This cat knows more about big data than most people

I cringe when I hear someone mention big data.  Usually the person is saying it because they heard it in a game of buzz-word bingo and actually have no idea what they’re talking about.

Unfortunately the real value of it has been taken over by the advertising department of corporations.  I was recently sitting through just such a sales pitch, when I decided to write this article.  I wanted to give three demonstrations of how big data — better known as just data – are being used correctly by two companies, and how I am using it.

This is what data problems really look like

You’re facing true data problems if you’ve ever said the following:

• “oh shit, I have so many files I can’t even ls that dir”
• “I accidentally tried to ls that dir and I’m still waiting for my computer cancel that command”
• “I tried download the data set and now my computer wont boot saying ‘HDD out of space’”

Ok, maybe I’m exaggerating on the last one, but you get the idea.  Worst of all, all these companies are trying to push the need to big data without even understanding what you do once you have such data.

Two companies using their data correctly in unique ways

Netflix

Netflix was onboard the big data train way before it was popular.  Since their inception, they asked people to rate movies they watched.  This seems simple enough – you watch a movie, provide a rating, and Netflix can then recommend other movies to you.  Netflix, however, had a bigger dream.

Recently Netflix launched the wildly successful House of Cards series.  There was a lot of talk from bloggers about how it was such a gamble for Netflix to step into producing their own content.  It wasn’t a gamble though.  It was a very calculated move by Netflix, doing all they could to ensure the series would be a success well before it ever started filming.  How?  Well it goes back to all those ratings you gave them.

Netflix was able to determine what the most popular types of shows were for a particular age group — political dramas.  They knew this because they just filter all those star ratings by all the other info they have on you.  Then they decided on actors, and found Kevin Spacey to be quite popular.  Same with directors, and on down the line.

So you see, Netflix net before they even started filming that they were on the right track.  That’s how you use data!

Duolingo

Duolingo is a free application that helps people learn a language fast — even faster than Rosetta Stone.  How in the world are they teaching people a language faster than the de-facto software?  By being data driven of course!

Duolingo designed their first set of lessons for teaching Spanish around a book they got from the store — something along the lines of Spanish for Dummies.  They launched that version to their users, then sat back and collected data.

After a sufficient amount of data was collected, they started doing analysis.  They found that, for example, if you teach people adjectives before prepositions, they’ll progress much faster later.  Foreign language teachers and Rosetta Stone, however, were always in debate over which should be taught first.  None of these two used data to guide them.  Duolingo on the other hand, is collecting so much data, that they can see such trends easily.

How I’m leveraging data

I’ve created an called Repper.  Repper provides users with customized workouts, providing specific detail on the number of reps, weights, and exercises that should be done.  After a user submits their workout, Repper logs all the data.  It then starts creating more customized workouts based on a users history.

That’s the basic idea, but here’s the grand idea.  Once I have enough people using Repper, I can run grand experiments.  For example, I can test whether its better do to 8 reps or 12; rest for 30 seconds or a minute; do 2 sets or 3.  I can put users into a control group and a test group, and measure who progresses faster.  Then I can reach conclusions about the best way to exercise, and deploy the results to everyone.

Today, such experiments come in two flavors. Typically the experiment involves only a single person who then writes a book proclaiming what they’ve done will work for the masses — yet the amount of detail they provide for you is razor-thin.  Alternatively, experiments may be conducted by scientific researcher, but typically only involve 40 participants.  It’s hard to draw conclusions from a trial of so few people.

Repper is looking to change all that.  Best of all, by just working out, you’re helping everyone else in the community, since you’re contributing to the available pool of knowledge.  Each time you exercise, you’re essentially helping us build the next House of Cards, or describing to us that conjunctions should be taught before adverbs.  Everyone wins.

(img src)

Unrelated but true.

Background

Recently, I took my core qualifying exam (quals) for my PhD.  Legend holds that one in four students are declared clinically insane from the mental tortue that is involved in the period leading up to the day you take your quals [reference needed].   For me, the quals covered three topics.  You are expected to know everything about these topics.  From the most elementary of questions, to complex magical insight-driven solution.  Everything.  It’s no wonder students checkout at such a high rate.

And then there’s me.  I’ve never really studied that hard for anything in my life.  No, I’m not a gifted student who magically got straight A’s.  Instead I was happy with poor grades in exchange for extra time outside of class to hone my skill set.  I’m not endorsing this life-style, rather I’m attempting to make a point.  I don’t have a successful track record — in the context of academic — when it comes to studying, evaluating, or managing my time.  Yet, all three would be required if I had any hope of passing this exam instead of bouncing off padded walls for the next 30 years.

I’m happy to say, I did pass.  And in doing so, I developed and implemented a system that created a hyper-focused, task-oriented student.  A student in such stark contrast to his historical version, my parents would certainly claim it isn’t their son.

Put another way, if I — a far-from-perfect student — can leverage this system to pass a quals exam, you too can use this system to bring out that side of you that is capable of climbing mountains.

I spent roughly 8 months of my life perfecting this system.  And now I’ll present the framework of it to you, for three easy payment of $19.99.  Or just scroll down to get it for free…large checks made out to cash will still accepted though.

The Framework

(note:  I’m omitting a lot of details that did play key roles in my success, but I can detail these at a later date if requested.)

The framework is really quite simple, but powerful as I demonstrated first-hand.  The framework has two key components.  First, is a component to manage my time.  Second, a feedback loop.  The former prevents me from thinking I have endless amount of time or wondering what I should do right now, and the latter prevents me from procrastinating.  We’ll go in order.

Time Management

It’s a sexy subject, isn’t it?  This is usually the point where I fell asleep in all those “homework planning” lessons we had in grade school.  However, a very simple tip can make the world of difference.  Here’s the tip.  At the start of each day, grab a blank notecard, and plan out every hour of your day.  I made my notecards detailed enough so I wouldn’t wonder what I should be doing at a particular point in the day, but concise enough to fit on one side of the notecard.  This prevented me from coming home from work and wasting away on the Internet, or lazily seeing if I could become the next Jeopardy champion.

There are a few beautiful things about this having this notecard.

• I always had somewhere to be, or something to be doing.  When the ambiguity is removed from your day, it’s replaced with clarity, which allows for focus.  That focus, is what will drive you to success in your application.
• A notecard doesn’t have a battery.  It is always on, awaiting input, just one pocket grab away.
• It’s flexible.  Maybe you run overtime on a task, need to swap meetings, or  had a late night pwning newbs in Call of Duty and need a quick nap.  A scratch here, a few arrows there, and you’re back in business.
• It requires no thought.  No need to invest vital time learning a new piece of software.  It’s a notecard.  You write on it.
• The reward of scratching things off cannot be underestimated.  You’ll feel accomplished.

Feedback Loop

At the end of each day, I’d evaluate my day’s performance.  I had a Google Spreadsheet that I used to for this purpose.  It’s quite simply.  I entered the number of hours I planned to work that day in one column, and the number of hours of work I completed that day in the column next to it.  Then I did some visualizations to see my trends over time.

Allow me to hint at something obvious: it does not feel good to have a string of poor-performing days.  I naturally had those.  The difference, however, is that because of this feedback loop, I was aware of just how much time I had let slip away.  The implication of how precious time is and how much you’re letting get away will help motivate you past that point of ignoring your notecard’s schedule to being task-oriented and hyper-focused so that at the end of the day you can enter numbers you’re proud of.

My Results

For me, this framework delivered tremendous results.  For example, one of the areas on my qual was Theory of Computation.  This is an area that I was far from comfortable in at the beginning of my 8 month journey.  I went from failing that section on my first attempt, to being asked to take an advanced Theory course with a select few students after the performance of my second attempt.

I still use this framework today.  It helps me not only focus, but also let go.  I know when I should be working, and I know when to tell my brain to relax, and go have fun.  It’s empowering to plan and evaluate your days, not cumbersome.  I encourage everyone working towards a goal to try it, and let me know how it works out for you, and what improvements you make or observations you have.

In the previous posts, I discussed my motivation for making the switch to a standing desk, and some basic looks at the science behind it. This post will detail my experimental weekend, so that you too can give a standing desk a chance. I’ll also detail what comes after the standing desk…

But first, some feedback I’ve received. 3 people contacted me [update: 6 people!] to say they’re trying out the standing desk as a result of my blog. The idea that I’m helping others question typical daily decisions, or am a source of motivation to change, is very inspiring. So, thank you for the feedback, and good luck in your own experiments. Now, on to mine.

Like any good 6th great class taught you, experimenting is all about developing a hypothesis, testing it, and observing. I kept detailed notes during my weekend experiment. Those notes, edited to be more concise, are below.

The hypothesis

Standing will make me hungrier, burn more calories, hurt for a while, but ultimately help me focus on work and be healthier…I believe it’ll make it easier to move in and out of tasks…Promote moving and stretching…[and] Increase focus as I can quiet the voice telling me my body is turning to mush.

I cheated a little in the development of my hypothesis. I had done a lot of prior research before running this experiment. I had a good feeling what to expect. You’ll likely develop a similar (or matching) hypothesis.

Experimental setup

I started with using my laptop for about an hour in a standing position, then quickly realized I needed something more serious if my experiment was going to be legit. I encourage those thinking of making the switch to take your experiment seriously. If you have a desktop, use your desktop. Also don’t settle for “almost at the right height,” otherwise parts of your body will unnecessarily ache.

After realizing looking down at a laptop screen wasn’t going to be the proper experimental setup, I did the impossible: unplugged my desktop. I shuffled through the chaotic chain of cables to figure out what wires actually needed to be unplugged to move my desktop, and held my breath while I unplugged them. Then I utilized my college text books for the first time, using them to prop up my desktop.

My goal was be to make the monitor eye level so my neck would be happy. Adjusted the keyboard and mouse so my elbows were bent at 90 degree angles. The final adjustment was crucial. I turned my old desk into a place for my dog to conduct his business meetings.

The observations

I ran this experiment for 2 days. Here are my observational notes by day:

Day 1 (9 hours standing):

• I walk around a lot more instead of staying stationary. Bursts of work instead of a sustained period.
• My lower back is hurting.
• Feet hurt

Day 2 (6.5 hours standing):

• Left foot hurts. Everything else ain’t so bad.
• Hungrier
• The remote doesn’t seem to far away anymore…

Summary

There were 4 things that stood out to me during this experiment.

1. How different my body felt. Instead of feeling like my legs were being used for the first time — a feeling I often experienced when sitting in a chair for hours then standing — I felt exhausted. So much so, that by the end of the 2nd day, I called the experiment quits. My foot developed a bruise, my back ached, and my leg muscles were quite sore. I much prefer this feeling (standing) to no feeling (sitting). However, it’s important to take it slow at first, and listen to your body when it says enough is enough. Lame comment I know, but still true.
2. Moving is easier. You’ll immediately notice this difference. The remote control is closer. Mental walking breaks are more frequent. No more delaying lunch. Moving in and out of your current task becomes effortless. This is likely due to the inertia of sitting vs the complete void of inertia when standing. This is a great contrast.
3. Clarity. Usually around 2pm everyday my eyes start to glaze over. Eyelids become heavy, fingers move slower, and my production drops to nil. Getting up and walking around usually breaks me out of this funk, but without fail, whenever I reseat to work, I wouldn’t have any success. Now, you can take 5 hour energy to help you out (see yet another reason our country is so unhealthy), or you could stand. The increased blood flow from standing keeps your brain focused, and prevent the post-lunch mental shutdown. I never experienced this shutdown while standing.
4. Take showers. This is more as a courtesy to those around you. For some reason, standing for long periods of time in shoes hurts. You feel better in socks or barefoot. So, do everyone around you a courtesy, and shower.

Enough standing still

If you want to get really serious about your health, you can take things to the next level: Get a treadmill desk. Yes, they exist. You walk at a speed of roughly 1MPH. The speed is so slow, that you barely notice you’re moving, allowing you to perform tasks like typing, writing, and hold a phone conversation.

If you don’t have the money to buy one, just apply to Facebook. They have a treadmill desk for their employees. I believe you burn roughly 400-600 calories using one of these over the course of a working day.

Today

This section has 2 part. Today about me, and today about you.

Today about me

I still stand. I have not developed an official standing desk, and still use my books. They’ve been so good, I have no reason to drop money or time on a different solution. I spend 5-8 hours of my day standing while working (either at home or at the office). This changes day-to-day depending on my schedule. I’ve also become extremely conscientious of when I’m sitting, and how much I dislike it. So much so, I’ll stand during some meetings, depending on the setting.

I feel a lot better in my daily life too. More energetic, more focused, and less concerned about my health. All great things, with such a simple change. One day I would like to transition to a treadmill desk, but I’d have to OK that with my office first. I also bounce around from office to office so that would present yet another problem. It is still my goal though.

Today about you.

Do something to make the transition today. Develop your hypothesis. Design your experiment. Pick a date when you’re going to try it. Or even just journal about how you feel each day you’re sitting. Having a detailed journal of your sitting observations is important for contrasting those trends with your standing observations.

I’m sure we can all find plenty of excuses to not make the switch. Instead, find just one reason to make the switch. You’ll feel the difference immediately.

Image from Wikipedia

(This is the second post in my Standing Desk series.  Check out the standing desk preface)

Stand or die.  Is that statement really too extreme?  Sadly no.  Let’s look at the science behind sitting, the many benefits of a standing desk, and a simple change you can make to be healthier starting today.

Why are we so unhealthy?

Think of your daily life.  You sit in the car on the way to work.  Sit again at work.  Drive home, sitting.  Sit down to eat dinner.  Sit to watch some evening TV.  Sit and relax before bed.  You’re on the bottom while having sex.  Sleep.  How close does that sound to your day?  How does your body feel when you stand up after having sat for an extended period of time?  Bad?  Perhaps you should listen to your body.  After all, it’s trying to tell you it didn’t evolve to do this.

Joe the typer’s average caloric burn

Now lets assume you’re a good person and consume only 2,000 calories in a day.  When you sit, you burn less than 1 calorie an hour minute.  Can you believe that?  You burn more calories sleeping.  Putting some numbers to this will provide so good perspective.

You burn less than 60 calories an hour sitting, but lets just round up and say it’s 60.  Assume your commute is 1 hour total, (sitting) work day is 6 hours, 1 hour of sitting at dinner, 4 hours of tv/internet/reading, and 8 hours of sleeping.  That is 20 hours of you day.  In those 20 hours, you have burned less than 1,200 calories.  So now you have 4 hours left in your day to burn 800 calories, just to break even.  It would take roughly 2 hours of continuous moderate swimming just to reach a net intake of zero for your day.  It’s even worse if you eat more than 2,000 calories in a day.  Now does anyone wonder why we are so unhealthy?

The gym isn’t a cure (although you should certainly go)

Consider that you were actually able to burn off those remaining 800 calories during your day.  Well then you can just happily sit-away your days watching The Biggest Loser, right?  Wrong.  Just one of the many irreversible problems of sitting is that it allows particles to settle in your legs.  These particules will eventually build up and break off and have numerous adverse impacts on your body.  When you’re standing, and therefore have an increased blood flow, said particles time bombs do not collect in your legs, awaiting their command to end your life.  Going to the gym does no rid your body of this problem either.  The best cure is prevention, as in, don’t sit for extended periods of time.  The many more problems of sitting are detailed in the now famous infographic at the end of this post.

Standing benefits

Standing decreases back pain; helps prevent herniated disc injuries; lowers depression; increases focus and problem solving; burns more calories; increases blood circulation; simplifies context switching; decreases risk of cancer…the list goes on and on.  Now to be fair, a standing desk isn’t all rainbows and lollipops.  Standing in one place for an extended period of time can lead to things like the development of varicose veins.  However, wouldn’t you rather have those, than lose years off your life?

I put these benefits to the test, first hand, in my weekend experiment.  The setup, hypothesis, and results of my standing weekend will follow in my next blog post.

Start standing, right now

Why the hurry?  Do you sit for over 6 hours a day?  Guess what, you’re 40% more likely to die within 15 years than I am.  Even if you exercise.  So do something about it, right now.  Otherwise I’ll have to find a new generation to read my blog.

Step 1: Identify where you spend the most time in your day.  For me, it was at my computer.  So with minimal effort, and major potential impact, I happily raised my computer to standing level.  I did this by taking all those $200 text books I was forced to buy in college, and finally using them for the first time.  They now raise my computer up to standing height.  Your goal should be to get your monitor to eye level, and your keyboard to the level where your elbows are bent 90 degrees.  Laptops can hurt your neck overtime (since you have to look down at the screen), but it’s still a good start.

Step 2: There is no step two.  You’re now living a healthier life.

If you made this change at work, and people give you weird looks, don’t worry, statistically they’ll die well before you.  They also are unlikely to get their lazy ass out of their chair to come laugh at you.

Oh, and be prepared to be in pain a lot.  You’re body is probably going to be pissed that you’re actually trying to use it for effort, after all these years of sloth.  Hang in there, and don’t push yourself beyond your limits.

In case you’re wondering, this post took over an hour to draft, and I stood the entire time.

Until my next post, get your ass up.  It truly is a matter of life and death.

Image from here

Famous Infographic

Via: Medical Billing And Coding

(important preface: I am an agnostic/atheist, but think this is a very cool argument)

What if I told you God exists? That you can’t argue that he doesn’t, because you’re not capable of understanding him. Furthermore, what if I told you I can prove it? Would you believe me? In this blog post, I’ll do exactly that. Oh, and while we’re at it, why not show how you can compare the sizes of two infinite sets. Because, as we all know, not all infinities were created equal…right? But that is not ambition enough. Let us also explore its impacts on language and the theory of computation. Furthermore, I am attempting to ensure everyone, regardless of mathematically or theoretical ability, can follow the construction of this argument.

So put your believer hats on, whip out your calculator, and read carefully. We’re about to explore the depth of an argument that was not only used long ago as proof God exists, but also is the foundation of modern computers.

Computers can do anything. Except what they cannot do.

In theoretical computer science, there is a very real problem known as the halting problem. Superficially, this problem asks the question “Given a particular input, can a machine ever determine whether it is going to stop what it is currently doing?”

For example, lets say we have some machine called U. Lets say U’s purpose is to simulate other machines on given inputs. That is, we can hand U another machine and say “Hey, U, act exactly like this machine would act on this input.”

So now that we’re all buddy buddy with U, lets abuse our friendship a little. Construct a new machine called M. Being the asshole you are, you make M loop. That is, M never completes what it’s doing. Remember riding the school bus and kids singing “This is the song that never ends…”, yeah, you made a machine that does exactly what that song does.

Sidebar: In theoretical computer science, U is known as a universal Turing machine. That is, it is a machine capable of running other machines. Universal Turing machine’s played a very important role in stimulating development of store-program computers. That is, you have U to thank for your ability to double click a button and log onto Facebook, or any other multitude of things. Without it, you’d need a lot of wires and a punchcard.

Next, we encode the machine M and its input in such a way that U can simulate it. In order to do this, we encode M and its input as what is known as a language. The precise definition is not important, but sufficient to say it has the same definition as spoken languages. We’ll call this new language A.

Now we return to U, with language A in hand, and say “Hey, U, I want you to run A and let me know when it’s done, ok?” Well, wait, there is a rather obvious problem. U wont ever let you know anything. U wont ever tell you it’s done. Nor will it ever tell you “I’m looping”. That’s because, as far as U knows, there is still work left to be done, so do it. U does not know if it is almost done, or if it has an infinite amount of work remaining.

But what if there was a way for us to tell if there was work left to be done? What if, say, we could tell we were looping forever, and not halting. What if we could somehow look at a set of problems and recognize if it goes on forever or not.

This problem, is known as the halting problem. It is undecidable. To “prove God exists” we must first prove that this problem is undecidable.

In 1873 the decision about undecidability was decided

In 1873, a mathematician, George Cantor, discovered a technique for comparing the size of infinite sets. This method, incidentally, can be used to prove the halting problem is undecidable, and that “God exists”. So, lets examine how we can compare the size of two infinite sets, which will give us key insight into whether we can recognize the halting problem.

“Just count them!” some of you (likely the less mathematical ones) are yelling. Well, I challenge you to count to infinity. Hint, you can’t. If you could, the halting problem would be trivial. Thus, if two sets of numbers are of infinite size, how could you ever compare the two of them? You certainly cannot count them to decide which is bigger, but you can still compare their sizes.

Lets start off with an interesting question:

Which is the following two is larger: The set of numbers natural numbers — called N — (that is: 1, 2, 3…all the way to infinity), or the set of even numbers — called E — (that is: 2, 4, 6…all the way to infinity)?

The natural numbers must obviously be larger! After all, there are only half as many numbers in E as there are in N! Not so. It turns out they are of equal size. In order to prove it, we need to get our hands a little dirty.

A quick proof

Lets assume that we have the two sets, N and E, as defined above, and some function f. f takes one input and provides one output. For example, f(1) = 2, where 1 is known as the input and 2 is known as the output. Now lets setup a few tools we’ll need for this proof:

• f is a one-to-one function: That’s a fancy way of saying that for any unique input for f its output will be a unique value. For example, if we have f(1) = 2 then no other input could ever output 2. As an example, f(3) = 2 would be impossible given our previous input/output of f(1) = 2.
• f is an onto function: That’s another way of saying that for every element in E, there is some element in N that will, when input into f, output that element from E. Formally: For every e \in E, there is an a \in A such that f(a) = b.
• Finally, Cantor defined sets to be the same size if there exists a one-to-one, onto function f for those two sets.

So lets quickly show that N and E are of equal size. Let us construct a table of their inputs and outputs. In the below table, n is a number from N which is fed into f, and f(n) is the output of our function f. Notice that, if we define f(n) = 2n, then the output just so happens to always be a number in E.

We can see that this function is one-to-one and onto, thus, N and E are the same size!. Go figure…

Cantor further says that a set is countable if it is either finite, or has the same size as N. That is, if some set if of at most N, then we can recognize it. This is trivially true because we can either count all the numbers in a non-infinite set, or simply compare its size to N and recognize if they are equal.

But, wait. A you insinuating that there are numerical sets / languages that we cannot recognize?

Well if I were, that’d have quite powerful implications, wouldn’t it. Perhaps someone could argue, then, that we cannot recognize the language of God…

On the 7th day, he hid within unequal infinite sets

Lets try and prove languages exists that cannot be recognized by the machines we created above. Perhaps, they are not capable of recognizing languages that’ll run forever.

For the sake of brevity, a complete proof will not be provided (also because it is quite rigorous and will detract from our ultimate goal). But I will provide a quick overview.

Consider the two infinite sets, N and R. N was previously defined (1, 2, 3…). For R, we will define it to be the infinite set of real numbers (that is, a number with decimals — ex: 3.14159…). Construct the table again:

Now, lets just say somehow you managed to construct the entire table. I can then construct a number that will be guarenteed not to be in the table. The construction of this devilish number is created in the following way:

1. Look at the first mapping, f(1) = 0.14159…. In order to make sure my number does not match, I’ll just look at the underlined decimal place, and pick any other number, say 2. Now, I’ve guarenteed that it is not possible for my number to match f(1).
2. Repeat with the second number: f(2) = 0.555…again we change the underlined number to be something different. Say, 3. We have now guarenteed that it is not possible for my number to match f(2) (and f(1)).
3. In the third one, 0.12345…change the underlined number to anything other than 3, say 4.
4. Repeat for all remaining numbers

The results? 0.234…, a number which has no mapping. Because it has no mapping — and given our previous definition that equal infinite sets must have a mapping for all possible inputs — these two infinite sets are not of equal size. That is, one infinity is larger than the other infinity!

WTF?!

So, what did all that mean? Well, by showing that R is larger than N, we have shown that it is, by definition, uncountable. Ok, big deal? Well, actually yes. Since R is uncountable, how can you ever recognize when I have given you the set R? How, for example, can you tell it is not some other arbitrary set Q? Or Z? Or the language spoken on planet Romulan? You can’t.

We have just mathematically shown that there exist languages that our machines are not capable of recognizing. Seeing the “God exists” argument yet?

Bringing it all home

We were interested in the halting problem. We question if you could ever recognize a given language loops forever. To identify infinite loops, we needed to verify we can recognize all possible languages. Unfortunately, we proved that we cannot recognize such languages. That is, we are not able to construct machines capable of recognizing all possible languages. Now, lets finish this off.

Lets say the human brain is like the machines we defined earlier. Then, using the mathematically arguments we constructed, there exists languages/things, that we cannot recognize/understand. Thus, we may not be able to understand if a God exists, but instead need to just have faith.

You believe me, don’t you?

Just have faith…

Roughly 2 months ago, my hand was in excruciating pain.  For several days in a row, I spent atypical amounts of time at my keyboard, typing away, until, finally, I could type no more.  The pain had become too much and concerned me.  Naturally, given my posture, worthy of an olympic gold, coupled with my repetitive typing for endless hours, I pulled out my jump to conclusions mat and landed on the “mild case of carpal tunnel syndrome” square.

During the following days, while attending typists anonymous, I ordered Siri to Google as much information about my situation as possible.  I landed on a common method for relieving the pain of carpal tunnel: increased blood flow.  I.e., move, like you were born to do.

During the months leading up to this occasion I was also becoming increasingly conscious of my unhealthy lifestyle.  Long days of sitting in an office had rendered all the leg muscle I’d accumulated from my childish antics, obsolete.  It was time for me to find a solution.

Those of you with Orbitz ties will recall that while there, I experimented with alternatives, like using an exercise ball in place of the $900 chair I had stolen from my superiors desk during one late night in the office.  While bouncing around had its novelty, and throwing it at co-workers who were attempting to concentrate provided endless hours of entertainment with minimal productivity, I was still sitting, and didn’t feel great about that.  Having failed to solve the problem with my balls, I decided to go another route: a standing desk.

There is a plethora of research preaching the benefits of standing.  There are the “nice-to-have” improvements like increased blood flow, focus, and context switching, to the staggering study that found sitting, for extended periods of time, increases your chance of cancer by ~40%.  I’m sure some of you will argue “I wont be that 40%, I hit the gym daily.”  Sorry folks.  No matter how much exercise you do, at any intensity, it is not possible to undo the effects of sitting.  (Although I do challenge my male readers to do a cock-up.  Just one.)

There is but one solution to sitting, don’t.

In what will be a multi-part series, I’ll detail the science behind standing desks, my weekend trial at doing it, my observed results, whether I stick with it, and any lifestyle changes it introduced.

My hope is that by the end of reading this series, you’ll understand why standing is important, and understand that standing desks are not a fad.  How do I know they are time-tested?  The man you see at the beginning of this post, with that ever so slight “I’m wiser than you” smirk on his face, is Ernest Hemingway, fondling his standing desk in a way that was only legal during his era.

In a time when obesity, anxiety, and depression are out of control, one simple solution to improve your life, is the standing desk.  I seek to prove that to you in the coming days.  After all, what do you have to lose, but a few pounds?

I’m no computer novice, but I lost roughly 10 hours of my life to trying to solve this problem.  Hopefully this post helps you.

WordPress allows for pretty URLs (known as permalinks).  It’s a cool feature, and very useful for SEO, except for when it turns all your pages into 404 pages.  Enough talk, lets fix it.

The Problem

Any permalink selection other than the default 404ed all my blog post pages.

My setup

• Amazon ec2
• Apache
• WordPress 3.2
• mod_rewrite enabled
• .htaccess file: https://gist.github.com/2527357 (located in /blog)
• WordPress installation location: /blog

The Solution

You need to allow the .htaccess file to override settings elsewhere.  To do so, track down your httpd.conf file (your file name may vary, but usually it’ll be found in your /etc/ folder).  To do so, replace all instances of AllowOverride None with AllowOverride All.  Restart apache (usually /etc/init.d/httpd restart) and everything should be solved.

Heres to hoping you find this in time to save some innocent hair follicles.

The start of something new. A thrilling time chock-full of potential and uncertainty. Today, I embark down the road of blogging. Something I’ve considered before, but am now going to take seriously.

Why blogging? Three simple reasons.

1. Sharing. I’ve learned a tremendous amount of useful information in the past year. So much so, that I feel compelled to share it.
2. Accountability. The power of having a voice cannot be underestimated. Prompted by a company that released my SS# to the world, I’m motivated to hold people publicly accountable.
3. I suck. Frankly, I suck at writing. Every book or post I’ve read about how to improve says “write more”. So, to suck less at writing, I’ll write more, hopefully with less suck.

Join me in my adventure. I’ll tell you about my life-hacks (like switching to a standing desk), keep you informed about computer security (like why you should use Chrome), and, hopefully, do so in a concise mannor.

Other adventures will include my climb up Mt. Kilimanjaro and how to plan yours; what you should do when you wake up to your bird bleeding out on your floor; and how to have a spotless floor without ever vacuuming again in your life. And of course increase your penis by 15 inches, of girth. I imagine I’ll now be marked as spam by Google.

Feedback, and criticism of my writing, are encouraged.

And with that, something new has officially started.