I have had a TV for at least 15 years now — maybe 17, but it’s pretty fuzzy back there in my early 20s. Anyhow, what I always wanted back in the day was a way to archive the shows that I was watching. I have that now with cTiVo. cTiVo will transfer files from your TiVo over your local network and then transcode them however you want. The files can be quite large — the last one I transcoded tonight was 2.48 GB for a 85-minute movie — but I have far more storage space on the Drobos in my house than I do on the TiVo.
My wife’s family and mine love Plex, because we can share all sorts of things (home videos, photos, etc.) via the Internet! It’s great to be able to share things with them, and sometimes that includes movies that we’ve made archival copies of videos we’ve recorded on our TiVo.
One of the really cool things that cTiVo does is Plex renaming. The naming is rock solid for TV shows, it doesn’t create folders for individual movies. You’ll end up with:
LoCeltics needs to be a multi-ender. Jason Snell (2015) and Dan Benjamin (2008) have this topic well-covered; I include both here because the principles are the same even if the technology has changed. Everyone must be making local copies, and then a smart person pulls them together at the end.
Microphones, microphones, microphones
I was on Liftoff #12 back in the day, and that recording sounds like crap is because I didn’t test my setup in time, so I chose to go with EarPods for recording. Guess what? It sounded so crappy, even with a local recording going, that they went with the Skype. It’s awful, awful, awful, and I feel like I owe Jason and Stephen a beer for how bad that was.
If your core team — for LoCeltics, that would be John Karalis, Jay King, and Sam “Jam” Packard — are all locked on and ready to go with good microphones and local recordings that get pulled together at the end, you’re going to have a tighter-sounding podcast that will equal or exceed a radio show.
Get a producer (?)
I’m pretty sure that Karalis pulls the shows together, and that’s fine — host-led production is really common in the podcasting world because you already have someone who was in the room where it happened and has ears to what’s going down. But an outside ear may help, too, and for two reasons:
Eliminating/reducing cross-talk and vamping
Simply put, the show could be tighter. On the March 23, 2017 show, they vamped and vamped trying to get a final score on the Wizards game. Guess what? You can put the podcast on hold, wait five minutes, and break down the impact on the playoff seeding. No one needs to know that you were recording during the games, nor that you didn’t record through the end of the Cleveland game. Here’s how you could have done that.
Karalis (or Packard, but probably John) could have recorded a voice-over of each score after the games were done. Simple.
In the meantime, Karalis and Packard could’ve recorded little bits about each of the four scenarios — Cavs win, Wiz win; Cavs win, Wiz lose; Cavs lose, Wiz win; Cavs lose, Wiz lose — and speculated on what that means in terms of rest, lineup choices, etc.
The show leading up to the ending was really, really solid, and it just fizzled down the stretch like the C’s kicking away the Philly game last weekend. (Note to Jay King: in this situation, you are not IT.) I think that’s because John and Jam sacrificed the episode on the almighty deadline and working in real-time. If you don’t want to wait for it, you can script it up ahead of time and put it together in post! It’s not like you’re doing a real-time radio show, and anyway, the goal is to put those Felger and Mazz assholes out to pasture.
Non-host producers can keep the team organized
Say that a host doesn’t know a stat — he can ask for it and wait for the producer to get it while collecting his thoughts for a riff based on that factoid. The producer can note the time hacks for the request and the response and cut out the wait time. Let the producer make you look smarter.
A non-host producer can keep you on-topic and help you be smooth. Run a text chat behind the scenes with a large font delivering short messages and you’ll be fine.
Non-host producers can feed breaking news and monitor social media.
Non-host producers can also help with topic ideas / segments (Magical Mystery Machine, #jamjunkdrawer, etc.) and lining them up before the show.
Obviously, a non-host producer is going to be expensive in a number of ways, not all of them monetary.
You can’t call yourself the best daily Celtics podcast if you don’t record on weekends; because the teams play on the weekend, you need to be there. But this brings me to another point.
Add one or two more voices, schedule them, and do crossovers with other LO podcasts
The NBA season is lined up well in advance, so plan accordingly: two-host shows every day, three-host shows when you can, and cross-over shows — either one or two hosts going at it with a host (or maybe two) from another LO podcast before, say, a big and/or rivalry game. This keeps the show fresh, and if you do that you’re going to have more downloads and stop having your ads be for another podcast and damn car parts.
The other thing that scheduling hosts does is that you allow fans to know what to expect. John teased an interview that Jay has coming with Millyz for the Friday show. I love that stuff! Give me a reason to be in tuned.
The boys have to decide if they want to keep on being the #5 seed or be the #1. I think they’re going to be the #1.
The new job gave me a MacBook Pro! Given the option, I wanted the Mac, and I figured that I’d get an Air, which would’ve been more than fine. Instead, I have the 15″ Retina beast.1 They allow me to install my own software on it, which they won’t support, which is also more than fine. Hell, they even gave me free access to the Mac App Store, which meant that I just clicked a few Install buttons and had all the apps that I really wanted on it.
The big thing that I wanted was OmniFocus. I’ve used it for years, having migrated away from Alex King’s Tasks Pro2 to a system that was more GTD-focused. I always sorta fought with OF1,3 but OF2 is pretty damn amazing.
I live out of OmniFocus. If I think of something that I need to do, it’s Ctrl-Option-Space, a little typing, a couple tabs, and Enter and my task is saved. Today, I was talking with my colleague when I thought of something that I needed to capture. I said, “Give me a second,” and eight seconds later, i was back to the conversation. What was that task item? I couldn’t tell you now, four hours later. But I don’t have to know, because OmniFocus will tell me come Monday morning.
What did OF delight me by doing? Well, I have a Folder title Geocent, the name of my company. I have projects in it: Onboarding for all of the things that I have to do to get spun up as a new employee,4Recurring for tasks I have to do every so often,5 single-action lists for the various projects that I’m working on, and then I’ll create projects for things that have a sequence to them.6
The joy — no really, the joy — of this was Focusing on that folder and then going to Forecast.
Normally Forecast would show everything that’s Due soon, from these work tasks to me needing to take pills tonight, reading Ezekiel, and finding my PayPal debit cards. Nope! Focus has me focused on exactly work things. Can I see those things in my work OmniFocus install? Yep! Do I want to see them? Nope! I want that focus, and OF gives me a freaking laser.
In OmniFocus 1, I would’ve had to create a Perspective and filter it around, tweaking and tweaking. I expected to have to do that. When it worked exactly as I wanted, I was so happy — happy enough to unlock my phone and make two tweets. ((I won’t put Tweetbot on this machine, and I’m never logging into Facebook on it, either.))
This made my day, and my day was already pretty great because, you know, I have this great job.
insurance filing, 401(k) election, badging at NASA MSFC, etc. ↩
work journaling and time recording daily, internal and project office reporting weekly, safety and quality reporting monthly ↩
These may be less valuable to me given that OF is still unfortunately a solo and not a groupware program, but we’ll see. If I have solo work, like developing a complex engineering deliverable, I’ll probably use it. ↩
In the summer of 2013, I interned at The MITRE Corporation in McLean, Virginia. My office was actually in Tysons Corner,1 and both cities are fairly close to where the Capital Beltway crosses from Virginia into Maryland on the northwest side as it circles Washington, D.C, with Tysons on the outside and McLean inside it.
I carpooled with Brad, a law student at Vanderbilt. We figured that two professional guys who have gone to graduate school would have more in common with random undergraduate interns. We stayed in the same dorm apartment — the details of that are a whole other matter — at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, which is a good chunk from the Beltway. The layout was something like this:
You can see that there’s a lot of red there. It took us about 25 minutes in the morning. The evening commute was different. I think that our best in the first two weeks was 35 minutes. We came down the middle of those three route lines, exiting the Beltway for US 50. We’d head west from there, cutting down to the southwest, as you can see. GMU is just outside Fairfax on the southern limits, so getting there required going through Fairfax traffic after going through all the major thoroughfares.
On the Thursday of our second week of the internship, I decided to look into the 495 Express Lanes. That night, it took us 65 minutes to get back to campus. As we sat stacked up on Lee Highway, I brought up the express lane. Brad told me to do it if the money made sense. I ran the numbers, and they did. I picked one up at lunch on Friday, and we gave it a test that evening.
We got home in 28 minutes.
We had enough flexibility in our commute to give our friend Siggy — who had been taking the bus from Annandale to Tysons, walking a couple of miles on either side — a ride to Annandale, which you can see was out of our way, but not by much given that the Express Lane exit we used turned left for Annandale and right for Fairfax. Dropping Siggy off put us coming back into Fairfax on VA-236, which was a better road to campus than the one that the express lanes give you. It cost us maybe five minutes to save him an hour on the bus, and it was worth it to be kind to our friend and have a third person in the car for conversational purposes. (I love and miss you, Siggy!)
None of this happens Brad and I weren’t degreed professionals making north of $30/hr. We could afford to cut the lines. Hell, I used to half-heartedly laugh at the people stuck in traffic between VA-7 and I-66. “Those poor bastards. I’ve been there,” I thought. Because I had the money to pay for the privilege of driving on a controlled-access road, I had more free time available to do as I wished.
If I’d been making $20/hr, I would’ve been sitting in traffic. One of those days, as we were zipping down the road at 55 mph2 , we heard an NPR story about priority queueing all across the country, from theme parks to emergency rooms to, yes, vehicle express lanes. We really didn’t say very much.
Jumping the queue has become a part of the American Way, and I think that’s a dangerous thing. Waiting in line is the most democratic thing there is: we’re served one-at-a-time based on our arrival. It doesn’t matter if we’re a CEO or a postman; single, married, or divorced; pretty or ugly; fat or fit; kind or unpleasant: we just wait. None of us like to wait — just ask anyone about the DMV, or wait, just check Twitter and Facebook — but we all have to. Frankly, it’s pretty crazy that line-jumping should become a profit center for a service provider, but it’s 2014, and we’re there.
So let’s jump into net equality — or what some people call net neutrality. I like the former term, because it democratizes the Internet: every packet gets its turn. Neutrality implies belligerence. Anyway, the EFF has a good primer on net neutrality equality, and I think that you should read it if you’re not up to speed.
“These aren’t alike at all!” you’re saying. “Paying to go faster on the road isn’t the same as paying for better Internet access.” And yes, you’re right, in a way. There’s a fundamental difference.
With vehicle express lanes, the people paying for higher-priority access are the people directly benefitting from the service: the people able to get to and from locations faster than they once did. With net inequality, Netflix is going to be able to pay for priority, but Netflix doesn’t get the benefit — its customers do. No family was going to pay Brad and I more to get home from MITRE faster, and MITRE sure wasn’t going to pay us more if we could sleep in 15 more minutes. But Netflix can sell better access to their customers, and not just from a quality-of-service issue, which customers have always thought (rightly) was Netflix’s problem and not theirs.
The problem here is simple: it’ll be a race to the top of the heap. The obvious players — Google (for YouTube primarily), Facebook, Netflix, Hulu, HBO Go, ESPN, the sports streaming sites, etc.3 — are going to pay. Where are they going to get that money? You will be the ones paying a premium for an improvement on service that was, quite likely, adequate in the first place. But I’d be very surprised if there’s Netflix and Netflix Premium, with the former on the Beltway and the latter in the Express Lanes. No, I expect that everyone’s going to get to pay the freight for the better access, and that will mean:
More ads in our faces
More creepy data mining assented to in inscrutable Terms of Service that no one really reads anyway
But I’m following the line of argument that everyone follows, and it’s worth discussing, but there’s another thing to consider here.
The people that are making these decisions to allow for priority pricing — for net inequality — are the very people who have the financial resources to skip any damn line that they want.They think that people will be attracted to priority pricing because the world that they know is priority pricing. These decisions are made by people who either pay for priority lines or pay someone to stand in line for them. Of course this seems like an attractive proposition to them, because they’ve grown accustomed to it. I’m not arguing that any of the people making these decisions are bad people.4 But I am arguing that you’re going to be okay with inequality and for the “winners” retrenching their gains with legislation and regulation.
Let’s be honest: the services that have the resources to pay for priority pricing are the ones already running a profit or bilking money from investors. But many of those that would be paying for priority pricing are actors that wouldn’t have been able to reach these dizzying heights with an unequal Internet. It’s classic retrenching: garner success and then build walls around it to keep contenders out. While that’s a classic American business practice, we shouldn’t let our Internet — the one that our tax dollars, cable bills, and phone bills — have paid for to suddenly become unequal. The amazing disruption that is the Internet should be allowed to retain its disruptive power.
If net inequality were possible in 2006, just after NewsCorp bought them, Myspace could’ve built a wall around its part of the Internet that would’ve made it impossible for Facebook to supplant them. Whether or not you feel that we upgraded when we got Facebook — as a former GeoCities user, I think that we did — we couldn’t have gotten there if Rupert Murdoch had been able to outspend Facebook’s investors.
The Internet should be an amazing, chaotic, wonderful place, one that keeps participating providers honest and vigilant to interlopers. Net inequality allows the current winners to stay winners while sending us the bill. I won’t sit still for that.
This isn’t the best photo in the work, but the Belkin is at top and the Velcro at bottom. Note that the Belkin has that big flag to help you identify cables and remove the ties. Removing ties is not what I want to do. I looped both ties around my left pinky for this image, and handling the Velcro unit was much easier, as you loop the tail end of the tie through a loop at the head, which you can then Velcro to the outside of the tail. After that, you just start making loops. They’re easier to handle, cheaper, and I feel like they hold things more securely. Add in the cost factor and it’s a no-brainer.
Well, I’m done with the tip jar experiment, and the changes that I made in Round 2 really didn’t matter very much. I got a very mixed result. In the first round, tip jar size and the time of day dominated the effects. In making each day an experimental run, I controlled for that some, but the response I got was that size was statistically significant — but only after dropping out insignificant terms from the model, and the result was 180 degrees off of the previous result: smaller was now better.
There was no statistical significance to seeding or opacity, meaning that my main hypothesis is thoroughly shattered. Oh well, that’s why you run experiments! That there was no significance for either in 16 experimental runs tells me that it doesn’t matter.
One of the baristas told me on the first or second day that she didn’t think that I’d get good results given that “some baristas just get more tips than others”. Even that didn’t necessarily hold true, as one barista got 3x the response today as she did a day earlier this week, and she always works opening shifts at that store.
What this tells me is that there are nuisance factors at play — things that you can’t control for. The key nuisance factor is the amount of traffic the store does. I could control for this by indexing the tips to that day’s sales. Does that give me a perfect answer? No. Does that give me a better answer? Yes. However, I decided that situation was out of my control and that information was beyond what I could expect to be given.
Another nuisance factors is indeed what my friend suggested: some baristas just get more tips than others, for whatever reasons. Now you could do some observations and see why that is, but you can also block for operators and say, “We’ll have Geof do all of these variations on his shifts, run the analysis, and see what turns up.” Frankly, what may work for one barista may not for another one, but it could also be that isolating by blocking would help to reduce that noise factor. Also, baristas tend to work the same shifts over time, so you’d be going back toward the time-of-day factor that I controlled for with this second run.
I really did think that I’d get conclusive results on this, but I estimated the main effects yesterday and realized that the small-jar days had three of the four highest responses; when I got a low response for the larger jar yesterday, I knew how this would come out. It’s a little disappointing, because I’d like to be able to go back to the women and say, “Here’s your answer!” I can’t.
Like a lot of people, I’ve been affected by the Heartbleed bug. Most frustrating to me is that I got to spend a couple of hours on Tuesday afternoon futzing about with SSL certificates to make sure that I wasn’t vulnerable to the attack.
I’m taking a little free time on Friday afternoon to do an audit of my password data using 1Password, which I am on the record as using and really liking. After de-duplicating a bunch of items where I had a stored password and a stored login for an account, I still have 600+ login items. I’ve been doing a very good job of using good, hard passwords that are unique to sites. A good password manager is worth having, even if you’re like my dad and just keep it in an encrypted Excel spreadsheet.
But my main frustration right now are the sites that won’t let you change your password unless you use the lost-password function. How dumb do you have to be as a developer to miss that step? This is not fucking rocket surgery.
So the first round of the tipping jar experiment went well. There were two dominant factors: time of day and size of the jar. I was not surprised that morning tipping was better than evening tipping, as the store is busier early than late. I was surprised by the degree to which it dominated the results. You use fractional factorial experiments to screen for results. Normally, I would reduce this to a 23 experiment1 by dropping an insignificant factor; instead, I have changed how I collect my data and am re-running with the other three factors. Instead of morning and night shifts allowing me to collect the data in 5-6 days, I’m using each full day as an experimental run, which will take me eight days.
I fully expect that tip jar size — larger was better, which surprised me — will continue to be a key player, but I want to know if opacity and seeding have main effects, and I want to know if any interactions occur.2 With a full factorial — even with a single replicate — I’ll be able to create a good reduced model once I see which main effects and interactions have any meaning. It may be that tip jar size is the only factor that matters, but I won’t know until I take data.
I start in the morning and finish next Friday, which gives me 11 days to pull the data and plots together to write a paper. It’s going to be a furious finish to the semester. The big thing is that I now have to be there at least some of the time every single day for the next week-ish. I’m there most every day, but now I have to make a concerted effort.
For future work, we’re going to refine the testing a bit. Weekdays and weekends have different clienteles. My tentative plan is to take data M-Th and F-Su, using those as blocks. That really slows down my time to get results, but I won’t be on a schedule. The baristas seem really interested in the results of this, which probably doesn’t surprise you. They have ideas, too, and I’m the man that knows how to make the data happen. It may take us all summer, but I bet we’ll be getting a good result at the end of it. I’m already making plans!