Unquiet Desperation

Ever since I got involved with Podiobooks.com, people have asked when they might see fiction from me hit the Interwebs. Today’s the day.

If you head over to The Secret Lair, you will find the first episode of a work of serialized fiction called Tricksters.  It’s based on a writing prompt from two years ago, when Kris and I were meeting each morning at a local coffee shop to write. The ideas implied by the original piece have been lurking around in my head since then, and as one of my big goals for the year is to work on my practice of writing, I decided to jump in with both feet.

I freely admit that this a novice effort: I’ve long talked about writing fiction, and like many people, I’ve gotten caught up in buying books, reading blogs, listening to podcasts…doing anything but the actual work. That ends now.

Please check out the story. I welcome your thoughts.

Mark Pilgrim’s “Tinkerer’s Sunset” is an excellent article discussing the chilling effect that so-called “appliances” portend for the generation of computer enthusiasts. It’s a thoughtful reflection on both trends in the law regarding the freedom to tinker:

When DVD Jon was arrested after breaking the CSS encryption algorithm, he was charged with “unauthorized computer trespassing.” That led his lawyers to ask the obvious question, “On whose computer did he trespass?” The prosecutor’s answer: “his own.”

If that doesn’t make your heart skip a beat, you can stop reading now.

And on the roadblocks which new “appliance” devices impose on would-be tinkerers:

The iPad is an attractive, thoughtfully designed, deeply cynical thing. It is a digital consumption machine. As Tim Bray and Peter Kirn have pointed out, it’s a device that does little to enable creativity…

The tragedy of the iPad is that it truly seems to offer a better model of computing for many people — perhaps the majority of people. Gone are the confusing concepts and metaphors of the last thirty years of computing. Gone is the ability to endlessly tweak and twiddle towards no particular gain. The iPad is simple, straightforward, maintenance-free…

The thing that bothers me most about the iPad is this: if I had an iPad rather than a real computer as a kid, I’d never be a programmer today. I’d never have had the ability to run whatever stupid, potentially harmful, hugely educational programs I could download or write. I wouldn’t have been able to fire up ResEdit and edit out the Mac startup sound so I could tinker on the computer at all hours without waking my parents.

Now, I am aware that you will be able to develop your own programs for the iPad, the same way you can develop for the iPhone today. Anyone can develop! All you need is a Mac, XCode, an iPhone “simulator,” and $99 for an auto-expiring developer certificate. The “developer certificate” is really a cryptographic key that (temporarily) allows you (slightly) elevated access to… your own computer. And that’s fine — or at least workable — for the developers of today, because they already know that they’re developers. But the developers of tomorrow don’t know it yet. And without the freedom to tinker, some of them never will.

If you’re like him or like me…one of the guys who got his start tinkering around with a computer in your basement, finding your way by intuition and discovery, please read his full post and pass it on.

The only value I see to the iPad is that it will force other companies to innovate and improve on the concept. Perhaps we can even hope for openness.

I cannot deny that it’s pretty. It’s very pretty. Shiny, too. Maybe I’m just getting old, but pretty doesn’t impress me much anymore.  From what I can see, it’s not terribly useful and at the price point of $500…ahem…$499 for a measly 16G of space, it’s just not worth the money.

I also object to the inability use the device in any manner I choose. Apple’s need to control MY hardware and software is intrusive and offensive.

From Thomas Gideon’s iPad is Yet Another DRM Crippled Device:

I have vastly different expectations of a tablet, even one as stripped down as the iPad appears to be. How does Apple justify hobbling the device? Wireless carriers have begun offering comparably stripped down computers, netbooks, that are still open to the end user installing whatever they like. I might concede that a single distribution channel makes the experience better. And Apple is clearly more about experience these days than substance.

But why does the experience of some have to preclude the ability to exercise owner override? Would the App Store be any less used if power users could still install their own bundles? If the arguments Apple makes about their captive channel really hold water, why not open the device to both and see if the market agrees? Allowing users to install simple application bundles like on a regular old Mac would be the shortest way to turn around much of the negative PR the approval process for the App Store has generated almost since day one.

I have no doubt that people will buy it. There’s a market out there for it, and people will line up for the New Shiny. It’s sad that people will give up freedom and hard-earned cash for something so…vapid.

I found the following article interesting and, frankly, accurate.

Protestors: iPad is nothing more than a golden calf of DRM

Steve Jobs may have descended from the mountaintop today with Moses Tablet in hand, but a group of protesters were waiting in the foothills with a simple message: the iPad isn’t a divine revelation, but a golden calf.

Members of the Free Software Foundation staged a small protest outside today’s Apple event in San Francisco, making the case against Apple’s use of DRM. The group’s four-foot signs were headed with the message “Entering Apple Restriction Zone” and laid out the tablet’s detriments:

‘Oral sex’ definition prompts dictionary ban in US schools | Books | guardian.co.uk

Dictionaries have been removed from classrooms in southern California schools after a parent complained about a child reading the definition for “oral sex”.

Merriam Webster’s 10th edition, which has been used for the past few years in fourth and fifth grade classrooms (for children aged nine to 10) in Menifee Union school district, has been pulled from shelves over fears that the “sexually graphic” entry is “just not age appropriate”, according to the area’s local paper.

The dictionary’s online definition of the term is “oral stimulation of the genitals”. “It’s hard to sit and read the dictionary, but we’ll be looking to find other things of a graphic nature,” district spokeswoman Betti Cadmus told the paper.

This, from my pal SuperJesus: