What Are You Wearing?

Apparently there was some fancy awards show last night in Hollywood. The Golden Globes, right? As you can see I get all these award shows mixed up. I find them all pretty boring to watch. However, just so I don't look totally clueless, I try and glance at the news the next morning or pick up the newspaper so I can at least see who the big winner was. That way I can look "well informed" and "in the know" around the office water cooler. Clever huh? It seems that the big winner was "Brokenback Mountain". Notice my maturity level and self control there to resist the urge of making a joke about the film title? Yes, it's about 2 gay cowboys and no, I don't know anything more than that because it's not exactly a movie I'm eager to put down my 10 bucks to see. I'll just take the word of the Golden Globes, say it's a good flick and keep my wad (of cash that is) in my pocket. (Darn, a harmless gay joke still snuck in - sorry.)

So my sister calls me last night and is shocked that I'm not watching The Golden Globes. Shocked? Is she serious? I don't know any guy that watches award shows unless they are gay or forced to sit on the couch with a girl and partake in the "what are you wearing" red carpet arrivals. I mean seriously, there was a basketball game on the other station so what does she think I would be watching? Silly girl. Well being the fashion guru that she is and if she sees this post, she will appreciate what I am about to do. It's the "what am I wearing" red carpet interview via a blog. Now unless you know me pretty well, you probably won't find this very funny because it has to be said/read in my pretend gay/lisp/snooty celeb voice.

"I'm wearing Armani and I'm going tieless because I can rock it without it. The shoes are by Aldo. My bling...I'm going blingless. However I did find a rather shiny new paperclip in my coat pocket. Does that count as bling? Now that is what I wore to the big show, AKA work today. For the after party, AKA going to the gym...I will be sporting some Nike shorts and a plain white tee. Yes darling, I look fabulous but did you expect anything less? After all, it is Golden Globe night! Now you fierce bitches step aside while I strike a pose for the cameras."

Be Annoying Online And You'll Be Arrested Offline

Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime. It’s no joke. President Bush recently signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying messages online, sending annoying IMs or e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity. The law comes under the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act. Criminal penalties include stiff fines and 2 years in prison! Web Anonymity may not be a crime, but annoying someone on the web is? So is it ok to flame someone in a message board forum or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name? These are questions that are raising alot of issues.

Originally the purposed law stated that...
"It was reasonable by comparison and criminalized only using an interactive computer service to cause someone substantial emotional harm."

Toady the signed law states this...
"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

The use of the word "annoy" is particularly problematic because what's annoying to one person may not be annoying to someone else. Therefore this makes the definition of the word "annoy" open to personal interpretation and makes this new law seem a little sketchy to fully understand. So who decides what is annoying? The official word is that as long as there is "intent to annoy" and not whether or not someone is actually offended, that seems to be all it takes for it to be considered a crime. However, while people are debating whether or not a crime has actually been committed based on their own personal definition of the word "annoy", what about the real cases of when "being annoying" has gone to a new level and develops into harassment or even stalking? Well we all know that harassment and stalking whether done online or offline is clearly a crime. There are numerous laws that state that you can not harass or "cyber stalk" someone whether you disclose your true identity or remain anonymous. It's against the law either way you do it.

To some, being annoying should be a crime. It's a little funny to think of it like that, but wouldn't life be so much sweeter if you could take every annoying person you know and throw their ass in jail? Ahh, pure bliss! Only in a perfect world would such an easy fix and a true pleasure exist. Since we don't live in a perfect world, annoying people will continue to exist online and offline. It's how you choose to deal with these annoyances that will really make a difference. In many cases simply distancing yourself as far away as possible from the problematic person/s and ignoring them at all costs is the best solution. When that fails, sometimes legal measures need to be taken. To the person/s being annoyed, harassed or even cyber stalked, you can feel like you are on the losing end. However, it's important to keep in mind that although you may feel angry, frustrated and even overwhelmed, that there is help and laws put into place to protect you. You must look at the situation as the annoyer/harasser/stalker as being "sick" and in many cases they really are. How else can you explain the great lengths these people will go to in order to continue their annoying/harassing/stalking behavior? The effort and time they put into it alone is scary. Everyone deserves a peaceful life, online and offline. This new law is meant to protect that right and help insure that you too can have peace from the annoying. Of course, don't abuse it and get "sue happy" like so many people tend to get in the US.

Today is Martin Luther King's birthday and in celebration of him, we remember his famous "I Have A Dream" speech. Today I have composed my own speech which is a little similar...
"I have a dream that one day people will find something better to do with their lives than annoy, harass and stalk others. I have a dream that one day they will wake up and see that their evil efforts are wasted and they have gained nothing by their wrong doings. I have a dream that they will look in the mirror and see how foolish they look and feel ashamed for their behavior. I have a dream that these people will change for the better. Until that day, I wish for the rest of the world to feel not afraid and turn to this new law that has been signed and sing... Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"

On The 7th Day, God Watched Steelers Football

Don't disturb me today because I need to focus. I will mentally prepare for the big game by first dressing in the appropriate holy attire which consists of my favorite pair of faded broken-in blue jeans and my black #86 jersey. Then it's time to get nice and comfy on the couch. I will need to turn the volume up on the TV to at least the "L", you know in "Volume", about 20 squares in from the left. That way I'll be drowned out yelling at the plays on the field. I suggest everyone reading this watches the game too. God himself will be watching! How do I know? Let's just say we are tight, we talk and he told me he's a Steeler fan. Just between you and me...there is a slight chance that lighting may strike the entire Colts team dead today, guaranteeing a Steeler win!

Polamulu, voted "Sexiest Hair" in the league!
(Anyone gullible enough to believe that?)

It's onto the next round in the NFL playoffs for the Pittsburgh Steelers. After last week's Wildcard win against the Bengals, the Black & Gold are in Indianapolis today to take on the Peyton Manning and the Colts. I was pretty confident last weekend that we would beat Cincinnati, but this week I'm a little nervous. It seems that every year we are bumped out of the playoffs due to a lose coming from either the Colts or the Patriots. I'm hoping this year will be different and we can pull off an upset. If today marks the end of the season for the Steelers, it may also mark the end of an era for "The Bus", Jerome Bettis. After 13 years, one of the best running backs in the NFL may be making his last stop in Indianapolis. If Bettis does retire, it will be sad, but don't worry because we have Willie Parker to fill his shoes! He is like a black Forest Gump, that boy is crazy fast!

So if I was Coach Cower, I would prepare my football team with a few short words. The same words I was given when I boxed. "Strike first, strike fast, hit hard, no mercy." If the Steelers can come out, put points on the board early and pressure Manning, then I smell the scent of sweet victory...or the smell of sweaty gym socks, whichever you prefer.

Macworld 2006 Is An iSnooze, Except For 'Dissing Intel

If you are a Mac lover, than you are probably aware that the annual Macworld Conference & Expo took place from January 9-13 in San Francisco. It comes just days after Microsoft's CEO Bill Gates took stage at CES to talk about his upcoming Microsoft products. Macworld on the other hand is the place where Apple's CEO Steve Jobs shows off his latest and greatest Mac products. It's the place where the iMac was first introduced to the public over a decade ago. Since then, there has been 2 major redesigns of the original iMac. This year I was expecting we would see the 4th gen iMac, but unfortunately that didn't happen. Since Apple's other big product is the iPod, surely we would see a new iPod at Macword, right? Nope, no new iPod either. So what did Steve Jobs show us? Well, not much if you ask me. It was a bit of an "iSnooze" of a keynote speech giving Mac lovers little to get excited about.

Of course in lue of a new redesigned iMac or iPod, Jobs had to talk about something. Therefore, the bulk of the Macworld news consisted mostly about Apple's new ties to Intel. In the hardware department, Apple released the first ever Intel-based iMac and the new MacBook Pro. When it came to software, 2006 versions of the iLife and iWork suites were introduced, along with a new program called iWeb that helps you design websites, set up blogs and assist with podcasting. New Apple accessories also debuted, including an FM receiver and remote for the iPod. Lastly, the OS X operating system will begin shipping with new widgets. Despite all these new products, many people will look back at Macword '06 and not remember the hardware or software introductions, but rather the huge "insert foot in mouth" Apple campaign slogan. Various banners were hung with the phrase..."What's an Intel chip doing in a Mac? A whole lot more than it's ever done in a PC."

It's no secret that Apple and Microsoft are heated rivals. It's also no secret that for years Intel chips have been the processor of choice in Windows PCs. So it's only natural that the bulk of Intel's business comes from Microsoft. Are you following me so far? Now the big question is...if you (Apple) are trying to break new ground in an area (gaining Intel's business) that is mostly controlled by your competition (Microsoft), I would tend to think you do not want to publicly bash your new business partner (Intel) regardless if they also do business with your competition or not. It just looks...well, childish.

I just don't understand what Apple's PR department and legal team is thinking when it comes to "smart business". You may remember awhile back when word got out that Apple made the biggest tech blunder of all time - forgetting to patent the iPod! When that news broke, I just couldn't believe it! How could a company as innovative as Apple be so dumb? Well it seems Apple didn't learn much from that huge mistake as they once again are embarrassing themselves, or perhaps more importantly, embarrassing their new partnership with Intel. Just a FYI for Steve Jobs in case he hasn't figured this out yet, Intel is pissed over the new campaign slogan. I suggest you change it before you find yourself in an ugly legal dispute.

Fine. You Perverts Want It? You Perverts Can Have It!

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

The Blog Post I Pulled

Some of you may of noticed I didn't do a blog post for Thursday and although this post you are reading now is postmarked as "Thursday", I'm really writing it a day late on a Friday. Why? Well, I had something written up on Thursday. I even posted it and it was on the net for about 30 minutes while I debated on whether or not to keep it there. As you can see, in the end I decided it was best to pull the post. I figured if it was making me hesitate on my decision so much, than perhaps that alone was a sign that it shouldn't of ever been written. Ok, maybe it needed to be written for my own personal sake, but it didn't need to be read by anyone else. Sometimes I find comfort in writing, even if it is just for myself. It can be helpful to get my feelings out on paper when at times I feel I can't say the words I need to say to someone, so I write those words instead to myself. To some that may sound silly, but to me it works.

Then I usually throw the paper out and move forward. Maybe that is a cleansing process. I get what I need to say off my chest without hurting or burdening anyone with my feelings in the process. I'm sure someone is reading that sentence and thinking "how sad". Sad or not, I have to do what works for me. We all deal with things differently and I suppose that is one of the ways I cope. Did my thoughts/feelings for the day really need to be turned into digital text and brought to life? Did I really need to share with the world what was going on with me yesterday? I'm thinking no. Usually I will share, but I'm begging to learn that sometimes it's not good to share. Some things need to be private, whether to protect the hearts and lives of others involved, or just to protect my own heart and shield my own life from anymore unnecessary pain or judgment. It's always a bit of a gamble, but I hope I am playing the best hand I can given the cards I've been dealt.

I understand this is just a blog. It's not a mandatory work assignment. There is no rule saying I must bare all or bare none. There isn't anyone holding a gun to my head and demanding I open up. The only one that can hold me back from exposing my soul is me. I sort of like the fact that in the past some people have said such shitty things about me that it made my Mother upset. Upset enough to not want to come back to my site. Don't get me wrong. It infuriates me when anyone makes my Mom cry. It breaks my heart and embarrasses me when she calls to ask me why people are doing that to her son. However, deep down I am a little relieved that for the most part, she doesn't see what I write. Those incidents have discouraged her from coming back. When it comes to blogging, I've always been torn between the fact of whether or not it's a good thing that those that know me in "real life" also read my blog. Sometimes I wish nobody knew me outside my blog. Then I could write with more freedom. I wouldn't feel the need to sometimes censor myself or hold back expressing myself. I would lay it all out there without a care of who reads it because their judgment is one I would never have to see on their face, because I would never see their face.

I really don't know if my words touch people or if they just wash over them. I really don't know if people are sincere when they compliment me. I like to believe they are, but how can one tell in the "virtual world"? I think sometimes I only feel sincerity if someone takes me by the shoulders, looks in my eyes and tells me themselves. So in cases where that doesn't happen, then I have to believe that my words don't carry any more weight than the wind blows. It sounds a little sad to view it like that, but I think it might be a fair assumption to make?

Hack Your Starbucks Cappuccino & Feel The Buzz

In the past I've given you little "hacks" to help simplify, speed up and make your life more enjoyable. Take for instance 2 of my past posts, The Traffic Light Hack and The Elevator Hack. So in conjunction with improving your morning commute, I'm going to help you get a stronger kick out of your morning coffee. Best of all, it will save you money! Now that is something every Starbucks junkie can appreciate right? So here's the little secret that Starbucks doesn't want you to know. They will serve you a better, stronger cappuccino if you want one and they will charge you less for it. Just ask for it in any Starbucks and the barista will comply without batting an eye. So I'm going to share a little love and let you in on the trick.

The drink in question is the elusive 8-ounce "short cappuccino". It is a third smaller than the smallest size on the official menu, "the tall". It is also dwarfed by what Starbucks calls the customer-preferred size, the "Venti" which weighs in at 20-ounces and contains more than 200 calories before you add the sugar. The short cappuccino has the same amount of espresso as the 12-ounce tall, meaning a bolder coffee taste and also a better one. The World Barista Championship rules, for example, define a traditional cappuccino as a 5 to 6 ounce beverage. This is also the size of cappuccino served by many continental cafés. Within reason, the shorter the cappuccino, the better. Confused yet?

The problem with large cappuccinos is that it's impossible to make the fine-bubbled milk froth ("microfoam" in the lingo) in large quantities. A 20-ounce cappuccino is an oxymoron. Many Starbucks junkies can confirm that it is a better drink than the buckets of warm milk topped with a veneer of froth that the coffee chain advertises on its menus. This secret cappuccino is cheaper too. On average, Starbucks charges $2.35 instead of $2.65. So why does this cheaper, better drink along with its sisters (the short latte and the short coffee) languish unadvertised? The official word from Starbucks is that there is no room on the menu board. Although this doesn't explain why the short cappuccino is also unmentioned on the comprehensive Starbucks website, nor why the baristas will serve you in a whisper rather than the usual practice of singing your order to the heavens.

In short, economics is the answer. This is the Starbucks way of sidestepping a painful dilemma over how high to set prices. Price too low and the margins disappear; too high and the customers do. Any business that is able to charge one price to price-sensitive customers and a higher price to the rest will avoid some of that awkward trade-off. It's just good business sense. Bottom line, if you'd like a better coffee for less, just ask. Then thank me for the "hack". Knowledge is power.

Other Starbucks coffee related posts of interest...

09/28/05 Study Claims Caffeine Addicts Are Fat, Sexless And Will Die!
09/28/05 I Like My Coffee Tall & Black Like My Men