AudioBlogger

Newest off the blocks from Google: AudioBlogger.

Basically, you connect your blog to a number, and you can call their given number from any phone, leave a voice message, and the audiofile will be posted to your blog.

This is (a) really cool; and (b) pretty useless. At least I doubt I'll ever use it. At least not constructively. But...well...here goes nothing:

(I just phoned in and recorded that through my phone.)

Get Hype

This is going to be an awesome movie! Check out the offical website. Just watch the trailer!

"Dark and difficult times lie ahead. Soon, we must all face the choice between what is right, and what is easy."



To quote Logan: "nov. 18th accorind to some other website; 107 days, 13hrs, and 55minutes".





Logan later added: "damn she's hot".

Quite Frankly with Steven A. Smith

You may have read Rell's Preview and/or Jeff's endorsement of the Steven A. Smith's new show on ESPN, Quite Frankly. And I have to admit, after hearing such good things about Steven A.'s hosting The Jim Rome show better than Jim Rome, and seeing the commercials for Quite Frankly, I was quite excited about the show.

I just finished watching the first show, and I'm turning in mixed reviews. First of all, I'm not a big fan of the format. I didn't want Steven A. do what everybody is already doing (ie, the sports arguing show for people with ADD, where each topic is done in 2 minutes), but I'm just not crazy about a true talk show. He had one guest, Allen Iverson (who I will touch more on in a minute), whom he interviewed over the course of the hour.

I really didn't like Steven A. when he first burst onto the ESPN screen as a sports writer for the Philadelphia Inquirer. I found him obnoxious. But over time, he mellowed (slightly), and I got more used to his style, and now I am a big fan. This format, I feel, in a way, under utilizes his personality. I was excited to hear Steven A. talk, and instead I more just got him leading AI.

That being said, despite the fact that I was really down on the show when I first saw the format, I thoroughly enjoyed the show. Much of this was due to AI. I had never really paid much attention to AI before the Pistons/Sixers series in this years NBA playoffs first round. I left that series with a true respect for Iverson for the way he truly cares about playing hard and leaving it all on the court. After this interview, I respect Iverson even more. AI gets a bad rap through the media because he has a lot of the outward traits that white, middle-upper class America associates with "thug": his cornrows, his diction, his Tupac camo shirt and baggy shorts, etc. He has had run-ins with the law, and the entire "practice" fiasco. Despite this, Iverson is a (relatively) humble guy, who over the course of the show discussed how much he loved his mother, came to tears when they played a clip of (his former coach) Larry Brown talking about him, and talked about how the media will grab onto anything, and draw their own conclusions to the ends of producing a hot story.

I left the show with a couple questions:

• AI is one of the most interesting/misunderstood/lightning-rod characters in sports. Can the show stay interesting for an entire hour as the guests become less interesting (which they must, as it is a daily show)?
• Will the show adjust the format to compensate for less interesting personalities?
• Can it maintain a daily interest?
• As the guests are less controversial, will we get to see more of Steven A.?

Overall, I found the show entertaining, and I will definitely tune in again to figure out the answers to these questions...

Google Maps (Now even better)

Google maps just recently released its newest innovation to complement the map and satellite views: the hybrid view. This view puts the street names onto the satellite picture. It's pretty damn cool. Here is a bit of a screenshot of directions to my old apartment:



maps.google.com continues to blow mapquest out of the water...

Book Review: Freakonomics

The book has been very successful over the last year, and after reading it, it is easy to see why. Steven D. Levitt is a well-known Economist who currently works (teaching and researching) at the University of Chicago (who gets a big "boo" for rejecting me from grad school...). Anyway, his book takes a chance to look at interesting questions about society from an analytical point of view. He focuses on incentives; why do people do things? What's in it for them?

The reason this book has been such a success is that it is incredibly interesting. A quick look at the chapter titles show that you are not looking at some kind of econ text book:
Chapter 1: What Do School Teachers and Sumo Wrestlers Have in Common?
Chapter 2: How Is the Ku Klux Klan Like a Group of Real-Estate Agents?
Chapter 3: Why Do Drug Dealers Still Live with Their Moms?
Chapter 4: Where Have All the Criminals Gone?
Chapter 5: What Makes a Perfect Parent?
Chapter 6: Would a Roshanda by Any Other Name Smell as Sweet?

Levitt finds large batches of data and explains the result carefully, mentioning constantly that correlation is not the same thing as causation (or, in other words, that just because X and Y happen together a lot, it does not mean that X caused Y, or that Y caused X). He uses Chicago city school test scores, an undercover drug dealer, and California birth certificates, among other things, as data.

I have only one bad thing to say about the book. Between chapters are excerpts from newspaper articles written about Dr. Levitt, and most of these make him sound like God's gift to the earth. I do think that Levitt is brilliant, and thoroughly enjoyed his book. But I got that opinion by reading the book, and I don't need you telling me that you are brilliant mixed in. Let your work do that.

Overall, this is one of those books that just makes you say "I have never thought of that like that before."



Check out excerpts at:
www.freakonomics.com/