Stupid Injuries

You should follow Ben Swanson on Twitter, @CardboardGerald, because he's just super-good at it. Like tonight, when he asked a simple, brilliant question that produced an avalanche of answers.

Stupid Injuries

Ten band names inspired by 'Mad Men'

Not Great Bob

Sally's Future Therapists

Trudy & Tammy & Pete & Connecticut

He'll Never Golf Again

Crab Duck Duck Crab

Ginsberg's Nipple

Lane Loves the Mets

It's Called A Carousel

Basket of Kisses

My People Are Nordic

David's been writing a lot (self-promotion alert)

Perhaps you're the type of person who wants to break through the clutter and just read a series of important headlines. (Note: I didn't write "curated"... maybe I should have written "curated"...)

If so, make sure to read my early-morning rundown of all the important news in a given day. It's usually up by 6:15am, eastern time, weekday mornings. (That's early.) And it's not just headlines. I've also been charged with summarizing at least one of that day's important stories each morning. On Mondays, it's really full! Here's the post from this morning. And here's an example of the expanded Monday version.

If you want to make this part of your daily routine (YES. YOU DO.), either subscribe to the American Business Daily newsletter, which will get emailed to you every morning around 6:45am, with my post linked in it, or hop over to my author profile page on BizJournals.

(I suppose you could also keep an eye on my Google Plus profile, but I doubt any of you use Google Plus like that.)

The perfect wedding playlist -- Creamy Middles Music Podcast S2E2

Is a musician greater for the artistic heights she reaches, or for the quantity of quality work she puts out over her career? Jay and David also tackle the tough questions that arise when putting together a wedding reception playlist.



Download MP3 (26:41)

As mentioned in the show, Bob Dylan and Van Morrison, chillin' in Greece, singing "Crazy Love". Dylan seems either annoyed or under the influence of something illicit.



Season 2 of the Creamy Middles Podcast is an occasional discussion about popular music. Jay Cowit usually produces it, though David may occasionally step in. Subscribe in iTunes with this link or in another podcatcher with this RSS feed. Music from this episode is by Wounded Buffalo Theory.

'Bawitdaba' would have been a terrible choice

Post by David A. Arnott.

The cloud photos I'll never take

I'll probably never take a photograph from a flying airplane. As long as I can remember, I've struggled with fear of flying, but I thought about taking pictures through airplane windows because of the last flight I took, this past weekend, from Atlanta to Charlotte.

We took off ahead of an incoming line of storms that (I assume) were fascinating to see from above. Unfortunately, since my flying anxiety rules everything I do in an airplane, I sat in the middle seat of a three-seat cluster, with my wife to my left in the window seat and an understanding gentleman to my right, in the aisle seat, and kept my eyes closed for what must have been at least 80 percent of the 40-minute flight.

I keep my eyes closed because I dissociate from the flying experience and imagine I'm driving down Interstate 85, or riding a bus on some long, lonely highway. Which means that while I'm on an airplane, I'm essentially locked in to my seat, constantly trying to keep calm and relaxed.

I dissociate because facing the reality of being 30,000-plus feet in the air is too much for the lizard parts of my brain to handle, and actually looking at clouds from above -- or distant farmland, or matchstick cities -- triggers a flood of anxiety that we're going to spin out, or simply plunge from the sky.

So even though I actually enjoy seeing cloud formations and other weather events, generally, I realized during that Atlanta-to-Charlotte flight that unless something major changes, I'm not going to see those natural wonders with my own eyes.

A modest proposal for NBA League Pass and MLB.tv

Let's say I don't want to pay for cable or satellite television anymore, because I don't want to pay for the Home & Garden Network, SpikeTV, and hundreds of other channels I'll never watch. I'll gladly pay for a Netflix subscription, buy a Chromecast to watch YouTube and other streaming shows on my TV, and set up an antenna in order to watch over-the-air channels.

Sports is the obvious problem.

This isn't a novel observation, but it's kind of silly that, as someone who lives in Charlotte, NC, it's easier for me -- a cord-cutter as described above -- to watch San Francisco Giants games than Charlotte Bobcats games. Sure, I'm the rare dude who is a fan of those two teams, but there's still something kind of perverse about Fox Sports Carolinas and the NBA figuring it's in their interest to keep me from paying them to watch Bobcats games in order to encourage me to get back on the cable train.

Here's the thing: I'm totally willing to pay them for their sport, and I'm not sure the math supports their position.

Let's say the base price for a season of MLB.tv is $130

Let's say the base price for a season of NBA League Pass is $130.

I'm out of luck for Giants games on cable, but for the Bobcats, to pay for the channels that would get me all their games, I'd have to pay about $70 per month in cable fees, and likely be locked in for a couple years. That's $420 per basketball season.

But can I construct an offer that makes sense for the leagues, the channels, and me? Of course I can, and it's simple: Charge me $12 extra per month for the online packages, and redirect that money directly to the channels.

This should be a no-brainer for Fox Sports Carolinas. "Some dude in Charlotte wants to pay us $2 per month just to watch the Bobcats. Um... yes?" Another $2 would go to TNT. And the rest, $8, would go to ESPN/ABC. All of those networks command much lower subscriber fees than that.

So, let's extend this to the playoffs, too, and say that I'm willing to pay $84 extra per year to get full streaming access, with no blackouts, to Charlotte Bobcats games through League Pass. And let's also say I'm willing to pay $84 extra per year to get full streaming access, with no blackouts when the Giants play Atlanta, Washington, Baltimore, Cincinnati, or on a nationally-televised game, on MLB.tv. That would bring my total to $428 for the two sports packages, which is slightly more than I would pay for just cable over that time period, but far less than I would pay for cable and the MLB.tv package, and the networks in question would all make more money from me than they do now and more money than they would were I simply a cable subscriber.

Clearly, I'm missing something here. I suspect part of the equation is that the networks would prefer someone be an actual cable subscriber more than they want the extra payment. This proposal is essentially a backdoor a la carte option that, effectively, means I'd be paying ESPN $16 per month for seven months of the year, just to get its baseball and basketball programming. Yes, $16 per month via sports leagues' broadband packages is more than $0 or $5.40 per month, but it's also less reliable than $5.40 per month over a full year via a cable provider.

There's also the notion that ESPN doesn't want to do anything to upset cable providers, since ESPN, for all it's power, likely isn't ready to tell Comcast to piss off if it doesn't like what it's doing with its sports league partners. Morever, Comcast owns a bunch of regional sports networks -- including CSN Bay Area, which broadcasts Giants games -- and would much rather get full subscriber money than sports-only subscriber money; they have no motivation to accede to such a plan. I don't know how to deal with that part of it.

(Image cc-licensed: "Kemba Walker, John Wall" by Keith Allison)

Boss and Cougar -- Creamy Middles Music Podcast S2E1

In some circles, Bruce Springsteen is the quintessential American rock star, and it's hard to argue with a career that has spanned into a fifth decade. However, there's also a case one of his contemporaries, who hasn't fared as well in the historical record, deserves broader recognition, especially since his career compares well with the Boss's. Jay Cowit and David A. Arnott discuss Bruce Springsteen and John Mellencamp.



Download MP3 (24:17)

Post by Jay Cowit.

Post by David A. Arnott.

Season 2 of the Creamy Middles Podcast is an occasional discussion about popular music. Jay Cowit usually produces it, though David may occasionally step in. Subscribe in iTunes with this link or in another podcatcher with this RSS feed.

Bruce Springsteen

Post by David A. Arnott.

Republicans don't think you can think for yourself -- or at least that's what the party's latest ad campaign insinuates

Alex Pareene of Salon has already done the easy work pointing out the silliness of the "Republican hipster" ad the GOP released this week. But it turns out the other video testimonials in the GOP's campaign are equally ludicrous. Here's a look at some of them.

Raquel tells us:

"When I was a kid, a family had one phone, and it only did one thing: calls. Now we've got phones in our pockets with internet, cameras, and apps. It's amazing how we're always finding better ways to do things. Why can't we find a better way to run government? Smaller, and smarter. I watch the news and it's just getting bigger and more complex. I'm a Republican because I believe government needs some new limits and new ideas."

Let's unpack this a little, shall we? Raquel's central metaphor is that cell phones are smaller and better, as government should be. But she also says that it's amazing how phones these days have internet access, cameras, and a world of apps available to them. In other words: they're more complex. See, she likes the more complex thing because it does more things for her; the old single-use phone is really the smaller, simpler, less complex option. Never mind that just because something is "simpler" it must be "better"... Raquel doesn't actually know what her metaphor is, because she just argued for a multifaceted government that can do many things for people, but concluded she wants the complete opposite.

Angel tells us:

"I don't want my kids eating junk food, and I definitely don't want them getting a junk education. They deserve the best schools and the best teachers and it shouldn't matter where we live. I'm a Republican because all kids deserve the opportunity to succeed."

Everyone agrees with everything Angel just said! The thing is, Republicans largely don't want to spend money on public schools unless there's a profit motive attached; i.e. unless there's a private company trying to run the school as a business-like enterprise. That's funny, because business-like enterprises will do all they can to exclude clients who might make their performance look weaker, whereas traditional public schools take all comers and operate from the point of view that it benefits society to give the most vulnerable children a quality education, no matter what actions their parents may take. If Angel doesn't give a damn about other people's children, then sure, go ahead and be a Republican, because they mainly support a system that is essentially a race for spots in schools that will provide quality education, and a Republican who says that he truly wants every public school in his state to have unconditional government support, just because it's better for everyone that way, is seen as some sort of maverick.

Emily tells us:

"After four years in college, I'm ready to start my career. But the job market is tough, and I've got a mound of student loans. I don't need anyone to guarantee my success, but I don't think politicians should get in the way of my future. I'm a Republican because I'm ready to take control of my future."

Do you know why you're entering the economy in a historically difficult jobs market, Emily? It's because Republicans decided their best strategy to get Barack Obama out of office was to oppose him at every turn, and that meant opposing all measures associated with him, even if they were well-conceived and generally-agreed-upon measures that would help the wider economy. Republicans even blocked direct action to create jobs at the same time they blamed the president for not doing more to create jobs. Also, the stimulus worked, but Republicans continue to block other measures that could build upon it. Who's getting in the way of your future, again?

(Image cc-licensed: "House GOP Jobs Summit" by House GOP)

Epiphany about baseball and mortality and health insurance

I'm 31 years old, and recently signed up to play in an adult baseball league, the 28+ division. The last time I threw a baseball with any regularity was the summer of 2001, when I played in a league the summer after my senior year of high school, and the last time I played baseball at all was in April 2007, when I played in my high school's alumni game.

Before that game, I had hoped to pitch an inning, but decided against it when, during warmups, I realized I couldn't throw with any accuracy, or over about 30 miles per hour. Instead, I volunteered to strap on catcher's gear, asked the kids not to steal, and simply flipped the ball back to the pitcher, using no shoulder motion.

So, in preparation for the adult league -- and, because I'm going home at just the right time, the 2014 alumni game -- I started a throwing and weights program some weeks ago. It's not going as well as I'd hoped, but it's also going better than I should have expected.

The main problem is that my shoulder is barking during and after every throwing session. I'm not too concerned that I have little-to-no throwing strength -- I can barely make it 130 feet on the fly in long toss -- given that it's been so long since I've thrown like this, but what is concerning is that I think I'm having trouble distinguishing between the bad kind of throwing pain and simple soreness. In high school, I had real shoulder pain at the start of my senior season, but with enough rest and a little bit of grit, was able to pitch without real pain once I began, or so I remember it.

Now, however, any time I try to crank up the effort past 80 percent, or so, my shoulder doesn't like it. It's bad enough that I'm relearning how to throw, trying to teach myself to step toward my target instead of throwing across my body while at the same time trying not to drag my arm behind and put more stress on the anterior connections in the shoulder, but I'm also trying to relearn how to distinguish what might be damage and what is construction under way.

But that just brings me back to the point of the throwing program, and what I realized the other day.

Let's say that I go all "Rookie of the Year", get to the alumni game, and absolutely bring it, with a 92 mile-per-hour fastball with control, a passable curve, and a change that's a 30 on the scouting scale. Let's also say that, miracle of miracles, there's a Houston Astros scout in the stands watching the alumni game. This is The Best Case Scenario, The Dream Come True, The Confluence Of Events. Let's say all this comes to pass.

A professional baseball team would be CRAZY to sign me. CRAZYPANTS, even, considering that I'm 5-9, right-handed, and 31 YEARS OLD.

Keep in mind, I'm the same person who harbored vague delusions of getting in great shape, preparing for a year, and going to an MLB open tryout somewhere until I saw that Miguel Cabrera was younger than I am and playing in the 2003 World Series.

So, my epiphany was that my goal isn't to try and get back to high school pitching shape. My goal isn't even to get into shape to pitch in the adult baseball league, or the alumni game. My goal is to get into shape to play baseball without hurting myself, which is different. Because hurting myself would mean physical therapy, which, while I have health insurance, sucks.

That means that when I throw on flat ground at a catcher's target (thanks, Rick!), it's okay that I'm barely breaking 50 miles per hour, because I'm just trying to hit my spots with a two-seamer, and get comfortable enough with the curve to get it over. It means that I might not ever be able to whip the ball from behind third base all the way to first ever again, and that's okay. It means when I go to the alumni game, if I catch again, I'll ask the kids not to steal.

Because my goal is to not hurt myself. I want to be able to throw BP to my own kid, someday. At about 50 miles per hour.

(FWIW, I got in the batting cage for a few sessions over the past few weeks and had zero problems hitting liners from both sides of the plate on pitches coming at about 70 miles per hour. Total confidence, there.)

Read this stuff I wrote -- Chromecast is going to be an essential home entertainment device, soon enough

I've had a busy few weeks, and haven't had much of a chance to post even the smaller things I would normally post here. Mostly, that's because of the stuff I've been writing for BizJournals, like how I think Google has a huge opportunity to own the home entertainment hub business with its next iteration of Chromecast by simply doing the legal version of what Aereo is trying to do.

Also, I took a version of the Wonderlic test and wrote about that experience. Short version: it's no joke.

(Image cc-licensed: "Chromecast" by @iannnn)

Calling the Oscar winners, weeks in advance

Look, this isn't rocket science.

I missed on Lupita Nyong'o and "20 Feet From Stardom". But you know what? That's still really freaking good for calling the awards shortly after the nominations were announced. So... toot toot.

The problem with Instagram

This is a photo I took and uploaded to Instagram. It's the only one on my account. It doesn't matter what filter I used, or what's in the photo.


Rather, the point is that using the "embed" function is the only easy way to post it anywhere outside of Instagram, itself. That's fine for a good number of situations, but it doesn't work for the majority of people looking for a photo-hosting service and seeking to present their photos in any context they wish. Now, I could do a little bit of HTML jiu jitsu and grab the source URL for posting on Creamy Middles, like so:

But the image above isn't full resolution; it's about one-third the size of my original photo, which, once I delete it from my phone no longer exists. Which means that Instagram is purely an on-network sharing tool and not a saving tool.

What if I want to save all my raw photos in the cloud? I could set up my Android phone to save all my photos to Google Plus, and share certain photos via Instagram, but then what happens when I want to share a high-resolution image? Instagram doesn't work for that. Google Plus doesn't allow hotlinking. (At least, last I checked, it doesn't allow hotlinking.)

You know what does work for any and all of these situations? Flickr.

I can share this image in whatever resolution I have, to my friends on Twitter or Facebook directly from my phone, and use any of a series of filters from Aviary. If I really wanted to, I could post my images to both Flickr and Instagram, but unless I'm intent on building an Instagram network separate from my Facebook network, there's no point in doing that, since it's easy enough to post Flickr photos to Facebook.

Which brings me to a question: If the primary reason to use Instagram is that it has a super-simple interface with cool filters, do people realize they're giving up storing high-resolution photos and total flexibility in sharing their images for that interface and those filters, and do they realize that those things are also freely available on apps that don't make them give up that control?

"Sweet Child O' Mine", blues style

Miche Braden sings "Sweet Child O' Mine" in the style of traditional New Orleans blues. It... just... works.