You may remember Nick Pitera from the video where he sings both the male female portions of A Whole New World from Disney’s Aladdin. It has, as of this writing, over 22 million views. Go watch that first, if you’re one of the few who missed it.
Well, he’s back. And this is mind-blowingly awesome:
These marble machines (with interchangeable components) are blowing my mind.
Florida Senator Stephen Wise introduced a bill intended to force schools to each “both theories” on evolution (welcome to the further re-branding of creationism). But due to the way the bill is worded, he may actually increase the detail with which evolution is taught to children.
A thorough presentation and critical analysis of the scientific theory of evolution.
Sounds good to me! No more letting teachers just avoid the subject.
I’m over six feet, four inches tall. I’m also long in the torso. As of this writing, I weigh 220 pounds. Not super-thin, but not hefty by any means. Finding shirts that fit me is a challenge.
As the weight of the average American goes, it seems that shirts get more and more square-shaped. I’ve found that for many shirts, larger sizes means that the shirts only get wider. They assume that if you need more room, it is for girth, not height. I need a large shirt for girth, but an XL (or often XXL) shirt for length.
For dress shirts, I have to either buy fitted shirts (~$70) or buy an XL shirt (~$20-50) and have the sides taken in by a tailor (~$15). T-shirts are harder. Paying $15 to tailor a t-shirt seems silly. That could exceed the cost of the shirt itself! And t-shirts don’t have as long of a shelf life as dress shirts, so tailoring seems like a poor investment. I like t-shirts. They’re comfortable, and about the only sane thing to wear in Florida about five months out of the year.
I’ve embarked on an epic quest to solve this problem for me, and for tall or long-torso’d men everywhere.
If you’re rolling in dough, you can pay $10-$15 per shirt to have them altered by a professional tailor. Find a shirt that you like for length, and have them take in the sleeves and the body.
Yes, I totally bought a sewing machine. Taking a t-shirt in isn’t too hard. Lay it down, inside-out, under a t-shirt whose width dimensions you want to emulate. Pin or mark at the overhang. Baste or use a wide straight stitch (and mind your tension). When happy, cut off the excess, leaving about an eighth of an inch. Use an overlock stitch to tidy it up. I think this will by my solution for graphic t-shirts, or t-shirts I get at events, etc. I’ll just get an XXL and take it in.
For basic t-shirts in solid colors, I found several vendors whose shirts are longer than most, as well as some who sell “long” sizes.
I really love the American Apparel “2001″ t-shirt. Great fabric, no side seams, longer-than-normal length. Bulk pricing, and a zillion colors. Unfortunately, it’s not quite long enough. If I move too vigorously or lift my arms, I’m in danger of showing skin. this makes me really sad. If they made this shirt two inches longer, it would be my go-to t-shirt. I have a few of these that I wear once in a while, if I’m wearing a higher-waisted jean.
The Pima Cotton Basic Tee from Banana Republic is a great choice that is available in “tall” sizing! The color choices are disappointing (plum, heather, and navy, in addition to black and white), but otherwise I am very happy with this shirt. It is extremely soft, 100% cotton, with a light-to-medium weight. The shirt feels decently well made. At $19.50, it is perhaps a few dollars more expensive than I’d like. The length is pretty much perfect, and it is a slim fit, with perfect length sleeves. I have found that there is some variation in length. Once in a while I’ll get one that is shorter (but still within acceptable range).
LL Bean is a great resource for tall, thin men. They made high quality dress shirts, many of which are available in tall sizing, and some which are available in tall/trim-fit sizing (these fit me like a custom-made shirt). LL Bean also makes excellent t-shirts, which are available in tall sizing. Their large/tall t-shirt is great. Excellent quality, perfect length, and a bunch of color choices. The fabric is heavier than Banana Republic’s Pima Cotton shirt, but it also feels sturdier — like it would last through more wash cycles. This is an excellent choice, from an excellent retailer of clothes for tall men.
Duluth Trading Company’s Longtail T-Shirt is actually advertised as a solution to plumber’s crack. The shirt I got in large was indeed very long. But it was also insanely wide. It looked like an XXL, or maybe even an 3XL. The sleeves went past my elbows. What the heck? Additionally, the fabric was very heavy and course — more suitable as a workman’s shirt. Returned it for a refund.
Affiliated with American Apparel, this clothing company exclusively makes big and tall clothing. Unfortunately the smallest size they offer in tall is XL. I wrote in the order form comments box that I feared the XLT would be too boxy. When the order arrived, it contained a handwritten note from the CEO saying that they do clothes for Tom Brady, who is 6’4″ and 220 lbs just like me, and XLT fits him perfectly, so that I might be pleasantly surprised by how it fit. That was a nice touch! And truth be told, it wasn’t as wide as I had feared. Roomy, to be sure, but nothing like the Duluth Trading Company one. What it was, however, was crazy long. Like almost four inches longer than the Banana Republic long. It went to my crotch. I liked the shirt — similar fabric and quality to American Apparel, because it is made in their factory — so I took the time to shorten the hem and bring the sides in about an inch. But that solution doesn’t scale. I really wish they offered a large tall size. I made a second order for an XL shirt (not tall). That was actually pretty good. Even their non-tall shirts are taller than most other shirts. Still a bit roomier than I would like, but completely passable. And once again, I got a hand-written note from the CEO on my order form. You can’t beat that for customer service!
There are some great options here. I think that the Banana Republic t-shirt will be my go-to shirt for black, grey, and white, and that LL Bean is my choice for other colors. If your torso isn’t as long as mine, American Apparel will be perfect, and if you’re wider in the chest, an XL from Colossal Clothing is the way to go.
Danny Sullivan at Search Engine Land revealed a few days ago the results of an internal Google “sting” to see if Microsoft’s Bing search engine uses Google search result data as a factor in Bing’s search results.
Short answer: they do, albeit indirectly. Microsoft admitted as much, though they obviously couched it more delicately.
In the case of this “sting,” Google was able to show that if all other factors were isolated, Bing would sometimes copy bogus Google results. Matt Cutts of Google likened this to how map manufacturers sometimes insert fabricated streets onto maps and then monitor the competition to see if they copy these non-existent streets onto their maps.
Microsoft is collecting data through the Internet Explorer browser and/or the Bing Toolbar add-on. That data includes the URLs you visit. In order for Microsoft to know which URLs you click on Google, they either need to directly capture clicks, or they need to capture HTTP referrer information along with every URL. Either way, the data they are receiving lets them know what you searched for in Google, and which Google search result you clicked on.
Bing is then using that data as a factor in their algorithm. With all other factors removed, as Google was able to do in its sting, Bing will in some cases use that as the only factor influencing the search results. That’s not direct copy of Google search results data, but it is certainly indirect copying. Microsoft is essentially using IE users as a proxy for this information.
Microsoft doesn’t have to scrape Google’s search results pages (SERPs) and directly copy them. By receiving URL and click/referrer information, they can recreate the results of scraping Google’s SERPs. All they have to do is extract the Google search query (it’s right in the URL), and then group together clicks that come from that Google search result. The most popular one is very statistically likely to be the first result. The second most popular one is very statistically likely to be the second result, and so forth. The popularity of clicks almost always trends inexorably downward as you go down the list of results on a SERPs. This data is used in Bing’s algorithm. We don’t know to what extent it is used, but it was used enough for Google to become suspicious, and in some cases it is weighted so strongly that all other data is discounted.
My comment on Twitter was the following:
Illegal? Probably not. Unethical? Maybe. Lame? VERY.
Bing uses a ton of factors to craft their search results pages. If all of those factors are saying that there are no results for the current query, there should be no results for the current query. Sometimes “no results” is the most correct result of all.
Instead, Bing seems to be second-guessing itself. Sure, it found no results, but Google did, so they just use that data without even checking it.
So now we get to my point: the most disturbing aspect here isn’t the indirect capturing of data about Google’s search results pages — it is Bing’s lack of confidence in its own data and algorithms. It is tremendously disheartening that the second largest search engine on the web would discount its own data, use its users to obtain data from the competition, and use that competitor data blindly.
I would absolutely expect Bing to be comparing their results to Google, just like I’d absolutely expect Google to be comparing their results to Bing. Microsoft could even use automated capture of user data to do that. Say if the number one result on Google is below the fifth result on Bing, they could flag it for review. Engineers could study the discrepancy, determine which result set is preferable, and tweak their algorithm to obtain a better result next time. But to directly incorporate the competition’s data into their algorithm crosses the line from “comparing results” to “copying answers.” It may not be technically illegal, but it’s certainly worthy of criticism and a certain amount of shaming.
The web needs search engine competition. Google should not be allowed to rest on its laurels. Competing with Google will require genuine innovation, and Bing is undoubtedly doing much innovation. They’ve made great strides. But incorporating Google search result data into their algorithm will retard their progress. The extent to which Bing’s algorithm is influenced by the competition will necessarily relate to difficulty in evolving their own algorithm. Just as there is more to being a student than getting the right answers on a test, there is more to being a search engine than presenting good results. Your process for getting those results speaks to your value to web users and acts as a prediction of your ability to continue providing good results. Bing shouldn’t be trying to be as good as Google. They should aim higher.
I find political talk shows to be massively frustrating to watch, for a whole host of reasons that I couldn’t possibly cover adequately here. I would, however, like to point out one specific way that they their deficiency and deceit has become increasingly irksome. See if this scenario sounds familiar.
Two pundits want to discuss the political ramifications of an event. Pundit #1 (let’s call him Jack) makes an alleged statement of fact about the event. Pundit #2 (let’s call her Jill) disagrees, and alleges that the truth of what transpired is something else entirely. In this case, these aren’t subjective claims, these are claims of fact, about something that reasonable people could agree on were the evidence presented to them. Just to be clear, this isn’t something like “Obama is a communist,” where there are endless opportunities for nuance, obtuseness, and subjective interpretation. This is something that could be objectively determined. And now Jack and Jill have made opposing statements of fact about the matter. This is an impasse. One of two things should happen: Jack and Jill should investigate the matter and find out who is mistaken (it must be one of them, but could even be both of them), or they should move on to a topic where the basic facts are not in dispute.
This is not what happens. Instead, they forge ahead.
Forsaking all logic, they continue with the debate, talking about the ramifications of the event, whose basic facts are disputed. Jack makes his argument for the fallout due to his alleged fact. Jill makes her argument for the consequences due to her alleged fact. Of course, I’m being generous. They don’t argue so much as shout over each other at an exponentially increasing volume, until they run out of time and cut to commercials or start another infuriating segment.
While this cacophonous charade is under way, I have pulled out my mobile phone or opened a new tab in my browser and, usually in a matter of seconds, I have figured out who is mistaken about the facts. So now I have to endure the rest of the segment knowing that one (or both) of the pundits is utterly wrong on the basic facts of the matter they’ve proceeded to debate.
If I can do this at home, why can’t they do this at the studio, where segments are often prerecorded? If they can do it on the game show Jeopardy, where a cabal of judges behind the scenes sometimes comes back and awards or subtracts points upon further review of an answer, why can’t they do it on political debate shows? In many cases, I’d be better off listening to the opening statements by each pundit, and then tuning out and investigating the matter on my own. Having two people vociferously claim opposing sides of a matter of fact is not in any way newsworthy, journalistic, or worthy of anyone’s attention.
I call this problem increasingly irksome, because viewers’ access to information on demand has increased massively, but debate shows have inexplicably been held back. It’s as if they’ve been dropped into an informational “dead zone.” They’re broadcasting, you see — there’s no room for information to come in. If ever they allow for communications to flow in to the show, it’s in the form of inane Twitter comments. “Fuzzycat9953 on Twitter says that Obama is communist because he wants the government to take over health care. Thank you, Fuzzycat for that comment. Now back to our panel…”
There is a disheartening lack of truth lust on television. You might even say that there is an aversion to the truth. The occasional pundit who has their sources on hand and tries to provide them is often subjected to a vocal stampede of stubborn reiterations of conflicting disinformation. A debate cannot occur without first laying the factual groundwork. Many segments are ended with the trite “well, we’re going to have to leave it at that.” No you don’t. “That” is nothing more than a collision of utterly contradictory basic premises. “That” is not a state that any human being concerned with the truth should feel comfortable leaving anything.
Freespace: They’re better than you.
Timothy Sandefur peels back the faux-sophistication of those who lose their ideals and slide towards statism in later life:
“Now that I’m a grownup, I want to use violence to compel people to do what I want them to do, instead of letting them make their own choices. I now believe that I am superior enough to others that I can force my preferences on them.” [...]
This animation, made by a fan for Jonathan Coulton’s “Shop Vac,” is fantastic:
I went to Best Buy this evening. I was nearly arrested in the parking lot for refusing to return to the store and show store employees my receipt. Here’s how it went down.
My wife and I bought some movies at our local Best Buy store on the evening of November 26th. In the parking lot, on the way back to our car, a Hillsborough County Sheriff intercepted me, detained me, and said that I had to return to the store and show them my receipt, because it is “store policy.” I politely declined, and said that regardless of their “policy,” the purchases and the receipt were my property, and Best Buy had no authority to demand that I return to the store and let them inspect my property. He replied “they don’t, but I do have the authority.” He continued: “go back and show them the receipt, or you’re going to jail.” Oh how I wish I were making that line up. It feels silly to even type it.
What would the charge be? “Excessive knowledge of the Fourth Amendment?” “Walking in parking lot with intent to mind one’s own business?” Absurd.
I didn’t go to jail. But neither did I return to the store. The officer took the receipt back to the store. Partial victory, I guess. If Sarah weren’t there, I absolutely would have told him to go ahead and arrest me. I really doubt he would have gone through with it. And had he gone through with it, I would have undoubtedly had a strong unlawful arrest lawsuit. I didn’t want to upset Sarah and ruin her evening, so I let him take the receipt. But I didn’t take one step back towards the store. If he was going to threaten to jail me over some stupid store policy with no legal basis, he was going to have to do all the work to jump through the store’s hoops. He brought the receipt back. The only change was that they had highlighted the phrase “Keep your receipt.” That’s rich. I was TRYING to keep it, but this rude officer said he’d arrest me if I did keep it. I asked the officer for his card. He verbally declined to identify himself and walked away. I got a first initial and last name from his uniform, however. Wrote a complaint to Best Buy, conveyed the story to The Consumerist, and am considering filing a complaint with Internal Affairs.
It is absurd for an officer to be threatening to jail someone for refusing to let a third party inspect their property, with no suspicion of wrongdoing. I was in the parking lot, minding my own business. It was an abuse of power for the officer to try to enforce store policies by threatening arrest if I failed to comply.
Remember, unless you explicitly agreed to allow the inspection of your purchases (common examples are Costco or Sam’s Club, where it’s in your membership agreement), you are under no obligation to show anyone a receipt as condition of leaving a store. And certainly not as a condition of getting in your car in the parking lot. If you don’t mind the imposition and the veiled accusation of malfeasance that usually accompanies it, go ahead and consent. If you’d rather proceed with your business, just politely decline. The best thing to do is to say “No, thank you,” and keep walking. I don’t always decline. If they ask me in the store, politely, I often allow it. But I never turn back to a store if they yell after me or if an alarm goes off. At that point, they’ve ceased being polite about our interaction, and I refuse to inconvenience myself at the behest of a boor. If they chase after me like a thief, and demand to inspect my property, it is now an adversarial relationship, and I will not respond with any degree of servility.
I want to make it clear: there was no mention that I might be suspected of shoplifting, and the receipt check seems to have had nothing to do with “loss prevention,” as no attempt was made to cross-reference the items on the receipt with the items I was carrying. No employee spoke to me in the store about checking my receipt. The first I heard of any objection to my egress was after I had left the store.
I understand that theft is a huge problem in retail stores. But I’m not in any way contributing to it. The only “loss” that they’re going to have at my hand, if this isn’t resolved to my satisfaction, is the loss of a customer who has spent over $6,500 at that particular Best Buy store in the last three years. It is not good public relations to treat your customers like criminals and send the police after them to threaten them with arrest for insufficient obsequiousness to the minutia of store policies regarding the use of highlighters by men in yellow polos.
