Six Cups of Coffee

As you may or may not know, I'm part of a group of writers and artists who produce content for an upcoming magazine. We call it Whale. 

We have a Kickstarter going to help us get the first issues printed. It's not a large print run; about 200 copies or so. It will be produced quarterly. Whale will contain feature articles, opinion pieces, essays, photography, poetry, and other kinds of art I probably can't think of or don't know the names for. 

We've done a lot of work for the magazine. Corissa, our senior editor, has done loads of work on it. She stays up late, she wakes up early, and spends most of her free time on getting it all to happen. The rest of us have worked to produce some of the best content for the magazine. 

While everyone who knows me well is aware that I don't buy physical media, there's something to be said for stuff like this being in print. Print design can be beautiful. Take McSweeney's, for instance. While it's awesome in digital, it's not the same thing. In print, it's a purer form of art, and gorgeous when held in the unmistakable medium of reality. 

We want to bring Whale to print, and to your hands. We're dedicated to creating a special experience for your hands and eyes four times a year. We're from all walks of life: we work in publishing, IT, schools, retail. We all have in common the burning to make something. 

And that, my friends and readers, is important to further. This isn't a giant publishing house; it's just us. And we need your help. I mean that. We need you. If you can spare as little as $5.00 for our Kickstarter, we'd be eternally grateful. It helps. Everything helps. Even sharing this plea helps. 

The act of art and creation is so important. Help us do it, and you'll be a part of that.

PS: This isn't part of the official "Kickstarter rewards", but if you donate $100 or more, mention this post and your address, and I'll send you a free copy of With a Net, my Internet memoir.

RIPTA, the Rhode Island Public Transit Authority, has had budget problems. A lot of them, and over a long period of time. In years past, the Authority has dealt with the issue of budget deficits by cutting service; in the last 30 years, fixed routes in the state bus system have faced cuts 28 times, leaving many area riders with less and less transportation options. 

During the last round of budget cuts, which necessitated finding just over $4 million in potential budget reductions, instead of cutting service, they cut bloat; over 30 non-transportation jobs are being eliminated. 

“Faced with a staggering budget deficit, we had to make tough decisions regarding the structure and operation of our organization,” said RIPTA's CEO, Charles Odimgbe. “Like any business operating in these difficult times, we had to streamline our operations to most effectively carry out RIPTA’s mission, as the state’s “Mobility Manager,” by operating in a fiscally responsible manner for our riders.” 

Obviously, this is a double-edged sword; no one wants to see people out of work. Since RIPTA is only funded in part publicly, it relies on rider fares to keep its operation running. To that end, Odimgbe also pledged to hire twenty new drivers by April 2012. Earlier this fall, RIPTA cut service one more time, but it seems that, according to Odimgbe's statements, that won't be happening again.  “We find ourselves hard pressed to make any more cuts to service at a time when people, many facing major economic need, depend on us for transportation."

Acknowledging the economic pressure of low-income riders, he added, "and at a $2 fare, we currently have one of the highest fares in the country."

While job losses are bad, hiring or keeping jobs at the expense of transportation routes isn't the way to go. Neither is raising fares. RIPTA's fares are high, and although there is statewide service that is extensive, more increases in the price of transportation for less service would make it even more difficult for low-income residents to get to work and do other things they aready have difficulty doing. It would cause further hardship in an economic climate that already fosters plenty of privation. The RIPTA board's decision was the right one to make, and should make other cities and states look at the problem differently than they have been.

Before I start, let me say that instead of reading this, you should probably be watching the House Judiciary committee's hearings on SOPA if you're so concerned about it. 

If you can't be bo(the)red to watch, then by all means, proceed here.

SOPA, the "Stop Online Piracy Act" bill that is before the House Judiciary Committee today, is bad. I think everyone gets that. Does everyone understand why it's bad, though? 

Reading through the bill, here's what it does:

• Title I of the bill says that if the Attorney General finds a foreign web site that is providing services to US residents in the US that facilitate the theft of United States intellectual property, it must get a court order to go to Internet service providers and US-run search engines and ask them to stop resolving those domains inside the US. It cannot require them to do so if there is unreasonable cost to do so or if it is not technologically feasible to do so. In other words, if there is a court order to stop The Pirate Bay from providing links to torrents to people in the US, you won't be able to access the site anymore directly, and because payment processors can be made to stop transacting with said business, you won't be able to, say, donate money to TPB. People can debate the legitimacy of this, but my position on this is the same as speeding: I don't care if you do it, and you can debate whether it should be illegal and take steps to make it legal, but don't complain when you get a ticket; you were breaking the law. Copyright law sometimes sucks, but work on changing that if you think it impedes your life.
• Title II is the one we're all up in arms about. It makes a change to existing law to include streaming public performances of copyrighted works. What this means is that if you record yourself singing Lady Gaga's "Pokerface" on YouTube, you can be charged with piracy. It's a ridiculous amendment to existing law that already makes putting copyrighted materials available for streaming illegal; adding language to extend that to amateur performances that have no commercial gain for the person performing is ridiculous. 

There are no other titles in the bill, though there are some other propositions that aren't objectionable (like protecting people from counterfeit drug sales over the Internet). These two are the ones that people are talking about.

Now, the reason I bring this up is that while Title II is horrendous and should be stricken from the proposed legislation, there is a lot of hyperbole about what it does, and it seems to me that hurts the cause of those who are trying to bring the problem with the bill to light. When someone makes the claim (as I erroneously did in a tweet) that it censors the Internet, that you can be stopped from saying anything online, it brings ridicule to the movement to stop the bill from becoming law. 

This is not uncommon when something like this comes to public consciousness. Exaggeration of the issues at hand is extraordinarily standard when discussing proposed legislation, and it's usually found in media that doesn't highlight what the language of a bill actually says. Take, for example, this article from The Tucson Citizen with the headline "SOPA (A bill that will send you to prison for watching YouTube videos) is being voted on today". SOPA will not send you to jail for watching YouTube, and when you say things like that, no one of importance cares about anything you have to say after that. 

So, it's my hope that as we discuss things like SOPA and other legislation that affects major parts of our lives, that we stick to facts. Facts can have emotion attached to them, but facts need to drive the train, and emotional hyperbole needs to remain a small part of the cargo. Reasonable people can discuss facts on their merits, and I think--or at least hope--we're smart enough to let that atmosphere rule.

Back in June, I had an idea for a book that expanded on this essay that I wrote a year before. I shared the idea with some friends, who were probably blowing smoke up my ass when they said, "dude! That would be awesome!" 

Smoke or no smoke, they're good friends.

Anyway, months later, here it is. With a Net: A Life Lived Online is a memoir about my experiences with online communications ranging from BBSes to MMORPGs, LambdaMOO to Facebook. Interspersed with other personal anecdotes and history, I'd like to think it's a good, quick read. You can buy it on this page.

Inspired by Wil Wheaton's decision to keep all his stuff DRM-free, I'm doing the same here. All ebook editions are free of copy protection. (Doesn't mean I want you to sell it on your own site, though, or put it up on file-sharing!) In addition, $1 from each sale gets donated to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, because I think they do good work. They're like the ACLU of the digital world. (There's a print edition available, too, and the same $1 EFF donation applies.)

Anyway, I hope you like it. Feedback is always welcome! Enjoy.

I haven't written in this space in awhile. It seems that it takes the tragic loss of an innovator to spur me to find time to write something here.

Andy Ihnatko sums it up best. "Yesterday, I lived in a world with Steve Jobs in it," he wrote. "Tonight, I don't." Indeed, that's no small sentiment. Today, Mr. Jobs succumbed to his battle with cancer, and the world lost a visionary man. 

"Well," I can hear some of you thinking, "he made things, big deal. He didn't do anything truly great." To that, I ask you to explain that to the grandparents who can talk to their grandchildren face to face with their iPhones, or the mom who doesn't know how to use computers compiling albums of photos on their Macs in iPhoto. Explain to my dad how his iPad isn't truly magical, allowing him to do everything he does while in bed where he's having his physical therapy, from banking and bill paying to watching TV to reading the countless books he reads. 

Sure, you can do these things on devices other than ones made by Apple. But these people I mention are people who don't have an easy time with regular computers. The grandparents have no idea how to configure a PC or an Android phone to videochat. The mom is computer illiterate but learned how to make beautiful photos at her neighborhood Apple Store. My dad can't easily see things on a laptop, but can do everything super-easily on his iPad. 

Yes, Steve Jobs really did change the world, no matter what you think of him. He envisioned technology as a way to enable people to do incredible things with their own creativity. And not just professional movie editors and expert music producers - he wanted everyone, from grandparents and moms and even my dad - to be able to make beautiful things, to be creative. He saw a world made better by technology. Fortunately, his drive to see that obsession come to fruition resulted in one of the most innovative companies ever to start in America.

I am writing this on a MacBook Air, one of the most beautiful notebook computers I've ever used. I have Deep Space Nine going on the Apple TV sitting in front of the TV, occupying a few square inches of space. I can pause it with my iPhone when I get up to get a beverage, and I've been checking various tributes and social networks on my iPad. In fact, I interact with all these things every day. The iPad usually starts my day (along with coffee) while I read the news, because it's like holding the web as though it were a small newspaper. My iPhone comes with me on smoke breaks while I check my to-do lists for the day, or check in with Twitter and Facebook to see what my friends are up to. If I'm in the middle of a great book on my iPad, I can pick up where I left off on my iPhone. At night, I sit with my MacBook Air to research and write my book. Sometimes I even throw it in my small bag and head down to the river to write; I'm able to still do research online thanks to my iPhone doing duty as a mobile hotspot. I take my iPad with me on my lunchbreaks, because who knows what I might want to do... I could keep working on my book, or watch TV, or check out my RSS feeds. On Sundays it keeps me tuned in to the day's football, and on Monday nights I can even watch the game if I'm out on it.

Sure, you can do all those things on other devices, but the integration of everything in the Apple ecosystem makes it better. It makes it easier. It makes it fun. And it constantly puts me in a state of awe. However, Steve didn't just do it for the "wow factor", he wanted these features because they help us be the best we can be. So, technology could be a tool, and why not make it a beautiful, easy to use tool? He made that happen, and millions of people appreciate that every day.

My friend Christopher said something to the effect of even though he's not an Apple guy, he appreciated that Steve's innovative visioin made the rest of the world work that much harder. He's an Android guy, and acknolwedges that he couldn't be were it not for Apple. What a testament. How many other companies have had founders and CEOs you can say that about? Not many, for sure. Steve's philosophy of not caring what the other guys are doing allowed Apple to put out some insanely great products that revolutionized the categories they're in, and pushed the rest of the industry to keep up and compete. 

He was a unique individual, not in that corny snowflake way, but in a once in a lifetime kind of way that someone comes along and disrupts the flow of the world. Yes, he did that. Things will never be the same because of him, and they'll never be the same without him. He'll be missed, and he will never be forgotten.