I used to watch a lot of tv when I was a kid. One thing that was very common was for stations (cable stations especially) to broadcast tv shopping in the off hours. I recall TV3 did this a lot, they called it "teleshop" I think.

What strikes me is that not only has this home shopping gig not worn out yet, it hasn't even changed at all from the early 90s. And that's a bit unusual, because so many practices have been forced to evolve or become deprecated. But this tv shopping has survived. Why is this? Do they actually sell those products? Hard to believe, isn't it? I've never bought anything. In fact the very "exclusivity" of the products, how you "can't buy them in any store" raises a serious credibility issue with me.

And the funny thing is they still sell the same things! In the 80s/90s there was a well established stereotype, at least in Norway, about vacuum cleaner salesmen who would come to your house and try to demonstrate the product for you. This was a solid reference for jokes and humor programs. A bit I've seen many times is a person answering the door and before the caller has a chance to say what they want you say "no, I don't want a vacuum cleaner" and slam the door.

And yes, in the 90s they sold vacuum cleaners on tv. This is how it would go. First of all, the studio looks like one of those kitchens they used to give away for prizes in game shows. It's clean, it's very big, no dishes or kitchen ware in sight. There are two hosts. One is the product expert, who is going to demonstrate the product. The other is, usually a woman, the person who is going to exclaim amazement at every detail. They start off with a side-by-side comparison of the product on sale with some other "typical" product. So they make a mess on the floor, and the "expert" tells the woman to clean it up . She tries, and, of course, fails. Then the expert uses *his* product and it goes very well. She's very impressed. Then he starts enumerating the virtues of the better vacuum cleaner, to her wide eyed disbelief.

After that's done, he launches into a sales presentation. This is how much it costs, but we're giving everyone the special discount (which is perpetual) and so you will only pay this much. Plus shipping. And we're giving you these bonus items just because we're nice. And if you order within 10 days you'll get a complimentary cheaper-product-also-sold-on-tv. You can't beat that deal.

Then comes the black and white sequence. A woman (a different one) is shown vacuuming and she's holding a hand to her back, which means her back hurts. She's also doing a poor job of cleaning, as she misses spots here and there. This is you. It's shown in black and white to tell you that what you're doing is arcane and obsolete. And silly. Seriously, wisen up and buy this product. And now comes a repeat of the sales pitch again, without any people this time, just filming the vacuum cleaner, all the extensions you can put on it, and the special price. And the bonus gifts. And finally the list of countries and telephone numbers to call.

And if you turn on the tv today in the off hours, you'll see very same thing. The same kind of studio, the same people, the same lines, the same sequence of scenes. It's like archival footage. And they *still* sell vacuum cleaners. Now they've abandoned vacuum cleaners in the traditional sense, so they sell mops and things that clean with steam and what have you, but it's the same thing.

But how much can a vacuum cleaner really do for you? It makes cleaning easier, but it won't make you happy, will it? I like the products that make you a better person. Like pills that give you more energy, and dietary products, and skin care. It only takes a clever person to make a better mop, but it takes a doctor to examine and approve a chemical that's going to be sold to the public. If you're a doctor you can be the star on tv shopping. They bring you out, you get applause and admiration. Then you have to explain how the lotion works and why it's so fantastic. Be careful to inject some pseudo scientific terms to sound like a credible scientist. And you have to wear a white lab coat and a stethoscope, like you just came off duty at work, because who in their right mind would believe a real doctor would come on a program like this?

I think that if you really have something to say, you'll write it. And when it is supposed to be advocacy or educational, you should also try to make it a) rich in content to be gripping and b) short enough for people to bother reading it. I've read countless of texts along these lines and I enjoy learning something.

On the other hand, when you have nothing to say, you can often obscure your lack of thought by making a list of things. Because then if it's longer than 10 items, each item is so short that there is virtually nothing conveyed by it. And even if at some point there was a rationale to it, the statement has been clipped to the point where all possible nuance is gone and what remains is a tired cliché that doesn't say anything.

Just like this fabulous list of 101 tips to improve your "online presence". What a priceless repository of knowledge this really is. For example what about #16 Tell your friends about your site. It’s free advertising init. By golly, never occurred to me. That should bring another handful of people around, most of whom are probably not interested anyway. Or #15 Add a link to your site in the signature of any forums you post on. The sheer ingenuity of this plot, can you believe it? Quick, register on as many forums as you can! The list as random as it gets, and the ordering is too.

You have your pick of utterly irrelevant things like #40 Avoid proprietary technologies like Java and Active X. Yeah, cause your users really care don't they. That is, they might... not, if they actually knew. It's a bit like saying "don't use a screwdriver to put up that lamp, no one will come to your house". Or why not #43 Contribute to related subject areas on Wikipedia. Well, it's nice to contribute anyway. #42 Learn about CSS. It’s the new HTML. Er... no, it's not.

My favorite has to be #48 Become a leading authority on your chosen subject. That should keep you busy for anything between ten years and a lifetime.

Well, the list goes on like this and it's utterly useless. If you're concerned about your "online presence", you probably know all the factual stuff, and you can safely ignore all the stupid suggestions. #37 Giving away an eBook is an excellent way to generate word-of-mouth about your site. Uh-huh.

Well this list is particularly rubbish, but it's pretty close to the standard. Long lists of tips on web promotion and money management (those seem the most popular), apparently written by people who are superbly successful and for some reason have decided to spend their time making long, useless lists about it.

And how redundant am I for making a point about redundant lists? :P

There is a certain large class of internet users who, despite knowing that the internet is global, only seem to be interested in the national parts of it. They will use webmail, but only some national provider in their language. They will read papers, but only papers of their country. This to me is a little weird, because why would you limit yourself to just that little part when you have the whole thing to choose from? Anyway, my point is that if you're one of these people you're not going to understand what I'm about to say.

If you are one of those people on the internet, of which there are many, who have a wider perspective than just their country, then you can appreciate how often it feels like you're a second class citizen. Want to buy something on amazon? Well too bad, because there is no Dutch amazon, so you have to buy it from the US and overpay for shipping (or the French, German or UK one, but those don't have nearly the same selection). Oh, and it takes two weeks instead of 3 days. Ebay? Same deal. More often than not, you get a worse deal when you don't have a US shipping address. A lot of things you can't get at all. And most sites default to their largest, US version as well. It's not discrimination on purpose, of course, it's just that that's their biggest market.

Well that's kind of like it is to run Linux. There is less software available, you don't get support for hardware, basically the total number of services offered for Linux is much less, because the market is lesser. Either you can't get the same deals or you have to do more work to get them. But it's actually less painful than online shopping, so those who are switching will find it's not as bad as they thought. Basically if you can stand to live in Europe and shop online, Linux is a delight. :cap:

The word geek gets thrown around a lot, with a slightly negative connotation. Actually the degree to which it is a negative term is determined by the social circle in which it is uttered. To some it is an insult, to others it's just a fairly neutral classification.

In any event, the term geek (as with many such labels) is a very bland and generic thing to call someone. What it means is a person who enjoys doing something on their own. Not a terribly discriminating term, is it? So if you're a person who can't stand to be alone for even a minute and possesses no creativity as to what you can do when people aren't available to spend time with you, then you are not a geek.

The geek classification often is linked to excellence in some field. If you spend a lot of time on something, which makes you a geek, you inevitably get quite good at it, which again cements your legacy of a geek. Of course, there's no other way to achieve the same thing, so if you want to excel at something, you have to spend a lot of time on it, and that amounts to an achievement.

For example, if you spend a lot of time learning a foreign language, then you're a language geek. If you spend a lot of time ice skating, that makes you an ice skating geek. So whatever you do to a certain level, you're a geek for doing it. And if you don't do anything to the extent that it establishes a pattern for which people call you a geek, then you won't be a geek. For instance, if you do *a lot* of different things for short periods of time, but never do anything for a long time, then won't be a geek. But, of course, you never do anything long enough to be good at it, so you don't accomplish anything.

If you think about when it is that people get assigned this label, it is precisely when they are engaged in doing something that doesn't involve the person announcing this fact. As such, it is perfectly possible to be a geek for doing something *with* people, just as long as it doesn't involve *everyone*. For instance, role playing geeks play in groups, and crackers (no, not white people called "crackers" by black people, I'm talking about the kind of crackers who break into computer systems) also associate with other crackers, because otherwise they would have no recognition for what they do. This is only a manifestation of the fact that people who are interested in something naturally seek out other people who are also into the same thing, to exchange information. It makes sense. So my first definition is actually too narrow, being a geek is *me* doing something that doesn't involve *you*.

So was the term geek originally a protest against exclusion? Was it a term that means why-can't-I-be-in-your-club? It might have been. Of course, not necessarily the word geek itself, words often originate in unexpected and random ways, but there are many words in many languages that mean roughly the same thing as geek.

I think we all agree it's very important to be politically correct. You shouldn't say spokesman, it's spokesperson. And you better not say Black, it's African American (whatever that means). But did you notice that there are still some shockingly backward phrases in popular use?

For example, Congressman and Congresswoman. What an outrage! I'm going on the record right now with Congressperson.

Likewise, all of our superheroes are in dire need of renaming too. Spiderman becomes Spiderperson, Superman is Superperson, Batman is Batperson, Wonderwoman is Wonderperson. The Green Lantern keeps his name, as lame as it is.