Sunday, December 30, 2007
Woo Hoo
It hasn't happened for 35 years, but it happened last night. I'm ecstatic that when it did happen, it happened to my sport team. The New England Patriots completed a perfect season last night by narrowly defeating the New York Giants. I'm on such a high right now I can't believe it. That perfect season did not come easily at all. First, there was a cheating allegation. Once that debacle was over, the Patriots went 4 or 5 straight games by completely blowing out their competition. Then, things started to get rough. They ran into the Indianapolis Colts, who have always given the Patriots trouble. Besides being one of two undefeated teams left, the Colts nearly beat them, but the Pats squeaked by as they always do when they play the Colts. Next came two games back to back where the Eagles and the Ravens had the Patriots beat, but luck smiled on the Patriots and they were able to keep they undefeated season alive. In the Ravens game, the Patriots lost it twice, but just-in-time penalties kept the season alive. The game with he Giants was the toughest, though. They had the Patriots beat and by a good margin, 12 points. However, someone threw a switch or it could have been the rise in pressure, but the Patriots scored 22 unanswered points to go up by 10 points, all in the 4th quarter. One touchdown by the Giants brought them closer to beating their undefeated opponents, but they took too long to get that touchdown and there was only a minute left. The Giants tried an onside kick to try and get the ball right back, but the kicker kicked it right to a Patriots player. A couple of kneeldowns and a Giants timeout later, and the game was over. 16-0. It's been a great football season. It's now on to the Superbowl to cap off this great season. Once the season is over, though, what am I supposed to do with my Sunday afternoons?
Friday, December 28, 2007
Friday's Feast
Appetizer
Name 2 things you would like to accomplish in 2008.
Lose some weight and get a good raise
Soup
With which cartoon character do you share personality traits?
I think Homer Simpson
Salad
What time of day (or night) were you born?
I don't remember exactly. I do know I was there, though.
Main Course
Tell us something special about your hometown.
It is the home of BYU-Idaho and will soon have a new LDS Temple
Dessert
If you could receive a letter from anyone in the world, who would you want to get one from?
Gordon B. HInkley
Name 2 things you would like to accomplish in 2008.
Lose some weight and get a good raise
Soup
With which cartoon character do you share personality traits?
I think Homer Simpson
Salad
What time of day (or night) were you born?
I don't remember exactly. I do know I was there, though.
Main Course
Tell us something special about your hometown.
It is the home of BYU-Idaho and will soon have a new LDS Temple
Dessert
If you could receive a letter from anyone in the world, who would you want to get one from?
Gordon B. HInkley
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Christmas Hangover
Well, Christmas is over for another year. It's funny how it happens every year. The anticipation builds and builds and builds for weeks. You shop and shop, wrap and wrap, send and send, and decorate and decorate for weeks. Then in matter of minutes, Christmas is over. The kids open their presents, play with them, and then the parents start to think about the clean up. At least in my house, we didn't worry about saving the wrapping paper. I remember as a kid either my parents, grandparents, or some other relatives who would always fuss about saving the wrapping paper. Didn't really understand why and I still don't. But the hardest thing about Christmas being over, is going to work the next day. All day on Christmas Day, I kept thinking it was Saturday and that I didn't have to go to work the next day. Then, seconds later, I would realize that it was back to work the next day and my heart would sink a little bit. It's just very hard to go back to work after a huge holiday like Christmas, especially when the holiday isn't right before or right after a weekend. The next day at work I honestly felt like I had a hangover. I've never had one because I've never drunk alcohol, but man, the day after Christmas was a major downer. Things are returning to normal now, but it is still a little weird to think that Christmas is over. Now, if the snow would just go away, it would be great. But not until the kids can play in the snow in the backyard and we can get some pictures.
Sunday, December 23, 2007
It's Almost Over
This year's Christmas season seems to have lasted forever. In fact, this year has been the longest Christmas season for almost a decade because of the way Thanksgiving took place. Because Thanksgiving was a week before the month of November ended, this year's Christmas season was extra long. I don't know about you, but I'm ready for the Christmas season to be over. I love the season and all, but I'm worn out from being bombarded with Christmas music, fighting people in the stores, and driving around forever in a parking lot looking for a parking spot. In two days, all that we have worked for for the last 5 weeks will be over in just under an hour. All that work for an hour of fun and excitement. I'm just glad we didn't spend a ton of money on Christmas this year. I hope everyone has a great Christmas. Be thankful that the ruckus is almost over and we can get back to normal life, whatever that is because I can't remember anymore.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
On The Horizon
I'm so glad. Congress finally passed an energy bill that moves the United States in the right direction in terms of its own energy independence. Even better, President Bush made a good decision and actually signed this bill. The biggest part of the bill was the requirement that all vehicles, not just cars, get an average of 35 mpg by 2020. In addition, the bill also calls for a huge increase in the number of gallons of ethanol and biofuels to be produced. The bill also calls for biofuels in the next decade to not be produced just from corn, but from other natural resources like switchgrass, wood chips, and agricultural waste. Finally, Congress and the President are doing something to get America from using so much oil.
I've been so tired lately of paying out the nose for gas. I wouldn't mind so much about paying so much for gas if there was another source of propulsion to use. Finally, the government is trying to make it more feasible to have those other sources available. That is the main problem with gas. If there is so much as a whisper or hiccup of a supply disruption, the price climbs faster than a bear climbing a tree. It then takes months for it to come back down. I've gotten tired of cutting out food money just so I have enough money to get to work.
Finally, change and help is on the horizon. The Toyota Prius, the amazing hybrid car, is the number one selling vehicle in the nation. American automakers are currently expanding the number of vehicles that can run on biofuels, and even Chevrolet is producing an electric vehicle that you can plug into your wall at night to charge. And, that electric car, called the Chevy Volt, can go as much as 40 miles on a charge. That means you could possibly commute to work all week without using any gas. Great, Great, Great!!! And, to top it all off, the government is finally pushing to get the amount of gas we use dramatically down. There is hope on the horizon and it's great to see that we are moving in the right direction in terms of energy independence.
I've been so tired lately of paying out the nose for gas. I wouldn't mind so much about paying so much for gas if there was another source of propulsion to use. Finally, the government is trying to make it more feasible to have those other sources available. That is the main problem with gas. If there is so much as a whisper or hiccup of a supply disruption, the price climbs faster than a bear climbing a tree. It then takes months for it to come back down. I've gotten tired of cutting out food money just so I have enough money to get to work.
Finally, change and help is on the horizon. The Toyota Prius, the amazing hybrid car, is the number one selling vehicle in the nation. American automakers are currently expanding the number of vehicles that can run on biofuels, and even Chevrolet is producing an electric vehicle that you can plug into your wall at night to charge. And, that electric car, called the Chevy Volt, can go as much as 40 miles on a charge. That means you could possibly commute to work all week without using any gas. Great, Great, Great!!! And, to top it all off, the government is finally pushing to get the amount of gas we use dramatically down. There is hope on the horizon and it's great to see that we are moving in the right direction in terms of energy independence.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Friday's Feast
Appetizer
Make up a word and give us its definition.
carpy - adj - characteristic of someone who likes to be walked all over
Soup
What is currently your favorite song?
RockStar by Nickelback
Salad
What’s at the top of your Christmas wish list this year?
The golf clubs I had to return to the store last year
Main Course
Name a scent that reminds you of someone special in your life.
There was a shampoo a girlfriend used to use. It was a very distinctive smell, but I never found out what kind of shampoo it was.
Dessert
Who is someone on television that you feel probably shouldn’t be, and why?
Nancy Grace. I don't see her doing something productive on tv, she just seems to be making a lot of people upset at what she is saying or at what is talking about.
Make up a word and give us its definition.
carpy - adj - characteristic of someone who likes to be walked all over
Soup
What is currently your favorite song?
RockStar by Nickelback
Salad
What’s at the top of your Christmas wish list this year?
The golf clubs I had to return to the store last year
Main Course
Name a scent that reminds you of someone special in your life.
There was a shampoo a girlfriend used to use. It was a very distinctive smell, but I never found out what kind of shampoo it was.
Dessert
Who is someone on television that you feel probably shouldn’t be, and why?
Nancy Grace. I don't see her doing something productive on tv, she just seems to be making a lot of people upset at what she is saying or at what is talking about.
Money To Kill But Not To Heal
The two top headlines on CNN.com both have to do with money and President Bush. I have to admit, that up until a few months ago, I was rooting for Bush. When the nutjob terrorists attacked the United States on September 11th, 2001, he took immediate action to retaliate for the meaningless killing of nearly 3,000 innocent Americans. Not an easy task. His actions destroyed the Taliban and placed Al Qeada on the run. All this organizing and warring does not come free of charge. It costs tons of money, most of which the government doesn't have, at least right now anyway. So, of course, President Bush needs to request this money from Congress, who has to approve it in order to continue to fund two wars.
Here's where Bush's priorities come to light and also where Bush lost my vote. A couple of months ago, the SCHIP program came up to be renewed. For those of you not familiar with this program, it is a joint program between the states and the federal government to fund health care for the nation's children. The children this program covers belong to families who make too much to qualify for Medicare or Medicaid, but cannot afford private insurance. It is a great program and I guarantee you cannot look around and not find someone who does not have a child on it or did not at one time have a child be part of this program. These children are our future and in the United States of America, the wealthiest and best country in the world, should we really force parents to make a decision between putting food on the table or taking their children to the doctor for a broken arm, an operation, or something as simple as a checkup? Absolutely not, but President Bush says otherwise.
When the program came up to Congress to be renewed, Congress wanted to expand the program by $30 billion over 5 years. This expansion would have allowed more children of middle class families to be on the program. Even though these families may make a bit more, middle class is does not mean money flows from the heavens. It is still hard to make ends meet and this program was only going to be expanded to cover the lower end of these middle class families. When President Bush received the legislation which had huge bipartisan support in both houses of Congress, he immediately vetoed it. His initial answer was that it would be too expensive to expand health coverage for the nation's children. He said it would not be fiscally responsible. I guess you can put a price on how much a child's health is worth, according to President Bush. Then, later in the same week he vetoed that legislation, President Bush asked Congress to give him 70 billion dollars to cover the cost of the war for the next couple of months. Congress is expected to give that to him and, of course, he's going to sign it and get his money. So let me get this straight, IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE TO EXPAND A PROGRAM TO GIVE HEALTH CARE TO MORE OF OUR NATION'S CHILDREN OVER 5 YEARS, BUT IT'S NOT TOO EXPENSIVE TO FUND A WAR FOR THE NEXT FEW MONTH'S???!!!!! So I guess it's okay to have plenty of money to kill a bunch of people who may or may not attack us, but it's not okay to fund health care for our own nation's children.
Congress knew it couldn't override a veto with the number of votes they had, so they tightened down the program. They still expanded it by 30 billion dollars over 5 years, but they added provisions that you had to be 18 and under and your income could only be so high. Again, Congress passed it with wide support from both parties. When President Bush got it again, he immediately vetoed it, AGAIN!!!!. This time, out of fear of retaliation for saying it was too expensive after getting his war funding check, he now says that the bill took the nation's health care in the wrong direction. Wrong direction? In case he hasn't noticed, our nation's health care isn't exactly on a good path. In fact, it's on the wrong path and headed for cliff. We are the only developed country in the world that doesn't have federally funded health care for everyone. Too much money in the pot and too many hands in that pot. But I guess that's okay, right? I mean it's for the greater good, right? Oh, let's go fight a war and kill thousands of people, but we can't afford to take care of our own children.
Congress is going to try and override the veto again, though, they aren't sure if they have the votes. They can have the votes if enough people write their congressman and tell them to fund health care for our children. If those congressmen want to keep their jobs, they will have to listen to us. Bush has only vetoed 5 bills in his entire presidency. 2 were for stem cell research, one was funding for water projects around the nation, and 2 were for expanding the SCHIP program. 40% of his vetoes have gone against funding health care for our nation's children!!! I'm sick of this. We have all kinds of magical money to fund a war, but we can't find the money anywhere to better the health of our nation's children. Write your congressman and tell him to support overriding Bush's veto on this. He cannot be allowed to do this anymore. He cannot be allowed to force low income parents to decide between food and medicine while still killing hundreds of people, including children, in some far off nation.
In the United States of America, our children deserve better.
Here's where Bush's priorities come to light and also where Bush lost my vote. A couple of months ago, the SCHIP program came up to be renewed. For those of you not familiar with this program, it is a joint program between the states and the federal government to fund health care for the nation's children. The children this program covers belong to families who make too much to qualify for Medicare or Medicaid, but cannot afford private insurance. It is a great program and I guarantee you cannot look around and not find someone who does not have a child on it or did not at one time have a child be part of this program. These children are our future and in the United States of America, the wealthiest and best country in the world, should we really force parents to make a decision between putting food on the table or taking their children to the doctor for a broken arm, an operation, or something as simple as a checkup? Absolutely not, but President Bush says otherwise.
When the program came up to Congress to be renewed, Congress wanted to expand the program by $30 billion over 5 years. This expansion would have allowed more children of middle class families to be on the program. Even though these families may make a bit more, middle class is does not mean money flows from the heavens. It is still hard to make ends meet and this program was only going to be expanded to cover the lower end of these middle class families. When President Bush received the legislation which had huge bipartisan support in both houses of Congress, he immediately vetoed it. His initial answer was that it would be too expensive to expand health coverage for the nation's children. He said it would not be fiscally responsible. I guess you can put a price on how much a child's health is worth, according to President Bush. Then, later in the same week he vetoed that legislation, President Bush asked Congress to give him 70 billion dollars to cover the cost of the war for the next couple of months. Congress is expected to give that to him and, of course, he's going to sign it and get his money. So let me get this straight, IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE TO EXPAND A PROGRAM TO GIVE HEALTH CARE TO MORE OF OUR NATION'S CHILDREN OVER 5 YEARS, BUT IT'S NOT TOO EXPENSIVE TO FUND A WAR FOR THE NEXT FEW MONTH'S???!!!!! So I guess it's okay to have plenty of money to kill a bunch of people who may or may not attack us, but it's not okay to fund health care for our own nation's children.
Congress knew it couldn't override a veto with the number of votes they had, so they tightened down the program. They still expanded it by 30 billion dollars over 5 years, but they added provisions that you had to be 18 and under and your income could only be so high. Again, Congress passed it with wide support from both parties. When President Bush got it again, he immediately vetoed it, AGAIN!!!!. This time, out of fear of retaliation for saying it was too expensive after getting his war funding check, he now says that the bill took the nation's health care in the wrong direction. Wrong direction? In case he hasn't noticed, our nation's health care isn't exactly on a good path. In fact, it's on the wrong path and headed for cliff. We are the only developed country in the world that doesn't have federally funded health care for everyone. Too much money in the pot and too many hands in that pot. But I guess that's okay, right? I mean it's for the greater good, right? Oh, let's go fight a war and kill thousands of people, but we can't afford to take care of our own children.
Congress is going to try and override the veto again, though, they aren't sure if they have the votes. They can have the votes if enough people write their congressman and tell them to fund health care for our children. If those congressmen want to keep their jobs, they will have to listen to us. Bush has only vetoed 5 bills in his entire presidency. 2 were for stem cell research, one was funding for water projects around the nation, and 2 were for expanding the SCHIP program. 40% of his vetoes have gone against funding health care for our nation's children!!! I'm sick of this. We have all kinds of magical money to fund a war, but we can't find the money anywhere to better the health of our nation's children. Write your congressman and tell him to support overriding Bush's veto on this. He cannot be allowed to do this anymore. He cannot be allowed to force low income parents to decide between food and medicine while still killing hundreds of people, including children, in some far off nation.
In the United States of America, our children deserve better.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Best And Worst Parts About Winter
Now that it is wintertime here in Idaho, I would like to mention some of the best things about winter and some of the worst things about it as well.
The best things:
- How you feel when you are outside and it's snowing and it's can-hear-a-needle-drop quiet
- Christmas
- Many Christmas parties
- Sledding down hills, tubing down hills
- Snowball fights
- Christmas lights
The worst things:
- Driving through snowy roads
- Fighting other customers at the stores
- The madness of day after thanksgiving sales
- It's just too dang cold
- It costs more to heat your home
Basically, I love how winter looks, but I hate driving through those looks. Winter yields so many fun times, but at the same time it's just too dang cold. Even though I've lived through many winters here in Idaho, I still haven't gotten used to the coldness of them. And believe me, the coldness of these Idaho winters can be brutal.
The best things:
- How you feel when you are outside and it's snowing and it's can-hear-a-needle-drop quiet
- Christmas
- Many Christmas parties
- Sledding down hills, tubing down hills
- Snowball fights
- Christmas lights
The worst things:
- Driving through snowy roads
- Fighting other customers at the stores
- The madness of day after thanksgiving sales
- It's just too dang cold
- It costs more to heat your home
Basically, I love how winter looks, but I hate driving through those looks. Winter yields so many fun times, but at the same time it's just too dang cold. Even though I've lived through many winters here in Idaho, I still haven't gotten used to the coldness of them. And believe me, the coldness of these Idaho winters can be brutal.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
The Best Vehicles
Because I work for a company that does all kinds of research on trucks, the discussion of what is the better truck comes up almost every day. Here's the list of what I feel is the best vehicles out there.
1. Toyota Tundra (I love this truck, especially the newest ones)
2. Toyota Tacoma (I have wanted one of these since I was a teenager. Plus, they can go anywhere)
3. Chevy Cavalier (I have owned one of these for 5 years and it is a great car to have)
4. Chevy Avalanche (Only the newest ones, without the plastic on the outside)
5. Mazda RX-8 (I love this car, mostly because it's got a third door that can be used to hug you).
If you don't like any of these cars, well I pity you. Just kidding. To each his own.
1. Toyota Tundra (I love this truck, especially the newest ones)
2. Toyota Tacoma (I have wanted one of these since I was a teenager. Plus, they can go anywhere)
3. Chevy Cavalier (I have owned one of these for 5 years and it is a great car to have)
4. Chevy Avalanche (Only the newest ones, without the plastic on the outside)
5. Mazda RX-8 (I love this car, mostly because it's got a third door that can be used to hug you).
If you don't like any of these cars, well I pity you. Just kidding. To each his own.
Friday, December 7, 2007
Friday Feast
Appetizer
What was the last game you purchased?
- Worldcraft 3
Soup
Name something in which you don’t believe.
- I don't believe in quitting until the job is done
Salad
If you could choose a celebrity to be your boss, who would you pick?
- Robin Williams because he would be the funniest boss to work with
Main Course
What was a lesson you had to learn the hard way?
- Don't get over your head in credit card debt
Dessert
Describe your idea of the perfect relaxation room.
- A room with a large flat panel tv on the wall, lots of windows, warm temperature, plenty of Mountain Dew, and tons of funny show to watch.
What was the last game you purchased?
- Worldcraft 3
Soup
Name something in which you don’t believe.
- I don't believe in quitting until the job is done
Salad
If you could choose a celebrity to be your boss, who would you pick?
- Robin Williams because he would be the funniest boss to work with
Main Course
What was a lesson you had to learn the hard way?
- Don't get over your head in credit card debt
Dessert
Describe your idea of the perfect relaxation room.
- A room with a large flat panel tv on the wall, lots of windows, warm temperature, plenty of Mountain Dew, and tons of funny show to watch.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
What Is Fair?
Yesterday, I posted about how to end Google's self-imposed reign over the Internet. I realize the Google is very popular and companies want to be at the top of their search engine results. Getting put at the top of that list does need some sort of calculation on Google's part. That is partly why they use the PR system. The higher the page rank, the higher it goes on the list. So it comes down to calculating PR. This is supposed to calculate how popular a site is. This popularity comes from traffic, backlinks, regular visitors, and new visitors on a regular basis. Sounds pretty simple huh? Well, it is, but there is an inherit power in all of these calculations.
Because Google is so popular, everyone wants to base what they do with their site so that it appears on Google where it can be seen more often. Google's huge popularity also equals a huge amount of power. Since everyone relies on them, Google can basically control what these people do on the net. They can do this by changing how PR is calculated. Remember, the purpose of PR is to calculate how a page ranks on the Internet. But, Google has added bias into that rank. Google has changed their PR calculation to automatically set a PR of a site with paid blogs straight down to 0. Is that fair? Does a site with paid blogs have no traffic as a PR of 0 would imply? Does that mean no one reads the posts on that site or visits the site anymore or that everyone who linked to that site suddenly killed all their links to that site overnight? With that in mind, does PR sound like a fair ranking system anymore? Ya, I would have to say no.
Let me give you a couple of examples of how this PR system is not fair and unbiased at all. First, my wife's blog has been established for over year now. She has all kinds of regular readers, back links, and enough traffic to make my blog look like a dwarf. Her PR used to be 3 until Google made their PR system more "fair". By more fair, I mean cutting anyone out of the loop who does paid blogging. Her PR is now 0. Ya, 0. How do you computer that big fat goose egg? Obviously, it's now without bias because when someone sees a blog has a 0 for a PR, they think the blog is new and has no traffic. Clearly not the case in this example. So, is the PR system fair and unbiased? Again, no.
The next example is my blog. My blog is new, only a few months old and has 20+ blogs on it. No regular traffic and only about 2 backlinks to it. I checked the PR of my blog yesterday and it is 1. My new baby of a blog has a higher PR than the much older and more mature blog of my wife. How does that compute? How does a fair and unbalanced ranking system rank a popular site lower than a site that is new to the blogging world? I'll tell you how. By killing PR of those sites who do paid blogging and by rewarding sites who don't do paid blogging. And Google can do this because they have the power and feel that no one can take it away from them.
The time has come to take this power away so the ranking of websites can be fair and unbalanced again. This power can be taken away in a number of ways. First, stop using Google to do your web searches. I know I have. Second, stop using any of Google's products (maps, email, etc). I do still have my gmail account only because it is the site listed on my resume. Third, people need to stop using PR as a basis for everything on the web. When the PR system stops being used, someone will and is going to have to come up with a much better and really unbiased system. And, finally, people need to dump their stock in Google. When the money runs out for Google (I know the stock is only part of their income), they might actually start becoming the likeable governor of the Internet instead of the self-proclaimed Dictator of the Internet.
PayPerPost has actually come out with a great new alternative to PR. It's called RealRank. This system actually calculates a site's traffic, backlinks, etc in an unbiased manner and calculates this on a daily basis. This new system is based on real numbers and not a business's bias. This is fair. Actually ranking a site based on how popular is, not based on how popular it is with just one site.
Because Google is so popular, everyone wants to base what they do with their site so that it appears on Google where it can be seen more often. Google's huge popularity also equals a huge amount of power. Since everyone relies on them, Google can basically control what these people do on the net. They can do this by changing how PR is calculated. Remember, the purpose of PR is to calculate how a page ranks on the Internet. But, Google has added bias into that rank. Google has changed their PR calculation to automatically set a PR of a site with paid blogs straight down to 0. Is that fair? Does a site with paid blogs have no traffic as a PR of 0 would imply? Does that mean no one reads the posts on that site or visits the site anymore or that everyone who linked to that site suddenly killed all their links to that site overnight? With that in mind, does PR sound like a fair ranking system anymore? Ya, I would have to say no.
Let me give you a couple of examples of how this PR system is not fair and unbiased at all. First, my wife's blog has been established for over year now. She has all kinds of regular readers, back links, and enough traffic to make my blog look like a dwarf. Her PR used to be 3 until Google made their PR system more "fair". By more fair, I mean cutting anyone out of the loop who does paid blogging. Her PR is now 0. Ya, 0. How do you computer that big fat goose egg? Obviously, it's now without bias because when someone sees a blog has a 0 for a PR, they think the blog is new and has no traffic. Clearly not the case in this example. So, is the PR system fair and unbiased? Again, no.
The next example is my blog. My blog is new, only a few months old and has 20+ blogs on it. No regular traffic and only about 2 backlinks to it. I checked the PR of my blog yesterday and it is 1. My new baby of a blog has a higher PR than the much older and more mature blog of my wife. How does that compute? How does a fair and unbalanced ranking system rank a popular site lower than a site that is new to the blogging world? I'll tell you how. By killing PR of those sites who do paid blogging and by rewarding sites who don't do paid blogging. And Google can do this because they have the power and feel that no one can take it away from them.
The time has come to take this power away so the ranking of websites can be fair and unbalanced again. This power can be taken away in a number of ways. First, stop using Google to do your web searches. I know I have. Second, stop using any of Google's products (maps, email, etc). I do still have my gmail account only because it is the site listed on my resume. Third, people need to stop using PR as a basis for everything on the web. When the PR system stops being used, someone will and is going to have to come up with a much better and really unbiased system. And, finally, people need to dump their stock in Google. When the money runs out for Google (I know the stock is only part of their income), they might actually start becoming the likeable governor of the Internet instead of the self-proclaimed Dictator of the Internet.
PayPerPost has actually come out with a great new alternative to PR. It's called RealRank. This system actually calculates a site's traffic, backlinks, etc in an unbiased manner and calculates this on a daily basis. This new system is based on real numbers and not a business's bias. This is fair. Actually ranking a site based on how popular is, not based on how popular it is with just one site.
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Someone Needs To Stand Up
Okay, so my wife and I basically just have one main source of income and that source is my job as a Software Engineer. It's pays relatively well for the area that we live. It pays the bills and keeps a roof over our head and gas in the car. My wife does babysitting and paid blogging on the side so that we can have money for unexpected expenses like taking the cat the vet, fixing the car, or trips to the ER. Well, that paid blogging portion was doing great. She was pulling in over $900 dollars a month by blogging. It was great. The bills were getting paid and the stress on not having enough money had been eased. Then, the hammer hit the nail, and a big self-proclaimed bully came into the picture. That big bully is Google and their trusty (and ever-so-innocent-and-fair) PR system.
My wife was receiving that paid blogging income through a company called PayPerPost. In a nutshell, advertisers give PayPerPost a bunch of money. PayPerPost divies up the money into so many chunks of the same amount and then gives bloggers a chunk if they blog about that advertiser's product. There is a bit more work involved then just getting handed out money, but that is the gist of it. It's a great program and a wonderful opportunity for stay-at-home moms to supplement their income or for college students to earn rent money and still stay home. In addition, each blog has a Page Rank(PR). This PR is given out by Google. It's supposed to accurately measure the popularity of each site by giving is a number from 0 to 10. Advertisers through PPP usually want popular sites to have their advertisements. The amount a blogger can make for an advertisement is solely based on their Google PR. This dependence on PR has been in PPP since PPP's beginning, which is coming up to be nearly 2 years. However, PPP(PayPerPost) has a competitor, Google's Adsense.
Google's Adsense are those annoying links you see on almost every single website. Google gets paid by advertisers to subscribe to that program and Google gives a small fraction of that money to the website owner if someone clicks on those links. Well, as you can see, PPP is in direct competition with that. What usually happens when a big giant company has a competitor start to gain on them? Three things usually happen: The big company buys the small one, the big company comes out with something better, or the big company tries to kill the little company. When Google saw PPP was taking more and more money away from them, (like they need more money anyway), Google decided to go with option 3 using their PR Tool.
In an effort to "level the playing field and make the Internet fair", Google changed how they compute a page's PR. Now, if you do any paid blogging, your PR is automatically 0. No questions asked and no apologies given. When asked why they added this, Google comes out and says it has always been their policy and nothing has changed. Well, if it has always been their policy, why did they just now enforce that policy? I know why. Because PPP is a major competitor with AdSense. Now does that sound fair? Only if fair means unfair.
Google did say there is a way to get you PR back up. Just stop blogging for money. So in other words, you can get our support again when you stop using our competitor's product. Ya that's fair. And that goes right along with Google's motto: Do No Evil. Apparently, Google only follows that motto when someone plays by their rules. Once you step out of line, Google changes its motto to "All Gloves Are Off". Since when does Google call the shots on the web? Who are they and why do they have so much power? What is wrong with the average Joe making money by paid blogging? Advertisers try to sell their product on tv all the time through commercials. You don't see the FCC trying to shut those companies down or companies shooting each other over getting on tv. If Google wants a level playing field, they are doing it like they own the field. Anyone remember why the pc world was in an uproar when Microsoft packaged it's Internet Explorer into its Windows Operating System? Microsoft got sued for being a monopoly on webbrowsers and had to change their ways. Isn't this stunt by Google along those same lines? They want to have the only means of people making money on their websites. Well, I don't hear any stories of people suing Google over this crap, so I guess we have to do something else.
This is where the blogger world needs to stand up to the Google giant. I don't care how big they are, they need to be stopped. The biggest chance to stand up to them is right now before they succeed in killing their biggest competitor. Google needs to be stopped. The way to do that is taking Adsense off of your site and pushing back against Google. To push back, use PPP as a means to advertise for a product instead of Google's Adsense. I promise you, you will make more money with PPP then you ever will by have annoying Adsense ads on your site.
Google needs to have their godhood over the Internet taken away. The Internet has been around for a lot longer than Google has. They should not be allowed to rule it. Once one of Google's competitors is allowed to survive, then more companies will come that will have great products that will compete with Google and perhaps Google will have to come out with a better competing product in order to stay on top. Now, that entire process is what I call really leveling the playing field.
My wife was receiving that paid blogging income through a company called PayPerPost. In a nutshell, advertisers give PayPerPost a bunch of money. PayPerPost divies up the money into so many chunks of the same amount and then gives bloggers a chunk if they blog about that advertiser's product. There is a bit more work involved then just getting handed out money, but that is the gist of it. It's a great program and a wonderful opportunity for stay-at-home moms to supplement their income or for college students to earn rent money and still stay home. In addition, each blog has a Page Rank(PR). This PR is given out by Google. It's supposed to accurately measure the popularity of each site by giving is a number from 0 to 10. Advertisers through PPP usually want popular sites to have their advertisements. The amount a blogger can make for an advertisement is solely based on their Google PR. This dependence on PR has been in PPP since PPP's beginning, which is coming up to be nearly 2 years. However, PPP(PayPerPost) has a competitor, Google's Adsense.
Google's Adsense are those annoying links you see on almost every single website. Google gets paid by advertisers to subscribe to that program and Google gives a small fraction of that money to the website owner if someone clicks on those links. Well, as you can see, PPP is in direct competition with that. What usually happens when a big giant company has a competitor start to gain on them? Three things usually happen: The big company buys the small one, the big company comes out with something better, or the big company tries to kill the little company. When Google saw PPP was taking more and more money away from them, (like they need more money anyway), Google decided to go with option 3 using their PR Tool.
In an effort to "level the playing field and make the Internet fair", Google changed how they compute a page's PR. Now, if you do any paid blogging, your PR is automatically 0. No questions asked and no apologies given. When asked why they added this, Google comes out and says it has always been their policy and nothing has changed. Well, if it has always been their policy, why did they just now enforce that policy? I know why. Because PPP is a major competitor with AdSense. Now does that sound fair? Only if fair means unfair.
Google did say there is a way to get you PR back up. Just stop blogging for money. So in other words, you can get our support again when you stop using our competitor's product. Ya that's fair. And that goes right along with Google's motto: Do No Evil. Apparently, Google only follows that motto when someone plays by their rules. Once you step out of line, Google changes its motto to "All Gloves Are Off". Since when does Google call the shots on the web? Who are they and why do they have so much power? What is wrong with the average Joe making money by paid blogging? Advertisers try to sell their product on tv all the time through commercials. You don't see the FCC trying to shut those companies down or companies shooting each other over getting on tv. If Google wants a level playing field, they are doing it like they own the field. Anyone remember why the pc world was in an uproar when Microsoft packaged it's Internet Explorer into its Windows Operating System? Microsoft got sued for being a monopoly on webbrowsers and had to change their ways. Isn't this stunt by Google along those same lines? They want to have the only means of people making money on their websites. Well, I don't hear any stories of people suing Google over this crap, so I guess we have to do something else.
This is where the blogger world needs to stand up to the Google giant. I don't care how big they are, they need to be stopped. The biggest chance to stand up to them is right now before they succeed in killing their biggest competitor. Google needs to be stopped. The way to do that is taking Adsense off of your site and pushing back against Google. To push back, use PPP as a means to advertise for a product instead of Google's Adsense. I promise you, you will make more money with PPP then you ever will by have annoying Adsense ads on your site.
Google needs to have their godhood over the Internet taken away. The Internet has been around for a lot longer than Google has. They should not be allowed to rule it. Once one of Google's competitors is allowed to survive, then more companies will come that will have great products that will compete with Google and perhaps Google will have to come out with a better competing product in order to stay on top. Now, that entire process is what I call really leveling the playing field.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
