Technically Incorrect

Vermont is an interesting place with some very interesting residents. Brigham Young and John Deere are both said to hail from this mountainous state.

But will either turn out to be quite as fascinating as Jacob Rehm?

According to WCAX News, Rehm stands accused of illegally borrowing a $500,000 tour bus and taking it for a little spin. Rehm is a former employee of the bus company and will make an appearance in the Vermont District Court on Tuesday.

However, something else will also be making a court appearance at the same time--a video entitled "The Fabulous Bus Ride," which was posted on YouTube on November 5.

It does not appear to have been made by a concerned and civic-minded passerby. No, it is alleged to have been made by Rehm.

In the notes accompanying the YouTube posting, someone whose handle is vudushuz, says: "Vermont to Connecticut in the Middle-O-the-Night :)Originally thought about heading to Pennsylvania but... anyways, stopped in Bradford for GREAT pizza at the Exit."

As you will see from the embedded piece, the video is quite a work of art, with music by Yes and some very interesting camera work.

I wonder what the judge will think of the alleged director.

The thing about the finest of soap operas is that they must create conflict in order to inspire truly dramatic love.

This is why I was rendered temporarily cynical by a Verizon print ad in a recent edition of Sports Illustrated. The ad was for the Droid. The words were directed at the sensitive regions of the iPhone. But the sentiment seemed to refer to a slightly larger picture.

In case you have not seen this particular work of art, it is headlined "This is a world of 'Nope', Nuh-Uh' and 'Sorry, Charlie.'" The first line gives a clue that perhaps this is not just another anti-iPhone ad. "A world of smiling denial," it begins.

But the next line offers a shudder with every consonant: "Petty tyrannies have made their way into our cell phones."

Smiling denials. Petty tyrannies. Are they talking about a competing cell phone or perhaps a certain individual at the competing company?

(Credit: Chris Matyszczyk)

This is not the rather charming exile of the iPhone to the Island of Misfit Toys. This isn't even the rather teenage assertion of the iPhone's alleged "semi-functional, giggling-brat-vanity".

This print ad strains to mask its truly adult feelings and fails in quite a spectacularly positive way with the phrase: "these arrogant little devices."

Alrighty, now. The use of the word "arrogant" makes this a deeply personal work that might have been inspired, well, by whom? By someone who might have been personally involved in Verizon's negotiations to secure Apple's iPhone, perhaps?

The hearty phraseology of the Droid campaign is admirable, in the way that the Ultimate Fighting Championship can, I am told, sometimes be admirable.

However, one wonders whether Verizon's confidence in its wireless coverage is making the company feel far more assured in its ability to soon offer the iPhone as well as BlackBerry and Droid products.

Is Verizon suggesting that Apple needs Verizon's coverage just as much as Verizon needs the iPhone's cachet? Is it suggesting that the alleged smiling denials, arrogance, and petty tyrannies cannot prevent a slightly altered world order?

The upliftingly personal nature of this ad might just portend a new, big love between Apple and Verizon in just a couple of episodes. A 4G Verizon iPhone? There won't be a dry eye in the house.

Ever wander into one of those Verizon or AT&T stores, attempt to have a conversation with one of the smartly dressed salespeople, and whisper to yourself, "What kind of emotionally awkward humans end up working in a place like this?"

Well, I have good news for you.

Ricky Gervais, who made David Brent perhaps the most painfully sympathetic character in modern television in the original BBC version of "The Office," has been asking himself the very same question. "Phone Shop" a new British sitcom, enjoys Gervais as its script editor (he reportedly took one look at the idea and volunteered his involvement). The pilot airs Friday evening on Channel 4.

"Phone Shop" will explore the life of salespeople in a soul-sucking mall cell phone shop.

(Credit: Channel 4)

Unlike "The Office," which gained existential pleasure from the old-world business of paper manufacture, "Phone Shop" is set in a mall cell phone store.

The pilot episode follows the troubles experienced by trainee salesman Christopher, who has to sell a cell phone by 6 p.m. as part of his one-day trial.

Clearly this series will reside in the emotional halfway house that has just two difficult residents--comedy and tragedy. And one wonders just what impression will be left by the arduous task of pushing yet more portable technology on a populace that bristles with sensory overload.

I am deeply concerned that the cell phone business will not come out so beautifully in "Phone Shop."

You see, The Independent quoted Angela Jain, head of the E4 Channel, which has bought the series. And beneath her words I sense a little cackling: "Everyone's got a mobile phone and has had some encounter in a phone shop. It's also about those difficult dead-end jobs that everyone has at least once in their lives."

So the Droid and the iPhone are being pushed by people in dead-end jobs? What has become of our brave new, smartphoned world?

Sometimes a man can be betrayed by his wife in a good way.

A 61-year-old woman from Bridgend, Wales, had been married to her husband, for almost 20 years when, according to a court report from the Telegraph, she noticed a curious message on their computer at home.

She focused and realized that the message had been sent by an underage girl to whom her husband had been sending messages in a chat room. The message was of a sexual nature and included her husband's original message to the girl.

Perhaps some spouses would have been so stunned as to not know how to react.

This woman was different. She decided to use another computer in a different part of their house. She then entered the same chat room her husband had been using, posed as a young girl and made contact with him.

(Credit: CC James Jhs/Flickr)

The prosecuting lawyer told the court: "Her husband had no idea but soon he was chatting with his own wife, believing it was a 14-year-old girl."

The woman didn't merely get written replies from her husband. He also used a Webcam to film himself for their supposed mutual pleasure.

Still, the court heard, she didn't confront him. Instead, she went straight to the police and the British National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children.

The man, who has grown-up daughters, only discovered that it was his wife who had betrayed him when interviewed by the police. He was given a three-year community order. He was also banned from having any contact with children under the age of 18, a ban that holds for both the real and the online worlds.

After the case, the woman, who is now divorcing her husband, told the Telegraph: "I did the right thing and I don't regret it. Now I just need some time to think and put all this behind me."

However, she was indignant that her husband did not receive a more stringent penalty. She said: "I thought the judge would be a lot harder and that he might go to prison."

Sometimes, we never even know those closest to us. Or sometimes we do, and then one day, they just change.

Here's the story. Or at least most of it.

Some 19 years ago, a man in Germany, together with his half brother, reportedly murdered an actor named Walter Sedlmayr. The man was convicted and served 15 years in jail.

Now he is free. And, according to Wired, he has exercised that freedom by instructing lawyers, the elegantly named firm of Stopp and Stopp, to sue Wikipedia.

The lawsuit claims that German privacy law, designed to help criminals re-integrate into society, prevents the man being named in association with Walter Sedlmayr's murder.

Wired quotes Jennifer Granick from the Electronic Frontier Foundation as saying that the lawyers are not only demanding that publications change whatever they write now, but that online archives must endure revision, too.

In writing to Wikipedia, the lawyers offered a very interesting approach: "As your article deals with a local German public figure (such as the actor Walter Sedlmayr), we expect you are aware that you have to comply with applicable German law."

Well, gosh, perhaps not everyone realizes when they mention, say, Boris Becker or that interesting actress who was in the first of the Bourne movies, that one is subject to German law when one does so.

Geek.com quotes the Electronic Frontier Foundation as adding: "At stake is the integrity of history itself. If all publications have to abide by the censorship laws of any and every jurisdiction just because they are accessible over the global Internet, then we will not be able to believe what we read, whether about Falun Gong (censored by China), the Thai king (censored under lèse majesté) or German murders."

(Credit: CC Schoschie/Flickr)

You might be wondering why I have not mentioned this German murderer's name. You see, as I write, I am reminded that the world seems to revel in the persona of murderers. In some slightly twisted way, they become figures of fascination.

I have a strange suspicion that the more the name of Walter Sedlmayr's murderer is mentioned, the more famous he will become. And the more famous he will become, the more money he might be able to make from the fame he claims not to desire.

So I am conducting a fame-reduction experiment. Moreover, I know that everyone who chooses to discover his name can do so in a myriad of ways.

I wonder how many people tried to access information about this man who murdered the German actor Walter Sedlmayr and how many people have done so in recent days.

I also wonder how Wikipedia will choose to respond to this interesting and rather revisionist-minded lawsuit. At the time of writing, the full names of both murderers are still there in the Wikipedia entry for Walter Sedlmayr.

However, the Wikipedia Administrators' noticeboard has a spirited discussion about all aspects of the case.

The solution proposed by a poster called Zara 1709 on the noticeboard is to "remove the full name from the article and the article talk page, but leave in the edit history of the article and the talk page. We would even have some sources that mention the full names in the reference, simply because they provide other, relevant information, too."

The precedent for this is the so-called Star Wars kid case, in which a 14-year-old Canadian boy waved around a golf-ball retriever like a lightsaber and then endured painful taunts, leading to an equally painful lawsuit.

Zara1709 noted that: "It is quite important to point out that, on Wikipedia, regard for people's privacy applies to criminals and former criminals, too."

However, another poster, Baseball Bugs, dissented: "There is no justification whatsoever for censoring the names of the killers. The notability argument is bogus, there is no privacy or BLP issue, and the 'doing harm' argument is crystal-ball and thus is irrelevant. And some anonymous German judge has no jurisdiction over Wikipedia."

In reading all this, I am left with the words that were often drubbed into me by teachers: "History is written by the winners."

So if this German request succeeds, might some consider that the winner is Wolfgang Wehrle, the man who, with his half brother Manfred Lauber, murdered Walter Sedlmayr 19 years ago? Dash it, I couldn't help myself. I hope I'm not causing undue work for some future editor.

Corporations can be heinous places. All day, people wander around, playing politics like so many Lindsay Lohans in "Mean Girls."

So today, one wonders just what machinations are being endured by Simon Aldous, the Microsoft Partner Group manager who was Wednesday quoted by PCR as suggesting that Windows 7 was rather inspired by the simplicity of the Mac OS. Indeed, Aldous declared that Microsoft's new operating system was designed to "create a Mac look."

In what appears to be a somewhat hurriedly written post on the Windows Team blog titled, "How we really designed the look and feel of Windows 7," Microsoft showed that perhaps some of its underwear is currently a little twisted.

The post read: "An inaccurate quote has been floating around the Internet today about the design origins of Windows 7 and whether its look and feel was 'borrowed' from Mac OS X."

This would suggest that Aldous was, in fact, misquoted.

However, the post, written by Brandon LeBlanc, continued, "Unfortunately, this came from a Microsoft employee who was not involved in any aspect of designing Windows 7. I hate to say this about one of our own, but his comments were inaccurate and uninformed."

"I'm Steve Jobs, and Windows 7 was my idea?"

(Credit: Stephen Shankland/CNET)

Some would therefore now conclude that he was quoted accurately, but he didn't quite get his facts right. This is entirely possible, though one might wonder why he would have made comments with a ring of such endearing honesty.

However, perhaps the most interesting aspect of this Windows Team post is a comment left by someone with the handle "i-dont-do-tat".

This commenter wrote: "I know Simon Aldous, having worked in the same U.K. subsidiary as him for a few years. He's a good guy who, for me, is telling it like it is. He's paying testament to the common view that a Mac is cool and a great template to copy."

As many in the world of business will tell you, copying happens all the time. The competition is scrutinized religiously, and the best articles of faith are taken and sometimes even improved. This happens in every product category.

The "i-dont-do-tat" poster concluded that perhaps honesty might not be such a bad thing: "Denying this to your customers just makes you look stupid because the very look and feel of Windows 7 is desperately trying to look like a Mac OS--just admit it."

Oh, of course one mightn't expect honesty in the mass-market arena. It is a very dangerous place in which to say anything at all. Equally, though, in a tech world interview, perhaps a little nod toward the opposition is not such a bad thing. It might even lull it into a little complacent smugness.

One can only hope that Simon Aldous had a good breakfast Thursday and that he hasn't endured any untoward communications. Unless it's a job offer from Apple, of course, which he should accept only if the company gives him a better deal and appears to come from nicer people.

That's how the corporate world works, you see. Like high school, it's all temporary, so you have to make the most of it while you can.

Sometimes you take a wrong turning in life and, Wednesday, a slight concussion led my eyes to fall upon the pages of PCR.

It is a little more intelligent than my normal reading matter, but I am very grateful for its interview with Simon Aldous, Microsoft's partner group manager.

He was quoted, for example, as saying: "One of the things that people say an awful lot about the Apple Mac is that the OS is fantastic, that it's very graphical and easy to use."

Perfect harmony?

(Credit: CC Esparta/Flickr)

You're waiting for the punchline, right? You know, the one about how he was kidding.

Wait away because he continued: "What we've tried to do with Windows 7--whether it's traditional format or in a touch format--is create a Mac look and feel in terms of graphics."

I know that such words might cause some entrenched foot soldiers in both of the fanchildren camps to hoot, hiss, sigh and reach for the nearest farming implement.

However, isn't it rather charming to hear someone admit that a competitor's product isn't overly expensive or overly pretentious, but that it has something about it that is good and that real people who buy real products actually appreciate?

You might suffer paralysis in several digits when I tell you that there is now a dating site exclusively for those deemed gorgeous.

BeautifulPeople.com exists to protect its members from having to espy the corpulent, the disproportioned, and the downright fugly-puglies.

On its home page, next to a photograph of a quite impossibly eugenic couple, the site presents its most famous media quote: "The sexiest Web site in the world today."

Entertainment Weekly? No, CNN.

Now, another august publication, the Telegraph, has reported some painful news from this online island of the beautiful: BeautifulPeople.com says British people are ugly.

Perhaps you might wish to blame the fish, chips, haggis, curry, and 14 pints of lager consumed by the average inhabitant of the Fragmented Kingdom. Perhaps you might indicate that such a lifestyle suggests an increasing amount of procreation between beings of indeterminate provenance in indeterminate places.

Some feel the British image problems begin with their teeth.

(Credit: MyBulldog/Flickr)

But BeautifulPeople.com revealed that only 12 percent of British men and 15 percent of their female cohorts were accepted by the prettiest online community in the world. This compares rather desperately with the 65 percent of Swedish males who enter this refined paradise and 76 percent of Norwegian women.

The site went live around the world just a couple of weeks ago and so far 83 percent of those who have attempted entry have failed to satisfy the bouncers.

Oh, did I mention that when you present yourself at BeautifulPeople.com's doors you have 48 hours to impress with your deeply ingrained pulchritude and your pulsating profile before you are voted in or out?

BeautifulPeople.com's managing director, Greg Hodge, told the Telegraph: "It hurts me. I'm British."

I am concerned, as I often am, for the Brits.

They donate so many pretty actors and actresses to the world--Hugh Grant, Sienna Miller, Ian McKellen, Judi Dench, Michael Gambon--that one wonders if they are using their theatrical greats to cover up for some serious national genetic deficiencies.

One can only appeal to the British government to launch an immediate campaign in all media. The government should spend some of its vast advertising resources in encouraging its most striking citizens to put their finest jaws and fingers forward and apply for membership to this site.

National pride is at stake. And if the British can substantially increase their presence on BeautifulPeople.com, it might be the start of yet another British cultural renaissance.

Facebook seems to have contributed to countless broken love affairs, divorces, and insane levels of jealousy. People pry into your friend lists and updates until they sometimes reach conclusions far beyond reality. How lovely, then, that a mere status update appears to have saved a Harlem man from jail.

According to The New York Times, Rodney Bradford decided to update his status with a call from the soul. "Where's my pancakes?" is the Times' translation of a status update it says was written in "indecipherable street slang." The fact that Bradford did this at 11:49 a.m. on October 17, using his father's computer, meant that he would not have to suffer pancakes of a more distasteful nature in the local penitentiary.

(Credit: CC Slushpup/Flickr)

Bradford, you see, was arrested the next day for robbery. However, after he was booked, his lawyer was intelligent enough to update the district attorney with news of Bradford's Facebooking.

A subpoena was swiftly flung the way of the Zuckerbergville crew so that they might reveal whether the timing and location of the update were correct. They were, meaning Bradford could update his criminal status to "cleared."

There are some, however, who are not entirely convinced the charges should have been dropped. Joseph Pollini, a teacher at the Department of Law, Police Science and Criminal Justice Administration at John Jay College of Criminal Justice told the Times: "With a username and password, anyone can input data in a Facebook page."

He also offered a dire warning of the infinite dastardliness of people Bradford's age: "Some of the brightest people on the Internet are teenagers. They know the Internet better than a lot of people. Why? Because they use it all the time."

Oh, why is it so hard to give young people the benefit of the doubt--especially on Facebook?