After a very long short night (leaving Seattle at Midnight for a five-hour transcontinental trip), we landed at JFK just shy of 8AM. JetBlue was a great experience, despite the jet lag. The television in front of every seat kept everybody entertained the whole way. I tried to sleep, but the middle seat is not the most comfortable one in the world with nothing or nobody to lean against. I'd have to wait until Ponzi turned over, then I would attempt to use her back as a pillow. It worked, but I'm definitely feeling much better in my warm bed tonight. Oh yes, we're probably in for the long haul here - as it's streaming sheets of snow outside right now. We were lucky enough to land before Mother Nature reared her snowy head. Time to make a street snowman!
Ponzi took a stroll down the street in the early afternoon, but I crashed immediately after having a bagel (with some schmear) and very bland oatmeal. Crashing, of course, in our hotel room - not in the Greeky restaurant. I'm somewhat more awake now, catching up on a day's worth of work in a city that's getting set for a Snow Day. Not that I'd want to sled down 42nd Street or anything, but I'd much rather have spent this time walking around a bit and seeing some of the sights before the conference gets into full swing tomorrow at 7AM - a very stupid time to get started with a conference that has attendees from the West coast. We're certainly going to be too busy to notice what's going on outside… so long as the $10-a-day Wi-Fi stops being so flaky here at the New York Hilton. I'm dreaming of a White Tuesday…

As Robert so eloquently put it, this thing is amazing. We heard about NASA's free World Wind application tonight on .NET Rocks. The sucker weighs in at ~180MB, but it's worth every byte (and then some) - completely putting Google's Keyhole to shame. Imagine having the ultimate 3D mapping system sitting on your desktop… and then see it.” World Wind allows any user to zoom from satellite altitude into any place on Earth, leveraging high resolution LandSat imagery and SRTM elevation data to experience Earth in visually rich 3D, just as if they were really there.” I know that Ponzi will appreciate the topographical features, as that's what she's been wanting in a consumer-oriented mapping system for some time. I use Google Maps because it's quick, Microsoft Streets & Trips when I want to explore local resources, and… World Wind for a bird's eye view of the globe. You don't need to be into GIS or anything - this digital mapping system is quite accessible. Topo maps, satellite photos, free download - what's not to like?

Did any of you catch “UFOs: Seeing is Believing” with Peter Jennings last night? I'm surprised it hasn't shown up on any Torrent sites yet. For the most part, it was everything we've seen before - inflated with a lot more production. I've never had an alien encounter, but I do believe we're not alone in the universe. Guy Malone, someone we met at a “UFO conference” last year, had this to say in an email blast to his friends this morning (with a 'Please forward freely' attribution):

Well, the word “wow” does come to mind…
Not so much “Wow that was amazing,” because it was largely what many reading this already know. But “Wow - all that was on the air!” I'm guessing (but only guessing) that Project Blue Book was still active the last time any valid “news reporting” about UFOs was featured on any of “The Big 3″ networks. History Channel and Sci-Fi Channel are one thing, but NO MATTER WHAT Peter Jennings and ABC reported tonight, the most significant factor is that a serious and thought-provoking special on UFOs, showcasing credible witnesses and researchers, finally hit the American airwaves - during prime-time, on a major network, AND was presented as a straight news documentary. This just cannot be understated. Jennings made no effort to prove or debunk anything, but finally presented to the public at least some of the facts and arguments (pro and con) that can be reported on the topic, and isn't that what we've all wanted, for a long, long time?
My quotable quote however, is that “This ABC special hosted by Peter Jennings simply could not have been any more pro-UFO, and still call itself journalism, if it tried. But it *was* journalism…” and that's my point. For the first time in my life I saw honest journalism relating to UFOs on network television. Wow. ABC didn't have to “try” to prove UFOs are real (or not), as the “tip of the iceberg” they did reveal was, in my opinion, more convincing than anything mainstream America has ever seen. The special undoubtedly covered “both sides” fairly I believe, but the facts always seemed to come down on the side of the fence that says, whatever they are - UFOs ARE HERE… the public believes they exist… and the government's explanation for them is historically unsatisfactory. Not to mention deceptive. Yes, the documentary included scientists covering all the best arguments against the UFO hypothesis and the eyewitnesses, the supposed impossibility of space travel, etc, etc, etc… However, ABC's investigative coverage, which revealed that The Air Force's Project Blue Book was never anything more than a concentrated debunking effort was, in a word, exemplary. Decades late perhaps, but this glaring fact of American history finally got the prime-time journalistic butt-kicking it sorely deserved.
The abductee community - if it can or should be addressed separately from the UFO community - came out way ahead tonight as well. Jennings even said that “Reporting the UFO story is incomplete without this facet,” a statement long-overdue for the more (ahem) “serious” and scientific among us, whose most compelling form of evidence to-date has always been nothing more than eyewitness testimony in the first place. While sleep paralysis and hypno-suggestion were appropriately included in this documentary, the abduction experience no doubt got the “fairest shake” ever seen on prime-time as well. It's not enough to just report (as Jennings did) that “more than 80 million Americans believe the earth has been visited by extra-terrestrials” and “more than 40 million Americans say they have seen, or know someone who has seen an Unidentified Flying Object,” without also including (as Jennings did) the fact that 1 of 5 Americans also believe that abductions are happening. ABC did an admirable job of bringing both the UFO and the Abduction topic to the American table, via the most credible people it could showcase, rather than the most colorful, or most outlandish. Just go to any UFO conference (as Jennings suggested, although I doubt he did) and you'll typically see more news cameras on the man or woman with the glittery outfit and silver make-up, than you'll ever see on the ones with the PhD's.
But… if UFO enthusiasts were the clear winners of this program, who were the losers? Roswell, for starters… or at least it's believers. Just as the best UFO skeptics were given their air-time on this show but came out somehow wanting, the same might be said for Roswell authors Stanton Friedman, Kevin Randall and Don Schmidt. Arguments both for and against the Roswell incident (being alien-related) were presented briefly, but I think anybody watching ABC tonight would have to say that this special ultimately sided with The History Channel's past Roswell special (which also concluded that the Project Mogul view of a top-secret, but altogether man-made event is “the truth”). Disappointing for many, no doubt. Giving Karl Pflock and Project Mogul the last word, and Jennings' use of language like “hallowed ground,” “holy grail” and “article of faith” to refer to the Roswell story, even this decidedly pro-UFO documentary let down more than a few people no doubt, ending with Peter Jennings saying (of Roswell believers) that “they cling to a myth.” In striking this blow, ABC wins both ways, seemingly maintaining it's journalistic integrity by promoting UFOs as unexplainable by earthly science, yet nonetheless “dissing” Roswell as “the” cornerstone of ufology.
Why? … perhaps the most responsible efforts at journalism inevitably lead to both conclusions in fact, perhaps not. But there is however, another view of UFOs that can only be referred to as “the excluded middle” which might explain the seeming incongruence. This view also lost out on this show, but only becuase it was not represented (understandable and forgivable, given all that was covered in the time allotted). While neither popularly known about nor financially profitable, a growing number of researchers are beginning to promote the idea that that UFOs are indeed real and beyond conventional explanation, BUT that aliens are not piloting them - or even designing and crashing them for our benefit. Here, I'll simply refer readers to look into this view for themselves via www.manmadeufos.com (a booklist) and www.roswellufocrash.com (a view that takes neither the alien nor the Mogul view of Roswell). What I will say is that those studying these views see a global conspiracy that involves oil, banking, military, mainstream science and conglomerate MEDIA that far surpasses the organization neccessary to cover up extra-terrestrials, if that's “all” that needed to be covered up.
If (and I'm just saying, IF) this view is the most accurate one, then one only needs to remember that in prior decades Walt Disney himself and his mickey mouse company were used by / partnered with the U.S. government to promote the idea of extra-terrestrial life to the American public (just Google it), before the plug was pulled and what we now know as “The UFO Cover-Up” ruled the day, to begin to glimmer WHY Disney-owned ABC *might* have been the first major network to suddenly put UFOs back into the credible, mainstream consciousness. Is ABC in bed with a government higher than our Federal one? is the question I'm posing. If there's anything to this, then perhaps “The American Public” might be included in the loser list as well, as the aftermath of ABC's Jennings report could have more to do with preparing us for something other than “disclosure” (as some might hope) is all that's behind this out-of-nowhere special. It's a big puzzle that for now I'll leave to the most astute researchers and UFO historians to piece together, but not one that should be ignored.
One-world conspiracies left for deeper, darker minds to ponder however, it could well be argued that “sweeps week” is the only reason ABC chose to devote 2-hours to this program. No matter why though - hey, we're all glad they did. What can those of us interested in these topics say negative about a prime-time special that accurately and plainly states that “the UFO phenomenon (is) only a shadow of mainstream science,” but then a moment later gives several minutes of airtime to Art Bell? While there are no doubt many, many opinions relating to the origin and nature of UFOs, NONE of them are relevant until people believe that they are real to begin with. For some, ABC's special was merely affirmation of what they already know is true; for others it may be the first time they admit there's something worthy of investigation. But as a result of this special, people are going to talk. They're going to talk about what they've seen, and they're going to share their ideas. And as a result of this special, many of them won't be laughed at. Other people are going to ask questions, and those who have dedicated themselves to finding answers are going to be more in demand. I don't mean to simply say “this is good for business” (although it undoubtedly is), but what I mean is that it's good for the public interest. Very, very good. All views should and will begin to get more airtime, and interested parties will be exposed to more information. Those with questions can use this documentary to take to your government officials, your churches, your educational institutions and your local media outlets and say “Hey - I want answers, and your previous ones haven't been good enough. Are you going to give them to me? Are you going to give us someone who can? Or am I and my money going to have to go somewhere else?” As a result of this special, the general public - not just the UFO community - has won a minor moral victory, and ABC and Jennings deserve our thanks for finally showing some integrity by finally delivering this information to the American public, and especially, for doing it without including 10 minutes of Zelda Zoroastrian in the mix.
By the way, did you catch the “skeptic” who said that the Phoenix lights were flares that Phoenix radar didn't pick up? He then finished his arguments by saying (60 seconds later!) that it was *also* lights from 5 airplanes (that Phoenix radar apparently didn't pick up either?). Like I said, ABC and Jennings didn't even have to try, because for once the debunker on TV actually looked more idiotic than the witnesses. It's a new day.

Indeed, for something like this to happen, I believe we're one step closer to the truth. And if any aliens are reading this blog, please ignore that whole Rent My Chest thing I did?

Lots of upset celebrities were forced to change their mobile phone numbers this week when hotel heiress Paris Hilton’s T-Mobile sidekick II was hacked. An attacker was some how able to login to T-Mobile’s Web-based portal and download all of her camera phone pictures, notes and her address book. And then, they were published to the Web. This humorous snafu has spurred the production of a new t-shirt which reads, “Paris made me change my number.” � Available from Glarkware.com.

Among the problems caused by Paris’s Sidekick being compromised were not only the release of her celebrity friends’ phone numbers and e-mail addresses, but some naughty pictures Paris had taken of herself.

With people relying more and more on their mobile phones and data devices these days, wireless security is becoming more and more important. Here a few tips to keep you secure.

(1) Pick a complex password that consists of numbers and letters. They are more difficult for an attacker to crack. Especially if they are not dictionary words.

(2) Change your passwords often � this will limit the time an attacker is able to have control of your account, or keep them off the trail of getting into your account.

(3) Pick security questions that only you have the answer to. In the case of Paris Hilton, anyone could use Google to find out the name of her dog and answer the security question “What is your favorite pet’s name?” Keep in mind, if you are not a celebrity, social networks make a great resource for hackers.

(4) Use combinations of numbers that are not obvious for your voicemail pass code. Remember, if you are famous and someone has written a bio of you, it’s likely to include your birthday. Or if you use a social network (Friendster, The Facebook, Orkut, etc.), people can pick out your birthday and use that as a four or six digit code, too. You should be scared if we stumbled upon your ATM code or voicemail password.

Be weary if your voicemail does not ask for a PIN when you check it. Using a new technique known as Caller-ID Spoofing, an attacker could spoof your phone number and simply dial in and access your voicemail. This can lead to any number of vulnerabilities, like someone changing your outgoing message or deleting important voicemails.

Keep listening to The Chris Pirillo Show every week and visiting Tylersworld.com for more from me, Tyler Cooper.

Geoffrey Kleinman founded DVDTalk six years ago as a place for movie geeks to gather and discuss their passion. Thousands of movie reviews later, DVDTalk is one of the most popular places to find DVD information. We caught up with Geoffrey to talk about his favorite DVDs, where to find great foreign films on DVD, the merits of Gone With the Wind, and the debut of DVDTalk Radio.

By day, Sean Alexander is a Group Product Manager at Microsoft. At night, Sean is a digital media junkie, geeking out in front of his HDTV as he watches shows he scheduled remotely using MSN Remote Record for Windows Media Center. Chris talks to Sean about life at Microsoft, Flickr and MCE, and other digital media diversions.

Steve Gillmor is a human inforouter. Tracking the flow of conversation is his vision put into being as attention.xml. Steve explains the complexities of attention as it relates to the blogosphere and podosphere as Chris catches up with him via the newly added VoIP lines.

Tom Pohl runs a wireless ISP based in Iowa along with several other ventures. Tom is instrumental in getting the phone system running for The Chris Pirillo Show. In his spare time, he posts his comments to Tom’s World. This week, we talk with Tom about wireless, the open source Asterisk PBX and life as a geek in Iowa.

I submitted my serial number a few days ago, to get the Xbox Replacement Cord. Why is a new Xbox power cord needed? According to Xbox, “the replacement power cords are designed to protect consumers and their Xbox consoles from rare electrical component failures that can pose a fire hazard.” Has anybody really been burned yet?

Microsoft is providing new power cords at no charge to replace the cords that originally came with some Xbox consoles. You will need your Serial Number and Manufacture date to verify if your Xbox Console requires a replacement cord. Fewer than one in 10,000 consoles have experienced these component failures. In almost all instances, any damage caused by these failures was contained within the console itself or limited to the tip of the power cord at the back of the console.

I also found this part of the FAQ a bit humorous: “I received my replacement cord, and it was damaged. What should I do?” Run away, that's my answer. I've got the replacement cord in hand now. I suppose I better swap it soon, eh?

In a few days, we'll be flying cross-country to New York City. It'll mark my first time in New York - ever. I'm not sure what to expect, so any tips would be appreciated. It's business this time around, so sightseeing probably won't happen. I hope to at least catch a glimpse of the Statue of Liberty, Ground Zero, and the Empire State Building before leaving NYC, but just being in the vicinity is cool enough for now. I'd also love to catch a live taping of the Daily Show (which they do in New York), but that's probably not going to happen, either. New York City is one of those cities that I should have experienced long before now. I've only heard things about NY and its citizens, though. We're going to New York to cover Search Engine Strategies for The Chris Pirillo Show (with our conference sponsor, MSN Search). I'm going to be a part of it - New York, New York!

New York City is the safest big city in the country, according to a report from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The FBI’s 2002 “Crime in the United States” indicates that while crime increased nationwide, New York City’s crime rate actually decreased 5% to the lowest level since the 1960s. In addition, the city’s murder rate dropped 9.6% in 2002 to reach the lowest level since 1963.
The FBI’s ranking of New York City as the safest large city in the United States means that, of all American cities with populations of 1 million or more, New York City has the lowest rate of total crime committed.
“These statistics are terrific news for New York City’s visitor industry,” said NYC & Company President & CEO Cristyne L. Nicholas. “With winter approaching, millions of people and families from around the world will consider a trip to New York City to see its many magical holiday attractions. New York City is one of the world’s foremost family destinations and these new FBI crime reduction figures reinforce what a safe place it is to visit.”

Well, I haven't been stabbed yet (although, I have been a witness for a double homicide). 'Cause everyone's your friend in New York City - and everything looks beautiful when you're young and pretty. The streets are paved with diamonds and there's just so much to see… but the best thing about New York City is you and me.

No word on how my auto insurance will be impacted after the accident. I had the opportunity to contest the ticket that the officer decided to write me (even though, on the scene, he said he wouldn't issue a citation). I've been happy with AllState for a few years now; even in California, my auto insurance premiums were quite managable. Yes, I still have to get into the DMV to get a Washington driver's license before too long. In reading Dan's recent post in Technobabble on ,Auto Insurance Shopping, Lockergnomie Terry Wambaugh sent this piece of feedback:

I went shopping for auto insurance on line about a year ago. My wife was involved in three auto accidents during the previous three years Our auto insurance had steadily risen as you might imagine. Then we moved from to a new state. Upon notifying our insurance company, I was unpleasantly surprised to find that they do not provide coverage in my new state and that they were terminating the auto insurance policy in sixty days.
With little time and no local connections, I decided to shop o line. I found it very easy to get quotes from a variety of companies quickly on line. I only queried companies that I had heard of previously. Safeco provided one of the lower rate quotations. I 'googled' them to see what others had to say about them. Then I called to speak to a representative and explore the effect of various coverages and deductibles. During that conversation, I ended up with a different set of coverages and deductibles which further reduced costs. After six months, the policy cost was reduced due to one of the accidents in our profile moving out of the penalty window. That happened again at the annual renewal. The downside of this, if you can call it that, is that I have no experience with claims processing which is what having an insurance policy is ultimately all about. The upside, is that the policy reduced my insurance costs by hundreds of dollars up front and the cost has been reduced twice during the first year of coverage.

I keep seeing great gecko Geico commercials, but I think I'll stick with my current insurance carrier. AllState has great online insurance account management options, FWIW.