I was kind of hoping for a game like Boggle, one where you get a selection of letters and you try to find as many words as you can from what’s available. The iPhone would lend itself to such a game, in fact, as you could shake the phone to randomize the letters and set them each time. Of course, Boggle is copyrighted and all that, so the app would cost a bit, but I wanted some game like that.

Turns out, there’s an app out which could be about as fun–depending on what version you get. The game is called Word Wrap, and it’s a Boggle-like game where you are given six letters and must figure out as many 3- to 6-letter words as possible which can be spelled with just those letters. You start out with the letters and a list of dashed-out word blanks which show you how many words are possible and how many letters each is.

The game is fun and addictive–but there’s a catch I explain at the end of this review, so for the time being, you may not want to download this.

To enter words, tap the letters in sequence, and they appear in the white blanks above the letter buttons. If you want to take a letter back, tap the white blank with the letter and it’ll go back.

The “Warp” button jumbles the letters–a useful function as it helps you rearrange them quickly to prompt you to find new combinations (see image below). I’m not sure how useful the “Last” button is, as it just shows you the last word you tried. When you have a word you think is valid, tap “Got It” and if it’s one of the words, it will appear in the list. If it’s not valid, then it doesn’t appear and the white boxes blank out for the next try.

As you compile the list, the words appear in order of length first and then alphabetically–meaning that if you’re stumped at some point, you can use the list as a clue in itself. In the example at right, there’s a word yet to be found which comes between “NOR” and “ONE.” That narrows down the possibilities, as is would have to start with one of the two letters; if “N,” then the next two letters come after “OR,” and if “O,” then the next two letters come before “NE.” In this case, that word is “NUN.” At the end of the game, all of the missed words are shown in red.

The “Word Warp” feature mixing up the letters, helping find new combinations.

There are several problems, however. First is that you get bogged down with the three-letter words, and they often repeat and can be inane. Some two-letter words in plural form are accepted, but some aren’t; some abbreviations work, others don’t. And often you’ll be supposed to know words that don’t register as words. When I’m stumped, I start entering words that I don’t think are words but which follow spelling rules, and often I’ll hit something. I mean, “Elan”? “Ulnae”? They didn’t bother to weed out the arcane or technical words.

On the good side: in the prefs, you can activate “alternate” words, which lets swear words be recognized; but better, you can alter the time limit. One minute is not nearly enough, for example. I prefer three minutes, but even that can be too short when there are up to 32 words–not enough time to enter them all even without getting stumped much. It goes up to 30 minutes, then to unlimited time.

Now the down side, and after that, the BIG down side: ads. If you got the original version of the app, it’s not so bad. At the start and at the end of a game, you get an ad screen; tap it and a prompt appears, and you can dismiss the ad. The first version of the app, the ads are not intrusive at all–you have to dismiss them every 15 or 20 minutes, between plays, and it’s not such a big deal.

Now the BIG bad point: the developers apparently decided that their original ad rate was too lenient, and probably too few people were clicking through to the sponsors. So they released an “update” to “fix bugs,” but really all it did was to change the ad display settings–to something really obnoxious. Apparently, the new version’s ads pop up every time you complete a level, stay up for a while before you can dismiss them, require more taps to dismiss them, and apparently even pop up in mid-play sometimes. Ironically, the upgrade that was supposed to introduce “bug fixes” actually introduced a bug where the clock runs too fast–that in addition to the ads. If you download it now, you get the bad version.

Reviews of the app, before in the 5-star area, have started to tank as people who fell for the “upgrade” scam are complaining in droves. What was a great free app with a minor ad distraction has, apparently, been ruined–unless the developers decide to put it back.

If you really, really want and app like this, you can buy the 99 cent version without ads. If you got the first version of the free one, DON’T UPGRADE! Otherwise, you maybe should stay away from it–until it becomes clear that they made it better. I hate to even introduce a game where the developers are acting so dubiously, but the first version is very fun, and it might be worth it to some people to ante up the dollar.

Me, I’m sticking with the first version.

Obama (emphasis mine):

“[Nobel-prize winning physicist Steven Chu’s] appointment should send a signal to all that my administration will value science. We will make decisions based on the facts, and we understand that facts demand bold action,” Obama said.

That’s a 100%, 180-degree reversal from the current policy of politicizing science and manufacturing facts to fit an agenda. Night and day.

Good morning, America!

Bush just isn’t getting any breaks on Iraq. Pretty surprising footage, which you’ve probably seen a thousand times already:

From Bloomberg:

In Arab culture, throwing shoes is a grave show of disrespect. “This is the farewell kiss, you dog,” the man shouted in Arabic. …

The shoe-thrower, who was in a group of journalists, was wrestled to the ground and taken away. “This is from the widows, the orphans and those who were killed in Iraq,” shouted the man, later identified by the Associated Press as Muntadar al-Zeidi, a correspondent for Al-Baghdadia television, an Iraqi- owned station based in Cairo, Egypt.

The guy actually had pretty good aim. Though it’s hard to judge, it seems that he might have hit Bush if Bush hadn’t ducked both times. The shoes might have been a little high, though–like I said, hard to judge.

And yes, it’s just one guy, the other journalists apologized, with all the deaths in Iraq it’s inevitable that at least someone would feel this way, etc. But it’s pretty iconic, don’t you think? If this is the footage that gets remembered when we think back about Iraq, it would be pretty damned appropriate.

It’s also a small peek at authenticity in an arena where little is authentic. Everything about Bush and Iraq that the U.S. can control, especially at high-level events like these, is scripted; for real life to intrude like it did here is worth noting because it’s the only thing you can be sure is true to life instead of being some kind of manufactured political play.

The thing to look for is how the Iraqis in general respond. Will they see this guy as a jerk, or will he become an underground hero? My bet is on the latter, which doesn’t bode well for him–who knows what the people in charge will do with him if they consider him a threat to the manufactured imagery.

If you think that all this not really something that’s important or relevant, remember that pageantry is very important with Bush and Iraq. Remember that other iconic moment, from the beginning of the war, where a crowd of “Iraqis” toppled the statue of Iraq? The scene you see again and again whenever a TV program shows a quick succession of images recalling the Iraq War? That even was a pure fabrication from start to finish, one that the media willingly went along with (and still goes along with today).

I see it as wholly relevant, perhaps definitively so: Bush going out not under the carefully staged guise of a patron statesman seeing off a country he liberated, but as a dirt-low huckster with an angry audience throwing shoes at him.

This is the pageantry Bush deserves, and I’m glad he’s getting it.

Sachi and I are probably going to spring for a 42“ HDTV in the next week or two. Any recommendations? I like the Toshiba Regza ZH7000 for the HDD recording feature, but am less than thrilled that the lack of a VGA port means I won’t be able to connect my new Macbook Pro, at least not yet. Sharp’s Aquos seems to be the only one to sport an English option for the menus, significant because I’m the one who usually uses the menus and the language is hard to decipher. Some have Internet browsing (but never with a keyboard), others have special split-screen capabilities, and so forth. We’re looking for something in the ¥200,000 ~ ¥230,000 range preferably.

Please clue me in on what models are best for you, and why! Help us choose a new TV!

While the Mac vs. PC rivalry is well-known and widely waged, there is another Apple-Microsoft war which is far less know: Zune vs. iPod. Most people with iPods just ignore the Zune, but Zune owners tend to hate the iPod, Apple, and Apple enthusiasts with a passion. And there is the inevitable “which is better” debate, though again, it’s usually just the Zune fans talking amongst themselves.

One of the most common ways that Zune users claim superiority is to use selective comparisons. When comparing the products of the two companies, Zune users invariably compare the top Zune model with Apple’s bottom-of-the-line iPod Classic model, which, naturally, gives the greatest advantage to the Zune. The iPod Touch and iPhone are considered “different” enough that a comparison cannot even be attempted.

The justification is usually based upon an imagined alignment–that the Zune and the iPod Classic just naturally align with each other, and the iPod Touch and iPhone are completely different machines that can be discounted and ignored. The most common argument to support this is that the iPod Classic has hard disk storage like the Zune, so there.

The problem is, that doesn’t quite work, for at least a few different reasons. The first is the fact that all Zunes and iPods/iPhones compete directly with each other. Whatever features any of them have, almost nobody is going to buy more than one for personal use. That is, you’re not going to see someone buy a Zune and and an iPhone. In this sense, all of these players compete with each other, in that the purchase of one of the units generally precludes the purchase of another.

Another reason that argument doesn’t compute is that they’re all different. The Zune no more lines up with the iPod Classic than it does with the iPod Touch or the iPhone. Sure, the Zune and iPod classic both have hard disk storage and a 320 x 240 screen; however, the Zune and iPod Touch share roughly the same screen size and WiFi. There are features all share, and features unique to each player. Consider the chart below (click on it to see the full size), and you’ll see that the Zune doesn’t really line up with any Apple product. (Although the Flash Zune and iPod Nano line up pretty well.)

Then there’s the idea of alignment by media type, which falls flat when you realize that the Flash Zune then gets lumped together with the iPod Touch. Doesn’t work anymore, does it?

So comparisons between the Zune 120 and iPod Classic 120 are very comforting to the Zune crowd, but they really don’t constitute an equal match. Just as Microsoft decided on a certain feature set with both of their Zune player categories, so did Apple with their five categories–but because each company had different objectives and different ranges of models, none lined up perfectly. Everything is a matter of choice. You could just as easily have a Zune 80 and iPod Touch 8 shoot-out. The problem is, with the exception of storage capacity, the iPod Touch would completely blow the Zune 80 out of the water. But that’s a lot less comforting to Zune fans, so let’s not go there.

You could even compare the Zune with the iPhone. Zune fans would shoot that down instantly because of the iPhone’s added cost for a cell contract. However, there’s no reason to do so, as most people have cell phones and would pay for the contract anyway; in fact, the iPhone is a better savings in that respect as you don’t have to buy a separate cell phone, and is more convenient as you have only one device to carry around. Zune users might argue that the iPhone looks cheaper because of the cell carrier subsidizing the costs–except that PC users have no problem discounting such subsidies when they crow about $400 PCs which require a subscription to an Internet service.

The bottom line is, we’re comparing Apples and, well, Zunes. In order to make any comparison, you have to weigh each machine as a complete package. Is a touch screen a big deal? Would you prefer an FM radio or streaming Internet radio over WiFi and/or a 3G network? How do the interfaces work for you? How much memory do you really need? (Surprisingly, I find my iPhone’s 16GB perfectly satisfying; you may not.) Are a handful of games sufficient, or would you like a cornucopia of thousands of apps? Do GPS and an accelerometer sound good to you? Do you like to have access to email and the Internet wherever you are? How often do you actually use wireless syncing or social sharing? Does having a camera built in matter? How about avoiding carrying a two separate devices? How much do you like the styles of each?

Then work out how much each is worth to you, and look at the prices. Then buy. Just keep in mind that the whole Zune-iPod Classic paradigm is a crock. It’s pretty much a subjective comparison any way you look at it.

This particular bird is often seen in or above narrow watery areas, and tends not to be very skittish; I have seen them be comfortable at a distance of no more than six feet from a good number of observers or passers-by. This particular bird was at Rikugi-en, though I have spotted the species fairly often at Inogashira Park in Kichijoji and at Kasai Rinkai Park on the bay. The third and the final images can be enlarged.

If I haven’t been doing much detailed or political blogging, there’s a reason: I am working like a dog around this time. Starting a few weeks back, and maybe going a bit into next week, my whole time is consumed by one aspect of work or another. Once in a while I get some free time, but then I prefer to spend it doing other stuff, like going to the parks with Sachiko. Hopefully, this weekend I’ll have some free time.

More Autumn leaves from Rikugien Park:

This was a lovely image of a teahouse from a lower path in the park. Larger version on click:

There’s not much to say, except, beautiful.

This is something I have always liked: yukitsuri, or a rope setup to support these trees in parks like these. Sachi says thay are there to support the trees against the weight of fallen snow, except that it doesn’t snow much here at all. It might be just the to support the weight of the branches themselves. I think I saw this kind of thing first at Kenroku-en in Kanazawa, in Ishikawa Prefecture.

This nice couple walked into the park shortly before we left. I have no idea what their story is, but I love their clothes, and his hair. Very cool, and I told them so. Well, about the clothes, anyway.

Here’s Sachi posing at the scenic spot I noted in the previous post.

As always with these gardens, the carp are somewhat of an attraction. They’re everywhere in the waters.

Sachi too a liking to this one Calico Carp, which was not very visible, but that Photoshop feature brings it out:

And this shot was a favorite of mine: the scenic bridge from the tree-framed view, with the sun reflecting off the water. Click for a larger view.

Joe the Plumber is turning on John McCain:

Recalling a conversation he had with McCain about the $700 billion financial industry bailout in September, Wurzelbacher said: “When I was on the bus with him, I asked him a lot of questions about the bailout because most Americans did not want that to happen.”

“I asked him some pretty direct questions,” he continued. “Some of the answers you guys are gonna receive — they appalled me, absolutely. I was angry. In fact, I wanted to get off the bus after I talked to him.”

Even worse, in fact:

“I honestly felt even more dirty after I had been on the campaign trail and seen some things that take place,” said Wurzelbacher, “It was scary, man.”

Right off the bat, that sounds credible–a regular American citizen getting an inside look to a politician, the politician forgetting he’s not talking to an insider, and the citizen being outraged at the answers.

But then you remember that we’re talking about Joe the Plumber, a guy who came to fame via an intentional lie designed to act as a “gotcha” moment for Barack Obama; the guy who then rode that opportunistic horse into town, acquiring an agent, a book deal, and all the accoutrements of sudden fame as experienced by someone immediately ready to cash in, as political as they come and as ready to milk the system as anyone.

So, keeping in mind that he’s selling something and controversy will help his bottom line, that makes one less inclined to take his report of the foulness of the Real McCain seriously. And believe me, I would like to take it seriously, as it fits perfectly my expectations of how it was in McCain’s camp.

But then Joe kills off his own credibility:

Asked why he didn’t leave McCain’s campaign if he was “appalled” by the candidate, Wurzelbacher said, “honestly, because the thought of Barack Obama as president scares me even more.”

While Wurzelbacher was critical of McCain during the interview, he had nothing but praise for his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. “Sarah Palin is absolutely the real deal,” he said.

So much for Joe the Plumber. But hey, with all his cashing in, he might actually get enough money to buy that plumbing business after all. And it never would have happened if Obama hadn’t walked down his street. I think you owe Barack at least a warm thanks there, Joe. You betcha.

I just realized… my plan was to scale back my blogging efforts to a few times a week after my 2000th day of consecutive blogging. I just now realized that this will coincide exactly with the Obama inauguration. That was completely unplanned–I only noticed it when I started using the Obama Inauguration countdown clock, and saw that it had about 43 days left as I start my 1957th day of blogging. Funny how things work out.

Sachi and I returned to Rikugi-en Park recently. We were there last November at about the same time, and each time it’s lovely. I will let the images speak for themselves. First, Sachi leading the way in to the park:

A lovely spot–everyone paused here to take photos of each other against the background.

A nice bridge, with an even nicer view from within the woods:

Closer:

Everywhere the trees were of different colors; Sachi on the bridge, from a different perspective:

The next two photos I liked enough to link larger versions to, if you’d like something larger for your personal use…

Photoshop, I should say, works beautifully in cleaning up images. I recently found out about the “Shadow/Highlight” feature in the “Image” menu, under “Adjustments.” If you have a shot with a mix of bright and dark, something in shadows, a badly exposed shot, that Photoshop move might help make the image a lot prettier, and fast.

To show you how Photoshop helps, here’s the un-retouched version of the above photo:

That’s not even the best example of how the Shadow/Highlight helps, but it’s a hint. If you’ve ever had a photo where some people are in bright sunlight and some are in dark shade, that feature helps immensely. But it also helps in a lot of dark shots to bring out detail, brightness, and color. Most of the shots here don’t use that, but when the original just didn’t cut it, I was still able to get something from the image.

More images from the park tomorrow.

Sometimes, winds and storms clear up the air enough for us to get nice views of distant features of the Kanto landscape. One feature that’s an early indicator is the ferris wheel at Kasai Rinkai Park, just at the eastern edge of Tokyo, with Disneyland across the river from it in Chiba. On bad days, we can’t even see it. On good days, you can not only see the ferris wheel (16 km. distant, 10 miles), but you can see the Chiba coastline (40 km., 24 miles) behind the wheel as well. Really, that’s probably mountains, not coastline, which would be 50 km./30 miles.

Closer-up, notice that small mountain to the right of the wheel; that’s “Mysterious Mountain,” an attraction at Disney Sea, the sister theme park to Tokyo Disneyland.

We also get a great view of Mt. Tsukuba in Ibaraki Prefecture, 70 km./40 miles distant, a nice, big landmark.

The structures to the left are a shrine complex, with weather and cell repeater towers in the middle.

These mountains and a bunch surrounding the city of Nikko, a resort town famous for being the source of the Three “No Evil” Monkeys–“See no evil, Hear no evil, Speak no evil,” you know. Distance: 120 km./75 miles.

I’d love to be able to see Fuji, but the damned Toyota Amlux building is still in the way….

Again with the views from the balcony. A short while back, Sachi and I heard some drumming ruckus coming from outside. I checked it out, and there was some sort of group marching down the road away from us. By the time I got my camera ready, they were just turning out of sight, but with the magic of the zoom lens and many megapixels, I saw at least this much, far more than the naked eye could resolve:

From what we could read of their signs, they seem to be a group of protesters. At least some of them came from the Northern Area Labor Group–that’s the big red flag with the sunburst. The yellow banners read, “Citizens unite in protest of the Patriot Missiles.” (Japanese-language only, see the last story on this page.) It would seem that the U.S. is outfitting Japan with a series of such anti-missile missile systems in response to missile tests by North Korea. All the same, a lot of Japanese are not all that enthused about them. Many have been installed in the Tokyo area–two installations as of a year ago, and about a dozen or so in all planned over the next few years. Apparently they’re located in local military bases spotting the Tokyo plain, many in the middle of outlying cities, close to large populations.

Once again, we had our graduation ceremony at the college. This is the 20th we’ve had since I started, and I have attended all but one or two, when illness made attending impossible. But for me, this one was supposed to be a special case: as a once-in-a-blue-moon situation, I am acting head of the branch campus, the Academic Coordinator, while we have a graduation ceremony. This would have been the first time in five or six years–and maybe the only time ever again–where I would have the ability to lead the commencement ceremony, and hand out degrees. Also landing on the tenth anniversary since my first one, I was very much looking forward to it.

However, the best laid plans of mice and men are all too easily derailed by a stray virus picked up from the class or office at the outset of chilly winter days. When we had to set the speaker in print last night, there was little hope that my throat would be in shape–it was gravelly all day yesterday, and these things almost never clear up. And, as it happened, I would not have been in shape anyway. Major bummer. I was, as I mentioned, very much looking forward to it.

However, the ceremony went very well with my on the sidelines, and our traditional after-party went just as well. We got a bigger-than-usual hall this time.

The Hyatt Regency serves up a delicious buffet, the Bingo game is always fun, and student performers really put on a show. One popular set of acts came from the Hula Club–three dance numbers, and these ladies do a spectacular job.

Afterwards, a group did a dance number based upon a dance done at fishing festivals; from what I was told, this was popularized by an episode of Kimpachi Sensei, a Japanese TV show from long ago, often revived, like Doctor Who (which, coincidentally, I was able to discuss with a student at length–we shared an interest). Later, the Guitar Club put on a performance which was very nice.

I did get some stage time, introducing many of the students who won awards for their participation in school activities and responsibilities. A great group of kids we’re seeing off this year.

While Democrats hoped for the Democrat to unseat the rather vile Senator Saxby “Politics Is a Contact Sport” Chambliss in Georgia, we always knew it was a long-shot. Simply the fact that Chambliss was forced into a run-off was rather amazing, considering that the state went for Bush 58% – 42% in 2004, and for McCain 53% – 47% this year. Even powerful turnout for Obama could not win this for Democrat Jim Martin. There was hope for an upset, but it was pretty clear that this was the long-shot for Dems to pick up another seat.

But now, Republicans are basking in the glory of their win, despite it being less of a “win” and more of a meeting of expectations. That there even had to be a run-off in the first place was a big blow for Republicans here–Georgia is a stronghold, and for Democrats to make this kind of a showing is unusual. This should not have been a run-off, it should have been a cake walk in the general election.

But I suppose the Republicans have to run with what they’re got, especially with Al Franken closing in on Norm Coleman in Minnesota–Franken seems to be the favorite there, though it is still far from decided. But after losing Stevens’ seat in Alaska and likely losing Coleman’s in Minnesota, they needed some kind of victory so they could claim the beginnings of a comeback.

In the runoff, Chambliss defeated Martin 57% to 43%–a bit less than what Bush won the state by in ’04. In large part, it was a less close race because black voters were not coming out in as strong numbers for this one. This election, if anything, shows the breadth of Obama’s coattails, giving Martin four extra points and perhaps shaving one or two more off of Chambliss’.

So, why didn’t Obama campaign here? After all, Republicans came out like an all-star line-up, with McCain, Romney, Huckabee, and Palin all stumping for Chambliss. Chambliss even gushed over Palin (he knows the future of the party when he sees it), claiming that she made all the difference. (If that’s so, then the Republicans are in trouble in Georgia, because even with the all-star line-up, they’re still doing worse there than in ’04.) So, where was the president-elect?

Well, he was busy not being stupid. The worst thing for him to do after winning the election as cleanly and as clearly as he did would be for him to go all-out and campaign for someone who was bound to lose. Remember, even with Obama on the ticket, Martin still was 3 points behind Chambliss. The chances for Obama having enough of an effect were virtually nil. No way Obama could have moved 15% of the vote for Martin. And despite the heavy odds against him, a loss would be widely interpreted as a loss of mandate, effectively neutralizing the power he gained by beating McCain so soundly. Obama would be hobbled a month and a half before he could even wield the influence he stood to lose.

Which was also why Republicans flocked to Chambliss: they were pretty sure he would win, and they wanted to be seen as part of that victory.

So now Republicans are doing a victory dance in Georgia, as if winning a Senate seat which should have been safe in a solid-red state is somehow an indication that the GOP is on the rise. It’s all about creating perception, nothing more. They want to put the shellacking they got this November behind them and come away looking like winners.

In the meantime, if Franken wins Minnesota, Obama and the Democrats will still have 59 senators behind them, and will only need to win one or two Republicans to shut down the expected flood of Republican filibusters. That will probably not be a problem.

Meanwhile, a lot of right-wingers are calling for the GOP to turn even further to the right to regain party “purity” (“purity of essence”?), while Sarah Palin–wildly popular with the hardcore right, laughably scary to everyone else–is making the rounds for a future run for something big.

If their aim is to cement the Democratic majority, they’re doing a kick-ass job.

SteadyCam is available for the first 3000 users free; it just came out, so I don’t know how long it’ll last. But it works. As advertised, it allows you to take sharper, more in-focus shots under dark or difficult circumstances. It probably won’t help for action shots, though–it steadies the shot by waiting for your hand to stop shaking, then grabbing that frame as an image.

Here’s a shot, reduced from the original size, to show you what I was shooting–the cityscape at night out my balcony window:

I took six images–three with the SteadyCam app, and three with the native Camera app. Here are the same part of all six images; click to see a blow-up:

The three on the left were taken with the SteadyCam app. The first and third images were with intentional hand shaking–though neither image shows it. The ones on the right were taken with the regular camera app–the first one with a strong effort to keep the camera still, the second and third with hand shaking similar to what I did with the SteadyCam app. As you can see, even my best effort holding the camera still with the native app did not do as well as any of the shots taken with the new app.

In short, as I said, it seems to work.

Another app I got recently is iEasyCamera, which addresses another problem with the iPhone’s built-in camera software: the small “take photo” button. It’s hard enough to take regular photos, making sure you’re tapping the tiny button right. But what about when you want to take a self-portrait, or take an image of you and your sweetie together without asking a total stranger? Not having any screen real estate on the same side of the phone as the camera already makes framing a hit-and-miss proposition, but touching the “take photo” button blind? Almost impossible.

This app makes it so that touching the screen anywhere triggers the camera, meaning you don’t have to guess where the button is anymore. Not a perfect fix–framing is still a problem–but the worst difficulty is nicely eliminated.

---

This isn’t a camera-related app, but I like it enough to want to tack it on somewhere. I like those Risk games, but it’s nearly impossible to find good ones for free (even the paid versions are usually not very good). I had one for a while, but it was a pre-OS X app, and is no longer playable on my Intel Macs. But there’s a decent one for the iPhone for free: Lux Touch.

The good points: it’s easy to use and doesn’t get in your way by trying to fancy things up–it’s a straight, old-fashioned Risk game. The down side: you can’t set up the game. There are always five players, you are always blue, you always go last, and the countries you start with and the initial allocation of troops is random and usually not at all what you want. Sometimes, I have had troubles with tap-commands going non-stop, in that I tap and release, but the app continues to act as if I were holding the tap. You wind up with all your troops in one place that way… but it doesn’t happen too often.

Anyway, a few good apps there.

A short time ago, Sachi and I decided to visit the local aquarium. For us, it’s right down the street–we can even see it clearly from our balcony. While there, we saw lots of cool stuff, but there was one resident that I really, really liked:

I’m not fooling around with Photoshop with these colors; that’s what makes the Cuttlefish so cool. It has an amazing mechanism in its skin which allows it to change colors, patterns, and even apparently textures radically within the wink of an eye. But it has to have a reason to do so, which is why the color variations are so mild here.

Want to see it really strut its stuff? Here’s a preview of a NOVA special on the creature that’s just staggering. The preview is good, but if you can ever see the whole show, do so.

You know those political statements you hear sometimes in which the sheer number of lies and inaccuracies embedded in such short utterance just overwhelm you?

GIBSON: You’ve always said there’s no do-overs as President. If you had one?

BUSH: I don’t know — the biggest regret of all the presidency has to have been the intelligence failure in Iraq. A lot of people put their reputations on the line and said the weapons of mass destruction is a reason to remove Saddam Hussein. It wasn’t just people in my administration; a lot of members in Congress, prior to my arrival in Washington D.C., during the debate on Iraq, a lot of leaders of nations around the world were all looking at the same intelligence. And, you know, that’s not a do-over, but I wish the intelligence had been different, I guess.

The “intelligence failure.” You have to sometimes wonder if Bush, at this point in time, truly believes the line of BS that he has been spinning all these years about Iraq. Maybe, like Reagan, he actually does; it’s hard to tell. But if you recall what actually happened, the intelligence failure was not at the CIA end, it was at the executive end. Or has everyone forgotten that the Bush administration, fully intent on steamrolling forward into a new Gulf War, (a) completely and intentionally ignored evidence given to them by the intelligence community that said Iraq was not a threat (just as they ignored terror threats before 9/11), (b) spun intelligence reports like political talking points so as to emphasize the propaganda they felt best helped their established political goals, and (c) completely made up crap as the metaphorical whipped cream with a cherry on top–you know, like Cheney’s assertion that our intelligence not only told us that Hussein was 6 months away from completing a nuclear weapon, but that we knew exactly where the Iraqi nuclear facilities were.

There was no “intelligence failure” in the traditional sense, or if there was, it was far less significant than the fact that the Bush administration, as with everything else they were involved in, politicized the intelligence information that came their way, just as they politicized scientific data, the Constitution and our laws, the bureaucracy and the entire legal system, so on and so forth.

The problem with politicized intelligence data: it fails.

“A lot of people put their reputations on the line and said the weapons of mass destruction is a reason to remove Saddam Hussein”? Yeah, because you told them so. You were the head cheerleader in that propaganda assault, remember? You were the one releasing only information that led people to that conclusion, remember? You were the one sanitizing even data being given to Congress, and then claiming they made an independent decision on the matter because they saw the same data you did. And, it “wasn’t just people in my administration”?? Listen to this guy cast the blame on others, as if it was everyone but himself–world leaders, the Congress, people in his administration–everyone and anyone but himself. All Bush has to do is utter the phrase “the buck stops here,” and he’ll break irony but good.

As for everyone else having the “same intelligence”? That part is pure fiction.

But Bush didn’t stop there:

GIBSON: If the intelligence had been right, would there have been an Iraq war?

BUSH: Yes, because Saddam Hussein was unwilling to let the inspectors go in to determine whether or not the U.N. resolutions were being upheld. In other words, if he had had weapons of mass destruction, would there have been a war? Absolutely.

I can’t find an emphatic enough synonym for “unbelievable.” Either Bush really is buying into his own line of crap, or he believes that everyone else has. Bush said this years ago and keeps saying it, even though the facts are so blindingly clear they hurt: Hussein did let the inspectors in, Hussein’s claims that he did not have WMD were true, and it was Bush who yanked the inspectors out.

But note Bush’s re-writing of the question: the question clearly intended to ask, “if the intelligence had been right and shown that Hussein was not a threat”–a question that makes sense. But Bush did not answer that question. Instead, he assumed that the question was, “If the intelligence had been right in that the WMD were actually there, would there have been an Iraq war?” And that question makes no sense–after all, the war was completely predicated upon the fiction that the WMDs were present; if the “intelligence” had been correct, it would have been no different than what happened. Here, Bush must be (a) an idiot, (b) so entrenched in his lies that he literally cannot imagine anything else, or (c) both. My vote is for “c.”

But Bush gets the Academy Award for irony when he answers this question:

GIBSON: Greatest accomplishment? The one thing you’re proudest of?

BUSH: I keep recognizing we’re in a war against ideological thugs and keeping America safe.

Do I even have to explain that one?

Would you be offended by this?

If you would be, the obvious question is “why?” Friendly Atheist points out that an atheistic organization tried to put up eleven such billboards, but two were not allowed to go through because of protests by Christians. They were offended by the message.

That’s right, offended. Offended by atheists reaching out to other atheists. Offended by a statement of belief which is different from their own. As was pointed out, the billboards did not reference Christians; they did not denigrate Christians, nor did they even deny the existence of god. They simply said, “Hey, you probably think you’re alone in your beliefs, but you’re not.”

This was given as at least one of the reasons some Christians got so mad:

John Matson, of Denver, was so mad after seeing the Santa Fe Drive sign that he dashed off an angry letter to the billboard’s owner.

“It is a despicable act to allow that sign,” the 60-year-old man said in an interview, “and for just a few pieces of silver.”

He went on COCORE’s [the organization putting up the billboards] Web site, and it made him even angrier, John Matson said. It is trying to gather, he said, “a constituency of what I call mob rule.”

“I know they’re atheists, and my opinion is they want others to believe the same thing. The billboard misrepresents their purpose,” he said. “Their agenda is wolf-in-sheep’s clothing political. Why don’t they just say it.”

As you can see, the entire tone is highly subjective. The “few pieces of silver” reference makes it clear that he believes that the owner of the billboard has betrayed the good guys because the bad guys paid them; that’s the exact meaning of the Judas reference. So we already have assumptions that religious people are good, atheists are bad, and the billboard owner is assumed to be a Christian.

But the last paragraph in that quote is a giveaway: he believes that the atheists are proselytizing. They’re not, not really (any more than a sign saying “Gay? You’re not alone” would turn a straight person gay), but here’s the thing: what if they were? What if the sign said, “You should become an atheist”? That’s essentially what the guy thought it was saying, so what if it did?

Then it would mean that a few atheists would be doing what scores of Christians have been doing since time immemorial: trying to convert others to their belief.

And that, to Mr. Matson, is unacceptable. Christians are allowed this; atheists are not.

Here’s another quote from Mr. Matson, a common refrain from religious people like him:

“I also understand free speech. And I can also stand up and tell them that they are wrong.”

People who say that kind of thing don’t understand what “free speech” means. You see this sentiment a lot, usually from religious organizations that have their panties up in a bunch about whatever strikes them as heinous that week. “Free speech means I can protest them.”

I would agree, if it were just protest. But there is a marked difference between protest and gagging others. If you say something that I don’t like on your blog, I can try to comment on your blog, or I can write on my blog, or I can go out on the street and picket. That’s my right to free speech, it means I can say something also. But if I get together a group of people and go directly to your web host and threaten to put them out of business if they don’t shut down your blog, then that is not “freedom” of speech, that is the antithesis of freedom of speech. It is censorship. It is gagging someone and trying to deprive them of the right you claim to be exercising.

And the golden rule of rights is, “your right to swing your arms ends where my nose begins,” meaning that your rights do not extend to depriving me of mine.

But people like Mr. Matson believes that it’s perfectly okay to shut others up by getting large groups of people together and making threats.

I think that’s called “mob rule.” Another term Mr. Matson apparently does not understand.

Ever since the Shiba Inu Puppy Cam took off, there seems to be a new interest in Shiba Inus. This pleases Sachi to no end, because she just loves Shibas. Several Shiba cams have sprouted up since then, but most are on-and-off, more off than on. One that we’ve found that seems good is the West Chester Shiba Inu Cam. This one is with a white Shiba mother and what I believe is a sesame father.

Four of the pups are standard brown, but one is brown with white spots–something I’ve never seen in a Shiba before. I suppose the colors will change as it matures–I don’t think that marbled Shibas exist.

The owners of the original Shiba puppies are giving them away for free–not so with this new cam’s object. They’re selling their pups. I can only suppose that after the huge popularity of the San Francisco Shiba pups, a lot of people with litters coming are buying web cams and trying to figure how they can get bidding started or something.

Shibas, by the way, are good dogs but also quite quirky. They are good and loyal dogs, but not very sociable with outsiders unless carefully acclimatized while growing up. They have a strong hunting instinct, and so must be kept on a leash, or they’ll often bolt. They shed profusely twice a year, when they “blow” their coats–a tremendous amount of fur coming out in a very short period of time. They are also not very loud–they don’t bark much, though they do whine some and when extremely distressed, are said to emit something called a “Shiba scream,” something you reportedly do not want to hear.

A few decades ago, movie stars never starred in TV series; that would have been considered a career-ending downgrade. Many went from television to movies, but not the other way around. Some made cameo appearances, but did not star. I recall, however, that there was one big-name movie actor who did make the transition, and very successfully–and thus opened up the floodgates. Now, we see lots of big-name actors with TV shows–some not even in the starring roles, such as Harvey Keitel in Life on Mars. But tons of movie stars can now be seen on TV shows–James Spader, Edward James Olmos, Holly Hunter, Gary Sinise, Keifer Sutherland, James Caan, Martin & Charlie Sheen, Alec Baldwin, James Woods, and Glenn Close.

Here’s a trivia question: who was that breakthrough actor or actress who legitimized television as an option for film stars? I ask not because I know, but because I can’t remember. Candice Bergen stands out as an early example (Murphy Brown started in 1988), but for some reason that doesn’t sound like the right answer. But I don’t know, maybe it was.

So, who was it? Remember, it must be someone who was known primarily as a movie actor–ruling out people like Michael J. Fox, who gained fame as a TV star first.