Disqus - Latest Comments for mkoby

Re: Ageism

Michael Koby — Mon, 24 Mar 2014 12:30:12 -0000

Ageism is a really funny thing. Most people think it only happens to older people but at 34 I've been a mild victim of it in the past.

Specifically I was just barely over 30 and I was working as a consultant (for a consulting agency) at a client, and my company had placed a manager above me. I was working a niche role, a developer on the QA team to help automate testing and to help the QA team communicate with the dev team. The manager was an older woman who would refuse to listen to anything I said until the managers on the development team (also from our consulting agency and whom I had worked with on previous projects) would validate them or make the exact same suggestions. Keep in mind I had been professionally developing software for 10 years at that time and had also spent time as a network, database admin, and even a QA person. So it wasn't like I was new to the game.

It was eventually discovered that it was due to both my age and position in the company that caused her to dismiss my ideas and comments outright. Fortunately for me, I had already won the respect from others in our company (including those on the project and the highest manager of our local office) and she was eventually told to listen and consider what I had to say, and that not doing so would come at a great expense to her.

Ageism happens both ways. And for someone like me who's been doing computers and programming for over half their life, it's painful when managers and higher ups don't trust us or our opinions simply because "well you're young." And not everyone in my peer group is going to be lucky enough to have co-workers and mangers that come to their aide.

Re: Why the new Google Hangouts screws over users | void Fox() Dev Blog

Michael Koby — Mon, 20 May 2013 10:51:04 -0000

I think that this being the first version of Hangouts, we'll see things added back in over time. They were trying to solve a problem, the biggest one being that they had a bunch of somewhat disconnected communication services. Hangouts solves that problem. It creates some new ones sure, but it solves a major problem. And with that problem solved I think we'll see some of the other problems that are still left and some of the new ones created will get resolved over time.

Re: Gun Deaths vs. Gun Ownership

Michael Koby — Sun, 16 Dec 2012 16:51:54 -0000

Incredibly cool. I've grabbed the CSV files as I've been looking for some kind of data to use in learning D3.js.

I also find the resulting graphs interesting.

Re: Jotting Journal: Your New Private Online Journal

Michael Koby — Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:13:03 -0000

Sorry to hear that. However, I have zero intention of changing that, mainly because it's how the payment system I integrate with works. But also, there are plenty of other sites on the internet that follow this practice (for example, Amazon does it for their Prime Memberships).

Re: Ron Paul's Last Speech to Congress: 30+ Strangely Ordered Questions

Michael Koby — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 13:14:21 -0000

"Yeah, because Republicans were just about to pass Obamacare. Or the Civil Rights Act."

Umm, you lose all credibility here, not to mention you show a complete misunderstanding of history. Go back and check again, it wasn't the Democrats that pushed for the civil rights act, it was the Republicans. In fact, it was Democrats that tried to block its passing.

Really, your thought process for much of this was "Ron Paul as a (R) next to his name, therefore he is evil, stupid, and no one should take any of this seriously." Would you be saying any of this if he had a (D) next to his name?

Re: Ron Paul's Last Speech to Congress: 30+ Strangely Ordered Questions

Michael Koby — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 13:02:45 -0000

Seeing how he makes a big deal of individual liberty, I don't understand your question. Or do you mean for "control their own bodies and access to reproductive rights" to act as a stand in for "the government should pay for my birth control and abortions?"

You have the right to abortions (our supreme court says so), no one has ever said you have the right to have them paid for with tax dollars. Same goes for birth control. You have a right to purchase it. No one ever said you have the right to have it paid for with tax dollars. There is a distinct difference between the two.

Individual liberty, which he spends a great deal of the 48 minutes talking about means you'd have the right to abortions and birth control. It doesn't mean someone else pays for them via tax dollars.

Re: louisgray.com: Built Like a Blogger? Lose Weight on the Fitbit Diet.

Michael Koby — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 12:26:28 -0000

Cool post. I have been thinking about getting a FitBit for this exact reason. Being able to see the numbers and beat your own goals seems like a compelling way to exercise and work towards shedding pounds.

I hadn't considered getting the Scale though, now I might rethink that.

Re: Passbook and NFC - Fast Chicken

Michael Koby — Fri, 05 Oct 2012 15:47:06 -0000

If the NFC reader is already there, they just have to turn them on in the POS system (usually a quick update to each POS terminal, that can even be done remotely).

This article states that Passbook is better because the merchants wouldn't need to do as much as they would have to do with NFC, which isn't necessarily the case. If they have the NFC readers but they're not activated that's a simple phone call an update to their system and they can take NFC payments. Passbook requires an iOS app that utilizes it and the merchant's POS system to know how to handle the barcode that gets scanned.

NFC readers at merchants serve a very distinct purpose and with Mastercard & Visa already having their own versions of it, all the "you have to get the banks, credit card companies, etc to all sign off" is almost nonexistent these days. The problem is that either A) The merchant doesn't have them (which would require a new hardware purchse) or B) they have them but they're not turned on or the POS isn't set up to use them if they are turned on. These POS NFC systems have been around for quite a while now.

Currently the NFC readers really only do payments. Where as Passbook could do gift card systems (like Starbucks), store boarding passes, handle loyalty info, and so on. That's not a bad thing but it requires a little more figuring out than an NFC reader on top of the credit card terminal at a merchant.

Now, all that being said. Google is working with making Google Wallet do more than payments, and they've even got some merchants to handle coupons via NFC but those are few and far between. So Google was already looking at doing something like Passbook but through NFC. Will that work? I don't know. But having done NFC to pay for things via Google Wallet on my phone, I really like the idea of not having to pull out my wallet, then pull out a card, to pay for things.

I like the idea that Passbook represents, I think Apple missed an opportunity to help further the mobile payments industry. As NFC payments won't really take off until Apple does it. They have too much of the "smartphone" mindshare (when someone says "smartphone" most people immediately think "iPhone"). That's not to say the iPhone/Passbook won't make use of NFC in the future. But right now I can pay for things with my Galaxy Nexus, Google Wallet, and a merchant with working NFC terminals. I can't really do that with an iPhone unless I'm at a specific vendor that has an app that supports Passbook, and that's a far smaller number than places that take NFC.

Re: Passbook and NFC - Fast Chicken

Michael Koby — Fri, 05 Oct 2012 10:53:24 -0000

While I don't agree with everything the article says, you're not entirely correct either.

1) PayPass isn't everywhere. It's mostly in fast food restaurants and a few places like CVS. And that's in the Houston area (the 4th largest city in the United States).

2) Some places that have NFC readers at their registers don't have them turned on. I experienced this the other night at the grocery store when I tried to pay with Google wallet. The system saw the NFC chip and Google Wallet tried to pay, but the register popped up an error to the clerk saying "RFID reader not operational." If those stores turned on their readers the available NFC merchants would probably close to double overnight (totally a rough estimate based on what I see here in Houston).

What this article fails to take into account is the fact that while bar codes can, in fact, work in more places more easily, the store's Point of Sale system has to be able to understand what that barcode is suppose to do. So one of two things need to happen A) the POS system needs to be updated by the POS system provider (the most common option) B) The store owner needs to be able to the POS system what to do with the barcode on their own (a much less likely option as a lot of merchants aren't tech literate enough to do this). There is a third option, which is the merchant buying new hardware (iPad, iPod Touch, etc) to read the bar codes and use a system that will track that data accordingly.

Compared to NFC which is already set up to work with the POS system, at least for payments (deals and stuff take a little more work), and many stores do already have the readers (even if they aren't turned on), Passbook is nothing more than an app that stores barcodes. And since both require extra work on the merchant side (hence the reason Apple had to "partner" with the initial Passbook integrating merchants), both Passbook and NFC are going to require extra work to see any kind of widespread adoption.

Re: Kindle Serials is the next brick in Amazon’s walled garden

Michael Koby — Wed, 26 Sep 2012 17:32:53 -0000

What I'm saying is that when the new cool device comes out, the regular person won't care too much about it if they can't read they're Kindle library on it. They'll just continue to use their Kindle or buy the newest Kindle.

Regular people don't shop like we do. Geeks and tech people tend to get more upset about such things than regular people. Geeks will buy the device and then complain about it not being able to access/view their Kindle books. Regular people say "I can't read my Kindle books on it? Okay, do you have a new Kindle?"

Re: Kindle Serials is the next brick in Amazon’s walled garden

Michael Koby — Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:43:37 -0000

Really it's all coming down to the idea of silos. Who do you want storing your data. Granted I try to remain as platform agnostic as I can and try to use as many as possible. This avenue gets pricey, but it has some advantages.

People probably don't realize they're locking themselves into a platform. But my question is do regular people care? After giving my 62 year old mother a Kindle last year, she's been in love with it. She doesn't care about platforms, DRM, or any of the other stuff. She just cares that she can check out books from the library and buy new books for the device. Anything else, to her, is secondary to those two things. I don't think non-tech people really care about lock-in or what not. They get a Kindle, they'll always use a Kindle because that's where their books are. They just want to read.

That being said, I think that we as those educated about such matters as vendor lockin, format compatibility, etc should continue to care a great deal and push companies to use cross compatible formats (I'm looking at you Amazon and you're lack of ePub support on your Kindle devices). Because if we care enough, those that don't care will benefit from the results of our caring, and that's a good thing.

Re: Some Thoughts on Apple vs. Samsung

Michael Koby — Sun, 26 Aug 2012 14:30:58 -0000

Actually that's EXACTLY what prior art does. If there's prior art than you're not suppose to get a patent for the thing your patenting because others have already done it.

Just because Apple was the first to file for a patent on something doesn't mean they're suppose to get the patent. Especially if prior art exists. Basically, if there's prior art, you don't get the patent. At least, that's how the patent system is suppose to work.

So yes, I'm focused on the bad patents because this verdict gives them some validation, even though, for some of the patents, prior art exists. And that's a bad precedence to set.

We'll see how it all holds up during the appeals process though.

Re: Some Thoughts on Apple vs. Samsung

Michael Koby — Sun, 26 Aug 2012 13:44:28 -0000

I gave 3 distinct examples of the patents and listed the prior art. That's what prior art is, it means someone did it before hand.

Basically you want to have an argument where you remove the actual argument I'm trying to make. Or you want to simply ignore the argument because you don't believe there's anything wrong with the patent system.

Which is interesting to me, because even some of the more crazy Apple fans will still agree the patent system is broken.

Re: Some Thoughts on Apple vs. Samsung

Michael Koby — Sun, 26 Aug 2012 12:53:25 -0000

I'm not arguing for Samsung's copying. In fact I'm against it.

What I'm saying is that several of the patents involved in the case that Apple has claim to, are either obvious or have plenty of prior art to invalidate them (including their trade dress patents). The 3 examples I gave are all good examples of this argument.

What I'm arguing is that the patent system granted patents it shouldn't have and that this verdict gives credence to those patents, which I think is a bad thing for innovation as people can't do things that "make sense" or are "obvious" because Apple has been granted a patent on the obvious. The clickable phone numbers thing is a great example of this. Skype was doing that with browser plugins for years before the iPhone came out. This is a patent that Apple applied for, was granted (even though prior art existed), and was able to use as part of a court case. That is why this verdict is bad for innovation, it has nothing to do with the copying Samsung did (they dug their own hole with that).

The argument against Samsung's blatant copying is obvious, and Apple actually has a case for that. I never said they didn't. But that's just a small piece of the much larger picture which your comment wants to blatantly ignore. The larger picture and the much more important impact is on the validation of the bad patents. And no, not all of the patents Apple used in the case are bad, obvious, or have prior art, but several of them do.

Re: Do citizens have a ‘right to record’ in the digital age?

Michael Koby — Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:54:31 -0000

I like a lot of what he's trying to say, which is basically "Yes you have these rights, but you have to be careful that while exercising those rights you don't trump someone else's rights."

It's all about balance.

Re: I’m Not Boycotting Apple, But They Have Made Me Angry

Michael Koby — Thu, 05 Jul 2012 15:44:28 -0000

Huh? None of this really made sense, except for maybe your extremely thin "pro-American companies" argument, but even that makes very little sense.

What's being debated here is a SOFTWARE issue, not hardware with that in mind:

1) the software in question here is Android, which is a Google property, Google is an American company.
2) None of Apple's products are manufactured in the US.
3) Most of Google's aren't either (Nexus Q being a notable exception).
4) Apple's use of very thin patents to grant injunctions that hinder competition should never be applauded. Ever. Same goes if the situation was reversed and it was Google getting injunctions.

Re: I’m Not Boycotting Apple, But They Have Made Me Angry

Michael Koby — Thu, 05 Jul 2012 15:40:08 -0000

Generally it's before filing, at least that's my understanding of it. A lawyer might tell you differently.

Unified search wasn't even a new concept in 2000 (when the patent was filed). Also, patents are not suppose to be obtained for logical extensions of existing ideas. So since searching wasn't new in 2000, the idea of unified search is logical extension of search, hence the patent shouldn't have been granted.

That's just one logic road. Point is, software patents are bad (so bad in fact that the EU ruled to abolish them completely). Developers will generally think of doing things in a similar way, hence the reason that software patents weren't really allowed initially. Oracle actually lost a huge court case against Google over patents and API copyrights.

Re: Engadget Giveaway: win a Beats-enabled HTC One X, courtesy of AT&T!

Michael Koby — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 20:46:46 -0000

Why the heck not. I'll take an HTC One X for AT&T. It's even on my carrier :-)

Re: Borders Line: Come See TOMBSTONE At The Alamo With Me This Weekend

Michael Koby — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 17:21:58 -0000

As a person who doesn't really like westerns, I LOVE "Tombstone" and a good friend (who does love westerns) once told me, "well if you're gonna pick one to like, you could do a lot worse than Tombstone." :-)

Re: GeekMom: Comic Book Corner — June 20th, 2012

Michael Koby — Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:52:29 -0000

The basic origin of the Turtles (turtles oozed, mutate, etc) and April (lab assistant) are fairly in tact. It's not an exact copy but the basic elements are there.

It's been a few years since I re-read the original comic run, so I can't get too more specific as to what changed or didn't, I'd need to do a refresh read. But a quick hop over at Wikipedia will probably give you the basics. However, this new series is more in line with the original comics than it is with the shows/movies (though it appears it's using elements of all iterations).

Something else to keep in mind is that the Turtles were originally meant as satire on several comic books, including Daredevil and Miller's Ronin. If you can find the original run in trade, I highly recommend reading it. It's quite good, but it's not nearly as campy as the tv show.

Re: GeekMom: Comic Book Corner — June 20th, 2012

Michael Koby — Wed, 20 Jun 2012 15:59:25 -0000

You can always tell when someone didn't read the original TMNT comics and only know them from the tv show and movies. In the original comics, the turtles all wore red masks, it was the tv show that introduced the ideas of unique color masks for each turtle.

In the new run they eventually go to having their own color. But the all red masks is actually a throwback to the original comic series.

Re: Peter Weller to Voice Batman in Animated Dark Knight Returns

Michael Koby — Wed, 23 May 2012 13:08:15 -0000

Which is really sad, because the Wonder Woman animated movie was REALLY good. The Green Lantern "First Flight" wasn't great, but it wasn't horrible either, and Emerald Knights (the Green Lantern movie animated "anthology" "prequel") was decent as well (I'd argue it was better than First Flight).

I think with the right writers and voice cast they could do something really good with the other characters. That being said, even the worse DC animated movie is still done better than the best Marvel animated movie (Planet Hulk is the only one that's on par with DC's animated stuff).

Re: Markey, EPIC Won’t Let Google Wi-Spy Die

Michael Koby — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 20:25:53 -0000

Ahh, the whole "you're a fan boy" argument.

Which is usually from person who believes "I'm too stupid to take responsibility for my own actions that I require the government to step in to make sure a company takes responsibility for my actions"

Yes I called you stupid, because people with no argument that resort to name calling when someone points out that it's their personal responsibility in securing their data, usually are stupid.

But just to show you I'm a nice guy, I wish you a good day.

Re: Markey, EPIC Won’t Let Google Wi-Spy Die

Michael Koby — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:40:11 -0000

"did not address the applicability of federal wiretap law to Google’s interception"

Huh? Why would it? This was PUBLICLY broadcast-ed data, being broadcasted on PUBLIC frequencies, IN PUBLIC PLACES (where there's a bunch of case law that says you have NO ASSUMED RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN PUBLIC). Just because people using UNECRYPTED wifi weren't educated enough to know to secure their data, doesn't mean that Google is in violation of wiretap laws.

Security is YOUR responsibility, no one elses.

Re: AT&T Cries “We Told You So” on T-Mobile Layoffs

Michael Koby — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 16:52:14 -0000

Didn't AT&T during negotiations with the DOJ and FCC say they wouldn't layoff anyone from T-Mobile for a period of time thus meaning that those jobs would have stuck around beyond now?

Deutsche Telecom as already stated they want out of the US cell business, they stated it before the merger attempt. Anyone with half a brain knew these jobs and T-Mobile as a "competitor to keep AT&T from getting a monopoly" were going away before the merger.

But somehow everyone's going to blame AT&T, make them the bad guy and say "they would have laid off MORE people than this" but you don't actually know that, you're just speculating because it fits in your world view that "AT&T is a giant evil company" and thus that's all you care about.