Why I trust Google as much as I do.

In another attempt to appear more hip than I actually am, I started using Google Voice to text message my friends, as this appears to be what you use a cell phone, in lieu of talking, if one is actually hip. While discussing my new set up with Brooke, she mentioned that although the system seems kind of cool, she doesn't know how she felt about Google knowing even more information about her (if you're not aware, Google Voice will record voice messages and send transcriptions to you via e-mail, I assume Google uses these transcriptions for something, you also must give your contact's information to Google for the system to work effectively).

While I can certainly understand the feelings, I don't share it, I have no problem with Google knowing, and profiting from, all types of information about me. However the conversation did spark an interest in why I feel this way about Google. It didn't take me much thought before I realized that it all came to one simple fact, protecting my personal information is in the best interest of Google.

If one of my credit card companies loses my information (along with the information of millions of other customers) they look foolish, type up a press release and call it a day. On the other hand, if Google loses my information, they have lost their only asset, a large volume of personal information that they had exclusively. So while losing my information might cost other companies customers in the long run, it would cost Google their competitive advantage.

My name is Sam, and I have a problem

Recently my employer has started blocking access to a myriad of web services. Originally it was stated that these blocks were to prevent employees from accesses websites that are forbidden under our polices (gambling and porn) as well as curb the heavy amount of bandwidth use (mostly due to streaming media) that we had been racking up.

The implementation of this new policy really forced me to examine my internet addition as I discovered which site were and weren't being blocked. Below is a list of sites/catagories which are now blocked followed with my reactions.

Social media - While this shows that the people making decisions don't really understand the usefulness of these new means of networking I know that they were being overused by many co-workers (probably including me). I can cope with this.

Wulffmorgenthaler - probably not the most appropriate site to check out during work, but it's no worse than some of the "humorous" e-mails that get forwarded around endlessly. I can cope.

Pwned on camera - see above. I can cope.

Blogger - When you try to access a blogger blog, the blocking software says that this falls into the category of "Forums & Newsgroups" which are blocked, this category includes many blogging services (not wordpress for whatever reason) as well as many forums. This was my first set of blocked sites that I found objectionable, as I use a wide variety of forums to gain information about ducts and pipes. This is what I view as being one of the strengths of the internet, the virtually unlimited amount of information that is available on it. This resulted in medium annoyance and heavy head scratching. (luckily the mechanical engineering group have a blog set up, so I have since gained access to Blogger).

Sports - An interesting group of sites to block, as news sites were not blocked. I can cope (even once fantasy football starts)

Games - It makes complete sense to me to block this category, while I am guilty of playing games at work sometimes, I realize that I shouldn't be doing so. I can cope.

Porn - [Don't worry, while porn is blocked, the porn entry in Wikipedia is not (I think, I haven't checked it)] Who looks at porn at work (we don't have private offices). Blocking this makes perfect sense as it is part of our corporate policies but didn't realize that we were having problems with people looking at porn. I understand, and can cope.

Streaming media - This is what I thought the whole filter system was for, streaming media eats up an incredible amount of bandwidth which the company has to pay for. Although this is the most heavily abused category of web usage I still think that this can easily be monitored and dealt with on a one by one basis. I can cope.

Web based e-mail - Discovering this almost caused me to have an aneurysm. That may be an overstatement, but I did have to spend several minutes on the roof of the parking garage cursing loudly to my brother on the phone. A good part of my life is spent online, utilizing numerous tools to connect to people in my life, and all of those internet resources are funneled to me through my gmail account. In addition to that I have been forced to use my gmail account when the one provided to me by my employer is too sissy to perform a needed task (I am limited to 5 MB file size and a total of 80 MB of storage, seriously). While I can understand limiting my usage of the previously mentioned sites, by preventing me from using gmail I am unable to even be alerted if someone tried to use them to contact me. A lot of cursing and thinking about quitting my job. (As previously mentioned the mechanical engineering group has a blogger blog set up, to view this blog one needs a gmail account, thus I was able to argue my need of access, along with this access came a greatly reduced amount of cursing and feeling bad for myself) (And yes, I do realize I have an internet addiction problem)

While I understand that many companies have much stricter internet filters in place, I don't care. These internet restrictions were not implemented due to security concerns or because of widespread abuse. They were implemented because a small group of people did not know how to responsibly use the internet and their managers weren't able to address these issues.

During one of the many conversations with my brother on this issue he used a phrase that I think is very appropriate, "Penny wise, pound foolish." While I can understand someone looking at the sites being blocked and pointing out that most of them do not have any business application, they lose sight of the fact that if I am able to spend a few minutes catching up with my friends outside of work, I am much more willing to stay at work until late at night/early in the morning.

I imagine that this policy will be changing a lot in the near future, even as it was implemented it was being questioned by in the company above my own plebeian class. I'm sure I will write about it as it changes, as complaining is something I never get tired of.

Instantaneous communication

I have always complained about the expectation of instantaneous communication that cell phones and e-mail create. Nothing sums up my issues as well as the following video:




This video also does a great job of encapsulating a crazy girlfriend in text form, which is much more hilarious than a crazy girlfriend in person.

(Via Kottke) (I know kottke wasn't the first site this video showed up on, however it is the site I saw it on first.)

A burger not good enough to write about (but I did anyway)

For today's lunch I went to Victor's Place and purchased their daily special (I of course got the bacon cheeseburger, not the pasta).

I have always been pleased with the quality of the food as well as the variety offered through their specials, however today's fare left much to be desired. I would refer to this burger as a Sysco burger because it was very apparent that is where everything came from.

The patty was obviously preformed, and was low quality meat to boot, while the bacon was your standard razor thin slices of something bacon-like. Neither one of these items bothered me too much, as such food of this quality is unfortunately the norm and not the exception.

What really bothered me about this burger were the vegetable additions, namely the lettuce and onion. Instead of a nice crisp leaf of lettuce, the bun was filled with preshredded iceberg, and instead of sweet and crisp onions, they were limp and bitter, telling me that they had probably been pulled out of the ground a year ago.

Overall there wasn't anything about this burger I could complain about, nothing was obscenely gross tasting, and nothing was wrong, but I found the burger so uninspired, it was as if it had been put together by someone with less pride in their job than the burger assemblers at Wendy's.

My final rating of this food is one of the worst I can give, I determined that the burger was not worth the calories contained within and didn't finish it.

Idaho's Stop-As-Yield law

Local bicyclist B.J. Smith recently tweeted an article about Idaho's Stop-as-yield law.

To quickly sum up the law (you should read the article anyway,) the law allows bicyclists to roll through a stop sign,

when a cyclist approaches an intersection controlled by a stop sign, the cyclist must slow to “a reasonable speed,” but is not obligated to stop unless doing so is “required for safety.” After yielding to any vehicle that has the right of way, the cyclist may proceed.

The points raised by the article all make a lot of sense,

[Stop signs] reduce [safety] by requiring cyclists to enter the intersection after a stop, with no momentum, which makes them less stable and poorly positioned to execute evasive maneuvers, if necessary.

I see two points there were not mentioned in the article, firstly is improve the efficiency of the auto traffic at an intersection by decreasing the amount of time necessary for a bicycle to clear the intersection, and in turn decreasing how long opposed automobiles must remain stopped.

Secondly, it increases safety by making bicycle traffic more predictable. It makes standard what many cyclists (and cars as well) do already, the rolling stop. By officially stating bike can perform a rolling stop in lieu of a complete stop, it makes it easier to predict what is going to happen when a car and a bike approach an intersection.

However, I would be interested in hearing what impact such laws have on the motored segment of traffic. Do laws like this make driver's feel like they should have the right to roll through stop signs thus causing more accidents, or does it enforce a set of rules for rolling stops thus decreasing accidents?