It’s Not Hard to Get Your Copyright Notice Right

Copyright NoticeI’ve become something of an addict of Current Affairs. It’s not that I agree with it all the time. But I like the style. I am clearly a member of its demographic. It’s for educated people with a focus on politics. But it is also a magazine of culture. And the two things mix. When they write about culture, they bring in politics; and their political writing always touches on culture. They do a great job. What they can’t seem to do is put a proper copyright notice on the bottom of their pages.

This bugs me. They are smart people. Their website is written with the Bootstrap framework, so they aren’t total neophytes. If you are going to hand-code a site, it’s a good way to go. I’m a big believer in WordPress, but that’s more an indication of my age. I’m just not interested in the technical side of things anymore. (Yes, I know: it’s what I do for a living; but I get paid for caring about it then.) So it makes no sense that at the bottom of every page, we get this:

Current Affairs - 2015 Copyright Notice

Let Computers Do What They Do Well

It’s almost 2017. What’s more, the site started at the end of 2015 (29 November is the first time that Archive.org noticed it). So they put in the copyright notice and never looked back.

I know: putting the copyright notice on the bottom of webpages is a pain. Many sites wait well into January before they finally get around to moving to the new year. And some take a good deal longer than that. There is no reason for this! Computers are great at doing really boring stuff like displaying the current year in your copyright notice.

There is an endless number of ways to solve the problem. If you look, you will see that at the bottom of every page on Frankly Curious is this:

Frankly Curious - 2016 Copyright Notice

And the wonderful thing is that at 0:00 on 1 January 2017, that will say, “© 2009-2017 Frank Moraes.” I never have to think about the issue except when I go to otherwise well designed websites that claim that fine articles published on 19 November 2016 have a 2015 copyright.

Automating Your Copyright Notice

There are a lot of ways to do this. It’s a single line of PHP code for instance. (WordPress is written primarily in PHP)

<?php
echo "&copy; 2009-" . date("Y") . " Frank Moraes";
?>

That has the advantage of not requiring that the web browser be running JavaScript. Of course, there are very few people who have JavaScript turned off in their browsers. But if you want to create a website that doesn’t require JavaScript, that’s one way to do it. It can be done with any other backend language like Ruby or C# or whatever.

The JavaScript Solution

It’s very easy to do in JavaScript. And you can even set it up so that it works without JavaScript, but those users will have to wait for you to update the year before they see things correctly.

&copy; 2009 -
<script>
<!--
document.write(" " + new Date().getFullYear());
//-->
</script>
<noscript>
2016
</noscript>
Frank Moraes

Now this has the disadvantage that it does have to be maintained. It’s just automatic for the vast majority of your visitors. It’s also the case that it doesn’t work with my WordPress theme. The <noscript> tag is just stripped out and I end up with two “2016” strings. So I use the much simpler solution:

&copy; 2009-<script>document.write(new Date().getFullYear());</script> Frank Moraes

If JavaScript is enabled, the visitor sees the normal thing, “© 2009-2016 Frank Moraes.” But if they don’t, they see “© 2009- Frank Moraes.” Since the copyright notice isn’t necessary as a legal matter, this actually works just fine. Constructions such as “2009-” tend to be interpreted as “2009 to the present.”

Given this, one wouldn’t necessarily need to do anything but to put in “&copy; 2009- Frank Moraes.” But I think having the current year is clearer and gives the reader the impression that the website owner takes copyright more seriously.

Regardless, none of this is difficult. All anyone has to do is copy and paste some code. I’ll even provide it for the folks at Current Affairs:

<span id="copyright">&copy; 2015-<script>document.write(new Date().getFullYear());</script> Current Affairs</span>

Now they have no excuse. Not that they did before…

North Korea and the Nature of Democracy

Kim Jong-un - North Korea - InternetLast week at the website I edit for, we published, Everything We Know About North Korea’s Bizarre Internet. It was written by Claire Broadley who is kind of the co-editor with me of the blog at WhoIsHostingThis.com. It’s one of the best things we’ve done. In one way, it is hilarious. In another, it is extremely sad. Even though it is about the internet and technology, it provides a great insight into North Korea itself.

My favorite part of it is, “On the majority of North Korean websites, the names of all three Supreme Leaders are displayed larger than the text that surrounds them.” This is actually what led me to add “bizarre” to the title of the article. To give you some idea of this, consider the Kim Il-Sung University. Since “Kim Il-Sung” is one of the supreme leaders, the name is in a larger font. So when “Kim Il-Sung University” is written, it doesn’t come off as a single unit. It’s silly.

Pettiness of Authoritarians

I was so interested in this that I went looking through their HTML and CSS. What I found was that every time “Kim Il-Sung” was mentioned, it was put inside a “span” tag with the class “august.” The “august” class was then defined in the CSS file to be bold and 10 percent larger than the text it was around. It was fun to find this out. But it’s pathetic for three reasons:

  1. Those in power are so insecure that they must deify their current and previous leaders.
  2. They used the word “august.”
  3. It was hand coded so it had to be put in the HTML every time one of the names was mentioned.

But this is hardly surprising. This is the nature of authoritarians. And you don’t even have to go to that level. Look at the state of the aristocracy in England two hundred years ago. Or even the way people treat the royal family today. Or remember when Wall Street banks got their feelings all hurt when Obama talked about “fat cat bankers”? Entitled people are amazingly petty.

It’s hard not to see this all in the context of the recent American presidential election. He seems genuinely ignorant of what a president is. He seems to imagine that he’s going to be Supreme Leader.

What was so sad preparing the article on the North Korean internet is thinking about the millions of people who all have horrible lives just so that one man can feel like he is a god. And it’s all for nothing. Kim Jong-un isn’t the supreme leader of North Korea because he keeps most of the country living near starvation; he’s leader because China backs him. Without China, he would be executed and that would be the end of it.

North Korea vs America

The irony is, of course, that if he allowed as much freedom as the Chinese despots do, not only would the people of North Korea be better off, so would Kim Jong-un. Or he would be in all but one way: he wouldn’t be allowed the delusion that he is a god. He would just be an incredibly powerful man with more money than anyone could ever spend.

It’s hard not to see this all in the context of the recent American presidential election. The president-elect ran for office because he already had everything else. And that’s one of the reasons why he’s so dangerous. He seems genuinely ignorant of what a president is. He seems to imagine that he’s going to be Supreme Leader. And during my life, I’ve seen one political norm after another fall. So in addition to the Republicans getting all that they want — stripping away much of what is left of the New Deal and the Great Society — we will take another giant step toward kleptocracy.

Democracy is about a lot more than voting. In the coming years, we will see just how how much different we are from North Korea.

Afterword

I highly recommend reading the whole article, Everything We Know About North Korea’s Bizarre Internet. I’ve barely touched on it. The article is fascinating — and probably the best work any of us has done over at WhoIsHostingThis.com.

Google Is Driving Me Crazy!

Google LogoI feel for people who own websites that need to make money. They really are at the mercy of the internet giants that push traffic. A great example of this is Upworthy that saw its traffic go down by 25 percent almost over night because Facebook made a change to one of its algorithms. Late last month, Google made a change in its ranking algorithm: Penguin 4.0. And the results have been dramatic.

The change is not necessarily bad. In fact, it’s been great for Frankly Curious. Traffic has increased by about 10 percent. That doesn’t matter that much to me. For one thing, the site doesn’t really make any money. But more important: I’m focused on the regulars around here. It is nice when a particular article gets a lot of attention, but that’s not what keeps me grinding out content every day. I like the community here, even if it is small. (There are about a hundred regulars, but only a couple dozen who ever comment.)

For other websites, Google’s changes have not been welcome. Search Engine Roundtable ran an informal (non-scientific) poll and found, Only 12 Percent Said They Saw Ranking Improvements After Google Penguin 4.0. But mostly, people aren’t seeing any change. (Of course, it’s hard to say because traffic is noisy.)

Weirdness at Google

But there is one thing that has been going on with Google that driving me crazy. A month and a half ago, I wrote an article I’m rather proud of, Dean Spanley: Film and Book Comparison. It’s more the idea of it that I like. No one has written about this and the film and the book (novella) are really different. So I knew that I would get traffic for it. But I haven’t.

So I went to Google and I did a search: “dean spanley book film comparison.” That’s almost the title, so I figured it should be at the top of the search results — or close enough. But the search produced this:

Google Search: dean spanley book film comparison - Example One

Okay, so it isn’t at the top of the rankings. But when I looked, I found it was nowhere. That is to say: Google didn’t even have the page in its database. This was horrifying — not for me but for the world. The best thing about Google has always been its enormous database. That’s why it has always been better than Bing.

What was going on? Frankly Curious is a small website, but its been around a long time and it has a lot of unique content. What’s more: it isn’t that small. Anyway, I went to show a friend. I entered the same search into Google and I go this:

Google Search: dean spanley book film comparison - Example Two

Now the page was the top ranked. In fact, just “dean spanley book” ranks at number 11. So I was pleased. And, as usual, I just figured I had imagined the other search or that it was a glitch.

Flipping a Switch

But no! The truth is that the search flips back and forth. It seems that my article isn’t in the database during the day and it is during the night. Or something. I haven’t studied it closely. But it is the case that for days, sometimes it’s there and sometimes it isn’t. Of course, maybe Google has always been this way and I simply didn’t notice.

I’m just glad that it doesn’t really matter to me in a practical sense. But it is driving me crazy!

Frank Is Sick

Frank Moraes - SickI was very sick yesterday. It felt like a rope had been tired around my heart and pulled. I could barely walk. So instead of leaving at 5:30 in the morning yesterday, I ended up staying in bed the whole day. This went along with instances of shaking, turning white, and going very close to blind. It’s all very strange.

I’m feeling much better, but hardly well. I hope that I will be feeling better today. And assuming that, I should be back on my regular publishing schedule. But if I don’t, it won’t be because I’ve died. This may just take a few more days for me to recover.

I’m looking forward to working on this. I love writing. But as for now, I just want to go back to bed. Have a great day!

You Don’t Know What an Editor Does

What an Editor DoesI’ve noticed that most people don’t know what an editor does. They almost always think that an editor is a copy editor. That means that they think what editors do is work their way through a writer’s text and replace “than” with “then” when the need occurs. And this is an important job that is done less and less. Who has time for copy editing when you have to get an article out on the results of National Federation of Independent Business v Sebelius within five minutes of its release? It’s a now, now, now world — and I’m just trailing behind it.

I’ve known a couple of great copy editors in my life. They are amazing. Copy editing is like playing music: you can study and get good at it. But some people just have the mind for it. I was not born with this gift. But I’m an okay copy editor because I’ve developed a few tricks. But I never do any copy editing here. It’s hard enough to get myself to do a quick read through of an article after I’ve taken the time to write it. If I happen to read an article I wrote a long time ago, I always find errors. And roughly half the time I can’t even be bothered to fix them then.

Editor Ecosystem

It’s not surprising that people think editors are all copy editors: it’s so concrete. What’s more, “editor” is not actually a job title. The editing process is so vast that calling yourself one is like calling yourself a scientist. Sure, if you were a theoretical atmospheric physicist, you might tell the prols you were a scientists just to avoid getting a bunch of questions. But you would think of yourself as an atmospheric physicist because your job doesn’t involve a white lab coat or the use of a pipette.

At big publishers — book, magazine, website — you will have layers of editors. You have editors who screen material and send it on to other editors. You have development editors who work with known writers to come up with in-house projects. And you have content editors, who actively work with the writer throughout the project. But these are only used when publishers think they have something big — generally when they have a famous non-writer creating something. I don’t live in that world and I never have.

Now, of course, the title “editor” has lost much of its meaning. Brian Beutler is Senior Editor at New Republic. I would be shocked to learn that he sits in on editorial meetings and works with writers. Beutler is one of the most senior writers at New Republic. He is also pretty much their best. But I guess at a lot of places, an editor is a step up from a writer. So if a writer becomes too dear, they become an editor, even if they are doing the same thing they were doing before.

The Ginsu Knife Editor

The name for what I do is “line editor.” It sounds like an intense copy editor. But it is actually a jack-of-all-trades editor. It is the editor that small companies have because they don’t have enough work to split the job up. So here are the main things that I do, more or less in the order of importance:

  • Mother: I make sure the writers are happy. I try to get them to do more work. And I advocate for them. I also tell them (in the nicest way possible) about various hard truths of life. This is easy for me, because I’m older than everyone else and I genuinely like my writers.
  • Develop: I get a constant stream of requests for articles that will fill some need. It’s often quite a lot of work to figure out what that article should be and how to communicate it to the writers. This last part is key. I don’t want writers wasting their time (And mine!) writing about the wrong thing.
  • Edit: this is mostly copy editing. But it involves a fair amount of content editing. It also involves fact-checking.
  • Publish: there are a lot of different parts of this. It ranges from typesetting to finding graphics to pushing things live. Interestingly, it’s both tedious and terrifying work. It’s also great, because it is the end of a project — in some cases, one that took over a year to complete.
  • Write: when I don’t have a writer for a particular task, I have to write it myself.

Editor as Generic Middle Manager

There’s no doubt that I do much more than that. At the end of any day, I’m not usually sure what I got done. I feel like I’ve spent the whole day playing Fruit Ninja (which I only know about because of work).

There are many kinds of editor. But being a line editor (“lone editor” would be a better term) is very much like being a middle manager at any other company. There are people, they do work, you try to keep it all flowing while maintaining an acceptable level of quality. Oh: and you try to remain calm.

Facebook Fake Featuring Sergeant Jill Stevens

Facebook Fake Featuring Sergeant Jill Stevens

I saw the image above on Facebook. It is entirely typical of what Facebook is: a photo sharing website. And by and large, what people share is crap. And when it isn’t, it is generally something I’ve seen dozens of times before in similar forms. It’s especially concerning when it is political stuff that I agree with, because it is often pushing things that are not quite right. It’s very hard for me to stop myself from responding, “I agree. But it’s slightly more complicated than that.” Most Facebook users don’t do complicated. However, they do do what I can only call “Facebook Fakes.”

The image above is a Facebook Fake. When I texted a link to it to Elizabeth, her instant reaction was, “Fake.” She’s a sophisticated Facebook user. (Many of my friends are and they try to save me from myself — mostly just trying to get me to not be so obviously clueless.) So I think she instinctively knew. But she didn’t notice what made me immediately tag it as a Facebook Fake: the typesetting. So yes, before I continue on, it is necessary for me to discuss a fine point of editing.

Typesetting for Fakers

The typesetting of large numbers is a problem. For example, what is the number: 4294967295000? It’s hard to say. So in all languages that I know of, we use digit groupings. What’s more, the standard grouping (at least in the west) is three digits. So here in America, we would typeset the number: 4,294,967,295,000. So it’s easy to determine that it is 4.3 trillion, whereas it wasn’t with “4294967295000.”

Interestingly, Americans do not use digital grouping on the right side of zero. So we would in general see a highly precise number typeset like this: 0.4294967295. It makes a certain amount of sense in that case. But what about this case: 0.00000004294967295? It would be a whole lot more helpful to typeset it like this: 0.000,000,042,949,672,95. Easy: 0.042… micro-whatever.

But while the comma is used for the separator here in the US, it isn’t used everywhere. Some countries use spaces. And others use periods (generally then using the comma for the decimal point). Hence: 4.294.967.295.000 — still quite clear.

Now Back to Our Facebook Fake

If you read this whole Facebook Fake, it’s pretty clear. It is very sloppy and pidginized, “I am American soldier”?! But the first thing I noted was that the digit grouping marker was a period and not a comma. I dare say most Americans don’t even know that a lot of countries use periods, just as the creator of this Facebook Fake apparently didn’t know that other countries (specifically, America) use commas.

It probably doesn’t speak well of me that I delight in this kind of stuff. But there are many reasons why I am a writer, and this is one of them. People communicate things with words that they never intend. In this case, “I’m not American!”

The Truth Behind the Facebook Fake

The woman in the photo is Sergeant Jill Stevens. According to Wikipedia, “She is a combat medic in the Utah Army National Guard.” What’s more, she was Miss Utah in 2007. The original image extends higher, and it includes the quote (brackets in original):

Seeing how women are treated [in Afghanistan] was sad. In the villages, I’d take my helmet off to show I’m a woman and I’m respected, and that women do have worth.

So the Facebook Fake was the image of an American soldier who did an 18-month tour in Afghanistan. But the rest, well, no. Beyond the absurdity that her sergeant would send her home based on Facebook likes, Stevens is a Sergeant. Also, that photo of her appears to be from 2008. She was deployed from 2004-2005. And having listened to her speak, I can’t imagine her mangling the language so. Finally, she’s far too media conscious to put out an image that looks that bad.

I like to think that one of my skills is being able to create a teachable moment out of anything. I think this Facebook Fake is a good example.

Shakezula Thinks I Have No Business Commenting on Transgender Rights

Angry Teacher Explaining Transgender RightsLast week I wrote, Bill Maher, Donald Trump, and the Existential Threat. It was not about transgender rights. But I did note, “As with same sex marriage, I don’t think [transgender bathroom use] is a particularly big issue.” I added, “When LGBT people are still commonly beaten up and even murdered, these other worthy causes strike me rather more as easy and non-threatening things that the straight community can do until the descriptor LGBT itself because pointless.” But Shakezula and others at Lawyers, Guns & Money thought I was very wrong. In fact, Shakezula even responded that I had “no business commenting” on the subject.

I Wasn’t Writing About Transgender Rights

Remember that my article is not about transgender rights. The article is about the notion that Donald Trump is an existential threat. It argued against the idea that we should all give up our liberal principles because of This Year’s Existential Threat to Truth, Justice, and the American Way. I did come back to the issue of transgender rights. At the end, I wrote, “It is not the time to pretend that we aren’t liberals — to back off on transgender bathroom rights or anything else.” So I think you can see that the problem we have here is not that I don’t support transgender rights, but that I admit to a hierarchy — bathroom rights not being at the top of the list.

Let’s consider same-sex marriage for a moment. Most liberals these days think that it is the very definition of LGB rights. Yes, it is a sign of the progress we have made. But if you want to pick a single issue that galvanized the LGBT rights movement, it was the AIDS epidemic. And yes, the hundreds of thousands of Americans who died of AIDS was far more important than same-sex marriage. That doesn’t mean that I’m unaware that different kinds of prejudice work together. For example: voting rights and lynching.

The truth is that we all prioritize, and I was deeply offended that Shakezula seemed to think that I had no business commenting on transgender rights if I don’t follow his orthodoxy. Not that I think he was commenting on me specifically. There were only 16 click-throughs from that trackback. And I doubt that any of the commenters made it past the second paragraph where they got their outrage fix.

A Comment That Could Start a Conversation

The whole thing started with this comment, which I think explains everything. Commenter JL wrote:

Huh, I followed this link back and while this person thinks Maher is wrong, they also don’t think that bathroom access is a very important issue for trans people compared to harassment and murder. That’s an impressive misunderstanding. Bathroom discrimination for trans people is connected with suicide attempts, excessive absence/dropping out of school, avoiding going out in public [PDF], physical violence, and physical health problems like UTIs and kidney infections.

Now, I’m actually aware of all this. But if I weren’t, I would want to be. So shouldn’t that comment be made here where I would see it? After all, anyone can comment here. It isn’t like at Lawyers, Guns & Money where one must register to comment. But no. The comment wasn’t intended for me. What’s more, it wasn’t intended to increase transgender rights. It was meant to preach to the choir and prove how worthy and liberally pure JL is.

Outrage Is More Important That Engagement

So let’s sum up. I wrote an article encouraging liberals not to abandon their principles just because Donald Trump is running for president. I specifically mentioned not retreating on transgender bathroom rights. And I get a bunch of “holier than thou” liberals who most likely read at best part of my article complaining that I didn’t understand transgender rights. And by extension, the rights of any oppressed group.

Nice going people! Especially you Shakezula! Very liberal. Very open-minded. So very helpful.

Afterword

If I sound angry, it’s because I am. Over the past few years, I’ve become more and more intolerant of what I see as “middle class liberalism.” One of the commenters wrote, “I feel that anyone who dismisses bathroom access as a ’boutique’ issue or as a not very serious problem should be willing to forgo any use of public bathrooms. For a start.” Well, has this commenter ever tried to find a bathroom in San Francisco as a homeless person? I suspect not. I suspect that very self-righteous commenter has never been homeless and broke. I have. Many of my friends have been. I am not surrounded by the effete class. The “boutique” is Lawyers, Guns & Money, where financially stable people can increase the happiness of their lives by pointing out just how “noble” they are. What a pathetic show of self-righteousness!

Marissa Mayer and the Death Of Yahoo!

Yahoo! Sign on I-80

If you live in the Bay Area, you know this sign well. Since 1999, it decorated I-80 as you made your way to the Bay Bridge from the west. It was iconic. As a Bay Area nerd, I always felt a bit of pride seeing it. Yes: we were in Silicon Valley. Or close enough. But over the years, it came to seem a bit sad. Even when it was built, Google was on its way to ruling the world. It was put up when Excite passed up the offer to buy Google for just $750,000. And it was two years before Google turned down Yahoo!’s billion dollar offer to buy the search engine giant. But by the time the sign was taken down in 2011, it was more a cruel reminder of how the mighty could fall.

Back in 2008, Microsoft tried to take over Yahoo! with a $45 billion bid. Failing at that was probably the best business move in Microsoft’s long history. At the time, I was very ill — near death. My heart wasn’t functioning well and my brain was not getting enough oxygen. But even in that state, I could see that it was a terrible deal. Yahoo! was dying and there was nothing that was going to change that. Paying that amount of money for Yahoo! would have been on par to Excite’s decision that Google wasn’t worth three-quarter million dollars in 1999.

Marissa Mayer Cannot Fall

Yes, mighty companies like Yahoo! fall and disappear. Look at Excite: if you can find it. While the mighty companies fall, the mighty CEOs who run them into the ground do not fall. The current Yahoo! CEO, Marissa Mayer, will walk away with $55 million once she is finally thrown out of the company. But that’s not to say that she hasn’t suffered. Because of Yahoo!’s poor performance, she only made $25 million in 2014. And then last year, her compensation pancaked to a mere $14 million. How she’s surviving is anyone’s guess.

Marissa Mayer

I want to be fair, however. She isn’t responsible for the failure of Yahoo! In general, I think the company has been reasonably managed. For example, the acquisition of Overture in 2001 was a smart move. But it was also an obvious move. I’m no good at business, so when a company does something that I think is smart, it can’t have taken a brilliant business mind to come up with it. So by 2001, the Yahoo! management team saw the future as clearly as I did. Yippy! (Note: Yippy.com is much more popular than Excite.com.)

Why Are CEOs So Important?

But it makes me wonder. By American standards, I’m roughly in the middle class. Yet we have people like Marissa Mayer (net worth: $430 million) and Terry Semel (net worth: $300 million). They never fall. They aren’t allowed to. But what is it that makes them worth so much? Semel ran the company from 2001 to 2007. And the company did about as well as you would expect. So why not just hire me? Or a trained monkey?

I suspect that it really is all a matter of appearances. The idea of a multi-billion dollar company being headed by someone who makes just a million dollars a year would look odd. And it would be seen as unfair to make a CEO’s pay truly dependent upon how well the company did. For example: imagine if instead of Marissa Mayer getting a pay cut of 44% in 2015, she had been required to pay Yahoo! $10 million dollars. Why not?! We hear so much about people being rewarded for taking risks. Getting your yearly pay cut from 10 times the average worker’s lifetime pay to five times it doesn’t seem like much of a risk to me.

Once a person reaches a certain level of success they become a kind of community charity. We all weep at the thought of them going without. In fact, I’ve heard much the same thing said on Fox News: it’s so much worse to go from rich to poor than to simply have been poor your whole life. To a normal person, such talk is rubbish, but it sounds quite reasonable to some people.

Companies Represent Nameless People

But there’s something much more nefarious in this. Marissa Mayer is a real person. The thousands of people who lose their jobs and pensions are nameless and faceless. They are allowed to suffer in their anonymity. They are but statistics. “Are there no prisons?” There must be something: some kind of system to take care of the nameless and faceless. But what would become of Marissa Mayer if not for her $55 million severance package? There are no government programs for her! No prisons to make sure she is kept fed.

Thus the once mighty Yahoo! is allowed to fall, because it only represents the destruction of the lives of the nameless masses. We would be monsters to allow real humans to suffer — the ones with names — the ones like Marissa Mayer. But as long as she and her ilk are taken care of, then Yahoo! can die because it won’t harm any real humans.

My Dirty Little Blogging Secret

Frank Moraes - Webpage ImagesWhen I first started this blog, I had no idea whatsoever what I was doing. I knew computers, of course. And I set up my first web server in 1993. And I was, I guess, an expert with HTML, CSS, JavaScript. And I’m a decent enough PHP programmer. But I’d never used a content management system before. And I didn’t read blogs. In fact, I wouldn’t even call Frankly Curious a blog for the first couple of years. Most of all, I had no thoughts about it being publishing in the grand sense: there was no layout, and most of all: no webpage images.

It took me almost exactly two years, in late 2011, to start using webpage images. At first it was a now and then thing. But within a month, it was required. I am a man of habits. But it caused my writing to change. Now, since there were always webpage images in the upper-left hand cover of each article, I had to write enough text to be below it before I could quote someone.

You know what my quotes look like:

They are done inside boxes. Now they have a light grey background, but that’s relatively new. It’s slightly less readable. But I believe most people just scan display quotes.

Webpage Images Changed My Writing

I didn’t want the box to run into the image. So I had to write enough introductory material to get beyond the image so that I could quote whatever I wanted to. This changed the way I wrote. Instead of doing the standard kind of blog writing — X said: [quote]; let me add — I wrote a summary of their argument.

And I like it that way. I can normally condense a 3,000 word article down to a 100 word summary. I hate it when bloggers provide more quoted material than new material. As much as I love Digby, she will, at times, quote thousands of words. Mark Thoma does much the same, but I have to give him a pass; he does extensive edits of the material for things all his readers would know. (He writes for economists.)

But as much as I like the general style of Frankly Curious, it is still a bit embarrassing that it is the result of adding webpage images to the site. It seems like there ought to have been some grander vision. But there wasn’t. In fact, at times, I felt like a fraud, doing the literary equivalent of treading water.

There’s a very good side of this, however. Limitations often improve us, and this case was no exception. It forced me to think more deeply about the subject at hand. My freelance writers can all tell you: there is no such thing as “literary treading water.” If you need another hundred words, you need to come up with something else to talk about. I’ve seen lots of writers pad, but at most they get 20-30 extra words out of one thousand.

Sizes of Webpage Images

There’s an interesting mathematical aspect to these corner article webpage images. If they are very small, you don’t need much of anything before you start quoting. “X said the following…” is good enough. And if the images are really big — take up the entire width of the page — when you don’t need anything at all. But there are optimal image sizes for a webpage. We could do some math, but what would be the point? Just remember that it has to do with the width of the content area and the height and width of your webpage images.

With the old (pre-WordPress) site, the content area was thinner: a bit less than 500 pixels. So I thought that 150×200 pixel webpage images looked rather good. But on the new site, the content area is about 100 pixels wider. And the 150×200 pixel images looked kind of small. So I’ve increased the size of the default images to 225×300. This is the same aspect ratio.

It’s all kind of complex, but the net result has been that now I don’t need to write as many words to be past the image. Of course, I don’t even think about it anymore. But it does come up when I’m dealing with quotations pages. There, if the text is not long enough, I have to put the image on the right, or it looks bad.

Anyway, that’s my dirty little secret: I changed my writing style for the sake of making my webpages look prettier. But then, I’ve never claimed to be anything more than a hack.

How Long Will Mivhsrl Dsbshr Be Michael Savage?

Michael Savage - Or Mivhsrl Dsbshr?!Just two days ago, I wrote, Dvorak Simplified Keyboard and Awesome Google. It was about my typing “Narj Kevub” into Google. I had meant to type “Mark Levin” but my right hand was misplaced. Google, however, simply showed me the results for “Mark Levin” because it is awesome and understood what I had done. It was also the case that there were no results for the search “Narj Kevub.” Well, that’s not true anymore!

In a comment, paintedjaguar wrote, “Sadly, nine times out of ten I am indeed trying to look up ‘Narj Kevub.'” So I went to check to see if I had remembered right: that there were no results. But, of course, there were results. Now there was my article (as well as the author and category pages that linked to it). So Google has learned that “Narj Kevub” is not necessarily a mistake. What’s more, it shows that Google has humility.

This is something I deal with a lot of at work. A big part of my job is editing articles and infographics about very technical subjects. Now I’m particularly good at the job because I know a lot of this stuff rather well. But I’m no expert. Sometimes I make mistakes. So when I call out a writer on a mistake, I tread carefully. I write, “I think this is wrong; could you check it out?” I even write that when I have absolutely no doubt but that I am right. (There have been too many times in my life when I was absolutely certain of something that was not true.)

Narj Kevub - Mark Levin - New

But the change in Google’s response to “Narj Kevub” reminds me very much of an old problem in science. It is usually mentioned with regard to Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, although it really has nothing to do with it. Imagine you want to know what a bunch of termites are doing inside their mound. So you shine a flashlight in and see what they do. Well, you will see what is happening when light is shown in, but you don’t know what was happening when it wasn’t. Shining the flashlight changed the environment.

So I’ve effectively destroyed the “Mark Levin right hand shifted left” experiment. And it isn’t trivial to find other experiments. For example, Abragan Kubcikb does bring up Abraham Lincoln results, but it asks if you really meant to type “Abraham Kubrick.” However, “Mivhsrl Dsbshr” still works perfectly for “Michael Savage.” But hopefully that won’t be true for long.

But it may be necessary to mention the name more often. So let me note that Mivhsrl Dsbshr is a vile person. I used to work for some people who were very into boating in Sausalito. Well Mivhsrl Dsbshr lives right next door in Larkspur. And Mivhsrl Dsbshr refuses to talk politics except on his radio show. He clearly knows that he lives in one of the most liberal areas in the nation. I wonder why it is that Mivhsrl Dsbshr lives in such a liberal area? Could it be that liberal areas are a lot nicer to live in?

What’s more, I’m sure that Mivhsrl Dsbshr knows that there are lots of people in the Bay Area who really know about politics. They wouldn’t be screened out and so most likely, Mivhsrl Dsbshr would look like the bigoted fool that he is. But enough about Mivhsrl Dsbshr.

I created this name by moving my left hand one key to the right. The reason is that “Savage” is typed entirely with the left hand and thus doesn’t look as interesting: Nucgaek Savage. But it is fascinating how one can change the internet just by writing about it. But just to see if we can continue to do this, I’m going to add a handy link to see if we’ve created a new person:

Is Mivhsrl Dsbshr alive?!

Dvorak Simplified Keyboard and Awesome Google

Narj Kevub - Mark Levin

A commenter mentioned talk radio star Mark Levin, so as usual I ran to Google to get a quick refresher on him. He’s famous enough for me to know him, but I’m not an expert on the world of right wing radio hacks. Instead of typing in “Mark Levin,” however, I typed in, “Narj Kevub.” And the result is seen in the screen capture above. Google knew exactly what happened before I did. Instead of placing my right first finger on the “j” key, I placed it on the “h” key. Thus, all of the characters that I typed with my right had were the characters just to the left of what I wanted.

Now I understand: in a sense, that’s no big deal. That’s exactly the kind of thing that computers are good at detecting. But it’s totally awesome because computers rarely are so good at protecting us in this way. The focus is constantly on our making computers more like humans. But this is something that humans are actually kind of bad at detecting. And the fact that Google just fixed the error without even really alerting me to it is fantastic.

The Dvorak Simplified Keyboard

This all reminded me of something that happened on Late Night with David Letterman back in 1985. Barbara Blackburn was at that time the fastest typist in the world. According to the The Guinness Book of Records (1977) she “maintained a speed of 150 wpm for 50 min.” That’s just amazing. People think I type pretty fast, and I don’t even manage half of that for short periods of time. Well, the show had her on to compete against the fastest typist they had on staff, Barbara Gaines. Blackburn’s resulting text was similar gibberish.

In a later episode, some encryption expert was brought on and he determined Blackburn’s hands had been misaligned. I just assumed that it was nerves, but it is also possible that the show set her up. Those early days of Late Night were wild. Regardless, this is the kind of thing that can and does happen with typing — as I saw today. And because of the way keyboards are laid out, we really have no intuition about it.

One of the reasons that Blackburn was able to type so fast is that she used the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard. It was designed to replace the QWERTY system that is what we all know. There are various problems with it, but the following statistics kind of sums up everything: roughly 52% of all typing is done on the top row; only 32% is done on the middle row (70% of all typing is done on the middle row with the Dvorak system). What’s more, most typing is done with the left hand. As a result, there is a lot more and more awkward finger movement in the QWERTY system. The Dvorak system looks like this:

Dvorak Simplified Keyboard

The Dvorak system was completed in 1932, yet it has never really caught on. A large part of this is due to network effects — it’s a hassle to change. But it’s also the case that despite the clear theoretical advantages of the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard, practically speaking, its advantages in speed and comfort are marginal.

Google Doesn’t Care about Dvorak

It’s kind of interesting in how computers play into this. In the past, typewriters were typewriters. If you had an advanced one with a ball, you could get one with the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard on it. But most people were stuck with whatever they had and that was almost always QWERTY. Computers changed all that. I could have my computer use the Dvorak system with just a couple of clicks of my mouse. At the same time, computers have made the kind of typing that Barbara Blackburn did (where she could type a novel in one work day) unnecessary.

Strangly, Google does not recognize it if you type something on a QWERTY keyboard using the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard. It must be that people just don’t make that mistake enough to check for it. I’d be surprised if even one percent of typists know the Dvorak system. But I suspect people make the kind of mistake I made today quite often. And it truly is awesome.

No One Is Slacking at Frankly Curious

Nobody's SlackingI know you are all probably thinking that I’ve been slacking. I haven’t been posting two articles per day. I think this is a misconception. But the truth is that I’ve been very tired. Dealing with my father’s medical problems were hard. But they were nothing compared to after it was all over. You can maintain a certain level of energy while you have to — while you are going through a stressful situation. But after it is over, you fall apart. Or at least I do.

But all of this has been more reflected in my day job. I’ve actually been doing a lot of work here on Frankly Curious. For one thing, I think the features that I’ve been writing here have been more in-depth. In the past, when I was writing a lot of articles, I had a tendency to bring them to hasty conclusions after I hit about 500 words. Now there’s more of a natural flow of things. And I seem to be writing more things in the 800 to 900 word neighborhood.

More than that, I’m doing things that you probably haven’t noticed. The new page, Don Quixote in English Language Translation, is now up to roughly 3,000 words. And it continues to climb. But along with that, I have to go through all these old Don Quixote articles. Most of them are from the days before we switched to WordPress, and they need to be reformatted. And there are other technical details that need to be dealt with. It’s all a pain.

Of course, I know that few people around here are all that interested in Don Quixote. But it’s part of a process. There are a number of other things that I think I will do similar pages for. One is for the artist Bernard Frouchtben, although I think my articles on him are already the top three on Google. It’s too bad he isn’t better know, because I am pretty much the only source of information about him. The other thing I’m thinking about doing is a long article about Bob’s Burgers. I really do think I could do a blog on the show without any problem. And it would be unusual, because I think my insights are much deeper than what you are going to find at the AV Club.

So I haven’t been slacking. I’m just focused on making Frankly Curious more than it is. The truth is that over the last two years, we’ve seen the popularity of the site grow. But for the last six months, it’s stagnated. I do know one way that I could increase traffic: I could write about Donald Trump all the time like Digby is. But I just don’t care. In fact, as you’ll see later, about the only time I write about the presidential election at all is when I get angry at the way that “liberals” treat Bernie Sanders. It isn’t that I think Sanders deserves to be treated well. But I wish people would stop claiming that they are democratic socialists when they were never willing to vote for the only democratic socialist in the race.

Bottom line: I’m not slacking. I’m working hard. Even as I write this, I’m exhausted. Yet here I am in front of my computer working. And what are you all doing? Slacking I’ll bet!