I hope you saw the debate last night because the format (questions posed via YouTube videos by regular people) was incredible. I couldn’t wait for the next video question. They were creative, direct, funny, poignant, angry and wacko (the guy with the assault rifle who called it his baby after implying that his babies were his children). Far better questions than moderator debates. I cannot imagine anyone in the Bush administration being able to stand more than a few seconds of this directness.
The format fell down because of two things. First, Anderson Cooper was awful in his management of who he directed questions to and keeping answers relevant. Very bad choice. Second, the candidates could not resist spouting out their talking points instead of directly answering the questions. And this Gravel guy- who the f**k is he? We already have Kucincich in the rabble-rouser role (loved his use of my oil wars analogy) so I guess Gravel is filling the nutcase role which he did quite well.
The winner? Hillary is the only one who sounds and looks presidential. Obama is impressive but naive, Edwards is making good points but I can’t drop the multi-millionaire who goes on three day ‘poverty’ tours image, whatever that is. Biden- love the pit bull, dose of reality bit but he and Dodd (give it up Chris, you’re too old school) can’t escape their long term Senate roots.
Number two? I can’t believe I’m saying this but It’s Richardson. I think he is the dark horse.

They’re doing this with the Republicans in the fall- they’re going to get crucified by the YouTubers. I wouldn’t miss it for the world!

Khoi Vinh writes about the desirability of things that are worn and through that wear are improved. They represent a history of use. The word he seeks (but does not use) is patina. A patina is the gradual wearing of an object until it achieves a personal cohesive feel and appearance. Any antiques dealer will tell you that legitimate patina on a piece is a major factor in its value- those who refinish are destroying the evidence of years of existence and loving usage.
The design of things for temporary use is one that we simply cannot continue to pursue. New buildings are a prime example. In my area a monstrosity of a restaurant called The Cheesecake Factory is being built. This huge temple to overeating is being constructed to last a good ten years at the outside. Its metal frame sheathed in foam plastic and sprayed with a substance designed to make it look like stone, phony sculptures and architectural details betray a cynicism that is breathtaking: We’ll build it cheap, milk it until the novelty wears off, tear it down and build the next novelty building.
The problems here are multi-fold: Disposability extends to things once championed as being ‘built for the ages’. Landfills will have to encompass buildings that are being rebuilt every decade instead of every hundred years. The generation growing up as children now will see nothing recognizable from their youth just a few years from now with the resultant sense of dislocation trailing them for a lifetime. Environmentally, this kind of thing is a disaster, not just because of the disposability but because it flies in the face of sustainability, a critical line we must draw in the sand to survive climate change and population growth.
I’ll never set foot in the place.

Khoi’s piece wonders if his iPhone could acquire a patina of experience. This device is far more sustainable than many gadgets because it is easily software upgradable, a good first step in changing our disposable mindset. I can imagine the day when owning a ‘first-gen’ iPhone might have some cachet. One can hope.