Tuesday, October 29, 2019

Conflicted ...

I've been saying for some time that I want to record a song or three. And guitar-wise, I've got at least one ready to go.

I want drums. But I don't play drums. I hate the idea of using a drum machine, but I have a little guitar effects processor coming that has one built in, so I guess I can live with using a canned rhythm.

If I want harmonica (probably) and mandolin (maybe), I'm capable of overdubbing those.

But now I'm at the point of making decisions about bass. I haven't played bass since I was a teenager, but I don't think it will be a giant problem. Not planning anything fancy.

Except that it means buying or building a bass.

I have a great suitcase I bought for the specific purpose of using as the body of a stand-up bass with a 2x4 for neck, but I still haven't started on that build.

A "real" bass fiddle is expensive, and my experience is playing electric bass guitar. So that's what I'm thinking of buying.

I'd prefer acoustic/electric, and I'd prefer fretless. But that drives the price up.

So I'm looking at el cheapo electric basses in the $60-90 range, which sounds cheap, and is cheap, but I've watched a number of YouTube reviews of a particular make (Glarry) that indicate it's a good deal for the price.

So now I'm trying to decide between a standard P-Bass (i.e. a clone of the Fender Precision, which is to generic basses what the stratocaster is to generic guitars and is what I played on as a young'un) or the jazz model. I'm leaning toward the jazz ax, as you can do some interesting things based on where you hit the strings in relation to the two widely spaced pickups.

I considered just trying to find an "octave down" pedal and playing bass line on a regular guitar, but it looks like most cheap octave pedals go up, not down. I'd have to spend more money simulating a bass than I would spend buying an actual bass.

Fortunately, I have time to think (and to wait for the value of my cryptocurrency to take another upward spike -- in the last week I've spent about $50 at Amazon using Purse, but have a balance of about $30 more than I started with). I'll be recording the guitar/drum line first in any case. Once I start recording that first song, I expect to spend a week getting it as right as I can get it.

Anyway, opinions on cheap bassitude welcome.

Update: I found a REALLY good deal on the Glarry Jazz ($80 with a 20 watt amp included), so that's on the way. I also got over big-time on a vinyl copy of Woody Guthrie's Dust Bowl Ballads. I put in an offer of $5 on it and was refused, so I just bid on the auction and got it for $3. I guess the guy should have accepted my offer.

Saturday, October 26, 2019

Trump to Receive Award for Acting Like Kamala Harris

And Kamala Harris is boycotting a South Carolina criminal justice forum over it.

Because only Kamala Harris gets to posture as favoring "criminal justice reform" after "decades of celebrating mass incarceration, pushing the death penalty for innocent black Americans, rolling back police accountability measures and racist behavior that puts people’s lives at risk ..."

Something I've Been Meaning to Get Around to and Finally Just Started

I'm going to listen to each and every one of what Rolling Stone considers to be the 500 Greatest Albums of All Time  (here's a convenient list format versus RS's broken up article/review format).

Of course, some of them I've listened to straight through before a bazillion times, and some of those (including their #1, Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band -- a ranking I disagree with) I won't be listening to straight through again as part of this "listening tour" (I'll just check them off).

I'm on #3 (Revolver) at the moment. I had never done a straight play-through of  #2 (the Beach Boys' Pet Sounds) before, did that one last night and it was definitely worth the listening time.

I do find the list generally defective. The Beatles have four of the top 10, Bob Dylan has two. Then again, Dylan has the most albums on the full list (11), to the Beatles' 10. So it's not like he got short shrift in general.

I think I'd have spread the top 10 across 10 different artists (and the top 10 Beatles pick would have been The White Album).

The top 10 choices (one per artist) I agree unreservedly agree with with are that one (it comes it at #10) and the Stones' Exile on Main Street (#7). I think Pet Sounds probably deserves its top 10 placement.

The top two Dylan picks are Highway 61 Revisited (#4) and Blonde on Blonde(#9). I could see one of those making the cut, but I probably would have gone with either The Freewheeling Bob Dylan or Bringing it All Back Home or maybe even Blood on the Tracks. But I can't complain.

Some bands' top showings boggle the mind. You're out of the top 25 before you see any Who, Zeppelin, Doors, or Pink Floyd; and out of the top 50 before any Simon and Garfunkel or Paul Simon solo stuff shows up.

Now that I have that record player I mentioned in an earlier post, I'll be keeping an eye out for vinyl of records on the list. Might even have to print the list out for use at e.g. garage sales, etc.

Friday, October 25, 2019

About Those "Secret" Impeachment Hearings

OK, so far the House "impeachment probe" hearings are "closed." They take place behind closed doors, and only members of the committees conducting them are allowed in.

I prefer complete transparency, and would thus prefer to see each and every hearing held in public and televised on C-SPAN.

Republican politicians pretend that that's what they're all about too.  For example, on Wednesday, a bunch of them tried to achieve "desegregating the Woolworth's lunch counter" optics by crashing a House Intelligence Committe deposition of DoD official Laura Cooper.

I can sympathize, but only so far. They aren't really after transparency, they're after a circus. If the hearings were open, their tune would change to public yawning and urging everyone to move on -- "nothing to see here."

If I had to pick the biggest reason why the initial hearings are closed, it would be this:

If they're closed, the committee chairs and Nancy Pelosi maintain a certain amount of initial control over the narrative instead of handing it over to lunatics like, say, Maxine Waters. That lets them dial down expectations to a certain degree, and also increase suspense.

A secondary reason (one that Democrats have offered up) is that closed hearings make it a smidgen harder for the people being subpoenaed to coordinate their testimonies in advance. Just a smidgen (there's nothing to stop these people from talking to each other), but at least they can't hear what was actually said and prepare their own answers to match.

I Wish I May, I Wish I Might ...

... recommend Wish. If you use the code kvlvtwx at checkout, you get a discount (and I get some store credit).

What is Wish? I'm sure I've mentioned it before, but the short description is "all kinds of stuff, cheap, but it does take a little while to get to you."

It's cheap because the stuff is sold and delivered directly from Asia (usually, but not always, China).

It takes a little while to get to you for the same reason.

I've never bought anything very expensive from Wish, and I'd advise taking a skeptical approach to supposed name brand electronics and so forth with significant price tags.

If you're hung up on "intellectual property," be advised that brand name products might be "counterfeits." I bought some guitar straps for $1 a pop via Wish once. They had a brand name on them indicating a price tag more in the $15-20 range. They were fine straps, and I bought them because I needed guitar straps, not because I cared about the brand, but I'd be lying if I said I was sure they were made by the company whose name appears on them.

Just this morning, I ordered 100 guitar picks. Total price, including shipping (after a coupon code, one of which is almost always available), $1.50.

Actually, $1.00, because 50 cents was a "first person to buy this shirt gets it for 50 cents" deal (if it turns out I wasn't first, I get 50 cents refunded to a Wish account balance to spend on other things.).

I've ordered guitar strings, guitar picks, guitar tools, posters, bicycle lights, etc. from Wish. The products are of varying quality, but I can't say I've ever felt cheated. Tamara's bought earrings, necklaces, knick-knacks, and even a piece of clothing or two, and seems to be satisfied with the quality and price of her purchases.

Tamara uses her phone, I use my desktop computer. One feature of the phone (I'm guessing, since she gets the option and I don't, but I suppose it could be based on purchase history) is that you can save on shipping by having all the stuff in an order sent to a local business and pick it up there, instead of receiving separate packages in your mailbox.

When I want something inexpensive and don't need it this week, I always check Wish before hitting Amazon or whatever. Even paying shipping (as opposed to using my "free" Amazon Prime shipping), I often pay a dollar or two for something that would have cost me ten bucks or more elsewhere.

And while I'm sure there are things you can't find on Wish, I don't know what those things might be. Just about anything I search for, I find (or find something very close to).

Sunday, October 20, 2019

The New McCarthyism ...





I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but I am.




Saturday, October 19, 2019

When Buying Something Cheap Leads to Buying Something More Expensive ...

... it's not always a bad thing.

Gainesville is renowned for its annual "Friends of the Library" sale. Lots and lots of books. Lots of other media, too. Tamara wanted to get there early this morning hoping to beat the crowds. No dice. I'd be surprised if there were fewer than a thousand people in the building by the time we got there. The "express lane" for 20 items or less snaked around the building and my guesstimate of wait time is 20 minutes or so.

I bought a couple of cheap paperback mysteries (I don't have the reading time I used to and like something I can get through in the rare "nothing to do" day, e.g. a power outage) ... and then went to look for Tamara in the CD section.

Which meant going through the record section.

Which meant I ended up spending $3: 25 cents on a 78 rpm of Louis Armstrong's "Blueberry Hill," 25 cents on a Joe Jackson 45 (mostly because I knew Tamara would dig the sleeve), and $2.50 on this:

Four LPs. The Weavers. Flatt and Scruggs. Odetta. Doc Watson. Joan Baez.

All of which I can easily find on YouTube, I'm sure.

But I've been thinking about buying a turntable for a couple of years now. Whenever I hear vinyl being played, it brings back a feeling from my youth that I miss.

My vinyl collection went missing in a divorce 25 years ago. About 400 records, mostly LPs but some select 45s. The original "film can" issue of Public Image Ltd's "Metal Box." A first pressing of the 13th Floor Elevators' "You're Gonna Miss Me." An early pressing of the Stones' "Paint It Black" in the original sleeve. The original "School's Out" by Alice Cooper (the sleeve opened like a school desk and the inner sleeve was a paper pair of panties). Lots of albums by bands no one seems to have heard of in years (for example, three of Divine Horsemen's four albums).

I love vinyl.

Now I have some.

Which means I'm buying a record player.

I've got a bid in at Purse (affiliate link!) to get a substantial discount on a $40 job that, as a bonus, will output the vinyl sound to MP3 on a flash drive. If someone doesn't bite in a timely manner I'll either pay full price (minus the default Purse discount of 5%) or start keeping an eye out at local garage sales.

Wednesday, October 16, 2019

Concerning "Third Rate Politicians"

That's supposedly what President Trump called Nancy Pelosi during a meeting today.

Trump has been elected to office a grand total of one time, by a margin of about 80,000 votes in three states, getting fewer votes than his Democratic opponent nationwide from a population of about 320 million.

Pelosi has been elected to Congress 17 times. She beat her last Republican opponent by more than 230,000 votes -- not in three states, not nationwide, but in one of 435 US House districts with a population, according to the 2010 census, of approximately 700,000. She's also managed to remain at the head of her party's congressional delegation for more than a decade and a half.

Whatever else she may be, Pelosi is a successful politician. If she's "third rate" as a politician, Trump is at best sixth or seventh rate. Just sayin' ...

Monday, October 14, 2019

Polling: "Generic" Doesn't Tell Us Much

A new poll (h/t Taegan Goddard) has Donald Trump running behind a generic Democrat 48%-47%  -- and 51%-37% among independent voters -- for re-election in Ohio.

But after a certain point, Trump won't be running against a generic Democrat, he'll be running against a particular Democrat.

That's important.

Of the voters who are thinking "don't like Trump much, a Democrat might be better next time," some of them already have "as long as that Democrat is or isn't [insert name here]" floating around in the backs of their minds.

Also, once there's a nominee apparent, Trump and Co. will be able to focus their campaign strategy on that particular Democrat. They're already doing that to a degree (Biden is their main bugaboo of choice at the moment), but whichever Democrat they're attacking at any given moment is really more of a proxy for Democrats in general -- a "generic" target, one might say.

Finally there's the question of just how motivated the voters being polled are. It's one thing to say you prefer a generic Democrat when asked. It's another thing entirely to get off your ass cast a vote for a specific Democrat. It's gonna be a little while before we see how good the two major party campaigns' Get Out The Vote games are.

Trump won Ohio by 8.13% in 2016 after a cycle of zig-zagging poll numbers. Third party, independent, and write-in candidates grabbed 4.75% of the vote. As of this moment, it looks to me like he's reasonably well-positioned to win it again, albeit likely by a lower margin.

Is Alan Dershowitz on Trump's Impeachment Response Team?

Dershowitz's supposed version of an old saw:


Saturday, October 12, 2019

The Golden Age of Streaming is Over

I didn't wake up this morning with a powerful urge to watch A Fistful of Dollars, but I did arrive at such an urge via a rambling route that began with news of Robert Forster's death.

I'm sure that I watched it no longer than two years ago on one of the streaming services (I'm pretty sure it was Amazon Prime Video). Wherever it was that I watched it, I know that I didn't pay a premium above and beyond my subscription fee at whatever service I watched it on.

Now if I want to watch it, I have to pay out extra -- rent it, buy it, or add a subscription to STARZ on top of my Amazon Prime. Ditto The Magnificent Seven (the original, not the recent remake), which I last watched "free" a few years ago as well.

That seems to be happening a lot lately.

"That" being: Content formerly available via single-subscription-payment "all you can eat" streaming services moving back behind various "additional payment" walls.

I have some notions as to why that's happening.

Back when Netflix started their streaming service, it was speculative. The owners of older intellectual "property" were happy to license their stuff for peanuts. It's not like VHS/DVD sales of older westerns were bringing in fat stacks. This streaming fad was found money.

Then streaming got popular, as did "no added cost" on-demand video via cable networks.

And since each streaming service (two new big ones now out or coming soon -- Disney and Apple) and cable network wants to be able to offer stuff that can't be found anywhere else, they're bidding up the prices to license all that old stuff and moving it either onto their own services as "exclusives" or completely behind "additional payment" walls.

The same thing happened with cable. First there was basic cable. Then here came HBO for a little more per month. Then "want to watch X? Only on Showtime. Or Cinemax. Etc." With every new entrant, one of two things happened -- you forked over a little more, or you got a little less.

Looks like we're getting back to that way of doing things.

Netflix and Amazon saw it coming. That's why they started producing their own content and working out the "add channels" deals. The value proposition for subscription-based streaming is changing from "bazillions of movies and TV shows you remember and would like to see again for one flat price" to "you can only see Bill Burr's latest stand-up special on Netflix, and Bosch is just for Amazon Prime subscribers."

Personally, I have no intention of adding any more streaming services, or buying any premium channel add-ons to the ones I have. I've got Netflix and Amazon Prime, and occasionally consider dropping the former (Prime has the advantage of offering other benefits). My household also has Hulu, which I'm not interested in and which my wife pays for because I won't.

I suppose I might change out one of those services for another if one of the old ones starts sucking and a new one looks better. But I never really fell for the cable TV version of this trend, and don't plan to fall for the streaming version either. The few times over the last few decades when I've taken an "add HBO free or for only $X/month for Y months" (basically when I've moved and changed cable providers), I canceled when the free or cheap deal ended because the added value seemed like a fraction of the added price.

I guess I'll either go back to not watching as many different things on a whim, or buy a DVD player (my last one died years ago) and let my whims be driven by 50 cent garage sale / thrift store finds.

Friday, October 11, 2019

My 2020 Presidential Election Projection as of October 11, 2019

Not that anything's changed lately. I'm waiting to see what the impeachment show does to the polling over time before making any major changes. Here's the electoral map as I see it at this moment:

And here's Taegan Goddard's current projection (see the original page for the sources he's relying on):

One reason for this post is to remind myself to use that interactive map function from now on.

The differences between Goddard's projection and mine:

  • He has Arizona, Iowa, and North Carolina as toss-ups. I still have them going to Trump as they did in 2016.
  • He has Wisconsin and Michigan as toss-ups. I have them going to the Democratic candidate rather than to Trump as they did in 2016, and my confidence in that prediction is in excess of 99% for Wisconsin and in excess of 90% for Michigan.
As to where I think I might just be wrong:

  • Arizona made my initial "watch this state" cut several months ago as a prime state for change on both of two criteria: Trump won the state by less than 5% and third party/independent candidates polled more than 5% in 2016. Also (not among my "watch this state" criteria), in the 2018 midterms Democrat Kyrsten Sinema beat Republican Martha McSally to replace Republican Jeff Flake in the US Senate, and Democrats picked up a US House seat as well. My gut feeling is that Arizona still goes for Trump again, but I might move it into toss-up territory soon.
  • North Carolina only met one of my two "watch this state" criteria -- Trump won by less than 5% (3.66%), but third party/independent candidates only hit about 4%. That more than covered "the balance of power" but  there's a "base" third party vote that isn't up for grabs. Net in-migration (mostly from from "bluer" states -- advantage Democrats) also seems to be decreasing and I suspect that culture war considerations (advantage Trump) will keep the state red.
  • I'm not married to the idea of Iowa staying red. It might make the "toss-up" list next time around, especially if Trump keeps screwing the farmers with his trade wars.

Monday, October 07, 2019

File Under "It Can't Be Both"

From the dust-up over Houston Rockets general manager Daryl Morey's Hong Kong tweet ...

"Chinese citizens stand united when it comes to the territorial integrity of China and the country’s sovereignty over her homeland. This issue is non-negotiable," [Brooklyn Nets owner and Alibaba co-founder Joe Tsai] said as he outlined the problem with supporting what he described as a "separatist movement" in Hong Kong.

If Chinese citizens stand united on territorial integrity/sovereignty (if that's defined as including Hong Kong), there's not a separatist movement.

If there's a separatist movement, Chinese citizens don't stand united on territorial integrity/sovereignty (if that's defined as including Hong Kong).

Pick one, Joe.

Oh, Come ON

After one story popped up in my RSS feed this morning, I went to do a search and take a count. No fewer than 12 stories total.

Everyone's outraged. Everyone's upset.

OK, well, not everyone. Just everyone without, you know, a life or anything like that.

What are they upset about?

A song. In a movie.

The song's been used in movies before. And in video games. And to rile crowds at large sporting events.

But now the guy's in prison in Vietnam for raping kids, so a song of his from nearly half a century ago must go down the memory hole.

It's only Monday, but that's an instant front-runner for Dumbest Thing KN@PPSTER Will Read This Week.

Sunday, October 06, 2019

A Couple of Brief Notes on the "Why Hasn't There Been a Vote Yet? Gotcha!" Impeachment Stuff

I'm seeing, in various places, a claim (implicit or explicit) and a supposed "gotcha" question about impeachment.

The claim: The House has to vote to "open an impeachment inquiry" in order to have one.

That claim is incorrect.

Article I, Section 5 of the US Constitution specifies that "Each House [of Congress] may determine the rules of its proceedings."

There's neither any constitutional provision, nor any statute, nor any House rule requiring a vote of the House to "open an impeachment inquiry." It's been done before, but as a practical matter if the Speaker of the House announces an impeachment inquiry and the relevant committees (all of them controlled by, and chaired by, the Speaker's party) start, um, inquiring,  the inquiry is a fact.

The only way I can see around that is if a majority of the House supported some kind of parliamentary appeal to require a vote to make it official.

The supposed "gotcha" question relates to congressional votes either of the "open an inquiry" sort or of the "the SOB is hereby impeached" sort, and amounts to "well, if Pelosi has the votes, why haven't the votes been taken yet?

Pelosi announced the "inquiry" on September 24.  Congress has only been in session for three days since then, and won't be back until October 15. There are committees doing stuff, but the House as a whole has "district work periods" (i.e. "go home and campaign") until October 12, plus weekends and a federal holiday on October 14.

They aren't voting on anything right now because they're not there to vote on anything. And presumably there's at least some lag time between announcement of an "inquiry" and the production of actual articles of impeachment to vote on.

And Then There Was One

Ginger Baker has died.


I Just Don't Get the Value Proposition

Herewith, an anonymized and truncated version of a recent conversation:

FRIEND: My computer is f*cking up again.


FRIEND: Yeah, after years of you saying that, I think I may just go that way.

ME: Here's a link to one for like $65 on NewEgg that's probably the same one I'm using as my laptop. My two work computers together, both Chromebooks (I rigged up a Chromebook the screen went out on to use as my desktop machine) came to, I think, less than $200 altogether.

FRIEND: I'm going to buy mine from Best Buy. That way it's covered under my Geek Squad subscription. [Note: My read is that a Geek Squad subscription covers machines not bought from Best Buy]

Yes, I've heard of Geek Squad, seen their vehicles driving around town, had a vague idea of what they do, etc. But this made me go have a look at what they offer.

Basically, they charge, every year, about the price of a budget Windows PC (or a pretty good Chromebook) to talk you through un-f*cking your machine, or remotely unf*ck your machine, when Windows/MacOS and/or proprietary Windows/MacOS software f*cks your machine up.

I guess they would do the same thing for Chromebooks/Chromeboxes if Chromebooks/Chromeboxes had such problems, but I've never experienced such problems with a Chromebook/Chromebox.

Non-remote stuff, where they have to come out to your house and get on the machine, costs extra (and ain't cheap). Hardware repairs/replacements not included so far as I can tell (and that makes sense -- you're paying for time/expertise, not physical stuff).

I don't see how that kind of offering makes any financial sense for the average consumer who's even remotely computer-literate.

I also don't see how a Windows or MacOS machine makes any sense versus a Chromebook/Chromebox for the average consumer, computer-literate or not.

In fact, I'd say that Windows/MacOS = injury, and Geek Squad = added insult.

Thursday, October 03, 2019

Good TV Times ...

My 18-year-old has never been much for parking in front of a screen he doesn't have control over for any period of time. It's not an attention deficit disorder. He's quite capable of focusing intently and for hours at a time on a coding problem or a game. But as for TV, his life-long engagement level has mostly been walking through the room, pausing for a minute or two, coming up with a creative insult regarding the writers/actors/cinematographers, and going back to something else.

Which, overall, doesn't strike me as entirely unhealthy.

But recently he got sucked in to Tamara and I binge-watching House, MD. One, two, or three episodes nearly every night.

We watched the series finale last week, then Tamara traveled and we did some emailing back and forth on what we might offer him next. It's not TV as such, but the idea of him actually spending an hour or two a day hanging with us, that's the goal.

But TV it is: Breaking Bad. After the quality of insults he came up with the first time we watched the series, I was doubtful that it would capture his interest. But we watched the first two episodes last night and he would have watched a third if I hadn't needed to go to bed.


What if Trump WANTS to be Removed?

If Donald Trump is impeached, he will be the 13th president subjected to US House impeachment probes and/or the introduction of articles of impeachment in the House, and the third to actually be impeached. If he resigns before the House votes on impeachment, he'll be the second president to have done that.

My impression is that Trump doesn't like being second, third, or 13th at anything. He likes to be -- or at least appear to be -- first at everything.

In this situation, the only thing he could possibly place first in is "convicted by the US Senate after impeachment by the US House."

What if that's what he's angling for?

Tuesday, October 01, 2019

Thanks For Asking! -- 10/01/19

I'm really, really, really trying to get in the habit of posting an AMA thread once a month, and the first day of the month seems like the best day to do that. So, thanks to our sponsor, Free Pony Express ...

... ask me anything. I'll answer either in the comment thread below this post or somewhere else (if somewhere else, I'll point you to the answer via comment).

Let'er rip.

A Modest Proposal for Reform of Post-Impeachment Trials

On one hand, the impeachment process is not a "criminal prosecution."

On the other hand, it shares certain features with the US "justice" system. When considering impeachment, the House of Representatives acts, pretty much, as a grand jury. And after impeachment, a "trial" is held with the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court presiding and the Senate acting as a "jury."

If I hear that a grand jury is considering indicting someone for (for example) murder, and I run around yelling (or even just telling my friends) that the guy is guilty or innocent and should or shouldn't be indicted, I think it's reasonable to not seat me on the jury if he is indicted.

So I think the Constitution should be amended to add two features to the Senate "trial" --

  1. Conviction on a 2/3 vote of Senators actually voting, not of the whole Senate; and
  2. A "voir dire" process in which any Senator who can be shown to have expressed an opinion in favor of or against the impeachment is excused/excluded from the "jury duty."

Platform Committe: There's an App for That

You heard it here first:

On January 14, I announced my candidacy for the Libertarian Party's 2020 platform committee.

This morning, I received an email informing me that the Libertarian National Committee is seeking applicants for that committee. My application as filed (with one typo correction -- I left an "s" out of "accessible" and feel really bad about it) appears at the very bottom of this post.

How You Can Help:
  • If you believe I belong on the committee, contact your LNC officers, at-large representatives, and regional representatives to recommend me.
  • If I'm selected, I'll be back to ask for your help getting to the in-person meetings and the national convention ... and regardless of what amount or form (I've slept on couches before and am willing to again), I'll do what I have to do to show up for those things.

And now, the aforementioned application ...

How long have you been a dues paying member of National?
I don't remember -- since at least 2015, but also at times for 20 years before that
Are you involved with your state or local party? How so?

When I lived in Missouri (until 2012), I served as a local party committee member (and sometimes officer, up to and including county chair), served on the state committee, and on the state executive committee, and ran for city council, school board, state legislature, and Congress as a Libertarian, and was appointed to a federal position (draft board) as a Missouri Libertarian.

These days, living in Florida, I am older, fatter, poorer, busier, and not as physically outgoing. I served on the Libertarian Party of Florida's rules committee in 2016, but since then haven't done much in terms of activism (I am also a dues-paying member of the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania).
Have you ever served on a similar committee before? Do you have any reports or finished products you can refer the LNC to? What are your specific qualifications to serve on this particular committee?
I served on the national platform committee (as appointed by the Libertarian Party of Florida) in 2018, so I'll refer the LNC to that committee's report.

I'll also boast that I initially drafted, proposed, helped hone, and advocated for the first amendment to the platform that the 2018 national convention considered and passed (to section 3.4, Free Trade and Migration).

As for specific qualifications, there's that past committee service, a term on the Judicial Committee in the early 2000s, and more than 20 years of party activism including seven national conventions as a delegate. I'm also, by occupation, immersed in the political news cycle with an ear toward issues that are trending such that they deserve attention in the party's biennial reconsideration of its platform.
What changes, if any, are you interested in proposing (please submit a sample proposed change).
2.11 Labor Markets

Delete the phrase "and these contracts should not be encumbered by government-mandated benefits or social engineering" in the first sentence of the plank.

As a platform committee member, my emphasis has been and will continue to be on making the platform continually more clear, understandable and concise rather than proposing substantive changes. This does not mean I OPPOSE substantive changes as such (I don't), just that I mostly look for ways to make the platform more readable/understandable/accessible to the voting public.
Have you read the Statement of Principles? Do you agree with it?
Yes, I've read it many times and I agree with it completely.
Will you commit to show up and actively participate in committee email discussions and any in-person meetings?
Yes (I attended all online meetings and in-person meetings of the 2018 platform committee).
Which national conventions have you attended?
2000, 2002, 2004, 2008, 2010, 2016, 2018
Please give a brief (a few sentences) summary of your understanding of Libertarian philosophy.
I understand Libertarian philosophy as rooted in the constraint of non-aggression. That is, no one (including government actors) has a right to initiate the use of force against another, and those against whom force is initiated are entitled by right to defend themselves. Society and politics, under libertarian philosophy, must be governed by consensual relations and personal responsibility in every area.
(optional) What is your position on committee transparency (should all meetings and emails be open to observation by Party members or should there be limitations)?
I support 100% transparency. Committee email lists should be archived in viewable form online, and committee meetings (online or in person) should be open for viewing/attendance by party members.
(optional) What are some of your most important accomplishments?
My most important personal accomplishments are my kids :)

Occupationally, I'm inordinately proud of things I accomplished in the Marine Corps, of the fact that mainstream newspapers and non-libertarian political publications publish my libertarian op-eds more than 1,000 times per year, and that I'm the publisher of the oldest daily libertarian news/commentary roundup on the Internet (founded in 1991).

Vis a vis the Libertarian Party, I am proud of my own campaigns for public office and my appointment by President George W. Bush to the Selective Service System in 2004, but more so of the party work I've done at all levels and of the campaigns I've worked on (to name two, the WINNING campaign of my wife, Tamara Millay, for local office in 2004 and serving as media coordinator for Michael Badnarik's post-nomination 2004 presidential campaign).
(optional) What kind of people annoy you the most, and how do you deal with them?
Parliamentarians. I fight them when I think they're wrong and work within the strictures of their rulings when I lose.

Also, Yankees fans.

Facebook: Is it Just Me, or ...

... could it be my machine or my browser?

For the last couple of weeks, Facebook has loaded/operated like a snail with a stomach ache. The time from pointing my browser at it to the page being fully loaded (including whatever "dynamic content" it pulls up) has gone from a few seconds to more than half a minute on a good day.

It's not my connection (other sites load fine and I've messed with e.g. DNS, switching from my usual Cloudflare to Google servers and "automatic" to see if anything changes).

So far as I can tell, that leaves three possibilities.

One is my machine. I switched from an aging Chromebox to a newer Chromebook as my desktop machine a few weeks ago. But the Chromebook should be, and so far as I can tell is, faster than the old Chromebox, and the problems did not start at the same time as the switch.

Another is my browser. There have been at least a couple of recent ChromeOS updates. But if that's the problem, it doesn't seem to be affecting anything but Facebook. I haven't added any new browser extensions recently either.

The final one is Facebook itself. I don't watch the site closely enough to have noticed if they'pre adding a bunch of crap to it that might slow down site loading.

Anyone else having (recently discovered) problems with Facebook? Anyone else have a clue as to what's causing them?

I've resisted giving up Facebook because I happen to like a lot of its features and since my privacy went in the shitter as soon as I joined the Google ecosystem anyway. But I'm at the point of giving up on it because it's getting hard to use.

Three Column Modification courtesy of The Blogger Guide
Some graphics and styles ported from a previous theme by Jenny Giannopoulou