10 Thoughts for May 24, 2014

1. The original backers (including tech companies who'd called for such reform) of a House bill to scale back NSA domestic spying have bailed because of the amendments to it.  You see, if you look closely at it, the bill now codifies bulk collection of data with very few limits by using vague language to describe the limitations.  This is the same sort of wool over the eyes of Congress that happened when the Patriot Act came up for a reauthorization vote.  The NSA and President Bush said it did one thing, but the vague language codified what had been previously illegal.  Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on...Congress.
2. Are you paying attention to Mark Cuban's latest foot in mouth episode?  Let me sum it up for you: In trying to explain why he's bigoted and that he's comfortable with his level of bigotry, he ended up realizing that he was a bigot and apologized for being a bigot.
3. And unlike Mark Cuban, I don't cross the street to avoid anyone.  Never have.
4. Google fixed Chrome when casting video from a tab.  The last month or so, casting a tab with video -- such as Colbert Report -- then trying to go to full-screen, would not allow you to use your computer for anything else, otherwise it would automatically resize itself back to normal.  Now, everything actually works better than before the bug was introduced.
5. I think it's funny, that Republican politicians can't figure out shifting demographic trends.  Whether it is immigration reform or just bad targeting of money, Republicans just can't seem to embrace data that contradicts their echo chamber information.
6. Boil order for Portland.  Meh.  What we didn't know for the last three days, was that there were two other positive tests for e coli, yet we were all drinking the water then.  Today, following the boil order, has anything really changed?  No.  But people ran to the stores and cleared out all the bottled water, such that chains were redirecting supplies from outside of the affected area.  Panic and hording.  Classic.
7. I'm not sure what Microsoft's Surface 3 is, in an existential way.  Chromebooks, we know, are targeted at the low end (for now) as a thin, mobile, sync'd cloud client.  Eventually though, if you're running on a gigabit network, top end hardware can be useful.  Is the Surface 3 a replacement of ultrabooks or laptops?  It's too weak to beat out high end laptops, though.
8. The natural comparison of the Surface 3 is the 12.2" Samsung Galaxy Note Pro.  Both come with a stylus, both have 12" screens and they're priced at the same level.  But the Note Pro's screen has a far better resolution (2560x1600 vs 2160x1440), is 1.1mm thinner than the Surface 3, the Note Pro is also 47g lighter, and again, battery life is substantially longer (13 hrs vs 9) with the Note Pro.  The only spec where the Surface 3 wins out, is the CPU.  But if a top end CPU is your desire, why would you want to settle for a device running a power-sipping CPU?  I'd want a separate, dedicated 17.3" laptop running an i7-4900MQ.  So that's the issue right there: The Surface 3 is a compromise device that does not excel in anything.  In fact, it leaves out some things that the Note Pro has: GPS and LED flash.
9. I'm calling bullshit on the NYT's assertions that Amazon is engaged in monopolistic behavior by holding off Hatchette titles from pre-ordering.  Hatchette was one of the publishers caught by the DoJ in the Apple price-fixing scandal.  Hatchette, Apple and the other major publishers forced Amazon (and all other retailers) to use the agency model for minimum prices.  In other words, consumers were being hurt by Hatchette limiting our choices through the elimination of price competition.  In the case of Amazon limiting Hatchette titles, it does not harm consumers as all of the other retailers have their titles available for pre-order, allowing price-conscious shoppers to find a lower price and to place their orders months in advance.  Labeling Hatchette as a victim, is rather pathetic on the part of the NYT.
10. I'm deeply troubled and concerned that the Obama Administration isn't standing up for Eric Shinseki, much like how the Bush Administration basically trashed Shinseki's assessment of the poor prospects of going to war in Iraq.  The allegation has been that one or more VA facilities falsified documents to cover up the actual wait times.  Even as the investigation has expanded into many more facilities, it does not imply that the cover up was systemic, but that they are looking to see if there was evidence of systemic problems or not.  Just because he doesn't emote outrage, doesn't mean you should be outraged at him.