Ask.com Privacy Eraser

The NY Times today has a story saying that ask.com is adding a privacy eraser to its search engine. You can just click it on with each search.

Ask.com and other major search engines like Google, Yahoo and Microsoft typically keep track of search terms typed by users and link them to a computer’s Internet address, and sometimes to the user. However, when AskEraser is turned on, Ask.com discards all that information, the company said.

So I checked out Ask.com. And there's the privacy eraser button in the corner and when I clicked it I got this window:



(You can click on it to enlarge it.)


But is ask.com good enough to find what you are looking for? I searched for:

what do I know Alaska blog steve

And this blog didn't show up until the second page.

When I did the same with google, What Do I Know? showed up in the first four spots. Of course, this is a blogspot blog closely tied to Google.

Anyway, I'd suggest people start trying ask.com so that the other big browswers realize that people do want privacy options. Even if that means when I check out the hits on my blog, I'll get less information about the visitors from sitemeter.

Here's what ask.com's FAQ's say about what will be erased:

What is search activity data?
Search activity data includes information about the pages you visit on Ask.com, including the terms you search for, the links you click, your IP address, and any user or session identifier. When AskEraser is enabled, Ask.com will delete from our servers all references containing any single element of search activity data; query (what you searched for, clicked on, etc.), IP address (where you searched from), and user/sessions IDs (who you are in relation to previous searches).

Return to Top

Is my search activity deleted immediately?
When AskEraser is enabled, your search activity will be deleted from Ask.com servers within a number of hours. In some instances, it may take a longer period of time for your search activity to be deleted for example when we need to run automated systems to detect and block users or automatic bots that are abusing our site (see Is there any reason Ask.com will stop deleting my search activity?)

If Yahoo had this policy in China, the government there couldn't track down who visited what sites. And this may become more important in the US too.

Not Consuming isn't just about Being Cheap

Our first VW van lasted 24+ years. We still have the TV my mom gave us when our son was a year old. And you may have read my post about replacing our Maytag washer this year, which we got when he was born. (Now he's older than I was when his little sister was born.) My mother was certainly an influence on this sort of behavior. She grew up in Germany where, even today in many places, you have to turn on the lights in the stairwell and they go off in two minutes. I was raised with a no wasting household, lights out when you leave the room, don't leave the water running while you're brushing your teeth, etc. - well at least that was the dominant mantra if not always practiced.

Living for two years in rural Thailand added to that earlier training. I lived in a house up on stilts. There was electricity and I could fill my large earthen jug with water with a hose from a tap outside. But basically I saw that life without all the things I took for granted was quite possible, even enjoyable. No telephone, no tv, no car. (This was the late 60s, everyone with a decent job has a cell phone in Thailand now.) I learned that most of the stuff just isn't necessary. That doesn't mean I don't use technology today, but I use the stuff that I need to do what I want to do. So I have my macbook and my Canon digital camera, but no cell phone.

The whole logic of capitalism has seemed to me to be a giant ponzi scheme. It works as long as you keep people buying and using up stuff. So you have to develop planned obsolescence, products that will break down so you have to keep buying new ones. So when I saw this video, I realized it voiced my reasoning pretty well. The whole video is at storyofstuff.com




I know there are people who will scream and yell things like socialism, communism, radical freak, etc. But their ancestors were the last to give up the flat earth theory, argued Hitler was Germany's future, and still think global warming is an environmentalist plot.

Here's a quote from the film attributed to Victor Lebow, The Journal of Retailing, Spring 1955, p. 7, as quoted in Michael Jacobson Marketing Madness,1995, pg."191. I can't find the article right now to confirm it because the UAA library on line data bases don't go back that far. But they do have copies - probably microfiche (awful stuff) - going back to 1955. And just because he wrote it, did anyone read it before this Michael Jacobson found it? Was it an important influence on American business? I just don't know. But it sure sounds like the philosophy that has been followed.


Maybe this quote sounded too good to be true. And the only people quoting it on the internet were anti-consumption people. Well, it was a 1955 reference, but something wasn't right. I looked up Vicor Lebow again. He wrote a book in 1972 called "Free Enterprise: The Opium of the American People." Did this man go through some great conversion between 1955 and 1972? Or was the original quote a critique rather than a prescription? I'll try to read the original article tomorrow. It doesn't change the point being made, but if this was a critique, it is hard to argue as they do in the film that this was the blueprint for planned obsolescence.

[follow up post with the complete original 1955 article posted here.]

AIFF - Their Picks for Best Films, My Criteria

From the AIFF official blog:
Best Feature
The Clown and the Fuhrer

Best Short
Its a tie for first: Anonymous and Demain la Veille
Runner up: Dear Lemon Lima

Best Documentary
The Prize of the Pole

Best Short Documentary
Labeled


We were pretty close. My picks were

Clown and Führer
Anonymous
Taxi to the Dark Side (It wasn't clear, except for the shorts, which films were and weren't actually in competition for awards. If Taxi wasn't in competition, then the Prize or maybe Autism the Musical would have been my pick)
Labeled
I Have Seen the Future was my pick for animated, but that seems to have been rolled into shorts.


[December 28 - I just saw "A summer in the cage" and it would challenge the Prize of the Pole for the documentary award. It turns out that Taxi to the Dark Side was in the competition. I don't see how Prize beat it, and I think Summer in the Cage was a strong contender. Taxi wins on current political currency, but I think Cage was - cinematically a more interesting movie. Also, there were two other winners -

• Joseph Henry - Best Super Short

• La Flor Mas Grande Del Mundo - Best Animation

I haven't seen Joseph Henry, but I have since seen the La Flor. I still prefer I Have Seen the Future just for its technical innovativeness, though Flor does have more appealing content.
Based on Summer in the Cage I've added a new AIFF post.]

So what were my criteria? There are several factors.

• Technical Quality A continuum from.. shaky...no problems..very good..innovative. Some might have a combination of more than one of these which makes it harder to judge. Clearly Anonymous and I Have Seen the Future impressed me with their innovative technical styles.
  

• Content - There's a vague continuum from:
• Negative/disrespectful ...Boring...good story....originality...currency...impact
• I gave my only really negative review to The Dalai Lama's Cat because I thought it was a very negative and disrespectful portrayal. That doesn't mean a film can't be critical - I gave Taxi to the Dark Side lots of credit for being critical of the Defense Department's use of torture. But they provided lots of evidence. The Cat filmmakers began with what appears to be a bogus story about a cat, knew apparently little or nothing about the Dalai Lama or the Tibetan people, and then used Tibet, its people, and its holy shrines as the props for their ethnocentric humor. They used the Dalai Lama's name to sell their picture. It was simply rude and disrespectful to get a laugh and sell their movie. This is not about being politically correct. If you drop a kid on his head for laughs (which they did in the movie) that's not acceptable in my value system. Most depressing was how many people did laugh.
• Content is probably the most variable issue, since what interests me may not interest you. I thought Prize of the Pole and Taxi to the Dark Side both covered important social/political issues well, but that Taxi's was focused on a more current issue and had potentially more impact.
• Friends thought No Place Like Home was awful. I thought it had some editing problems, but there were a lot of things in there that I enjoyed.

• Use of Medium. Movies combine sight and sound and movement. The best movies are those that take advantage of the medium and tell their stories in ways that you couldn't tell it orally, in a book, etc.

• Whole Package. Even with weaknesses here and there, a film could pull it off by doing some things so well that the problems don't really matter. Autism the Musical seemed to use pretty basic video technology, but the story it told and how it told that story made it an excellent film. Just like parts of a face, individually, might be a little off, all together the face can be beautiful. So the same is true for the movie.

Anyway, those are the things, roughly, that go into my assessment of a good movie.

AIFF - Labeled

We saw the first two minutes or so of this film the other night. I learned today it was supposed to be the intro for "Crossing Alaska with Horses." But it was so crowded there and the [Horses] filmmaker was there to speak afterward, they pulled it to have more time for the Q&A.

But in those first couple of minutes I fell in love with the movie. The visuals of the paint being poured into the tray, cleaning the brushes, painting the rooms were just exquisite. And tonight after seeing the rest of the ten minute movie it was even better. Elaine Riddick was sterilized at age 14 after giving birth after being raped. Now a house painter, she tells her story against the beauty of the images of the paint, painting, and peeling wall paper. She says the painting has helped with her anger. Dan Currier, the film maker, has a great eye, and through the visuals turned a compelling story into an extraordinary short documentary.

And it won the best short documentary award at the festival. You can see the whole video at his website.

The video below shows a few seconds near the beginning of the movie and a bit of the film maker Q&A after the movie was shown tonight.

AIFF - My Picks [Final Version]

The Festival awards were given out last night, but let me identify my own picks first and then official award winners. I saw four more tonight and have added them into the revised documentary table. It was interesting putting these tables together and seeing what all I've seen. Here's my first go at this. I'll do a final version after tonight's movies. I heard it said there were about 175 films at the conference (many shorts) and you can see that I only saw a small percentage of that. But I had to make lists of the films I saw to figure out which ones I liked best. And that led to the tables below so you can see what my choices were from. There are still a couple I want to see and I'm hoping I can this week before all the dvd's go back. Those are: Henchmen, by the filmmaker I met last week and Horn OK Please. (I just saw that the second one is 90 minutes. I'd thought it was a short animation. Maybe I should put others on my list.)

The tables for each category show the films I've seen in that category and how I rated them. Many I have mentioned already on the blog. You can put the name in the search blog window at the top left if you want more on that film.

Feature films:


Animated (I wasn't that impressed with most. They were technically good, but empty.)

Short features:
[Before Dawn got left off this chart, I'd put it in the "Go Out of Your Way to See It" Column]


Documentaries: (It turns out I didn't see many short documentaries - both tonight - so I'm making one documentary category.)


I'll do more on the four documentaries we saw tonight. And, making these tables, I realize I should discuss the criteria that I used. Actually, the first step is my gut reaction. Then I go looking for reasons I responded that way. More on that later.

AIFF - Film Makers Forum 2

Today's the last day of the Festival and I got to Ship Creek Mall for the filmmaker forum only to find the doors locked, but there was a note - moved to Starbucks at 5th & F. There I found 11 folks around the table talking about making films.

A majority were local people and talk got around to how to improve the film making environment in Alaska itself - ways for people to keep in touch with like minded others, equipment rental possibilities, etc. People talked about projects and passed out their cards. There was even someone from Bristol Bay Alliance looking to connect to local film makers so they can make a film about Bristol Bay and the potential impacts of mining. He made it clear they want an all Alaskan project - funding, film makers, everything. And they want it something that talks to people in the middle, not the extremes. Here's a glimpse at the meeting.

AIFF - Shorts in Competition Catch Up

This evening we saw Body/Antibody at the museum and then back to the Fireweed for Cthulhu.

But I need to catch up with all the great shorts we saw at the Shorts in Competition showing Friday night. Was that only yesterday? This was a very strong field of good shorts.

I'll give you the Festival website blurb and my comments.

The Wine Bar
When blue-collar Henry orders a beer in a snooty wine bar he offends everyone and has to defend himself and the woman sitting next to him.
In Short Competition

This one I already liked the best last Saturday and did a short comment then. This one is just a very well made, funny, insightful, and you feel good at the end.

Dear Lemon Lima,
A lonely girl with a vivid imagination struggles to plant seeds of love after her narcissistic sweetheart breaks her heart.

Posted about this one already.

Boletos Por Favor
(Tickets Please)
A train, a pursuit, only one way to escape.

It's hard to write about shorts without telling too much. This one was like walking into a highly charged situation and getting to watch it close up. The ending wasn't as satisfying as it could have been.

Anonymous
New fresh kind of independent cinema.

This one blew me away. It had a quirky style, every now and then it got jerky, like stuttering visually, along with the sound of the turntable scratching back and forth. And it was just right for this strange little story of a writer, his typewriter, the woman in the apartment next door, and an elevator. This was my favorite. Though it might not be everyone's taste.

Security
Dark humor veers into tragedy in Security, a drama about an American Immigration agent at Newark International Airport whose private fears spill into his professional life when he confronts an Iranian mother and her son. Starring Chris Messina (Six Feet Under). Based on the play by Israel Horovitz.

This one had me so pulled in that I totally forgot about my camera. Powerful. Homeland Security is NOT the hero of this film.

La Parabolica
(The Parabolic Dish)
During the broadcast of the Pope's visit, Vicente’s television is broken. Desperate, he decides to make a homemade parabolic dish.

This was the weakest of the bunch. It was fine, but not up to the quality of the others.

Demain la Veille
(Waiting for Yesterday) (See the trailer)
Bob is a 30 year old man like all others: he walks backwards, looses his memory, his skills, like a good citizen. But one night, he wakes up in sweat realizing that the world that he lives in is not “normal”. As he starts behaving differently, he finds himself chased by mercenaries, trying to put him back on track. Little does he know what he is in for: fighting the abstract power that has taken mankind backwards.

This one was also amazing. Seeing the world go backwards - wine pouring out of the mouth into the glass, ink disappearing off the page into the pen - is a nice brain stretcher. Making the film go backward isn't that hard, but at times I thought the storm troopers might actually have been running backward. I'd like a copy of this to play over and over again. Not sure if this was that good or it was simply the novelty of everything going backwards. Definitely worth seeing.

AIFF - Your Beautiful Cul De Sac Home

Waiting at the Fireweed to get in.






Getting to talk to the director of this film, Cameron Kirkwood was an extra bonus after watching this film. There was excellent acting, complicated story lines, and hard issues - how to live in a compromised world. Bringing all of it together wasn't easy, and I still had questions about how Trevor connected with Ben. Cameron pointed to events in the film that did tie them together, but I just didn't know enough at that point in the film. He mentioned that an earlier version was even more vague and they'd debated about how much to make it all clear. I think leaving some things unspelled out can be a good idea. I was making the connections here, and I think in a second viewing things would all fall into place. As I ponder this issue, I think that the basics of the story line should be fairly clear at the end. There shouldn't be questions like, but how did that guy get in there? With the basic story line in place, there should be as many layers of story as you can get in for the viewer to discover in multiple viewings. There was also a 'lecture" toward the end. An older name sits Ben down and tells him what's what. The actor was very good and it worked. But it was on the edge of heavy handed and I'm sure for people who reject the message it would have seemed to have crossed the line.

The movie also did a good job of integrating the issue of domestic violence into script, and issue I have an interest in. We've gotten to see some really fine films showing peeks into different people's worlds in non-standard film languages. Thanks to all the volunteers who have put this all together.

AIFF - Most Likely To

I saw two very good Canadian films - both about young men at early career stage trying to figure out how to live in the world. They were both well made and had stories to tell.

The blurb for Most Likely To says:

The film was shot in a Danish style imploying many techniques found in Dogme 95 practice but specifically was inspired by murdered filmmaker Theo van Gogh. 1) The film was shot with a rule of three - Shot in 3 days, with 3 camera's, 3 takes per scene, for 3 grand. 2) Without any rehearsal, the dialouge in the film is completely improvised.

Tony Sheppard, the Festival founder, said they did it for $5000. Five high school friends meet as they are at early stages of their careers, or should be. They are staying for the weekend at the home of the boss of the young attorney in the group. And he is worried that the party they are planning is going to cost him his job. Movie parties can be bad, but this one was filmed well - including split screen stuff. But things kick into high gear after the party. As they discuss whether to call the cops or not, I thought, this is the film that Alaskans should watch. So many people ask how Juneau got so corrupt. How is it Kott Kohring might not get that they did wrong. Here are five young men making a major decision based on the potential consequences to their lives. And they don't think about it twice. Good movie!

AIFF - Playing Cats and Moose

We were a little late to Out North so we had to sit on the floor to watch these two films.

The crowd, or at least parts of the crowd, loved the first movie - The Dalai Lama's Cat. The film festival's program blurb isn't too far off:

'Lonely Planet' meets 'The Office' at a dizzying 5000 metres.

But I had several other reactions, none positive.

1. This is another self promotion travel film. Last night we had Crossing Alaska with Horses, and earlier this year we had Asiemut. You go on a trip, take a video camera (and crew in the case of Horses), and pay for your trip by making a movie. Asiemut worked for me. The two from the festival didn't. This one not at all.
2. The movie has nothing to do with the Dalai Lama or cats. The title is premised on a story one of the travelers heard about the Dalai Lama's cats and reincarnation. They could find nothing about this cat story - in the book stores of Kathmandu or in Tibet.
3. The use of the Dalai Lama's name in the title is nothing but blatant exploitation of his name. People regard the Dalai Lama highly and drew many to the film. This film, while criticizing the Chinese in Tibet for disappearing any evidence of the Dalai Lama in Tibet, didn't show any understanding of the Dalai Lama himself. I'm sure though, the Dalai Lama would just offer a mysterious smile if he saw this, but I think he deserves a cut of any profit they make.
4. These 40 or 50 somethings acted like drunk frat boys and made ignorant fun of everyone and everything. I feel a little like a grump here, but when you visit the holy place of several religions, leaving your girlfriend's fluffy pink slippers and underwear as an offering, it isn't humorous for me. Acting like this at home is one thing, but when you do it elsewhere, it's just rude. Try this line: "He made friends with the locals by dropping a little kid on his head" and then the audience laughs at him playing with a little kid and dropping him (accidentally, I'm sure) on his head. I guess what gets me aroused is that this is rich white privilege at work. The Nepalese and Tibetans put up with stupid tourists for the same reason they put up with the Chinese - they have no choice. But if one of these Tibetans were to come to Britain or Australia (they said they were Brits living in Australia) or to the US and acted like they did, they'd probably run into serious problems, as we saw in a short film later in the evening called "Security" about an Iranian woman and her son who get special interrogation in a US airport on the way to visit her husband teaching at a US university.
5. They told us after the showing that they lied about their film making intentions because they wouldn't have gotten permission to enter Tibet and their guides could have gotten into trouble. Nevertheless, the were willing to risk their guides' livelihood and possible freedom for their own lark. Exposing others to such risks to document human rights abuses to the world is one thing, to have a laugh and possibly make some money that the risk takers won't share and have never consent to is quite another. I understand self centered 13 and 14 year olds doing this, but I expect more from adults.

Look, if I met these guys in a pub in Australia or in Anchorage, I'm sure we'd tell good stories and get on fine. But my overseas experiences have been attempts to learn the language where I was and learn about people from their perspectives, not to make fun of the people I visited. Many of the films in this festival have given us glimpses into the culture and inner worlds of people we would never otherwise meet. This film did give us insight into Mike and Peter's world, one that enjoys privileges the people they meet will never have. And they use those privileges not to learn, not to share what they've learned, or not even to be introspective, but to clown around with the backdrop a people in poverty. They don't laugh with the people of Tibet, but at them. This is a far different movie than, say Asiemut, where two film makers biked through Mongolia to India. They used the 'exoticness' of the people of Tibet and the cache of the Dalai Lama's name to pay for their trip to Tibet. They said they sent five copies of the movie to the Dalai Lama, but they didn't say if they make a profit they would share any of it with the people of Tibet.


Below the film makers talk after the showing.



Oh yeah, the title mentioned moose too. The second film was about local heroes Rick Sinnott and Jessy Coltrane, the wildlife biologists who help keep humans and moose (and bears and other critters) coexisting in Anchorage. This film was fun. Rick is well known and generally well liked in Anchorage and I even went out with him once to band magpies. Not an easy task. We like our moose walking the streets and his work helps to keep the moose and the people safe so that this can continue. That's what this film made for the BBC is about.