PokerStars.com’s Mac software to arrive soon

Mac Tips, Musings, Web Programming No Comments

The following is a compensated review for PokerStars for Mac.

If you’ve ever played online poker, you’re probably familiar with PokerStars.com, one of the most popular poker sites on the Web. The ‘Mac-friendly’ poker reference site PokeronaMac.com, is reporting that the Mac version of PokerStars’ downloadable PC client will be hitting the Web soon. If you want, there’s a place to voice your support of the new Mac version, and press PokerStars for its release.

Now, it’s pretty neat that PokerStars is choosing to support a Mac client, especially in light of the fact that most new Macs will run Windows just fine. It speaks to the volume of PokerStars’ subscriber base that they have seen a significant demand for a Mac client from their customers. However, what I don’t understand about PokerStars or many of the other popular poker sites is simply why a well-written Java client is not the standard. Java will run on Mac, Windows, and even Linux, and it’s this sort of thing that the sometimes cumbersome, always lethargic language was designed for. There’s no offline play in the downloadable clients of any of the companies, as far as I know, so it seems that there’s no reason to use the player’s computer as the source of the application, when a universal client-server language exists that is universally compatible with all desired target platforms.

In spite of this note (and perhaps someone from PokerStars will care to comment), I think it is pretty nifty that the Mac client will be coming out. I’m only a little hesitant because there doesn’t seem to be a release date on PokerStars.com or PokeronaMac.com for the Mac client, and this wouldn’t be the first time that such a project never appeared after a lot of advance publicity. I certainly hope this isn’t the case here, but only time will tell. Until then, hope springs eternal!

mac, poker, pokerstars, pokerstars.com, poker on a mac


Is Google writing a code of ethics for the Web?

Musings, Politics, Web Programming, WordPress 2 Comments

Karl MarxThere has been quite the buzz recently about Google’s recent move to encourage use of the rel=”nofollow” tag on paid links. Matt Cutts, whose blog offers an insider look at SEO in the Google world, argues that buying links to boost page rank should be prevented, as it constitutes deception of the search engine’s algorithm, and prevents it from serving the most relevant links to searchers.

The Official Google Blog also has an article about the nofollow attribute, which clearly states that incoming links from sites that Google deems have been paid for will not be ‘credited’ towards the target site’s page rank. Now, my point here is not to argue that Google should be allowing comment spam and other obvious and highly exploitable means of link-spamming. However, the fact that Google (and now Yahoo! and MSN Search) have decided to support and enforce the nofollow attribute as the default for paid links means that the three major search engines on the Web, through which most of the people that find information on the Web locate the sites and content they want, have taken the stand that money shouldn’t be able to buy recognition on the Internet, or at least better search results on the Internet.

While this attitude seems quite reasonable, and is garnering a lot of support throughout the blogging community, where spam is an ever-present problem (thank you Akismet, 10,000+ pieces of junk automatically filtered and counting), few seem to be regarding it as the fundamental cultural paradigm shift that it represents. In the ‘real’ world, companies with large amounts of capital can fund massive marketing campaigns, using their clout to eliminate poorer and weaker competitors. It is a simple reality of capitalism that money continues to be used to buy influence in the offline world; in fact, large firms constantly flood the market with print, radio, and TV ads that cost billions per year across the board. Why is it then, that Google and other online search giants have decided that paying to be noticed is deceptive and wrong? Is it a moral stand against a cutthroat practice, or merely another assertion of corporate domination over a particular market by its largest players.

I, for one, will be curious to see how the forces at play in the market affect the decision Google has made on paid links, as sites like ReviewMe and Text-Link-Ads will have to decide whether to conform with Google’s ultimatum, risking the wrath of their advertising clientele, or to leave the nofollow attribute out of their links, thereby risking losing publishers who fear a declining page rank. All in all, I think the decision made by Google to filter search results by non-paid links only is noble, but it ignores the larger reality of our society, which is that money drives people to content all the time.

One Dollar Bill PyramidTake, for example, the recent advent of Gofbot.com, a site operated by McDonald’s as part of a marketing campaign featuring fake newscasts proclaiming Gofbot to be ‘bigger than the Big Mac.’ The point of the campaign, and the fake page counter on Gofbot.com, which always resets to 4 hits, is that nothing is bigger than the Big Mac, a tried and true ‘American classic.’ However, if you look it up, Gofbot has a relatively decent (for a site with NO content) Alexa ranking of 352,306, driven solely by the TV campaign and the buzz it created. The page takes you to McDonald’s website after you’ve seen the mini presentation, and voila! McDonald’s has paid to send you through a link to their site. And they did it by circumventing Google and placing their high-priced advertisement in a market that already accepts that money buys the attention of people in our society.

When you consider that the Web doesn’t live as an entity by itself, and that search engines are but one way that people are driven to websites, it certainly complicates the issue that Google is taking such a clear stand on. I would love to see a world in which advertising dollars don’t make you more relevant for a particular search term, but I’m not sure Google’s moral stand can survive in a world where money already buys the attention of millions of consumers every day.

SEO, google, search, paid links, gofbot.com, mcdonalds, mcdonald’s, msn search, yahoo, advertising, online advertising, nofollow


I’ll pay for two months of your new GameFly subscription

Musings 2 Comments

GameFly.com is currently running a promotion where you get a free Nintendo Wii if you sign up 5 friends for GameFly. Those people need to stay subscribed for at least 2 months in order for their sponsor to get credit. The first month at GameFly is $8.95, each month thereafter is $15.95, so if you just get it for 2 months, then cancel, it costs $25. So here’s where the bribe comes in. Sign up for a new GameFly account, get me my referral, and I’ll reimburse you the costs of your first two months of membership. Of course, it’s on you to cancel thereafter, since I’ll be paying cash, not giving out my credit card number. So, if you’re a little bit responsible, you can get yourself two free months of new games, and I’ll get 1/5 of the way closer to a new Wii for $125. Clicking the link below and signing up doesn’t get you any legal guarantee that I’ll pay, so make sure you know where I live and talk to me before you sign yourself up and expect to get paid.

Here’s the link: http://friends.GameFly.com/r/048bbeca86bd102a919d

gamefly, gamefly.com, free wii, nintendo wii, referral, promotion


What a mom!

Musings, Pets No Comments

I went to move one of the cacti I’m plantsitting for my mom, and lo and behold, there was a crazy-looking spider on it. I started taking pictures, because it had what seemed to be an amazing pattern on its back. After about 10 pictures, I noticed that one of the ’spots’ on the spider’s back had started to move. That’s when it dawned on me that what I was actually looking at was about 20 baby spiders, all clinging to their mother’s back. Here are the two best photos that I got. Unfortunately, I couldn’t get any video because it was too dark in the bowels of the cactus.

Spider with Babies

Spider with Babies

spider, baby spider, spider with babies


World’s most individualistic bug

Musings No Comments

This wasp has been building a nest in-between the main door and the screen door at the back of my house. I have no idea if it’s the same wasp, but there’s never more than one there at a time, and it’s taken almost a month for the nest to reach this size.

Wasp Closeup 2

Wasp Closeup 1

wasp nest, individual, wasp, hornet, bug, wasp’s nest


Confess to the Almighty in your underpants

Musings, News, Reviews, Web Programming No Comments

The kind shepherds over at Flamingo Road Church (grab their daily podcast) in Florida have created a religious website with a twist–ivescrewedup.com is a website on which you can confess your sins and, assuming it is approved by the moderator-ministers, your confession will then appear for the world to see, along with your home town.

The first thing about ivescrewedup.com, which struck me almost immediately, was this: on one hand, the amazingly slick and graphic-heavy website, and on the other, the amazing lack of literacy amongst the flock posting their confessions online. If anything, this website definitely confirms the sad relationship between ignorance and religion, as well as the fact that evangelical churches continue to use the latest technology to proselytize to a media-hungry and gullible audience.

Amongst the litany of grief and suffering were quite a few truly poignant stories, some very tragic indeed, such as the following from someone in South Africa:

I was raped and have HIV. I cannot tell anyone this. My family will hate me. I think I am pregnant. Lord, please send me friend who will understand.

As with any website, there are also the odd tongue-in-cheek pseudo-confessions:

dear lord, im so glad you got the internet, you really are everywhere! now you have restored my belief in you and i will serve you as long as i can

Flamingo Road Church logoOf course, the other thing to consider is that none of this is actually checked for veracity. In fact, any of the confessions might well be nothing more than the creative fiction of bored teenagers. After all, the main element of Catholic confession, namely atoning for the sin in some ritual fashion, is conspicuously absent in this outpouring-only .com non-denominational confessional. Also, many of the confessions on ivescrewedup.com seem to be more pleas for help than confessions of transgression–perhaps fare better suited for GroupHug, or even the intervention of a trained professional. Ultimately, ivescrewedup.com is an interesting addition to the internet landscape, but it’s more an exercise in occasionally-frightening, flashy evangelical web-marketing than any sort of groundbreaking means of freeing the human spirit to allow communication with some sort of god.

confess online, online confession, confessional, catholic, flamingo road church, sin, sinner, grouphug, group hug, religion, ignorance


I have a temporary arboretum in my front yard

Musings No Comments

I’m plantsitting my Mom’s plants for the summer, and yesterday we brought them all over to my house in a 17′ truck, stuffed full o’plants. Once we got them all out on the front lawn, people driving by started to slow down noticeably, often to a complete halt, to check out the new additions. I love small town life…

Plantsitting

Plantsitting

Plantsitting

plants, arboretum, plantsitting


Why won’t eHarmony reject me?

Humor, Musings, Web Programming 34 Comments

You may have seen one of the recent chemistry.com commercials depicting people ‘rejected by eHarmony.’ If you haven’t, here’s one of them:

Ok, so the point of this ad series is obviously that eHarmony actually doesn’t let everyone join their dating site, even though they claim to be out to match you with your soulmate based on ‘29 dimensions of compatibility.’ So, is eHarmony saying these people don’t have soulmates? Will no one love them?

That seems to be the question asked by the girl in the ad above, and you’ve got to feel sort of bad for her. After all, she’s clearly not freakishly hideous, nor does she seem to have any obvious sociopathic qualities. So what’s going on here?

Well, first I tried to get rejected by eHarmony. After their gazillion question survey, they offered to find me my special someone. Great. Only problem, I’ve been in a relationship for five years now. So, what does it take to get rejected? Many people have alleged racism, or that eHarmony only matches religious people. But that just seems like a quick route to getting sued, so I poked a little deeper on Google, and found this: Why eHarmony Rejected You.

You can read the whole article on the site, but the long and short of it is this: eHarmony apparently has standards, and emotionally-broken, committment-phobes apparently don’t make for stable life partners. Here’s an excerpt from the article:

Reason #1. You said you are separated or married on page 14. 30% of eHarmony rejects fall into this category, according to a May 2007 article in the Washington Post.

Reason #2. You said you are below 21 on page 14. 27% percent fall into this category.

Reason #3. You said you were married more than twice on page 14.1 “EHarmony also rejects anyone younger than 60 who’s been married more than four times,” according to the Washington Post article. (The cursed test asks these three items only when you’re almost done.)

Reason #4. Your answers don’t tally, i.e., (a) you clicked randomly or (b) for example, you put “1″ under Aloof on page 1, but checked “Outgoing” on page 6. 9% of rejects fall into this category.

Reason #5. You scored low on the following traits — eHarmony calls them dimensions:

* Self-Concept (how you perceive yourself)
* Emotional Status (feeling happy, fulfilled and hopeful)
* Character (honesty and trustworthiness)
* Obstreperousness (the black hole dimension)
* Character (honesty and trustworthiness)2
* Emotion Management: Anger (expressing negative emotions constructively)
* Conflict Resolution (resolving issues).
* Family Background (happy childhood and supportiveness of your parents)

It may seem crass, heartless, or even inhuman that, in our touchy-feely society, not everyone can be matched by a dating service promising the personal touch. However, when you think about it, eHarmony has a duty to someone equally important as you: the customer they send on a date with you. And frankly, if you’re an emotional wasteland from the fallout of your third divorce, you may need to just take some time away from the dating scene before throwing yourself at some poor, unsuspecting slob on the other side of the internet-tubes. I think that, were I looking to date online, I’d rather take my chances on a site like eHarmony, where the mercenary work of screening out the true crazies is done for me, than on the sappy, all-inclusive chemistry.com.

eharmony, rejected by eharmony, chemistry.com, eharmony.com, online dating


Punk rock music videos you probably haven’t seen…but should

Musings No Comments

The following videos are all by relatively well-known punk bands. That’s not to say they’re by pop bands with a punk flavor, like Blink-182, whose videos pepper MTV and others. These are by bands well-known in punk circles, often made for peanuts, and with intelligent lyrics behind all the special effects (of which there are few).

Bad Religion: 21st Century Digital Boy

The Vandals: My Girlfriend’s Dead

Descendents: I’m the One

NOFX: Bob

punk rock music video, punk rock, punk videos, nofx, bad religion, vandals, descendents


20 years of Windows boot screens

Musings No Comments

Windows 1.0.1
Remember what it was like to boot into Windows 1.0.1, with its simple two-color blue-and-white scheme (the Blue Screen of Life, perhaps?)? I don’t, since I was two. Thankfully, TechRepublic has this tribute to Windows splash screens throughout the ages so you can nostalgize about waiting for all sorts of different computers to boot.

microsoft windows, splash screen, history of windows, windows 1.0.1, windows, OS, operating system


« Previous Entries