# Beards

Growing a beard is a gradual change. A good beard takes time to grow, months for some men, years for others. Sure, you can have the basic outline there in only a few days, but it takes times for the slow peachfuzz to grow out and help fill it in. Your family, your friends, your coworkers, the people at the coffee shop, they all have a chance to get used to it. Sometimes they don't even notice, one week you don't have a beard, the next week you do.

Shaving a beard, on the other hand, is a drastic and immediate change. You have a beard. Five minutes later you don't. The very first person you run into who knows you, no matter how casual the acquantance, will notice something different about you.

I started growing my current beard about this time of year in 2004. I couldn't tell you exactly when, such is the way with beards.

Sometimes a drastic change is needed.

posted at: 2008 Jan 22 19:41 UTC | category: life | (story link)

# Today is Veterans Day

Go show your support for the troops. http://thisnovember11th.com/.

It's not often that politics compels me to action, but I donated $100 today. You should too.

posted at: 2007 Nov 11 21:32 UTC | category: life | (story link)

# Random Wit

If you're like me, you have a terrific sense of wit but only when it doesn't actually matter.

For example, today I read a 3rd-hand story about a pizza shop employee who was complaining about people on cell phones. Apparantly they'll talk on the phone while waiting in line and then have to decide what they want once they actually get to the cashier, often after taking 30-60 seconds to wrap up their phone call.

My first thought after reading this was, "She needs to send that customer to the Deciding Area, which is, of course, between the door and the other customers in line." It's a pity that I couldn't have been there to deliver a line based on that thought.

Luckily, I can still "blog" it so my readers can sorta chuckle about it (both of you.)

posted at: 2007 Nov 04 23:47 UTC | category: life | (story link)

# To paraphrase Fermi: where are all the viruses?

Apple is known for cultivating a cloud of smug. The users are arrogant and have an inferiority complex. In addition, Apple has been been playing up MacOS X's security in ways that some people find irritating.

David Maynor, for example, was willing to tarnish his reputation and be a laughing stock in order to, as he put it, poke a lit cigarette into the eye of Mac users. Granted, he was quoted saying that while he was supposed to be off the record, but it demonstrates just how much Apple gets under some people's skin.

Given that, you would think that by now someone would have written a self-propagating virus that targets Mac users, but it just hasn't happened.

It's not like it'd be difficult. I can think of 3 or 4 security issues that exist in MacOS today that would allow me to escalate from a normal account to root. Most of them involve exploiting the keychain, which by default is left unlocked while the user is logged in. Others involve getting the user's password from certain locations in memory that are accessible to all programs through various device and swap files.

All of the problems I just mentioned can be fixed by end users, but the point is that by default these are vulnerable points in the system that can easily be used by an attacker.

Getting the virus payload into the system is easy enough, too. Mac users are just as susceptible to dancing babies and love as PC users.

There are millions of Macs out there. More Macs than FreeBSD servers, but FreeBSD servers have been worm targets. Granted, they tend to be on faster connections, but given the low number (in the low hundreds of thousands, at most) of FreeBSD machines on the Internet why have they been targeted by malware when Macs (numbering in the millions) have not?

I'm not sure I have an answer to this. I know the answer is not "Because windows is the biggest target so all the kiddies look there." What better way for an obscure black hat to get his nick out there than to have written the first MacOS X virus that actually spreads? In one fell swoop you earn fame and reputation. You get to embarrass a giant corporation and show that they're not as invulnerable as they claim in their ads.

That seems like a much bigger prize to me than being just another anonymous entry in some antivirus vendor's database.

posted at: 2007 Oct 09 14:52 UTC | category: tech | (story link)

# Emacs Users Need To Stop Holding Back Unix

So for those who don't know, I've been using Ubuntu the last week or so. I've been keeping notes and I may write about it later, but I had to rant about this now.

It is late in the year 2007. The last time I used a unix-like desktop was in 2003, and I had the same problem then: A useless right alt key.

Why is the right alt key useless? Because for some reason it's been assigned the function "Super" instead of "Meta". Why was it assigned Super? What is Super? Why hasn't anyone fixed this minor detail that has existed for the 10 years linux has been a plausible threat to MS?

Super is just another modifier key, like shift or control. Old sun keyboards all have dedicated super keys. Back in the 80s it was used quite a bit, I've been told. These keyboards also had a single alt, a single control, and another modifier key called compose.

Meanwhile, in the real world, IBM came along and make two alt keys standard for the vast majority of computer users. They also put in two control keys and (one of their few bad moves on the keyboard) put capslock next to A, where control had historically been. This has since become the standard keyboard for everyone, even sun and apple.

So why is it that on a standard linux installation, no matter which distro you choose, the right hand alt key has been assigned Super? Emacs.

You see, Emacs is this software that does everything. It handles your email, it will monitor logs, you can play games in it, talk to a virtual psychiatrist, and even edit text files. If you need to perform a command in emacs there is probably a command for the exact situation you're in, assuming you can find it.

Learning emacs requires a harness and a rope, plus good ice shoes and a pickaxe. You will need this equipment to scale the steep and slippery learning curve. It is the only software still used that uses super. It will also use compose, snoz and snorglebutt modifier keys if you happen to have them assigned to your keyboard.

Emacs users are a small but vocal minority in the open source world (much like the religious right.) They command an unusually large amount of mindshare in the open source world (much like the religious right.) The rest of us could really do without emacs users, but they contribute a lot of code back to the community, so we put up with them (s/code/money, and again, much like the religious right.)

<colbert> EMACS USERS! I'm putting you, "On Notice!"</colbert>

Before a distribution like Ubuntu will be popular with the masses (and it's so very close) this default will have to be changed. It is unreasonable to suggest that the majority of users change their configuration or be stuck with a useless key so that the minority of emacs users don't have to change anything. You can do it now or do it later, but sooner or later it will have to be done.

If it's not, someone like my grandmother will never use Ubuntu (at 75 she, on her own, went out and bought a computer, learned what she needed to about it, and called me up and asked me to bring her Firefox and Thunderbird because it was taking too long to download over her dialup.)

posted at: 2007 Sep 24 15:13 UTC | category: tech | (story link)

# Bodyguardz Protective Skins

So I bought a Treo 755p to replace my 2 year old Treo 650. The phone is fine, it's basically my 650 with EVDO, no antenna and miniSD instead of SD.

I never had any sort of protection on my 650, and it held up great. However, it got pretty badly scratched up. I decided I'd see what sort of protector I could get for my 755. After looking at cases and researching for a few days I bought a set of plastic skins from BodyGuardz.

I put the skin on this morning. It hasn't cured for the full 24 hours yet, so this is a review of the installation process only, plus first impressions.

On a technical, "Can I do this" level, the installation was a breeze. Just spray on the solution and apply the piece in the right spot. Lift or slide until it's in position. I found that the skin didn't slide across the rubberized paint of the 755p very well, but peeling and resticking was fine.

However, on a "How hard was the install" level, it's meticulous. You have to clean the treo, then spray your hands, peel the next piece, spray it, then start applying and sticking it. I found I was spending 5-10 minutes per piece to get it on. The squeegee was useless for the body protector, again because of the rubberized paint. Pressing hard with fingers worked perfectly to stick the cover and work out bubbles.

The fit is not perfect, but it's close enough. There are a couple places where it stuck over the edge slightly, but a razor blade was able to cut those bits off (it was right where the battery cover meets the phone, so I had to trim it.)

The screenguard works as expected, although even with the solution getting bubbles out wasn't easy. This is a place where the squeegee helped. If anyone from Bodyguardz is reading this, please keep those in here, they are very useful for this step. :) My screenguard is slightly smaller than the screen, but once placed you don't notice it unless you look for it.

So first impressions? Seems great. By now the solution has dried and I can see how it'll look. I think it'll do a great job, provided it actually stays on the phone.

All is not rosy, however. The most scratched up part of my 650 is the part of the case that frames the screen. The Bodyguardz don't protect most of this area. Also, there are some corners that look like perfect candidates for catching and becoming a removal point, possibly when I don't want it to be removed. I'll keep an eye on those.

So should you buy your own? Well, I like it so far, and would tenatively say yes. At $25 it's cheaper than most cases, and it keeps my treo sleek enough to stay in my pocket.

I'll post another review in a few weeks, when I've had a chance to really put it through the paces.

posted at: 2007 Aug 16 21:36 UTC | category: tech | (story link)

# New Job

Well, I've put off this announcement a while, but I really should say something here. I've taken a new job, and it means moving back to the Bay Area.

I've officially gotten a place to live, a nice 2 bedroom house on Seminary Ave in Oakland. It's actually a duplex, and the other unit is downstairs and only one bedroom. My unit is upstairs and has this really cool spiral staircase leading from the garage to the unit.

I get to move in sometime next week, I'll have the exact date when my landlard emails me.

My new job is with a company that is doing streaming video to mobile devices. We have established relationships with a number of wireless companies in the US and Canada.

I'm doing sysadmin stuff, as usual, and mostly support developers and QA engineers.

In the spirit of keeping a basic (although easily traversed) disconnect between my professional and personal life I will not be publishing the name of the company I work for, but it's not very hard to figure out. Most people who read this know how to contact me anyway. I hang out on the usual network, you need only msg me. Failing that, you can construct my email address from the URL to this page. :)

posted at: 2007 Jul 24 01:41 UTC | category: life | (story link)

# Why Are CS Degrees So Worthless?

There's a debate starting on Dave Farber's Interesting People list. They're starting to discus why it is there aren't more CS students, but I think that's focusing on the wrong aspect of the debate. The better question is why CS programs suck so much.

I sent this post to Mr. Farber, in the hopes he would post it to his list. This is a question I have wondered about for many years.

There's one question I have for everyone on this list: Why do we need 
more CS students? 


A bit of background for everyone before I jump into my question:

I'm currently 28 and have been working professionally in one tech job 
or another for 10 years now. I've been interested in and learning about 
technology since I was in grade school. Somehow my personal track kept
me away from programming and steered me towards a sysadmin career, but my 
experience has put me into contact with many different programmers and
technical people. Today, in addition to my system administration work,
I also write web applications in php and python that are used in a number 
of different organizations in the energy sector.

I have not attended college. I graduated from high school in 1998 and saw 
the writing on the wall. I moved immediately to Northern California and 
started working in the tech industry on the basis of my technical skill.
Had I gone to college I would have graduated just in time to hold a 
degree that might get me a McJob (2002, just after the bubble burst.) 


In my past I've worked for ISPs, local tech houses, software companies
and non-technical companies. There are a number of roles for which
companies indicate they want someone with an EE/CS or equivilent. 
No matter what their actual dutites I've seen 4 basic archetypes: 

The Genius; The genius was the smartest guy at the company. He knew how 
everything worked and was the guy that management went to when they had 
something new to do.

The Programmer; The programmer was just that, the average, everyday 
computer programmer.
The Admin; The senior system administrator, who made the decisions on 
what their technical infrastructure looked like.

The Tech; The tech was generally a semi-skilled worker doing grunt work,
such as help desk, QA or system maintenance.


Let's take a look at The Genius first. The Genius is the guy that's been
programming since he was 8. He started on a C64 or an Apple II with basic 
and moved on from there. In high school he was reading Diijkstra and
Knuth. From there he either went on to the working world or he went on to 
study EE and/or CS, often on a full scholarship.

These guys have universally put me to shame. I have tried to debate them
in my weaker moments and have always lost. I've talked to many of them
about their college experience and except for one guy all of them said
it was a waste of time. Of those that didn't attend college they have 
universally said that they've never regretted not going.

The Programmer is by far the most common player. This is also the 
player that is most likely to benefit from a CS degree. The problem?
They didn't learn anything useful.

I have had to educate programmers in basic skills they should have
picked up in CS 101. For example, not long after I joined a well-known
dot-com there was a vulnerability discovered in OpenSSL. Naturally I
upgraded it to avoid the exploit. 

A couple weeks later our head programmer (who held a CS degree from 
Caltech) came to talk to me about it. Apparently because I had installed
both the shared and static versions of OpenSSL it was now being compiled
against the shared version. I spent an hour explaining the difference 
between shared libraries and static libraries. He still wasn't convinced
it didn't matter. So I spent 30 minutes explaining to him (in step by 
step detail) how to change '-lopenssl' to '/usr/local/lib/openssl.a' and
how it was no different than not having the shared library in the first 
place.

The kicker? A couple hours later he came back with my boss and they asked 
me to remove the shared library because they thought it was causing 
problems. I did so and it didn't fix their problem. A month later I put 
the shared library back and never heard another complaint.

For those of you unfamiliar with Unix the problem I just described is 
a basic one. A programmer who doesn't know the difference between a 
shared library and a static library is similar to a car designer who
can't tell you the difference between a carborator and fuel injection,
and has to ask the mechanic to explain the differences. 

The Admins and The Techs are really in the same boat when it comes to 
a CS degree. There's no reason for having them go through a CS program. 
If these jobs need any training after highschool it's best handled either 
on-the-job or in some sort of vocational school. (Those have their
problems too, however. I will not hire an ITT grad, for example, as I've
never seen any worth their salt.) 


This brings us around to my question; Why do we need more CS students?
Or, more correctly (if a bit harsh); Why are CS degrees so worthless? 

The smartest guys, those who should be involved in getting their
doctorate, see it as a waste of time because they learned it all in high
school. There's nothing a CS degree will teach them they don't already
know. 

The guys that would actually benefit from a CS degree aren't learning 
anything either. Why? They're not being taught. Current CS degrees focus
so much on algorithms and math that they see the basics as unimportant. 
They're teaching students to jump and do cartwheels but they don't teach
them how to walk. 

There are a couple interview questions I ask every candidate that anyone
with a CS degree should be able to answer in under a minute. Most (~60%)
of the candidates I've seen can't answer these questions. 

The questions:

Please write a program that prints out the numbers 1 through 10 
in the language of your choice. 

Please demonstrate a snippet of code in the language of your
choice that will swap the value of two variables. 

I'm not looking for specific answers here. I'm looking for whether they 
can answer these very basic questions in under 5 minutes. 

I've asked a number of candidates these questions. Those who did not
have a degree answered them every time, typically in under a minute.

It's only the people who have a CS degree that have ever failed these 
questions. Some of those guys had more than 5 years working experience, 
too! To be fair, most of the guys that failed these questions were trying 
to get their first job. 

It still leaves me wondering: How did these guys gradutate with a CS
degree in the first place?

posted at: 2007 May 29 18:13 UTC | category: tech | (story link)

# I rule

I just hit the Pro level on Wii Golf. I rule.

posted at: 2007 Apr 30 19:07 UTC | category: wii | (story link)

# WII IS TEH R0X0R

So I managed to get my hands on a Wii yesterday. I got lucky when I decided that I was going to give all the local places a call, and one place happened to have a used Wii in the store. It was even $10 cheaper than a new Wii. I picked up a copy of Excite Truck too, since their game choice was rather slim. It was obvious this particular store wasn't getting any new equipment in, and just relying on what people sold to them.

I've now had the Wii for just about 24 hours. I've played it for 11 hours so far. Thanks to the advanced tracking technology borrowed from the CIA the Wii even tells you how much time you spend playing each game, by day and session. Here's my totals so far by game:

I'd say that speaks for itself. I haven't spent this much time with a new console since the SNES. With the PS/Saturn and Dreamcast/PS2/Xbox systems there was nothing to get me excited enough to play them for hours, let alone plunk down hard cash for a system during its launch phase.

If I can stop playing them long enough (or my arm needs a break) I'll write up some mini reviews of the games. For now, I need to finish eating and get back to driving trucks around a dirt track at very high speeds.

posted at: 2007 Apr 28 22:33 UTC | category: wii | (story link)