High Def Confusion

I know that huge amounts of technology, standards, and terminology that come along with these fancy new HDTV's can be seriously confusing. And I realize that setting the things up correctly is not always the most obvious thing to do. However, it's not rocket surgery by any stretch of the imagination, and I find this article a bit scary. If you live in one of the country's estimated 20 million homes with HDTV sets, please listen up, as I have an important tip for you: if the picture you see isn't ridiculously better than what you were used to from your old TV, you're not watching a program in HD. I don't care what it says at the start of the show.

That approximate half of HD sets in the country aren't able to watch HD programs on their fancy sets reminds me of a funny (if perhaps statistically inaccurate) aphorism: half of the population is dumber than the average American. I wish all of us happy and smart holiday seasons.

Excuse me while I vent

OK, I realize that this here web thing is all about the dissemination of information, preferably quickly, and I realize that its fluid and immediate nature tends to mean that people aren't often able to edit (or have edited) things they write as much as, say, a novel or a term paper might be. Those of you who pay attention to user comments here on the Chronicles will know that I'm no champion editor, either, as my big bro has had to correct some of my more glaring boo-boos from time to time. So I think we can all stand to be more forgiving of grammar mistakes and typos on the Internet than we might otherwise be inclined to be. Besides, people who make a big deal of complaining about and/or correcting the grammar of others generally -- not to put too fine a point on it -- annoy the ass out of people.

However, I can't keep quiet about this one any longer or I might explode, and that would be quite messy. There's one recurring mistake in particular that I've been noticing at an ever-increasing rate that has me wondering if it's a mistake or just an example of widespread ignorance. I used to see it every now and then and just chalk it up to the whole lack of editing I mentioned above. However, I can't recall the last time I saw it used correctly, and it's used way more than I would have thought. What I'm talking about here is the difference between "compliment" and "complement." The former has to do with goodness (praise, good wishes, etc.). The latter has to do with completeness. (There are other meanings, but they aren't the ones that are confused.) I'm sure you know this. You're very smart. But I wish that you would inform the people who write things I read on the web (read: sportswriters), because they don't have a clue.

The most recent example (that made me write this post) was talking some smack about the Pittsburgh Steelers' punter, Chris Gardocki. It said, "He entered Week 14 last in the AFC in net punting average — which is also no complement to the team’s punt-coverage team." I think it's no compliment to anyone. Not to Gardocki, not to the punt-coverage team, and certainly not to the writer. Come to think of it, not to me, either, as I just can't let things go. I think I have a problem.

Apparently, I'm not the only one who has noticed this general state of confusion.

OK. I'm done. Thanks for letting me vent. You may now return to your normal, hopefully less picayune lives.

Just Let It Go

I know you love your cellphone. I mean, who doesn't really? In this very space, I've waxed rhapsodic (or at least enthusiastic) about the things that cell phones can do. However, one has to wonder just how valuable the thing really is. I know it has all your phone numbers in it, along with your pictures and text messages and endlessly downloaded ringtones. Still, isn't there a place where you draw the line to say, "It's just not worth it -- I'll get a new phone?" Isn't there? I'm thinking this guy should consider revisiting where he draws that line.

1 and 5

It seemed to many that the sky was falling. After a lackluster (and perhaps Duke-hangover-induced) home win over Eastern Michigan, the Hoosiers traveled to bucolic Terre Haute and put forth about at much energy as I will typically exert on my couch on Sunday morning. (Not a lot.) So they lost. Obviously, they should have been able to win that game. They should have been more interested, more energetic. But they weren't, and they paid for it. That was a low day. That's not to take anything away from the Sycamores, who played well, but they shouldn't be able to beat this Hoosier team's backups. All was not well in Hoosierdom. They don't care. They don't play hard. Killingsworth has been reading his press clippings. They settle for jumpers. Davis can't coach. They won't buy me a pony. You've heard it all before. Not good times.

So what was to happen when they faced Kentucky, a team who has dominated the Hoosiers for the past 10 years (IU was 1 and 9 against them in that time), a team whose coach, according to some know-nothing blogger, absolutely owned residence inside Mike Davis's cranium? The Hoosiers pounded those Wildcats. That's what. It was glorious. For once, Kentucky was the team that had no answers inside and couldn't buy an outside bucket. For once, Kentucky turned the ball over and didn't share it. For once, the Hoosiers played hard and came away victorious. Showing amazing prescience, the Big Head Kid predicted the Hoosiers would win, calling it an "all hands on deck game" and pointing out that Kentucky's victories were against the likes of Georgia State and High Point. I didn't know. I thought the BHK's points were good. I thought the Wildcats were down. But I couldn't buy into it. Davis was 0 and 5 against Kentucky. And the Hoosiers lost those games badly. It seemed like Tubby was in his head somehow. Oh and Five. That's not good.

But they did it, and I'm ecstatic. They passed the ball around. Ratliff came off the bench to score 21 points in 21 minutes. And they played excellent defense. It was a big win for my Hoosiers. I'm thinking that many Hoosier fans are back on the bandwagon now. And as I read on the Duke Basketball Report (sure, I don't like Duke, but those people know their stuff pretty well) a couple of years ago, "Okay, all you guys who jumped off the bandwagon - we'll let you back on. But you have to sit in the back ... and keep your damn hands off our beer." Very well said.

As for Davis, he's only 1 and 5 now. But that's a damn sight better than 0 and 5, and he finally got to smoke some bluegrass. Go Hoosiers!

Some X-mas Advice

Well, we're rapidly spiraling (assuming that's a word) toward the most commercial time of the year, and it's important for us all to remember what this time is really about: presents. Since many of you will be buying presents, and since some of you know (or are) people (read: guys) who need to compensate for certain slights from Mother Nature, genetics, or whomever you feel compelled to blame by owning very large electronics, I thought I would offer some information about High Definition TV's. So I sat down to write the official Absian Guide to HDTV, but then I realized that would take a while. So instead, I'm going to link to two other guys' descriptions, which are far more amusing than mine would have been.

This guy explains the two main different types of HD pictures in terms that everyone can understand: Oompa Loompas and Hobbits. [Aside: just because I've mentioned them before, don't go accusing me of having an Oompa Loompa fetish.]

This guy offers some more useful information with a couple of wry observations about the whole situation.

I hope this information helps you buy a Big Ass TV for that compensating guy in your life. And before you go claiming that I don't know what I'm talking about when it comes to Big Ass TV's and compensating: au contraire. I happen to own a 50-inch HDTV. So I know exactly what I'm talking about.

Happy Holidays.

Strange Toys

This post absolutely cracks me up. I love it when people have enough time on their hands to amuse me in different ways. Here's my favorite part:

Another oddity was that the toy came with two guns, one for the police officer and one that either belonged to the X-ray screener or the passenger. The luggage actually opened up, and the gun fit inside. I put it through the X-ray machine, and it went through undetected. Perhaps this is where the toy came closest to reality.

But, really, what kid would want this playset, aside from those kids whose parents work for the TSA? This really seems like it would be a more useful way to indoctrinate child terrorists from an early age. "These are the types of obstacles in our way, Johnny. How will we get by them today?"

Not Quite

So I thought that the Dookies were good but vulnerable. Now I think they're just good. The Hoosiers gave them a good fight, and Marco Killingsworth was a stud. The calls actually went the Hoosiers' way (even though Paulus travels every time he drives from the top of the key, but they weren't calling travels on anyone). They got Williams in foul trouble. McRoberts, too. But it didn't matter. Duke was still Duke. They know how to win close games. They're well-coached. They're veteran. They're just good. They may not dominate like they have some years, but they're sure going to win a lot.

But, I'll take that game over 5 Nicholls States. As the Big Head Kid put it, you have to see them in the crucible of competition to know about the team. And what I know is that these Hoosiers are pretty good, too. I sure would have liked to see them beat Duke, though.