Minority Opinions

Not everyone can be mainstream, after all.

Archive for January 2012

Soft-pedaling the Truth

leave a comment »

Where do you get your information?  Given that you’re reading this, I’m going to assume that you collect quite a bit of knowledge from the internet.  I also expect that you’re smarter than average, and probably have a technological bent.  You are probably conversant with the major theories of physics, chemistry, biology, and astronomy, having learned many of them at school.

Curiously, there are many who refuse to believe some of the things you take for granted.  My own grandfather, for example, despite a subscription to Popular Science, still denies the plausibility of a Big Bang.  Indeed, for centuries, it was thought that the universe was essentially static, with stars circling around each other in perpetuity.  For millennia before that, it was common to think that the Earth was the center of the universe.

Most of that time was before the age of scientific rigor, though; how can people still disbelieve?  A significant part of the answer may lie in a deep flaw of the scientific community: It doesn’t advertise well.

Read the rest of this entry »


Written by eswald

31 Jan 2012 at 10:11 pm

Posted in Lifestyle, Politics

Language Ambiguity

with 2 comments

As a programmer, physicist, and engineer, I’m used to words with precise meanings in certain contexts.  Surprisingly, that skill has also helped me learn to skim legal documents.  Sure, I use that skill most often for software license statements, but it has also come in handy for patent terms, buying a house, and taxes.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by eswald

24 Jan 2012 at 8:19 pm

Posted in Politics

Git Velocity

leave a comment »

After playing around with the number of lines in my recent git commits, I’ve found something that makes my work look roughly linear.  The key is to take the logarithm of the number of lines per commit, before adding them together.  That changes the graph from a completely useless set of stairs:

To a much more gradual slope:

Vacations and slow times are highly visible against a background of steady progress with occasional spurts.  The huge cliffs are now well integrated into slopes of a few commits each; yes, the graph is a bit steeper in those areas, but it’s not clearly dominated by a small set of points.

In this particular case, the value added to the total by each commit is ROUND(LN(LINES+2)*10), where LINES is the number of lines added or changed.  The 2 is necessary for zero-line commits, since zero itself is undefined for logarithms.  It could be 1, causing such commits to contribute nothing at all, but I like the extra punch that the second fake line gives you.  The rounding is simply to yield integers, in case I want to store the results in a text file sometime, and the 10 is a convenient scaling factor to avoid nasty truncations at lower line counts.

The trend line shows a velocity of just over 80 points a day, or 112 points per weekday.  Those points are more or less meaningless as indications of work, but at least say that I’ve been doing something.  To make my quota for a single day would take 16 zero-line commits, 8 two-liners, 4 commits of 14 lines each, 2 of 256 lines, or a single commit of almost seventy thousand lines.  The three huge ones above top out at 104 points each.

That these counts encourage smaller commits is probably a good thing.  Small changes are easy to verify, and make it easier to see the purpose for a given line.  Massive commits are more likely to have unintended consequences, particularly when they’re caused by accidentally committing everything at once, instead of just the piece you were most recently working on.

It’s still possible to game the system, of course, by running through loads of nearly meaningless changes, or even by breaking up one logical changeset into single lines, because it counts only quantity, not quality.  It’s probably best that you leave it for personal use.  On the other hand, if Github or someone wanted to pick it up as an alternative metric, I would not be opposed.

Written by eswald

17 Jan 2012 at 2:54 pm

Posted in Technology

Beeminding Git

with 2 comments

After trying out Beeminder to get me to write more, I considered having it make sure I was getting actual work done at work.  Nearly everything we do is in a repository, lately git, so it made sense to base a graph on commits.  Sure, I could base it on time spent, but that’s even harder; I have utterly failed to get accurate counts of the time I spend on anything.  Besides, the results are more important than the process.

With that decided, there are two key metrics that commits give you: The number of commits, or the number of lines changed.  If you do anything resembling a large amount of work on a single commit, the former is grossly understated.  With any amount of copy-and-paste or other trivial changes, the latter is grossly overstated.  Together, they can give you some sort sense of what was happening, but for graphing, they’re probably more lies than reality.  They can also be easily gamed, so never, ever, use this as the basis of any sort of payroll or employment decision.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by eswald

10 Jan 2012 at 6:42 pm

Posted in Employment, Technology

Akrasial Motivation

with 5 comments

My significant other just started a productivity blog as a motivational tool.  It’s been helping us both get things done around the house, almost by virtue of being there.  Part of that may be that it’s being read by family members who want to know more about our life and kids.

This one isn’t, as far as I know.  In fact, it’s read by almost nobody.  I’ve considered submitting it, or at least certain of its categories, to an aggregator or two, but that’s not really its point.  The point is that I need to write.

But I’m a procrastinator, so I spent a couple of years posting only here and there, until I read a post on self-binding by Daniel Reeves.  I signed up for the Beeminder service it described, and was greeted with the happy news that a bot could even fill out the graph for me, from my blog’s feed.  It took a bit to get things rolling, but I eventually got into a habit of posting once a week.  Granted, my procrastination led me to habitually let the graph touch the bottom of the yellow brick road before posting, but I was more or less on track.

However, sometime during this process, the post-processing bot stopped filling things out.  By that time, I had the graph in my head, so my posting schedule kept on track, but my page on the site has flatlined.  Worse, I think I’ve missed a week or two, so I’m probably below the yellow brick road for real.

Therefore, I’m hereby making a new commitment.  I will post once per week for this whole year.  More specifically, I will maintain a rate of at least one post per full seven days from this date.  If I slip from that schedule, I will donate USD$500 toward development of beeminder.com, to Beeminder LLC.  That’s enough that the manager of my money will freak out, but not so much that we’ll be in serious trouble of missing a bill payment.

I think I can do it, but it will probably still be tough sometimes.  One of these days, it may be important to admit that I have money riding on it, but I hope to avoid that fate.  I haven’t even admitted yet that I have a blog of my own…


Written by eswald

3 Jan 2012 at 8:54 pm

Posted in Lifestyle