Games to Try (or not)

Been trying a bunch of new games recently. Given that Christmas is on the way, figured I'd let people know my opinions, to help them with their shopping.

Wii Fit (Wii)

Thumbs Up!

Finally, you can find these in stores, though who knows how they'll fare during the Christmas rush. Basically, Wii Fit is a step board, capable of determining centre of balance and weight. The game itself simply unlocks a variety of activities and mini-games completed with the board and occasionally remotes, including a full assortment of yoga poses, strength training, cardio/fitness, and balance games.

The balance games are the most 'fun' - downhill skiing being my favourite so far. The fitness games are a good middle ground, with Einin being a huge fan of the hula hooping. The strength and yoga break the illusion - there's no mistake here that you're doing exercise rather than playing a game, and they don't try to hide it. I'd also say these last two are weaker in that it's far more difficult to detect correct execution of the techiques from balance alone.

However, Wii Fit is still win. The balance games are sufficiently entertaining to be party games, and the rest are nice for when you don't feel like trekking to the gym. I don't like the lack of solid multiplayer (you have to go all the way to the main menu to switch) nor the lack of pre-programmed exercise routines, but those are in no way fatal flaws.

Plus, hackers have done some sweet things with the Wii Fit board.

Final Fantasy III (DS)

Epic Fail

A port of the Japanese classic not only to English but to the DS (complete with advanced graphics). Summary: I can see now why they skipped over this one when they originally ported the series.

The game is the worst RPG I've ever played. The characters may as well be random pixel blobs - they're so undeveloped that I don't even remember their names. The story is a sequence of mini-quests, but beyond "I'm saving the world from the darkness", and there's some crystals involved, the story is nearly non-existent.

The class system is ridiculous. There's maybe 20 classes to choose from... you get a few more after each crystal. Each character may change at will. However, short of the Internet, there's no way to know what class does what, is good for what, or can use what equipment. Plus the fact that you have to level each class you try separately, so experimenting is an expensive proposition.

The final straw for me was the end tower. I fight through a bunch of very difficult areas, get to the final boss world, decide I want to save. Walking back the way I came leads me not to the exit, but to an encounter with an unkillable boss who kills me and sets me back 3 hours of play time.

I quit at that point. It's not worth another half-dozen hours of playtime to see the end. And I use 'play' time in the loosest sense.

Geometry Wars: Galaxies (DS)

Surprizing Win!

Capitalizing on the success of Geometry Wars: Evolved and Geometry Wars: Evolved 2 for Xbox Live Arcade, a clever company decided to make a DS version. To justify the value they added, they included a 'campaign' mode and an upgradable drone. Oh noes...

I thought this was going to be serious cheese, but I bought it anyways, figuring that it'd still be Geometry Wars, and thus fun enough for a short plane ride. But wow, it took me by surprize. The campaign is excellent! Yes, you just play a bunch of rounds of what is essentially the same game, but they mix it up a bunch. Levels with different shapes and borders; a level with Astroids-like dividing shapes. A level with minelayers whose mines you have to set off. Even a giant spinning gravity well.

I hope they adopt these features into Geometry Wars 3!

Wrath of the Lich King (PC)

Say goodbye to your non-WoW friends.

Everyone expected good things from the second expansion to World of Warcraft. Blizzard exceeded expectations. Their updated engine shows; the new world is all about tall peaks, snow lines, and waterfalls. There's times where we've just stopped in the middle of a battle for a town to just admire a breathtaking view! Death Knights are great fun, and make use of seamless instance transitions to script an elaborate opening scenario. Not a bug to be found, and except for a couple of queues, solid as a rock.

If you've left WoW, now is the time to come back.

Other Games I don't have yet, but want to try

Fallout 3 (PC/Xbox)

The first two were epic; you're sent on a grand quest into the post-apocalyptic wastes, and by the time you're done, your entire worldview has changed. Turn-based RPG that actually emphasises freedom of choice, and lets your character and even the world evolve based on your decisions on and off the battlefield.

While the new FPS style worries me, I've been assured that the game is still excellent.

Saints Row 2 (Xbox)

A blatant ripoff of Grand Theft Auto. But it took the announcement of this game to really appreciate some of my dissatisfaction with Grand Theft Auto 4. While I did love GTA4, it really spent too much time doing realism over the fun factor that makes GTA great. As Yahtzee points out, taking my cousin bowling got boring after the 12th time, and distracted from running over pedestrians.

Saints Row had no such qualms. Loose driving mechanics, readily available weapons, and hilariously entertaining subgames by the truckload. Saints Row 2 looks to play the "If it ain't broke" card; every description looks like it's the same as its predecessor; down to a cheezy retcon of the first's ending (even the cliche coma). I can't wait.

My Final Canadian Election Choice

So, I made my decision on Monday, and finalized the series of envelopes that will ultimately make absolutely no difference to the fate of my riding, but make me feel better for at least participating.

Oz Cole-Arnal (NDP)

I know I am going to take a fair bit of flak for voting NDP, but I think the decision was justified based on what I consider a reasonable analysis, so please read on before you flame me to my ultimate demise.

Green John Bithell didn't make the final three. While I have no particular gripe with the Green party, the continued green focus of the NDP, and 'Green Shift' of the Liberals give me two alternatives to access the key Green platform item. The rest of their platform is a grab-bag of ideas across the centre-left; clearly not a unified vision. The Greens are working hard to be taken seriously; they've had an MP, and their leader is finally in the debates. Still, I'm not ready to be a Green "early adopter" until at least one MP is elected and proves to be a force in the House of Commons. My particular candidate is a new nomination to the riding, has no serious qualifications to brag about, and has practically no personal platform information beyond his basic bio. He didn't even have a Facebook politician page. No communication - no vote.

So, down to the parties.

Conservatives are socially and fiscally the right of the spectrum - which puts them at odds with my other options (who pretty much all share the environmentalist centre-left at this point). This really leads to an "us vs. them" approach to just about everything, from their party politics to the media. Continuing the trend from 2006, the Conservatives' platform has consistently been less about their own policies as ridiculing the Liberals.

Despite an accountability platform in 2006, they're the least trustworthy of any party, for reasons I've already outlined, even in the very calling of the election! They've even earned the ire of two provincial governments though their broken promises to date. There's several deal breakers in their policies that have relied on their secrecy and disregard for accountability to proceed. The main ones - the latest IP treaties and copyright bills, directly affect my life even from the US! Plus, even where they've got positive campaign points, like anti-spam, they're areas that they've already provably failed from the past two years.

It also doesn't help that I am morally opposed to their social conservatism (right to life, anti-gay, etc) - it doesn't affect me personally at all, but I still can't support the party that actually tried (and failed, heh) to reopen the gay marriage debate.

On the plus side, their leader is tried and tested, and he's good at what he does. They're also the only party that is actually thinking about not lighting our economy on fire (though their success to date is a matter of opinion). Their social conservatism actually helps them out in getting tough on crime. They're the only party for whom the main sales point is something other than the environment. Finally, as much as I hate to bow to it, they're good because they're not the Liberals or NDP, who are next on my scorn list.

The Liberals are the 'natural' Canadian party, and what I would normally support in any sane election. However this time around, it's just bloody ridiculous! Their leader is incredibly uncharismatic. Instead of selling a reformed Liberal party willing to lead responsibly in times of economic uncertainty, they're selling a green shift (with a proposal of which many are dubious). This, combined with rampant spending I mentioned earlier. If I wanted a slew of new social programs, I'd go NDP, much like I'd go Green for a carbon tax.

It's a party that is ready neither for an election nor to lead. Given their inability to show the slightest backbone as opposition between 2006 and 2008, they don't even seem ready to be an opposition. They're the least vocal of the parties in the campaign, and haven't done anything to sell most people beyond trying to stave off the vicious Conservative offensive.

The NDP are basically socialists. Raise taxes, give them to some poor starving kid overseas. Or more likely, give it to the unionized workers who make up much of their base. Not pleasant at all if you like paying less taxes, or think that a high corporate tax rate will negatively affect your job. They've been focusing on green issues much longer than the Liberals, but with a more regulation heavy cap-and-trade approach.

Their leader: a veteran of campaigning, but not of leadership. Never a leader, nor even an official opposition. Still, Jack Layton is charismatic among his supporters, and at least has more support than Dion.

Candidates

• Stephen Woodworth (CON)
• Strong educational background (practicing lawyer).
• Liberal candidate (1988), but hasn't otherwise run recently.
• Passable communication from website with press releases, though often focused on the party level. Local commentators have observed very little communication.
• Website has very little useful 'static' information. Focused almost exclusively as being a Conservative mouthpiece.
• Involvement in right-to-life groups.
  
  
• Karen Redman (LIB)
• Weak educational background (BA, a 'writer').
• Veteran of riding for 11 years, party whip, caucus member, leader of several private member's bills, and often involved in question period.
• Lack of online communication via her website or Facebook group. I got more info on her campaign from Woodworth's website!
  
• Passable static website information talking about her varied activities while holding her seat.
• Environmental issues, womans' issues, disability issues.
• Hefty religious involvement, but does not appear to play out in her political life.
  
  
• Oscar Cole-Arnal (NDP)
• Doctorate in European History! (my previous comments mocked his Masters in the New Testament, but when you add a pair of post-grad degrees on top of that, you've got my respect).
• Newcomer, replacing a better-known NDP candidate. Only been in Canada since 1975, and a citizen since 1986.
• Top communication by far. A blog, active Facebook group. Also lots of static information - I know exactly what his personal key issues are.
• Lots of support for 'redistribution of wealth'.
• Woman's issues, social justice. Meh.
• Regulation. Yay. Proportional representation. VERY yay! More transparency in Government, but in particular not negotiating trade deals in secret - with ACTA coming, this is absolutely essential.
• Extremely high level of religious involvement. Doesn't play out negatively like in the US, but one stil has to worry.

Analysis and Conclusion

My choice is Conservative, Liberal or NDP. None of the three have the perfect platform. However, while I enjoy the fact that the Conservatives are the only party that differentiates itself from the pack and isn't trying to raze the economy to buy voters, they have deal-breaker policies (eg. copyright) and a blatant disregard for their own accountability laws that would otherwise prevent such travesties from happening. Anyways, I just don't like their US "character assault" style of campaign. While their local candidate is educated, I don't have the information nor the trust to believe he'd do the right thing either.

But I have to look at reality. The conservatives will get the plurality, no matter what I say. The choice is only really of majority or minority, and who gets how many seats of opposition. So I must choose the party who will best defend my interests against the Conservatives, which is a very different question than who I want to lead.

In the end, it has to be the NDP. The Liberals were literally useless in the last parliament, meekly surrendering to every confidence vote. During the Liberal minority before it, the NDP were a major player, and bought several concessions for the budgets they voted for. The Liberals are basically a shattered party, which is no good for an opposition that needs to keep the Conservatives from doing evil things.

While I'd normally worry about the excessive spending of the NDP or their focus on the common worker over... well... me... as an opposition they are unlikely to cause these sorts of problems. Anyways, the Liberals seem so concerned with rebuilding their voter base that the NDP seem fiscally conservative in comparison. A party more amenable to government regulation may also prove useful, given the telco stranglehold on the country. For example, I think NDP would be a better defender of net neutrality and cell carrier abuses, which the Liberals enabled, and the Conservatives ultimately failed to defend when it counted.

But I can't lie, what ultimately sold me: Oz. I respect his extensive education. I enjoyed that I could read his policies, and follow his campaign online. Even when I was ambivalent or even against his policies, at least he was upfront and honest about them. Both him and Karen from the Liberals focused exclusively on what I'd call 'meh' issues that mean nothing to me, but the fact that Oz's communication was more personal and immediate from him blog gave me confidence that when an issue I do care about comes up, he'll be a stronger advocate for it.

Guess it's all marketing in the end. As is with the microcosm that is my riding, Jack Layton's message reached me best. So they get my vote.

Voting By Mail

My vote is filled out, and ready to go in the mail. It's sad that I need to vote before the leader debates, but it has to arrive by the same election day the rest of you scrubs vote, or it's not counted.

It's actually a very reasonable process. You proactively register to vote in the riding of your last permanent address in Canada, and provide your new mailing address. They will contact you occasionally by mail to make sure your info is up to date (even with the occasional reminder email, if you're one of those 'computer' folk). You can register (or remain registered) up to five years from the date of your departure, after which you are no longer considered eligible to vote. 

When an election is called, they print up your 'special' ballot and mail it out to you, right away!

A ballot. Literally just a dotted line to write a name, so don't make a mistake! But then, no less than THREE envelopes.

• Inner envelope. Votes need to be private, after all, so they give you a small unmarked envelope that actually goes in the ballot box on election day.
• Outer envelope. Your vote needs to be private, but also unique. Name, riding, and various uniquely identifying marks clearly on the envelope, and a dotted line to sign saying that this is your one and only vote for the election. I might have spilled some Photoshop on it.
• Mailing envelope. Since your name and signature need to be private, right? Plus nice and addressed. But sorry, you have to pay your own postage.

Pretty easy! It's my last election (anywhere!) for awhile, so I'm making it count.

Who did I vote for? Well, you can probably guess, and it's something I enjoy sharing, but that can wait for the next post.

Riding Updates and More Voting Thoughts

They updated my riding again. The Communist candidate is back. Also an Independent candidate, Amanda Lamka; though a complete unknown. Found some great commentary about my riding as well.

Even better, a website and blog for the NDP candidate! While I was skeptical of Cole-Arnal before (both as a fresh face, and a perceived danger of faith-based policies), I am now far more accepting of his candidacy. The web is a powerful tool of democracy - there's no excuse anymore to not be in regular communication with your constituents. The combination of a regularly updated blog and a Facebook page garner huge amounts of my respect. Even better, I now know about his policies instead of just his qualifications.

The election continues to depress me. Given that my vote has to be mailed in soon to make it to Ottawa on time, this is a worrying development. My choices are: don't vote at all, vote for the independent candidate, for the Communist party, the Green party, the NDP, the Liberal party, or the Conservative party.

I dismiss not voting. Not voting is a bad option (unless you're uninformed) - it expresses support for all parties equally, even the ones you like less than the others. One may say that it sends a message of disdain for all of the candidates. However, in the results it is very difficult to differentiate apathetic voters from informed dissenters. Voter apathy is a key battleground for the US, but not much at all in Canada.

I dismiss the independent. Recent minorities have proven that independents can decide the fate of entire governments! I cannot in good conscience vote for someone with potentially massive power with no knowledge of their intended platform. Until she reaches out to voters over the Internet, no vote for her.

I dismiss the Communist candidate. No chance of the vote being meaningful, and I don't agree with most of the platform (eg. anti-free-trade). Nor do I suspect that a disabled truck driver is going to be the most effective advocate of my concerns.

So, Green, NDP, Liberal, or Conservative.

My thoughts, coming up...

So Much for Kitchener Centre

Well, I've received my ballot, so whenever I'm ready, I can get my vote on in Kitchener Centre.

But it's not that easy. No sooner than I declare a grudging respect for one of the candidates in Kitchener Centre, that it's announced that every party except for the Liberal incumbant Karen Redman, has been swapped out!

Lets see who we have for candidates now.

• Stephen Woodworth (CON). Laurier grad, and a lawyer. Former Liberal candidate. Admittedly, not bad, except for being heavily involved in right-to-life and Christian advocacy groups.
• Karen Redman (LIB). BA English. Involved with disability and children's issues.
• Oscar Cole-Arnal (NDP). Masters in 'New Testament' (I can't make stuff like that up!). Issues mostly centre around civil rights.
• John Bithell (GRN). Not much mentioned. 'Studied' macroeconomics.

Except for the Green Party candidate, every single candidate has heavy religious involvement to the point where I can't expect them to really be advocates for... you know... actual important issues instead of faith-based initiatives or random useless hippie propaganda. Great. Way to ramp up the suck in my riding.

I'm getting a lot of people telling me "you should vote for the party, not the candidate." While I disagree with the assertion (your MP is meant to be your representative first and foremost), I already explained that it was just a backup plan because of the equal amount of suck thrown out by all the parties.

But just to satisfy people, lets see what we can find about the parties. We already know that there's no way we could ever trust the Conservatives. Apparently it's an opinion shared even by some provinces. So, vote Liberal or NDP? Well, unfortunately, not wanting to prove Harper's claims of ridiculous spending wrong, both parties are fighting to waste as much money as possible to give free rides to old people and parents to buy votes. Of course, they're also looking to offer some money to potentially useful things like city infrastructure and schools, but still, there's only so much money to go around, and it's pretty clear that the sort of spending they want to make is going to be off the charts!

The Greens and the Bloc seem to just be staying out of the way, and allowing the mutually-assured-epic-fail between the big boys to play out to their advantage. Great.

This is ridiculous. How am I supposed to vote when I'm being given these sort of choices?

But wait, Lownewulf... can you vote in 2008?

Yep, I can vote by mail, likely for the last time. After five years out of the country, Elections Canada will probably start questioning my extended absence from Canada, so by 2012, I may only be able to contribute through what meager influence I can make on other voters.

I'll probably vote in Kitchener Centre, as my last 'permanent' address. Unfortunately, it's an unfamiliar riding to me, since my last (counted) vote was Kitchener-Waterloo (I was eligible in 2006 in KC by mail, but the ballot didn't reach me). KW was easy, especially with the on-campus debates. The charismatic Liberal veteran versus the asshat Conservative, the NDP nooblet, and ridiculous Greeny. It was a pretty easy call.

In my latest riding; well we'll see who the candidates are. If voting by party, the Liberals get a massive 'meh', and I'm still waiting to see if the NDP can pull some excitement out of their ass. So really, it'll probably come down to candidates.

In terms of candidates, I'd probably support the NDP guy, Richard Walsh-Bowers. I appreciate his hefty professional and university academic backgrounds in clinical psychology - I believe higher education, especially in the sciences, can lead to a candidate better predisposed to critical thinking and objective analysis. Still, I haven't seen or read much on him, so we'll have to wait and see if he's persuasive, or if he supports any crackpot policies.

Karen Redman, the Liberal candidate... meh. She's the Liberal whip, and apparently fairly competent. But she lacks the powerhouse academics of Walsh-Bowers (BA English... fries with that?). The groups she's involved in seem like the polar opposite of anything I'd remotely care about - heavy church involvement, disabilities, dependent children, blah blah blah. She campaigns a lot for her riding's interests, which is great for her riding, but meaningless to me here in Seattle.

Even if I hadn't already summarily dismissed the Conservatives for their disregard of their own accountability platform, Steven Cage sounds like a pretty big asshat. Big MBA education and money job is his background (as a techie, I naturally distrust MBAs). Standard anti-Liberal rhetoric instead of an actual platform of his own... except for an aggressive opposition to gay marriage of course.

Oh, and a Communist Party candidate. Yarly! If that wasn't hilarious enough, he's a former truck driver on disability for stress and depression. What a winner!

Why You Should Send the Conservatives Packing

The Canadian Prime Minister, the Right Honourable Stephen Harper, is expected to request the dissolution of Parliament today, which will ultimately lead to an election in October 2008. Despite being the smallest minority government in history, it is also the longest a minority government has survived.

Still, this is a great opportunity to send the Tories packing.

"Why, Lownewulf? Why, if the Conservatives have done so well, would you send them home? They even gave us a 2% GST cut!" Sure, but in the end, for a Government whose campaign was centered around government ethics and accountability, they have shown a brazen disregard for their own accountability rules that make the Liberals look like saints in comparison (and given that the Liberals were largely booted out due to the sponsorship scandal, that says a lot!). They are so incredibly dishonest, and have shown such a callous disregard for accountability, that one cannot possibly trust them to lead for a second longer.

• The call for an election contradicts C-16, the law the Conservatives passed to mandate fixed election dates. They passed it specifically to prevent parties from calling elections for political advantage, which is exactly what Harper has just done.
• Despite campaigning around and ultimately passing enhanced accountability laws around election finacing, are trying to slot in an election before the issue of their in-and-out campaign financing is decided in the courts.
• After rolling out a policy of tabling any treaty before ratification legislation is introduced, has brought out bill C-61 without tabling the WIPO Internet treaties.
  (As many of you probably remember, I think the new copyright bill is one of the biggest threats to Canadians in the 21st century!)
• Attempts to limit accountability and visibility by trying to control access to government activities by the press.
• Killing the CAIRS system, a key system used for access and mining of Access to Information Requests.
• Firing the head of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission over a disagreement on safety with the government.

So, if you feel that a Government should actually be accountable, vote for anyone but the Conservatives! Of course, that's easier said than done. After all, who on Earth are you going to vote for?

The Liberals? Sure, they're the standard middle ground for Canadians - the Liberals are always a safe bet! But Dion is perhaps the least inspiring leader that Canadian politics has ever seen! I may have despised Paul Martin, but at least he was worth paying attention to. And seriously, a green focus? Why not copy a party that's actually successful rather than copying the Greens, who have never even held a seat! Seriously, it's like this party lost it's will after 2006, and is still floundering to find its purpose again.

The NDP? They were exciting during the 38th Parliament, but what have they done for us since then except whine in the background? Anyways, I'm not quite ready for a 80% tax rate to support every sad story on the planet.

Ironically, the Bloc is the sanest of the parties right now (assuming you ignore the whole soverignty thing :p). A socially liberal stance but with the sort of financial and political discipline that even the Conservatives should admire. Problem is, you can't vote for them since they only exist in Quebec - and even if you did, it's a mathematical impossibility for them to govern *.

[ * 308 seats, 75 of them in Quebec. Split the remainder evenly between Liberal, Conservative and NDP; each remaining party must have at least 77 seats, meaning Bloc can't govern without a formal coalition. ]

The Greens? Seriously? Come on. No.

Of course, there's always the local independent candidate. After all, they made all the difference during the 38th Parliament. But, is there a good one in YOUR riding, who will fight hard enough to make your vote count?

Some folks down here admired the fact that we could call an election now, and still have our results decided before the Americans chose their president. On the other hand, at least they have some decent candidates to choose from this time around.

Satellite Radio Showdown

After discovering that Microsoft Prime gives us a 20% discount on Sirius satellite radios, Amber said she would get me a satellite radio for my birthday if I wanted one.

So what is satellite radio? Basically, it's like satellite TV, but for music (and recently, for TV as well). You buy a special radio that lets you tune in to approximately 130 digital-quality radio stations, whenever you can get a signal from an orbiting satellite or set of ground-based repeaters. Cost is $12.95/mo, but all the music stations (about 60) are commercial-free.

There's other options for radio. Traditional radio is free, and has a local focus - but the quality is low. I'm not just talking about sound quality either, though it does suck too. There's at best one station that I can pick up in Seattle that's even worth listening to. From the near-constant barrage of commercials during the morning commute, to repeats of months-old talk shows, to the total lack of any control or choice, and the rampant FCC censorship of anything even remotely interesting; it's only barely an option at all! There's HD Radio; same radio, same stations, but in digital. Addresses the sound quality issue, but the fundamental suck of free radio remains. I could always just download podcasts, but that involves effort on my part to keep getting fresh material. Finally, there's Pandora-on-the-go. While you may remember that I'm a total Pandora fanboy now, I must admit that the appeal of radio does include being exposed to new material, and perhaps even a DJ sometimes making a few comments. You really do need to interact with Pandora to keep the experience fresh, I've found. Anyways, Pandora on the Go doesn't support my Tytn (or any Windows Mobile phones) yet, and even if it did, I can't use it in Canada because of the ridiculous roaming data rates.

So, convinced that I'd give it a try, I decided to compare the two heavyweights, Sirius and XM. Of course, the two just announced their merger, but plans for mixing and matching across the networks' content are still a ways off, so I'd be stuck with one or the other. I tried the three day trials of each service's Internet streams, and below are my findings.

Sirius offers most of their channels online; free at 32kbit if you subscribe, or 128kbit for an extra $3/mo. I found this embarassing, since XM had free CD quality with their subscription. 32kbit is just not reasonable if you're paying for a service. Plus, their solution was based on Windows Media Player. They obviously didn't get the memo that Flash won the Internets. XM had a really slick Flash-based solution at high quality, and free is the best price. Internet radio victory clearly goes to XM.

I spent my three days focusing on mostly the metal and hard rock stations. Overall, it's hard to say which I like better; it really varied over time. Both have "metal" stations: XM Liquid Metal and Hard Attack for XM and Sirius respectively. I was not impressed with either - both focused a little more on the American Death and Thrash than I'd care for. Hard Attack was pretty much a waste of time unless you're seriously pissed off at your parents; XM Liquid Metal you'd at least get a bit of In Flames and old-school Metallica mixed in with the cookie monsters. Next on the list is Squizz vs Octane. Both are more mainstream hard rock... they were pretty good, but a bit far from the metal bus I wanted to get on. I'd say that Octane just barely edged out Squizz, so victory for Sirius. For classic rock Sirius had Buzzsaw and Hair Nation, and XM had Boneyard. Boneyard was freakin awesome - basically the 80's hits of all the bands we love; Ozzy, AC/DC, KISS, and even some really hard stuff! Buzzsaw and Hair Nation were both pretty good, but had a slightly higher 'cheese' content in terms of music. Basically a toss-up; Boneyard is great, but Sirius gives me two stations to bounce around.

Overall, the DJ component was pretty light on all the stations, but I must admit I preferred the far more professional atmosphere from the Sirius DJs. While some of the banter on XM was pretty funny, it was also pretty dumb at times. Though I must admit, the lack of FCC regulation is great! It feels much more natural when you don't have censor every other word.

I tried listening to a few other stations; news, sports etc. But meh, I hit commercials right away, and didn't really make much progress. They both have BBC and CNN, so meh. XM has NHL, so they win on sports, peroid, no matter how much everyone asserts that Sirius wins sports.

As for reception... it's the one thing you can't judge from the Internet. The internets say that Sirius runs a trio of satellites in elliptical orbits, while XM runs a pair of geostationary satellites. I'd guess the former would work better (geostationary satellites have to orbit the equator), but apparently, XM has a pretty nice network of repeaters near Seattle. Both are designed for strong coverage through the continential US, and would be fine for the parts of Canada and Mexico I'd care about.

Finally, hardware. My Scion tC is satellite-ready, so I should be able to wire in directly, right? Well, not really. It's difficult to get the hookups for XM at all except through the dealer, who wants $Ridiculous to install it, and won't do any dockable setups. Sirius you can buy the parts to link into my radio off the Internets, and I can find an installer easy enough. Still, it's going to be $300 to do even before the radio itself. I finally gave up and decided I'd just use my aux jack, which means I can use any radio I want from either provider. Still, points to Sirius for at least having the option for an aftermarket hookup.

So, Mike, what's your conclusion? Sirius or XM?
I... um.... can't decide. I checked all the right things, and they beat each other down into a stalemate. But, more importantly, it shows how important this merger will be - what hardware will we need to access both networks? How much will it cost to get the best of both worlds? Will the price go up, or down? Or is this the final desperate cry of a technology that knows full well that 3G cell networks may obsolete them entirely?

I decided to wait. I'm going to ask for a bluetooth GPS instead, and then see if I can run my entire car off one device. In the meantime, I hear you can download music off the Internets...

In Advanta

Anyone who talks to me pretty much ever, knows that a) my team moved to a new Microsoft campus, b) that it's the exact opposite direction from the old campus vs my new house, and c) that I've been uniformly skeptical about the benefits of the move.
Well, I've finished my first week in Advanta-B. Having dealt with the commute, the new building services, and my new office, I'm sold on the place. The commute thus far has been under 20 minutes (but is farther; I need to investigate some more fuel-efficient options). The cafeteria, while not yet impressive (some stations aren't open yet), is at least usable. I love my office. The building also has a better area-to-distance ratio, meaning it's a shorter walk to most offices I need to visit. Spirits are high so far.

So, I retract my complaints, and admit that Advanta is not a horrible place to work.

Pandora

While Pandora may be old news to most of you, I just tried it for the first time yesterday, admittedly because both of my favourite streams were down and my Youtube playlist was getting old. I was amazed by what I saw, and am now a convert.

Pandora is an extension of the Music Genome Project, a grand effort to basically classify everything in the world of music. This leads to a gargantuan collection of data that can be mined. Not only do they have the official discography and history of the band, but also the 'genome' of the band. For example, a particular band may have flags for "hard rock roots", "electric guitar solos", and "vocal harmonies".

Pandora basically builds a radio on top of this information. All you do is type in the name of a band or song that you like. It uses its knowledge to find other songs it thinks you'll like. Then, using a simple flash player, it plays a continuous stream of similar songs for you! I tried this a couple of times, naming a band I liked each time. The result was astounding - out of the next 20 songs, I'd say about half are among my current favourite songs, and the other half were songs I hadn't heard but loved.

You can apply feedback to the process too - a simple "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" balances the station closer or farther from attributes similar to the song you're listening to (to the point where entire bands can get 'banned' from your station). You can also add more seed bands to your station to vary certain attributes (but reinforce commonalities). For any song that plays, Pandora can tell you exactly why it chose the song for you.

How is this all legal? Well they pay the major studios, just like a radio station does. Anytime you click on the webpage (to thumbs up, pause, etc), they adjust the background of the page to an advertisment. Alternatively, you pay a small fee for a premium service with no ads. Also, of course, every band and song has a link to Amazon/iTunes, and you know that they're getting a cut of that.

However, since they want to be considered a radio station, they have to make some concessions. You can pause, but not rewind. You can't request specific songs. You can't save the song to your computer to play later.

Also, unfortunately, it's US-only for now, though several have found ways to circumvent this check.

Still, if you have access, give it a try. If you're on Facebook, my profile lists my stations if you're curious.

All Canadians Need to Beware!

I normally wouldn't post on something like this, but it is literally a cause that could destroy Canadian technology overnight if it not stopped. I hope you will all take the time to browse some of the many links I've provided here, and read up on this issue.

Bill C-61 "An Act to amend the Copyright Act", introduced by Industry Minister Jim Prentice (largely considered a prime candidate for the next leadership of the Conservative party), had its first reading today.

While this may seem boring to most of you, if passed, this would totally destroy many of the privileges you enjoy in today's technological society.

While parts of the bill are reasonable, the primary point of concern is section 41. This is the widely-expected "Digital Millenium Copyright Act" style anti-circumvention regulations. Basically, what they say is that making, selling or even talking about any device that could possibly circumvent any copy protection is illegal.

Basically, this means that any encrypted content (most technology made in the past decade, for example) cannot be accessed except expressly how the creator has specified. C-61 spells out explicitly what were formerly just implied rights. But section 41 overrides every right you have, including those they explicitly give you in section 29.

The following things would now be illegal under section 41.

• Any DVR used for cable or satellite TV. This includes things like Tivo, but more importantly, could even extend to your VCR, or anything that lets you watch a show later.
• Copying music to a CD or iPod to play in your car.
• Unlocking a cell phone for use on another carrier.
• Giving your friends instructions on how to repair his broken car stereo.

In fact, even TALKING about the above things could be illegal. Unless you're in a strictly academic setting, a simple twelve-year-old hobbyist trying to figure out how to make a DVD player would be fined up to $20,000 if he told anyone what he did. In fact, I would have to get a very good lawyer if this law passed just to justify some of my hobby projects (under the 'interoperability' exemption) or my publications (under the academic exemption). I would have to take a hammer to my perfectly legal Xbox, which despite not being usable for any sort of piracy, is not protected by any exemption.

You think it's not that bad? The American version of the DMCA was described by its creator as being a dismal failure, and has been rife with frequent abuse since it came out. The anti-circumvention provisions in C-61 are actually described as worse than the US equivalents!

If you currently live in Canada, you need to talk to your MPs. Right now. Don't wait. Email. Letters. ANYTHING to make sure this bill dies (or, like the Liberals, the government dies before the bill).

Here's some neutral coverage from the major outlets. They are only loosely accurate, but show the sort of front-page attention the issue is getting.
[ CBC National Post Globe and Mail ]

Want to Buy My House?

Well... half my house. I live in a semi-detached home, and my attached neighbour is selling her home!

Asking $369,900 for 3 bed 2.5 bath @1470 sq ft.

But, most importantly, you'd be my neighbour!

http://www.realtor.com/search/listingdetail.aspx?mlslid=28092651

Nexus Cards

• Lownewulf received [Nexus Card]!
  [Nexus Card]
  Requires Honored with Canada
  Requires Honored with United States
  Allows the bearer to travel in the nether regions between countries.
  Use: Reduces aggro radius of all border guards by 60% for five minutes.

So myself and Kyna finall got ourselves our Nexus passes. The basic gist of the program is as follows: by consenting to a background check and risk assessment, and ponying up a non-refundable $50 fee, you get to use the fast lanes between the US and Canada for five years. You know, when you drive through the border and there's that lane that's always empty beside you? You get to use that. Even better, with a stop to a participating airport you can get your irises scanned, which enables you to use the same Nexus pass to clear customs at US and Canadian airports, allowing you to sit waiting at the baggage claim in record time!

It was pretty easy; all you do is sign up online. If you pass their screening process, you get an acceptance letter, and are invited to an interview. This interview for us actually happened in a room with both a Candian CBSA officer and a US CBP officer*. One asks you why you want to enroll in Nexus, and if you are a dangerous criminal that probably shouldn't be given a carte blanche to wander the border. If you pass this grueling interview, you're handed off to the other officer, who asks you largely the same thing. The result: they snap your picture and print you a little plastic RFID card right there on the spot, and you're a member.

(* The US CBP officer was surprizingly friendly; probably because she got the slacker desk job, instead of dealing with jerks like me in cars at the border on a day-to-day basis. The Canadian CBSA officer seemed a little less happy with her situation, probably due to being trapped in a small room with a US CBP officer for eight hours a day. )

BUT, the officers warn, HEED OUR WARNINGS! For as the Border Patrol giveth, the Border Patrol can also taketh away.

Then starts the fifteen minute lecture of the many many things that the newly minted Trusted Travellers must refrain from doing, else they risk being forever barred from the cool persons club. And it really is quite the list. I couldn't possibly remember them all. Even worse, the rules are completely different for residents in each country and in each direction. For example, I can't bring beef dogfood into Canada... but that same dogfood is okay coming back into the US, as long as it's not lamb or goat. You have to declare every item you bring into Canada, in writing, but only if you're a Canadian resident. The US rules for personal exemptions doesn't require a written declaration, but it takes an entire booklet just to describe the basic cash exemption. Speaking of cash, if you have a lot of it, you have to use the regular lanes with the peasants.

The caveats go on and on. No using the lanes if you're travelling with the untrusted masses. No using the lanes past bedtime. And so on and so on. I can genuinely envision that even for the simplest of weekend trips that I could spend more time figuring out if I'm eligible to use Nexus than actually waiting at the border.

But, lets be honest. For what adds up to $10 a year and a few minutes of your time, you get to use the fast lane. Skip an hour border wait, even once, and there can never be any doubt that it was a worthwhile investment.