Eclipse or Case CATalyst? That is the question. I've been on E for quite a while, but I wanted to give CC a look so I could make sure I'm on the best software for me. I had a few issues with E, and at the same time was hearing interesting things about CC, and then a friend of mine also converted and had good things to say, so I ponied up and bought it.

After going through the built-in training and paying for an additional several hours of personal training, I really liked what I saw! CC has a much more logical--to me--user interface. Also, except for the process of assigning speakers and accessing dictionary entries, the CC basic features seem to come more naturally to me. Also, I love the fact that CC is so close to offering refreshable realtime on iPads, which I'm seeing more and more attorneys bring to jobs.

But fast-forward to realtime features. They are very different between the two software programs, and I'm finding I much prefer E's! Someone correct me if I'm wrong, please, but here's my experience:

In E, I can edit from the writer via macro commands to make globals IN BETWEEN taking down testimony. In other words, if the speakers start speaking again but I haven't yet completed my global (say I'm in the middle of fingerspelling some long specialized term on a realtime job), I just switch to taking down the proceedings and I lose no progress with my global. At the same time I'm taking down proceedings, my global dialog stays open, awaiting my next command. Then at the next breath the speaker takes, I finish my global and get back to taking down proceedings. So I can just switch back and forth seamlessly between proceedings and globaling, both functions being done from my writer.

In CC, if I'm editing from my writer and I'm in the middle of a global and the proceedings start up again, I have to actively escape from the global and get back to taking down what they're saying. I lose any progress I had made in the global and have to start over at the next pause, hoping/gambling that pause is long enough for me to complete my global.

Alternatively, I could edit from the keyboard and, with split screen, keep alive whatever progress I've made in a global. But that's only possible with editing from the keyboard. It's not possible with editing from the writer. To me, editing from the writer is hugely preferable because your hands are already there. There's no movement or time wasted in switching from the writer keyboard to the laptop or portable keyboard.

I would love for CC to offer this!

Conformity (Groupthink)

A show on the Science Channel the other day reminded me of the Asch conformity experiments. Does anyone else remember learning about these in sociology class? They are a fascinating series of experiments about the influence groups can have on us.

The experiments were set up with a teacher and a group of student volunteers in a classroom. They were told they would be participating in some kind of vision test. In reality, they were participating in a social experiment. The teacher and all but one of the students were actually in on the experiment and were just playing predetermined roles. It was only the one student who was the subject of the experiment, although he didn't know it.  

So the teacher would hold up very simple pictures like this one below, asking the group to look at the line on the left and then select whether A, B, or C on the right matched it.

The group then had to give their answers in order, one at a time out loud, for everyone else to hear. It was always set up so that the fake students were positioned first in the group, with the one subject student near the end. In other words, he always would be hearing several answers given before his turn to answer.

In the beginning, everyone answered in the obviously correct way. But at one point, the group all started answering deliberately incorrectly--except for the one subject student, of course. The purpose of the experiment was to measure whether the one subject student would keep answering correctly, now against the group, or would conform at some point and start answering incorrectly, along with the group.

I remember watching the videotapes at the time, and the poor subject at first would usually be looking around in disbelief, as if “How can they all think that line is the same height as that line?” but often would wind up conforming and answering incorrectly, due simply to the power of the group.

Scary, huh, to realize how easily people can be swayed?

What would you guess as to the rate of conformity?

26 percent. That's how many people conformed to the group despite very clear evidence from their own eyes. Isn't that something? Other researchers have gone on to conduct their own studies with similar findings. 

I believe we see conformity or groupthink a lot in our daily life. 

For example, have you ever observed a large crowd unsure of what to do or where to head, such as at an amusement park or stadium? You'll see one or two or three people peel off from the group, and then suddenly there's this mass migration following them – for better or worse! You'll see far fewer people standing and waiting to decide for themselves what seems to be the best course. 

Another area we see a lot of conformity in is politics. Do you notice how, after a strong media personality takes up a certain talking point, you start hearing that same talking point elsewhere, down to sometimes the exact wording? It's as if there's no independent thinking that takes place, as if predigested thoughts are automatically passed along. 

These situations and many others we face are much more complicated than simply visually detecting line height differences. Deciding which way to go or what's right and what's wrong requires a lot more thought and effort. So if the conformity rate is 26 percent with simple matters, imagine how much higher it is with difficult ones! 

Some conformity is very positive, of course, such as conformity with laws and social customs like taking turns. Without it, it would certainly be difficult for different groups to get along. However, some conformity is negative, as history shows us, such as conformity with racism and other forms of bigotry. And much conformity is flat-out inaccurate, such as in the Asch experiments. 

I personally would rather be accurate than fit in with the group! So I want to do my own thinking, and I encourage others to also. 

Just as we've heard we shouldn't get our information from only one source . . .

... let's make sure we don't form our opinions based on just one group's way of thinking. Let's expose ourselves to different viewpoints and beware of groupthink.

Just learned this the hard way and wanted to pass it along.


Need Internet at a depo that's being held in a hotel?


(1) Bring a (long) ethernet cord in case you need a wired connection (which you very well could).


(2) Keep this in mind if you're having trouble getting online: With some hotels, booking a meeting room with Internet access doesn't mean Internet access for the whole room, as you very naturally might except; some give Internet access to only one user in the room, with an additional charge for each user.


This came up in a realtime streaming job I had the other day. When I arrived to set up, the videographer was there setting up too, and he passed over to me the paper from the hotel that listed the Internet network name and password. He was already online and said it worked fine. 


So I set up my equipment and go to connect to the Internet, and I get this "Access denied" message in my browser. To shortcut through all the stress that caused, and the precious time wasted in fixing the problem, during which the agency was breathing down my neck as to why the connection wasn't set up when they wanted, I'll just say it turned out that the reason I couldn't get online was that the videographer was already online. Only one user had been paid for by whomever arranged the room. 


I never would have thought of that! So in case you think like I do, I wanted to pass that along to help shortcut your stress/time in setting up.