Bradley Holt

The Northeast PHP Conference Wants More Women Speakers

2013-04-09T17:59:34Z

Courtney Stanton had the following to say about getting more women to speak at conferences:

The easiest way I saw for getting more women on stage at the actual event was to get as many women to submit speaking proposals as possible.

We opened up the call for papers for the Northeast PHP Conference about a week ago. Guessing by the names, it appears that we have a very low number of women who have submitted talks.

Courtney went on to say:

So! Getting women to submit content: easy? Um. When I’d talk to men about the conference and ask if they felt like they had an idea to submit for a talk, they’d *always* start brainstorming on the spot. I’m not generalizing — every guy I talked to about speaking was able to come up with an idea, or multiple ideas, right away…and yet, overwhelmingly the women I talked to with the same pitch deferred with a, “well, but I’m not an expert on anything,” or “I wouldn’t know what to submit,” or “yes but I’m not a *lead* [title], so you should talk to my boss and see if he’d want to present.”

I promised mentoring, I promised practice sessions, I promised one-on-one slide deck reviews with people who have spent hundreds of hours speaking at conferences. I emailed my Women in Games Boston group, I attended events and encouraged groups of women in person, I sought women out online, I met with women over coffee. I encouraged/begged them to consider translating the hours and hours I’d spent with them in the past talking about their careers, their specialties, their ideas, into a 45-minute presentation. I told them how much I respected their reputations and their ideas and that I’d be thrilled if they had the time or interest in submitting a talk.

If you have even the slightest inclination to submit a talk proposal for the Northeast PHP Conference then please email me a draft or a sketch of your idea. I will happily take a look and help you develop your proposal. By the way, this offer applies to anyone (not just women).

What else can I, or others on the organizing team, do to encourage more women to submit proposals? Please let me know.

Why Gigabit Matters: Guest Post in the Free Press Blog

2013-01-22T18:42:01Z

I’ve written a guest post in the Free Press blog on Why Gigabit Matters. From the post:

Gigabit is almost 150 times as fast as the average national broadband speed, giving communities an opportunity to develop a thriving culture of innovation.

But simply noting it’s 150 times as fast fails to capture its true import. Gigabit is a new paradigm, one in which the network’s speed is no longer a bottleneck.

Read the full blog post.

Diversity at Technology Conferences and Metrics vs. Quotas

2013-01-09T18:03:27Z

Another discussion about diversity at technology conferences is making its way around various technology communities. This is a huge and important topic and I’m glad that people are talking about it. Given the enormity of the topic, it’s not one that I’m prepared to tackle in a blog post. Besides, I feel that most of what I could add to the discussion has already been said by others.

However, I do want to share some thoughts on one narrow aspect of the discussion. There has been much hand wringing about diversity quotas at conferences. In reality, I don’t think anyone with any credibility on the topic of diversity is advocating for quotas. My theory is that many people are conflating metrics (and associated goals) with quotas.

A commonly used mantra in research and other disciplines requiring critical and analytical thinking is, “If you can’t measure it, it doesn’t exist.” Assuming that one believes that diversity is a worthy goal, how do you know whether or not you have achieved this goal? Diversity itself cannot be truly measured. We are all different from each other in an immeasurable number of ways.

While diversity can never truly be measured, there are indicators of diversity that can be measured. Some of the indicators of diversity are gender, race, culture, and sexual orientation (to name a few). These indicators can be measured and evaluated in order to quantitatively infer whether or not the goal of diversity is being achieved. I believe that most advocates of diversity (including myself) are encouraging conference organizers to have a goal of diversity and establish metrics to gauge their progress towards this goal—not enforce quotas.

Why Gigabit Matters

2012-12-07T21:42:53Z

A handful of communities across the United States currently have access to gigabit-per-second (1 Gbps) Internet speeds. This super-fast connectivity is only possible with a fiber-optic infrastructure and a fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) deployment. Existing coaxial cables and telephone lines can’t even come close to providing gigabit-per-second bandwidth. But why does gigabit-per-second Internet speeds (and fiber-to-the-home) matter? A recent post on The Economist’s blog had this to say about fiber-to-the-home and gigabit-per-second Internet speeds:

There are limits, though, to the benefits to a fast connection. Often, they can end up demonstrating just how (relatively) slow the rest of the net is becoming. Cyrus Farivar, a writer for the tech website Ars Technica, traveled for a few days to Kansas City, Kansas, for a stay in one of the Homes for Hackers set up by a local entrepreneur to boost the city as a place to move to work and start companies. Mr Farivar’s first posting explained that despite having a purported 1,000,000,000 bits per second as his disposal (and somewhat fewer in practice), he found it hard to fill the pipe.

The above quote describes the early stages of a classic technology adoption lifecycle.

This bell curve describes the adoption lifecycle of a given technology. First come the innovators (2.5%), followed by the early adopters (13.5%), then the early majority (34%), the late majority (34%), and finally the laggards (16%). The innovators love technology and will be first to use the new technology, even if it’s still in the lab. The early adopters represent the first successful commercial use of the new technology. The early majority represents the technology breaking out of a niche and into the mainstream. The shift from early majority to late majority represents the technology becoming commonplace and standard. At some point, the laggards have no choice but to use the technology.

Gigabit-per-second technology is currently in the innovators phase of the technology adoption lifecycle. Only a handful of communities in the United States have access to gigabit-per-second Internet speeds. There are no statistics available on how many people within those communities have signed up for gigabit-per-second service. Successful commercial uses of gigabit-per-second bandwidth are practically non-existent at this point.

Fiber-to-the-home technology is currently in the early adopters phase. Fiber-to-the-home has been a commercial success but has not yet reached the mainstream. The Fiber To The Home Council Americas reports that nine million North American households are connected directly to fiber-optic networks. With over 115 million households in the United States alone, this puts fiber-to-the-home technology adoption well within the early adopters threshold but clearly not yet in the early majority phase. Within urban areas, one might see fiber-to-the-home reaching an early majority phase, yet there is very little availability of fiber-to-the-home in rural areas due to the high costs of deployment.

This brings us back to the question, why does gigabit-per-second Internet speeds (and fiber-to-the-home) matter? If you live in a community with access to gigabit-per-second Internet speeds, why should you care? If your community doesn’t yet have access to gigabit-per-second Internet speeds but does have fiber-to-the-home, why should you care? What are the advantages of your community being an innovator or an early adopter? Why not just wait for the technology to reach the early majority or late majority phase? Or, why not just be laggards and wait until you have no choice?

The main answer to these questions should be obvious by now. If one accepts that gigabit-per-second bandwidth and fiber-to-the-home technology are on a trajectory towards mainstream adoption, then you will eventually have to get on board as a laggard. Wouldn’t it be better to get on board during the early adopters phase (or maybe even during the innovators phase)?

As with Moore’s Law, bandwidth speeds are ever increasing. Moore’s Law correctly predicted that processing power would grow by 60% every year. In 1998, Nielsen’s Law of Internet bandwidth correctly predicted that bandwidth for high-end home users would grow by 50% every year. Since processing power is increasing faster than bandwidth speeds, Nielsen observed that user experience is ultimately bound by bandwidth, not processing power. Just as computers will and must get faster, bandwidth will and must get faster. Extrapolating from Nielsen’s Law, I predict that gigabit-per-second Internet speeds will reach the early adopters phase within five years and the early majority phase within ten years.

It takes innovators using a new technology in order to discover its first successful commercial use and move the technology to the early adopters phase. Communities with gigabit-per-second Internet speeds will be the incubators for these innovators and the place where successful commercial uses are discovered. These communities have much to gain by fostering innovators and early adopters as they discover and refine commercial uses of this technology.

Building a Hypermedia API in CouchDB

2012-12-03T19:43:34Z

The latest issue of php|architect includes an article of mine on Building a Hypermedia API in CouchDB. The article’s description:

This article demonstrates how to create a hypermedia data API using CouchDB, a document database and application server that is accessed through an HTTP API. URIs identify CouchDB resources such as databases, documents, attachments, and configuration sections. HTTP methods define actions on these resources. Requests from CouchDB clients—and responses to CouchDB clients—are self-describing through the use of request headers, response status codes, and response headers. However, CouchDB’s core API does not include hypermedia controls. This article will demonstrate how you can add hypermedia controls to your CouchDB application through the use of show functions, list functions, document update handlers, rewrite rules, and a virtual host or a reverse proxy.

The article uses the JSON Hypermedia API Language (HAL) draft media type (application/hal+json). This allows for the creation of a generic hypermedia API. HTTPie is used to demonstrate interactions with the hypermedia API.

The article includes a companion proof of concept Hypermedia API built in CouchDB which is available on GitHub. PHP, the Doctrine CouchDB Document Object Mapper (ODM), and Cilex are used to push the proof of concept application to CouchDB. PHPUnit and Guzzle are used for a suite of tests that exercise the hypermedia API served directly from CouchDB.

This same issue of php|architect also includes the following articles:

Using SimpleDB by Eli White
Stored Procedures and Variables in MySQL by Chris Tankersley
Performance: Performance Concepts from Those That Know by Matthew Setter
Outside the Box: Method Overloading by Joshua Thijssen

PHP 5.4 Cheat Sheet from DZone Refcardz Published

2012-11-26T18:31:29Z

I’m happy to announce that my PHP 5.4 Cheat Sheet from DZone Refcardz was published today. This is a major update to DZone’s existing PHP Refcard with material for PHP 5.4 added. In anticipation of this release, DZone interviewed me about this update. From the interview:

The PHP 5.4 Refcard is for beginner to intermediate PHP developers. It’s not for complete beginners as readers will need to have some knowledge of things like basic control structures and data types. More experienced PHP developers should find this Refcard helpful, too. For example, there’s a section on security that talks about filtering input, escaping output, and password encryption.

Being a cheat sheet, there was only so much space available and a lot of great content had to be cut. Also from the interview:

The biggest section to be cut was the one on classes and objects. Some of the object-oriented programming features not included were property/method visibility, class constants, static properties/methods, abstract classes, abstract methods, interfaces, traits (introduced in PHP 5.4), late static binding, type hinting, namespaces, autoloading, exceptions, and the Standard PHP Library (SPL). This section alone probably could have fit in an entire Refcard. Some other content that was cut included more details on data types, how to use database transactions with PDO, details on working with the various string syntaxes, more detail on arrays, more examples of working with functions, how to serve static assets using the built-in web server, and further details on working with dates and times.

A big thanks to Engine Yard for sponsoring this Refcard!

Entity Relationships in a Document Database at ZendCon 2012

2012-11-18T23:47:42Z

Here are the video and the slides from my Entity Relationships in a Document Database at ZendCon 2012.

Some of the tools mentioned in the presentation:

Domain-Driven Design at ZendCon 2012

2012-11-19T00:15:19Z

Here are the video and the slides from my Domain-Driven Design talk at ZendCon 2012.

If you’re interested in learning more about this topic then I’d recommend reading the original book on the topic of Domain-Driven Design by Eric Evans. Eric also runs a training company called Domain Language which offers training on Domain-Driven Design. I had the privilege of attending his four day hands-on immersion class which I would highly recommend for anyone who wants to take a deep dive into Domain-Driven Design.

Here are some additional resources that may be helpful:

Statement on Burlington Telecom and its Governance

2012-10-11T19:43:28Z

Almost exactly a year ago I was appointed by the City Council of the City of Burlington, Vermont to the Telecommunications Advisory Committee. In this volunteer position, my role has been to advise the City Council on matters related to Burlington Telecom, a municipally owned telecommunications services provider. At the last regular meeting I was elected Chair. Soon after, I learned that the City Council has plans to potentially dissolve this committee at the next City Council meeting this coming Monday, October 15^th. We’ve drafted the following statement (also available on the BTAC Documents page) to be read at this meeting which expresses my thoughts on this potential decision.

To the Burlington, Vermont City Council on October 15th, 2012:

This is a statement from the current members of the Burlington Telecom Advisory Committee—often referred to as BTAC. The BTAC is a citizens committee created by the Burlington City Council and its Transportation, Energy, and Utilities Committee. Formed in 2004, the BTAC was designed to “include a measure of citizen input and oversight into the development and deployment of the telecommunications project.”

It is our understanding that the City Council is considering dissolving the BTAC and transferring its responsibilities to the Blue Ribbon Committee. The decision on whether or not to dissolve the BTAC is a decision to be made as part of a political process. We do not see the BTAC as a political entity, but rather as a governance and oversight body. As such, this statement is not intended to influence your decision one way or another. However, we feel that it is important to share our perspective on the future of Burlington Telecom and its governance in the absence of a citizens committee.

The governance and oversight of Burlington Telecom has long been a difficult and complex issue. In 2009, the City Council formed the Blue Ribbon Committee with two primary responsibilities: assess the viability of Burlington Telecom and assess all available options for the financial structure of Burlington Telecom. Due to the nature of the Blue Ribbon Committee’s work, much of its activity has been done in secret executive sessions.

This is not meant as a criticism of the Blue Ribbon Committee. We understand the reasoning behind this approach. The Blue Ribbon Committee feels that public knowledge of some information might put Burlington Telecom at a competitive disadvantage and that it would not be in the public interest for this information to be publicly known. We also understand that the Blue Ribbon Committee feels that conversations with potential Burlington Telecom investors, partners, or purchasers must be kept confidential, at least initially, in order to obtain the best possible terms for the citizens of Burlington. These are arguably good reasons for secrecy around the Blue Ribbon Committee’s work.

In contrast to the Blue Ribbon Committee, the BTAC rarely holds executive sessions and almost all of its activities are open to the public. There are many areas of Burlington Telecom’s governance where transparency better serves the interest of the public. Our concern is that, without the BTAC, transparency into Burlington Telecom’s operations will become almost non-existent. We urge you to consider the importance of transparency and to move forward with options that increase, not decrease, the level of transparency around Burlington Telecom.

The timing of this action is unfortunate. At its last regular meeting, the BTAC elected a new Chair who outlined three main goals for the BTAC moving forward. These goals were: improve communication between the BTAC, the City Council, and the Blue Ribbon Committee; increase public dialogue to channel input to and from the City Council; and define a clear role for the BTAC. We were looking forward to acting on, and have taken initial steps towards, these goals.

We joined the BTAC because we care about Burlington Telecom and the positive impact that we believe it can, and does, have on our city. Burlington Telecom is not just another telecommunications provider. It is critical infrastructure for the 21st century that is owned by us, the citizens of Burlington. This Fall, Burlington Telecom is rolling out 1 Gbps symmetrical broadband speeds. We are one of a handful of cities in the country with access to this type of bandwidth, putting us at a distinct economic advantage.

Market forces alone have failed to create the broadband infrastructure we need. According to Akamai’s Q1 2012 “State of the Internet” report, the United States is ranked 12th in broadband speed, with an average speed of 6.7 Mbps. This Fall, Burlington citizens and business will have access to broadband speeds 150 times as fast as the national average. In comparison, South Korea is ranked highest with an average broadband speed of 15.7 Mbps. Burlington citizens and business will have access to broadband speeds 65 times as fast as the fastest country’s national average.

Burlington Telecom is a critical part of our city’s infrastructure. It belongs to the citizens of Burlington. In order for us to continue to benefit from this infrastructure, it must be governed transparently. Thank you for your time.

Northeast PHP Tickets

2012-06-26T18:10:03Z

Tickets for the Northeast PHP Conference will be going on sale this Thursday, June 28^th at a cost of $99 per person. The conference will be taking place on Saturday, August 11^th and Sunday, August 12^th at Microsoft’s NERD Center in Cambridge, MA and will feature talks from dozens of speakers across four tracks. This event is being organized by Boston PHP (a non-profit organization) and other user groups from the northeast region—it is completely volunteer-driven with the help of some generous sponsors. Tickets will likely sell quickly, so be sure to reserve your seat early!