Smartphone apps - Modern day checkbooks

Admit it, you hate them. We all hate them. You know...that guy...that lady...those people who write checks to pay for things. They're always in line. In front of you. They hold up everything, while they write out their archaic little IOU...on paper...with a pen. Sheesh! Get with the times people!

Haven’t they heard of the 21st century? We've leapfrogged past the whole ‘paper or plastic’ payment era and right up to paying with apps on smartphones. And it’s all so much faster, right? Right?! Well…

Our smartphones have become modern day checkbooks. Remember checkbooks? Those over-sized wallets we used to carry? Right… We used them to haul around books of blank IOUs, and we stuffed them to the hilt with miscellany like receipts, reward cards and coupons. Coupons…oh, yeah, those printed bits of tattered paper we spent hours cutting from other printed paper in order to save 10 cents here or 50 cents there. Ugh.

Reward card apps like Key Ring are used to digitally store and access the myriad rewards and membership cards we all are forced to carry. We need these “tokens of good faith” at every grocery store, warehouse club, gas station, restaurant and gym. But why do they make it so much work for we consumers to be customers? Most of us carry a driver’s license and some kind of credit or debit card, which is almost always enough “ID” for gov’t process. So why isn't it good enough for retailers to keep track of and reward me? Why do I have to carry yet another card or fob or thingy?

Apps like Snip Snap will allow you to take pictures of, store, and catalog your coupons digitally on your smartphone. Plus you can download digital copies of other coupons you may not have or may have overlooked. It’s a great concept, but my question to retailers is this: Why use coupons at all? If you’re trying to promote your products or grow your customer loyalty, why not just discount your item price for a week or two? Coupons are a two-fold insult to all consumers, even those who don’t use coupons. Here’s why. 

(climbing on my soapbox...)

Coupons have trained us like Pavlov’s dogs to drool, not at the sound of the bell, but at the thought of saving 50 cents. We spend hours scanning through papers, magazines and online sites, in order to cut, tear out, and in many cases PRINT, scraps of paper. We then pack them around to stores, where we scan them (hopefully) for a few cents off here and there. Using coupons is a giant time-suck that benefits the retailer, not the consumer. Those scraps of paper wind up in the trashcan and then the landfill, which is another fail.

The super-double-whammy comes from the growing “black market” for coupons. This market exists because retailers insist on luring new or continued business with scraps of paper that are intrinsically easy to reproduce. It costs retailers too much money to produce complex coupons that are counterfeit proof resistant and support the back-end infrastructure to secure them. This, in turn, has created coupon fraud police task forces and prosecution teams. Everyone loses with coupons when you get down to the tight federal budgets forced to allocate what little funds they have to dealing with coupon counterfeit abuse. Those funds and personnel could be better used for fighting real crime or putting teachers in classrooms.

And then there’s the multitude of payment apps like Google Wallet or retailer specific payment apps like those used at Starbucks. All of which require a special POS (I mean ‘Point Of Sale’, aka register) equipment…which is often “POS” in its own right, even when it works.

Which brings me back to my original point.

How many times have you been stuck behind someone in line who insists on using an app to look up and scan their rewards card? Scan…scan…scan… And then they have to open another app to look up all their coupons one at a time; opening, searching, scanning, opening, searching, scanning, opening…oh wait, Josh just commented on my Facebook status! Back to my coupon app. Opening, searching, scanning… And lastly, they insist on paying for their purchase with yet another app, and another scan, …wait, scan…scan…scan…scan….beep, there it finally took!

I love my smartphone. I love apps. I love shopping. But I’m not sure they’re all designed to work together. Not yet anyway. The system can be better. It has to be better. Or we might as well go back to writing checks.

Constitutional Rights -or- Lynch Mob Rules

It's been less than 24 hours since Dzhokar Tsarnaev was taken into custody in the Boston area. He was found injured and bloody, hiding in a land-bound boat in some back yard. He was hunted down, literally, by local and federal law enforcement agencies under suspicion of the Boston Marathon bombing. Those of us who are wired and socially connected have been barraged, nay, drowned with Headlines, 'Breaking News!' and page after page of social network outcry and memes, all declaring the judgement, sentencing, guilt and possible arraignment of the suspect.

What happened in Boston was an act of terrorism, no question. The various law enforcement agencies partnered with local citizens and businesses to gather and process tons of photo and video evidence so as to help lead them to suspects. The partnership and immediate outpouring of help was nothing less than heroic. Period.

But what happened to Constitutional Rights in all this?

Don't get me wrong. I am fairly confident the cops are on to the right guy, given his older brother and accomplice went out in a hail of gunfire. But let's not lose sight of due process.

We need to make sure we are honoring the rights and Amendments for which our forefathers died. We need to make sure that we duly process Dzhokar Tsarnaev to the fullest extent of law and in light of Constitutional rights. Nothing less. Which means we cannot so quickly dismiss our Sixth Amendment: The right to a fair and speedy trial of impartial peers.

I'm not defending Tsarnaev, or any other goomba who tries the same shenanigans. No way. I want to make sure he's tried fairly, and IF FOUND GUILTY by a jury of impartial peers, sent away for a long, long time. The problem is with our 24x7 "Breaking Headlines!" and always-connected social networks, all pre-judging his guilt, he has no hope for a fair or impartial jury. Which leaves some "wiggle room" in the eyes of the law to throw out vital evidence and data, and potentially lead to a hung jury...or worse, "innocence." Two words: Oh Jay.

We can't let that happen. Again.

I challenge you to clamor and shout for "Fair, Speedy Trial!" Let's find Tsarnaev guilty beyond the shadow of doubt and get this ugly action put behind us all so we can get on with healing.

Google Glass: Modern Technology Mopeds

We've all see the reports about how Google Glass will come with caveats; Google may 'neuter' any Google Glass that is sold or traded without gaining permission to do so in writing. 

Google has confirmed it is barring current buyers of its Google Glass spectacles from passing them on to somebody else. It’s not clear if the restrictions will still apply once the devices go on general sale.

Here's the question: Other than MIT and Stanford grad students, who's really going to wear these ridiculous things? Seriously.

We've seen articles about how Google Glass will be banned in some businesses and locations, like it's some kind of weapon. I get the privacy concerns, but those places aren't banning cellphones with cameras today. Why, all-of-a-sudden, are they getting concerned with privacy?

I can't imagine anyone in their right mind paying $1500+ for "eye tech" that force-feeds everything directly into your retina...except protection from UV rays. 

Why isn't Google partnering with Ray Ban, Oakley or any designer eye wear vendor? These need to be way more attractive before they will be worn en mass. If Google is ever to monetize this kind of technology they need to make them attractive. Which brings me to my point.

Mark my words: Google Glass will be the Moped of modern technology. Totally fun to ride, but no one wants to be caught in the act.

Credit: Geeks are Sexy, Google

Gay Marriage: Separation of Church & State or Denial from Divorce Court?

Gay rights are an incredibly polarizing topic in our culture. Right now, the Supreme Court of the United States are hearing arguments for and against passing law to allow (or deny) same-sex marriage. This is a monumentous time in our Country's history, for sure.

• Where do you stand on gay marriage and same-sex legal unions?

I'm asking whether it should be legal for two people of the same gender to be legally united in matrimony, just like their differing-sex counterparts, in the eyes of the US government...and the IRS. I'm not asking where your church or faith beliefs stand.

Today, all 50 States allow two same-sex people to date, maintain a romantic relationship and cohabit. They can hold hands in public, go out on dates, shop together, vote, pay taxes, co-borrow on a home, attend church (yes, they really attend church...sshhh) and even share a bedroom. Gasp! They get to do all of the same things that straight people do. What they cannot do in every state is take advantage of the same IRS tax code, share medical benefits, take a common sir name, make death-bed decisions or visit divorce court. Today, these are legal "privileges" for the straight and married.

The decision before the Supreme Court has nothing to do with faith, God, the Bible, or what you and I believe from a religious point of view. This is about life, liberties and the pursuit of happiness. This is the essence of our Constitution, through separation of church and state.

Contrary to popular opinion, there is no official Constitutional Amendment specifically guaranteeing any separation between church (faith, beliefs, houses of worship) and state (government, taxes, state and federal laws). The whole 'separation of church and state' reference was made by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 in his letter to the Danbury Baptist Association as to the importance of the First Amendment: "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State." 

I couldn't agree more.

If you don't agree with same-sex marriage or legal unions, then why not? What do you think the consequence will be? Some opponents to such laws believe there will be a "result in public schools teaching our kids that gay marriage is okay". Similar and stronger statements have been issued by the Roman Catholic Church and Church of Latter Day Saints, among other mainstream faith organizations. My home church, the United Methodist Church of the Resurrection, welcomes any and all who come seeking His word, regardless of sexual orientation, despite the governing organizations (United Methodist Church) decision to not participate in gay marriage ceremonies. But that may change.

There seems to be a lot of deeply faithful people who think our government should protect their tenants of faith through government legislation. This ideology effectively mandates a certain belief system through law. I find such efforts disturbing and frightening. I don't know about you, but I don't want the government telling me what to believe, what faith to have, or how to worship. I don't want a state run church. No one does.

I've heard many people use the logic "The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it." Which is all well and good...if you don't read very much of the Bible. Or, you pick and choose what parts of the Bible you choose to 'believe it' and 'settle it'. The Bible makes far more references to the acceptance of slavery, concubinage, demeaning women, killing children and many other detestable acts, over and above the condemnation of homosexuality. Furthermore, the homosexual acts referenced in the Bible (arguably only five such references exist) have nothing to do with two same-sex people who enter into a committed relationship, and more to do with the cultural norms of the Roman era and how men and boys were hazed and punished, and the sicknesses of immoral communities (which did and DO exist in Biblical times and our modern heterosexual world).

You have every right to believe gay men or lesbian women should not be married in your church. If your church doesn't support gay marriage then they don't have to marry gay people. No argument. It's diverse faiths and beliefs that make our country stronger and a great place to live. But let's not confuse faith practice with legislation of law abiding citizens.

For just a moment, let's take sexual orientation off the table. Let's hold the straight feet to the same fire.

If you think our government should pass laws to protect the "Biblical elements of marriage," then I have to assume you also want repealed any and all laws that recognize marriage outside of the Christian faith. You must certainly want to do away with legal unions based on NO faith, right?

What happens to Jewish, Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu or Wiccan couples? What about atheists and agnostics? What happens to the marriages of myriad soldiers and sailors who have married their sweethearts at the J.O.P. before they ship off to war? All of those marriages are, and always have been, protected and recognized by all 50 States despite not being done in concordance with "Biblical values."

If two straight people, regardless of faith, can be legally married outside of Christian faith values, then this issue really boils down to legislating faith, or an attack on gays. Or both.

The issue confronting the Supreme Court is not about faith, God's will or the Bible. It's about fairness, equality and justice for all citizens. It's about the rights of ALL citizens. It's about being Of the People, By the People and For the People. Notice the word "straight" is not in the last sentence.

Can we really take faith principles out of the picture; WWJD? Faith principle and practice is matter of personal belief, of course. Here's what I believe: Jesus stated in Matthew 22:21: "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's" Jesus made clear His wish to keep faith sacred while still respecting the authority of secular law. As a Christian I try to balance my faith with my patriotism and desire to be a good citizen. I don't see the issue of gay marriage as an affront to my faith or beliefs in any way.

Fair is fair. If we aren't going to make allowances for same-sex marriage, then we should at least adjust all the other laws that benefit one sexual orientation over another. But I'm not hearing any of the Christian conservatives arguing that tax code should be rewritten for straight, married couples and child tax credits negated. I guess some of us have no problems using those extra gay taxes to pay for the schools that our hetero-created children are attending. Even though some of them will "come out" as gay some day when they grow up.

I tremble to think that our country, which was founded on the principals of equality for all citizens despite differences, is so widely divided on this seemingly minor hurdle. If you can't get your head around the equality of gay people being legally united in the eyes of all 50 United States, then maybe it would help you to think about guaranteeing equal access to divorce courts for everyone. :)

Is it just me or do we need to rethink numbers?

It dawned on me this week that we desperately need to revise how we use numbers. The world outside the US has adopted the metric system of weights and measurements. Inside the US we've half adopted the metric system, but still cling to remnants of SAE. Why? Wait...hold that thought.
Then there's the whole time measurement conundrum. We measure time in units of 12 until it's not convenient or precise enough. Calendars have 12 months, our days are broken into 12 hour halves (lets not get into the reasons why important institutions have creatively invented ways to forego the 12 hour clock for a 24 hour time table) and our time measurements are made up of 60 increments. Once those units are not precise enough we break them down into completely different units. Days...28, 30 or 31? Races are measured in minutes, seconds and then 10ths, 100ths or even 1000ths...not divisible by 12. Why?
I'm convinced the tool industry and Timex are behind these long standing and completely wasteful measurement standards. Through their extensive network of lobbyists and hardcore media blitzing we, the unknowing sheeple, continue to buy two sets of tools and myriad time measurement devices.
Lets stand for change.
Step one: The US should get on board with the metric system 100%. Nuff said.
Step two: Lets all rethink this whole time system. Instead of 60 second minutes, 60 minute hours, 24 hour days and variable day months, let's figure out a time keeping system that's easily divisible by 10. Just like the metric system.
Ya,  it will be a huge change. Huge! Calendars, clocks, time zones, watches and even holidays have to be re-invented. Once the dust settles I think we'd all be better off. And it won't hurt that bad to take lunch at 75r units past 52 o'clock.