"Poetry Month" and a little bragging

Yesterday I learned that if you google the words "poetry month" this Rhombus article is in the top 10 hits. What makes that amazing is that I wrote that article!

Now, granted, not a lot of people google "poetry month," but the search returned about 4.3 million hits when I tried it. That means of those millions of hits, my article is deemed by google to be one of the most relevant. Huzzah!

I discovered the high ranking of this article, btw, when I was curious why the article has consistently been in the top 10 articles on Rhombus lately. Other articles I've written, such as this one on the Neon Trees, will show up in the top google results, but only with more specific queries (googling "neon trees provo" will get you to that one). "Poetry month" on the other hand is something that's pretty general and which people who have never heard of Rhombus, Provo, etc. might look up. And apparently they are because the article continues to get traffic.

Obviously this could change at any moment, but I was both thrilled and astonished by this news. It was a great reminder that the internet is a crazy place where something can blow up or go viral at any minute.

Pointless Technologies

I rely on—and generally love—technology. I can’t imagine life without the internet, I already depend heavily on my new iPod touch, and most of the jobs I’ve done (writing, video editing, etc.) have a significant tech component.

However, there are also some really pointless uses of technology. Despite promising to save time, make life more convenient, or whatever, they actually just cause problems. Yet, somehow, they prevail. I’m not taking about those silly things that people invent, put on late night commercials, and then fail to actually sell. I’m also not talking about great ideas by major companies that just didn’t catch on (Apple, for example, has created a lot of things that didn’t catch on, but it’s also managed to produce paradigm-changing products at the same time. I’m also not talking about the iPad, because the jury is still out on that and though I don’t have one, I like them.) Instead, I’m talking about things that lots of people use, but which aren’t actually saving time, or even benefiting people much.

So here are a few examples:

Weed wackers: When I was a teenager I always had to mow and edge our yard. I really hated it. Now that I’ve moved back into my parents house, that has apparently become my job once again. However, while the lawnmower works well enough, I was surprised this week to see just how aggravating the weed wacker still is. It’s a gas-powered machine, and it uses those green plastic cords to cut the grass. To use it, you wrap the cord around a spool, and then to feed more cord out you bump the spool on the ground. (The ones I've used are similar to the one pictured below, but are also not that exact model.)

Whether that makes sense or not, the point is that it doesn’t even remotely work like it's supposed to. As you can imagine, a thin plastic cord constantly hitting rocks, cement, etc. wears down quickly. However, the machine that my parents have hardly ever feeds more cord out properly. That means that literally every five minutes you have take the thing apart and manually pull out more cord.

The result is that a job that should take 20 minutes ends up taking hours. There are many solutions to this problem, but the easiest would just be for some one to invent a weed wacker/edger that actually works.

Dishwashers: Dishwashers might be my most hated appliance ever invented. They seem so promising: no one likes washing dishes and a machine that would do it for you would be great.

The problem is that no dishwasher I’ve ever seen actually works. First, you basically have to wash all the dishes hand before putting them in the dishwasher. Then, somehow, there is still food stuck all over the supposedly cleaned dishes. I’ve lived in lots of houses and apartments, and without fail that’s the outcome I’ve experienced. And while I have no doubt that there are probably some super powered (and super expensive) dishwashers that actually work, I’m yet to see them in action.

The funny thing is that it’s also pretty easy to wash dishes hand. Most people are already doing it, but without soap, so that their dishwashers will work. For some reason, however, there seems to be a mistaken impression that machines are getting dishes more sanitary or clean, simply because they’re machines.

Rice cookers: This may be a controversial choice for this list, because most rice cookers I’ve seen do work, and many people love them. However, what are they really doing? To cook rice, you literally just have to boil it in a pot with water. That means that a rice cooker is just a pot with a timer on it. They may save some time by going marginally faster, but they also sacrifice some freedom: you can’t test and season rice as easily when it’s locked in a machine.

Bread machines: Bread machines are like a cruel joke. They make something that looks and deliciously smells like bread, but that typically is a monumental disappointment. The vast majority of bread machine bread that I’ve had have a bland flavor, overcooked crumbly crust, and a far too airy interior. Maybe those things are the result of bad recipes, but time and again I’ve had disappointing bread machine bread from different people and in different settings. It’s usually on par with the cheapest store bought stuff, but coupled with the smell of home cooked bread, it's infinitely more disappointing.

This list could go on and on, but the point here is that everything doesn’t need to be mechanized, and that some modern machines are just producing awful simulacra of good things.

The latest travel update and iPod touch

So, Laura and I are preparing to leave on our trip this month. We've seriously started planning our day by day brazilian itinerary, recently received our visas and are just about ready to go. However, one the that we have thought a lot about is how to stay connected while on the road (or in the air, or kn the rails, etc.). For some people, I suppose that a trip like ours would be a welcomed chance to disconnect with the plugged in world, but for me at least (if not exactly for Laura) I really want to stay in touch while we're gone. More specifically, I hope to blog about our trip while it's still taking place. Plus, it'd be nice to be able to check or bank account, email family, etc. whenever we need to.

Our cell phones aren't internationally enabled (and it would have cost a lot to get new ones that are), and we didn't want to take a computer that would easily get lost, broken, or even stolen, so we decided to get a portable device that would be relatively cheap, but still allow us to stay connected when needed.

So, we settled on and iPod Touch. I really like the iPhone, but we're on Verizon and I didn't want to switch (plus I wasn't ready to commit to some expensive two year contract). I also considered the uPas, but decided that it had most of the same vulnerabilities as a laptop.

Thus, and iPod Touch seemed like it was the best option. It has wireless, which most of our hotels provide (as does, I discovered, the entire beach front in Rio de Janeiro), is small and easy to conceal, and is less expensive (on the long run, at least) than most other, similarly capable devices. Obviously, it's not going to be good for writing a novel on, but I think it will allow us to keep in touch with what's going on back home.

In the spirit of preparation, I've actually written this entire blog post on the iPod touch. And actually, I've been surprised by the experience. There are some really annoying aspects to it (like having to switch keyboard screens everytime I need a non-letter character like a dash or parenthesis) but the software that automatically fills in words and fixes typos far exceeds my expectations. Obviously, I can't say how well this is going to work on our trip, where we'll have more intermittent Internet access and probably be more tired a lot of the time (and so less excited about writing blogs on a tiny keyboard), but at least for now it looks like well able to stay in touch and document our trip.

Google Docs

Between my various different jobs and my old and failing Apple Powerbook G4 12 inch, I'm using a lot of different computers these days. Rather than use flash drives and email to ensure I have access to all the necessary documents, I have switched to using Google Docs. In fact, I haven't opened Word in almost a month. If you haven't used Google Docs (probably you have, but who knows), all you need to do is make sure you're signed into your gmail account and go to docs.google.com.

Though Google Docs isn't perfect, it is pretty great. Here is my review of the program.

Pros: Google docs is easy to use. Really easy in fact. It's possible to set everything up so that it pretty much mimics the folders you have on your computer. Right now, for example, I have three folders; one each for my blog, the Daily Herald, and Rhombus. Obviously if I'd been using Google Docs longer, I'd have more folders.

The best part about using Google Docs, however, has to been that you never have to mess with sending files, saving them somewhere, or transferring them. If needed, you can send them as attachments, but you can also share them and make the available to others through Google Docs itself. This approach to creating and storing files (i.e. cloud computing), is so much better than traditional computing that I can't figure out why it hasn't completely caught on yet. The biggest disadvantage that I see is that I still have store music, video, etc. on my computer.

Cons: Probably the biggest downside to using Google Docs is that you give up some freedom to manipulate your work. For example, I love fonts and have downloaded and installed quite a few on my computer. These fonts didn't come with any program and I had to find them on my own, usually because I was making a particular kind of document. As of right now, I can't really figure out how to get extra fonts into Google Docs. That means that either it can't be done, or that doing it isn't quite as easy as doing anything else in the program.

For me, this is a big disadvantage to Google Docs. Though I rarely use Word any more, I'd be reluctant to get rid of it completely because at some point the basic style settings aren't going to cut it. (On the other hand, I guess I could just buy Photoshop and only use word processing programs for basic writing.)

The other big disadvantage is that Google Docs relies on an internet connection. For most people that's not a big deal, though Laura and I use the neighbor's unprotected wireless network and we thus don't always have a stable connection. The times I've opened Word during the last month or so have been when I couldn't access the internet, and therefore couldn't get into Google Docs. This is extremely frustrating.

Of course that's more my problem than Google's, but it seems that people are going to have unstable internet connections more often than their computers are going to crash, which means that using Google docs will almost always be less reliable than Word.

Conclusion: The world is almost ready for a complete switch to Google Docs (and cloud computing, generally). We're not quite there yet, but once internet access is as stable as, say, landline telephones, there will be no reason to have much storage space on personal computers.

Don’t Buy Tacky Digital Picture Frames

Some things from the past are really tacky. Shag carpet, for example. And TVs with fake wood paneling. Though some of us love that stuff for its nostalgic quality, I don’t think any one would ever call it “classy” or “quality.”

Today’s equivalent of the wood-paneled appliance is the digital, USB picture frame. I’m sure you’ve seen this item. Perhaps you even own one yourself. When they first came out the novelty of the idea nearly made me get one. Thankfully I didn’t make that mistake and if I had I would probably find some person I only half liked so I could give it to them as a Christmas present.

These frames are tacky for a lot of reasons. First off, they’re pretending to be something they’re not. Like it or not, displaying 4x6 photographs on a bedside table is going to get rarer and rarer. After all, digital pictures are not pieces of paper and they don’t need a picture frame to hold them. Hardly anyone takes anything but digital pictures these days, but because all of us were alive when analog photography ruled the earth we still tend to want to play by the old rules. Just because were taking digital photographs, we might think, doesn’t mean that we actually have to display them differently. That, however, is wrong. Like most new technologies, digital photography is not well suited to old fashion frames and it will eventually change how we think about pictures.

In many ways digital pictures frames are a lot like those old radios, record players, or TVs that pretended to be large wooden pieces of furniture. You’ve probably seen these things in the homes of old people (my grandparents seemed to have a few). I think the idea was that all the new-fangled technology needed to be proper and respectable, so it had to look like a table or a cabinet. In retrospect that idea seems quaint and kind of silly. Similarly, the idea that you’d want to put a low quality monitor on a shelf to perpetually play a screen saver is rapidly looking outdated, passé, and downright ridiculous.

As if digital picture frames weren’t bad enough by themselves, many models actually leave the flash drive hanging out the side. Why the frames’ designers wouldn’t have realized that USB drives are longer than half a centimeter baffles me. Still, I’d say at least half the frames I’ve seen suffer from this problem and it always kills what little aesthetic appeal they have; it’s like wearing a polyester suit, and then going out with your fly down.

I predict that in the future we will have ways of viewing pictures that take into account technological advances and don’t try to make new things fit into old boxes. If I could vote, it’d be for something like Facebook’s photo system, where I get to chose which pictures I see. With the proliferation of the internet into new devices (gaming systems, phones, etc.) anything around the house could be used to display pictures. For example, while you’re not watching anything, your TV could continuously display pictures that are stored in one central location and accessible by any device. (Someone is probably reading this think that they like being able to have their digital photographs displayed like old fashioned ones and they don’t want something new. All I can say is too bad. After all, how often to you consume technology or media the way people did in the 80s, 70s, or 60s? The reality is that things change.)

Of course, predicting the future is a fool’s game, but learning from the past is not. It’s possible that digital picture frames will survive and be really cool for a long time. On the other hand, there are very few examples of old technologies (like picture frames) successfully being applied to new ones (like digital photography). So this holiday season avoid digital picture frames and don’t do the 2009 equivalent of installing wood paneling in your home. It’s a choice you appreciate sooner rather than later.