I saw something which I think was pretty cool last week. I was walking home from work when an owl caught my eye. It was perched above the front door to a house along University Avenue. It was about 4:45pm and still completely bright outside so I thought this was a bit weird but who am I to argue. I luckily had my camera with me so I snapped a couple of pictures.

This was cool because I think this was the first time I had seen an owl outside of a zoo setting before. The owl sat above the door for a bit the moved on to a wire a couple of houses over before being chased away by a couple of crows.

I hate mail-in rebates. I believe they are a tool which stores uses to swindle more money away from consumers. I believe this for two main reasons. First of all, the main business reason for having mail-in rebates is because a certain percentage of people will simply be too lazy to send them in. This is the person who the sales representative convinces to buy a certain (possibly more expensive) product because of the fact that is you as a consumer jump through some hoops you should get some money back. I have a couple of problems with this, I don't like being made to jump through hoops. There is added cost to me, my time and the cost of producing the required documents (not to mention the stamp on the envelope). For you observant people you may of noticed a couple of sentences back when I said you should get some money back. This brings us to my second problem.

Companies find many many ways to not give you your money back. The number of rebates that get lost in the mail is incredible. I believe they are the most lost type of mail (at least that is what you would have to believe if you take what companies tell you at face value). There seem to be so many processing errors and what not that many many rebates get rejected. Companies use deceptive wording on forms and to explain conditions for granting a rebate that many people who think they are sending all required information are actually sending what companies say is incomplete submissions.

Most people also do not follow up on rebates. If one does not come most people do not even notice and therefore don't complain to anyone (the company, the BBB, other watchdog type bodies). Even many of the people who do remember they did not receive their rebate do nothing about it. It takes almost no time online to find many stories of people not getting rebate, contacting the company and getting no help at all, many times being hung up on. If you frequent any online forums these stories come up far too frequently.

Here is one example of what I am talking about.

Why do people download movies instead of paying to see them in the theater or renting them? One of the reasons given by those who download the movies is because you simply are not given good enough value. Simply put, the movies are not good enough and therefore are not worth the price you are asked to pay in order to see them. While it would be absurd to expect that every movie produced is going to be a huge hit I am starting to see why more and more people seem to have this point of view.

This weekend I watched two movies, beginning with Kingdom of Heaven and then moving on to and War of the Worlds. After completing the first movie I thought I understood the sentiment about not getting good enough value. Kingdom of Heaven is not a good movie and I would not recommend it to just about anyone. The only good thing I can say about the movie is that it has some good morals that fit very well with the world as it is today.

I moved onto War of the Worlds thinking that this one had to be better when the previous. I still can not believe how mistaken I was. There was even less plot, if the randomness of the whole thing can be called a plot at all. The movie concludes leaving one with the feeling that the producers are laughing at you because you were dumb enough to waste two hours of your life watching their garbage. Zero plot, bad acting (the little girl was the best actor / actress in the movie) no reason for being. There is so little story and even less explanation as to why things happen, it is random garbage.

Anyways, neither movie is worth seeing however if they are your only two choices go with Kingdom of Heaven, for as ungood as it is, it is superb when compared to War of the Worlds.

Judging by the number of random link I have accumulated lately it seems like a good time to post some of them. Unlike my other posts containing a list of links, I promise no links to programming or web design stuff this time.

Earth destruction - this is a very funny 'how-to' on destroying the earth. Its long so you may just want to read a bit at a time but it worth going over for a couple of laughs.
Music Backup - a how-to guide on backing up your music collection on your computer using iTunes. This is really cool as it can keep track of new songs you add to your library so that you don't backup the same files multiple times.
Cut arts programs - this is a letter written by someone in the US who is attempting to argue for the reduction of funding for arts programs. They don't have an argument, but if you wanted a bit of insight as to why some people think this way then its worth the read.
Misused Words - there are many sites with very similar lists but I chose this one to list. Some good reminders.
iPod Encyclopedia - if you ever wanted a mobile encyclopedia and you own an iPod then this is for you.
The Guy's Guide to Geek Girls - this would be similar to the Girls Guide to Geek Guys which I have a link to on the links page (in the humor section at the bottom) but from the other perspective.
Random Tech Facts - This is a blog but the person who made it seems to only have used it for one post. Some interesting information although I have not verified any of if.

Slashdot and Digg are both news aggregators that lean strongly towards news from the fields of science and technology. Slashdot has been around for a while Digg is still fairly new. I am going to compare and contrast the two site a bit.

In my daily attempt to somewhat keep up with the news, tech news in particular, I visit a number of different websites including Slashdot and Digg. I have been reading articles on Slashdot for a number of years and greatly enjoy the site. While at times I find that the stream of news can be a bit slow, what is there is normally of above average quality. The way slashdot works is that users submit stories which then go to the moderators. Stories include a short blurb which will contain at least one link as well as a title. The moderators then decide if the story is worth publishing for all to see. If it is deemed worth it can either be posted to the front page or to on of the sub-sections. Front page stories are seen by a much wider audience. Stories which go directly to sub-sections may be less of interest to the general reader so only those who choose to read that section will see it. It is on the sole discretion of the moderator as to what stories are accepted and published and what are rejected. No one ever sees rejected, they disappear into the void.

Digg is a fairly new site that has gained a large following very quickly. It would be considered among the new breed of web 2.0 sites. Digg uses totally user based moderator system. Like Slashdot it is up to the users to submit stories. Users submit a short blurb along with a title. For stories on Digg the title serves as a link back to the original article, you are not allowed to put links in the main body of the submission. I believe this is to try and limit spam to the site. When users submit stories they go into a queue that is visible by everyone. Other users then rate the submission by either 'digging' it or reporting it (as spam or a duplicate story, ...). If a submission gets 'dug' enough (there is some kind of formula that compares the number of diggs a story gets to the number of times it gets reported) then it get promoted to the front page and just like Slashdot front page stories reach a much larger audience. The majority of people who visit both sites will never look beyond the front page.

While I find Digg a useful source of information I find that the quality is far lower then that of Slashdot. Most users seems to be more interested in trying to make sure the story they submit gets into the front page then with making a good submission. Many of the titles are very misleading and lots of the blurbs are simply a sentence or two from the article. As well, lots of submissions link back to personal blogs or sites with very little information. As anyone can post a submission about whatever they want there is a lot more to wade through in order to find things worth reading.

On the other hand because of its moderation style, Digg is able to promote stories to the front page much quicker then Slashdot. This means when certain news comes out you can usually find information linking to it on Digg before you can on Slashdot. As well, Slashdot usually aims to have 10-12 (I think) front page stories a day while on Digg the number of stories depends on whether or not people like them. If there are more stories that people like then there will be more front page stories. Because of this you can find tidbits of information on Digg that you would never see on Slashdot.

In conclusion I think that there is a place for both Slashdot and Digg. Digg seems to attract a slightly younger audience who likes to feel like they are in control while I think Slashdot users are more likely to want to get to the meat of a situation without having to sift through quite as much junk first.