Monthly Archives: September 2015

Cutting the Cord (the Saga Ends)

Posted on by

Four weeks ago, we began the convoluted process of breaking away from Comcast, the cable TV giant that is one of America’s least admired companies. We had a package deal for television, internet and phone service with Comcast that wasn’t worth the monthly fee, especially since we weren’t watching much live television. With the arrival of Verizon’s fiber optic internet service in our neighborhood, it was a good time to consider alternatives.

First, I called Comcast to see if there was a way to lower our monthly bill. They told me that was impossible. Even if we completely eliminated our cable TV service, we wouldn’t save money (the combined price of Comcast’s internet and phone service bought separately would be almost as much as what we were paying for internet, phone and television as a bundle). 

Like Comcast, Verizon offers its best deals to new customers. Unfortunately, most of these deals weren’t as good as they first appeared. For example, to get TV through Verizon, you pay an additional fee for every television you hook up. That makes sense, except that Verizon assesses this additional fee even if you’ve only got one television! I believe this is known as “chutzpah”. (“Since you don’t actually have a television, you can get Verizon cable TV for the advertised price!”)

It turned out that even with an introductory offer, we’d pay Verizon almost as much as Comcast if we got Verizon’s phone and television services in addition to the internet. So our best option was to buy as little as possible from Verizon. That meant getting their internet service and nothing else. The good news was that Verizon offered a faster internet connection than Comcast for the same amount of money (and installation was free).

Not wanting to give up our current home phone number, we then signed up with Ooma, an internet phone company. Ooma doesn’t charge a monthly fee. You buy one of their boxes up front. You also pay a fee if you want to keep your old number. After that, you pay Ooma a few dollars each month (in our case, $4) to cover federal and state taxes. 

Finally, there was the television problem. Many people don’t realize you can still get a lot of channels free with an antenna connected to your TV, kind of like the old days. It’s called OTA (“Over The Air”) television now. The bad news is that the broadcast signals aren’t as strong as they used to be. I looked at a Federal Communications Commission website to see which channels are available where we live. There weren’t very many. even though we’re only 20 miles from a big city. A quick experiment with a borrowed antenna confirmed that we would need an expensive antenna up on the roof to get more than one or two channels. 

That led us to Roku, an internet streaming service. Like Ooma, our new phone company, you buy one of their boxes up front. If you stick with the free channels, there is no monthly fee. And the free channels could be sufficient, since Roku has more than 2,000 of them. The bad news is that maybe 1% of Roku’s free channels are worth watching. For example, about 1/3 of them are devoted to religious programming, and looking at their many “special interest” channels didn’t reveal anything interesting.

The Roku website isn’t very clear about it, but what you get free is easy access to loads and loads of videos that can be played whenever you want. Very few channels have live feeds. For instance, you can watch videos from PBS and the Smithsonian Channel. You can also watch video segments from the network news shows.

For live news, you have the BBC and Sky News (also British) and a strange collection of American stations (in case you want to watch the local news from Sacramento or Little Rock). If you want to watch much live television or so-called “premium” cable channels, Roku says “the service may require additional fees”. However, so far as I could see, the “may” in that sentence always means “does”. If you already subscribe to something like Netflix or Showtime, you can access those channels through the Roku device.

In conclusion, we’re happy so far. We may eventually spend a bit more to add some live television (some sports, in particular), but for now our total monthly payment is $90 less than before. Taking into account the Ooma and Roku boxes we bought, the Ooma phone number transfer fee, and some new internet security software (Verizon doesn’t include security software in its standard package like Comcast does), and then spreading those costs over two years, we’ll still be saving $75 every month.

One other note: I didn’t have to tell Comcast that we’re moving to Iceland in order to easily disconnect our account. Fortunately, once I told them we’d already switched to Verizon, there wasn’t much to talk about.

Young Thoreau on Thinking and Writing

Posted on by

In his journal, Thoreau (age 23) explains why thoughts don’t usually come to us in smooth succession:

…the flow of thought is more like a tidal wave than a prone river, and is the effect of a celestial influence, or sort of ground swell, … each wave rising higher than the former and partially subsiding back on it. But the river flows, because it runs downhill, and descends faster, as it flows more rapidly. The one obeys the earthly attraction, the other the heavenly attraction, The one runs smoothly because it gravitates toward the earth alone, the other irregularly because it gravitates towards the heavens as well [January 22, 1841].

Furthermore, if there are any valuable thoughts expressed in a journal (or in a blog?), they’re most likely hidden amid the clutter, only to be found later: 

Of all strange and unaccountable things this journalizing is the strangest. It will allow nothing to be predicated of it; its good is not good, nor its bad bad. If I make a huge effort to expose my innermost and richest wares to light, my counter seems cluttered with the meanest homemade stuffs; but after months or years I may discover the wealth of India, and whatever rarity is brought overland from Cathay, in that confused heap, and what perhaps seemed a festoon of dried apple or pumpkin will prove a string of Brazilian diamonds, or pearls from Coromandel [January 29, 1841].

Thoreau’s Journal and Modern Equivalents (with Apologies to the French)

Posted on by

Henry Thoreau wrote a lot more than Walden and Civil Disobedience. Among other things, he wrote two million or so words in his journal. Here’s the first entry, dated October 20, 1837, when Thoreau was 20 (the “he” is probably Thoreau’s friend and mentor Ralph Waldo Emerson):

“What are you doing now?” he asked, “Do you keep a journal?” — So I make my first entry to-day. 

A week later, Thoreau described two interlopers at Goose Pond:

Two ducks, of the summer or wood species, which were merrily dabbling in their favorite basin, struck up a retreat on my approach, and seemed disposed to take French leave, paddling off with swan-like majesty . They are first-rate swimmers, beating me at a round pace, and – what was to me a new trait in the duck character – dove every minute or two and swam several feet under water, in order to escape our attention. Just before immersion they seemed to give each other a significant nod, and then, as if by a common understanding, ‘t was heels up and head down in the shaking of a duck’s wing. When they reappeared, it was amusing to observe with what a self-satisfied, darn-it-how-benicks-’em air they paddled off to repeat the experiment.

According to the usual sources, a “French leave” is an old expression that means leaving or taking your leave without permission or without an announcement. You just go, like two ducks quietly paddling away from a naturalist or a birthday part; or  like a soldier going A.W.O.L. or even deserting. In some contexts, a “French leave” is a pretty bad thing, which is why the French call it “filer Ă  l’anglaise or “to leave English style”. (By the way, I couldn’t discover what “darn-it-how-benicks-’em” means, or I’d have shared that too.) 

When I picked up my unread copy of The Journal 1837-1861 this afternoon and read those two entries above, I was impressed. Thoreau was a damn good writer, even at the age of 20. Then I asked myself a standard question. Would Thoreau have written a blog instead of a journal if he’d had the opportunity? People do write journals today. Some even write millions of words, despite the modern world’s distractions. But why write a journal instead of a blog? (And why in the world write a blog?)

It seems like the basic difference between journals and blogs is that journals are private and blogs aren’t. In theory, you can write whatever you want in your journal and nobody will be the wiser, at least until you make it public or your grieving family resurrects it. But on a blog, there are restrictions. Usually, anyone with the necessary technology can read your latest post, so you watch what you say. You want to be interesting, but not too interesting.

On the other hand, you can give yourself much more freedom on a blog by writing anonymously or using pseudonyms. But if journals can be made public and blogs can be made private, perhaps ease of access isn’t the fundamental difference between journals and blogs. Maybe the key difference is the intended audience. In writing a journal, you are writing to and for yourself. Someone else might eventually read your journal, but journals are self-directed. Blogs, on the other hand, are other-directed. It’s assumed there is an audience of actual human beings out there. Hence, you write a blog with an audience (you guys) in mind, even though by doing so, you are writing for yourself as well.

On this blog’s “About” page, I used to say that writing is a way to find out what you think. In the case of a blog, however, it’s a way to find out what you think and then share it. Your words could even save the world one day. (Hey, it’s not completely impossible!) As for Thoreau, I think he would have been a blogger, because, despite his time alone in the woods, he wanted us all to live better lives.

But let’s get back to those ducks. You’ve probably noticed that many blogs display a certain statistic. Here on this blog, as of this moment, you the reader are invited to join 313 other followers. The idea behind that statistic, of course, is that a large number of followers demonstrates that a blog is worth following (50 million Frenchmen can’t be wrong). What you probably haven’t noticed, however, is that the number of followers (on WordPress blogs anyway) never goes down! At least, this blog’s number has never gone down (jeez, I must be almost as good as Thoreau).

Now, assuming it’s just possible that somebody who decided to follow this blog once upon a time may have lost interest, or that someone who followed this blog only did so in order to tell me about their blog, I should see my number of followers fluctuate. Somebody stops following – the number goes down. Somebody starts following – the number goes up. I’m forced to conclude, therefore, that “join 313 other followers” should really say “join 313 other people who followed this blog for whatever reason and may or may not be following it now, with the emphasis on ‘not'”.

I know that at least five people, well, maybe four people, read this blog regularly, because they tell me so (I prefer to believe them). And there are statistics indicating that other followers visit now and then. But when you think about it, a blog that is only read by its author is basically a journal. A blog with no readers is about as self-directed as one of those fancy notebooks that come with a lock and key.

Despite the impressive statistic, therefore, many “followers” have, yes, taken French leave! They’ve quietly departed, even more quietly than (here they are) those ducks on Goose Pond.

The County Clerk Who Cried Religion

Posted on by

That Kentucky county clerk is back on the streets, as long as she promises not to interfere with the clerk’s office issuing marriage licenses to gay people. My reaction to her situation is that anybody who strongly objects to their job requirements for personal reasons should look for another job. Same-sex couples now have the legal right to get married. Nobody has the legal right to stop them. It’s as simple as that, regardless of any objections the county clerk might have, including objections based on her particular interpretation of a book she considers sacred.

In a lighter vein, someone named Jim expressed himself on Facebook (the link is no longer universally available). You might lift your voice in song if you know the tune: 

I am the very model of a modern fundamentalist
I’m not merely judgmental, I’m the absolute judgmentalest!
I always follow scripture and I act on God’s authority
But marital longevity was never my priority.

I married first one husband, then two others, then another one
Because I think one man is pretty much like any other one.
I’ve never been too troubled by the dubious legalities
Of sex outside of marriage or of other trivialities.

But when it comes to icky stuff like homosexuality
I’m always very strident with my Puritan morality.
In short in matters biblical and spiritual and Calvinist,
I am the very model of a modern fundamentalist!

In questions of behavior I fall back on my Old Testament
(Though saying no to shrimp is way too much of an impediment).
I pick and choose the verses that support my little weltanschauung
And pledge never to change my mind from now til götterdämmerung.

I’ll ride this hobby horse until I’m richer than a sybarite,
There’ll always be good money in denouncing godless sodomites.
I’ll put my name as author on some books that I can barely read
And get a show on cable to inform the world what God decreed.

My husbands all agree that I know more about what marriage is
Than five Supreme Court justices whose law my faith disparages.
In short in matters biblical and spiritual and Calvinist,
I am the very model of a modern fundamentalist!

In fact, when I see what is meant by constitutionality
When I can do my job with requisite impartiality,
When I can join in marriage two young men who might be thespians,
Or issue nuptial licenses to enterprising lesbians,

When I can see that love is love no matter what the sexes are
And understand that gays are just like me and my three exes are,
In short, when I have finally got a dose of moral clarity
I’ll find out what is meant by the idea of Christian charity.

Til then I’ll flout the law and draw my wages from the county tax
Which is what God would do if only He was up on all the facts
Til then in matters biblical and spiritual and Calvinist,
I am the very model of a modern fundamentalist!

Cutting the Cord (Thanks to a Hard-Working Man)

Posted on by

The Verizon website said their technician would get to our house around 9:30 pm to do our installation. The anonymous dispatcher said it would really be around 8:15 (only three hours after the original 5 pm deadline).

So it was a pleasant surprise when the technician called at 6:30 to say he’d be at our house in fifteen minutes. He arrived as promised and quickly got to work.

Four hours later, he was done. Among other things, he’d had to string 350 feet of cable from our basement to a telephone pole two blocks away, working in the dark on a hot, humid night. It was an impressive performance.

When we thanked him and said good-night, we assumed he’d be dropping off his van at some Verizon garage and then get home by midnight or so. No, he’d actually be driving to Newark to do some work for another customer. He explained that Verizon is forcing their previously-unionized technicians to work 60 hours a week.

We didn’t ask what time he started work yesterday. But on a good day, if all goes well, he puts in 12 hours. That’s not 12 hours in an air-conditioned or heated office. That’s 12 hours of driving around, in good and bad weather, carrying equipment, going up and down stairs, climbing on roofs, drilling holes, stringing cable, attaching electronic gizmos to inside and outside walls, while also dealing with people like us. Sometimes in the dark. 

Do you think it would be a good idea for Verizon to hire and train more technicians, so their employees wouldn’t have to work 12 hours a day (or more), five days a week? We all know the corporate business model is to get as much work as possible out of workers while providing as little compensation as possible, but there are lots of Americans who could use a decent job. It would be good for the country and even good for the corporations if they’d spread some of the wealth around.