A $15,000 bike

I don’t really care that much about bike trick-riding or anything about the whole biking world, but the cinematography and editing of this video is really superb.

The end is bad, though.

Ah, the memories

Sometimes, I go to florida.arrests.org and for fun look up the county where I grew up to see how long it takes me to find someone I know – or rather, knew.

It usually does not take that long because I grew up in, let us say, less than savory conditions.

Take this one, for instance.

Arrested for battery? What a shocker.

I once chased this clown out of my house with a chainsaw when I was about 16.

Funny to think that in some video games people think it is badass to wield a chainsaw as a weapon. I’ve wielded one in real life that way. Heh.

If only I were making this stuff up. If only.

Egging me on

Some people have crack. Some people have meth. Some have heroin.

I have eggnog.

Every opportunity, I have been checking the grocery store shelves for that glorious substance to appear.

And every day, I have been disappointed.

Oh, eggnog, will you not return and bring joy to this cheerless, bleak world?

Smiling thugs or sneering thugs

As much as liberals in general will hate to hear this, I think they are mostly incorrect when they state that there is in fact a substantive difference between the Republicans and Democrats — on domestic policy, at least.

I think the one substantive domestic policy difference there is that though the Republicans and Democrats both bow completely and utterly to plutocratic interests, and produce on average about the same end results, the Democrats are less cruel about it. Sometimes in rhetoric only, and sometimes in actual application of socially regressive and oppressive policies, the Democrats don’t actually seem to feel (or at least to express) glee when they subjugate the poor, disentangle the social fabric, and in general make the world worse for everyone.

The Democrats, at least the ones who make it into office, do these things just the same as Republicans, though. Welfare "reform" was signed into law by Bill Clinton, after all.  And the Democrats are more firmly in the pockets of the copyright monopolies than the Republicans.

On the foreign affairs front, though, there is more of an argument for the superiority of Democrats (though I rarely if ever hear that argument made by actual liberals). The war in Iraq likely would not have occurred if Bush had never been elected, for instance.

That is, I agree, enough reason to always vote Democrat. However, as I noted above, I rarely ever hear that actual argument. What I hear instead is some absolute bullshit about how Democrats "care" more about the poor, about the middle class, about the working person, when in fact the evidence does not at all bear this out.

They talk a better game, but the result is the same — they just are more clever about it, as often the appearance of Democrat-led false reforms precludes and prevents real reform. This is by design. It’s sometimes referred to as “good cop, bad cop.” And just like in a police force, both cops here are tools of the system, just as are their cheerleaders.

I can understand the appeal of someone not sneering at you while ripping you off and stealing your livelihood, but that doesn’t make the theft any less larcenous, and that doesn’t make the impoverished any less poor.

Let’s not forget that when we talk about the saintliness of Democrats versus Republicans.

Loan

On the immorality of student loans.

“On a rough estimate, it would only take $70 billion of the federal budget to cover the tuition costs at every two- and four-year public college. This happens to be the sum the Pentagon wastes annually in ‘unaccountable spending.”

I once calculated that using all the money we wasted in Iraq, we could have converted the entire US to a solar power infrastructure and provided free college education to every American who wanted to attend for the next 30 years.

Shows you where our priorities truly lie.

Sleep peels

One of the biggest issues for me in fitting in with normal human society is that my circadian rhythm is not nearly earth-normal.

In an ideal world – say, I wasn’t working, had no commitments – I’d sleep 3-4 times a day, for as little as 45 minutes and as much as two hours. This would be just perfect for me. And I know this to be the case as periods when I’ve not had jobs for months at a time this is the natural pattern I fall into.

Never do I feel more alert and cognitively enhanced (compared to normal) as I do on that schedule.

Another thing I am tired of

I’m getting righteously tired of being told that I can’t tell the difference between a high-resolution display like the new iPad and other tablets’ inferior displays.

Yes, I very fucking well can tell the difference – at 14”, 36” and 48”. Using my partner’s tablet (original Asus Transformer), I can tell the difference pretty easily until it’s about seven or eight feet away.*

How do people believe this?

After eight feet, I can’t really tell at all. But who uses a tablet from eight feet away? At any distance I will use my iPad, the resolution difference is extremely, extremely obvious to me.

*I bet under ideal lighting conditions and after a migraine, I could tell from 12+feet away.

Smackdown 2012 version

I like Lance Mannion’s blog, but he seems to discount anything with women in it. A lot of middle-aged men do; they can’t seem to help it. Since the protagonist of The Hunger Games isn’t even a woman, really, but is a teenage girl (though an extremely capable and whip-smart teenage girl), I was expecting that from him.

However, that’s not what I want to write about. Instead, I want to rant about this idiotic rat turd of a comment.

After a little more thought I know why I turned this off (having not read the book, which probably represents the vast majority of the movie audience) – it was right after they mention that it was the 75th annual Hunger Games, and I thought, WHAT? You mean this miserable farce has been going on that long? The population of the Districts, having once had enough spirit to rebel, is now subjecting themselves to poverty, squalor and serving up their kids every year to a slaughter? While the other half of their world lives in modern affluence? Surely you jest. I couldn’t possibly care less if you think I can even accept that premise in the first place.

Let’s see — we live in a country where income inequality has been rising for nearly forty years. Where there are 45,000 extra deaths every year due to no health insurance. Where global warming is denied, which will lead to vastly more deaths. Where living standards are falling for many, and that fall is accelerating.

And furthermore, we live in a world where a single country — Germany — singlehandedly and in an automated, industrially efficient fashion exterminated six million people not all that long ago. Where 800,000 were killed less than two decades ago in Rwanda by their former friends and neighbors. Where the Brazilian favelas exist (remind you of anything, like, say, the Districts?) A world where women are routinely “honor-killed” and have their faces burned with acid.

Compared to that, the deal that those people got, I’d rather compete in The Hunger Games. I’d have a better chance of coming out alive.

And this goddamn idiot commenter finds something like the premise of The Hunger Games implausible.

Fuck me.

I’m even choosing to ignore all the facts that she got wrong in her comment, as I don’t want to write a 3,000 word screed.

By the way, the Roman-era gladiatorial games — which I might remind you really, actually happened in our history and were more brutal than anything in Collins’ novels — went on for something like 800 years.

By the standards of what I’ve written above, to me The Hunger Games actually seems pretty tame. There, you have a one in 24 chance. In the Holocaust, in Rwanda, or as one of the 45,000 every year who dies from lack of health insurance in the US, what goddamn chance do you have?

And about that commenter, how do people live such cosseted, clueless lives? How do you fit so much dumbass in so little space?

These days, I try to avoid flinging insults like confetti at a ticker-tape parade, but sometimes it is just warranted. Not doing so would be wrong. This is one of those times.

I find it implausible how obtuse and uneducated and that commenter is, but nevertheless, there it is.

Not knowing what you don’t know that you don’t know

I stopped reading the New York Times article about data center power use after the second page, as I realized that the reporter(s) did not have the first damn clue what they were writing about.

I have built data centers. I run data centers. Not really large ones, at the moment, but the ones I run are getting bigger by the day. And running a small DC is in some ways harder than running a large one as you often lack the resources (financial and other) to make use of capabilities that large ones are able to tap. By the way of credentials, I am the US infrastructure manager for the largest company in the world who does what my company does (which is still pretty small), so I know just a little something about it.

The Times article could not be more clueless, really. I don’t regret not reading all of it. Running a data center – even a small data center – in a 24/7 operation is incredibly difficult. I am not saying that to make me seem noble, or my job harder. That’s just a fact. Here’s one reason why.

This isn’t just an incredibly inaccurate representation of the dedication and hard work of eng/ops everywhere in the computer industry, I know for a fact it’s also inaccurate in what regards to Facebook itself. I imagine Facebook engineers (and that of any other website really) reading this article, thinking about the times they’ve been woken up in the middle of the night to solve problems that no one has ever faced before, for which no one has trained them, because no university course and no amount of research prepares you for the challenges of running a service at high scale, and having to solve all that as fast as possible, regardless of whether it’s about making sure that someone can run their business, do their taxes, or that a kid halfway around the world can upload their video of a cat playing the piano.

I worked on a problem in our NYC DC for five hours on Friday, on a product that before I started I knew almost nothing about. The product is set up in a non-standard way (by a previous IT team), is unsupported by the vendor – though I cajoled them into assisting anyway – and is also very complicated to administer and to use.

So, let’s summarize. No one knows how to use it, no one knows how it is set up, the vendor doesn’t support it and the configuration status is unknown. Oh yeah, and who gets to fix it? Me, the “owner” of the data center.

Sound like a job you want to do? Yeah, didn’t think so. You’d be crazy to want to. (What does that say about me?)

I’ve sort of strayed away from the main point as I am still frustrated from Friday, but it’s always amazing to me how absolutely wrong articles can be when they are written by people who don’t know the field and who buy figures from clueless consultants*.

*As a rule, consultants are nearly always clueless.

The risk

Projects like Everyday Sexism and Hollaback are awesome, bringing attention to the problem of the pervasive street harassment that women experience.

But I can’t agree with this (the part I cited below specifically).

Guys who care about sexual harassment – you can help. When you see sexual harassment, call it out. If you see a guy wolf whistling at a woman trying to go about her day, yell loudly at him “Show some respect, asshole.” Let women and most importantly MEN know that you won’t stand for it, that women deserve better.

In such a situation, men are much more likely to be violently attacked than women are for speaking up. Why? Sexism, of course. A woman challenging a man (by most of these guys) is seen as inconsequential. To them, women are low-status. From their perspective, it’s like a gnat arguing with him. Terrible to hear, but it’s true.

But a man challenging these types? That matters to them. That threatens their status. A lot of them will respond with violence.

Most people – including most men — are scared of violence. I feel sympathy for this. When you as a male stand against these harassing men, your risk of experiencing violence goes way, way up, far more than a woman’s does.

I’d never ask anyone to possibly bring great violence on themselves for me as I have sympathy for that fear.

And also most women may not realize this or think about it (just as most men don’t realize or think about street harassment), but when you stand against a man or group of men in public as a man, you usually stand alone. No one will come to your side and fight with you. Often, no one will even look at you.

So when you open your mouth, know that you will be fighting alone. If you can’t accept that risk, probably best to keep quiet. I can accept that and have in the past. Such is life.

I am not a violent person by nature. But violence does not scare me — although perhaps it should — so I generally call out men who are acting like idiots and non-humans. I can’t help how I was born, though. My risk profiling is all screwed up. I know this. Can’t help it. Don’t be like me.

But I think it’s wrong to ask anyone else to do these scary (to most) things on your behalf. Most people piss themselves when true violent situations are cropping up. I think it’s morally wrong to ask people to expose themselves to such fear. I’d never ask that of anyone.

But here’s my dirty secret. I like confrontations. I like fighting*. If I didn’t worry about brain damage, I’d be in a boxing ring every day. Hand-to-hand combat training was my very favorite part of being in the army. However, I don’t provoke people and I am an introvert by nature. I don’t walk into fights. And I retreat even if people call me a coward because I also don’t like prison. But if someone pushes me and I have no way to escape (or my companion does not), then I will dispose of them as calmly as I do everything else. My nature is what it is.

I have no real point to this. Just that I think it’s wrong to ask someone to potentially get beaten, stabbed, or shot, no matter how much potential good it might do for society in general. There has to be a better way.

*Engaging in street-fighting recreationally, though, will lead to a very short life as there is always someone faster, smarter and stronger than you are. And even the best fighter has very bad chances against two or more assailants.