nature of the technology itself, we really have no idea who we elected in 2004. Clearly I'm not at all pleased with the result, but that's not my primary issue. The lack of trust is the biggie for me. Good or bad, we need to know absolutely that our leaders are duly elected indeed. Without this, it is very difficult to continue to have a strong faith in our system as a whole.

And on to the news:

Watchdog Group Questions Fla. 2004 Vote

"An examination of Palm Beach County's electronic voting machine records from the 2004 election found possible tampering and tens of thousands of malfunctions and errors, a watchdog group said Thursday."

Ohio Voting Fraud

This is a nice analysis of the issue and it's potential ramifications on upcoming elections. Bear in mind, that 30 percent figure for 2004 may well be 50 percent by the time the elections come to pass...

Alaska Now Refuses Release of 2004 Election Data Citing Security Concerns!

Can somebody explain to me how the record of the peoples votes threatens the security of the state of Alaska? Maybe they are worried more about how people will react to the knowledge than they are about accurate and trustworthy elections...

Elections Officials fear '06 Season of the Glitch

"When you look at disaster stories, it is usually that first time using a new piece of equipment that something is going to fall apart," says Kimball Brace, president of Election Data Services, which maintains data on voting systems across the country.

I've got a couple of still relevant articles, here on OpenGeek, on the topic as well:

How Electronic Voting Impacts the Trustworthiness of Our Elections

This article details the fundemental differences between votes cast with electrons and those cast with ordinary means, such as paper ballots marked with pens and how those differences impact trust and thus democracy as a whole. Recommended for anyone that does not understand the very basic trust issues.

"Electronic voting machines that use Closed Software and electronic voting records violate the two strongest of the core ideals necessary for mutual trust in an election. These ideals of transparency and oversight are time tested and necessary. Without voter-verified paper record facilities attached, these machines are unacceptable for use in any election."

Dealing with Voting Machine Ignorance, One media person at a time

This is an advocacy how-to article. Blog posts, such as this one and the ones linked above are valuable in that we are getting the word out. That's good, but we need to pack a bit more punch with our traditional media sources if the issue of electronic trust is to see greater acceptance and consideration. (and yes, we do need this!) Challenging posh voting machine success stories is one very effective way to do this that I used with some solid success in '04. Nothing has really changed, but the year, so go get 'em people!

"[How does it work?] First, you find a story, such as: “Voting machines exceeded expectations in recent election” This story is great because you can put the following in your e-mail subject to the reporter of the story. “How do you know those machines worked so well?”
Trust me, they are going to read that..."

Offset your home heating costs with junk mail!

2006-02-06T21:22:00.000-08:00

The title says it all really, but the idea was goofy enough it ended up worthy of a short post. Any thoughts?

I'm thinking subscribe to every free trade magazine, catalog and get ones name onto the very best junk mail lists and save a bundle on your home heating next year. Of course, the mail guy is not going to be happy, but maybe cut him in for half the savings as a nice annual delivery bonus!

If you are one of the lucky people with a fireplace or real wood stove, this idea is for you. Finally, all those crazy ads end up doing some real solid good --bundled up that is!

Nice kickoff for AM Stereo: Two new AM Stereo stations on the air!

2006-01-12T23:30:00.000-08:00

IBOC, or HD Radio has been way overhyped on AM and it seems a small but growing community of broadcasters are deciding to put real analog AM Stereo stations on the air! This is really great news that I hope to see continue. IBOC just isn't going to deliver the quality originally promised and it makes a total mess of the dial as well.

KRIB-1490 and WNMB-900 have both started transmitting full analog AM Stereo signals, despite a huge industry push for Ibiquity HD Radio IBOC technology. In WNMB's case, they have received some very positive listener feedback, including on guy amazed at the quality sound in his brand new Ford Expedition, shipped with factory premium sound system. Yes, many American cars feature AM Stereo support in their better sound system, meaning anyone choosing to broadcast AM Stereo today can tap into a similarly equipped listener base that is many times larger than HD Radio will be for many years to come.

Why did they do this? In the case of WNMB, it was the desire to deliver the best product they could with out risk of losing their existing listeners. IBOC, demands a noisy and narrow analog signal in return for a marginal digital one that only can be received on expensive new radios almost nobody is choosing to buy. AM Stereo, by contrast, can easily deliver great sound that in many ways remains superior to the digital one, on the many AM Stereo equipped receivers in use today.

WNMB has also been educating their listeners with radio giveaway promotions and a tie-in with a local electronics retailer who agreed to stock quality radios for WNMB listeners.

This folks, is how the AM band is going to improve. One station at a time, serving it's listeners with a quality product.

I've written on this topic recently and it appears I am clearly not alone in my thinking that AM Stereo is still relevant today. Just think, if all new HD Radios included support for AM Stereo, the coming IBOC mess would have a nice fallback solution for the many up and coming conflicts 30Khz wide AM signals are going to create....

Here's to hoping for a more vibrant and better sounding AM Dial as we move into '06!

Google not returning Yahoo Groups in search results?

2006-01-01T02:10:00.000-08:00

I've a few yahoo groups I read on occasion. Never bothered to bookmark them as a simple google query always returned accurate results.

That does not work today. Anyone else experience the same thing?

Recommended: Oregon Media Insiders

2005-12-10T23:08:00.000-08:00

I've recently been following the conversation there. The community is still small, but appears to be growing. Decided to get an account and test the waters. Nice site that appears to be well run.

If you dig media gossip, then this site is worth a look a few times per month. Nice job Lynn!!

http://www.oregonmediainsiders.com/

The scandal of scandals.

2005-12-10T20:58:00.000-08:00

From the Dailykos: Phony Front Companies Cycle Millions Back to GOP!

I'm not going to add much commentary here, this summary teaser should suffice:

The Duke Cunningham scandal goes much deeper than just the $2.4 million in bribes being reported by the media. There is a lot the media is not telling you.

Ever wonder why the Republicans have SO much money in every national election?

And what did the Dukester do to get his Rolls-Royce, anyway? Whose Lear Jet was he flying around in? The answers to those 3 questions turn out to be The. Biggest. Scandal. Ever!

The. Biggest. Scandal. Ever! on the flip!

Go on, you know you wanna get the scoop!

And they say bloggers are not journalists. Ha! The blogsphere is a bit noisy, but the good stuff never fails to rise to the top. Having been peer reviewed, commented on and contributed to, the top stories reach acceptable depth and credence far more quickly than they do via the traditional media channels these days. '06 is shaping up to be a very, very interesting year indeed!

Perhaps undoing scandals like these will bring elections closer to parity, allowing other parties a solid chance at some seats. Given the high disapproval ratings we are seeing today and our founders desire for a representative government, it seems only right for some gains to happen next year. Here's to hoping!

2005 Minigame Compo Voting is complete.

2005-12-10T18:53:00.000-08:00

My first entry, Ooze written in the budding Batari Basic language for the 2600, managed to place 11th out of over 20 entries in the 4K game catagory.

You can view the voting results here. Go ahead and bonk on the results link, found at the left of the page. Dammit, I hate it when sitemasters make direct linking a non option.

That's it really, just happy others found my game worth the effort. While there, be sure and play the winners on your emulator of choice. While this is my first year actually taking part in the Compo, I've been a fan for a number of years. The quality of the games, given the harsh restrictions on system resources, is always better than one would expect otherwise.

Interestingly, had these games been made in the early 80's, the authors would have been millionaires! Now it happens for fun and to keep a rapidly fading art alive!

Riding the bus in Portland Oregon?

2005-12-09T00:24:00.000-08:00

Then you really should give Google Transit a try. While Microsoft is working hard at playing 'look at me!', Google continues to churn out a steady stream of useful web services. Needless to say, I remain sold on Google for the time being.

Be sure and format your to and from route query properly. I found this example worked well.

12345 ne somestreet, portland oregon 12345 to 5432 sw someotherstreet, portland oregon 99887

They give an interesting cost to drive -vs- cost to transit comparison that I'm not totally sure I buy. For example, my drive to work takes about 20 minutes and uses about $1.50 in gas, but they said the trip actually costs about $4.00! Perhaps they are factoring in car wear, insurance averages, etc... Anyway, the transit time was fairly accurate, including the segments where you need to walk!

HD Radio: Digital Boondoggle

2005-11-28T23:33:00.000-08:00

I've not written about HD Radio in a while, largely because I wanted to see it play out a while before trying to add anything new to the discussion. Here we are nearly two thirds of a year later and it seems that my initial reactions were largely spot on. HD Radio, on AM looks to be just as stillborn as AM Stereo was. The reasons are different, as I'll detail below, but the result is the same; namely, nobody outside the radio community seems to care. On FM, the rage is multicasting, that is the capability to broadcast multiple audio streams on the same frequency. Quality on both bands does not meet the initial set expectations of CD and FM quality for FM HD and AM HD respectively.

Sales of new HD radio receivers has been dismal at best. Many outlets have them on back order, or simply do not know they even sell the units nor understand what their value proposition is. I can't blame them because I've not seen any clear statement on the matter from the industry either. On that topic, it's worth noting that Arbitron is not rating Satellite and Internet streaming radio listeners at the request of the major radio players. Could it be those numbers won't look good, or that there are just too many problems? Although my gut suggests the former is true, I'm perfectly willing to accept the latter for the time being. We will know the truth soon enough. I'll step up right now and just say it: listenership is down and will continue to be down. Population growth will bring new listeners to the table, but not as quickly as they are likely to be leaving for other venues. Put simply, radio is losing it's mind share one podcast, satellite subscription and Internet stream at a time.

I've been evaluating technology for a long time now and there is one sure sign of trouble that always rings true. I call it the "coming soon" syndrome, or vaporware for short. HD radio will have better quality, more stations, promise of surround sound, more receivers, multicast capability, improved AM capability, nighttime any day now, etc... For a technology that's been cooking for as long as HD Radio has, these are very bad signs. Where are the success stories? Of course, the answer remains, "It's still early". Really? I'm thinking it's getting fairly late actually.

Numbers are hard to come by, but it's obvious that new Satellite subscriptions outnumber new HD radio purchases at least 10 to one, if not worse. There are plenty of HD Radio stations on the air now and the Christmas holidays are upon us. Yet I see nothing about HD Radio anywhere. It goes without saying that you just can't enter an electronics store without seeing at least one Satellite radio kiosk.

So what's the dirty secret of HD Radio? Glad you asked because the answer is becoming increasingly clear: Technical issues aside, HD Radio does not add any significant value to the radio listeners experience. When all is said and done, radio is radio. People will either bother to listen or not. And of course a growing number of them are not.

Let me make something clear here and now: I love radio, particularly AM radio. I want nothing more than to see the medium and the many great people working to continue to bring it to us every day, grow and continue to be a healthy, vibrant part of our culture. My personal reasons are all about the simplicity radio brings to the table. You just grab one, turn it on and tune the dial. Three steps to portable, quality entertainment that's almost impossible to beat from a cost standpoint. However, there are other reasons as well. In times of need, radio, in particular AM radio, has proven it's ability to inform, entertain and educate people despite the worst happening. None of the other technologies can come close to the power radio has. In good times people may choose their alternatives, but in bad times you can bet every last one of them will tune the dial looking for news and entertainment that will help them through.

If radio has such value (and you can bet it does) why then are people turning to alternatives in droves?

Content, relevance and diversity. Those three words lie at the core of our radio troubles today and HD Radio does exactly nothing to address any of them, save diversity and even that one is questionable given the IBOC system makes receiving distant and or low powered stations more difficult. Despite industry claims to the contrary, quality is not part of the discussion, content is!

While radio listeners everywhere are looking for interesting programming, the radio industry is bogged down in it's own digital quagmire --HD Radio. It seems the lure of the word "digital" has blinded those people that matter in the industry. "Going Digital" is a mantra repeated throughout the industry. This is a mantra of death as the precious dollars necessary to cultivate, develop and deploy new and interesting programming are consumed with technical software license purchases, expensive studio audio chain upgrades and untold transmitter site tweaks to make it all go. And as of today, nobody is listening!

It seems I read news of good radio people being downsized for cost reasons, yet these supposedly cash strapped radio giants will spend those dollars many times over to "go digital" without even asking just what the value add is. What's worse is the HD Radio technology is currently the focus of the media content companies. They want legislation to make an already limited value proposition more limited by mandating additional restrictions, such as the ability to control what listeners can and cannot record off of their new digital radios! The one killer radio application, being PVR type capability, will be hamstrung before it's even born. This makes no sense.

I've got an iPod and I've put a lot of very interesting content on it, from e-books and music to great segments from one of the very few quality stations (Go KNRK!) here in the Portland area. What's on my iPod is not anywhere as important as why it's on there.

The e-books are just cool. Reading good stories or news while listening to music is great entertainment. Having that portable just makes sense. The music tracks are a no brainer as well. Everybody has their favorites and having them on the iPod works when...

THERE IS NOTHING ON THE RADIO!

That's the biggie right there and I'm just stunned that nobody in the industry that matters actually gets it. But wait there is more!

I've got KNRK recordings on my iPod because that station is just great. The various shows and music sets really resonate and are worth actually listening to again and again. That's content worth tuning for and it competes with my iPod nicely. Frankly, nothing else on the dial, save some talk radio, actually does that any more.

Let me put it this way: The content on KNRK (and some other great stations here that just don't fit me musically) is worth keeping because I fear it might not be around much longer. So many great radio productions have gone dark, replaced by automated systems featuring what is best described as lifeless attitude. I enjoy my station enough to archive it for when it's no longer there.

For all those in the industry seeking to cut costs, consider the value quality people with passion bring to the table. Sure it's a two way street in that you will end up needing them, but is that so bad given the digital system you are spending many more dollars for will be just as needed and offers no solid value where it's needed most?

I know this is getting long, but bear with me just a bit longer while I weave podcasts and Internet streaming audio into this mix.

People are streaming today because the Internet brings them access to the content that fits them best, no matter where it's actually being broadcast. Podcasts let them carry similar content with them for use when THERE IS NOTHING ON THE RADIO.

Let me say that again:

FOR WHEN THERE IS NOTHING ON THE RADIO.

The prevailing view seems to be that podcasts and Internet streaming audio are competitors to radio like Satellite radio is. Let me offer a counter view that is exactly the opposite. Given the current focus on quality, automation, scalability and low cost, Internet streaming audio, podcasts and Satellite are competitors. Not because they are better, but because the radio industry lowered the bar!

If the emphasis is on content that is relevant, engaging and compelling to the listener, then radio becomes the source for a lot of great podcasts and streams, thus leveraging the Internet and it's (dwindling) in-house audio production strengths. HD radio is an awful expensive way to add additional stream capability when the podcast and Internet are up, running, hip and largely free by way of comparison. Imagine the returns some dollars spent on working out licensing issues would bring, given the existing audience and growth potential it has.

So, forget HD radio. It's nothing more than a boondoggle that looks good on paper, but does nothing to address the core business issues of growth in both listenership and revenue. So, how to embrace the new digital media without going digital?

That's the subject of my next post --stay tuned!

(Thank you, thank you Entercom and KNRK for continuing to broadcast radio worth keeping on my pod!)

New PDX AM HD IBOC samples. (KEX 1190)

2005-10-24T23:25:00.000-07:00

Just a quick note, these samples are up on the samples page. At the time they were recorded, the KEX engineering staff were hard at work improving the audio processing chain. Give 'em a listen, I think overall IBOC audio has been improved.

More PDX FM HD Radio, from the same time period, along with another set of DAB samples coming soon.

2005 mini-game compo!

2005-10-23T10:40:00.000-07:00

The mini-game compo is a annual event, running for a few years now, that encourages people to write little games under tight system resource requirements. Typical limits are 1K, 4K & 8K of total program size at system load time. That's right Kilobytes, not Megabytes!

Of course, some of the systems, like the wonderful Atari 2600, fall well within these meagre constraints. The 2600 weighs in at an absolutely tiny 128Bytes of system RAM and 4K rom. Hardware tricks in the cartridge can add to this, but still the whole thing is an 8Bit system, meaning one byte variables and limited address spaces. Totally cool, if you are into computing for computings sake.

I've got an entry this year called Ooze! It runs on the 2600 and I think it's pretty cool actually. Competition is stiff however with many great games entered this year. Win or lose, my only regret is not having participated sooner.

There are no prizes, just the commentary from fellow gamers and authors and that almost forgotten wonderful feeling that comes from others playing your game. As kids, us gen-x ers used to do this on our old 8Bit computers and it was a lot of fun. Crafting games, showing them to others and sharing both code and ideas is really what computing is all about for me. This little compo brings it all back.

Interested? Please do check out this years compo, I'm sure you will be glad you did. Links to past years efforts are provided and they feature lots of very interesting, creative and fun games. How are they played? Emulation of course. The computers of today are more than capable of reproducing older systems and that's how the games get written and published. Atari, NES, Color Computer, Apple ][, and more are all there waiting just as they always have been. Play some games, read the comments and maybe next year I'll see you at the compo!

Christmas is a coming! Holiday gift ideas from OpenGeek!

2005-10-15T15:43:00.000-07:00

On a lark, I posted some of these gift ideas on another forum and thought I might just share them here too. (Hint Hint!) Express yourself, learn how to think better, or just poke a little fun at your elected representatives. Might want to stock up before these are legislated away!

Dick Cheney "Go Fu*k Yourself" Apparel, mugs, stickers, caps and mousepads!

Watch the Bill of Rights evaporate in real time with your morning hot beverege of choice!

Feeling a little overwhelmed with dogma? Ears ringing from the sound machine? Perk up both your mental acumen and your outlook with these insightful critical thinking mini-courses from criticalthinking.org. Each mini-course is focused on a specific aspect of critical thinking. Informative, but not wordy, these pocket guides are perfect for the busy thinker on the go!

Have some ideas of your own? Please, do share them with a brief comment below, or shoot me an e-mail. Would love to post another set or two of these before the serious holiday season arrives.

Sorry, blogger account now required for comments. Too many &^%(^% spam comments posted here to allow anon comments. (Sorry guys, I would not otherwise mind.)

Eureka DAB Audio Samples posted

2005-10-05T23:02:00.000-07:00

Just a brief post letting you know I've added some DAB audio samples to the samples page. The system has a nice sound overall. Better than I expected to hear actually. Our Satellite radio sounds poor by general comparison. Too bad we didn't consider this system more seriously here in the States. I like what I hear.

The new KEX 1190 AM Portland AM HD Radio IBOC are coming soon...

Save the CD's!

2005-10-04T09:07:00.000-07:00

While the number of legal digital music download purchases continues to grow, the numbers for traditional CD media continue to decline. At first glance this is good news in that it more or less vindicates all of us who knew legal and easy digital downloads would be able to compete with free, illegal ones. Bear in mind, not all free downloads found on Peer to Peer networks are illegal. There is a growing pool of content licensed under the Creative Commons as well as Indie music. P2P appears to continue to evolve into a viable distribution channel for those so inclined to use it.

So, what about the CD? At first I was not bothered by this. Having access to a deep catalog is worth a lot, but is it worth the demise of the CD? Today I'm having second thoughts. Most all of the digital music downloads are compressed audio of one kind or another. Often the quality is good, but it's not as good as a well mastered CD is.

Recently, I went back through my CD collection to listen for forgotten tracks. After listening to so much compressed audio, I find the CD still packs a lot of punch. It's easy to convert into other formats and durable. I will continue to purchase CD media for those pieces of music that are worth the quality. Given all the movement toward DRM enabled services, devices and delivery systems, I think the CD will continue to be a good buy overall.

Consider a purchase or two to keep your options open. In a few years, we all might be glad you did.

Incoming new HD Radio and Satellite Audio Samples

2005-10-03T23:32:00.000-07:00

I've finally got decent Satellite Radio samples from the Sirius system up on the samples page. Several different program formats are represented there for your comparison.

It looks like I'll also have the newest AM HD Radio samples from the folks at 1190 KEX, here in Portland Oregon. They have been working on improvements to their HD Audio chain and thought a new set of samples was worth posting. I agree and will have them up, ASAP.

Since we are departing the, "just get it running phase" and entering the "tweak it until it sings" phase in HD Radio, please consider sending in some updated samples over time. I'm happy to host them and any technical comments you might have. If you decide to do this, raw wave files are the best for comparison purposes. So far, the easiest way has been to just mail a CD. Feel free to contact me: samples@opengeek.org and we can figure out how best to get the samples up and on the page.

Interest remains high with about 5K hits / month average. (Lots of bandwidth...) For now, it's not impacting me but it may well happen soon. Looks like I will just cross that bridge when I get there.

Back to old Blogger Template

2005-10-03T20:31:00.000-07:00

Honestly, Blogger has been annoying me lately. Lots of things do not render well in IE. Not that I personally care, but the many IE users clearly do. Instead of fighting that battle right now, I'm just gonna run a mostly default template for the time being. Another day...

If this does not render well in IE, let me know.

"on the box" Post Sale Product Terms of Use Now Legal?

2005-09-04T02:36:00.000-07:00

This post is two parts. The first being the new legal precedent set by Lexmark in the Ninth Circut court, and the second being what I see as the only long term solution to what is a clear attempt to reduce competition and lock consumers into solutions that are more expensive than they would otherwise be.

Edit: I've seen a coupla early comments on this and it seems I missed the mark. Clearly I'm not happy with Lexmark, but this post is not about just avoiding Lexmark products. (Which I would recommend doing!) It is about the problem in general, being our poor representation due to a basic knowledge gap between the average person and corporations looking to increase profit at their expense.

Maybe I'll do a rewrite of this. Ideally this little preamble will make things more clear in the meantime. Keep the problem embodied by Lexmarks recent actions in mind while reading --thanks!

From BoingBoing:

Box-Wrap Licensing is an odious patent-holder practice that's been upheld by the Ninth Circuit. It allows a patent holder to print terms of use (e.g. "single-use only") on the side of the product box and to force you to abide by them:

This little gem is from our friends at Lexmark who have already tried using the DMCA to control the re-use of their printer cartridges. That attempt failed, but it seems they are seeing some success using a mix of patent and contract law to discourage commercial and private refilling of their printer cartridges.

Corante has links to the 9th circut ruling and commentary that I won't repeat here.

Here is the takeaway:

This ruling just established legal precedent for companies to print terms of use on the box that you agree to when you open it. If you use the product, you agree to their terms. In Lexmarks case, you agree to only buy printer ink from them and nobody else. That's just like owning a car that may only be serviced at their dealers, for example. I think most people would say they really don't own the car under those terms. Well, when you purchase a Lexmark printer cartridge, you really don't own it the way you own other things, because you have agreed to abide by Lexmarks terms.

Don't like it? Your only alternative is to purchase other printers and supplies. However, what happens when the other printer manufacturers follow suit? What do we do then? Read on for what I think needs to start happening...

The whole concept of Intellectual Property, combined with corporations economic power and greater ability to influence legislators is beginning to really do some damage and most folks have no idea it's even happening. Corporations are exploiting the knowledge gap that exists between most ordinary people and their own highly trained staff.

It's nothing more than a virtual land grab, with serious real-world implications most of us are just beginning to understand. The companies are already there with a running start locking in everything they possibly can.

Our legal system and our government is a system of checks and balances. Our two most effective checks are rendered largely useless these days. They are our ability to vote for representative government and our wallets. (Vote with your feet!)

The knowledge gap is a problem for both of these and it needs to be addressed before we are going to see the changes necessary to tip the balance back in the average citizens favor.

If we don't understand the technology or the law, how can we vote our best interests? That's problem number one. If we don't know we have alternatives to the licenses, how can we know what not to buy? That's problem number 2.

I think the only realistic solution is citizen advocacy and education. If we are better informed, our votes will matter more than they do now. This will also generate more informed legislators, who might be more willing to limit these kinds of things. Same for the courts.

A more informed public will also be better able to exercise it's economic power as well. In the case of Lexmark, it's probably easier for most people to just buy new cartridges. That's wasteful and expensive. However, if people understood the implications better, more of them would avoid Lexmark on principle, thus discouraging other companies from following suit.

One thing I've noted is the serious lack of coverage on these complex and subtle issues in the mainstream media. Everything becomes common knowledge at some point, isn't it time for these issues to see greater discussion?

I'm not totally sure this is by accident. The "people won't understand it" argument, frequently used to dumb technology down is a non-starter today. A few years ago, nobody understood the details surrounding computers and the Internet, but they did know about cars, radios, phones and television. Today, our understanding of computers and related technology is good enough to being talking about the issues in a general way.

People may not understand the complexity behind their printer, but they are easily capable of understanding that a Lexmark printer cartridge comes with terms of use, crafted to extract more money from them per page printed.

We have already largely transitioned to a "what to buy" culture from a "build it yourself / fix it yourself" culture. The ongoing emphasis on ease of use is helpful and often productive, but also dangerous because it encourages a higher degree of dependance as well. My personal choice happens to be in favor of limiting dependance where practical. However, I can understand people choosing otherwise. What's not ok is the lack of balance in the system to make sure their interests are duly represented.

We need to form groups of people that understand technology, or better leverage groups, such as the Electronic Fronter Foundation (EFF), that do understand these things. This Lexmark story should be news like changes in traffic law, or local law are news. To a degree it is, but it needs to go farther than the business section, back page one paragraph coverage or 10 second sound byte heard on the radio.

What's missing are the implications and what people can do to act and why it matters. We are also missing some bigger picture coverage too. Taken one at a time, each of these subtle yet important changes in the law and technology, are fairly minor. But they build up --and have built up to equal serious changes in our rights and responsibilities we are largely ignorant of.

I think a good model would be the one we use for political issues. Afterall these are political issues, once the technology learning barriers have been distilled out.

I've asked this question of media people before and got the usual, "yeah, but is there interest?" stock answer, followed by it's too complex or boring, etc...

Again a comparison of political issues reveals a similar level of complexity and subtle facts that see media coverage and discussion on talk radio each and every day.

One could take the headlines from the many fine Internet blogs and websites, currently covering these issues, water down the technology issues and focus on the legal and social implications, just as we do with political issues today. At first, folks might not grok all that they are hearing, just as they did with politics at first, but they will learn and share, just as they do with politics today.

Mix in interviews and commentary with known advocates and start hammering things home until enough people get it well enough to start pushing back.

That's it really. Long post I know, but I think this is getting to be enough of a problem to warrant some greater action than we are currently seeing today. Is there anyone doing this for radio, TV or print publications now? If you know of something, I would love to check it out. Share your thoughts and links via e-mail or use the handy comment button below.

Reality

2005-09-03T22:16:00.000-07:00

I've been watching, reading and listening to news related to Katrina and New Orleans since it all started. Of course the usual emotions washed over me in waves as each new detail arrived: anger, sadness, helplessness, futility, pain. It's hard to really grok the scale of things there.

A Whole City Lost

The emotion for me this evening is fear. I try hard to not live in fear, but sometimes it grips me and I have to deal with it. I fear our nation has been stripped of essential services and supplies we need to handle situations like New Orleans. It's like some sick gamble. Stealing from Peter to pay Paul, hoping Peter won't notice right away.

We should be able to do better than we are doing right now. I just don't quite understand what has changed here in America, but something has and we need to wake up and fix it before we really get into trouble.

The amount of finger pointing, blame shifting and outright spin I'm seeing is just sick. The truth is we have lost whatever it is that brings Americans together in times of need. It's not lack of money, nor inability to prepare and execute safety plans.

We have lost our trust in one another.

When bad things happen, there are always a group of people that take advantage. Nothing new here. However, the majority of Americans have always outweighed this and prevailed to get things done. We are not seeing this in New Orleans and we really should be.

People are dying because our own government does not trust us to help ourselves. Churches feeding and housing refugees have seen those in their care taken and shipped off to another city because they were not authorized to care for them. What the fuck is that? Authorized? Since when do we need permission to help ourselves stay alive?

Granted, the police and military forces are stretch thin because of Iraq. That does make the job harder for those left here to handle things. But where is the trust in one another that makes good things happen? Why are we pointing guns at people barely able to walk? How come the civilian volunteers cannot enter the city to help people? Why can't we work together for the common good when we need to?

An army publication called the people in New Orleans an insurgency today. I'm sorry, but those people are Americans. Not the nicest ones, mind you, but Americans all the same. Has our mindset shifted so far that we cannot see that and act accordingly?

People with cameras are being told to leave and have had their equipment confiscated or destroyed. What's to hide? We know it's a bad scene, but can't we be honest about that and move on toward making things right? Why do we have to control the flow of information like this? Again, what's being hidden? I know an election cycle is coming, but do we seriously believe suppressing the information about the damage needs to be done to protect those in charge?

If they were acting as true statesmen, why all the secrecy and tough control over the city? Why keep people from reporting the news? I can only conclude we have some serious problems we are not being told about. Nothing else makes any sense.

Back on the trust issue. A growing number of blogs are detailing goofy and cruel actions by the military and police forces there. Folks who worked hard to organize aid are being denied access and they shouldn't be. The current plan is to evacuate the entire city. Why? What about those that have homes, businesses and other interests there? Can't they be allowed to help others, maybe secure their possessions, and do other simple human things?

Are we just going to close it all up and ignore it?

The lack of resources is easily explained. We have over extended ourselves in Iraq and it's showing now. The high level of control is necessary to keep the peace and allow rescue efforts to continue.

Why can't we be honest about these things and address them as a nation? Why are we not allowed to take pictures and communicate the situation to others? How come people have to die so our government can look good? Why can't our rescue teams, volunteers and the miltary / police work together like they use to do?

Fear and trust are gone and what's left is not pretty. Our leaders have cultivated fear and have used it to strip away rights, start wars and exploit us. That same fear has eroded trust between fellow Americans. All of this makes us weak and vulnerable when we need to be strong. It has also divided us, making us weaker still.

I don't know how to fix this stuff, but I do know I don't want to live in a world where churches need authorization to help people in need. I don't want to live in a place where taking the wrong picture can put you in jail or have your camera taken. And I sure don't want to be living in a place where keeping secrets that help prop up a failing government is worth American lives.

We need leaders we can trust. Leaders that inspire us to do great things. Leaders that the world looks up to and that we can be proud of. All I see today are people that act like sleezy businessmen that honor the bottom line and their own power above all else.

I'm not sure who to believe over this whole mess and that's a problem too because I should be able to know what is happening and trust those making it happen to do the right things at the right times.

Fear....

What if we are attacked right now? If we can't handle this, can we really handle other things? Is our nation really so weak now and untrustworthy that we cannot take care of our own? Are we now sitting ducks while our corporations continue to make money hand over fist?

If we are going to bring on the digital revolution through "HD Radio", why not actually make High Definition Radios?

2005-08-25T18:21:00.000-07:00

A recent discussion thread on PDXRadio.com, involving AM IBOC HD Radio, got me to thinking about the lowest common denominator problem (LCD) and how it might actually suggest a solid solution we all can live with, going forward with HD Radio IBOC technology on both AM and FM.

Most AM radios today are built to mask off all but the most basic audio in an attempt to trade complexity for reliability. If the audio is narrow, noise and crosstalk issues are kept to a minimum.

While this idea has increased reliability, the resulting loss in overall audio quality leaves much to be desired and an AM band not working to potential. Broadcasters deliver everything from the best quality audio to marginal audio. The listener experience varies considerably as well. Some receivers sound better than others do, and it is often difficult to know what to expect from a given receiver / broadcast combination.

We are not setting and managing expectations, and we should be.

HD Radio does provide a unique chance to really address the LCD problem this time around and encourage the best overall radio experience instead of the least acceptable one, on AM.

The new HD radios are not going to be as simple as ordinary analog radios were capable of being. This is a good thing in that we get the chance to set some expectations that will benefit everyone involved. HD Radio is the one chance we have to reintroduce radio to people and actually get it right this time.

Some level of listener education is going to be required if HD radio is to see the level of success required to remain viable over the longer term. If this is not done, listeners are likely to simply ignore HD and continue using analog radios. If this occurs in high enough numbers, receiver manufacturers are going to simply do to HD Radio what they have done to AM radio in general; namely, build the least capable units and sell them for the highest cost they can get.

This benefits none of us.

Where AM radio is concerned, the idea seems to be to ignore the analog compatability and quality issues, hoping the digital will just be accepted. This approach might be somewhat cheaper and easier, than what I propose is, however it does carry with it a lot of unnecessary risk and waste as well. The risk lies in a spoiled first impression and the waste being lots of existing radios rendered increasingly useless for reasons already well known.

Interestingly, the LCD issue means we are going to be dealing with analog radio for a very long time yet, because it will take time for the technology to work through it's own issues and for listeners to understand the changes and how to take best advantage of them.

The same line of reasoning that says we have to deal with narrowband radios also brings with it the reality that not everyone is going to be happy about HD radio. If we accept lowest common denominator problem as being the cause for poor quality AM analog radio today, then we must also accept the tradeoffs inherent in HD radio will cause listeners to fall back to analog, if their experience with HD does not match their expectations. Given the number of known tradeoffs, we can expect a set of listeners to continue to prefer analog radio into the forseeable future.

Digital artifiacts, more complex radio interfaces and potential coverage issues all will harm HD radio the same way that cross talk and noise harmed AM radio. The resulting divided listenership will benefit nobody, if allowed to fester beyond the current crop of early adopters and radio professionals.

Rather than simply power through and deliver a less than perfect digital solution today, I suggest we redefine what HD radio really means. The primary advantage being that we do not have to paint analog into a legacy corner until the time has truly come to do so. That time is not today.

Ibiquity has stated HD does not stand for "high definition". Despite this claim, the average person is going to associate the HD moniker with high definition because the television industry already set that expecation. In addition, the word "Digital" has already set similar expectations as well. The industry itself has justified the implementation of HD Radio, using quality as a primary benefit, despite the overall quality being simply different than analog radio, not necesssarly better.

Instead of spinning the tradeoffs surrounding IBOC digital radio, into a war of sorts against digital and analog, we should just spend a little more today actually making very good quality, high definition, digital radios a reality.

So, what does that mean exactly. Glad you asked.

I propose a real "High Definition Digital Radio" do the following things:

Support AM Stereo, narrow and wide, mono, and IBOC. Because the radios are really computers, smart defaults, combined with some focus group studies and user interface interaction studies, will yield a better radio experience, no matter the modulation technique.

DSP technology can address a *lot* of existing analog AM issues. Since it comes for free, with IBOC, we are all fools for failing to make the best use of it right now.

Apply the DSP technology to the FM side of things as well, improving the quality of analog broadcasts where it is possible to do so.

Do the above programatically in order to keep the user experience as simple as possible while keeping overall quality as high as is possible, regardless of modulation technique used at the broadcast station.

Remember, one only gets to make first impressions once. No matter your position on IBOC, the success of HD radio is as much about managing that first impression and the expectations that come with it, as it is dealing with the technical issues. Take a moment and go read some of the customer reviews on the current HD radios being sold by Crutchfield and others. You will find them mixed, with some listeners happy and others unhappy.

This, more than all the technical discussions and politics, suggests the basic need for simple, quality radios will not be met with existing HD Radios any more than it currently is with ordinary analog radios. This begs the following rather obvious questions:

Why are we making new, expensive radios that still fail to satisfy the needs of a majority of the listeners?

If these needs are not met, in a very high percentage of listeners minds, why buy them? Does it make sense to ask people to re-purchase new and expensive radios, when the content received has a fair chance of not being substantially different, quality wise, than it was before?

The key here happens to be the word "Digital". A radio, using digital technology to enhance analog audio broadcasts is just as digital as a radio decoding highly compressed digital audio broadcasts. In essence, we are making what would otherwise be a minor technical distinction in the eyes of the average radio listener, a major cause for conflict and confusion that benefits none of us.

Put simply, I propose radios that bear the HD Radio moniker, reproduce all broadcasts, analog or not, with the highest fidelity possible. Doing this makes it very easy to explain to people just what an HD Radio is and why they would want to purchase one. It also helps clarify the growing confusion surrounding the multicasts, all bearing obscure identifiers, such as: KCXX-2, Jammin' HD2, WNKO1, etc... being prime examples.

This benefits listeners because HD radios will make *any* radio station sound far better than it does today. That's a simple, easily stated and understood value proposition that will do more to help HD Radio succeed than any amount of technical and poltical wrangling will.

Broadcasters are covered on AM because the new radios would all support the various choices. Everybody involved knows there is no fix all for AM. Why not enable the various choices in the new radios so that broadcasters have every chance to succeed?

Ibiquity benefits because doing these things not only quiets the critics, but adds a *lot* of value to their IP. Their investors are looking for that payback, and this only sweetens the pot for them.

The FCC also benefits because the improved array of choices on AM will provide solid solutions to the many problems that are going to arise from the use of HD radio on the band.

This, in turn, gives the smaller broadcasters a clear benefit as well. With a growing base of quality radios, they can leverage their existing gear for better sound, in order to keep cost / risk to a minimum. Maybe the returns from that will encourage them to purchase HD gear with money earned, rather than money borrowed.

Receiver manufacturers benefit in a coupla ways too. Instead of all their eggs being in the HD basket, which is risky, (And might explain the efforts to marginalize analog broadcasts) they can simply promote a new generation of radios, capable of making any broadcast sound better and be more reliable than older radios were.

Also, economies of scale will negate any cost issues that will arise from the initial development.

By tying all of this to a combination of an FCC ruling and Ibiquity licensing, equipment manufacturers can be (finally) assured their development will go toward radios people will actually continue to use, instead of radios that *might* see use. (AM Stereo syndrome.)

All it takes is some honest acceptance about the realities of the AM band, and the willingness to follow through toward a greater shared goal, instead of the "knife the old baby" syndrome we are currently seeing today.

Digression

2005-08-20T12:13:00.000-07:00

I got roped into a project that feeds one of my true addictions --classic games from the 8bit era. Computing on the 8bitters is a unique experience that is largely lost today. Early machines, while complex, did not exceed the level necessary for one person to be able to completely understand the machine.

That might be true of todays machines as well, but the number of folks capable of full understanding is a lot less than it once was.

As a kid, I used to program games on the Atari machines and the Color Computer. Back then, BASIC was slow, compiled BASIC was expensive and somewhat limited, and assembly language was fast, but difficult. My games then were good, but were a mix of BASIC and assembly language. Never did reach that solid user experience possible when the machine is running bare metal at full tilt....

Enter Batari Basic. This is a compiled basic for the Atari 2600 of all things. Very cool. It runs at machine language speed and nicely exposes the bare metal with inline assembly, for those wanting to do more. Of course I jumped on this and wasted a bunch of time, but oh well. My soul is happy again for a while.

The environment models the assembly language environment closely, while keeping need to know details to a minimum. 128 bytes of ram, a few sprites and a playfield bitmap are avaliable right now. --Enough for interesting games. New features and capabilities are in progress as you read this. While that does not seem like much, and it isnt much at all, it is enough to capture the very essence of classic gaming at it's finest. The language runs at real time speeds, allowing the programmer to handle game logic frame by frame in step with the TV monitor.

I've a fairly nice game in progress, about half way through the development process. You can read about it, play it on an emulator, and join the discussion here. While you are at it, maybe make a game of your own.

Cool stuff I just had to share!

IBOC Update

2005-08-15T23:49:00.000-07:00

I've been pretty busy lately, so my apologies in advance for the lack of updates. Work and family are high right now.

The samples page has been updated. The nice folks at Infinity Chicago sent me samples of their secondary WUSN HD FM Radio streams in action. I received them as 320Kbps Mp3 files. Given their length, I decoded them and have posted a few wav files for comparison to the other samples collected so far. Thanks Dave & A.J. Much appreciated.

For anyone wondering how the IBOC discussion is going, I thought it worthwhile to post a link to the FCC filing page. The relevant proceeding is 99-325, enter it in the upper left search field, leave everything else blank, and bonk the document submit button to see the comments filed to date.

If you have not filed your comments on this important issue, I encourage you do go ahead and do so. You can do that here. Note it is possible to file brief comments using the provided online form. Comments made in this fashion are quick and easy to submit. If you do plan a more inclusive comment, be sure and prepare it as a PDF file and submit that.

Despite this being the reply comment period, the FCC appears to be accepting general comments at this time. Ideally, you should reply to comments already made. It is not necessary to reference specific comments, only that your comments address points already made.

Doonesbury takes pot shot at bloggers

2005-07-05T13:47:00.000-07:00

UPDATE: The headline change was prompted by a poor word use. I also decided to clarify my own pointed comments regarding their feedback system below as well.

I encourage you to read the strip, then pass along your comments.

Read the strip

Tell 'em what you think

I've copied my comments to them below because they moderate all comments to their site. I challenge the Doonesbury staff to publish my comments on their site, in full, as I will do here on OpenGeek. Of course, having read through the comments, I have no real expectation of that actually happening.

Let me clarify that just a bit. I've got a real problem with sites that offer "samples of comments recieved" or anything similar. Moderation of comments is totally ok. Given spam, hate mail, morons, etc... the use of moderation to keep interaction clean is a good thing. However, publishing samples clearly serves another goal; namely, to keep tough questions out of the public eye.

Having read the samples they offer for review, I find them dated and lacking relevance to the topic at hand. This limits the utility of the feedback in that non-timely comments, however supportive or not, fail to provide both the publisher and reader any real value and there lies the problem. If the effort does not add value, why bother to produce the product?

This is exactly what I sent them, with spelling errors corrected for publishing here.

Your most recent characterization of bloggers is off the mark and in poor taste. I would normally ignore such a pointed thrust all things being equal. However, things are not equal these days. Traditional media sources have largely marginalized themselves in their general failure to act as the check they have been in the past.

Internet Bloggers have filled this gap quite nicely and should be encouraged for their efforts, not punished as your recent strip does.

A growing number of Americans are seeking answers to their questions on policy. The reality is our softball traditional media coverage, old media if you will, is not up to the task. This gap, too large to ignore, has been filled by bloggers.

In your defense, the blogspace remains a messy one. Recent estimates put the number of blogs in the 10 million range, painting a picture of reckless publishing sans the many editorial checks in place we are accustomed to. A healthy skepticism is not only warranted, but mandated if one is to make any sense of the medium. At first glance, the blogsphere is a dicey proposition indeed.

Having said that, old media attacks on blogs fail to account for their highly distributed and interlinked nature. Where old media depends largely on editorial review to check stories, the blogsphere works on journalistic integrity, ethics and relevance to build reputation, trust and thus readership. These things, combined with the distributed nature of the medium allow worthy blogs, regardless of their ideological stand, to rise above the fray and be heard thus:

a solid blog that embodies the highest journalistic standards of form and conduct, lacking relevance to the larger issues at hand, will enjoy both a worthy reputation and a small but loyal readership appropriate for the subject matter addressed; such a blog will be cited and linked where it's relevance adds value,

a relevant blog, lacking journalistic integrity, may enjoy a substantial readership, but will lack the reputation necessary to gain loyalty and trust; such a blog will not be often cited and linked by blogs that do embody proper ethics,

a blog that embodies both ethics and relevance will see a growing audience and trust that sets them apart from other lesser blogs; said blog will be often linked and cited by other worthy blogs as well as by lesser blogs, thus making them an 'authority' where the subject matter at hand is concerned.

This process is as effective as any editorial review process is. This process is by the people, for the people and about the affairs of the people and embodies the very best of our American values. Publishers compete on their ethics and ability to remain relevant with the result of their collective efforts being timely and valuable news and information for their readers.

Bias is permitted and it's negative effects diminished, compared to the strict consolidated hierachy that rules old media, through the ability for interested information consumers to compare and contrast many news sources together in their search for truth and information relevant to their lives. While this point is as valid for old media as it is for blogs, the latter also act as a check on the growing problems of bias and non-relevance media consolidation brings to the table.

Our old media coverage of events has clear gaps today. These gaps have been filled by blogs, the result being more complete news and information coverage for everyone. Blogs also check old media in that informed (and uninformed!) commentary related to old media publications is now a reality, published in real time for all to consume and consider.

It is no longer possible to publish news with the expectation that said news will be simply consumed sans fact-checking, bias awareness and additional commentary being a integral part of the process.

This is the gift, for better or worse, the bloggers have given us and I for one and quite happy to receive it.

My own niche blog exists at http://www.opengeek.org

Doug's drive through law.

2005-06-20T16:29:00.000-07:00

This little rant was inspired by this great Taco Bell story found here while doing a little mindless surfing. Enjoy.

I've got a family of six, plus Grandpa. Sadly, this means the drive thru is nearly useless for me because of Doug's Drive Thru Law, namely:

the number of food items ordered multiplies the percent chance for an error in package delivery with an item being defined as a single expression, communicated to the establishment staff that represents a standardized food package; each item brings 5 percent of error; add on expressions that modify an item, or portion of an item, are subject to a 2X multiplier; generic product references add another 1X multiplier as well with out of order expressions adding another 1x to the total. Deduct one base item error percentage for each sane question asked by the order taker to arrive at your total food error percentage.

This means if you have more than one kid, it's simply not practical to get a correct order from the drive-thru without checking your food, ordering in small chunks, getting extra make up items, etc...

Before I go too far, lets explore what is and what isn't an item. As I defined above, an item is a single expression that identifies a food package to be delivered in exchange for money. Now that's a bit more complete than the law above states, but I think you get the idea. Afterall, this is just a quick rant. Remember, lower your expectations and you will be happy more of the time! Ok, lets get started on the item examples!

"#3, medium with Coke" is one item. That's a package that links to the little buttons on the console. None of the kickers apply here, so you will get this right 5 out of 100 times. Not so bad. The expression maps directly to the buttons making parsing as easy as possible. Total: 5 percent chance of error.

"fat burger, no onions, a medium fry, and a cola" happens to be three items. Even though all three items are in the combo package, listing them by themselves requires thought at the register, thus adding significant error. That's 15 percent error right there, but it gets worse because of the generic product reference. You just can't say cola and expect to get Coke, Pepsi or RC cola because there is no button for that. If you are lucky, the person will ask. If not, you will get what you get. Total: 20 percent chance of error.

I have found it's easier to get correct food orders more often at the burger places because the combos group the food together in ways that keep the error rates down. When ordering for more than a coupla people, these combos really start to matter! For my family, I can expect 50 percent on a good day. Not too bad compared to:

Taco Bell

This is where it gets messy. Taco Bell has lots of items and most people want a few of them. Disaster just waiting to happen. Lets see why:

"2 soft tacos with meat and cheeze only, 1 bean burrito, 1 burrito supreme with extra beef and an extra tortilla wrap, an order of mexi nuggets, 3 hard tacos and a medium pepsi."

2 soft tacos is one item (explained below), plus the meat and cheeze only 2x kicker brings us to a 15 percent chance of error without even getting started. The bean burrito is right off the menu, adding it's tame 5 percent bringing it to 20 percent chance total. 1 in 5, not bad though that might just get started feeding one hungry teenager.

That burrito supreme is a monster with 5 percent for being an item, and 10 more percent each for the two modifiers. Now we are at 45 percent or so...

The order of mexi nuggets adds 5 percent as does the three hard tacos. The latter is a tricky one because it seems like three items, but the reality is actually better than that because the words three and hard taco both directly map to the little order taking buttons. Whew, only 5 percent for all that food!

The medium Pepsi is right off the menu, only bringing another 5 percent to the table, leaving us with a total of about 60 percent chance of getting a food error. That's a best case scenario. If you have not properly prepared your order delivery, the numbers go way up. Here is the same order again, only delivered in a less organized manner.

"Medium Pepsi, 1 soft taco, an order of mexi nuggets, 1 bean burrito, another soft taco with both soft tacos being meat and cheeze only (If you don't get questions back at this point, be scared --really scared!), 1 burrito supreme with extra meat and an extra tortilla wrap, and 3 hard tacos".

Now we know the best case scenario was about 60 percent. The out of order items add another 10 percent (never order drinks first, it's just does not work.), breaking the two soft tacos adds another 5 percent because they are two items now instead of one, plus the modifiers go up on each one as well. That's 20 percent for a total of 40 percent additional error.

If you deliver this particular order, at your local Taco Bell, and they don't ask any questions, you are safe to assume your order is going to be wrong!

Now imagine that scaled up for about 5-7 people and you had better be checking your bag before you drive off!

I have found a few tips that can cut your potential losses however. Asking for special items to be placed in their own bag really helps a lot. It's easier to check your food and it makes them think a little about just what they are shoving though the window. For large orders, you just know they put the specials in the bottom in the hopes you won't bother to look until it's too late! The seperate bag cuts way down on that. (I have gotten my specials in their own bag at the bottom of a larger bag though!)

Let your kids order more items, if they are standard ones! The time and hassle savings is more than worth the extra coupla bucks.

Never get drinks at the drive thru! They are expensive and add to your food error potential. Snag those at your local food mart and make the kids go get them. Almost as good as the drive thru and you can snack on the smaller items, like fries, while you wait! It's a win, win scenario as I see it.

Check your food at the window, before driving off. This annoys them to no end, but once they get to know you, your error rates will drop. Of course, you then have no idea just what is in your food. It's a tough call. Cold and wrong food, or correct and hot food with bonus ingredients! You decide.

Have any fast food drive-thru tips to share? Post 'em below.

Read e-books on your iPod

2005-06-13T12:56:00.000-07:00

I've been toying with the notes function on my iPod. So far, it's been limited to helpful reference information. Being a Unix guy, I find the ability to keep specific command-line administration tips and other information on my iPod pretty handy.

Of course there is always somebody who gets it just a little more than I do. Reading e-books on the iPod makes perfect sense and is completely obvious once you think about it. I've linked a few resources below to get you started:

Plain Text e-book online converter utility

The Fiction of Cory Doctorow
(Published under the Creative Commons license)

The Baen online library

(Get the Rich Text download and convert it to plain text)

Have a good online e-book resource? Share it with a comment below.

Content is KING! Radio ramblings

2005-06-13T09:10:00.000-07:00

Anyone who has any interest in radio today knows these are troubled times. For some formats, such as AM Talk radio, the consolidation has been a good thing with hosts syndicated nationwide and good numbers for many programs. Things are only getting better for AM talk as the industry discovers progressive / liberal talk programming holds great potential for ratings just as conservative talk has for the last 10 years. Additionally, these popular national programs are helping local talkers find their voice too. KOPJ AM 620, here in Portland Oregon, recently added local programming in the mornings. An already great station, just got a notch better. Ideally, similar things are happening around the country.

Being the liberal sort, I'm all for getting as many voices into the fray as we can. Maybe we will see the smaller parties find their voices too. Where are our libby and green talkers? Listeners are waiting!

The gauntlet has been thrown with the purchase of the Ed Schultz show by industry vets Randy Michaels and Stu Crane. Anyone who doubted lefty talk was viable has a lot less to say now. Political issues aside, this can only mean good things for talk radio in general. Now that we have ratings and a growing base of programming, can we please have more FM talk stations or at least a few more AM Stereo ones?

FM radio continues to struggle however. The recent wave of format changes are blowing up quality stations all across the country. The replacements are less then stellar, highly automated, "iPod Killers" featuring wide music sets, less talk and a bold, "just don't tell us what to play" attitude. Blech!!

Back in 2004, Clear Channel communications launched an advanced technology initiative to "identify, develop and deploy technologies and products that improve the quality of radio for listeners, advertisers and the industry," Here in 2005 we are seeing the fruits of that labour in the form of aggressive HD Radio station rollouts, increased automation aimed at cutting costs and fewer AD spots. What's not to like?

Plenty.

Radio listenership is not down because the overall quality of radio. Radio sounds plenty good to most everyone. Even AM radio, in it's analog form, is perfectly fine for many listeners. It seems the Radio industry has drunk a whole pitcher of the digital koolaid. The race to digitize our radio stations, embodied in HD Radio, has brought a technology focus to the discussion that does not address the core problem with radio listenership today.

Quality is not the issue, program content is. History shows us, time and time again, that people will listen to well produced, quality radio programs, despite any quality issues that come along for the ride. Broadcast it and they will listen. Of course the digital revolution has nothing to do with programming and everything to do with quality. At a time when radio has more alternatives than it ever has, we are seeing the industry devalue itself in an attempt to co-opt the digital alternatives with buzzwords and technology.

Today we have iPods, streaming Internet audio, satellite radio, digital music downloads, podcasts and other technologies that all deliver audio streams to the listener. Despite being digital, most of these new alternatives do not have the quality a plain old analog radio broadcast does nor do they have the years of experience and name recognition radio has. But they are digital and they are new and that's got the industry executives attention.

It seems everybody is focused on quality and technology, but does this align well with the problems before radio today? Do these things significantly improve the value proposition of radio and how do they promise to bring new listeners? Finally, where is the return on investment? How will these things attract new listeners when quality is not the primary factor in their decline?

We all know listenership is down. Clear Channel is currently seeking new listener measurement tools. Maybe they want better numbers, maybe they think they are missing listeners, maybe they just don't know. It's almost as if they are saying the numbers can't be that bad, we just know there are listeners out there but we just can't identify them.

Folks, if the listeners are that hard to identify, there simply are not enough of them. End of story.

Radio is losing listeners because a growing percentage of programming being aired today is not worth their time, not because they don't like the sound of their radio.

Overall quality does not matter, number of spots mostly does not matter, number of stations does not matter and the music does not matter. Lets face it, they all play the same tunes anyway, it's just a matter of which sub-set of the list of payola approved tunes they choose to play.

What does matter? Programming, programming, programming.

Right now, quality oldies radio stations across the nation are being closed down, along with their radio personalities, in favor of bland automated formats like Jack and Charlie. These formats keep talk to a minimum, don't take requests and have fewer commercial spots. They also play a pretty wide set of music. Charlie has even run "iPod" spots by way of comparison.

Radio needs to be braodcasting programming that cannot be easily had elsewhere. That's why AM Talk is doing well. It's relevant, often local and very dynamic. People tune everyday because they cannot get the programming otherwise. Same for well-produced news programming.

Music, on the other hand, is everywhere. The only differentiator radio had was the on-air talent! If that's gone, radio becomes just another digital media delivery technology. Big loss, in my humble opinion and this is why:

Podcast: Not real time, can be local, are largely free, no commerical spots (yet), portable, timeshiftable, quality potential ranges from poor to CD-quality, iPods are growing like weeds but needs computer / internet for content.

Satellite Radio: Can be real-time, not local, somewhat portable, pay per month and per radio, growing commerical spots, generally not timeshiftable, quality ranges from poor to decent mp3, must purchase radio and subscription.

Internet Streaming audio: Can be real-time, can be local but mostly isn't, mostly free, growing portable but really isn't today, timeshiftable, largely free of commercial spots, quality ranges from poor to decent mp3, tied to computer / wireless devices, but computers are everywhere.

Analog Radio: Is real time, local, extremely portable, free, features commericals, somewhat timeshiftable, quality ranges from poor (narrow band AM) to very good (analog FM Stereo), radios everywhere.

HD Digital Radio: real-time, local, not yet portable, free, features commercials, maybe timeshiftable, quality ranges from Internet streaming audio (AM HD) to very good mp3 (FM HD), almost no radios anywhere and those that exist are going to be expensive for a while yet.

You may disagree with some items on the above list and that's ok. The idea here was to compare and contrast radio with it's competetors in a way that reveals it's strengths. Those clear strengths are:

Radio is Free: Anyone can pick up a radio and listen.

Radio is Local: Nationally syndicated programming and station clusters have sharply eroded this, but each station serves a local audience.

Radio sounds good: To the average joe, the differences between digital radio and analog radio will largely go un-noticed. Both sound better than most all other alternatives. My point being that radio is plenty good enough in this area.

Everybody knows what Radio is: Not everyone knows what a podcast is, understands how to get internet audio, etc...

Radio was first: This means radio sets the bar others must follow. Given this leadership position, why is the industry working so hard to lower the bar thus setting easily met expectations for it's competition?

Here is the question again: If quality is so important as to cut live staff and spend tons of money on digital radio, how come the competition is doing well with marginal quality overall? What does the competition have that radio does not? What does HD Radio add to the overall picture? Increased quality and some increased choice for those willing to pay for HD Radios. These are already pretty strong yet listenership is falling. Doesn't that indicate the efforts are not properly aligned with the needs?

Instead of spending tons of money on expensive and hard to maintain automation systems and digital radio technologies that do not address programming problems, we should be seeing increased programming efforts. Those efforts are going to take people to produce which is exactly the thing being removed from radio today. Devaluing the industry to save costs will only work for a while. As the new alternatives continue to mature, radio will enjoy fewer cost, portability and quality advantages, leaving only programming as it's primary differentiator.

We need programming on the radio that is not easily obtained elsewhere, not programming avaliable everywhere delivered at a lower cost! Until we see this happening, radio will be innovating technically while increasing numbers of people quit listening. Perhaps if enough of them tune out, we might see some investment in innovative programming worth tuning in.

OpenGeek site updates and general Rambling

2005-06-09T00:14:00.000-07:00

Update: [07/06/05] New information found below in red.

Update: I have had the hyperlink attributes turned off for a while and somebody finally noticed. Well, it's fixed. Thanks.

It's been a busy coupla weeks for me. Family issues, work, etc... all just a mess frankly. Tonight I'm going to take a break from it all and get some of the great new HD Radio samples I've received posted. I've finally got local AM HD Radio samples from 1190 KEX here in Portland Oregon! You can find those on the Samples Page using the link embedded here, or on the sidebar. Enjoy!

I'm in the process of completing an e-mail question and answer session with Ibiquity. When that is done, I'll post the results here for your HD radio enlightenment and discussion. Topics range from technical issues to up and coming feature sets. I expect this in the next week or so. Until then, enjoy the samples Ibiquity sent my way.

Ibiquity has been stalling. I'm going to give them a little while longer, then publish the unanswered questions here. (Crosses fingers, hoping it's just a busy time for them.)

While not part of OpenGeek my other radio hobby site, PDXRadioSpots is about to see some new content as well. Into old radio audio clips and spots? Give it a look. There is a lot there, and more coming soon. (Thanks go to Randy for a copy of the old KSKD Salem Dolby FM alignment signal. Way cool.)

Finally, I've received a number of corrections to my HD Radio essay. (Thanks everyone for helping me sort that all out --much appreciated!) Look for a new version of that this weekend as well. Enough has changed that a new PDF version looks like a reality at this point as well. I'm not going to link that here as the changes are still in process. --Just wanting to let folks know I'm getting it done, that's all. You can use the quick link on the sidebar if you really want to. I'm still working on this. --coming soon!

My oldest daughter pulled a run away a couple weeks back. This put the brakes on most everything for a while. I'm actually tempted to just blog it all here to get it out, but something says I should just let it go and concentrate on healing and problem resolution. Normally, I would write a little but this really hurts and I'm not at all sure what to say... I guess this is just a quick thanks for everyone who helped me through the last coupla weeks. With kids, you just never know. Man, who ever knew being a parent was going to be so damn tough? I'm an adoptive foster parent to boot, meaning I asked for it too!

Don't take that the wrong way. I would not trade anything for the last 10 great years. It's just been a tough month. It's looking to be a real tough year ahead too.

I've got things under control for now. I'm finally starting to get over the hurt she has caused. You see, I'm an adoptive foster parent. 10 years of tough parenting really has taken it's toll. To have my own kid judge me, after all I've worked hard to do, really makes one wonder just what they are thinking. The many folks I have spoken to say I am doing the right things and it's just going to take time...

Hit Record Sonograms

2005-05-30T11:35:00.000-07:00

Interested in learning a little bit about the production values featured in many greatest hit recordings? The author of this page details them from an interesting perspective of contrast and precision in the recording. This combined with effective use of dynamics and compression really tell a part of the story I find interesting and educational.

Check Out The Sonograms

Photos from Iraq

2005-05-14T13:43:00.000-07:00

This gallery shows many faces of the Iraq conflict. It's safe for most viewers. I found these images profound and moving. How will we be remembered there? What are these people really like? What has been lost? What has been gained? (Has anything really been gained?)

View the Iraq Gallery

I hate this, yet I look because I don't understand. I look because I know I am not getting the whole story otherwise and I need to know more. I look because those brave people who captured the images for me deserve my attention as do the dead on all sides.

I look because war is ugly and something deep down wants to see ugly. I don't know why, but accept it's true. Denial is false.

It's like a sore that you pick at, knowing it only gets worse that way. We pick at sores because a part of us wants to understand while another part wants to feel. This war is like one of those sores. We fight, we heal, we fight again, we try to heal again.

The damage is real, but the feeling is both pain and relief at the same time. In the end, things will heal. It heals faster if we leave it alone, yet we pick at our sores anyway, knowing the healing will be less than perfect but our need to feel and understand wins out.

This war is like that sore, these images are like the scab. My understanding is no greater today, but my empathy grows for both sides. Did I already say I hate this?

Isn't Freedom, Equality and Democracy Worth Enough to Fight For?

2005-05-11T12:08:00.000-07:00

The passing of the REAL ID act gave me pause this morning. Just how far have we come and what will it cost?

We have come a long way in the last 5 years or so. I thinking of boundaries, of lines crossed, of things somehow forgotten. If one were to wake up, after having been in a coma, would they recognize the United States today? How would we explain how we got here and what the future holds?

I remember that deep feeling of general unease and anger when the Supreme Court appointed George W Bush as our next President. My stomach sank that day because I knew things were going to change. The various discussions that happened over the next week or so conjured images of gloom and doom that have not even come close to the reality we see today. I don't think any of us realized just how many lines we were about to cross and how difficult the task of stepping back would seem in the years ahead.

That was the first line. Our Supreme Court failed to honor the will of the American People and uphold the decision of their Florida Supreme Court. On that election day in 2000, the American people chose Al Gore as their next President of the United States. The Supreme Court ruled that our votes don't count and that the party with the best legal team wins the prize. We were told our votes don't count and everyone was OK with that. The Supreme Court knew what they had done too. They wrote their opinion and included specific language to try and limit the damage in that their poor decision applied only to Gore -vs- Bush. They picked the president, ignored our vote, and didn't want to set precident. They didn't want to cross the line, but they did anyway.

I've thought a lot about the fragile nature of democracy since then. Democracy is about trust. A democracy is only as solid as those who participate want it to be. Our founders gave everything to establish ours. That meant something. It meant enough to carry us over 200 years. It does not mean as much now.

Despite, great efforts to bury the story, Bush did feel public pressure to fix our election crisis, thus HAVA was born and with it came Electronic Voting machines. We struggle with this today in that most Americans don't value their democracy as they used to. We have been lulled into trusting untrustworthy processes that govern our democracy. In this we have largely lost the power our founders intended us to have. That's another line crossed.

We have placed our trust into untrustworthy processes and people to handle our votes, count them and tell us the result rather than do the work ourselves and be assured the result is true and just. Everybody knows the importance of accountability. That's why we vote. Our government is supposed to be a representative one that works in our best interests. We have checks and balances to help keep our human nature from getting the best of us.

We don't have that anymore because our votes are counted for us by machines that we cannot understand or oversee. By trusting what is untrustworthy, we lose our ability to control our own future as a nation.

That's the fix George Bush brought to us. Rather than actually work to make sure the democratic process works for everyone, he chose to exploit a crisis in order to erode and transfer our chain of trust to third parties, more than able to manupulate our democracy for their own ends with most of us none the wiser. For those few who can see what has happened, a compliant and willing media works to brand us with names and labels that marginalize our cries for justice and trust.

So many lines, so little time...

Another line crossed happened after 9/11. I am sure every American wants to see those responsible brought to justice. I want that too. The line we crossed that day was one of fear. Call it the culture of fear if you will. Our fear of terrorism, under a true leadership would bring strength and unity to the American people. We have been here before and worked as one to defend our core American values; namely, equality, freedom and democracy. And we won.

Sadly, we have crossed that line too. We have crossed into fear where our values are not worth the risk anymore, or that's what they tell us anyway. Rather than leverage and focus our fear and anger toward justice, our administration cultivates it with banners, colors and other devices that keep us aware of it. Under that fear we have been asked to yield many rights in return for safety. We crossed that line and got the Patriot Act in return.

Fear and false trust brought us another failed election. This time it was stolen, largely outside the courts and media. 30 percent of our votes cannot be proven to represent the will of the voters. We have no way to go back and see the true will of the American People as we did in 2000. There is no story to tell of how our democracy went wrong because we cast our votes and our trust into machines that did not keep either sacred for accounting later.

9/11 castrated our national mainstream media too. Everyone wants to support the President in a time of war. War on Terror. Is it even possible to have a war against an idea, a technique?

Somehow, we have lost the ability to question our leadership because the threat of terror demands we follow blindly or be struck. That's just not the America I grew up in. The Americans I used to know would fight to the last to uphold our democracy and freedom. Today we yield it piece by piece in the name of protecting ourselves from terrorists.

Lots of little lines crossed. Getting them drawn in the sand took everything we had. Stepping over them is so easy now. Looking back is tough too. We know what it took to earn our soverginty and the rewards of freedom and democracy. How much will it take to get it back? What would those who gave so much say of us today?

Now we have a national ID system in the works. This system is supposed to help us find out who the terrorists are among us. One central record will be made for each American. God only knows what will be attached to that record and what it will be used for.

Some say there is hope. We have checks and balances right? We can hold the listkeepers accountable right? Nobody will abuse the system because it's only for identification right?

Look at the lines crossed together and a different picture emerges. Our national ID can and will be used to validate all sorts of things we take for granted today. Travel, banking and other critical things will all require this identification system be carried at all times, or risk a strike from the terrorists among us. Do any of us honestly believe they will just step up, get their ID and then be found out? Is the fear so great as to make, "Your Papers Please" worth the false relief it will bring?

These ID cards will likely feature remote data transmitters called RFIDs. They allow the ID to be read at a distance. We have provisions in our law that prevent unwarranted search and seisure. We give lip service to the idea of privacy in ones own person. The Patriot Act lets our government brush those things aside in the hopes of finding terrorists. Again is that false relief worth it. Will a little card, broadcasting your personal information to passers by really do anything to prevent terrorism? What about this coming election? Will your electronically processed vote be tied to this ID you will very likely have to show in order to vote? What about your banking, things you buy, places you go?

One day in the near future you might have trouble finding a job. In the back of your mind, you wonder just what your personal record says about you. It will be kept a secret so nobody is at risk, but that means you will have to carry a device that holds information about your own person that you cannot see or read? What if it says you are gay, for example? It's like a nasty rumour that you are clueless about, but everyone else knows.

Are these things worth the false relief from fear they bring?

The way I see it, we have one more shot at fixing things. The upcoming mid-term congressional elections are the best shot we have at re-establishing a two party government while we still can easily do so. Large portions of the country are still not fully converted to electronic voting. We have a chance if we vote in record high numbers for change. We can still audit our elections and reveal fraud and manupulation. There is still time.

There is one more time.

We have crossed a lot of lines. Grave damage has been done to our democracy. Our founders saw this day and gave us the power we need to put our nation back on a solid path. They gave us the vote. We have nearly given it back to those who govern us, but there is still time.

What to do?

Simple. Stop the bickering and blind party loyalty. Stop giving away the farm so gay people can't get married or women can't have abortions. These are little things we can work out once we have earned the right to persue them. Right now, we are being lead, not represented. Right now, our best interests don't mean much because our government does not fear our accounting. We are weak and divided, confused and uninformed. Our votes don't matter because we don't want them to matter.

Here is the solution. No matter your party affiliation or social values, you need to vote a full Democratic Ticket in '06. I used to be Republican. Now I am simply an American asking you to join me in getting our checks and balances back. I am asking you to not sweat the little things and vote for the greater good.

Are the Dems perfect. Hell no. They are no prize and have just as many problems as the Republicans do. But I have learned something over the last few years that is very important and that is we need at least two sides to the discussion. Ideally we would have more, but we can't afford that right now.

One party government means absolute power over us. We have seen what that does time and time again. Will we sit and watch it happen to us, here today right now, because we are stuck on some silly issue? Will we let our freedom be taken one value at a time while we feel better that some of us can't get married, or that our church supports a president that will legislate our beliefs on the masses?

Vote a straight Democratic Ticket. Put the checks and balances back into our government then hold all of them accountable with the fear of our votes. Only then will we see legislation that helps us all improve our lot as Americans.

Do it. Cast your vote and cultivate a little healthy fear with me. We both will be better for it.

Roughly 48 Hours Remain to Oppose National ID card.

2005-05-09T01:17:00.000-07:00

This one was a complete surprise. Packed in with the latest Iraq Military Funding bill, the proposed national ID card legislation passed the House and is on a fast track for the Senate later this week.

Having a national ID card is a bad idea on so many different levels, it's hard to know just where to start. If you agree, for just about any reason, please give your Senators a quick FAX and phone call to urge them to oppose the National ID card legislation.

FAX YOUR SENATOR HERE

There should be some rule of government that prevents things like this from riding along with important legislation, that is politically difficult to oppose. Regardless of where you stand on the Iraq war, failing to approve funding for the troops is politically deadly given the mid-term elections coming in 2006.

That's what makes this whole effort to create a national ID card such a surprise. It passed the house, many of whom did not even get much of a chance to review the legislation and fear the sound bites if they did oppose it. We should not have our elected officials be forced to make a choice like this becuase it's a no win for everyone but those select few that want this national ID card to happen. As it stands now, you either support the troops and support a national ID card, or support neither and we all know what that means.

Ask John Kerry how well failing to support the troops comes across during an election.

We have one more shot at this while the bill is in the Senate. We need to let our senators know we understand the difference between supporting the troops and the damage a national ID card will cause. We also need to let them know they have our support. The military funding should pass, but the national ID card provision, which has not even seen any debate, should not.

FAX YOUR SENATOR HERE

I would follow this up with a phone call and be sure and let your friends know to do the same. Take some action, or you too will be digging up several forms of ID, plus whatever biometric info they require for this new ID. You too could find yourself having to use this ID to vote in the next Presidential Election wondering if your voting record is tagged to your ID...

We have less than 48 hours, that's about two days. This is a really big deal that is getting Zero attention. It will dramatically affect each and every one of us and it's GETTING NO ATTENTION.

What is this nation coming to?

Your secrets on a postcard.

2005-05-04T10:04:00.000-07:00

This is a very intriguing site. The idea is that you express your darkest, deepest secrets on a postcard and mail it in for everyone to read and ponder over. Wish I had more ideas like this!

You know you want to read it.

Cingular Cell Phone Spam

2005-05-02T17:52:00.000-07:00

I have noticed the number of "push" messages from my cell phone provider is on the rise since the AT&T Cingular merger. Are these mergers ever actually good for anyone besides the companies merging? Each time two companies combine, it seems we get a lower overall value proposition. This latest spam attack is a nice example of that in action today.

AT&T used to send these, but they went to the incoming mailbox on my phone. No biggie, just delete 'em and move on. Well, Cingular seems to want to own my phone from time to time on my dime to boot. Their messages take over the phone interface, making it useless until you read and dismiss the thing. What if I really wanted to make a call just then?

Bastards

In this age of ever increasing technology, I find the addons to cell phones are doing nothing that add to the core value of the phone, namely: making and receiving phone calls. Somehow I find this idea of them getting in the way of me using my phone, that I paid for wrong. Don't they make enough money from those of us making phone calls? How many ads for additional services must I pay for or wade through just to make a lousy phone call?

Today, I wanted to make a phone call and was limited on time. Normally I would just whip out the phone and get it done, but noooo. I first have to deal with a message right when time is short. This is not ok and is also the reason for this post.

Thanks Cingular for denying me the use of my own phone, only to have to wade through your ads, an increasing amount of the time. At this rate, I'll have to listen to a frickin' ad before my outgoing call is connected, even though I am paying for the call!

Saw "Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy" today.

2005-05-01T02:31:00.000-07:00

In a nut shell, I liked it. Rather than do a long blow-by-blow, I think I am just going to ramble a bit and call it good.

If you read the books, go watch the movie, there will be something in it that you will appreciate. Bring your towel too! It isn't often the movie people see folks bringing things into the theatre like that. They seemed to enjoy it. I found their reaction interesting in that it was obvious they didn't read the book, but wondered if they probably should!

A long time friend of mine suggested a few of us get together and watch the movie. Highly recommended approach really. I got to catch up with some people that I really should have caught up with sooner all because some guy decided to almost write a book a number of years ago! Thanks Douglas where ever you are, I had fun today because of something you wrote.

Impressions:

The visuals were well done, with the factory scenes being just great. All the zooming around the yard filled with all sorts of interesting looking planet building stuff fit my mental picture well.

I didn't see as much humor as I thought I was going to see, but what I did see basically worked in an odd way however.

The cast did a fine job bringing characters to life for me. I really liked Arthur and Zaphod. Speaking of Zaphod, I thought that was going to be one of the major challenges of this movie. How to deal with the two heads? The solution is perfect and I'm not going to spoil it. Very creative and a nice surprise.

I liked all the props. They matched my own personal mental visuals. Very British with blinking lights, humorous design attributes and lots of just goofy curves and shapes. They are as vibrant as the characters are in the book. This made up a lot of ground for me as the movie does miss the mark where story is concerned. (I can't blame them, it's a whopper to try to put to film in a way that an ordinary person might have a chance of relating to.)

The Vogons met my expectations easily enough. Rich seems to think they were inspired by one of the creatures from Monsters Inc. --the secretary does appear quite Vogonish. Who knows, this film was a while in production --maybe it's the other way around. My favorite part of the movie happens when the crew lands on the Vogon home planet. Don't miss that part, it's classic Adams humor realized on the screen just as it should be.

I didn't like the mushy element added. It was just a bit to much traditional hollywood-ish. No great harm done, just somewhat annoying. To give them credit, this does help folks, who didn't relate or read the books, to get something out of the movie. I'll catagorize this as a necessary evil.

One of the other challenges was how to handle the narrative. The guide was realized as this electronic gadget, book thingy that worked for me. The transition from movie to guide entry was done right and made some of Douglas Adams trademark humor approachable. Very well done, IMHO.

Be sure to watch the credits and don't walk out early like Jim did!

All in all worth a movie ticket. It could easily have been a lot worse. It could also have been a lot better too, making it just good enough to enjoy.

Again, I would take this chance to enjoy it with your friends who appreciate this kind of story. You will get more out of the movie that way. Save the critical analysis for the DVD where you can pick it apart in the privacy of your own home where nobody actually cares. After seeing this film, I wonder just what would have come if Douglas was still here with us.

Call for better AM leadership

2005-04-30T12:53:00.000-07:00

AM radio is the oldest form of radio. Despite repeated attempts to modernize it, including wideband transmission, various AM Stereo schemes, AMAX and others, we are left with a less than stellar AM listening experience overall. After listening to the harmful effect Portland Oregon's first AM HD IBOC digital broadcast has on existing AM radios, I wonder just how many more AM listeners we are going to lose before we figure out what it takes to get the most out of AM radio.

I think the core problem is the unaddressed need for leadership. The FCC badly mangled AM Stereo and looks to be making a bigger mess of things by allowing AM IBOC onto the air, but only during the daytime hours. (IBOC sideband noise is too high at night.) Ibiquity is in a position to help the AM band see more of it's potential through it's licensing of HD technology to radio receiver manufacturers.

We have understood how to make good quality AM radio broadcasts for many years, yet here we are in the 21st century still listening to poor quality narrow bandwidth audio being broadcast by an increasing number of stations. Despite what AM fans say, AM is not ever going to deliver the quality of service that newer technologies, such as FM and Satellite radio do, yet we are not seeing all that AM radio is capable of. Why is this?

I have come to believe it is because we are not taking the fickle nature of AM radio into account as we try to improve it and that's largely a leadership problem, not a technology problem. You see, AM radio is about tradeoffs. Everything is a give and take that demands a careful balance be maintained; otherwise we all fail to realize the full potential AM has to offer.

I'm not a fan of AM IBOC technology, largely because the quality of the digital audio is not good enough to warrant the harsh tradeoffs required for it's broadcast. AM IBOC stations must be narrowband analog to make room for the digital signals. That means harsh 5Khz, or less, brick wall analog filters that introduce ringing and distortion audible on even marginal AM radios. The digital signal itself adds noise to an already noisy medium, for those listening on ordinary AM radios. Given the just huge number of existing radios, it does not seem right to just slowly render them useless in favor of a marginal digital solution.

So what to do?

We need to coordinate the use of the AM band, keeping the interested listener in mind. It is these listeners, and more importantly potential new ones, that keep radio viable.

Interesingly, Ibiquity licenses it's digital HD radio technology. It is not possible to make an HD radio without first licensing the Ibiquity core technology and that licensing comes with terms. Normally, I am against this kind of thing, but perhaps it makes some sense where AM radio is concerned and that's the core reason for this post really. Maybe we can use Ibiquitys unique position to force the right kinds of AM improvements.

Look at the difference between the HAM radio spectrum and how it's used and the CB spectrum. The HAM radio operators work hard to get the most of their spectrum. They work together to innovate while not diminishing gains already made. The CB spectrum, on the other hand, is simply a mess with nobody doing much of anything besides shouting as loudly as they can in the hopes of being heard over the noise. The resulting experience is striking in that CB radio, though capable of long distance communication with clear and pleasant audio, is reduced to the worst of both. Narrow, distorted audio and local communications are the norm. Everybody lost with CB.

I do realize the issues surrounding CB radio are more complex. Just think about the leadership issue and it's potential advantages and let the rest go for the purposes of this post.

It's a given that no one AM modulation technology solves all the problems. This means that we really should not dismiss any one technology, out of hand, in favor of the others because we would not be gaining anything. The ideal approach is a well applied mix of existing technology that allows broadcasters to tune their programming and signal in a way that best serves their listeners.

The problem with this is that receiver manufacturers don't see a clear standard to build to so they end up building to the lowest common denominator. We learned this from the AM Stereo struggle where we did not endorse one technology, but let them compete to our mutual demise. AM Stereo is in wide use in many parts of the world that chose to learn from our mistake and support one technology solution.

If Ibiquity would include analog support specifications in their license terms, we would then have some leverage on how radios are made which would bring the combination of choices to the table necessary for AM radio to improve as it should be doing. There would be then two kinds of radios:

Ordinary analog radios, just as we have them today. These would continue to be a mixed bag with the receiver manufacturer free to do what they will.

Digital HD radios would support both AM and FM HD IBOC broadcasts and also support the analog AM options that make sense as well, namely: AM Stereo, AM mono and a narrow / wide option that could easily be incorporated into the treble control so users don't have to deal with another control. Impluse noise blanking would be a nice addition here as well.

All of that could fit onto one chip. I'll bet such a chip already exists and could be put to the task right away, making this a whole lot easier.

The core idea behind this to be a solid platform for AM radio that is a known and stable quantity. This stability would then promote better quality AM broadcasts. Ibiquity could make this happen largely on their own to all our mutual benefit.

It would be nice to also begin work on a more realistic AM band plan. Over time, as stations upgrade their facilities, channel allocations and broadcast types (AM Stereo, AM narrowband, AM IBOC Hybrid, AM IBOC only) could be mixed and matched to the mutual benefit of everyone.

This alone would make the purchase of new HD radios justified, regardless of your position on AM IBOC because AM analog would improve as well. Since IBOC is not a cure all, an improved analog scene just makes AM that much better to listen to as a whole.

AM Stations could then choose to broadcast full time analog AM Stereo broadcasts and be assured of new listeners. AM HD stations could use AM Stereo to cover their night time broadcasts, or simply choose to broadcast wideband AM or whatever else they think might best serve their listeners.

That's it really. I'm not a fan of HD IBOC on AM because it ignores all the progress and quality gear we have today. However, I'm also totally aware of the analog issues too. There is no one stop solution that will fix AM radio. What we all really want is better AM radio, why not apply the full range of avaliable solutions to the problem and just make AM better?

1190 KEX First Portland HD AM IBOC Station

2005-04-29T18:40:00.000-07:00

Interested PDX Radio listeners posted the news today and my AM radio confirms it. IBOC AM is now a growing reality here in Portland Oregon. My first impressions are not favorable at all.

Now we get increased daytime noise and hiss in addition to already narrow bandwidth and analog distortion caused by the harsh brick wall filters required for both analog AM and HD IBOC to co-exist on the same station. Every AM radio, I own reproduced the 1190 KEX IBOC noise, despite industry claims otherwise. My better radios really sound terrible now, just as I said they would.

Update: I've got AM HD Radio samples for 1190 KEX up now on the samples page. Ideally, I'll add analog AM samples to the mix in the next few days.

HD FM, at this point, is largely benign in that most existing radios do not see a change in service quality level. As I suspected, the story would be considerably different for AM. 1190 KEX now sounds like a weak, out of town station during the day because of the increased noise the new HD Radio signal brings with it.

Look for AM 620 KPOJ to be next in line for the noise treatment as the HD AM digital downgrade continues here on Portland Oregon Clear Channel stations.

Not Happy with Oregon Public Schools

2005-04-27T12:48:00.000-07:00

After reading this post, I realize the issue is wider than my local school district, so I changed the title. I live in Parkrose and am writing about what I see.

Before I really get to the core issues, know that I appreciate the many quality educators working hard at Parkrose schools. I've talked with many of you over the years and you are appreciated. This post is not about you at all, please know that.

So, what's my beef?

The negative impact CIM/CAM standardized testing has on the ability for educators to actually educate.
In my district at least, a growing bad element combined with a sharply limited ability for the school to properly address the problem.
What's with the poor quality food. Somehow I have never managed to be in the school during lunch time. That recently changed and it stinks! Literally. What are we feeding our kids? Old fast food quickly prepared?

These things are forcing me to consider alternatives and I resent the extra expense they are going to cost when our tax dollars should be providing a solid basic education environment. Something is really wrong and it's growing worse. I've never been a supporter of school vouchers, but that's beginning to change because I'm not seeing the minimum results I need to see for my tax dollars. Kids are important enough that I am willing to do what it takes to raise them right. If that means a voucher system and diminished public schools, maybe that's the right approach if change cannot happen otherwise. I hate to force the issue, but something needs to give. In a nutshell, we need to find a way to address the following, or I'm basically going to begin advocacy for vouchers. I just don't see any alternatives. Your comments on this are welcome and encouraged actually. The schools need us talking about this stuff because it really matters.

CIM / CAM Standardized Testing

I'm opposed to these tests for these primary reasons:

they artifically focus the classroom on a fact-based rote education aimed at passing the tests,
they do not take into account different learning styles and critical thinking skills; thus removing individuality from public schools,
educators are held accountable for more than they have control of,
the program is costly and has yet to provide any demonstrable value in terms of educational benefit (where is the Return on Investment?),
the incentive to "dumb down" the material presented is higher in a standardized testing environment.

Lets take these briefly, one at a time. My experience with my children, over the last 10 years or so, has seen a increased emphasis on fact based learning a the expense of critical thinking skills. A significant and growing percentage of middle school kids cannot reason as they should be able to at their age. I'm seeing kids tapping buttons on calculators and getting answers but not understanding what those answers mean. Writing assignments are similar. They are being asked to recall facts, but not offer opinion and provide solid support. Education in civic matters is cursory and not adequate for their understanding of what it actually means to be an American citizen. I know that last one is touchy, but should they at least know their rights and how they got them? In short, kids are learning lots of facts (and likely forgetting a lot of them), but they cannot tell me what they really mean.

Everybody learns differently. This demands an evaluation environment that can take this into account, further meaning such an environment cannot by it's very nature be standardized. Interested parents (and yes that's another big problem) educators and kids should be able to all participate in their understanding of where they are and what they have accomplished. This is more than a number on a chart. What about the kid who is highly creative, but maybe is not great at math? They are going to see low numbers and in the standardized environment thus be discouraged from learning because they cannot see progress. What about the kid who can remember anything but lacks critical thinking skills? They might be shown to be doing really well, but will wash out in secondary education. We need to be reviewing more than just ability to output facts and make computations. Standardized tests do not encourage this and that's a mistake.

These burdens hit home in the classroom in a frustrating way for many of the quality educators I have talked to. They are held accountable for many things they cannot easily control. Given a large class size, and diverse skill set they are somehow supposed to manage to achieve uniform testing results? That makes zero sense to me. Further, the tests don't apply each year so a kid can slide backwards for a while, then be tested only to find out they are behind and lack time to catch back up! The material on the tests also forces them to build their class plan in such a way that might not make optimal sense given the students at hand. The amount of material required also limits focus where it might be needed. Ask yourself these questions:

Would you rather your kid be able to read well, write well and understand basic mathmatics if that meant some sacrifice on other facts they can easily get for themselves at a later time given the ability to actually read and think for themselves? Is is really important to know all the nations of the world, for example, but not be able to properly read, understand and consider the information in their local newspaper?

My point here is that we need to stress the ability to learn and reason given the facts at hand, not make sure all the facts are properly remembered if we are to build people that possess the ability to learn and grow on their own.

All of this testing is expensive. Money spent on expensive testing programs takes away from the classroom, resulting in less attention per student. Given less potential student / teacher interaction, the incentive to dumb things down and focus on fact based learning is emphasized. We are not doing our kids any favors in this.

Ok, these are state issues not unique to Parkrose schools. However, I do live here and am going to speak from my experience because that's all I have.

Growing Bad element / limited control potential

This one is a biggie. I've met a lot of the students attending Parkrose Schools. They are good kids working hard for the most part. It's the growing percentage of problem kids that is making things hard on everyone. These kids are why at least two of my children are not going to attend the full course of Public Education our tax dollars pay for. It's our inability to manage this problem that is leading me to support vouchers. The testing issues are not helping either, by the way.

Here is the core problem we need to somehow figure out a way to address our our public schools will see nothing but growing trouble:

Kids today know there is little the school can really do to them. Many kids will not work to do the right things unless doing the wrong ones are not worth doing. All of the limits (I don't know if they are self-imposed or not) on the schools ability to address this are the root of the problem. We need to empower the school to enforce a solid and safe learning environment. Somehow we have forgotten the importance of doing this.

I see kids walking around with cell phones text messaging in class, despite clear rules banning their in-class use. Why are we not checking phones at the door, or confiscating them to be returned during a parent / teacher conference of some kind? The kids do this day after day after day. Why?

Foul language, inappropriate dress, insubordination and other common infractions every kid is tempted to engage in happen over and over and over. Simple parenting solutions, obvious to anyone who actually has been a caring and dedicated parent, are denied to the school, leaving useless options in their place. Ever see those television shows where the detention room is nothing more than a play house? Believe it. I have seen this and it's wrong. When I was a kid, the school used to be able to do more to make bad behaviour not worth doing. Today that's not the case with obvious bad results. Maybe we have too many lawyers working to limit the schools liability and too many parents all to willing to believe the school is at fault when the reality is likely their own parenting and failure to instill fundemental values and expectations?

Little of what I see today would have been tolerated in my own school as a kid. (And it was not even that good of a school.) I'm missing something here and would like to know what it is. We know how to solve these problems, why can't we empower the schools to do so? When I go to ask my school for more aggressive discipline, they grant it and say they cannot do it otherwise without my agreement, I shake my head and wonder why not?

I have not asked for much, by the way. Cleaning walls, maybe some writing or work after school. Nothing big. Just enough to get the kids to think a little and move on. Maybe this is our fault as parents. Maybe the schools could work harder to educate parents a little bit too. Maybe provide ready options and get consent for those kids who need more than the tame options at hand otherwise.

Kids come to school high, they bring weapons, they combine into groups and harass other kids. We know these things, it's nothing new. Why the reluctance to just step up and address them. If I were in charge I would. Would I then be fired? Is that the problem the school sees today? How can we fix this?

What is with the food?

The elementary school lunch room actually stinks. It smells like grease and fat. The kids are eating fast food every day and we wonder about attention and weight problems? School lunches used to be made at the schools. Does farming out this to Taco Bell really cost us less in the longer term? Don't we need the jobs and community involvement? I'll gladly pay for this to happen rather than see my kids eat fast food. Lord knows we do enough of that as a busy family. Do you other parents reading this actually know what your kids are eating and why? I am beginning to reconsider my foul memories of school lunch as a kid. It was better food than we see today!

(That's scary to me, isn't it to you as well?)

Ok, so those are my gripes. I know it's harsh, but I really needed to get this out today. So where do we go from here? I don't know the answers, but I will tell you what I am doing. Maybe you can join me, or tell me what you are doing as well. Together we might achieve change.

I want to support my public schools. Paying a bit more for better schools is one hell of a lot cheaper than what I am doing right now. However, if I can't get the minimum quality needed, I would rather do something terrible like consider vouchers to force the issue. That's the last option in my book. Can we not find alternatives to the issues presented above? They are basic things. We should be able to fix them and move on.

What I am doing today:

I'm an involved parent. I set high expectations for my kids and work hard to help them meet those expectations. We are getting it done today, but it's hard and expensive.
Advocacy such as what you read here. I talk with educators when I can and other people in the community. I haven't spent time with the school board, but I plan to in the near future.
I do not allow my kids to participate in the CIM / CAM program to send a clear message this is not the right path to follow. If you want to join me, let me know and I will tell you how. no-cim-cam@opengeek.org. It's easy to do and costs you nothing. (It does cost the school though.)
Volunteer at the school. I do work a lot, but my wife goes to class just to keep the kids in line and help those that need it. With 30 kids in a class, just one or two bad apples spoil the whole lot. This also consumes a lot of time, but it helps a lot.
Write your legislators. I do this often. Maybe it matters, maybe it doesn't. I think if there are numbers doing it, then it does matter.

Again, I value the hard working educators at Parkrose schools. Know you are appreciated. We need to fix our schools because the long-term harm is beginning to show in that our future leaders are ill-equipped to actually handle the tasks set before them. Our nation is being diminished as a result.

Comments, ideas, whatever? Feel free to express your ideas and experiences below. Think I am wrong? By all means please tell me why. I want to help and am willing to accept all input because our kids matter.

A short news media fast

2005-04-25T09:49:00.000-07:00

I just got done doing one of these and I highly recommend it. Take a week, maybe just the weekend or a few days and just don't consume mainstream media, particularly news media, during that time.

The first day is tough, but the days after get kind of interesting in that your mind begins to wander in places that it does not go often. In this, I realize the level of attention we have become accustomed to granting our media companies is too high. What do I mean by that exactly? Glad you asked.

I mean too high in that our ability to just ponder things is diminished by all the information we are taking in. We just don't take time to think about things we want to think about anymore. Of course this is not true for everyone, but I can honestly say that it is true for me.

While tuned out, I thought about my life and family more than I usually do and came away with some ideas to help improve that without too much work or money being involved. That's worth it in itself, but there is more. Local TV news is quite shocking after not watching for a while. What I see now is a sales pitch for local business and other interested parties and a lot of crime reporting along with some light local politics. No solid disucssion of any real issues from what I can see. Where are the investigative reporters I used to see? Were they really there as I remember from childhood? I'm tempted to get some archives to see for myself.

The national news is a joke as well. I see human interest stories that really don't matter, sprinkled with health warnings, crime and some bonehead "what the president did today" stories. There is lots of opinion too. In my opinion, this bias is in favor of the President in that good things get reported to death, probably because there just are not that many of those to report on, real issues get only the most cursory treatment. (This is a disservice to all of us.) Again I ask where is the investigative reporting? Anyone can publish a press release. Is this really where our national media has diminished to?

My newspaper is somewhat more interesting than the television or radio is, but it still avoids the heavy hitting topics far more than it should. Where are the stories about voting, health care, social security, Tom Delay, etc...?

During this little fast, I did seek news and opinion on the Internet and found something very interesting there, missing from mainstream media. What is is you ask?

I found facts and truth mixed in with an amazing variety of opinion. Lots of people, such as myself right here on OpenGeek, writing about stuff and talking with one another, exchanging views all over the map. What a refreshing and colorful medium compared to the bland traditional media.

I'm not saying the Interent should be king, though I must admit I am giving it a lot more attention from now on. I am saying there is something really wrong with our mainstream media that needs to be fixed. Our vibrant culture is being dimmed by a media that grows more tame by the day. As an American I am ashamed really. We used to be better than this. At least I remember us being better than this. Were we, or did the enhanced communication possible with the Internet just open my eyes a little more than they were before?

Do it. Turn off your TV, Radio, and just give your paper to your less fortunate neighbor who might not otherwise have one to read. Do it for a week, or maybe just a few days. Enjoy a brief fast as I did. It's easier than you think and well worth it.

Spend a little time online searching on things you think you might find interesting. Participate in a message board. Interact with your family and talk about things. Your kids will bring up very interesting things to talk about I assure you this is time well spent. Keep a notepad handy and write down those meandering threads that bubble up when given the chance and follow them.

When you come back to plug in again, wonder about your reaction. Will it be the same as mine? I'm betting it will.

I plan to take a little time this week to write my local media and let them know what I just learned. I'm going to ask them how they got where they are today and encourage them to consider the longer term cost. Afterall a vibrant and questioning media is in all of our best interests. Will this be the Internet going forward, or can our traditional media step up and do what they are supposed to be good at in like kind?

My expectation of getting answers is pretty small really. Maybe they will think a little, maybe not. Maybe if they hear it from more people things will change, maybe not. For me, things have changed in that I am now going to make sure and carve out a little space for me and my thoughts. Why not do the same? Better, do as I am doing here and write something about it. Interested others will be better for it just as you will.

The Black Dot Game

2005-04-18T03:47:00.000-07:00

This little game is simple and actually kind of stupid really, but has lots of attitude! I must confess, I really enjoy goofy little web games. They are one of the best things to happen to gaming in my opinion. The limits of the medium force us to get back to essence of gaming, namely: simple hand eye contests, puzzles and a little mindless shooting mixed in from time to time. The focus is on the game rather than the experience so often found in modern console and computer games today. I like those too, but sometimes I just want to play a simple game. This is one of those games.

Give this one a try, you will either have a great time for 15 minutes or so, or totally hate it. They have other games on the site too, but I liked this one the best.

Yeah, Yeah, Just Take Me To The Game!

Site Update and general roundup

2005-04-18T02:39:00.000-07:00

I've had a misstep or two lately. Sometimes the writing just works and other times it doesn't. After looking things over, I've pulled a couple posts to work them over when I'm in a better space. Lots of anger and worry in my life at the moment and it seems to be coming out in my posts here from time to time. Sorry readers, everybody has their moments.

The other changes are light this time around. Mostly minor formatting and general cleanup to various posts. That's an ongoing task that will take a while longer to complete, i'm afraid. I see it this way: I can post when things are perfect and never likely post, or post when I can and cleanup later. Despite a couple of poor choices over the last couple of weeks, I think I'm going to continue posting when the mood strikes me and get the cleaning done as time permits. At least that way, things get out there for you to enjoy. As always, your feedback is important to me.

Despite what everybody might be telling you, the real killer application the Internet brings us is simple human to human communication.

I've started digging through my bookmarks for places and people I find interesting. The first batch is in the sidebar on the right, with another healthy bunch on the way soon.

That's basically it for now. I've got a couple of short political essays in the works, soon to appear here. I find writing about technology and its potential effects on society fairly easy. However, political stuff is really hard. Normally I would let this kind of thing go, but the need to express these things seems to grow daily... The plan right now is to keep the mix light on political issues and ease my way in while trying not to step on my own feet too often. We shall see how that goes.

The reality is that recent polls indicate a growing majority of us are increasingly uneasy about the current state of things today. That means we all need to be expressing our views, whatever they may be, in the hopes that greater understanding of the right solutions will result. The alternative is to simply sit back and do nothing but hope. I'm not one for doing nothing though...

In that vein, my primary political issue remains the untrustworthiness of the electronic voting machines and the highly secretive Voter News Service. Both of these do not have any direct public oversight and almost no news coverage of any kind, despite many thousands of documented problems and complaints. More on this later. For now, you can find two essays on the topic in the QuickLinks section of OpenGeek Sidebar.

iPod Mini

2005-04-09T01:07:00.000-07:00

After toying around with various lower-end portable music players, I decided to take the plunge and grab an iPod Mini today. Overall I am pretty happy with this little device and thought I would jot down a few initial impressions and experiences and see where things go from there.

UPDATE: My iPod Mini has been working very well. I use ephpod for my music transfers and have been storing lots of useful text files on the iPod for reading later. Of course somebody went a step further and enabled all of us to put e-books on our iPods for reading later. Way cool.

The Purchase

Being the sort that wants instant gratification on something like this, I purchased my iPod Mini from the nearest vendor I could, namely Circut City here in Portland Oregon. I like this particular store. It's close to the house, they offer new DVD's at a nice discount when you buy them on release day, have decent sales people and don't work too hard to upsell. (Hope they stay around because I appreciate that.)

Having said all of that, I must say I was surprised with my iPod experience there. They didn't have any models running for demonstration purposes. For me, this was basically a non-issue because I had plenty of time to sample players and had already decided on the iPod unit. Still, one would think they would have a couple of different units running. Same for the headphones too. How can anyone buy headphones without first hearing their performance, unless they know about that in advance?

Minor demo issues aside, I quickly pointed out the model I wanted. Surprisingly the sales person there didn't unlock it from the cabinet, but offered the Creative Labs Nomad to me instead. Lets just say that if one is in the mood for an iPod Mini, the Nomad is simply not the same kind of player and leave it at that. (Liked the Nomad, but just liked the Mini better.)

That conversation was interesting in that the sales people actually work pretty hard to sell against Apple iPod products. They brought up every showstopper possible for the Mini while positioning the Creative Labs product at the same time. I have asked which sold more and the answer has always been Apple though. Hmm...

Anti Apple Points:
-can't change battery easily or under warranty (true)
-does not hold as much music for the dollar (true)
-more DRM (debatable)
-have to use iTunes (true, but I just know somebody is working on this.)
-"The wheel Interface sucks"(True if you only want buttons, which I didn't!)

Pro Creative Points
-can change battery
-holds more music
-more industry standard (twisted truth in that it is a more PC like product, but false otherwise.)
-no wheel to wear out (True, but the buttons are going to see a lot more action too)
-less DRM (Don't actually know or care.)
-bigger (This is a downside for me personally.)
-better sound (debatable given the input source material.)

I was hit with all of those before bringing up:

-size and form factors
-user interface (hell yess!)
-industry standard (I don't see a lot of Nomads around, sorry.)

Let me say right out of the gate, the first two on my list are the primary drivers behind the iPod Mini purchase for me. (More on that in a minute) While the last is just simply obvious though not too important for me, in that I run Linux, use SGI machines, build my own stuff, etc...

Apple probably knows this, but still it's gotta be tough to have a winning product that your own distributors don't want to sell. Grade C

Out of Box Experience

I liked the packaging. It's small size and well thought out ongoing use makes keeping it good sense. The only throwaway is the thin plastic shrinkwrap. I am not used to this and I like it! Grade A+

Initial Installation and configuration could have went well, but I didn't quite do the right thing the first time through. There is clear instruction on the packaging that asks me to install software before connecting iPod. (I am using a win32 machine for the time being. Mac Mini is next for me though.) However, the program installation software suffers from the same problems most win32 programs do. I reached a screen that implied I should have the iPod connected, so I did. That ended up being a bust in that I had to uninstall, then reboot, then reinstall without iPod, then connect, etc...

That cost about an hour or so of futzing around with things. Other than that, everything else made good sense, happened quickly and seemed to work. Grade B

Note I did say initial above. To make a long story short, I quickly ran into problems with iTunes. Overall the application itself was decent. It did have the look of something written for the win32 environment that really didn't want to be there, but Apple computer is not the first company to do this and won't be the last either. Not a big deal.

So, what was the big deal then? In a nutshell, iTunes just didn't work well on my system. Without listing a bunch of specs, lets just say the machine is perfectly capable of handling iTunes and leave it at that. Using the music store was flawless, but using iTunes to handle other music sources was a mess. Importing CD media is risky and crash prone and so was managing mp3 files. Both tasks are crash prone and slow at times. This is enough of a problem that I chose to learn how to use my iPod without iTunes. Apple needs to put a bit more polish on iTunes for win32 systems if it expects to get all its new iPod users onboard. Grade F+

I know several happy iTunes users, so the application does work for people. It just doesn't work for everyone yet. In the end, I put together a CD Ripping program, mp3 encoder and iPod management tool that together replace iTunes quite nicely. After Apple has had another revision or two, perhaps I'll give iTunes another try.

If you find yourself in a similar situation, be sure and visit the ipodlounge. The forums are full of interesting and informative iPod related discussions. You will find solid answers there given some common sense and a willingness to look around. Highly Recommended.

The iPod Mini Itself

Software issues aside, the iPod Mini is just great. I find the package stylish and highly functional too. I have no complaints, only a suggested improvement on the overall screen latency. The display, while crisp and legible, does suffer from blurry moving images. A faster screen would help this, but might cost more in terms of power too.

How come we don't have a black iPod yet? With all that power in such a small package, I would think a black model would be a great complement to the other colors. iGoth! (Hehe)

There are plenty of hardware reviews on the net, full of screenshots and glowing praise, so I'm not going to go there today. Lets just say I'm fairly picky about these things and am quite happy with the iPod Mini from a hardware standpoint.

That leaves the little extras and some observations to cover before wrapping this whole thing up.

If you are planning to use your iPod in the car, I would not bother with the FM modulators because they degrade the sound quality too much, in my opinion anyway. Depending on the radio you have, the number of and proximity to your local FM stations, you might actually experience additional noise when using the FM modulator with your iPod mini.

I found the inexpensive ones also pass along the internet iPod RF noise and suffer from pretty bad EQ as well. The one more expensive, "designed for use with iPod" unit did a fair job of keeping noise to a minimum, but didn't improve much where EQ is concerned. FM is limited in almost every way when compared to the iPod. Overall frequency response is only 15Khz, dynamic range is in the 70's on most gear too. While I don't have the stereo seperation specification handy, it goes without saying the iPod is superior there too

Put simply: Don't expect to hear the quality iPod audio through an FM adapter.

Since my particular car radio does not have an external input I can use easily, I chose one of the cassette adapters and was quite happy with the performance. The cassette adapter was up to the task in every way but overall noise. It's easy to have the iPod turned down too low and not realize the problem because the cassette input adapter seemed able to handle a wide range of inputs without any significant clipping or distortion at all. Given a good high setting on your iPod, you can expect to get some very good sound from one of these little adapters. Recommended.

The few CD tracks I was able to import into iTunes encoded very well. The Apple format is very good compared to your average mp3 encode. Bit for bit, the Apple format is better. If you are planning to use iTunes, the 128Kbps encode default will work for most people. If you are a bit picky about your audio, I would suggest either the 160 or 192Kbps settings. There is plenty of room in the player either way.

If you are planning to stick mostly with mp3 files, I would suggest getting a copy of LAME to do your encodes with. This encoder beats the Fraunhoffer reference encoders hands down. A good balance for everyone is the -q3mix quality settings that are part of the LAME defaults. (~160Kbps) My personal experience with the two (Apple and LAME) is a wash with both encoders having their strengths and being capable of enough quality. Sadly, most mp3 software encoders shipped today do not do the format justice. That's an advantage for Apple in that their format works very well out of the box.

And that's about it really. I'm a happy iPod owner that isn't going to be using iTunes for a while just yet. The application shows promise, but just isn't cooked well enough for my tastes yet. If I can get it to install properly, I'll probably keep it around for the occasional download, but that's about it for iTunes.

Kid Sports starting to ramp up (About that Candy Tax)

2005-03-29T15:26:00.000-08:00

I can feel it coming. Practice schedules, transportation arrangments, increasingly good weather, chatty parents you don't know --and some you do, getting pestered for new equipment... there is a general restlessness is in the air. All signs are go. The countdown to summer sports has started. Oh, and the candy companies are salivating over the "fund raiser" potential these leagues present each and every year. I'll bet the sales are roughly equal to a holiday one. More on that later, lets get back to that warm fuzzy sports feeling for a moment or two longer.

For me the big indicator is the end of dance team. My oldest daughter is a member of the Parkrose Elite. This particular high school sport is a lot of fun for parents because we get to be part of the whole thing. It's a bit expensive in terms of both time and money, but highly recommended if your child is into dance. As a father, I didn't think I could relate to this sport, but it's surprisingly interesting and very good for the kids. Girls outnumber boys about 50 to 1, but all are welcome. I think I'll write a bit more about this in the near future.

With the end of the AAA State Dance Final Competition, managed by OSAA (The Elite scored 2nd place!) comes the beginning of soccer and baseball. There are plenty of other sports too, but those are what drive my family at present. The two middle kids really enjoy both of these sports. It looks like we are going to have a mostly hot and dry summer baseball season and that's just great.

This will be the first year that I am not coaching or just helping with a team. It's kind of wierd to just watch after being so involved, but I might actually get to enjoy watching my kids play this year. Given the hectic schedule I have had lately, I'm more than happy to grab my munchies and a cold pop and just kick back for a nice game. I love watching baseball live. I love it more when the kids are older, but not yet high-school. You get a great game of baseball, but still get to see all the funny kid stuff that happens. --Just watch out for the alpha parents. (Having been one of these, I'm sorry. I know better now.)

This just would not be OpenGeek without a short rant or two, so here goes:

This time it's about the candy tax, err... fundraiser! Now don't get me wrong, I have no problem with these clubs and teams working to get the money needed for the season. Car washes, yard work, community dinners and such are all great for both the team and the community it plays in.

But, I just don't like paying the Candy Tax.

The candy tax? Oh yeah, you know the drill. Sign up, write your check and get handed this box of candy to sell. The whole thing has gotten pretty bad with some teams just padding the cost of the candy into their signup fee leaving you to just deal with the candy. Of course every year, I skip the candy and just pay the team whatever they would have made off the candy sale, plus a little bit for not having to actually deal with the box. It's often a hassle as the candy and packaged meat people will make the teams sign contracts that go as far as they can to force the candy on every family participating.

This all used to be a volunteer deal. Either you wanted the candy or not. Now it's pay for the candy up front as part of your team signup and sell it to get your money back for the team.

Oh, and if you actually make any profit on your particular box of candy, you can give that back to the team too. Right. Folks, that is a candy tax plain and simple. The candy and packaged meat companies have made handling their products a part of the club signup process. Think about it a little. I'm sure you will agree that just is not ok.

Who is the soulless sales rep that thought that one up? I have to give credit where credit is due. The first time I experienced this, I just knew things on the candy tax front were going to go from poor to bad right quick. Of course it did. That little trick has caught on like wildfire with more and more teams every year. Whoever you are, you mostly suck ok?

Ok, enough of that thearpy, back to the candy tax. Some people like to sell the candy. I don't have a problem with that really. It's an option that should be there for those that need it or want to do it.

Let's be honest,

with the entire community basically trying to sell candy to each other, who exactly is going to buy it?

And that's my rub. Rather than force this on everyone, making it harder for those who want to participate in the program, why not present the candy fundraiser program an option to everyone instead? Failure to do this really turns the entire thing into a tax that simply makes the sports more expensive for everyone.

Other minor issues are the price of the candy. Selling the candy is tough because you really can't discount it much below the retail price. Isn't the point of a fund raiser to help the kids? How is simply providing everyone with a bunch of candy they can sell at basically the retail price helping the kids? Seems to me it's helping the candy companies more than anyone else and that's just not OK. Krispy Kreme is an example of a company that actually does fund raise. Whatever you think of their product, they do sell it to clubs at a highly discounted price for fundraising activities. That's helping the kids.

Giving people chocolate bars, that can be found at nearly every retail outlet in the country, to be sold at retail price is only fundraising for the shareholders, not the sports clubs.

So every year we go through the same hassle. We don't take the candy, normally upsetting somebody stuck with the job unloading the candy onto all of us. We do pay the amount the club would have made, plus some extra to make up for the hassle. This actually puts them ahead!

I also spend a little time each year letting parents know they don't actually have to deal with the candy tax. When presented with the price, market saturation and contract issues, most parents think a little bit about it, but will let peer pressure get the better of them and they continue to take the box of candy.

You know most of them just suck it up and eat it. How does just eating the candy contribute to sports anyway? Maybe if we were talking granola bars or something it would be different, but this is just candy. Lots of it for no good reason.

So what to do? For starters, just don't take the candy! Be polite about it, and do tell them why. If you are not sure what to say, just send 'em here to OpenGeek and they can read it for themselves. Better yet, print this out and give it to them with your contribution equal or greater than the amount they would have made from a candy box sale. Just to make this a little easier, I'm going to make a PDF flyer you can print and distribute as well. Look for it here on OpenGeek in the next couple of weeks.

Another good activity, in your new found quest to beat the candy tax, is to talk to other parents. Ask them what they think of the candy. Let them know what you read here and see if that matters to them.

Finally, start a real fundraiser! Setup a car wash or two, raffle off your school principle for the day. Anything but the candy tax! Perhaps your business has product that can be donated to the team for sales at the snack shack, or used to help the teams. I hate to say it, but give the Krispy Kreme folks a call. They do great fundraisers. Your local Mc Donalds also has a program where you can work the store for a day and collect a percentage of the days sales. I know the food sucks, but it's no worse than the candy and working the store is entertaining for a day. I've done this and had a lot of fun.

Comments? Suggestions? Successes? Failures? Just want to tell me about a great game or two? You can read about one of mine right here. As usual post 'em here, using the little comment button below this post, or shoot me an e-mail or two!

Sony Ordered To Pay $90 Million Dollars And Stop Selling Game Consoles

2005-03-29T03:37:00.000-08:00

You can get more detail here from C-Net news. This is bad for Sony, but really not the point I'm trying to get at today. Eventually, Sony will pay whomever whatever is required to begin selling it's games again. Not to worry, the PS2 is not going anywhere for a while just yet.

How this affects the upcoming PS3 is another matter and another post.

So, what's the point right?

Patents are my point today. Our system is currently badly broken. What just happened to Sony is happening with increasing frequency to companies doing all sorts of business. Patents are rapidly becoming a threat to any new product development and that's not good for any of us.

Now is a great time to talk to your friends and other interested people about exactly what is wrong with patents that cover ideas instead of specific implementations of ideas. Ideas you say? Yep. In the late 80's, I believe, computer software patents were allowed, then business practices and from there pretty much anything goes.

The way things are going right now, the ability to actually do things and develop products will end up divided among patent holders who do nothing but collect revenue while giving nothing of value in return, thus causing a drain on the economy that hurts all of us. Our ability to build things will be controlled by these various patent holders all looking to make money through licenses and nothing else.

So, why is this wrong?

Glad you asked! Well, you didn't really, but lets just say you did and go through a little thought exercise. It's not long, I promise. It is however, worth thinking about.

Imagine somebody patenting something simple, like the drip coffee maker. How many different coffee makers would be be able to buy today and what would they cost?

Answers:

1. There would only be a small number of products, licensed by the owners of the ability to make drip based coffee makers.

2. The cost of those would be as high as we could bear.

While easy, those answers really don't tell us very much do they?. The real story lies in the whys and hows behind those simple answers.

Lets take #1 for starters. Why would a patent on a drip coffee maker limit the number of coffee makers? Afterall, anyone who wants a license can get one right? While this would be technically true, where is the incentive to get a license? If there are people already making these coffee makers, why try to crash their party? It's probably easier to just find something else to make rather than try to take over the coffee maker business.

But, you say, "What if I have an idea for a really great drip coffee maker?". Wouldn't that be worth a license? Sure would, but, a license for what exactly? Permission from your new competetor to make your better coffee makers? And you have to pay them? That makes no sense at all. Why bother.

It's beginning to become clear isn't it? Nobody is going to bother to improve the state of the art when it's locked up by a patent that prevents those who would make things better from actually making money by doing so.

That takes care of number one, lets take a closer look at number two.

Why would the costs be so high. Wouldn't volume make up for a lot? Afterall we all want coffee makers. Selling so many has always made things cheaper before, what's the difference today?

Again, look at the incentives for the real truth. If you own the ability to make drip coffee makers, why bother giving anybody a deal? All you are worried about is license and royalty revenue. That's best for you when the product is high, not when the product cost is low.

This is what is happening to Sony right now. Somebody, somewhere owns the ability to make vibrating video game controllers. Not just a specific kind of vibrating controller, but almost all different kinds of them. Their overly broad patent covers just about any specific design, so rather than actually build anything, they are looking to license just like the fictional drip coffee example above.

What does that mean for us? Well, more expensive and potentially limited Playstations for starters. How about the longer term?

Putting the simple ideas I've written above together is not too tough. Longer term we are going to see fewer new products and less incentive to keep costs down.

That means we are going to pay more for the same technology than we normally would. Can you imagine what your computer would cost, or how powerful it would be if this had been the case early on?

I can, and it's not pretty. We would all be using the most limited computer at the highest cost because that's what is best for the patent holders. Sound wrong to you?

I sure hope it does because it sounds wrong to me too.

There is not time in this brief posting to explain all the differences, so I'm not going to even try today. I just wanted you to begin to think about patent reform today and be watchful. As this problem continues to grow, ideally you will tell your friends and elected members of legislature.

We need to fix patents before we kill our very ability to innovate that got us to where we are today.

Finally out of work hell (I think.)

2005-03-28T07:34:00.000-08:00

After a long Easter weekend, I can see the light at the end of the tunnel. Man, I have never done so many all nighters in such a short time-span. Glad it's all over!

As I wrote before, there is a positive side to this whole mess. Actually a couple:

For once, I got some serious radio listening time in. It was kind of nice to checkout the night time FM scene here in Portland. Late nights and early mornings actually have some interesting content. It's too bad some of these programming choices can't see the light of day. Between the odd show in the morning and interesting music sets, I'm wishing I had the disk space to do more recording.

On a more solid note, the real benefit lies in my new perspective. I have realized that I've gotten a bit spoiled over the last coupla years. Working a little over used to be such a drain. After this mess, that seems almost too easy compared to what I just dragged myself through.

Now I can get things cleaned up this week, sort of reset and start the next month fresh. Whoopee!

Another why I like the Internet post

2005-03-27T06:51:00.000-08:00

This is just cool. It's a series of images blended together to give the illusion of extreme depth. The whole thing repeats, but it takes a surprisingly long time to do so.

Anyone care to explain how this kind of art is done? I've always liked it.

The Evil Tree

Site Updates

2005-03-26T18:52:00.000-08:00

Ok, I think I am going to go with this template for now. Expect to see a collection of Links on the sidebar at left, along with a few more color and formatting links. If any of you have problems with this page rendering correctly on your browser, let me know. That's why I changed things in the first place.

A few posts saw changes and updates to their content, I have listed them below for those who might be interested:

Digital Radio: What is it and how will it affect Radio as we know it today?

Open source STL file viewer gets much needed update!

President Bush says we need to move to an Ownership Society

HD Radio, Analog FM and ogg Audio Samples

Thanks for reading OpenGeek. I hope you enjoy this site as much as I enjoy putting it all together!

Political News and Commentary Site Mortally Wounded by AFP Frivolous Lawsuit

2005-03-23T19:52:00.000-08:00

"Do no Evil" -- Found on Google Corporate (well sort of, they really say: "You can make money without doing evil.", but my version is cooler and simpler.)

AFP, a French based newsfeed service, has sued Google for carrying it's content headlines, along with a brief summary on its news content search service news.google.com. This foolish and short sighted action has implications beyond the monthly income AFP feels it's entitled to. For starters the value services like Google News provide is well known in that information consumers will consume more content if said content is easily located and that is just what Google, along with many others, does. That seems obvious enough doesn't it? How many readers would you have if they had to come to your site for the reading? Answer for the Internet impared: Not many, even if your content is really good.

This particular political news and opinion site seems to agree and has the bruises to prove it. The damage to their service offering looks to be mortal. Only time will tell, but I remain doubtful. They have been damaged by simply being an AFP content consumer. They are not even named in the lawsuit, yet suffer right along with everyone else unlucky enough to be involved with AFP.

You see, AFP demands that Google remove all content related to their news feed until they pay up. Of course, if Google actually paid, everybody would then demand their share, thus ruining the Internet for all practical purposes where news is concerned. So, Google removes what AFP asked them to, gets the legal team warmed up and ready to go and waits...

That's where the mortal wound comes in. If AFP bothered to look past their own greedy interests, they would have realized all their paying customers would not see their site headlines on Google anymore either.

Either content is linkable or not, it's really that simple. AFP is telling Google their content is not linkable, so Google is not going to link. Unfortunatly for the Political Gateway news and commentary site, that means no more search related traffic from Google either and according to them that very likely means no more site period.

It's going to be much of the same story for anyone who carries AFP traffic. I'm sure there are many other sites now experiencing what the Political Gateway is. Hopefully they are big enough to carry the day. Too bad for them and worse, too bad for their readers and too bad for AFP also. Anyone affected by this folly is probably looking hard for other news sources to replace the now tainted AFP.

Carrying AFP news is now the kiss of death. I'm sure they didn't think of that before thinking hard about how to satisfy their greed. I'm sure business will be booming now huh? Schumks.

Clearly most of the Internet agrees with Google and not AFP. In the end, I'm sure AFP will come around, though I'm not sure those that used their service will be around when it's all over. AFP may not be around when it's over. Afterall, how can one run a business when becoming a customer hurts more than it benefits?

Why not stop by the Political Gateway and support them? I found their site interesting and informative. Perhaps you will also. While you are there, consider supporting news services, other than AFP.

Do no Evil indeed.

Not happy --not happy at all.

2005-03-22T02:51:00.000-08:00

It all began last week. One of my clients runs a pretty high pressure work environment. When things are going well, everything and everybody is in good spirits and works hard. However, any little bump in the road usually turns into a stress situation fairly quickly. Lets just say that the situation early last week was basically a sink-hole kind of deal with all the stress that comes with that.

At first, it looked like the easy solutions were going to do the trick, but I soon learned this mess was the gift that just keeps on giving. Professional courtesy demands I keep the details out of this, so I will. Lets just say what started out as a decent week ended up being one of the longest periods I have ever been awake in my entire life.

The peak time without sleep was somewhere around 40 hours or so. It's kind of funny actually. The first day was really tough, but then I hit my second wind, then a third, and then I was just UP... Crazy UP, as in I'm not sure I even remember what a morning really is supposed to be like UP. Coffee is a good call anytime kind of UP.

The being UP for a long fucking time bit is the point of my post, I suppose, not the problem that caused it. In that vein, let me expand on that a bit.

In a morbid sort of way, I recommend everybody experience this at one point in their lives, ideally a point where your support structure is solid because you are going to need it. (I did, thank you Seana!)

The days blur and time becomes this thing you note, but really don't want to pay much attention to. This brings me to the first realization; namely, the only reason we really consider time is that we have something to look forward to. If this is not the case, time then really does not matter much at all. Wierd.

Memory changes too. After this experience, I firmly believe one of the reasons we need to sleep has to do with cerbreal house cleaning. Short term memory and long term memory are related through sleep somehow. Our brains take that time to sort the good stuff from the crap. When we awaken, our brains are nice and tidy, for the most part, ready to do battle again.

Well, here is an interesting thought! If there is literally nothing good happening, which clearly was the case for me, then there is a lot less reason to sleep. Why bother cleaning house if everything in it simply needs to go? For me, staying awake throughout the debacle meant the ability to compartmentalize it when it finally ends.

That's exactly what happened! After one nights sleep, it all seemed to just fade with only the bare minimum information preserved for hating later.

Damn Cool

This particular gift just does keep on giving, by the way. My entire schedule for the next week or so afterword is almost as hosed as that week was. That's exactly why I'm not too happy right now. Between OpenGeek blowing up after a benign post, resulting in the new look you see here, all the little crap that would have gotten done needs to be done right frickin' now for another few days on end. (Which is what I am supposed to be doing instead of posting here on OpenGeek. --A guy can only take so much, I swear!)

There is an upside though. I used to dread the all nighter. Well, I still do, but you know what?

It's not nearly as bad. A simple one day all nighter really is nothing compared to 40 or so hours. I think I gained something good in that. Of course it's not good to work straight through, but being able to do so with few worries is a nice thing to be able to take advantage of from time to time.

(Back to work... I'm out of the dog house and back to normal sometime later this week, I hope.)

Oh, there was a point to this post besides my whining and over analysis of my current plight; namely, the Tard Blog is back! Damn fine timing too.

Warning, if you are short on time, don't visit this site like I just did. It will suck up hours while you laugh until you cry! Man, I never knew just how funny the lives of these special ed kids really is. Don't get me wrong, I'm not laughing at them, but with them! That's a big difference I want to to think about before sending me, or the Tard Blog any hate mail --thanks.

You will have reached a new level of compassion and respect for those wonderful beings willing and able to work with the special ed kids. Hats off, I couldn't do it!

(The Riti Sped archives are the very best, IMHO)

The first part of this post demonstrates the Dingus patented speed reading bold trick. In a hurry? Just read the bold words and you are outta here in half the time! I think I'll call this use of formatting capability spolding. (Another wacko definition post coming soon, I can feel it!)

OpenGeek looks Different!

2005-03-22T00:29:00.000-08:00

I have been having problems with the sidebar displaying at the bottom of the page. Since my blog tends to have long pages, this basically was a show stopper.

Before putting all the links and stuff back into the sidebar, I think I am going to just try this out for a while. Expect a few more changes soon before OpenGeek settles in for a while. All your bookmarks 'n such should be just fine.

If you can't find something, let me know, and I'll drop a link or two right here.

An idea on how to get more sound out of IBOC HD Digital radio.

2005-03-21T19:43:00.000-08:00

I need to develop this, but just had a great idea for making the best of the fewest bits.

Everyone knows the best quality audio encodes take a long time. Given enough information, a good acoustic compliler could be written (Yes I will define that) that would significantly outperform more real-time codecs.

One problem IBOC radio has is the limited bitrate. 96Kbps max is just not enough to convey CD quality audio without significant effort. And that's the other problem, being time. We have an 8 second latency as it is. Adding more is not going to fly. So the choice is either more compute (expensive, particularly on the receiver side), or more time.

Why not pre-compile program segments? Bumpers, imaging, commercials, and preset music sets could be encoded to a much higher standard than is currently possible in an 8 second window. This is where the 'acoustic compilier' comes into play.

This special piece of software would do the following:

1. Pre-process source material. The output of this stage is a collection of information about the source material that can greatly help the codec make it's best moves. (Determining noise sensitive segments, silence, commonalities, etc..)

2. Enhanced encoding stage where both the source material and hinting information from stage one are combined for a greater encode.

3. Analysis. The resulting stream from stage 2 is compared with the original source material. Flaws are noted and further catagorized according to some information from stage 1 and some other information to be determined by the broadcaster. (Acceptable tradeoffs, priorities, etc..)

4. Tweak. The bitstream is then tweaked to make the most of the receiver codec according to the analysis stage. This stage and the previous one form a loop that interatively approaches the source quality until no further returns can be made.

If this isn't clear, consider early computers and sound. Playing sounds through limited hardware does get better once the limits of the medium are well understood. As people learned to "play" the system, the resulting sound got better. They did this by spending time and making tradeoffs. The IBOC / HD Radio system is a limited system in that it cannot just reproduce full-on audio as an analog one would. This idea is simply expanding on that process in order to get better sound out of the system than that intended.

I got this idea from hearing different mp3 codecs and players. Some combinations sound really good, others bad even though the basic process is the same. Also, some mp3 encoding software, such as LAME, already do this to a degree, resulting in a better sounding program by bending the rules a bit to the listeners benefit.

(I'll put up a picture of what I am thinking later.)

Once created, these pre-encoded streams would then exist on some sort of storage system, at the ready, to be inserted into the main broadcast bitstream when it makes sense to do so.

These 'compiled' streams could also be re-distributed to interested listeners to be played on other equipment. Their professional quality nature, compared with real-time and or consumer level codecs could make them attractive enough to be worth paying for, or at the very least provide another means of getting additional ad revenue through an archive service of sorts.

The core idea behind this is the common elements to radio. There is a lot of material broadcast today that really can be built ahead of time, with the idea being to limit the real-time material as much as possible.

Here are a couple examples I could think of that might clarify this idea further:

Archives: Many talk stations will recycle their shows during off hours. Those stations replaying syndicated content could simply receive compiled bitstreams ready to play at the highest quality possible. Lets say a talk station has one additional audio stream running in addition to their main hybrid digital / analog one. Compiling a broadcast in this way would likely bring the secondary stream audio quality on par with the primary one. Lets further say the secondary stream time-shifts the live broadcast for off-hours listening. These listeners would experience a much higher quality program.

Station imaging, bumpers, jingles and other "already cooked" bits. I think almost everyone agrees on the quality being a necessary element of a strong station identity. The extra clarity would make these elements stand out in a subtle way that is powerful but not annoying or tiring to the listener.

Highly automated evening sets, music bundles and special program segments. Stations here do "three of an artist" or "focus on whatever" or simply play daily sets with very similar rotation. All of this material can be compiled ahead of time for the best quality reproduction possible. This combined with already build imaging elements would make for compelling radio when combined properly. Long sets, such as those used by oldies stations would also fit into this catagory. With storage being cheap, several variations on these would be possible. --Just rotate sets instead of specific tunes.

I suppose that's enough for now. I just thought I would put this out there for discussion. --You read it here first!

(This post will see some serious edits when I have the time.)

HD Radio, Analog FM, mp3 and ogg Audio Samples

2005-03-11T15:02:00.000-08:00

New Sirius Satellite Radio samples added: 10/05
New Eureka DAB Samples added: 10/05
Rough Dates added: 10/05
KEX AM 1190 added: 10/05

This page started out as a quick 'n dirty way for folks to sample real world HD Radio. It seems to be evolving as a more general comparison of the various content delivery technologies and that's a good thing. There is a lot to compare frankly and the number of choices continues to grow.

Scroll Down For the Samples

Interested in getting your samples on this page? Contact me at samples@opengeek.org and I'll be happy to get that done. Please include any relevant technical information, station ID, credits, etc... with your samples so that everything can be sorted accordingly.

Call for additional samples: I am particularly interested in updated HD Radio samples. As things continue to improve in the audio processing chain, it would be great to have a record of those changes for comparison. A quality vinyl 12" and LP sample would be great to add here too.

I received a lot of material. For bandwidth reasons, I have posted a few snippets in raw wave audio format. (wav) Please be kind and download once then listen as many times as you want. Depending on how traffic goes, I'll either rotate the snippets, add new ones, or do something else.

Currently there is no real rhyme or reason to the order of samples presented. At some point in the future, I plan to reorganize the page to better reflect some of the audio tradeoffs each of the content delivery platforms represented below bring to the table. For now, each platform is colored along with the relevant samples to help tame the clutter.

All of the audio samples, save those indicated below, are presented in the form I received them in. In a couple of instances, I encoded the audio in order to allow for reduced bandwidth downloads, where I was sure the encoding process would not have a signifcant impact on the sample quality.

The various audio samples on this page are intended to help people understand where the different media delivery technologies fall on the quality scale. I was tempted to normalize the audio, but decided to just leave it as I received it. The first HD sample track from KGON was normalized, faded, etc... (EDIT: Actually the first two got this treatment...) That's all I am going to do. Anyone really needing to tweak the sound can grab their favorite audio editor/processor and tinker until happy.

And now onto the audio!

HD Radio (AM 1190 KEX Portland) 07/05
Sample 1 (raw wave audio)
Sample 2 (raw wave audio)

These represent quality improvements made over the first few months of IBOC broadcast at KEX. The originals can be found in the AM HD Radio section for reference.

HD Radio (FM) 04/05
KGON-hd-sample-01.wav (01 = Long)
KGON-hd-sample-02.wav (02 = Short)
KKRZ-hd-sample-01.wav
KKRZ-hd-sample-02.wav
KWJJ-hd-sample-01.wav
KWJJ-hd-sample-02.wav

The HD Radio samples were recorded directly from the RCA line outs on a Kenwood KTC-HR100 into a portable Marantz CD recorder. I have more material, but thought it best to start with this and go from there. ---Thanks Chris!

HD Radio (FM Secondary Streams) 07/05
WUSN-HD1a.wav
WUSN-HD1b.wav
WUSN-HD1c.wav
WUSN-HD2a.wav
WUSN-HD2b.wav
WUSN-HD2c.wav

The source samples were very long 320Kbps mp3 files. For length and content reasons, the samples presented here are shorter raw wav audio files, extracted untouched from the main mp3 file. Thanks go to the folks at Intercom Chicago ( Dave & A.J) for sending these my way. http://www.wusn.com/

Eureka DAB 10/05 [New]
bbcradio4.wav
[speech, 128kbit/s Joint Stereo : BBC National DAB]

virginradio.wav
[music]

core.wav
[Pop Music, 128 Kbit/s Joint Stereo -- Digital 1 Network]

bbcradio3.wav
[Classical Music 192Kbit/s Stereo -- BBC National DAB]

Digital Radio Monidale [mp3 file]

Audio samples taken from RCA "phono" sockets of a Sony D777ES DAB tuner directly into a computer. No processing was done, other than to trim the overall sample length and save as 48Khz, 16 bit WAV audio files. The Digital Radio Monidale (DRM) sample presented with this group, came along for the ride from the same contributor. I don't have a lot of detail on this one, other than it was transmitted via Shortwave. Please consider a visit to: http://www.wohnort.demon.co.uk/DAB/

Sirius Satellite Radio 10/05 [new]
Sirius 1 [channel 08]
Sirius 2 [channel 37]
Sirius 2a [channel 24]
Sirius 3 [channel 24]
Sirius 4 [channel 72]
Sirius 5 [channel 80]
Sirius 6 [channel 100]
Sirius 7 [channel 112]
Sirius 8 [channel 133]

Credit for these samples goes to some guy (you know who you are!) who preferred to remain anonymous. Several different channels, including a talk channel or two, are represented here. For more detailed information about the different channels, consult the Sirius channel guides. The samples were recorded directly from the radio as raw wave files. I have included short segments, cut from the original wav files, here for comparison purposes. No additional processing was done, other than to reduce the overall audio length.

HD Radio 03/05 (AM)
1190 KEX HD 1 (wav)
1190 KEX HD 2
1190 KEX HD 3
1190 KEX HD 1 (mp3)
1190 KEX HD 2
1190 KEX HD 3

Credit for the AM HD Samples goes to Dylan. He recorded these for me, using Larry's HD radio @ KBPS, and fiddled with the antenna to simulate rough signal conditions and allow comparisons between the analog AM and HD AM audio reproduction on an HD radio.

I went ahead and made quality mp3 encodes that don't appear to change the overall quality of the audio much. If you are on a slow connection or just want to save bandwidth, feel free to download those. The content is the same.

UPDATE: The folks at KEX 1190 have been doing some serious work on their HD AM audio processing chain. Look for samples here soon that represent their latest work as of Aug, 05.

Analog FM 03/05
KNRK-analog-fm-sample.wav
Another FM Analog Sample.wav

Analog FM Samples were recorded from an older MCS Series tuner, directly into the computer sound card. Honestly, my gear is not the best though it probably represents the median of FM radios out there. My location also suffers from multi-path, which can be heard in these samples. If you have a better FM sample or two, you are willing to get to me, let me know.

CD Audio 03/05
CD Sample 1
CD Sample 2

These samples represent some very good dynamic CD audio. Given the huge variation in CD quality, these samples are really more about representing what CD audio is capable of, not what we mostly see today...

Compressed Audio 03/05
Analog FM Compressed to Mp3 (.mp3)
Analog FM Compressed to Ogg Vorbis (.ogg)
CD Audio 1 Compressed to Mp3 128Kbps
CD Audio 1 Compressed to Mp3 192Kbps
CD Audio 2 Compressed to Mp3 128Kpbs
CD Audio 2 Compressed to Mp3 192Kbps

LAME was used for the mp3 endode, and the standard Ogg Vorbis tools were used for the ogg encode. You might need a plug in to play the Ogg encoded audio. Mp3 is capable of a notch better than you hear on this page, but the encode time is probably 3-5X that required for the file I posted here. Better to just use ogg.

Update: I decided to post some CD audio and mp3 compressions for another data point for those looking for simple metrics. ie: How much better does CD sound than FM? If there is demand, I'll add ogg files later on.

AM Stereo
You can get some great samples on the AM Stereo Page.

Other HD AM/FM Samples 05/05
WOR HD AM samples
WOSU HD AM and FM Samples

Sadly, these appear to have been re-encoded as mp3 files with what sounds like the Fraunhoffer codec, thus limiting their accuracy. You may find the quality of the real signal better than what you hear on this page.

Ibiquity HD Radio Sampler 06/05
A quick disclaimer is in order. I'm posting these with permission. (Thanks David!) Before sending me a happy fun C&D letter, please contact me and I will provide my contact information just to clarify things. Thanks and now onto a sample of the sampler:
01 - Intro
02 - FM Cont. Rock
04 - FM Jazz Inst.
07 - FM Urban
09 - FM Contemp
10 - FM Country
11 - AM Jazz
12 - AM Talk
14 - AM Oldies

Each of the tracks is roughly a minute of audio comparisons between analog broadcasts and digital ones, produced by Ibiquity. I've not had the time to check these to see if they are the same ones on the Ibiquity page or not but I suspect they are. The ones there are re-encoded as mp3 and have quality issues. These appear much better in that regard.

That's it for the samples page! Check back from time to time as new samples will be added as technologies appear, change and grow. Thanks for reading OpenGeek.

HD Radio thoughts, speculation and technical info

2005-03-06T00:25:00.000-08:00

This started out as a short essay on IBOC radio and it sort of grew a little. Honestly, I was going to trash it, but it's big enough that I am going to publish it anyway. I just hate to waste that much text!

03/25/04 Update: I've gotten some interesting e-mail on this work. As a result, I've made some changes and additions to the HTML version of this paper. I'll probably get the PDF done at some point.

I've been doing some hard thinking about FM IBOC and realize it has some potential. This is a *long* post, but if you are interested in IBOC, HD radio, there is probably something here for you of interest. I've been pretty vocal on the technical issues, particularly on the AM side of things. AM IBOC may not ever fly and I am convinced it is stillborn today. --We just don't know it yet and there is work to be done, despite industry claims it is ready to go.

FM IBOC brings a lot of choice to the table and one facet of it in particular really interests me. Multi-stream capability. The current specifications clearly provide for more than one audio stream per IBOC station. This essay really was the result of some hard thinking about that. --Take it for what it is worth and please do let me know what that ended up being for you! --Thanks.

I've also got some real HD radio samples on the way. When those arrive, I'll edit and repost the old samples page and put 'em there. (EDIT: They have arrived and can be found here.) Links will be provided from here. I expect to have what I need to do this in the next week or so.

You can also download this essay as a PDF file, if that works better for you. Be aware, the resources portion of the PDF and this introductory information will slowly grow out of date. The best info, related to this work, will be here on OpenGeek. The PDF file represents the original version of this work and no longer contains the information the Internet HTML version does. I will address this at a later date, once the document reaches a stable point.

And here, finally, is the monster:

Digital Radio: What is it
and how will it affect Radio as we know it today?

This essay is a brief look at Digital Radio technology, it's technical issues, potential benefits and potential pitfalls as I see them today. Some statements presented in this essay are speculative and should be treated as such.

What is IBOC, HD Radio, Digital, etc... ?

IBOC stands for In Band On Channel with HD Radio being the marketing catchphrase for the IBOC Technology powering digital radio in the US today. To put this in very simple terms, IBOC/HD Radio is the new digital radio signal, broadcast along with or on top of, depending on your point of view, an existing radio stations traditional analog signal, with the idea being to allow both types of broadcast to co-exist going forward.

We are at the early stage of HD Radio technology implementation. I believe it's important to express how this technology affects us now while many decisions are being made. This paper represents my view, I encourage you to express yours as well. The more voices we have, both positive and negative, the better the end product will be for all of us.

While HD Radio is broadcast in addition to existing analog signals, the long term plan, put forward by Ibiquity the creator of the IBOC system, is to transition to an all digital system at some time in the future, making existing radios obsolete. Frankly, I don't see this happening for a very long time given the number of existing radios in use today. Let's just say the potential exists for all digital stations and leave things right there for the foreseeable future.

Ideally, existing radios will not be significantly impacted by the additional digital information. On FM this is turning out to be largely true. On AM the reality is a bit different as I will explain below.

My aim for this essay is to communicate in fairly simple terms how digital radio, using IBOC technology will change radio as we know it today. FM IBOC and AM IBOC differ enough that many aspects of this paper will not apply equally to both technologies. Some general technology speculation is offered, along with technical links and other resources, for those interested in learning more.

How FM IBOC and AM IBOC differ

While the core technology is the same on both AM and FM, the implementation is different. These differences are largely a factor of existing radio tolerance to the new signals and compatibility with existing broadcast regulations, not the IBOC technology itself. These differences are significant enough to warrant a comparison with some level of technical detail.

While both systems share the same modulation technology the traditional bandwidth allocation differences between AM and FM have significant implications on the AM band.

In a nutshell, the implementation of IBOC on the FM band is superior in every way to AM IBOC making FM IBOC viable and AM IBOC questionable at best at this time.

AM IBOC

AM IBOC features a total RF bandwidth of 30Khz per IBOC station. The innermost (closest to the center carrier frequency) 10Khz of this contains 5Khz traditional analog audio with the outer 20Khz of bandwidth being the new digital information. (Remember, the total RF broadcast bandwidth is twice the audio bandwidth.) This outer 20Khz can be broken roughly into two 10Khz layers that differ only in their radiated power, with the greater radiated power going to the outermost 10Khz of digital transmission.

The total radiated power, for IBOC transmission, is typically 1/100th of the total analog power. A 25Kw AM station would be transmitting 250watts of IBOC information, for example.

Testing indicates the IBOC signal, despite being a fraction of that required for analog, is able to provide solid service inside the 60dbu contour. This contour is the area of coverage, unique to each broadcast site, where an acceptable signal is present at all times. Receivers located outside of this contour may well see an acceptable level of service, service is not a guarantee.

All of this yields 32Kbps of digital information per AM IBOC station, in addition to its 5Khz of analog audio. This bit-rate is the upper-limit for a hybrid (analog and digital) AM IBOC station. AM Stations are free to make analog digital tradeoffs to better address the needs of their listeners. It is possible for AM stations to adjust their analog signal component at the expense of digital bandwidth. The IBOC system will allow up to 8Khz of analog audio bandwidth.

Reference implementations allow for 15Khz stereo audio digital broadcasts. Depending on how the public receives highly compressed audio, two monophonic limited bandwidth (6Khz?) sub-channels may be a viable option. AM IBOC digital bit rates are about half that available on the better satellite radio service channels.

Night time AM IBOC remains problematic, at this time, because the wide signals required combined with night-time AM propagation introduce more noise than can be reasonably tolerated on existing analog gear.

All digital AM IBOC stations are likely to see higher bit rates though I know of no plans for this at this time.

The HD Radio codec, responsible for transforming the analog audio to and from the digital domain, is a hybrid codec similar to the mp3pro low bitrate codec. All audio below about *5Khz is encoded in the usual way to be reproduced on the receiver end. Higher frequency audio is artifically reproduced by the receiver with the help of some additional information encoded into the audio bitstream. Together these two techniques provide the listener with the perception of a fairly wide audio bandwidth at the expense of accuracy on the higher frequencies.

(I don't have precise figures for this and the cutoff point can be adjusted. The idea here being to simply make people aware of the tradeoffs made in the HD radio technology where higher frequency audio is concerned.)

AM IBOC Technical Implications

Traditional AM band allocations are 10Khz, meaning most quality AM stations, broadcasting 10Khz of audio, overlap today. For daytime operation, this has been a minor problem at best in that many radios are limited to less total audio bandwidth and daytime propagation properties keep this interference to a minimum. Most of the problems we see today, with AM analog broadcasting, occur at night where signal propagation is far greater than daytime.

An analog AM radio, will continue to suffer from overlapping stations, beat tones, noise and other common AM issues. However, an AM IBOC radio will operate largely outside these issues within it's coverage area, at the expense of analog listeners however.

Without going too deep, AM radio has been plagued by it's simple nature, making it particularly suceptable to noise. This combined with poor regulation over the years has left the band largely unusable for most programming, other than talk, sports and ethnic/niche music programming.

Analog improvements, such as AM Stereo and noise limiting, have strong potential even today, however our regulatory decisions over the years have marginalized this to a point where most of the AM listening public remains largely unaware of the benefits and sharply limited in their ability to take best advantage of them.

AM IBOC further complicates the mix in that it degrades the existing analog signal, particularly with quality wideband radios, while bringing modest to average potential for improvement in return. The big question being how people will respond to the changes and if the improvements are worth the trade offs for those using existing radios.

Existing analog AM radio listeners, depending on the gear they are using, will experience increased noise, due to IBOC signals overlapping with existing analog ones, as a minimum.

Users of quality AM gear will experience a reduction in service quality in that IBOC stations are limited to 5Khz of analog audio and analog AM Stereo broadcasts are not able to exist with IBOC digital broadcasts. Additionally, the harsh filtering required to keep the analog audio in check at 5Khz, causes significant audio distortion audible on even marginal AM radios in use today. These filters are necessary "brick wall" types because any analog spillover into the IBOC portion of the broadcast can easily overwhelm the low-powered IBOC signal, rendering it unusable far sooner than it otherwise would be.

AM IBOC brings near FM quality improvement to the table, along with a more binary listening experience. Either an AM station will be listenable or not. The digital audio will be highly compressed, using a hybrid wavelet compression scheme that replicates frequencies artificially above 10Khz or so to bring the total audio bandwidth up to 15Khz. In terms of pure audio frequency response, this is an improvement over other AM broadcast technologies, on par with the quality FM audio service we have enjoyed for years.

For many, this is an improvement over the somewhat messy analog situation we have today. The combination of low bit-rate and aggressive compression techniques do bring audible artifacts to the table however. How much of an improvement this really is will depend on listener expectations and the program material being broadcast.

In addition, the artificial spectral reproduction of higher frequencies reduce the overall accuracy of the audio made available to the listener.

To sum this up, existing analog AM radios, of all types, will be impacted by the addition of IBOC broadcasts, with marginal to good digital improvements in return. What is not known, at this time, is how the average listener will respond. Will the reduced level of service be easily tolerated, or not? Will AM listeners move on to FM with it's increased quality and choice potential or choose other technologies, such as satellite radio or podcasts or simply tune out entirely? Given the audio artifacts, AM IBOC will be less competitive than FM IBOC will be in this regard, making the risk / reward ratio less favorable where AM IBOC is concerned.

Given the aggressive audio compression, quality analog broadcast tecnhiques combined with noise limiting technology available today, remain competetive with AM IBOC transmissions.

There is no clear path forward that keeps impact to a minimum. I believe additional work will need to be done in order to properly move the AM band forward without losing the utility of the many AM radios in service today.

AM radio, being a technology close to my own heart, has been largely marginalized in recent years from the onslaught of many new technologies. Despite this, many people today still consider AM a viable technology in times of need, or for niche programming.

AM radio has a long history of public service and, despite the considerable challenges of the medium, has provided much value to our society, particularly in times of need. I harbor serious concerns about it's continued viability, given the reduced level of service to existing radio gear IBOC implementation will bring, particularly given the aggressive audio compression necessary to maintain an acceptable audio bandwidth.

At this early stage, the overall fate of AM radio, as we know it today, is unclear. Ideally, the radio industry will take conservative steps until we know more and can make solid choices from there. There is a strong case for AM broadcast remaining mostly analog.

At this time, I remain unconvinced AM IBOC makes good sense to implement, given the strong potential and sharply reduced level of service tradeoffs present in analog technologies, such as AM Stereo and impulse noise blanking.

FM IBOC

FM IBOC features a total RF bandwidth of a little under 400Khz. The innermost 200Khz is naturally the FM analog signal, essentially unchanged from the FM service we know today.

FM signals are more complex than AM ones, often including audio, data sub-carriers and the stereo portion of the broadcast as well. This additional complexity is made possible through the greater degree of discrimination possible on the FM receiver side.

The IBOC portion of the signal, extends another 100Khz in either direction from the primary center carrier frequency, meaning an FM IBOC station will occupy a total of 400Khz of RF bandwidth. There are two modes of transmission in the hybrid analog / digital mode as well; namely standard and extended. Early standard systems in use today do not make full use of their portion of the FM channel in that IBOC signals are not right up against the analog portion of the channel, keeping impact to existing receivers to a minimum. Current standard mode systems only make use of about the outer 70 percent of the 100Khz IBOC allotment. (Per sideband) The innermost 30 percent remains unused, leaving a gap between the analog signal and the IBOC one.

However, the multi-channel capability and additional data bitrates made possible by filling this gap are likely to result in the extended hybrid mode seeing wider use. This mode provides allows for a higher total bitrate on the order of about 150Kbps. IBOC transmission in this mode will likely have a greater impact on analog receivers, particularly wide band IF ones.

As with AM IBOC, total radiated power is a fraction of the analog signal with this ratio being 1/100. A 50Kw analog FM station would then transmit 500Watts of IBOC signal. This amount of power is sufficient to provide service within the 60dbu coverage contour typical of analog broadcasts.

The greater bandwidth allowances on the FM band, bring the peak total IBOC digital bit-rate up to a little above 96Kbps per IBOC station. This is considerably higher than the more limited AM IBOC is capable of. The IBOC signal does not mandate a reduction in audio bandwidth for analog FM Stereo signals. I do not know the effect on FM sub-carrier services at the time of this writing. Peak FM IBOC bit rates are 150 percent greater than that available on the better satellite radio service channels.

The much higher peak bit-rate bring more choice and quality options to the table. Broadcasters will, for the first time, be able to bring multiple programming streams to their listeners in a practical way.

The number of streams determines the overall bit rate available to each particular stream. If a station were to choose 3 streams, they could have one 48Kbps stream and two 24Kbps streams in addition to their analog signal for a total of up to 4 program channels, for example. Or a more conservative choice could be made where three streams are made available to the listener with the higher quality 48Kbps stream duplicating the analog program for robustness.

Another alternative would be to simply broadcast the same program on both the digital and analog systems at the same time, taking best advantage of the ~96Kbps bit rate and the more robust error correction. (robustness) Early systems, on the air at this time, make use of this approach.

It is possible also to trade signal robustness for a bit more bandwidth in the sub-channels. FM stations, operating in a fairly benign topology, could reduce their robustness and offer more aggressive sub-channel bit rates (24Kbps) and still retain their 96Kbps quality primary channel, for example.

Use of the extended hybrid digital mode will allow for higher bitrates overall, with no channel seeing more than 96Kbps total for audio. The original bandplan for this extended mode was 40-50Kbps of data bandwidth, National Public Radio has proposed this additional bandwidth be configured to allow more audio broadcasts as well. They call this Tomorrow Radio. In addition to the choices mentioned above, higher bitrate audio channels will be possible when stations are operating in extended hybrid mode. It may be possible for a station to run three audio streams at 48Kpbs for example. Work in this area is ongoing and the information I present here is early.

Finally, the potential exists for data services to be carried along with audio ones. While both AM and FM IBOC have this potential, the higher bit rates of FM IBOC present more potential in this area.

FM IBOC is not restricted at night because existing radios and the wavelength of FM both combine to properly discriminate between analog FM broadcasts and the new IBOC digital ones well enough to allow full time service.

FM IBOC audio frequency response can reach 22Khz. This is an improvement, in sheer audio frequency response, on par with digital CD audio. The hybrid nature of the digital encoding process does introduce the potential for artifacts, however these will be limited to the upper frequency range and are likely to be easily tolerated by the average listener.

As with AM IBOC, only a portion of the audio is directly encoded with the higher frequencies being artifically replicated at the receiver end. I don't have hard numbers for the cutoff point at this time. Spectral analysis of early HD radio samples lead me to believe audio above 10 to 12Khz is artifically reproduced in the receiver.

How this will be received will depend on the processing techniques used, program material, and total audio bitrate. Subchannels are likely to see a maximum of 48Kbps per channel available.

FM IBOC Technical Implications

Although it is possible for FM IBOC signals to overlap with other analog FM stations, current frequency allocations in many markets, keep this to a minimum. Additionally, the modulation technique used by IBOC combined with it's fractional power levels will keep this from being an issue in all but a small number of cases because the IBOC signal is largely invisible to analog FM detectors. This is perhaps, the biggest differentiator between the FM implementation and the AM one, besides overall peak bit rate and the potential for multiple audio streams.

The additional choice potential FM IBOC brings to the table is it's strongest attribute, making the HD Radio moniker a bit misleading. Overall audio will not be "high definition" in the sense that HDTV is higher definition, because the peak bit rates available at this time limit the overall quality of the audio received. Instead, the HD Radio system only conveys the perception of higher bandwidth audio, due to the hybrid encoding system and it's artificial spectral reproduction of the higher frequencies.

However, the audio experience, potential quality issues aside, will be a more consistent one overall. FM multi-path 'fuzz' will not be an issue when listening to an IBOC broadcast. For many, sensitive to noise and multi-path, the quieter and more consistant broadcast may well make up for any audio accuracy issues.

When compared to satellite services, the additional bit rates are likely to make the 'HD Radio' tag more appropriate, when the higher 96Kpbs bitrates are used.

It is worth noting, FM IBOC implementation will have a negative effect on "Dxers", those listeners who either depend on fringe area coverage, or choose to seek it for entertainment purposes. It is also worth nothing, existing translators already have begun to enroach on these listeners today. Over time, the expected growth of radio and the additional choice provided by IBOC broadcasts has the potential to balance the loss of distant signals for many listeners.

Unlike AM, the implementation of FM IBOC will have little overall effect on existing listeners in that the technology will go largely unnoticed on existing radio gear. The extended hybrid mode may change this, but is not likely to exceed the negative impact found in all AM IBOC systems. Additionally, FM stations wil be free to choose their operating mode, trading analog signal quality for number of digital channels where AM IBOC is an all or nothing affair.

General IBOC Technical Implications

The digital processing required will introduce a delay into the audio chain, making "on air" monitoring difficult. Additionally, the digital audio is buffered, making real-time broadcasts questionable. Perhaps some of these, such as sporting events, will need to remain analog for the most crisp experience. This buffer can cause a disjointed experience when a receiver falls back to analog mode, then jumps forward into digital mode again. This can be largely mitigated in the receiver and is moot for digital only programming.

All audio is encoded and compressed. Those building digital music library systems, may find their programming quality reduced below expectations due to re-encoding necessary for IBOC digital transmission.

Audio broadcasts, received via the HD Radio IBOC system, do not have the accuracy of either analog methods or quality compressed audio. The primary limiting factor remains the peak bitrate available. In the future, the higher bitrate (~300Kpbs) possible on all digital FM stations may provide a remedy for this. However, plans for this are largely still on the drawing board. The IBOC transmission technology has been developed, but receiver implementation and codec technology is a work in progress.

Despite years of planning, IBOC is not yet "cooked" in that we are still seeing new ideas come forward for how to best use the bit stream to deliver programming to the listener. This means current IBOC implementations will offer the basic level of service, with enhancements planned over time as our understanding of the technology and demand grow.

Unlike analog broadcast improvements, changes to the digital bit stream can require changes to both the transmitter and receiver side in order to be fully realized to the listener. These changes, given solid initial planning and some over engineering in the receiver, can largely be software related, keeping potential issues to a minimum. However, the potential for early receiver obsolescence is much higher than the general public is used to, given the long service life of their existing analog gear.

Early adopters may well find their HD Radio capable of only a sub-set of the total programming in the future, or may find selecting that programming to be difficult due to user interface issues. Given the rapidly advancing state of the art in digital encoding, it is very likely this will continue for some time yet. It is not yet possible to know if the weight of existing HD Radio gear will hold the technology back, or if listeners will be willing to upgrade / purchase new radio gear to take advantage of improvements still to come.

Additionally, digital technologies have proven less robust in the face of adverse conditions and over extended periods of time than analog methods. The more binary nature of the listening experience (either you get the signal or you don't) could be a problem on occasion. Having to "reset" the receiver, or perform other computer related workaround tasks will bring a level of complexity to the ordinary radio, some listeners may not be accustomed to. This additional complexity will also create new user interface challenges as well. HD radios won't be as simple as traditional analog ones currently are capable of being.

While these issues are not show stoppers by any means, they are going to need to continue to be addressed until everyone has the right expectations. Put simply, HD radio is going to have some teething pains for a few years yet.

IBOC is not an open technology like AM or FM radio is. Every transmitter and receiver will include a royalty to cover the use of the patented IBOC technology. While this helps bring a standard to all digital radios, it also puts a private entity at the center of the radio industry that all parties must depend on and pay to make use of the RF spectrum. This does raise public interest concerns in that we won't see competition for digital radio and will see cost built into both broadcast and receive parts of the process.

Ideally we will see Ibiquity, the owner of the IBOC technology, provide RAND (reasonable and non-discriminatory) licensing terms for those interested in providing IBOC / HD Radio related products and services. Without these terms, there is little incentive for both innovation and cost reduction of IBOC related services and radio gear. Additionally, software radio technologies are still developing at this time. Most of this work is Open Source. Will HD Radio broadcasts remain invisible to software radios due to licensing issues? Should they be, given the public interest in the radio spectrum? These and other questions surrounding the licensing of the IBOC technology remain a growing concern in the longer term that should be addressed before the use of the technology becomes to pervasive.

I have not seen plans for providing part 15 hobby level radio capability at this time. If we are to continue to encourage digital radio broadcasts, we should also encourage a more open use of the technology as well.

Ok, so how does this change radio for me?

This is the fun part, where I just throw out a bunch of things I believe IBOC to be capable of. Some of these are a reality today, others may or may not happen depending on how things evolve. --Take with two large grains of salt and enjoy!

Right now, FM stations all across the country are implementing basic IBOC signals. These signals duplicate existing programming in the digital form, allowing listeners to take best advantage of both broadcast forms on their new radios. This first stage will bring the basic technology improvements and changes to existing radio broadcasts. Ideally, these will be enough to drive HD Radio forward into the next stage, where increased choice, through multi-streams comes into play.

Once the basic services are up and running, broadcasters are going to begin programming their different streams. This will be an interesting time in that we will see new programming without having to invest in new stations for each additional programming choice. Additionally, the ability to offer more than one programming choice should make the risk of that choice easier to bear because existing streams would be largely unaffected. I expect to see more risks taken resulting in a more diverse set of programming choices for the average radio listener.

Success in the streams will also depend on receiver manufacturer support and planning / implementation issues. If the interface is rushed, or the streams are poor quality, etc.. listeners could largely ignore them. This is also true where expectations are concerned. The general HD Radio marketing catchphrase may not be appropriate in this regard. The NPR "Tomorrow Radio" might be better able to manage and set listener expectations where overall quality and program content are concerned.

AM IBOC stations, being more limited, will largely concentrate on bringing a better experience to their existing listeners while trying to limit the reduction in service at the same time.

There is the real possibility of AM IBOC not seeing much adoption at all given the issues. Despite the considerable engineering acumen of the IBOC team, the case for continued analog AM innovation and transmission remains strong, particularly given the audio accuracy and night time broadcast tradeoffs in IBOC. The digital return is minor, given the heavy AM tradeoffs. There is clear demand for better quality AM service, but I honestly don't expect IBOC to fit the bill at this stage. More work needs to be done and analog methods deserve greater consideration than they are currently being given.

I see no public demand for digital radio, only better radio. Where FM IBOC is concerned, the technology has strong potential to provide both. As I wrote above, AM IBOC is doubtful in this regard.

Back on the subject of choice, we might see a blend of program types become an option on both AM and FM bands. Talk programming, for example on FM becomes interesting where multiple streams are concerned. It's possible to carry multiple viewpoints, or provide program rotation/repeat cycles that bring a particular show to a wider audience not otherwise able to normally listen, though multiple schedules on different streams. This makes live broadcast of talk programming possible in all markets without having to force listeners into schedules they find uncomfortable, for example.

On AM, given the basic technical issues are resolved, music programming may be viable again as well. The upper limit on peak bit rate may well prove too low for this. Early tests on classical and jazz music are favorable. It must be noted these programs represent best case material for the codec due to their harmonic content. IBOC must be evaluated on a program by program basis to better understand what works well and what doesn't.

The additional choice and low cost of daily listening, compared to the recurring fees found on satellite radio systems, combined with a local presence should give radio an incentive to provide programs better adapted to a particular audience along with national program formats with less risk than is possible today with analog only systems. Multi-stream capability will power this, IMHO.

These are near-term expectations. In the longer term, FM IBOC presents some interesting possibilities. This is the pie in the sky part. Take your second grain of salt here -both if you didn't get started with one!

Digital radios, in Europe, are being fitted with download capability. The primary goal is being able to time shift broadcasts. This option, combined with multiple streams, here in the US, may well present listeners with choices not possible until now.

Here is one example: A station decides to run a special show at a specific time. Listeners could cache the program for listening later, or perhaps choose not to listen and play another cached show, or switch to another stream. Programming possibilities in this environment allow for new formats not possible with analog broadcasts today. To me, this is perhaps the most compelling possibility IBOC brings to the table.

Subscription services may become available, though I think those are better suited to satellite, Internet stream, and pod cast type delivery systems. I don't want to see these on radio, so I'm not going to write much about them.

Although there are no current plans for this, that I know of, it seems natural to include a media slot on future HD radios for downloaded content. As listeners consume their favorite program on a regular basis, they would be receiving portable content at the same time for their ongoing loyalty. Such content could be pictures, special release music files, hyper links, or simply text data or documents relevant to their local area, such as concert schedules, promotional discounts, and other localized information.

It is early, but there is another good use for removable media storage: namely pod cast like replay of programs, or distribution of pod cast like programs using the IBOC system instead of the Internet. The added value here would be ease of use combined with the station being able to air promotional programming related to the pod cast in question.

Market saturation with digital IBOC capable radios is going to take a while. Being able to "record" a broadcast onto some removable media, such as a USB memory key type device, would enable owners of IBOC capable radios to get the most use out of them. A car radio could be caching late evening programming for use during work, for example. Such a cache could also be used to playback favorite program segments, or provide entertainment outside of a coverage area.

Sadly, the legal landscape we see today makes these things nothing more than a dim reality, but it could yet happen. Perhaps the growing market pressure of satellite and Internet delivery systems will help this along a bit.

The digital nature of IBOC also allows for blanket coverage with advantages over analog means, such as RDS. Some small portion of the data could be used to tell a radio when it can switch to an identical program as a listener moves between service areas. This information could also be used to schedule time shift requests for listening later in a manner similar to satellite PVR video systems do today.

IBOC does allow for data transmission as well as audio broadcasts. I didn't discuss this much earlier because the focus of this paper was on the radio listener, for the most part. Stations can choose to devote a portion of their bitstream to data applications, not directly targeted at the average radio user. These applications include commercial controlling, tracking and automation applications not well served by existing and more expensive technologies. These applications hold the potential for additional station revenue. This may be a good thing for radio listeners in that healthy radio stations may be better able to provide live and local programming. However, it may be that overall audio quality and choice may suffer as well with data profits simply going to the station bottom line with no improvements in return for the listener.

I did get one interesting comment on the multi-stream that is worth noting here. The potential for multiple FM streams may result in reduced AM service in that the AM programming can simply be moved to a stream, thus making the expense of an AM station unnecessary. In this case, we may lose AM stations, or others may choose to operate them in new and creative ways. Either way, it is worth noting the broadcast giants have little incentive to operate multiple stations when they can use one, more powerful and capable one to hold their different programming offerings. Will they choose to further consolidate or will they simply provide more options given the new capability offered to them? If AM stations are freed, will we lose them, or will others fill the gap and try new programming to compete?

Endnotes

We are entering an interesting radio time, particularly for FM radio. IBOC holds strong potential for greater choice than we have today. There are technical challenges to overcome yet, particularly on AM. Increased choice and reduced risk are the biggest benefits I see IBOC bringing to the table. Quality has the potential for being greater than satellite and most Internet delivery systems with the added advantage of being inexpensive for the listener over the longer term.

This paper represents a best case view for FM IBOC as much as it does an overall reference to the technology put into basic terms. Many factors may well contribute to the IBOC picture that sharply reduce the overall value delivered to the listener. I have tried to present many of these here for your consideration.

Going forward, I believe the increased choice potential outweighs the technical problems on FM and am eager to see radio grow in that direction. Content is king, and I would rather see more of it, that I have a chance at enjoying, than continue on the path we are on now. IBOC on FM will provide a vehicle that will make that happen with less risk than currently required today to "break the mold" so to speak. Lets hope that part of things begins to happen sooner rather than later.

I have mixed opinions about AM IBOC and welcome your comments and insight. I hope the right decisions will be made regarding AM IBOC and feel it is important for everyone to continue to express whatever view they have on that topic. My personal view is not favorable in that the value added to AM does not outweigh the value lost in existing services. (Loss of AM Stereo, increased noise, limited analog bandwidth, etc...)

Why this paper? I evaluate technology as part of my day to day activities. A long interest in radio, prompted me to look at IBOC and write what I have learned so far. The story is not over yet by any means. We shall see just how much I have wrong over the next few years.

From time to time, this paper will see updates and changes as the IBOC HD Radio landscape continues to evolve.

I hope you have enjoyed reading this as much as I did writing it! Please direct any comments / suggestions and (gasp!) errors to:

doug@opengeek.org

Resources

(At the moment, this section is incomplete. Look for additional links and some brief commentary on the significance of each one here in the near future.)

http://www.ibiquity.com/ -- Creator/owner of the IBOC technology.

http://www.ibiquity.com/technology/papers.htm -- Various white papers detailing technical implementation details and core technology elements.

http://www.ipodder.org/ -- Source for podcasts. While not directly relevant to this paper, I used the term several times. This should clear things up if you have questions. Enjoy a few while you are there!

http://www.crutchfieldadvisor.com/ISEO-rgbtcspd/learningcenter/car/hdradio.html - Rather sales like treatment of HD radio, but does have links to actual HD radio gear for reference / comparison.

http://www.euonline.org/pub/iboc/ -- Interesting information about bitrates and multi-stream technology progress.

http://members.tripod.com/rad4rest-of-us/IBOC-UNECESSARY.htm -- Negative view of IBOC. I don't agree fully with this work, but include it here because many of the points given apply to the delicate AM IBOC discussion. Worth a read on that basis alone.

http://n2.net/k6sti/iboc.htm -- This is an informative page that details FM noise expectations where multi-stream is concerned.

Have an additional IBOC resource to share? Drop it into a comment below, or shoot me an e-mail. I'll add it to the list.

So, what's with the goofy New Terms?

2005-03-03T12:35:00.000-08:00

I've always been facinated with how new words form. People mix words together, such as 'blignorant', meaning: both unable to accept new ideas and lacking sufficient ones to begin with. Sometimes, a word just gets used in a different way enough times that it eventually sticks. My kids are stuck on using the word 'bleach' to describe the change in tint new colored clothes can have on white shoes. Clearly they understand the color change part of the word, but not in the right way at all. Of course I helped them to say 'tint' & 'stain' instead, but I just know, by the funny looks I got, they still say 'bleach' when around their other 'bleach' using friends. --Alas..

The two I just posted are actually typos that I found interesting enough to stake my claim. Like 'em? By all means spread them far and wide, use them where you can and have a great time doing it! Have any of your own? Post 'em here, or shoot me an e-mail and I'll look 'em over. Anything good gets my full attention.

New Term: leasership

2005-03-03T12:32:00.000-08:00

leasership (n. and adj.) "lee-zerr-ship":

recently coined slang term that referes to a bought and paid for tempoary state of arguably false leadership, unpopular with a significant percentage of those so governed.

Related Etymology:

1.

chief (n. and adj.)
1297, from O.Fr. chief "leader, ruler, head" (of something), from L.L. capum, from L. caput "head" (see head).

2.

ship (v.)
c.1300, "to send or transport by ship," from ship (n.). Transf. to other means of conveyance (railroad, etc.) from 1857, originally Amer.Eng. Shipment "that which is shipped" is from 1861.

3.

lease (n.)
1483, from Anglo-Fr. les (1292), from lesser "to let, let go," from O.Fr. laissier "to let, leave," from L. laxare "loosen, open, make wide," from laxus "loose" (see lax). The verb is attested from 1570. Lessor, lessee in contract language preserves the Anglo-Fr. form.

New Term: spindaganda

2005-03-03T12:24:00.000-08:00

spindaganda (n.) "spin-da-gann-da":

recently coined term that refers to a paid, or sponsored form of information, represented as objective, but is not so; additionally, said information content not only benefits a particular party, but does so in a way as to diminish the opposition at the same time, playing on key facts in order to do so.

Related Etymology:

propaganda

1718, from Mod.L. propaganda, short for Congregatio de Propaganda Fide "congregation for propagating the faith," committee of cardinals established 1622 by Gregory XV to supervise foreign missions, prop. abl. fem. gerundive of L. propagare (see propagation). Modern political sense dates from World War I, not originally pejorative.

Some blogs to consider:

2005-03-03T12:12:00.000-08:00

My previous post detailed the beginnings of the war on blogs. In that vein, here are a few you should look over while you compose your thoughts. There are many many more where these came from. Feel free to use these as jumpers to other blogs of interest. Find anything really great! Post it in the comments below, or shoot me an e-mail. I would love to hear what you have to say!

Brad Blog

Crooks and Liars

Nero Fiddled

Daily KOS

World 'O Crap

There are also plenty of people writing their thoughts for you to read. I'm one of them. Why do we do it? Because we want to get at the truth of things and find the best paths forward. That can't happen from the top, because it takes all of us contributing to really build this nation in a way that benefits us all. Here are a few clearing house sites for this kind of thing:

OpEd News

Truthout

You may not agree with all you find on these, and other, pages. However, their continued ability to exist is vital for the health of the society you live in. Give these words some thought and let your elected representatives know what you learned.

First Shots fired in the WAR ON BLOGS!

2005-03-03T11:28:00.000-08:00

Let me start with this: Either we can speak freely about our elected officials or we can't. Which is it? The America I grew up in clearly says we can. The America I grew up in was about checks and balances. In this case, the media is supposed to act as a check on corrupt government though freedom of the press. Seems simple enough, do enough stuff wrong and somebody is going to tell. The American People hash it out at the polls and we all move on right?

"Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech or of the press. . . ."
Amendment 1, Bill of Rights, U.S. Constitution, 1791

Does the current Administration want to change that? After first being selected, as opposed to being elected, then elected via one of the most error prone and doubt filled elections this nation has ever had, I can easily see the motivation for a WAR ON BLOGS. If they want to restrict the freedom for their own people to express opinion, WAKE THE FUCK UP! That's a problem. Read it, know it, tell it.

It must really hurt to spend so much time and effort on carefully crafted spin-da-ganda <-- you read that little term here first and there will be more -->, only to see the whole house of cards get wacked off at the knees by a bunch of American People simply asking the questions their "Media" should have been asking in the first place.

Trust me folks, there is going to be a lot more of this before the '06 elections. Thanks to Bloggers, to be linked below and later on the sidebar, the amount of dirty laundry this administration is packing is simply staggering. (And they still won! --unbeliveable!) Why is that important? Simple. It's going to take the full four years to properly spin this crap into another Neo-con win and bloggers are hosing that timetable nicely right now. Either they must accept the reality being the neo-plan at risk, or change that reality as they have so many other things. Which things? Your TV, Newspaper, Radio, and Major Internet news sites all carry the party line, without any real investigative reporting happening, far more than they ever have before. Fourth estate... If you count the Bloggers, then yes, otherwise you might as well just forget it.

The result: Twenty-four Seven SPINDAGANDA! Talking heads, talking as only they can talk about how good this administration is going to be for all of us, if they can just be left alone to do things how they want them done! Silly isn't it? I sure think so and I know I am not alone.

Why? Bloggers of course. Without them, none of us has even the slightest chance at really knowing the state of things and thats where the war begins.

What are their weapons? Links and copyright. That's how they are going to fight. They are going to say links are "contributions" and information sent to you is "copyrighted" and intended only for you. Folks, this is facist, unamerican, and downright sick and let me tell you why:

If links are twisted into being contributions of some kind, then sharing information about someone can be monetized in some strange fashion. As soon as a dollar amount can be attached to a hyperlink, regulation can then follow because speech becomes money in some twisted way.

The copyright battle has been brewing for a good long time. Everybody likes the Internet. It's open and everybody plays the same. Well, that's good for you and me because we can reach one another, just as we are right now. You publish, I publish, mix in a little RSS and bam! We have made some news not easily possible any other way. Great, we all communicate better and the world becomes a better place right?

And that's the rub for those wanting to take advantage of their power position. When your population can speak to one another in small village fashion, propping up the spin gets a lot harder because it costs too much to buy everybody off!

What prompted this entry? A little gem by Cnet News. It frames most of the issues, but clearly does not have our interests in mind. The article leans heavy toward narrow exemptions favoring major news organizations --such as Cnet. Bastards.

Give your elected representatives a call, email or letter on this. Then do it again. This is a very big deal. Between all the goofy election voting issues and partisan funded spindaganda, the emergance of Blogs is one of the only true media checks left to us going forward. It is in all of our best interests to let this continue.

Gmail continues to improve

2005-02-24T17:22:00.000-08:00

I wrote here, fairly early on, about using Gmail as a quick 'n dirty contact manager. It seems Google is listening to all of us quite well.

They have added the ability to store some information with each contact. --Cool and exactly what I was looking for.

Click on Contacts, then a contact name, then use the edit button to add the info you need to relate to the contact.

OpenGeek is now closed.

2005-02-19T10:54:00.000-08:00

Just kidding, I'm actually taking a short work vacation. Attending a conference in Vegas. (Yeah baby!)

If I go missing, and you know who I am, this is where I will be last seen.

Going to try some Texas Hold 'em this time around. Should be fun.

Broadcast Flag Appeals Case Set to Begin Next Week

2005-02-18T10:41:00.000-08:00

You can read the brief announcement on Radio World Online.

Folks, this is an important case. Many, including myself, believe the FCC exceeded it's authority with the Broadcast Flag mandate, set to go into effect later this year. I've included a couple of links for additional reading, at the end of this piece.

What is the Broadcast Flag and what does it do?

The FCC mandates that all consumer equipment, that can handle television broadcasts, be built to honor the evil "broadcast flag". This capability allows the broadcaster to control what you can and cannot do with digital television content you recieve on your own equipment.

Watching American Idol and want to skip through the commercials? If the broadcast flag is set, you might just have to watch your timeshifted copy from start to finish assuming they even let you record one. That's right, record. Another feature of this little flag is the ability to deny recording rights on a program by program basis.

The advent of the DVR has eliminated the concept of "Prime Time" for a rapidly growing percentage of the TV watching population. Of course the networks hate this because they lose potential AD dollars on popular programs. On the other hand, most people love this because it puts TV on their time, not network time.

Being a father of 4, I can say my DVR lets me actually watch TV again, so it's not all bad. I timeshift into the late evening and watch when things have settled down. The ability to fast forward lets me enjoy the average 1 hour program in about 40 minutes.

The question at hand is the ability for broadcasters to do this. Should we allow our own devices to be controlled by the broadcasters or should our existing ability to record and watch later, as we do with VCR's today? The digital transition is enabling the media companies to revisit these questions again, with the answers having significant implications for us going forward.

If you have gotten this far, the rest of this essay attempts to communicate the implications this case will have on consumer technology and how that could affect you in the near future.

Many of their arguments will be framed around the issue of piracy, that is unauthorized copying of broadcast content. The simple truth is that people have been copying things ever since we have been able to copy. Despite this, media companies continue to see high profits and growth, making the piracy issue a red-herring. So, what drives this movement forward besides simple greed?

Control Implications: (WHY YOU CARE)

If consumer gear must adhere to a mandated set of artifically restricted capabilities, the media companies then get to dictate what we do, when we do and how we do it. However this is not the whole story. The media companies know they can generate plenty of live content that will attract people at regular times. It's harder to do with PVR enabled viewers, but not impossible.

The real reason behind this broadcast flag control is to limit competetors. Before I detail why I believe this to be so, let me first explain briefly the difference between open technology and closed technology.

Most common consumer technology is currently open technology. A VCR, for example, can record video. The recording, stored on videotape, can be played back on most any VCR. This allows everyone to produce content.

By contrast, digital technologies are increasingly closed. The information format and behaviour is determined by the software code that handles the information. Without getting too technical right now, lets just say not everyone will be able to produce and distribute digital content in the near future. It's possible today, but that ability is being attacked in our courts and legislature right before our eyes.

To sum up:

Open Technology:

Anyone can produce / distributre content. With this comes the ability to copy things; thus, the potential for Copyright Infringement exists. Good for us, not as good for the media giants.

Closed Technology

Only authorized content creation and distribution is allowed. Ordinary people are not part of this group. The potential for Copyright Infringement is sharply reduced. Bad for us, very, very good for the media giants.

Another interesting side effect of closed technology, not mentioned at all in the press, is the shrply reduced competition. If only authorized content is allowed, the existing media giants will be able to keep new content and means of distribution from sprouting up. They get to say who can compete and on what terms.

This is bad for us in that it creates an artifical scarcity of both new content and distribution which, in turn, keeps prices artifically high.

That's why this case is important. It will set the stage for our future technology direction. Will it be open or closed?

One more example:

Lets take a brief look at recorded music. Until recent court actions and market pressure forced price reductions, the average music CD was as expensive or sometimes more expensive than a full-length movie on DVD. Buying the soundtrack could be more expensive than the movie itself! Clearly the music companies want to keep their product valued as high as possible, but should they use our laws to do that, or should they be working hard to improve their value proposition?

In a free market, these questions are answered through competition and demand. We are seeing lower music prices because the movie companies put price pressure on the music companies. Cheap DVD media means cheaper music media, that's just the way it is.

However, traditional music distribution also is under pressure from Internet music distribution methods and Peer to Peer music swapping and sharing on the Internet.

The music companies are being pressured in a third way as well, in that the cost of recording music itself has dropped dramatically as well. It's possible today to produce quality music with only a modest investment in technology. The Internet allows for easy distribution to potential listeners as well. This new distribution channel has the major labels shaking in their boots because they profit from their current lock on distribution.

If artists can sell directly to the people wanting to listen, what do we need the major labels for?

Now you know why the media industry is working so hard to close our technology. To them, it's a matter of their very existance. The open nature of most personal computers, for example, makes their task very difficult. Nobody wants to buy limited machines when unlimted ones cost the same. How to solve the problem?

Get their existance mandated into law. That's what this broadcast flag represents.

If the broadcast industry can get their interests mandated, then so can the rest of the media industry.

I'm opposed to this because it limits our creative ability, while at the same time forcing us all to depend on outdated business models we will likely not need in the near future. Each wave of innovation has had to fall to the one following. Why should multi-media content be any different?

Imagine laws like this during the early industrial age. Would be still be using horses and wagons because they were threatened by cars? That's crazy isn't it?

The advent of the Internet has started another change in how we produce, consume and distribute information. Shouldn't we let it develop rather than kill it because some existing businesses find it cheaper to buy laws than compete for our dollars as they should?

I think so. If you agree, now would be a great time to contact your elected officials to remind them of this issue. The media companies are well represented and have deep pockets. If we ignore this issue, it will be decided for us and we won't like the decision. Do something --anything besides just nothing. Send a friend a link to this blog entry, mention it in conversation sometime, call your legislator, write a letter.

Something.

Resources:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation

Susan Crawford "It's as importatnt as Grokster"

Engadget.com -- Backgrounder

HD Radio audio samples and mp3 / ogg comparison.

2005-02-10T20:02:00.000-08:00

HD Radio Samples can be found here

---> Thanks Chris! --I appreciate it.

I am still looking for quality Satellite Radio samples of both talk and music programming. Have one? Lets talk and get it on the samples page for everyone to compare. -->samples@opengeek.org

Another Edit: I'm getting a lot of hits on this page. People from all over are wondering what HD really sounds like. --Please know those Ibiquity samples linked here are terrible. Despite my negative view of Digital radio, the impression I am getting is that it is a notch above satellite. Lots of folks enjoy that, meaning content is king. Looks like another essay coming soon... there is a flip side to digital (FM at least) that might prove compelling.

Have samples of HD and Satellite radio? I would love to put those here for comparison. Drop a comment or and e-mail if you can help out here. --Thanks!

There has been some discussion about HD radio audio quality and how well the codec compares to quality mp3 and ogg encoding. Here are a couple of samples to compare codec quality with:

You can find the Ibiquity audio samples here.

This file encoded with LAME, 96Kbps, high quality.

This file encoded with Ogg Vorbis, 96Kpbs.

This is the original FM source material.

Discussion is on http://www.pdxradio.com. "Search on IBOC & HD Radio"

Edit: It appears the Ibiquity samples have been encoded twice. Once passing through the HD system and then a second time being converted to mp3. I've heard from someone that has an HD radio the quality is far better than the sample linked here. That puts the quality potential for FM HD higher than both mp3 and ogg meaning near CD quality potential for many programs. Don't judge HD Radio via the Ibiquity sample quality.

Still no quality wav file samples on the net for HD radio. --Anyone want to send me one? UPDATE: I have received some good quality HD Radio samples. --Thanks Eric!

03/10/05 -- Cleanup and final updates to this page. Original material in black, updates in red, final info in green.

Why I like the Internet

2005-02-08T09:52:00.000-08:00

Communication, plain and simple. All the other stuff is cool, but communication is key. I planned a long rant on the value of this, but lets just say I'm in a lighthearted mood this morning.

Check this guy out --funny as hell.

(Food warning. Swallow everything completely before viewing this video.)

www.ebaumsworld.com/numanuma.html

Worthless communication? I don't think so. The guy has talent and free time. Made my day better for sure.

Interested in old / technical radio bits?

2005-02-05T16:43:00.000-08:00

Take a moment to check out PDXRadioSpots.com

It's a blog started to publish radio stuff, ideally older radio stuff. A lot of the material came from the original vinyl promotional releases and station production tape archives.

Generally, there is new content each week with a fairly hefty sample of stuff to listen and ponder for a while.

Time, space and childhood --Your life is as long as you think it is!

2005-02-03T21:58:00.000-08:00

Was talking with my oldest daughter this morning. She had a bit of interesting conversation with her boyfriend about the big 20. (I only wish!) Anyway, she posed the idea that somebody at the age of 20 was, in fact, one quarter dead. After their little morning conversation ended, one thing lead to another and we got on the topic of time and perception.

How long is your life really? Does it seem long or short? This really is a matter of perception. Remember those endless days as a young person? I do. One day seemed to last forever. As an adult, too many days seem short. I've probably written about this before, but thought the whole "your life is as long as you think it is" bit was worthy of another post.

I used to think it was mostly over at 30. Time begins to pass faster and life gets busy and routine. Getting closer to 40, I realize this may not be true. We go through spurts. Some busy, some not, some slow, some fast. I happen to be entering another slower phase. Not sure what actually triggers that yet, but I am looking now because I have begun to finally realize my perception matters. In that vein, I might as well work to find the best lens to look through...

Here is the takeaway:

Your life is as long as you think it is. Having considered this, I propose an attitude that can significantly change your perception of the whole thing:

When slow times come, cherish them. Instead of tapping your foot in boredom, relax knowing you are actually gaining! Kick back and know the breaks are on. You will actually be 'here' with the rest of us for 'longer'. Interesting isn't it?

While the physical amount of time we all have does not really change, our feeling about it can and that is worth, again what you think it is.

(I know kind of goofy, but hey I'm a geek. I get to say this kind of stuff!)

The IRAQ elections

2005-01-31T13:48:00.000-08:00

While I am not at all convinced we have done good here, information on our mainstream media is hard to seperate from the propaganda and spin doctoring. Of course we have a large investment in this election and need to see success. That remains to be seen.

I like this project. It's a clearing house for Iraq information and news. Worth a read. The page I linked to also has some very interesting details on the election process and lets just say I am less than impressed at this point

Given the reasons for this war are null and void, (No WMD's) and the ongoing expense, I'm not sure this is a benefit to the American or Iraqi people at all. We are spending roughly a Billion, yes that right --A fricken BILLLION, every week on this mess. When will the killing of our troops and the Iraqi people end?

(depressed)

Anyone have ideas for a dirt simple RF filter?

2005-01-29T03:29:00.000-08:00

What I am looking for is either an inexpensive product, or very simple circut that will cut RF noise between computer and Tuner.

Considering a pre-amp to solve this problem, but just thought I would toss out the idea.

Comments, quick hacks for the lazy? Actually I'm just really busy...

Click the link below and make me proud!

IBOC Noise in Portland Oregon

2005-01-23T15:14:00.000-08:00

THIS ENDED UP NOT BEING IBOC NOISE

HD side effects, for me, include:

- no more FM DX and poorly functioning autoscan. Most of my radios now stop at the IBOC sidebands of the stations broadcasting them :(

Ok, so that's not very many effects. I guess that puts me into grudging general support of IBOC FM really. I think people will easily trade DX, for more program choices offered by FM IBOC. AM IBOC, on the other hand = pure evil.

Edit: Others have pointed out this is not IBOC. Dang, that means I've got a noise source to nail down. Accordingly, I'm removing one of my side effects now, leaving the DX issue. DX in my case it actually pretty minor. The Portland FM dial only has one real station; namely, KNRK 94.7! Since the rest of the dial does not matter to me, the DX issue is off the table.

What prompted this post? New tuner teething pains actually. (It's an old tuner, but new to me!)

I wrote a nice paper on HD radio technical implications, and you can get samples of HD FM audio here. Be nice please and download once, then listen! --Thanks!

I think FM IBOC might be accepted, I have serious doubts about AM at this time --read the paper if you want to know why.

Minor edits, addition of samples and paper link. 03/15/05

Open Source Software really here to stay!

2005-01-20T22:43:00.000-08:00

Yeah I know, I'm just another blogger late to the table, stating the obvious. Seriously, It just hit me today. I made a comment on a /. thread about Google including images in with the search results.

For the record: THIS IS A BAD IDEA Google. Please consider carefully what you are doing.

Google is about simple, fast and accurate. The minute they start trying to be all things to everyone, they begin to lose the core values that put them where they are. The image button works well. Adding a button to do both, or letting users choose works and is true to the Google way we have seen to date.

Ok, back to the topic at hand, namely OSS actually being here to stay. My comment was about page thumbnails. I would love this feature because it would add a useful visual to the search results. Not sure it should be part of the default search, but useful if made an option of some kind.

In typical Slashdot style, I got a quick reply letting me know that a Firefox extension has been able to do this for a while now. I MISSED A BROWSER PLUG IN? WTF !?!

And there's my point. OSS is big now. Big enough that it is very difficult to actually know the state of it anymore and that's very cool. Long ago, or at least it seems long ago, reading Linux Today, Slash, Lwn and a few others brought a person current. Chatting with a few friends took care of the loose ends and all was good. Today, that works for a segment of OSS only, and that can be tough.

Thanks everyone for working to build something so very cool. If you don't feel appreciated, drop me a line and I will make it so because you are appreciated by at least one geek!

Cassini probe an early success!

2005-01-14T11:48:00.000-08:00

Man, I love this stuff. Why can't we put aside our various wars and greed and get more things like this done? We don't live anywhere near long enough to waste time as we so often do.

Anyway, images and other data will be available here once the data issues get sorted out. News from the ESA indicates the basic mechanics of the mission were a success.

The big question is the integrety of the data. The initial design forgot to account for the doppler effect on the transmission. There is still a real chance of the data shifting outside the antennas optimal bandwidth however. Let's hope those subsystems are overengineered as well as the probe itself was.

(Crossing fingers)

Good for the Eurpoeans. After the loss of Beagle, this success must feel pretty good.

Comments? Probably not yet, but if you find something interesting, post it here.

Edit: minor bonehead content removed

Google Publishes Coarse USENET Timeline

2005-01-09T21:46:00.000-08:00

From /. of course... Here is the link to the timeline and the /. discussion.

I connected to the Internet for the first time in 1991. Man, that seems like so long ago. A little ISP called TechBooks.com provided the dialup connection at the time. The speed was a blazing 1200Baud. The interface was a Unix shell. (Thanks for that BTW)

No WWW, no Google, not much of anything actually but e-mail, MUDS and USENET. Usenet was the shit frankly. So many different groups and conversation. I was instantly hooked.

I still USENET today, but it's noisy now. Still lots of discussion and useful information if you know where to look. Miss the old days before spamming when a troll or two were the only troubles. USENET showed me the true power of the Internet --communication. Nothing else even comes close today. The Internet made our world smaller. USENET was the first practical demonstration of that. Thanks guys, this geek appreciates it.

Here is an interesting page related to USENET personalities. I found it very entertaining and actually informative. Study the different characters then use them to catagorize people you bump into.

House Dems issue final Ohio election irregularities report

2005-01-05T10:09:00.000-08:00

Raw Print House Dems issue final Ohio election irregularities report to a largely silent mainstream press.

For the impatient, you can get the PDF here. [OpenGeek Mirror]

More later after I get a chance to read it tonight.

AM 620 KPOJ & AM 1190 KEX lead the way toward

2005-01-04T19:00:00.000-08:00

the worst quality AM radio signals, on the dial, in Portland Oregon.

Clear Channel communications has decided to limit the audio bandwidth of their AM stations to about half of what it normally is to make more room for expensive and flawed digital IBOC AM signals. Though KEX was first on the block with the new low quality signal, KPOJ joined the race to trash the dial. Clearly, Clear Channel has made the decision to obsolete all the quality radio gear their listeners have invested in, despite little evidence there is public demand to do so.

KOPJ and KEX now feature poor quality audio no matter what radio you use. Other stations in the area, such as KKAD 1520, KDZR Radio Disney (1640 AM Stereo no less!!), and KBPS (1450 AM Stereo also!) all broadcast great quality AM signals that every listener can continue to enjoy to the fullest their gear will allow. AM Stereo radios are being sold today, for a fraction of the cost of the newer digital AM radio units. In addition, about 10 percent of all car radios are AM Stereo capable today.

KOPJ, despite a recent power boost and great ratings, reduced its sound quality today. A year of hard work, building great progressive talk programming, transitioning to a more powerful 25,000 watt signal, and great imaging all combined to make KOPJ the best AM signals on the dial here in Portland Oregon. Now it's one of the loudest stations, but the hosts all sound as if they have a cold.

I don't get it. Why build a great station only to degrade it and annoy the listeners who invest in quality gear to listen? For that matter, why degrade any radio station? Is there any particular rush to lower quality? Does radio really need this additional problem?

Here is the story:

In a word, IBOC. This is In Band On Channel Digital radio. The radio people think this will be the next big thing. Nervous radio executives, worried about the ongoing erosion of their marketshare and relevance, due to stiff competition from satellite radio, are pushing digital with both hands hoping to breathe new life into the increasingly stale radio scene. Marketing people say Digital is better (and it likely is done right). Of course, everyone knows the XM and Sirius satellite systems are digital and they are getting new listeners. --Radio listeners.

So the radio industry wants digital and they want it yesterday. Along comes a company called Ibiquity with their IBOC technology. Radio bites hook, line and sinker. The NAB lobbies the FCC to get IBOC accepted as an official standard for broadcasting, despite Ibiquity owning the technology lock stock and barrel. Of course, Ibiquity licenses to everyone, broadcasters, and listeners alike, eager to own radio on the industries own dime.

From the looks of things they are beginning to have some success. When we see broadcasters willing to work against their own loyal listeners interests to advance a technology, it's either the next best thing since sliced bread, or we've all been had.

Pssst.. WE'VE BEEN HAD.

Many FM stations around the country are beginning to transmit FM IBOC HD digital signals. For the most part, these are unobtrusive enough to be tolerated by existing radio gear. It's a lot like FM stereo was. New radios will be able to reproduce the digital signal while existing radios work the same. If it weren't for the licensing issues allowing Ibiquity to own public radio, this could work out ok. I am not convinced the quality of the digital signal will be better than an existing analog FM signal however, the technology does allow for more programming choices.

AM however is a different story. AM stations that broadcast AM IBOC signals, cannot be AM Stereo stations, so we lose the use of those radios. In addition, the IBOC signals take a lot of room, so the AM stations wanting to get ready for AM digital IBOC HD must cut their bandwidth back to make room. There goes all the good radios.

AM IBOC will leave all existing AM radios
sounding like the very worst quality radios!

Anyone that enjoys AM today will lose with this proposal and they can thank Clear Channel, along with others for it. AM IBOC is going to fill the AM band with digital noise that will be heard on any AM radio, but for the new expensive digital ones. This noise will be heard loudly on any better radio. This makes no sense particularly when the AM IBOC technology has not left testing stages yet and is not approved for nighttime operation!

Nobody is going to spend $500.00 for a new digital AM radio only to be limited in so many ways! Yet, plenty of people will spend $30.00 to $50.00 for a great AM radio that, until today, delivered a quality experience.

Thanks Clear Channel for trashing the AM band. I suppose if you make a majority of AM stations sound bad more people might look for other options.

Millions of radios are going to become increasingly useless over the next couple years so a few worried radio execs can feel they are just as digital as the next guy. Nevermind the millions of people wanting to just listen to their radio they have today.

Edit: Minor changes to the above content addressed minor issues with form and style. In addition to those, you might find the information below interesting:

- 10 percent of all car radios are AM Stereo capable. This means any AM talk station today can broadcast in Stereo and dramatically improve the experience for a significant share of their listeners today.

- AM Stereo continues to see wide use around the world. Poor leadership, here in the USA is the only reason AM Stereo failed. The technology itself is more than viable with listeners around the globe enjoying quality AM programming every day.

- Successful broadcast technology innovations have traditionally enhanced the experience without significantly degrading the utility of existing consumer gear. Color Television and FM Stereo are two excellent examples of this. AM Stereo was to be another, but for corporate infighting and poor FCC leadership.

- On a recent trip, I had the chance to compare KOPJ to another station in Eugene, that has not reduced its audio quality. Despite the radio being an ordinary radio, the difference in clarity, particularly siblants, was notable. The harsh filter required for IBOC digital to be used, significantly degrades the analog audio.

Translation: This narrowband approach sounds bad on most any radio.

- AM Stereo radios can be had for as little as $100 today. Brand new portable units are being manufactured and sold in the US.

Anyone Remember the Pop Shoppe?

2005-01-04T13:09:00.000-08:00

I sure do. Growing up in the small town of Molalla Oregon, I was lucky to be blessed with one of these, complete with drive thru! Being able to pick any combination of flavors you wanted was what made the Pop Shoppe special for me growing up.

While chatting about local TV Station KPTV on PDXradio.com, the topic of conversation drifted toward the Pop Shoppe and commercial spots. One of the folks just happened to have one and let me post it here. You know you just wanna click it and bring back a memory or two so go for it!

The Pop Shoppe 1976 (mp3 audio)

Edit: Yes, I did mean KPTV instead of KPDX --thanks anonymous.