Open-pit Coding

After a visit to Facebook I want to establish a new phrase for the English language: open-pit coding (see “open-pit mining“).

The current Silicon Valley best practice seems to be a big room filled with desks and chairs. There are not private offices. There are no cubicles. There are few dividers of any kind. At least for Facebook, this cannot be because it is cheap. They hired Frank Gehry to build a space that is essentially an aircraft hangar with cafeterias both ends. If they cared about cost they would have hired a hangar company to build it.

Here are some snapshots from the Facebook campus. Note the Burning Man play structure in the roof garden. Also note that it is impossible to walk more than about three minutes without passing either a smoothie bar, a kitchen stocked full of snacks, or a full-fledged restaurant. Our lunch began with a rooftop smoothie and continued indoors with dim sum. We then walked to the other end of the big new building for the salad bar. Ribs at the BBQ shack were next. Finally there was the ice cream parlor and bakery.  “We had lunch in five restaurants,” I explained later to friends. Donald Trump said in the first debate, regarding who might have had sufficient computer skills to crack into an email server, that “It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, OK?” I wonder if the Silicon Valley leaders are creating factories for these 400-lb. software and system experts.

As far as decor goes, Facebook has an in-house poster-printing facility whose output adorns most walls. Although I don’t recall seeing any black employees, “Black Lives Matter” posters are prominent and sometimes dominant. The only posterable wall that I found without a Black Lives Matter poster was one (pictured below) that celebrates same-sex marriage.

Readers: What do you think about the open-pit coding office design? Can this be the way to get the best work out of people? Is the reason the ease of collaboration? Or the fact that people whose screens are exposed to the rest of the team won’t get sucked into non-work-related Internet activities (e.g., signalling virtue by denouncing Donald Trump on Facebook).

Full post, including comments

What was interesting about the third presidential debate?

I didn’t watch Trump and Hillary contend last night. Maybe readers can let me know what was interesting. One thing I am curious about is whether it makes sense to let a single person decide what is relevant. The moderator says “For the record, I decided the topics and the questions in each topic. None of those questions has been shared with the commission or the two candidates.” What if I were the moderator? Could I ask about Canon v. Nikon, iPhone v. Google Pixel, or obscure FAA regulations and demand that the American public follow along?

From looking at the transcript….

Hillary: the Supreme Court needs to stand on the side of the American people, not on the side of the powerful corporations and the wealthy.

Wealthy people don’t have legal rights.

Hillary: Well, I was upset because, unfortunately, dozens of toddlers injure themselves, even kill people with guns, because, unfortunately, not everyone who has loaded guns in their homes takes appropriate precautions.

Bureaucrats in D.C. are going to change the domestic behavior of gun owners and toddlers via regulation?

Hillary: The government has no business in the decisions that women make with their families in accordance with their faith, with medical advice.

Yet the government now pays for the majority of health care and determines what is paid for.

Trump: Drugs are pouring in through the border. … the single biggest problem is heroin that pours across our southern border.

Aren’t more Americans now addicted to prescription opioids than street heroin? And marijuana is now legal in a lot of states. Is Trump talking about the Colorado border?

Hillary: We have 11 million undocumented people. They have 4 million American citizen children, 15 million people. … I have been for border security for years. I voted for border security in the United States Senate.

Doesn’t this prove Trump’s point that the government, as currently run by people such as Hillary, is incompetent?

Trump: You’re the puppet!

How can a woman who has made more than a billion dollars (including the foundation funds that she can spend as desired) from “serving” as a politician be considered anyone else’s puppet? What does she need or want that she doesn’t already have? Gulfstream 650 instead of 450? The foundation can buy one.

Moderator: The top national security officials of this country do believe that Russia has been behind these hacks. Even if you don’t know for sure whether they are, do you condemn any interference by Russia in the American election?

Why would we want to hear from two older non-technical people regarding computer security?

Hillary: Well, I think when the middle class thrives, America thrives. And so my plan is based on growing the economy, giving middle-class families many more opportunities. I want us to have the biggest jobs program since World War II, jobs in infrastructure and advanced manufacturing.

She promises a Soviet-style planned economy. But why didn’t she and Barack Obama execute this plan back in 2009-2010 when the Democrats controlled congress?

Hillary: I think we can compete with high-wage countries, and I believe we should.

How is that possible when Americans are not as well-educated as people in high-wage countries?

Hillary: I want us to raise the national minimum wage

Why didn’t Obama do that already?

Hillary: I sure do want to make sure women get equal pay for the work we do.

The government will determine the correct wage for each worker, possibly after checking sex chromosomes? Or will gender ID determine the fair wage? Later the moderator points out “Secretary Clinton, I want to pursue your plan, because in many ways it is similar to the Obama stimulus plan in 2009, which has led to the slowest GDP growth since 1949.”

Hillary: I feel strongly that we have to have an education system that starts with preschool and goes through college. That’s why I want more technical education in high schools and in community colleges

The federal government will take over schools and colleges from states.

Trump: Saudi Arabia, nothing but money.

CIA Factbook says that they $53,600 in GDP per capita, about the same as the U.S. Despite falling oil prices their real GDP growth rate is at 3.4%, comfortably ahead of the population growth rate of 1.46%. Trump may be right on this one.

Trump: I am going to renegotiate NAFTA. And if I can’t make a great deal — then we’re going to terminate NAFTA and we’re going to create new deals.

Americans will be richer without having to study or work harder.

Trump: right now, our country is dying at 1 percent GDP.

Trump is correct that our GDP growth rate is pretty close to our population growth rate. Thus the only way to pay for the government that we have voted is massive population growth via immigration (doesn’t work if immigrants collect welfare, though?).

Hillary: I also will not add a penny to the debt.

Clinton is a defrosted Calvin Coolidge?

Hillary: one of the biggest problems we have with China is the illegal dumping of steel and aluminum into our markets. I have fought against that as a senator. I’ve stood up against it as secretary of state.

Why is it still happening then? And it is truly upsetting to have China sell us stuff at a low price?

Hillary: Donald has bought Chinese steel and aluminum.

So Trump is now a competent business manager who found a low-cost high-quality supplier?

Trump: She’s been doing this for 30 years. Why the hell didn’t you do it over the last 15, 20 years? … You were very much involved in every aspect of this country. Very much. And you do have experience. I say the one thing you have over me is experience, but it’s bad experience, because what you’ve done has turned out badly.

Hillary: back in the 1970s, I worked for the Children’s Defense Fund. And I was taking on discrimination against African-American kids in schools.

To the extent that we are told that there is still discrimination against African-Americans in schools today, doesn’t this prove Trump’s point regarding Hillary’s ineffectiveness?

Moderator: Secretary Clinton, during your 2009 Senate confirmation hearing, you promised to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest with your dealing with the Clinton Foundation while you were secretary of state, but e-mails show that donors got special access to you. Those seeking grants for Haiti relief were considered separately from non-donors, and some of those donors got contracts, government contracts, taxpayer money.

Hillary: everything I did as secretary of state was in furtherance of our country’s interests and our values. The State Department has said that.

What’s good for the Clinton family is good for America? Maybe that is true if they keep flying Gulfstreams and not Embraers.

Hillary: Well, very quickly, we at the Clinton Foundation spend 90 percent — 90 percent of all the money that is donated on behalf of programs of people around the world and in our own country. I’m very proud of that.

The poor and suffering get rides on chartered Gulfstreams?

Moderator: Do you make the same commitment that you will absolutely — sir, that you will absolutely accept the result of this election?

Trump: I will look at it at the time. I’m not looking at anything now. I’ll look at it at the time.

What does this question (now front page news) even mean? Is the election over when TV networks report a winner? After litigation over various state issues is concluded, as in Gore v. Bush? What if election officials report a result that is wildly inconsistent with polls? Should Hillary “accept the result” if officials say that Trump won by 99:1? What does it mean to reject a result? Sulk at home and tell reporters “I think the vote counting was inaccurate”? Or would Trump have to show up at the White House in January 2017 to demand a paycheck? Like a good deposition witness, Trump should probably have asked for a complete hypothetical rather than an incomplete hypothetical.

Trump: She shouldn’t be allowed to run. It’s crooked — she’s — she’s guilty of a very, very serious crime. She should not be allowed to run.

What does this mean? Who would block someone from running?

Hillary: So that is not the way our democracy works. We’ve been around for 240 years. We’ve had free and fair elections.

Lyndon Johnson was apparently elected to the Senate by fraud (nytimes) and presumably this is not the only example. Why do Americans think that our country is honest while everyone else around the world is corrupt?

Hillary: I am encouraged that there is an effort led by the Iraqi army, supported by Kurdish forces, and also given the help and advice from the number of special forces and other Americans on the ground. … The goal here is to take back Mosul. It’s going to be a hard fight. I’ve got no illusions about that. And then continue to press into Syria to begin to take back and move on Raqqa, which is the ISIS headquarters.

We’re going to pour just enough military resources into this war to make sure that it goes on forever.

Hillary: Donald is implying that he didn’t support the invasion of Iraq. … before the invasion, he supported it.

Why is this relevant? Wasn’t Trump merely a real estate developer at the time? Is he supposed to have had an informed opinion on U.S. military and foreign policy at all points in his life?

Hillary: you are the most dangerous person to run for president in the modern history of America.

More dangerous than Kennedy and Johnson who nearly got us into a nuclear war with the Soviets and who actually did get us into the Vietnam War?

Moderator: Let’s turn to Aleppo. Mr. Trump, in the last debate, you were both asked about the situation in the Syrian city of Aleppo. And I want to follow up on that, because you said several things in that debate which were not true, sir.

… big argument ensues about just how badly Aleppo is doing …

Is a U.S. president supposed to know every detail of every military problem all around the planet? What are the subordinates supposed to do?

Moderator: Secretary Clinton, you have talked about — and in the last debate and again today — that you would impose a no-fly zone to try to protect the people of Aleppo and to stop the killing there. President Obama has refused to do that because he fears it’s going to draw us closer or deeper into the conflict.

Hillary: Well, Chris, first of all, I think a no-fly zone could save lives and could hasten the end of the conflict. I’m well aware of the really legitimate concerns that you have expressed from both the president and the general. This would not be done just on the first day. This would take a lot of negotiation. And it would also take making it clear to the Russians and the Syrians that our purpose here was to provide safe zones on the ground.

We’re going to pour just enough military resources into this war to make sure that it goes on forever.

Hillary: We’ve had millions of people leave Syria and those millions of people inside Syria who have been dislocated.

We will keep pouring resources into the Syrian conflict to ensure that it goes on long enough for everyone in Syria to emigrate to Germany, the U.S., etc.

Hillary: I want to respond to what Donald said about refugees. He’s made these claims repeatedly. I am not going to let anyone into this country who is not vetted, who we do not have confidence in. But I am not going to slam the door on women and children. That picture of that little 4-year-old boy in Aleppo, with the blood coming down his

Full post, including comments

Trump hasn’t moved the needle for Nobel laureates

One of my Facebook friends referenced “70 Nobel Laureates Endorse Hillary Clinton” (nytimes) to support his beliefs that Trump is (1) the candidate favored by stupid people, (2) a Hitler-grade threat to American democracy, world peace, etc. The original letter seems to be tough to find (Twitter version), but it seems to be signed by American academics who are prospering under the status quo of government funding for university research. Thus it would be in their interest to vote for a candidate promising to preserve the status quo. What was more interesting to me was a section towards the end of the nytimes story:

In 2012, 68 winners of the prize backed President Obama over Mitt Romney. Four years earlier, 76 winners supported Mr. Obama over Senator John McCain.

In other words, previous Republican candidates were equally unpalatable to America’s Nobel laureates.

Related:

Full post, including comments

The world center of high quality printing: China

I talked to a team that has been publishing high-quality coffee table books for more than 30 years. Printing these books in the U.S. was never an option due to poor quality and high costs. “Italy was and still is a great place,” said one of the managers, “but it is expensive so we used to go to Japan.” What about today? “China. When you go to Japan it is kind of sad because everything is stuck where it was 15 years ago.” So China is now as good as Japan but cheaper? “No,” she explained. “China has newer and better equipment so the end-result is actually better.” In other words, once a country falls behind and stops being the volume leader it also may lose its quality edge.

How does it actually work? Can you send a PDF to China and then wait for a container of high-quality color coffee-table books to show up? “That’s how most people do it,” she said, “but we always have someone on press to ensure quality control.”

Full post, including comments

Minivan engineering progress over 33 years: 2 decibels

Car and Driver tested a 2017 Chrysler minivan against a 1984 version. How much engineering progress was made on interior sound level over the 33 years that separate these two cars? 2 dBA! The old minivan measured 71 dBA and the new one 69 dBA, both at a 70-MPH cruise. The new minivan is 1150 lbs. heavier (one reason why there was no improvement in gas mileage) but apparently there isn’t a lot of soundproofing included in that extra weight.

Related:

Full post, including comments

Adapting WordPress to a legacy web site’s user authentication system?

Folks:

We’re celebrating (feebly) the 23rd anniversary of philip.greenspun.com. The site currently runs software that is nearly 20 years old, the ArsDigita Community System version 3.3 (docs). Although it pains me to admit this, it seems that there have been some improvements in web toolkits, especially for authoring without Emacs proficiency, since the mid-1990s.

I’m not quite ready to throw out everything that we built in the 1990s but for new content it would make life easier if I could author, and users could comment, via WordPress.

Has anyone tried bolting WordPress to a legacy web site that already has a username/password authentication system? I would also want people to be able to authenticate using Facebook. Any tips on how best to integrate WordPress with a legacy online community? It would not be acceptable to break any existing URLs. And I really don’t want to exert any manual effort to bring old hand-authored HTML into WordPress.

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Full post, including comments

After two years of campaigning, support for a Republican candidate has moved from 39 percent to 37-41 percent

Folks:

About 1.5 years ago I wrote “Why bother to read news about the 2016 presidential election?“:

The media seems to be gearing up to get excited about the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Pew Research, however, shows that 48 percent of Americans are Democrats and just 39 percent Republican. If we assume that those who aren’t affiliated are roughly equally likely to vote for either party, we should be able to predict the result of the 2016 election: 54 percent Democrat; 45 percent Republican; 1 percent Other. (For comparison, the 2012 election was 51/47/2.)

Learning about Republican candidates would seem to be completely pointless. If there were some serious primary challenger to Hillary Clinton perhaps that would be worth studying, but after the primaries the election should be essentially over.

If the above analysis is correct why do people bother watching TV or reading news articles on this subject?

Was this analysis correct? A CNN article on the latest polls says

In the NBC poll, Clinton has 48% support compared to 37% for Trump, 7% for Libertarian Gary Johnson and 2% for the Green Party’s Jill Stein. In a two-way race, Clinton leads 51% to 41%.

In other words, the needle does not seem to have been moved at all despite all of the energy expended by Americans on Facebook and elsewhere. Nor are things much changed from Mitt Romney’s 2012 prediction that a minimum of 47 percent of Americans wouldn’t find it in their interest to vote for a Republican candidate.

[Separately, note that CNN presents as fact its interpretation of Donald Trump’s recorded conversation: “The NBC poll shows Trump could have paid a steep price for the ‘Access Hollywood’ tape that showed him bragging about sexually assaulting women…”]

Related:

Full post, including comments

Would self-driving cars be most life-changing for stay-at-home moms?

As a suburban dog owner a lot of my casual conversations are with stay-at-home moms. On a recent morning walk two stay-at-home moms (and dog owners) commiserated about how their hectic lives and overstuffed schedules. Example: “I need at least three extra hours every day.” I asked one of them what she had planned for the day. She responded with “I have two doctors’ appointments for myself and then my personal trainer. Then I have to pick my [teenage] daughter up from school at 4 and drop her off again at 6:30 and then there is another pickup at 7:30 and somehow I have to find time to make dinner.” Her old daughter is at college and refusing to talk to her at all, which saves some time, but there is still the chauffeur job.

For a wage slave it wouldn’t seem that the self-driving car will usher in a new world. Roughly the same amount of time will still be spent on the road, perhaps listening to OPR (Obama Praise Radio). But for a stay-at-home mother who is currently spending a lot of time driving children to various enrichment activities, a car that can ferry the kids should open up close to the three hours extra per day that this mother said she needed.

Readers: What do you think? Whose lives will be most changed by the self-driving car? (Aside from the obvious: Uber drivers!)

Full post, including comments

When Hertz doesn’t give you the car that you reserved

Here’s a Facebook posting that I made while out in California (I use Facebook for family stuff and throwaway ideas) that I though might be enjoyed by a broader audience:

It sounded okay when Hertz said that they didn’t have the Camry that I reserved but could give me a BMW sedan instead.

2016-10-13-13-17-03-1

Related:

Full post, including comments