I remember reading an article about how the web and hyperlinks were going to change the way children thought. At the time I dismissed it as mumbo-jumbo about non-linear thought patterns and other such nonsense. I fear the hypothesis have been proven true in myself.

Sitting in an evening university class (a place which is both foreign and familiar to me), I found myself constantly wanting the professor to move on. I found myself ‘skimming’ the lecture and was incredibly frustrated when I couldn’t control the movement from topic to topic.

Clearly, part of the problem is my inability to interact with people who don’t exist on my computer. However, I think this points to a clear conclusion: The Internet has fried my brain.

I would like to state, that from the beginning I was against the title of this site. Although the meanings are different, ‘Volition’ triggers similar word-sound-associations to ‘Volitile’ and ‘Violation’. Both words that I associate to negative things. I’d complain more, but I don’t have a better title.

Nothing is more upsetting than a good domain name gone to waste. Well no, actually there are many far more upsetting events, and Sick.com could have proudly displayed any of them. At the very least it could have been a medical webiste or a porn site. However, Sick.com peddles e-cards. These aren’t just any e-cards either, these cards are “cards that bite!” They range from the inane , to the inexplicable , to the profoundly inexplicable. Can anyone explain these to me? Am I missing something? Is there a larger joke here which I am not grasping?

I suppose the quality of Sick.com isn’t entirely surprising considering the apparent leader in the field of e-cards, but if you want to make an “in your face” e-card, at least put some effort into it.

I was just like to take a moment to call my own judgement into question. Specifically, why did I assist in the creation of a website whose address I consistently misspell? In retrospect, as nifty a title as acts of volition may be, dogs and cats would probably have been a wiser choice.

Humankind Systems, maker of a fine webmail template I bought recently, seems to be diversifying.

Their product, The Flasher, occasionally flashes on your computer screen while you work with affirmative messages like:

• cigarettes taste bad
• smokers are ugly
• lung cancer is painful
• I like to exercise
• I love my body
• I Chew My Food Thoroughly

I did not make this up. However, I wish I had.

A fine demonstration of how to make a point with interactive media by the Laramara Foundation. Be patient and do what it says. Try It >>

Requires Flash and a set of speakers.

Despite being an unfortunate Amazon.com rip-off (and we all know how much I hate rip-offs) Startech, a computer accessory manufacturer, has an exemplary website in terms simplicity, product information, and something which is often overlooked, high quality, hi-res, kick-ass product photography.

Earth to other e-commerce sites: I’ve never seen product shots this good. It doesn’t cost much to get a decent digital camera folks. Especially after you’ve spent hundreds of thousands on your website and millions on marketing. I can’t buy it if I don’t know what it is.

They have actual customer service and very handy product finding wizards. You can’t order directly, but my local reseller is just down the street.

When it comes to useful product info on e-commerce sites, some big players just don’t get it. Check out this laughable details page for a similar product at OnVia.

As a token of the recent anniversary of my birth, a very cool person bought me ‘soft foam’ toy planes*. The planes are very cool and can easily achieve the advertised 10 meter + flight distance. What struck me as odd was the included illustrated instruction sheet that you see here.

Also included where the helpful instructions “Please retain this section for future reference”. I guess that’s for when I find the planes in my basement in 6 years and forget how to use them.

Shelcore, the company which produces the planes, advertises their website on the packaging. I’m not sure this is wise. You be the judge.

* I am not a child.

An excellent book review on Salon today concerning a new book on network security and its inevitable failure by Brendon I. Koerner. The review touches on one of my more frequent complaints about computer software in general:

There are an average of five to 15 bugs in every thousand lines of code, which means that Windows 98 is riddled with somewhere between 90,000 and 270,000 oopsies. Since software vendors cannot be held liable for faulty code, thanks to those licenses they make users agree to, they have zero incentive to create better products — much to the delight of computer criminals, who revel in exploiting bug-ridden programs.

This is a slight overstatement. In theory at least, software developers attempt to improve their code so they don’t lose out to competing developers. Nonetheless, it has always seemed bizarre to me that a user is required to sign a licensing agreement before they have ever used the program. Can you imagine any other industry operating this way? “Sure we’ll sell you this car. But first please sign this agreement stating you won’t sue us when something goes wrong. Would you like Firestone tires with that?”

I certainly don’t pretend to know how things should work, but it seems clear to me that any industry which has an exemption from customers taking it to task for failing to live up to its own promises will not produce as high quality a product as it would otherwise.