I watched the White House Correspondents Dinner in 2011 when then-president Barack Obama made fun of the future-president Donald Trump. 

I understood at the time that Obama deserved a chance to get even with Trump, who had just dragged him through a totally disrespectful non-scandal about Obama's birth, the kind of thing only a black man has to endure, at the hands of a white man. It was a humiliation not just for the president, but for a country with a long history of racial oppression, trying to overcome its past. 

But I had a bad feeling. I had learned from years of conflict in business and tech, that you don't want that last bit of victory, it always comes back to bite you. When you win, you want to be gracious, extend an olive branch, be big, even if inside you feel like taking the revenge that is yours. 

I learned this lesson from a defeated adversary. When I first arrived in Silicon Valley, I did a deal with a company called Personal Software, that had just bought a product called VisiCalc, which was the first spreadsheet program. They became a juggernaut, and my product, which eventually became ThinkTank, wasn't making it. When I finally delivered, the company decided not to market it, and they told me about their decision in a nasty, humiliating way. I was forced to take a perp walk through the company offices, administered by a guy I'll call Rick, though that's not his real name.

A few years later, Personal Software was gone, a victim of its own success, and my company, formed around the project they rejected, was thriving. I forget what I was doing, but I was playing with Rick, making his life miserable, because our fortunes were reversed. I was on top, and he was the loser. He reached out to me, and said something memorable (paraphrased). 

"You won, Dave, I see that. It would be great if you'd let me get on with my life."

I felt shame. I stopped. And every time I won a personal victory, I remembered Rick and his humility. 

But Rick, when he dragged me down, actually did me a huge favor, as Obama did for Trump that night. Rick motivated me. He gave me the push I needed to win. I had a reason to win, to kick his ass. It worked. And in the end I found I didn't need to kick his ass, the victory itself was enough of a reward.

Obama should now have learned that lesson. He was the guy up on stage, speaking in front of a podium that said President of the United States. Trump was in the audience, with no mike, no voice. Trump had to take it. But he was brewing his revenge as Obama humiliated him, a revenge that he would ultimately take out on all of us. 

Why tell this story now? 

Because Trump just did it to his adversaries. 

His tweet, where he called American journalism the "enemy of the people" was too much. It was so wrong, so dangerous, so "burn down the house" that it motivates me, an American citizen and voter, to want to see him brought down. It tells me that there is certainly something very awful that he doesn't want anyone to know. So now we have to know it. And journalism will be part of how we get to know it.

It could motivate the Republican Congress to take a chance, really a small one, and authorize an independent commission with subpoena power, to investigate, so the news doesn't have to break through leaks. It should come out legally, under government supervision. Whatever the truth is, whatever it is that connects the Trump Family to Russia, we have to know it, we will know it. Either through the government or through journalism. And Trump, if he wishes to learn from his mistakes, will know he shouldn't have motivated his enemies. 

I'm an American citizen, I vote, and I want journalists to investigate the president. I want them to investigate the connection between Trump and Russia, and the ways the president and his family are using his office to enrich themselves. I depend on them doing a great job, and the more the president attacks the press, the more I want them to dig in and find out what's going on. This is one of the core values of our country, and the source of American strength.

We're watching the western alliance crumble waiting for the Repubs in Congress to give up on their fantasy of looting the treasury.

16-minute podcast with a proposal to pair famous people in politics, law, entertainment, education, sports, one Repub and one Dem, to join together to demand a bipartisan investigation of the connection between Trump and Russia, like the commission that investigated 9/11, the Kennedy assassination, or a select committee like the one that investigated Watergate. 

Ultimately for it to mean anything, Congress has to authorize it, and then step back. Independence is everything. But it won't do for unelected members of the intelligence community, a.k.a. spies, to leak info about elected reps. That would turn the US into a police state, if you think about it. 

Now we must pick up the ball, and show Congress what we want to happen. Demanding it is not enough, we have to show them, with examples. 

BTW, in the podcast I promised to find a video of Sam Ervin, who led the Watergate Congressional inquiry in 1973. If only he were alive today. He was a wonderful, perfect, no bullshit, friendly, lovable, down-home Democrat from North Carolina, who talked like Foghorn Leghorn, who couldn't stand Nixon's bullshit. 

If you get a few minutes, this podcast helps focus the mind. 

It's David Frum of all people.  Our politics don't match, but that's the point. We agree that it's America's strength that we can listen to each other, disagree, and co-exist in the same political system. We love that about our country, even if we disagree about almost everything else. 

Frum says the two main threats from Trump are:

  1. The kleptocracy.
  2. His connection with Russia.

But even those aren't the big problem. It's the things he will do to cover them up that are going to destroy the republic if left unchecked.

Therefore he says and I agree the two things we should focus on are:

  1. Demand the release of his tax returns.
  2. Call for a bipartisan investigation into the connection with Russia.

He suggests that the commission be led by Michael Chertoff and Madeleine Albright. A Republican and a Democrat who are widely respected in the US and around the world. 

Also it's important to track progress. When a decision is made on the tax returns or the commission, pass the link around to your social media followers. It's not as salacious as the latest TrumpTweet, but keeping the pressure up on these two issues keep the process focused on what really matters.

Be inclusive if you want to win

One more thing Frum says, and I totally agree, if you can't rally with people you disagree with on other issues, then Trump is not your biggest issue. 

His example. The Women's March on January 21 wouldn't admit pro-life speakers. Pro-life speakers who can't support Trump? Those are our people. (Note: I am pro-choice.)

That's probably why we should have had a more general protest, one that didn't have the conflicts that the Women's March brought to it. Getting past the Trump crisis is the most important thing right now as far as I'm concerned. We must work with everyone who agrees. 

The Daily podcast

The NYT has a real winner with the Daily podcast. It's only 20 minutes, so it fits in with my other daily podcast listening. And it's great stuff, and quick. No points belabored, the news of the day covered. I'm hooked. 

An old slogan from days-gone-by: Ask not what the Internet can do for you, ask what you can do for the Internet. 

I read a piece in Ars Technica talking about efforts to get DRM built into the web. It's a complicated story, touches on a bunch of different viewpoints, Tim Berners-Lee, Richard Stallman, Cory Doctorow, Joi Ito.

My point of view: I have been, at one time, a dues-paying corporate member of the W3C, around the time XML-RPC was becoming SOAP, but I mostly stayed away from the process. I saw it as a time sink, it took me away from developing features for users, which is what I like to do. It looked to me as if the goal of the W3C was to negotiate between the big companies of the day, at times Microsoft, Oracle, Apple, Sun, IBM, then Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, the entertainment industry, these days. 

The idea -- take a public resource and let the biggest companies divide up its future. The result is as lifeless as you might imagine. A big part of the reason imho why the web is in so much trouble these days. 

Anyway, I wanted to offer my two cents in the DRM debate.

Should the web have DRM?

I don't see why the web needs DRM. 

Is there a simple one or two page summary of the reasons for DRM? I understand why big media companies want to keep people from copying their movies, music, TV shows, etc. No judgement on that. In that I'm not as radical as Stallman, but I'm closer to his view than I am to that of big companies with expensive content that they want to lock up under DRM. 

I was surprised to hear that MIT is unhappy that the W3C isn't paying rent. They are entitled of course, but I don't think the web itself should have to pay. 

Anyway, I see how the web can help big companies, but I wonder when you all are going give back to the web? Seriously, the web has given us so much, and it's languishing because the big companies and the organizations they back suck the life out of it, and we stand by and say nothing? What does the web get in return for making these companies and their founders so rich? 

Maybe we should have a negotiation. Someone should stand for just the web. You can have DRM, but in return you have to help the web. If you can't do that, then the argument might go, the web can't help you.

I think I get how frustrated El Presidente is. He had a great weekend at Mar A Lago. Perfect. Everyone loves him. Applause when he comes into the room. He gets to impress his pal from Japan, and they probably talked some sweet business, endorsements, etc. And everyone I mean everyone just loved him. And those stinking reporters can't see that. Look at how everyone loves me. I get to eat outside and play golf. And there was even a crisis with me as the CENTER OF EVERYTHING and that was cool cause I just said I'd be tough and they all thought that was exactly the right thing to do.

This would be even better than embedding journalists in small towns (which is a very good idea, imho). Teach people to be journalists. We could have eyes and ears everywhere.

Like the Indivisible howto, but for journalism. Teach everyday people the basics of reporting. It would be incredible for our self-government if we had millions of people who knew how to report based on actual facts.

A civil defense system against a central government that's out of control. Think of it as a backup system. An Emergency Broadcast System for news. 

Viewing the First Amendment the way gun advocates view the Second, a defense against tyranny.

Continuing the thread started by The ACLU's feeds, a couple of new goodies for RSS developers and expert users.

  1. A new collection of feeds for The Guardian. It's a really good news org, no paywall, and covers a lot of territory. Based in the UK, but it covers the US very well.
  2. A river that's formed from the updates to the feeds in guardian.opml.
  3. A little Node app that reads an OPML file and reports on the feeds it couldn't reach. I used it to determine the feeds in the Guardian list were accessible. Just change the OPML url to check a different set. 
We need open news systems to keep our political system open.

Here's a random thought.

If Congress won't hold hearings into what happened in the elections, and into the president's conflicts of interest, what's to stop an independent organization, like a ProPublica or Snopes, from starting a public inquiry, with televised hearings, that looks into the matter, as citizens. 

Form a shadow government, and out of that bootstrap a new House and Senate that works the way the people want it to work.

I don't imagine you'd have to finish the exercise, though you should. The real reps would get the idea and copy it, which is what you'd hope they'd have the will to do on their own.

Yesterday I posted a note about the ACLU's feeds. I'm going to do more of those feed collections. I already have a few. Thinking of ways to distribute them that will allow people to contribute, probably using GitHub and pull requests.

I got into doing work on River5, not sure why, but I'm not fighting the impulse. I did a bit of work on the default way it boots up, so that the initial result is more pleasing and understanable. 

And then I noticed a warning in the Unix console about a "possible EventEmitter memory leak." It was just a warning but it bugged me, so I looked into it. 

Turns out it was an infinite redirect loop for a nytimes.com RSS feed when you request it with cookies disabled. They document it on GitHub, and I've reproduced the problem here. 

I added a workaround in River5

I'm going to keep rolling and feeding the RSS community little nibbles of sweetness, in the hopes that some of the lights come on. 🎈

Part of building the news underground is organizing lists of feeds. 

We haven't done much there, in a systematic way, to help news orgs show us, in machine-readable form, where all their feeds are. 

There were some attempts to do this, but mostly without much communication, and if you think about it, the whole point of it is to communicate about them. 🎈

So to get the ball rolling, I decided to make a list of the ACLU feeds. A good place to start. In an emergency we'd all like to be able to find their feeds, right? I know I would.

So here's the list.

http://rss2.io/lists/aclu.opml

A few questions.

  • Do they work?
  • Is the list complete?
  • Do they overlap?
  • Does it give you ideas?

I've turned on comments for this post. Stick to these questions, thanks.

More feeds

Update: The Guardian's feeds.

try to watch the Rachel Maddow show every night. It's really good and they're doing good. Unlike other shows that are still stuck in horserace mode, if you can believe that, Maddow has the guts to report on the world we're in now, the one that needs us to save it.

Anyway, reporting on a blogger who did a backup of the USDA website that they took offline, she said something like this --

We should all do what we're good at.

I had more or less come to that conclusion. It's why I so desperately want to help news get on solid distributed ground where it can be not-so-easily controlled by a crooked and corrupt government.

All that's missing are users and developers.

Users who will use the product of the open systems created by the developers. The technology to create an open news ecosystem is trivial. And it doesn't need to be implemented. It already exists.

This is the amazing thing -- it already exists. Say that 100 times.

It already exists and WE AREN'T USING IT.

That's a crime. 

To developers

This originally appeared as a tweet. Since many of the people who read this blog are developers, I should say where, if you want to get involved, you could start.

To be a good developer you first have to become a user. So I would recommend downloading and installing River5. You don't need a server to run it. Set it up to follow some feeds you like, let it run for a few days. Visit the river page several times a day. Add more feeds if you want. 

This is an open news system. That's all there is to it. You don't have to be much of a developer to set one of these up.

Now what can you do with it? Put it on a public instance at AWS or Digital Ocean or where ever you like to host. It should be part of your political group. Or if you work at a news pub, it should be something you provide as a service to your editorial people. Let them tell you what to subscribe to.

That should give you more ideas. Build! Serve your users. Help open news thrive. We need it to survive. 

To users

But wait there's stuff users can do too!

First thing, can you find a developer to set up a river for you, as described above? If so, send them to this page. Make sure they know how much you love and appreciate them, and how important their work is to the cause. Take your developer friend to lunch. It's a little secret, programmers like to be appreciated, pretty much like other people. 🎈

Until then, you can start using my rivers. I did what I describe above. I have one for politics, one for the NBA, a river of podcasts. These are of course just examples, but they are useful on their own. These are total labors of love, I'm not trying to sell you anything other than our freedom to share what we learn without using centralized systems. It's going to be really important if things go badly.

Update: Thanks for the help! We got to the problem quickly. Forever's log files were what's taking up all the space. I deleted them and freed up many gigs. 

TL;DR -- Running Ubuntu, I need a way to find out which folders are using 99 percent of the space on my disk. 

I have a number of servers on AWS running Ubuntu, running Node apps under Forever. One of them has a single app, called wo.js. Dropbox is also running on the machine.

A few days ago my servermonitor app reported that wo.js wasn't running, so I went to check it out and the Forever list was empty. Which is weird because a crashed app should still be in the list, with a big word STOPPED next to its name. But there was no sign of wo.js.

The app keeps a cache of rendered pages in its folder, so I figured that folder had gotten too big, so I deleted it, 

rm -rf renderedPages

Then relaunched the app, and it was good. That appeared to have solved the problem.

But a couple of days later same thing happened.

I am very much a newbie when it comes to running a Ubuntu server. So far I haven't had to know very much. Just the basics. I asked how much disk space was available on the server.

df -h

It said the disk was 7.8GB and it was using all of it. Okay that's the problem. So I removed renderedPages again, and took another look. That only freed up about 10MB. The disk was still almost totally full.

So....

The problem was not that my app was using too much space, something else is. This is where I need help. I have no idea where to look to find the files that are using up all that space. I'd rather not have to reprovision the server, so any advice would be appreciated.

The great thing about jury duty is you get a very clear sense of what self-government is about. It makes you feel empowered which can be even more uncomfortable than feeling powerless. 

So much of the frenetic activity online is about that sense of powerlessness. So we give money to causes or we join in boycotts, but these aren't as powerful as participating in governing. Jury duty is a very quick way to do that. 

We have to act more like citizens and less like subjects. I think that's the real message of the election of 2016. Subjects elect someone like Trump. People who think like citizens would elect someone very different. 

People are flying through things. 

So much is being written and people are getting alarmed by this and that, but being frantic isn't going to help. 

When I find myself freaking out, and it happens a lot, I step away from the keyboard and try to refind a perspective in a bigger world.

Outside, things are actually normal. The buses and taxis and Ubers are all on the streets. People are walking, riding the subway, doing what they usually do.

So far the shit hasn't actually hit any fans. 

The press and the president are doing a good job of keeping us whipped up. Congress is trying to sneak some nasty shit by us, but we're hearing about it. Or so it seems. 

But the things we're worried about mostly have yet to happen.

And meanwhile there have been encouraging signs. Don't overlook those.

  1. The courts stopped the ban and the executive branch seems to be respecting the court. The president doesn't like it, but he hasn't convinced anyone around him to break the law, at least not yet.
  2. There was a fantastic Super Bowl. What a game. And even better, the ads all told kind of an amazing story. The people who decide these things at the big companies that advertise want all of us to know they see all of us. Immigrants, women, POCs, Muslims. So many very positive messages. Not one of them disturbing. Quite the opposite. And wasn't Lady Gaga great?
  3. The world is standing up to Trump. Did you see the cover of Spiegel! Wow. Mexico and Iran aren't taking his shit. Good for them. And our European allies are preparing to stand up for themselves. 
  4. Nancy Pelosi said hold on, what's up with Trump and Russia. Now we need to know. She said that. The press gave her some shit about it, they shouldn't have (these are important questions) but she stood her ground. Thank you Rep Pelosi. 
  5. Even Fox gave him grief about how we're as bad as Putin. Well that's some bullshit. And I'm glad Fox knows it. They're not completely out of their minds. 🎈
  6. Saturday Night Live.
  7. There's a snow storm coming to NYC, and it's been raining on the west coast. The drought there has eased, if not ended? No earthquakes. That's good too. 
  8. Most important, every one of us understands now how important it is to vote. So even though the Repubs are inventing new ways of cheating, more of us are going to show up to vote, so there's hope.
  9. The US is still the US. Things could get bad, but they haven't changed much yet.

Let's all stay friends and try to stay positive, and this is a great country, with long traditions of free speech and tolerance and the rule of law and separation of powers and respect for the individual, and those things don't change overnight. Really, they don't. We still are who we were. 

PS: I still think the patron saint of the revolution should be one of the two kings. Rodney or Martin Luther

How voting works in things like the Betsy DeVos nomination.

I read this somewhere a long time ago about how they do this.

Basically, the Democrats made a big issue of Betsy DeVos because they think it'll make it easier to win future elections.

The Republicans understand what the Dems are doing. They also know they have two votes to allocate to vulnerable members. Just two will get leave to vote against DeVos. Lots of factors determine who. How likely they are to win re-election. How reliable they are. Favors they are owed. Their ability to raise money. Do important lobbyists like them?

Some people think, imho erroneously, that they voted against DeVos out of principle. Maybe they really do believe she'd be a bad Secretary of Education. But first and foremost they are Repubs. Their No vote was not an act of rebellion. It was part of a Repub strategy to remain in control of the Senate.

All the theater the Dems put up over this was also for the purpose of winning future elections. 

Takeaway

The takeaway is this. Nothing will change how politics works in the Senate. But we the voters have the ability to move them in different directions based on how they think we'll vote. Also factor in whether they think we will or can vote. 

That's the system. Think about manipulating it to get what you want. And for that you have to team up with lots of other voters, because that's what counts, massive numbers of votes, in the right places. That will change the calculations of the parties in Congress.

A friend sent a link to a conference called Misinfocon, a joint project between MIT Media Lab and Nieman, two orgs I'm familiar with. 

Here's the problem they're looking at:

Misinformation, and increasingly disinformation, is distorting people’s ability to make sense of the world around them, threatening the democratic process around the globe. While not a new phenomenon, the problem is compounded by both the speed that information travels in our networked world, and the technological and cultural “filter bubbles” that we live our lives in. This is a problem that impacts all of us.

I was trying to figure out if I should go. 

I think the focus should be the other way, on collecting news flows that are reliable, from people and orgs who are trying to get accurate stories. I think that problem is easily solved, and then the next problem is revealed -- how to get people to come there for news.

I can create the flow, I have -- but I can't get people to come there.

I think this requires a change in thinking at the news orgs, that their futures are tied together, that without flowing their ideas through one central place (actually a number of them) they will eventually sink under the weight of all the flows captured on Twitter and Facebook.

We should have done this years ago, but now it's urgent.

So I don't think Misinfocon is for me. I would prefer to have a small meetup with a few systems people from news orgs, and create a UX for news-hungry people that only includes trustworthy pubs. I offer politics.newsriver.org as the seed. 

From there, it could grow the same way BloggerCon grew out of the Thursday evening meetings at Berkman in 2003 and 2004. 

I'm working on a little project to get the archives of my linkblog online going back to the beginning of 2011, when I started using Radio2. Later I switched to Radio3, but the archives were compatible and were stored in a uniform way, in JSON. 

So this post is probably of little interest to human readers, but hopefully it will be of great interest to search engines. I hope they'll start indexing these pages. That's the reason I wanted to do the archive. Let's see if it works.

So here's the archive page for March 21, 2013, a date chosen totally at random. 

Election Day 2016, and the day after

Election day, four years earlier

March 16, 2011, for no reason whatsoever.

Ten years after 9/11.

I will add some more links here in a bit. 🎈

I admit that I like Michael Wolff's work. Most of his colleagues in the press don't. I've never been able to figure that out. And no, I don't want it explained, because I've heard it all, and find it unconvincing.

Yesterday I tweeted, to some acclaim, that he was right that the press is self-obsessed, as narcissistic as our president, and as a result, misses big stories that we really need them not to miss. 

For example...

We hear all the time, in the op-ed pages of venerated pubs, how Facebook is stifling the news, but never how Facebook is killing the web. A few very simple additions to Facebook would help bring the web into Facebook, but they are deaf to this. As is the press. Why? Presumably because it isn't 100 percent about them. 

Also when we hear how Facebook is stifling news, we never hear the other side, how news ceded its distribution to Facebook, and how we still don't know it wouldn't work, if the news industry just replicated what Facebook does, without the mistakes that Facebook makes. I think it would work. And as a user of news, I wish they would just do it. In America, we have a word for this -- competition, and like the First Amendment, it's one of our core values. You can't prove someone has a monopoly if you haven't even tried to compete with them. As the great Scoop Nisker says, "if you don't like the news, go out and make some of your own." That includes the news itself, imho.

Then just now I heard Jeff Jarvis, famous news-about-news pundit say, on the BBC News Hour, that journalism must be better at self-examination. Right there that's the bug. They need to not so much depend on self-examination, but rather learn how to listen to their users, not as amorphous mindless slurry, but as sentient beings.

For an industry whose existence depends on its ability to listen, news has become a ghoulish imitation of itself, sort of the Walking Dead of listening. They just can't do it. Most of what they do is recycle fumes. Yes there is some actual news in the fumes, esp in 2017 when the news is so rapid and real, but it would do better if instead of gradually reforming, news underwent a revolution of relevance. Let the people take over for a while. Find ways to radically listen. Extreme listening. It'll be painful at first, but no pain no gain. On the other side, we'll all be better for it. 

Which is the Truth of Trump in every way. He himself is a disaster. But he forces us to get off our butts and actually work with each other. And that means the press has to learn to work with people who criticize it, because in the criticism, is truth that the news industry has been scrupulously avoiding. 

I just did a tweetstorm that says something important. I've listed the points below with a little light editing.

Journalism plays dumb, worse than "view from nowhere." Can't ask who is in charge until someone says Trump isn't.

It seems journalism has at least two functions. 1. Reporting facts in evidence. 2. Asking questions. What are the rules governing #2?

Was journalism allowed to ask if Obama was born in the US, because someone made a big deal of it? (Clearly no. And they, largely, didn't.)

But they were allowed to question Hillary's honesty because other candidates raised it as an issue. They did. Even though scant evidence.

This is one of those conventional wisdom vs obvious reality things. I think it's obvious Trump is not in charge. Isn't it? Objectively.

But the press plays along with the (imho) farce that Trump is on top, ready to respond to crises, or even driving what his admin is doing.

Perhaps instead of 1984 or Brave New World, we all ought to be reviewing Wag the Dog?

People joke about #presidentbannon b/c we think we understand what's going on. But Bannon has been impeded, so even he isn't in charge.

The problem is this -- when the attack comes, and it is coming, there won't be anyone home at the White House. And everyone knows this.

But we are collectively pretending we don't.

The flow of EOs has stopped, which is good, by govt managers, the military and courts. system worked. we passed a big test.

The next step, to get back on solid ground, get someone in charge of the White House who is up to the job. Trying to be clear as I can.

To Repubs, get a grip. Your shopping spree is over, for a while. Pop your heads up, realize no one is running the show, fix it.

Josh Marshall says that even if Trump doesn't want to be a dictator, he thinks like one. We've known this for a long time. And I don't think there's any question that he wants it. Of course he does. 

Starting early in the campaign he asked why Hillary Clinton was allowed to run. I always wanted to ask a followup: Who does he thinks decides? The answer is of course, in the US, no one. We are all equal. There are rules about who can and can't run, you have to be a citizen, over 35, and born in the US. I think that's about it.

In the US we're all about self-government. This is a basic core value. That's the opposite of how Trump sees it. He thinks that he's the government. We're the subjects. This is the clash of values between the people and the president. I doubt if many of his voters see him as President For Life, but there's no doubt that Trump does. (We should raise this question, with both Trump and the voters.)

Anyway, obviously, now that he's president, he will decide who can run against him in 2020.

Later in the campaign, he said at least once, that we should not bother with the election, let him be president. He might say he was joking, I don't think it was a joke, it was a pitch. 

There were other clues. The "Lock her up" slogan. An insult to the Constitution. It isn't up to a crowd whether or not someone is locked up. That's the point of the Bill of Rights. There's no majority rule when it comes to the rights and freedom of an individual. The individual is sacred in our country.

Also, I'm done being a good guy and giving Trump the benefit of the doubt. When someone tells you who they are, believe them. He has told us his intentions, in plain language, over and over. 

Also, we must not give an inch on the rule of law. While I don't like him questioning the legitimacy of the court, the executive branch is following the court order. I would love to know how that discussion went inside the government. Perhaps it was DHS acting independently? (Update: It was.)

We're going to have a showdown soon, it has probably already started. It's great that the states and the courts are standing up to the president. This is the fight for the soul of America. It's not over yet. 

Facebook changed the API, sometime around the end of October I think, and a few of my apps that post stuff to Facebook stopped working.

Now I'm trying to fix them up to use the new API, and am looking for some good sample code. I remember this was the problem when I first did the work, I think it was back in 2014. 

There are two problems I want to fix this morning.

  1. I'm working with Radio3 as the test case. I have it posting, but it has to login every time I load the app, which causes a window to open, and on my tablet this causes a dialog confirming that it's okay for the app to open a popup. This is annoying. 
  2. The earlier version would get the URL of the new post by accessing an element of an array called actions that's part of the info you get about a post when you ask Facebook. But that array is no longer in the returned struct. So I don't at this time know how to get the URL of a post. This is also annoying, because I display the URL, behind an icon, so when I'm working I can easily see the post without having to navigate. 

If you have any help to offer, please post a comment below.

Thanks!! 🎈

On January 25 I started trumpstatus.org, a "status center" outline of crises and concerns around the new Trump administration. I felt it was necessary for my sanity to not forget any of the developing catastrophes as new ones were added to the mix.

People seem to like the site. It's gotten a lot of flow and RTs and people have had a lot of suggestions for new things that should be kept track of. This is great, but I'm just one person, and not even a journalist. 

My enthusiasm ebbs and flows. And my biggest enthusiasm is for other people taking this up, to organize information for use by others, and keeping it up to date. So I've made it easy for others to do that. 

How to

Here's the doc that shows you how to take an outline in Little Outliner and turn it into a public status center that you can maintain as I maintain trumpstatus.org.

It also explains what you have to do to use another outliner. And it's all open formats and technology, I don't care if you use my software, just let's start getting systematic about maintaining this information so we don't lose track of what's real and what's not.

Journalists, librarians or?

At first I thought journalists would do this best, it's the next step after explainers. It's showing the relationships between things, and the relationships are malleable. But there was no uptake from journalists. So maybe it's librarians? I don't know, but I've seen people complain that this doesn't exist, and until a real news org does it, they won't believe it. We're that much in a fog these days. 

I would like to see this happen. So I'm sharing what I have. I hope others will share what they have, expertise and time. 

For me, Twitter is soaring. It's becoming literature. Something Twitter has never been, for me. And meanwhile Facebook is quiet. Crickets. You can hear a pin drop. I have a friend who just moved to Vietnam, so that's interesting. But there isn't much life on Facebook, and that's unusual.

Now of course this is just the way it seems to me due to the way the algorithm is working for me. It's possible the algorithm is confused about my interests and the world all around is bustling and vibrant, but just my algorithmic presence is quiet and almost serene. 🙏

What game do the idiots in the Senate, both parties, think we're playing?

This is the End Times game, not the Who Wins in 2018 game.

There isn't going to be a Chuck Schumer or Mitch McConnell in government when Trump is finished.

It's time to do your thing now. Whatever you do when you have to rein in a rogue Commander In Chief.

Put aside the president's nominations and get together and figure out how you're going to get him to start obeying court orders.

If you don't, nothing else really matters.

Just read a piece in Fortune by my longtime friend Mathew Ingram about Kellyanne Conway and Trump's war against the media. Ingram makes it sound like a conundrum. If they don't give her airtime that will just fuel their argument that the press is at war with them. So -- confusion.

But if you actually look at it like a war, or a sport, which are all modeled after war -- like tennis or chess or canasta, play it out. Either way they're going to say the same thing. It doesn't matter what you do. Anything you do will provoke the same response.

Why do I see this so clearly? Because I once tried to appease a platform vendor who was committed to crushing my small startup. They kept giving us hoops to jump through, and we would jump through them. There was always another hoop. Eventually they won. But the truth was they had won the moment they started.

POTUS has power and tools you can only dream of, as with the platform vendor we had the hubris to challenge. If Trump goes to war with you, he wins. So you might as well accept that from the beginning, and change how you see yourself, and change your goals accordingly.

I suggest you think of yourself as one of your readers or listeners, one with an extra big megaphone. You have no more rights or privilege than we do. Now you can relax and be glad you get paid to do this. Eliminate any sense of power or right or privilege and you now are fighting a different battle, not one where you can bring down a corrupt leader, but one where you can help the people figure out what's going on, even a little. That's a different kind of achievable victory.

And for crying out loud don't go to the Nerd Prom this year. It will be totally humiliating, in ways you can't possibly imagine. 

We should be running ads on Fox showing who Trump nominated for Cabinet. I don't think his supporters know they're bankers and billionaires.

The story -- Trump's elite Cabinet. What do they read? Where do they live? How do they travel? Where do they go? They're running a populist campaign, but they are anything but populist. 

This is something the tech industry could help with -- the money to run the ads. Just to bootstrap it, because I'm sure a Kickstarter-like campaign would raise lots of money. 

BTW, this idea came from the latest Frontline, about how the Tea Party got started. I realized I agree with the ideas behind it, the only difference is I know Trump isn't doing what he said he would re the swamp.

A funny thing happens if you use your mind, you might remember that you were lying to yourself. What's happening in the US is nothing compared to the chaos and devastation we brought to Iraq, and in doing so destabilizing the region. Recall that...

  1. We invaded Iraq on the pretense that they were involved in 9/11. 
  2. And that they were massing WMDs.
  3. While the war was starting up, we were getting a huge tax cut. No pain for us.
  4. There was no draft, so every American who was killed or harmed in Iraq was a volunteer.
  5. Credit in the US was such that anyone could own a home, and the value of homes appreciated so fast that people could live, extravagantly, off refinancing. 
  6. All the while Iraq was being reduced to rubble, hundreds of thousands died, and the government we toppled, while awful, was replaced with an ineffective government that lost huge amounts of the country to medieval rulers without hearts and huge ambition.

#1 and #2 are wrong. They were not involved in 9/11 and they were not massing WMDs. The US govt lied about both. 

It's immoral for a country as large and powerful as ours to invade a much smaller country, while totally not feeling the war at home. Unless you watched the news you'd never have known we were at war. We were debating something very far away that most of us didn't experience personally.

So now, imagine if you were viewing the outrage in the US today from the point of view of Iraq, the country we destroyed, who we now blame for our non-existent terrorism at home. What are you so angry about, they might ask. They would look at our lives and think we are spoiled, and they'd be right.

We fear that the chaos we brought to Iraq is now coming home. That was completely predictable, and sorry to say, just. You know the old biblical slogan, you reap what you sow. We sowed a lot of what we are now on the verge of reaping. 

The Iraqis must be thinking "we knew this, now they are learning." The US is in the business of chaos. As they used to say in the 60s, now the war is coming home.

We still are the most privileged and spoiled culture on the planet. We feel we're entitled to all that we were given. We're like the rich kid who thought he had hit a home run but in truth was born on third base. We're a lazy spoiled child of a society. And as a famous philosopher once said, now the chickens are coming home to roost. 

Now we have to earn our freedom, we have to deserve it, instead of having it handed to us.

Think about it. 

I think emotions are getting the better of us.

We're capable of clear thinking.

Let's use the web for that, and other places for expressing emotions.

I know people feel they have a "right" to do it, but here's the thing about the treadmill we're on. We wouldn't be on it if people did things for smart reasons not because they have a right to do it.

Think about that for a bit.

You know IBM had a great sign they put on all employees' desks when they were at their peak of power.

It's what they valued. It works.

A picture named think.png

Let's do that.

I listened to a podcast discussion between Buzzfeed editor Ben Smith and New Yorker editor David Remnick about Smith's decision to release the dossier of opposition research on Trump. This is the second time I've heard Smith interviewed on this subject, the other time was on the Chris Hayes show on MSNBC. 

They reached a conclusion, sort of, that there's a difference in ethos between reporters that came up through blogs and ones who write for New Yorker, a 90-year-old publication known for excellence and breaking big stories (no sarcasm).

But it wasn't a satisfying conclusion, and I have some standing as part of the early evolution of the blogosphere whose traditions led Smith to the correct answer, to release the dossier. I just wish they had done it in time to make a difference in the election. 

So, to me there are two reasons, the first more important than the second.

  1. Smith identifies with his readers. It would be outrageous for him to have valuable source material like the dossier and keep it hidden from his readers.
  2. There had already been extensive dumps of Clinton campaign emails, but none on Trump's. Now we know why. The Democrats were being nice, pleading with the FBI to release the dossier without telling the public there was a dossier, and the press were being even nicer, sitting on the dossier until after the election, though happily publishing Clinton's emails, and Comey's scolding and his 11th hour letter and 12th hour retraction. Somehow that was okay but it was not okay to release the Trump dossier? I don't get it.

Put a disclaimer on it, as Buzzfeed did, and trust the readers to be smart enough to figure it out for themselves. Trust is a two-way thing. If you don't trust your readers it would be unreasonable for you to expect that they would trust you. 

I have yet to hear a convincing reason why any news org would hold on to the dossier.

BTW, it's offensive to think this difference in values is connected to age. Although Smith was careful not to say it, Remnick mentioned it several times. I'm older than both of them, and I feel strongly that the blogger ethos is the correct one, because it's grounded in the connection between news and reader. That's really what matters in news, imho. 

The "we know better" idea that the press are inside, and will decide what the outsiders are entitled to know, is very old and isn't real anymore. The people own the means of publication now alongside the press. Eventually the dossier would have gotten out even if all the journalists agreed to embargo it. 

There's a big trust problem because you guys make simple questions complicated, like this one. Think on your feet, and stay focused on what your readers need and want, and stop being so fair to people who cut all the corners, including ones we don't know anything about, like Trump. He withholds vital information, don't you do it too. And the people, the readers, are the ones who have to decide, and then live with the consequences. It's better if they know what they're getting into.

You know the story about boiling a frog in water? Put the frog in a pot and turn the heat on. The frog says "This is fine!" And never notices that the water is boiling until it's too late.

Mitch McConnell, majority leader of the Senate, quietly warned shortly after the election about overreach. He said all new administrations seem to do it. 

“I think it’s always a mistake to misread your mandate, and frequently new majorities think it’s going to be forever. Nothing is forever in this country. We have an election every two years right on schedule, and we have had since 1788,” the Kentucky Republican said. “We’ve been given a temporary lease on power, if you will.” 

McConnell isn't someone I usually quote, but on this he is an expert. 

So, the Trumps, as distinct from the Repubs, have overreached. 

The frog can tell the water is boiling while there is still time to jump out of the pot. 

Are they being smart, do they see something we don't over there in the Trump White House? Maybe so. On the other hand maybe they're doing the same thing so many newly-elected majorities do, overreaching. 

Somewhere deep inside every Republican politician is a basic will to survive. They're constantly trading off options. The billionaires who pull their strings do the same. They may think they're super men and women but they're just people like us. When their fear rises too quickly, they might be inspired to act. 

We need the Repubs to grow a pair and put a stop to all this.

It's pretty clear that the Trump organization, which now includes the executive branch of the US govt, is just beginning to start up a new massive news system, funded with hundreds of millions of US taxpayer dollars and the authority of the president behind it, and a good third of the US population already sold on the idea.

So if we want to get out in front of this and at least have a chance at competing with this communication monster, we have to start now to circle the wagons around news orgs that will oppose what will be an alternate fact juggernaut.

There is an easy way to do it. The technology is easy. And the news orgs don't have to merge. They just have to recognize that this is the new landscape and act in the interest of the union of all the Old School fact-based practitioners of news. 

This isn't a new plea from this space. I've been pushing for this since blogging took off and we had near-universal support for RSS among all the professional news orgs. 

Well, we still have it. It hasn't gone away. 

And we just have to remember what's printed on our money.

E pluribus unum. Out of many one. That's the secret sauce. 

Walking south on Fifth Ave in the 60s looking for an entrance to the park, I saw a father and son who looked lost...

The father asked how to get to the zoo. I said I didn't know, but I was heading that way, so let's walk together.

Where are you from? Mexico.

I didn't vote for him.

He looked at me puzzled, as if he didn't know what I meant.

I smiled. There's the entrance to the zoo. Have a great visit!

Democrats in Congress need to hit the brakes hard, unanimously, in hopes of waking the Republicans up. 

Democrats are clinging to a reality that we're rapidly leaving behind. They are imagining elections in 2018. There aren't going to be any elections in 2018. You have to act in accordance with that.

Hit the brakes hard. And hope that the Repubs see you do this and realize that they have to do that too. Stop believing this is ordinary. It is not.

Wake up American political leaders. You are the last line of defense. We need your help. Not your insane dreams. That goes for Repubs and Dems. 

Get the new links from this page sent via email every night.
© 1994-2016 Dave Winer
Last update: Saturday, February 18th, 2017; 10:48 AM.