Ah! Found it:
http://www.youtube....atch?v=bp3Dt1Nk3WE (www.youtube.com)
"they're MAGICALLY delicious."
The organic food movement has corrupted even my most cherished childhood memories.
1. It doesn't just show the post. Instead it says, "Successfully posted. View your comment here." I thought this was changed a long time ago.
2. There are multiple warnings at the head of the page, above idkfa. They say:
"Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /home/idkfac/public_html/v3/include/db_query.php on line 20"
and
"Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/idkfac/public_html/v3/include/db_query.php:20) in /home/idkfac/public_html/v3/w_msg.php on line 172"
3. I'm using firefox.
Huh, how weird. idkfa was experiencing some pretty severe downtime on Thursday / Friday, after which there were... subtle changes on my host system. These changes tell me that the idkfa hosts disabled certain features of PHP (the language idkfa is written in), likely because they found other users abusing them.
As such, during these downtimes, it must have been that the idkfa cache got borked while that thread was created. And the case for "no cache files for a thread, even though it's impossible for them not to exist" suddenly issued an error message that it couldn't find anything (the "invalid argument" error). And that message came before I could do the proper "redirecting," violating a constraint of the HTTP protocol, and thus kicking your browser to the manual redirect page.
Thanks for the heads up.
Why, Amazon, why (www.npr.org)? You're simply not going to win the tablet war, even at that price point.
"Have an open mind, and it will be simpler" : http://www.youtube....atch?v=aY_CidIS8YM (www.youtube.com)
Your nightmare scenario could get worse. In fact, it will get worse as I slowly start to release bees into your building. It will start with one that you may never even encounter. Each day their number will increase exponentially. I'll buy your coworkers, who will never mention their presence and look at you askance when you voice your concerns. Erik will overlay a buzzing track on top of all his music, so even at home you will whirl in sudden alarm. You will be forever haunted.
This looks... awesome.
"Zombies, Run!" a phone-based running program that has you running to survive the zombie apocalypse: http://www.kicksta...nture-for?ref=video (www.kickstarter.com)
Also, other photo albums that I've been too busy or lazy to upload:
 (picasaweb.google.com) |
| 2011 Jamison's Last Days before School (picasaweb.google.com) |
 (picasaweb.google.com) |
| 2011 Bird Ridge (picasaweb.google.com) |
 (picasaweb.google.com) |
|
2011 Hanus-Johnson Wedding (picasaweb.google.com) (the few I had the presence of mind to take) |
 (picasaweb.google.com) |
| 2011 Camping after Wedding with Jake and Katy (picasaweb.google.com) |
A continuation of my series of bad videography from my phone, taken over the course of this summer:
Any semblance to artistic talent or cinematic competence is purely accidental.
(Password is "idkfa")
I had a thought. And it's probably not a novel one, but maybe something I'd want if it's already out there.
I was hiking a few days ago, and found myself asking the question: "If I start hiking now, at one point do I have to turn back so that I can be back by X." The solution is fairly simple: keep track of how long youv'e been walking, and if doubling that time puts you past your return time, you have to turn back.
So it ends up being something like:
if ( now() + ( time_elapsed * 2 ) > start_time+max_duration ) then alarm()
This, however, assumes that it will take you exactly as much time to go out as it will to come back. That's not always the case, though, being that often when hiking you'll be walking up a mountain and then back down. The return trip will probably take 75% as long, or maybe even less. So it might be that your logic is more like this:
if ( now() + ( time_elapsed + ( time_elapsed * 0.75 ) ) > start_time+max_duration ) then alarm()
Maybe this is just a feature I've never bothered to read on for every digital watch made. But still, sort of an interesting idea, particularly if you're worried about getting back to a critical social function or something.
Ditto all of the above. What a beautiful wedding and a fantastic reception. (Mal, I might be calling you up for tips/ideas/etc. hehe.) I am so incredibly happy that Dan and I both were about to be there for it. It was so wonderful to spend a couple days with some of the most favorite people!
p.s. Josh, when the the PR work with the NT? As fantastic as this post is, neither Dan nor I remember this!
Yes it was indeed an excellent event. Good ceremony that was entertaining and beautiful, and of course the reception. Well the parts I remember were excellent, so was dancing with everyones mom. If there are any other pictures floating around for the reception I would love to see them, as I said there was many a hazy part of the evening.
At the coffee pot:
Coworker: "Hey, so, do you shop at Costco?"
Josh: "Oh heck yeah, the only place I shop most times."
Coworker: "Well, their apricots are particularly good this time. The wife brought some home, and they are choice."
Josh: "Cool, I'll have to check them out. I've been particularly enjoying their grapes."
Coworker: (continues to pour coffee in silence, and then leaves)
I feel like I insulted them somehow. Or that maybe they were like the mindless NPCs in video games, with only one or two pre-programmed responses, after which they discontinue their conversation or start repeating what they said.
Whatever. Sanity is a small price to pay for coffee.
For anyone who doesn't facebook but still wanted to see.
https://picasaweb.google.com/johnlaurance/BabyBirth?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCKO_gOHP8_KX0gE&feat=directlink (picasaweb.google.com)
Deacon Carr Laurance was born at 2:02am September 6th. He weighed 8lbs 1oz and was 20.5" tall. Mom and baby are apparently healthy enough and we were allowed to come home tonight.
Interesting things to note, while watching Katy get her IV put in I fainted while clutching my book I was trying to read to my chest. Deacon was almost too big for Katy and the docs were telling her that if she didn't get him out with 1 more push they'd have to do an emergency C-section. That threat apparently did the trick, but on the way out we found out that Deacon and the umbilical cord wrapped twice around his neck which probably didn't help things much.
Congratulations!! I am so happy for you both. John and Deacon are both so lucky to have you. That sucks about the challenges, though... I hope Katy is recovering from that, and I hope Deacon wasn't too traumatized with that cord. Were there any serious complication with that? Or was it quick enough that it didn't have lasting effects?
It will be so great to see you tomorrow! We should Skype Katy in or something. haha.
I miss those from Japan. Not that I'm particularly embarrassed by bathroom noises, just that it was nice to have soothing (if loud) nature sounds rather than muzak or aging pop singles.
These are the guys that frequently have bizarre, nonsensical conversations whilst pissing. If I recall, one, saying to the other just as he started, "I AM THE BEARER OF THE GOLDEN RING!" Also, these guys are at least 60. It must be hell getting old.
I suppose that means you have a unique opportunity to try out various non sequiturs to see how they respond.
"I see the price of mung beans is up today. Let us pray the koalas don't whistle too loudly in the pale moonlight."
Also, I think their behaviour at the urinals is a strong argument for a plan to make it to 55 and punch your own ticket, so to speak. Why bother with obsolescence and degeneration.?
Tonight was the first of the Tuesday night race series. 5 miles (longest distance possible in the Farm league), and the trail setter told us after the race that he tried to hit every major hill possible. ^&%$ you "stairway to heaven"....
On a happier note, it should make the run next week at Russian Jack seem easy and very very flat...
http://www.muni.org/Departments/parks/PAges/TuesdayNightRaces.aspx (www.muni.org)
Think of it as a community wide xc race. Run 7 of 8 and get a tee shirt! (pretty much anything for a tee shirt...).
But come on... That is just an unfair comparison. The Beckett's were engineered to run. It's like they are a family of criminals born to run from something. I remember "running" with Ryan and other friends in high school, and by "run" I actually mean he was out for a jog and I was trying to hide the fact that I was dying. You're cooler than they are anyway. :)
Alright, I was a little disappointed with week 3. Less than 5 miles, completely on groomed trails, and they somehow designed the course so that all three leagues essentially finished at the same time.
I've never wanted to conduct mass murder of children so bad.
However, even though I literally walked up to Heather near the starting line, then said, "Hello" before immediately starting to run (no warming up, no stretching), I still managed damn near 7 minute miles, even on the hills. So I win. I was just ready to run for another 20 minutes ;)
So, this latest week was at East, and was the best/most hardcore trail yet. 10k through a swamp, up down hills, required fording a stream... crazy shit.
But I hit a milestone. I beat Travis, even if only by a small amount. He was very gracious and complimented me for it, such a nice guy. We'll see if I can keep in shape enough to keep it consistent.
Overall, ran 7:25 minute miles, which I feel is very good, given the course (and the fact that for practically half of it, my shoes were completely soaked). Unfortunately, my true nemesis, Erik Mundahl (never met him, this is based solely on the fact that we have similar names and he is also an environmental engineer based on google stalking), beat me by about three and a half minutes. I have work to do.
Second-to-last Tuesday night run, a fun little 7k jog through the woods. All I can say is my poor trail shoes. Less than 10 runs with them and they have already been completely swampified twice. I just hope they don't start smelling...
Did about 7 minute miles, which isn't too bad considering I ate and drank heavily for a week. But my nemesis still destroyed me by 25 seconds a mile. Time to start drinking spinach shakes for breakfast.
SPDCA: An alternative to texting.
I think I've mentioned before my opinions on texting. Long and short: it's an ingenious way for cell phone companies to essentially charge for nothing. From a technical standpoint, the profit margin on texting, given the almost negligible effect texting has on existing infrastructure, is incredible, particularly when it comes to overage fees. Having recently been disappointed in AT&T's announcement for their future move to stop selling "limited texting" plans (instead either pay-per-text or unlimited plans, and nothing in between), I wanted to talk about an alternative.
Instant Messaging (IM) is almost as old as the Internet itself. Starting as bulletin boards, moving through forums, and then services like ICQ, AIM, Yahoo, MSN, etc., most of our/my generation has had some experience with a chat window. The services were built with the intent that two people would each be sitting at a computer, with a keyboard, and a relatively persistent connection to the Internet. The systems and protocols themselves work surprisingly well, even supporting things like file transfers, video chat, screen sharing, even sometimes blending telephony into the mix (see: Skype). There even exists a protocol whose purpose is to allow you to create your own IM protocol, making the formalization of old IM protocols (AIM, ICQ) and the creation of new ones (Gtalk) relatively easy.
The problem is that the IM services have become somewhat unpopular, largely due to the onset of texting. The cell phone is the form factor that the original IM designers dreamed of: an always on, always connected device that could fit in your pocket, notify you of new events, and allow you to send and receive messages. And what's more: cell phone companies have convinced the public that it's necessary to pay for such a service, when instant messaging gives you the equivalent functionality, with the potential to exceed that of texting in some ways (status messages, for one).
Recent smart phones have started including IM clients (somewhat better supported on Android, in my short experience, than on the iPhone). I'm glad of this trend, because it gives its users an alternative to the obnoxiously overpriced texting racket. The problem is that for those who choose to communicate over IM, even though they can communicate outside the bounds of "texts," they quickly run aground of the fact that the people on the other side of the IM chat are often at a keyboard, not on a phone. This means that they can easily be spammed by a litany of messages, or be unable to respond quickly enough. Most IM clients, on a computer or otherwise, fail to indicate where a client is connecting from, so a user can't always tell if they're talking to a phone, a computer, or both. This is because most of the IM protocols don't make this distinction, for the reason that as long as you're connected, the service really doesn't care about anything other than successfully delivering a message.
So here's my solution: maintain an IM chat account, say on Gmail/Gchat. Maintain that account separate from your other chat accounts, and only use it for your phone. With that account, only allow messages from other chat accounts that you know are associated with cell phones, and nothing else. Don't log in to this chat account from a client with a keyboard, and if you do, only do so with the knowledge that the person on the other line will respond as they would a text: eventually, not necessarily immediately.
This satisfies the need for passive, non-verbal communication. It also grants the user the ability to set status, such that even if their phone's IM client is connected, they can indicate that they are otherwise engaged (something that isn't possible with texting). Also, depending on how you configure your Gchat client, you can have an off-phone record if your texts, and a record that is searchable (something hard to find in an text clients).
I'd be interested to hear if anybody wants to try this. It requires a smart phone that supports an IM client and push notifications thereof. There is a decent client for Gchat on Android, and I've heard of people using a utility called "Fring" on the iPhone. At the very least, it would be interesting to see if people who text each other frequently (roommates, significant others, etc.), could get rid of the majority of their text usage by going the IM route.
In a journey of infinite undiscovery and breaking things on my phone, I've found that the native Talk/Gchat application on Android doesn't support multiple accounts signed in (and in fact, doesn't support even changing the one account without serious issues).
I found another application, and I'm running. If you feel like you want to IM me (for free, rather than paying for a text), talking to me at j.to.the.rho AT gmail.com. I'll have to confirm your request first.
So, don't let me rain on your parade here, but there seem to be a few glaring flaws here. First, this option requires a data connection to work, and while this isn't a concern in most cities, AT&T seems just shitty enough in Anchorage that it would be an issue.
Second, a chat client that is always on with push notifications seems like it would run down your battery in an instant. At least similar apps seem to do as much to my iPhone, and I can only imagine a setup like you're talking about would be even worse. Text messaging seems to have very little impact on battery life.
Thirdly, we have plenty of ways to update statuses. I mean, hello Facebook. Twitter is even an answer to your testing problem, because you can direct message, enable push notifications, etc. Or, um, email? I mean, this hardly seems like a problem to be solved.
Lastly, I've been thinking about your objection to texting and it doesn't quite hold water with me. I understand the ridiculousness of charging for something that costs a company nothing, but this has been a viable business plan for years. Although the infrastructure wasn't originally built for texts, the fact that it can now be used for it means that the cost you pay to text is covering those original startup costs (and ongoing maintenance costs), regardless of how much it really costs the company to provide that service. A toll on a private road, for instance, is fair because it pays for the original investment and the continued upkeep, even though it doesn't cost the operator any more to have more cars on that road.
Most users I've come across that use the texting of their phones also have a data plan. Case in point: every iPhone user that is forced to pay for a data plan simply because they own an iPhone. Additionally, most users under-utilize their data plans (particularly those grandfathered under the old "unlimited" data plans), such that the minimal extra data as a result of XMPP messages being passed to your phone would be negligible given your total data capacity (even assuming that the "always on" application would have to poll for messages from the server inefficiently, which it wouldn't).
Second, I'm not sure you understand push notifications. Maybe I'm not sure I understand push notifications. But my logic follows thusly: for a year or so, I had an iPhone 3G, which theoretically could not "background" its applications, or have apps that were running constantly other than those that were built-in or somehow tied to underlying system processes. And yet, I was able to receive push notifications for applications that weren't running (see: Words with Friends). The notifications were "pushed" to my phone on behalf of the servers behind the applications I had installed, in much the same if not the exact way that a text message is received by one's phone by way of control messages from the connected tower. That means that push notifications do not require running applications, no more so than text messages require you to be constantly polling the towers to ask "Do I have any new messages?"
The messages are delivered on an as-needed basis, and are re-transmitted or re-issued in the event of network failure or having your phone turned off. The only reason anybody recommends disabling push notifications is because it requires connecting to something more sophisticated than the Edge network, and HSPA ("3G") inherently takes more battery life than the Edge protocols.
I don't know what kind of crazy applications you're running on your phone that drag down your battery so, but I would venture that a simple IM client,ran in the background (or not at all, if you were only responding to IMs as a result of push notifications) would be fairly battery friendly.
And fine, Facebook and Twitter allow you to transmit status to people. I've expressed my distaste for these services before. And the convention for IM status is different than those for Facebook or Twitter, in that the statuses are not "stored" anywhere, they are simply a temporary state assigned to a user. That seems a much more logical application of a "status" when applied to communication like texting or IM.
It may be justified that they charge for texting, but their margins are incredible, especially when you consider overages. I think the featureset surrounding IM improves upon texting, is based on a better underlying technology, and can be considerably more "open" if you decide not to depend on free-ish corporate services.
My primary concern was that your IM-to-text plan wouldn't work where coverage is lacking. If I'm somewhere that has no data network but does have signal then your setup is at a considerable disadvantage. I don't know about you, but it seems pretty often that I find that I have limited or no data coverage but reasonable signal strength, especially in this backwater village you call a town.
Crazy apps that run down battery life- Grindr (OH GOD WHAT HAVE I BECOME). If it is any indication, battery may be a concern.
Also, incredible profit margins for texting doesn't make it less justifyable; if anything, it makes it more justifiable, because in a capitalist system making more money is better. I'll grant you the no-access from any other platform argument, but you can say the same about phones, which is sort of the point. If people wanted a way to access their texts from other sources, they wouldn't text, they would email.
I'll grant you that: texting will work on minimal signal, and in the absence of a proper data network ("3G," etc.). However, lack of "data coverage" but having "signal strength" doesn't make sense: if you have access to the signal, and you're subscribed for a data plan, and you have access to the 3G network, you have "data coverage." Whether the bandwidth available to you and your big city friends is anything remotely like our meager offerings on this edge of the world, well, who knows.
The majority use case for smart phones is in populated areas with relatively high bandwidth. And that use case would be much cheaper for consumers if they would be educated on the use of a separate and functionally improved message passing system. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but in capitalism, isn't competition supposed to be better?
And I think that if people thought to consider the value in having contents of texts available outside of your (easily lost, frequently broken, battery powered) mobile devices, they would consider it a valuable feature. Saying "if people wanted that they'd just email" is just wrong: email is a different context of message passing altogether, almost completely devoid of the concept of "instant" communication. Texting offers features that email doesn't, same as IM offers features that texting doesn't.
There are some cases, say in the gawdawful frozen tundra that is north of the Brooks Range, where I frequently have signal with no data, as it is evidently impossible to get "teh tubes" to run past the Arctic Circle. There, texting is essential to staying in touch with anything resembling a civilzation. Well, that or to switch over to GCI, which has data. Nevermind.
Capitalism only cares about competition until you have enough money to BUY the competition. Then it's katy-bar-the-door (see: AT&T and T-Mobile).
I feel like Twitter was an ill conceived attempt to merge email with texting and lost the convenient features of both, but somehow manages to capture our diminished attention spans long enough to entertain us while we wait in elevators and to order drinks at dinner.
Finally, I wouldn't have any personal experience here, but I believe Grindr requires you pay to use push notifications. Otherwise, that shit will consume your battery like I consume red velvet cupcakes (or, perhaps, ping that server like I pinged someone's mom last night. Take your pick).
If ChatRoulette taught the internet any lessons at all, it's that heterosexual males will turn anything remotely sexy into a testosterone covered sausage fest (and not the fun kind, I might add). I'd venture a guess that a "breeder" version of Grindr would have similar results - more demand than supply.
Or, alternatively, you could always try CraigsList; however, that sounds a bit like reverting back to the family reunion as a good place to pick up dates. Or trolling trailer parks in an IROC-Z Camaro.
Do you know any programmers who are interested in a venture capital project?...
I can provide caffeine and foodstuffs for fuel. You might have to provide the advisement about how to best target our market, though. If nothing else, I think we have a cougar demographic taht is currently waiting to be satiated.
In that case, texting then would be a reasonable alternative. Sitting in one's cubicle in mid-town Anchorage? You have more options.
(Also, I'll venture the poor performance of "teh tubes" up there has a lot to do with already limited pipe. I've heard of nothing but complaints about people unable to get their data (porn) at a reasonable rate because the connection was so oversaturated (with other people's porn). Imaginably, AT&T and GCI probably have mostly-dedicated connections, maybe even prioritized data traffic for their cellular data traffic... but if GCI's works any better, I'll venture it's because they have fewer customers. Can't speak to actual numbers, unfortunately. I do know that the majority of the traffic handled up there isn't via terrestrial landlines, relying on satellites instead. It's all about handling left turns.)
I had to look up "katy bar the door."
Twitter works well... if you don't plan on exchanging any important information. And there is also the convention surrounding it: you don't expect immediate delivery, or reasonably quick responses. It is yelling into the void. Sometimes somebody yells back the exact same thing with "RT" in front of it.
And another thing.
We've come to accept that we can access Google, Google+, Twitter, Facebook, Myspace, Netflix, Hulu, now Words with Friends, and any number of social, gaming, or entertainment applications from numerous devices, be it your phone, your computer, your game console, your home theater system, your TV.
Why is it that you can't "access" your texts from outside your phone? Or receive texts on more than one device? Or write texts with something other than a touch keyboard or 9-key pad?
Texting violates the concept of ubiquitous computing.
There's a hybrid solution to this problem that allows you to retain the use of text messaging UI on your phone, use your data plan to transmit the texts, and view/store/transmit/receive them online at a "real" computer. However, it requires an additional phone number be disseminated to your cohorts and you sign an additional component of your life over to teh Google.
http://www.google.com/voice (www.google.com)
I'm not sure if it currently requires an invite or not. Ultimately, though, it appears to meet all the previously discussed criteria, if access to the service itself can be obtained. I've had an account since their Grand Central days, and other than a bit of lag with the iPhone app, it seems to behave quite well and function as advertised.
(nods) I've been using Voice for a while as well, but only in the capacity of having it transcribe my voicemails (or fail to do so). When I first set it up, I had only a non-jailbroken phone on AT&T's service, which precluded me from using it for anything but a call forwarding service. Having my phone dial out from my Google Voice number wasn't possible, if I remember correctly (as the application was blocked), and I was reticent about using the service's calling feature if I wasn't in an area that was data-capable. The same would be for sending/receiving texts. There's also that if I were to "receive" texts-proper using the Voice number, there would still be inbound texts that would be counted towards my monthly limit.
Also, it would have been a pain in the ass to explain why I had two phone numbers.
Such is why I never went the "full-featured" route, though I would have loved to have an audio record of all of my phone calls.
Thinking further, either I'm not aware of some component of texting, but there is no way to maintain a blocked/unblocked list for texts. I have yet to see a system that prevents unsolicited texts, and also have those texts received not count for a monthly limit. Something IM has going for it, at least.
Welcome to idkfa.
The iPhone app was eventually approved through the iTunes store, thank goodness. It will handle free text messages, both inbound and outbound, in a way that is nearly exactly the way the native "Messages" app works.
If you're in an area with poor data coverage in Anchorage (read: my kitchen), the Google Voice app is nearly unusable. You are also perfectly correct when you say it's a pain to explain having two phone numbers. It is even more painful to try to thoughtfully explain how to use each number without sounding like a pretentious ass.
Finally, you're right again on the text filtering. The call filtering is second to none, as far as I have experience. The text filtering doesn't exist, as far as I have found. Thanks for the warm welcome.
SPDCA:
It is really, really hard for me to let go of ideas. Particularly when I convince myself they are good ones, and when I'm continually reminded that things could be better.
Why is this not a thing? Does it not have a cool enough name? Is it not flashy enough? Does it not promote elitism among Apple product owners? Did you ever ask what happens when you do a Group MMS with iMessage and include somebody with an Android?
(rubs eyes)
I don't think I'm concerned as much about the answers, or the idea itself, as much as it is my inability to sell something like this. In fact, I've had a number of things like this come up where I have a novel, effective, and (arguably) superior technological solution to a problem everyone has. And... something just doesn't stick. Not to say that people don't understand, or aren't listening. I mean stick as how in the marketing world they might call something "sticky," that is, an idea or emotion that seems to stick with people.
I'm not much on marketing. And yes, I'm not much of a salesperson, but I'd like to think I'm not yet so far gone down my technological rabbit-hole that I can't communicate something to someone else, particularly when that idea is exciting or interesting in and of itself.
About the worst thing someone said to me in recent memory was at work, when someone asked of what I was proposing, "Is this something normal, or is this one of your 'Josh'-type things?" implying that there was a distinct separation between a "normal" solution to a problem, and how I would have approached the problem.
Admittedly, I have a different approach to technological things, given my background, but they are almost never unfounded. The implication of this person's question was that for the things I make... they no longer represented something "normal" or at least normally accessible outside of my own little world. It painted me as someone who had lost touch with what could be considered normal, at least in the technological arena.
It was absolutely insulting. And devastating. I try to keep my technological exploits apart from my identity, but I don't do a good job. I took the comment in stride, but even now, months later, I still think about it. Nothing is worse than having your perspective on the world questioned.
I'm maybe a week out from starting a new job. I'm likely to meet new people, and start solving new problems. I'm unshaken in my confidence of my own technological merit, but I'm still willing to entertain new ideas, even if they're contrary to my own. But that's not the problem. Likely, I'll be in the position that I will have ideas that may be improvements on old systems, or policies, or processes. And I may find case to bring them up, and I will have to convince others that the status quo is unacceptable.
My question is: how do I argue to convince in this case? And what am I doing wrong in trying to sell these ideas?
This is kinda something I run up against all the time here at work. Not so much me really, but my manager. Science is probably no different than anything else in that we get stuck with routine, not matter how inefficient, and love it because it is both comfortable and familiar and after some time we can even excel to the point of feeling pride in the process. When someone comes along and challenges our inefficiency with something new and faster and better, we will defend our choices just so we don't have to change our habits. My boss is the kind of guy who is always looking for and trying to implement new methods of doing things, it rubs a lot of people the wrong way. Partly because people don't like to change, but mostly because people get mad trying to defend their ways and more so when they don't really have a good defense. I am guilty of this, but I also try to accept new things.
If you are the kind of guy who wants to tinker and improve it is imperative that you are also the kind of guy who can sell and force your ideas. Its not that your ideas are the weird Josh ways of doing things, it's that you are a quiet guy who doesn't bully people into believing your ideas. This gives people the easy out, allowing them to maintain the status quo without feeling all that bad about it. So its not that you are doing wrong so much as you are probably running up against the limits of your personality type when it comes to interacting with others and trying to sell your ideas. This is probably the source of your frustration.
I don't think being more forceful is going to help in this case. For the quote "Is this something normal, or is this one of your 'Josh'-type things?", I know I've said something very similar but with different words. Mainly by saying, "does this require programming?" - and Josh has always been persistent in his push for use of programming ("Josh, I understand your dice program is faster... but I really want to roll dice.") For many problems, there are elegant solutions that are simply waiting to be found, especially in the technical fields. However, most of us do not have time in our daily lives or work environments to find these solutions, as they typically take much longer than just doing it in whatever inefficient means that are being used. Honestly, there are "Josh-type things", but I don't think it's an insult - I think it is simply a different way of looking at things (typically involving software customization or code generation) and that they often require a set of skills that people don't have, because few of us know how to code (especially at the level that Josh does, since it is his profession). Most people that I've worked with find having to learn something new at the whim of someone else to be annoying, however irrational that feeling might be.
Honestly, I think it is more about persistence in showing the benefits, and not forcing people to adopt a system they don't understand or will have to put effort into using.
If I may wax poetic for a moment:
“If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people together to collect wood and don't assign them tasks and work, but rather teach them to long for the endless immensity of the sea." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
There's a thin line between inspiring others and unsuccessfully evangelizing. Also a thin line between persistent reminders and forcing an issue. Take for example my Excel woes, which I've all but given up on, that horse being dead enough. I've resolved that there is some intrinsically intuitive element to Excel that make it everyone's choice toolmaking environment. (shrugs). More power to it. The designers created a lingua franca for small-to-mid-range quantities of mathematical calculations. The point at which I get cranky is when people insist that Excel be used despite Excel itself getting in the way of solving a problem. I feel like the logical hop people make from using the system calculator to Excel should be met with the same hop towards using a more robust (albeit more complicated) tool. I can tell people that. Lots of times. I can smile, look up and to the right at nothing for a beat, and then look back self-righteously. But it offers nothing by way of teaching them to love the sea.
There's another element to the "Josh-type" thing, aside from just the Josh-type things being programming related. At the time when my coworker brought this up, it was a question of maintenance and involvement. "If this breaks, Josh, how do we fix it? Do we have to call you?" -"No, you can do X." -"What if we want to change it?" -"You can change the code." -"We don't want to change the code." -"Then you call me."
When I make a tool to solve a problem, the tool itself becomes another moving part of the machine that can fail. Of course, I build things to the best of my ability so that they don't fail, but things happen. Then it becomes a question of involvement: How many hours will it take Josh to fix it? How many hours will it take someone else to fix it, if they know how? How many hours will it take someone to learn how? And, usually the question that has me being told "don't bother" is whether someone else's involvement is worth the risk in ignoring the inefficiency/potential for failure/inability to perform a function.
It is this second part that I consider insulting. It is when, despite a tool or a set of tools' usefulness, any "quirk" that causes the dreaded involvement becomes associated with me and my handiwork. And for most people, involvement means merely having to spend the time to gain even the morst cursory understanding.
I understand that my perspective is terribly biased towards the things I feel comfortable with. And my excitement towards these types of things sometimes keeps me from objectively analyzing the value in creating a thing (see: my awesome random number generator, or "dice program" :) ).
The problem I have is when I'm dead on. (Not saying I am with XMPP, but pretty darn close). I can try to make a good argument, but I'm competing at the same time with people's technological apathy, their aversion towards complexity and involvement, and every quirky, backwards thing of mine I've forced them to use instead of a shiny Apple product. The odds are a little stacked against people like me (which is fine, it makes us feel even more correct). But for all the things I come up with, it's incredibly rare that any are used, despite how strongly I feel about them, or how hard I work on them.
Which is why I'm wondering why being "right" isn't enough. I guess I have to take solace that some of my children make it through.
In somewhat related news: http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/05/20/2315216/google-drops-xmpp-support (tech.slashdot.org)
This depresses me a bit. Two parts at the loss of the adoption of open standards, one part at Google killing something I've used in the past, and one part making something that worked well work worse. My IM chat logs have been disabled since the 15th.
A project I once worked on (but was eventually discarded) was having Gmail chat clients be able to reach network personnel to ask questions or to report issues. It worked incredibly well inside the office, and given the sometimes unwieldy nature of email (and lack of any "instant" delivery mechanism), it would have been pretty damn convenient.
However, Google's chat feature will now join MSN Messenger, ICQ, Skype, and Apple iMessage in the pantheon of proprietary, closed communication mediums.
I enabled the trial of this Google Hangout madness a few days ago. I'm not sure what Google is trying to accomplish exactly, but if it's driving their technically competent users to other services, they are succeeding. mIRC, ICQ, AIM, MSN Messenger, and Yahoo Messenger were all a part of my life at one point, but I shed them for Google Talk. Now that they're trying to ruin IM, perhaps it's time to shop around yet again.
SPDCA: The idkfa reminder page: http://idkfa.com/v3/reminders.php
Recently, in trying to figure out ways to manage my time better at work, I got the idea that it would be nice to have something that could calculate whether something could be done by a certain date. For example, if I estimated something would take 20 hours, how many business days, given an 8 hour work day, would it take? And what if that 20 hours was in conflict with another work load, due before then? In that case, what was the soonest I would be able to complete all of the tasks?
Investigating this, I found that it was useful, but somewhat limited. At the same time I wanted this type of date calculation, I also wanted simpler reminders for things outside of my hourly pool, or just simple notes that I could reference. I also wanted to record items to be notified of at a later date, or ones that would auto-cancel after a certain time period.
At first I was content with using Google Calendar and its tasks, but this didn't provide the kind of work-hour calculation I wanted. I experimented with the Linux remind utility a bit, but decided that though it was fairly powerful, it wasn't perfectly suited to what I wanted. It was also the case that I had to be SSH'd into my server at home, which made it inconvenient for accessing from my phone, etc.
So I made the script above. You can enter options for new reminders, notes, notifications, and task estimates. Based on which fields you decide to fill out, the script tries to just "do the right thing." If you enter nothing but a message, it will just be a note. If you enter either a "Notify Until" or "Notify After" value, it will hide reminders until/after a given date. If you enter a due date, it will calculate the time until the due date and display them in a sort of "countdown" format. If you enter in a "Remaining Hours" estimate, it will try to show relevant work-hour information based on an 8-hour work day and Mon-Fri work week.
The nice part of this is that it is fairly flexible on how you enter your date information. I used a date parsing library that can support almost any format, given that the distinction between day, month, and year are clear. I also modified it a bit to add features like being able to put in something like "25", and have it be translated to "the 25th of the current month, or the next month in the event that the 25th has passed."
Another feature is that the page isn't rendered on the server, it's instead smart enough to render itself based on the raw data returned from the server. As a result, you can modify the output of the page without having to refresh, making the addition and modification of reminders quick to see which reminder "bucket" they go into. It also supports the "auto-update" feature on idkfa,
It may be that I end up being the only person that uses this, and that's fine. I'm not even sure I'll end up using this extensively. Mostly just glad it's over with, as it was cutting into my Star Trek time.
