Favorite t-shirts series: inaugural post

If you’ve spent significant amounts of time with me, you’ll know I have a t-shirt for every occasion. I want to start cycling some of the old shirts out of my collection and bringing in fresh new designs. I figure I’ll feel much less bad about ditching my old shirts once I’ve preserved the art and the story here.

I’m going to start posting a picture of me in one of my favorite t-shirts twice a week. Each Monday, I’ll debut a shirt that I’ve recently added to my collection, with links to where you can get shirts by the same artist. On Thursday, I’ll post a classic shirt from my collection along with the story of the shirt if it has one.

Without further ado, here’s the first shirt:

20090119-1 20090119-2

I figure the artwork speaks for itself, so I won’t say much about it other than it’s by an absolute genius of a t-shirt artist named Glenn Jones. There’s pretty much no design I’ve ever seen him publish that I don’t love. If you want one of your own, check out his store.

The need for wiki standardization

Selection paralysis

I got to thinking lately about how I wish I had a wiki on my personal web site, because I want to do some quick’n’dirty semi-structured and richly linked writing to share with others so I can get feedback and input. I spent some time catching up on what wiki systems are best at what, and discovered I was completely daunted by how many different choices there were.

I eventually whittled the list of candidates down to just short of 10 different packages, and then got stuck again. What happens if I pick one today and invest considerable time in it only to discover that a different one fits better with what I’m using it for? Is there any way to migrate the data to a different wiki package at or near full-fidelity?

Read More »

Minimum lengths for usernames. Wtf?!

I get bitten all the time with minimum username length requirements. The most common number that I bump up against is 6 characters, probably because my usual username is 5 characters so I wouldn’t hear about requirements of 4 or 5, and it’s obvious to everyone that requiring 7 or 8 characters is silly. But why have a minimum length in the first place?

Help me out here—I want to believe that when Zoho tells me that I need to use 6 characters, it’s for some reason other than “the developer who wrote that validation code picked 6 arbitrarily”. But I can’t for the life of me imagine what the other, better reason might be.

Even worse than Zoho is Google’s Picasa. Before successfully choosing a username there, I managed to uncover 3 different error messages, two of which are completely useless:

  1. Please enter a username between 6 and 30 characters.
  2. Please enter a username without invalid charcters.
  3. The username ‘xxxxx_’ is not available.

Okay, for message number 1, I can understand what to do in response to the message, but it frustrates me nonetheless. As far as I can tell, the only “charcter” (their misspelling, not mine) that triggers message 2 is ‘@’. Any other character that’s not a letter or a number results in message 3 (which was caused by the _ in this case).

I know that neither the Zoho developers nor the Picasa develoeprs are likely to read my meager blog rant. But for those of you out there who do web development today or in the future, please keep in mind that there are some of us with well-established usernames that are only 5 characters (or 4 or 3 or shorter, for that matter) that would love to not be subjected to capricious and silly rules when using your site. If there are technical reasons for arbitrary-seeming restrictions, then fine, but in most cases there shouldn’t be.

Jinni needs better Netflix integration

Read about the new movie recommendation engine Jinni on Techcrunch earlier today. I’ve done a few queries, and love the particularly rich axes along which they slice and dice the catalog of movies. They call their taxonomy the Movie Genome Project, and admit that it aims to do for movies what the Music Genome Project (most famously in use at Pandora) has adeptly done for music.

While they’ve done a great job of building a really nice movie recommendation service so far, and I can’t wait to see where they go next, one particularly significant missing piece today is integration with the Netflix API. As with most of the profile data that I scatter around on the web, I don’t want to have to enter movie ratings on every single web site that could use them to improve my experience. The good news is that Netflix has cracked open most parts of their user database and will allow me to grant access to third party sites using OAuth to read the ratings that I’ve already entered, as well as add ratings for additional movies. They will also allow sites to add movies to my queue or even stream the movie via Watch Instantly.

If Jinni were better integrated with Netflix, it might become the only site that I use to manage my movie-rental experience. Which is great for Jinni, and just fine for Netflix. If Netflix spends only enough money on web application R&D to provide a basic experience, they can focus more resources on doing what they uniquely do best—getting movies in front of my eyes either via mail or via streaming over the Internet. That is, by enabling sites like Jinni to supplant some of the work that Netflix has historically had to be good at, Netflix ends up with a more satisfied and loyal customer.

Update: Minor edit to fix up an unclear pronoun in the last paragraph.

Best IIW ever!

During the wrap-up circle at today’s IIW2008b (which is the acronym for this fall’s Internet Identity Workshop), Phil Windley said that this may not have been the best IIW ever, but that it was the best in a while. I admit that I didn’t start attending until IIW2007a, but this was definitely the best IIW ever for me. (btw, Kaliya, I believe amorphous blobs of chairs are far more egalitarian than circles… Seriously.)

I’ve finally been lurking in Identity Land long enough to know most of the key projects, and many of the key people. Accordingly, the number of relevant and interesting conversations that I manage to find continues to climb with each IIW.

The other thing that I think contributed to my feeling that it was such a good event is that many of the projects in the space are finally reaching a significant level of adoption and awareness. This adoption and awareness is driving people to come together to solve some of the remaining difficult problems before we can break through to the mainstream. It’s also driving some of the traditionally competing technologies in the space to come to an understanding of each other’s technologies, and to look for common ground and opportunities to collaborate on mutually beneficial efforts.

One of the best sessions that I attended was a session led by Paul Trevithik that sought to explore what request the identity community would put to the major browser vendors for inclusion in future versions of their browsers. When people from each of the OpenID, iCard, and SAML communities showed up, many of us who have become familiar with the politics of IIW figured that we were going to reach a stalemate in the first 15 minutes and end up having made very little progress. But it turned out that we all came together and quickly found some common ground. We all readily agreed that if the browser could help a user discover and catalog which credentials he has, and could help match them up to relying parties that can use them later on, we could all get on about our business of actually making our protocols do what our protocols do and rest easy with the knowledge that future web browsers will help us out.

Now that we know what problem should be solved by future browser facilities, we still have some tricky technical work to do to get to a proposal and then still more work to get to an actual prototype. But I’m optimistic that we, the united identity community, can get there.

Funnier than it should be

The latest Apple vs. Microsoft ads are hilarious even if there are a few folks pointing out the hypocrisy in the first ad.

Regarding spending money on advertising

 

Regarding getting back to simple naming

Now 25% more CTO!

It’s been a very long time since my last blog post, and an incredible amount of stuff has changed since then. My wife, plus our cats and a blueberry bush moved to Portland, OR along with the rest of Vidoop on a road trip that we called the Oregon Trail (the day 4 video is particularly worth watching).

Jennifer and I have settled in to an apartment in downtown near Portland State University, and are still trying to get all of our boxes unpacked. (I’m not the best unpacker the world has ever known—I have a tendency to freeze up once I’ve encountered the 3rd thing in a box for which I can’t find a home.)

I’m really enjoying Portland overall—I never have trouble finding interesting things to do or interesting people to talk to. I actually think I’ve become acquaintances with more techies here in 3 weeks than I managed to meet the entire time I was in Tulsa. I’m sure it’s not entirely Tulsa’s fault, but there are so many well-established and well-attended tech events here that it makes it really easy to meet lots and lots of people.

And all of that’s just the stuff that I do outside of work. My day job has recently changed as well. I’m still (or possibly even more so) Vidoop’s Chief Technology Officer, but I have handed off responsibility for day-to-day operation of the engineering team to Vidoop VP Scott Kveton. I’m already impressed with the number of good ideas he’s brought with him and the energy with which he’s implementing them.

I, meanwhile, have had more time to get caught up on how technology has been changing around us. I’ve had time to think about the way the Internet oughtta be, and some time to figure out how to get there. I’ll be picking up and running with a bunch of the projects that have come out of Vidoop Labs, and will be spending more time outside the office talking to various tech influentials about the problems and solutions they see, and how Vidoop can help them.

I know this is the first post on this blog in quite a while, but expect to see a whole lot more soon!

Facebook Connect doesn’t doom OpenID

Dick Hardt’s Identity 2.0 blog has a very interesting post that wonders if Facebook Connect might prevent OpenID adoption. I think he’s vastly oversimplifying the ecology of turning a good idea into a monopoly when it’s surrounded by interoperable alternatives.

I have no doubt at all that Facebook will get significant traction with this (Dick’s Digg scenario is a great one), but the reason this doesn’t doom OpenID is the same reason that many people have gmail but _everyone_ has email.

For any ecosystem where 90% adoption makes ~100% adoption an almost sure thing (phone, email, and now Identity 2.0), interoperation not only makes it easier, but is practically required to make it possible in the first place.

Facebook Connect might provide additional value above simply being any old identity provider (just like gmail ain’t just another email provider), but there are still holdouts who haven’t heard of Facebook, don’t care about Facebook, or are maybe even conscientious objectors to Facebook. I’m optimistic that some of these users might settle on something else that works fine for them before facebook manages to build a monopoly in online identity.

Is twitter’s the future global namespace?

I’ve seen an interesting, and maybe alarming, trend of using a person’s twitter username prefixed with an ‘@’ to refer to a person almost everywhere on the web. Granted, this is only happening in the highly interconnected early adopter circles that both blog and are well-known tweeters. But that’s the sort of thing, and the sort of crowd, that spreads out to others over time.

Better get your favorite Twitter username while it’s still available, or you’re going to be @smileybob1992039…

Managing mental energy

A couple weekends ago, Jennifer and I went to Denver for the annual convention of the National Puzzlers’ League. I ended up enjoying it overall, but I got off to a difficult start mentally.

In retrospect, my mental journey through the extended weekend o’ puzzles & games has taught me a lot about managing mental energy, including some things about how to invest it and being able to assess the opportunity cost of such investments.

Let’s start with a quick peek at my mental state throughout the weekend. Looking forward to the convention, I was incredibly excited. After all, solving puzzles is one of my favorite things to do in the whole wide world. Memories of how much fun I had had at conventions past mixed with the anticipation of decompressing over the course of my first consecutive vacation days in a very long time.

I got to the convention and started off tense. I spent some time hanging out with my Seattle-area puzzle-friends, and said hello to a few others, but I was having trouble mustering the energy to bring myself to spend time chatting with or even to greet many of my acquaintances from prior conventions. The fact that no one seemed to be worth talking to began to make me wonder why I was even at the convention in the first place.

Later, when activities such as games and puzzles began, I discovered how woefully out of practice I was at that sort of thing. I was reminded that, like almost anything else, current practice is required to be at your best at any activity–physical, mental, or otherwise. My relative decline in ability over what I remembered added an additional layer of sadness and disappointment to my already depressed mood–I had lost my puzzle-solving mojo.

Eventually, despite that I stuck to interacting with my most favorite fellow puzzlers, I got a little more warmed up to the people around. And over the weekend as I did a few puzzles, my brain got back in the groove, as well. By the time we got back home, Jennifer and I had co-solved a particularly brilliant and satisfying cryptic crossword constructed by Mark Gottlieb (he gets bonus points for involving colored pencils), and I was once again convinced that puzzles were fun.

So what did living that story teach me about managing mental energy? Or maybe even before that, what do I mean by “mental energy” in the first place? It’s extremely hard to define, but you all know what it is. It’s that unquantifiable stubstance that gets spent when you’re doing something “taxing” or “draining” or “annoying”, and that you gain when you’re doing something “fun” or “energizing” or “recharging”.

The biggest thing my convention experience taught me about managing mental energy is that, like that well-known business aphorism about money, “you have to spend mental energy to make mental energy”. I had been spending nearly all of my time and mental energy throughout the preceding 20 months on Vidoop. And while that was fun and exciting, my other mental “areas of investment” were becoming atrophied through neglect.

I realized that it’s actually very important for me to spend some time on the non-work pursuits that are most important to me, because not doing them actually makes them less fun. And there being diminished funness to my most significant hobbies makes it harder to keep my mental batteries fully charged and functioning at peak efficiency.

I have begun spending more time on puzzle-related things since the convention, and I’m really glad I have.