Citing the Text

Disqus!

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 05:28:00 +0000

Go ahead. Disqus.

Out with the old...

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:42:00 +0000

Alas, poor Blogspot. I knew him well. That's right - it's time for bigger and better things, this time in the form of a shiny new (hand-crafted!) blogging platform.

More details are in the inaugural post. This final post here is mainly to say that if you are one of the brave souls reading this via RSS, please update your feed - and thanks for reading!

How-To: Debian (Lenny) + Enterprise Ruby + Passenger + Git

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 21:20:00 +0000

Editor's Note: I am continually amazed by and grateful for the thousands of internet denizens who write about their problems and the solutions they have found. This post is one feeble attempt at contributing to that collective knowledge; hopefully many more will follow.

I decided to rework my home page as a simple Rails application, mainly to take advantage of the way Rails handles views/templates. Is this overkill? Probably. Are there a ton of other tools I could have used? Definitely. It's a classic case of holding a hammer and taking a look around for nails. But I digress. I also decided to set up Enterprise Ruby/Rails, Passenger, and Git, all of which are totally overkill at the moment but will hopefully lay a groundwork for things to come. Again, I digress.

The first thing we'll need to do, assuming we're working with a fresh install of Debian (5.0 - Lenny), is install libraries for Ruby, Apache, and mySQL.

apt-get install build-essential apache2 ruby1.8 zlib1g-dev libssl-dev mysql-server mysql-common libmysqlclient15-dev libmysqlclient15off apache2-prefork-dev libreadline5-dev

(I have no idea what a couple of those items are: I was prompted to install them later on in the process, so if you install them up front it will go more smoothly)

Get the most recent version of Ruby Enterprise Edition.

For me it was:

wget http://rubyforge.org/frs/download.php/51100/ruby-enterprise-1.8.6-20090201.tar.gz

Note the Enterprise Ruby version in red, we'll need it later.

The Ruby Enterprise installer looks in /usr/bin/ruby for Ruby, which doesn't currently exist; link up your install in ruby1.8 by doing

ln -s /usr/bin/ruby1.8 /usr/bin/ruby

Now, using your own version of Enterprise Ruby from above in place of the ###...:

Unarchive:

tar xzvf ruby-enterprise-########.tar.gz

Run the installer:

./ruby-enterprise-########/installer

Follow the prompts. Should be self-explanatory.

Next, remove the old link to ruby1.8:

rm /usr/bin/ruby

and link up to the enterprise ruby goodness:

ln -s /opt/ruby-enterprise-1.8.6-########/bin/rake /usr/bin/rake
ln -s /opt/ruby-enterprise-1.8.6-########/bin/gem /usr/bin/gem
ln -s /opt/ruby-enterprise-1.8.6-########/bin/rails /usr/bin/rails
ln -s /opt/ruby-enterprise-1.8.6-########/bin/ruby /usr/bin/ruby

Now install Passenger:

/opt/ruby-enterprise-1.8.6-########/bin/passenger-install-apache2-module

As you may have noticed, the Enterprise Ruby install directs you to add some lines to Apache's config file. If you're using Apache2, open that up with

vi /etc/apache2/apache2.conf

and add the following, replacing the gem version in red (2.1.2 at this time) with your own gem version.

LoadModule passenger_module /opt/ruby-enterprise-1.8.6-########/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/passenger-2.1.2/ext/apache2/mod_passenger.so
PassengerRoot /opt/ruby-enterprise-1.8.6-########/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/passenger-2.1.2
PassengerRuby /opt/ruby-enterprise-1.8.6-########/bin/ruby

That's it for Enterprise Ruby and Passenger! Next up, Git:

aptitude install build-essential gettext zlib1g-dev

Get Git - right now it's:

wget http://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/git-1.6.2.1.tar.gz

Unarchive; configure; make; install!

tar xvzf git-1.6.2.1.tar.gz
cd git-1.6.2.1
./configure
make
make install

You'll likely want to set up Virtual Hosts on Apache as well; this gets a little bit specific for the purposes of this how-to so I'll leave it at RTFM :-)

The Days are Just Packed

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 03:45:00 +0000

1. Create "Maximo Park Radio" on Pandora

2. Happen upon the song "We Don't Think, We Know," by Maritime

3. Catch the allusion in the lyrics: "All the days are just packed / And we’re asleep in the trees"

4. See if anyone else caught it -- nope! (Well, they didn't write about it anyway)

5. Write about it

6. Smile :-)

Raw [Normalized] Data Now: Tim Berners-Lee and the Future of the Web

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 16:40:00 +0000

Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the internet, recently spoke at the 2009 TED conference. His talk was an inspirational glimpse into the life of someone who has clearly never stopped exploring and always done what was intriguing to him -- it just so happens that his road wound up providing a tremendous benefit to society.

Some highlights of the talk were Tim's *sheer joy* at the notion that he had made an addition to a collaboratively edited map; a new Three. Word. Mantra (Raw Data Now); and a shoutout to a previous outstanding TED talk on the power of making data useful and universally accessible (sounds familiar).

Tim also put up a cartoon that made fun of the fact that all of these different social sites (Facebook, LinkedIn, Flickr, etc.) exist in silos, incapable of fully interacting with one another.

This is certainly a problem that the major sites are aware of and are working to fix; Facebook, for example, allows me to import a feed of my activity on Picasa (Google's photo storage/sharing service).

But it doesn't quite cut it. Photos are a perfect example of my point. Let's say I have an album, and I want to keep it on Picasa (or Flickr, or wherever) instead of Facebook because I don't want the picture size reduced (or any other reason). However, I still want to tag my friends in that album, and if people make comments, I want those to appear below the pictures.

The current solution is broken -- when's the last time you clicked through on something like "John has uploaded new photos to Flickr" and left a comment on his picture, after finding it tagged with all of John's Facebook friends?

The workaround hints at the solution. I have several photo albums that have "_facebook" appended to their names. These albums are duplicates or near-duplicates of albums that are stored elsewhere but that I wanted to share and tag using my Facebook network.

Such duplication of data should leave anyone who works with databases (myself included) banging your head against your keyboard right about now. ao;idsgja;sodijadosifj. That's better.

We need to "normalize," in database-speak (read: stop duplicating), the content that we put on the web. After all, it's our content! Right now we're jumping through all sorts of hoops because Facebook has our network but Flickr has more storage and better picture quality. Why should that matter? Why should we have to make this compromise?

Instead of duplicating and distributing content, it needs to be in one single place, accessible to those applications and sites that you give permission to. You provide the information; Facebook provides the social network, the display formatting, and the ability to easily allow others to make additions (e.g. comments) to that information. Your. Raw. Data.

It's REST meets the social web.

Tim talked about how data is all about relationships (bing!). The most challenging part of all this is making it simple to manage these relationships. Let's move away from photos for a second and talk about another piece of data that we would ideally keep in one place rather than duplicating it across multiple sites: basic profile information.

Things like name and email address are straightforward. Any site that is interacting with Your Raw Data probably requires one of these as their primary way of distinguishing an account. But what about something like "favorite books"? Or "professional experience"? I want the first to be on Facebook but not LinkedIn, and vice versa for the second. Or what if I want to have "homebrewing" on my list of interests on Facebook but replace it with "golf" on that same list on LinkedIn?

Connections are perhaps an even better example, and one that's gotten more attention - I want to be friends with my co-worker on LinkedIn, but not so much on Facebook. How to manage those different relationships?

And to cite a far more useful example -- Tim talked about databases for pharmaceutical companies and researchers, trying to find all the proteins with certain characteristics. One lab might do an experiment and determine that a protein does have the ability to do XY and Z - does that mean the connection should be made? What if another lab produces a conflicting result? Who decides whether it's a valid connection?

While there are a ton of people working on the problem right now, none of the results I've used take the approach that I've outlined here. Many aggregate from the current smorgasbord, which is certainly the easiest thing to do, but not, in the long run, the most useful. If anyone is jumping out of their chair right now and interested in a little side project, let me know :-)

I'm going to cut this off here but hopefully will have more to write about on the topic soon. In the ultimate irony, these thoughts will be posted to my blog and then imported as a "note" to Facebook. Any comments written in either location will not be displayed in the other one.

Musings

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 14:41:00 +0000

I've had the same question work its way to the conscious part of my brain a few times lately, so I thought I'd share it here.

The question arises when I'm traveling through the underbelly of New York City on the subway at upwards of 30 mph (I know the speed because each subway train actually contains a speedometer, visible to any passenger riding in the exact middle of the train, right next to the conductor). I'll be riding a local train as the express goes by (or sometimes, somewhat counter-intuitively, I'll be on the express train as the local goes by...) when I happen to look out the window and see some of the passengers on the other train.

If the trains are moving at similar speeds this can actually be quite a fun little experience; for some reason, people are not as quick to avert their eyes from someone else who happens to be peering out the window.

Something about this brief connection with a fellow traveler makes me think: I am physically just a few feet from this person, and yet if I wanted to actually speak to him, or shake his hand, it could be nearly impossible. What if I happened to see someone I recognized? In a small percentage of cases, the local and the express are both stopping at the next station, so it might be as easy as walking across the platform.

But it could also be extremely difficult - what if, instead of two subway trains, you happened to be on a NJ Transit train moving side by side with an Acela leaving Penn Station, headed straight to Philadelphia?

So what's the furthest you can be, in terms of effort, cost, time, and distance, from being able to shake someone's hand, while still being just a few feet away?

Fashion Icon

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 22:48:00 +0000

Andy Brett, fashion visionary. A WSJ article on Wednesday highlighted an upcoming trend¹ for the spring: bright, solid colors. A picture taken from the article:

And a picture taken from my apartment a few months ago:

¹ I'm not really sure what the WSJ has to do with fashion trends, much less predicting upcoming fashion trends, but whatever.

Update: RecycleBank

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 17:55:00 +0000

On the day of my last post, the Dow closed at 11,516.92. I apologize for the amount of time that has passed; for the amount of "wealth" that has thus vaporized, I can offer no similar sentiment.

But that's not the subject of this post. Much has happened since September 2, 2008, presidential elections and recessions aside. That's right - this post is one of "those" posts. A navel-gazer. More diary entry than anything else, these posts are all too commonly spotted in the wild, often as the solitary entry in a defunct LiveJournal.

In December, I left my job at the Big Consulting Firm where I had been working since graduating in 2007. Once I realized that I would not be happy on the typical career path up that ladder, it was a quick exit. I was able to find another opportunity very quickly, and started on January 5th as a "Developer-Analyst" with RecycleBank. RecycleBank works with cities and private haulers to raise the recycling rates in the households that they service, by recording individuals' recycling habits and awarding points based on those habits. The points can then be redeemed for gift cards and other incentives. I'm working on the team that writes the software to process the data we receive from the trucks and allow people to receive their rewards.

I was (and still am) extremely excited about this opportunity, first and foremost because the company is a startup. "Startup" is a bit of a loose term, and RecycleBank is by no means a small company that is just starting to try out its model - we're already in 15 states and serve over 200,000 households. However, RecycleBank still has what I would consider to be the distinguishing characteristics of a startup, or the ones that are meaningful to me. For one: rapid growth, with an eye on even more growth. For another: dynamic teams, high energy, and flexible work processes. In other words, the specifics of how the company is going to achieve its goals are still very much up in the air, but everyone is going like gangbusters to try out different ideas. It's the kind of environment that makes me excited to go to work, which is never a bad thing considering how many of your waking hours you spend there.

These are all aspects of the company that I *expected or *assumed prior to joining, based on my interviews, research, and just knowing that it was a startup. To date its all been true to form, and I'm very pleased about that.

The other major draw was the technology that RecycleBank is using to build its applications. It's been almost two years since I started working with Ruby on Rails, the framework that we're using for the bulk of our work. It's great to be in a position where we're using it for something a bit more "mainstream" or "enterprise" than many Rails projects out there. Rails is still the new kid on the block, with a lot to prove to those who don't think it will ever be a useful tool for "serious" business. Hopefully the work we're doing with it can eventually be evidence to the contrary.

Race Report: Coast Raid

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 22:02:00 +0000

Pictures

More pictures

Video

The 2008 Coast Raid was without a doubt the hardest thing, physically, I've ever done. Four days of mountain biking, kayaking, intense trekking, orienteering, and ropes courses made for some serious "type two" fun. For those unfamiliar, "type two" fun refers to activities that are not actually that fun while you're engaged in them, but in retrospect, are really fun to look back on. The Coast Raid is a prime example.

But let me back up. Before the race even started, our team undertook an adventure in itself in the form of the journey to Blanc-Sablon. After arriving in Deer Lake, Newfoundland and retrieving our rental bicycles from Cycle Solutions in Corner Brook, we loaded up the van to the brim. However, one thing was missing - our fourth teammate, who was arriving on a later flight. Somehow we managed to squeeze another body and her associated gear into the van.

Somewhere along the way (maybe it was over dinner and a Black Horse at the local dinner haunt in Deer Lake) we decided the best way to catch the ferry the next morning (four hours away in St. Barbe) was to drive straight to St. Barbe immediately, through the night.

There were three amazing things about the trip that ensued. The first was the fact that the main road to get there, Route 430, is also known as the "Viking Trail," presumably because of Newfoundland's past history of Vikings. There are few things that pick you up at 1 in the morning like seeing a sign for the Viking Trail and realizing that you are on said Trail. The second was the pit stop amid some very misty weather at two in the morning along a particularly desolate stretch of Newfoundland's coast. The pit stop was made possible by amazing item number three, which was that in the course of the four hour drive, we saw exactly six other cars on the road. Newfoundland is remote.

After a fairly restless night, we boarded the ferry for Blanc-Sablon. Stormy conditions took over about halfway across the channel, and worsened on the short drive from the ferry dock in Blanc-Sablon to the school that would serve as the race check-in headquarters. The irony was palpable as we made several mad dashes to transport all of our gear from the car to the school's gym without getting it wet, knowing full well that if tomorrow's weather turned out like today's, our efforts would have been in vain.

By the afternoon, however, the sun had come out, so we seized the opportunity to take a quick ride to test out the bikes and take in the beautiful scenery we'd be experiencing over the next four days.

As the other teams came in, we began to slowly gather bits of information about the race.

- We'd be staying in a different town each night, most of the time based at the local school, and could expect to be racing for about 11-14 hours each day, including a night section.

- Most of the other teams at the race were professionals or sponsored in some capacity; and they all looked like they had done this before. Yikes.

- The majority of the water on the course was completely drinkable, without any purification (minus the sea water of course).

- The first event the next day was to be kayaking; we then paid close attention to the demos on how to properly inflate the kayaks.

After receiving our formal race briefing, the race maps, and our itinerary for day one (as well as a welcoming song - very Quebecois I'm told), we cooked a team dinner over our stove and got some stories from the school's janitor about the town.

The next morning saw another early wake-up call to get on the "special" school bus that would take us to St. Paul for the start of the race, about a 90 minute ride from Blanc-Sablon.

The race organizers wisely decided to make the first kayak inflation off the clock, so after we arrived in St. Paul, we were able to take our time getting set up, chat with the other racers (and, unbeknownst to us at the time, the mayor of the town), pose in front of the media helicopter, and test out the water temperature (a balmy 9 degrees C).

After a few words from the organizers and a countdown in French, we were off! The first kayak leg went smoothly if slowly, and after a few miles to wake us up, we were hoisting the kayaks onto our shoulders for the first portage. I got about three steps here before twisting an ankle in the bog (this will become a theme) and going down hard on a rock, opening a nice gash in my knee. We pressed on, however, and after a few more carries and another long paddle, we arrived at the first transition of the day, ready to drop the kayaks and head overland to the first checkpoints.

We hit the first incline hard and had actually pulled ahead of the other four-person mixed team by the first P.C. (Point de cheque, or checkpoint). We would trade leads with them throughout the rest of the day. It was quickly apparent that the trekking portions would be over some really tough terrain. Just about any path off the ridge line meant that with every foot plant you sunk down to mid-ankle at least. We stayed high as much as possible, but much of the time it simply wasn't to be. These stretches were punctuated by swaths of undergrowth: thick, spiny, and unforgiving, ranging in height from mid-thigh to over our heads. These can really slow a team down.

This first day would also see our introduction to "coastering," which is similar to trekking except it's done along the coast, sometimes over some very sharp rocks and other times mostly in the water, if that happens to be the fastest way across a bay. It can get you pretty wet and sometimes turns into full-on swimming. In very cold water.

Speaking of new sports, here's another one we did on the first day. It doesn't have a cool name like "coastering," but it's pretty fun, and in some cases much faster than the alternative of riding your bike over crappy trail or on the beach. It's called riding your bike through a lake.

At the race briefing the previous night, we had been informed that each day would have an "extreme" section with additional checkpoints. In order to attempt it, you had to finish the normal course before a certain time, to prevent teams from racing well into the night. Teams not attempting the section would be assessed a four-hour penalty. The race organizers made the mistake of saying that they only expected one quarter of the teams to qualify for the section, which meant that everyone was gunning for it from the get-go.

So when we finished the regular course with an hour and a half to spare on the cutoff, the choice was clear. We headed back to our kayaks and out to an island to hunt down the three "extreme" checkpoints. We wound up getting back pretty late, well after dark - but we had done it! The Extreme Coast Raid -- Day One. Of four. Uh oh.

We ate dinner and plotted the checkpoints for the next day in haste in order to get as much sleep as possible for day two.

Day two was by far our toughest day. We had all done previous races of 12 hours, but nothing longer, so it was a new experience for all of us to get up the day after a really tough race and do another one. After a bike to our kayaks, we trekked our way around an island for the next four PCs. Our somewhat lagging energy was buoyed by a more relaxed pace and some stunning weather that served to accentuate the beautiful views we had already been experiencing.

We then kayaked back to the mainland to get a few more checkpoints and the Hike-A-Bike, wherein participants hike up a cliff with bikes in tow. It's exactly as fun as it sounds.

Afterwards, however, we were rewarded mightily with a loooong downhill ride to the next transition: adventure swimming! The race officials informed us that we had a choice between actually swimming across the bay or trekking around it to get the last checkpoint of the day. Assessing the situation for less than five seconds told us that the trekking would clearly be the fastest route (especially after accounting for the time to don and remove wetsuits), but goshdarnit, we brought these wetsuits over a thousand miles just for this, and we were going to use them!

Upon departing the transition (and leaving some puzzled locals in our wake), one of us made the remark that after the bike ride back to town, dinner awaits us - after we cook it, that is. Turns out we were mistaken. The locals in St. Paul, like all the locals up and down the lower north shore, seemed to think that this race was the greatest thing since sliced bread. As a result, they cooked for us - not sliced bread, but fresh seafood! We were welcomed with a feast and some very friendly faces, as well as the realization that we were, in the words of Bon Jovi, halfway there.

Day three was the journey from St. Paul to Middle Bay, population 35. In between stood some gnarly hills on the bike, a 1 km kayak portage, and a circumnavigation of yet another island. The home cooking in St. Paul had really revived us though, and we were also treated to more spectacular views (including a whale rib) and some great coastering:

We managed to roll in to the finish right around the cutoff for the extreme section (a vast improvement over day 2). We were greeted with MORE home cooking and the news that, with a population of just 35, Middle Bay did not have a school to speak of, so some of the teams, including ourselves, would be spending the night in the local church.

The night was to be a short one, however, as the teams headed out at 10 pm for the night racing stage. This turned out to be a strong suit for us (somehow): we were 10th out of 19 teams here, our highest place in an individual stage.

After a short four hours of sleep, it was time to tackle the final day. Opening with a bike ride to the kayaks, we bid our inflatable friends adieu, but not without a tense fifteen seconds - I'll just say that there's nothing to get your heart rate up like the sound of an inflatable kayak deflating when you're in the middle of the water and not really close to any shoreline.

After a long trek along the coast, were were back on the bikes to a Tyrolean pit stop:

After hopping back on the bikes, we started seeing signs for Blanc-Sablon again, but the wind off the ocean was becoming an increasingly angry nemesis. The first three bike PCs were inland, which offered a little respite, but the final two checkpoints of the race were directly on the coast and by this point the wind was absolutely howling. Someone said it was gusting to 60 kph, and I believe it - it was nearly impossible to ride in a straight line, even after we had secured the final PC and got back onto the gravel road back to town.

The excitement built quickly with our speed on the bikes as we progressed to smoother and smoother roads and the sounds of cow bells and cheering entered our periphery. The final 50 meters to the finish were uphill through a gravel playground, but we were determined not to walk our bikes through the chute. I continued my tradition of spectacular finishes by (accidentally) wiping out and diving across the line. There are several photos of this but I haven't been able to get my hands on one. We did get a great team shot though, with our representative Canadian holding the American flag:

Almost immediately we were handed a 40 ounce bottle of Bud. I'm not sure what NASCAR is thinking with the milk thing -- this is a far superior way to end a race.

From there the recovery began in earnest. Later on that evening we were awarded a "special" prize for being the team with the most smiles on their faces throughout the race, which came with some sweet hats and t-shirts from Endurance Aventure, "for people wilder than average."

With a final time of 55 hours, 46 minutes and 11 seconds, I think we earned the description.

Departure

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 21:09:00 +0000

Tomorrow I will begin making my way to Blanc-Sablon, Canada, for the 2008 International Endurance Aventure, otherwise known as the Coast Raid. We've got a great team together for what should be a very exciting race.

The race organizers have informed us that the teams' progress will be monitored and posted online. Right now the site directs here, but right now it looks like last year's teams are up there. There's also a video feed that I'm assuming will be updated as the race progresses.

Sunday Life Update

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 02:49:00 +0000

As Facebook-stalkers will have already noticed, I recently changed projects at work. Gone are the days of Amtrak’s train 2105, 6:50 am from Penn Station to Union Station; my commute to work is now just under a half-hour, door to door. The 20 minute ride on the 1-2-3 takes me downtown to the new gig, for the NYC Mayor’s Office, near City Hall. In addition to the shortened commute, some other perks and habits of my new routine:

- A great breakfast place, in Blue Spoon Coffee. They “import” H&H Bagels from the Upper West side (and toast them too, a feature unavailable at the actual H&H), so for $2.25 I get a bagel with cream cheese as well as eight cents left over to contribute to the tip jar poll of the day, or more if I feel strongly about the poll and wish to swing the outcome. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen something so simple and yet so effective at getting people (well, getting me, anyway) to come by each morning.

- Easy access to City Hall Park. A great place to take out lunch from one of the numerous buffets and delis nearby; my favorite spot might be over by the 4-5-6 subway entrance with the great view of the bridge. The office we’re working out of can be a bit cramped at times and short on meeting space, so we have held more than a couple of our less formal meetings out there.

- Speaking of the view, the view from the office is amazing, overlooking the park and with the Brooklyn Bridge and skyline in the distance. I have officially joined the legions of Verizion-building-haters.

- Farmer’s market on Fridays in the previously mentioned City Hall Park. Yum.

In other news, the RoR app for the volunteer project is moving along well, though it’s getting near crunch time. I will say that committing to give weekly State of the Application addresses, while burdensome at times, has been really helpful in keeping things on track (and also “agile,” but that’s for another post).

It’s also been a bit tough to focus on work items lately given the impending sense of ~~doom~~ excitement stemming from the fact that in a week I’ll be getting on a plane for the Coast Raid. Still a lot of last-minute details to figure out there, but I am very excited to get up there and start racing – or adventuring, as the case may be.

Remember: adventure, not race.

Marketing, Microsoft, and ... Buddhism

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 01:19:00 +0000

Let's say you suddenly became completely isolated from the rest of the world, and decided, as your first task, to come up with a list of things that you would need to be happy and lead a good, meaningful, “productive” life. What’s on that list?

Of course, this is an unrealistic question – people derive satisfaction from the context that they are placed in and the things that they take from and contribute to society. It may be more useful to think about what characteristics a society needs to have in order for its members to be happy and lead meaningful lives.

In any case, the “isolation” that I’m trying to get at in the above scenario is not so much isolation from society as it is isolation from the elements of society that have a vested interest in convincing people that they “need” an item or a service in order to separate them from their money in its name – namely, marketing departments.

So what would we deem as “necessary” if marketing weren’t constantly running in the background of our lives?

It's easy to vilify marketing and think of it as billboards and banner ads, designed to take advantage of the fact that many people are easily suggestible if the message is repeated enough. In a way, people have delegated, by default and without much conscious thought, much of their decision making when it comes to their spending to marketing departments, resulting in a kind of Darwinian battle where the most persuasive message -- though not necessarily the most truthful or accurate one -- wins.

On the other end of the spectrum, take sources of information, such as personal recommendations and word-of-mouth referrals, that might be considered as far from billboards and banner ads as one could get, in their degree of customization for their audience and their level of "authenticity." These are still effectively "ads" for products -- it just so happens that the products are good enough to sell themselves, and the company doesn't directly pay for these endorsements. Have you ever seen an ad: "Google, for all your searching needs?" Of course not.

However, marketing departments have already figured out that a seemingly genuine, personal recommendation is far more likely to work than an impersonal ad that makes the user skeptical from the first claim. Marketers have probably have known for some time, though they lacked the tools (and, of course, the buzzwords like "astroturfing" and "viral marketing") to act on it on a meaningful scale until recently.

It seems obvious to point out that viral marketing can be somewhat disingenuous at its root; after all, the originators are still trying to sell you a product. But I tend to be more impressed (and more likely to have a favorable impression of the brand) upon seeing clever, "viral" marketing that in the end reveals that it's selling something as opposed to the kind of word-of-mouth marketing that, although it truly is genuine, has little to do with "truth?"

This is all heading back to the point that led me to create this post in the first place (I swear...). The inspiration for this was the bungled marketing of Vista (and, it seems, Microsoft products in general) that leads to the kind of blind Microsoft-hate that spreads by word of mouth and without regard to any form of "truth."

I will first admit that, despite the fact that I have never used a machine running Vista for more than a few minutes, never tried to install any peripherals, never really explored the user interface that is so obviously bad because it's new and different, I still find myself making negative, off-hand remarks to people about it. ("Oh, you got a new machine? Vista huh? Good luck.")

And why? Solely because of the anti-hype that it's gotten. I think what the Mojave Experiment (hat tip to Sam) shows, besides the fact that the issues with Vista are beneath the surface, is the rampant effects of anti-hype, much of which is generated by Microsoft's direct competitors (I'm thinking of a fruit here). People get one message (Vista = Bad, or Microsoft = Bad) and allow it to completely color any shred of objective judgment they may have had.

I suppose the lesson I'm taking from this train of thought is a reinforcement of a lesson I heard a very long time ago in the context of Buddhism about taking a healthy dose of skepticism and critical thinking with you, no matter who the source is (in this case, no matter if it's a banner ad or a buddy of yours). One of the teachings of Buddhism is that if you trust a lesson of the Buddha simply because it comes from the Buddha, you have missed one of the most important lessons of all, to find the noble path (and "truth") by always asking questions and never taking anything as true unless you have personally vetted it yourself.

That's it for the attempt at an intellectually stimulating post; up next, some navel-gazing in the form of a life update.

Facebook Notes

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:55:00 +0000

I've decided to try out adding this blog's feed to my Facebook Notes application, in hopes that 1) I will post more regularly, and 2) Said posts will be more widely viewed.

So if you are reading this in note form, I will try not to get all up in your grill (i.e. your newsfeed) with lots of pointless posts. If you prefer to keep tabs in a more direct, non-facebook-assisted manner, the blog itself, with its beautiful custom design, can be found here.

Race Report: Nautica NYC Triathlon

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 23:06:00 +0000

Yesterday I raced in the Nautica NYC Triathlon. It was my second triathlon, and my second reminder that these things are really all about the bike.

My day started slightly after the scheduled start time for our wave, 7:03 am, on a barge near 98th Street in the Hudson River. The main goal here was to get down to the exit at 81st Street, 1500 meters away, without swallowing too much of the Hudson en route. Speed was actually the third priority; second was to avoid getting my goggles kicked/punched off my face, as I made the decision to do the swim with my contacts in.

The starting horn went off with very little warning; I was actually facing the opposite direction and talking to someone at the time. Not that it mattered - the first 50 meters were devoted solely to survival as the pack thinned out. Once I got some open water to work with I settled into a nice rhythm, stopping every once in a while to gauge distance and release some built up air pressure. A little over 20 minutes later, I staggered up the pier with all three goals accomplished, even holding my own in terms of speed. About 200 meters from the end I had felt a pinch on my upper lip. I didn't notice any blood so I forgot about it and kept going.

Following the barefoot run to T1, I learned what had actually happened to my lip, as several other athletes were asking each other about jellyfish stings while everyone loaded up their bikes. As it turns out, the thing to fear in the Hudson is in fact the living creatures, and not the non-living garbage - all in all the swim was surprisingly pleasant, just a little salty.

Next came the bike, which, as I mentioned, serves as the bulk of any triathlon. This always frustrates me a bit since it's definitely not my strong suit. Overall it was an enjoyable ride up the Henry Hudson - flying through the EZ-Pass lanes provided some comic relief as well. I managed to drop a chain shortly after coming out of transition and was more cautious switching gears on my rental bike after that. The rest of the ride was incident-free and I actually coasted on many a downhill section.

After a brief pit stop to drop off the bike and take care of some other business, it was time to head up a very well-placed hill out of Riverside Park to get to 72nd Street. Running across 72nd to the Park was probably the highlight of the race. Tons of fans, lots of energy, and familiar surroundings.

By mile 2 of the run, however, it was apparent to me that I was going to need to take on some energy in order to not be crawling the last half mile, so I mixed myself a little Accelerade/water cocktail (1:1) at a hydration station and took it down while walking. It seemed to sit pretty well and did the trick for the time being.

In the end, however, it turned out that my stomach was really not very happy at all about this mixture and decided that it was going to rebel approximately 25 meters from the finish line. Still waiting on the video of this, but the photographers did a pretty good job of capturing me donating my breakfast to the Central Park pavement.

I think one of the spotters at the finish noticed this because as soon as I crossed the line I had about 18 people surround me and cover me with ice packs and cold towels - I never thought it was possible to see steam coming off my body on a day like yesterday, but it happened. Before I even really realized what was going on, they had me laying down on a cot and were ready to stick me with an IV saline drip before I let them know that I was in fact okay and would just like some cold water to drink, please.

The main lesson I'll be taking from this race is that if I'm going to keep doing athletic events that last longer than a few hours I need to come up with a better strategy for taking on energy in the later stages of the race without having my stomach do flips. This means finding a product (gels seemed to work pretty well at the Savage this year) and actually practicing with it on long training days. Oh - and actually doing the long training days will probably help as well.

Friday Rant: "Out of Pocket"

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 14:50:00 +0000

Someone just walked by my desk and I overheard them say "out of pocket." A few months ago I heard this phrase in its new context, and have since deduced that people are now using it NOT to describe when they are paying for something themselves, but rather to indicate that they are or will be "unreachable," specifically if they will be in transit.

This drives me absolutely crazy. It doesn't even make any sense. My best guess is that it is somehow derived from the fact that people can now be in contact and reachable by phone, text, AND email etc. on their smartphones in their 'pockets'. But then, if someone says that they are "out of pocket," it should be an indication that they are reachable, but just not at their desk. The other (completely unfounded and not probable) explanation is that it is a twisted version of "out of socket," in the sense that if your phone is turned off and you are unreachable, you are not "plugged in" to the network.

Either way, whenever someone says it, I want to punch them in the face and/or gargle Drano. I also tend to make the assumption that the speaker is someone who cuts up buzzword bingo sheets and uses them as flashcards for vocabulary.

RimuHosting

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:55:00 +0000

This is a blatant plug, but they have earned it.

RimuHosting

I've been using RimuHosting for the new project I've been working on, and their support is nothing short of amazing. There have been a number of times that I've gotten stuck with some sort of config issue, sent them an email about it, gone to bed, and woke up the next morning to find that the problem was solved. I highly recommend them.

Consultants and Office Space

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 20:02:00 +0000

My dad bought me a copy of Office Space when I was 17, soon after I got a job where I was dealing with a "boss" on a regular basis (caddying didn't really fit that requirement and is about as far from the Office Space environment as a job can be). The movie has become ingrained in pop culture since it came out in 1999. In one scene, Tom, an employee at the "fictional" software engineering company, is being quizzed by consultants (Bob & Bob), who have been hired to analyze the company's business processes and make them more efficient (in other words, fire the chaff).

Let's watch, or follow along below (my emphasis added).

Bob Slydell: So what you do is you take the specifications from the customers and you bring them down to the software engineers?

Tom: That, that's right.

Bob Porter: Well, then I gotta ask, then, why can't the customers just take the specifications directly to the software people?

Tom: Well, uh, uh, uh, because, uh, engineers are not good at dealing with customers.

Bob Slydell: You physically take the specs from the customer?

Tom: Well, no, my, my secretary does that, or, or the fax.

Bob Slydell: Ah.

Bob Porter: Then you must physically bring them to the software people.

Tom: Well...no. Yeah, I mean, sometimes.

Bob Slydell: Well, what would you say… you do here?

Tom: Well, look, I already told you. I deal with the goddamn customers so the engineers don't have to!! I have people skills!! I am good at dealing with people!!! Can't you understand that?!? WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!!!!!!!

Annnd end scene.

As I kept the movie and that scene in mind (and as I rewatched the movie far too many times) throughout college, I tended to view the Bobs in a favorable light. After all, they were making things more efficient for a company, which was great! Even if some people "lost" their jobs in the process, it would be better in the end; if your job was redundant or could be done by a machine, wouldn't it be better to lose it and move on to something more meaningful?

My identification with the Bobs, while it certainly wasn't the sole motivator behind my post-undergraduate job search, did seem to jibe with the end result of that search: an entry-level position at a consulting firm.

However, my experience over the last year has led me to at least consider the possibility that there are many people in consulting who are actually more like Tom in the above scene than the Bobs. Consider:

- They aren't the ones that have the actual technical skills to build the solution (the "software guys" in the scene)
- They deal with the customers/clients to determine what the specifications for the final design should be, but without a full grasp of what it takes to technically implement the solution.
- That solution (often in the form of a "functional design"), essentially has to be translated into a technical design which is what's used to build the final product anyway.
- In order to produce a good "functional" design (i.e. one that will translate well), it's more or less necessary to have the technical know-how such that you could write the tech spec and build it yourself anyway.

So what's their purpose? What would you say... they do here?

And to tie this back in to my previous post about agile development, this realization that Tom and functional designs aren't all that valuable seems to be at the root of the agile manifesto. Also at that root is the Bobs' rhetorical question: Why can't the customers just take the specifications directly to the software people? Why are the engineers/developers necessarily bad at dealing with the customer?

According to the agile philosophy, they don't have to be.

Software and Construction

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 12:28:00 +0000

Matt over at 37 Signals has a recent post on the difference between a fifty-year-old carpenter and a novice. As 37 Signals is a software company, the parallel between software development and a construction project is thinly veiled. I'd like to think it supports my own assertion that these two professions are not all that unlike each other.

The excerpt from Matt's post notes that:

Members can be moved around before they are firmly in place. All those detailed design decisions which can never be worked out in advance on paper, can be made during the building process.

Perhaps this is exposing my own naivete or lack of understanding about different approaches to development, but the parallel in software development that jumps to mind is that of agile development approach as opposed to a traditional or "waterfall" approach. Like the expert carpenter who doesn't set anything in stone and is constantly able to adapt to changing requirements and be creative in every step of the process, agile developers are free from rigid requirements and processes.

On a related note, I've begun a small side project, a volunteer effort at work for a non-profit. I'll have a decent amount of responsibility in most of the technical and design aspects of a web application. Already I'm beginning to see the stark contrast between myself and the members of the team that have been schooled in the waterfall school of thought - I think it will certainly be a challenge to integrate these two different philosophies.

Testing...

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Wed, 28 May 2008 14:53:00 +0000

If you saw the previous post and want an explanation, this should help you out.

The Collectively Imagined Economy, Part II

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Thu, 22 May 2008 17:41:00 +0000

"The way I see it is that my money represents an enormous number of claim checks on society. It's like I have these little pieces of paper that I can turn into consumption. If I wanted to I could hire 10,000 people to do nothing but paint my picture every day for the rest of my life, and the GNP would go up. But the utility of the product would be zilch, and I would be keeping those 10,000 people from doing AIDS research, or teaching, or nursing. I don't do that, though."

-Warren Buffett

I recently stumbled upon this quote on a friend's facebook profile. It's yet another way of looking at the economy, and, in my mind anyway, it supports my idea that an economy can be thought of as the collective sentiments of the people that it encompasses.

But where do those sentiments come from? How has it happened that "green" has entered the mainstream consciousness over the last three-five years? It seems like many of these "collective" decisions are actually triggered by a relatively small number of people that have accumulated a tremendous amount of influence, wealth, power, etc.

So are we to assume that, just because some collective thought has reached a tipping point and won over a critical mass of people, it's automatically right and should be accepted as what a society and an economy "should" be putting its resources towards? There's at least one example of a pretty smart person who disagrees: John Tierney, whose NY Times blog is "guided by two founding principles":

1. Just because an idea appeals to a lot of people doesn't mean it's wrong.
2. But that's a good working theory.

We could also get into the difference between a thought or a sentiment winning over a critical mass of a society as a whole (after all, the larger the group, the less likely it is that a really bonehead idea could take root... right?) versus winning over a critical mass of the small subset of people that can exert their own whims and ideas on the rest of society. A troubling thought, perhaps.

What are the implications of this? If you had the means to pay 10,000 people to do whatever you wanted them to do for the rest of your life, what would you have them do?

Amtrak Cuts Service, Hikes Fares

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:33:00 +0000

Regular Amtrak commuters received a surprise last week when a number of Acela Express trains that normally make the DC - NYC trip were taken off the timetables for the foreseeable future. The irony here is that these trains have been getting more and more packed of late and have been selling out faster, even without the recent reduction in service.

In another, perhaps related, move, Amtrak has raised its base fares by about $5 for the NYC - DC route. In any case, the two decisions were enacted at the same time, making for some disgruntled passengers. I'm writing this from the train right now and have overheard a couple conversations already this morning about the changes, accompanied by some unkind words for Amtrak.

My inquiring note to Amtrak's customer service department has yet to be answered, though I'm promised a response within 24 hours.

The service reduction may have to do with summer construction and track work; last Friday the train was delayed for about 10 minutes near Philadelphia and we were informed that only one track was available and that this would be the case all summer.

I'm still a big proponent of the train over air travel, though; the worst I've been delayed in nine months of commuting weekly from NYC to DC is about 30-40 minutes. Compare that to air travel and it's not even close. Still, high-speed US rail service is severely behind that of other developed nations. The primary problem is that it's very difficult to purchase the land required to build a long enough stretch of straight enough track to accommodate bullet trains and therefore make it worth the investment. For example, the Acela "Express" from NYC to Boston take nearly four hours; an experienced driver (or somewhat reckless Chinatown Bus operator) can make it in approximately the same amount of time and at a fraction of the cost, largely because of the train's non-linear route.

Some interesting commentary, including coverage of National Train Day and discussion of why high-speed rail won't work (and shouldn't be pursued) in the US, can be found here.

Testing...

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Sun, 18 May 2008 20:44:00 +0000

Testing a new toy - call me at Grand Central!

The Collectively Imagined Economy

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Thu, 08 May 2008 17:40:00 +0000

There has been ample talk over the last several months, in the presidental campaign in particular, about so-called "green-collar" jobs. These jobs, for the uninitiated, are loosely defined as jobs that are similar to blue-collar jobs, but that help in some way to further the cause of clean, renewable energy and manufacturing, either by researching new technologies or executing newly learned skills related to such clean technologies.

This rise in demand for "green-collar" jobs has coincided with a shift in public opinion and marketing campaigns that have brought "green" to the mainstream. Both of these shifts have helped to spur an overall willingness to invest in such technologies, as investors and venture capitalists feel more assured that there will be demand for clean technologies and processes in the future.

Take, for example, everyone's favorite search engine. Google has not only pledged to become carbon neutral (by... five months ago...), but has also gone a step further and stated its sentiments that carbon is indeed a pollutant and in the future will be regulated as such, putting its money behind this opinion by behaving now as it believes it will have to in the future, when carbon is regulated and priced appropriately. From the site linked to above:

Additionally, when buying power for our data centers, Google will use a “shadow price” for carbon. This voluntary pricing of carbon will enable us to calculate a more accurate cost of power as one of the key criteria in site selection for our data centers. The cost of carbon is not yet recognized by the U.S. market, but may soon become so through legislation.

This is all independent of Google's philanthropic arm, which has its own project for clean, renewable energy.

The point of all this is to note that any economy can be thought of as the collective sentiments of the population that it encompasses. This statement is, in a sense, a counter to the argument that all this talk about a "green economy" is nothing more than a dressed up version of the "broken window" fallacy. Let's go a little deeper. For those not familiar, the broken window fallacy goes something like this: If I throw a rock through a window, someone has to come and repair the window, which increases GDP, and is therefore good for the economy. Ergo, we should all go around breaking windows.

Like I said, it's a fallacy. But it's commonly used to argue that the "green economy" is nothing more than a lot of people sinking a lot of money into something that really shouldn't have to be fixed in the first place.

However, this idea that one should view an economy as the collective sentiments of the people that it encompasses runs against this argument. If that's what an economy is, then all it takes is a groundswell of popular support (backed by people willing to pay of course) that green technologies and jobs are inherently a "good" thing for society and are worth something. There's no one particular industry or activity that should necessarily be valued or promoted over another; once those sentiments change, that's what the jobs and activities "should" be directed towards.

That's not to say that things should be left completely to whatever whim the "ignorant masses" happen to come up with. There are definitely times when the government (ideally a libertarian paternalist government) can and should step in to give that "nudge" where it's appropriate.

So come on, and join the groupthink! Just kidding - sort of.

Of Projects, Decision-Making, and Vocabulary

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Mon, 05 May 2008 12:55:00 +0000

The sun began to set over the mountains, which had been turned light green by the slowly advancing line of new spring leaves that had nearly reached its peak of the tree line. The second of two days of deck deconstruction and reconstruction was coming to an end, and looking around, I was secretly disappointed at how little visible progress we'd made.

At some point during those two days I'd had a flash of insight, the kind of moment when you can practically feel the synapse firing in your brain. This is just like a software engineering project. And not just because we got less done than we intended, either. The more I thought about what we had undertaken and accomplished, the more parallels I saw.

The project as a whole was a deck deconstruction (several supports and pieces of the deck itself were old and rotting) followed by a reconstruction. It may help to put a microscope on one specific example here. Since several supports had been replaced and had slightly different dimensions than the old ones, some of the deckboards were no longer completely snug with these supports. Definitely not a structural issue, but a minor aesthetic one; also, the boards themselves were certainly aging as well, but it wasn't completely necessary to replace them. In other words, a tossup on whether or not to rip them out and replace them with new boards.

The owner of the deck, an elderly but still strapping gentleman who was also the foreman of this two-man work team, decided that there was reason enough to install new boards. Prior to making that decision, he probably did a quick cost-benefit in his head - how much better will it look with new boards? What about the fact that the new boards won't match with the old ones? How long will it take to rip up the old boards and put in the new ones? Are there any requirements from the client (his wife) about what the deck should look like or how long it should take? What are the penalties associated with not meeting those requirements?

Further similarities emerged after I started to take the board out. The nails used to hold the boards in were very old and tough to remove; it was therefore taking much longer to finish the first part than anticipated. Do you continue on the current path? Maybe even reassess the situation and make another decision with the new information?

At another point we realized that the ideal tools/supplies we needed were in town, a 30 minute drive. Another decision - do we use a "workaround" (very common term on a software project)? Sacrifice the time to get the supplies? How does that impact the amount of daylight we have to work with, and is there anything else we could pick up from town while we are there to make it more appealing to go?

I also realized (again) that I tend to think in very general terms about things - this is part of the reason I make these far-flung connections in the first place when other people think I'm off my rocker. A "project" is therefore anything that one or more people put their time into (ideally with some sort of plan for it), a "client" is anyone that anyone has to answer to, "requirements" are the things that constrain the design and give the project a shape and direction. People that work as consultants have similar mindsets - which may be why very little "actual" vocabulary is required outside of technical vocab. But in some sense, everyone is a consultant, since everyone works with resources, such as their own time, skills, and wealth, in order to create something for a client. In the ultimate meta-thought: the term "consultant" itself has become vague to the point of meaninglessness.

Profound thought of the day: The nuances no longer come in the words we use to describe the world, but rather from our experiences as we interact with that world.

[Update: Discovered a related post and discussion over at the 37 signals blog recently.]

Adventure Racing as Life, and Other Analogies

noreply@blogger.com (Andrew P Brett) — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:48:00 +0000

Starting with last year's SAVAGE I've now done three adventure races in the past year. It's practically enough to make one think about actually purchasing a yearly membership in the US Adventure Racing Association.

That is, unless your next race is in Canada. Today marked the more or less official christening of our team for the "Raid International Éco Endurance Aventure 2008." Held in the tiny town of Blanc-Sablon on the Lower North Shore of Labrador in northeastern Canada, the International Endurance Adventure Race (in English) entails trekking, orienteering, mountain biking, climbing, rappelling, cliff jumping, canoeing, kayaking, and something called "adventure swimming."

As if that weren't enough, there are many "surprises" promised along the way. Teams of two and four compete over four days and 180 miles of some of the roughest terrain that Canada has to offer. If it's any indication, I couldn't even find a major city close enough to Blanc-Sablon that had weather data available online so we know what we might be in for.

I'm not sure what possessed me to finally commit to doing such a race. I've obviously become mildly obsessed with adventure racing over the last year - so I'm going to try to articulate some of the reasons here.

The first is that adventure racing is a team sport. You are inherently reliant on your teammates to have good judgment (especially if they are navigating), to pull you along if you're behind, and to keep their own cool during what can be a truly stressful event, in all senses of that word.

The second is that while adventure races are long, they don't require nearly as much training as a single-discipline race of the same timeframe. The SAVAGE took us five and a half hours to complete, but the training was minimal. Doing a six-hour running race or even a bike race without doing extensive training for months beforehand is a good way to wind up in the medical tent, not to mention permanently damage some joints.

I've found many parallels between a team of adventure racers working to get to the finish and a team of people working toward a goal in the "real world" or just life in general. The team size in an adventure race is pretty reflective of what I would deem as an ideal team size to work with on a regular basis. The roles that people play on a team of racers also mimics the roles that develop on a goal-oriented team in real life.

I've been thinking about what life lessons can be taken from these races, since I think there are many. This past race taught me a lot about the kind of role that I tend to take in such situations and on such teams. I've noticed that I want to try to do everything myself - but I'm getting better at delegating. I still like to be the one that's in the know about as much as possible, and involved in every decision. I like to think of myself as a field general, though I'll be the first to admit that I'm far from that ideal. However, picturing yourself as one is the best way to start to become one.

I'm sure I'll have more thoughts on the matter in the months to come - many will likely be posted at our team's newly-minted blog.

Up next, in the "other analogies" department: how deck reconstruction resembles a software engineering project, and why the whole thing makes me want to study design.