tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-196098122024-03-07T16:19:24.900-08:00Four Year PlanIf people who "use the word 'hegemony' in everyday conversation" and who cherish "freedom from the oppressive hetero-normative patriarchy"—or even know what that means—sound like your kind of folks, you might be a Smithie.cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.comBlogger129125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-72074318181532624962009-10-14T08:38:00.000-07:002009-10-14T11:09:47.707-07:00Liveblogging p&p summit, day 3, designing for performanceYes, let's all agree that <i>all</i> apps must have a performance plan.<div><ul><li>Highest-priority scenarios - could be response times to user input, or server throughput, or other. I'm thinking data response times too.</li><li>Articulate Bad, Good and Excellent performance - e.g., on startup 10 sec is bad, 3 sec is good, <><li>Do coarse estimation if "good performance" is in jeopardy - if uncertain, prototype and measure more; if bad, redesign.</li></ul><div>Design design design design. "If you have a performance catastrophe - 10x, 100x from acceptable - then you either have some serious bugs or the flaw is in design. If it's in the design, then you're screwed. You <i>cannot</i> fix this late in the product cycle. You have to start over and redesign the app from scratch for version 2." You don't say. J.f.C.</div><div><br /></div><div>Measure. Use real numbers. Measure early. Don't skimp on this. Performance is not free.</div><div><br /></div><div>You cannot commit to features or designs until you know how much they cost, and to know that, you need real facts and real numbers. Use references (consults?), past experience, and experiments/prototyping to determine what things cost. You can only make rational decisions about how to build things if you know this. (I am sure this must apply to aspects of decision-making beyond just performance.)</div><div><br /></div><div>Multi-threading. Ugh.</div><div><br /></div><div>A symptom of blocking - you have a ton of stuff going on/waiting, but the machine's CPU is <i>not</i> fully utilized. This means something's hanging on some thread while the machine has idle threads to spare. Points of communication between threads will then be the bottlenecks. It's fine to share RO data between threads because each thread can keep its own hot copy.</div><div><br /></div><div>Disk is 10,000x slower than RAM.</div><div><br /></div><div>"The problem with caches is they only work the <i>second</i> time." D'oh.</div><div><br /></div><div>("Argaments"?)</div><div><br /></div><div>Memory is not a primary metric - time is. It only matters inasmuch as it affects time.</div><div><br /></div><div>Takeaways:</div><div><br /></div><div>1. Care.</div><div>2. Plan.</div><div>3. Measure.</div><div>4. Design.</div><div>5. Measure some more.</div></div>cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-64563883750224323652009-10-13T09:27:00.000-07:002009-10-13T10:01:45.954-07:00Liveblogging p&p summit, day 2, keynote<b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;">"Don't allow an unbelievable schedule to live."</span></b><div><br /></div><div>Not just <i>don't</i>, but here's <i>why not</i>:</div><div><br /></div><div>When people don't believe the schedule, it undercuts their belief in anything else you say.</div><div><br /></div><div>When everybody "knows" you can't make the schedule, if you're not actively managing that, they'll start making their own decisions and judgments. If this is under the table, then they won't do it the way you (the manager) would want. E.g., if they "know" the ship date isn't realistic and no one is talking about that, maybe they'll speculate about <i>how much</i> it's going to slip, and start working to that assumption. If you (the manager) don't know what they're speculating and aren't giving realistic, believable input into that judgment, then you won't have any influence over that decision they're silently making about how to work. Yowch.</div><div><br /></div><div>The usual solutions are to change the ship date or change the scope, to bring about a believable schedule. Both of which are the right things. I suppose there is another possibility, to convince people that the original scope & schedule should be believable, by providing lots of supporting facts and Gantt charts and suchlike. The problem here is that this is more like browbeating, most of the time. If your developers don't believe the schedule (assuming your developers are minimally competent and are at least somewhat able to explain their concerns rationally; if not, then you have a much bigger problem), chances are you should listen to them instead of trying to talk them out of it. As well, not listening to them makes <i>all </i>of the above outcomes worse.</div><div><br /></div><div>"Working harder is a short-term solution." Death marches R bad, mmmkay?</div>cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-4890384470801832422009-10-12T11:09:00.001-07:002009-10-12T15:21:40.418-07:00Liveblogging p&p summit, day 1, moreGratified to see that my team isn't the only one with an unhealthy fondness for layer cake metaphors (and Visios)!<div><br /></div><div>"Customer doesn't care whose fault it is; they just want things to work." Good reminder for <i>me</i>, personally.</div><div><br /></div><div>Got to talk to a very delightful p&p program manager/session presenter in the coffee line while a different session was going on. If I were actually any <i>good</i> at this "networking" thing, I would have figured out a way to snag a business card or thought of a thought-provoking question for further follow-up. Live & learn.</div><div><br /></div><div>"When [users/developers] get a new version and have to spend all their up-front time fixing compatibility issues, they tend to not want to use your app at all." Not that Microsoft would know, of course. ;)</div><div><br /></div><div>Much later in the day...</div><div><br /></div><div>Experimental 15-minute "lightning sessions" debuting this year. The first one was a Program Manager discussing transition to Agile, which was disappointing because it didn't cover Agile in very much depth. In 15 minutes. I <i>know</i>! Really! (Ahem, <i>kidding</i>.)</div><div><br /></div><div>The current "lightning session" covers a concept called Behavior-Driven Design. I love it. This is either something we are already accidentally doing, or something I wish we were doing. Either way, it seems to me that it would fit well within the methodologies we already use. Awesome.</div><div><br /></div><div>I exercised restraint and did <i>not</i> "mention" the speaker, @ElegantCoder, in a tweet, even after other attendees did and his TweetDeck notifications started popping up on his presentation laptop. The temptation was tremendous.</div><div><br /></div><div>So he uses the word "scenario" for the "given/when/then" construct describing a desired/expected behavior. We also use the word "scenario" and I'm trying to figure out whether our usage is reasonably compatible with this standard definition, or if we're abusing it. We use it to describe automatedly-testable behaviors, so it does seem to fit together, but it doesn't really describe our internal architecture, so maybe not so much.</div><div><br /></div><div>OK, this is cool. Third lightning session on SharePoint development seemed ridiculously irrelevant to our team, but instead, here he is demoing the concept of Inversion of Control, which is perfect for some of the team members we brought along, and the examples are simple, and he's explaining the value IoC adds to the process. Hooray!</div><div><br /></div><div>That means 2.5 out of 3 lightnings are useful so far.</div><div><br /></div><div>Last lightning round: Billy Hollis. Always a total, major win even if he doesn't fully appreciate that there may be female coders in his audience (or in the universe) when he writes his jokes. Ahem. *dusts shoulder-chip* I'll still give him full credit for "useful". 3.5 out of four, nice work p&p.</div>cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-686705344136192282009-10-12T08:39:00.000-07:002009-10-12T09:39:06.420-07:00Liveblogging p&p summit, day 1, intro & keynoteZOMG it's Martin Fowler. Right now! I knew he'd be here, but, <i>first</i>! #fangrrrl<div><br /></div><div>"We need to reduce our emphasis on quality so we can fit more features into the next release"? No, that's definitely never happened to me. Nope.</div><div><br /></div><div>Attendance is way, way down compared to two years ago. Our own delegation this year is half the size (or smaller?) than ours then, and I'd really guess the overall crowd size is similarly proportioned. Which makes me wonder about last year (immediately mid-meltdown) when <i>we</i> couldn't attend at all. Don't know if it is valid to think of us as a bellwether.</div><div><br /></div><div>Lord, this clacky Dell keyboard is already not making me any friends here.</div><div><br /></div><div>Key concepts from the Martin Fowler leadoff keynote, part 1:</div><div><br /></div><div>External quality, which is negotiable with the users/product owners (e.g., they get to prioritize bugs vs. new features), vs. internal quality (architecture), which really mustn't be.</div><div><br /></div><div>Accidental complexity vs. essential complexity. Code debt!! Initial accidental complexity is the principal and working with the accidental complexity when implementing new features/changes is the interest. This impacts the effort required to do that new work. It isn't just "debt", it could be on the scale of a technical subprime mortgage. Not that I would know. Nope.</div><div><br /></div><div>Debt planning (refer also to the debt payoff line graph):</div><div>Deliberate/prudent: "We must ship now and deal with the consequences"</div><div>Deliberate/reckless: "We don't have time for design"</div><div>Inadvertent/prudent: "Now we know how we should have done it"</div><div>Inadvertent/reckless: "What's layering?"</div><div><br /></div><div>Event sourcing:</div><div><i>(This is relevant to my interests.)</i></div><div><br /></div><div>We log all events in an insert-only store, and we trust our log, such that at any time we could rebuild the entire current application state (e.g., dB) by parsing the log. This also means we have a solid audit trail, and we could rebuild the entire historical state of the application (presumably someplace else) just by dialing back the date. Or diff two states. In other words, this stuff isn't just for version control systems any more.</div><div><br /></div><div>Also useful for various other things which hopefully one of my colleagues took notes about. Oops. #shortattentionspan</div><div><br /></div><div>OK, now there's a dude in front of me taking pictures of Martin Fowler. Unless he's part of Microsoft's PR division, that means I am not the only #fangrrrl in the room! I am sorely tempted to take a picture of him taking a picture.</div><div><br /></div><div>Coffee time!</div>cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-76980015264163367482009-08-24T14:31:00.000-07:002009-08-26T15:04:04.888-07:00Algebra in real life, part IIThis post is dedicated to the memory of Mr. Earl Wog, who taught us about Joe Pythagoras and also taught me how to drive. :)<br /><br />I've needed to know this two different times in the last six months or so, and had to figure it out from scratch both times, so it's time to document it for posterity.<br /><br />When you're trying to get payment from somebody via, say, an online credit card processor such as PayPal, and the processor takes a percentage of the <span style="font-style: italic;">total transaction</span> as its transaction fee, how much do you need to charge in order to receive the amount of money you actually want? Here is the correct formula:<br /><br /><code>[amount you want to receive] ÷ ( 1 - [fee, as a decimal] )</code><br /><br />The following, seemingly plausible formula <span style="font-style: italic;">does not work</span>, and will result in you receiving <span style="font-style: italic;">less money than you wanted</span>:<br /><br /><code>[amount you want to receive] + ( [amount you want to receive] × [fee, as a decimal] )</code><br /><br />Pro tip! If you accidentally used the second formula instead of the first one, don't make an indignant post in the credit card processor's user support forums demanding to know why they're shorting you.<br /><br />Thanks, Mr. Wog, wherever you are!<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Update:</span> I received a suggestion that the following formula may also yield the desired result:<br /><br /><code>[amount you want to receive] × ( 1 + [fee, as a decimal] )</code><br /><br />However,<br /><br /><code>x(1+y) == (x </code><code>× 1) + (x </code><code>× y) ==</code><code> x + xy</code><br /><br />which is the same as the <span style="font-style: italic;">second</span> formula above and isn't correct. Thanks to GAM for helping me with the proof on this. Make no mistake, my algebra skillz are tenuous and that's why I have to struggle through formulas and post them on my blog. :)cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-76785897226109836022008-12-20T21:20:00.001-08:002012-01-16T15:07:50.484-08:00WTF is it with Seattle and snow?I survived four years of Massachusetts winters in college. That's mostly where I learned to drive; I picked up some snow skillz during shifts piloting the (16-passenger, RWD, usually-empty) campus shuttle van. It just wasn't that scary.<br /><br />One year I invited a Mass-native friend (hi Katy!) home to see Seattle during winter break, and my family wouldn't let us go <em>anywhere</em> after < 1" of snow fell on the city. She was disgusted; I was mortified.<br /><br />So what is the <em>deal</em> with snow in Seattle? If, e.g., Bostonians, had our attitude about it, they'd be forced into hibernation six months of the year. Non-natives never seem to tire of pointing out what pantywaists we Seattleites are about this.<br /><br /><strong>Most obvious reason</strong>: It rarely snows in Seattle. My entire childhood, twice a year (November and March), lasting 1-3 days, <em>if</em> we kids were <em>lucky</em>. This leads to side-effects, and not just the one where Seattleites hardly ever get to practice driving in snow.<br /><br />Seattle and King County <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28307710/">own fewer snowplows</a> than other cities. Many or most snowplows are fitted with <a href="http://burienwa.gov/index.asp?nid=763">rubber blades</a> to keep from damaging the extensive network of raised-button and reflective lane markers:<br /><blockquote><p>Roads crews are working around the clock to continuously plow and sand City streets.... Following the plows are the sanders to provide traction on the ice. <strong>Snow plows’ rubber blades do not remove ice</strong>.</p></blockquote>(We use raised lane markers because it <em>rains</em> here. Ever seen the lane markings when it's wet in Boston? Neither have Bostonians.)<br /><br />No wonder most of Burien today looked more like it had been <em>polished</em> than plowed, though.<br /><br />Seattle and King County say it is not cost-effective to maintain any larger a fleet of snowplows or sanding trucks for how infrequently they are needed. This seems reasonable to me, unless these last few years of storms are harbingers of long-term climate change or something.<br /><br />On the flip side of this, as alluded-to above, cities with regular heavy snowfall get good at dealing with it out of practical and economic necessity. People couldn't live there if they didn't. People would have to move to friendlier climes, like Seattle... hey, waitaminnit....<br /><br /><strong>A related reason</strong>: Snow in Seattle is <a href="http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2008/12/more-precipitation-today.html">almost always <em>wet</em> snow</a>. Even when it gets cold enough for precipitation to fall as snow, we're usually flirting with 32°F.<br /><blockquote>Several of you commented about the nature of the snow last night. Most of you are used to the large, dendritic crystals that fall when temperatures are near freezing...our usual situation. Last night you got to enjoy the type of snow they get in colder climates.</blockquote>Most of the time, that means what little snow we got will melt away quickly, completely. But when we get snow of any quantity, often, it'll melt <em>partially</em> during the day and re-freeze as sheets of solid ice.<br /><br />Also, wet snow compacts differently when driven on than dry snow does, which is especially relevant when the streets aren't getting plowed right away (or at all).<br /><br /><strong>A frequent complaint</strong>: We don't salt the roads. The poor salmon! Think of the salmon! (Or is it "think of the undercarriage"?)<br /><br /><strong>Another obvious, though debatable, reason</strong>: Seattle is really, really hilly. Stuff other places call "mountains", we call "housing developments" and "arterials". I have to negotiate several steep hills to get out of my neighborhood in any direction. Only one of these is ever sanded; none are ever plowed. It is claimed, however, that other actual hilly cities manage better than Seattle does. See above and below.<br /><br /><strong>The oft-cited reason</strong>: "I can drive fine on snow... it's all those <em>other</em> maniacs." Does this refer to all those native Seattleites who can't drive on snow? The natives <em>I</em> grew up with refuse to leave the house at the first sight of flurries. Could it be all those transplanted drivers zipping around assuming our roads are as driveable as the ones where they came from? (Maybe it's just the free lobotomy given to both kinds of drivers when they buy an SUV.)<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitOQy63VcHAEHc08ir7qeYCF3YvCdi2DIWKNn_4_ZBXnTvz5ppwbTZnGYNHCr-Z_NRa0To5Y1rL7Nmv0hYiaoKFpuRcchIov-072YPIQ84fYlCiWIiuhsol1yAQ00HpC7F6Xin/s1600/2008seattlesnowbus.jpg"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitOQy63VcHAEHc08ir7qeYCF3YvCdi2DIWKNn_4_ZBXnTvz5ppwbTZnGYNHCr-Z_NRa0To5Y1rL7Nmv0hYiaoKFpuRcchIov-072YPIQ84fYlCiWIiuhsol1yAQ00HpC7F6Xin/s320/2008seattlesnowbus.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5698369698906385394" style="float: right; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 10px; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 219px; " /></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgG3YpgHBJ5FSmrsIB4K5wqxSj2V2a4TtN5yDJSuMKXikkW2XjCRF4rzT8azDfUBxP9MSdOtuyYw4pzbiVOowr9qdktfTxRK13EDnEk2dmglOvqJphrkJAZ3r7HAzmtg2YmLXRI/s1600/2008seattlesnowbus2.jpg"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgG3YpgHBJ5FSmrsIB4K5wqxSj2V2a4TtN5yDJSuMKXikkW2XjCRF4rzT8azDfUBxP9MSdOtuyYw4pzbiVOowr9qdktfTxRK13EDnEk2dmglOvqJphrkJAZ3r7HAzmtg2YmLXRI/s320/2008seattlesnowbus2.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5698369696313562290" style="float: right; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 10px; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 217px; " /></a><strong>Case study</strong>: This <a href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008541924_bus20m.html">super-awesome news story</a> from yesterday, wherein <em>two</em> charter buses nearly plunged 20 feet onto I-5 after trying to take an icy hill without chains, arguably had several of the above causes:<br /><ul><li>Steep urban hills</li><li>Closure of an unplowed arterial</li><li><a href="http://westseattleblog.com/blog/?p=12689">Icy Side Street of Death™</a></li><li>Some kind of driver cluelessness, or reckless bravado, which led the <em>first</em> bus to ignore pedestrians frantically trying to wave it off its ill-fated left turn and the <em>second</em> bus to make the <em>same</em> turn after the first bus was already sliding and the second bus' passengers were <a href="http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/392969_bus20.html">screaming at the driver to stop</a></li></ul><strong>What have we learned?</strong> I dunno, but Washington state seems to do reasonably kind of OK with that big ol' mountain pass we have (I-90, known elsewhere as the Mass Pike); we manage to keep it open most of the time, even during avalanche season, so somebody somewhere in this state must know something about making roads driveable in snow. Maybe just not so much down here at sea level.<br /><br /><strong>In conclusion</strong>: A couple years ago, I waited a few hours after the snow had started to begin my trek through the city from work toward home. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0317740/quotes">I Had a Bad Experience</a>. Two to three HOURS of road closures, crazy heavy traffic on unplowed urban side street detours, unwise steep hill attempts blocked by other people's earlier unsuccessful unwise hill attempts, jackknifed Metro buses, and finally utterly fucking clueless pedestrian neighbors who let their kids and dogs frolic in front of me on the steep unplowed hill I was, at that moment, sliding down uncontrollably. <i>¡No más!</i> I got nothin' to prove any more, and I ain't goin' out in this stuff if I don't have to.<br /><br /><strong>Bonus update</strong>: <a href="http://dearscience.org/2008/12/21/special-bonus-dear-science-why-is-my-car-shit-in-snow/">Dear Science</a> explains how your SUV is subject to the same Newtonian physics (hi lafe!) as the rest of us, no matter what the dealer may have told you.<br /><br /><strong>Another bonus update</strong>: <a href="http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2008/12/noon-update-and-editorial.html">Cliff Mass wonders</a> whether it's <i>really</i> more cost-effective for Seattle to skimp on plows:<br /><blockquote>It is true that having extra plows for city trucks are not free and that snow events like this are unusual. But the economic loss of allowing the city to be crippled by such modest snows is substantial...and major decisions (like the cancellation of schools last Wednesday when no snow fell) are made in the context of such poor snow removal.</blockquote>It would be interesting to try to quantify, indeed.cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-29540491902297638422008-11-14T17:12:00.000-08:002008-11-14T17:38:28.681-08:00Bold, bold choicesLast night on <span style="font-style: italic;">Countdown</span>, I swear* Keith Olbermann said something about how President-elect Obama's hypothetically possibly choosing <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton">Hillary Clinton</a> as his Secretary of State would be a <span style="font-weight: bold;">bold move</span> because it would place a woman in such a high office.<br /><br />A few moments later he clued in and noted that the <span style="font-style: italic;">current</span> Secretary of State is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condoleezza_Rice">Condoleezza Rice</a>.<br /><br />Great job, Keith, except <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madeleine_Albright">Madeleine Albright</a> was appointed Secretary of State by President Bill Clinton in 1996 and served through 2000.<br /><br />[insert "Worst Persons" ominous theme music here]<br /><br />But wait! There's more!<br /><br />This morning on KIRO AM 710, Dave Ross said something about how President-elect Obama's even-more-hypothetically possibly choosing <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Powell">Colin Powell</a> as his Secretary of State would be a <span style="font-weight: bold;">bold move</span> because it would place an African-American in such a high office.<br /><br />He did <span style="font-style: italic;">not</span> manage to clue in that the <span>current</span> Secretary of State is Condoleezza Rice.<br /><br />And, somehow, even though this was the <span style="font-style: italic;">whole point</span> of the discussion, did not put it together that Colin Powell, having been appointed in 2001 by President GW Bush and having served through 2005, <span style="font-style: italic;">has already been Secretary of State</span>.<br /><br />In conclusion, people:<br /><ul><li>We have already had <span style="font-style: italic;">two</span> female Secretaries of State.</li><li>We have already had <span style="font-style: italic;">two</span> African-American Secretaries of State.</li></ul>I realize that we are really, really enjoying the historic-ness of the present moment, but let's come to grips with the fact that the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_State">State Department</a>'s historic moment has passed.<br /><br />Hell, I'm not sure even an openly gay or lesbian Secretary of State would be <span style="font-style: italic;">that</span> <span style="font-weight: bold;">bold</span> a move... unless she or he has the temerity to want to get <span style="font-weight: bold;">married</span> or something.<br /><br />(<a href="http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=32970639099">Seattle March for Equality</a> tomorrow, November 15, Volunteer Park, 10:30 AM with keynote speakers starting at noon...!!)<br /><br /><span style="font-size:78%;">__<br />* I did not rewind or write down the exact quote or look online for the video today, so standard disclaimers apply.</span>cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-88820659992944450652008-11-04T21:34:00.000-08:002008-11-04T21:47:11.056-08:00Election Day transcendenceI tempted, no, taunted fate by wearing a RED shirt* to work on Election Day.<br /><br />I was pleasantly surprised to find that Kyle wore a blue one. (Certainly without as much "meta" or superstition as me.)<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3158/3004864398_754935a191.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 500px; height: 375px;" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3158/3004864398_754935a191.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br />I would like it very much if we could follow President-elect Obama's lead and be less "red" and "blue" in our collective political thinking. This is not to say that I'm turning away in the slightest from my values, nor Kyle from his, which will make it an interesting exercise.<br />__<br /><span style="font-size: xx-small">* Not a Star Trek reference.</span>cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-85643678603633134112008-11-04T11:04:00.001-08:002008-11-04T11:05:54.929-08:00Election Day synchronicityInteresting mix here in my Twitter feed.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrM5OHrXsELCWZLzhD-_GtJQ-wiH8CWtpXnmDhSOXbGA1aw2rhnmf6v8dWa5d6CT4KVofa2AgiyuqG8pvcFGjbCrBlvrflYptfAK28tb2XUsSJGvxuUDhj5jqzBoUN9bXGZrtq/s1600-h/obama.bmp"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 105px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrM5OHrXsELCWZLzhD-_GtJQ-wiH8CWtpXnmDhSOXbGA1aw2rhnmf6v8dWa5d6CT4KVofa2AgiyuqG8pvcFGjbCrBlvrflYptfAK28tb2XUsSJGvxuUDhj5jqzBoUN9bXGZrtq/s400/obama.bmp" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5264880304018432258" border="0" /></a>Now go vote!cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-61373957299813482202008-11-03T14:41:00.001-08:002008-11-03T15:09:03.416-08:00Suki Halloween Costume<span style="font-weight: bold;">The Challenge:</span> For Halloween, LG wanted to be Suki, Kyoshi Warrior from <span style="font-style: italic;">Avatar: The Last Airbender</span>.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUWnrgPz49mhzf6_ms-lXt-F3G-tl5d6Mta8wKy2HlwovbEhES0JI1Gj3lZ7c1YnAhq8YROPO8SmoH6IkG77BcOWbjZ8v3LaLLka6436JsUBOz7Sw2aavtuhpeZez9zj9M6GgO/s1600-h/suki.png"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 267px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUWnrgPz49mhzf6_ms-lXt-F3G-tl5d6Mta8wKy2HlwovbEhES0JI1Gj3lZ7c1YnAhq8YROPO8SmoH6IkG77BcOWbjZ8v3LaLLka6436JsUBOz7Sw2aavtuhpeZez9zj9M6GgO/s400/suki.png" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5264566258629112690" border="0" /></a><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The Mission:</span> Design an awesome, accurate Suki costume for Halloween which would, we hoped, also be wearable for next year's Anime Con and Emerald City ComiCon.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The Staff:</span> Lead designer and dressmaker: my mom. Headdress and makeup: me. Lead researcher, accessories and finishing details: LG's mom. Kyoshi Warrior attitude: all LG.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The Project:</span><br /><br />We spent a morning at JoAnn Fabrics picking out clothing and costume patterns that contained different elements mom could piece together to create the final dress pattern. LG located fabrics that exactly matched the colors in our screen printout. I took some wild guesses at yardage. We picked up a few notions that we thought mom wouldn't already have.<br /><br />Mom did some shopping for supplemental patterns in better sizes, and modified the design to be expandable in a variety of ways in case it needs to be altered next spring.<br /><br />Barb picked up fans, two shades of gold spray paint, tassels, and other items. We each shopped for a variety of items to try for the facepaint. Very annoying that all the Halloween brands say not to use red around the eyes.<br /><br />I designed and built the headdress out of a Clorox bottle and some chopsticks from Panda Express. I glued green bias tape to the wraparound headband area and added laces for adjustable sizing. We painted the pieces using Barb's gold spray paints and assembled with a hot glue gun.<br /><br />Barb spray-painted the fans and applied gold medallions and tassels to finish up the costume.<br /><br />On Halloween evening, LG finished dinner, suited up, and we sat down for a makeup application (which was long enough and unpleasant enough to give her serious second thoughts about her showbiz career aspirations). We used Clinique foundation base, white drugstore greasepaint (dabbed on with a makeup sponge), cornstarch powder to set the white, and then Wet 'n' Wild black eyeliner pencil and Wet 'n' Wild red lipstick (applied with a lip brush) for the designs.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The Result:</span><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3231/2990120447_4e693362f5.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 375px; height: 500px;" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3231/2990120447_4e693362f5.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br />Perfection. Look for LG and a gaggle of proud grownups at next year's Cons!cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-85157205342882274062008-09-03T23:36:00.000-07:002008-09-03T23:40:27.731-07:00Oh no he didn'tFrom <a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/04/palin-attacks-shrill-and-sarcastic-says-reid-spokesman/">CNN's Political Ticker</a>:<br /><blockquote>"A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is hitting back hard at Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin's speech Wednesday night, calling it 'shrill...'"</blockquote>"Shrill"?<br /><br />Really?<br /><br />Way to go, Harry. You're a fine representative of the principles Democratic voters hold dear, and I simply cannot imagine how your Senate majority's approval ratings managed to become so low.cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-48206779868009439942008-09-01T15:51:00.000-07:002008-09-01T16:02:37.715-07:00Oh no she didn'tI assure you, I am not making this up. I'm actually pretty late to the party.<br /><br />From an <a href="http://eagleforumalaska.blogspot.com/2006/07/2006-gubernatorial-candidate.html">Eagle Forum Alaska questionnaire</a> in 2006, when Sarah Palin was a candidate for governor:<br /><blockquote>"11. Are you offended by the phrase 'Under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?<br /><br />SP: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance."</blockquote>The original version of the Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892.<br /><br />"of the United States of America" was added in 1922-23.<br /><br />Congress declared it the official national pledge in 1942.<br /><br />And finally, "under God" was added by Congress, at the urging of the Knights of Columbus, in 1954.<br /><br />Maybe she meant different "founding fathers" than the ones in 1776?cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-89501943021306430902008-07-11T13:34:00.000-07:002008-07-11T13:40:17.927-07:00D minus ten10 days to Deutschland!!<br /><br />Newcomers, be sure to watch my <a href="http://www.travelblog.org/Bloggers/bsktcase/">TravelBlog</a> for exciting and insightful posts throughout my journey to Old Europe. It'll update to my <a href="http://www.facebook.com/minifeed.php?id=707300787">Facebook feed</a> as well.<br /><br />I do travel blogging over there, rather than here, because there's extra mapping and social networking and stuff. It's cool. Čech it out!<br /><br />See y'all in August....cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-37575030751118260562008-07-09T22:06:00.000-07:002008-07-09T22:19:00.122-07:00Gemini FTW!Loyal readers will recall that a few years ago, <a href="http://bsktcase.blogspot.com/2006/02/gemini-vs-taurus.html">I got run over</a> by a lying, scene-of-accident-fleeing sack of shit in a blue Ford Taurus.<br /><br />Back then, I said I would be investigating options as to dealing with the miscreant. Investigate I did... my lawyer advised that no good lawyer would help me sue (I'd win, but miscreant has no money to pay my lawyers any percentage of)... but my lawyer also advised me to check with my own auto insurance company, because I had about 50-50 odds that my own Uninsured Motorist policy would cover my accident, a <span style="font-style: italic;">pedestrian</span> hit-and-run.<br /><br />Sure enough, mine did!<br /><br />Thanks to my aforementioned lawyer, whom I adore, I was able to negotiate a nice little cash settlement from my own insurance company. Unexpected and pretty sweet.<br /><br />Oh, but that's not all.<br /><br />Tonight, I get a letter from my own insurance company, roughly along these lines:<br /><blockquote>Hi, as you know, we recently paid you a nice little cash settlement. It is our intention now to go after the miscreant who hit you, to try to recover for ourselves some of the money we just paid you. This letter is to advise you that we might ask you to come testify against the lying sack of shit if it ever comes to that; hope you don't mind. Love, State Farm.</blockquote>Let the happy dance, on my skillfully repaired and rehabilitated knee, commence.cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-57491003651443648342008-07-03T15:19:00.000-07:002008-07-09T16:07:04.113-07:00On the meaning of lifeLast weekend there was a bad apartment fire in Burien... 1.5 complexes were destroyed, 3 people died, 70-some are homeless, and arson is suspected (<a href="http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/368964_fire01.html">Blaze that killed 3 people was arson</a>).<br /><br />I hadn't been able to figure out <span style="font-style: italic;">where</span> the apartments were located in Burien, and it bugs me to not know things about Burien. I had heard something about them being generally on SW 155th, and yesterday I happened to be driving on SW 156th... so... yeah. I wanted to check it out*. SW 155th isn't very long, so it didn't take much time to find the place.<br /><br />LG & I cruised by and looked at the two burned-out buildings and the "ARSON" signs. As we passed, I noticed a memorial set up for the victims of the fire, and I mentioned to her, by way of imparting how bad a deal this fire really was, that a 7-year-old boy was one of the ones killed.<br /><br />LG thought for a moment and said: "He didn't even have a chance to live his life."<br /><br />Then: "He didn't even get to live as much of a life as <span style="font-style: italic;">I</span> have."<br /><br />Something about that, from an 8-year-old, struck me as really profound. That is all.<br /><br />--<span style="font-size:85%;"><br />* Not <span style="font-style: italic;">trying</span> to be disrespectful, but... yeah, I know. I did it anyway.<br /></span>cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-62502580651741187812008-06-26T17:47:00.000-07:002008-06-26T18:31:58.400-07:00Everybody who has ever put a flag sticker on their car or worn a flag pin had better show up CHEERFULLY when summoned for jury dutyI have completed my first real week of real jury duty.<br /><br />Back in 1992, I got summoned in Massachusetts while attending college. I told the judge I was carrying 20 credits that semester, which I was, and that got me excused with some kudos from the judge for being so impressively studious.<br /><br />A couple of years ago, I got summoned for service in Seattle on December 26. Seriously. I decided to serve it, rather than postpone it, at least in part because it pissed off my then-boss so much. :) Turns out when we all arrived for service, the clerk couldn't imagine why anyone summoned any jurors for the morning after Christmas... all the judges and lawyers were on vacation and no trials were scheduled for the entire week. She spent an hour confirming this fact, then dismissed us all outright. Sweet way to satisfy a jury summons!<br /><br />This week, I served at Burien District Court. I participated in two selection panels, both for DUIs. I found it interesting how the jury-screening questions by the prosecutor and the defense attorney telegraphed their approaches to the trial itself. Granted, two is not much of a sample size, but in both cases the prosecutors asked a lot of questions about "reasonable doubt" and whether we jurors would be willing to convict in the <span style="font-style: italic;">absence </span>of Breathalyzer test results or other scientific evidence. Would the "credibility" of the arresting officer be sufficient to convince us that the defendant was intoxicated beyond the legal limit? Most jurors said <span style="font-style: italic;">no</span>, the officer's word, judgment, observation, whatever, alone would <span style="font-style: italic;">not</span> be enough. Most jurors said <span style="font-style: italic;">no</span>, it is <span style="font-style: italic;">not</span> possible to know for sure whether someone is drunk just by looking at them, unless you know them well.<br /><br />All this really got me wondering. If it's legal for accused drivers to refuse breath and/or blood tests, and I think it might be, and if modern CSI-watching juries will only accept the results of scientific tests as sufficient evidence, wouldn't that make DUI cases inherently unwinnable for the state?<br /><br />A lot of people complain about DUI laws not being strict enough, and re-offenders seeming to get away with it time and time again, unless/until they kill someone, and sometimes even after that. Is that true? Is <span style="font-style: italic;">this</span> why?<br /><br />I totally, completely appreciate that the burden of proof is, and always should be, on the state to prove its case. I'm also pretty OK with protections against self-incrimination, and the idea of forcible breath or blood tests makes me uneasy. But DUIs suck. So what do we do?<br /><br />The defense attorney in our second trial said something about how the burden on an arresting officer is "probable cause", while the burden in a criminal trial is "reasonable doubt" which is a much higher standard. Both sides asked lots of questions about what a drunk driver <span style="font-style: italic;">drives</span> like... in other words, the probable cause-type stuff. It seems to me like it would be fairly easy to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant was driving really dangerously, and I'd be a lot more comfortable relying on an officer's credibility to judge <span style="font-style: italic;">that</span> question. The way DUI laws are set up, though, in a DUI trial it's the influence of the drugs or alcohol that becomes the key question for the jury, and it seems to me like <span style="font-style: italic;">that</span> is the more difficult question to answer. It also lets a lot of other dangerous drivers off the hook.<br /><br />The problem seems to be that our penalties are linked to the <span style="font-style: italic;">reason</span> for the dangerous driving, which is difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, instead of linking penalties to the dangerousness of the driving itself. Sure, there may be laws against inattentive driving, driving while applying mascara, driving while juggling a cell phone, etc., but I don't think a DUI jury is allowed to return a verdict based on the quality of the driving. I think they have to decide on whether the defendant met the legal standard for intoxication. Without any scientific evidence. I don't know how that would work.<br /><br />I didn't get seated on the first jury.<br /><br />Interestingly, in the second trial, one of the other jurors on the panel spoke at length about being a 26-year member of AA, with numerous friends & family having a history of DUI, and he was furious about what he saw as a completely broken and worthless system that allows alcoholics to get away with DUI over and over again. He asserted that anyone who's pulled over for DUI is almost certainly guilty, and allowing them a jury trial is just a waste of everyone's time and an opportunity for them to game the system. A few others on the panel expressed agreement. After all the questioning was finished, the judge asked us if anything we had heard <span style="font-style: italic;">during the selection process</span> might affect our ability to be fair and impartial in this case. Everyone said "no" (other than those who had already said they couldn't be impartial for other reasons).<br /><br />The 18 of us were sent to the jury room, where we waited to find out which six of us would be selected for the actual jury. We waited a <span style="font-style: italic;">really</span> long time. Like an hour and a half. When the court clerk finally returned, she dismissed <span style="font-style: italic;">all</span> of us! I figure several things could have happened: last-minute plea bargain, last-minute dropping of charges, some kind of continuance or reschedule, last-minute waiver of jury trial in favor of judge trial... it just makes me wonder if either side blinked, and if so, which one? Was the possible "tainting" of our jury panel an issue?<br /><br />Pretty awesome to see our justice system at work, even clunkily.<br /><br />And <span style="font-style: italic;">that</span> is patriotism, bitches.cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-85872117887389851892008-06-20T15:45:00.000-07:002008-06-20T16:07:45.496-07:00Birthday contact lens emergency avertedSo, today's my BIRTHDAY and I've been having an amazing day... an awesome surprise present in my office (photos forthcoming), "Happy Birthday" sung at me across the hallway by my teammates, a fun lunch with friends, and a great dinner and movie planned with even more friends and family this evening.<br /><br />Last Wednesday, I finally got around to ordering some more disposable contact lenses. I'm really terrible about over-wearing every pair I get. They told me my order would be in in a day or two.<br /><br />This morning, one of my old lenses was irritating the heck out of me; I assumed I had a bit of fuzz in it or perhaps a scratch on my eye, which happens often enough and works itself out. As the afternoon wore on, it got more annoying, until finally I pulled the lens out to figure out what the heck was going on.<br /><br />It had a little RIP in it.<br /><br />No wonder it was irritating!<br /><br />Never had one of THOSE before.<br /><br />Well, hell, I didn't have any spare lenses, certainly not right there at work. Even my backup glasses were back at home... 25 minutes the opposite direction from work AND dinner.<br /><br />I put the lens back in and tried to ignore those rough edges. No dice. By that point I was panicking about it tearing in half completely and the little fragments getting lost on my eyeball... or whatever.<br /><br />As a last resort, I called my eye clinic and asked if they might HAPPEN to carry my prescription in stock in their supply of samples. "Toric?" "Yup." "No chance; those are special order only." Bummer. So I made plans to leave work early, drive back home, dig through the house for any old yucky lenses I might have forgotten to throw away, and as a last resort pick up glasses.<br /><br />Great. We've got birthday dinner reservations at a restaurant with a patio, on one of the first beautiful sunny days of 2008 in this town, and I'm going to be stuck in my scratched-up winter glasses, no shades, squinting through dinner and then is it even worth it to try to GO to a movie after? Grumble. Glasses all weekend? Grumble. My own fault for putting off ordering backup lenses, but still.<br /><br />I was about to head out for home when I glanced at my cell phone. Missed call. From University Vision Clinic. Like, 5 minutes prior. They couldn't've been calling me back... I didn't give my name when I called. In fact, I think they called WHILE I was talking to them...?! Voice mail: "Hi, this is <span style="font-style: italic;">[a different guy from the one I talked to]</span> at University Vision Clinic. Those new lenses you ordered are in, you can pick them up any time."<br /><br />WOOHOO!!!!<br /><br />Took me like 30 seconds to get 'em and another 30 to put in a fresh pair.<br /><br />Sunshine, dinner, movie, VISION. Might be the best birthday present of all. ;)cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-32280557828477137342008-06-05T09:16:00.000-07:002008-12-10T07:35:59.485-08:00Feminist technology theory as it is realized in a Guitar Hero III Pro Face-OffBig news first. There's a vendor booth here where they're running a contest: beat one of their employees at Guitar Hero III Pro Face-Off, win free software (developer tools). I was too chikin yesterday, but today I showed up determined to play. That's when I found out their <span style="font-style: italic;">real</span> GHIII player had to go home, so other booth staff are subbing in for him. The new rules? "You pick the song, you pick the difficulty, but no Expert. And if it's an upper-tier Hard you're pretty much gonna win." Heck. If I'd've known that yesterday....<br /><br />Anyway, I picked the hardest song I can beat on Hard: Stevie Ray Vaughan's "Pride and Joy". I knew I was in trouble when I didn't complete <span style="font-style: italic;">one single</span> Star Power phrase in the <span style="font-style: italic;">entire song</span>. Beat him anyway, with 80%, which isn't a score I'm happy with, but not bad for a Pro Face-Off in front of strangers with no warm-up. :)<br /><br />When we were finished, someone from the little group of spectators called out to the booth staffer: "You got beat by a <span style="font-style: italic;">woman!</span>"<br /><br />Hmm.<br /><br />Didn't like that.<br /><br />I prolly should've challenged the heckler to a duel right then & there. You know, on all the afterschool specials they say even if you fail epically, you'll win their respect. I dunno. Not my style. Whatever.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/paulroub/2554006572/"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkSa6pZKjtZJxZX27EpI2K4U2lvaoY-RxatFm8EjkW8e-ArmchdBEw5TyS4au8QbIcub68ID8Z3CvtHVhnp8epuF7g0iLn0LAY7tpPw0X5VmoHKDDHbMV2XCBcyq3qAz49Ep9p/s320/2554006572_cd782fdae2_m.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5209646549418923154" border="0" /></a>I filled out all the paperwork for my free software, and got my photo taken for the booth's "Wall of Shame" screen saver, which I gotta go back and check out later. That's awesome.<br /><br />As I walked away, another conference attendee walked alongside and complimented my performance. "You really pounded him! Nice job. Do you play at home with your kids?"<br /><br />Wait. What?<br /><br />Super nice guy. Paying me a compliment. Loved it. But I cannot imagine that the hundred developer <span style="font-style: italic;">dudes</span> here who've beaten the booth staff at GHIII got asked if <span style="font-style: italic;">they</span> learned to shred by playing with their <span style="font-style: italic;">kids</span>. The guy before me who pwned him on Iron Maiden didn't get that question from anybody.<br /><br />At lunch, K & I got talking about assumptions, and how initial assumptions are generally based on past experience, and hell, even <span style="font-style: italic;">I</span> would have to assume that a random girl I meet, even here at TechEd, probably doesn't shred on Guitar Hero and probably doesn't aspire to be a software architect. Can I blame other people for basing their assumptions on what we all observe together as the most <span style="font-style: italic;">common</span> realities? Certainly not.<br /><br />In our most recent architecture session, I looked back through the roomful of ~300 attendees and saw that I was one of only two females in the entire room. That percentage of women who are here at TechEd at all (you know, the ones in the Women in Technology Luncheon I blew off yesterday), almost none of them are in the 400-level architecture track. I noticed this, and I was <span style="font-style: italic;">proud</span> to be one of the only girls in the room. I have started to feel like the more profoundly outnumbered I am, the more likely I am to find the content rigorous and interesting... the more likely I am to be exactly where I want to be. And that was <span style="font-style: italic;">before</span> Guitar Hero!<br /><br />I'm very seriously really hoping I'm the only girl on the Wall of Shame screensaver and will be disappointed if I'm not. I'm sure a girl who plays GHIII is perfectly capable of beating the booth staff, but I don't expect the girls, even here, to be likely to play in the first place. Even <span style="font-style: italic;">I</span> make that assumption.<br /><br />So perhaps it isn't the assumptions that cause the problem... as long as you're open to being wrong, open to individuals being individuals.<br /><br />"No, I don't have any kids." Random TechEd dude was perfectly delightful after that, rolled with the punches, kept up the conversation. Well done, random TechEd dude. It's true... I only <span style="font-style: italic;">look</span> like a girl. I don't really talk or act like one. I like it that way.<br /><br />But it isn't really enough to throw "girls" under the bus and argue that I only need concern myself with people's assumptions about <span style="font-style: italic;">me</span>: "sure, girls are lame, but <span style="font-style: italic;">I'm</span> an exception." Not cool.<br /><br />"Beat by a woman" implies that the crowd expected me to suck... <span style="font-style: italic;">even after I finished playing</span>. In their eyes, the fact that I won didn't prove anything good about me... only something bad about the guy I beat.<br /><br />And that's why you TechEd dudes are not fully off the hook for how you think about us girls. Even if 95% of the females you've ever met or heard of don't show any interest in actual software development, even if they all end up on the BA or PM or UI tracks, even if they don't game, it doesn't mean girls are <span style="font-style: italic;">bad at</span> the tough technical stuff. It just means they tend to be no-shows. You don't know <span style="font-style: italic;">why</span> that is. You can't actually assume anything from that, and you shouldn't.<br /><br />And that's why I have to keep being a girl here at TechEd. And that's why I, who am wearing a <span style="font-style: italic;">skirt</span> today and everything, am gonna go see if I can beat that guy again. ;)<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Update:</span> it has been brought to my attention that kids, regardless of gender, are generally way better than adults, regardless of gender, at Guitar Hero. This is the sort of thing I would have been in a better position to have known if I had kids... and it is a worthy and valid point to consider. Perhaps developer dudes don't get asked about their kids because the answer ("my kids pwn me at Guitar Hero") is obvious. :)cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-1158683991585137402008-06-04T21:09:00.000-07:002008-06-04T21:24:03.985-07:00Roller coasterBeen looking longingly at SeaWorld Orlando's Kraken coaster, which is clearly, hugely visible from the south windows of the Orange County Convention Center. $70 admission to ride one damn coaster. It mocks me, there on the skyline.<br /><br />Here inside TechEd, session offerings are listed at three "levels": 200-Intermediate, 300-Advanced, and 400-Expert. When I sat down with K to plan our schedules, one of the first things he did was filter all the courses for "400-Expert" and pick from those. I was horrified, firmly believing that I had no business attending anything labelled "Expert" level.<br /><br />Yeah. OK.<br /><br />I accidentally went to a couple of 400-level sessions. They were amazing. Fast-paced, chock full o' useful information, learned tons, and <span style="font-style: italic;">got</span> it.<br /><br />Then I went to a couple of 300-level sessions. Slow. Kinda repetitive of stuff I already knew. Made me wish for more 400s.<br /><br />WTF?<br /><br />Either the "levels" are totally inflated, or, hmm, I'm kinda expert.<br /><br />So who needs the Kraken when there are such wild roller coasters right there at TechEd?cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-31679537040893277022008-06-04T10:44:00.000-07:002008-06-04T10:54:09.400-07:00Sketchy programming dayConference presentation programming, not code programming. Well, maybe both.<br /><br />I could tell I wasn't the only one who found this morning's offerings to be somewhat dissatisfying... I bailed out of two different classes, hoping to write code (DIY Hands-on Lab!), only to find the wireless network getting utterly hammered by other attendees having, perhaps, the same idea.cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-22392947778267628702008-06-04T07:34:00.000-07:002008-06-04T22:17:06.282-07:00Dilemma of the dayThe "Women in Technology" Luncheon conflicts with a lunch-hour session on C# lambda expressions.<br /><br />So... do I choose to be a girl today, or a coder? Stay tuned.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Update:</span> Even worse. The lambdas session was full, so I skipped <span style="font-style: italic;">both</span> and <span style="font-style: italic;">wrote code</span>. Wonder what <span style="font-style: italic;">that</span> means.cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-42317290831491518402008-06-02T11:00:00.001-07:002008-06-04T07:39:13.753-07:00Core competenciesUnfortunately for the health of this blog, the best lectures won't get the best blog posts because I'll be busy listening to them.<br /><br />The Magic Seven core competencies for architects was, for me, greatly encouraging. (I'm trying to reassure K that the stuff I found exciting wasn't precisely the same stuff he objects to on principle.)<br /><br />A lot of the Magic Seven, I already have.<br /><br />I have at least a <span style="font-style: italic;">little bit</span> of all of the different types of them.<br /><br />Some of the things that separate architects from developers are the same sorts of things that cause me not to feel like a true developer sometimes. You mean there's a name for that?<br /><br />Many of the competencies that I <span style="font-style: italic;">don't</span> have, or need work in, I can think right now of very specific problems I'm having on my project that are caused or worsened by those very things (or the absence of them).<br /><br />Finally, even supremely competent architects fail. In the middle of an ongoing epic fail, it's pretty much impossible to know whether the architect could have prevented the failure by successful deployment of core competencies, or whether the whole thing was doomed from the start, but one hopes to be able to learn something someday looking back. (Hopefully not looking back from the business end of an espresso machine, though.)cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-87893385700503105852008-06-02T10:44:00.000-07:002008-06-02T10:50:36.582-07:00Friends don't let friends drink Kool-AidThe thing is, software + services is almost certainly the right model for us (the place where I work) whether we "like" it or not. :)<br /><br />And yes, a major draw of "cloud computing" was its Microsoft-killer potential.<br /><br />But it's still funny-sad to see how hard Microsoft propagandizes for desktop client software <span style="font-style: italic;">plus</span> services, pretending as though their very life didn't depend on it (and as if they weren't also scrambling to get cloudy just in case). "Software plus services! What a great idea! Oh, no reason."cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-48095607152728381362008-06-02T07:35:00.001-07:002008-06-02T08:03:16.191-07:00Pre-conference seminar for Aspiring ArchitectsTurning software development into a true profession has been a wishlist item for years. If only we had a governing body, unity, standards, education and career paths to follow, networking, community, leverage. Some of my hotheaded friends even threw the word "union" around for a while. Now it's gotten even more specific: turning <span style="font-style: italic;">architecture</span> into a true profession. In all the same ways. Which seems kinda odd considering the original software development profession thing hasn't been solved either. (At least, I don't <span style="font-style: italic;">think</span> it has... hope I didn't miss a memo.)<br /><br />Having said that, the presentation by the founder of the (non-profit) International Software Architects Association (IASA) was really interesting and useful. He's a good speaker, and he addressed so many of the things I struggle with... sure seems like I'm not the only one trying to get my brain around this.<br /><br />"Architects are technology strategists." (I heard a lot of keyboarding in the room after he said that one, but I'm still contemplating what it means.) "The best developers don't always make the best architects," and vice versa. I do not think that actually means a <span style="font-style: italic;">bad</span> developer can be a good architect, but it does seem to contradict the notion that an architect is someone who's been a developer for > n years for some employer-specific value n. Following that idea, "can architects be <span style="font-style: italic;">made?</span>" From scratch? Is the architecture skill set a refinement of the developer set, or is it something else entirely? IASA guy says the latter. Interesting.<span style="font-style: italic;"></span><br /><br />I'm glad for the focus on professionalism, rather than yet another list of articles and/or tools and/or frameworks... not necessarily because I think the pink-unicorn-dream of turning software into classical engineering or medicine or what have you is likely to happen, but because even short of a full-blown professional organization, talking about the professional issues seems to be the right path toward applying architectural ideas to real problems.<br /><br />Who <span style="font-style: italic;">are</span> you and what right do you have to call yourself an "architect"?<br />What do you need to know to be any good?<br />Once you learn that, what's next?<br />How do you get the support you need from your employer?<br />How do you get them to listen to you?<br />How do you <span style="font-style: italic;">prove</span> your value to your employer?<br /><br />P.S.: I had some doubts about whether Microsoft really was going to be totally on top of every single little detail at this conference. (TechEd veterans may point & laugh at the n00b now.) I needn't've worried. They've got it all covered. E.g., I guess OCCC doesn't necessarily have wireless coverage throughout the center, which seemed like a major oversight, but, duh, Microsoft brought in their own.cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19609812.post-22676630926277731972008-06-02T05:31:00.000-07:002008-06-02T08:04:04.397-07:00Resistance is futile: Microsoft TechEd NA 2008"But this is <span style="font-style: italic;">Microsoft!</span><span> Why wouldn't they have their pre-eminent developer conference of the year in <span style="font-style: italic;">Seattle?</span>"<br /><br />The fact that I've now seen two business-suited Orange County Convention Center staffers zip by on Segways suggests an answer to this question. OCCC is mind-bogglingly huge. The quantity and density of hotels in the immediate vicinity similarly challenges the imagination. And, finally, here in Orlando there's stuff to <span style="font-style: italic;">do</span>. Hell, that's all Orlando is, is stuff to do. The whole thing definitely puts the Washington State Convention & Trade Center into perspective: a very tiny perspective.<br /><br />I've only been here an hour, and I've already seen exponentially more females than I expected. I have a feeling this is not so much a measure of any different ratio than I expected, but rather of the huge size this conference is going to be.<br /><br />I shall be trying to stay attentive to what they're teaching here, shying away from Kool-Aid but remaining open to actual knowledge. :) I shall also be trying not to fall apart from feeling way in over my head. Stay tuned.<br /></span>cmhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13364396399710683125noreply@blogger.com0