How I Facebook

I've had this discussion with several people before. The result of every discussion is that there are different ways to use the same service. Neither are inherently bad, but some can be worse than others. More on that as I share with you how I use Facebook, and why.

1. Profile
I fill out my profile with relevant information. Facebook's publishing settings are actually not terrible. Now, you can choose each part of your profile to be visible to various levels of friends, to lists, to the public, or to nobody at all. For example, if you're single, but you are building an interest in someone and wish to not display your relationship status, you can make just that part of your profile invisible. Alternatively, if you are in a relationship and want the world to know, you can make it public.

I'm of the opinion that if you add someone to your friends list, you genuinely care about them enough to let them know details about your life. So, if I add someone to my friends list, I'm alright with them knowing everything that's in my profile. Also, people only know as much as you tell them. If you don't fill out your work history, then they won't know where you worked before. Really, you're in control of your information.

Fields like Religion, Political Affiliation, Education and favorite sports, music and movies are all voluntary. I think that sometimes it may be a good idea to leave those blank. After all, when you meet someone new, it gives you something to talk about. This can be a double-edged sword though. More on that below, in the Friends section.

2. Friends
At the time of this writing, I have 78 friends. I've been a member since before Facebook went public in September of 2006. If you recall, Facebook was open to various universities first, before it went public. I've never had more than 100 friends... I don't even think I've had more than 80. I had a MySpace account before Facebook and most of my friends from MySpace moved over, so I added them. However, over time, I stopped talking to some of those friends and we drifted apart. I removed them from Facebook.

I remove people from my Friends list when I don't talk to them, or when they don't talk to me. If we have nothing in common, when we don't talk, then we're not friends. When you have 500 friends but realistically chat with only 10 of them and see 5 or 6 of those 10 in real life several times a month, what does that say about you? Why do you have 500 "friends"? Do you know that's a security risk?

How is it a security risk, you ask. If you fill out your profile with information you only want to share with your friends, and then one of those 500 friends gets hacked (and people do get hacked, all the time), they have access to your information. Then, your pictures appear in local ads in Ching Chang province in China, or on anti-American posters in Pyongyang, NK. Or your data is sold to telemarketers. If you have your cellphone posted in your profile and have your various emails visible to your friends, you are risking all that to telemarketers. But... hiding it from everyone? What's the point of putting it there then? What about your network e-mails? You can't remove those or you lose network affiliation.

Facebook profiles get compromised all the time. Unless you have all your 500 friends separated into lists and each list has its specific permissions set for various areas of your profile, you are at risk of being exposed. Sorry, that's just how it is.

Besides, what's the point in having so many friends? I never understood it. You meet someone at a bar, and immediately share your FB information. Say you're a guy and you met a girl, and now instead of exchanging numbers, you both whip out your smartphones and add each other to Facebook in hopes of getting laid. Is that it? Have we fallen this far?

3. Status Updates
Harsh language warning. Honestly, I know you love music, but fucking stop with the youtube links. Sometimes people will sign on Facebook and post every single youtube song they listen to over the past hour on their profile. Then, my Newsfeed is flooded with their music. The worst is when it's several people doing it at once, because they just happen to be in the mood to spam Facebook with Offspring or Pink Floyd. Seriously, I love both Offspring and Pink Floyd, but please, if I wanted to know what kind of music you listen to, I'd look at your profile. Or even better, get Spotify. Stop fucking spamming my Newsfeed with youtube. The worst part of this is that I don't want to block you, because you're my friend (because I friended you) and I care about what you have to say. If you spam my feed with youtube links though, I will block you entirely.

I care about how you feel, but please expand a little bit more on the circumstances of your mood instead of just posting "today sucks". Try this: Today sucks, because I woke up with a hang over and drove my car into the ditch outside of the adult store I was heading to to purchase a whip for tonight's festivities. This tells us a lot more about your circumstances and I'm sure some of us can identify with some or all aspects of your situation. That said, I'm guilty of being vague sometimes too. I'm working on it.

4. Photos
Your baby/cat/puppy/hamster is cute. I actually do care to see them, but not every single fucking day. Really. Stop that.

Instead, post pictures from trips (and label them). Post pictures from events. Post pictures of you... and your significant other. Or just pictures of you. Post pictures of interesting things you see around the city. Post videos that you record of cool stuff! Seriously, people don't post enough videos (not youtube, jerks).

Don't re-post shit from other sites on Facebook. If you really have to share something, post a link to it. That's what internet is all about. Perhaps if you post a link to a Reddit article, someone will go there, read it, and then peruse the site and discover a wealth of information they have never even imagined existed.

5. Conclusion
Don't be an attention whore. Share responsibly. Be aware of privacy issues. Don't spam my Newsfeed. Thank you.

Livability Ratings Are Rubbish!

For this blog post, I consulted three people in three different countries about their standard of living; expenses, income and overall livability in their cities. The cities which I'm going to compare are Seattle, Vancouver and Warsaw.

You can pour over livability studies all you want, but the reality of the situation is that every person is in a different life situation and opinions are often skewed depending on what part of the city people may live in. The Economist's 2011 Livability rankings puts Vancouver, BC on top of the pile of cities all over the world. No single US city even made the top 25. The Economist says "Vancouver (Canada) sits at the top of the Economist Intelligence Unit's Global Liveability Ranking, a position that can only have been cemented by the successful hosting of the 2010 winter Olympics and Paralympics, which provided a boost to the infrastructure, and culture and environment categories." This is pretty funny to me, because I only know one person who was truly proud of the Olympics hosted there in 2010 and not a single person who thought the cost was worth it.

The Economist's Livability Rating is based on 30 unique factors divided into a few categories: stability; healthcare; culture and environment; education; and infrastructure. Vancouver scored better than every other city on the list. How? Granted, this rating was calculated before the riots earlier this year and the impending teacher strikes, so stability might have escaped relatively unscathed. I'm not sure how healthcare in Vancouver compares to healthcare in Seattle for instance (but I hope to find out soon through conversation with a health professional there). I've never had any healthcare issues here in America, even though people bitch about this system non-stop. This is probably, because I'm young still! Vancouver's culture is definitely varied, but I don't know if that's good or bad. I can see both sides of the coin. Environment? Well, there's pollution everywhere. Vancouver is a fairly heavy industrial port city. Education, sure, Vancouver's got that covered for the most part. As far as infrastructure, though, I think that's Vancouver's bigger flaw. There is only one freeway which is constantly under construction. Traffic can be pretty atrocious during rush hour and the Skytrain doesn't transfer enough volume to be considered efficient. Biking? Forget about it, unless you have a death wish.

Additionally, when the Economist looked at Vancouver, they must have looked at Vancouver proper and not the surrounding suburbs. Sure, maybe if you can afford living downtown Vancouver, it's a pretty awesome experience - especially if you work there. But what if you live in Surrey, Delta or Richmond? Not exactly the epitome of fine living, is it? If the rating were to include the city and its suburbs, would Vancouver still fare as well as it does on the charts?

Let's leave Vancouver alone, and examine its Northwest cousin, Seattle. Here, I believe the story is reversed. Seattle proper is a dump, no argument. Sure, it's nice to visit every now and then - maybe hit a pub or enjoy the nightlife, but to live there? Hell no. Seattle is dirty, dangerous, roads suck and transportation is awful. However... once you exit Seattle and make your way across Lake Washington either by I-90 or I-520, you will find rich neighborhoods left and right with clean, maintained streets, parks, manicured lawns and modern buildings. Bellevue, Kirkland, Redmond, Sammamish and Woodinville are a complete inverse of Seattle (which is also reflected by price of property). A lot of the "niceness" on this side of the lake is thanks to giant contributions from Microsoft and Boeing. Redmond is basically owned by Microsoft.

So we have Vancouver, where Vancouver proper (and North) is great to live in, but the suburbs not so much. Then, we have Seattle proper which is terrible, and the Eastside which is terrific. Now, let's take a look at Warsaw.

Warsaw is a bustling city with mostly post-war and few modern buildings. There are no "suburbs" like we have in America and Canada. You either live in Warsaw, or you live in the boonies outside of Warsaw and it takes you an hour to get downtown, because the traffic is always awful. Granted, Warsaw's public transportation is amazing compared to both Vancouver and Seattle. However, apartments in Warsaw are for the most part tiny, parking spots are basically nonexistent and roads are absolutely terrible. There are no freeways, but there are several highway stretches downtown without lights. Real quick on the size of apartments... an average apartment in Warsaw is somewhere between 36-42 meters squared for a studio (that is a living room, kitchen and bathroom). 36 meters squared is 324 square feet, roughly. That's less than half of what I live in, and even twice 324 sq ft would be too little to fit all my stuff. Can you imagine living in 324 square feet? With your significant other? I can't (although I've seen it and it can work). We are so spoiled in North America, it's ridiculous. Oh, I should just throw this out there too while I'm at it; in Kentucky you can get a 3 bedroom apartment, 1300sq ft, for approximately what I pay for my 769sq ft apartment here. And that's still America!

But if you don't need to go downtown Warsaw and can, say, work from home... you can live in one of the rich neighborhoods outside the city where houses are so big (and much sturdier) that they make American architecture look like child's play. Standard of living there goes up dramatically. Once you no longer have to deal with Warsaw proper and can afford to live outside the city, you are living like a boss.

The moral of the story is: ratings don't mean shit. Vancouver may be #1, but if you live in Whalley, you're definitely not part of said rating. Seattle may not even be on the list, but I bet Redmond and Kirkland (and maybe Bellevue) would definitely find a spot near the top. I don't even know if Warsaw was on the plus list (doubt it), but again, suburbs have you living like a king if you can afford it.

I will always be looking to live in the best place possible. For me, that's where jobs are. I am fortunate enough to work at a company which is also located in one of the richest cities in the state (maybe even country? $66,300 median income in this county). Not sure where I could go to up my standard of living. Where do you want to go?

Mobile Ecosystems

Ecosystem, noun – a system formed by the interaction of a community of organisms with their environment. In the case of this entry, though, let’s ditch the ecological definition, and focus on its application in the world of cloud computing. A cloud ecosystem is simply the aggregate of all services offered by one provider, such as Apple and used by a community of organisms – in this case Apple fans.

Some examples of what cloud services entail:

• Calendar – you update your calendar on your laptop, and then can check it on your phone. Perhaps you set it to ring a reminder tone at a certain time, because you know you will have your phone with you.
• Mail – your mail is stored on the cloud, so even if you check it on your laptop, it will be available on your phone as well.
• Maps – you create a map of a trip on your home computer, but then use your phone along with a maps application to act as a GPS when you go on the road

Google has been developing its cloud services at a rapid pace. Calendar, Address Book, Mail, Maps, Music, Docs, Reader, Photos (Picasa) and now its newest social network Google+ are some of the offerings from Google. Its Docs service is incredibly popular among students and small businesses for its ability to collaborate document editing in real-time. Google Music, while still in Beta, is essentially a music streaming service which streams your own music. You don’t have to buy it, either. You could rip your CDs, throw them up on your account and listen to them on your Android phone, Honeycomb tablet or any computer with internet access and a compatible browser.

In the case of Apple, its ecosystem is somewhat lacking comparatively to its competitors, though apparently not for long. Apple’s iCloud service is arriving soon along with the new iOS5 devices. Although a tad late to the cloud party, Apple’s strong host of hardware devices out on the market and its rabid fanbase spells competition to Google and Microsoft. A quick look at what Apple currently offers reveals the standard Calendar, Address Book, Mail and some other stuff. The iCloud is supposed to offer access to music you purchase from iTunes and give you the ability to store documents (probably from Pages etc.) The problem here is, obviously, that you have to use iTunes to buy the music in order to be able to store it on their cloud. Now, that’s alright if you use iTunes to purchase music exclusively – but what if you just went to a Broadway show, bought the OST CD and want to listen to it on your phone? Sure, you can rip it to MP3 and put it on your phone’s internal storage, but then you have less space on your phone for other stuff! Apple’s handling of its ecosystem is somewhat draconian, and I’m afraid (read: hopeful) it eventually will be their downfall.

Microsoft also has a cloud service, Windows Live. Hilariously enough, I don’t know much about it. I used it a while ago to store documents for school, but I don’t use it anymore. I know that it is possible to sync stuff you write in Word on your PC to online storage, and then open it from the web as well and edit it there. I know that Hotmail syncs with Windows Phones, as does their Xbox service. Microsoft is pretty smart though, I don’t doubt that if they are a bit behind Google, they are on their way to catching up.

Alright, so now that you hopefully know what an ecosystem is, I want to throw an opinion at you.

In this article by Miguel Helft of New York Times, we learn a bit about Apple’s culture. Disregard the fact that this article is roughly a year old and that Android has already annihilated what lead iPhone had in America over the past year (and overtook it, too). For those of you who are lazy, here are the key points the article makes:

• Android OS is available on (now) over a hundred devices from a dozen of different manufacturers.
• iOS is available on… the iPhone.
• People all over the world (article says Americans, but that’s a year old statistic) are buying up Androids like hotcakes, resulting in the platform literally surging forward ahead of competition.
• Apple has faced near extinction before due to their closed business practices before in early 1980s when Microsoft Windows did to Macs essentially what Google Android is doing to iOS.
• The mobile market is not just a clash of titans as Apple vs Microsoft was. There are other platforms on the market taking chunks out iPhone (and Android).

If you keep reading through the article, a fellow named Mitchell Kapor says: “Having a tightly controlled ecosystem, which is what Apple has, is a large short-term advantage and a large long-term disadvantage.” What he means by this is that by controlling the content within its ecosystem, such as custom apps, it creates an amazing user experience. Apple’s ecosystem is huge and clean. Let’s draw a few metaphors!

Imagine Apple’s ecosystem is a lake. This lake is somewhere up in the mountains, so the water is relatively clean. There are lots of fish in the lake and the scenery around it is beautiful. There is only one inlet into the lake and it is controlled by the state government so as to keep the lake clean and pretty. Before you can take your family to the lake, you need to pay a $15 entry fee, but the experience is guaranteed to be first-class.

Now, Google’s ecosystem is also a lake. It’s a huge lake with several islands, a near infinite amount of species of wildlife and fish, but its inlets are not controlled. The scenery is still beautiful and the lake is high up in the mountains, but there is a possibility of pollution. It charges no fee per entry, but your experience is not guaranteed to be first-class, and you may sometimes find it tough to find a picnic spot.

For comparison’s sake, Microsoft’s ecosystem is a pond. It is similar to Apple in that it is controlled, but the entry fee is only about $3. It’s also similar to Google in that its wildlife is diverse, but not as plentiful. It is however very healthy and high quality. You can catch some of the best fish in the world in that pond.

Which of these ecosystems would you most likely make your regular visit?

Lastly, in the vein of opinion, I want to link to a couple more articles and briefly talk about them. This one is a blog entry by an Adobe developer (creators of Photoshop, Premiere, etc…) in which we learn that Apple’s App Store discriminates against applications which feature technology which Apple delivers in their own products. When you think about it first, it makes sense, ya? John Nack, the author of the post, says this: “Apple refuses to carry Lightroom (Adobe) in Apple retail stores. That’s okay; Lightroom is doing just fine against Aperture (Apple). But what if the Apple store were the only store? How would Apple customers get the benefits of the competition?” Nack basically says what we already knew; Apple’s stranglehold on the App Store prevents competition from innovating on its own platform, resulting in more and more developers hopping to Apple’s competitors’ open platforms to sell their wares.

Another great article featured on Wired.com talks about Android’s beginnings and its ascent and eventual domination over the iPhone. It is a lengthy article but well worth the read if you’re interested in the shifting world of mobile devices. If anything, the last paragraph of that article is worth reading. Choose a wagon and jump on it, because eventually only one of them will make it through the Oregon Trail.

Last article I want to point your attention to, is this one. Although Apple and Google are the two behemoths in the mobile fight right now, Microsoft is not one to be underestimated. Windows 8 is coming and with it is Microsoft’s vision of the cloud. From what I’ve seen (and trust me, I’ve seen a bit more than you) it’s going to make Apple’s iCloud offering look like riding a Honda compared to a Microsoft’s Windows 8 Lexus. And then there is still Google with a Hummer.

In conclusion, regardless of what ecosystem you choose to go with, if you plan to stay in touch with the rest of the world, increase your productivity and yes, even feel better about yourself, you are in good hands whether you go with Apple, Google or Microsoft. You may not get as many features with Apple or Microsoft as you do with Google, and your experience may end up being more limited too, but if you don’t need those extra features, then both Apple and Microsoft are very strong platforms to bet on. Apple’s dirty business practices, lack of investor love and draconian App Store/Manufacturer handling will eventually end up hurting the company. Microsoft’s small, but growing market share limits the amount of apps and features its users have access to. Google’s open system, while a blessing to both investors, developers and manufacturers, has other ramifications, such as malware apps and OS instability (although Android 2.3 has been super-stable IME).

I use Android. Thanks for reading!

Six Months of Staying Clean

It has been just over six months since my divorce with World of Warcraft. Although I briefly rebounded on Rift for a couple weeks, it never got serious. Staying away from MMOs has been easier than ever. Let me put this in perspective for you.

When I played, my days all looked the same. I would wake up, go to work, and try to leave early to log on to WoW, then sit there and play until it got late. I logged on and did daily quests, then raided for 4 hours, then maybe crafted and played the auction house. This would go on for 5 days a week from Sunday to Thursday. Friday and Saturday were supposed to be days off, where people can go and do stuff outside, but… yeah right! I had stuff to do in the game, still. I would raid more on a different character, gear up, gain experience, you name it. I was consumed by this game.

That is not to say, that WoW ran my life. I did, however, plan my life around it. To be the best at what I did, I had to put in a considerable amount of time. Towards the second half of my WoW “career”, I contributed to the leadership of my guild, which resulted in even less free time than before. Since I put in so much time, and the amount of time put in translated proportionately into success, I was really very successful… at slaying Dragons. I had a great time, I met amazing people and I do not regret it one bit. WoW kept me out of trouble. I played from the age of 20 to 26 – years during which a lot can go wrong – and given my proclivity for trouble when I was younger, I am thankful for my MMO addiction.

I could say that I turned out better this way, than I would have otherwise. Obviously that’s an enormous assumption based on not a single fact, but I genuinely feel like I would’ve either been a baby’s daddy or struggling in community college if it wasn’t for World of Warcraft. Now that I’ve been “sober” for a whopping 6 months, in retrospect, I can really appreciate it.

Since quitting mid-February, I’ve accomplished a great deal. I have redoubled my efforts at my university, actually taking it a bit more seriously than before when I was busy slaying dragons. I’ve become more politically acute thanks to reading more and watching the news regularly. I made a very special friend with whom I’ve reconnected after over 10 years of silence, and yet another couple friends with whom I haven’t spoken in ages as well. I am more willing to go out and do stuff outside of my house – though that usually saps at my finances, so such excursions are still limited. My drive to travel has been rekindled, partly thanks to the aforementioned special friend, and partly because I have a lot more free time to do it. For example, since quitting, I’ve been to Portland and the Oregon Coast, to Salt Lake City, Utah and I am very soon going to Europe, to see my family and also to tour Classical Italy.

Life has been good – as someone put it; “You’re on cloud 9 lately.” It has been great, actually, and with an amazing, newly-found friendship, a light at the end of the University tunnel, and a promising career, I am absolutely ready to tackle almost anything life throws at me. Bring it on, bitches.

Travel Prices

I had an interesting discussion yesterday about the price of travel. This summer, in fact in about 20 days, I will be going on a trip to tour Classical Italy (hopefully). The total cost for me to experience this is going to be roughly $2200 USD. This includes my flight from Seattle to Warsaw, and then the trip itself which is about $850 all-inclusive. Tacking on admission fees to various places and a few Italy-specific meals I will definitely have to partake in (and photograph), it will end up being around $2200, maybe a hundred more.

But that’s actually nothing compared to what I’d have to pay if I wanted to fly to Italy and tour there directly from Seattle. The price ends up being 1850$E which is something in the vicinity of $2670 USD for the tour itself! Additionally, the tour only includes breakfasts as far as meals go, so you’re on your own for the rest of the day, every day. Travel in Italy is in First-class coaches in trains.

http://www.roadtoitaly.com/budget-tours-italy/classical-italy-rome-tour.html

Tack on $1150 USD for the round-trip airfare from Seattle to Rome and you’re looking at $3800. Add another $200 for food (since only breakfast is included) and we have $4000. That’s a low ballpark estimate – imagine you want to taste some authentic Italian cuisine and buy souvenirs - that’s another $150-200. So now we’re looking at $4200, maybe a hundred more.

So Americans would pay $4200 for a 10 day trip to Italy. You see Rome, the Vatican, Pompeii and Naples, Florence, Pisa and Venice. That’s basically all the major points in Italy for $4200. Going back to the first paragraph in this write up, I’ll be paying $2200 for roughly the same.

There are two reasons for this:

• Accommodations – Americans have higher standards than the rest of the world as far as travel and living goes. Above budget tour includes stay in Marriott-level hotels in Italy, First-class coaches while travelling through Italy, private transfers to and from the airport/railway station and other amenities. Comfort is great, but the above is listed in the Budget Tours section. Imagine what the First Class tour, or Luxury tour would include (and how much it would cost)!
• Purchasing Power – Because I’m flying to Poland first, and then to Italy from there, my tour is going to be in Polish. It’s also going to be priced to be affordable to people who live and work in Poland. Given that the average median income in the US is $43500 and in Poland $18800 (CIA, 2010), you can see why the trips there would be organized to be much cheaper than their American equivalents.

It’s ridiculous how expensive travel from the US is. Doing a little bit more research, it would actually be about $800 cheaper (but definitely more time consuming) to organize your own flight from Seattle to Italy, book your own hotels, buy your own train tickets and take time to see places without a tour guide. I think if and when I ever travel from Seattle like that, I will most likely organize my own sight-seeing trip.