Today I’m announcing the launch of a new blog: Fascinating Names. A while ago I was reading about a street with a strange name and thought that a blog that had some of the stories behind that kind of name would be a pretty interesting read, so a couple of weeks ago I snapped up fascinatingnames.com, bought the Neutica+ WordPress theme, and got to work. I’ll be posting a new name over there every day or two, so check it out, subscribe, follow @fascinames on twitter, and enjoy.

I have now downloaded Firefox 3 with no problems at all and am writing this post using it.  I had played around with some of the release candidates but hadn’t been using them full-time because of plugin compatibility, (I’m looking at you Firebug).

Speaking of Firebug, it didn’t upgrade automatically when I installed FF3 as it should have, and when I went to getfirebug.com I got no response.  After a quick Google search I discovered that getfirebug.com has been down for a bit, (ownership is being transferred to Mozilla so this never happens again).  However, you can download Firebug 1.2 from Mozilla, (this is the FF3-compatible version).

So I am now running FF3, (and keeping a copy of FF2 around for testing). If you want FF3, get it here.

A plan like this screams for regulation. Does dumping nitrogen into the ocean really sound like a good idea? We’ve been told for years not to use soap or fertilizers with too much nitrogen in it because it unbalances the ecosystem of the bodies of water where the runoff ends up.

Not only does this plan pollute in ways that we’ve been trying to avoid for years, but it is also next to impossible to measure how much carbon will be sequestered, (if any), by this project.

That’s about all I have to say, read the article yourself and form your own opinions.

Pop!Tech and Ebay have teamed up to create the Pop!Tech Carbon Initiative. They started selling carbon credits today and will continue to do so through the end of the year. The thing that sets the Pop!Tech Carbon Initiative apart from other carbon offset vendors is that you can actually choose the project that your offset will contribute to. There are three projects. You pick one and buy the offset and your money goes to that project.

Personally, I would like to see the projects certified as Gold Standard, or something similar, (they’re not at the moment), however since I can choose which project my credits support I can support the project that I believe is best, (for example one of the projects involves reforestation — I would likely choose another project).

Finally, this quote from the Pop!Tech Carbon Offset Initiative website that really drives home the concept of additionality in carbon offset projects:

It is essential that the activity you are supporting would not otherwise have happened. So if someone is installing a solar hot water system on their roof, for instance, which will reduce the amount of gas they burn to heat water, and you offer to pay for half of it, that is not a valid carbon offset.

Shane Bernier is seven years old, and has had cancer for two years already. This year for his birthday on May 30 he wants as many birthday cards as possible. He’s trying to break a Guiness record.

Every card he receives gives Shane a small escape from his life in the hospital and his cancer, and according to his mother, since he’s been getting the cards Shane’s immune system has become stronger.

To send a card to Shane, simply send it to:
Shane Bernier
PO Box 484
Lancaster, Ontario
K0C 1N0
Canada

If you can write it in French he will be able to read it. If not don’t worry, his parents will read it to him.

On YouTube:

Now I have to go get a card & send it.

Update: My card is now sent!

InformationWeek is reporting that the FAA in the U.S. has “placed a moratorium” on upgrades to Windows Vista, Office 2007, and Internet Explorer 7. This comes hot on the heels of InformationWeek reporting last week that the DOT placed a similar ban on Microsoft products.

The reason for the temporary ban is to examine the feasibility of using Linux-based systems with Google Apps, a big victory for Google, and I think a great idea. There would be some huge cost savings not having to buy Windows or MS MS Office. However, there are a few disadvantages as well: first, since the FAA deals with air travel one might assume that their employees fly a fair bit, (I’m not sure how true this is), and right now there is very little internet access on airplanes, and second, this is the FAA, they deal with pretty important information that should be kept safe. Can they trust Google to do that? Or, can they at least trust Google to keep the data as safe as it was before?

There is one thing I don’t agree with in this ban on Microsoft products. Why ban upgrading to IE7? It’s free and it’s way better than IE6. I know that there will be some issues with upgrades that will require some technicians’ time but really, I think it’s worth the effort. IE7 is being adopted very quickly and if the FAA forces all their 45,000 users to stick with IE6, just because in a 18 months, (or whenever), they’ll be using Linux those users will suffer. Really, everyone should be upgrading to IE7, or something else, as soon as possible. Forcing your workforce to stick with out-of-date software that can’t do its job properly is not the way to go about this.

That said, I think it is a good plan to go for Linux. Tax-paying Americans will benefit, as will the flying public in general.

The act proposes to “protect” children by cutting off federal funding for schools and libraries that do not block access of minors to a list of websites to be published by the FCC. The FCC is to come up with this list taking into consideration the extent to which each website:

`(i) is offered by a commercial entity;
`(ii) permits registered users to create an on-line profile that includes detailed personal information;
`(iii) permits registered users to create an on-line journal and share such a journal with other users;
`(iv) elicits highly-personalized information from users; and
`(v) enables communication among users.’.

In layman’s terms this means: Blogs, Wikis, Amazon, Yahoo!, Newsvine, Digg, the new Netscape.com, and many other valuable sites. Some sites may be spared because they’re not-for-profit, (Wikipedia perhaps), but you never know.

If this resolution is signed into law and withstands legal challenges, (I’m sure there will be some, and honestly I don’t know as it will stand up), it means that not only will children not be able to access useless time-wasting sites from school, but also an incredible number of very useful and valid resources.

For me it means that if I were to add interactivity to the Ballet it could be banned! Most of my users come from school. In fact the site is used as a reference for some courses.

Children do need some form of protection online the same as they do in the “real” world but this act is not the answer. What should be done is children need to be educated. After all, you don’t forbid your child from ever leaving the house, but you do teach him or her to never talk to strangers.

For an excellent resource, from a teacher who is very web-aware, check out Vicki A. Davis’ blog. She goes through the act and tears apart the good, bad, and the ugly of it.

If you want to do something act fast. This Resolution went from being introduced to passed in just over a month. There is an online petition at saveyourspace.org to try to stop this bill in the senate. If you feel, (as I do), that this bill is wrong, go and sign it and maybe something will happen.

For still more check out Techcrunch and CNN.