sourdough tennis

updating flash, nauseating details version

2010-11-06T06:50:00.003-07:00

FIRST, log out of any account on your computer, then log in AS ADMINISTRATOR. Then:
A) Go to this link in firefox (select the link address below, press Ctrl-C to copy it, then open firefox, put the cursor in the address bar, delete its contents, then press Ctl-V to paste the address)
http://www.adobe.com/software/flash/about/
If it says your version is not the same version as the recommended, latest version, continue. Otherwise, you are ok and can stop now.

B) Click this link in firefox:
http://fpdownload.adobe.com/get/flashplayer/current/install_flash_player.exe

C) A dialog box will come up that says what do you want to do with this file. Click "Save File."

D) Now you want to run the file. The easiest way to do this is through the Firefox downloads window. To get to it, press Ctrl-J on your keyboard, or go to the Tools Menu | Downloads.

E) A new window should appear, with a list of downloaded files, perhaps just one. The top one should say "install_flash_player.exe" or "install_flash_player(2).exe" or some other number. Right-click on this and select "Open."

F) If the Windows warning/authentication dialog box appears, select OK or enter your admin password to the computer and press OK.

G) Now a new flash window should appear with a red background and a white lowercase, styled "f". Don't do anything yet.

H) We need to close the firefox windows before flash can be installed. You might want to print out these instructions now so as not to lose them if you have these instructions open in firefox. There are at least two firefox windows open now, the regular browsing window and the firefox downloads window. Use Alt-Tab or move the flash window around to get to both firefox windows and close them.

I) Back on the Flash Installer window, check the box, "I have read and agree..."

J) Click the INSTALL button on the Flash installer window. If you can't it's probably because the checkbox above is not checked.

K) A blue bar should go from left to right, indicating your progress. When it says "Installation complete," click the DONE button.

L) Now we are half-way there, we need to install the Internet Explorer Flash version. Open up Firefox again.

M) Go to this link in Firefox:
http://fpdownload.adobe.com/get/flashplayer/current/install_flash_player_ax.exe

N) click "save file."

O) Again, go to the Firefox Downloads Window. Ctrl-J or Tools Menu | Downloads.

P) In the Firefox Downloads window, the file listed should be install_flash_player_ax.exe, or install_flash_player_ax(2).exe or some other number.

Q) Right-click on this file and select "Open"

R) A new Flash Installation Window will appear. This time, you do NOT need to quit firefox, as only Internet Explorer uses this version of Flash. If you have Internet Explorer or AOL open, close them.

S) In the new Flash Installation Window, check the "I have read and agree..." checkbox.

T) Press Install.

U) A blue bar should go from left to right, indicating your progress. When it says "Installation complete," click the DONE button.

V) Let's test to make sure it worked. Open up Firefox and go to this link:
http://www.adobe.com/software/flash/about/
Make sure it says you have the latest version.

W) Open up Internet Explorer to this link:
http://www.adobe.com/software/flash/about/
Make sure it says you have the latest version.

If either doesn't have the latest version, try again. If that doesn't work, you'll need to try uninstalling the old version of flash first:
See step #1 of:
http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/191/tn_19166.html#main_ManualInstaller

CONGRATS, you are all done.

updating plugins. Sigh.

2010-09-11T06:24:00.000-07:00

Firefox, Flash, and Java have been updated lately. Those should be updated on your computer too, if you haven't done that in the last two days:

For each install, you have to download the file, then find the file on your computer (right-click on the file in the Firefox downloads window and select open containing folder) and double-click the file to run and install it.

Check flash: http://www.adobe.com/software/flash/about/
Install Flash: http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/191/tn_19166.html#main_ManualInstaller
(this is the manual installer, a much simpler install, and you don't have to uninstall old versions unless they are really old - you do have to install flash twice, once for IE, once for all other browsers).

Check/install Java: http://www.java.com/en/download/installed.jsp?detect=jre&try=1
(be sure to UNCHECK the Yahoo Toolbar in the installation process!)

Install Firefox: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/
Thanks for doing this as this helps prevent malware on your computer, and thus all the other computers!

Firefox has a "plugin check" which is also really useful:
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/plugincheck/

I know, I know, I know... this takes time, but not as much as recovering from a virus trashing your machine and your data.

My hill to work

2010-04-12T12:42:00.002-07:00

I ride up a pretty steep hill when I bike to work. Now I know how steep:

132 feet elevation gain in about a half mile.

Here's where to find the site that told me.

Waking up at ridiculous hours

2010-01-31T03:32:00.003-08:00

What is it about waking up in the middle of the night to watch sports on the other side of the world? I love doing this, though I admit it's crazy. Quite often, you have to watch alone. There's no party atmosphere, no beer. Does tea just make sports more enjoyable? I don't think so.

I was pulling for Andy Murray today in the Australian Open 2010 Final, and though he lost in straight sets, I'm glad I got up at 4am to watch it. I even woke up before my alarm went off, fearing I'd wake my 19-month old and have a distraction to consider as I tried to watch. I had to tiptoe around the kitchen not to wake anyone up making tea, and watched some good tennis, enjoying chatting with folks similarly obsessed on a blog.

When you wake up in the middle of the night to watch a sporting event, you are doing it because you love the event. There's no "I'm just hanging out with friends for the party of it" like you have at other events. No one proposes playing Scrabble during a break in the action, much less during the action (this has happened during Super Bowls I've watched, and the board game actually materialized for those bored with the game).

I have many memories of waking up early - often the World Cup and sometimes the Australian Open. Glad to add another one today. It's especially good when you have to bike or walk through an eerily quiet town to watch the match, but today is too snowy for that.

I enjoyed the banter on a Craig Hickman's excellent tennis blog with other people crazy enough to wake up so early to watch this match.

Yes you can use Regular Expressions in MS-Access

2009-08-13T11:44:00.002-07:00

I've heard it was not possible, but it is:


Private Function testRE()
  Dim re As Object, strText as String
  strText = ""the short brown fox, jumped over " _
    & "the Foxy lad of foxtown in Fox-ville."
  Set re = CreateObject("vbscript.regexp")
    Dim colMatches
    With re
        .Pattern = "\bfox\b"
        .IgnoreCase = True
        .Global = True
    End With
    'Debug.Assert False
    Dim myNum
    Set colMatches = re.Execute(strText)
    Debug.Print colMatches.Count & " matched"
    Dim inttemp As Integer
    For inttemp = 0 To colMatches.Count - 1
      Debug.Print ">" & colMatches(inttemp)
    Next inttemp
    
    Debug.Print re.Replace(strText, "Dog")
    
End Function

The results:



results:
2 matched
>fox
>Fox
the short brown Dog, jumped over the Foxy lad of Newtown foxtown in Dog-ville.

Hurricans are the bane to NJ Devils

2009-04-29T06:34:00.003-07:00

For the fourth time this decade, the Carolina Hurricanes have made the playoffs. Every single time they've been there, they've played the New Jersey Devils.

Back in 2001, the Hurricanes lost to the Devils in the first round 4-2, including two shutouts by the Devils, but Carolina won the only game going to overtime.

Since then, it's been all Hurricanes:
2002: the Hurricanes won 4-2, where all four games won by Carolina were won by one goal, including both overtime games in the series.

2006: After the league took a break for a year and the Hurricanes took a break from the playoffs for a while, they once again encounter New Jersey, this time in the second round, and this time only needed 5 games to beat New Jersey, again winning the only game in overtime.

2009: Again, New Jersey in the first round, and this time New Jersey won an overtime game for the first time against Carolina in the playoffs this decade, game 3. But Carolina won in seven, winning one game in overtime and two games with a goal in the last minute. Game 4's goal came with 0.2 seconds left to win 4-3. Game 7's goal came less than a minute after the tying goal, with ~30 seconds left. Which is more dramatic? Gotta go with Game 7.

Beating Windows Update's IE Quicklaunch

2009-04-16T07:36:00.005-07:00

Whenever I update my computer, it seems, Windows insists on adding Internet Explorer to the QuickLaunch area. Hmmm, let's see, if I deleted it, I probably don't want it there. So why does MS add it when there's a security update? No idea, except it probably has to do with pushing the use of their browser.

There are a few problems with this. 1) I didn't give it permission to add something to the QuickLaunch area. 2) I have no way of opting out of this. 3) Except, I could skip updates, which would be a bad idea. 4) I can no longer see the icons I have there, because now now all icons can be shown, and the little double arrow is needed to click twice to the icon I want and IE.

I've found the solution, though. It's simple and I'll never have to remove it again. I added a batch file (yes, those still exist) to my startup that removes IE from the QuickLaunch area. It's simple.

1) Go the the start menu and find the "Startup" folder. Right-click on it and select "open" (not "open all users"). This will take you to some place like:
C:\Users\(yourUserName)\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs\Startup on Vista and something similar on Windows XP.

2) Add a new text file to that folder by right-clicking and selecting "New Text File." Rename the file "RemoveIEQuickLaunch.bat" and say OK to the warning about changing the file extension.

3) Open the file with notepad and insert the following:
del "C:\Users\(yourUserName)\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch\Launch Internet Explorer Browser.lnk"
If MS creates it with a different name, you could be more aggressive with:
del "C:\Users\(yourUserName)\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch\*Internet Explorer*.lnk"
4) Save the file and close it.

For Windows XP, you'd need to know the path of the QuickLaunch area, which is similar, just right click on the QuickLaunch area (not an icon), select "open folder", and it will open a window to QuickLaunch, which will tell you the path.

Now whenever I log in, the internet explorer icon is removed if it ever got added!

Better, by far, than we deserve

2009-02-03T07:11:00.010-08:00

The tennis this past week has been stellar. Serena completes another solid run in Australia, winning as she did in the previous odd years to have 4 titles in 2003, 2005, 2007, and 2009. A few other good stories on the women's side, including Jelena Dokic's comeback and Carla Suarez Navarro's surprising run to the Quarterfinals, and the Venus-Serena doubles win.

The men's side was at least as good, with an amazing 5-set win by Rafael Nadal over countryman Fernando Verdasco, who beat expectations along with Andy Murray and last year's finalist Jo-Wilfried Tsonga. With extra drama because his final opponent, Roger Federer, had 2 days of rest compared to his 1, Nadal got inside Roger's head once again and won in another 5-set match, solidifying not his but many others' claim that he is the best right now, perhaps better than Federer when it is all said and done. For my part, I love to see Nadal not worry about who is the best ever, who has more rest or a more fair draw, or any of the other things he can't do anything about, and just play tennis with all his heart and that is an extraordinary amount of heart.

This match wasn't as good as the 5-set Wimbledon final between the two, nor was it as good as the Verdasco-Nadal match. But it was amazing tennis. It's better than we, as tennis fans and players, deserve. Consider the poor football fans who have the Steelers and Cardinals to watch in the Super Bowl. That was exciting, at least at the end, but the winners could only do so by being thuggish and a bit lucky. The quality of the tennis and its players is very high right now, even if exceptionally concentrated at the top for both men and women, and I'm very grateful.

The wisdom of 3 years

2009-01-26T11:12:00.005-08:00

My son Joe and I have been watching a few tennis matches over the course of the last week in the Australian Open. Joe likes watching tennis (or any sport, really), and wants to know who is who. I tell him. Now he can identify Andy (Roddick), Serena (Williams), Carla (Suarez Navarro, she beat Venus Williams), James (Blake). In the match we just watched, between James Blake and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga (pictured right), Joseph had the following observation:

"I don't think Jo likes the ball very much."

I respond: "Why is that?"

"Because he just HITS the ball away REALLY quickly."

James Blake probably feels the same way. Tsonga won 6-4, 6-4, 7-6. James had a chance in the 3rd set, being up a break, but couldn't keep it.

Sometimes James is called a streaky player. The difficultly in being streaky is that it's a lot easier to have a bad streak that costs you 10 points in a row than it is to have a good streak that wins you 10 in a row. Ditto for a few service games. Tough loss for James, as the draw was open after with Verdasco having knocked off Andy Murray.

Joseph has lots of interesting comments. The other one that comes to mind is when we were watching football, he enjoyed calling out the numbers that were on the football players jerseys. After a while he was getting frustrated. After I asked him what's wrong, he said "I'm trying to find 8-7 (player #87)." I told him that he should look on the edges of the field, where the wide-receivers were. After about 10 minutes, he starts whooping hooray. Sure enough, 87 had just come on the field and Joe had spotted him.

Ah, the little things in life.

11 foods I'm supposedly not eating

2009-01-16T14:06:00.003-08:00

The NY Times did a story that Men's Health originally did about the 11 foods "you" aren't eating. Taken literally, I hope you're not eating them now, because few of these foods would be welcome as you interact with the computer!

Here's the story.

How accurate are they? Are you eating some of the foods they list? Do you disagree?

1. Beets: YES – especially beet treat and grated on salads.
2. Cabbage: YES – especially in ground nut stew.
3. Swiss chard: YES
4. Cinnamon: YES, on oatmeal. Maybe I’ll splurge on that now.
5. Pomegranate juice: no. It doesn’t come in the CSA.
6. Dried plums: no. Do dried figs or dates give me any credit?
7. Pumpkin seeds: rarely.
8. Sardines: no
9. Turmeric: sometimes, again, now I’ll splurge and add extra when it goes in the curry.
10. Frozen blueberries: yes, if I can remember to eat them, which isn’t often.
11. Canned pumpkin: no, but I eat fresh ones in the fall, once in my bread (see the blog photo at top).
So I get 6/11, better than half but not great.

And I have a feeling my score will drop unless I find a CSA in the US.

How do you score?

Joe vs. the volcano

2009-01-08T09:19:00.000-08:00

We had to get our driver's licenses, car insurance, and car registration done. Our Canadian insurance and registration expired Jan 2, and it was December 29 (the first working day after Christmas). That left the 29,30, and 31st to do it. Doable, right, we have plenty of time.... We'll see.

The first day, we checked the website and found out that you have to have proof of identity, your old driver's license, and proof of car insurance to get a driver's license. However, to get car insurance, you need a driver's license. Hmmm, what to do? My wife went to the DMV and chatted with the guy who worked there whose daughter was going to Canada to University. He asked her all sorts of questions about that, but not about her proof of car insurance. The whole process took three hours, though.

"Joe" (meaning us) 2 (like basketball, 2-points for something done), the volcano (bureaucracy) 1 (for the wait time).

I went to see our old All-State insurance agent who was very helpful when we moved to Canada and still had US-based car insurance. He had my old driver's license on file and said that they'd probably give me the same number. Catherine called us and gave us her number. He gave me a proof of insurance form that I'd need to get my driver's license, and I helped him navigate his new Word 2007 to print the print option, which is not in an obvious location (just use Ctrl-P I said).

Joe 4, the volcano 1.

Then I went to the DMV to get my license. They needed my proof of insurance form, but I had it, and my wait was shorter (different DMV). I answered some of the questions wrong and had to squint a bit to pass the eye test, but I passed and got my license.

My wife also managed to get the car inspected for the annual state inspection, having refused defeat as the gas stations said they couldn't do it because they were full, as she found "Mr. Inspector" in the phone book and took the car there.

Joe 8, the volcano 1.

After one day, we're looking pretty good, maybe tomorrow would solve the rest.

The next day, the 30th, we were supposed drive to a different state to visit more family, but we had to get our car registered first. Ambitious, but possible?

We both went and took our 7-month old with us to the vehicle registration place (in Canada, insurance and registration and titles are all done in one place and are indeed only one piece of paper). We dutifully checked the website to see what we'd need. It clearly stated: 1) proof of insurance (check), 2) proof of residence (check), 3) NC driver's license (check), 4) previous title and registration (check, but Canadian, so iffy), 5) various forms we filled out from their website, 6) the annual state inspection.

We got the directions to the place off the website and printed off directions from Google, plus I had a new handy GPS navigation unit. We got near the place, but couldn't find it. The address placed in within the bounds of a hospital, so we looked all around and couldn't find it. We looked on the other side of the street in a shopping center. Nothing. Finally, we drove further down the street and saw a sign for something related to state-run vehicle something. We followed the signs. When we got there, there was a sign in front of it saying if you needed to register your vehicle, go to a different place instead. We did so and found it. The address on the NC DMV website was wrong, listing the address as "West such-and-such St." instead of "East such-and-such St." Details.

Joe 8, the volcano 2.

We got there and the line was out of the door and into the parking lot. We got in line. Soon the line was ACROSS the parking lot. The screw on our Canadian license plate was stripped, so I couldn't get it off with my Canadian looney and tooney that I had handy (Canadians have large $1 and $2 coins which are really handy). I finally got part of the jack out of the trunk and managed to unscrew the thing. The line was moving, we got into the place.

Joe 8, the volcano 3.

We finally got a chance to talk to someone and they pulled out their 45-lb. manual for what to do when a car comes from Canada. They said we needed to provide our proof of purchase from Canada or three years worth of registration and insurance proof. Neither exists, though, because the car was purchased in the US (12 years ago, too) and was only registered in Canada for 2 years. We had 1 year's worth of registration there and the previous year was at home, I happened to notice. Maybe we could have it faxed in? But the car was previously registered and titled in NC, surely that should help our case, proving the car was ours. They had to get on the phone with someone in Raleigh and sure enough, that was sufficient.

Joe 9, the volcano 3.

However, we also needed a different inspection for cars coming from Canada. Nothing was mentioned on that on their website. Surely, since the car came from the US and was previously registered in this very state, it wasn't needed. The car was already declared legal to operate in our state. No good, they said, we needed this done, and gave us the phone number to call for the inspector, who only answered the phone from 8-10am. I was so frustrated. We'd spend about 2 hours there and had nothing to show for it, other than an inspector's name and phone number, where they only answered the phone for 2 hours each day. How full would they be?

Joe 9, the volcano 6 (that was a 3-pointer).

We called the highway patrol inspector and left a message that we wanted to get this other inspection. We then called a different vehicle registration place, played dumb and said we needed to register our car, previously registered in state, but subsequently in Canada. We hoped they would do it for us. "Well, you'd need a highway patrol inspection for a car from Canada," they said. Arg, defeat. No use driving there and hearing it in person. It was 1pm and we couldn't do anything else today. And tomorrow was our last day to get this figured out. We thought we'd call the inspector and they'd say they were full today, but how about the next working day, which would be too late.

Lesson for us and anyone: ALWAYS CALL ANY BUREAUCRACY AND CONFIRM EVERYTHING YOU NEED BEFORE GOING. Check the website and bring everything both sources ask for.

Joe 9, the volcano 7.

The inspector called us back about 4pm that day! Surprise, surprise! She asked us to come in first thing in the morning, between 8-10. I said we'd be there at 8. She said, well, make it 8:30, traffic is pretty bad first thing. Nice. That's good for another point for us. But we postponed our trip another day, much to the disorientation of our three-year old who is big on knowing what's next and doesn't like last-minute change.

Joe 10, the volcano 7.

My wife saw the inspector in the morning at 8:30, and she looked around the car and found the EPA certificate under the hood. "That's all I need," she said. Annoying, because this was required for the car to have been registered before. It didn't cost us anything. 2 points for us, but 1 for the volcano.

Joe 12, the volcano 8.

She then went to the registration place (now that we knew where it was), where I was afraid there would be something else to inhibit us. I went ahead and gave my wife the previous year's Canadian registration in case all of a sudden they needed the 3-year's proof of registration. Just in case, you know?

She had to wait in line again, but not as long of a line. 1 point for the volcano.

Joe 12, the volcano 9.

She got to the same person who helped us the day before (she did all she could to help us). They ran through everything again, this time with the inspector's report done. Everything looks good, except...

You knew that was coming didn't you. The "Except" gives the volcano one more point, just because it was there.

Joe 12, the volcano 10.

We turned in our old NC plate to the Canadian agency. They made us do it. We asked if they would send it back to NC. They said normally they were destroyed, but they would see if they could mail it back. (Yeah, right). So now, the records showed us having a valid plate, but no valid insurance, for which there was a hefty penalty we had to pay. My wife explained that we did have insurance the whole time and explained what happened with the Canadian agency. And she had proof that we had it insured, because I had given her the form from last year.

Maybe that would work, they'd have to call Raleigh. Raleigh said it was OK, so they nixed the fine and gave us the plate. We were done. At last. But it was already pushing towards noon or 1pm, too late to start the drive to the next place with two small children, that would have to wait until the next day and year. We had finished, just in the nick of time. Three points to us, 2 for getting the plate, registration and title, and 1 for revoking the fine.

Joe 15, the volcano 10.

Go Joe!

Transition: Maple Leaf Land to Bald Eagle Land

2009-01-06T14:59:00.003-08:00

So I've moved from Vancouver, BC to North Carolina. Or at least, I'm in the process of moving. My family (two kids, my wife and myself) took a full week to make the journey, stopping over with friends in Wisconsin and my sister in DC (don't call it Washington, she says, the locals all call it DC). What a ride! We really enjoyed it, even despite a six hour bus ride across the eastern half of Montana due to a freight train derailment and a delay of 13 hours. We were only 4.5 hours delayed after we got around the derailment, so other things were slowing them down. Anyway, Amtrak gave us a nice voucher to reimburse us for time in the family bedroom that we lost due to the bus ride and delay.

Now I'm left trying to figure out how to adjust from one place to another; from one lifestyle to another. I was working half time, as was my wife, and we cared for our children in the other half. We were paying $125 a month for health insurance, with no co-pays, deductibles, or co-insurance. $125 was all we paid, nothing extra even for two children. Now I am still trying to get through the bureaucracy to enroll with health care at my US-based job. And that will still mean a few hundred bucks a month premium, a few hundred bucks deductible that we pay solely, and after that insurance only picks up a percent of what our bills cost. Wow, what a step backwards.

I've been listening to Tom Allen CBC Radio 2 via the internet. This has been a great link to my life before, as I listed to him sometimes when driving across town to go play tennis with a friend. Tom's very funny and I enjoy his stories about his amateur hockey games, as well as his interesting tidbits on music. Plus, since I am now in the Eastern time zone, I can start work at 9am and hear him at 6am in the Pacific time zone, which is when I was driving across town to play tennis anyway.

Separation of University and Political State

2008-10-16T09:31:00.004-07:00

I received an alarming email today in which the chancellor informed the university community about what we can and cannot do in relation to the political campagins "with University Resources:"

Dear Carolina Students, Faculty and Staff:

With Election Day approaching, this is a reminder that students, faculty and staff may not use University resources - e-mail accounts, computers, vehicles, equipment, supplies, funds, postage, photocopying, faxes, and the like - for political campaign activities.

University employees who want to engage in political campaign activities may do so when those campaign efforts will not interfere with their job responsibilities.

Everyone in our campus community has the right to freely express their views on any subject, including advocacy for or against candidates for public office. It's just that, in exercising this right, no University resources may be used.

I urge everyone to become informed and to vote. If you live in Orange County, consider registering (if you have not already) and voting early at the one-stop location at the Morehead Building on campus starting today, Oct. 16 through Nov. 1. (For details, see http://www.co.orange.nc.us/elect/onestop.asp.) You can find a complete list of one-stop voting locations by county at http://www.sboe.state.nc.us/content.aspx?id=17.

See you at the polls.

Holden Thorp

I was shocked and wrote a reply:

Dear Chancellor Thorp,

While I appreciate that the university's resources are not to be used directly to forward a political campaign, but I think your email may be overstated. I'm not sure what you mean exactly by "political campaign activities." Is this paid time working for one of the campaigns? If so, then I can see you point more readily, especially if the university resources used are "used-up," such as postages, equipment use, photocopying, etc.

But what if you are advocating a candidate or party as a volunteer, particularly if it is at your own initiative? What if furthermore, the advocating of said candidate or party in no way diminishes the resources of the university, or diminishes resources at a level consistent with any other allowed personal use? Overuse and abuse of the computer network (spamming, or hogging lots of bandwidth) is banned for any reason, and you didn't mention that in your email, so I don't interpret that to be what you are addressing.

Am I banned from writing an email to a friend advocating a candidate while in a University Library at a University computer? What about using my own computer, but using the University network? Can I use my UNC email address to sign up for updates from one of the campaigns -- surely that's acceptable? What about updates from some other news source (CNN, Washington Post, Fox News) about the campaign? What if I forward these to others (in small scale, just a few email addresses), or donate to a campaign using my own money, but through the university network? I think at a base level of interpretation of your email, you are banning all of the above activities I mention if they take place in a University building, on the University network, or on a University email account. Do you really mean to ban such activities? I don't see how emailing someone about the campaign is different from emailing them about what happened on campus last Friday night.

Do you intend to ban such activities if they are advocating something other than politics, such as a particular religious expression, support for rights of marginalized peoples, criticism of the government? Surely not.

Please clarify your email for all of us, especially if you do not mean all the things I have construed you to mean.

Thank you,
Michael

What do you think?

CSA pizza

2008-07-29T12:16:00.003-07:00

I made sourdough pizza crust last night as we had some friends over who just got married. Since our CSA is stocking us with lots of veggies, many went on the pizza. The sauce was sauteed (fresh, non seasoned) garlic with diced tomatoes added and cooked for a while, then honey and balsamic vinegar (tasty sauce!). Then I put garlic, 5-minute steamed broccoli, tomatoes, pesto, and basil in varying combinations on 3 pizzas.

No leftovers.

No surprise.

My son ate three pieces of pesto pizza, which is lately a favorite of his.

It was joyous, with wine that they brought and port afterwards to toast the newlyweds.

Defensive Strategy in Tennis

2008-07-26T13:42:00.002-07:00

I have been thinking about defensive strategy in tennis lately. The as the mantra goes "good defense beats good offense." But is this true in tennis?

In other sports, defense is fairly intuitive: in baseball your defense is in your pitching and fielding; in soccer, hockey, and basketball it's in stealing the ball/puck and defending the goal; in football and rugby it's tackling the other players before they reach a first down/touchdown.

In tennis, I think playing good defense is first defending your side of the net by getting to your opponent's shots and getting them back over the net. This is part of the style of play of Rafael Nadal, and it gets into the opponent's head, forcing them to go for more and more risky shots in order to win the point, and eventually they make mistakes. It's also labeled counterpunching.

But there is another style of defense I think, akin to good pitching in baseball. This style of defense is less thought about and talked about, but I think still very effective. You hit the ball in a way that makes it hard on your opponent to be aggressive. This involves, generally shots like low slice shots (Steffi Graf) that don't bounce high enough to give your oppenent much to work on. Also, hitting the ball deep into the court (anyone ever heard that from a tennis coach?) prevents your opponent from stepping up into the court, which would expand his/her angles for a shot. It can also involve hitting the ball more into the middle of the court for players that love creating angles from the corners or just in general hitting in a way that your opponent doesn't like (not enough pace, varied spins, moon-balls).

Federer is quite good at mixing up his shot selection, making you uncomfortable. And when combined with lethal offensive weapons, no wonder he's dominated men's tennis for four years.

Sourdough best of breads? I knew that.

2008-07-08T11:10:00.001-07:00

There was a study on whole-wheat vs. white vs. sourdough bread. Guess which one won? Sourdough!

http://health.lifestyle.yahoo.ca/channel_health_news_details.asp?news_id=15727&news_channel_id=1055&channel_id=1055

Whole wheat lost, interestingly, to white bread as well as sourdough.

RG: Blake's draw opens up

2008-05-28T14:19:00.003-07:00

This is as much of a dream draw for James Blake as he could ever have wished, at least through to the Quarter-finals. His draw was good to start, not being too close to Nadal or Federer. But he did have both Tipsarevic and Berdych in his quarter, both of whom he's lost to this clay season. But they are both dismissed, and now I'm hoping and praying that he makes it through to the QF. I'm also believing firmly that posting something like this will not affect the outcome at all, certainly not jinx things. And I think if you have to face Federer, Nadal, or Djokovic on clay, you have to pick Djokovic, though that's a tall order. We'll see!

2008 <> 2007 Roland Garros

2008-05-28T06:54:00.003-07:00

So you'd think if Andy Roddick pulls out of a tournament, Americans wouldn't fare as well. But that's not the case at the 2007 Roland Garros (French Open).

2007 American results were horrifying:

Roger Federer (1)	SUI	def. Michael Russell	USA	6-4	6-2	6-4
Juan Carlos Ferrero (17)	ESP	def. Amer Delic	USA	6-7	6-3	6-3	6-4
Nicolas Almagro (32)	ESP	def. Justin Gimelstob	USA	6-4	6-4	6-4
Laurent Recouderc	FRA	def. Sam Querrey	USA	6-7	2-6	6-0	7-6	6-3
Diego Hartfield	ARG	def. Robby Ginepri	USA	6-4	1-6	5-7	6-4	6-2
Gilles Simon	FRA	def. Vincent Spadea	USA	2-6	6-4	6-4	6-3
Igor Andreev	RUS	def. Andy Roddick (3)	USA	3-6	6-4	6-3	6-4
Ivo Karlovic	CRO	def. James Blake (8)	USA	4-6	6-4	7-5	7-5
Juan Pablo Brzezicki	ARG	def. Robert Kendrick	USA	6-1	3-6	6-2	6-1

Match record: 0-7	Set record: 9-27

2008 American results are much better:
Roger Federer	SUI (1)	def. Sam Querrey	USA	6-4	6-4	6-3
Julien Benneteau	FRA	def. Vincent Spadea	USA	6-4	6-4	3-6	3-6	6-3
Robby Ginepri	USA	def. Donald Young	USA	6-2	3-6	7-6	6-2
Luis Horna	PER	def. Scoville Jenkins	USA	6-4	5-7	6-3	6-0
Marty Fish	USA	def. Agustin Calleri	ARG	6-7	6-4	6-2	6-4
James Blake (7)	USA	def. Rainer Schüttler	GER	6-4	6-1	7-6
Bobby Reynolds	USA	def. Thierry Ascione	FRA	7-6	4-6	6-3	6-2
Wayne Odesnik	USA	def. Guillermo Canas (29)	ARG	7-6	7-6	7-6
Juan Ignacio Chela	ARG	def. John Isner	USA	2-6	3-6	7-5	6-3	6-4

Match record: 5-5	Set record: 21-18

In 2007 and 2008, Americans did OK in the first set. The difference is after that. In 2007, they are 3-6 and 1-8 in 2nd and 3rd sets, and "oh-for" in 4th and 5th. In 2008, they went 6-4,6-4,4-3,0-2 in the 2nd through 5th sets. Still not working in the 5th, but 2-4 is much better. Perhaps they have increased their grit, which is really needed in these long matches of the Grand Slams.

George Will, Barack Obama, and Socrates

2008-05-02T14:39:00.020-07:00

I was recently forwarded an article that George Will wrote about Mr. Obama's statements, trying to use a Socratic method to trap him in his own claims. Unfortunately, Newsweek isn't making this article public, and I probably can't legally attach it to this blog. So I'll have to summarize Mr. Will's point about Mr. Obama's point and then respond. Sorry for the lack of context, maybe I can link to the article later if it becomes available.

Heart and Judging

Mr. Will quotes Mr. Obama as saying "We need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old."

Mr. Will responds: Should a judge side with whichever party in a controversy stirs his or her empathy? ... Should other factors-- say, the language of the constitutional or statutory provision at issue-- matter?

Mr. Will isn't directly saying that Mr. Obama thinks judges should judge "by heart," but he's making that implication. I think Mr. Obama would say that empathy is important, that it is not the only important issue. This argument from Mr. Will is less the Socratic Method than Strawman Method.

Insurance company profits

Mr. Obama: "The insurance companies, the drug companies, they're not going to give up their profits easily when it comes to health care."

Mr. Will: "Why should they? Who will profit from making those industries unprofitable?"

Me: Mr. Obama's statement implies, to my mind, the giving up of some of their profits. Mr. Will seems to be creating a strawman once again, painting Mr. Obama as saying they should "become unprofitable" which is to say, have no profit. That's not how I interpret Mr. Obama's statement, perhaps some context would help. Back to Mr. Will's question: Why? The reason for less profit (not no profit) is, simply enough, that the US Health Care system is in bad shape. Insurance costs are too high. People are too unhealthy. Far too many are uninsured. Something has to happen, which, in my opinion (I'm safe since I'm not running for office), will probably take taxation, government insurance, reduced profit for insurance and drug companies, and people choosing to live in more healthy lifestyles. If I were in the US at my current job, I'd have to shell out $400-$700 per month for my family, and perhaps be responsible for the first $400 of my costs per year. Canadian system: $100 per month (whole family) and no copays. Who should benefit? All Americans.

Exxon profit

Mr. Obama: [Exxon's profit of $40,600,000,000 annoys me.]

Mr. Will: Do you know that its profit, relative to its revenue, was smaller than Microsoft's and many other corporations'? [emphasis mine]

Me: 40.6 billion just looks a lot smaller than 40,600,000,000. It's an enormous amount or anything, including dollars profit. Mr. Will seems more comfortable in comparing it to Exxon's revenue, their gross receipts. Well, by that logic Exxon's profit is probably less (relative to revenue) than my high-school job when I had my own business mowing lawns-- 85% of my revenue was profit. What is Mr. Will's point? They have a smaller margin than some? Nifty. This is a cheap economists trick which doesn't fool me. I think Mr. Obama's point is that for an industry that basically writes federal energy policy (or if they don't Dick Cheney won't let us know who does) and says it requires large tax breaks to operate, it's astonishingly profitable.

Mr. Will: And that reducing ExxonMobil's profits will injure people who participate in mutual funds, index funds and pension funds that own 52% of the company?

Me: Mr. Will continues to be slippery. He doesn't come out and say "I like Exxon and they should do whatever they want, because I am a shareholder and they're making me more wealthy," but this seems to be his implication. He is right, that if Exxon's profits tumble, the market and lots of investors (normal people, mostly) will be "injured" to use his word, or will lose money. But this "injury" could well be justifiable, which is likely what Mr. Obama would say, especially if it meant an America less dependent on oil, an America pouring less of its money into cars, an America contributing less to climate change, an America with more livable cities, towns, suburbs, and rural areas with more smaller shops closer to homes with more jobs for more people, and less time spent in commuting.

Me: It's easy for me to say I'd support less profit for Health Insurance Companies or Oil Companies, because I don't work for them. I admit that it would be a lot harder if it were my job that would be lost if things were to change. But for the good of the entire country, we are all going to have to make sacrifices if things are to improve with respect to our health and oil. I doubt I will relish the sacrifices I have to make, but the alternative is to pass worse consequences to ourselves later and to our children. And I feel that the well-off (of which I am a part) should bear more of the burden than the less-well-off. If we don't work to make that happen, the poor will bear the brunt of it, as they always do. When Creation is harmed, it is the poor who suffer first and hardest. When the economy is wrecked by people who are raking in huge sums while passing along significant costs to everyone ("externalities") (and there are plenty of worse offenders than Exxon, housing speculators and even worse grain speculators come to mind), it is the poor who suffer first and hardest. There is a difference between my word "suffer" and Mr. Will's word "injury."

Increase not the tax on the ~$150K police officer and teacher

Mr. Will: You [Mr. Obama] favor eliminating the cap on earnings subject to the 12.4 percent Social Security tax, which now covers only the first $102,000. A Chicago police officer married to a Chicago public-school teacher, each with 20 years on the job, have a household income of $147,501, so you would take another $5,642 from them. Are they undertaxed? Are they rich?

Me: I have often wondered percent of American's make how much money. After Googling for a while, it's still not too clear to me. The information on a census page for 2006 showed stats up to $100,000 per household, but stopped after that. A surprising 19% of households made over $100,000 in 2006. But Mr. Will's surprising example would fall still well over that line. Extrapolating from the data on the census site, it seems that this couple makes more than 94% of American households. In my mind, that puts them in the higher tax brackets. This is hardly a "middle class" family, though Mr. Will doesn't claim that they are, but he seems to allude to it through their job titles.

Me, still: Are they undertaxed? They probably don't feel that way. Mr. Will doesn't seem to. But Social Security faces huge problems in shortfalls, and this would be one small way of trying to bridge that gap, rather than just ignore it.

Me, still (hey, it's my blog): Are they rich? Absolutely. Or they have the opportunity to be rich--they might give away 95% their (post-tax) money to charity or they might gamble it all away, so like the fool be soon parted from it. But compared to what people throughout the country have, they are rich. The world: really really rich. I don't know what Mr. Obama would say, probably something different since he's running for office.

The Diplomatic Hammer

Mr. Will: You denounce President Bush for arrogance toward other nations. Yet you vow to use a metaphorical "hammer" to force revisions of trade agreements unless certain weaker nations adjust their labor, environmental and other domestic policies to suit you. Can you define cognitive dissonance?

Me: This is an excellent point by Mr. Will. Mr. Obama's position seems positive from the left side of the political spectrum because it is using US power to leverage some good for the laborers and poor of other countries, who are abused in sweatshops and come into contact with all sorts of pollution to keep me supplied with cheap electronic gadgets that I think are cool, cheap clothes that I too often fail to find time and energy to mend, and cheap natural resources so I can fly for cheap. But it's true that "hammering" other nations is arrogant, unpleasant, and likely to be abused, whether that's to make things look a bit rosier for the US in the Middle East or trying to protect foreign workers and make their companies operate on more of the same rules that "our companies" should be operating under. (Does "our companies" mean anything anymore? I mean companies that operate/employ in the US, but so many are global.)

Mammon

Mr. Will: You want "to reduce money in politics." In February and March, you raised $95 million. See prior question.

Me: This is also an excellent point. Mr. Will certainly saved the best for last. Mr. Obama would probably argue that in order to change the influence of money in politics, one must first be elected. He would also likely argue that he is funded by a large number of smaller donors (his website currently tells of 1,484,322 people who have contributed money, impressive, but still less than 0.5% of Americans). I would love to see him do the amazingly crazy: give away that money to organizations that are doing the things he advocates and stop throwing it all away on TV ads and phone calling stuff that doesn't really change minds anyway. From now on, he and his supporters could just speak their minds to their networks of friends and do interviews with bloggers and the others in the media. It's be a huge publicity stunt, too.

More reflection

Getting away from those two, I think that my e-mailing friend had a really good point that it's interesting that nothing was said in Mr. Will's article about Iraq. We have a political system that creates these inane situations. After months of campaigning in a changing climate of voter opinion and opponents, talking all the time, who wouldn't be liable to being accused of cognitive dissonance? Only the very wealthy, extremely ambitious, well-connected, unbelievably fortunate ever get a shot at being president. Mr. Obama is all of these things, though perhaps less so than others. And his being the likely Democratic nominee is really quite a feat. But where are the reluctant, capable leaders, the King Davids? But even that didn't turn out so well, as power does corrupt. That's one of the reasons I hate seeing so much power consolidated onto this one office as we have seen under Bush-- who can resist being changed by it? And I don't mean changes like they mean it here.

Like most of our really entrenched, difficult problems, I don't think that there is a silver bullet to this. It's not Mr. Obama, of that I'm sure. Though it's also not Mr. McCain or Ms. Clinton. And it certainly wasn't Mr. Bush, though he made similar promises as Mr. Obama does, getting away from Washington status quo and being a "uniter and not a divider."

I think finding a way to break the two party system would be helpful to our politics. I heard of a system (New Zealand, I think), where representatives are allocated based on who wins each zone, but then there are also representatives who are at-large for the entire country, and these are elected proportionally on total votes, with a minimum cut-off of 10 or 15% I think. Example: Party A and B win all the zones, A with 55 seats and B with 45. Party A gets 45% of the vote, party B 30%, party C 20%, and other parties total 5%. In their system, a remaining set of seats (say 50) is allocated to Party A (23 seats), B (16 seats), and C (11 seats). That sounded interesting, as it would give more of a voice to alternative parties. But it wouldn't be THE solution.

Amateur Tennis

2008-04-29T17:36:00.000-07:00

So I've blogged about professional tennis fairly frequently. But is this where the real spirit of tennis lies? I think no. I think that the real spirit of tennis lives in amateurs who go out and hack at the ball as they have time and ability to find others to play with. When you are paid to play, it is hard not to become a mercenary. Those who play for the love of it are the ones who truly have the spirit of tennis (and perhaps a few of them are also paid to do so). As the Bible says, you can't serve God and Mammon, as you can't serve two masters, and "you can't say fairer than that.*" No wonder so many pros find it hard to continue to love the game.

I played on high school tennis team for four years, and the team won the state title each year. But then dropped off completely in college. I think some of the politics of the team aspect had bummed me out about it (younger players selected over older players because it would be more beneficial to the team in later years). And I also knew that I wasn't really going to be a superstar tennis player, which was disorienting and disappointing. A guy who lived across the street from me was much better than me, yet he was getting down on himself because he didn't think he had a shot at division I college tennis. Who then was I?

So I didn't play much in college and tried to play some since, but never with much gusto. It is hard to find someone about the same ability level, and without that it's not that much fun. But I have somewhat recently recaught this amateur love of tennis, thanks in part to finding someone who plays a similar style and ability. So we've dusted off the racquets and play once a week, indoors since our climate is predictably cold and rainy in the winter.

Maybe I'm being vain (again) in thinking that we are among the heart and spirit of the sport. But I wake up at 5:30am, get dressed in the dark so as not to wake my wife, then make coffee, eat some granola and yogurt, stumble out the door with my racquet bag (with my shoes inside it, as otherwise they'll get wet before I play). I pick up my friend, Marty, who lives a few doors down at 6:15, and we drive across town to the tennis centre to start play at 7. We park 15 minute's walk away to get free parking.

This week, the guy who was supposed to open up at 7 didn't show, so along with another regular (the only other 7am Monday morning regular), we snuck into the building through a hole in the tarp-like building. The guy who works there wasn't too happy about it, but he didn't show until 7:45, so what were we to do? Sit out in the rain for 45 minutes? No, we played, and we played well, perhaps pushed by our adrenaline at sneaking in. Perhaps because we play a game called "8 Canadians and an American" where we hit eight shots "nicely" (the Canadians), then get aggressive after that (we're both Americans living in Canada, so we see it both ways). It's a fun game because it forces you to stay consistent and then switch gears.

What is your tennis routine, if you are an amateur player? (OK, any professionals can chime in too, if you're reading this).

*Jack Aubrey, Aubrey-Maturin novels, by Patrick O'Brian.

Grain, Markets, Starvation, Fuel

2008-04-27T08:53:00.002-07:00

The Post has a great summary article on what is happening to poor people because of moderate increases in prices of grains:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/26/AR2008042602041.html

It was bad enough when people were speculating on housing, driving its price up. I always thought this quite odious- to be altering the price of a necessity for people for the purpose of making a profit. But to do this on FOOD?!!?!??! Monstrous.

The glim bright side in such a situation would be that farmers might actually start being able to make a living, but it seems most of the profit is being taken on the middle-men trading stage, so that's not so much the case, but appears to be increasing farmers' income some.

Most ironic line:

"Some are even trying to grow their own vegetables."

Let us hope that in twenty years we aren't so out of touch with food that someone writes in the newspaper, "Some are even trying to cook their own food."

And doubly horrible that one of the chief food problems in the US is too much food. Lord, have mercy.

Davydenko's Breakthrough

2008-04-06T12:38:00.007-07:00

It's weird to write that someone has just had a breakthrough when they've been in the top 10 of men's tennis since June 6, 2005, and in the top 5 since October 30, 2006, peaking at #3 for a total of 16 weeks. Rankings history here.

But Davydenko had a breakthrough this week. Like my favorite player, James Blake, he has earned high rankings despite not winning any grand slams or even being a contender. Davydenko has earned his high rankings because Federer and Nadal have won and been finalists in most of the grand slams, and consistently being in the QF and SF of big tournaments. He did win the Paris Masters Series event in 2006 (kudos deserved), but that was an event where all the big names qualified for the Masters Cup pulled out (Federer, Nadal, Nalbandian, and Roddick didn't show, and Gasquet and Haas withdrew during the tournament). He faced Ancic (#11) and Robredo (#7) but no one else in the top 20. (Hello, he double-bagelled C. Rochus in the 2nd round, wow.)

Davydenko, it could be said, does well because he wins the matches he is supposed to win. But he doesn't pull the upset so often. In fact, he has the worst record against the top 5 of anyone currently in the top 10:

Federer: 44-19 (70%)
Nadal: 16-11 (59%)
Djokovic: 7-10 (41%)
Davydenko: 2-22 (8%)
Ferrer: 9-17 (35%)
Roddick: 12-24 (33%)
Nalbandian 13-18 (42%)
Gasquet: 3-13 (19%)
Blake: 9-25 (26%)
Berdych: 5-14 (36%)

His records against top 10 players is not great. Here's what the matrix looked like before Shanghai 2006:

	Federer	Nadal	Ljubicic	Roddick	Davydenko	Robredo	Nalbandian	Blake
Federer	--	2-6	10-3	11-1	8-0	6-0	7-6	5-0
Nadal	6-2	--	3-1	1-1	0-0	3-0	0-0	0-2
Ljubicic	3-10	1-3	--	3-5	2-2	4-1	3-2	4-1
Roddick	1-11	1-1	5-3	--	4-0	7-0	3-1	6-2
Davydenko	0-8	0-0	2-2	0-4	--	1-1	2-4	0-4
Robredo	0-6	0-3	1-4	0-7	1-1	--	2-3	1-3
Nalbandian	6-7	0-0	2-3	1-3	4-2	3-2	--	0-0
Blake	0-5	2-0	1-4	2-6	4-0	3-1	0-0	--

Davydenko (and Robredo) didn't have winning records against anyone. Davydenko was "oh-for" against Federer (plenty of company there), Roddick, and Blake. Unluckily he got two of them in his group that year (Blake was lucky and got the 3 guys he had winning records against and not the 3 guys he had losing records against.)

For Davydenko, it gets worse by the end of 2007, as he adds Nadal to the "oh-for" group and against the other guys are still "oh-for", but he has a great record against Gonzales.

But now, in Miami, he beats Roddick and Nadal for the first time, and wins a big trophy for the first time when at least half of the top 10 players are in the draw. So this is a huge breakthrough for him, and I am very happy for him.

Why now? He had a surgery at the end of last year, which slowed his serve in the Davis Cup final, so perhaps the surgery fixed something. The investigation into the Poland match finished. He switched to a new racquet. And he's just hot.

This is good for tennis: a big breakthrough. And there are gladly a lot of them now. Marty Fish broke through in Indian Wells (first Master's Series final since 2003 and second overall, plus first win over Federer). Roddick's win in Dubai was huge (beating Nadal and Djokovic along the way and Federer this week), though that's not a breakthrough, but the best news for him in a long time. Kei Nishikori, though ranked 288, came out of nowhere and won Delray Beach. Djokovic won his first Grand Slam in Australia.

The curse of Federer

2008-04-05T13:46:00.007-07:00

I just discovered something interesting about Roger Federer. You don't want him on your side of a bracket. "Duh!" you reply, but aside from the fact that few people manage to beat him, those that do fare poorly afterward.

His last 8 losses are (with most recent first):

Tourn	Round	Date	Opponent	Opponents next match(es)
Miami	QF	Apr 2008	Roddick	Lost in SF to Davydenko
Indian Wells	SF	Mar 2008	Fish	Lost in Finals to Djokovic
Dubai	1 r	early Mar 2008	Murray	Beats Verdasco in 2r, but loses to Davydenko in 3r
Australian Open	SF	Jan 2008	Djokovic	Beats Tsonga in F, but loses to (withdrew) Davydenko in Davis Cup next
Masters Cup	RR	Nov 2007	Gonzales	Loses next RR to Roddick and also Davydenko
Paris	2 r	early Nov 2007	Nalbandian	Won tournament
Madrid	F	Oct 2007	Nalbandian	Lost in 1r of next tournament (Basel) to Wawrinka
ATP Canada (Montreal)	F	Aug 2007	Djokovic	Lost to Moya in first match in Cincinnati

It's tough enough to beat Federer, but also tough to keep winning after beating him. Explanation? It's not that the next player is unbeatable. Many are very beatable. It's probably too much to defeat the world #1 who seems so unbeatable, and not dwell on it too much. It's such a big deal, the players lose focus on their next match. Also, whoever is up next is probably so relieved not to face Federer, they come out swinging boldly and with lots of confidence - that matchup is much better than facing Federer.

Nalbandian escapes in Paris from this curse, but he had just beaten Federer in Madrid, so perhaps it wasn't quite as big a deal mentally. Djokovic defeats Tsonga to win the Australian, but loses focus in Davis Cup play.

It's also odd that Davydenko picks up the pieces in 4 of the 7 instances on this chart (if we count him winning in RR against Gonzales).

Davis Cup 2008 QF

2008-04-03T14:13:00.004-07:00

So the quarterfinals for the Davis Cup 2008 are set. I was good in my predictions about the first round, with the exception of Serbia just not showing up against Russia.

Spain vs. Germany

I wonder where Tommy Haas is for Germany as they face Spain at home. They'd have a real shot with him, especially if Kohlschreiber shows some of his Australian Open brilliance. Not sure they have much of a shot now, but depends on who shows up for Spain. Nadal and Ferrer are listed, so you certainly have to go with Spain if they are both in the line-up. Spain has had cancellations before (last year against the US) that hurt their chances.

US vs. France

Big matchup here, with Tsonga and Gasquet vs. Blake and Roddick. Home court advantage is big. I'd say the likelihood for singles is a 2-2 split, as Blake and Roddick are both playing well now, but so is Tsonga in particular. The order of play will be influential, if one side can go up 2-0, that's huge. If I'm US I want Roddick vs. Gasquet first. If I'm France, I want Tsonga vs. Blake. If either happens, the other will happen later that day, obviously. Blake beat Gasquet a few weeks ago. The Bryans are the chance to be the difference, but Llodra and Clement are no cakewalk.

Czech vs. Russia

The Czech team is very solid here, so I'm going with a Czech upset, even though it's in Moscow. Davydenko is playing better as of late, but Youzhny is hit-or-miss. Berdych and Stepanek are solid players, and their doubles team is quite good, too. Is this just wishful thinking? Maybe.

Argentina vs. Sweden

It's in Argentina on clay. Enough said. They'll win. Nalbandian and Cañas are brilliant players that will keep the rising Söderling busy, and they are far too much for Bjorkman, no matter how much I like him.

Rye with oats

2008-03-02T15:09:00.002-08:00

Tried a nice batch this past week. I made a sponge from my starter by adding 1 cup starter, then ~2 cups rye flour and ~2 cups water. I let that sit all day.

Then (three times, well once doubled and once a bit more than singled) I took 1/2 cup water mixed with with 2+1/4 t yeast, then 1 cup of sponge, 1 T sugar (we are out of honey), 2 T oil, 1/2 t salt with 2 cups all purpose flour. Kneaded a bit, let rise 1.5-2 hours or so, baked at 350 degrees for 30 min. One loaf I added 1/4 cup oats.

All were good. We ate a loaf and a half for that meal (my house has 11 occupants, plus a guest). The rest was finished within 24 hours.

Davis Cup 2008

2008-01-27T21:23:00.000-08:00

Some thoughts on the Davis Cup 2008.

I was thinking while watching Djokovic win the Australian Open that Serbia could be a very dangerous Davis Cup team. His compatriot, Tipsarevic, took Federer to five sets and Zimonjic is a highly ranked doubles player.

Then I see they have Russia up first in the Davis Cup 2008 bracket. Hmmm, Russia could be out in round 1, if Djokovic decides to play Davis Cup.

That's the only seeded team I see falling in the first round, though. Maybe Belgium will lose.

Only three setters from QF in Aus Open '08 and US Open '07

2008-01-26T15:09:00.000-08:00

I noticed that there were only 3-set matches from the Quarterfinals on in the men's US Open 2007 last year. That pattern has continued in the Australian Open 2008 (at least through the semi-final round).

Here's a graph:

I began to wonder what's going on here. It's as if when the QF arrive, the 4- and 5- set matches just vanish. There are fewer matches, so it's possible it's just variation on a normal curve, but BOTH tournaments?

It's not just that more of the matches include guys named Federer and Nadal, who are taking everyone out in three, though at least that could be partly the cause with Federer. This Australian Open, however, both those guys lost in straight sets in the SF round.

Is it just that the initial rounds are more competitive, with guys ranked between 30 and 80 just duking it out to more? Maybe, but often the top players are involved in the longer sets in initial rounds too. They just generally have the ability to come back from it, perhaps aided by less experienced players choking once they get a set or two.

Is it because guys are getting weary as the tournament wears on and just can't mount a come-back? That may have more to do with it. I don't know the answer, but I'm curious about what others think. It is not true about Wimbledon 2007. Does it only work for hard-courts?

Links: US '07 QF | Aus '08 QF

Windows Vista: a Minor Review

2008-01-21T15:56:00.001-08:00

Here's my take on my Windows Vista on my laptop I've had since April.

What's really good:
*The Start Menu. Just press the windows key and start typing the name of a program and the list of programs filters to just ones that match what you've typed. E.g., if you type "Word" you'll see "Microsoft Word, Corel Word-Perfect, Open Office Word-Processor."
*The limited user (standard) by default. Windows XP had a admin user as default. Vista also usually allows you to enter Admin password to do things needed as admin.
*searching for stuff in the control panel. Similar to Start menu, just start typing "mouse" and the various mouse options are all that's shown.
*Breadcrumb navigation. Want to go up three directories? Just click the directory name. There is thus no more "up" button into the parent directory.

What's not so great:
*Backup. The Backups are in .zip format, which is helpful, but there is no way to specify "I just want this folder" or better yet "This folder, but not files matching these names, and not this subfolder" etc. I just search for files and copy them to a zip file for my backups.
*Folder views. With Windows XP, one click would bring up the "folders" view or hide it, same with search. With vista, you have to scroll through several options before turning these "pains" on or off. Similarly, there is no name of the folder you are in in the title area, it's just mysteriously blank. This is where I'm used to looking to see what a window is. Also, the search box takes up too much space when windows are narrow, thus you lose you breadcrumbs navigation trail. Search bar should be hide-able.
*Sidebar. What's the point? There are so few programs designed by MS for them, and few others that are signed. This is a total window of opportunity for infection, so I just leave it as calendar and clock.
*Networking controls. There are so many places to work with network settings that it gets confusing as to how you do simple things like disable your wireless card. Fortunately for me, I have a hardware switch that does this.

Windows XP Computer Maintenance

2007-12-20T19:25:00.000-08:00

Things to do when doing some Zen and the art of WinXP Maintenance:

1) Windows update: is everything patched?
2) Firefox check: is it there, is it up to date?
Check version: FF | Help | About --- Get Firefox here |
3) Flash check:
Check Flash --- Get Flash here
4) Quicktime check:
Start > Programs > QuickTime > About --- Get Quicktime here, if you must
5) Java Check if installed --- Get Java here
6) Windows Media player: test at Davis cup website: radio
7) Real player? Oh dear. - test with BBC audio Real.com

Software installation gripes

2007-03-09T12:37:00.000-08:00

I'm now installing my software onto my computer that crashed and I reinstalled Windows XP on. A few gripes to those who make software:

#1) DO NOT EVEN CONSIDER OR FOR A MOMENT LET IT ENTER INTO YOUR BRAIN to associate any file with your program without asking me first. Exhort me, encourage me, but allow me to say no.
#2) NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER put anything in the system tray without asking me.
#3) DO NOT put anything in my quick launch without asking me. I have just a few things there and don't want your crap there unless I put it there.
#4) DO NOT put anything on my desktop. Nothing. No shortcuts, no updaters, nothing!
#5) Please let me specify where in the start menu your program shall go. I am about over this as few programs do this and I have to rearrange it all at the end anyway, but come on!

Manually triggering system restore after winXP crash

2007-03-06T13:15:00.000-08:00

So my laptop crashed the other day. When I booted it up, there was an error:

"lsass.exe - invalid parameter was passed to the service."

I freaked out a bit, but was also not too upset because I had just backed up my system less than two weeks ago. And I am pretty good about backing up files that I work on a lot during the day, especially work files. So I didn't think I was going to lose much, even if I couldn't get my machine to boot up or otherwise access the hard drive.

So I googled this error message and came up with some threads in forums that didn't sound too positive at first, but then got better.

I first tried to start windows in Safe Mode, which isn't obvious how you do that (or even that it exists). Here's how. When your computer first starts up, start pressing and keep pressing F8 until there's a screen with lots of options for booting windows, including

Safe Mode
Safe Mode with networking
Safe Mode with command prompt
Last known good configuration

I tried all of these, but always the same error message.

Then I tried my Windows XP CD that came with my computer. You don't know where yours is? You should try and find it, because it's really helpful in these situations. I pressed "any" key when it asked if I wanted to boot via CD instead of hard drive. This entered windows XP setup mode. There is a recovery option that you can access by pressing R.

Here, windows asks me for the administrator password. Now, I have an account on the computer with admin rights, but it isn't the account they are interested in here. STUPID! You should be able to log in as any admin to access this. My computer never even prompted me with supplying an admin password when I got it (and when I reinstalled the OS several times since). So it rebooted when I guess wrong 3 times. Then I tried repairing the windows installation, but that didn't work either, though it changed the screen a bit (I think I may have lost SP2).

Then I tried to enter the recovery console again and this time it worked with a blank password! Then I tried to do a manual system restore with instructions from the thread I read online. I figured worst case scenario is that I have to completely reinstall the OS with the disks I got with the computer.

Manually getting system restore to work

This worked for me, but I am no expert. Do at your own risk! I am sorry if it doesn't work, but I am just sharing what worked for me.

Note: You can also buy a case for the hard drive that enables it to connect to another computer via USB and transfer files over if you think your computer is really toast. Or you can do that first before trying this.

System restore is a very powerful tool in getting your computer to work if it gets wacky on you. Windows resets itself to how it was at a restore point (which it thankfully takes restore points regularly). Problem is, if windows can't boot, you can't use this tool. Or can you? Turns out you can, but you have to do all the work yourself, here's how:

Enter recovery console, other otherwise access the hard drive at command prompt. A boot disk (floppy) may well not be good enough, as most windows XP systems have hard drives in the NTFS format, not FAT or FAT32 which can be read with those disks (which are MS-DOS). So you need either the recovery console or another hard drive with Windows XP on it (that isn't a great option on laptops, but can work on desktops), or a program called ntfsdos that is shareware. I used the recovery console, which you can find out more about from Microsoft.

In the recovery console, you only have access to the windows directory (c:\windows, usually), its subdirectories, and other system directories. This is great, because you want to access C:\system volume information. This is where the data from system restore points is. These have been copied out of the windows configuration directory at different points in time. You can manually restore the system by copying them back into the right place, here's how:

In C:\system volume information, there is a directory called _restore{some-long-set-of-characters}, and within that are directories named RP## with the ## increasing as you have more restore points. To get here, type this at the command prompt (which now should say C:\windows).

cd ..
cd "system volume information"
cd _resto~1
dir

This lists all the RP directories. Pick the one that is dated before your system messed up that is the highest number. If the number was 160, then type this:


cd RP160
cd snapshot

Then you want to copy some files here into the windows directory, but first you copy these files to a new directory so nothing gets removed from system restore. I'm calling anything that I modify iRestore or file.iRestore as this isn't something used by windows already.


mkdir iRestore
copy _registry_user_.default iRestore
copy _registry_machine_security iRestore
copy _registry_machine_software iRestore
copy _registry_machine_system iRestore
copy _registry_machine_sam iRestore

Then, you go into that new directory called iRestore and rename the files to what they will be called in the windows direcory:


cd iRestore

ren _registry_user_.default default
ren _registry_machine_security security
ren _registry_machine_software software
ren _registry_machine_system system
ren _registry_machine_sam sam

Now you will need to rename the offending files in c:\windows\system32\config and replace them with the new files. I'd go there and rename them at the command prompt like this:


cd C:\windows\system32\config
ren default default.irestore
ren security security.irestore
ren software software.irestore
ren system system.irestore
ren sam sam.irestore

Then go back to the system restore section and copy the files into the windows config:


cd C:\System~1\_resto~1\PR[##]\snapshot\iRestore

copy default c:\windows\system32\config
copy security c:\windows\system32\config
copy software c:\windows\system32\config
copy system c:\windows\system32\config
copy sam c:\windows\system32\config

Now you have restored the system and just need to reboot it. You should be able to do that by typing exit at the prompt. If all else fails, you can turn off your computer. Congrats! When it boots back up you should have the system restored to what it would have been at an earlier time.

Modernity and the Death Penalty

2007-01-22T14:50:00.000-08:00

When I went to Germany, I remember being asked by one of my housemates, as we discussed the death penalty, if I supported it. Having only lived in the US, where it is often allowed, and where we heard only the reasons why the US had the death penalty in High School government classes, I answered yes. Ingo was shocked.

"But you are a Christian, how can you support the death penalty?" he asked.

Indeed how?!?! I have met more people and learned more about the subject since then. I have a number of friends who go to the places where people are executed in our country to protest. One pleaded with a police officer: "They are killing a man in there. This is horrible, we have to stop it!"
Police officer: "I can't do that."
My friend: "But you could! It will continue until people like you and me decide to do just that: stop it."

I have a friend now, who is from Iraq. His family has been destroyed by Saddam Hussein and I don't mean that figuratively. He has run from Iraq, but when Saddam came to trial, he says:

"I don't understand. Why would you kill him. He's an old man. Put him someplace where he can do no more harm. Let God kill him."

I think my friend is wise. Even in George Bush's opinion, the leaked footage of Hussein's trial is just below [less] Abu Ghraib in terms of encouraging terrorism.

So I decided to do some research on what countries still allow the death penalty. Sudan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea, Libya, Saudi Arabia, China, Cuba, Somalia, Vietnam, Rwanda, Pakistan, Palestine, and the United States. Wow, that's some kind of company!

In fact, there are only three countries that are industrialized democracies that execute people: Japan, South Korea, and the United States.

It's not cheaper (endless appeals in court), it's not an effective deterrent, it's not a positive thing for society. 18 states don't execute currently (Kansas may start again, though). Why not all 50?

Info:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777460.html
and
http://www.religioustolerance.org/executh.htm

Maps:

maps from religioustolerance.org

Sourdough image

2006-11-08T16:32:00.000-08:00

This is some sourdough I made, the left loaf has squash in it and is a bit sweeter.

Sourdough Pizza

2006-11-08T16:06:00.000-08:00

So I seem to never write in this blog and when I do it seems never to be about sourdough. So here's proving both points wrong, at least for today.

I made sourdough pizzas on Monday which werethe best I'd ever made. Due to living in a community house with 7 adults, 3 children, 1 unborn child, 1 cat, and 1 dog, I decided to make four pizzas. Two usually sufficed in our last house for us and another family, but this is a different scale. And leftovers are never unwelcome, least of all pizza leftovers.

Since I tutor from 4-5:30, I needed to get going really early on the pizza, and would prefer to be cooking earlier anyway, as I'm better then and the kitchen and downstairs are less zany. So I got some sourdough out and made a sponge (1 cu. sourdough starter + 3 cups water + 3 cups flour) on Sunday night.

On Monday morning I made the dough (equal parts sponge and flour with a little salt and olive oil). I forgot to add whole wheat flour at the point, darn! And I didn't seem to have enough for four pizzas. So I asked my wife to get another frozen pizza crust (unbaked) when she was out, which she willingly did, along with toppings.

So the dough rested for the morning of Monday and I made them into pizza shaped shells after lunch. They then sat until after tutoring at 5:30pm. This allowed the dough to actually rise, which was great. The dough was less dense, more airly than usual. I was happy that my dough did better than the store-bought one, even though it was on the pizza stone (we only have one, and don't know where it came from).

The stone isn't seasoned and this is most of the problem. The pizza stone has a wooden circular sheet with a handle that is excellent for lifting the pizza off the pan/stone and cutting, then returning for serving (since I needed it more). Nothing cuts pizza so well as an ulu knife.

I had a problem coming up with ingredients. I finally arrived at 1/2 sausage (for the meat eaters in our house)- 1/2 cheese (for the children who don't eat anything unlike my son); tomato and mushroom (the standby, I love that); tuna and olives (thanks Mom, her idea); and pesto and sundried tomato (my wife's idea on the sundried tomatoes, and also her potent pesto).

It was a hit, and everyone had plenty, plus plenty the next day.

Sourdough success!

Torching cars is worse than millions in fraud?

2006-07-05T12:03:00.000-07:00

Jeff Luers wrongly destroyed 3 trucks at dealership in a crime that was described as "eco-terrorism." For this, he now serves 22+ years in jail. No one was hurt in the arson.
More info.

Compare this to Andrew Fastow, who wrongly committed fraud of millions of dollars in the Enron scandal. He had to pay back some of the cash he made in the deal and serves a ten year sentence.
More info.

What gives?

Devastating Poultry Factories in the South

2006-02-22T07:44:00.000-08:00

Factory farming should be made illegal within 20 years, or so predicts the Whole Foods owner. All that is needed is to make known what these things are, and I think people's disgust will propel such legislation before too long. There will be "economic downsides" to such legislation, but these CAFOs (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations) are:

A breeding ground for Avian Flu and who knows what other types of diseases. Too many organisms, too concentrated.

Destructive to the people who work and live there. They earn relatively little, are exposed to arsenic and other serious hazards. This is cruel and unusual.

Devastating to our earth- the earth that gives us food and sustains our lives. ALL of our lives. Runoff from waste and carcasses, chemicals and additives that have passed through the chickens, fouling of rivers... the list goes on and on

All that so our chicken prices can be a bit lower. Come on, let's pay twice as much for real chicken rather than stoop to this immoral and unconscionable activity. To advance such a system for one's own profit, while harming people directly and indirectly, as well as the earth and creating possilities for disease outbreaks-- what else could this be but treason?

More from Grist here

And people actually ask us why we only buy free range eggs!

Unsafe in Europe, probably OK here

2006-02-20T08:12:00.000-08:00

There's an interesting trend in what's healthy and what's not, when it comes to geography. If it's unsafe in Europe, just bring it across the Atlantic to the US and it'll be just fine.

I've known for a while that Europeans have rules against certain hormones (called rBGH or recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone) being given to cattle for increasing milk production, as they are cancinogenic and can cause infected udders and lots of pain for the animals. Ben and Jerry's opposes it use. Canada also bans the substance, but the US Dairy industry assures Americans that it's safe. Safe for profits is more like it. With our economy the way it is, a slight price advantage is the difference between succeeding along with competition and going bankrupt, so you can't find milk in the US without this hormone (at least not easily- labels aren't required apparently). Fox News (of all people) had 2 reporters working on this story. A large company urged the brass there to cancel the story, and it was...

Now, I find that the FDA is allowing Carbon monoxide to be added to meat in the US, which prevents it from turning brown, even if the meat has spoiled. And no labelling is required there, either. This is the same molecule that is odorless and deadly when in the air- we even had a detector in our basement growing up to warn us if it was present in any significant quality. Hmmm, the Europeans have deemed this unsafe too.

Maybe Americans are just OK with the idea of getting cancer, as long as it means profits.

Ahh, the price of cheap energy: coal

2006-02-16T14:20:00.000-08:00

The full story here

Apparently, the cheapest way to get coal out of mountains is to remove the top of the mountain, and dump everything that you don't want, including boulders, rocks, and carcinogenic coal compounds, into the surrounding valleys.

The solution to summer time auto-greenhouse effect

2006-02-15T08:42:00.000-08:00

Problem #1: Energy shortage, and pollution from "traditional" energy sources.

Problem #2: Exposed cars get too hot in the sun in the summer time.

Neato solution: The picture above, which in case it's been removed, is a parking lot with a solar-energy (PV) roof. It's owned by the USPS in San Francisco, and they predict it will pay for itself in 7 years. Full Story

Minor problem #1: People say solar cells are ugly.
Solution: Put them over things that are uglier (Parking lots).

Cool stuff.

I was going to stop there, but a more elegant, simpler solution is this:

WALKING

Pollution free, solar powered (yes, you are solar powered, because you eat stuff which gets its energy from the sun (plants), or from things that get eat those things (herbivores), or rarely from things that eat the things which eat the other things that get their energy from the sun (carnivores)), and also keeps you in shape, which helps lead to a better life.

phishing - detect it!

2006-02-01T07:39:00.000-08:00

There has been a lot about phishing lately in the news, but I haven't seen much teaching folks how to detect and prevent it. Here are some ideas.

1. Sceptism. Most phishing promises things that are really unlikely.

Dear BancorpSouth Client,

This is your official notification from BancorpSouth that the service(s) listed below will be deactivated and deleted if not renewed immediately. Previous notifications have been sent to the Billing Contact assigned to this account. As the Primary Contact, you must renew the service(s) listed below or it will be deactivated and deleted.

Renew Now your BancorpSouth Bill Pay and Services.

If you are not enrolled at Web Banking, please enter your SSN as Username, and account number as Password.

SERVICE : BancorpSouth with Bill Pay.

Thank you, sincerely,

Tricia Doyle
Customer Service

Would this company (even if I banked with them) really cancel my account? Why do they need all this info that they already have? Suspect emails as being phony and you'll catch more of them as phony.

2. Never follow links from emails to any place where you enter any personal information. Type the URL manually in the address bar of your Firefox browser (or some other browser, if you must). They are ususally short URLs, but make sure you type them correctly. Better, bookmark them, and use the bookmarks. Some phishers try to get similar domains so that when you type "mycerditcard.com" you see a site that looks the same as "mycreditcard.com". Links in your email can say Get an IBM but take you somewhere different (click the link). Even worse, they often say things like www.ibm.com which looks like it would take you to IBM's web site, but it doesn't. Also, they will take similar sounding URLs to try to trick you, too. URLs like www.ibmcomputers.com sounds ok, but it is NOT IBM- who knows who it is. Don't click on the email links. The previous example sends people to:
http://???.nctu.edu.tw/bancorpsouthonline.com/CheckSession.php

The address is clearly bogus, can you see that? The .tw at the end of the first bit signals the country code, which is here Taiwan. It is in no case the bank's real website.

3. Emails are not necessarily FROM who they say they are from. There should be a way to look at the full email headers in your email. I can do this with GMail, as well as my UNC email. You can do this with hotmail, but it's clunky (surprise!!). Go to Options (upper right corner of the screen with your emails), then choose "Mail Display Settings" then set message headers to "full" then click OK. Now you'll see lots of weird headers with your email:


X-Sieve: cmu-sieve 1.3
Return-Path: 
Received: from email.unc.edu (mgate2.isis.unc.edu [152.2.1.95])
    by mailserv0.isis.unc.edu (8.12.2/8.12.1) with ESMTP id k1114G0a000372
    for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:04:16 -0500 (EST)
>>>>>Received: from gs0.media3.net ([63.74.122.251])<<<<<<
    by email.unc.edu (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k11141w4014944
    for <[MyEmailAddress]@email.unc.edu>; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:04:12 -0500 (EST)
Received: by gs0.media3.net (8.9.3/8.9.2) id UAA12769;
    Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:00:03 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:00:03 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20060203310100.UAA12769@gs0.media3.net>
To: [MyEmailAddress]@email.unc.edu
From: BancorpSouth Online Banking <customercare@bancorpsouthonline.com>
Subject: New message from BancorpSouth
Reply-To: BancorpSouth Online Banking <customercare@bancorpsouthonline.com>
Content-type: text/html

Note that the "from" says "bancorpsouthonline.com" but there is nothing about that in the rest of the header. Instead, the header says it comes from "Received: from gs0.media3.net ([63.74.122.251])" (I added the pointers there) which is not the bank. This may be a bit of overkill, but it is helpful in describing why you shouldn't click on links from you email, nor trust the "from:" line in email. This is stuff not a lot of people know.

"Renewables" vs. Exxon

2006-02-01T07:22:00.000-08:00

In Pres. Bush's State of the Union, he gleamed that:

Keeping America competitive requires affordable energy. And here we have a serious problem: America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world.

The best way to break this addiction is through technology. Since 2001, we have spent nearly $10 billion to develop cleaner, cheaper and more reliable alternative energy sources. And we are on the threshold of incredible advances.

[my emphasis - who knows if that money includes nuclear, which is not alternative energy, not clean, not safe, not cheap if you include all the costs related to keeping the nuclear waste well handed for 10,000 years.]

$10 billion over 5 years stacks up... not so well against what Exxon earned (one company) in one year on just oil: $36 billion in one year [stockholder's and CEO's emphasis]. Exxon doesn't attempt other types of energy, and is trying to get out of obligations related to the Exxon Valdez too.

All this while most scientists are pointing to horrible consequences about climate change, that the U.S. won't deal with. Or will deal with it "on a voluntary basis." Because it's not possible/bad for the economy to mandate CO2 limits. But the UK has cut its emissions, and without adding nuclear plants. And what about the consequences of global warming on the economy, since that seems to be all some people care about?? Florida floods, more hurricanes (do those cost money?), more erratic weather, weed plant species increasing...

This is nothing new, however. Psalm 37 warns about not getting too angry over such evil, for that anger only leads to evil. "But the righteous will inherit the land forever..." but there will be a lot of work to do to fix the wounded land.

Agricultural "Efficiency"

2006-01-20T22:16:00.000-08:00

Several things have combined in my reading that I'd like to think about a bit more. I'm reading Wendell Berry's The Unsettling of America: Culture and Agriculture. This is a fabulous book in which Berry, a Kentucky farmer for decades, writes about (among other things) the very wrong direction of American agriculture toward larger farms owned and worked by fewer people and more machines. The effects of this include (some of this is him, some is me):

dying small towns and rural areas in America

an influx of people out of these areas and into cities that cannot handle the additional population

a resulting swamping of the job market in such urban areas, decrease wages (you can't demand more pay with endless newcomers swelling the cities, desperate for jobs)

a similar flooding of the housing market, increasing housing prices

a "more efficient" agricultural process, but one which relies extremely heavily on:
- Large machinery, which increases debt of farmers
- Petroleum fuels and Large corporations which manufacture and maintain the equipment
- Increased specialization toward one crop, reducing crop rotation efforts
- Removing animals from plants has resulted in a large need for costly petroleum-based fertilizers for crops and huge problems of large amounts of polluting manure, which is also highly toxic due to chemical and hormone additives to animal diets. Berry summarizes: "The genius of American farm experts is very well demonstrated here: they can take a solution and divide it neatly into two problems."
- Using all available land for cropland and rangeland, removing boundaries and margins, which previously helped farmers in many ways, including maintaining topsoil (which is being eroded at rates higher than those during the dustbowl of the 1940's in some areas)

Low prices on food goods

So, are all the negative consequences of this ever-increasing "efficiency" worth it (and I didn't even begin to mention health concerns about pesticides, milk-hormones, and crops bred to grow quickly and have length shelf lives)? Our small-scale family farms can't survive in this environment, as prices are pushed so low that only the large industrial farmers can produce crops at the prices of today. At least they do this currently, but is it sustainable? Certainly it is not, as soil takes decades to regenerate, as does the natural fertility of the soils. Now we are dependent upon the processes that have destroyed the land in the first place. The vicious cycle.

I didn't mention the rest of the world, which of course is greatly impacted by the lower prices on food. In that their farmers can't make a living (unless they mimic what our farmers do, but only a few farmers can do that, because of the large-scale operations required). So most of their farmers can't make a living in this environment.

Which brings us to points of conflict in the world. Bolivia, the poorest of South America's countries, relies on coca farming (which isn't farmed as I describe above), since other crops don't provide as much income. See this Washington Post Article on Evo Morales and Bolivia's Coca Farmers. Perhaps this is an isolated event? No, consider the Opium farmers adding to the difficulty of success against terrorism in Afghanistan.

Eating is basic to the human life. We all must eat. And farming is the way we've relied on eating for thousands of years. By industrializing farming, by treating the earth as a machine, we are destroying something so vital to our own existence.

Perhaps this is necessary, some would argue, as the population of the earth continues to sprial upwards. True, it does. But this is only delaying larger problems later, when population is even larger, and agricultural land is less, due to our current actions. So this isn't a solution. Surely, we must reduce our impact on this earth, which will mean a reduction in ease, comforts, power, and probably food too. But if we don't start doing it now, we just pass the problems on to my newborn son's generations, who instead of aiming for great things, will just be trying to ward off disaster, or to survive it.

How to buy a new computer

2005-12-07T07:55:00.000-08:00

So you're thinking about buying a new computer, but either haven't before, or would for some other reason like to know how to do so (or at least how I think you should do so)? OK, I'll share my thoughts on the matter, which are not authoritative, but it's at least a start.

When to buy

I heard someone say on the radio, that the time to buy a new computer is when you NEED a new computer. Well, since very few of us truly need a new computer, I suppose you could say "When you have substantial reasons to strongly want the use of a new computer." i.e. not a whim. i.e. not because you are frustrated with your old computer. So buy a new computer if you have such reasons, and don't have an old one (yes, the majority of the world, and loads of people in the United States and every other large "developed" nation do not own computers), or your old computer cannot be upgraded to perform as you need it to. (More on upgrading in a later blog.)

What to buy

I've always bought PCs running Windows/MS-DOS, but believe that there are very good reasons to strongly consider a Mac, or a machine to run Linux (which would also be a PC initially). Some reasons for this are better security, more customizable/different user environment, ethical/ideological reasons, etc. But, if you have strong compatibility needs with other Windows PCs (i.e. you need to run MS-Access, like me, or share files lots and have bought the MS software already), read on.

Computer Component Basic

There are 3 major components to a computer which you need to understand before beginning. These are the basis for controlling your computer, and therefore affect everything your computer does.

Processor: This is the "brain" of your computer. It does the thinking for you. Intel Pentium is a line of processors, as is Intel Celeron. AMD Athalon is another. There are all kinds of special bits of expertise one could have about processors, but for the beginner, the most important piece of information is the processor speed, which is measured in Hertz (Hz). This is a measure of how fast your processor can do a series of tasks. Now, processors are fast enough to be measured in Giga-Hertz (GHz), or 1,000,0000,000 Hz. Yes a bunch.

RAM (Memory): RAM is "Random-Access Memory" something that few computer users remember from their days of learning about operating systems and the like. This is the amount of "speedy short-term storage space" that is avaible to your computer when it is thinking about a lot of things at once. I like to think of RAM as a large table capable of holding a lot of items. When you open a program, the program has memory needs that it buts on the table-top. The more table-top space you have, the more stuff your computer can think about at the same time, because it can easily see and reach everything on the table. So, while a faster processor makes your computer faster, more RAM also makes your computer faster, as the alternative to using RAM (the table-top) is to use bits of your hard drive (a filing cabinet) which is a lot slower to use and retrieve. RAM is measured in bytes, or nowadays, millions or billions of bytes, which are Megabytes or Gigabytes (MB or GB). A byte is a series of ones and zeroes that stores the data; the more bytes, the more memory.

Hard Drive: this is the large, permanent storage area for your computer. This is where your digital pictures stay, your programs are saved, your word-processing letters are kept, etc. You can think of this as a filing cabinet, which is deep and has many folders, but is a bit harder to get at (slower) than the table-top. But it holds a heck of a lot of data. Hard drives, like RAM, are also measured in Bytes, generally Gigabytes (GB) these days. The more hard drive space you have, the more space you have to store a lot of pictures, videos, software programs, data files, etc.

Note: I prefer not to use the term Memory unless I have to. The reason is that most computer geeks use the word Memory to refer to RAM, while the average person thinks of Memory as hard-drive space. Confusing, so I use either the word RAM or hard-drive depending on what I'm talking about.

Monitors: While this is not a "core" component for a computer, as it connects to your computer most of the time (not in laptops or most Macs), I have to delve into it a bit. Monitors can make or break your computer purchase. There are 2 types of monitors currently that are widespread. The conventional CRT (Cathode-Ray-Tube, same as your TV, unless you have an LCD or plasma TV) is a cube-shaped device you will probably recognize. Some have perfectly flat screens (which is good), while others have some curavature to the glass screen (which isn't good- it distorts the images). Then there's the LCD screens, which are basically a laptop screen, encased in a stand for people who want something that takes up less space. These do take up a great deal less space, but they take up several inches of depth, a bit more than some people expect. They are also much more expensive than the CRTs, and sometimes (strangely) have lower resolution.

Resolution is the number of dots (or pixels) that your screen can display. Older machines can only display 800x600 pixels, or even less. Modern screens can be widescreens (giving dimensions in a different shape than 800x600). The more pixels, the clearer images can be. It also means most of the stuff on your screen will be smaller. You can adjust resolution on your computer to display at less resolution (bigger). You pay more for monitors that have higher resolution, especially in laptops and LCD screens. Screens are also measured for size, which is the diagonal measure from upper right to lower left corners. Flat panels usually measure the entire visible image, whereas CRTs include a bit of space that isn't really part of the screen. My 15" laptop Flat Panel is barely smaller than my 17" CRT monitor.

On to the store!

No, not quite. I think it's very useful first to ask yourself and write down on a piece of paper the needs you have for a computer (see above). Do you want to write emails and surf the web? Do you have certain programs you'll be running? Do you have access to another computer (at a friend's, the library, your workplace, an internet café) that does these tasks adequately? Then look up the specs (Processory, RAM, and hard-drive) for those computers and WRITE THEM DOWN. It's easy to remember, but even easier to forget! This will serve as a guideline for what type of computer you might need.

How do I find out the specs on a computer. Good question! The processor information is sometimes hard to find. On Windows computers, go to the desktop (close or minimize all windows or press the Windows Key (left of the spacebar a bit) and M to minimize all windows). Right click on "My Computer" (not there? then go to the start menu, look for my computer and right click on it there) and select properties. It may list the processor and speed under the general tab, and should list the RAM (which may seem a bit lower than you thought it was). To find out how big a hard drive is, double-click "My Computer" and it should show a listing of hard drives, with their total size.

To check your monitor resolution, go to start menu -> control-panel -> display. Under the settings tab, it should show you your current screen resolution, and the different options available to you if you want to change it. Get out a ruler and measure the diagonal screen size to see what size screen it is, approx.

Now, on to the store!

Well, sort of. It's a good idea to check things out online, if you can. Several reasons to do so. #1 most manufacturers sell directly online, so you can avoid the middle man. #2 pesky sales agents don't pester you. #3 you can customize your system in lots of ways, something not usually offered at stores. #4 you can compare a lot of options more quickly.

So, I'd try a few sites first, like Dell and HP/Compaq and maybe even IBM. Mac users can go to Apple's website to shop there. Then I'd make a chart that lists the various computers, with the various components (more than just the first 3), and see what starts to make sense, like this:

Computer Brand	Model	Processor	Speed	Hard Drive	RAM	CD	floppy	monitor	speakers	modem	price	rebates	tax	shipping	TOTAL net cost
Dell	Dim B110	Cel	2.53GHz	40GB	512	CDRW	no	17"CRT	no	y	419	50	25.9	99	493.9
Dell	Dim E310	P4	2.8Ghz	80GB	512	CDRW/DVD	no	17" FlatPanel	yes	y	649	0	33	24	706
Compaq	SR1020T	P4	2.93GHz	80GB	512	CDRW	no	17"CRT	no	y	690	100	34.5	65	689.5
HP	a1110y	P4	2.2.93GHz	80GB	512	CDRW	no	17"CRT	no	y	589	100	33	99	621
Dell-small bus	Dim 1100	Cel	2.53	40GB	512	CDRW	no	17"CRT	no	y	369	0	20	24	413
Dell-small bus	Dim 1100	P4	2.8	80GB	512	CDRW	no	17"CRT	no	y	590	0	31	24	645
Dell-small bus	Dim 3100	P4	2.8	80GB	512	CDRW	no	17" FlatPanel	no	y	640	0	33	24	697

Note about CD/DVD players:
Type of CD/DVD player/recorder (ie CD only, CD writer (CDRW), DVD & CD Reader (DVD ROM), or DVD/CD reader/writer (DVDRW))
If you want to watch DVD movies on your computer, you should get a DVD ROM, at least. If you want to backup data onto a CD (a good idea!) you should get a CD-RW (reader & writer). All DVD players will also play CDs, there's no need for a separate drive.

Tricks of the traders:
They love to advertise a computer with a "perfectly flat monitor" and show you a picture of a plat panel monitor. Don't be fooled. Look for "flat panel" words if you want one. Also, rebates are still taxed, and you need to fill out the forms and send them off- many people don't do this, which is why they still have rebates and don't just give an instant discount.

Go through the whole process online if you find a good deal, until you can see what this shipping is (DON'T ENTER CREDIT CARD INFO YET, as you can't buy the thing until you do).

It may become pretty obvious where the best deal is. Or, as in the above example, 2 types of computers emerge. Above, there is a more top-of-the-line computer for at least $600, then there are entry level computers in the $400s.

Final tips and thoughts

Note that "an extra hundred bucks" is 25% of the cheaper models above and 16% of the more expensive ones. It's a serious percent of the price, so careful not to load up on too many "extras" as your computer will suddenly be much more expensive.

Customizing computers online is great, because you can see how much each option costs. An extra $20 for more hard drive is probably worth it. An extra $200 to double the RAM is probably not, if the current amount will work for you. You can always upgrade RAM and hard drive later. You can also take components like CD-ROM, Modem, Mouse, Keyboard, Monitor, floppy drive, even hard drive, from another computer.

Computers have generally cost about $1000 for decent entry level computers since as long ago as I can remember looking at prices. That's changed recently as hardware has plateaued. My 4 year-old computer is still about the same as the cutting edge. But my 9 year old computer was already a dinosaur 5 years ago. Things are slowing down a bit with hardware, which is good, it means you don't have to keep buying new computers. The manufacturers have adjusted by cutting prices to entice users to buy. They no longer have as many users for whom their old computers are obsolete.

Laptops are great if you NEED to take your computer somewhere else to work. Most of the time, that place needs to be indoors and with an AC-plug if you want to do anything for any length of time. Add WiFi (internet) if you need to be online, and your options continue to shrink. Laptop disadvantages are: 1) they are not as robust, tending to break more easily, partly because 2) taking them more places means there is a greater chance for theft, droppage, coffee-spillage, etc. 3) if something does break, like a screen or keyboard, replacing it is much harder than on a desktop, 4) cost- they cost a good bit more for the same oomph as a desktop, 5) even more cost because you probably want an extended warranty, whereas you don't need one with desktop, 6) ergonomics- laptops aren't designed for long term use, as the screen and keyboard can't both be positioned well for long term use (even though I do it).

I'll blog more about this hardware plateau and the potential future direction of computing in a later blog.

That's it, happy computer buying, or not buying, which is also an option! I'll get into computer setup and keeping it secure in another blog entry.

The problem with budgets

2005-11-22T09:38:00.000-08:00

Isn't it strange that whenever someone draws up a budget, it's always SHORT? A friend thought that the reason this is the case, as well as the reason stuff seems to take longer to do than one estimated is:

Divide the task, let's say creating a blog and writing an article, into components:
1) create a blog (5 minutes)
2) read some articles online (15 minutes)
3) think about things to say about them (10 minutes)
4) compose a draft (15 minutes)

so you think the whole thing takes 45 minutes. Now, say it really takes this long:
1) 3 minutes [estimated 5 min]
2) 7 minutes [est. 15]
3) 20 minutes [est. 10]
4) 30 minutes [est. 15]
total: 60 minutes [est. 45]

So you were a miserable predicter. But you did overestimate as much as you underestimated, so things should wind up about even, right? Nope, because, and this is my friend's central idea, you tend to double and halve estimates. When your estimate of composing a draft is half as long as reality, you lose 15 minutes. You'd have to read articles in 0 minutes to make up for that. Thus, the things that take you twice as long to do make you overbudget because they drag you down more than the things that take you half as long to do.

So is this why the DC Stadium project is overbudget, as indicated in this article? And what do they do since they are overbudget?

1) It could be they are overbudget because they too are lousy estimators. But, in trying to sell their estimates, one could really argue that they were encouraged to underestimate rather than overestimate. Now, I don't know who does the estimating, but if it's the same people who are bidding on getting the job done, then this is definitely a conflict of interest. So, they are really starting off the process with 2 strikes against them (sorry, baseball pun...).

2) They are overbudget, so now what? This is the beautiful part of it all. They make the city pay for the overbudget part. Nice folks! I always hear from my friends who talk about how great the free-market system is, how people take risks and get wonderful things done, blah blah blah, but I see this as more of the norm. They are running low on their project, so they cut out parts they promised the city they'd do (parts that don't increase the value of their project, but rather decrease the harms to the city, like roads and metro stops). Now that the city has a team, and the deal has been cut, they can get away with this. Amazing. Free-market lesson #1:

Take risks and get other people to pay for your mistakes and costs you don't want to pay. Outsource the costs.

Ooh, this sounds like a good way to get rich! Seriously, how do they get away with this? Is the city of DC so desperate for a baseball team to take the risk, while others take the profits? They almost turned the deal down, maybe they should have. I have an idea- maybe I can build a house, but if IT goes overbudget, maybe the city can pay for my roof. Or, I can create a brand new shopping center, way off in the middle of trees, and after tearing out the trees, making the older shopping center go out of business, maybe the city will pay for all the new roads, because I've messed up all the traffic patterns and any woefully inadequate traffic/city planning. This happened, as far as I can tell, in SouthPointe Mall in Durham, NC.

Or, maybe I can copy Wal-Mart and refuse to pay health care for employees, saving lots of cash, and putting that onto the American taxpayer in the form of Medicaid. (This highlights part of the ridiculousness of employers providing health care for the nation- perhaps they should provide electricity too?) Or, maybe I can get Uncle Sam to clean up whatever environmental disasters I create because "it's too great a burden" on investors (this is seriously what the Bush administration is pushing with new nuclear reactors- you and I take the risks, both financial and health, while rich investors take the profit). And it's not limited to that scenario, by any means.

The other thing you should have learned from this, Free-market lession #2:

Once you've started, it's too late for your opposition to whatever you are doing.

So start that DC Stadium and tell people you ran out of money later, it'll be too late to oppose the team then! Or go ahead and start that war in Iraq, once no WMD are found, it'll be too late to undo the war... Heh heh heh. Or create a gi-normous debt and huge environmental, social, poverty problems- someone else will deal with our intentional "miscalculations."

These problems are of course not limited to a free-market system. But how can you get around them in our current system? With globalization and an obsession with competition (part of the free-market), the distance between consumer and producer is increased. Thus, I have no idea what the consequences are of my purchases, except that the cheaper item saves me money. And thus I act on this single consequence alone. So, whose stuff am I buying, given that it will be cheaper if a business exploits, steals, refuses to pay costs, "miscalculates" estimates, etc. Now if this person lived next door and I saw the REAL consequences of his/her business, I would not support his business to save 3 cents, or even $30. Obfuscate the costs and the consumer stays ignorant, supporting harms to himself.

With Molasses

2005-07-22T14:13:00.000-07:00

Today I tried a new thing with my sourdough: using molasses. It's exciting stuff, turning the bread such a rich amber color. It's been a while since I've made sourdough, I had a scare.

About 6 weeks ago, I decided to start making sourdough everyday, and leaving the starter unrefridgerated. This meant I could make lots of sourdough, and that I spent some time making bread each day (with Sundays off and a few other days, too, when there just wasn't time). When I don't make it, I either save a cup and feed it, or just refridgerate the day before.

Well, some of it went too long unrefridgerated when I went on a trip with friends, and it turned bad. It smelled not quite of rotten eggs, but in that direction. Something in the vinegary direction as far as smells are concerned. Then, my other starter, which was ok, but still out of the fridge, started smelling more and more like that. My family was visiting and I didn't want to deal with sourdough stress, so I fed it and put it back in the fridge. I haven't tried to use it again.

But my backup starter, which I used today, smells fine.

Thomasina, a friend who also makes sourdough and many other breads (who is part of my inspiration for using molasses), said that it does sour up quite a bit after a few weeks out of the fridge. She said to split the starter and feed it more to reduce the sourness. It gets alcoholy.

I also ran out of yeast, so I tried a few times just letting it rise with the sourdough as levening. Worked ok, sourer bread, and lighter, fluffier. 8-12 hours rising I allowed.

Intro to Sourdough

2005-07-07T07:55:00.000-07:00

This is my sourdough bread blog. Here, I'll post what's happening to my bread and different things I'm trying with it.