Dumb and dumber

So now you can't touch your stuff for the last hour of your flight.

Why? Because once someone tried to do something bad on a plane in the last hour of its flight. (Now, I'll bet that's happened before and it's simply slipped the TSA's minds. Then again, a lot of things have slipped their minds.)

Now, is this going to stop a terrorist? No, because most terrorists can tell time, just like about one-tenth of airline employees responsible for working out scheduling. They'll simply start their stuff 90 minutes before their flights land.

What it's going to stop is people like you and you from flying. (Not you and me. I gave up on the airlines a W ago.)

You'd think that people like Secretary Napolitano would realize this. You'd think they'd realize that instead of consistently staying a step behind most terrorists (notice that the last couple of guys trying this stuff were stopped in the act anyway?), they'd see that they need to be a step ahead.

But no. You can't bring liquids on a plane because someone might have had liquid explosive once. You have to show your shoes because someone had explosive shoes once. Now you can't get up because a terrorist got up once. (I can't wait for the lawsuit that'll follow someone with medical concerns being unable to get to the bathroom in the last hour of a flight.)

All this security theater doesn't prevent people from bringing explosives on a plane. Would it really be that hard to make the security at airports more reasonable (by hiring more competent people to work the lines, for one thing)? Would it really be that hard to put security people on planes to stop this stuff, because we're already relying on passengers to do this?

Look. The security theater isn't working. This latest jackass brought explosives onto the plane. And the entire show depends on catching people before they get on the plane.

I hate to say this, but Obama is failing in this area as badly as W did. The TSA isn't the answer. "Tighter" security isn't the answer. Better, smarter security is.

Then again, in a couple of years, it probably won't need to be better or smarter. There will be few enough passengers that the TSA can probably question each one in detail.

Update: Great minds think alike.

XBLA review: Magic: The Gathering: Duels of the Planeswalkers (1/10)

I was going to rant about how stupid this is and link to my earlier review when I realized I didn't post one yet.

So, in short:

a) This is not the ultra-cool version for the PC. This is an incredibly retarded version.
b) It's done so badly that there are threads about how to get around the broken control system. You can't even tap your own lands for mana.

Don't bother. This is a waste of money. You're better off finding the PC version, digging around to get the patches for it, and playing that. The PC version is 100 times better than this.

Microsoft + Verizon: tons of money, massive stupidity

So this Bing, I suppose someone out there is using it. (I saw one of the commercials once. Apparently Bing is for people who don't want to find too much online.) And it's Microsoft, the company that has been fined millions and millions on multiple continents and still doesn't learn.

Anyway, Consumerist says that the Register and the New York Times reported that searching via an app (do people really do that?) can now be done with either Bing or ... Bing.

Verizon gets $500 million. You get the least useful application on the internet.

Merry Christmas, everyone, from Ivan Seidenberg to you.

Scrooge's links

Jump to conclusions.
Yes, that's right, before too long only Grandpa will be talking about old-school controllers. Project Natal will be the death of the control pad. In fact, I think it just happened.

Please. How many games on the Wii suck because they aren't suited to motion controllers? How many times do you catch yourself playing something on the 360 or the PS3 and thinking man, this would be so much easier if I could just wiggle or point?

Look, people still play PC games with keyboards, okay? Fifteen years ago, they were selling game peripherals for PCs like they were going to take over console gaming. Yes, you can still buy them. No, they aren't always necessary. They still make games that are playable entirely with the keyboard, and other games that work best with keyboard and mouse. Why? Because that's what the game requires. Want to play WoW with motion controllers? Hahahahahahaha.

Health care reform passes the Senate.
Despite the efforts of certain wealthy Republicans who already have excellent health insurance through Congress. Sure, let's let health care costs spiral out of control, watch normal people choose between bankruptcy and painful death, see people turn away from careers in health care because of the challenges they face fighting the current system, because we don't want to spend money to fix the problem. (How much did we spend trying to seize oil fields in Iraq? Oh, right, that wasn't part of the budget.)

Fortunately, the wealthy Democrats in Congress (plus a socialist and a grandstanding jerk) won a small victory, but I think it's fair to wait to celebrate. First, it's not even a bill yet, and second, even if it were and if Obama signed it today, those provisions wouldn't take effect overnight.

Still, it's a huge step.

Old media still doesn't get it.
They never have. Even new media outlets don't get it ... ever read ESPN The Magazine? (Even by its title, you should know it's dumb.) It's just print versions of online articles, sent to you whether you want it or not. Why? Who knows? Probably because some executive decided they needed to challenge SI.

Why bother with it? Look, news today is the same as 100 years ago: facts and opinions. The problem for old media is that now, everyone with an ... um ... opinion can share it in the same space they use, and plenty of places are sharing facts for free. If you aren't adding value, you're not going to make money, and if you're trying to make money, you're living on borrowed time.

You want me to pay for a magazine I can only read on the iPod/iPhone? What? It's a terrible reading device in the first place (small, small, and small), and now you want me to pay to read your crap? No way. I'm not even sure I want to pay to read books on a Kindle (although I do like the idea of owning a lot of books that don't take up space).

I get SI for the same reason I always have, because my grandmother extends my subscription for Christmas. It's all right, I guess, but most of its news is 3-7 days old, and most of the opinions are already available online; not only that, but some of the opinions are less informed than blogs I read. (ESPN? Don't get me started.)

Of course when old media thinks change, it thinks TALK RADIO change. (Case in point: the crusade by the Free Press to demonize Rich Rodriguez. Does it attract readers? I guess. Does it poison others against them? You bet it does, and there are all kinds of places to get Detroit sports news that have nothing to do with the Free Press.) That's not going to work. Hell, eventually ESPN will realize that Around the Horn is the worst show in sports history.

I'm rambling, but at least I'm having fun. Merry holiday season.

and get off my lawn!

Sports links

Missouri is definitely not uninterested in the Big 10.
Well, to be more precise, they're tired of being screwed in the Big Texas Conference. (Profit-sharing in the Big 12 is 50% to everyone and 50% based on TV appearances, which means Texas gets more money and likes it that way. The Big 10 splits everything evenly.) Texas, naturally, doesn't want anything to change, and with a supermajority required to make changes (9 of 12 schools), Missouri and similar schools must sit by and watch as the Big 10 and SEC steam ahead. (Nice interview with Missouri's AD in this link: he is asked several direct questions and does not flat-out deny anything.)

Mark Shapiro is one of the dumbest men in television sports history.
No, not the Cleveland Indians GM. The guy that ESPN hired in the early 2000s, the one who decided to turn the network into MTV Sports. He failed miserably, leaving in 2005 to pal around with Dan Snyder. (The jokes write themselves sometimes.) 10 of the 11 shows on this list are ESPN-family shows (11 because the two "reality" shows on ESPN are combined), and Shapiro was involved in all but one. This was the problem with Disney's involvement: more people who have no clue about sports. (See Ducks, Anaheim.)

Fortunately most of the damage has been repaired, although for some reason Around the Horn is still on the air. If you can explain to me how this survived and Stump the Schwab didn't ...

By the way, the one show that wasn't a Shapiro failure? McEnroe, on CNBC. One week, the only show it beat was "How to Boil Water". No, really. (At least that's what the link says.)

Even gamers know that playoffs are better.
And not just because we remember the version of Bill Walsh College Football that let you choose between bowls and playoffs. (As soon as the NCAA name appeared, the playoffs disappeared.) Anyway, Kotaku gives you its take on a playoff for the 2009 season. Hint: Alabama doesn't win.

5th isn't bad.
Purdue's holding steady at 4th in the polls and 5th in Sagarin's ratings after knocking off Ball State on Saturday. SIU-Edwardsville and Iowa are next; the Boilers should be 12-0 when they host undefeated West Virginia in the Game of the Year a week from Friday. (That's a joke, sort of: a week from Friday is New Year's Day, so at that point, yeah, it'll be the game of the year.)

When is a win not necessarily a win?
Wow. So I guess they can't even correct it properly ... sorry, there weren't actually 1.8 seconds left when you scored. You should be watching the clock at all times because the clock may be wrong.

Oops, sorry. Background: Butler ball, down by 1, shot clock off. Xavier knocks the ball free, goes into backcourt, Butler recovers as clock stops briefly and restarts. Bulldogs lose ball twice, recover, put up a shot, score with 1.2 seconds left. Officials review sequence interminably (15-20 minutes, never mind that 10-15 they claim in the article) and decide that because of the stoppage, there would actually be no time left, so game over, Xavier loses.

Of course, the fair things to do would be a) give Xavier the ball with 1.2 seconds left because that's what the clock said or b) give Butler the ball in the backcourt with 14.7 seconds left and play from there. Wiping out time because the clock was run improperly is crap; in fact, at least in the NBA, you can go back to a point in time and replay if the clock is not run properly, at least if it's the shot clock. (1988 NBA Finals, Game 6, I think. John Salley has a breakaway dunk called back because a Lakers shot was ruled not to have touched the rim; the shot clock should not have reset, so the steal did not count. Lakers get the ball with 3 seconds left on the shot clock, I think, score, win the game, win the series. But don't worry, the NBA isn't fixed.)

Don't get me wrong. I'm far from a Xavier fan, but this is just wrong, and given that the NCAA director of officials is quoted in the article as saying there's nothing else they can do, then it needs to be addressed in the offseason.

A collection of links and minor thoughts

xkcd: Dreaming about school.
no kidding. Except these are my most common semi-lucid dreams. It's much easier to realize you're dreaming when a) you haven't been in a classroom in nearly 20 years and b) class wasn't that big of a deal when you were there in the first place. (I also dream about working in the cafeteria.)

Coding Horror: Even serious developers forget to back up their important stuff.
When Jeff Atwood fails, people listen. (It's okay if none of you know who he is. Just back up your stuff. Now.)

law: The FTC is after Intel again.
Intel doesn't learn ... or doesn't care to. Probably the latter. For the record, this is how the "free market" tends to solve things.

Yes, it's been a slow week at work. Not my fault. I have only one project with this client. If I were full-time, I'd be doing more with them.

stuff: Why most of what you see in movies is crap.
Of course you knew that already. Yeah, I'm the guy who points out stuff during movies like "um, things don't explode in space".

more stuff: Rocket Science.
No, really. What things ought to do, rather than going boom. I spent a lot of time here. Warning: interest in accurate sci-fi and/or knowledge of physics required.

NCAA 10: Season 1 summary

Well, we started off giving up 22 points to a I-AA school (of course they're all generic in NCAA 10, so let's say it's Nicholls State, for no reason other than that I keep assuming they're in Texas and realizing they're in Louisiana) which wasn't a good omen. Next came thrashings by Kansas State and LSU ... at that point I was wondering whether or not we'd be able to compete in I-A at all, never mind the Sun Belt.

But we went into Lincoln and stunned Nebraska (apparently without their All-American DT - yes, the same guy in New York right now hopefully awaiting the Heisman), and suddenly things didn't look so bad.

Conference play next: lost our opener to North Texas, ran off five straight wins, and suddenly we're bowl-eligible. (Funny, I thought it was six wins because I-AA wins counted. I guess I know more than EA.) Sadly, that was the end of the line. Lost to Louisiana-Monroe, lost to Troy, finished fourth in the conference and were left out of the bowl picture. (One of the Florida schools won, FIU or Florida Atlantic. Naturally, we'd beaten both of them. ULM and Troy were 7th and 9th, respectively.)

Turned down an offer to join Conference USA (replacing UAB). No thanks, I'm in this for the achievement. (Not that I'll be able to win the SEC, but I guess you never know until you try.)

Signed a couple of three-star recruits during the season, then landed a four-star and a couple more three-star guys in the offseason. Added a pipeline state, too (but of course I can't figure out what it is because EA sucks). UPDATE: it's Georgia. You can't find out until the season starts. So now my pipeline includes Texas, Louisiana, Georgia, and Florida. You might think it's odd that Mississippi and Alabama aren't included, but it's a numbers game: the most populous states around me. With Texas and Florida, I probably don't need to try to get California or New York.

It's hard to recruit when everything other than location is C+ or worse, but easy when you know basically anyone two-star or better can come right in and play. I did redshirt a lot of players, including three wide receivers: we're already six deep at the position and have an 85 transfer from Florida State who'll play his senior season next year.

Our recruiting class was much better than the rest of the conference, so that's a good sign. There are three teams picked to finish above us, but they're all pretty much the same. We're C- overall (up from D), C on offense, C- on defense, B- on special teams (was D+/D/C-, I think).

I added rival Louisiana Tech to our schedule, which is a C- in strength again. I got one of two goals last year (finish .500 and get a bowl bid). This year it's beat ULM, get a bowl, and beat a 5- or 6-star team. The last one won't happen unless we meet one in a bowl: 4-star Mississippi is the team with the biggest rep on our schedule.

The only tough games should be the ones at Mississippi and Minnesota; we should be able to play with anyone on the schedule, but then again that should have been true in-conference last year and we went 5-3. We'll see.

srsly?

If you were responsible for a U.S. post office branch, and if you wanted to run a daily maintenance process on the self-service postage machines, would you run it

a) on each machine separately, or
b) on both machines at the same time?

Would you run these processes

a) late, late at night, say between 1:30 and 3:30 AM, or
b) in late evening, say around 10:30 PM?

If you guessed b) for both questions, you'd better be guessing, because if you're the incompetent fool who actually made these decisions, you're an idiot.

Because what's less effective than a "24-hour" self-service kiosk that is down for "daily maintenance" at the same time as the other one in the branch?

Besides Congress, that is.

Weigh-in: Week 36 through Week 40, +0.6 pounds

So I fell behind a little bit, as I tend to do on long-term projects, and rather than making up five weeks of paragraphs, here we are:

Week 36: +1.2 pounds
Week 37: +2.2 pounds
Week 38: -1.4 pounds (actually this was on Thursday, I forgot to weigh myself Wednesday)
Week 39: +0.2 pounds
Week 40: -1.6 pounds

Basically, in early November I fell into a trap of eating potato chips and stuff like that with lunch. Caught that, turned it around, and then later in the month as work slowed down, my weight began to stabilize. It was neutral the first week in December and has been dropping since then; as you can see, yesterday's weight was almost where I was back in late October.

With the slowdown in contract work, I may not be ready to purchase my reward if I do earn it; then again, I'm also eating more carefully in part because I'm at home, so there are good parts and bad parts to it.

I feel like I'm focused again, so we'll see how the next couple of weeks go.

I don't think that word means what you think it means

NCAA 10. New dynasty with Louisiana-Lafayette, aiming to take them to the SEC and win in the first year (for an achievement). This year they're terrible.

Playing Kansas State, K-State is up 30-0 in the third quarter ... and throwing. A lot. Naturally if I had the lead like that, I'd be penalized "sportsmanship points" every pass, but of course it's different for the computer. (There are also points for kicking on 4th down, also a joke: the computer goes for it all the time, which I support in principle, but it makes the standards they hold you to ridiculous.)

I'm down 37-0 now and have a 4th and 17. We can't hit any long passes, so I kick a field goal ... and get 10 points for sportsmanship for kicking on 4th down.

EA meant well, but as usual, made a hash of it. Did they set up kick return formations or allow you to tell whether or not your opponent is trying an onside kick? Oh no, they don't fix problems, they just add "features".

Of course, that's going to change as they put out fewer games with more quality. I'll believe that two years after I've seen it.

Playoffs

No, not the NFL kind. There's time enough for that ... what I mean are nonexistent playoffs, the I-A kind that we would have if idiots weren't running the show.

How it wouldn't work

Any form of four-team system: plus-one, whatever. First, that's not a playoff. That's old boys disappearing into the back room and declaring a champion. Second, really? Interest in the non-champion BCS bowls has been steadily dropping because people realize what they are now: consolation prizes. Besides, there are six BCS conferences. Tell me how that's going to work. Uh-huh, that's what I thought.

An eight-team playoff. Case in point: 2009. Six BCS conference champions – that's a given, as mentioned above. So that leaves two spots, and which team are you going to exclude?

a) Unbeaten TCU;
b) Unbeaten Boise State;
c) One-loss Florida. (Bonus: they're the only one-loss team in I-A football. Look it up.)

Exactly. Two at-large berths aren't nearly enough. Yes, I know, not every season will see five unbeaten teams heading into the bowls, but every season's going to have a number of qualified candidates from outside the power six, and remember, the old BCS was expanded under threat of legal action. They can't very well shrink the field back down now.

How it would work

Sixteen teams. First-round games at campus sites, quarterfinals at three permanent sites, say Tampa, Jacksonville, and San Antonio, with the fourth spot to one of the existing BCS bowls in rotation, then semis and final at the other three bowls in rotation.

I picked Tampa (Outback), Jacksonville (Gator), and San Antonio (Alamo) for a combination of longevity and geography. Ideally, you'd have a western site, a southwest site, a southern site, and a southeast site, but I don't know that there are enough bowls for that.

Anyway, the teams: 11 conference champions and 5 at-large teams. Oh yes, all 11. It's an NCAA championship, so that's how it works, and anyway if you think you're excluding any of the other conferences, you would be wrong.

What it would look like

Version 1: how the computers might see it
(16) Troy at (1) Alabama
(15) East Carolina at (2) Florida*
(14) Central Michigan at (3) Texas
(13) Penn State* at (4) TCU
(12) USC* at (5) Cincinnati
(11) Pittsburgh* at (6) Oregon
(10) Georgia Tech at (7) Boise State
(9) Ohio State at (8) Virginia Tech*

At-large teams marked like so*. Assumptions: no more than one at-large bid from a conference, and teams from the same conference may not meet in the first round. To avoid this, teams may be moved a spot from their original seeds. (In fact, at first I had a Pitt-UC rematch, a USC-Oregon rematch, and a GT-VT rematch originally.)

Troy-Alabama? Coincidence, plus the Sun Belt sucks. Florida as #2? That's how the computers see it, and we're thinking an RPI-style system, not the crap that currently puts human guesses above carefully-research systems.

I just don't think you can justify three teams from one conference when there are five at-large bids for everyone. With a 24-team playoff like I-AA has, I think you could allow four; with a limit of three, you might drop pretty far down to pick up other teams. LSU is 10th in both Sagarin and Massey and Arkansas averages 14th. Miami is 11th in both and Clemson averages 19th. If you draw the line at 4, that shuts out Mississippi ... but I think you kind of have to, no one wants to see a second-division power-conference team in the playoff. (Hear that, NCAA men's selection committee?)

Version 2: how the BCS might see it
?? at (1) Alabama
?? at (2) Texas
?? at (3) Cincinnati
(13) West Virginia* at (4) TCU
(12) BYU* at (5) Florida*
(11) Virginia Tech* at (6) Boise State
(10) Iowa* at (7) Oregon
(9) Georgia Tech at (8) Ohio State

Same notes for at-large teams, multi-bid conferences, and first-round meetings. So the first problem is that the BCS stops listing teams at 25, so we have no idea where Central Michigan, East Carolina, and Troy would fall. (A cynic would list them in order by wins because he'd say the BCS would understand anything more.)

No teams needed to be shifted. Iowa gets the Big Ten's second spot instead of Penn State (margin of victory being important in a real ranking system, but in the neutered version, PSU gets virtually nothing for whipping bad northeastern teams). West Virginia sneaks in ahead of Pitt (which has to hurt considering the Big East "championship" – makes you wonder if people even watched that game, but I think we all know the voters don't actually watch games).

BYU slips in ahead of USC, and to be honest I'm fine with that. In fact, in an RPI system, I doubt USC would get in, because they were tied for what, fifth in the Pac-10? They finished their season terribly. Maybe the conference was tough as a whole, but cry me a river. If you're taking a team from the Pac-10, it's Oregon State, right?

Of course in an actual BCS-based playoff, BYU wouldn't have a chance in hell (pardon the phrase), because they're not in a BCS conference, and the power conferences would always get the at-large bids.

Anyway, you see where this is going. TCU-Boise State is a nice matchup, as is Alabama-Texas and Florida-Cincinnati, but that will still leave at least two unbeaten teams, and if you think that doesn't matter, well, you were probably happy with the poll-determined champions.

The BCS is a limited system put in place by greedy fools who had no clue and updated by fools who still have no clue. It will be replaced by greedy people who have a clue. (Make no mistake, a playoff will be introduced for money, not because it's a fair way to determine a champion or because every single sport at every level of NCAA competition has a tournament except I-A football.)

Looking forward to that Troy-Alabama matchup? Too bad. Waiting to see if Cincinnati could make it to the semis or if the TCU-Alabama winner would trip them up? Keep waiting.

In the meantime, we'll have the Orange Bowl. Iowa-Georgia Tech. Mmm-kay.

Totally not screwed

The World Cup draw was held today. Normally, in these things, the USA is screwed, mostly because FIFA is really only concerned with distributing competition in geographic terms. (This is probably because of the heavy concentration of talent in Europe. Think of it as soccer's equivalent of the BCS: the current system strongly benefits Europe, and Europe has significant influence in FIFA, so it's not likely to change any time soon.)

What happens is that if you aren't the host country or a top team, you're grouped essentially by region, so you can't play anyone else in your region. Unfortunately, we end up grouped with other CONCACAF countries and usually the weaker Asian teams, so instead of being able to draw them, we draw a couple of European teams. In theory, this wouldn't matter for a top side: obviously to win the World Cup you have to beat a number of quality teams. In practice, we're not that good yet, so we could use a balanced draw rather than a geographic draw.

Well, this is what we got:
Pot 1) England. Well, it wasn't Brazil or Spain. Of course, given how we played Brazil and Spain in the Confederations Cup, maybe those would have been better draws. South Africa would have been the dream draw here. Instead, we get a difficult opponent.
Pot 2) USA. This is just to show where we came into play.
Pot 3) Algeria. Jackpot. Arguably the weakest team in Pot 3. They've not played in the World Cup in 24 years and were not a particularly strong qualifier from Africa. They do have some home-continent advantage, but I don't think it will be enough to threaten.
Pot 4) Slovenia. Another great draw, considering that France and Portugal were in this pot. Slovakia would have been a better draw, but Slovenia and Algeria should be enough to guarantee advancement for the US.

Will the US be strong and healthy enough to advance beyond the round of 16? There's no way to tell right now, but it should certainly be a consideration. This is a team that was a match from early elimination in South Africa this year, yet found itself at halftime of the championship match ahead 2-0 against Brazil.

On the flip side, we're strong enough that the Confederations Cup should be a disappointment rather than an accomplishment. In past World Cups, struggling with a draw like this would be unfortunate. Now, it would be a disaster.

The minimum expectation should be six points and a second-place finish. A reasonable expectation would be seven points and a tiebreaker for group finish (drawing with England, goal differential deciding the group winner). Winning the group? That would be good ... but not incredible. Incredible would be advancing to the semifinals.

I think we'll make the quarterfinals. In six months, we'll find out.

Virtual me (NCAA 10)

If you don't like reading posts about playing video games, skip ahead to the next post.

In my junior year at Georgia Tech as a MLB, we started off the season 0-2, and to make matters worse, both games were conference games (UNC and Virginia Tech). So after starting the season #3, we were down to #21. Amazingly, we won our next 10 games, finished in a tie for the division with Miami (whom we'd beaten), and got a spot in the ACC title game again. We'd also managed to work our way back to #2/#4 in the polls and #3 in the BCS standings, in part because we played something like 8 top-25 teams. Clemson was actually ahead of us at #3 when we were #4 in the BCS, but they lost to South Carolina ... I figured even if they didn't, we'd pass them anyway by winning the ACC while they were idle. Texas was #1 and ND was #2, so it seemed like a safe bet for us.

Well, Alabama beat Florida, who was ranked higher than BC (our opponent in the ACC Championship), and they vaulted over us to #2, dropping Notre Dame to #3 and us to #4. Instead of playing for the title, we're playing #14 Boise State. woo. Not as fun as shutting out overrated Notre Dame last year (oh yes we did), but it'll do.

Just a reminder that the BCS is crap. Sure, we screwed ourselves by losing two games, but you can't tell me that it's a good feeling to win your last game prior to the bowls and end up moving down. In this season, it was really Texas and everyone else; there simply weren't two teams that were clearly better than the rest, and that was the only reason the BCS came into play.

Guess I'll return for my senior season.

Rock Band 2 song difficulties

I admit it, I've been slacking on this. Of course they don't make it easy on you, what with DLC coming out every week and all. Now that there are more than 1000 songs available, well, it's a bit of a challenge.

Anyway, I've created a new Google Doc with most of the songs and Rock Band 2 difficulty levels. (Remember, RB and RB 2 have different systems for difficulty. Also, IMHO the RB 2 difficulties are less accurate. Take that for what it's worth.)

There are a number of songs with no difficulties yet because I entered only the song info, knowing I'd have to come back to them. This is still a work in progress. I'm down to the Rs with just the new Nirvana and Night Ranger songs to go back and fill in.

Finally, there are some songs in the game itself that I haven't marked, and then there are the songs from the first game that you can import. (I deleted some of those, so I may not have ratings for everything.)

Enjoy!

Oh, one more thing: a few songs only use three instruments (one song with no drums, three songs with no vocals). For those songs, I removed the averages from any column with the part that is missing, so they'll be at the bottom of the list (because the full band can't play them).