Ahh Columbus Day

I’ve never understood why Columbus Day is still a holiday. Despite growing evidence that Columbus wasn’t the first to discover America, there’s even better reasons to stop celebrating this holiday.

First of all, he didn’t land in what we currently call America. In his efforts to find the Indies, Columbus mistakenly ended up discovering the Carribean Islands and Mexico. In fact, it’s his flawed navigational skills that gave us the term “Indian.”

Believe it or not, Columbus actually made 4 voyages to the western world. In his first voyage he basically discovered Cuba. On his second he explored more of the Caribbean islands. His third voyage took him to Trinidad, and his fourth voyage landed him in Mexico’s Yucatan Peninsula. Some high school text books fail to mention this. All high school text books fail to mention what follows:

It was here in the Yucatan Peninsula that Christopher left his mark on the world. Inspired by the Mayan riches, it wasn’t long before he started looting. Determined that there must be vast riches, Columbus enslaved the newly labeled “Indians” and sent them off into the desert digging for gold. Those who came back empty handed were accused of stealing and had their hands chopped off. Ironically, this actually caused many to steal gold to give to Columbus.

Recapping, Columbus gets lost, discovers a place that others had already discovered, steals everything in sight, rapes and mutilates the locals, then gets his own national holiday! It’s the modern day equivalent of somebody breaking into your house, telling you he lives there now, kicking you out, raping your wife, and murdering your children.

Maybe I’m just jealous that some of my friends get to have gourmet cookies delivered and celebrate at home while I have to work.

Note: I originally posted this on Oct 7, 2007 on a much different version of dotCULT- but felt like updating it.

October 10th, 2011

OMG, Hank Williams Said Hitler!

Hank Williams Jr said the word Hitler on TV. What’s the big deal?

Watch the video below, then tell me if you think it’s as bad as the media is making it out to be. Also, pay attention to the TV anchors. They seem to completely stop listening to what he’s saying after he says the word Hitler and focus in on that.

I don’t think Bocephus was comparing Obama to Hitler or saying anything like that. I think he was simply referring to the absurdity of two people who hate each other golfing together as some sort of political propoganda. He was saying it didn’t make any sense and used a Hitler example to show how absurd it was. (He’s right – we all knew it was simply for show.)

Why is this even an event? Hitler did terrible things, but I think this reference was fair. Hitler was one of the most hated men in the world. That’s why it would be ridiculous for Netanyahu to golf with him – almost as ridiculous as it was for Boehner to golf with Obama. They’re also political enemies – just not as extreme as Hank’s example. (I wonder how many of the TV personalities there know who Netanyahu is? I’m pretty sure most Fox viewers don’t.)

What do you expect when you let Hank Williams talk about Politics?

But seriously, it’s Fox News! Have you ever watched Fox News? At least 3 different people per day compare Obama to Hitler on Fox. It’s part of their standard programming. Glenn Beck wouldn’t have a career if not for Nazi references.

There’s no story here. Some better stories would be “who the hell at Fox News thinks letting Hank Williams talk about politics is a good idea.” and “what happened to jourmalists who actually listen to what their guests are saying?”

TL;DR Hank Williams said “hitler.” He didn’t say Obama was Hitler. Everybody over-reacted. It’s even more hilarious that it happened on Fox because Fox calls Obama hitler on a daily basis. ESPN should bring him back for MNF – especially for the Detroit game (yes I’m biased.)

3 comments October 4th, 2011

Are Hockey Rule Changes Causing More Concussions?

Concussions are a problem in all sports, and Sidney Crosby has vaulted the NHL to the top of the player safety discussions. But what’s causing all of the concussions and why are so many happening now as opposed to back when players didn’t even wear helmets?

I’d like to switch gears from SEO and examine some potential causes of the increase in concussions – specifically whether or not the recent rule changes are responsible and what can be done to reduce the amount of concussions in Hockey.

First we need to figure out if we’re really seeing more concussions in the game of if we’re just getting better at diagnosing head injuries that we couldn’t several years ago. That’s a very sound theory and it could have lots of truth – but even if it is true it still presents a problem: Diagnosed or not, the concussions are still happening and it’s in everybody’s best interest to prevent them.

I’d like to take a look at some of Bettman’s asinine screw ups rule changes and see if they could have an effect. Specifically I want to examine the following rule changes:

1. Removal of the redline and 2 line pass
2. The trapezoid behind the net
3. Obstruction penalties

Let’s start with the Trapezoid Rule that doesn’t let goalies play the puck behind the net. I know what you’re saying, “how can that have anything to do with head injuries.” If you’ve ever played defense in a check hockey league though, you’ll instantly get it.

If the goalie can’t play the puck behind the net on dump ins (usually a dump and chase situation) somebody else has to. That somebody is the defenseman. The problem is, it’s a dump in. So while he’s attempting to play the puck, there’s an opposing forward getting a 90-foot head start to drive him into the boards as soon as he does. When the goalie could play it, he wouldn’t get hit. That D man is fair game though, and over the course of the season blueliners have taken way more hits than necessary. Those hits are hard and add up quickly.

So what about the removal of the red line and 2 line pass? The goal here was to speed up the game (not the running time, but the actual pace of play,) let players skate more, and increase scoring.) It’s done that. But when you have players moving a lot faster through the neutral zone it means the hits get that much harder too. It’s simple F=MA math. Players moving faster with more room generate more force.

The same goes for obstruction. Let’s go back to our dump and chase play above. In the early 90’s your forwards would slow up those oncoming checkers by getting in their way. Now, that’s a penalty called obstruction. Prior to 1995 if you got to the ice in front of somebody first, you were entitled to it. It doesn’t work that way anymore and it’s adding to the faster players hit harder issue.

Note: While not technically a rule change, the NHL’s attempt to discourage fighting has left players without fear of consequence for head hits, also adding to the issue

But it’s not just rules, equipment plays a role too.

I’m going to make this next point as concrete as possible.

If anything, there’s a huge part of the problem in itself. In football shoulder pads are weapons. In Hockey, they started out as protection but quickly turned into weapons. I’m willing to bet if everybody went back to the old Coopers (which they still make today) then I’m sure we’d see a drastic decrease in head injuries.

I don’t think there’s one single cause contributing to concussions in the NHL (unless you count Gary Bettman as that single cause) but I do thin all of the recent “innovations” in the game have played their part in adding to the concussion mess. What do you think? More importantly, what do you think the NHL should do about it?

5 comments September 29th, 2011

If Google Was a 13 Year Old

Happy Birthday Google! According to Google’s homepage logo today, Google has officially turned 13. That got me thinking, what would happen to Google if it actually started acting like a teenager?

If Google were actually a 13 year old:

1. Results about girls would be given a significant ranking boost.
2. Occasionally a search results page would simply return “I don’t feel like doing that, leave me alone”
3. The homepage design would be a different background color every week.
4. teh s34rch rslts wuld luk lyk dis.
5. did you mean.. suggestions would be replaced by OMG NOOB!!11!! lrn2 spell.
6. Instead of a captcha for too many searches, Google would require you to drive it to the mall.
7. Google would over-react to rejected buyout offers with thoughts of bankruptcy.
8. The length of results returned would suddenly increase, almost overnight.
9. New product: Google Porn!
10. It would constantly be trying to act like the older, more mature Yahoo – while wanting nothing to do with the younger Bing.
11. Senators would be grandstanding about protecting the Google.

Let’s hear your suggestions. Now that Google is 13 and a teenager, what would be different if it actually were a teenager? (I was tempted to include some lines about plus, gmail, youtube, etc but those services aren’t actually 13 today – just the search engine)

Leave your suggestions in the comments and I’ll update this post with the best ones.

1 comment September 27th, 2011

Facebook makes changes. People Wig Out (for now)

OMGFacebook changed their layout! Quick, everybody wig out.

Everybody’s seen it, and we’ve all already complained about it on Twitter. Facebook updated their layout and the “most recent” is gone. They also added a mini facebook on the top right. They also creepily decided that they know what’s more important than I do. It’s a drastic change – I know – and drastic changes can take a while to adjust to.

But guess what – everybody hates changes. Nobody’s going to leave facebook over this change despite their threats.

It reminds me of something @DrewCurtis said at Blueglass Florida last year and has repeated over and over.

People hate change. OCD is 20% of the population. People just wig out when you change things around. I know because I screw with my friends apartment… Wait 3 days and see if they are still upset. Main thing is don’t change core functionality. If you move layout around people will get use to that, but you can’t change core functionality. I’ve got people telling me that I am ruining the community because of the political hit…. It’s less than 1% if my site. If you are passionate about it and feel your right then go with it. Of course it helps when you are right… and you better be right.

(thanks to search engine people for actually writing this down at a time of the conference when I was too hungover to do so. And yes, that hangover is also attributed to @drewcurtis )

But guess what – Drew is right! Facebook has made changes before and everybody rioted before eventually liking them. Fark has made changes. Delicious made changes. Reddit made changes. Every site site does it, and every time they do the users complain. But then a few days later something crazy happens: The users realized that the change is for the better.

Just look at new Twitter. Everybody hated it, then they made it standard. Now that they’re taking it away you’d think people would be happy; but they’re not. They hated new Twitter when it came, and now they hate being switched back to old Twitter.

The key to changes is like Drew says: make sure you’re right. So far, Facebook has been right. They’ve managed to last longer than any other social network has, and they’re still growing.

Time will show that Facebook probably does know what’s most interesting to you. Sure, we’ll miss the “most recent” option but I’m sure in a few days it’ll either be back or it’ll be no big deal at all.

My advice: Quit going crazy and bitching about the changes and start using them. You might be surprised to find that they grow on you.

1 comment September 21st, 2011

Mustang Customizer

The Mustang is such a sexy car isn’t it? I love mine.

Today I’ve been playing around with the new Mustang Customizer we (Team Detroit) launched recently on Ford’s website. My custom mustang is kicking ass right now. Check it out:

Click the thumbnail above to see a larger version of the one I customized. Check out how it’s faring in the battle below.

And yes, I did sort of design it like my current mustang (if Mine were a Shelby – I wish) here’s mine below in a great pose near world headquarters that I wish we could have used on the customizer.

September 16th, 2011

Why Does My Eye Twitch?

If you’ve ever started typing a question into Google that starts with “why” you’ve probably seen “why does my eye twitch” come up as a suggestion.

your cat stares at you because you stink and keep winking at it, you old pervert.

Believe it or not, it’s not just a bunch of oddballs searching for this stuff – eye twitching is a pretty common occurrence.

The good news though is that Eye Twitching Is Completely Normal. According to WebMD That eye twitch is known as blepharospasm.

Blepharospasm has a few causes that can cause your eye to twitch. These causes include dry eyes, stress, caffeine, lack of sleep, or harsh light conditions.

As somebody who’s had a twitchy eye in the past, I can say that mine was definitely caused by a combination of stress and caffeine. When I cut down my caffeine intake and started taking CBN gummies from Exhale’s website my eye stopped twitching. (Luckily the twitch stopped when I un-stressed during hunting season – which is good because I would have hated to see what happened if I fired a rifle with a twitchy scope eye.)

So if you eye is twitching, try and see if you’re stressed or changed your routine lately. Check the lighting, cut out the caffeine, get some sleep, or try some allergy eye drops. Also, I recommend trying this drink here if you’re looking for products that can help your body relax.

Of course, I’m not a doctor so if you think you have something serious, by all means see your doctor.

As for why your belly button smells? (how does one even smell their own belly button anyway?) I can’t help with that – try taking a shower.

1 comment September 12th, 2011

Black Hat Technique turned white: Posting to Social Networks

You always see posts talking about evil black hat methods and automation. You’ve been warned about things like Xrumer, Scrapebox, etc and how the black hats use them to dominate search positions – but has anybody ever thought about using them for white hat techniques?

The technique I want to talk about today is submitting to social sites like Digg, Fark, Delicious, reddit, stumbleupon, etc. Done wrong, this can be a shady black hat technique. Done right however it can be a very valuable form of PR. After all, if you aren’t willing to tell people about your own sites why would anybody else?

One of my old favorite black-hat tools was something called Social Poster. It’s basically a giant list of social media submissions pages that you can use as shortcuts when spamming submitting your site to social media sites. Sure you can use it for spam, but when you’re genuinely submitting quality content to a few sites, it’s not really spam. It’s promotion. The key is to use tools like this in moderation and use them genuinely.

Lately though, I’ve been playing with another tool called OnlyWire. Onlywire works like socialposter above, but it saves you time by doing the submitting for you. You can choose what networks (and you still need an account on each network to tell it) and it does the hard work for you. They even have bookmarklets, wordpress plugins, a blog button for your users, and an API. The features are a bit more robust than social poster. The pro version starts at only $10 per month, but there’s also a free version with limited submissions. For most white hat SEOs not wanting to submit a ton of stuff to a ton of sites, the $10 version is more than sufficient. (Remember, the key to staying white hat is to only submit relevant stuff to relevant sites, not everything to every site.)

So Check out Onlywire – it’s a useful tool that blurs the lines of black hat / white hat SEO to help you increase links and visits. And remember: most black hat tools started as a way to automate white hat ideas, and then quickly turned up the volume. Black hat tools can be super useful for legit SEO – as long as you keep the volume back at a reasonable level and use some common sense.

August 31st, 2011

Google+ Won’t Be Abused like Pagerank

I was reading a post by @rustybrick about google+ being a ranking factor and noticing how the twitterspehere seemed to collectively think that it opens the door for abuse. Many SEOs were making comparisons to how people link spam and anticipating the same for pluses. They point to the already available services that sell pluses as proof. (which, by the way is a waste of money when you can get them by other methods like cross site + buttons in iframes or paying as little as $0.01 each on Turk)

We can talk about better ways to game the system later, but for now I’d like to say that I don’t think Google+ will present anywhere near the spam problem that pagerank/link spamming does.

I’m not saying that people won’t try to spam pluses – they will. Plus counts will surely be affected by spammers and the companies that sell them aren’t going away. I’m just saying that the spam pluses won’t be effective at all.

We all know that paid and spammy links still work and work well. The reason they work is because it’s awfully difficult for Google to detect un-natural linking patterns. They’ve gotten pretty good at it, but a lot still slip through the cracks.

Spam pluses will be easily found and ignored in the algorithm

With Google+ and pluses however, they won’t have that problem. There’s one key difference between pagerank and plus. With plus, your real name is associated with everything you plus – and your history and patterns are all stored in Google’s system. That’s one of the benefits of Google’s real name policy (flawed as it may be.)

See, when you plus something you do it publicaly – with your real name. Unlike links, selling pluses requires one account per plus. Those accounts require real people. It won’t take long for patterns to emerge and Google to figure out which accounts are doing the spammy pluses. Once they do I imagine they’ll take the scalpel approach that they do for paid links where they simply “cut” them out of the link map.

Google and Bing already do this pretty well with their Twitter as a ranking factor implementation. They look at your followers and followees, your tweet history, link history, etc and come up with something similar to a trust rank. Well guess what? Google+ knows way more about you than Twitter does – so deciding who to trust is much easier than it is with a site from Twitter. And I don’t see Twitter spam accounts working that well. In fact, Google+ is probably tied to your Twitter account anyway so there’s no reason they couldn’t use that reputation you’ve already established.

I think that’s the beauty of plus. Having your pluses and history readily available allows Google to form patterns and decide just who to trust in rankings. Regardless of how much of a factor it is (I don’t buy that it’s as small a factor as Barry claims) Google will get pretty good at knowing whose pluses count and whose don’t.

8 comments August 30th, 2011

Google Analytics Changes Session Definitions

If you weren’t paying close attention yesterday you may have missed a small announcement from Google about an update to sessions in Google Analytics. It’s a small update that will affect less than 1% of total users, but if you’re in that 1% of users (or have your analytics set up wrong) you may see some crazy effects.

Here’s what Changed:
Sessions used to end at the end of the day, after 30 minutes, or when the user closed the browser. Now, a session will no longer end when a user closes their browser and can alsoend when a user’s utm parameter changes. That last one’s the important one.

What?
Basically, if I come in to your site from a paid search ad, that’s a session. If let’s say 20 minutes later I click on a link in a tweet with a ?utm_source tag. Previously that would be part of my same open session. Now however Google Analytics will end that old session and start a new one.

Why?
This solution provides better attribution for campaigns. Basically, it’s GA switching to a last-click attribution model. There’s plenty of arguments about whether last click, first click, or weighted attribution are best but I’ll leave that for another post.

Let’s talk about potential issues
According to Google, 99% of users won’t see a problem. If you’re seeing your visits significantly rise for no reason though, you might be in that other 1%. You’re bound to see some small increase in visits due to the browser closing change, but some sites will huge changes. Here’s how that can happen:

Suppose you set up your Google Analytics lazily or just plain wrong. For some reason (and there’s a lot of websites who I won’t pick on that are doing this) you put ?utm_source on your internal site links. Perhaps it’s a promo box on your homepage that links to one of your other pages and you want to track it as a campaign – an easy mistake for a novice to make.

Under the old system, there was no problem here. Under the new system though you’ve got an issue. Now, anybody who clicks on that promo box is essentially ending their current session and starting a new one! That could throw off your total visits / sessions and any calculations that use them.

The solution here is to make sure you’re not using any ?utm_ parameters on your internal site links. That’s not what they were made for. There’s a lot of great ways to track that type of thing in Google Analytics (all beyond the scope of this blog post and better answered by the Google Analytics Help files.)

In light of the recent change though, now is a great time to re-check your analytics implementation and make sure everything’s working as it should.

August 17th, 2011