This week’s Blawg Review is presented in honor of the 28th Birthday of Mark Zuckerberg and the impending Facebook IPO, destined to make Zuckerberg enough money to buy a solar system. It is also presented with deepest and most sincere apologies to George Orwell.

It was a bright cold day in May, and the clocks were striking thirteen. On the telescreen in front of me, status updates were still babbling away about shopping trips, restaurants, or children. I sat back. A sense of complete helplessness descended upon me, and I sat gazing stupidly at the screen.

Suddenly, I began to write in sheer panic, I shared a link that “Lincoln Invented Facebook”. It was malreported, and Chris Taylor at Mashable (mashable.com) wrote about How the ‘Lincoln Invented Facebook’ Hoax Foold Some of the People .

I don’t know what made me pour out this stream of rubbish. But it was time for the Two Minutes Like.The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Like is not that you are obliged to act, but on the contrary, it’s impossible to avoid joining in. You scroll through your newsfeed, as status updates flash by, and within thirty seconds, any pretence is unnecessary. One moment you are “Liking” the status update of person you knew in elementary school and the next your great Aunt. It is possible, at moments, to switch your “Liking” this way or that by a voluntary act. But doing so may not be protected speech, as Brock Vergakis points out in his Law Technology News  post Clicking Facebook ‘Like’ Button Ruled Not Constitutionally Protected Speech.

I had been reading Mashable about the Facebook IPO Pitch: Can It Win Big Investors and The Huffington Post  about how “Eduardo Saverin, Facebook Co-Founder, Drops U.S. Citizenship, May Sidestep Taxes on IPO Profits when, my fingers slid voluptuously over the keyboard, updating my status in ALL CAPS:

DOWN WITH FACEBOOK
DOWN WITH FACEBOOK
DOWN WITH FACEBOOK
DOWN WITH FACEBOOK
DOWN WITH FACEBOOK

I sat back in my chair, slightly ashamed of myself. Maybe I was just caught up reading Rob Horning of The New Inquiry  on Facebooking in the Age of Facebook. Or Will Wilkinson’s response at Big Think on Facebook and False Consciousness . I quickly edited my update to repost the Facebook slogans:

PUBLIC IS PRIVATE
FRIEND EVERYONE
THIS APP WILL RECEIVE ALL YOUR PROFILE INFORMATION AND TRACK YOUR POSTING HABITS

At that moment, the telescreen let out a piercing whistle. New Notifications. Four friends has also commented on my status update. My simple reposting of the Facebook slogans had received 25 “Likes”.

If there is hope, I thought, it lies in the proles. Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious.

Maybe they are becoming conscious. The ACLU has a post about a company fighting the good fight, ACLU: Twitter Stands Up For One Of Its Users

But Facebook is not interested in the overt act: the like is all they care about. They do not merely track their enemies, they change them. That’s why Kashmir Hill, over at Forbes writes about the trend of employers seeking applicant’s social media data, in Why We Need a ‘Password Protection Act’ Against Employers.

A number of states have, or are looking to, expand privacy protections to social media and to keep prying employers out of our status updates: Friend Request Rejected: Maryland Bans Employers from Asking Employees for their Social Media Passwords, Delaware Proposes Facebook-Privacy Law , California is One Step Closer to Banning Employer Requests for Social Media Passwords.

Bradley Shear  also has some insightful posts about how Colleges & Schools That Force Their Students to Facebook Friend Them May Be Violating the Stored Communications Act and how SNOPA (HR 5050) May Protect Insurance Companies From Schools and Businesses That Demand Access to Personal Password Protected Social Media Accounts.

And a Woman launches legal action to identify Facebook trolls.

But then I remember: who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past. The proletarians will never revolt, not in a thousand years or a million. They cannot. I do not have to tell you the reason: you know it already. If you have ever cherished any dreams of violent insurrection, you must abandon them. There is no way in which Facebook can be overthrown. The rule of the Facebook is for ever.

In the UK, Aneela Akbar at Lawdit points to a case where Facebook leaves employee jobless.

And the Canadian Privacy Law Blog points out that, the FBI Seeking Wiretap-ready Internet, Like Canada” and offers another post about Cloud Computer and the Patriot Act: A Red Herring?

Timothy Flynn, The Law Blogger posts about the dangers of social media like Facebook and Twitter in jury trials, in Social Media Not Mixing with Jury Trials.

And James Goslee reminds us all at Lawyerist.com that Private Facebook Pages May Be Discoverable.

Facebook isn’t interested in the good of others; it is interested solely in advertising. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only advertising, pure advertising. Power through advertising. Facebook is setting up the way to sell ads off the site, as Kashmir Hill notes in Facebook Privacy Policy Change Paves Way For Off-Facebook Advertising they’ve updated their “Data Use Policy” to put the policy pieces in place.

And how responsible should lawyers be with social media anyway? Scott Greenfield at Simple Justice  has a pretty good idea, and doesn’t disappoint with, And Now, For a Commercial Break.

Weeks or months must have passed. It would have been possible to keep track of the passage of time, had I been paying more attention to my Timeline.

Suddenly, a shrill trumpet-call pierced the air. It was a Notification! Someone had Shared my status update! The telescreen was pouring forth Shares and Likes. I poured myself a glass of Victory Gin and stared at the screen. My soul white as snow, I was updating my status with everything, sharing with everybody. I was posting photos and videos. Allowing myself to be tagged. The long hoped-for bullet was entering my brain.

I gazed up at that youthful face. Eight years it had taken me to learn what kind of smile was hidden behind that t-shirt and hoodie. O cruel, needless misunderstanding! O stubborn, self-willed exile from the loving breast! Two gin-sented tears trickled down the side of my nose. But it is all right, everything is all right, the struggle is finished. I’ve won the victory over myself. I love Facebook.

Next week’s Blawg Review comes from the esteemed Kevin Thompson of cyberlawcentral.com. Along with the works of George Orwell (particularly Politics and the English Language) I highly recommend you check it out. And don’t forget, Blawg Review has information about next week’s host, and instructions how to get your blawg posts reviewed in upcoming issues.

If you live in a cave and haven’t heard of the SodaStream yet, it’s a home carbonation system. Think “giant seltzer bottle”. It lets you carbonate water and then add flavoring to create your own soft drinks at home.

How It Works

Basically, you put liquid in a bottle (water only, according to the manual–more on that later), then screw it into the SodaStream, and press the button a few times. Each time you press (and hold) the button, the CO2 is injected into the water, carbonating it. After 3-4 pushes, you unscrew the bottle, pour in your flavoring, cap it and mix. Then you’re ready to enjoy a freshly made carbonated beverage!

The Models

There are seven different models of the SodaStream, ranging from the low-end “Fountain Jet” to the high-end “Penguin” that actually carbonates your drinks in swanky glass carafes. All of them are essentially the same thing: a tank of carbon dioxide, a hose, a valve, and a nozzle that you can screw one of their bottles onto. I looked at the more expensive models, and frankly, they aren’t constructed any better than the lower end models. None of them are made especially well–lots of plastic. They all feel kind of cheap, especially compared to other kitchen appliances. But there’s also not much to them–they don’t have any electronics or anything. They are just CO2 delivery systems. So there’s also not a lot to break, I suppose.

One feature that I do think differentiates them is that most can only take the 14.5oz. CO2 cylinders, which will carbonate about 60 liters. SodaStream also sells a 33oz. cylinder, which is more cost effective–so I wanted the option to use the larger size, in case I got hooked. Fortunately, the lowest end “Fountain Jet” can accept both. The higher end ones can’t.  I am really not sure how SodaStream made their design decisions. Other than styling, I can’t see any reason to buy any of the higher end versions of the SodaStream.

The Bottles

You can’t just use any old bottle with the SodaStream, you have to use their bottles. That’s somewhat understandable: you are injecting pressurized gas into the bottle. The wrong bottle, or a weak bottle could break, exploding liquid everywhere. The Fountain Jet comes with one bottle, but of course, if you end up using it a lot, or want to have different flavors around, you’ll have to invest in more bottles. The default size is 1 liter, which is fine. They do sell a smaller .5 liter size, but nothing bigger.

The most annoying thing about them is that the basic bottles are not dishwasher safe. Super. Annoying. They do sell a dishwasher safe bottle, but I have yet to see it on sale anywhere, so I have not been able to use it. They also sell replacement caps, so if you lose one, you can just buy the cap. The reason they claim the bottle isn’t dishwasher safe is that the heat weakens the plastic, which is valid I suppose–but I think they should just include the dishwasher safe bottle with all the kits. I’d pay a little more for that.

Using the SodaStream

It really couldn’t be easier. Step one: fill the bottle to the line with water. Step two: screw the bottle onto the SodaStream nozzle. Step three: press the button 3-4 times. Step four: unscrew and pour in the flavoring. Step five: cap and mix. Step six: drink!

One thing that took me back a bit the first time I used it: when you press and hold down the button to carbonate, you keep holding it until it “buzzes”. That first buzz can be a bit jarring. You get used to it, but that first time I thought I broke something.

Now, you’re supposed to only carbonate water, and then add the flavoring after you’ve carbonated it. Yeah, right. I’ve tried to carbonate all kinds of stuff–but I do have to warn you: I’ve also exploded liquid all over my kitchen. When you carbonate a liquid other than water, some react differently to the carbonation. If the pressure exceeds some threshold, it blows the valve on the SodaStream, and whoosh. Liquid explosion! So, I fully endorse experimentation, just be prepared to do some cleanup.

In general, I have found that adding whatever flavoring you are going to use after you carbonate is the better idea. But here’s another tip: use liquid flavorings. I was experimenting with some Crystal Light flavor packets, which are powdered. When you add a powdered flavoring, it’s an explosive mix–the powder (probably because of the increased surface area of the particles–but I’m not sure) causes the CO2 to be released really fast. So if you aren’t lightening fast with the cap, you get to clean up again. The solution: just pre-mix the powder in a little bit of water to make your own flavor syrup first. That makes it much easier.

The Flavors

I’ve been experimenting with pretty much any kind of drink you can make. But SodaStream sells a number of flavors you can add: Cola, Root Beer, Ginger Ale, Orange Drink, Lemon-Lime, Cran-Raspberry, Pink Grapefruit, Energy Drink, etc. Most of them also come in a diet version, made with Splenda. Overall, they aren’t too bad.

One thing to note, which I think is a bit duplicitous: most of the non diet versions of the SodaStream flavors also contain Splenda (sucralose). That helps them advertise lower calories than Coke/Pepsi, but if you’re trying to go au natural, this is a huge fail. SodaStream is now marketing “All Natural” flavors–which are in addition to, not replacing, the regular flavors–so there are non-sucralose versions of their cola, but I still think they are trying to pull a fast one.

One thing is for sure: if you are a Diet Coke fan, forget about it. The “Diet Cola” flavor–while not bad–is no substitute. To me, it tastes a little like Diet Coke with Splenda, but mostly it tastes like RC. It’s not bad, but I’m not giving up Diet Coke for it anytime soon. Update: The Diet flavor sucks. There is a bad aftertaste that I just can’t get past. It was mild at first, but once I noticed it, I can’t not notice it. I won’t be buying it again.

In fact, I found most of the flavors to be somewhat lacking, compared to commercial soda’s available. The “Orange” flavor isn’t bad. The Ginger Ale is merely OK. The “Diet Dr. Pete” isn’t bad–but oddly doesn’t seem to hold carbonation for squat. The Diet Lemon-Lime is pretty awful. The flavors that stood out, to me, are the Cran-Raspberry, which was pretty tasty, and the Pink Grapefruit, which I thought would be like Squirt, but was actually much more “grapefruity” and not bad at all. The Diet Root Beer is OK, too. It will never beat a premium root beer, but it’s not bad to be able to make on demand.

The nice thing about using the SodaStream official flavors is that they mix well. And you can easily tweak how much flavoring you add, according to your own tastes. What I would *highly* recommend, though, is that before you spend the $5-7 for a full bottle of any particular flavor, you pick up the SodaMix Variety Pack. It comes with 12 samples of the various flavors, so you can try them before you commit. It’s well worth the investment, believe me. One really annoying thing about the bottles, though, is that they come with a “built in measuring cap” which is basically a cap with a little shot glass in it. Unfortunately, there are no clear markings, so I wasn’t clear on how to measure–turns out, you just fill it to the top. However, it doesn’t pour very well. They could have easily moulded in a little dimple/spout so that the syrup would pour smoothly. As it is, I always end up getting some of it poured down the side, etc. which makes a mess. That’s supposed to be the point of the built in measurer: convenience and no mess. Doesn’t work very well.

The Bottom Line

Should you get a SodaStream? Depends. If you are looking at it because you think it’s going to save you money by making your own soda, then I’m skeptical. Taste the mixes at a store sampling or at someone else’s house, first. I don’t think the flavors hold up to most commercial brands well enough to think of the SodaStream as a replacement for them–unless you really don’t care. For many drinks, I don’t care (like orange drink) but some, like Diet Coke, I do care–the SodaStream is not going to make me give up Diet Coke. Probably ever.

If you are looking at it because you’re a dork like me and you want to experiment with different flavors and carbonate everything in sight, then go for it. It’s a relatively cheap gadget to play with making your own carbonated drinks. You can mix and match with the SodaStream flavors… you can try other commercial drink mixes… or you can get super inventive and make your own! (I’m going to try making my own ginger ale at some point.)

Overall, it might not be a soda replacement system, but it’s a pretty fun kitchen toy if you like to tinker.

Lite-Brite Template

Made by Me! Spin ’n Spiral Doodler Template

These are mostly for my use, but other parents can download them, too.

I grew up within bike distance of a public library: the Wells Library, in my home town of Lafayette. The library was a frequent destination for me on summer days. I would ride my bike there and hang out in the stacks all the time. I still love library stacks. I love the smell of the aging books. I love discovering hidden gems on the shelves. I love the sounds of the library. The hushed voices. The hum of the air conditioning and the click of shoes on terrazzo floors. It’s more than merely the love of reading, it’s a love of the experience. The thrill of the hunt, with the reward of a great book. Which is why I also love bookstores.

There aren’t many things I like about my hometown. But one of them is a bookstore: Von’s Books. Von’s books was much like a library to me. It was a little further out of reach, so I had to be taken there as a kid–and fortunately my mother is a reader, too. Von’s is the kind of overstocked independent bookseller you might see in a charming romantic comedy. It’s homey. It’s dusty. The shelfs are bursting with books and it seems there are stacks of to-be-shelved inventory all over the place. I loved that I could get lost in the shelves there just like the stacks at the library. I also loved that every time I needed help finding something, I had to go to the counter at the front of the store where the clerk could almost always be found with their nose in a book.

That was never my experience with the big box booksellers, like Borders or Barnes & Noble. Sure, they had row after row of books. Sometimes their stores seemed bigger to me than the library I remember from my childhood. They had friendly clerks, roaming the stores and keeping the shelves tidy. The difference was that when I wanted to ask about a book or an author or ask for a recommendation, it was a crapshoot. Some clerks were readers. Bookstores attract people who want an employee discount, I’m sure. But more often than not, the clerk would need to run off to a computer terminal to answer my questions. It was often clear to me that this was a job to them. Just a job. I want my bookstore to be staffed by people who read voraciously and who love books, not just people who need a job.

I hated Borders for other reasons, too. In college, I was in Bloomington, Indiana, which had an indie bookstore by the name of Morgensterns. I loved Morgenstern’s. My friend and I would go there to hang out. It wasn’t as musty and dusty as Von’s, but they had a good selection and a staff that seemed to know and love books. Then Borders opened. It was offensive to me. It wasn’t just that Borders was a “big box” chain store. It was that they chose for their location a space in the very same shopping center, just a few doors down from Morgensterns. There was no doubt in my mind then, nor is there now, that Borders wanted to put Morgensterns out of business, pure and simple. And they did. I don’t think it was even a year before Morgensterns closed their doors.

So I can’t say I wasn’t the tiniest bit happy when I first started hearing about Borders problems. Karma, man, it’s a bitch. But I guess I thought that like many corporations facing grim realities in a digital age they’d find a way to get by. Downsize, maybe, but come out still chugging along. I had hope when it looked like Books-A-Million might come in and scoop up their remaining stores. The notion that their stores are worth more liquidated rather than open, selling books to the public, really makes my heart ache. No bookseller is worth more closed. None.

In my current hometown, Oak Park, Borders occupies a prominent anchor store position near a busy intersection downtown. We aren’t without other fantastic bookstore options in Oak Park. Down the street from Borders is The Book Table, where the people staffing the store read books and where a book lover always feels welcome. We also have The Magic Tree–which is a favorite of my daughter. I pay more for books at both of those stores than I would on Amazon because I know I’m paying for more than just a book. I’m paying to have them stay in the community, to keep my town the kind of town I want to live in and the kind of town I want my daughter to grow up in. I’m happy to do so and I’m happy to support these local businesses.

Because of that and my feelings about Borders, you might think I’d be happy about their closing. But I’m not. I’m sad. Really sad. I’m sad because of the people Borders closing will put out of work. I’m sad because of empty storefront that will occupy that busy corner in my town. I’m sad because there’s one less outlet for publishers to promote authors to the masses. But most of all, I’m sad because there’s one less bookstore to haunt in my hometown.

But I’d read that Apple stores got shipments in daily (although it’s a crapshoot on the models they get) so I decided to give it a shot. I got in line at the Schaumburg store just before 9:00AM, and by 9:30ish I was walking out with my new iPad2! Awesome luck! (Your mileage may vary!)

So yesterday I had a chance to play with it, so here’s my take:

Size
It is, without a doubt, lighter and thinner. It’s more comfortable to hold up for reading and laying with on the couch or in bed. It’s not like the old iPad was a brick, but the new svelte body style is a nice touch.

Speed
It’s faster. No question. The interface actually feels about the same–maybe a little snappier–but apps load much faster. So no complaints. Network performance is fine, seems about the same to me. I have a wi-fi only version so I can’t speak to 3G performance. (I’m not giving telcos any more of my damn money for craptastic service when free wi-fi is never more than spitting distance away in a major city like Chicago. So F* You, AT&T)

Screen
Meet the new screen; Same as the old screen. I *really* wish they’d up the resolution with a retina display, but c’est la vie.

Cameras
Oh yeah, baby. The cameras are pretty nice. Are they going to replace my DSLR? Uh, no. But it’s really nice to have the ability to take snapshots and record video with it. And I loves the facetime. And Skype. I do think Skype needs to bring out an “HD (read: iPad optimized) App” before it will be really cool, but damn, being able to video conference from the couch is exactly what I was looking for. Couldn’t be happier with that.

Smart Cover
Meh. Yeah, the magnet alignment and clip on thing is cool… but I wanted black, and didn’t really want leather. So that kind of sucked. I also hate that the cover offers no protection for the back of the iPad. At all. None. Zip. Zilch. Oooh… it rolls up so you can prop it up! So f’ing what? You know how often I roll it up to prop the iPad up on a table? Yeah, never. I’m always holding it. Yes, it’s cool that it senses when you close the cover (F’ing magents! How do they work?) and puts the iPad to sleep, but overall, this falls solidly into lame territory for me. I’m going to skin the thing anyway for body protection from scratches, etc. And hopefully the 3rd Party cases will have more to offer soon, but I’d say skip the “Smart Cover” unless you really want a fairly expensive screen cover that has some cool magnets.

And there you have it. The iPad2: Slightly Thinner. Slightly Lighter. Slightly Faster. Finally, cameras! And a “meh” cover.

Update: Now that I’ve been using it more, I have to say I actually hate the “Smart Cover”. It’s anything but smart. Yes, it fits the front of the iPad very nicely. And at first glance, it’s cool the way it rolls up. But there are some serious flaws.

First, you know how it lines up perfectly over the screen? Well, with the iPad’s tapered body, that means it does not line up perfectly when you fold it over the back (i.e. when you’re using the iPad). It hangs over just enough to be incredibly annoying.

Second, the magnets on the front and sides line it up great. Too bad there is no magnet on the back, which means when you fold it over, again, to use the iPad, the “smart” cover kind of flops off, constantly getting in the way if you switch hands to hold it.

The “Smart Cover” is a perfect example of style over function. The concept is “wow” and at first look, you think, “gee that is nifty.” Then you start using it and you wonder if the people who designed it ever actually used it themselves, in real world situations, or if they just sat around stroking each other over how cool it looks.

Yeah, it looks cool. But it doesn’t protect a full 50% of the iPad, and it’s annoying as hell in practical, everyday use. Don’t give Apple a dime for the “Smart Cover” and go with a third-party option instead. Trust me.

Well, a friend suggested that I give PlayOn (www.playon.tv) a try. So I did. The conclusion? PlayOn is not ready for prime time, but there is potential there.

To give you some background, I have a pretty robust network environment at home. My wireless devices are all 802.11N with good performance, and the NAS sits on a 1GB switch. Netflix and Hulu both stream like champs to my Roku.

PlayOn requires a “server” that runs on a PC on your network. Once that is installed, you can connect to it with other devices (iPhone/iPad, Roku, XBox, etc.) and stream a number of different channels. The idea was pretty appealing, because you can stream content from ESPN, ESPNIII, PBS Kids, etc. It’s an interesting selection–and channels that we watch a lot in our house (PBS Kids, especially). There is also a feature that lets you stream your local media files (well, almost).

Installing the PlayOn server on the PC was easy. It was also very easy to get the channel installed on the Roku. Sadly, though, that’s where PlayOn stopped performing.

First up, we tried to watch Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood, on the PBS Kid’s channel. It took forever to start the stream, and then, before the video started, an error popped up that the media file was “unavailable or an unsupported format”. What? An unsupported format? It’s their system. Okay, so we tried another episode. Same thing. Frustrating.

We decided to move on and try another channel. We tried Cartoon Network, and I just tried a cartoon at random. Another annoyance: it started playing an ad, but the buffer ran out before the ad was finished. So, it replayed the ad from the beginning. Three times. This was to be a constant problem. Finally, the program started and it played OK.

The final network TV test was Comedy Central. I queued up an episode of the Colbert Report. After watching the same ad three times in a row, the video started to play. Then, about 1.5 seconds later, the audio started to play. It remained out of sync for several minutes when I just got so annoyed I gave up.

I would be more forgiving of these issues if I thought it were a problem with my setup, but since I regularly use Netflix streaming and Hulu Plus–both of which are awesome, I’m pretty sure all of the issues with streaming were problems with PlayOn. And considering most of the potential users of PlayOn are probably also users of either Netflix or Hulu, I would say PlayOn has a way to go in improving their software if they want people to pay for their service.

Overall, the network programming was a big fail. So I decided to try the local media option. In fairness, PlayOn makes it very clear this feature is in Beta. So I really can’t fault PlayOn that it did not work for me at all. I do have an atypical setup, too, in that I have a NAS box where I store my media, so I’ll cut PlayOn some slack.

In the end, I’m still stoked about the potential for a product like PlayOn, which would let me stream individual network television. We watch very little broadcast television in our house, limited to about five channels with any regularity. If we could subscribe to a service that allowed us access to that content, and found a way around the live sporting events, we’d drop satellite/cable in a heartbeat. So listen up PlayOn: the market is there! PlayOn isn’t priced bad at all: $3.50 per month. If it worked, I’d gladly pay that. However, based on my experience with PlayOn so far, it’s not work any money at all. Yet. If they fix their software issues, or a competitor comes along with software that works well, that could easily change.

My “ultimate” media box is almost here, and the Roku and Boxee both come close, yet fall just short. If they mated, we’d have a winner. Here’s what I’m after:

• I want streaming media: Netflix and Hulu Plus are required, Amazon, Vudu, etc. are nice but not deal breakers.
• It should be able to play any type of media I throw at it (within reason). For me, that’s primarily MPEG video, MP3 Audio, and JPEG Photos.
• I need to not only get streaming services, I need to be able to browse my local files (I’ve digitized my entire CD library and I take a lot of home video).
• The interface needs to be non-techie friendly, so other members of my household can use it without always needing my assistance.

So with those requirements in mind, here’s how the Roku and Boxee Box stack up.

The Roku

It seems that a number of my tech friends own Roku’s (pronounced “Row Koo”) and I wanted a device to put on a second TV to get Netflix streaming, so I figured I would give the Roku a shot. The Roku is certainly the more affordable of the two. Models start at $59 and top out at $99. I purchased the XD/S. All of the Roku models have HDMI out for pumping video to HD televisions and they all come with a remote. I went with the XD/S because I wanted the dual-band wireless and the USB port (for convenience, mostly). If you don’t have a need for USB or the dual band, save the money and get the mid-range model.

Roku Media Player (XD/S)

The box itself is small and the build quality seems fine. It’s very unobtrusive in the small cabinet where my second TV sits. The remote functions fine and there is even a remote app for it to control the box from a smartphone which works well, too.

The Roku is based on a “Channel” model. So out of the box it has “Channels” configured for things like YouTube, etc. and you can then add Channels for the services you want to add. I had some issues getting the box to play nice with my wireless, but I’m not running your average home network, so I won’t go into details of that here. Suffice it to say that it took me about an hour to get it running, but it’s been very steady ever since.

What the Roku does, it does well. I’ve had good results streaming Hulu Plus and Netflix content. I also use it to get a Weather Underground feed. The interface isn’t the most beautiful in the world, it looks like it was designed by developers–not designers–but it’s functional and not confusing. I’d say it’s a very solid streaming performance and well worth the price.

Unfortunately, what the Roku doesn’t do is play local media. Well, that’s not entirely true. There is the USB port. However, there is not (currently) any good way to get access to my music, photos and videos that are stored on my NAS (Network Area Storage) box. That’s a *big* detractor for me, and why I wouldn’t use the Roku as my main media device. Part of the problem seems to be inherent to the device itself: it was clearly built for streaming, not downloading, and most local media doesn’t stream. This is a big drawback, though, and I think moving forward Roku will have to address this need, or they’ll end up failing to other boxes that serve it.

Boxee Box

Next up is the Boxee Box. Boxee has been around for a while in the media game, making software that runs on your PC so it can act as a media center. I’ve used it on my Mac for a while and it’s really fantastic. The Boxee Box represents the first foray into the dedicated hardware arena for Boxee. It’s a small cube made by D-Link that runs the Boxee software. It’s pretty.

Boxee Box (by D-Link)

The overall build quality feels about the same as the Roku, but the similarities end there. It’s really a shame that the first Boxee Box is made by D-Link, because the hardware seems to be buggy as hell. The wireless card in it doesn’t support 5GHz (even though it was release in late 2010!) I had a *nightmare* of a time getting this box on the network. And I had problems updating the Boxee software on it as well. I eventually got it running and it seems stable, but it was a whole lot more effort for a nearly $200 box.

Fortunately, the other saving graces of the software make this box a winner. Boxee has clearly put more effort into user interface design, as the UI feels much slicker and looks much more refined than the Roku. The interface is gorgeous and really easy to use.

The Boxee does now support Netflix streaming, but it still doesn’t do Hulu Plus, which is a definite limitation for me, but Boxee has been in negotiation with Hulu and is *supposed* to be brining out Hulu support sometime soon. I hope that’s not just a rumor.

The Boxee Box is really outstanding when it comes to playing local media. It’s been able to play anything I’ve thrown at it. Music, videos, photos, all look great on it, and it all works without too much trouble. It even indexes movies (although it does so painfully slowly sometimes) and displays them with their cover art. Nice.

To me, there is no question that the Boxee Box is the more polished of the two devices, and it does everything it does quite well. If other hardware vendors get on the bandwagon and someone makes a slightly higher quality box, and they get their Hulu ducks in a row, the Boxee could be a device to be reckoned with.

The Verdict

Overall, both boxes do what they do well, they just do slightly different things. If all you care about is streaming Netflix movies and Hulu television shows, the Roku fits the bill. It’s affordable and it allows you to watch media from the net like a champ. If you’re like me, though, and it’s just as important (if not more so) to be able to watch your own media from your local network, it’s Boxee all the way.

For me, I’ll keep both for the time being. But once Boxee manages to offer Hulu streaming as well, I probably won’t have a need for the Roku anymore (unless Roku can make some big strides in the user interface and playing local media before then.) But I probably won’t buy another D-Link Boxee Box. I’ll either hold out for a better hardware vendor, or make my own small media PC.

So here, the best jerky I’d ever had was only getting three stars. That meant we had a mission: to try some five-star jerky. As it happens, the jerky they rated best was Ed’s Roadhouse Jerkly which happens to be made in the Chicago area (Buffalo Grove, to be precise).

Ed’s website looks like it was made with Geocities in 1998, but my god, can that man make some jerky. I tried the Black Pepper and the Sweet Black Pepper, and without a doubt, it was, hand’s down, the best jerky I’ve ever had. I still love the Mingua–it’s got a totally different style/taste thing going. But Ed’s is some incredible jerky. Still, it’s not cheap. And I wanted to be able to tweak the flavors. You know what that means… I decided to make my own.

I spent some time researching techniques and recipes online, but in the end, I decided to go with my man, Alton Brown.

Brown’s technique appeals to me on several levels. First, I don’t dehydrate a lot of food, so I didn’t really want to purchase a dehydrator. I also didn’t want to use the oven drying technique, because leaving an oven propped open for hours at a time with a toddler running around is too much work.

So, I made a trip to the hardware store, picked up a cheap box fan and some paper furnace filters. Then a trip to the butcher for some flank steak. All stocked up, it was marinade time.

I tried three different marinades for this batch. The first was Alton Brown’s recipe. The other two follow:

Dave’s Variation
2/3 c. Worcestershire Sauce
2/3 c. Soy Sauce
1 Tbsp. Honey
2 tsp. Fine Ground Black Pepper
2 tsp. Coarse Ground Black Pepper
2 Tbsp. Medium Ground Black Pepper
2 tsp. Onion Powder
1 tsp. Garlic Powder
1 tsp. Liquid Smoke
1 tsp. Cayenne Powder

Teriyaki Style
2/3 c. Worcestershire Sauce
1/2 c. Teriyaki Sauce
1/4 c. Soy Sauce
1 Tbsp. Honey
3 tsp. Black Pepper
2 tsp. Onion Powder
1 tsp. Garlic Powder
1/2 tsp. Liquid Smoke
1/2 tsp. Cayenne Powder

I also tried an experiment with cutting the flank steaks, and cut one with the grain (as Alton suggests) and one cross-grain, just to compare textures. I marinated each batch for about 5.5 hours, and then carefully laid out the marinated strips onto my furnace filters, one batch per filter. I then used bungee cords to secure the filters to the box fan, set it up in a cool, dry area, and let it sit.

It took about 16 hours for my jerky to be ready and then it was time for tasting!

My first batch of homemade beef jerky!

Texture wise, both jerky cuts were good. The cuts made with the meat grain were definitely more stringy and chewy. The cross-grain cuts were pretty good, and definitely my preference. They still had a nice “chew” factor, but didn’t take quite as much work. Going forward, I’m going to stick to the cross-grain cut, but if you’re trying it, you should do both at first to find your personal preference.

Flavor wise, the Alton Brown was a solid, damn good jerky. But no surprise, I think my variation was better. First, I like a little more pepper in the initial taste than Alton had, and second, I think the pure ground cayanne (as opposed to red pepper flakes) helped boost the flavors of the marinade, and gave a little more residual heat, which I really like. The most disappointing was the teriyaki, which wasn’t as “teriyaki” as I’d hoped. It was still tasty, but definitely the weakest of the three. I did a taste test among some other jerky aficionados and we were all pretty much in agreement: Alton good, Dave better, teriyaki weak.

This was definitely just the first batch, so there’s still room for tweaking. I’ve already planned some improvements:

1. I’m going to tweak the “Dave” recipe a little more. I’m going to add more pepper, a little teriyaki to the recipe, and boost the garlic a bit. I may play around with different kinds of peppers… not sure yet.

2. I’m definitely going to stick with the cross-grain cut.

3. I’m going to try a couple off different cuts of meat, some top round, and some bison. I like the flank steak, but want to see how the different cuts compare in texture.

4. My wife made cookies yesterday and had out her baking cooling racks when it hit me: they would be perfect for sandwiching jerky strips in! I’ll probably put the jerky strips between the racks, and then put one furnace filter on the front/back (to filter the air blowing through). But that will allow me to reuse the furnace filters.

I’ll be sure to post my future results here, on my quest for the perfect jerky!

Update (4/23/11):

I’m trying a new “sweet” recipe, based on some of the feedback I got on my previous batches. Here’s the new recipe…

Dave’s Sweet Jerk

3/4 c. Soy Sauce
1/2 c. Worcestershire
1 1/4 c. Teryaki Sauce
1 T. Honey
1 T. Dark Brown Sugar
1 T. Ginger
1 tsp. Fine-Ground Black Pepper
1 tsp. Cayenne Pepper
2 tsp. Garlic
2 tsp. Onion Powder
1 tsp. Each Paprika (Smoked Spanish, Hungarian Half-Sharp, California Sweet)
1.5 tsp. Ground Cumin

Glaze (Yes, glaze!)
1/4 c. Dark Brown Sugar
1 tsp Honey
1 tsp Maple Syrup

Ed. had asked me last about the possibility of hosting Blawg Review today, and I had indicated that I would, but since I would be traveling this weekend, that it would be a little more, um, low-key than some of my previous efforts.

Ed., being the kind soul that he is, decided that he didn’t want to burden me with the responsibility while on the road. And so, I thought he had been able to find someone else to host today. Imagine my surprise when I saw his tweet about lacking a host.

So I’ve decided to delay my travels a bit this morning to answer his call for a “sua sponte” edition. (I’m driving, so I have a *little* flexibility, and no groping. At least by the TSA.) So, here it is: your November 22, 2010 Blawg Review. Dave! Style, with an emphasis on Dave! and a little short on the style:

With Thanksgiving approaching fast, I thought I would take the time to focus the Blawg Review on lawyers I’m thankful for. Our is a profession that is often lambasted and subject to ridicule because of those members of the bar who are, well, lesser. It’s easy to take pot-shots at the worst of our profession and there are a number of blawgers out there doing just that. Some do it humorously, some do it viciously. But it’s rare (to me at least) to see lawyers celebrating good lawyers. And there are good lawyers. Let’s be thankful for them this week.

First up, I’m thankful for one of the most well-known lawyers of our history: Abraham Lincoln. I first encountered his famous “blog post” entitled “Notes for a Lecture on Law” when I was a law student. It was read during a guest lecture by Thomas Fitzgerald, Chief Justice of the Illinois Supreme Court (Ret.). I was incredibly moved by Lincoln’s words, and I try to live by them everyday in my practice. I’m thankful that Justice Fitzgerald shared them with us, and I’m thankful that the folks at Harris-Greenwell have them posted, along with some pics of the original in Lincoln’s hand, so you can see not only the incredible text, but get some insight into Lincoln’s thought and writing process.

Thinking back to Law School, I’m also thankful for the sort-of-weekly which is occasionally hosted by Evan Schaeffer and Thanks, But No Thanks. The Law School Roundup makes me thankful that there are law students out there who are not all self-entitled income seekers, and that there are people in law school today who are entering our profession to do some good–be it in public service or in the service of individuals. Reading student blawgs can be a great antidote to some of the cynics in or of our profession.

As a repeat host of Blawg Review, I’d be remise if I wasn’t also thankful for the Blawg Review sherpas who have helped shape my Blawg Review’s past with their numerous and insightful submissions. In addition to many others, I don’t think I could have done it without the assistance from Colin Samuels at Infamy or Praise who now puts together A Round Tuit or Victoria Pynchon who writes the The IP ADR Blog and The Negotiation Law Blog.

Speaking of lawyers helping other lawyers, there are countless blawgs out there who follow changes and happenings in their particular area of law or in a particular jurisdiction. I’d love to name them all here, but I simply can’t. However, since I drove through the “Crossroads of America” (Or as we Hoosiers call it, Indiana) yesterday, I thought I’d give a shout out to The Indiana Law Blog where Marcia Oddi does a fantastic job recapping news, cases, and developments in Indiana law. I’d be willing to bet there’s at least one blogger in your jurisdiction, in your practice area, doing the same thing. Find them. Support them. Post them here in the comments!

I’m also thankful of the folks in our profession who do the really hard stuff that I don’t have the constitution for (no pun intended). I’m speaking mostly of the Criminal Law folks, who are again, to numerous to name in the limited time I’ve got. Some of them are gruff, some of them cultivate an “asshole” image in their on-line personas, but they all do something day-in and day-out that is vital to our lives: prosecutors work to protect our safety and defense attorney’s protect our liberties. So, why not highlight someone who’s not only been at both tables in the courtroom, but is also funny as hell? Here’s a thankful shout out to Ken Lammers who I’ve read since law school.

I don’t practice criminal law. I practice IP. And in that area, I’m particularly thankful that in my home town of Chicago, we have some great IP attorneys who also happen to be great people. If you’re ever in the Windy City for a conference or just passing through, you should try meet up with Kevin Thompson who writes Cyberlaw Central,
David Donoghue of the Chicago IP Litigation Blog or
Evan Brown of Internet Cases. All of them contribute to the IP community in Chicago and all good guys to grab a beer with.

As a solo practitioner, I’m also thankful for Carolyn Elefant and Susan Cartier Liebel. Carolyn writes over at My Shingle (among other places) and is, in my mind, the indisputable queen of solos. She provides so many resources and so much encouragement to those of us on our own in this profession that she deserves all the praise she gets. Susan is another outstanding supporter of solos, and her Solo Practice University is a fantastic resource for those just getting started in solo practice.

Finally, I’d like to take a moment to thank Ed. for Blawg Review. I’ve been reading (and contributing as a host) to Blawg Review for many years and I think it’s a fantastic resource for attorneys everywhere. There are so many wonderful blogs written by dedicated attorneys who take the time out of their busy days to write about topics that are important to them, topics to educate others, or even to merely vent and commiserate. In the deluge of information available, it can be really difficult to find all the good stuff, and Blawg Review helps shine a light on some of the gems out there that I might have missed otherwise.

Putting Blawg Review together is fun as a host, but sweating the details: arranging for hosts week after week, helping with topic ideas, submissions, and feedback once an edition is up must be grueling. But Ed. has never been anything but encouraging and gracious to me, and for that, I’m also thankful.

So, on that note, I encourage anyone reading this hastily dashed off, sua sponte version of Blawg Review to please leave a comment, highlighting one of your fellow attorneys that you are thankful for and why. I don’t have the time to do a fancy or theme based design for this edition, but I think that’s OK, and I’d love for anyone out there to share some good about our profession for this week. How about building a Thanksgiving Blawg Review together? Everyone bring a blawg for the feast, and enjoy!

And don’t forget, Blawg Review has information about next week’s host, and instructions how to get your blawg posts reviewed in upcoming issues.

In a recent post over at My Shingle, Carolyn Elefant talks about the ABA “making a play” for solos and asks if solos should play back. I will preface this post by saying that I have not seen all of the ABA’s new efforts, but based on what was outlined in Carolyn’s post and the ABAJournal article I’m unimpressed.

Here’s the run-down:

* Sponsoring Solosez. Good for Solosez! How does that really help me? Solosez is a mailing list the overhead cannot be that much. And you do not have be an ABA member to participate in Solosez. So, this is worth $X a year??

* GP Solo Magazine. I don’t need another ******* magazine. Seriously. Every bar org out there has a magazine. Or six. I flip through them once standing next to the recycling bin, and unless something really seems worth reading, they go straight in. I probably get 6-8 of these types of magazines a month. In the last year, I’ve given a reprieve to _two_ issues to read an article. In both cases, I regretted it.

* Quarterly Solo e-Mail Newsletter. This is why people increasingly view the ABA as an anachronistic organization. An e-mail newsletter. Seriously???

* Smart Soloing eBook and publication. _Yawn_. As Carolyn mentions, these types of publications rarely contain information that isn’t already available by the boatload on other blogs or on-line resources that are, quite often, free.

* Smart Soloing School. The ABA is so tired and out of ideas, that they have decided to blatantly rip-off one of their _own_ nominated Legal Rebels, Susan Cartier Liebel, who runs Solo Practice University. The ABA claims their “school” is a $1600 value. Well, guess what? SPU costs a fraction of that, and provides excellent, on-going content and community. Why does the ABA need to re-invent the wheel? So they can focus even more on content I don’t need from them because it’s already being provided by someone else who is doing it well?

* Lobbying. Yes, I appreciate the ABA lobbying on behalf of lawyer advertising, blogging, virtual law office technology, etc. But as far as I can tell, given the disparate state of ethics rules across the country regarding virtual offices, etc. The ABA isn’t really doing a bang-up job there, either.

All these things are nice, but honestly, as a practicing solo, let me clue the ABA in on what it is that _*I*_ really need:

1. Community. I need to be in touch with other solos regularly to share resources, share/get referrals, and commiserate with. I can–and do already–have that nationwide through Solosez, Twitter, etc. I don’t need the ABA to do it because they are duplicating effort, and generally, not doing it very well. As for the in-person networking, one or two conferences a year does not make for good networking opportunities. My local bar associations (the Illinois State Bar Association and the Chicago Bar Association) provide so much more value in terms of community and networking, that for the ABA to even attempt it is laughable.

2. Insurance. I need insurance: professional liability insurance, health insurance, life insurance. The ABA “value” really falters here. Did I say falter? I meant fail. Epic fail. Titanic fail. At least for my practice areas and geographic location. Considering the membership numbers at the ABA, the ABA should be able to offer me the best deal in all three areas of major insurance. Yet, in all three, the ABA offered me the _worst_ deals. How is that possible? They have the largest membership of any bar association, and they are lawyers–but they couldn’t negotiate better discounts than my local bars?! Should I fear for the future of the ABA or the future of my profession!?

3. Legal Research. Have you priced Lexis and Westlaw these days? I pay as I go for them, and rely primarily on Fastcase. Which, by the way, I get for _free_ from the Illinios State Bar Association. And the ISBA membership is _still_ less than ABA Membership.

4. CLE. Again, I can get this from so many other sources, most of the time cheaper and better. Including, again, my local bar associations.

So, while I think there _could_ be value in the ABA for solos, there certainly isn’t for me, at least not now. Right now, the only value I get from the ABA comes from Solosez and the TechShow, neither of which require membership to gain access to. For everything else, and I do mean everything, my local bar associations provide a much better return on investment for my membership fees. Of course, living in Chicago, my experience might not be the same for solos who don’t have strong local bar associations–I can’t speak to that.

But in the opinion of this solo Chicago attorney, take the money you save by not joining the ABA and join a local bar association instead. That’s the real “Legal Rebel” way.