Author: matthew

For many years, my family has done without broadcast or cable television. The TV was in the basement; the only available cable TV plugs were in the main family room on the ground floor, and one in the master bedroom.

We had television sets in neither of those places. The TV in the basement was used pretty much strictly for XBox and watching movies.

Then we decided to reorganize. The front room became the family room, while the main basement room was re-purposed for reading, computing, and studying. This layout seems a bit more natural, given our usage patterns, but it’s had some interesting side-effects.

For one, I decided to hook up the TV to the cable. Realize, we only pay for cable Internet. I was told at the time I signed up that a few channels would come through because they don’t have a filter option for “Internet only”. To my surprise, there were around fifty channels available. This was far more than the dozen or so channels I expected. Including Discovery, Disney, History, HBO, Weather, and most of the local broadcast stations.

The side-effects of this unexpected bonanza have been profound. On Saturday and Sunday mornings, we no longer have children piling on the bed to wake us up because they are bored and want us to do stuff with them. Instead, we hear the sounds of the Disney Channel or Cartoon Network echoing up the stairwell to wake us. Our children are now talking about Hannah Montana and the Sweet Life of Zack and Codie rather than Harry Potter. We have strict “No TV” times now to limit when children are allowed to watch the boob tube.

When we go to Grandma’s house now, the children are more likely to ignore the television set, which is always on at their house and generally tuned to news or sports. Prior to this, my kids would be glued to the tube at Grandma’s because they didn’t have this stuff at home. We now hear occasional wheedles from children for toys and items that they saw on TV. My older kids will sit down and watch ‘Dirty Jobs’ or the History channel with their dad and appreciate it, at least for a little while.

My watching habits haven’t changed much. I didn’t watch any TV for many, many years, and these days it’s much the same. I prefer to get my news from news web sites, and I only turn on the tube when I’m interested in an alternative distraction. Christy, too, doesn’t seem to spend much time couch-surfing, despite her misgivings about HGTV being available 24/7 and our occasional addiction to that channel when it’s available in the hotel rooms when we’re on vacation.

Overall, a working television set is a mixed bag. There are some pluses, and some minuses. Our daughter is more likely to retreat to her room or the basement to read and get away from the onslaught of the TV, and spends about as much time on the computer as before. Our younger boys don’t complain about being bored so much. The oldest boy gets bored with the TV frequently and prefers to go play with his friends in the neighborhood. There’s a bit less fighting about using the computer than before.

But left to their own devices, the kids would have the tube playing just about every waking moment, even if they weren’t watching. There are times when I think that perhaps I should disconnect the cable again for a couple of weeks just to compare for myself what life was like for the nine years in this house without television.

A long time ago, this story about dog intelligence arrived in my inbox from a friend who sometimes goes as “Marcelo” online. I thought I’d share it.

About twelve or thirteen years ago, I was sitting on a crowded bus during the afternoon commute in Santiago, Chile. This was after my mission; I had moved to Chile and was living/working in Santiago while I waited for my future ex-wife to get a divorce so we could be married. (That’s a long story in and of itself, but not directly related to this narrative so I’ll skip it). As we sat in gridlocked traffic, I looked out the window and beheld the following spectacle: On the street corners, there were maybe 150-200 people gathered, waiting for the light to change. As I said, the traffic was gridlocked so there was absolutely no automobile movement on the street. It would have been safe to cross. Yet, the “walk” light was red, and the large crowd of humans standing on the corner dutifully waited like sheep at the corner for the light to change before crossing the street.

As the crowd grew larger, I noticed a stray dog (one of many in Chile) which walked up to the corner, looked one way, looked the other way, saw that it was safe to cross, and crossed the street. The dog, of course, was oblivious to the light and to human conventions and law. It simply walked up to the corner, saw that it was safe to cross, and crossed.

It was curious to watch the people standing on the corner. At first, there was no reaction. Then, I suppose, somebody must have realized, “Hey, the dog is right! There is absolutely no reason why we shouldn’t be able to cross the street!” One or two intrepid humans had the courage to step out into the street against the traffic light, and soon the entire herd was crossing the intersection en masse.

I don’t know if anyone else on the bus saw this, but I laughed to myself as I watched it unfold. In some sense, the dog was “smarter” than the 150-200 humans standing on the corner. The dog wasn’t constrained by society’s norms or laws; it simply saw that it was safe to cross the street and did so. I made a mental note to try to be more like the dog and less like the crowd; to constantly ask “why?” and be willing to buck convention when it made sense to do so. It has made a big difference in my life, and I pass it along in the hopes that it may enhance your life as well.

Then recent discussions about the improper behavior of a US Senator while in the airport men’s restroom in Minnesota has brought male bathroom etiquette to the fore in workplace discussions. In the spirit of celebration for the long-overdue attention to this ubiquitous facility, I submit for your consideration, “Male Restroom Etiquette”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzO1mCAVyMw

(Soundtrack is what’s funny. Safe for work, but co-workers might be grossed out, double over in laughter, or spontaneously vomit.)

Don’t be a Ralph or a Chuck!

My brain has recently been focusing on money. I mean, I’m pretty good with numbers. I enjoy math, and I like to figure out min/max statistics for online role-playing games I play in order to create the most effective character in most situations.

The other day, I thought, “why not apply that same mentality I use in gaming to my life?”

I earn very nearly the same amount of money today (within 3%) in 2007 that I earned in 2001. I heard a fellow on a talk-radio show indicate that government statistics of 2%-4% inflation per year were not even close to accurate, and actual inflation rates if we figured according to 1970’s-era and earlier calculations would tell us a story of greater than 10% inflation since 9/11/2001.

So I decided to apply my puny little brain and think in terms of “How much can I buy for my dollar?” I mean, I make almost exactly the same amount in dollars today that I did six years ago. If we look at just the last five years, from, say, September of 2002 to September of 2007, I should get a good idea of what the actual inflation rate is.

All figures are with annual compounding. Monthly/weekly/continuous compounding figures are very slightly lower.

Item	September 2002	September 2007	Inflation
Gold (ounce)	$310	$670	16.6%/year
Oil (barrel)	$26	$75	23.6%/year
2,000 sq ft townhouse (mine)	$100K	$150K	8.4%/year
1 gallon of 2% milk	$2.14	$3.54	10.6%/year

Based on this small sampling of things the average consumer might buy — investing in gold, buying fuel, buying a house, or picking up a gallon of milk — I would also submit that a 2-4% inflation rate is overly optimistic. It certainly feels like 10% or more. Simple fact is, my dollar doesn’t seem to go nearly as far as it did five years ago. In fact, five years ago my salary felt generous, enough to afford plenty of luxuries. Today, it barely covers expenses.

Admittedly, we have two extra mouths to feed. So that skews my sampling-size-of-one.

What I found interesting is how hard it is to get data on average consumer items. Like, what if I wanted to check the new retail cost of a Toyota Camry with standard options in 2002 versus 2007? Good luck digging that up. Or what about the cost of a non-king-size Snickers bar in 2002 versus 2007? Yeah, no luck there either. Cost per kilowatt-hour of electricity?

It seems in so many of these things, we have an awfully short memory… and manufacturers or providers of goods and services don’t seem to go out of their way to point out how much more their stuff costs.

Nifty little inflation calculator: http://www.westegg.com/inflation/

Unfortunately, at least for my relatively small sample size above, it’s totally off-base. This next one offers a more usable output, indicating inflation over the past five years has been around 14%-15%… a figure I totally agree with, and which is totally at odds with the figures put out by the administration.

(EDIT: I totally mis-read their figures. They are claiming a total inflation increase of around 14%-15% from August 2002 to August 2007, which is bogus. It’s a 10%-15% compounded… So these guys are using official statistics, which I suspect are being intentionally manipulated to give citizens overly-optimistic inflation data.)

http://inflationdata.com/inflation/inflation_rate/InflationCalculator.asp

Also a nifty time-value-of-money calculator which will solve for any of the variables (like interest rate): http://www.1728.com/compint.htm

I have a conclusion. I am being misled about inflation by those in who’s best interest it is to mislead me. The actual inflation rate over the past five years has been 10%-15% per year, which is a level unheard-of since the 1970s. From everything I see, it’s going to get much worse before it gets better, as we have to increase taxation to pay the bills due on our simultaneous wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, unfunded school mandates in “No Child Left Behind”, and initiatives like the RealID card.

From 1972-1979, the US dollar lost 2/3 of its value. I predict the same, or worse, for 2007-2014. Time for me to find some overseas shelters for my meager savings.

Then again, I’m a UNIX admin, not an economist. Imagine that you earned $65,000/year in 2002 and didn’t get a raise for five years. Based on the cost of a gallon of milk, in 2002 dollars, you’re earning only $39,277/year today.

What do you think? Time to panic? Or is that time long since gone? Or are my figures just way, way off?

The conversation with Christy was illuminating. “If you’re feeling overloaded, just figure out what you don’t want to do anymore,” she said. Easier said than done!

For some time now, I have realized that I’m involved in too many things, and that there are some where I really should put more effort into it if I were to truly say that I was involved at all anymore.

It’s time, I think, to do a little housecleaning. Let’s start with the easy time-wasters: Mailing lists. Way too many. First one on the list was Board membership in an organization devoted to people in certain types of life transitions.

Yeah. That’s gone. What about the affiliated mailing list for members of the organization? Well, I plan to remain a member, but I’ll resign as Board member and webmaster. Way too much to there, and after four years driving, it’s time for someone else to take the wheel. I guess the only way it will happen is if I park it and refuse to hop back in the driver’s seat.

Balsa-sailplanes? Yeah, I don’t need that one. It’s all about people scratch-building their own sailplanes. I like my sailplane, but not that much. Gone.

Exmormon? Yeah, let’s make that web-only. Maybe I’ll be interested in perusing the messages one day, but I don’t need them in my inbox.

Human_ism? Yep, I’m a Humanist, I don’t have much desire to talk about it in detail these days. Gone.

freethinking_unschoolers? Uh, this was a group for home-schooling children without relying on religion-based curricula. The fact is, the vast majority of home-schoolers do so for religious reasons, and the vast majority of home-schooling materials pander to this bias. Yeah, I lost interest in this about 3 minutes after I joined 3 years ago. Don’t know why I’m still a member.

More decisions like this, on down the line, eliminating the stuff I don’t use or don’t want in my life. Next is going home and doing the same thing. Run the drill through the old hard drives filled with data I have not used in years. Chuck out the old CAT-3 and coaxial cables stuffed into the closet in hopes that one day they will be useful. Toss the things I know I haven’t used in two years or more.

It’s painful, because I remember when each of these things — the mailing lists, the computing supplies, etc. — were useful, important, and functional to me. I strongly suspect there may be some data on those old 9GB drives, like old copies of songs that I never finished, that may have important data I’d like to keep. But if I never get around to actually inventorying them, how different is that from just destroying them and being done with it?

You gotta break some eggs to make an omelet.

Let’s get crackin’.

Back when we moved into our home, code requirements did not require a stairwell or deck on a rear door. Just a solid means of blocking access. So we’ve had a lock on our rear door for years, and just sort of ignored the fact it was a door.

Well, now we’re seeking to refinance our home to help with the tight-money situation due to Christy being back in school to get her Master’s, and the underwriters are insisting that a rear stairway or deck is required before they will approve the loan. That’s fine, but we’re planning on closing this week, and we just learned about this requirement late yesterday.

So today, I get to figure out how to build a staircase, buy the supplies, and get building. It’s over six feet off the ground, so it’s not a trivial endeavor.

Wish me luck!

It arrived in my inbox today.

Hi Matt,

[My company] has an opening for a tier 3 Unix System Administrator. Not sure if you’re looking for a move to the Southern California area, but I think you’d be a great fit. I’ve included the job description below. I look forward to hearing from you!

Simple. To the point. I’m not really looking for a move to Southern California. But the name of the company stuck out to me. I won’t disclose it publicly, but I will say that it is a major player in an industry in which I have a great interest. It’s one of only a handful of companies about which I’ve said, “Yeah. If they approached me, I’d be really interested in leaving this really comfortable, stable, good-paying job with Ultra-Mega-Corp as long as the salary was compelling and the benefits were reasonable.”

The job is doing what I do well: UNIX system administration. They went so far as to ask for code samples by tomorrow night at 6:00 PM, which is a big clue-in that someone in their recruiting chain knows what they are doing. That’s exciting, because few things about a job suck more than having a boss who doesn’t appreciate what you do.

I also hear it’s a fantastic place to work.

The HUGE downside? Southern California. Yeah, I know a handful of people who live there. I used to live there myself, once upon a time about thirteen years ago. I have a bit of a phobia about earthquakes as a result, since I was there during the 1991 Northridge earthquake. This experience, and the lack of power, clean water, food, and laundry facilities for an extended period of time afterward gave me a deep and abiding dislike of living in urban areas subject to routine natural disasters.

Additionally, my wife and I listed a few places we didn’t want to live when we were married. Tops on the list? Utah. Yep, the place we live now and have lived for over a decade. Well, if we’re going to be given a hand-crafted definition of “irony” by the Almighty, why not cover #2? Yep, that’s right, California. After visiting Northern California, I revised my earlier personal promise that I wasn’t interested in living in CA because, really, Northern CA is almost nothing like Southern CA. People live there. There is an ocean relatively nearby. There the similarity ends.

Also on our list were the backwaters of Alabama, New York City (a fellow at work misses living in New York so much, he says, that he urinates in his swamp cooler to remind himself of home), and several war-torn Third World countries. I now fully expect to, at some point, entertain the notions of living in Beulah AL, the Bronx, and Baghdad before I die.

I did the math, too. Wow. My mortgage costs me $940 a month. Including everything. If I wanted to live in a similar home with a similar commute near the major city in which these offices are located, my mortgage would be more like $3500 a month. Yeah, that means I would have to net more than a $30,000 raise just to pay for my home! Of course, there are other options I could entertain, like telecommuting part-time, working alternative schedules, and other options which would be cheaper for them and cheaper for me, but involve some modest inconvenience to both my family and the company.

So, although it’s a fantastic opportunity, I’m not optimistic about their desire to pay me what I’d need to make in order to maintain my standard of living. Also the lack of a real support system — people I know in the area — would make things difficult for a while until we became established. But on the other hand, it’s for a company with a great name, apparently great benefits, doing very well financially, and doing what I love to do.

Ahh, decisions, decisions. Regardless, I look forward to the opportunity to interview, discuss, and haggle over benefits. Who knows? Even if it doesn’t turn out, the worst I’ve lost is a day or two in sunny California talking about extraordinarily interesting things with people doing what they love.

I plopped down in my usual chair in the bedroom and fired up the computer right after work, ready to do some blogging and catch up on some email. Christy walked in.

“I just got off the phone with your mother,” she said.

“Oh, how are things? I think she likes you more than me, you know,” I replied with a wide smile.

“She does,” Christy replied candidly. “But she and your stepfather saw the doctor today. The news is not good.”

My smile faded a little.

I had been expecting this for quite a while. The fact is, my stepfather’s cancer was of a type and severity which results in around a 75% to 85% mortality rate in short order. Expecting it, however, is not the same thing as talking about it.

“What did the doc say?” I asked.

“That the chemotherapy is having no effect. Without a substantial reduction in size, the cancer is inoperable. And that perhaps they should start traveling and doing the things they always wanted to do together.”

“Oh. That sucks.”

Points for originality and safety in a prom dress:

So this past Sunday, August 26, 2007, I sat down after my wife and children headed off to their church and decided to watch what had been on television on some random cable channel that morning when the family was watching. It looked like a nature program, talking about life in the oceans. I was watching half-heartedly, computer in my lap while I was typing up another entry, when I heard a word that made my ears perk up and my heart sink:

“Darwinism.”

Now, for those not in the know, this is a special word. It’s special because only one group of people tend to use it: Creationist Christians*, and generally only in one sense. It is a pejorative, carrying with it implications of ignorance, idolatry, and cultism. In this case, they placed the blame for the massacres of the modern age — including the Holocaust — squarely at the feet of these “Darwinists”.

So I paid a bit closer attention. I mean, apparently I’m part of an elite league of mass-murderers. I should probably take notes for the day when I finally grow up and carry out my own personal genocide.

Hot on the heels of the D-word, a few moments later I heard another interviewee use the “E-word”: “Evolutionists”. Yep, like “Darwinists”, this word carries negative connotations, and implies blind devotion to an ideal without regard for consequences. It is also a word almost exclusively used as a pejorative by Creationists. These evil evolutionists are defined by what they believe rather than the color of their skin, I guess.

The film did a good job of making people think those Evolutionists and Darwinists are really, really bad people. I mean, I couldn’t be one of those awful people. I hadn’t shot down a child’s hopes for an education that day. Nor had I shoved a Molotov cocktail down the windpipe of a resident Creationist and lit it on fire. In fact, I didn’t even get my ritual textbook-censoring finished that morning. I hadn’t forced Jesus out of my child’s elementary school with my own Cat-o-nine-tails, or beaten mention of the word “God” out of the vocabulary of a public school teacher.

I guess that makes me remiss in fulfilling my duties as a faithful member of the “Darwinism” church. I didn’t park a twenty-ton rock inscribed with Carl Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit in the main hall of my local courthouse. I haven’t fulfilled my quota of burned Bibles today, nor have I paid my bribes to my local police officers to pull people over for having fish with IXOYE on their bumpers.

There is another word used for people who think Darwin’s ground-breaking work was good science, but, of course, flawed. These people may have their own personal beliefs about God, but they think that these beliefs have no place in a public school science class. They acknowledge when they are proven wrong, but generally aren’t swayed on their opinion about facts by PR campaigns and evangelical television specials.

The word for these people?

“Scientists.”

What does it take for someone to be a scientist? Rigorous dedication to thorough research and supportable conclusions in published papers comes to mind. Every child learns the Scientific Method in school. According to Wikipedia, the “Scientific method is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena and acquiring new knowledge.” This is key: it’s a method of investigation and acquiring new knowledge.

If it can’t be used as a method of investigation for acquiring new empirical knowledge, it’s not science. End of line. If you aren’t willing to — or can’t — be proven wrong, what you are promoting isn’t science.

But not to the people I saw on television. They seemed convinced there was a radical conspiracy to outlaw Intelligent Design (ID) from public schools. They pushed the view that the “secularists,” “Darwinists,” and “Evolutionists” are in positions of power, forcing evolution on unsuspecting children and denying ID proponents their rights.

The video tried to cast Creationism as the victim of a massive government ploy to rob children of their Christian heritage. They kept insisting that schools need to teach “both sides” of the issue. This phrase was repeated over and over again, like a mantra of righteous indignation. “Both sides,” with the word “sides” emphasized sometimes, and the word “both” emphasized in others.

Big clue for the makers of this video: there is no “both sides”. There is good science. There is disputed science. And there is bad science. There is a range of gray across the whole spectrum. “Both sides” sounds as if these Creationsts want fact taught together with fiction, melded into a whimsical whole fraught with pseudo-science, superstition, and a small dose of truth to keep the naysayers in line.

If you wanted to cover all sides of the issue — since there are far more creation myths than just the Christian one — then do so. Somewhere other than Science class, because at that point it’s not science anymore. If Intelligent Design is “science”, it is very bad science. The hypotheses are untestable and unprovable from the evidence. It’s not a method of investigation or acquiring new knowledge. It is an intellectual dead-end, a giving-up on hope for answers in favor of farcical well-wishing.

Now, I’m absolutely in favor of educating children on the issues. Let’s hear about the intelligent design vs. evolution “debate” — decidedly one-sided, since there is little debate in the scientific community about whether evolution happened, just how it happened — in classrooms. Let’s teach that there are two opposing positions in the US political arena, and a far different situation abroad. Let’s get children involved in debating one another about some of these questions, with a focus on having them learn to support their arguments regardless of whether they personally agree with the position or not.

Let’s talk about that in debate class. Or politics class. Or perhaps American History. Science class is for instruction in facts, not an unsupportable hypothesis like “my god did it.”

Evolution is no mere hypothesis. It’s a theory, tested and repeatedly proven for over a hundred years. What form exact changes take is hotly contested, and there are worlds of research available in the field to understand how these changes happen. Debate about specifics in the scientific community is a sign of a healthy community. You’ll see these in abundance. It does not indicate that there is any dispute about the basic fact of evolution underlying so many useful, life-saving science advances.

The Luddites who produced this video are no better than flat-earthers, trying to carry humanity back to a more primitive, violent age by blaming the Holocaust on evolution. They are doing a disservice to their country, their God, and their fellow citizens by advocating hate for science, and I will oppose this type of anti-facts disinformation campaign whenever I see it.

(Side note: I’d like to buy a copy of their video so that I can write a fuller critique, since I only saw part of it. However, on their page they say to make a donation of “any amount” to get the video. While I’m not opposed to exchanging money for goods, I am opposed to making a “donation” to a cause which I vehemently oppose. Should I just donate a dollar and cost them money to send me the video?)

( *Creationists don’t like to be called Dominionists or Christianists for similar reasons.)