Monday, January 24, 2005

Tonight's movie: Sideways. Loved it. 

Accordion Guy: "I'm stickin' it to The Man!" 

Tim Jarrett: "According to MSNBC, today, January 24, is 'statistically' the most depressing day of the year." 

It's a really gorgeous day in Cambridge. Just took my morning walk, it was a little treacherous in spots where the snow digging hasn't been done yet, but it's bright and sunny, and after five minutes of walking it's warm and almost everyone is happy (at the center of Harvard Sq there was a homeless lady screaming at everything and everyone). At the end of my walk I stopped in at Finagle Bagel for some breakfast. Now I have a warm feeling from toasty greasy bagely food mixed with endorphins, and the optimism that comes from the day after being shut in for two days (albeit in a luxury hotel with great room service and two excellent football games, who am I to complain). This afternoon I move out to suburbia, just outside Route 128, and a whole other point of view. 

Today in Seattle a business blogging conference, keynoted by 40-something Microsoft blogger Robert Scoble. It makes me so proud to see him spin like the best, I knew him when he was knee-high to a grasshopper. It's gotta be a good show with Scoble leading off. Looking forward to lots of blog posts and pics from the show. 

David Berlind: Is Big Media getting the picture? 

In December 2001, I posted a heads-up about a new version of OPML that would be documented soon, Murphy-willing. Well, here it is, January 2005, and it's fair to say that Murphy got involved. First, I got flamed for the heads-up, then I procrastinated, then our needs changed, then my health took a big fall and I left UserLand. I explain this in more detail on the heads-up page. Basically if you see an OPML 1.1 file, you should treat it like an OPML 1.0 file. Not much more to say at this point. Will there be an OPML 1.2? I have no plans at this time. I do plan to write some docs, and ship some new software that builds on OPML. 

One of the most personal things you can say to someone is that they are taking something personally. Recently, someone said this to me. Inside my mind and emotions go into a swirl, what did I say, am I taking this personally (yes, of course, now that it's been made so personal) etc. There's no possible response other than silence (what are you going to say, no I'm not taking this personally, the asshole has no idea how you are taking it, no point arguing it with him). More thought. It's a Republican tactic! Remember how just before the DNC they said the Democrats are so negative, they made that the issue, and as a result the Dems didn't say very much that was negative (except Al Sharpton, bless him, who's not so dumb as to take the bait). Then the Republicans had the most negative convention and campaign in memory, they even dragged out Zell Miller to blast the Dems for having the gall to run against his beloved President. I bet they were howling over that at RNC headquarters. Anyway, the guy who played this little trick is a Democrat, and if he does it again, I'm going to out him.  

A new BBC Radio podcast.  

At sunrise, sky is clear, bright blue, utterly different from yesterday. 

Sometimes you just have to View Source 

GM's not-so-hidden secret message: "This is the last time you will ever have to feel alone on our nation's roadways."

They got the answer by peeking into the Flash movie on the site, I guess the equiv of View Source on Flash. It wasn't solved by the blogosphere, as far as I know, and it wasn't solved by playing the game.

Now an editorial response. I think want to be alone on the nation's roadways. I think that's what I like about driving in the most remote parts of the country. I'll have to think about this next time I'm wandering, and that sure isn't today. I could have gotten snowed in anywhere, I suppose. (Maybe not Florida.)

Today I will venture out, like a lot of other people in the eastern and midwestern US. It's fair to say this storm has shaken me in some way.

What I learned 

Jay Rosen asked what we changed our minds about at the Blojoucrecon (this name is growing on me). I wrote a long essay, again, but wanted to make it about one thing that people might remember, and decided on this.

I learned that the op-ed page of the NY Times may someday have room for bloggers. For some reason, of all the things I heard, this gave me the most hope. It's been impossible to crack the hard shell of the Times on the editorial side (we've had considerable success with RSS, and their archive policy).

As Ed Cone points out, they still take cheap shots. This has been going on forever, with a few exceptions, here and there, and indicates fear, not reason.

How interesting that today William Safire, a Republican columnist for the Times, is retiring. It was a good move when they brought him on in 1973 to diversify the editorial face of the paper. Now if the Times could accept a Republican in 1973, it could certainly accept a blogger in 2005. Someone who operates a blog now, and has for some time, and (key point) continues to blog on his or her own terms while writing regularly for the Times. This would be a big door-opener between the cultures, and would accrue enormously to the benefit of the Times, and probably to the blogosphere (maybe not). But I would support it, assuming they chose a blogger with integrity, inteligence, an idealist who never moves inside the Beltway, whose feet stay firmly planted with the people.