Greg Hartnett

At my presentation at PubCon, I decided to mix it up a little bit. I experimented a little by not using a PowerPoint, and speaking more off the cuff. I think it worked out pretty well, as I kept my ad-libbing to a minimum, and stuck to my pre-rehearsed topics of discussion. Integrating the video clip of my son’s hockey fight into my part on multimedia got the crowd laughing, and from there it was smooth sailing. Thanks for the encouragement to do so from Todd and Brian.

My biggest fear was losing the crowd a bit. I was afraid that if I wasn’t able to keep their attention throughout the speech, their minds would definitely wander. If I wanted them dozing off, I would have opted for a bullet point laden PowerPoint. At one point a few minutes in, I tried spinning a bit off the cuff. While the comments I made flowed well while ad-libbing, I lost my track in where I was, and had to briefly refer to my note cards - it was a four second lapse that seemed like an eternity.

One thing I screwed up on - not providing handouts of the important points of the presentation. I did it when I spoke in Boston, and the crowd definitely dug it. Next time, for sure. For the handful of people that asked me about the books I mentioned, they were: Lexus, by Mark Buchanan and Linked by Albert Laszlo Barabasi. Both of them discuss network theory, and are very insightful from a search marketing perspective. I highly recommend both. If you enjoyed Tipping Point, and have some interest in science, these will be right up your alley.

So next time, I think I’ll stick with my no PowerPoint, and make sure to give handouts. I already got the heads up from Brett that I’ll be back for more presentations, so I’d better start thinking of some cool new stuff - I can’t rely on that hockey fight video forever

Now that I am finally home from my conference tour, I’m getting back into my groove. Two nights of real sleep, and some time with my family were just what the doctor ordered. After a few days in New York, and almost a full week in Vegas, these old bones needed some down time.

Once again, I depart from a conference a bit torn. While it is nice to return to the homestead, I immediately long for the next conference. We are a very fortunate group, for ours is a close-knit community, unique with knowledge share, friendship, and collaboration. White hats and black hats, side by side. Newbies and old-timers mixing it up. Programmers and designers sharing notes. You can feel the energy as some of the sharpest minds in the industry wheel and deal.

And yet I’m left feeling as if I am doing it all wrong. Maybe I should start doing a little more business at these things and stop viewing them as a social function. For me, these things serve as a vacation where maybe I can do some business. I use these times to catch up and hang out with old friends, and as an opportunity to make new friends. And PubCon provided many opportunities for both.

So, much love to friends new and old:

Brett - a big shout out. Awesome conference - the best yet. Thank you for putting it together, and making it all happen. Without your efforts, we’d all be more isolated, and less the wiser.

The Shoemoney Crew, Jeremy and Dillsmack - great times boys. I was very happy to be able to spend so much time with you two.

Shandyking - awesome to meet the Mrs., I definitely wish we could have all spent even more time together. Thanks for giving me the poker bug.

Todd “Oilman” Friesen - it was great to finally be able to hang out a bit, and I was happy to learn what a down to earth guy you are.

Greg Boser - thanks for throwing such a great party and sharing some of your personal life with us yabos. I feel very priviliged to have been there.

Markus - dude, I’m going to send you a list of all conferences I am going to be at, in hopes that you will attend each one as well. You ROCK!

Shawn Hogan - one of the peeps I have wanted to hang with for awhile.

Chris Boggs - one of the funniest guys in search (and genuine to boot). Love hanging out with you.

Neil and Cameron - thanks for helping us with the booth. You guys are princes among men - I apologize for missing you afterwards. Damn alcohol induced flakiness…

Chris Sherman - it’s the quiet ones you have to look out for.

Jenn Slegg - what a sweetheart. Sorry I wasn’t a very good teacher - luckily it was a free game

Brent Csutoras - an up and comer. I love meeting future stars, though you and Annie are never allowed to play Hold ‘Em with me again!

Brandy and Daron - the hardest working couple in search. Always a blast to spend time with.

Marc Levin - thanks for the invite to the awesome party. Definitely the best conference party I have ever been to. You guys know how to do it right.

I’m sure that there are others, but in an effort to get some work done today, I’m going to cut it off there. So for all my homies, much love - I look forward to spending time with you guys again. And to the people I met for the first time, let’s make sure that it’s not the last. See you all at the next show.

Throughout my life, I never would have considered myself a morning person. When I was enrolled in college, many a day would pass that saw me finally emerge from my room close to the dinner hour - just in time to pretty myself up, and get ready for another evening of rabble rousing. I dreaded waking up in the morning, and the only time I ever got up pre-6 AM was if I was headed to the mountain.

As an adult, I have grown to love the mornings. I find that my days are filled with distractions - some self imposed, most external. When I worked in an office, most distractions came from coworkers. Now that I am working from home, my family has filled that role nicely. Between taking the kids to school, playing with them upon their return, and helping my wife with daily tasks, I lose hours of productivity each day. I found myself staying up later at night in an effort to make up for lost productivity. But those hours at the end of the day were tough to work through and remain focused on the task at hand.

Approximately two years ago, I decided that the only way for me to “do the needful” and maintain a meaningful personal life was to start my day earlier. So I set about creating a plan to get my ass in to work earlier. After some trial and error, I discovered the best way to accomplish it was in baby steps.

So I started off by setting my alarm clock 15 minutes earlier than I used to. Anybody can wake up 15 minutes earlier - it doesn’t take much will power. After a week of waking at the earlier time, I set my alarm clock 15 minutes earlier yet again. Continue for another week, and repeat. After the course of a couple of months, I was able to start my day almost three hours earlier than I had previously. Instead of starting my work day at 8 o’clock, I was consistently beginning at 5 AM.

Most other people start their day a few hours later, so I was able to create three hours of distraction-free work. Typically, I use the time to pour through some email and RSS reading (about an hour), and then I use the other two hours to jump into any outstanding projects I may be working on. That way, by the time everyblody else’s day has begun, I know that I have some productivity under my belt.

Another benefit - by waking so early it is damn near impossible to stay up later than 9 or 10 o’clock. I have found that by going to sleep earlier, I watch a lot less television. That should be enough of an incentive to give it a shot. While I don’t know if there is a direct correlation between early rising and success, it makes me feel more productive, and thus puts me in a successful mindset.

Give it a shot, and let me know how it works out for you.

There are few things in life that can be neatly classified as black or white, yes or no, good or evil. Outside of mathematics and science, I am hard pressed to think of just about any scenario that could be summarily assigned to one camp or the other.

I’m aware that it is human nature for us to try to categorize everything we encounter. It helps our fragile brains make sense of the sensory overload bombarding us. It has helped mankind evolve by learning and adapting to various stimuli and information. These simple classifications help each of us to get through the day. But they also hold us back.

Most people are so accustomed to the categorization model that they fail to realize that most things in life are neither black nor white - they are grey. What is right in one case, may be wrong in another. Good now, evil later. A constant flux.

Don’t get caught in the trap, and more importantly, don’t let others draw you into the game. Adversaries will throw out loaded questions seeking a yes or no answer. Questions like “Do you want the US to win in Iraq?” - how can an intelligent person simply answer yes or no to a question like that? First of all, what does the question even ask? How can you define a “win” in this scenario? It’s not a football game where at the end of the game, the team with the most points wins.

What are the conditions of this “win” - and at what cost does it come? Does it simply mean that we kill more of them than they kill of our troops? Does the democracy we wish for Iraqis come at the cost of 100,000 lives? 200,000? Half a million? Don’t these considerations come into account when postulating an answer?

Refusing to answer such a question with a simple yes or no opens you to criticism and second guessing. Most people simply can’t accept the fact that some questions can not be answered yes or no. They know that they want the US to “win”, without even knowing what the hell that means, and project their simpleminded deductions onto you. When you refuse to accept their flawed arguments, be prepared for ad hominem attacks or other logical fallacies. When you know the game, at least you can be prepared to play.

Update:  It would appear that David Letterman shares my philosophy - give him hell Dave.  I love his “because I’m thoughtful” - zing.

With all the talk of which country is good, which is bad, and which is evil, it’s getting tougher and tougher for a good American to know which people we are permitted to like, and those we are compelled to fear.  Of course we already know that Iraq, Iran, and North Korea are bad bad bad, but what about some of those less overtly evil regimes?

Recently, we have heard with more urgency of Venezuela’s flirtation with the Dark Side.  Their democratically elected official, Hugo Chavez, has become a lightning rod for American critics, wary of his bravado and his democratic socialist rallying cries.  However, most Americans don’t know of (at least not yet) Equadorian leader Rafael Correa.  An outspoken critic of American foreign policy, Mr. Correa has promised that if elected, he plans to nationalize oil production and will remain committed to “popular revolution”.

In a recent TV interview, when asked to comment on Chavez’s comparison of Mr. Bush to “el diablo”, Mr. Correa  replied that it was an unfair comparison.  “The devil is bad, but at least he’s smart.  Bush is a tremendously clumsy president who has done damage to his country and to the world.”  Ouch.

While it’s not yet a fate complete, most pollsters expect Correa to emerge victorious in the elections.  At which point, Americans can expect an onslaught of Correa smearing and Equadorian fear mongering.  By the end of Q1 2007, it will be like we hated Equador since the dawn of the nation.  All in a day’s work for the propaganda machine…

FOX News, America’s beacon for fair and balanced reporting, and home of bully Bill O’Reilly. When I watch TV news (not very often), I always watch FOX. Hey, I like my news fair and balanced so I can decide for myself - ha! Seriously, I watch FOX because at least I know they are full of shit. Not like the folks at CNN or MSNBC who pretend to provide unbiased reporting while pushing their agenda, at least when watching FOX (or Faux, as many lefties endearingly refer to it) I don’t have to sift through the propaganda. It’s right up there on a big plate, with none of that ugly pretense of objectivity to sift through.

Yesterday, O’Reilly “interviewed” professor Jim Fetzer. Fetzer, an outspoken critic of the Bush junta, was on the show to discuss 9/11 conspiracy theories. The entire piece is a character assassination, never once actually addressing any points - in typical O’Reilly fashion. See for yourself, here.

Wouldn’t it have been better for all parties if Mr. O’Reilly had given Mr. Fetzer the opportunity to provide some points, at which point Mr. O’Reilly would have ample opportunity to debunk Mr. Fetzer’s outlandish claims? Aren’t all sides served better when an open debate ensues? Instead of name calling, marginalization, and character assassination.

Not debating Mr. Fetzer and relying on bully tactics shows O’Reilly for what he truly is - a mouthpiece for the furthering of the American elite’s propaganda. God forbid the public have access to alternative views. It is much easier, and the system much less vulnerable, when those who are charged with promoting open discourse use their positions to fein debate while stifling the voice of the opposition. Bully Bill is a master.

Throughout the piece O’Reilly repeatedly calls Fetzer a “loon” a “nut” and tells him that he must have an alien in his bedroom too. All the while, never even hearing a point Fetzer may have to make. Perhaps the most deplorable act is O’Reilly’s accusation that Fetzer et al, “hate your country”. What the hell does that even mean? News flash Mr. O’Reilly - questioning your government does not mean you hate your country. Having a deep resentment towards the current administration does not mean that you hate your country. Hell, even those that hate the government don’t necessarily “hate their country”. Empty words, no meaning, thrown out there to evoke emotion, and call the credibility of the accused into question. A despicable act given that Bully Bill knows exactly what he is doing.

And since we are on the subject of meaningless expressions, how about “Support our Troops”? What the hell does that mean? How do you support our troops? Send them money (because they are not getting paid enough by the government to risk life and limb)? Send them flowers? How about sending them some armor - that would help support them. How about coming up with a plan to get them home safe - before 2010? That sounds like supporting them. But that’s not what the expression means now, is it? As far as I can tell, “Support our Troops” means “Shut the Hell up - GW Knows Best”. Now that’s some good propaganda.

I have to admit it, I am a fan of Alexa. I know it has some flaws, and that it disproportionately skews results towards webmaster-related sites, and that it’s not the best way to gauge the value of a text link ad, and a host of other complaints from the peanut gallery. But I like the numbers, and the cool little graphs. Huh huh… Just another stat for me to check. Another metric to judge the current temperature of the pool.

I remember stumbling across Alexadex a while back, and while the game caught me as quaint, I didn’t bother. A few months ago, I happened across it again, and decided to give it a shot. In a nutshell, is a pretend stock market where you buy and sell shares of websites, based upon the site’s “reach per million users”. That number is a rough guesstimate (this is where the controversy over Alexa begins) of how many people per million visit the site on a daily basis. Yahoo, Alexa’s number one site forever and ever, has a reach that hovers near 300,000. Which means that for every one million people online, almost 300,000 of them visit Yahoo - impressive. On the flip side of that example, my humble blog, typically meanders in the 12-15 area (sometimes single digits). Not nearly as impressive.

You start off with $10,000 (all Monopoly money) and are free to purchase any available shares of any domain of your choice. I typically buy and sell botw.org - it’s easy for me to judge a “fair” price. Most recently, I “purchased” some shares of jimboykin.com, after I noticed a dip in his number. It has since bounced back, and I am up more than 30% on the position. Go Jim go!

I know it’s all some geeky little computer game, but since I check the numbers anyway… And while the Alexadex may share some similarities with a typical stock market, at least when these numbers get manipulated I don’t risk my mortgage payments.

If you want to sign up for a free account, feel free to sign up through this link. They credit me with $1,000 Monopoly money for each person that signs up.

In perhaps the most important Congressional battle this year, that weird kid with the cool dog will be battling the greatest linguist in history. That’s right, the perennial underdog will be duking it out with the animal translator turned naturalist for a coveted seat at the Round Table.

In what is proving to be a close race, Democratic candidate Charlie Brown is making big promises. While quick to point a critical eye at incumbent, Republican Dr. Doolittle, Mr. Brown has recently had trouble keeping his own critics at bay.

At a recent press conference, Charlie Brown lashed out at reporters for criticizing his poor math skills. Mr. Brown quipped, “Well, what the hell do you expect? That’s why I have made schools one of my highest priorities. How can you expect a kid to learn if they can’t understand a single word any of the adults are saying? Maybe my opponent can understand - the guy can talk to ducks - but until we get some teachers in the classromm that our kids can understand, we’re stuck at square one. The current Congressman, Dr. Doolittle, is too busy taking money from special interests to pay attention to our schools. California will not be safe until we have a representative that values our kids more than his animal friends. ”

An aide to Dr. Doolittle, Gub-Gub the pig, declined to comment.

More on this as news from the Fourth Congressional District unfolds.

A classic propaganda piece straight out of the Cold War era.

All hail King Joe. Thanks shandyking for hitting me with the link.

There have been quite a few calls to boycott Citgo recently. After the most recent outburst by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, right-wing bloggers and other keepers of the gate have been ranting and raving about how Americans should unite and stop supporting this madman. Apparently, they seem to think that a boycott of Citgo would teach Chavez a lesson. I would oppose such a boycott for the following reasons:

• The boycott wouldn’t hurt Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A (the parent company) at all. They’d still be able to sell all of their gas to plenty of other interested parties - China, Russia, etc… Your local dealer might get screwed, but your boycott won’t hurt El Presidente at all.
• Punishment of the Venezuelan population for the outbursts of their leader doesn’t seem very fair. Our elected officials have insulted more than their share of other leaders. How about applying the same rules to all parties?
• Today’s foe may be tomorrow’s friend. Remember when Citgo bailed helped us out when Katrina hit? Seems a prudent course of action would be to not alienate ourselves from non-Middle Eastern crude oil sources.

Most of the outrage seems to stem from the recent UN debacle. However, this isn’t the first time Chavez has been on the radar. Remember when Pat Robertson called for the assassination of Chavez? A truly deplorable moment in the cross section of church and state. However, in the heat of his cry for state sponsored terrorism, Robertson does have one moment of clarity. One thought that really touches at the heart of the matter:

This is in our sphere of influence, so we can’t let this happen. We have the Monroe Doctrine, we have other doctrines that we have announced.

That’s it in a nutshell, isn’t it? “God damnit, this guy is playing in our section of the world, and if he doesn’t get with the program, then take him out by any means necessary.” His failure to bow to our power is unacceptable to the corporate interests pulling the strings. What kind of example would that set? We couldn’t let Latin America break loose of our shackles.

At present, Chavez poses no threat to the US. There is no chance of Venezuela invading or militarily attacking us. The only attack we face from them is an attack on ideology. Venezuelan’s socialist democracy can’t be permitted the chance to flourish, or our Latin American house of cards may come tubmling down. The propaganda machine will ensure that the public stays ill-informed, or focused on the clowns climbing out of the car in the third ring. All the while, ignoring the elephant in the room.

The digital camera I had been using for the last couple of years has all but forsaken me. The batteries won’t stay in properly, and I have trouble getting the lens to fully close. We decided it was time to relegate that camera to kid friendly status, and go out to buy a new one for the adults.

After reading some good reviews - here, here, and here - I decided that the Canon Powershot S3 IS would do the trick. I picked it up at the local Best Buy for $399 - a hundred dollars cheaper than it was advertised just a couple of months ago. With a $25 rebate, I save a few bucks more.

Thus far, I am pleased with the purchase. If you are using Mac OS X, I would recommend not installing the included software as the install is a bit cumbersome, and sets itself as the default. The whole program makes getting to your iPhoto a PITA. I wound up downloading the software, and promptly placing it in the trash. Save yourself the time.

The shooting speed is very quick - one of the best in a comparison done on the CNET review. It’s a bit too large to fit into clothing, so I may still have to pick up a pocket sized camera for traveling. I broke it in with some new pictures, and plan on experimenting much more in the near future. Look out Ansel Adams.

I saw this on a newly added blog to my reader - The Indy Voice. I tend to miss things on network news, and feel I am better off for it. This however, I applaud.

Keith Olbermann “offers a special comment” on President Bush’s soon-to-be (in)famous Rose Garden news conference. Watch the video here (it’s only 8 minutes).

I commend the bravery of Mr. Olbermann in standing what appears to be alone amongst his peers. Why didn’t this get more airtime? How come more members of the media aren’t asking similar questions, or making similar demands? Oh, that’s right. NFL season is back, the MLB race is on for the playoffs, and Clay Aiken has a new look.

Equally important, and regretably ignored by Olbermann, we were told that not only were we not allowed to think about a comparison, but that:

It’s unacceptable to think that there’s any kind of comparison between the behavior of the United States of America and the action of Islamic extremists who kill innocent women and children to achieve an objective.

How many women and children have died at the pursuit of American objectives? If there is anything that we have in common with those Islamic extremists, it’s our willingness to sacrifice the lives of innocents. Not only are we willing (eager?) to make those sacrifices, we have a history of stripping away any annoying little civil liberty that may interfere with the operation.

So what’s next? What opinion are we prohibited from expressing next? How far away are we from a full-fledged attack on any form of dissension? Is this the country that you believed it to be?

I have always been fascinated with language. Few things do I value more than the intricacies of expression through the verbal and written word. I find that the people I admire most are experts of expression, and fellow language enthusiasts. Some have turned their love of language into a profession: the comedic genius, George Carlin; MIT professor and activist, Noam Chomsky; or master essayist Gore Vidal. All of these men understand and appreciate the role of language in our society, and painstakingly labor in choosing the precise words to convey a particular emotion or thought.

No facet of life is immune from the gravity of communicating properly. From the most serious of issues to the mundane tasks we all run, if you don’t express yourself properly, you’ll find that you don’t get what you desire. I’m sure that you’ll notice that the most successful people are often the most eloquent - surely not a coincidence.

One of my favorite nuances of language is the widespread use of euphemisms - a mild or indirect word or expression substituted for one considered to be too harsh or blunt when referring to something unpleasant or embarrassing (i.e. downsizing instead of firing). I much prefer the use of dysphemisms, but that just goes with my status of in-house agitator.

There is perhaps no expression that bothers me more than hearing somebody say “Well, to be honest with you…” I used to use the expression as well, until a respected English Literature professor gave me a verbal bitch slap. Most people use the expression to preface a statement that they believe will either surprise, or go against what they believe the listener expects to hear. I understand the use of the expression (serving as a space filler and warning to the listener), but admonish those who utter the phrase. What are you saying to your listener? “OK, now I am going to be honest with you. Before, I may have been bullshitting, but on this rare instance, I am going to tell the truth.” Shouldn’t all of your statements be de facto truthful? Why preface this one statement with the proclamation of honesty? By pointing out the honest intentions of your future remark, you are discounting the inherrent honesty of your previous statements.

You are using the wrong words. Instead of using this obnoxious term, substitute with “Well, quite frankly…” or “To be frank with you”, or “To be blunt”. Any one of those phrases will convey the desired warning (hey listener get ready), without casting a potential shadow of falsification over your previous remarks. In actuality, it’s not honesty that you are preparing your listener for, it’s candidness, or surprise.

So choose your words wisely. Sometimes what you don’t say is just as important as what you do.

In early August, a friend of mine, Sumo Rob, told me that he had heard a poll reporting more than a third of Americans believed that Bush and company may have had a hand in the 9/11 attacks. While I had heard some of the “inside job” arguments before, the number seemed abusrdly high, and I wrote it off as bad information. Most of the people I know, and I run with a fairly liberal crowd, would scoff at the notion.

Last week, I heard Bill Maher reference the same poll, citing the same results. I decided to look a little further, and indeed they were correct. According to a recent Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll 36% of respondents replied that

it is “very likely” or “somewhat likely” that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them “because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East.”

The entire article is worth a read. Of additional interest is the role that the web has taken in the dissemination of alternative views, and how the rival philosophies reside on opposite sides of the technological divide. But that’s for another post.

Things aren’t looking good for GW. His approval ratings are abysmal, currently hovering anywhere between 30 - 40%, depending upon which poll you look at. Even his loyal supporters are beginning to run for the exit. I knew back when right-wing mouthpiece Anne Coulter slammed him for his nomination of Harriet Miers that there was trouble in paradise.

With the November elections approaching quickly, expect the Bush-bashing to reach new heights. Republicans seeking election will try to distance themselves from the Cheney-Bush junta, and Democrats will sling more mud than ever. Grassroots organizations and liberal bloggers will continue to prop up their candidate of choice, with increasing fervor as November approaches. But where will these naysayers be when Bush is gone? I wonder if DailyKos and Salon will report of the deception and chicanery of a Democratic leader if/when one is in office? What will all the “crazy liberals” do when they can no longer blame everything on GW?

Only time will tell, but if history is any indicator, I would imagine these outlets will gloss over the misgivings and misdeeds of a Democratic leader, probably resorting to pointing the finger at a hostile Senate or Congress. Complicitly playing their role in the polarizing of the American populace in an effort to advance their own agendas. A song and dance, getting you talking and thinking about issues that are not really important, in the guise that your officials are actually concerned about your well being. They are not. The system is broken, and spiraling ever more out of control.

So now that it is socially acceptable, you can hop on the bandwagon and let the world know that you think GW is a bumbling fool - truly redefining incompetence. But you had better start planning on what card you are going to play next. GW day’s are numbered, and you can’t afford to be a one-trick pony.

Have you heard of Camp Democracy? Not likely if you get your news from mainstream media. Why would they want you to know that people are gathering to speak about important issues. The more they can keep you in the dark, the easier it is for them to control the conversation. But I digress.

Camp Democracy is a non-partisan (yeah right) group coming together in Washington DC to promote “peace, democracy, and the restoration of the rule of law.” Various booths are set up between the Mall and Constitution Avenue for interested parties to learn about activism, electoral reform, community building, and more.

While the main topics addressed will cover and end to the war in Iraq, there will be plenty of speakers covering topics ranging from corporate globalization to the ineptitude of the Bush administration. If you are within the DC area, and would like to attend, here is a list of the schedule of events.

If you can’t (or don’t want to) go, but would be interested in donating money, click here. Or you can volunteer for any number of projects. Or you could do nothing, and complain that your country is going to shit. Your call…