The Day of Zeroth, satisfactorily explained

Exceptionally alert readers will have noticed that yesterday I made a blog "post." Don't be alarmed. I voluntarily signed up for a 500 Word Challenge, which mandates I write 500 words each day in January and deposit them on this blog.

Altering my blog in this way wasn't something I took lightly. The static immutability of this site has brought it no small fame as a historical snapshot representative of blogging culture in the early 2000s. The charming blend of links, photos, seamless background image, even a Twitter widget (since broken), made this humble site a favorite reference of computer science theses and nostalgic "web log" articles.

Alas, one must move on. Thus, a second post in as many days.

Yesterday's suggestion of adding a new day to the calendar--Zeroth, the day between years--has provoked numerous questions as to how, exactly, such a beautiful thing would work.

Question: What is this new day, Zeroth, that you want to add to the calendar between 12/31 and 1/1?
Answer: Zeroth, the date 0/0, the Day Between Years, can be thought of as an "airlock" between the previous year and the coming year. Just as an airlock provides a transitional refuge between external and internal environments, Zeroth is a contemplative refuge between years.

Q: Where would this additional day come from? If we blithely add calendar days, our descendants will end up celebrating Christmas during the summer solstice.
A: Excellent question. To accommodate the additional day of Zeroth, we will remove the last day of February. February will have 27 days, 28 during leap years. Few will notice the difference.

Q: What happens to February 29th?
A: It is already the case that February 29th comes around rarely. Now the 29th will come around exceptionally rarely.

Q: How rarely?
A: Never. Let it go. Greater good. All that.

Q: Won't this new day of 0/0 cause havoc with computers?
A: Yes. Gloriously so. Zeroth will knock computers back on their heels and fuel IT industry jobs for years.

Q: Don't you work in the IT industry?
A: Stop getting distracted.

Q: Given the focus on reflection and rumination, are you concerned about the commercialization and merchandising of the Zeroth holiday?
A: Yes. This idea hasn't put a single penny in my pocket, which concerns me greatly. I'm mocking up some Zazzle t-shirts, however, which all the cool people are already probably pre-ordering.

Q: Are these actual real questions from actual real people?
A: No. I am making these up.

Q: Do you honestly think this "Day Between Years" will catch on?
A: Stranger things have happened. If a small circle of deeply committed people embrace the brilliance of Zeroth, I have some hope of being internationally labeled as the crackpot who  hatched it. That's a gift of sorts. Good enough for a CNN interview or two, certainly.

Q: Have we hit 500 words yet?
A: No, but we're very, very, very, very close.

Q: Will you be writing about this yet again tomorrow?
A: Absolutely not. Something new tomorrow.

New Year's Day, fixed.

New Year's Day is a horrible way to start the year. You stayed up too late stuffing your gullet with greasy snacks and glutinous dip, imbibed a bit more bubbly than was prudent, perhaps even shook a booty that--be honest--needed more than a few minutes of stretching before attempting such rhythmic indignities, and now, here, January 1st, when all the buoyant resolutions have come due, you are exhausted, bloated, stiff, dehydrated.

This is not a day of triumph; it is a day of convalescence. Happy, happy new year, indeed.

But enough about me. Perhaps, instead, you are the sort who retired to bed early, awoke early, ate something incorporating kale, and then embarked on an invigorating run, singing hymns as the sun broke majestically across the horizon. You kept your resolutions, but have much to lament today as well. Specifically this: everyone hates you. I'm sorry, but truthfully, we're all hoping for an opportunity to clip your kale-fortified flank as we head to the drive-through at Dunkin' Donuts.

Either way, there's no winning on New Year's Day. One might think the solution would be to look inward, to seek moments of quiet introspection, to start with "the man in the mirror." But why, when we can construct elaborate schemes such as, say, completely altering the calendar?

What do I have in mind? First, some background.

Historically speaking, calendar alterations have not been uncommon. The Julian calendar was broadly used before adoption of the current Gregorian calendar, but there have been dozens of others. Even today, people have suggested new calendars that would bring uniformity to the number of days per month. We're already accustomed to Leap Years and the wanton vacillations of Daylight Savings Time, why not nudge the calendar a bit?

What I'm suggesting is a new day--a true new year's day. Much like noon and midnight are technically neither AM nor PM but rather simply noon and midnight, this day would be between years, neither past nor future year. Rather than go from 12/31 to 1/1, we would go from 12/31 to 0/0, and then tomorrow to 1/1. The zeroth day of the zeroth month. I quite fancy that--and so it shall be called Zeroth, the day between years. A day to rest and recuperate from yesterday's revelries and initiate the loin girding for tomorrow's conquests.

On the day of Zeroth, time is suspended. It is like a baseball thrown high into the air that is, at its apex--for that brief moment between rising and falling--floating in stillness. You have this stillness, this moment, to reflect. The previous year has passed; it is a dissipated vapor. The next year waits, with all its promise, for you and your resolutions.

And your kale-eating. They say your body craves what it needs, and if your body craves kale then something is terribly, terribly wrong with you. We both know this. Don't worry, we'll figure it out together, this year.

34/24 < 50/50 :-(

A fiftyfifty.me retrospective

In 2012 I fell short of my 50/50 goal by 16 books and 26 movies; not terribly impressive. Numbers like that yield no medal, no ribbon, no fat corporate sponsorships, but merely a small mention in the local newspaper, and then only because I paid for it.

In the face of abject failure, the best question we can ask is, “Who can I blame?” These days the answer to that is, “just about anybody.” But the second best question, and the one we’ll be addressing here is, “What did we learn from this?”

We--and I’m using the royal “we”, as there is only one of us--learned that we aren’t really big on movies. Socially speaking, this is akin to not liking pizza, or not being on Facebook, or worse, not “liking” pizza on Facebook. But there it is, a stark truth--I tend not to like movies.

Not entirely a revelation, as movies have long not been my favorite pastime, but until I was challenged with watching many, many films did I realize that I avoid doing so. The “time spent/enjoyment found” ratio rarely pays off.

So what were these awful movies I watched?

Of the total twenty-four films, half were children’s movies that I viewed with my kids. I did like the majority of these--none were actually awful--but a big part of that is simply the pleasure of spending time with my children, laughing and curling up on the sofa. I’m not terribly critical of children’s movies; I understand when I’m not part of the target audience.

Of the remaining half, I rated four movies good, five okay, and three bad. Of the three “bad” movies, “Transformers: Dark of the Moon” earned special distinction as a film that should be prescribed only by doctors as a powerful emetic.

Thus, two-thirds of the time I spent watching “big person” movies, I wasn’t really enjoying myself. Part way through the year I realized I would never, ever, ever, hit 50 movies. I reached a point where I simply wasn’t willing. Goal or not, I decided to spend my time otherwise.

What of the books, then? Of the thirty-four read, I enjoyed thirty-two, with the remaining two being “okay.” None were “bad.” Several of the books I absolutely loved. Many taught me things I didn’t know and some changed my perspective. A much better return on time invested.

What, then, for 50/50 in 2013?

Book-wise, the plan going forward is to continue following the bloodlines of two mystery authors who are writing series I enjoy, but likely not pick up any additional mysteries. Instead I’m going to expand the variety this year based on recommendations I’m collecting from various sources: friends, twitter, magazines, and the like. I’ll probably more actively scout books from other 50/50 participants as well. Expect a few more “youth” titles also; I may pad my total with shorter books that my younger kids are reading, though I’ll try to keep it below a certain level of shamelessness.

I am, then, trying to hit 50 books in 2013.

And the movies? I feel a bit guilty about this, and question whether I should officially sign up for the 50/50 challenge this year. It developed in 2012, and it remains today: an unwillingness to spend the time required to watch 50 movies.

That said, I’m signing up with the intent to improve, using a two-fold approach:

--I need to discern better what movies I tend to like, so I don’t feel like I’m wasting time.

--I should watch movies in smaller portions, rather than attempt to watch each film in one sitting, as large blocks of time are hard to find.

Forward, then. Wish me luck.

I'm tracking my 50/50 progress on Pinterest. Have any book or movie recommendations? Please let me know!

Fifty books, fifty movies in 2012

I signed up for fiftyfifty.me yesterday evening; it's a commitment to read fifty books and watch fifty movies in 2012. The fifty books I'm looking forward to. The fifty movies? I find it hard to sit through most movies. Given the intrinsically passive medium, weaknesses in story or character get my old crazy leg hammering and I'm out.

If things get bad I may need to replace "movies" with, say, "cheeseburgers." We'll see.

Most likely I'll keep a light blog of the books and movies elsewhere, with a link on the right.

Anyone else up for this?

Don't network angry!

Some strong words from Juniper Networks on the intended audience for their JunOS "Class of Service Configuration Guide:"

JunOS "Class of Service Configuration Guide," release 8.0, page xviii

I admit it--as a tempestuous young buck managing the corporate WAN, I would drop packets just to watch them fall.

Ever operated network equipment in a "hostile manner?"  Really?

If it ain't broke, what are you waiting for?

Most adages have a converse. "Birds of a feather flock together," while, "Opposites attract."

Today we take issue with, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

The counter-intuitive approach is to break things all the time. I recommend this. Start breaking things or stay in bed until the sheets curl. But here's the trick--constantly break LITTLE things, and enjoy tractable, manageable surroundings. The alternative? Wait for great big things to break themselves. Wait for spontaneous nuclear concussions that level the landscape. Perhaps I should explain.

Passivity seduces. Leave well enough alone. In technology terms, if it's running, don't touch it. Don't patch it, reboot it, upgrade it, replace it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

But this sort of stability is an illusion. A router or server with an uptime of 713 days is not a steadfast pillar; it's a lit wick. 713 days? Did we forget about it? Do we not love it anymore? No patch or minor code revision for its birthday?

Windows XP and Internet Explorer 6 running fine?  It may appear so, but that platform encumbrance incurs massive infrastructure debt.  And sooner or later, the piper always demands his wages.

A January 27th TechRepublic article, "Avoid getting buried in technical debt," references debt as it applies to software development, a concept introduced by Ward Cunningham in 1992. We can consider  "Infrastructure Debt" a useful abstract for emphasizing the cost of deferred action, whether it's a lack of documentation, rushed work, or sidestepped upgrades.

Too often we confuse stagnancy for stability. That apparent uptime costs plenty, and once we become cognizant of those costs, we'll realize that "a stitch in time saves nine."  

Time to break something.  We'll discuss the details in the coming days.

IBM's Watson, Artificial Intelligence without the Beak

IBM built a computer named Watson to play Jeopardy, and in a trial run Watson beat a pair of Jeopardy champions.  Why would IBM do this?  You might think, as I did, that IBM is in it for the money, given that top Jeopardy champions can bring home over $3 million.  Build a "Wheel of Fortune" and "Price is Right" computer and IBM could dominate the game show circuit, perhaps raking in enough money to stop laying people off.


But no, IBM built Watson to achieve breakthroughs in Computer Intelligence and Language Skills.  While machines have been thrashing us at chess for years, the field of Computer Intelligence has been stagnant, with few advances beyond Honda's Asimo robot and Tiger Electronic's Furby.  In 2008, some placed faith in an undefeated air hockey robot, but air hockey enthusiasts soon criticized the robot's "sissy, goal-parked" style of play as little more than artificial cowardice.  WIth Furby sales falling down the charts and Asimo falling down the stairs, the province of game shows, long considered the Holy Grail of Computer Intelligence, seemed forever beyond reach.

Enter Watson, the Great Blue Hope.  Sincere people, many with beards, spent years building a massive computer system that would master the language of Jeopardy. While Watson spent most of his early months muttering email addresses and posting on FaceBook, the breakthrough "pun algorithm" had Watson making unprecedented linguistic strides:

Watson - This type of tea has noodles in it.

IBM researcher -  I give up.

Watson - What is spaghetti?

IBM researcher - Wow!

Watson - This is why the firemen ignored the burning dentist office.

IBM researcher - Why?

Watson - What is, they thought it was a drill.

IBM researcher - Please stop.

Soon Watson's comprehension skills were drawing awed gazes toward IBM, the Geppetto of Silicon.

Watson - What is "I'm a real boy!"

IBM envisions Watson triggering industry transformations and helping doctors diagnose illnesses.  Industry experts, however, suggest the most likely use for this new technology will be improving answering machine services:

TODAY

Human - Hi, can I talk to someone in the customer service departme--

Machine - Thank you for calling. Please listen carefully to the following seventy-seven options, as our menu has recently changed.

Human - 0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0

Machine - For Pool Hygiene Administration, press 001...

Human -  *click*

BRIGHT FUTURE 

Human - Hi. Customer service department, please.

Watson - ???

Human - Customer. Service.

Watson - ???

Human - This department is staffed by countless telephone-tethered employees I'm about to swear at.

Watson - What is Customer Service?

Human - Exactly.

We can hardly wait.  The only loser here is, of course, Tiger Electronics.  If only they had given Furby a smartphone with Internet access when he asked for it, the little guy could have ruled Jeopardy years ago.


What do you think of Watson? Breakthrough or Jeopardy gimmick?