Utah Open Source Planet

Again, like with many of my other governmental inquiries through email, I have as yet received a reply from the Water Resources board regarding the avenues available for rainwater collection on an urban farm.  And then, a few weeks ago, I heard a report (or a followup at the very least) that legislators here in Utah are looking into reforming the Water Rights laws to allow for residential rainwater collection.  

So why did it take me so long to reply?  Because I can’t find any reference to the followup report on KSL, nor can I find a reference online from any legislator that is taking up the fight.  So in spite of the total lack of references, I’m reassured that someone somewhere is willing to take up this fight.  

Perhaps that is why I am not getting a reply from the Water Resources board.  Perhaps… or perhaps it is because I made the inquiry via email.  Either way, it looks as though sometime in the future it may be possible to build and collect rainwater for use on an urban farm.  Unfortunately I don’t know when or who is fighting for this.  Perhaps it’s time I contact my local legislator again.  Maybe I’ll get a reply.

While I lived in Germany, I learned to love a well planned out bus and Bahn schedule.  In Europe the trains are well timed and well placed, while the busses take the same ticket as the train, and you don’t have to purchase them from the driver (eating up precious time).  I often wished that Salt Lake would adopt the same principle as Europe to make mass transit more timely.

While I was gone in Chicago, UTA launched the new MAX bus line along 3500 South.  This line is faster than the usual bus line, and the bus itself is brand new.  The line only stops at all the major intersections along 35th, which means the bus isn’t stopping as often.  It also goes directly from the stop on 35th to the TRAXX line, with no usual transfer at the Valley Fair Mall.  The bus therefore can travel from 72nd West to the TRAXX station in 45 minutes, instead of close to 1 hr. 30 minutes.  Add to that another 30 minutes of travel time from the TRAXX station to the University, the commute now becomes a 1 hour 15 minute commute, which is only a half an hour longer than driving (with traffic).  

The bus is new too:  it’s more like a European bus, with three doors on the side.  People purchase their tickets at the MAX stop (most of them have a ticket dispenser), and the tickets are checked periodically as they do on the TRAXX train.  The train is also larger and low to the ground, so it’s easier to get in and out of.  Bikes are placed on the front of the bus, making local commuting beyond a TRAXX or MAX station faster and provide more exercise.  

Now, you may be asking why I am going on and on about the new MAX line.  Well, with the MAX line in place, the commute to work without a car is now very possible, time effective, and well within my budget.  Not only could I purchase a monthly bus pass for the same price that I would a tank of gas, but because I’m a University employee I get a free yearly bus pass (which includes the TRAXX, MAX, and most bus lines).

What this means is that we as a family can now go down to one car (or at least will be able to, depending on some factors).  If that’s the case, we may be able to sell both our cars and purchase a more fuel efficient vehicle:  a Toyota Prius, and the total savings will mean more budget for projects and building a very useful infrastructure here at home for a home business.  All of a sudden, funding becomes available. 

So if UTA happens to read this post, please note that I am quite happy with the new MAX bus line.  I look forward to it being implemented across the valley, perhaps replacing many of the multiple stop busses.  It would reduce the fleet of UTA busses overall, increase ridership.  Tickets can be purchased before boarding, people don’t have to check in with the bus driver while boarding, and the bus gets you to your location faster.  

If you haven’t tried the new MAX line, and there is one in your area, I would recommend it.

The blogosphere is rife with discussion on gay marriage and the LDS Church’s involvement in California. I would like to do my part in the battle for family. I pray this post will have positive effect in that battle, however modest it might be.

First of all, I’ve already said how I feel about group rights. Gays don’t have rights. Human beings have rights. Gays happen to be human beings. Good, we’re on the same page.

That said, this isn’t really about gay rights as much as it is about gay marriage, but it brings me to my first point.

Marriage is not a right.

For all the talk about gay rights you can mostly chalk it up to human rights that need to transcend prejudice. In other words, instead of clamoring for “gay rights” they should instead be insisting that they be afforded the already existing human rights. Gay marriage, on the other hand, is a prime example of a group inventing new rights so they can feel the same as everyone else regardless of their decisions. It’s like a people with dreadlocks inventing a right to lay their heads on your table simply because you don’t mind another person without dreadlocks doing it.

Marriage is fundamental to society.

This is entirely incident to marriage not being a right, but is yet a powerful argument against the thought that marriage should be a right. Marriage is the very institution by which children have parents, both mother and father. It is the core of the fundamental unit of society—family.

Marriage involves more than the couple.

Intimate relations are not just about consenting adults having a good time. There is ever present the possibility of new life. This new life has rights just the same. It has needs, physical, emotional, spiritual.

Husband and wife have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children. “Children are an heritage of the Lord” (Psalms 127:3). Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, to teach them to love and serve one another, to observe the commandments of God [etc.]

Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity.

—The Family: A Proclamation to the World

It is because of this sticky situation that marriage is instituted. The very purpose of marriage is to give children stable homes, to assure where possible that when children are created they have a mother and a father. Once you realize this, you realize that gay marriage isn’t the only thing you ought to be worried about. Fornication, adultery and divorce come to mind. Alas, this post is about gay marriage. Indeed, homosexual relations cannot result in offspring, so the very reasons for instituting marriage don’t even apply to the deviants. Yet they insist they have a right to marry. Again I propose it’s merely about them feeling the same as everyone else, regardless of their personal choices. It’s validation, nothing more.

Government should be involved in marriage.

Many of my libertarian friends throw around the idea that government should step out of marriage completely, leaving it a private and religious matter concerning only those involved. This is one of few places where I diverge from the libertarian camp (though not necessarily libertarian ideals). As stated previously, marriage inherently involves more than the parties involved. It involves family and new life; it involves society as a whole. It is in the interests of everyone involved (and everyone is involved, who among us was not born of a mother and a father?) and we should take every opportunity to encourage marriage over promiscuity and counseling over divorce. We should take every opportunity to afford children the privilege of being born into the marriage relation, and where that’s not possible to be adopted into such (no, I’m not saying single parents should give up their children, though they shouldn’t be discouraged to do so). The government is the vehicle by which the people are governed. Whereas the people deem it in society’s interest to afford children the opportunity to develop under the guidance of bonded mother and father, encouraged to stay together, for better or for worse, in sickness and in health, thus is born the state sanctioned institution of marriage.

6 comments

My dad sent me a link to the American Solutions website. I checked it out and was impressed enough to sign up for an account on it. If you are interested discussing and affecting the direction of future policy in America, particularly with regard to energy policy, this site may be of interest to you. It appears to be fairly non-partisan so don't assume it's conservative, liberal, environmentalist, or anything else.

American Solutions does seem to be somewhat weighted toward people who want to get rid of some of the current restrictions that keep oil companies from drilling in various areas of the US. Doing this would boost our domestic production, but unlike some of the people on this site, I don't think that will significantly affect crude oil prices much. We need to get busy investing in all kinds of alternative energy production as well as drill for more domestic oil. 

Do you remember when you were in elementary school and you learned that plants had some mysterious process that involved a substance called chlorophyll and energy from sunlight and it made them grow? Do you remember learning that plants emit oxygen and take in carbon dioxide, which is opposite of animal life like humans (we emit carbon dioxide and take in oxygen)?

If carbon dioxide is fuel for plants, having an increase of it in the ecosystem could result in more plant growth, you might think. I'd never heard anything reported about that until a couple days ago. I was listening to Glenn Beck's radio show and was talking to a scientist named Arthur Robinson who said, yes, several studies have shown a correlation between increased carbon dioxide and increased plant growth.

In addition, the conversation between Beck and Robinson touched on the Oregon Petition, another thing I had never heard of. The Oregon Petition is a petition signed by over 30,000 scientists, 9,000 or so of which hold doctorate degrees, which says, in a nutshell, "Global warming is a myth, a fraud, a lie, etc. and should not be the basis for government policy."

Considering that all of the three frontrunning candidates for the US presidency are in favor of sweeping policy changes in the name of global warming, it would appear to be up to us, as citizens, to raise awareness of these issues. "Cap and trade" policy is nothing more than hefty taxes on businesses which do nothing but funnel money into the government. On a global scale, these policies will seriously stifle technological development in less-developed countries and could result in widespread preventable loss of life!

Ever since I can remember, the argument for environmentalists have been to move to Solar and Wind power as the only way to save the planet.  Their position is from a green point of view:  that is, if it isn’t natural, it isn’t an option.  This is fine, and there are a lot of merits to these methods of generating energy, but right now it just isn’t enough.  We need something else to bolster our energy needs until these more green technologies can be made more efficient.  And the best move that can be made right now is energy recycling. 

What’s Energy Recycling?  It’s the process of using the excess heat created by a process to boil water, create steam, and move a generator.  One excellent example of wasted energy this way would be many cooling towers in Atomic plants.  

But that isn’t all!  Many factories, refineries, and smelters are major sources of excess heat, and as such could be producing electricity.  Just place a boiler on top of the plant, capture the heat, boil water, create steam, use that steam to move a generator and you are all set!  

Now, you may ask where I got this idea in the first place.  Well, I’m guilty of perpetuating an idea of others.  It seems that Europe and Japan has been doing this practice for years, bolstering their grids with additional energy from their factories, refineries, etc.  Heat is not wasted if it’s sufficient enough to boil water.  This was reported this morning on my way to work on NPR, by the way.  

So why don’t we do the same thing?  It’s such a simple idea, why haven’t the US thought of this before?  Because there are currently State and Civil laws that protect power companies from having to pay retail prices for the power that gets pumped back into the grid from an non-system source.  That, and most older facilities would be subject to new EPA regulations if they made any modifications to their facility.  

Now, the other day, I was listening to Sean Hannity on the radio.  Now, this isn’t a regular thing for me, as I don’t like to get just one side of the story (I find NPR the least biased news source).  But he had an interesting argument for the Republican Party:  Rebuild yourself.  He pointed out 10 items the Republicans could do in order to rebuild the party.  Number 4 was Energy Independence.  What could be more independent than using recycled energy?

So, my challenge to Government, both parties actually, is to challenge the protection laws currently in place for energy companies to allow energy recycling.  We could generate almost twice the energy we have now, if we follow Denmark’s model (half their energy comes from recycled energy projects), and lower our energy growth needs.  That’s the kicker: the need for foreign oil could be lowered as far as overall energy production, and allow more oil to be diverted to transportation (at least for now).  

Now, I don’t expect it will magically solve our nation’s energy needs overnight.  But wouldn’t it be nice to not have to worry about rolling blackouts?  More energy means cheaper electric manufacturing costs, and cheaper overall bills on the consumer.  Also, those factories that produce a lot of heat in order to produce their product can save even more money as they generate that excess heat into energy savings, or potentially a secondary revenue line.  

Those are the benefits, at any case.  Now the hard part needs to be hammered out:  negotiating with power companies and potential power generating sources a fair and sustainable model.  Perhaps they can offer to buy the recycled energy at wholesale costs..  Anyway, that’s a fight that will be well worth the effort.  

I love this quote from Ron Paul’s most recent installment of his weekly column “Texas Straight Talk“.

While Democrats propose to tax and spend, many Republicans aim to borrow and spend, which hurts the taxpayer just as much in the long run.

Republicans who are concerned about increased taxation should be up in arms about the present value of future taxation that we make inevitable by letting the government live outside its means. You can’t lower taxes without lowering spending; you can only defer them –and deferring them to a future generation through debt is, in my opinion, even more immoral then overtaxing the current generation.

What is needed (for both parties) is to lower spending. That can be politically tricky since everything government does costs money, and no leader wants to be seen as doing nothing; but nothing is precisely what should be done at least 90% of the time. That’s one of the reasons the Founding Fathers, through a delicate system of checks and balances, made it so hard to get anything done. Yet we often, as voters, reward candidates who campaign on all kinds of ridiculous, expensive plans. (Yes we can! Yes we can! Yes we can!)

Lowering spending, and in turn taxation, requires both that we mind our own business internationally and let people solve the own problems with their own money domestically. Right now neither major party as a whole can agree to do both, so Americans will have to pay the hefty price until we can bring about serious and meaningful change in American politics.

Connor, kudos to you for standing up for liberty. I find it sad that there are those who would so vehemently oppose liberty in any form. As for anti-discrimination laws and affirmative action laws, they are indeed different, and yet the same.

“Redistribution of wealth” is a hot topic these days, perhaps we should coin the term “redistribution of liberty.” It’s an erroneous and an insidious ideal that a group should be made equal, for you can’t make anything equal but the individual. Where a shop owner may refuse credit to a man based entirely on individual merits, how is he to prove his state of mind to the law if that individual happens to be in group $minority protected by the ill-conceived law?

I will reiterate for for clarity’s sake… “Rights can ONLY be protected on an INDIVIDUAL basis.” Note that rights cannot be “granted” except by God, or derived as necessary from those God given rights. To find such words as “minority” or especially enumerated groups in legislation is to find legal and even mandated discrimination. From merriam-webster.com:

3 a: the act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually

This discrimination may be spelled out such that it is discrimination in favor of a group, but as all things must be balanced, this discrimination is necessarily in hindrance of another group, specifically anyone not belonging to the favored group. I doubt anyone would be all gung-ho for anti-discrimination legislation in favor of caucasian white males. Such legislation would be immediately labeled as bigotry, so why the double standard?

In fact, to be truly anti-discrimanatory, you must allow everyone the discretion to make decisions on an individual basis on any characteristic he deems relevant. And thus it follows that to be anti group discrimination, you must be pro individual discrimination. Unfortunately, such things as skin color and other traits shared by groups are also perfectly valid as individual traits. Such is life, and we must live with the bad judgments of individuals if we are to value liberty over entitlement.

3 comments

I just finished reading an article on how we have strayed in a very fundamental way. It’s called Federalism: The Great Lost Concept. Here’s an excerpt.

A return to federalism, which is what Dr. Paul offers, is a return to the great experiment our Founders started. As a supporter recently said, we can choose between Candidate A and Candidate B’s plans for our lives, or we can choose Ron Paul’s plan to give us back our lives.

And for those of you who think Ron Paul would recklessly take us to anarchy, another excerpt.

It is possible to streamline operations and return to the states the powers they once held. Dr. Paul is not in favor of immediately abolishing programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security because, while these programs are unconstitutional and ultimately harmful, too many Americans have been made dependent on them for those programs to be immediately ended.

And here’s the link.

0 comments

This is in response to Jordy’s post. Though it quickly degrades into rant, it comes full circle to my main point.

If you follow my blog, you know I’m fairly anti Romney. Yet that’s not to say I’m anti Mormon, as I am one. Which begs the question, “Is Romney’s failure truly a reflection of religious bigotry?” Of course I’m one person, and this is all anecdotal. I would like to say that had Romney been truly conservative instead of merely “more” conservative than McCain, that he might have done better, stayed in the race, maybe won. Alas, I can see this is not the case. If Romney had been truly conservative, he’d likely be in the same boat as the true conservative. Perhaps not, for if he was in that boat he would have jumped ship long ago. Maybe that’s unfair, calling him a quitter, but I digress.

So here Romney runs as the “conservative” choice, as well as the shrewd businessman that can turn around the heaviest, most sluggish, most doomed of vessels. I almost wonder if he dropped out (or suspended) because he was sacrificing more and more of his true conservative values for the sake of media acceptance, the campaign, and the party. C’mon, we all know his loyalties lie with the party above all else. The theory goes he could not do it anymore, he couldn’t keep sacrificing his principles to keep the campaign going, but he endorsed McCain, the antithesis of conservatism… so much for that theory.

You may think with all this ranting I’m bashing Romney and may yet give him a whopping slap in the face. Well, you may be right. That depends on how you interpret it. Above I was merely conjecturing, posing possible reasons behind his suspension as well as reasons behind the reason for his suspension, another reason, you might say the reason… his lack of support. Funny definition of lack of support though, I think he really had a shot still, he was the runner up! Though I digress yet again.

There is a point to all this. Regardless of why Romney was losing, regardless of what tactics were used against him, regardless of what he really does believe in, the fact remains that he dropped out. This is the slap in the face, so brace yourselves. I truly sympathize with all you Romney fans out there. Whatever the reason you supported him, you were counting on him. You were counting on him to keep McCain out. You were counting on him to save our dollars. You were counting on him to bring God’s blessing upon our great nation. You were counting on him to bring his conservative values to the white house. Whatever it was you were counting on it, and he has let you down. And for what? For “the party.” And now he jumps behind McCain “for the party.” I’m truly sorry. If my main man did that to me, if my candidate of choice (you know who he is) so much as hinted at dropping the race, I would be dismayed beyond consolation. My heart goes out.

2 comments

Now ain’t that depressing? I think everyone has probably heard by now that Romney has officially endorsed McCain (aka McPain, McInsane, McShame). I would say I cannot believe it, but in fact I do. Merely because the more I found out about Romney the more I realized he is just the mormon version of McCain. I don’t want to believe it, but I do. Romney has lost any ounce of my respect he heretofore had, where before I somewhat generously if hesitantly gave him the benefit of the doubt. Now it’s come to this and I have to believe that sane people will not follow Romney’s endorsement. If this all isn’t depressing enough, here’s another video. This one at least has some hope to go with it.

Your choices are now McCain, Huckabee, Ron Paul or whoever wins the Dem. nomination. I used to lean towards Obama as a second choice, not that I’d ever resort to a second choice, but with fozzmoo’s recent article I fear he’s not much of a second choice at all. Obama is to Clinton as Romney is to McCain.

To be honest I’m not entirely well educated on Huckabee, but I hear he blew the lid off with high spending in Arkansas, and his admitted ignorance on things war doesn’t help much either. I hate to say I told you so, but it looks like Ron Paul is our man, so please go out and make a difference.

0 comments

“I believe in limited government. I believe the purpose of government is to protect liberty and not to run our lives, or run the economy, or to police the world.”—Ron Paul

The above quote was from a radio interview. I don’t think anybody could say it any better. That quote is the very embodiment of why I support Ron Paul to the very end.

Want to find out more of what he’s about? Here’s a blog that has video of his speech at CPAC.

If you find yourself dismayed and at a loss with Romney’s suspended campaign, please please take a close look at Ron Paul. If you have any doubts about him or any compelling reason not to support him I would certainly appreciate the chance to look into them, for my own enlightenment as well as yours. One friend of mine brought up a concern that, given any merit, would deeply concern myself as well. I spent many hours that evening looking into it, at the expense of homework, and came up convinced that the allegations were nothing but misrepresentation and slander.

If you wonder what could be done at this point with most primaries already passed, just drop me a line. There is work to be done.

2 comments

Here’s Mitt Romney answering a question about medical marijuana, if you can call it answering.

I’m not going to get much into the rights or wrongs of marijuana, medical or not, the war on drugs, or all that jazz. Instead I’m going to address Romney’s dodging of the question. One might say he in fact answered the question very directly, “I’m against the legalization of marijuana.” That’s a fine answer, Romney, but you were asked a very specific question. “Will you arrest me and my doctor if we use marijuana to treat my ailments?” He just wanted an honest answer.

Some have sympathized with Romney, saying it’s a loaded question. If he answers yes, then he’s not sympathetic to the less fortunate. If he says no, then he’s a hypocrite.

I say well then Romney, own up to your policy. If your policy is marijuana is bad in all shapes and forms, and you believe the feds should arrest abusers, then own up to it. Tell the man he’ll be arrested.

Ron Paul gives a very straightforward answer to this question. He says the federal government has no business interfering with such matters. Paul says the states have the say here. He says he (or the federal government) will not arrest you.

The tragedy is that Romney dodges around the question so he can fool as many people into voting for him as he can. If someone is going to vote against him because they don’t think the feds should arrest users in sympathetic states, then that’s their prerogative, and shame on Mitt for not coming clean to them.

Mitt Romney, own up to your policies!

3 comments

Here’s a well done video mashup comparing Ron Paul and Ronald Reagan side by side.

0 comments

Pretty scary stuff. I don’t think that we necessarily will face another great depression. We are, however, really on the verge of a recession (which is just a specific level being reached in the current trend we’re already in). Inflation is absolutely happening quite consistently. And I do think another great depression is completely within our grasp if we really want it, and wanting it may very well be no more than being content with the current trend.

I have felt the effects of this poor money management in very real ways. Gas is an obvious example which I’m sure we all feel, monthly grocery costs rise, you can even see it in vending machines and laundromats. The price just goes up and up, never down. Tuition is more imposing year after year after year, with no end in sight. Will the next generation be able to afford college? If they do manage to “afford” it, will they ever pay off the debt in their lifetime? I wonder if my youngest brother will even be able to afford it.

Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate I’m aware of whose platform is less government, less spending, less inflation, less debt, less war, less interference in our personal lives, all in all, LESS INSANITY.

Anyway, here’s the article that prompted my rant.
http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/2008/jan/14/protect_your_money
I’ve seen similar figures from other sources.

And if you don’t know who Ron Paul is, or especially if you’ve heard of him and your knee-jerk reaction is “lunatic” (thanks to our glorious media), please check out his website. (please also note that those donations are from common folk, not big lobbyists).

1 comment

I’d like to encourage everyone who voted FOR referendum 1 to please go to the Parents For Choice in Education website and register as a supporter. If the voucher concept ever resurfaces to sees the light of day in Utah (and I think it will since we only needed to sway an additional 12% of voters), we’re going to need people on the ground to pass out fliers, place yard signs, and host neighborhood meetings in their homes.

There was just too much misinformation out there. The opposition spent millions of UEA dollars to send daily mailers and buy up something like 6x the TV spots, and those anti-voucher ads were full of lies. The only way you can combat that kind of FUD campaign is to have a groundswell of grassroot support, willing to do what it takes to make sure that every citizen has the facts.

Please sign up now so that next time we can know our supporters and better coordinate our efforts. Help us ensure that parent’s choice in education never gets railroaded by union special interests again.

This is not over.

It’s easy for normal folks to get lost in an issue with so much rhetoric.

That’s why I was thrilled to get this ad in the mail:

This ad makes it easy for people like my mother-in-law to feel safe in a Parents’ Choice vote, despite claims from voucher opponents that

The real “bureaucrats and liberals” are the subsidy advocates and out-of-state voucher pushers looking for Utah to save their faltering national movement.

and

The issue isn’t about choice, is a liberal subsidized entitlement program that competes for scarce resources.

(Both those quotes come right out of the “against” portions of the 2007 Utah Voter Information Pamphlet, with my emphasis added.)

So, wait a minute… Sean Hannity, Mitt Romney, & Focus on the Family are liberal? What does that make Hillary, Atheists United, and the Rainbow Coalition? Can you ever be so far left that you actually wrap around? Voucher smearers, I think you may have a beam in your eye.

I only wish the pro-vouchers list had included the Utah Taxpayers Association and the late, Nobel prize winning economist Milton Friedman, from whose stellar essays the voucher bill is based. I think a lot of questions on the fiscal and tax impacts of Referendum 1 could have easily been answered by their inclusion.

BTW, I think that perhaps the dumbest statement I heard at Provo High School’s voucher debate was when an anti-voucher lady (whose name I don’t know) declared that she thought it was offensive that the Choice in Education side was citing some economist when these were Utah’s kids we were talking about it.

Some Economist –> Milton Friedman, arguably one of the greatest thinkers of our time.

Utah’s Kids –> Your Kids

Thank goodness, Internet Taxation moratorium passed, versions in both the House and the Senate.

The following message just came in from one of my teams' sponsors, Special Ops Paintball (Spec Ops).  This company has done a lot for paintball in general, and huge amounts for the sport in Utah.

Several months ago, Spec Ops bought land in Tooele County that it planned to use as a commercial paintball field. The Spec Ops property is over seven hundred (700) acres, and Spec Ops is exploring the possibility of developing a destination paintball field that would be the finest scenario paintball field west of the Mississippi. Unfortunately, the neighbors have petitioned Tooele County to ban ALL paintball fields unless they are located in commercially zoned areas. If the proposed amendment passes, not only will it scuttle Spec Ops plans for the existing land, but it might just keep all paintball fields out of Tooele County.

The Tooele County Commission is holding a public hearing on the proposed amendment to limit paintball in Tooele County. The public hearing will be held on August 21, 2007 at 3:00 p.m. in the City of Tooele at 47 South Main Street. This is your chance to be heard by the Tooele County Commissioners, the very people that will vote on whether or not to limit your access to paintball. Since it is a public hearing, anyone can attend the meeting and tell the Tooele County Commission just what they think about limited access to paintball fields. So if you'd like to keep paintball thriving here in Utah, we suggest that you turn up at the public hearing and voice your support.

We hope to see you there!

Special Ops Paintball

This news is just scary.  A similar thing happened a couple of years ago in Saratoga Springs, when city commissioners rezoned the land just to shut down Showdown, Pegleg paintball's field.  With that action they forced a up-and-coming business to give up major assets, and they also shut down Utah Valley's only paintball field.   Will Tooele join with other cities such as Draper to shut down paintball, either simply as recreation, or as a business?  Face it people, paintball is now the second largest "extreme" sport in the nation, it's big business.  The only reason I've ever been to Tooele is for paintball. I've seen mock-ups of some of the plans for the Tooele field, and believe me, they are telling the truth about it being the finest scenario field around.  Given the chance to build this field, people truly will come not only from across the state, but absolutely the country, just to play this field.  Don't be idiots Tooele, this would be a huge boon to your city and county.  Don't mess this up.

Thanks to Levi for this link from ars technicha today.  The link tells of people believing they can get the Pirate Party, started in the US, beginning with Utah of all places. 

The founder of the original Swedish Pirate Party spoke at OSCON this year (link) which explained very well the basic premise of the party, and made several very valid points.  I think he was pretty straightforward about the fact that even if they didn't win, they at least caused other parties to assume their copyright stance, or evaluate what they had.

Now frankly I see the chances of the Pirate Party in the US as basically nil.  Besides the mental and now largely legal lock in to two parties (there's a big soapbox to get on), the whole "Pirate" theme for a political party would be shunned by so many clueless folks.  With that said, I do hope it can help get the message out.  Who knows, maybe old Orrin Hatch could pay attention, he's got plenty to learn :)  Wonder how long until we get this discussed on the PLUG list.

Utah Pirate Party

THis week I am on vacation, working in the yard and spending some quality time with my son. But, being the geek that I am, I have kept busy with other things too. I've spent some time looking at video compression software, working with sharing images to my Apple TV, and looking for an acceptable way to activate an iPhone without having to worry about monthly charges (I don't like cell phones period, even if it's really cool). So, here's a quick review of what I've been doing, for those who are interested.

The Back Yard
Since I worked for an obscure ISP that stopped paying me, I have been letting my back yard go wild. THis isn't because of any particular choice, more because I haven't had the money to really fix it up. Well, as we are started to get a handle on things, I have started to work on the back yard. I had a lot of plans for it (as documented in my blog), but zoning laws have been keeping them from happening.

Well, I decided to shoot a bit lower with my plans, and just go for your basic back yard. I started by tilling under the weeds that have grown with a vigor that has daunted me for years. I then set some bricks down in a rough patio on the side of the house. All this in 100 degree weather (37.778 C for those metric fellows). I dismantled the foundation to the greenhouse I was going to build, and will settle for a quick and easy one over the current garden area. That will be easier to set up, and simpler to build. THe cob project is still under construction, and will be completed by the end of the month.

VIdeo Compression
I have a lot of video that I would like to convert to an Apple TV-Friendly format. These videos are in RealMedia format. I thought I could do it with VideoHub, but it doesn't support a lot of RealMedia formats. The video converted just fine, but it converted without any audio. Ah, well, back to the drawing board.

Streaming Video to Apple TV
With the latest version of iTunes, you can now stream your photo content to your Apple TV, and it displays in a slide show with music from your iTunes library playing along with it. Unfortunately, it plays all your iTunes library, so those tracks that I have of my "Teach Yourself Gaelic" are playing along. This is turned on within your Apple TV section within iTunes, in the Photos pane.

iPhone Hacking
Yes, I admit it, I really want an iPhone. Any surprise, considering that I have been talking about Apple products for quite a while? But I don't really want a cell phone. I hate them, because it's an additional expense that is hard to justify when I have phones everywhere I go. What I really want is a PDA that can do network SIP phone work, or have Skype installed. Something like that would be perfect.

Well, as such, the iPhone would be great (if you could install Skype on it, or any SIP phone client). I honestly believe that it's on the way, and will worry about that when I finally get the funding to purchase the phone. But for now, I would just like to know that it can be activated without having to sign up for an AT&T; account.

Having partly answered that question, the folks at Hackint0sh have found a way to do it. In this post here, some one found out that you can activate one phone, and then activate the other without having more than one phone number. It was all by accident, and will probably be taken care of in future releases. THey are also working on a number of hacks to open up the phones to other services. I'll be happy if they can find a way to activate the phone without having to purchase a service. This was one step.

Local Government Blues
As many of you know, I have been actively petitioning the local governments here for various things. Now, I don't expect them to actually act on the things I petition for right away. After all, I'm not that important. But I would at least like the consideration of a response, even a form letter of some sort. As of yet, I have not heard from County Mayor Peter Corroon, or West Valley City Councilman Joel Coleman. Needless to say, I'm not going to even consider voting for these men without some sort of acknowledgment of my petitions. After all, one is for the betterment of the County, the other for West Valley City.

So, that's what I have been up to this week. I would like to send out a really Happy Birthday to my good childhood friend Marc Steffensen, who is turning the bid 3-1 today. I don't know if he is reading this, but perhaps he will. Happy Birthday Marc!

Lately, I have to admit I have been impressed with Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon. While I opposed his election to begin with, he began to make sound choices within the county government that I was rather impressed with. To begin with, he denied the funding from the County to build a soccer stadium in Sandy City that would only benefit Sandy City financially. As I live in West Valley, I didn't see the financial benefits coming directly to my City, and saw it as a way to fund growth within only one aspect of the County. My understanding of the County government is to provide leadership and growth to benefit the whole county, instead of just one city. Well, the State is funding it now, and I'm OK with that. The State will get more funding from it, and it will be less of an impact on the taxpayers overall.

Well, with this understanding that the County government is there to benefit the entire county, I thought I would try contacting Mayor Corroon to see if the UTOPIA project could be expanded to the whole of Salt Lake County, instead of a few cities that ignored the interests of the communication monopolies, er, companies that oppose the measure. Here is the letter that I sent:

Dear Mayor Corroon,

I would first like to say that I have a lot of respect for you. Being one that normally votes with the Conservatives, I was rather impressed with your decisions you have made as mayor, and will probably vote for you again should you run for re-election.

But there is something that has been playing on my mind, and on the mind of many of your constituents within the Salt Lake County: That of affordable, usable network connections.

Now, this may sound like a small and simple issue, but businesses live and breath by the speed and bandwidth of their internet connection. New businesses are just waiting in the wings for the affordable bandwidth to start providing video streaming, network services, and various other services that require high speed, reliable connections.

Many cities, such as West Valley City (my city), has reacted by focusing on bringing their people and businesses the UTOPIA project. I'm sure you are aware of this project, and the arguments for and against it.

My interest is in those cities that have refused to participate in such a ground-breaking move. These cities have received assurances from various companies that communication companies that they will be able to provide the same services with the aging infrastructure that has yet to provide satisfactory service to their customers, let alone businesses. These companies seem to feel that a municipally organized and run infrastructure is a threat to their business model, and (in my opinion), their monopolies.

That is actually the case. No longer will they be able to charge inflated prices based on maintenance of their network. Instead, they are placed within a level playing field by the municipal network, and will have to compete with other companies that can now host their own services. Ultimately, it's a win for consumers.

So my request is that the County consider the Utopia project as the next possible leap to developing the county infrastructure.

I thank you for you time, and look forward to your response!

Jeremy Robb
Concerned Citizen

Now, I haven't had a lot of luck getting local government officials to respond to my emails. West Valley City Councilman Joe Coleman seems to have completely ignored my appeal for cycling lanes and paths in West Valley going East to West (which means I will not be voting for him again anytime soon). But I think I may be able to get a response from Peter Corroon, in that he's a bigger fish, and may have a more vested interest in keeping tabs on bloggers and what they say.

So, for those of you in cities that have refused to address the idea of the Utopia Project being implemented, I'm swinging for you. I think that everyone in the valley should have an internet connection that will allow for better living through communications. The benefits for Education alone would be outstanding. Imagine not having to build any more schools because we have distance education classes allowing kids to remain at home for part of the week. That would be a huge savings to the school districts in and of itself. All because the County did what cities were too afraid to do: wire their citizens up.