I brought this idea up with Dan, and wanted to bring it up here for public discussion. I’ve been listening to various “podcasts” lately (even though I really hate that term), and thinking about doing one myself, just for fun, with the help of Dan and/or whoever else would want to be involved.
For those not familiar with them, at a high-level, they are basically just MP3 radio shows that you record yourself and publish a certain way, so that RSS-capable applications can “subscribe” to your show (among others) and have it automatically downloaded to their listening device whenever they want. In reality, I think Dan summed up their true nature pretty well: “just somebody speaking their blog, instead of writing it” or something to that effect.
If I did do it, it probably would be something like that for me - a lot of the same topics that I post about on here. It would probably lean more toward the technical stuff, specifically computer security related topics (or maybe what some would label “hacking”), and probably very little political-type discussions, just because I don’t think that format really supports the kind of open dialog that that type of subject requires. I was asking Dan if he could do reviews on all the tech stuff he buys all the time and then turns around and sells on ebay (just kidding) and also he could talk about any Mac-related issues, so that I can poke fun at them. It might be entertaining.
Of course, it wouldn’t be limited to that either, we could talk about anything that came up: blog culture and technology, movie & music reviews, showcasing free music artists, etc. (maybe we could get Nathan to do the music reviews) My main question is whether anyone would listen, and whether it would be worth the time. I suspect that it would actually end up drawing more traffic here, since (at least right now) podcasts (like blogs) always start small, but seem to get popular much more quickly than blogs, just because there are fewer of them out there. What do you think?
the president contradicts himself again.
From a story regarding stem cell research and the threat of a veto from the president:
“I’ve made it very clear… the use of federal money, taxpayers’ money, to promote science which destroys life in order to save life, I’m against that,” he told reporters.
Foreign policy that has the same stated purpose (whether or not it’s true), however, is apparently OK.
Here’s one of the better cameos from Star Wars Episode 3:
With most cable companies now offering broadband internet over their cable system, DVRs should come with built-in bit torrent clients that you can use to go back and get shows that you forgot to record when they were on.
with 6 posts within the last 12 hours, even!
I urge everyone to please read this excellent transcript.
George Galloway puts the U.S. in its place, regarding Iraq; here are some notable quotes from Mr. Galloway:
Now I know that standards have slipped in the last few years in Washington, but for a lawyer you are remarkably cavalier with any idea of justice. I am here today but last week you already found me guilty. You traduced my name around the world without ever having asked me a single question, without ever having contacted me, without ever written to me or telephoned me, without any attempt to contact me whatsoever. And you call that justice.
I have had two meetings with Saddam Hussein, once in 1994 and once in August of 2002. By no stretch of the English language can that be described as “many meetings” with Saddam Hussein.
As a matter of fact, I have met Saddam Hussein exactly the same number of times as Donald Rumsfeld met him. The difference is Donald Rumsfeld met him to sell him guns and to give him maps the better to target those guns. I met him to try and bring about an end to sanctions, suffering and war, and on the second of the two occasions, I met him to try and persuade him to let Dr Hans Blix and the United Nations weapons inspectors back into the country - a rather better use of two meetings with Saddam Hussein than your own Secretary of State for Defense made of his.
I was an opponent of Saddam Hussein when British and Americans governments and businessmen were selling him guns and gas. I used to demonstrate outside the Iraqi embassy when British and American officials were going in and doing commerce.
You will see from the official parliamentary record, Hansard, from the 15th March 1990 onwards, voluminous evidence that I have a rather better record of opposition to Saddam Hussein than you do and than any other member of the British or American governments do.
Now, Senator, I gave my heart and soul to oppose the policy that you promoted. I gave my political life’s blood to try to stop the mass killing of Iraqis by the sanctions on Iraq which killed one million Iraqis, most of them children, most of them died before they even knew that they were Iraqis, but they died for no other reason other than that they were Iraqis with the misfortune to born at that time. I gave my heart and soul to stop you committing the disaster that you did commit in invading Iraq. And I told the world that your case for the war was a pack of lies.
I told the world that Iraq, contrary to your claims did not have weapons of mass destruction. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to al-Qaeda. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to the atrocity on 9/11 2001. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that the Iraqi people would resist a British and American invasion of their country and that the fall of Baghdad would not be the beginning of the end, but merely the end of the beginning.
Senator, in everything I said about Iraq, I turned out to be right and you turned out to be wrong and 100,000 people paid with their lives; 1600 of them American soldiers sent to their deaths on a pack of lies; 15,000 of them wounded, many of them disabled forever on a pack of lies.
Be sure not to miss more of my anti-Mac propaganda in the comments for this post.