The platinum shield

Greetings from sunny South Carolina!

• It's Flag Day. Happy Flag Day, everyone!


• Despite the Indians losing last night to Albert Pujols (oh, and that team around him too), they are playing better baseball of late and not out of it yet in the AL Central. They've bounced back and forth between fourth and fifth place this week, but remain only seven games out of first. One or two really good weeks, maybe an 8-2 run at some point, and the Indians are right in the thick of the race. Jake Westbrook is making rehab starts, and he should provide a much-needed consistency boost to the rotation. The bullpen is looking better and better of late. Offensively however, the Indians are starting to lose their consistency, due in no small part to losing Asdrubal Cabrera and Grady Sizemore, and Travis Hafner not all the way back. For this reason, I think the Indians will be buyers at the trade deadline, or maybe will try and sign an offensive player who is currently a free agent (Frank Thomas springs to mind).


• China has been in the news recently, since regulating that starting July 1, filtering software must be installed on all new PCs. This was one possibility I mentioned in my research paper I did for POSC 368 last fall (I'm posting it now because it's been turned in months ago; for the record, it got an A). My idea for what the Chinese was more along the lines of a tamper-proof hardware chip, however, since not only is it very easy to simply install Linux or a copy of Windows from the US to override that protection, the current software only blocks certain protocols. The other option, of course, is to do this closer to the ISP level, like installing a chip in cable modems, wireless routers, whatever. The software option, however, is not a great idea to begin with and hasn't been executed well, meaning that the censorship struggle in China will continue.


• I saw The Hangover last night, and while it wasn't by any stretch a movie you should take kids or maybe even teenagers to, it's a hilarious movie that absolutely lives up to the hype. I loved particularly how like the characters, the viewers were dropped into the next day with no clue what happened the previous night, letting only the outrageous events of the next day clue them in.

That's the news from Columbia, South Carolina. Hope all's well, wherever you are.

New apartment

I've posted newer pictures of my new apartment to my gallery online at PicasaWeb, now that I'm mostly moved in and cleaned up. Enjoy!

Clear head, new life ahead

I write this evening from sunny (well, it was earlier today) Columbia, South Carolina, where I've recently moved. Since a long, unified rant eludes me (although I'm sure I could think of something if I tried long enough) I'll write some tidbits.

• After winning again today, the Indians took a series from the White Sox...and are still stuck in last place. However, since it is the AL Central, they're only 7 games out of the division lead, and still have a decent shot at making a run.
  
  Fausto Carmona was demoted to single-A, which I felt was a little harsh, but hey, if the guy's only got one option left, why not? Not only could the guy not throw strikes anymore, but does anyone else remember him throwing like 96-97 in 2007, as opposed to topping out at about 94 this year? We wonder why he's overthrowing; maybe it's because he's used to getting more velocity. I predict he'll be back up in September, hopefully as a member of the rotation, but at the very least as a bullpen guy for the rest of the season.
  
  Travis Hafner is back from the DL, and he has a couple of hits in eight at-bats, both of them for extra bases. If the Indians are going to make a prolonged run, they'll need Hafner healthy and driving in runs to give a some veteran leadership in a lineup that now features Trevor Crowe, Luis Valbuena, Ben Francisco and Josh Barfield. The Indians have to be hoping Grady Sizemore and Asdrubal Cabrera come back from their respective DL trips quickly.
  
  Finally, we tend to forget about Jake Westbrook but he'll be back soon as well, and should provide some much-needed consistency to the rotation. Westbrook was signed to a three-year deal in 2007 meaning he probably won't be tremendous trade bait, but one person who may be on the move if the Indians don't start a run is Carl Pavano, who has defied odds and pitched well since May 1.


• I caught a late showing of Up last night. While I don't think it was the best Pixar movie I've ever seen, it was a Pixar movie in every sense and totally worth seeing. Up was Pixar's first foray into 3D films. I didn't see it on a particularly large screen and I sat near the back, so it was tough for me to really be immersed in the illusion anyway, but the reason Up works is not because of the 3D glasses (which are designed eerily similar to the main character's glasses); the movie is good because of the story. No studio seems to get this as much as Pixar; that's why they've never made a bad movie, that's why 4-year olds like the movies as much as 22-year olds and as much as 56-year olds. The animation is wonderful and in every sense a treat to see, but it plays second fiddle to the tremendous story that could be told with standard 2D, non-CGI animation and still be excellent. (Also worth noting is the score, which, like most of Michael Giacchano's work, including The Incredibles, Ratatouille, and Star Trek, fits the movie perfectly and is also excellent as a standalone score.)


• Rush's classic rock song Fly By Night (the title of this post is borrowed from lyrics from that song) came on the radio on the way home from my first day of work on Monday. Any time a song you enjoy comes on the radio, it's a good day. But when it's Fly By Night, it's a whole new level. Just sayin'.

Still getting settled in Columbia, but hopefully I'll have some pictures of my apartment with everything completely moved in by the next time I post. Until then, hope the weather's well in Ohio (or wherever you're reading this from) and hope things are well with you too.

A 160-grand piece of paper

At least it's on nice paper. And they give you a case (pun not intended). More pictures of commencement to come later on.

The park that started it all

Last Tuesday evening, I had the pleasure of attending a baseball game at Oriole Park at Camden Yards, home of the Baltimore Orioles. Completed in 1992, Camden Yards started a revolution in baseball: gone were the character-free, soulless, utilitarian stadiums of the sixties and seventies; Camden Yards ushered in a new era of baseball-only facilities that were designed to meld with the cities they inhabited, have some character of their own, and be a treat to attend.

The stadium is situated just a few blocks from Baltimore's iconic inner harbor and really in the heart of downtown (much like Progressive Field). Upon getting to the game, Katie, my dad and I received complimentary Aubrey Huff T-shirts.

The concourses are incredibly similar to Progressive Field in that they feel very wide open, a sharp contrast to all of the older stadiums. One difference is that Progressive Field opted for concourses almost twice as wide but added a merchants row in the middle of the concourse, making two somewhat smaller concourses. The upper deck at Progressive Field has only the one row, which is similar to Camden Yards on each of its decks. I liked Camden Yards' approach, but I think I prefer Progressive Field's lower deck because you are able to walk around the entire lower deck without missing a pitch.

We got to our seats in the lower deck and enjoyed this view:

With the exception that I wasn't able to get a nice wide-angle shot of the whole field, the seats were excellent. We enjoyed the game, some high-priced but substantial snacks, and the Orioles ended up winning. Overall, Oriole Park at Camden Yards, much like its contemporary, gets a 9 out of 10. If you're interested in all the pictures I took, they're available here.

Tiered pricing and why it sucks

Back in January, Phil Schiller (the keynote guy at Apple, in Steve Jobs' absence) announced a couple changes to the iTunes music store. The first one, which I covered, was to remove all DRM (supposedly) from each song in the music store. The second one, which is really only starting to appear in the last few weeks, is tiered pricing.

Great news, right? Phil seemed to think so at the time. He thought that the $.69 songs would balance out the $1.29 songs, and that most songs would remain at $0.99, mostly because music companies weren't up to going back and retroactively repricing each song.

Let's take a look at today's top 30 downloaded songs:

Out of 30 songs, 5 are $0.99. But that's not a big deal, because there are songs that are $0.69, right? As Ars points out, turns out that music companies aren't interested in discounting music.

A couple things here. First, is it really worth the music company's time to make songs $0.69? As we've seen, not many are that price anyway, and the ones that are are rarely downloaded anyway. If someone's searching for that song, that $0.30 isn't going to give them incentive to buy it - they've already made up their mind that they want that song (for whatever reason) and they'll pay $0.99. The record companies know this - the only way $0.69 songs could really come into play is for promotions, and in this case record companies like to discount the entire album to encourage users to buy the entire album rather than individual songs.

Now back to the $1.29 songs. If you remember, way back when iTunes Plus was first announced, iTunes Plus songs cost $1.29. This was a trade-off for the record companies - they make more money per song but face a greater risk that the song will be pirated or illegally distributed. As iTunes Plus matured, Apple realized that $0.99 was a fair price for a DRM-free song, and so they dropped the price and made all songs $0.99 and record companies could choose whether or not they wanted to participate.

Then in January, Apple announced that DRM was gone. Now if you're a record company executive, what do you choose? DRM-free and $0.99, or DRM-free and $1.29? For songs that are selling fast (like "Boom Boom Pow" by Black Eyed Peas...wow.), $.30 is a 30% increase in profits. Why would they not take it?

I think Apple screwed up. The iTunes Music Store became successful because each song was $0.99, and research has shown that people want to pay about $1 for a song (except you filthy pirates) - $1.29, especially in troubled economic times, is a lot. By instituting tiered pricing, Apple stood up for the record companies, not the consumer. If iTunes is going to be charging $1.29, they should be distributing FLAC files (or the Apple equivalent), which are completely lossless and have no built in DRM or identity management.

That said, Green Day's new album "21st Century Breakdown" is excellent, and I bought it off iTunes for $11.99. If you're going to buy the full album, it's still a pretty good deal. Unfortunately, that's exactly what the record company wants ("why download the single when you can download that song and 15 other songs you don't like for $10?"). In terms of acquiring music legally, it's record companies 1, consumers 0.

A highway song

People often ask me, "Jimmy, who is your favorite United States
President?"

Well, I think we all know the answer to that question:

Sometimes, the person asking the question goes "nice! Presidential high five!" in true Barney Stinson form. Usually, however, the person qualifies the question, adding that the President cannot be fictional. My answer isn't conventional. It's not Abraham Lincoln, it's not Ronald Reagan, it's not Barack Obama, and it's not Bill Clinton. It's this guy:

(For those of you living under a rock, it's Dwight D. Eisenhower.) While his greatest accomplishments weren't as a President (he planned D-Day and won World War II for the Allies in the European theater), perhaps his most underrated and still-relevant accomplishment is something most of us take for granted:

According to the the article on Wikipedia, the entire network of highways has over 46,000 miles of roadway. To put it in perspective, that's enough to nearly circle the globe twice. As drivers today, we take for granted that those roads have always been there and will always been there, and it's easy to forget that before June 29, 1956, there wasn't even the notion of such a unified interstate system.

Yesterday I had the pleasure of driving nearly the entire length of Interstate 77, which starts in Cleveland, OH and ends in Columbia, SC. You might think I'm being sarcastic, as it was a nine-hour drive (without stops), but while it would have been nicer if my car had a nicer iPod hookup, the drive alone is worth a blog post, because amazingly, Interstate 77 manages to paint a portrait of America as a whole even as it covers just over 600 miles.

I-77 has a little bit of everything. There are climbs up mountains, descents into valleys, bridges over lakes and rivers. There are two sub-ground tunnels (in West Virginia and Virginia). There are scenic overlooks worthy of being framed in a gallery. There is an eccentric rest stop in West Virginia which showcases the artisan skills of everyday Americans.

The most interesting part of I-77 though, at least in my opinion, are the cities it passes through. Drivers drive through cities that are struggling (Cleveland), through cities that are improving (Akron), cities that are thriving (Charlotte) and cities that time forgot (Charleston). It's an amazing cross section of the country: no one's in the same place, everyone's always changing.

The 2006 movie Cars takes a stab at the interstate system, saying that they're only in place so drivers can avoid tough, curvy roads. While this may be the case (especially out west), the interstate system is able to marry the concept of driving somewhere fast and having a good time at the same time. Apart from the Internet, it's probably the most impressive accomplishment of the United States since the 1950s, and it's why Eisenhower is my favorite President.

Retrospective, Part I

As you might know, I plan on graduating from the prestigious Case Western Reserve University on May 17. I've been here for the better part of four years, and I've had good experiences and bad experiences. In the next few days and weeks I'll try to write what I thought of this place. I'll start, today, with classes.

Favorite classes

• EECS 290 - Introduction to game design/development. (And no, it's not because my professor for this class is on Facebook and probably knows when I post stuff and thus probably reads this blog.) This class was a throw-in this semester, but it turned out to be a very good class for a few reasons.
  
  First, it was just plain fun. Being able to write in C#/XNA was a big part of the fun. XNA is a very well thought-out framework, and I've been using C# for almost four years, so it was incredibly intuitive to just dive in. The assignments for the class were fun to think about, fun to write and mess with while writing, and really fun to show to friends and family.
  
  Second, it was really informative. For the first time, I used inheritance intelligently, and was forced to come up with really good object-oriented designs, something I hadn't run into yet. Also, while I used to look at a game and wonder how it was made, now I can look at a game and know what's going on, at least on a conceptual level.
  
  In essence, 290 was a class I almost didn't take, and I'm so glad I did. In a semester full of homework, projects and other stuff, this class had the assignments I looked forward to doing.


• EECS 393 - Introduction to software engineering. As much as I complain about projects when I'm near the end of them and I'm running low on sleep and such, I really like project-oriented classes, and this one had the second biggest project I had during my time at Case - a web application and service which turned into my senior project. During lectures we discussed stuff like version control, development techniques, project management techniques and other stuff that was genuinely useful to know as I enter the workforce.


• EECS 341 - Introduction to databases. Databases are one of my favorite topics in computer science, and the project for this class (really my first real project where we had some creative control) was really fun too. The professor for this class was hysterical (although I don't think he meant to be). During lectures we covered really interesting topics, ranging from the high level topics like SQL to the low level topics like how databases are stored on hard disks.

Honorable mention: EECS 391 (Introduction to Artificial Intelligence), EECS 325 (Introduction to networking), POSC 370G (U.S. Intelligence and National Security)

Least favorite classes

• PHIL 304 - Engineering ethics. Complete waste of time. We spent half the semester talking about medical ethics and the other half discussing what people thought in the 1400s. I think ethics are important, but it's not worth having a class over.


• ENGL 398 - Technical writing. We read some interesting books in this class that dealt with freedom of information, but the final project and some of the homeworks (resume updating, etc.) left much to be desired. Waking up at 8:30 on Mondays to go to that pointless lecture was not appreciated. (The highlight of those lectures: when my future game design professor talked about (what else) creating video games.)


• EECS 314 - Computer architecture. I'm not sure why CSes are required to take this course, but it really wasn't all that useful to me. It did help bump up my GPA though - the computer engineers sure know how to bring a curve down.

Honorable mention: EECS 233 (Introduction to data structures), MATH 224 (Differential equations), every SAGES class

Best professors

• Chris Butler, MATH 122. This guy provided as easy of a transition from high school to college as anyone could ask for. Tests were challenging, but fair, and there was ample review time. Lectures were very entertaining and useful.


• Marc Buchner, EECS 290. The best professors are the ones that are passionate about their subject and passionate about teaching. Professor Buchner was both - his laptop had Half Life 2, Flight Simulator and other games installed, but he also was good at explaining concepts in class that could have been difficult. He also did something no other professor did during my time at Case: a live suggestion session. Very brave.


• Andy Podgurski, EECS 393. Professor Podgurski was really knowledgeable about the industry, and when teaching software engineering that's pretty important. Also enjoyed his dry sense of humor - it always came when you weren't expecting it.

Honorable mention: M. Cather Simpson, CHEM 111; Jiong Yang, EECS 341; Jing Li, EECS 340, EECS 343

What are some other lists you'd like to see? Let me know and I'll try and post them.

The launchpad in New York

The big story that emerged out of baseball this weekend is that the new Yankee Stadium is a launchpad. Buster Olney, a guy who I normally agree with, wrote the article I linked, and he does give some pretty hard evidence that the new stadium is homer-friendly: in the first four official games, plus the first two unofficial games, there have been 28 home runs (the article was from yesterday morning, the Indians and Yankees totaled 3 home runs yesterday). For those of you keeping track at home, that's more than four home runs a game. (To put this in perspective: in the 2007 season, 4,957 home runs were hit in Major League baseball games during the regular season. That's 30 teams, playing 162 games, divided by two for overlap (someone correct me if my math is wrong, but I think I'm right) to total 2430 games. This means that in 2007, there was an average of just about two home runs per game.)

But here's a thought: ever considered the fact that the Yankees pitching (and the Indians pitching, to a lesser extent, for that matter) is just bad? Remember the Indians of the late 90s? Albert Belle, Manny Ramirez, Jim Thome, Eddie Murray, Matt Williams and others led the Indians to winning seasons because of their offense. The pitchers consisted of starters like past-his-prime Orel Hershiser, flash-in-the-pan Jaret Wright, that-guy-from-Geneva Brian Anderson, past-his-prime-part-deux Dennis Martinez and others. (Oh yeah, I almost forgot not-even-steroids-can-save-you-now Jason Grimsley.) In the bullpen, Paul Assenmacher (probably the best of the bunch), Eric "Ker" Plunk...and the biggest goat of them all, Jose Mesa.

Anyone noticing a trend here? In the 90s, Jacobs Field was a hitters park because the Indians lineup had at least two Hall-of-Famers, probably three. The guys I mentioned above have over 2000 home runs between them. They know how to hit.

But what happened in the 2000s? The Indians got some pitching! CC Sabathia, Cliff Lee, Jake Westbrook, Bartolo Colon, and others forced opposing offenses to manufacture runs the old fashioned way, because you weren't going to hit many home runs off of these guys. On the other side, since the Indians could no longer afford Hall of Fame power, they settled for the likes of Grady Sizemore, Victor Martinez, Travis Hafner, etc. Grady Sizemore is the only one out of that group who might hit 500 home runs in his career, and he isn't even a power hitter! With good pitching on that side of the ball, and back-to-earth hitting on the other, Jacobs Progressive Field has become a pitchers park.

Now back to Yankee Stadium. First of all, it's early. This stadium will probably be standing in the Bronx for another fifty years. That's 8100 4050 games, assuming the Yankees never make the playoffs. You can't judge how the ball jumps off the bat based on four games. The wind might have been weird for that series, space aliens might have taken an interest, who knows. The point is, the sample size is too small to make such generalizations.

Secondly, I know this might be hard for Yankees fans to believe, but it's possible that your pitching just isn't that good. On Saturday, during the Indians' 22-4 drubbing of the Yankees, Indians hitters teed off against Wang (whose sinker is completely flat), Claggett (who was making his major league debut), Ramirez and Veras. Of the six home runs, three of them went to right field, and three of them went to left field. If the ball carries so much to right field, why did the Indians have no problem hitting them to left? (The hitters that hit them to left were DeRosa, Choo and Hafner. Choo and Hafner are left-handed, so they hit the ball the other way, and Choo hit his to left-center, a longer shot.) And if the ball was carrying in both directions, why didn't the Yankees hit six home runs and score 22 runs?

Occam's razor suggests that the solution to this problem is that the Yankees pitching was just worse than the Indians on Saturday. Before we go jumping to the conclusions "it's the park, it's the park! There's no way they could spend $300 million on free agents and still stink! Who are they, the Mets?", just remember that we're four games in, and the new Yankee Stadium has a lot more games left to be played.

EDIT: Math correction.