Friday, April 02, 2004

News.Com: "Microsoft's nearly $2 billion settlement could be considered hush money." 

I'm sorry this is lame. All the publicity about Gmail, and if you want an account, you do what? 

David Czarnecki: "It's webmail!" 

Over beers last night I told Kaye about Courtney Love's incredible story about the math of music that came public in the middle of the Napster heyday. It was a must-read then, and now. 

On this trip I discovered that my camera does MPEG video. Okay. And I even have a few short films I took by accident. An example. And then yesterday I took a walkthrough my uncle's old hippie house. It's a geodesic dome. Back in the 70s it was the latest new thing. It's held up remarkably well for something that's in a jungle. His water tower didn't last as long and it was made of steel.  

News.Com: Microsoft-Sun deal signals respect for patents.  

Microsoft press release.  

Back in Boston. Gray and cold. Just as I like it. I really got tired of the bright sunshine and sea breezes. April Fool.  

Good morning. Today's a travel day, first down to Orlando from Gainesville, and then up to Boston. I'm going to miss Florida, had a great time, esp last night at the dinner hosted by the university for journalist-bloggers. 

Lance Knobel contacted the Guardian through their "reader's editor," as did Rogers Cadenhead. No response. I can't imagine that they think that will just go away. What an embarassment, a reputable publication, that went to the trouble to hire an editor to ensure their integrity, and when a clear breach of integrity has occurred, and it's reported both in public and through their channel, nothing happens. I explained this at dinner last night, and heard the usual "Dave got some press he didn't like." That's like saying a reporter who blows the whistle on political corruption is just mad because he didn't get his cut. If you're a reporter, you wouldn't like it if someone said that about you, so please afford me the same respect. Aside from that, Lance and Rogers weren't mentioned in the piece, so that can't be their motive.  

Later. Rogers got a response. Saying Hammersley wrote a book about RSS doesn't explain that he's a member of the RSS 1.0 working group and a frequent partisan in the supposed war he describes. I thought about perhaps writing a Letter to the Editor, and decided that wouldn't be sufficient. After all, Hammersley stated his position in a news report. But of course if I tried to sell them on a news report written by me on this subject, I'd have to disclose all that I've done in this area, which (as with Hammersley) would immediately disqualify me. Instead of complaining about us, the Guardian should dig in right now, no excuses, and ask Hammersley about all the points Cadenhead raises, and if he can't answer them, immediately issue a mea culpa, and be a lot more careful in the future about having partisans writing news reports. They don't look good here, and the spin makes them look much worse.