I love it when folks come up with cool ideas - I've seen so many of these "unboxing" videos, but this took me by surprise. I totally want that phone now.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Friday, August 15, 2008
Chess
Played three games of chess last night with Neil, and got my ass handed to me all three times. At my best, I was keeping up; at my worst, I'd make some incredibly boneheaded move and put myself in a position where there was no way I could win. I admittedly conceded all three games, but my logic all three times went something like this:
1) With a level playing field, I can maybe keep up. Let's be generous and give me 50-50 odds.
2) Neil just made an awesome move that made me waste about four moves and ended up with me losing a valuable piece. Therefore, I'm about four moves behind and down in points.
3) Conclusion: with a level playing field, I'm about 50-50. With the chips in Neil's favor, I'm probably more of a 95-5. Therefore, let's just concede rather than playing for another 30 minutes just to arrive at the obvious conclusion.
I remember when I backpacked with Runar, we played a ton of chess, and he beat me almost every time (meaning like 98%). We were discussing rankings, scores, etc, and Runar pointed out something interesting - chess rankings (or scores, or ratings, or whatever the hell it's called) are very specific, and you need to play with someone with practically an identical score to you. I think the points go somewhere from 0 to 2000 or something, and a difference of 100 points means that the player with the better score will almost always win, which isn't really any fun for either player. The Internet has been a a great tool for chess players, not because of social aspects or by eliminating the need to have a chess board, but because you can find someone whose score is close enough to yours to ensure a good, fair game. And (at least according to Runar), the best way to improve is to play someone at more or less your skill level - it's not like basketball or other sports where you want to play with people who are better than you (actually, it kind of is, but a difference of 100 points is the equivalent of migrating from your pickup game to playing with college starters - i.e. it's so far out of your league that you just get shut down and don't really improve).
I'm very impressed - I'm tempted to teach him how to play poker, because I think he could be far better at it than I am. Poker takes analytical skill, which he obviously has, and it also takes an intuitive ability to read people, which I think he also has. Of course, I don't want to be responsible for him getting in trouble or turning to gambling, so maybe I'll hold off on that.
Speaking of poker, Clau and I have decided to go to Massachusetts for the holiday weekend coming up. We're making the balls-out drive to Salem on Friday night, crashing, exploring Salem and migrating to Boston on Saturday, partying in Boston on Saturday, then exploring some more before heading to Foxwoods on Sunday. I'll play poker at Foxwoods (probably until the wee smalls), then on Monday we'll explore Mystic Seaport and head back home. Should be a lot of fun. I've never played in a casino before and I hope I don't get my ass handed to me like last night. But, the way I see it, even if I lose $500 on Sunday night, the proceeds from our apartment the following Wednesday ought to take the sting out of it.
OK, lots to do for work, and if I get a chance I'm going to review some chess materials: if I can at least not do anything really stupid, maybe I'll have a chance.
Choice quote from Neil last night: "Hey, you've been making some pretty good moves; not the one you just made, obviously, but overall pretty decent." My cup runneth over.
1) With a level playing field, I can maybe keep up. Let's be generous and give me 50-50 odds.
2) Neil just made an awesome move that made me waste about four moves and ended up with me losing a valuable piece. Therefore, I'm about four moves behind and down in points.
3) Conclusion: with a level playing field, I'm about 50-50. With the chips in Neil's favor, I'm probably more of a 95-5. Therefore, let's just concede rather than playing for another 30 minutes just to arrive at the obvious conclusion.
I remember when I backpacked with Runar, we played a ton of chess, and he beat me almost every time (meaning like 98%). We were discussing rankings, scores, etc, and Runar pointed out something interesting - chess rankings (or scores, or ratings, or whatever the hell it's called) are very specific, and you need to play with someone with practically an identical score to you. I think the points go somewhere from 0 to 2000 or something, and a difference of 100 points means that the player with the better score will almost always win, which isn't really any fun for either player. The Internet has been a a great tool for chess players, not because of social aspects or by eliminating the need to have a chess board, but because you can find someone whose score is close enough to yours to ensure a good, fair game. And (at least according to Runar), the best way to improve is to play someone at more or less your skill level - it's not like basketball or other sports where you want to play with people who are better than you (actually, it kind of is, but a difference of 100 points is the equivalent of migrating from your pickup game to playing with college starters - i.e. it's so far out of your league that you just get shut down and don't really improve).
I'm very impressed - I'm tempted to teach him how to play poker, because I think he could be far better at it than I am. Poker takes analytical skill, which he obviously has, and it also takes an intuitive ability to read people, which I think he also has. Of course, I don't want to be responsible for him getting in trouble or turning to gambling, so maybe I'll hold off on that.
Speaking of poker, Clau and I have decided to go to Massachusetts for the holiday weekend coming up. We're making the balls-out drive to Salem on Friday night, crashing, exploring Salem and migrating to Boston on Saturday, partying in Boston on Saturday, then exploring some more before heading to Foxwoods on Sunday. I'll play poker at Foxwoods (probably until the wee smalls), then on Monday we'll explore Mystic Seaport and head back home. Should be a lot of fun. I've never played in a casino before and I hope I don't get my ass handed to me like last night. But, the way I see it, even if I lose $500 on Sunday night, the proceeds from our apartment the following Wednesday ought to take the sting out of it.
OK, lots to do for work, and if I get a chance I'm going to review some chess materials: if I can at least not do anything really stupid, maybe I'll have a chance.
Choice quote from Neil last night: "Hey, you've been making some pretty good moves; not the one you just made, obviously, but overall pretty decent." My cup runneth over.
FedEx follow-up
Got an email from my dad giving more clarification:
Read your blog. You don't hate Fed Ex, you hate Fed Ex Ground. It's two different services and Fed Ex Ground verily sucketh a major rock. Fed Ex Ground is a separate service that Fed Ex set up fr the purpose of fucking the drivers. These drivers are not real fed ex employees, they are called "contractors" but they drive a fed ex truck and wear a fed ex uniform and the packages they deliver come in a fed ex box. The services is way cheaper for the shipper but the drivers are getting royally fucked by fed ex. You must have noticed that some fed ex packages (the overnight, the two day) have a nice tracking number and you can re rout and other good stuff, and some seem to be just sitting in limbo and nobody cares about the package or you. That's the difference between the two services. When you ahve to ship fed ex, pay extra for a true fed ex servie like overnight or two day. Thought you might like to know.I'm not 100% sure that I don't still hate FedEx for doing this - I mean, I don't hate Indian call centers for their poor training as much as I hate the companies that employ them. And of course, this comes back to my gripe with vendors for not saying who is going to ship the packages - I mean, UPS has ground service too and we don't have any problem with it, and the price difference between ground and 2-day tends to be pretty substantial (especially when you're ordering something like a $10 DVD). Still, for big stuff I think it's definitely worth it to opt for 2-day delivery, just in case it's going to be sent FedEx...
Thursday, August 14, 2008
I hate FedEx
I cannot describe how much I hate FedEx. Every time a package gets sent to our apartment via FedEx it turns into a nightmare. Points:
1) They will not leave a package with the super. Every time we ask them to do that, they say "the super wasn't there". Funny how he's always there for UPS.
2) For "home delivery", they don't give a time window - well, that's not completely true - they say "sometime between 8am and 8pm".
3) The delivery time is never consistent, as can be seen from the door tags and the few times I've been home when they deliver. Sometimes they show up at 9am, sometimes 5pm, usually sometimes in-between.
4) They don't deliver on Saturday unless your delivery time just happens to be on Saturday. So, in other words, it's not that they're incapable of it, they just won't do it on request.
5) They "might" deliver to another address, depending on their mood, but they'll charge for it if they have to change to another FedEx facility (so, for example, if you can't be at home in Hoboken and you want it just delivered to your office in NYC, they charge for that).
6) They hold all packages in the bowels of Brooklyn. There was a time when they held stuff in Manhattan (admittedly way on the edge of Manhattan, but Manhattan nonetheless) - now you're just screwed if you don't have a car.
This is just my opinion - a quick scour of the Internet will yield lots of people who have similar but opposite opinions (like "FedEx is just fine, but UPS is awful!"). Personally, my big gripe is with vendors. I think it should be a requirement that all online vendors specify which carrier will be used to transport your order. Actually, what would be best would be a choice - most people would probably go for the cheapest option, but for people like me for whom it makes a difference, it would be nice. The only reason I can think of for this is either:
1) Vendors don't want to have to update their sites when they change carriers
2) Vendors themselves don't know who they'll use until the day they ship it, depending on packages, destinations, weights, etc.
3) Vendors know that people like me are out there, for whom "It'll be shipped FedEx" is a deal-breaker (and like I said, different people have issues with different carriers).
We need government intervention dammit! At the very least, I'm going to start getting picky about this and, when possible, let vendors know that I will only purchase from them if I can know that they're NOT shipping FedEx.
The worst part? I don't even really want this package anyway - it's something I ordered and then realized I don't need. However, I paid 30 bucks for it and I figure I ought to get it. Maybe I'll just let it go back to the vendor and suck up the restocking fee. Grr....
1) They will not leave a package with the super. Every time we ask them to do that, they say "the super wasn't there". Funny how he's always there for UPS.
2) For "home delivery", they don't give a time window - well, that's not completely true - they say "sometime between 8am and 8pm".
3) The delivery time is never consistent, as can be seen from the door tags and the few times I've been home when they deliver. Sometimes they show up at 9am, sometimes 5pm, usually sometimes in-between.
4) They don't deliver on Saturday unless your delivery time just happens to be on Saturday. So, in other words, it's not that they're incapable of it, they just won't do it on request.
5) They "might" deliver to another address, depending on their mood, but they'll charge for it if they have to change to another FedEx facility (so, for example, if you can't be at home in Hoboken and you want it just delivered to your office in NYC, they charge for that).
6) They hold all packages in the bowels of Brooklyn. There was a time when they held stuff in Manhattan (admittedly way on the edge of Manhattan, but Manhattan nonetheless) - now you're just screwed if you don't have a car.
This is just my opinion - a quick scour of the Internet will yield lots of people who have similar but opposite opinions (like "FedEx is just fine, but UPS is awful!"). Personally, my big gripe is with vendors. I think it should be a requirement that all online vendors specify which carrier will be used to transport your order. Actually, what would be best would be a choice - most people would probably go for the cheapest option, but for people like me for whom it makes a difference, it would be nice. The only reason I can think of for this is either:
1) Vendors don't want to have to update their sites when they change carriers
2) Vendors themselves don't know who they'll use until the day they ship it, depending on packages, destinations, weights, etc.
3) Vendors know that people like me are out there, for whom "It'll be shipped FedEx" is a deal-breaker (and like I said, different people have issues with different carriers).
We need government intervention dammit! At the very least, I'm going to start getting picky about this and, when possible, let vendors know that I will only purchase from them if I can know that they're NOT shipping FedEx.
The worst part? I don't even really want this package anyway - it's something I ordered and then realized I don't need. However, I paid 30 bucks for it and I figure I ought to get it. Maybe I'll just let it go back to the vendor and suck up the restocking fee. Grr....
Monday, August 11, 2008
Summer in NYC
So it's the middle of August, it's about 70 degrees and pouring rain. The worst part is that I left my window open this morning, even after seeing the weather report. I figured "well, worst case scenario is a quick burst of rain, a little bit might get into the apartment, but it'll be OK." I didn't figure for the biblical-proportioned downpour that I'm now seeing outside the window of my office building, complete with thunder, lightening, and lots of hail. I shudder to think of what will be waiting for me when I get home.
On the bright side, it's supposed to be nice for the rest of the week, so at least Neil will be missing it (although he'd probably get a kick out of it - you don't get any proper thunderstorms in the Bay Area).
On the bright side, it's supposed to be nice for the rest of the week, so at least Neil will be missing it (although he'd probably get a kick out of it - you don't get any proper thunderstorms in the Bay Area).
Wednesday, August 06, 2008
Dr. Horrible
I just the story behind this is so cool - Joss Whedon decides to make his little pet musical project and distribute it any way he can, without ever actually putting it on the air. I hope it's doing well.
Here's a link to an interview in Wired magazine about it. And, of course, it's on Hulu (after originally being aired in small segments for literally a few hours, before getting put exclusively on iTunes for the hardcore, and now free to all of you. A DVD can't be far behind.)
Click here to see the whole thing, or check out this tidbit:
Here's a link to an interview in Wired magazine about it. And, of course, it's on Hulu (after originally being aired in small segments for literally a few hours, before getting put exclusively on iTunes for the hardcore, and now free to all of you. A DVD can't be far behind.)
Click here to see the whole thing, or check out this tidbit: