[The Working Title Blog]

Transparency: The Ultimate Check and Balance

2018-06-28T20:20:00.001-05:00

"Unwarranted government surveillance is an intrusion on basic human rights that threatens the very foundations of a democratic society."
-- Tim Berners Lee, Wired

Take just two minutes of your time, right now, to help what the Atlantic called “perhaps the most diverse collection of groups in the modern history of American politics.” (There aren't many issues that the ACLU, Green Party, the Tea Party Association, and Occupy Wallstreet groups--just to name a few--can all agree on... but this is one of them.) Add your name to the 524.600+ signatures at StopWatching.Us to let Congress know this is not okay.

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
-- Benjamin Franklin

Checks and balances don't work when they operate in total secrecy; Transparency is the ultimate check and balance. If our elected officials are doing things we do not like or agree with, we are able to vote them out... but we have to be able to know what it is, exactly, they are doing. Would you be comfortable with it if police operated in total secrecy? If every court room, Congress, and the White House operated in complete secrecy? If the Constitution and Bill of Rights were classified documents, would you just take the government's word for it if they assured you that you *did* have rights... but they just couldn't tell you what they were because people might try to take advantage of them? This is too big of an issue to operate entirely behind closed doors.

"[The National Security Agency's] capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn’t matter. There would be no place to hide."
-- Senator Frank Church, in 1975, on Surviellance State evils.

With just your e-mail, name, address, and zip code, you're sending a letter to Congress asking for three things:

Reform the USA PATRIOT Act, the state secrets privilege, and the FISA Amendments Act to make clear that blanket surveillance of the Internet activity and phone records of any person residing in the U.S. is prohibited by law;
Create a special committee to investigate, report, and reveal to the public the extent of this domestic spying and create specific recommendations for legal and regulatory reform to end unconstitutional surveillance;
Hold accountable those public officials who are found to be responsible for this unconstitutional surveillance.

And if these programs are truly just the "modest encroachments on privacy," as President Obama has assured us, then it should really be no problem to accommodate these requests.

"No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks."
-- UN Declaration on Human Rights

Sign your name.

Share this with your family and friends and ask them to do the same.

HBO Won't Shut Up and Take My Money

2013-02-02T03:22:00.005-06:00

Netflix CEO says their "goal is to become HBO faster than HBO can become us." Well, personally, I'm hoping they succeed... especially in the realm of original series. Mostly because I want to see HBO lose. I want to see them wither and crumble.

HBO has always had phenomenal original series because they can take risks and make shows that will captivate, entertain, and push the limits with worrying about ratings and sponsors and viewer demographics and selling ad-time... which are huge factors that network shows have to constantly consider.

But HBO has failed to adapt to the evolving and rapidly growing digital world. No, worse than that: they have straight out *refused* to adapt. Want to watch one of their series? Get an HBO cable subscription. Or wait until it's out on DVD/Bluray and buy it. HBO series' aren't even available for purchase on iTunes. HBO's series aren't even available for purchase on iTunes.

Now, while they DO have a "streaming" service, HBO Go, it is a joke. Because not only must you already have a standard HBO cable subscription but it costs an addition $10/month! But the CEO of HBO was asked when, given the growing trend of people "cable-cutting" (ditching cable subscriptions and relying on services like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime Instant Video services), if/when HBO Go will be made to non-cable subscribers, he replied that cable-cutting isn't a "real thing," and that the number of people ditching cable in favor of streaming isn't significant and it won't catch on.

Yet, year after year, the most pirated and torrented shows are HBO series. HBO shows are some of the most-watched shows in the world... but the majority of those viewers pirated it to watch it. Why? Largely because HBO cable subscriptions aren't even available in a lot of countries, but the people in those countries still know good television when they see it. With literally no legal means to watch it, the only option remaining is to pirate it. But in the US? It's because HBO won't provide convenient and legitimate methods of distribution. It's the same phenomenon that the music industry went through: people wanted digital music, they wanted single tracks, they wanted it quickly and simply. No legitimate method existed, so they pirated. Fast forward to iTune, Spotify, Last.fm, etc., and music piracy is way way way down. Why? Because now it's easier for people to get their music legitimately than it is to go through the hassle of pirating it.

The only possible reason that I can conceive of for HBO refusing to embrace digital distribution is that they believe doing so would lead to a loss of their cable subscriptions. They must believe if people could purchase the shows on iTunes or use HBO Go without a subscription, people will have no reason to keep their cable subscription so they'll cancel it and their revenue will drop. That must be the reasoning they are using in order to justify it, because there is no other explanation why they should not. If they didn't believe this was true, then what disadvantage would they have from selling their shows on iTunes or allowing non-HBO-subscribing people from subscribing to HBO Go at a higher price than HBO-subscribers? HBO Go is proof that they clearly already have the means and capability to provide streaming content on a plethora of devices and platforms.

Just like the music industry, HBO is afraid. They are afraid to break their current distribution model. This is the model they know and have always known, and it is scary--as a company and especially as a CEO--to decide to break that format and venture into new waters. So, instead, HBO will play it the way they see "safe" and do nothing. Eventually this will catch up with them, though... especially if Netflix becomes a formidable rival when it comes to original series. They will find themselves with slowing growth and slowing profits and that will turn into falling growth and falling profits. At this point, they may decide to go the RIAA route and start suing people that are pirating their shows... and, just like the RIAA discovered, this will do more harm than good. It will be negative publicity and harm their corporate image, especially once 80 year grandmothers that don't even own a computer inevitably get slapped with lawsuits... just like what happened with the RIAA. They will discover that you can't intimidate consumers into buying (or in this case, subscribing) your product instead of pirating it because they would rather just not have it at all. Most people who pirate don't do it because they don't want to pay for it, they do it because it is easier.

So once lawsuits and intimidation fails to revive their bottom line, they will either be forced to adapt in order to survive, just as the music industry was forced to do, or they'll be stubborn, keep the current business model but think they can revive their numbers with some new shows or lower subscription costs or some other crap that may appear to work in the short-term but ultimately fail, fail, fail. The creative talent that HBO once housed for their original series will see brighter futures, welcoming arms, and a younger, more modern, and wider audience at places like Netflix... a company that helped to shape the way people can consume media and entertainment instead of dismiss it and shun it.

Screw you, HBO, because you won't shut up and take my money.

Innovation in Technology

2012-12-28T10:19:00.003-06:00

Reading Wired's recent interview with tech mogul Tim O'Reilly and he makes a couple of important points about innovation, growth, and the patent/copyright system in the tech industry.

Excerpt:

TIM O'REILLY: Everybody wants to foster entrepreneurship, but we have to think about the preconditions for entrepreneurship. You grow great crops in great soil. And the soil is the commons. Increasingly, we have monopolistic companies that try to take as much as they can for themselves. And we have a patent and copyright regime that makes sure nothing goes back into the commons unless by an extraordinary act of generosity. This is not fertile soil for innovation. [...] Pursing this path is not only altruistic. If companies don't think systemically enough--if they try to capture too much of the value--eventually innovation moves somewhere else.
WIRED: If you could pick a company that needs to hear this, which would it be?
TIM: Apple. They are clearly on the wrong path. They file patent suits that claim nobody else can make a device with multitouch. But they didn't invent multitouch. They just pushed the ball forward and applied it to the phone. Now they want to say, "OK, we got value from someone else, but it stops now." That attitude creates lockup in the industry. And I think Apple is going to lose its mojo precisely because they try to own too much.

Although I'm sure he has put it more eloquently than I have, it's somewhat validating when an industry expert with the pedigree of O'Reilly shares your point of view.

My issues with the patent and copyright system (and how it relates to and is being practiced in the field of technology) isn't some socialistic, anti-Ayn-Rand/Atlas Shrugged, free-for-all where nobody's work is protected... the problem is that the current copyright and patent systems were modeled and established on a purely analog world which is now being super-imposed onto a radically different digital one. User interfaces and lines of code are far different from the engineered mechanical innovations the patent system was designed to protect. Patents were meant to protect a specific method of implementation, not the end result.

Take the mouse-trap, as an example: The USPO has issues over 4,400 patents for mouse traps. Each of those devices patented has the exact same end result (more or less): capturing or killing a mouse. Those patents meant that competitors had to come up with and develop new ways and methods of achieving the same results. The modern, tech-industry patent equivalent would be ONE patent for "a device which traps, captures, or ensnares rodents or other small household pests," and there would then only be *one* manufacturer of mouse-traps on the market. Would that *one* mouse-trap manufacturer have to make the best, most effective, and least expensive mouse-trap possible? Of course not. Why would they?

Monopolies--whether they're legally sanctioned or otherwise--stifle innovation, and innovation means economic growth. It's time we update the patent and copyright systems for the digital ages before things really get out of control and the damage cannot be undone.

On Gun Control and the NRA

2012-12-03T23:21:00.005-06:00

As a hunter myself, I feel like I want to support the NRA... at least in principle. In practice, however, I find myself less and less able to do so. I'm generally and morally opposed to the methods, media spin, and propaganda tactics they have begun to employ (or maybe they always have, I just was too young and/or naive to see it for what it was?). They should represent responsible and practical ownership of firearms, not an off-shoot or subset of the Republican Party.

I think nearly everyone would agree that there are simply some people in our society that we do *not* want, nor should be allowed to, own firearms... people with a history of violent behavior, for example. It's out societal responsibility to keep firearms out of criminals' hands and keep them in the hands of responsible citizens. Yet any reasonable attempt to do so is met with outrage and fury by the NRA, heralded as the first step in abolishing our rights to firearms. "They want us to WAIT 15 days before purchasing a handgun?! THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE OUR GUNS AWAY!" It's sensationalism, in the very definition. (Sometimes I really wonder if the NRA isn't just being just by gun and ammunition manufacturers drum up sales by stirring up panic about Democrats wanting to take away all of their guns.)

In Hunter's Safety classes, the entire emphasis is the incredible power that firearms have and they attempt to impart how to use that power, safely and responsibly. There are no two ways about it: firearms are incredibly dangerous and powerful... things clearly obvious by any mass-shooting. In the wrong hands and used for the wrong purposes, these are things which can shatter the lives of entire families--not to mention the lives they can end. How can one rationally argue this is a power that needs less control?

And the old "If everybody carried guns..." argument is a logical fallacy... it's the equivalent of saying "If every country in the world had nuclear missiles and ICBMs, there'd never be another war." Take the Colorado shooting: Imagine if dozens of movie-goers pulled out their guns to fire back. What are the chances any of those people would have actually shot the shooter? It is dark, packed with people, and filled with smoke from the smoke grenades. How many more people would have been injured or killed by the stray bullets? It's just flawed logic. The people who do these types of things are rarely thinking logically, let alone even sane; they don't do it with the expectation of surviving to begin with, so why would armed civilians be deterrence?

In reality, the NRA should be working with politicians--on BOTH sides--to help create reasonable legislature for gun control that keeps them out of the hands of those who would use them to harm others and to keep them in the hands of hunters and other responsible citizens. Yes, these laws might be a slight inconvenience to responsible citizens but, as hunters and gun-owners, can't we accept it as being necessary to help ensure that the guns being sold are going to the right people, people who will use them responsibly? Wouldn't we have more support--in general--if we had representation of reasonable people were willing to cooperate and reach legislative compromises instead of a group that screamed bloody murder if a politician even mentions guns? One that politicians will actually want to work with on new laws to get support, instead of saying "Well, they'll oppose it no matter what... let's just write whatever we want to write."

The "tl;dr" version:

To steal a quote:

"With great power, comes great responsibility."

Firearms are a great power. And, as hunters and gun-owners, we all have a responsibility to ensure they stay in responsible hands and used properly... a responsibility that doesn't just end with ourselves, keeping them trigger- or breach- locked and in a gun-safe. It extends to ensuring the proper precautions and legislatures are in place to prevent (even more) firearms from falling into the wrong hands... even if that means we are slightly inconvenienced in the process.

The Apple Empire

2011-07-12T18:47:00.000-05:00

I think we need to start asking ourselves: How much can you *really* trust Apple?

Sure, in the beginning they were a relatively honest and trustworthy company. Even their philosophy of completely controlling every aspect---the hardware, marketing, sales, etc.---of their products made some sense. Doing so eliminated the problems which Microsoft had struggled with managing... hardware incompatabilities, driver issues, OS being installed onto--or worse being sold with---sub-par hardware... all of these issues, although not technically nor directly the fault of Microsoft, they become attributed as the fault of the software. (These problems which still exist although the industry has gotten exceedingly better with. Better cooperative development with hardware manufacturers for hardware and drivers, clearer communication of hardware requirements, etc.)

In this early point of the computer industry, Apple's full-control mantra saved itself a lot of headaches. Every Apple computer had hardware which was more than capable of meeting the needs of the OS. Apple chose the hardware and developed drivers specifically for it themselves ensuring the OS would fully function with it. They controlled the marketing, so they ensured that Apple computers were portrayed exactly as they deemed.

The PC market, on the other hand, was a free-for-all. Any company who wanted to could jump in and manufacture components and there were several companies---not just ONE, like with Apple--who might be interested. This free-for-all, although somewhat chaotic in the beginning, many would agree was actually a great thing. Increased competition between companies in the market accelerated innovation and lowered costs. The lower prices and greater availability had a lot to do with the PC gaining a dominant control of the market.

However, being the minority market share that Apple held was a blessing, in a way. With PCs being the predominant system format, it also became the target of hackers and other malicious things. Apple didn't struggle with viruses and malware like Microsoft had (does?) not because the Mac OS is SO much more secure---as some would have you believe---but simple because very few people wasted their time to write a virus that would only work on <10% of the computers it reaches. Out of simple obscurity, a reputation of security began to grow.

But today? Apple computers use the same Intel processors of PCs---and they even advertise the fact they can run BOTH Mac OSX as well as Windows! Following a couple of setbacks with Windows Vista and 64-bit OSes, hardware incompatibilities are rare, with Windows detecting hardware and automatically downloading and installing most drivers all on it's own. Hardware manufacturers now automatically develop 4 different drivers for hardware right from the start: Pre-Vista x86, Pre-Vista x64, Post-Vista x86, and Post-Vista x64. Credit where credit is due: Microsoft has come a long way, working hard to make hardware and driver issues a distant memory... and have been largely successful.

So is Apple's total-control model still advantageous--or even valid--today? Well, I guess it's debatable. They've gained back some ground following their switch to Intel-based CPUs and their "I'm a Mac" marketing blitz. My own experiences with OS X always left me wanting... to me OS X seems over-simplified and made me feel shackled... and I'm not a fan of regularly having to go to command prompt in order to maybe my expectations being built too high by people's praises of Mac's superiority. But that's neither here nor there.

This is a company which only allows it's software to be used on the hardware THEY dictate (and make), who doesn't allow apps that compete with THEIR own software to be in the AppStore, who makes "royal decrees" limiting how you may use the products YOU bought---post-purchase, and are constantly taking measures to enforce these things so that you do not defy them by using YOUR devices in ways that Apple does sanction. (Imagine if Microsoft started trying to control what programs you were allowed to run on your Windows PC? How do you think that one would go over?)

I'm SURE you know about Apple's AppKillSwitch, part of the iPhone OS, right? You know, the thing that allows Apple to remotely disable any app you downloaded onto your device from the AppStore? (Don't bother checking your Settings menu... you can't disable it.) Maybe it's just me, but I don't like the idea of a company telling me what software I am and am not allowed to use on the device I BOUGHT, and I'm REALLY not comfortable about them building in a back-door that allows them to control my device in order to enforce it. But maybe it's just me.

It might also be worth mentioning that Android-based (that's Google's //open-source// operating system) phone sales have overtaken iPhone sales, with more than 300,000 Android devices being activated each day, and Google's Android Market appstore has been gaining massive ground vs. Apple's (heavily policed) AppStore in downloads.

But don't worry, iPhone users... *APPLE* knows what's best for you, so just make sure you update your firmware right away whenever there's a new version... Apple needs to protect you... from yourself. Hey, that's probably why they keep track of your locations. Protection.

Introverts

2011-07-01T12:58:00.000-05:00

I have long known that I was an introvert. I dislike the popular conception of introverts as being shy loners, unable to fit in, so it is not something I often admit to. While I generally enjoy the company of others, I need time by myself to recharge. I generally prefer quiet and solitude as opposed to high-stimuli environments. I would prefer a laid back evening, having a couple of drinks with some close friends opposed to a big party or a crowded bar almost any day.

It wasn't until recently I have come to embrace this introversion aspect of my personality.

Somewhere around four months or so ago, I had taken the Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator. I had taken it once before--with the same result--however this last time I have taken a more serious look at the results. I don't know why the results didn't have any profound meaning for me... perhaps I dismissed it as having some of the Barnum Effect, where, much like in horoscopes, the results are generalized enough that they could apply to pretty much everyone yet still feel personalized. I also was not aware of the influence which the field of psychology had on creating the MBTI, although I did the second time I took it.

New Year's Resolution

2010-12-28T14:25:00.000-06:00

Once or twice each year in December, I *do* consider making a resolution. This is usually triggered by somebody else talking about their resolutions, causing me to wonder if I should come up with a resolution too. Then, following a full 20 to 30 seconds of consideration I still have no resolution and continue on with my life.

But in truth, I kind of have a problem with the whole New Year’s resolution thing. It’s not because I’m a pessimist, either… I really am not. (I am, however, a cynic. There’s a difference.)

People view the New Year as a "new beginning" and a "start fresh," ideas which are held symbolically in this date. Yet why people see such significance on this day is lost on me. The date has changed… but that happens every day. One day to the next, the world is more-or-less then same on Jan 1st as it was the day before.

Why do we wait until this one point in the year for reflection and self-improvement? Why do people believe one day is more of a "fresh" start than other day? Why is it that THIS one date change inspires people and leads them to try and change, to try and improve their own lives? Why do we only celebrate having resolutions for “this year” and on setting resolutions for “next year”? What about this month and next month?

Forget setting goals for the new year. Every *DAY* is a fresh start, a new beginning, a clean slate. Quit procrastinating if there are things you *know* you could or should be doing to improve your life, health, or happiness... start doing them TODAY. Instead of making excuses, saying “I’ll do that… starting in 12 days,” just start now.
Believing a specific day and time of the year is important because it marks a new beginning and a chance to change implies that the other 364 days *aren't*. We miss out and fail to see it that way, so we don’t think to set goals for ourselves and improve ourselves DAILY.

I don't have a problem with the resolution part of the "New Year's Resolution." And I'm not against it if people will only take one day a year to think about self-improvement... I could be wrong in that New Years doesn't take away the significance of each new day; maybe people wouldn't take ANY time for self-reflection and self improvement, if not for New Year's. If so, then the New Year’s Resolution is a boon to humanity, a virtue to society.

My problem? I'm just unable to relate to people holding special importance to New Year and the New Year's Resolution as a new beginning, a time to set out and improve yourself, and to take things on as if from a fresh start. While I, too, believe January 1st *is* a new beginning, a day for self-reflection, and a day to strive for self-improvement... where my beliefs differ is—even though do I believe we all should take time to do those things on January 1st—I believe that January 2nd is a new beginning, a day for self-reflection, and a day to strive for self-improvement. So is January 3rd. And for every day through to December 31st.
We should put the same amount of thought into self-reflection, the same amount of time into better our lives, see the same opportunities for change, and feel the same chance for a fresh start--all of it---the same EACH and every day.

So that’s why New Year’s Resolutions are lost on me. If I feel like I’ve been gaining a little weight, I start paying closer attention to my food and start eating healthier… instead of waiting until the 1st of the month or the 1st of the year, I make a conscious decision to start making changes now. If there is something I know I should be doing, for whatever reason, setting a goal on a certain date isn’t going to make the outcome more successful than making a decision to change right here and now.

So while I may not set myself any “New Year’s Resolutions,” it in no way means that I do not work to improve myself or my life. That’s something I’ve resolved to do a long time ago daily.

And it doesn’t stop me from wishing you a safe and happy New Year.

Working Title

2010-04-14T23:06:00.003-05:00

I've yet to come up with a decent idea for the title of this blog... "YITBOS" did not seem appropriate, as it says nothing of the content or theme of the blog or its posts... but what is the theme?

I thought about something referencing the beginning of a new chapter or part of my life, but that seems a big grandiose or melodramatic. Unlike a story, the chapters of our life are only obvious in hindsight.... so I almost feel deceitful in making that claim. Not that I am lying, but that I don't know whether this is accurate and true, which, to me, making a claim or statement without knowing its validity is close enough to deceit. I do feel as though I may be on the precipice of something significant, but none of it may pan out.

My initial reason, or central idea, is to blog about my experiences while working to obtain my Bachelor of Science in Information Technology through Kaplan University*, online, while still working a full time job. One thing I noticed, while researching online degree programs, was a lack of what I felt was reliable, independent, and unbiased first-hand accounts from students about their experience in the program. I know what it is like attending a traditional university, but how do online programs differ, aside from method of delivery? Online programs appear to be rising in popularity and in reputation, however, I failed to find very much about people's own experiences besides brief blurbs with questions of their authenticity. (I will cover how I came to decide on Kaplan University, even though I ~~had~~ have my apprehensions, in another post.) Seeing this, it is my intention that I might be able to provide one.

Although this intends to be one of the cornerstones, I do not wish it to be the only aspect or theme of this blog, so I do not want an educational-centric title. A title referencing my life or journey would not be accurate as I do not intend to divulge any details of my social life.

So as such, this blog is nameless. It is my hope that as this blog continues to take shape, a certain "theme" will develop and become apparent... maybe then, I will be able to come up with a good title which is also appropriate. Until then, this will be a Working Title. Any suggestions are welcome.

*: Apart from being enrolled as a full-time student, I have no affiliations with Kaplan, its associated, or its affiliated organizations and companies. I am being charged full tuition for every credit. I am paying for this through several different federal financial aid options, including subsidized and unsubsidized student loans, as well as some of it out of my own pocket. I am not paid or compensated in any way, shape, or form for the descriptions and opinions I provide within this blog... Kaplan University and all of it's respective associated products, services, copyrights, and trademarks are property of the Kaplan Higher Education Corporation, a division of Kaplan, Inc., a subsidiary of The Washington Post Company... Hopefully I just won't get sued for it, either. :P

Pilot

2010-04-11T22:12:00.004-05:00

So, as you must have guessed reading this, I have decided to resurrect my blog. Well, maybe "resurrect" isn't an appropriate word, seeing as I may have created this blog but never really used it to "blog." So I guess you can really say that I am, in fact, officially starting my blog after a very long construction and hiatus.

Why? Why now? I don't know... truthfully. In part, before I never felt there was ever anything to truly write about, at least anything that would be worth sharing. I don't think I was ever completely comfortable with letting strangers a glimpse into my mind and thoughts. No, that isn't true... it isn't the strangers, it is the people I already know---friends, family, acquaintances---and the fear that they may view me differently because of it. Truthfully, I am not completely comfortable with it now.

But what is it that I am afraid of others seeing? I have nothing about me which I hide from my friends, aside from maybe restraining my geek-level, only because most do not share the same level of enthusiasm I may have for a particular subject or idea, but to most it's pretty clear of my strong geek-tendencies. I have long held the belief that I am not going to change who I am for others, and if somebody does not like me for who I am then so be it, I'll live. Why should it be any different with this?

Maybe it was something I read recently that stuck with me:

"Taking a chance, and stepping beyond the safety of the world we've always known is the only way to grow, though, and without risk there is no reward."
-Wil Wheaton

And maybe part of it has to do with the feeling that I am embarking on a new chapter of my life... in a way that I haven't quite experienced before. Even if nobody ever really reads this, this may be the point in my life where I would look back and say "Here's where things turned around for me and I pulled my life together... here's where it all started." (Or maybe nothing will work out and I'll look back and say "Wow, I was so naive.") But I'll have these moments, snapshots in time, inside my own head where I can look back and see just what I was thinking at that time. for better or worse.

And if others read this, maybe that will turn out to be kind of cool, too, though it is not fame or fortune I seek through this blog. I was rarely the "life" of a party and do not enjoy the spotlight... instead, I am the guy off in the corner having an intellectual and/or philosophical discussion with the only two other people in the building who would be able to keep up with the conversation... and I see nothing wrong with that.

The Big Question

So, I guess that begs the question... what is this new chapter of my life?

Well, there are quite a few things, nothing that huge by itself... in fact, most of them are things I have had the occasional whim to do before. However, it is that all of them are take place around the same period of time which leads me to believe it is significant--perhaps part of a larger trend--and possibly the beginning of larger, more substantial changes and events. They probably won't seem that amazing to others, though believe me when I say that for me it is.

I'll only start with the first and probably most significant of all, at 25 years old, I am returning to complete my college education after a three year hiatus while working full time in my current job. I left college after attending for four years. I spent the first three years declared as a Business major. The first year went well, the second ok, the third not-so-much. I began to question the selected major as a career and wondered if it was something I really wanted to do with my life and spend all of this money---money which I did not have and was borrowing---on this? The classes did not interest me very much, and because of that I generally did poorly in them. I did great in the classes which interested me, psychology and philosophy--but what can one really do with a bachelor's in either of those apart from more schooling? These questions weighed on me and eroded my motivation to attend classes, while personal issues at the time compounded it.

My fourth year I made the switch to a BA in Philosophy, something I actually enjoyed greatly. Shortly after that, I hit a snag and a Catch-21 which caused difficulties securing finances for the upcoming year (I can get into that at another time). Essentially, I needed to pay the school $1,700 to have the block on my account removed so I could enroll in classes... and I needed proof of enrollment---a class list---in order to apply for a student loan. I couldn't get one without the other.

So I left school, determined I would return once I knew what it was I wanted to do... just as soon as I figured that small part out. I knew I wanted a degree and to further my education---I had no misguided ideas about my hopes without it. There were several things which interested me, however, I found it overwhelming be able to pick one and say "This is the career I am going to spend $45,000 of money I do not have and will borrow AND the next four years of my life attaining, and then the next 10 years afterwards repaying the loans!" That is a lot of pressure. What if I hated it? What if it bored me out of my skull? Then I would sit with how-many-years wasted and how-many-thousands-of-dollars spent in order to do something I didn't want? No pressure.

Anyways, I am now a year and a half into being employed with at a manufacturing facility based on my experience from working as a summer student in the mill my father is an engineer at. It is a good job, one that many in the area would kill for, but it is a manufacturing job nonetheless and not what I want to do with my life. At the risk of sounding conceited, I am not among my intellectual peers there and that is something which I find very frustrating. Not to say there aren't intelligent people there, of course, however there are not enough of them to make things tolerable on a day to day basis.

And instead of going back to the life of poverty of a college student, I am going to work on my degree through Kaplan University for a Bachelors of Science in Information Technology, full time, while working here... hopefully I can manage the time load.The upshot is that my credits already earned will transfer, and with any luck I should have my degree within two and a half years.

Anyways, my experiences with this, working full time and attending Kaplan full-time, will probably be a central part of this blog. I do not fully know what to expect from Kaplan... I know online educations have gotten somewhat of a shady reputation with pay-for-degree schools... but I also know that these types of programs have been gaining respect and positive reputations among institutions as valid methods of eduction. There programs and course structures appear legitimate, and appeal to me in that my largest hurdle while in school was not doing the work, but having to do the work at a specified time, like classes where attendance was mandatory and a large part of the exams came from lecture notes... that I had difficulties with. However, classes where I could do the coursework and study according to my own motivations were far more productive and I learned a great deal more. I always learned more with limited-guided and hands-on self-education than with take-you-by-the-hand-and-tell-you-everything kind of teaching. So I am very optimistic that this method of learning will be very well suited to the strengths of my learning-style. Stay tuned, I guess, to find out.

And of course, other experiences in my life and things which interest me will also be included, I'm sure... Anything from technology, psychology, and philosophy to humor and video games, and so on. I have a wide range of interests and I imagine I will probably cover most of them here eventually, including any new little projects I come up with.

Anyways, I suppose I should wrap this up, as it is already quite long as far as introductions go. I also have to work days (5am to 5pm) the next two days, so an earlier bed time would be best.

See you soon.

Joe