Sometimes, I wonder what I typed to deserve certain targeted ads in Gmail.

Like, for example, Banana Guard.

Get ready for bumpy dollars!

WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. discriminates against blind people by printing paper money that makes it impossible for them to distinguish among the bills' varying values, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.

The ruling upholds a decision by a lower court in 2006. It could force the Treasury Department to redesign its money. Suggested changes have ranged from making bills different sizes to printing them with raised markings.

I presume that the wallet industry will lobby for different sized bills so that it can sell millions of "new currency compliant" models. Hope that they go with raised numbering or imprints instead.

Full article from AP.

In other news, a 2400 pound Boar was seen soaring majestically over Washington, DC

A former Ku Klux Klansman, who filibustered the 1964 Civil Rights Act on the floor of the US Senate, has just endorsed a black candidate for President of the United States.

Bit o' Lit

Walking down the street in DC today, I came across one of those newspaper vending machines (of which there seem to be thousands per block). This one caught my eye. It was labeled "Bit o' Lit" and contained free booklets with excerpts from published books.

What a grand idea. So many commuters read a paper (or something, anything, to avoid making eye contact with other passengers!!) on the Metro trains and buses. Why not spend that time reading a bit o' lit? Writers get more exposure for their works, publishers can expect to see some increased sales if the excerpts are enticing enough, and we get a more literate society.

I also noticed on their website that they [plan to] hand out the latest issue in and around Metro stations each Monday. I hope it catches on!

Tip: Get off the junk mail lists

From someone who spent a significant portion of his career sending junk mail, here are a couple of tips.

You can have your name blocked from "pre-screened" credit card offers by calling 1-888-5-OPT-OUT or visit the Opt Out website here. Note, this doesn't mean you won't get any credit card offers, but it should cut the volume dramatically. That's because it's much more cost-effective for credit card companies to send mail to people who've been pre-screened. For one thing, it means they aren't wasting time and resources sending mail to a list where ~40% of applicants might get rejected for the card they are peddling. For another, pre-screened offers typically have higher response rates overall. So you might still get a handful of offers, but they'll be a general "invitation to apply", not a pre-approved offer, and the volume should be a fraction of what you'd otherwise receive.

NOTE: The day I found out that I was being laid off from a credit card company, Opt Out was one of the first things I did. Until that point, as an industry "insider", I wanted to get as many offers as I could to see what the competition was up to.

Tip number two: 41pounds.org. They are a non-profit, and they take their name from the amount of junk mail that an average American receives in a year. For $41, they'll get - and keep, for five years - your name and address off the mail lists for

...most common junk mail such as credit card offers, coupon mailers, sweepstakes entries, magazine offers and insurance promotions, as well as any catalogs you specify.

 It's not free, but for less than $10 a year, you can save yourself some hassles, save some trees, and honestly, save some direct mail companies the wasted expense of mailing you stuff that's going straight into your recycle bin anyway.

PS - if there's anyone left who hasn't signed up for the Do Not Call list, do that too!

What's right, and what's wrong, with the internet

That's an awfully broad title up there, and I don't intend to address it very thoroughly here. But I have one example that occurred today that illustrated a little bit of both sides of that argument.

There's a construction site that I pass daily, at the corner of Backlick Road and Old Keene Mill Road, abutting the Amherst Avenue bridge in Springfield. It's a mixed retail area, with some adjacent blocks in desperate need of redevelopment. In recent weeks, masonry and steel framing have sprung up on the construction site very rapidly, but there's no sign acknowledging what's being built. I'd heard rumors (can't remember where) of a new Marriott hotel, but the framing that's up so far seems to suggest retail to my untrained eye.

So where did I turn? To the internet, of course. (Is there still a physical world that exists somewhere, or do we all exist exclusively online now?) I started out with two relevant browser tabs open: Fairfax County's list of zoning permits by street address, and Google Maps. I used the latter to figure out the approximate street address of the construction site.

Fairly quickly, I uncovered the truth. It is, indeed, being developed as a new six-story hotel. A quick Google of the street address turned up several yellow page listings for a Residence Inn by Marriott at that address. So I guess it's true - hotel to be there soon.

Clearly, this illustrates what's RIGHT with the internet. Only took a few minutes to discover what's going on at the construction site.

So what's WRONG? In short: why wasn't there a mash-up?

A big part of government's role in a free society is informing the citizenry of changes that might impact them, and giving them a chance to weigh in (when appropriate) on those proposed changes. That's why there are zoning commissions and public hearings on projects that impact a neighborhood, like this example. The problem is that we're still using 1800's techniques to manage the government-citizen relationship: public notices of building proposals, in-person hearings, etc. The fact that zoning notices have moved from the newspaper to the web is a very small start, but we can do better.

It's time for public municipalities to get with it. In return for my tax dollars, I expect to be kept well-informed of what's going on in my neighborhood, and appraised of opportunities to weigh in on proposals that might impact me or my neighbors. The tools are out there, and many of the best ones are free. I should be able to pull up a map of my neighborhood/town/county, with all current or proposed development plans highlighted and linked to details. I should be able to add county events like parades and meetings to my Google Calendar.

I already get county-generated emails about this type of thing, but they contain cryptic proposal numbers and zoning terms I don't understand. Isn't transparency supposed to be a good thing? Isn't it good to have an informed citizenry? I'm sure the developers love the way it is now; hardly any neighbors even know where to start to get their opinions heard by the relevant decision-makers. But citizens are the constituents of government, and they want to be informed. It's time for government to publish relevant information for citizens in the format that's easiest for them to digest.

By the way, I'm not upset about the hotel construction. It'll be the closest hotel to my house, walkable if not exactly a stone's throw.

Circles colliding

I'm sure many of you are familiar with that phrase. We've all had it happen: you're at a business lunch, and run into your roommate and a few buddies. Or you're on a date, and your ex is seated at the next table.

For the most part, it was rare, and when it did occur, often intentional. I'd generally make plans with one group of friends or another, or perhaps host a party (OK, more likely a BBQ) where I've invited several of my circles and I spend a lot of time introducing people. Because those situations are planned, they're generally pretty safe. For instance, if your boss is there, you might refrain from kvetching about work to your buddies as you otherwise might.

In the age of Social Networking, however, it's much harder to keep your circles separate. I have Facebook friends from elementary school, high school, college, work, old jobs, summer programs, and so forth. When I update my status on Facebook, they can all see it. Makes you think twice before changing your status to "can't wait for 5:00!" on a Friday when the guy in the office next door - or even your boss - might see that in their Facebook news feed. (And no, that doesn't mean your boss is on Facebook during the workday - s/he might see it the next time they login, whenever that might be, even if you've since changed your status again.)

At the moment, this very blog is linked from my Facebook profile. I want to share it. It's optional reading, for sure, but I'd welcome my friends to get the peek into my life that is available here on Flippish. Does that limit my choice of topics? Perhaps. Should it? That's another matter.

In the old world, context was everything. You could kvetch about work to your friend or neighbor. Everybody did that, including your boss. But make that same snide remark in the office, and it's scandalous.

So here's the issue (took me long enough!)... living in a world where circles collide and overlap via Facebook, personal blogs, etc., it's entirely likely that any snide remarks you make about a person or a job will eventually find their way to that person or your employer.

Is that a good thing, or a bad thing? Will it make us all start to clam up in reaction to all this open information flow? Or will it teach us all to be a bit more diplomatic, a bit more honest, and a bit more tactful in expressing ourselves?