Sep 16 2011

The Free Market Case AGAINST Paying Student Athletes

Every year, it seems like some big college gets busted finding backdoor ways to pay their student athletes. Whether it’s turning a blind eye to selling a few autographs and directing students to some favorable car loans, or having boosters treat star players to strip joints and fancy dinners.

This is, of course, strictly against the doctrine of the NCAA. They’re in the business of amateur athletes, as oxymoronic as that sounds. Whether they classify as a business or not is debatable (they do receive tax-excempt status as a “nonprofit, higher education association“). But for the purposes of this argument, I’m going to accept that the NCAA is in it for the money, which is key if you want to debate this in terms of free-market capitalism.

Continue reading

Feb 16 2011

WikiLeaks, Part 2: How Do They Really Treat Their Sources?

So my last WikiLeaks post was about how what they present to the public doesn’t really represent their agenda. But WikiLeaks doesn’t just make claims about it’s purpose. They make lots of claims about security, protecting sources, and vigorous fact checking. But a WikLeaks staffer who has left the organization is crying foul on these claims.

Now, it’s important to recognize that these are just one man’s claims. It’s kind of a ‘he said, she said’ game. But Daniel Domscheit-Berg worked with WikiLeaks for three years (known as Daniel Schmitt at the time). And he does have one important fact that WikiLeaks has since verified: he’s the reason WikiLeaks isn’t currently accepting new submissions.

Continue reading

Feb 13 2011

WikiLeaks: It Has Nothing to Do With Freedom.

It sounds like a great idea: A place that people can safely publish leaked documents so they can be reviewed by the public and the press. They even cleverly put “wiki” in the title, to imply openness. I mean, it’s like Wikipedia, right? Anyone can leak stuff on there.

It’s bullshit, plain and simple.

Continue reading

Feb 9 2011

Steam is the Future of Video Games

Lately, there’s been a lot of talk of GameStop and it’s impact on the video game industry. No video game distributor likes that GameStop relies to heavily on used video game sales for profits. But at the same time, so many people think “GameStop” immediately when it comes to buying these same games new. Never mind that in less than 24 hours, you can probably find a used copy for $5 bucks cheaper in the same store.

This post isn’t about the evils of GameStop. They are plenty of reasons they’re evil. That they sell used video games isn’t one of them. Instead, this is about what the success of GameStop tells us about the demands of the consumer, and how video game developers can adapt to meet those needs.

Continue reading

Jul 19 2009

Get Real

I love Six Revisions and Smashing Magazine. They have been absolutely amazing guides to absolutely everything I’ve ever needs in web design. Tools, resources, tutorials, tip, tricks, air conditioning, power windows, am/fm radio; they’ve got it all.

But there’s a dirty little secret they’ve only hinted aboutWeb design never occurs in the ideal. It simply doesn’t happen. The biggest problem with these design blogs is they have a tendency to assume you’re doing your developing in a box, where everyone has they’re browsers up date, all the platforms you’re working with are impeccably designed, and your boss actually understands you when you try explain anything about how it is you do what you do.

What it comes down to is in most situations, it’s about results. My boss couldn’t pick an HTML document out from a lineup. He told me five times he wanted to make sure that all our images were named descriptively, and with descriptive folder names. Never mind that Google doesn’t index the Joomla ‘media’ folder. In his mind, picture names == Google image hits. Oh, and he’s been paying Google hundreds of dollars a month to promote his web sites to the top of the results list. Uh huh.

What my boss cares about is this: does the web page look how I want it to look, and do what I want it to do? He’ll never know or care if I conformed to standards, or used only external stylesheets. It’s all about results.

But I don’t want to be misinterpreted here. I’m not saying, “GO OUT! BREAK ALL THE RULES AT WILL!” Not at all. Standards are very important, and you should follow them as often as possible. But I’ve noticed that, particularly when building websites that non-programmers can manage, you need to be flexible. Go ahead and throw in an inline style here and there if necessary (just make sure you comment it). Let the user use those <b> and <i> tags, and just style them in the CSS. Maybe I’ll use a <table> here just this once, to avoid the nightmare of floating <divs> doing differing things on different browsers at different places and different times.

Think about your target audience. Are they ever going to know or care? Think about the needs of the site. If you can save yourself hours by putting all those products in a quick table instead, do it. I’ve noticed this in particular while using Joomla and VirtueMart. A table-less layout is hopeless. They throw in too many tables themselves. Even with addons and configurations, it’s impossible to get rid of them all. I’ve even edited core files to change them to <divs> and they’re still all over the place. And you know who noticed my efforts? Nobody. And they never will.

Now once you launched, if you find yourself with some free time, go back and fix up some of those issues. Take the time to clean it up and do it right if possible, and maybe you’ll learn a thing or two.

Just keep in mind that in the real world, compromises happen. They have to, because we don’t live in a sterile web development environment. If we did, there still wouldn’t be such a high rate of IE6 infections.