“Sharing Economy” and a Nation of Contractors

UberI remember several years ago, Paul Krugman was in the UK debating a couple of conservatives on a television show there. At one point, Krugman said, “Well not everyone is going to start their own business.” And a female PM said, “Why not?” Krugman didn’t even respond because it was such a ridiculously stupid thing to say. But I noted at the time that if everyone went into business for themselves, there would be no businesses — just contractors everywhere. One can hardly imagine a more inefficient system. There would be no way to improve productivity by scaling up. But of course, conservatives like the idea of everyone starting their own business so they can label workers as less worthy than business owners.

But among a lot of younger computer types, this idea sounds great. A nation of contractors, that’s the ideal! But the laws of economics have not changed. Business management has not changed. But the public intellectual space has changed to allow the myth of contractors to be used by big businesses to take on none of the traditional responsibilities of having employees while at the same time not having to pay the large cost premium of actual contractors.

This, of course, is what is going on with companies like Uber and Lyft. The drivers are just small business people, not employees! As Michael Hiltzik put it last week, “That concept is so alluring, on the surface, that it has spread to house cleaners, launderers, delivery persons — you name it.” The California office of the labor commissioner found that Uber drivers are actually employees and not “independent contractors.”

This case has a special relevance to me. Right now, I’m working for a company out of London. I’ve never met the owner or my main contact. I get paid for work done, which I do on my own time frame using my own tools, working in my own office. I am, in other words, the very definition of an independent contractor. And I’m very happy with that. But I’ve had employers in the past who wanted to claim that I was an independent contractor. There are lots of reasons for this, but one of the biggest is to avoid costs like payroll tax contributions. But at the same time, they wanted to dictate how I dressed, when I worked, where I worked, and generally wanted to micromanage me. I was not an independent contractor in those cases, although I was often so desperate for work that I went along with it.

The commissioner’s office found that Uber was far too controlling of what its drivers did for them to be considered independent contractors. What’s more, it noted that Uber is wrong to say that it is just a technology company. If it weren’t for the drivers, it would have no business. But consider this: Uber requires that drivers pass a background check. How does that make any sense if all that Uber is doing is hooking up drivers and fairs? Well, of course, it doesn’t.

In another case, US District Judge Edward Chen noted, “Uber does not simply sell software; it sells rides. Uber is no more a ‘technology company’ than Yellow Cab is a ‘technology company’ because it uses CB radios to dispatch taxi cabs.” And that really does reveal the whole game. The only reason that Uber has been allowed to get away with its shenanigans is because the technology that it uses is newer than other technologies. But there is nothing new about what Uber is doing to maximize its profits.

Amazon was created just shy of 20 years ago. For most of that time, it did not collect any state sales tax. It still doesn’t collect sales taxes in 19 states that have them. And the one thing we all know is that Amazon’s profit margins are razor thin. So it has used this illegal subsidy for many years, destroying local book stores who could not get away without paying sales tax. In California, the sales tax is at least 7.5% and where I live it is 9.25%! How many local bookstores now gone would still be in business if they had been able to grab almost as much as 10% in profits off the top?

Where Amazon Collects Sales Taxes

All this nonsense of the “sharing economy” and the “new economy” has to stop. We are not a nation of contractors. We are not a nation of people who only want to buy stuff online. We are pretty much the same as we’ve always been. It’s just that the rich and powerful are using new technologies to trick us into taking even more away from us.

Split Infinities and the People Who Use Them

A Dictionary of Modern English UsageThe English-speaking world may be divided into (1) those who neither know nor care what a split infinitive is; (2) those who do not know, but care very much; (3) those who know and condemn; (4) those who know and approve; and (5) those who know and distinguish.

1. Those who neither know nor care are the vast majority, and are a happy folk, to be envied by most of the minority classes. “To really understand” comes readier to their lips and pens than “really to understand”; they see no reason why they should not say it (small blame to them, seeing that reasons are not their critics’ strong point), and they do say it, to the discomfort of some among us, but not to their own…

4. Just as those who know and condemn the split infinitive include many who are not recognizable, since only the clumsier performers give positive proof of resistance to temptation, so too those who know and approve are not distinguishable with certainty. When a man splits an infinitive, he may be doing it unconsciously as a member of our class 1, or he may be deliberately rejecting the trammels of convention and announcing that he means to do as he will with his own infinitives.

—Henry Watson Fowler
A Dictionary of Modern English Usage

Confederate Flags and Nazi Tattoos

Confederate Flag - Nazi SymbolAny connection between the massacre at the Emanuel AME Church and the Confederate flag is, of course, indirect. So don’t consider this article about that vile act. People have been talking about the Confederate flag and that’s a good thing. But I will repeat what I’ve said many times over the last several years: I hate the Confederate flag. As I wrote back in January, “Martin Luther King Jr was born and raised in Georgia. Yet I’ve never seen anyone wearing a t-shirt with his image as an act of ‘southern pride.’ No. ‘Southern pride’ is always expressed with the Confederate flag, Stonewall Jackson, or Robert E Lee.”

There is no doubt that the Confederate flag is a racist symbol. But again, let’s leave that aside. As we all know, most of the people fighting for the Confederacy were not slave owners. But beyond slavery, the Civil War was the answer to a great question: is our allegiance to our state or our country? And the answer to that was resounding: it is to the country. States have lots of nice things and they have control over certain aspects of government. But we are all Americans and to put South Carolina above the United States is an act of treason.

Nazi Heritage Not HateBut like I said, that was an arguable question 150 years ago. And that’s perhaps why the liberals of that time said to the south, “Welcome back!” There was no punishment. Even the President of the Confederacy — a man who under most circumstances would have been hanged along with many others — spent just two years in federal custody and then went on to have a successful life, dying rich and having a huge public funeral. This was the early version of Obama’s looking forward. And the conservatives responded to that the same way they responded to Obama’s mercy.

As the Union moved on and forgot about the Civil War, the south did not move on. Instead, it wrapped itself in the flag of the Confederacy. It created myths about the righteousness of its cause. And so every time southerners bring out the flag, they are saying, “We were right!” It is not even a question of them trying to claim that they weren’t traitors — which they most clearly were. That would be understandable — especially if people commonly talked about the treasonous Robert E Lee. But they don’t. In fact, he is widely seen as a hero, much to my personal disgust. And these people are not asking for absolution for their forefathers’ treason.

But the people who continue to wrap themselves in the Confederate flag are the same people who claim to have some kind of a monopoly on the “real” America. Yet they clearly don’t care about America as it is. It is instead “America.” And that’s why we get this nonsense from the supposed Constitutional Conservatives that “the powers not expressly delegated to the United States” are given to the states. Except that isn’t what the Constitution says. That’s what the Articles of Confederation said, and what the south tried to re-establish when it revolted against the United States.

To me, the Confederate flag is very simple: it is the flag of a failed country that attacked the United States and started the most deadly war we have ever had in terms of our own casualties. Almost half the population of North Dakota are people of German descent. Would anyone find it acceptable for the state to fly the Nazi flag? Even apart from its obvious racism and offensiveness to Jews (and basically everyone else), it would be offensive to the very idea of the United States of America. It would be like having a Fort Rommel.

Yet there the Confederate flag is. I live in liberal northern California and I still see it everywhere. I’m not suggesting that people shouldn’t be allowed to display the flag. But I am saying that we should treat people who display it the same way we treat people sporting Nazi tattoos.

GOP Loses Even When It Acknowledges Racism

Brian BeutlerBrian Beutler wrote a very interesting take on, Why Republicans Didn’t Want to Say the Charleston Killer Is a Racist. He distinguished between the Republican presidential candidates not wanting to take a stand against the Confederate flag and not wanting to to call the massacre at the Emanuel AME church a racist hate crime. There probably are a whole lot more Republican flag lovers than Republicans who would be offending by saying a white separatist kid who kills nine African Americans is a racist. So why all the confusion from the candidates?

Beutler thinks it is fundamentally ideological, “Republicans are reluctant to attribute anything serious in American society to racism, because so many Republican dogmas are premised on the notion that racism has been all but wiped out in America.” He related it to global warming and the new Republican excuse for not having an opinion on it, “I’m not a scientist.” With the racism question, it is, “I can’t say what he was thinking.” But it all comes down to the idea that if you admit that there is a problem, you have to do something about it. And both those problems imply distinctly liberal solutions. The truth is that conservatives have no solutions to them.

I agree with all of this, but I think it goes deeper. Another aspect of it is Henry Kissinger’s idea of a revolutionary power, and the fact that the Republicans have become one. The whole party has given up on practical politics. It is now focused entirely on ideology. And that ideology is basically that the government shouldn’t be involved in anything but going to war (and stopping women from having abortions). So even to admit that anything is wrong in society is to open oneself to the charge of lacking purity in pursuit of the the “limited government” ideal.

But this is true only of the base. The Republicans understand that their broader appeal is based upon an unstated racism. Why is welfare bad? You can talk all you want about moochers and hammocks. But the appeal of slashing welfare is based primarily on the image of black people in public housing waiting for their welfare check. Cliven Bundy spoke what usually goes unsaid in the Republican Party, “I would see these old government houses, and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids — and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch — they didn’t have nothing to do.” They do nothing; just sit around waiting for those sweet, sweet welfare checks. Of course, those sweet, sweet welfare checks are a thing of the past — thanks to Bill Clinton’s welfare “reform.” But no one seems to know that.

The power the Republicans’ appeal is based on the idea that there is an underclass — and we all know what that underclass looks like — that is stealing all our hard earned money. So it isn’t surprising that Republicans would be disinclined to talk about race at all. The more explicit race is in the public conversation, the less powerful it is. Most people in the center — and certainly on the left — do not want to think of themselves as racists. The moment we start talking explicitly about race, these people become hyper-aware of racist appeals. And the Republican appeal loses much of its power.

So it is certainly good that Nikki Haley and Ben Carson are talking about racism and the Confederate flag. But generally speaking, it is bad for the Republican Party. Because resentment of minority groups is the primary product that the party has to sell.

Morning Music: Mark Eitzel

Everclear - American Music ClubI swear, there was a decade of my life that I’m not sure I would have gotten through if it hadn’t been for Mark Eitzel and American Music Club. His combination of wry despondency so matched where I was. It is often hard to hold onto the wry part. But if Eitzel could laugh at the fact that he was spending his nights crying into his beer, then there was hope.

Here he is all by himself performing the first track off Everclear, “Why Won’t You Stay.” Everclear is widely considered American Music Club’s masterpiece. I don’t agree, but it is unquestionably a great album. The thing is that the band has never produced an album that wasn’t good. But my favorite is probably United Kingdom because of its under-produced and dark sound. My friend Dave Luoto once gave me a cassette tap with California on one side and United Kingdom on the other. (I now own the import that has both albums on it.) It was one of the best gifts anyone had ever given to me. And I listened to it over and over again. I made a little fun of myself about this in my unfinished second novel:

We made our way down I-5, through Gresham, the turn off to OSU, and onward toward Eugene. I’d been switching between American Music Club California with “Jenny Don’t Go” and American Music Club United Kingdom with “Highway 5.” By about Roseburg, Rachel, silent up til then, blurted out, ‘If I hear My Big Aloha one more time, I’ll scream.”

Here we see Mark Eitzel singing at a radio station. And he seems like he’s actually, well, happy. I’m glad to see it. I feel a whole lot better these days too.

Anniversary Post: Roth v United States

American AphroditeOn this day in 1957, Roth v United States was decided incorrectly. It was one of the major “obscenity” cases. This was the one that said that Congress could pass laws banning material “utterly without redeeming social importance.” It was later superseded by Miller v California, in the sense of coming up with yet another definition of obscenity as anything that lacks “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.” Of course the question remains who is to decide. And how does any of this affect society when we aren’t talking about public expressions.

The case was about Samuel Roth, the publisher of American Aphrodite. I’ve used an image of one of its covers to give you an idea of just how “horrible” it was. And it wasn’t sold in supermarkets; it was a mail order magazine. It was mostly erotic stories. That perhaps is the biggest American disease: the compulsion to stick our noses in other people’s business. Banning erotica is a minor sin compared to our general tendency to invade any country that doesn’t do exactly what we want.

Regardless, who gets to decide what has merit is always the same: the power elite. And I find it amazing that today, the people who want to ban things like American Aphrodite are also the people who want to ban abortion and then scream about how big and intrusive the government is. As I always say: I’m a First Amendment absolutist. Only two justices agreed with me, Hugo Black and William Douglas. It makes me think back to the Soviet Union where political dissidents were put in insane asylums. So if Thomas Paine were writing today, the government would just decide that his work lacked “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.” Problem solved!

We mark this dark day — one of many — 58 years ago when another piece of the First Amendment was carved out.

Pazuzu and the Evil Use of Uncertainty

PazuzuLast week, I wrote, The Exorcist Is Too Serious But Still Enjoyable. There is one aspect of the film that is my favorite, and I just want to take a moment to highlight it. Father Damien Karras has just met with Regan, who looks like a monster and is totally taken over by the demon Pazuzu, who claims to be the Devil himself. And it is fun to watch Pazuzu mess with Karras’ head. The priest’s mother has just died, so Pazuzu says, “You’re mother’s in here with us, Karras. Would you like to leave a message? I’ll see that she gets it.”

This freaks out Karras, but he thinks he’s being played. So he says, “If that’s true, then you must know my mother’s maiden name. What is it?” Pazuzu could just answer the question. He knows, after all, who Karras is without being told. But his game is to not confirm anything. He knows that Karras is questioning his faith, so the last thing Pazuzu wants to do is provide confirmation. So Pazuzu vomits green slime all over him instead.

That’s all pretty standard. It gets far more interesting later when the exorcism proper starts. Pazuzu causes a bedside table drawer to open suddenly. Karras asks Pazuzu to do it again, but of course he won’t. “In time,” he says. But then, he starts speaking in Latin, “Mirabile dictu, don’t you agree?” That means, “Amazing to see.” Karras replies, “You speak Latin?” Pazuzu says, “Ego te absolvo.” You can probably guess that one, “I absolve you.”

Karras asks, “Quod nomen mihi est?” He’s asking the demon’s name. But again, Pazuzu will have none of it. He starts speaking French. He answers, “Bonjour.” Karras repeats the question — probing whether Pazuzu (who Karras is not convinced is real) actually knows Latin or just a couple of phrases. Pazuzu responds with more French, “La plume de ma tante.” This is a phrase used to teach French grammar — it means, “My aunt’s quill pen.” So it’s all nonsense — creepy nonsense — but nonsense nonetheless.

To finish the whole thing off, Karras dowses Pazuzu with what he claims is holy water. Pazuzu goes crazy. But this too is another feint. It makes Karras think that Pazuzu isn’t real and it is just Regan in some kind of psychotic state. The evidence of possession is overwhelming, but Pazuzu keeps encouraging Karras’ doubt.

This is what makes Pazuzu such an interesting adversary. It’s fairly easy to be a hero if you know that a hero is required. What normally stops us is uncertainty. In this regard, Pazuzu’s ultimate mistake at the end of the film is to possess Karras, because at that moment, all doubt is gone. The path forward is clear.

Trump, Sanders, and a Neil Young Song

Neil YoungDonald Trump announced his run for the presidency last week. I am of the opinion that we should take him just as seriously as any of the other Republican presidential candidates. The only thing that he lacks is actual experience, which is also true of many of the Republicans running. He’s a deeply unserious person. But I don’t see how that sets him apart from the others. The Republican Party has decided to abandon any notion of leadership and to simply pander to its crazy (elite created) base. Trump is as good on that score as anyone else.

Donald TrumpBut there has been a bit of a dust up about the announcement. You see, Trump used Neil Young’s song, “Rockin’ in the Free World.” Neil Young didn’t like that. His management spokesmen said, “Neil Young, a Canadian citizen, is a supporter of Bernie Sanders for President of the United States of America.” Two things here. First, aren’t Canadians great? Second, isn’t Neil Young great? Of course he would support Bernie Sanders. That’s because all right thinking people support Bernie Sanders because he’s a good guy with good policies that vast majorities of Americans support — if only they could get past labels and listen.

It’s interesting that Trump would pick “Rockin’ in the Free World.” The song is very much like Bruce Springsteen’s “Born in the USA”: it is highly critical of the United States but people have picked it up as a great patriotic anthem because they only know the refrain. The song was originally released in 1989 — the first year of George HW Bush’s presidency. And it has rather direct lyrics like: “We got a thousand points of light; For the homeless man; We got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand.” And note: the elder Bush was almost unimaginably more reasonable than the current crop of Republicans.

After Neil Young complained about the use of his song by Trump, the campaign responded, “Through a license agreement with ASCAP, Mr Trump’s campaign paid for and obtained the legal right to use Neil Young’s recording of ‘Rockin’ in the Free World’ at today’s event.” And I’m sure that’s right. Young has an estimated net worth of $65 million. You don’t accumulate that kind of cash without being a whore. And in the modern world, whores don’t get to choose who they put out for. This is not a criticism of Young; we are all whores; that is what capitalism does to people.

Bernie SandersBut the whole thing is such a great example of Donald Trump’s campaign. What is it that qualifies him to run for office? He’s rich. He can buy credibility just as easily as he can buy Neil Young’s song and pretend that it means the opposite of what it does. But it also speaks to Trump in the wider sense of Republican politicians. They are all so incredibly unhip, but they think they can trick the rest of us by talking about the NASCAR owners they know or surrounding themselves with music that you know they don’t listen to when they are alone.

The hippest person now running for president is the guy who doesn’t even try: Bernie Sanders. Because nothing is as hip as knowing who you are. Of course, that doesn’t stop Sanders from being an excellent politician. After the whole Trump-Young brouhaha, he used it to his advantage, “Bernie Sanders took down Donald Trump and took back ‘Rockin’ In The Free World’ by using the song with Neil Young’s permission at his rally in Denver.” And there was this juicy bit of reportage:

Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are complete opposites. Bernie Sanders is running a campaign that is about giving voice and power back to the people. Trump is running because he is, “really, really rich.” Bernie Sanders is generating overflow crowds for each of his rallies. Donald Trump had to pay actors to come to his rally and cheer for him. Bernie Sanders is a serious public servant who has spent decades fighting for ordinary Americans. Donald Trump is a reality TV buffoon who is most famous for saying “You’re fired.”

Another difference is that Bernie Sanders doesn’t need the song. But he has a right to it that extends past Trump’s right to license it.

The Perpetual Conservative Delusion Machine

Rand PaulJonathan Chait called my attention to something I had missed in Rand Paul’s new flat tax proposal that I discussed yesterday, Again With the Flat Tax! But as Chait pointed out, one of Paul’s reasons for his flat tax is to save us from the nefarious IRS, “We now know that the IRS, through political hacks like former IRS official Lois Lerner, routinely abused its auditing power to build an enemies list and harass anyone who might be adversarial to President Obama’s policies.” Chait responded that, first, a flat tax wouldn’t change the IRS’s ability to do this. And second, what Paul is saying is absolute nonsense: it never happened.

On the first point, this goes along with all this “Abolish the IRS” nonsense. People really think that if we have a flat tax or some other conservative wet dream, then there would be no need for a tax collector. There have been tax collectors since the beginning of civilization. But according to Rand Paul and company, if we just lower taxes enough, everyone will be glad to pay them. We know this isn’t true because throughout my entire lifetime, taxes on the rich have gone down and down and down. Yet the rich complain more about the taxes they pay now than they ever did. If they were required to pay no taxes at all, the rich would complain that they aren’t being given money because of all the “job creation” they do.

But I’m really struck by the fact that Rand Paul is using this tired old story about the IRS going after Obama’s enemies. There was never any indication of this. Even at the time. The idea that the IRS was going after conservative groups was simply the creation of the right wing echo chamber. Even since Nixon, Republicans have been desperately searching for a Democrat who has an “enemies list.” This is the conservative way: whatever they do must be done on the other side. Sadly, most of the media go right along with this — effectively enabling the bad behavior by the Republicans.

Sadly, I have little doubt that Rand Paul actually believes this nonsense. That’s the whole point of the right wing echo chamber: you never have to hear anything that disturbs you. So why doesn’t the left wing have a similarly sealed echo chamber? It is usually claimed this is because liberals are, well, liberal: they like to get a lot of different opinions. I don’t think that’s really it. I think the problem is that in the modern conservative movement, the ideas are so bad that the only way that they can be maintained by Rand Paul and company is for no counter arguments to ever be heard. How else do you continue on thinking that if only we give yet another tax break to millionaires then our economy will get a “steroid injection”?

But count on this: NBC News will not be reporting that Rand Paul is using patently false claims to justify his new tax scheme. No, it will all just be ignored. Because if there is one thing that the mainstream media know, it is that the Democrats must be doing the exact same thing. They just haven’t found it yet. But don’t worry: if they ever do, they will report on that!

Morning Music: Sony & Cher

I Got You BabeOn Sunday, I was with my dad at a car show. And during it, I heard the old Sonny & Cher song, “I Got You Babe.” I grew up knowing the song. My parents always liked it. I don’t remember a time I didn’t know it, which makes sense given that it was released when I was one years old. But hearing it on Sunday was like hearing it fresh — for the first time. And it really is an awful song.

The melody is repetitious and the transition from verse to chorus is clunky. Without the vocal harmony, the chorus is almost repulsive: the same three notes repeated over and over. Sony’s voice is weak and the song rarely uses Cher’s few strengths. And the production is plodding with by far the most annoying use of an oboe ever. And to top it off, the lyrics are juvenile — slightly less mature than The Beach Boys’ “Wouldn’t It Be Nice.”

Forget “(You’re) Having My Baby” and “A Horse With No Name” and “Muskrat Love.” “I Got You Babe” is a major contender for the worst song of all time. Even Justin Bieber’s “Baby” is better than it. Think about that.

Anniversary Post: War

War BattlefieldOn this day last year, the last of Syria’s chemical weapons were shipped out for destruction. Also, on this day in 1180, the Genpei War started in Japan. Also, on this day in 1758, the British beat the French at Krefeld. Also, on this day in 1940, Hitler came to Paris to celebrate the fall of France. I could literally go on and on and on. In fact, today isn’t a particularly great day for war. But every day is a great day for war!

As I do these anniversary posts, I stay away from wars. But I am inundated by them. Humans really are vile. There is always someone going to war with someone else. They all have their reasons but ultimately, they are all land grabs — whether for resources or tax revenues or just some king who wants more people to pretend that he is a god. Whatever.

What amazes me is that nothing has changed. As we went to war this most recent time in Iraq, I was struck by how gullible people were. They seem totally clueless. Why don’t people realize that the people of Nazi Germany were also given plausible sounding justifications for invading Poland? Leaders don’t go before their people and say, “I’m evil so I’m starting a war!” No, they say things like, “We don’t want the smoking gun to come in the form of a mushroom cloud.” Remember that Saddam Hussein didn’t think the US was really going to invade Iraq for a very good reason: it didn’t make any sense. Certainly all the justifications for that war were bunk.

So wars go on. And on. And on. And now the United States is constantly at war. War itself has lost its meaning for us. War is just where we are going to concentrate our attacks. But we have good reasons to support this state of things. We are all so very, very afraid. But it isn’t the “terrorists” who are making us afraid. It is our leaders. And that’s been true since at least the Neolithic period — over 12,000 years ago.

So happy anniversary war: it’s your anniversary every day!

Frank Gets a Job — Learns Valuable Lessons

Technical WriterWell, dear readers, I have started a new job of sorts. It is freelance writing — technical stuff with no byline. And it seems like it is going to be consistent work. But it has been getting in the way of my constant stream of frankly curious wisdom. Not that you would notice, because I haven’t missed any scheduled articles yet. But right now it is 5:30 pm on Saturday and I am just starting to write the last article for tomorrow. [Update: this was originally scheduled for Sunday evening, but got pushed back. -FM] Normally, I’m a bit further ahead than that. In fact, I prefer to stay two days ahead. And I hope to get another half a day’s writing in by the time I go to sleep. I can do that because I have nothing that anyone would mistake for a life.

None of this means that anything is going to change on Frankly Curious. I like the current publishing schedule, and I’m going to try to stay with it. What else am I going to do? What would I pull out? As it is, I’d rather be publishing eight articles per day — every two hours from 5 am to 7 pm. But if I publish some short articles or miss scheduled article, just assume all is well and I am just making money. (It is my current wish to get enough money ahead so I don’t have to pay for my checking account. Such are the simple pleasures of my life!)

It’s been interesting to do this kind of technical writing. In one way, it isn’t different from what I write here (especially in the Computer/Meta category) or over on Dirt Cheap Computers. But I have to play it straight there. Here I have what is charitably called “Style!” I can be cheeky and opinionated. For example, I’m likely to just authoritatively tell you what to do. If I wrote an article about CMS, I would just tell you to use WordPress because it works really well and there is such a huge base of users that problems are fixed quickly and there are always people around to help you. But in this work, I would have to write something like, 10 Most Popular Content Management Systems Online. (Note: I didn’t write that and it is not from the company I am working for.) That is an excellent and useful article, but not a lot of fun to read or write.

One nice thing about doing this kind of work is that it brings me back to the days when I first was starting on the commercial internet. I created my first website in 1993 — but that was when I had my very own IBM RS/6000 right on the internet and so I ran httpd and created some pages. In early 2000, I was no longer at a college and so I had to sift through endless options in terms of hosting companies and various bits of software to run on it. It was very confusing and it would have been helpful to have some guidance. Today, the technology available is so much greater. But so is the help. It’s nice to be part of that, even though I wish I could write things like, “You’re thinking of serving your own videos?! Are you crazy? Why don’t you just go buy a ball-peen hammer and see how many whacks it takes to crack your skull?” Like I said: “Style!”

Another good thing about this work is that it is very educational. Even when it comes to stuff I already know well, there is nothing like having to explain it to others for making it clear to yourself. Also: I’m being asked to write about things that I don’t know much about. Who knows? It may end up changing the kind of stuff we do here, because most of the work that I am currently doing is for people who have websites like Frankly Curious — with or without the “Style!”