A few hours ago, the first YouTube debate was held, and the final feeling is that they worked out pretty decently. 39 questions were chosen, and some of the candidates answered well, others went off on their own agenda-driven tangents; in other words, a pretty standard debate, with maybe more of a human face.
The debate opened with this request for candidates to actually answer the questions, but that was probably more wishful thinking. I loved when a YouTuber asked an obvious, direct question, and it was answered with, “I think we need to talk more about [unrelated issue]”. Politicians still don’t realize that anyone can see through those sort of answers. I’m glad the first real question, “How are you going to be any different?” was chosen, because it was one I’d noticed in the lead up to the debate, and I wasn’t the only one.
Some of the questions were too much about or promoting a single candidate, while others were the sorts that should have put the right kind of pressure (”Would you call yourself a liberal?”*). Other questions were about issues that don’t get any mainstream attention (reparations for slavery**), or questions that were too direct for well-coached candidates afraid to make real statements (”Do you support gay marriage?”***). Others were just plain intelligent questions (”Should women register for the draft?”, “Would a woman President be taken seriously by Arab states?”).
All in all, the questions were more of a star than the candidates. Politicians aren’t real people, and they haven’t been for years, and put them opposite real people, and you remember how different the rest of the world is. I enjoyed hearing real people act honest or entertaining more than politicians dance around trying not to offend anyone.
Although, the “turn to the person on your left and say one thing you like and dislike” question was cool. John Edwards didn’t like Hillary’s peach-colored jacket (and no one should; it was strange!)
The obvious answer is “I wish there was something I could do to help that woman”, and the obvious problem is why anyone should be running for President if they think they don’t have the power to help a sick and needy American.
This liveblog says Clinton came off the winner, with more experienced and nuanced answers to questions Obama clearly didn’t have much of an answer for. Obama’s lack of experience is going to be the main issue for as long as he is in this race.
* - Hillary said, “I consider myself a proud modern American progressive, and I think that’s the kind of philosophy and practice that we need to bring back to American politics.”
** - Obama’s not for them, Edwards isn’t for them, Kucinich is for them.
*** - Bill Richardson said that America doesn’t support gay marriage, and that gays have to be patient until the country is ready for it. That’s a courageous and honest statement.
Google has released a special iPhone-formatted version of its search engine. Besides being sized properly for the smaller screen, Ionut Alex explains that it is actually an implementation of Google’s AJAX Search API, and comes with the limitations of that API. You only get eight results (web search, news, and images), and clicking to see more only brings you to the regular sized Google. Plus, the back button probably won’t work. Still, it looks like it works well on a phone.
You’d think the iPhone would launch with a special Google search capability, given Google’s incestuous relationship with Apple. At least, since it uses a public API, anyone else can try their hand at changing the design or adding other API functions, like Custom Search Engines, blog search, and video search (not that any of the video can play on the iPhone).
UPDATE: A Google spokesperson contacted me and clarified that this is not the iPhone version of Google search, but rather a developer demonstration showing how the AJAX search API can be used in iPhone applications:
We actually haven’t launched an iPhone-formatted version of the Google search engine. The page in question is a demo the AJAX Search team created to illustrate how developers might use the AJAX Search API in their own iPhone web apps. It’s not an official interface for Google search. (See the original blog post here: http://googleajaxsearchapi.blogspot.com/2007/07/feed-discovery-api-and-ajax-search-on.html).
Very cool. So, developers can use the API and integrate it into their iPhone apps, and probably even give it a cool iPhone-like UI while they’re at it. That’s all. Of course, you can use the demo page on your iPhone, as long as it is available.
The Washington Post tells of how Google fixed a thorny situation with Google Maps satellite imagery. In June, Google added a collection of high resolution aerial photographs of Washington DC supplied by a government agency. The imagery looked great, but the government had edited out a bunch of areas considered terrorist targets, like The Mall, State Department, George Washington University, and other areas.
Google didn’t want large gaps, especially in areas likely to be searched by its users, so they came up with a good compromise: Wherever there was a censored location, they used the old imagery. Sure, 1/6th of DC is fuzzy, and some areas are out of date (demolished buildings raised from the dead, construction sites that are now finished buildings), but it’s better than no images at all.
I find it hilarious that the Washington Post uses as its expert a young “artistic” cartographer, who is upset about the integrity of the experience.
The older images frustrate cartographer Nikolas Schiller, 26, who takes an artistic approach to mapmaking and is working on an atlas. Schiller, who lives in the U Street area, said that too much of the District is represented using the older photos, diminishing the amount of information — and thrill — that aerial photos can provide.
Doesn’t the complete lack of imagery, the white rectangle’s covering national monuments, provide far less information than five year old fuzzy photos? Actually, he’s sort of right, since Google decided to use the older photos not just for the missing buildings, but for the entire surrounding downtown area. The area is stuck back in 2002, while other parts of the map are a whole lot more recent.
Perhaps it was too difficult to pick out individual buildings and fix them, but that’s surprising giving the huge amounts of work that goes into mapping products like Google Maps and Windows Live Maps. It’s a shame the imagery isn’t as clear or updated as it could be, but what do you expect from a free service?
(via The Raw Feed)
Tonight on CNN at 7 pm Eastern, the first Presidential debate with YouTube-submitted questions will be held. The debate will feature Democratic hopefulls for the 2008 election, and a later debate will feature Republicans candidates on September 17. I can’t find a list, anywhere of which candidates will particiapate, but video of the debate will be on YouTube following the debate tonight.
Take a look at Google Video’s top 100 videos, and you’ll see what appears to be a sea of hardcore pornography. It’s not, but it lets you know how many people are searching Google Video and YouTube for videos of naked women. Video after video features provocative titles like “sex hardcore xxx”, “arab sex”, “Youtube Sex” and “Thong Comes Off”, along with thumbnails that sometimes seem to have been taken mere seconds before some real sexy action starts off.
YouTube is partly to blame for this cluttering of their search results, letting users have too much control over which frame of the video is chosen as the thumbnail. It’s been known for a while which frame gets chosen by the system, and you can also choose from two others if you need to. Look through the top 100, and there are quite a few videos with completely inaccurate thumbnail frames. Why you would make it possible to manipulate the most important SEO portion of the video, I have no idea.
At least one blogger was fooled into thinking that the whole page was filled with hardcore porn. No, real porn gets removed from YouTube; fake porn clutters up the search results and ruins the user experience.
I find it hilarious that Getty Images is the worst obvious offender on the page, using sexy titles to sell stock video.
(via NoPornNorthhampton > Digg)
At least I found this video, which is pretty funny:
The search continues, and it looks like my first guess in Tangiers, the port, was a bad one. Five sightings in the first five days, not exactly a pace that’s going to net me an iPhone.
Anyway, it looks like we’ve gotten into Bourne’s locker, and we need Nayet to descramble a tape found in it. Looks like we’ll need to contact Nayet via IM, just like Godot before. Back to Dater Notes and Nayet’s profile. I’m guessing the saying in his profile is the passphrase, and… I’m right!
Nayet links to a video, which features a not-so-cryptic message. Enter the three words into the Message Transmitter, and you’ve now got two cameras to place. Having still no idea how this works, I chose the port again and the stadium this time.
Fill the comments with hints and tips, and share how you did.
