Samuel Gordon Stuart is no mere blogger. He is the epitome of a blogger. When Leonard Kleinrock first imagined the basic principles of packet switching, I am quite sure that Samuel was the embodiment of this. The chap appears to have a keen interest in, well, everything, though nothing in particular. Sure, we know he likes 2UE, John Kerr and Nattie, his dog, and he does make clear, however, his dislike for Summernats and those people who associate with such activities (“loonies“), but this lad is like a glass ball: nothing to pick at so that we can see his ‘interior’. Yet, if he is that glass ball, we can already see through him. The problem is, people already look through him, ignoring the fact that this person obviously has more than half a brain, knows what he is talking about and loves what he is doing. Everyone just sees this glass ball, and because they can’t rip into him, they try to break it. But Sammy has remained strong in the face of those trying to get at him, and it’s good to see he has continued on.
However, glass has another enemy: diamonds. Yes, the only thing that can leave a mark on him is a diamond, in particular, because of the ‘rough’ group of people that are after him, a diamond in the rough. OK, possibly the worst lead into a metaphor there, but who cares. But, that’s what this audience member happened to be when when listening to Samuel’s Persiflage #5. Towards the end of his broadcast, he spoke upon some recent news, in particular, a technological advancement by an Israeli company which has produced a glasses-type display unit that can plug into an audio set as well. It’s the cinema-experience without the cinema, or the T.V. shows without the T.V.. Unfortunately, poor Samuel seemed to shun this idea. Rather than dwelling on the increasing positives of this innovation, he turned to the evil, the dark, the malicious side of the world and brought the example of using the ‘experience’ of the headset on public transport, being robbed and thus, it’s the equipment’s fault. I thought that the short-sightedness of the poor boy might very well be resolved in a short, direct, possibly border-attacking, email that expressed my positive reviews of such a piece of technology:
Samuel Samuel Samuel. In your latest Persiflage, you didn’t show much appreciation for the new “display device” that you brought up through the single example of public transport. If you had widened your view to include further “examples” that are not, and cannot, be tailored to your subjective view of this issue, you would not have inadvertently slandered the name of the poor Israelis and the new technology they have created. As a well traveled person in flight and road, something that through the example you have brought up up may not be, traveling excess of twenty hours on an International flight to London, a little less to Paris and Rome, not including compulsory stop-overs, usually of a night, to Singapore, Jakarta, Dubai or Hong Kong. Also, taking into account those not as ‘well-off’ as some, like myself, who can afford First of Business Class seats, and must buy Economy Class, the mere opportunity of watching and listening to a movie that you choose from your own personal collection of DVDs (rather than having you selection dictated to you by the flight company), is certainly worth the cost-difference between a Economy Class and a Business Class.
Similarly, as a regular passenger in long road trips across Australia and Internationally, you may note, next time you are in a car, that there is no video/audio set up for cars made prior to the past two years, and that if you indeed wanted one, you would have to fork out a significant amount of money to afford such a system in older cars. This can also be dangerous in that it provides a substantial amount of distraction for the driver who’s primary objective is to concentrate on the road ahead. This new invention would eliminate all distraction for the driver, while enhancing the experience for the passenger. Note, young Samuel, that not everyone is enamoured with radio.
Perhaps in your further Podcasts you could refrain from passing judgment on a well-thought piece of technology before you consider all its uses rather than one that you choose to give. Objectivity is the key to being a successful reporter.
I believed I had a valid point, and, without any lies present in that email, believed I was more correct in my judgment of this product than young Samuel. I cannot wholly say I expected a reply within a day, but a mere one hour and forty minutes later, I did, in fact, have a new email in my Inbox. It read:
Dear Clayton, Thank-you for your email, you have raised some good points which did not occur to me at the time, and I will be more than happy to read your email in full on the next persiflage.
On a plane or in a car this device would be quite good, although I’m sure you would agree that there are some situations where it would be downright dangerous…much like mobile phone text messages are safe, as long as you’re not driving.
For the record I was not acting as a reporter, instead I was providing an opinion. Clearly my opinion did not take all the facts into account.
It might be worthwhile to point out that the reason I did not take some of your examples into account is that I have never flown in a plane, nor have I been on a long car trip (the longest one would have been a bit under two hours), and the longest bus trip I have been on
was about six hours, but that was a school excursion with a few breaks and some videos.
Anyway thanks for your email, as I said, I will read it in full.
What a polite young man, I thought. I also felt sorry for him in not having had the experience of the rest of the world (which is very much a post I would like to write soon). However, I was satisfied with his reply in that he thought that the points I raised should be addressed, something that I do hope he will do accordingly, while, at the same time, defending his own line of reason and opinion. I felt somewhat sorry after this in that I paid the young fellow no compliments for his efforts in any of his Podcasts or his blog, while at the same time attacking his opinion, something I really had no right to do*. I readily accept that he has valid points: it can be dangerous, however, certainly more dangerous products exist on the market, like the mobile phone. I don’t presume to think that any driver would attempt to travel with one of these head-sets on, however, he does bring up a point in that traveling on a train or bus, and, furthering the boundaries, merely sitting in some sort of park or public area, you would be susceptible to being the target of malicious people, and these are valid. I look forward to young Samuel’s response in his next Persiflage and my brush with fame.
*I did in fact email Samuel the link to this blog and a note of thanks after putting this post up.