Cheers, Enquirer!

Just wanted to point out that the Michael E. Keating photo piece that appeared in Sunday’s Enquirer was full of really wonderful, stunning photos of the John A. Roebling Suspension Bridge.  If you don’t know which bridge I’m referring to, you’re probably not from the Cincinnati area.  In short, the Suspension Bridge is one of THE consistent landmarks that define the look of Cincinnati.  Lots has changed over the years, and the Roebling bridge is one of the few things that hasn’t.

Too bad it’s a pain in the ass to find the story from the Enquirer’s front page.

The Most Dangerous Place In The World, Ever.

Straight Outta Locash, bitches.

By now, you’ve probably heard that we Cincinnatians are tougher than anyone else in the United States of America.  This study (which is to say, poorly-devised data model) tells us that a very small section of the city, partially in OTR, is was the most dangerous place in America, with a 1 in 4 chance that you’ll be the victim of a violent crime.

I’m not going to bother with the complaining about the this-and-that problems with the way the study comes across, or how the area size is small, or how the study doesn’t take into account the steadily-lowering crime rate there, or how their “odds” just seem to be fucked.  Pretty much every Cincinnati-related blog on the planet has discussed this story already, and each of them are right on all accounts: this study is bullshit.

At the same time, I can’t really resist adding one more nail.  So here goes.

Check out this bit from their “disclaimer:”

You further expressly understand and agree that the advice contained on any page herein is a work of art, and as such, no guarantees are expressed or implied including with regard to the suitability of any location, neighborhood or area for investment in real estate.

So, we’re not doing “science” with this, we’re doing “art?”  Art? Piling onto the “intellectually dishonest” wagon here is just not enough.  I don’t see how one could possibly call himself a fucking “geographer” or a “scientist” and simultaneously be okay with this.  This is the worst art ever.

I’d like to posit the notion that Dr. Andrew Schiller is an idiot who’s bad at his job and doesn’t understand the basic tenets of scientific maths or statistics.  These are things which, admittedly, I’m not an expert in, but it’s pretty clear that he isn’t either.  This is evidenced in the “methodology” page, where they all but admit that they don’t bother to double-check the numbers, or determine whether the “neighborhood” they’re looking at is even a complete “neighborhood.”

Simultaneously, they’re using these poorly-devised numbers to “predict” what cities they “think” will be the most dangerous.  Then they parlay the whole thing into a subscription service that you pay for when, ostensibly, shopping for a house in a city you’re not familiar with.  It’s a living, I guess.

So, here’s to you, Dr. Andrew Schiller.  You’re a giant asshole.

I wonder whether there are Chicago, Detroit, Miami, Jacksonville and Baltimore blogs that are complaining about this study.  Anyone who’s done the research already is welcome to drop a comment or a link.

Your Terrible Headline of The Day Award Goes To…

Came across this story at the Enquirer’s website and found the headline to be just a bit off

KFC giveaway beef headed to court

I had NO IDEA that KFC sold beef.  THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!  Seriously, beef or chicken?  Methinks there could be a better headline somewhere in here.  STOP THE NEWSPAPER PUN MACHINE!

In Which Craig Makes My Head Explode, a la Scanners

Straight out of the “Rants and Raves” section, I came across this, which might be one of the more impenetrable things I’ve ever read:

The firebox is dimming on the TrAiN, and the steam pressure is getting low. So it’s about time for the TrAiN to pull into the station to Cool The Engines for the night.
The little TrAiN that can and does will be getting up early to chug up and down the 1/5th scale rail. But early this the TrAiN is sure.
For it’s him, the little TrAiN that can and does, that keeps this TrAiNs rails parallel!. Or my “Chill pill” as Independence would call it.

No offense Inde’ but if you stick with the TrAiN,… He’ll show you how to torment someone but proper.

Please remain seated and wait for the rail cars to come to a complete stop before leaving your seats. Thank you for riding along with the…~ReDnEckCraZyTrAiN~ Express.

Ah, there’s nothing like an extended metaphor that makes absolutely no sense.  To be sure, there’s some conversation happening here–apparently “Independence” is a Cincinnati Craigslist troll or something like that–but man, this entry just drips with goofiness.  It’s as though this guy is the dj you never got to meet on WKRP in Cincinnati.

By the way, that Cool the Engines reference?  That’s his, not mine.

Dear Police: Segways Are Dumb Looking.

“These are for connecting with people,” Sgt. Eric Franz said in this story appearing in the Enquirer.  In sum, the story describes the Cincinnati Police’s Segways and discusses their value as a patrolling tool.  No word on whether these Segways are the same ones that folks have seen Shadow Hare running around on from time to time.

Franz admits that police might look “nerdy” on the Segways, but adds that the little machines of nerditude cause people to stop and look and that this is where that aforementioned “connection” comes from.  I would contend that a police force might benefit in much the same way were they personable and were citizens not scared of them.  Show me a guy who doesn’t get a twinge in his gut with a cop driving behind him on the highway, and I’ll show you the Mayor.

This sentiment, of course, isn’t isolated to Cincinnati; it’s pretty much the same no matter where you go.  The thing that irks me about this, though, is that for all its actual usefulness, the story makes it seem as though CPD is using these machines solely as a public relations tool.  Simply put, they’re not.  It’d be completely stupid for them to do that.  Segways aren’t cheap–they’re like 5k, give or take–and Cincinnati just used some grant money to buy 20 of them.

Can you think of better things to spend that ~$100,000 on?  I know I can.

Sunday Sartorial – Not That Kind of Wrist Action

When it comes to looking sharp, the right accessory can really make an impact.  Unfortunately, men don’t exactly have a lot of options in this area.  Necklaces, rings, and earrings can all be appropriate in the right setting, but they have to be applied very, very carefully or you’ll end up looking like an idiot.

The one accessory men can always get away with is the wristwatch.  A watch can be a fashion accessory, a piece of art, or a functional tool.  Sometimes, it’s all of the above.  I want this post to be a basic introduction to the types of watches that are out there for men including the terms you’re likely to encounter and what they mean about the quality, price, and aesthetics of those watches.

Terminology Basics

Let’s cover the very basic vocabulary.  The internals of a watch are considered as a unit and are referred to as the movement or caliber.  The case of a watch is the main body that encloses the movement and is usually made of metal or plastic.  Watch listings regularly tell you the diameter and height of the case in millimeters.  Anything larger than say, 10mm height or 40mm diameter would be considered a “big watch.”  The dial is the face of the watch on which the numbers (standard “Arabic” or Roman numerals) or hash marks delineate the time.  Covering the dial is the crystal, which is constructed of, from least to most desirable: plastic (“acrylic”), glass (“mineral”), or synthetic sapphire (“sapphire”).  Synthetic sapphire is actually 5 times harder than glass, and is therefore often billed as “scratch resistant.”  Where the crystal meets the case is the bezel, which sometimes is decorated or turns in some fashion, a feature popular on diver’s watches.  The knob on the side of the case is called the crown,and functions to set the time and date on the watch, or to wind the mainspring.  Securing the watch to your wrist is either the strap (if leather, canvas, rubber, or some other flexible material), the bracelet (if metal), or the band (universal).  The most common are leather and stainless steel.

The Mechanical Watch

The very first wristwatches created were pieces of mechanical wizardry.  Using precisely sized gears and springs, they were constructed to exacting standards and were status symbols for those fortunate enough to afford them.  The accuracy of these 19th Century timepieces were measured by independent organizations called bureaux officiels de contrôle de la marche des montres, or “B.O.’s” for short.  We take for granted now the length of a second and the accuracy of our clocks, but in the age before atomic and quartz timekeeping, watchmaking was very much an art.

Modern mechanical watches are manufactured to exacting standards in much the same way as their original counterparts.  They use precisely machined internal gears and springs and contain no batteries or electrical parts.  They often require service by a qualified jeweler or watchmaker in order to remain accurate.  The modern successor to the B.O. is the Contrôle Officiel Suisse des Chronometres and watches that have been tested and certified to a specific degree of accuracy are called chronometers – a designation normally only found on very expensive timepieces.

You will often see advertising copy for a mechanical watch advertising how many “jewels” a particular movement possesses.  These are literally jewels – usually synthetic ruby and sapphire – that are part of a watch’s movement.  The reason for this is that a mechanical watch is a tiny machine with metal parts rubbing against one another.  Like every other machine, even with proper maintenance metal on metal results in wear and tear.  Watchmakers put jewels in as bearings to prevent damage or increase accuracy through reducing friction.  Does that mean more jewels in a movement is always better?  No, despite what the marketing folks would have you believe.  A standard mechanical movement, for reference, has at least 17 jewels.

Mechanical watches are powered by energy stored in a large internal spring (called the mainspring.)  Automatics wind the mainspring by using the movement of the wearer’s arm to swing a pendulum or weighted lever.  Manuals require the wearer to turn the crown by hand to tighten the spring.

If you pay attention to which companies make quality movements or garbage movements, you can read the specifications sheet for a watch and get a better idea if it’s a good value or not.

The Quartz Watch

In the 1960s, watchmakers discovered a more reliably accurate way to keep a watch telling true time.  When you apply an electrical current to a quartz crystal, it causes it to oscillate at a specific frequency.  By harnessing this regularity of this frequency, watchmakers were able to create devices that are considerably more accurate than their mechanical counterparts.  The first quartz watches were brought to market by a familiar name, Seiko, in the 1960′s.

Quartz watches do not require winding, as their power is supplied by a small internal battery.  Some newer types of watches, such as “kinetics” or “ecodrive” watches blur the lines a bit.  They use the movement of the wearer’s arm like an automatic mechanical to generate electricity that in turn powers a quartz movement.

Quartz watches require no regular maintenance beyond the occasional replacement of the battery.

Other Features

The Omega Speedmaster is a chronometer, a chronograph, and a Swiss automatic. That's why it's $2,000.

Some features, when added to a mechanical watch, greatly increase the complexity of the movement.  This, in turn, drives up both the initial and ongoing maintenance costs for a mechanical watch.  The two most common of these functions are a calendar or chronograph.

A watch may just indicate the numeric date, or a “day date” which indicates the day of the week as well as the numeric date.  A watch that provides stopwatch functionality is called a chronograph, and often features two or three smaller dials on the main face of the watch.  Added complexity on a mechanical watch can drive up both the initial cost and make the maintenance of a watch a more costly endeavor.

To Sum Up…

As much as I am loathe to use a car analogy, you can think of a quartz watch as a Toyota.  It’s economical, purpose-driven, and perfectly acceptable for many men.  Mechanical watches are more akin to Italian sports cars.  They’re artful, usually expensive, and require more care and maintenance than their counterparts.  There’s always the Supras and the Fiats of the world to test the rule, but as a general guideline this is true.

Quartz watches are never more impressive or interesting to me than a microwave.  I don’t hate them – in fact I own several – but they’re just not very interesting.  If your primary desire is accuracy, functionality, and low cost, a solid quartz watch is a great choice.  If you want to appreciate the art of it all, a mechanical is the only way to fly.

In general, quartz watches are going to be cheaper (although several Swiss manufacturers carry multi-thousand dollar quartz models.)  Mechanicals (either automatic or hand wound) will require service at some point to keep them running smooth, which can raise the overall total cost of owning the watch.  Which type you decide depends on your budget, preferences, and tastes.