The Tin Lizard

Security For Computers

I guess it's really true that anyone with a computer ought to have some program in place to protect it from evil-doers sending viruses, spam, trojan horses, keyboard loggers, and all kinds of other bad stuff.

My security program subscription expired recently.  I had been using the product for several years so I decided it was time for a change.  I spent at least a couple of hours, probably longer, looking at reviews and rankings.   The rankings I found varied wildly in their selection of which are the two or three "best" programs - there's Kaspersky, and G-something, Avira, Norton, at least 15 or 20 "security suites," including a couple of free ones.  How to decide?

What I eventually discovered was that the difference between the top choice and the #20 choice in most of these rankings is marginal.  ALL of them do a pretty good job these days, and the differences often lie more in the interface than in the actual performance.   I renewed my "same-old, same-old," and saved myself the time and effort of having to remove one program, install another, and learn its quirks.

Best advice, in my view:  If you've got one you like, there's no need to go chasing after "the best" unless you're a serious geek.  Otherwise, stick with what you've got and you'll be just as well off. 

Spacex Junk

The private company Spacex, now that the NASA shuttle program has ended, is sending rockets into space.  One was supposed to launch today, intended among other tasks to deliver parts to the international space station, but it was aborted at the last moment and will be rescheduled.

All well and good, I suppose, but I was appalled to hear a second part of the story:  A capsule containing the ashes of a bunch of dead people is aboard, and will be jettisoned into space.

Seriously, isn't there enough debris in space from all the stuff humankind has put up there over the past half-century, without purposely adding to it?  Ridiculous. 

Nyet-Flix

It wasn't so long ago that Netflix made history by its rapid rise to dominance of the home-movie market, bowling over Blockbuster and other competitors with its combination of online ordering and snail-mail delivery.  Then, they added video streaming to the mix, enabling direct download of flicks, television shows, and other entertainment media.  Wonder of wonders, this was all available for one low price.  

But then, the honeymoon was over.  With a large customer base locked in to a marriage, the company began to show the ugly reality beneath the veneer of charming behavior.  Last year they declared that the streaming and mail services would be separated, and each charged separately, at the same price as both had cost up to then: a doubling of price.  Customers should probably have expected that move, but they had a right to be outraged at the high-handed and sudden way it was implemented. 

Many subscribers jumped ship.  Our household continued both services for a while, but we had always considered streaming as a secondary feature because what was mostly available was old television shows, and some even older movies.  Netflix promised quick improvement in availability on the streaming side.  Clearly, the future of the business, with the burgeoning popularity of tablets and smart phones, is in streaming.  But they didn't deliver.  Last month, we finally quit the streaming service because it was almost impossible to find anything we wanted to watch via streaming.  (Maybe they have lots of stuff teenagers want? That is beyond our ken.) 

Is it possible Russians own Netflix?  In Russian, "net" means no.  (It's pronounced "nyet" but spelled "net.")   The name would be apt.  So around our house, we're calling them "Nyet-Flix."

Nyet-Flix is attacking its DVD customers on other fronts.  Until recently, subscribers could put their subscription on hold during vacation or business travel and not incur charges.  As of May 1, however, that's no longer an option; now, they say you can "cancel" your subscription and reinstate it at any time; but - whoops! - the cancellation only takes effect on your next monthly billing date.  If you plan to be away beginning the 8th of the month, but you're billed on the 29th, this option is meaningless.   

We have also noticed other deterioration in the snail-mail service.  Two years ago it would have been rare not to receive one of the top two listings in your "queue" but more recently, it became common for them to send something from about 10 places down on your list, no matter how long you'd been waiting for the "No. 1" item which they'd say was "not available."  The only way to get a new, popular item, it seemed, was to delete all but one or two choices from the queue; then those same items became available.

The bottom line is that in Netflix I now see a company that's cutting corners, and squeezing its customers.  No doubt streaming will ultimately become the standard, but Netflix is attempting to make the snail-mail DVD obsolete before they have anything to replace it with.   It's an odd business model for a company providing a service.  I'd say Nyet-flix is ripe to go the way of Blockbuster as soon as somebody else can mount a customer-friendly challenge.  

Who Is Edwina Rogers, And Can She Separate Church And State?

I had never heard of Edwina Rogers until today.  Not surprising, since I don't much keep up with pop culture or the doings in area "society."  However, today's Washington Post gossip column ("The Reliable Source") describes her as a flamboyant local Republican lobbyist who will soon become head of the Secular Coalition for America, whose aim is to support the separation of church and state.

The Post column is wondering about the disconnect - a Republican working to advance secularism.  But it doesn't seem such a reach to me.  Who better to try to moderate the noisy god-in-government righters and bring them under the mainstream tent?   On this one vector, if she's serious and not an agent-provocateur, Ms. Rogers may be laying the foundation for the GOP to modernize, gain lost relevance, and reaffirm its place in the mainstream. 

 

I'll Have Another - The Magic Of Thoroughbred Horse Racing

About an hour ago I watched "I'll Have Another" win the Kentucky Derby on TV.

I'm no big horse racing fan (though some years back a friend and I did enjoy an occasional Friday-night drive from Kansas City to Ak-Sar-Ben track in Omaha, where we found that we could usually cover the costs of our trip and win a little bit besides).  Nor did I really care which entrant in the crowded field of 20 would win.  (I rooted for Creative Cause.  I like grays.)

But there is a terrific, magical quality about the Derby.  The long tradition, the excitement, the anticipation, the pageantry, the crowds ...  all for an event that lasts only about three minutes.  They do it year after year (and perhaps part of the secret is that unlike an NFL game, it's only once a year) but they bring it off, and it works. 

That said, I would vote against having a dialog balloon saying "Yum" plastered over everything in sight.  To me it suggests they're planning to eat some of the horses.  OK, so it's the logo of "Yum Brands," the fast-food chain that includes Kentucky Fried Chicken (get the connection?), Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut.  They're taking over the world, but really, you Derby managers, you stepped over the line on commercialism this time, and it will destroy what you've got, it you let it.

Drab Rides

While driving around last week I thought how drab our personal cars are these days.   Ninety percent of private vehicles on the roads, it seems, are silver, white, or black, and now nudging into the picture a "bronzy" color that's also pretty nondescript.  In between, you'll catch sight of an occasional green, red (usually more "burgundy"), blue or yellow.  Then I noticed local columnist John Kelly's recent column on the subject, plus a follow-up piece, so I guess I'm not the only one to notice.

In the second piece especially, Kelly looks for explanations for color-avoidance but I think many of the old ones, which we've all heard, are no longer valid (if they ever were).  Were cops more likely to track, and pull over, red cars for speeding?  Even if you think this might have been the case in bygone decades, speed cameras and radar guns are color-blind now.  There may be something to the suggestion that in these bad economic times, more people pick somber colors.  But my own guess is that people may go with the basics because they don't want to stand out on the highway - they prefer not to be identifiable, for security reasons.  They know they're going to do stupid things - cut someone off, sit forever at a light while on the phone, and such, and they don't want their vehicles to be "memorable."  Dealers may also lean toward stocking a high percentage of cars that blend in with asphalt, knowing that they could end the model year taking a bath on those bright yellow models they inventoried.   Blandness spreads further if people who might like a more colorful paint job have to wait to get it.

My own color chronology has been more varied.  In the 60s, I ended up with a hand-me-down 1954 Nash Ambassador in a bright green color as my first car.  In 1968 I rammed that into the back of another vehicle, bent the frame, and had to junk it.  Next came a white Chevy.  After the army I bought my first new car:  Tan.  From there it was white again, briefly; a "blue" that could barely be distinguished from gray; burgundy, teal, and currently silver.  So I still have lots of options:  a real blue, red, or even yellow.

Especially considering that cars all look stylistically alike now (all sedans in existence nowadays share a single, boring profile, and all SUVs another one), maybe it's time to expand our palette.