Poor Jeff Goldblum.

Michael Jackson and Farah Fawcett both died today. Jeff Goldblum did not, although the Twitterverse seems to think otherwise.

So much for all that legitimacy that Twitter picked up during the election unrest in Iran.

***UPDATE***

Jeff addresses his death on the Colbert Report:

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Jeff Goldblum Will Be Missed
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Mark Sanford

Poor Jeff Goldblum.

"Who do you want to tell?"

Remember when Facebook changed their Terms of Service, and everyone complained? Or when Facebook updated the News Feed to be all "twitter-esque" and everyone complained? Well, get ready for the next backlash.
ReadWriteWeb just reported on another update that Facebook announced today, and it's going to be unpopular. In fact, I don't actually understand it.

Here's the deal. When you post a link, status, video, etc on Facebook, you're going to be asked who you want to share it with. Here are your choices:

• Everyone: Anyone, on or off, of Facebook can see it.


• Friends and Networks: People you have confirmed as friends and people in any school or work networks that you've joined can see it.


• Friends of Friends: Anyone who is friends with a friend of yours can see it.


• Friends: Only people you have confirmed as friends can see it.


• Custom: Choose any friend or Friend List to include or exclude from seeing that piece of content

Right now, only users who had their profiles and status updates visible to everyone have been included in this beta release. But it's coming to everyone eventually.

What I don't get (and which isn't addressed in the announcement) is who's seeing these updates. Is it only people who have their profiles set to public? So I can set my updates to be seen by everyone, even if I'm not seeing everyone's updates?

Facebook suggests that you might want to share with everyone your post about how nice the weather is today. I'm asking you not to. Please.

"Who do you want to tell?"

think Google Wave isn't going to be a big deal? (you're wrong)

So I finally watched the really, really long demo (below)...and Wave is hella cool (much cooler than, say...having a 9 inch stick impale your neck and stab you in the lungs).

In a nutshell, Wave is a web application that allows you to build collaborative discussions in real time, in an extremely customizable email/IM/stream format. One of Wave's more ground-breaking functions is that it will facilitate collaborative (and even concurrent) editing and a "playback" feature that will show the chronology of the changes made by everyone involved. It also allows for drag & drop attachments (pictures, links, other waves, etc) and includes neat features like contextual spell-check (which will correct correctly spelled words if they're incorrect for the context of the sentence, like 'two' for 'too').

I'm psyched for it. Although I'm not entirely convinced that it might not be too collaborative. From a user perspective, it seems like there's a risk that information changes too quickly, too publicly. I'm probably just more reclusive then most though.



visual goodness starts roughly at 7:30 (yes...it really is a 2 hour demo)

think Google Wave isn't going to be a big deal? (you're wrong)

Bing - all about the bids.

I decided to test a search campaign on Bing about two weeks ago, to see if this was more than a re-packaged Live Search. I have to admit, Bing is pretty. I like the interface. Search results actually seem more relevant.

Unfortunately, that's where the compliments end.

The most tragic flaw to my campaign, so far, is that I haven't seen an impression yet. Not one. Granted, this is a small campaign, and my bids are low (is it, I may have mentioned...a test).

MSN support has suggested (twice already) that I increase my bids. In fact, they didn't even LOOK at my account before suggesting I give them more money...in the $10+ range. After I responded a second time that no sponsored results are showing up for my keywords when I search on them, they've gone radio silent. Perhaps it's because they were all at Microsoft's Search Summit last week in Washington. Maybe their customer service staff was cut back to help fund the $100 million dollar advertising campaign MSN is running.

I think the most likely answer is that Microsoft has a minimum bid requirement that they don't advertize, which blocks impressions even when no one else is bidding against you.

Anyone know if there's any truth to that?

Bing - all about the bids.

Twitter is still lame.

Making fun if it? Decidedly not so.

Twitter is still lame.

Dear Orthopedic Surgeon,

The next time someone comes to you with complaints of severe localized pain in their legs (which is not resolved with rest) and tells you that they're a runner...please refer them for an MRI. You may find that they have developed stress fractures. What you see may look like the legs below. Notice that the leg on the left is normal, and the one on the right is "all banged up" looking.


You could also give them an x-ray, since you probably have one of those handy machines right in your office. If you do, inspect it carefully, as any injury may not be very noticeable. In which case you might be inclined to tell your patient that he has shin splints. Which doesn't really help anyone, and makes it seem like you received your "specialized training" from a Cracker Jack box.


Certainly don't refer him for a Bone Scan, as nothing but a compound fracture is going to show up. Which might also lead you to tell the patient he has shin splints. Which will result in subsequent unnecessary office visits, which will help keep healthcare costs high, and patient satisfaction at an all time low.

Dear Orthopedic Surgeon,

things you can do with $1500

I accidentally read an article recently in Outside magazine showcasing this summer's sporting "essentials"...a collection of staff picks with obvious advertising origins (there was a full-page Bose sound dock ad a page before one of the editors suggested it was "essential"). I dig subliminal advertising. Even when it's obvious.

What bothered me was that the Senior Editor found it necessary to include his dog in his Fishing Essentials. His $1550 UK chocolate Labrador...breeder website included...length of waiting list included.

The Humane Society estimates that 3-4 million dogs and cats are euthanized in shelters in america every year. Every would-be pet owner that decides to pay a breeder for the privilege of owning a dog helps keep that number where it is by NOT adopting. The objective of this "essentials" article was to encourage the engaged and trusting readership of Outside magazine to take the staff's advice and invest in the products they suggest. Unfortunately, they not only missed an opportunity to make a positive difference in a lot of dogs lives, but they've probably served to increase the demand for bred animals that are already too highly sought after.

I shared my opinion with the editor, but he seemed offended. Sez he has a rescued dog too. Sez they're gonna delve into the issue of "shelter vs breeder" dogs in their new blog. I'd post a link to it here, but it's lame and one sided, and I'm too responsible for that.

Adopt a dog.

things you can do with $1500