SuperSatellite ||

Wow…this has been an interesting couple of days. As if I needed more stress right now. Southeast Kansas has been hit by a sort of surprise ice storm the past two days. Pittsburg itself looks nearly like a war zone. Trees are down absolutely everywhere. Twice yesterday I was out shoveling the walk and took off running when trees fell and hit houses across the street. Luckily, no damage or anyone hurt. But it’s a crazy weird sound to stand outside and you can just hear that *snapcrackchshhhhh* sound every few seconds around the neighborhood.

Where our luck went bad was with power. We’ve been facing constant random power outages. Fortunately, the last one wasn’t long, and was fixed before it got down to 53 degrees like it did in the afternoon. We had been planning to stay with Steve and Cassie to stay warm after that one, but the power came back before it got to that. Then it went again, and this time took Steve’s place with it, so by then, it was blanket time. That was fixed fairly fast though, and we have been good since. Where our luck also went bad was when I nearly lost the front of the house. We have a big tree in the front yard. It’s one I knew I’d need to get rid of soon, I just hadn’t planned on an ice storm in early December. Well, yesterday campus closed, so I went home early and found this tree, and several tons of it’s branches and ice, split right down the middle. It was happily ready to fall right on the house.

I have no clue what was holding it together, given the trees around town that had broken under lesser circumstances. Spit and willpower on my part, I think (well, maybe not spit, but definitely willpower. Lots and lots of willpower). Luck went good when it turned out A-1 Tree Service made me a priority and got it chained back to the good part of the tree and trimmed a bunch of weight from the top. Let us not discuss the cost this has dropped on me, aside from saying goodbye to Christmas, but hello to an insurance claim.

So right now, I’m pretty on edge. The tree, while less of a threat, is still a concern until we get it gone completely. And there’s more storm on the way. The money is probably going to come from a credit card, just when I was nearly out of credit card debt. All and all my stress level, which has been on the decline, has now spiked in impressive fashion. I really need to work on my meditation. But, it could have been much worse, and we are probably totally in the clear now, so, let’s call it Epic Luck.

So, today I wrote the dirtiest function I have ever written in PHP. I typed more profanity at once than I think I ever have in the past. As part of a new AJAX (Asynchronous Javascript And XML) live search query displayer I wrote for our Google Mini, I had to do some filtering to make sure naughty phrases wouldn’t show up. This is a pretty straightforward script you could incorporate into different applications, like a shoutbox, or comment form.

Alternatively, you could swap in preg_replace() or eregi_replace() instead of preg_match() and censor phrases that way. In this example, I use preg_match() just to test the query, and if the filter matched, I excluded the query from display entirely. I have this set to match anything that occurs in a query, so if the word “butt” was a filter term, it would catch “butts,” “butthole,” and “buttmunch.” That saved a lot of extra typing and filtering. Yes, it increases the likelihood of a false positive, but in this case we weren’t too concerned about an overly aggressive filter.

If the filter makes a match, it returns a boolean value of true. From there, do as you will. You could build in your own handler code as well (especially if you just wanted to censor individual words).

If you have a better idea or refinement, comment below and I can tweak this appropriately.

In the field of higher education, universities have a unique roll in terms of their web site and the services that we provide to visitors and users. Because the landscape of a university is so expansive, it can be easy to get caught up trying to showcase and provide for many different fields. Common features like e-mail are being augmented around the world at colleges and schools with things like e-portfolios, web storage space, blogs, photo galleries, e-learning software, and user communities. It is the latter that I am interested in focusing on today.

While doing web development, the important question to answer is: “What need are we fulfilling?” Often times we will rush head long into development to keep up with the work load that piles up. Until recently, this was a relatively safe procedure, because we often were trying to keep up with everything, so even if what we did wasn’t needed right then, by the time it was done, there would be a use for it. Now, however, that is changing. The big buzz word is “social media” or “Web 2.0.” Let me be perfectly straightforward with my dislike of the phrase Web 2.0. I think it is a misnomer that is dangerously abused, particularly by those not in web development.

It is this social web that is creating development and support challenges for colleges and universities. Many have tried to create their own social networks, or play off the popularity of others. So what’s the problem? Money is painfully finite. So are developer resources. By creating a network, you create a sort of implied agreement between yourself and the user that you will support that service for them. Worse than that, you create a service that people might use, that by comparison is still inferior to private sector counterparts. Eventually usage will drop off, and you are stuck supporting something that only a handful of people still use, but by that point you can’t justify simply scrapping it.

This creates a huge problem for college staff. How do you handle the constant complaints and feature requests? Remember, we are in the business of education and student support. By getting into these new areas, you are suddenly binding yourself to new areas of support and growth it fields that didn’t even exist five years ago. Why put that pressure on yourself? This is especially true in the face of tools being made available like Facebook’s API (Application Program Interface), which are there to make it easier to let them handle our needs. Facebook makes a lot of money. Certainly more than us. They have a huge support network in place. Dedicated people. By leveraging them in place of a homegrown solution, you solve a number of issues. First, growth into that area becomes a marketing issue, where it belongs. Web marketing staff can get in, set things up, and use the tools without any real need for us to step in. You don’t expend resources developing and supporting something that is, in essence, a fad. Ten years from now certain aspects of social media will survive, no doubt, but there will be a new big thing on the block. But if you decided to make your own tool, you are stuck playing catch up. Instead, you could have just dumped and moved on. At worst, you are out a little time that you spent working in the API, but that’s minor compared to the alternative.

Let us not forget the biggest issue. This is social media. It’s all about people, and people are around long before they ever get to us. In today’s world, it is the social norm to already have a MySpace, and a Facebook at the very least. The more adept kids are running Photobucket or Flickr, del.icio.us accounts, checking Technorati, blogging, and on, and on. Unless you can do a better job than these sites, why compete? If you could do better, you probably wouldn’t be working in higher ed in the first place, so why would we want to reinvent the wheel? If students come in already tooled up for their social networking skills, we are better off augmenting them in their domain, rather than trying to graft a new one on top of it. We see this a lot with .edu e-mail accounts, where the student gets it, and tends to use it grudgingly when they have no other choice. They are here for four years, and will get more e-mail addresses from ISPs and employers in the future, why should they hang on to this one? The same goes with social networking, since there isn’t anything we can effectively offer that would make sense for them to add one more thing they need to get on and check every day. Instead, get out and make a MySpace profile, and invite students to it. Go to them, and show that you are willing to work with them on their level. Then, once the fad dies off, just kill off the profile and move on. It was time well spent, and you can get focused on the next big thing.

There is a perception issue that associates with all this: embracing vs. chasing. First off, there is the community of people that will take any opportunity to criticize something a university does when it is the slightest bit deficient. Not to mention the ones that pipe up when things really are deficient. If you create a social networking portal that is weak and uninteresting, you will be reamed for it in the kids’ eyes. That also attaches a stigma to you that you just don’t “get it,” and are trying to play catch up with, and invest in, something that’s just a fad. That’s the “chasing.” On the other hand, by embracing and leveraging existing sites, you avoid that criticism. How can they come down on you for something everyone is using (unless you really screw it up)? You also gain credibility at the management level because of the time and money you’ll save, as well as your ability to stay with the trends. Instead of being a second rate copier, you suddenly are seen as an organization that understands how to actually use the tools that are out there. You get it. You see the power that others have made and can make it your own. In a single day you can have Facebook and MySpace profiles, in a week networks are growing, you can be reaching people through YouTube, and you can be making impressions on kids in a fraction of the time had you tried to redevelop similar tools.

What we finally boil down to is the concept that a “web presence” today means much more than just running a .edu on a box in our server room. That used to be it. Now the landscape is different. Things are evolving, and so too must we. Entertainment industry professionals are latching on to this idea, promoting movies, games, and music in the blogosphere and on social networking sites. People’s entire job description consists of creating these profiles and commenting on people and networking to the web users. If it works for them, why can’t we make that same strategy work for us? We must create “presence.” Show that we can operate in space and that the technology out there is something we understand and can use to reach people. If we do it all ourself, we become internet xenophobes, holed up on our domain, unwilling to exist outside the confines of our server room. This means being daring, and possibly adding staff to address it, but in the long term, it is time and money well spent, and your web staff and programmers can stay focused on true university needs.

Well, my day was made today. There were many of us disappointed when Jericho met an untimely demise after CBS decided not to renew it for a second season back early this summer. This following a season where several shows thought it’d be a good idea to go on a several week hiatus in the spring before coming back with new episodes. All the shoes suffered ratings drops from it, and Jericho was one that got the axe for it, sacrificed to unholy TV production gods. What made it doubly bad was that the series ended on a cliff hanger not matched since the days of Star Trek: The Next Generation. It was brutal to kill a show after that and leave us wondering where it went from there.

Then came the support. The internet turned out to be the proving grounds for a mass fan support campaign that resulted in something like 20 tons of nuts getting sent to CBS headquarters, if I remember my facts right. More than 40,000 pounds of nuts worked to change their mind, and CBS ordered a short run to follow in 2008. It’s not often this kind of thing works, but here it did, and we were ecstatic. And then we waited…

And waited…Every once in a while news would come out about the filming. Cast and crew were excited to be back, etc, etc. After a while, the filming of new episodes was done, and then there was nothing more to be heard. I was certainly beginning to get frustrated that apparently CBS was going to sit on this good show indefinitely, even in the face of the Writer’s Strike, which meant that if they got off their rump and gave it a slot, it could be one new show in a sea of crappy reality television. Well, today I got what I needed. I found out that CBS has slated Jericho to return Tuesday, January 12th at 9:00PM central time.

This is great, because it’s a low risk gamble. Sure, the WGA strike might be over by then, but the odds of new shows hitting the air by then is pretty low. That means Jericho will be one drama putting out new episodes each week, competing with worthless trash reality television. That gives it a good chance of bringing in good viewership. And even if it doesn’t, we get our short run, and we get some closure, as opposed to how it ended at the conclusion of season one. So yay!

This makes me think back to Firefly. Fox killed that off for some kind of illogical spite I think. Even if you wanted to watch it, you couldn’t, because they shifted the time slot around so much. But, Fox is notorious for that, and we all know it (anyone else get a kick out of how Bender’s Big Score started out?). Now it has a huge following. The Sci-Fi Channel has rebroadcast rights, as far as I know. This is my official announcement that they are idiots for not buying out the full rights, and putting it back into production. It would have been right at home there, and gotten the attention it deserves. The odds of that happening now are slim to none, with most everyone else off on other projects here and there. Such a waste…

Fingers crossed for Dollhouse though.

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its public health assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa.

So, yesterday I agreed to spend some time up at Pittsburg High School judging for their debate tournament. It’s something I tend to do often when I can, and it’s generally an okay time. Especially when judges’ lounges are well stocked. Being well fed and coffeed up can make a big difference in any activity. Sadly, the “Starbuck’s” coffee that was offered up was the worst coffee that I have ever had. Anywhere. Ever. I don’t know if it came straight from Starbuck’s, or if they just bought the beans and brewed it there or what, but it was downright awful. It was like drinking liquid hate.

Anyway, I wish I knew what it was, but debate now is only a shadow of what debate was when I was in high school only seven years ago. We fought tooth and nail for the rounds that we won. Now, the open teams that are breaking are on par with good novice teams of a decade ago. It makes me sad. And it isn’t new. I’ve discussed this situation with a number of people over the past years. I am being told that the new crop of novices are showing more promise than normal. Here’s hoping…

For instance, there is no such thing as an existential inherent barrier. No matter how hard you want it. You can neither prove, nor mandate through an existential problem in a debate round. Procedural or attitudinal, those are your two options. Pick one, define it, and go. Don’t make crap up just because you want to run a squirrel case. And for Buddha’s sake, signpost your damn arguments so I know where they need to flow. By the way, naming a solvency take out a “negative position,” and flowing it off case is ignorant. Flow it under Solvency and fricking run it as what it should be. The easiest way to beat a case down is straight on, full ahead attacking it. Trying fancy arguments you don’t know how to run and creating “cool” off case takeouts just frustrates me and makes you look dumb. Last but not least, the 2AC is not a place to be extending case with additional advantages. Learn the meaning of Prima Facia.

And why do people give up so easily? I’m already burning my Saturday to be there, the least they could do is give a full five minute rebuttal instead of giving up and sitting down after one. That’s the fast lane to a 4. Even if you are losing, there are points to be scored for standing up and fighting with some confidence. Who knows, maybe the other team will drop the argument and flow it to you.

The crazy part is, probably the best case that I heard was a canned case a novice team ran. When I say best, I don’t mean they were the best debaters of the day or anything. But their case idea was so nice and simple, and would create such nice clash. Send 1,000,000 additional aid workers to Africa. Simple, concise, topical. Sure, lots of attack angles for the Negative, but that makes for a good round. And the idea would be an easy one to find plenty of support on. It’s better than the Plumpynut case an open team ran. Not because the idea was horrible, but because there is no such thing as a self sustaining plan. Nice try though. You have to spend money to make money. They were also the existential inherent barrier people.

Even then, I fault the negative team for not trying to attack it from a more generic malnutrition angle. These kids need to work on some critical thinking skills in a big way.

All told, it ends up sorta frustrating, but I’m glad the kids do it anyway. Debate teaches very valuable skills that come in handy in college and work. I guess I’m just a sucker for the torment, heh.