And via Air Congress, the second in my budding series of good campaign videos.
Politics sucks quite a bit less when its served up this way.
Keeping politicians' hands off the Net & everything else related to technology
And via Air Congress, the second in my budding series of good campaign videos.
Politics sucks quite a bit less when its served up this way.
All year in 2008, former National Journal Tech Daily editor and Beltway Blogroller Danny Glover will be cataloging all the taxes his family pays.
“How much do you really pay in taxes?” he says. “If you knew, you might get angry. You should — and I hope this blog will get you riled.”
Note the Weekly Tax Bite posts, where he tracks the tax-man’s weekly take in sales taxes, gas taxes, and so on.
Now that Tech Daily is gone, Danny will be devoting his time to AirCongress.
Last week, I published an Op-Ed in the Detroit News predicting chaos at the border in the face of ramped up document checks. I was wrong.
In fact, the DHS was bluffing. Border crossers who lacked government-issued photo ID and proof of citizenship like birth certificates or naturalization certificates weren’t prevented from crossing. They were given fliers.
As the AP reports:
Bobby and Genice Bogard of Greers Ferry, Ark., . . . who winter in Mission, Texas, knew the requirements were coming but thought they took effect in June. So even though they have U.S. passports, they had left them at home.
“He allowed us to pass with a driver’s license,” Bobby Bogard said of a border agent.
“But next time he said he wouldn’t,” added Genice Bogard.
Yeah.
Something to keep in mind as the DHS threatens to make air travel inconvenient for people from states that don’t comply with the REAL ID Act’s national ID mandate.
I’ll probably get mocked again, but here’s another thing I didn’t know about regulation in the good ‘ol days of the 1970s (from this paper):
With capacity and route expansion foreclosed as outlets for product differentiation, the trunk carriers devised new means of service competition. “Capacity wars” gave way to “lounge wars.” On wide-bodied aircraft, lounges were introduced in first class, then in coach. When American installed piano bars, TWA countered with electronic draw-poker machines. Live entertainment proliferated, with musicians, magicians, wine-tasters, and Playboy bunnies.
When’s the last time you saw live entertainment on a commercial flight?
The league bans public exhibitions of its games on TV sets or screens larger than 55 inches because smaller sets limit the audience size. The section of federal copyright law giving the NFL protection over the content of its programming exempts sports bars, NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said.
Any idea what he’s talking about? I’ve read through a number of sections of the copyright statutes, and I don’t think I’ve ever seen the term “sports bar” mentioned.
Update: Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner:
In the case of a food service or drinking establishment, either the establishment in which the communication occurs has less than 3,750 gross square feet of space (excluding space used for customer parking and for no other purpose), or the establishment in which the communication occurs has 3,750 gross square feet of space or more (excluding space used for customer parking and for no other purpose) and… any visual portion of the performance or display is communicated by means of a total of not more than 4 audiovisual devices, of which not more than one audiovisual device is located in any 1 room, and no such audiovisual device has a diagonal screen size greater than 55 inches, and any audio portion of the performance or display is communicated by means of a total of not more than 6 loudspeakers, of which not more than 4 loudspeakers are located in any 1 room or adjoining outdoor space;
Now that I think of it, large sports bars with a bunch of TVs almost always have more than one game on. Now I know why! Thanks to reader dio gratia for the tip.
In the first installment of my Media Metrics series, I presented an analytical framework that can be used to evaluate the state the media marketplace and specific media sectors. I also argued that within each segment of the media value chain (Content options >> Distribution options >> Receiving options >> Storage options) we see more choice, competition, and diversity than ever before in human history. As this fifth installment of the series will show, nowhere is that fact more evident than in the market for audible information and entertainment, which has undergone radical transformation over the past decade.
For most of the past century, the audible information and entertainment sector was generally thought of as broadcast radio, the recorded music industry, and the live music business. It was a fairly stable industry that did not witness business model-shattering type changes. For radio, AM gave way to FM. For recorded music, vinyl gave way to tapes and CDs. And live music simply found larger (and more) venues.
Today, however, stability has given way to volatility. This entire marketplace is in a state of seeming constant upheaval. Everything has changed and continues to change at a rapid pace as “disruptive technologies” fly at us with increasingly regularity. Old business models are breaking down, and new ones are multiplying. Long-standing industry players are shedding assets or even disappearing as underdogs rapidly enter the sector and become big dogs overnight. You want a textbook example of Schumpeterian creative destruction in action? This market is it.
In case you didn’t catch it the debate last night, Sen. Obama had some very encouraging things to say when asked about the role of government when it comes to media content. “[T]he primary responsibility is for parents,” Obama said. “And I reject the notion of censorship as an approach to dealing with this problem.” He then stressed the importance of making sure that parents have the tools to make these determinations for their families (something I’ve spent a lot of time stressing in my work):
“[I]t is important for us to make sure that we are giving parents the tools that they need in order to monitor what their children are watching. And, obviously, the problem we have now is not just what’s coming over the airwaves, but what’s coming over the Internet. And so for us to develop technologies and tools and invest in those technologies and tools, to make sure that we are, in fact, giving parents power — empowering parents I think is important.”
Good for him. That’s the exactly the right position, and one that his opponent Mrs. Clinton would be wise to adopt. After all, she’s had some rather misguided views on these issues through the years.
Here’s the transcript if you care to read more.
The Institute for Politics, Democracy & the Internet, part of the Graduate School of Political Management of The George Washington University, is hosting the Politics Online Conference 2008 on March 4th and 5th at the Renaissance Washington DC Hotel.
Because of my work on WashingtonWatch.com, and because I live a) online b) in Washington, D.C., this looks like an interesting conference.
Among other things, TLFers might enjoy the first day’s keynote, entitled: Building a Broadband Strategy for America. I like America, and I like Broadband, so it’s got to be good – right?!
And here’s an exclusive for TLF readers – $50 off your admission! When you go to register, in the discount code (optional) field, enter “MINUS50” and you’ll get the savings. Convince 20 of your friends to come and you’ll save $1,000! Hard to pass up.
Hosted on the Web site of Orange County NORML (make of that what you will), a clever illustration of how we’re being “given” security by so many government programs:
By now everyone has heard the news announced this morning that Microsoft has offered to buy Yahoo! for $44 billion. Is this earth-shattering, or something that should have been expected given the current disarray at Yahoo! and Microsoft’s distant 3rd (domestically, 4th globally) in the search race?
And just like the Google/DoubleClick merger, many of the arguments won’t be about competition, but instead will focus on privacy. One would think that with the Google/DoubleClick approval now serving as precedent, the FTC will be able to dismiss these arguments as non-jurisdictional a bit more easily. But, being that the deal is still pending in the EU and that several groups are challenging the approval in the US, Microhoo! isn’t out of the woods yet.
EPIC will also have to come up with another clever logo like this one:
Though privacy is certainly a valid concern, a question remains for privacy advocates: Who can merge? Anyone competing in the search market who desires to compete with Google is likely going to do so with at least a few acquisitions and along with the hardware, patent portfolios, and a bunch of PhDs–these search market contenders will also be combing their data. But is this reason enough to oppose such mergers? Not if we want the market to stay competitive.
Blocking mergers of search companies blocks one of the most effective methods for any group of competitors to take on Google. Without the ability to acquire or merge with other firms, organic growth is the only method left to these companies to try to catch Google, making the search race much harder to run.
But would the deal be good for consumers? There’s reason to think so. Yahoo! and Microsoft could combine their online services to compete much better with Google. A few possibilities:
1.) Turn Microsoft’s Photosynth loose on Flickr and add tags to everyone’s photos using picture recognition software. This will enrich the database immeasurably. Imagine your pictures from the Louvre suddenly being tagged with the title of the work, the name of the artist, and the year the work was created.
2.) Use Microsoft’s Live Search Images software with Flickr to create filters for faces, portraits, and black and white photos.
3.) Give every MSN and Windows Live user the ability to create custom RSS feeds using Yahoo! Pipes technology.
The potential for much better targeting also exists especially given the purchases of aQuantive and Right Media by Microsoft and Yahoo! respectively. In addition, Microhoo! could benefit from sheer economies of scale. Both of these factors mean Microhoo! could cut its margins and offer ad buyers lower rates and ad sellers higher pay-outs. The result: online content creators will have more coin in their pocket to spend on content, benefiting everyone.