The Wall in Midtown
Did you know there's a decent-sized section of the Berlin Wall in a little public garden on 53rd Street? I walked by today and a bunch of business-type folks were sitting around sipping coffee next to it.
- posted by Amy @ 5/21/2004 10:55:00 PM

 

Sprint Fahshizzle
So what's up with Sprint today? It dropped all my cell phone calls all afternoon -- all over the Village, SoHo and Park Slope. Same goes for Web and picture access. It would connect, then disconnect after a couple seconds. Anybody?
- posted by Amy @ 5/21/2004 06:44:00 PM

 

Subway Camera Ban Proposed
Today's New York Times reports the MTA is proposing a ban on all picture taking in the subways unless you have a special permit.

Since I take a lot of pictures in the subway with my treo 600 camera phone, this is of course interesting to me. The ban is proposed and even if it happens, it's months away. My initial thought is that this rule is silly - despite the fact the former Mayor Rudy Giuliani earlier this week testified that of the terror threats New York received before Sept. 11 (on average of one a day) his best guess was that when terrorists did strike again, it would be in the subways, bridges or tunnels.

The thing that makes it silly is that there are already too many pictures out there of the subways. Thousands of books, magazines, videos and even moblog Web sites are available to get pictures of the subway cars, stations and behind-the-scenes infrastructure. Plus, anyone could go out now before the ban and take all the pictures they want and send them off to their local terrorist agency. The system is 100 years old and change comes slowly. Any picture taken now - or 20 years ago in some cases - is probably as good as one taken a year from now.

Additionally, the Port Authority has banned picture taking at the entrances to its tunnels. However, they conveniently have still and live Web cam pictures available online for all to see.

Also, the NYT article fails to mention the MTA already prohibits video cameras in the subway - as I was clearly reminded when a film crew was interviewing me in March about last summer's blackout. The cops threw them out even though they had MTA permission. Plus, they'd been filming all morning before cops noticed them. So basically, any ban on cameras is going to be unenforceable.

And additionally, it's gong to make a subway ride feel really creepy. They'll have to put up "no camera" signs at every entrance, and it will just like posting a sign that states: "Warning, you are no entering a terrorist target."

I'd rant further, but I have to go catch a subway into Midtown.
- posted by Amy @ 5/21/2004 10:05:00 AM

 

Treo 600 on the 'West Wing'?
I happened to watch the season finale of "West Wing," a show I don't usually see until it hits reruns. I could be wrong on this, but it sure looked like Josh, one of the president's advisors, was using a Treo to make a call while he was sitting down to the secret meeting with the Palestinian. Doesn't that open up interesting possibilities if he's got a camera phone and the ability to transmit those images immediately - secretly no less, considering most people still don't realize what that phone can do?
- posted by Amy @ 5/20/2004 08:18:00 AM

 

War Drama for Your Netflix Queue
I recommend you check out "Divided We Fall," a Czech film set in World War II about a husband and wife who get stuck hiding a Jew in their pantry for two years. As the movie unfolds, it becomes more about how difficult it is to do the right thing when you think your own life is at risk. Really one of the best movies I've seen in a long time.
- posted by Amy @ 5/18/2004 06:01:00 PM

 

No Top-Floor Rescue Plan
So one of the most surprising things I heard while listening to the Sept. 11 hearing this morning was that at some point before the towers fell, the FDNY top brass determined there was no way to rescue the people above the impact point (of at least one tower.) The stairwells were blocked and the heat was too intense for the NYPD helicopter to get near the roof. Not as though they needed to get to the roof, because the doors to the roof were locked and no people were up there.

Now I'm wondering what the above-impact rescue plan is for any other skyscraper standing today. Sure, they'll modify construction codes for future buildings to better protect the stairwells, but what happens if you're on the observation deck of the Empire State Building or the Sears Tower and something hits 20 floors below?

Or is the risk such a long-shot that the expense outweighs the diminishing risk?

I first started wondering about these things way back when I was covering the City Council in Gilroy, Calif. and the city manager came in with an expensive plan to shore up some bridge over a river. I think they were going to stabilize it for a "100-year flood." And there were questions along the lines of what happens if we get a "150-year flood" -- meaning a whole lot worse. And they discussed how much more expensive it would be and what was the decreasing likelihood that a flood of that magnitude would hit. And then if you consider the 150-year flood, why not the 200-year flood and even more expense? And the council was aware that if they wanted to prepare for a 150-year flood, you'd maybe have to take money from the library budget or delay the purchase of that $100,000 fire engine. As it happened, I think they did indeed get a 100-year flood that winter and the bridge withstood the water eventhough the construction wasn't yet complete.

I've probably mangled some of those exact facts since it happened a decade ago, but I'm bringing it up for those folks who start thinking that no expense should be spared when preparing for an outrageous attack. People sometimes forget that at the time the WTC was built, the architects built it strong enough to withstand a hit from the biggest plane yet built. Things will continue to change as will the risks. And people need to remember that up until the first seconds that the south tower began to fall - in some cases after the building fell - it was still incomprehensible that the buildings could fall.

So my thoughts are yes, that more could be done to enhance emergency communication and make buildings safer, but I think it's a stretch to say it was a "scandal" that New York wasn't more prepared for what happened Sept. 11.
- posted by Amy @ 5/18/2004 01:31:00 PM

 

Blog Survey Update
The Blogads survey of blog readers received more than 10,000 responses yesterday, Henry reports on the Blogads blog. So far, nearly 80 percent of those filling out the survey are men. What gives? You think men are more likely to fill out a survey, an online survey, or is it the topic? Ladies please feel free to leave your thoughts in my comment section.

If you haven't taken the survey yet, please do, even if you are only an occasional reader of the blogs.
- posted by Amy @ 5/18/2004 12:48:00 PM

 

Skyscraper Museum
A couple days ago I finally made it to the new Skyscraper Museum in downtown Manhattan. I'd been looking forward to the opening for a long time, but unfortunately disappointed with what they had. The room feels a little claustrophobic, although it has a mirrored ceiling to make the center columns seem like they stretch up into the sky. But there are so many random columns you're not sure which direction you should proceed through the exhibit. Instead of something chronological - which would seem obvious - the exhibit seems random and lacking in depth. It's mostly about New York, so when one column's text just referred to zoning codes, you just have to assume it's about New York -- although stuff nearby is about Chicago. Also, this place really isn't at all set up for kids, except for some books and toys in the gift shop. There are a few interesting things in there that make it worth the trip, but I wish my expectations weren't so high when I entered.

They did have a copy of the front page of the New York Times from Oct. 28, 1927, which announced the stock market crash. The same front page announced the invention of the automatic pilot for airplanes and that the architects had just been chosen for the construction of Rockefeller Center. The only other thing I had in my notebook from that visit was something that was mentioned in a couple different ways.

The tallest buildings in any real estate cycle tend to be constructed at the climax of a real estate boom, just before a crash.

It pointed out that during the 1920s, 40 Wall Street, the Chrysler building, the Empire State Building and Rockefeller center were all built or begun in the boom years of the 1920s. I saw no mention of the AOL Time Warner building at Columbus Circle started during our own recent boom-time.
- posted by Amy @ 5/18/2004 12:17:00 PM

 

Kosovo Lessons for Iraq
"Be Not Afraid, for You Have Sons in America," the new book from my friend Stacy Sullivan, is finally in the bookstores. Earlier this month, Stacy did her first reading of the book -- from a galley copy -- and she drew a couple parallels to the war in Iraq. She spoke at the time the U.S. troops were surrounding Fallujah and shooting into the city causing unknown civilian deaths since there were no reports coming from inside the city. Here's a section from her book she read that night:

Classical insurgency theory holds that guerilla movements pass through three phases: the "latent and incipient phase," in which insurgents exploit the populace's dissatisfaction with the leadership, heighten their expectations, and recruit, organize, and train fighters; the "guerilla warfare phase," in which insurgents begin a campaign of intimidation, threats and raids on government police and military forces to provoke more repression, a tactic that shores up support among the population; and finally the "conventional warfare phase," in which the insurgents have enough support to fight government forces in a conventional war. The prerequisites for success, the theory holds, are popular support, a friendly neighboring state or safe haven, and an outside source of financing and weapons.

- posted by Amy @ 5/18/2004 11:41:00 AM

 

Destroying New York in Art
Maybe other people are ready for this, but I'm pretty sure I'm not. I've seen previews for this "Day After Tomorrow" flick coming out -something about global warming causing the oceans to rise and destroy New York. Thanks, but no. I've got the 9/11 hearings on the TV in the other room and just listened to the commissioner say the terrorists will attack again and New York is still at the top of their list.

There's a new mural at the Brooklyn Museum with a similar theme. Alexis Rockman's "Manifest Destiny." The artist's statement describes it as the "radically transformed landscape of a future Brooklyn three thousand years from now." The Brooklyn Bridge has collapsed and nearly everything is underwater save for the tops of a couple bridges and tips of skyscrapers. The living creatures consist of seagulls, rats, cockroaches, seals, catfish, and creatures living on the underside of a rusted-out oil drum.

I'm guessing both the film and the painting are supposed to get me thinking about stopping global warming, but I have a hard time getting past the idea that these artists selected New York as their targets. I mean, come on, if it's global warming it's not like we're the only city that's going to be destroyed. If I want to picture what it's like to see my city under siege, all I need to do is walk back in the other room and watch the 9/11 hearings again.
- posted by Amy @ 5/18/2004 11:13:00 AM

 

A Blog Survey
Please click over to Blogads to take a survey about people who read blogs. I encourage everyone to do this - even if this is the only blog you read or if you almost never read blogs. And tell the truth when answering. Thanks.
- posted by Amy @ 5/17/2004 02:03:00 PM