Endopolis

On the scale of sports fans, I'm probably about a 6 out of 10. I care about my local teams and their place in their various leagues. Sure, I'm a little upset about how badly the Giants suck this season, but I'm not shelling out for season tickets, either. 

I care quite a lot about the general state of sports, mostly because I benefitted personally from playing many sports, and think that society would be worse off without sports. But given the current sorry state of sporting affairs, maybe we'd be better off without sports bothering us.

Yahoo! Sports' Dan Wetzel has a good roundup of the latest trials and tribulations from around the sportosphere. It's all downright disgusting. He even has the deets on a steroids scandal gripping the UFC. I don't get upset that the UFC is tainted -- I think there's generally something wrong with a "sport" that encourages its participants to beat the holy hell out of each other. I do get upset, however, about dogfighting and popular NFL quarterbacks, and about sacred sports records like the one Bonds is about to break.

Today's news that Tour de France leader Michael Rasmussen is out of the Tour isn't really surprising. It's just sad that drugs and doping continue to plague the sport, which is actually incredibly interesting and exciting to watch. For the Tour itself, are they supposed to let it go on and claim that anti-doping measures are working? Or, should they shutter the thing and tell participants to pack up and go home?

I have a 20-month-old, and he's already finding it fun to whack a ball with a bat or golf club. What am I supposed to tell him when he sees my photos of Barry Bonds and asks me what it was like to see him hit two homeruns in a game during his record season? What am I supposed to tell him when it's probable that the best athletes in the world can only be "the best" when they're taking some kind of drug, either legal or illegal? Pretty soon designer DNA will replace drugs altogether. Then how will we know who's on the juice? Should we stop caring and assume they all are?

Now even Gary Player is alleging that 'roids have found a home in golf. John Daly? No. Tiger? It's not impossible to imagine. And that's the problem: once you've found it impossible to look up to people that should be your heroes, it's over. Time to change the channel. I'm not there yet, but I'm really close.

Posted by senders at 03:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I'm not going to write about how YouTube is bettering Democracy by teaming up with CNN for its debates, one of which aired tonight featuring the democratic presidential candidates. Just because a webcam served as the interface between users and candidates, rather than a microphone between a live audience and the candidates, doesn't change the world imho. Although, it was smart of the producers to bring in a handful of the web questioners to ask a follow-up from the floor.

Still, I'll congratulate YouTube on a job well done. I watched for about an hour, and was focused on the content and quality of the questions, the overall feel of the debate, and the site itself after the debate was over. The debate was polished and interesting. I was half expecting amateur hour from users, but whoever was manning the editorial controls didn't let that happen (from what I saw). The questions were relevant and worthy of being broadcast to the TV universe. It's a different audience, and I think it demands a different approach. CNN and YouTube proved a great mix can be made between web and broadcast media.

A debate of a different kind has been taking up a lot of space online, as many users have complained that the most popular questions as rated by YouTube users should have been asked, or at least should have been featured in some way. It's a valid argument. However, just because they're the most popular doesn't mean they're the best questions, or are worthy of being asked on national TV to a crop of seasoned politicians. "Boxers or briefs?" was funny... once. We at Yahoo News keep a most popular section. If you've ever seen it, you know it's usually not the best stories or photos we have. We live by this mantra at Yahoo, and YouTube has proven again that human editorial intervention over automation is smart.

Sure, it'd be a mistake for YouTube to completely alienate its users. So part of my very unscientific analysis was in how YouTube handled its site after the debate. They've again done well, quickly posting a roundup of questions that were asked, and a big section featuring the questions that weren't asked. The recap is already posted, and the online crew obviously thought out this aspect of the presentation well. With the press YouTube and CNN earned by partnering on the event, YouTube will no doubt see a spike in users to its site from people who want to take in more than what was shown.

So, kudos to the YouTube and CNN teams on a job well done. I'm looking forward to the GOP debate on Sept. 17.

Posted by senders at 09:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Last Thursday was a typically warm summer day in the South Bay. Four-year-old Carlos Flores was splashing around in the new wave pool at Santa Clara's Great America theme park. His mother Yolanda and 8-year-old sister Jasmine weren't in the water. After a while, Yolanda couldn't see Carlos in the water any longer, so she sent Jasmine down to find him. A few moments later, Jasmine found Carlos motionless at the bottom of the shallow end of the pool, in about two feet of water.

She screamed. Lifeguards came running, onlookers were stunned, and Carlos couldn't be revived. He had drowned, and a day later Yolanda lashed out at the park to the press:

"That's a lie that there were six," Flores said (of the number of lifeguards watching the pool). "There's four lifeguards there. How can they not see my son? There's three walking and one sitting. They weren't doing their job. He was in 2 feet of water. How could he drown?

"I want this to be known," Flores said between sobs. "I want to warn all parents that they need to watch their kids at all times, because (Great America) doesn't do their job."

This story is incredibly sad to me, and really hit home for a couple of reasons. For starters, I can't imagine losing my son, nor can I imagine the pain that the Flores family is going through. I also can't fathom losing my son to a swimming accident of all things. I suppose a parent can only be so vigilant.

I spent the better part of my teenage years as a lifeguard and swim instructor. While the job was great way to get a tan, it was also totally serious. I have rescued kids, but thankfully have never had to perform CPR. I have taught kids as young as 3 and adults as old as 60 how to be  better swimmers.

We were very well trained, and one of the first things I learned was this: people can drown in 10 feet of water, and they can drown in a couple of inches of water. The bottom line is this: if you panic, then you can drown. It really is that simple.

Poor Yolanda Flores probably thought Carlos was safe in two feet of water. I'd never make that assumption.

Today Great America changed the park's rules, and now requires kids under four feet tall to wear life jackets if in the wave pool. That's a good idea, though a little late. They should also require parents to accompany kids under 10. Apparently State Sen. Elaine Alquist is going to write up a bill that would require "young children" not to be left unattended in water parks. I'm not sure what that means, but I do hope it passes.

Posted by senders at 11:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

We spent a few days in Portland, Oregon area last weekend -- a regular trip for us and our second this year. We landed, celebrated my sister's 30th birthday, stayed up too late, nursed our hangovers, let the kids play and get hugs from grandparents, and managed to get an afternoon/evening trip into a couple of downtown 'hoods, which we love to do.

We've fantasized living in Portland from time to time. It's an incredible city, small enough to walk and feel comfortable but big enough that there's always a lot going on. It's a cleaner, smaller San Francisco, if you will. There also isn't as much opportunity if you work in tech. Silicon Valley and the Bay Area is still where it's at. And, frankly, Portland (and Oregon) is still lacking in cultural diversity. That's changing, but we do love the ethnic mix of the Bay Area.

We had a glass of wine with one of Jo's remote co-workers, who lives in an incredible condo in the center of the trendy Pearl District. She's lived there for three years and had a lot to say about life as a Bay Area/Silicon Valley transplant to a city that doesn't revolve around high tech and the lifestyle that surrounds the industry. She pretty much affirmed our conflicted opinions of the city.

We finished with an early dinner at the BridgePort Brewing Co. (we're twice-yearly regulars), walked around the area, and stumbled upon Tanner Springs Park, which was probably one of the nicest urban/modern park designs I've ever seen. It was like stumbling into someone's uber-cool, serene backyard in the center of the busy city.

Portland is like that: pretty, welcoming, and full of discoverability and opportunity. That is, if you know where to look. 

Posted by senders at 09:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Last night, I flipped on the MLB All-Star game from San Francisco and caught all the pre-game festivities, including the fly-over by four jets after the national anthem. We live somewhat in the flight path of Moffett Field, and I know from previous nearby sporting events that upon fly-bys, the planes also often fly by my house. 

After the anthem, I said to Jo: "I bet in about 15 minutes they come screeching over our house."

Sure enough, in about 10 minutes, two F-16s and two F-18s made a sharp left turn directly over my backyard. I had forgotten to grab my camera, but was able to snatch it fast enough and change lenses to shoot this F-16. It's probably somewhere between 500 and 1,000 feet up -- incredibly low and noisy for a residential neighborhood. As pissed off as I was that it was so loud and so close (my kid started  screaming, and cat freaking out), it was just awesome to see.

I snapped about eight shots as it made the turn over my house with my 75-300mm telephoto lens. A gray plane against a cloudy sky doesn't make for the best shot, but you get the picture. 

Posted by senders at 07:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Nearly every day for the past week, the San Jose Mercury News has run a feature or some other article about Joey Chestnut, "competitive eater" and prime challenger of Japan's Takeru Kobayashi, the reigning hot dog eating champ. Merc readers today lambasted the paper for its ongoing Chestnut coverage, and especially for running a huge lead feature a few days ago, which took up about 2/3 of the front page news hole.

Yesterday, the Merc ran an editorial celebrating Chestnut and his talents, and suggested San Jose get in on the act by hosting a burrito eating contest or some other celebratory affair for its suddenly most-famous resident. 

Today, Chestnut and Kobayashi squared off at Coney Island for the annual Nathan's hot dog-eating contest, the Super Bowl of competitive eating. Chestnut knocked off the champ (Kobayashi has been suffering from a jaw injury), gobbling 66 hot dogs and buns. 

Congratulations to Chestnut and to San Jose. What a great claim to fame. I can't wait to see Chestnut's mug on the front page of tomorrow's paper.

Eating is now a spectator sport -- ESPN carried the Coney Island event live this morning. My brother-in-law claims that betweeen this and the iPhone, The Terrorists can rest assured America is still #1.

He may not be so wrong. Happy July 4th.

Posted by senders at 11:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

We recently got a great write-up from the Columbia Journalism Review on People of the Web.

Posted by senders at 08:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Jo and I found ourselves in Palo Alto on Saturday evening for dinner. Naturally, we had to stroll down the street to check out the Apple store, to see if there was any leftover pandemonium from Friday, when the iPhone went on sale. I was really beginning to hate the hype over this thing. As Walt Mossberg said, it's been unlike any event ever surrounding consumer electronics. Ridiculous.

Still, I had to see it. I wasn't expecting to actually play with it. 

The store was heaving, easily 100 people inside. The store itself has been totally rearranged from the last time I was at this particular location (granted, it's been a while).  But, a whole table just to the right of the door was set up for people to oogle the iPhone. Another shelf behind the checkout counter had another three or four units on it.

I spent a couple of minutes chatting with the Apple employee manning the front door who said, amazingly, that the opening event was less chaotic than they thought it'd be. I guess they were ready for riots, and people were generally well-behaved. That's so Silicon Valley. How boring!

After a few minutes, we wandered behind the counter to take a look. A kid was using one, playing with Google Maps. The interface looked really slick, the way you can zoom in and out using your fingers to pinch and pull the screen. Someone next to him stopped playing with a phone, so I was able to step right up and take it for a spin.

In short, the phone is unreal and to call it a "phone" isn't even quite right. It's unlike anything I've ever seen or any gadget I've ever touched. The touchscreen is incredible. The software's UI is unbelievable. It's smooth, and not overly sensitive to the touch. It does what you want it to do. The phone itself feels very solid and well-built. The form factor is really nice - it's small enough not to be a brick. The touchscreen was not really intuitive, though I could imagine getting it down after just a couple of days. Surfing the web was a little difficult because of the touch commands. I was really impressed with changing the aspect ratio of the screen, by turning the phone horizontal or vertical. The iPod functionality was really great, and scrolling through a music list was also... fun.

I only had a few minutes with the iPhone, but I nearly walked out of the store with one. I'll wait -- a 3G version will no doubt be coming, and surely Apple will be making other modifications. Hopefully the price will come down a bit. I'm sure there will be a few first-gen bugs.

I overheard someone at the store say: "you can make a call with it!" So, I did, dialing my parents who live near Portland, Ore. Surely the call plan doesn't discriminate between local and long distance on weekends, right?

Anyway, I was surprised that the call went through and my dad picked up on the other end.

"Dad, I'm calling on an iPhone."

"Nooooo!"

"Yeah, it's pretty cool. Don't worry, I didn't buy one."

"Wow!"

"Anyway, you sound really good." I truly was impressed -- the store was loud and I could hear dad crystal clear.

"You sound terrible!" he said. "Turn down the treble!"

"Alright, well I'll tell the employee standing next to me to do something about that. Although, I don't think it's Apple's fault. The phone is perfect, after all"

"Yes, definitely blame AT&T."

Posted by senders at 09:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)