Ask Roger Anything Archives - Page 16 of 24

Disinclined to get a smart phone

It would take a cheap, idiot-proof technology for me to get a smartphone. Or someone else paying for it.

Arthur, the Windy City Kiwi, writes:

Here’s another one for you: You’ve written about your lack of enthusiasm for smart phones, but do you see a time in the future when you might be persuaded to embrace them, and, related, what would it take for that to happen? For example, some people say that the ability to pay for things using their phone (rather than cash or card) would push them. That may or may not be true for you, but is there something that might be?

This is a far more complicated issue than merely smartphones. This has to do with me and technology in general.

1) I embrace technology, but technology does not always embrace me. There was a period when we would have our work computers were swapped out after so many months, and mine would always be a couple of months earlier than others. One of our techies theorized that I had some sort of anti-electronics aura, seriously.

I have had two Android devices, and they both have died, much earlier than they should have. I ENJOYED having them, but I was happy I had not become dependent upon them.

2) I have no instinctive understanding of technology. It took me days to figure out the way to start my cellphone was to press the red-colored END button; that made no sense to me. I can take pictures on my phone, but I’ve yet to figure out how to RETRIEVE them. I’ve read the manual, but it didn’t help. After a while, it just wasn’t that important to me.

I participated in the Pebble smartwatch Kickstarter. STILL haven’t figured out how it works. Yes, there’s a website that offers tech support, but anything that REQUIRES tech support just to find out how to turn it on quite literally gives me a headache from exhaustion. That was neither the first or last bit of technology I’ve purchased that I couldn’t suss out how to use.

3) I don’t want to become dependent on technology that I will lose, or will break, or otherwise not be able to use. I see people who are lost without their devices, and I don’t want to be one of those people. And I’ve misplaced my cellphone for days on end. Moreover, I’m convinced this true: Increased smartphone use equals lower GPA among college students; for some people, at least, it seems to take away their ability to think.

4) Similarly, I don’t want to be one of those people whose attention is buried in the device, oblivious to the surroundings. I see that a LOT on the bus each day.

5) I don’t always trust technology. This is actually more true of GPS that has taken me to wrong exits or around in circles, but smartphones have similar features.

6) I am very wary of geolocation. I don’t want to be omnipresent in the world, or hacked, or sent ads telling me what stores are nearby that I “want” to go to. Frankly, being able to pay for something on a smartphone is a disincentive. This is also why I hate the fact that The Wife has E-Z Pass on the car; the privacy concerns, for me, trumps the convenience of getting through the toll booths faster.

7) I find it very expensive. It’s not the phone, but all of the various deals for service. I see this ad about a “good price” for a family plan and it’s $175 a month for four people; gave me sticker shock. Moreover, they all seem to be tied to plans I loathe being trapped into.

The cellphones that the Wife and I have cost $14 per month, plus tax, total. It allows me to text, though in fact, I HATE to text, that’s more tied to not wanting to be always available. That’s is why I have an answering machine and caller ID at home.

So it would take cheap, idiot-proof, privacy-providing technology for me to get a smartphone. Or someone else paying for the monthly service.

It wouldn’t hurt if someone actually showed me how to do things. I went to the Apple store with my father-in-law a couple of years ago to investigate the possibilities, and these “helpers” spoke in a different language, assuming I understood terminology that I found incomprehensible. It probably had to do with 3G and 4G, or some such, but my eyes glazed over.

Arthur, you have a spouse who seems to be tech-savvy; I do not. Maybe the Daughter will figure out someone else’s smartphone to a degree that she can explain it to me in terms I can understand, and that might crack the door open.

Still, I don’t need one, I don’t feel deprived without it. Now if you want to SEND me one, my address is…

Now, one might say, “But Roger, if you’re so bad at technology, how have you blogged for ten years?”

Trial and error. Blogger had a product, I think it was called Picasa, to use to put photos in the blog; I NEVER got it to work. But I stumbled upon another way. (Blogger has made it much easier since then, of course.)

I remember one of the first times I used WordPress, for my Times Union blog seven years ago, there was a picture of either former New York governor Eliot Spitzer or the cartoon character Dudley Do-Right – they look alike, I theorized – that was three times the size of the page, and I didn’t know how to fix it. Now, I’ve looked at enough simple HTML code to correct the problem, using math. Basic MATH I understand.

Because I’m a librarian, I’ve occasionally been thrown into the deep end of technology. Usually, I drown, but now and then I swim, especially compared with someone actually computerphobic. I’ve actually helped people at the public library with their user problems, which are minor to my mind, but massive in theirs. It’s all a matter of degree.

Once I’m SHOWN many technologies, as opposed to being told or fumbling through the manual, I’m perfectly happy to use them.

I’ve learned how to fake it reasonably well. I know how to reboot, whether it be my computer or my home Internet/cable system; turning things off and on works remarkably effectively 80% of the time. But only if I can find the OFF button. Have you noticed the OFF buttons on computer hardware are never in the same place? That’s not user incompetence, it’s DESIGN error.
***
I DO need, however, the Selfie Shoe.

Variations on the name Richard

“Around the 16th century Dick started to be synonymous with ‘man’, ‘lad’, or ‘fellow’, sort of a general name for any ‘Tom, Dick, or Francis”.

Regarding my post of March 8, the Windy City Kiwi, Arthur@AmeriNZ, wrote:

HUGE props to you for doing a post relevant to International Women’s Day without making it about it. I tend to think the most powerful feminism from men is when it’s not about being feminist. Maybe that’s just me.

But I want to challenge you a bit. You wrote that you object to “the C-word” in part because of the “the reduction of a woman to a body part”. But, do you similarly object to a man being called a “dumb prick” or, more simply, a “dick”? That’s reducing a man to a body part, after all, but no one—ever—says “the D-word” or similar. Is it really any less objectionable and, if not, why not?

An “Ask Roger” question without being prompted!

Obviously I agree with the gist of your post, and I challenge myself far more than I challenge others. But I do wonder sometimes if we have cultural blinders on, and so, don’t see oppressive language in all its manifestations.

I suppose I didn’t think about this side of the equation very much, maybe because this is still a male-centric culture. It’s usually men that I hear using these terms, surely far more often than I hear women sharing them.

Perhaps others use the term because of the cliche – which may be true – that men sometimes (often?) seem to think to think with their “little heads”, that men are, as a whole, a less evolved species.

I will say that these aren’t words that I would use, personally. Indeed, there are a whole slew of terms for male body parts that I tend not to choose to describe the whole man. But is that a function of sensitivity or just me being a prude? The only time I use the word prick is when I get blood drawn and they prick my finger, which, BTW, hurts more than one would think.

The only people named Richard that I regularly referred to as Dick were Nixon and Cheney.

My father-in-law is named Richard. My mother-in-law calls him Dick, as do most of his friends in his age range, but I call him Richard. This is, undoubtedly a reaction, when I was a kid, to some poor boy named Richard being verbally tortured for his nickname.

And there are so many other choices for Richard: Rich, Richie, Rick. I wondered how How Dick Came to be Short for Richard:

Due to people having to write everything by hand, shortened versions of Richard were common, such as ‘Ric’ or ‘Rich’. This in turn gave rise to nicknames like ‘Richie’, ‘Rick’, and ‘Ricket’, among others. People also used to like to use rhyming names; thus, someone who was nicknamed Rich might further be nicknamed Hitch. Thus, Richard -> Ric -> Rick gave rise to nicknames like Dick and Hick around the early 13th century.

This s also how William became Bill, Robert became Bob, et al.

While few today call Richards ‘Hick’, the nickname ‘Dick’ has stuck around, and of course has come to mean many other things as well. Its persistence as associated with Richard is probably in part because around the 16th century Dick started to be synonymous with ‘man’, ‘lad’, or ‘fellow’, sort of a general name for any ‘Tom, Dick, or Francis” (which by the way appears in Shakespeare’s Henry IV, written in the late 16th century, with Dick at this point firmly established as an “every man” name). It may well be that this association with ‘man’ is in turn how ‘dick’ eventually came to mean ‘penis’.

But the more vulgar reference is much later, from the last quarter of the 19th century.

The etymological roots of the word Dick, as a replacement for an everyday guy, which somehow segued into something more vulgar, makes me no less eager to use the term, but it was something I learned that I did not know.

Justification for Ask Roger Anything

You can ask me ANYTHING, and I will absotively, possilutely answer.

Absolutely no one has written to me saying: “Roger, why are you such a lazy blogger, asking your readers to do the heavy lifting by coming up with topics for your blog FOUR times a year?”

My answer would be that when the bloggers I know, such as Jaquandor – like clockwork in the beginning of February and August – and SamuraiFrog and Arthur the AmeriNZ ask for questions, I always oblige them.

In fact, this time around, I was chomping at the bit to ask Jaquandor about Mario Cuomo vis a vis other New York State governors, and about the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.

My assumption is that, by doing this exercise on a regular basis, I can inspire your meanest, nastiest, rottenest questions to me. Since that actually hasn’t actually happened, I’m left with the conclusion that you are all rather swell people, which is also nice.

Last time out, I found questions from Melanie to be the most difficult because they were the most philosophical.

I feel throwing the floor open to youse folk – ah, the flaw of the English language – helps me as a writer, and a thinker, and a person. If this were a Nicholas Sparks novel, I’d write, “You fulfill me!” But it’s not. So I won’t.

The rules remain that you can ask me ANYTHING, and I will absotively, possilutely answer. Swear to whatever deity you follow, and relatively soon, within the month.

I promise to respond to your questions to the best of my ability and memory. Naturally, memory is a tricky thing – self-selecting, imprecise; ask Brian Williams. As always, a little obfuscation is allowed, because it’s more fun for me.

You can leave your comments below, or send them to me on Facebook (I’m the Roger Green as the duck) or Twitter (@ersie). If you prefer to remain anonymous, that’s OK; you should e-mail me at rogerogreen (AT) gmail (DOT) com, and note that you want to remain anonymous. Otherwise, I will cite you, or give you a citation, or…

Consider this a late birthday present to me. I LOVE presents.

Technology: it means I don’t miss…

Word processing allows me to write this blog every day, even though I am a no better typist than I was 25 or 40 years ago.

Jaquandor waxes philosophic:

Lots of folks often wax poetic about things we’ve lost in our more technological age, like record stores and big, high-service department stores that take up entire city blocks, but what’s something that we’ve ditched in our techno-era that makes you think, “Yeah, I’m glad we don’t do THAT anymore”?

It occurred to me that I’ve seldom described what it was that I have been doing for a living for the past 22 years. The methodology has changed tremendously, and it’s all about the technology.

The New York Small Business Development Center, which started in 1984, now has 24 centers across the state. The business counselors offer free and confidential one-on-one advisement to budding entrepreneurs and established small businesses alike. Since many of the counselors have been entrepreneurs or have worked in banks or other lending institutions, they know a lot of stuff about the business process.

For the things they DON’T know, the counselors contact the Research Network library, which has librarians with access to databases, and even – dare I say it? – books.

In the early days, we’d print out the research from the databases on something called paper. We’d Xerox pages from books. Then we’d put the information in the mail to the counselor. If for some reason, the package was lost, we’d have to do it over. The search would be in our computers, but we’d still have to reprint. And the copying had to be done over.

Let’s talk about the databases. They were on something called CD-ROM discs. We had two dedicated CD-ROM machines, but if I wanted to use the ProQuest database, and someone else was already using it, I had to wait until she or he was finished.

One of the first major improvements in the operation was the implementation of a LAN, or local area network, where we could ALL access the CD-ROMs at the same time, from our own computers, without having to go to the dedicated machine AND we could use a database even of someone else was using it!

As counselors started getting e-mail, we started to save the information and send some of it electronically. This was not as smooth a transition as one might think. For one thing, as mentioned by https://blog.servermania.com/what-is-unmetered-bandwidth-and-when-do-you-need-it/, the capacity of some of the e-mail servers in the late 1990s could be quite limited. Sending all the information we found could mean either having it bounce back to us, or clog things up on the recipient’s end.

Now, we package the data in an Adobe format. It sits on our server, and the counselors get an e-mail notification that the data are there, through a system called WebMQS, which usually works well. It DOES require the recipient to have the latest free Adobe software. Now, if someone hasn’t received the information, the re-sending now takes 5 minutes rather than 50 or more.

At home, my favorite pairing of technologies is the answering machine and caller ID. I hear, or see on the TV, that it’s a call from 800 Service, which the answering machine announces as “eight-zero-zero shervice” – our machine voice has a lisp! and we are oddly entertained by this – we can freely ignore it. But a familiar cell phone number or a call identified from someone known to us, we’ll pick up.

But the #1 favorite technological change I appreciate has to be the word processor, which allows one to correct errors things easily, rather than backspace on the IBM Selectric typewriter to use that tape which vaguely blots out the typos. No more Wite-Out, either.

When I was writing my last paper for library school in 1992, I had arranged the topics 1a, 2a, 3a, 1b, 2b, 3b, 1c, 2c, 3c. But as I continued, I realized it should have been 1a, 1b, 1c, 2a, 2b, 2c, 3a, 3b, 3c. I did a massive cut and paste, but it was WAY easier than retyping 46 pages.

And, of course, the same technology allows me to write this blog every day, even though I am no better typist than I was 25 or 40 years ago. Because if I had to do write this all longhand, and then type it in a manner that was readable and accurate, this MIGHT be a monthly blog, rather than a daily one.

A quick musing, though on one thing I DO miss as a result of technology: keeping score in bowling. The software won’t let you, and occasionally, it’s just wrong in terms of counting the remaining pins.

My favorite music: an iteration

I’m not at all sure what constitutes progressive rock.

Arthur the AmeriNZ asks:

Over the years, you’ve mentioned songs and albums you loved, and you’ve shared various rankings, or, at least, lists. Do you have a personal “Top Ten” of songs, and is it static or ever-changing? Both songs and albums, by the way.

The easy part to answer is that the lists are ever-changing.

Let’s try the songs:

10. You Won’t See Me-The Beatles.
I realized in the last five years that it is the Mal Evans sustained chord on the Hammond organ throughout the last verse, last chorus, and outro that gives this McCartney song a special buzz.

9. Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow – Carole King
Featuring the Mitchell-Taylor Boy and Girl Chorus. This arrangement practically begs for a cappella singing. From Tapestry, which I played so much, I wore out the LP.

8. River – Joni Mitchell
For lots of reasons, this reminds me of my late friend Donna.

7. Neil Young – Harvest Moon
Dancing in the living room with someone I loved.

6. Crying- Roy Orbison And k.d lang
Better than Roy by himself. And reminds me of the same past love.

5. John Hiatt – Have a Little Faith in Me
A key song on a mixed tape I made for my now-wife.

4. Billy Joel-Lullabye (Goodnight, My Angel)
Lots of songs about loss here. I heard an a cappella version of this, which was lovely.

3. Roberta Flack – Gone Away.
This song, part of the group of songs I used to play when love went south, really builds after the 1:30 mark, with instruments (a painful guitar line, and is that a tuba?) plus mournful vocals that feature the late Donny Hathaway.

2. I Only Have Eyes For You – the Flamingoes
My first favorite song.

1. God Only Knows – The Beach Boys
Brian and Carl Wilson pray together before the recording, and it’s almost palpable. The BBC version has only enhanced by feeling for the original.

Interesting that 7 of the 10 were in the Top 10 last time I did something like this, in 2008, and nine of the ten were in the Top 25.

Not sure I ever made an album list that crossed the decades, though. I had a 1950s list, 1960s list, and a later list or two. I’m reminded of the fact that the album lists I DID make were constrained by the fact that I couldn’t pick the greatest hits albums. No such problem now!

On the other hand, this list is suspect. I accept the albums ranking from the 1960s, which I evaluated thoroughly. The 1970s has so many GREAT albums that, if I bit the bullet and actually looked at a list, some might rank higher here; ditto the 1980s. But this is a blog, not a dissertation, so I shan’t sweat it much.

10. Jesus Christ Superstar (1970)
The source of a lot of theological discussions in my circle of friends.

9. Speaking in Tongues – Talking Heads (1983)
The album that came out around the time I saw them live.

8. Sly & the Family Stone – Greatest Hits (1970)
Features two or three songs that hadn’t been on an album to that point. A tremendous collection.

7. Who’s Next – The Who (1971)
Listened to this incessantly, even last decade.

6. Talking Book – Stevie Wonder (1972)
I could have picked any of those Stevie albums from this one through Songs In The Key of Life, but this one asserts his sonic independence.

5. Peter Gabriel (3 -Melt)- Peter Gabriel (1980)
The one with Games without Frontiers and Biko. When I thought of the top albums for 1971-1980, there were two sure things; this was one of them.

4. Beach Boys: Pet Sounds (1966)
It’s pretty much perfect from beginning to end. Paul McCartney gave copies to all his children as an example of great music.

3. West Side Story soundtrack (1961)
Seeing this movie was transformational. But it wasn’t just the story, it was the music.

2. Still Crazy After All These Years – Paul Simon (1975)
This was a breakup album for me. It remains an important album for me. I wrote about it HERE.

1. Revolver – The Beatles (1966)
From a kiddie tune (‘Yellow Submarine’) to painful songs about loss (‘Eleanor Rigby’, ‘For No One’), a most eclectic album.
***
Jaquandor wants to know:

Prog rock. Are you a fan or not, and if so, which bands?

I’m not at all sure what constitutes progressive rock. Sure there’s Procol Harum, Yes, King Crimson, early Genesis, ELP. But I looked on the list and also found The Beatles, Todd Rundgren, Deep Purple, ELO, Queen, Renaissance, all of which I own, and none of which I would have thought of.

But yes, I like it, especially Yes and King Crimson, both of which belong in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.