Just read in Locus about the death of Algis Budrys. Ruined what was promising to be a perfectly good day.
Some will write about how good of an editor he was. And there will the obligatory homages to Rogue Moon and Who?, his classics in the genre. All of that will be covered by others who will do it much better than I, so I will leave them to it.
Instead I’ll talk about Michaelmas, a flawed book with a conventional alien invasion plot, but with a more personal meaning. It was the novel that brought me into the computer industry. Besides being a forerunner to (and better than 99% of) the cyberpunk subgenre in science fiction, it was the first novel to explore the potential of human/computer teams, without making either one the slave of the other. Oh, there was no doubt who was in charge (Michaelmas, the human). But he listened to and often accepted the advice of the computer (Domino) and in general treated Domino as he might a human member of his staff.
That was what excited me. It made real to me the possibilities of computers not as calculators, but as assistants in the real meaning of the term: as things to assist us in what we do best. It was the synergy between Domino and Michaelmas that excited me. I wanted to make that happen in real life.
I was happily on my way to becoming a chemist when I read that book. It was a life-altering experience. Call him cranky, curmudgeonly, call him whatever you want. Just remember it takes a whale of a writer to reach into someone’s life like that.
I never knew Budrys the man, but that doesn’t matter. My world is a little darker today for his absence. And for the umpteenth time, I’m going to re-read Michaelmas.
Been spending way too much time with Capistrano recently, and it stops now. It’s quite possibly useful to me in my current projects, but its user-hostility makes it not worth the time.
As I searched and read page after web page, trying to find a pointer to how to use Cap in my environment (svn is on my development machine, not on a server somewhere else) without success, I began getting a feel for the attitude surrounding Cap, and frankly, I didn’t like it much. One article about doing this had several comments to the effect of “this capability is built in to version 2; this article is deprecated.” Of course, not one of them pointed to where I could find out about how to make version 2 use it.
The moment of my departure from Capistrano came when I ran across several exchanges about the (lack of) documentation for version 2. One of the respondents suggested the person looking for information could always read the code. (more…)
Jon Gruber writes, quoting Joe Wilcox (go ahead and read the story, but skip the comments as they devolve quickly into meaninglessness) on Apple sales figures.
The numbers look great, but the context of the initial report, and the lack of context in Gruber’s later spin, remind us of Mark Twain’s famous comment about statistics. (more…)
I’ve tweeted this a bit, but decided it’s time I start a catalog.
Been working an assignment on location at an ASP.Net shop (they’ve teased about it being a full-time gig, but no action on that front; honestly don’t know what I’d do, because the folks there are great to work with even if they do use VS) and so I’ve been having to deal with Visual Studio.
Now, I’d used VS a lot in my previous life as a software developer. What I wasn’t prepared for was:
- How my work style had changed.
- How the same little things I found helpful as a developer got in my way as a designer.
(more…)
(Both Joshua Porter and Eric Meyer have been musing on this theme, and it struck a chord here, as well. This should not be construed as a rebuttal to either piece, just some musings their writings have spurred here.)
In the beginning was the individual. If Og wanted something for his cave, he fashioned it himself, from the materials around him. Chair a little uncomfortable? Get out the hammer and chisel away a little more here and there. Sit down. Chisel away a little more. Finally the chair and Og’s bottom made their peace, and happiness reigned.
But Og had friends over, and they complained about his chair. Og didn’t understand this at first. After all, wasn’t the chair really comfortable when he sat in it? Eventually, Og realized his bottom wasn’t universal. Not everyone’s bottom was like his, so chairs built specifically for his bottom wouldn’t be comfortable for everyone else.
(more…)
Yes, Oliver there is a bug in Safari3. It’s a javascript issue, to be precise. And it’s annoying.
I have a design relying on Inman Positioning. The javascript is supposed to execute at load time. Problem is, when it does execute, the CSS has not yet been applied to the columns, so it gets an incorrect figure for the height of the div.
The only workaround I’ve got so far is to use setTimeout to set a delay of over 1/3 of a second on the executing of the positioning script. Yes, it’s ugly. But at least it works. And yes, Oliver, I checked the Safari3 tracker and I see 2-3 reports that look like what I’m seeing, so it looks like it’s been reported.
Andy Clarke of Transcending CSS fame convinced me Inman positioning was the way to go, but this makes we wonder. Is it worth it, now?
(BTW, if you haven’t seen that book, see it. The epitome of how a book on design should be not only useful but beautiful. Superb job, buy it, you won’t regret it. Not ever. I promise.)
Was at the Flex show last night over at WCTC. It was very apparent I’ve had my head inside Rails lately. Kevin Hoyt, the Adobe demo guy, did his database access schtick (writing just a few lines of code and — hey, presto! — a fuctioning CRUD db screen appears) and while the rest of the room was going “Oooh” and “Aaah” I was simply thinking “Scaffolding.” Heh.
Seriously, the Flex demo did scaffolding one better by activating sorts on the columns (along with the gee-whizz-bang but of little practical use trick of being able to rearrange the columns on screen) so I can’t say it was just like scaffolding. But it wasn’t a big enough improvement to raise my eyebrows.
(more…)
Joel Johnson writes a familiar but sad story. Malfeasance from a pastor drove him out of Christianity. He’s not alone; writer Sue Monk Kidd tells a tragically similar story. I’m absolutely certain the two are not alone in their experience. And they pose a conundrum, to believers and to those who have left because of this sort of thing.
As believers these sort of stories should serve to remind us of the burden we bear. We know we’re far from perfect. We know we’ll do things that offend others, sometimes egregiously, and even sometimes intentionally. There’s always that possibility; it comes from being human. And the burden is that when we do so, the world around us will blame our church, our faith, our Lord, rather than put the blame where it belongs — on us.
(more…)
The current issue of A List Apart has an article by Aaron Gustafson, one of those brave articles that is sure to cause a storm of un- and mis-informed comment. It’s a real attempt to solve a problem, and one that shows more than a little bravery.
Eric Meyer’s reply (published side-by-side in a point/not-quite-counterpoint approach) covers a lot of the thought process I went through when encountering it. I’ll freely grant that Meyer, having had more time than I did to come to grips with the idea, may have thought this through deeper than I, but I’m still at the “Ooooh, ick” stage with this idea.
I can see the point, and as I said I congratulate Gustafson for taking the bull by the horns in such a bold manner, but I cannot agree that he escaped goring.
I’m afraid I see this as an attempt to offload the responsibility for good design, to pass the buck, as it were, from designers to browser makers.
(more…)
I’ve created a new web design project as a giant learning experience. As a result, I’m making progress learning simultaneously a new language (Ruby) and a new framework (you guessed it, Rails).
I like learning new programming languages; To be honest I’ve lost track of how many this makes, but it’s over 20 now. I haven’t done it for a while and those skills have atrophied a bit. Still, the knack is coming back to me, and I’m enjoying myself immensely.
At the same time, I’ve let myself get talked into writing a book (for chess coaches, if you simply must know). So for part of everyday, I’m immersed in two completely different disciplines.
Or so I thought
(more…)
Just ran into an interesting quirk with Inman positioning.
I was using it with Safari 3, and noticed the same bug in Firefox 2.0.0.11 while testing. I loaded the javascript file in the document head and when the document started to load,, apparently it loaded a document and triggered the script before the body had loaded. The script failed, claiming document.body was null.
After ripping out handfuls of hair (”Whaddya mean null? I can see the tag right there! Open your eyes you stupid machine!”) I realized the timing issue and moved the script deeper into the document, so it would be triggered after the body tag was loaded.
Success.
I’ve got some real mixed emotions about the Boucher decision.
I mean, I’m all in favor of the Fifth Amendment. I think it’s necessary to preserve our liberties, especially today when the federal government seems intent on taking them away in the name of security.
I just don’t see any sort of meaningful difference between a password and the key to a locked room/box/safe. If I’m the target of a legally obtained search warrant, I can be forced to provide a key for a strong box. How is that different from a password for an encrypted file?
Even more to the point, the judge can compel me to provide the combination for a safe that might be the legitimate target of a search. Tell me, please, just how that possibly differs from the password for a computer file.
I’m definitely not in favor of giving the government carte blanche to search everyone everywhere. There are specific tests they must meet in order to be granted the right to search, and the warrants have to be specific about what they can find and take away.
But given those measures are satisfied, I’m completely at a loss how any reasonable judge can draw a distinction between the combination to a safe and the password to a computer, saying you have to divulge the one but not the other.
Every now and then, someone comes up with a solution that seems so obviously wrong you immediately open your mouth to object. But by the time your mouth opens your brain has done some more processing, and you realize what you’re about to say isn’t really an objection. Nor is the next thing. And you realize he’s thought it through a little more than you have. And you’re left with your mouth hanging open and nothing to say.
Derek Powazek just did that to me. On first hearing, his proposal to put images in pages as div backgrounds is just so wrong that my tongue trips over my teeth in its haste to make the declaration. My lungs fill, my mouth opens.
(more…)
Over at Lifehacker they ask the question, “Why not run an open wireless access point and share your connection?” Security maven Bruce Schneier offers several reasons for doing so.
I’ve got one good reason not to. I said I wouldn’t
You see, it’s not about the odds of getting caught. It’s not about giving people a reason not to hack me. It’s that when I signed up for the service I promised not to do that.
If the only reason you conform to an agreement is because of what will happen when you get caught, then perhaps you shouldn’t agree in the first place.
In the words of Lord John Whorfin: “Character is what you are in the dark.”
When I saw this, I just couldn’t help myself. Lift and enjoy, Dr Witherington!
Nothing warms the cockles of an old curmudgeon’s heart as much as things like this.
While I stop now and spend a moment of silence in mourning for the loss of Scoble’s data (which is truly a despicable act, one for which Facebook should be shunned off the web) I can’t help but remember something I learned long ago:
“Never commit to entering a room until you know the way out.”
I stayed away from Facebook for precisely that reason. I could see a way in, but no good way out.
(And to think, I learned that lesson long before politicos ever learned the phrase “exit strategy.”)
Anyone who trusts their data to a corporation without having a second copy of it is a fool. Period. Facebook is just one more example of a group that wants to lock us in their trunk and take us where they want us to go.
And to think, Facebook not only stole Robert’s data (if you think that’s strong, what other term would you use for keeping something away from its legal owner?) but they did this after having the temerity to use his name and likeness in a Saturn ad (without either his knowledge or his permission, and without compensating him for it). I think Scoble should talk to GM about their buying Facebook for him as compensation for that particular act of theft.
OK, Andy so you’re mad about the Opera Lawsuit. I get that. You’re also frustrated with the inability of MS programmers to follow a spec. I get that, too. But this just doesn’t make sense to me.
I just don’t see how it’s a practical idea to exclude from the creation of a standard the very people whose job it will be to implement that standard. I’m sorry, I just don’t see how that can work. Is there another working group at W3C that does that? For example, the XML protocol working group includes Oracle, the HTML group includes Microsoft.
(more…)
Picked up an old book in my library last night, and a bunch of memories came flooding back. The book was Marked Man by Harry Carmichael, a mystery, and I thought of Bengta Wu.
Bengta Wu was a bookseller. I never met the person, so I can’t tell you anything about him or her, but Bengta Wu was my own personal “84 Charring Cross Road.” We corresponded about books, and I bought most of my early library that way.
(more…)
Now this is strange.
I’ll make no secret of this: I’m not one of Jessica McBride’s fans. You want proof? The first line of her comment is disgraceful. I’ve even gone so far as to speculate on when her last remaining synapse might die of loneliness. But there’s a line between disagreement, even strenuously enthusiastic disagreement, and abuse.
(more…)
It was one of those moments that defines, even redefines, a life, although it didn’t look like it. A new coach had taken over the sorriest team in the league, a team that had barely managed to escape being winless the year before. Rookies had reported to camp, but the vets weren’t required to report for a couple of days yet, when the veteran wide receiver and fullback showed up. Their intention was to settle in slowly, have a look (and a laugh) at the rookies, and then have some fun in town before their training camp began.
The new coach called them in and informed them that if they were going to stay at the facility, they would be expected to suit up and practice with the rookies. The fullback stood on his rights as a veteran and refused. For some reason, the wide receiver agreed with the coach and showed up for practice the next day. By the time the season began, the fullback was gone, and the wide receiver was starting. (more…)
