Category: Stuff


I noticed that the deadline for Doodle 4 Google, the drawing contest where schoolchildren redesign Google’s logo, was today. I’m far too old to compete in the contest, but it got me thinking of doodles I might have drawn if I could.

Then I came home from work and this happened:

Yeah, I’m going to hell. But with all the news lately of Google moving Google.cn to Hong Kong and withdrawing from China’s censorship rules, it was inevitable. If something along these lines hasn’t already been put together, by someone who sucks less at Photoshop than me, I would be very surprised…

Edit: Hm, there’s this graphic from a Wired article about Google’s withdrawal that’s sort of similar. More colorful, less simple.

Help Karen pick her next computer!

I’ve been planning to get a netbook / ultra-portable laptop for grad school. Today, my dad offered to buy me one in exchange for my weighty hunk of metal (aka late-model Powerbook) so that he can give it to my grandma who’s still, somehow, running one of these funky boys. So that means I need to figure out what kind of netbook to buy. All of my computers up to this point have been Macs, so I know very little about companies or selections in PC land. Hence this blog post!

What I’m looking for:

  • Runs Ubuntu without breaking. Ideally, I’d get something with Linux pre-installed to avoid the Microsoft tax, but wiping Windows isn’t a huge deal.
  • Has a keyboard that is pleasant to type on. I don’t want something super tiny or where the keys take an inordinate amount of force to push. The main point of this netbook is to take notes and other type-y activities.
  • The touchpad and mouse button are separate things. That one-surface button thing on the MacBooks drives me up the friggin’ wall.
  • 2 GB RAM.
  • Ideally, solid state drive instead of a hard drive. I REALLY don’t need much space on this thing, I’m not keeping my music on it. The cloud (or the USB stick) shall provide!
  • Doesn’t run excessively hot. I like the skin on my thighs unscalded, thanks.
  • Not too picky about processor speed. Again, this thing is for web browsing and typing. It should be able to play YouTube videos without melting, but I’m not going to be gaming or running Photoshop on this thing. That’s what my desktop is for. I also don’t really care if it has a webcam or not.
  • Reasonably lightweight, though I really don’t give a crap if it fits in a manila envelope or not.
  • Good battery life is a plus. Take 4 hours as a lower bound. Beyond 6-7 hours I really don’t care, I’m not going to be going that long without putting the damn thing to sleep or plugging it in.
  • Good wifi reception. 3G/etc is irrelevant, I can’t afford a data plan.
  • Reliable manufacturer with good customer support. I don’t want this thing to break for at least two years. And if it does happen to break during that time, I want to be able to get things cheerily fixed or replaced conveniently and for free.
  • < $500. Ideally, closer to $300.

Here’s some of the laptops I’ve found so far that are close to what I’m looking for:

  • The Asus Eee 1000 has (had?) the solid state drive, native Linux support, and most of the rest. Unfortunately, although it’s still up on Asus’ website, it doesn’t appear to be sold on any reputable site on the ‘net anymore. And the rest of the Eee line has Windows and friggin’ hard drives. What gives?
  • Now that I’ve been thoroughly let down, the rest of the 10″ Eee line isn’t so bad. The 1005HA is supposed to be pretty Ubuntu compatible, and I like the seashell design concept. I do wish they’d pare down the number of models—with their stupid broken Flash navigation comparing models is slow and excessively difficult. I also wish Asus actually sold the damn things, or gave you links where you could find particular models with particular combinations of options. The battery life is way more than I’ll ever need, and the prices I’ve seen are quite low. I’ve heard bad things about Asus’ customer support, though.
  • Then there’s the Starling from Linux-only hardware shop System76. Ubuntu out of the box, 2 GB RAM standard. 160 GB of hard drive space that I will never, ever, fill. Reasonably cute-looking, 2.6 lbs. Unsure how I feel about the mouse buttons on either side of the trackpad. The battery life isn’t spectacular–only about 4.5 hours according to this review. Even with the extra RAM, it’s hard to justify the price point next to the Eee PCs. I guess that’s what decent support costs?
  • The Lenovo Thinkpad X10e is a nice machine, with a larger monitor than everything else I’ve been considering. It’s not technically a netbook, but it weighs three pounds so close enough. The whole Thinkpad line is so ugly it’s almost charming—they’re just begging for some vinyl decorations or acrylic paint or something. I’ve also heard very good things about Lenovo’s support. But it seems oddly underpowered for the price, with only a 1.6GHz processor and 1 GB of RAM by default. Reviews have also said it runs really hot, with a loud fan besides.
  • Also from Lenovo is the Ideapad 10-3, which they actually promote as a netbook. Okay price point, has the new-ish Intel Atom 450 processor which is supposed to be good, and has been celebrated in reviews for its keyboard quality. Main flaws: 1.) It only comes with 1 GB RAM and and 2.) The trackpad and the mouse button are the same damn thing and that will drive me insane.

So those are the machines that I’m considering so far. But as I said before, I know very little of the world of netbooks, or PCs generally. Recommendations, please!

The future starts out so innocuously, but it gets creepier as you go along. Watch the whole thing.

Hat tip to Mike Tauraso, who doesn’t seem to have a website.

And my head told my heart, “Let love grow”

And my heart told my head, “This time, no”

–Mumford & Sons, “Winter Winds”

There was a New York Times article a year or so ago explaining recent scientific findings in the neurochemistry of love. By manipulating oxytocin receptors in the brains of female voles, scientists could make them pair bond for life—or be completely impervious to pair bonding. The article stuck in my head because the author was so interested in the latter finding, more so than the first. I found that odd. Our myths and stories are full of love potions. I couldn’t think of a single myth that featured a love vaccine. Yet it was that was what the author found interesting. That was what he wanted scientists to produce someday.

(I think this was the article.)

At the time, I couldn’t imagine why someone would want to give themselves a vaccine against love. It struck me as self-denying and unnatural as the company that erases memories in The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. But now I wonder if the proper analogy would be to birth control—you’re deliberately, temporarily hindering a biological function until one is in a place in life when it makes sense to use that function.

So let’s assume that scientists were able to create a pill that could prevent romantic love in humans for as long as it was taken, like birth control pills. Let us also assume that it can isolate romantic bonding without affecting bonds of friendship or family—a non-trivial feat, but one I’ll assume possible for the sake of the question.

Would you consider taking the love control pill? Under what circumstances would you rationally consider romantic entanglements to be too complicated to be worth it? While employed as a dancer or sex worker? While studying for the bar? On tour with the band? During military service? During college? How about high school? Until your chosen career was solidly underway?

What are the things that you can get from romantic partners but not from friends and family? This list varies person-to-person, depending on both what they expect from romantic partners and what their circle of friends is capable of.

At what point in your life do you expect that list of things to be appropriate, useful, or necessary?

Look Ma! I’m a programmer!

I am currently trying to learn how to code. I’m most of the way through a Python tutorial; after that, I plan to take on Django and try my hand at basic web applications.

Coding is not something I am naturally good at. My worst grade in college was in CS 60. Even after two college CS courses and this tutorial now, I still struggle with it. I understand the high-level concepts just fine—my code just doesn’t work. Everything that can go wrong, does—the usual crop of syntax errors, conceptual mistakes, bizarre bugs that even the CS grader-tutors can’t figure out so you end up having to turn in a broken program for half or no credit. If you read Girl Genius, when it comes to programming I feel like Agatha back when her spark’s artificially crippled.

It’s a weird experience for me because I’ve had little difficulty with virtually any other mode of self-expression. I can draw, paint, sculpt, sing, play piano, speak, and write reasonably competently. It’s frustrating to have ideas for web apps in my head and no way to make them real.

At the same time, from a practical standpoint I like working with computer geeks and mastering code seems like a good way to be able to do that. Basic programming knowledge, specifically in Python, is also a requirement of the iSchool master’s program I plan to attend next fall.

So that’s what’s been motivating me to continue hitting my head against this wall.

Anyway, by way of encouragement, a friend pointed me toward this Jeff Atwood post, as well as its update three years later, about how unbelievably many people—many of them CS majors!—apply to programming jobs but don’t know the basics of coding, at all. Thus, many employers have resorted to requiring applicants to solve simple coding programs over the phone or online before they get to the interview stage in order to avoid wasting everyone’s time. One such easy problem is the FizzBuzz test:

After a fair bit of trial and error I’ve discovered that people who struggle to code don’t just struggle on big problems, or even smallish problems (i.e. write a implementation of a linked list). They struggle with tiny problems.So I set out to develop questions that can identify this kind of developer and came up with a class of questions I call “FizzBuzz Questions” named after a game children often play (or are made to play) in schools in the UK. An example of a Fizz-Buzz question is the following:

Write a program that prints the numbers from 1 to 100. But for multiples of three print “Fizz” instead of the number and for the multiples of five print “Buzz”. For numbers which are multiples of both three and five print “FizzBuzz”.

Most good programmers should be able to write out on paper a program which does this in a under a couple of minutes. Want to know something scary? The majority of comp sci graduates can’t. I’ve also seen self-proclaimed senior programmers take more than 10-15 minutes to write a solution.

Sadly (?), even I can solve this one. Does that mean I qualify as a programmer? :P

My solution after the cut.

View Full Article »

An article ran in the Star Tribune today about the Kelsey Smith Act, a bill being presented in the MN legislature that would require phone companies to triangulate and disclose the location of a cell phone whenever the police ask for it. No court order or subpoena needed.

It’s being billed as a way to find kidnapping victims. And indeed, triangulating cell signals is an important tool for finding lost people—that’s how James Kim’s family was found. But no court oversight whatsoever? Making it possible for the police to get the whereabouts of any cell phone owner, regardless of whether or not there is a real emergency? Creepy!

What’s so bizarre isn’t that people are willing to hand over that kind of authority to the cops, or don’t think through the privacy implications of their proposals. It’s that discussion of the privacy implications of this bill is nowhere to be found in the article. There’s just no mention. It’s presented as this common-sense bill that will save children. Are privacy advocates so few and far between that the writer completely failed to think of the civil liberties angle of the story? Or was it edited out?

There seem to be two stereotypes that dominate the entrepreneurial field.

The first I’ll call West Coast entrepreneurs. They’re the ones Silicon Valley is famous for.

The West Coast entrepreneur is a young, 20-something white dude who attended Harvard or Stanford. (Sorry Yale. And everyone else.) At least one of his co-founders has parents who are wealthy and willing angel investors. If he’s on the techie side, he is and has always been an ubernerd. If he’s on the business side, he was also socially inept as a kid, but now overcompensates for it in ways that are functionally valid but carry a whiff of smarminess, creepiness, or desperation. He is aware of his youthful arrogance and stokes it, takes pride in it; his ego is the size of Montana. He is dead certain that his product will change the world but is cavalier about building ways for people to pay him for it. He may have an Asian male co-founder, and will have Asian males among his early employees, but no other minorities in the early stages—not by design, but “it just worked out that way.” Before exit, he brags about how long he’s gone consuming nothing but ramen and Mountain Dew. After exit, he buys a red electric sports car and eats at black-tie restaurants in his swimming trunks.

The second type is the typical entrepreneurship model everywhere else.

This stereotype is a 40-something rich, golf-playing white man who thinks he’s still hot shit because he built something fifteen years ago that was just good enough to sell. He is motivated by money, ego, and possibly the thrill of the sell. He reads business books and magazines and finds them incredibly insightful. He doesn’t realize that his business is incredibly boring to just about everyone else. If he does happen to realize how boring he is, he becomes an angel investor to live vicariously through the next young crop of entrepreneurs. Sad to say, most of the guest speakers in last year’s Shotput Ventures incubator program fit this stereotype to the T.

If I had to pick one of these to be, I’d pick the former. I have so little in common with the latter stereotype. I hate boring, mediocre products, especially when they succeed in the marketplace.* I detest selling to people. Revenue in itself doesn’t excite me. I completely loathe golf.

But the West Coast entrepreneurship model is obnoxious in its own way too. It’s a fact that venture capital firms reward startups that pitch the best, not the ones that build the best, which enables pie-in-the-sky behavior and encourages talk and smarm over results and realism. Superior products and teams are likely to die from lack of funds if they don’t play along with the Ultra Bleeding-Edge Shiny Hype of the moment. There’s also a surprising amount of snobbishness about where you went to school; unless you developed your product in grad school, if you didn’t attend one of the top of the top schools with a legacy of successful dropout entrepreneurs, forget about it. It also has a deep sexism problem bubbling up from the male-dominated computer science departments and VC firms which compose this entrepreneurial scene.

Besides the systemic problems, from a selfish point of view, I don’t fit the West Coast stereotype either. I’m not male and my parents aren’t ever going to fund me. I attended a well-ranked liberal arts college, but not Harvard or Stanford. (It was a women’s college; that probably doesn’t help!) I’m a geek, but I don’t really know how to code (yet!). I have a strong allergy to buzzwords and zero allergy to bootstrapping. I’m motivated by the dream but I’m well aware that few things are truly world-shockingly revolutionary. (Fortunately, things don’t have to be world-shockingly revolutionary to still be awesome.) Ego is certainly also a motivational factor for me—I enjoy being independent and “self-standing”**—but mine can’t compare to the true delusion you often find in this scene.

I just like doing startups for the opportunity to build something awesome, something better than anything else out there, something that people like and use. It’s that simple. I like working with great human beings; I like to see it when the good guys win. Screw the stereotypes. Screw the buzzwords, and the hype, and the machismo. Screw the entrepreneur-bots. I know there are real, live, good-natured humans who are also startup entrepreneurs; I’ve met and worked with some. Though they’re fewer and farther between than I’d like, that’s the scene I want to inhabit, the people I want to recruit, and the new stereotype I’d like to develop.

—-
* I used to work tech support. Seeing how many bugs were left to fester while the devs pumped out new feature after new feature drove me mad. I never want to be continually embarrassed by the product I’m supposed to represent ever again.

**The Danish word for “self-employed” is “selvstaendige”, pronounced much like “self-standing”.

V-day playlist

I’ve always felt that Valentine’s Day was a stupid crock, but this is the first year I’ve actually hated it. Here’s a playlist for the broken-up.

“God Damn Valentine’s Day” (zip)

1. The Swell Season – “The Rain”
2. Death Cab for Cutie – “Tiny Vessels”
3. The Hold Steady – “You Can Make Him Like You”
4. Pedro the Lion – “Options”
5. Pete Yorn – “Lose You”
6. Say Hi to Your Mom – “Let’s Talk About Spaceships”
7. Cloud Cult – “It’s What You Need”
8. The Mountain Goats – “No Children”
9. The Magnetic Fields – “Epitaph For My Heart”
10. Cake – “Friend Is a Four-Letter Word”
11. The Dandy Warhols – “You Were the Last High”
12. Speechwriters LLC – “Blood on the Frets”
13. Ice Palace – “Slow Motion Fall”
14. Mumford & Sons – “Little Lion Man”
15. Tegan & Sara – “The Cure”
16. Susan Tedeschi – “Don’t Think Twice, It’s All Right”
17. Iron & Wine – “Boy With a Coin”
18. Stars – “In Our Bedoom After the War”
19. Archer Prewitt – “The Race”

Lilith’s letter

Today I had choir practice for our concert tomorrow. Between each of the songs, members of the choir are doing various readings. One of them was from Mark Twain’s “Extracts From Adam and Eve’s Diaries” (“Forty Years Later” and thereafter).

It was supposed to be a romantic passage, and indeed the other choir members were saying how “beautiful” it was. I thought it was disgusting and insensitive. A decent number of our choir members are widows, for one thing; they didn’t die first, and they are not so weak!

So I wrote a fictionalized response to Twain.

* * *

To Eve

I hesitated in writing you this letter because it would make evident the fact that I read part of your diary. I did not mean to—I did not even realize it was yours until I had already read the part in question. You left it sitting open under the pomegranate tree.

Anyway. Despite the tension between us, and the awkwardness of this particular situation, I felt I should write because I fear you are making the same mistake that I made. You will probably not change your mind—your nature is so different from mine—but at least then I can say I tried. And perhaps we are not completely different. We seem to have had the same taste in men, at least…

So. I will be blunt. To say “I can’t live without you” is not an expression of love. It is not noble. It is not beautiful. It is an expression of abject, self-negating weak-mindedness. Your nature may be less assertive than mine, but I assure you that even you are stronger, worthier than such childish sentiments.

When I loved Adam I also thought I could not live without him. I thought that was what love meant. But as time passed, I realized I could not live with him, either. He wanted and needed me to be someone other than who I am. I could not survive this way. So I left.

It was like amputating your own hand. Leaving love before it festers into loathing, because you know you must, is well compared with self-injury. It hurts. It is debilitating, for a while. But it is not suicide.

You would not ask a deaf person, “How can you live without hearing?” You would not ask a blind person, “How can you live without sight?” So how can you wonder how people can live without their beloved?

I will love, and be loved, again. But I know now that I will always be strong enough to stand alone if I have to. I will not be burned on my husband’s pyre. Will you?

Lilith

New webcomic!

Quick post: I already put a link up on my Identica account last week about it, but I’ve restarted doing webcomics! The new comic is called Zebulon and can be found at http://www.zebuloncomics.com/. The latest is perhaps my favorite so far, mostly because it gave me an excuse to doodle protest puppets. :)

And before everyone and their mom says it again: no, just because Chia is blonde and curvy doesn’t mean she’s supposed to be me. She is actually based on two ladies who will remain nameless. Indeed, unlike last time, most of the Zebulon characters are inspired by real humans. But so long as I don’t actually say who is based on whom, hopefully no one can get mad! Mwahahaha.

Creative Commons License
Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License.
Powered by WordPress.
Theme NewRiver by Karen Rustad, based on Motion by 85ideas.