62nd Emmy Picks

Here are my picks for the 62nd Emmy Awards, which airs Sunday, August 29th on NBC.

  • Best Drama: Dexter
  • Best Actor, Drama: Michael C. Hall, Dexter
  • Best Actress, Drama: Mariska Hargitay, Law & Order: SVU
  • Best Comedy: Modern Family
  • Best Actor, Comedy: Alec Baldwin, 30 Rock
  • Best Actress, Comedy: Amy Poehler, Parks and Recreation
  • Best Supporting Actor, Drama: Terry O’Quinn, Lost
  • Best Supporting Actress, Drama: Sharon Gless, Burn Notice
  • Best Supporting Actor, Comedy: Neil Patrick Harris, How I Met Your Mother
  • Best Supporting Actress, Comedy: Julie Bowen, Modern Family
  • Outstanding Music, Variety or Comedy Series: Tonight Show with Conan O’Brien

To check the complete list of picks as well as read picks from other Reveille staff, click here.

Posted in Lists | Tagged emmy | Leave a comment

College Debt and College Prestige: From a Student/Entrepeneur

A few weeks ago I posted a comment on Frugal Scholar, a blog I follow regularly. It’s written by someone I know, but her advice is still spot on. I’ve enjoyed learning over the past year how to live more frugally. I still have a lot to learn, however.

In any case, she’s posted quite a few times about the college debt debate. Since I’m in college and this very debate affected me, I’ve always jumped into the comments when she posts on this. I’m in a unique situation, but I think my perspective can be useful to others.

Read my full comment here.

Posted in Link | Tagged college, frugal | Leave a comment

Apple’s App Store and Antitrust

I’m seeing more articles these days that pose questions along the lines of “Why hasn’t anyone sued Apple yet?” or “Why isn’t the Department of Justice investigating Apple?” These are both valid and fair questions — whenever any business reaches a hegemony using questionable business practices, these questions should absolutely be posed (c.f. Microsoft in the 1990s). Apple’s intentions aren’t patently antitrust in nature, but there are some serious transgressions for which Apple needs to atone.

I think the root cause of these concerns is the disparity over applications of unwritten App Store policies. There are two major contentions here: 1) that Apple doesn’t apply the policies to themselves, creating an unfair competitive advantage; and 2) that Apple’s reviewers don’t apply the policies equally across all submitted applications. Both issues put Apple in a precarious position, but I think the former poses a greater antitrust risk than the latter.

Apple ships many apps for the iPhone, including both installed utility apps and downloadable App Store apps. The utility apps are installed by default and are uninstallable — these are similar to any system app on a computer that is necessary for the OS to operate: clock, date, sound, battery life, etc. These are immune to antitrust speculation because of this requirement and aren’t the primary focus here.

However, the App Store apps Apple ships — such as iBooks, Apple Store and Nike+1 — are a real concern because they don’t have to abide by the rules. For example, iBooks provides a slider UI element to control the brightness level. This puts Apple in an unfair competitive position because other apps — such as the Kindle or even non-competing apps such as Instapaper2 — can’t offer this functionality to their users. This is a real concern: when I’m reading, I don’t want the brightness at the same level as my normal use, especially when I’m reading for extended periods. I’d have to exit the app, go to the settings, change the brightness and then reenter the app. And when I’m done, I have to repeat this process — this is unacceptable.

Another example is the Nike+ app, which, among other things, takes over the lock screen. It’s a fantastic app for runners. These features make it a no-brainer and give it a clear advantage over other apps, such as RunKeeper — hardware sensor notwithstanding. Now, RunKeeper has other competitive advantages (cost being one of them), but that’s not the issue here. Apple’s flagrant use of private APIs is.

To be clear: I’m not arguing against Apple banning the use of private APIs. It makes sense on a lot of levels. Private APIs aren’t finished and therefore poorly documented, prone to bugs and likely to change at any point in the future. This makes for a poor overall user experience. Imagine an app that after an OS update suddenly broke, taking any functionality you rely on or data you’ve created with it. Scary, huh? Apple is all about the user experience. It’s why their products are among the best in the world.

Apple’s unbridled access to these APIs is what gives them an unfair advantage. It’s one thing to discourage the use of these unfinished APIs by not documenting or publishing them. It’s another thing entirely for Apple to use them and then ban third party apps that do.

The second issue at play here is the patent disparity in the App Store review process. It’s clear that Apple’s reviewers operate with a certain level of autonomy. And really they should: the reviewers are the appliers of the policies and, therefore, the interpreters. The problem here is that there is no accountability. If your app is rejected for a violation, you have to resubmit the app and go to the end of the queue where your app is reviewed, likely by a different reviewer.

Developers have no way of knowing if their app will be accepted precisely because of the capricious nature of the review process and the undocumented policies. John Gruber has argued on many occasions that Apple should clearly document their policies. This is a great solution because it provides accountability — the exact element that is missing from the App Store. Developers fully understand what they can and cannot do before they submit to the review process and Apple agrees to criteria outlining the violations for which it can and can’t reject. Moreover, there should be a type of appeal system. If an app is rejected on grounds that aren’t documented, then an appeal can be made and a secondary or tertiary reviewer can step in to remedy the situation.

Of course, this is hoping for democracy in a system that doesn’t yet require such freedom. Apple controls the App Store and can do with it whatever they please. However, this can all change with one ruling. If they DOJ files an antitrust suit, Apple could be in serious trouble, incurring fines, and ordered to open the App Store to a degree it does not want. The latter is scarier to Apple than the former: they want as much control as possible — and, mostly, for good reason. Therefore, it’s not only likely but inevitable that Apple will implement such changes, if only to stay an antitrust suit that forces their hand.

I don’t think that it’s Apple’s primary intention to crush all opposition a la Microsoft. Instead, I think Apple has implemented an imperfect system in order to create a perfect environment in which its device can flourish and please users. Apple’s methodology has a few basic pillars: perfection and synergy of hardware and software; effective advertising and marketing; and a polished user experience. This is paramount to the Apple way and what makes them very successful. However, a DOJ or civilian suit is not only likely but inevitable. The only reason it hasn’t happened yet is because Apple is able to placate developers with money — developers don’t want to bite the hand that feeds.

Summary: Apple’s App Store is a target for an antitrust or civilian lawsuit because of the policies thereof. The two major issues here are: 1) Apple’s use of private APIs in App Store apps; 2) disparity on the part of App Store reviewers in application of unwritten policies.


  1. Technically the Nike+ app is installed and turned on in the system preferences, but I wouldn’t consider it a required system app — the phone operates as intended without it. Additionally, it’s turned off by default. 

  2. Marco lamented about this. He had to implement a workaround which, granted, is quite ingenious. 

Posted in News | 1 Comment

Ray Bradbury Quote: 06/10/10

We are an impossibility in an impossible universe.

Posted in Quotes | Tagged quote, Quotes, ray bradbury | Leave a comment

Rails 3 jQuery

Rails 3 is awesome. It’s a huge leap forward for the framework with all of the exciting new features. Finally in Rails 3, jQuery is available in place of prototype. However, the gem still builds with jQuery. I’m hoping that soon we’ll get a command line option for this (much like the database driver), but for now it has to be done manually. I got tired of doing this, however, so I wrote a bash script to take care of it for me. Make a new Rails app, run the script, and then enjoy the new jQuery goodness!

The script is available at github. I’ve written a fair amount of documentation there, but to be clear the script probably — almost guaranteed — won’t run out of the box. It requires a git repo of the jQuery and jQuery drivers and that they are in a specified location. I could have added another command line parameter, but I decided against it because that’s too much typing. Instead, when you get the script, initialize the aforementioned git repos wherever you keep your apps and then edit the script to reflect these paths. Then it should work perfectly.

As always, if you have any modifications, please send me a pull request. Enjoy!

Updated: I trashed the old method in favor for a Rails template. It’s a much, much better system.

Posted in Code | Tagged jquery, rails, rails 3, ruby on rails | Leave a comment

Redis and Resque and Launchd on Mac OS X

I’ve been playing around with Resque, the github-developed library for background jobs. It’s really wonderful and satisfies all my needs so far. It’s got a sexy web interface and since it’s powered by Redis, it’s super fast. Plus, the syntax and configuration is really easy. I was able to get it all up and running in no time at all. The steps to getting everything setup and installed are scattered about, so I thought I’d reproduce them here in a simple step-by-step guide. Plus, I didn’t want to have to start the Redis server every time I needed it, so I wrote a launchd that starts the server and keeps it running.

Install Redis

  1. git clone git://github.com/antirez/redis.git
  2. cd redis
  3. make
  4. mv redis-server /usr/local/redis/bin/
  5. mv redis-cli /usr/local/redis/bin/

Install Resque

  1. (dependencies) gem install redis redis-namespace yajl-ruby
  2. gem install resque

At this point, you should be able to start Redis (/usr/local/redis/bin/redis-server) and then Resque (resque-web). This will bring up the web interface for Resque (yes, it comes bundled with a Sinatra app to monitor processes — how cool?) at http://localhost:5678/. Now, let’s get the launchd setup so we can avoid lauching the Redis server every time.

Setup Redis Launchd

I use Textmate and the command mate to open files in it, but you could alternatively use vim or whatever.

  1. sudo mate /Library/LaunchDaemons/org.redis.redis-server.plist
  2. Copy the contents here and paste them into the file you created above.
  3. sudo launchctl load /Library/LaunchDaemons/org.redis.redis-server.plist
  4. sudo launchctl start org.redis.redis-server.plist

That’s it. You now have Redis installed and setup to launch automatically and Resque installed and ready to accept jobs. Yay!

Posted in Code | Tagged launchd, mac os x, redis, resque | 1 Comment

Star Wars: 05/22/10

Who is more foolish: the fool or the fool who follows him?

Posted in Quotes | Tagged fool, quote, Quotes, star wars | Leave a comment

Bill Gates Quote: 05/02/10

To create a new standard, it takes something that’s not just a little bit different; it takes something that’s really new, and really captures people’s imagination. And the Macintosh – of all the machines I’ve seen – is the only one that meets that standard.

Posted in Quotes | Tagged apple, Bill Gates, mac, Macintosh, Microsoft, quote, Quotes, steve jobs | Leave a comment

LSU Parking Ticket Appeal

Last week, I got a parking ticket at LSU, so I decided to write an appeal in an attempt to get it expunged and avoid paying a frivolous $22.00 fee. Below is my letter, reproduced in full for your enjoyment and discussion. Granted, I am completely aware that the Parking Office likely won’t accept my excuse as legitimate grounds for appeal, but I decided to use the opportunity to get the powers that be to focus on a systemic problem. I have a captive audience of the people who can get things done and I’ve fully exploited the opportunity.

To Whom It May Concern:

I was issued parking ticket 1-4138096 on April 21, 2010 at 1:55 PM on the parking rotunda around the Parade Grounds near the Tower Drive and Dalrymple intersection. The officer, known only to me as T21/JJ, issued this ticket for an apparent ‘Out of Zone’ violation. I am writing to appeal this ticket.

Every year I, and several hundred of my fellow students, pay good money for the privilege to park at LSU. With this privilege comes the promise that somewhere there is a parking space available for my use. Generally, this is true. However, there’s a caveat that isn’t evident until you’re on campus: parking is frustratingly limited and often the only space available is very far away — even miles. This happens quite often, too — it’s more the rule than the exception.

It’s not unheard of, however, that there aren’t available parking spots anywhere. This happens daily on campus and is especially bad near residential areas at night. This relegates students to ‘creating’ parking spaces. Often parking on the sides of streets or on patches of grass, students have to willfully violate LSU’s traffic law because, quite simply, they are forced to.

However, none of this is important. What is important is that parking at LSU is a perennial problem that is unfortunately overlooked by administrators at LSU. Every student understands the egregiousness of parking at LSU, but few administrators do because it’s a problem they don’t face. Easy Streets and a plethora of reserved parking assures that employees of LSU never face this problem. Or maybe they do actually hear the collective voice of the student body in its plea to the powers that be to change the parking situation but ignore the situation, either willfully or carelessly.

In any case, I beseech you, LSU Parking Office, to consider what I’ve stated here and to fully examine the situation. The problem is obvious and can be seen quite plainly by traversing campus on any school day.

By now, you’re wondering how this relates to my appeal. In all honesty, it has nothing to do with it, I just wanted to use the opportunity of your audience to expose a problem that you have the power and authority to fix. I understand that the money might not be immediately available to, for example, build a parking garage (which, may I remind you, would be a worthy investment because you can charge for parking for gameday and other events), but the problem should receive attention nonetheless. Now is a good time to start planning and polling students. I thank you for your full consideration of the issue and I’d gladly entertain any questions or discussion you’d like to have — name a time and place.

But now, my appeal. On the specific day in question, I was unfortunately late for an important class. The importance of attending class on this day was exacerbated by the fact that professors’ discourses in the last few weeks of school is very vital to my ultimate success in the class. Therefore, to mitigate the effects of my lateness, which of course is a product of the terrible traffic congestion in Baton Rouge, I parked in a zone that didn’t match my parking hangtag. This was a mistake, which I didn’t fully realize because of the rush I was in. Therefore, I am appealing the ticket on the grounds that I was late for an important class and just needed to park.

Thanks, Logan Leger Sophomore, Computer Engineering

Update: I received word back from the Parking Office. They let me off with a warning for this ticket and reminded me to check my zones before parking. However, the rest of my email wasn’t mentioned in any subsequent conversation.

Posted in Essay | Tagged appeal, letter, lsu, parking | 9 Comments

Institutions

I hate institutions. They’re too big, clumsy, inefficient, and bureaucratic. They take way too long to accomplish anything and often when they actually complete something, it’s done incorrectly.

LSU is a classic example of an institution. They’ve been working with an outsourced company over the course of a year to develop an iPhone app at an exorbitant cost. They could have taken half of what they’re paying and developed it in-house in three months. Even better: they could have taken a quarter of that, gotten a few students and had it in a few weeks. But they don’t think like that. They think along the lines of “what’s the most backwards, inefficient and expensive way to do this?”

And you know what? It shows. Every where. They’re broke. They’re hemorrhaging money. They’re still operating everything on a mainframe. Mainframes died over 20 years ago. It costs three times as much to maintain it as it would to rewrite it and make the whole system modern.

If they’d have the insight to go to students for an iPhone app instead of a big company, it would have been like a miracle for PR. Newspapers from all over would be covering them, legislators would be lauding them, and future applicants would look more highly upon LSU.

But they’re not the only example. All of academia is like this and most of journalism, too. And both are finally — finally — starting to pick up on this and change their game.

Because if they don’t, they’ll be gone in a few years. Completely eradicated.

“Too big and too essential to fail” is bullshit. We saw that this year.

I hope that was a wakeup call. Because honestly, I’m tired of things being run completely wrong. It pisses me off and is, at best, detrimental to our society. In reality, it’s deleterious.

This post was adapted from a conversation I had with Brandy Ryan. I thank her for the inspiration and patience when reviewing drafts of this article.

Posted in Essay | Tagged institutions | Leave a comment