Lucas Richter

My review of Il Maniscalco Maldestro's self-titled album

Fri, 04 Jul 2008 09:52:29 +1000

My review of Il Maniscalco Maldestro's self-titled album

Beachballin' - Why identi.ca is cool

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:41:50 +1000

I should just start a proper text blog. Three Four out of my last 10 Tumblr posts have been slabs of...

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 15:28:00 +1000

I should just start a proper text blog. ~~Three~~ Four out of my last 10 Tumblr posts have been slabs of text. Not as epic as Steve Yegge, but still not tumblog material.

Keeping an eye on your "non-work" working habits

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 15:25:27 +1000

It’s time to come to grips with reality: people who have any kind of useful web access at work will use it to do “non-work”, that is personal activities, e.g. Facebook, paying bills, YouTube, blogging, reading, whatever. That’s a given, so employers should stop looking at ways to stop it happening. You make a “No Facebook, No YouTube” policy, you’re going to end up firing good people for bad reasons.

All that said, employees shouldn’t be wasting their employer’s time and money on entertaining themselves (this is the bit where employers have to hire people they can trust). What we employees need is a way to know when we’re not focussing on work. One that’s not intrusive, and doesn’t seem to judge (like anything that says “you’re spending x per cent of your time on email, y per cent on Facebook and z per cent futzing around in Word”).

I’ve been working at home for the last couple of days, and came upon a solution to this problem. Because I’ve brought my work desktop home with me (dual screens and all), I’m able to run my work and home machines side-by-side, using three screens in all. That isn’t the killer bit; others use three screens as a matter of course. What makes it great is that there’s literally a physical separation between work stuff (e.g. code and debugging), and other stuff that is not essential to work, but nice to have (e.g. browsing, music, IM, an SSH session or two).

This has had a pretty huge effect in a couple of ways: first, I notice much more easily when I’m not concentrating on code or work-related activities. Second, since I’m using a separate machine for the non-work-related stuff, it lets my work machine devote its entire resources to running an IDE (and the associated add-ons, compiling and unit testing software), and my debug browser (because my job is primarily web programming).

While this hasn’t increased my productivity per se, it has certainly alerted me to how much time I’m not spending coding while I’m at work. And that’s a great first step. So much so that I’m going to suggest that you do it. Here’s how:

Run two machines side-by-side if you can. On one, do only work-related things. On the other, do anything else that comes up (that you would ordinarily “just do quickly” during a work day). Take note of each time you turn your head back to your work machine. One more important thing here: keep your “non-work” screen away from the centre of your desk.
Failing that, if you have more than one screen attached to your machine, devote one of them to non-work-related activity (exclusively if possible). Again, note when you switch screens, however frequently or infrequently (either case could be telling you something).
If you’re stuck with only one screen, get another. No, I jest. Assuming you do much of your “non-work” on the web (and also assuming that you use a tabbed browser), separate your activities between browser windows. Note how many times your “non-work” window is summoned, or, indeed, minimised.
Another option is to do your “non-work” on a virtual machine. This is a slightly more technical option, but it has the benefit of consolidating all your “non-work” into one window, if you use apps other than a tabbed browser. And it’s not too hard if you have a technically-minded friend who can set it up for you (and, perhaps, explain it). There is a penalty in terms of computer performance, but if you have a relatively recent machine of which you’re not asking too much (like compiling code or ripping DVDs), then it shouldn’t hit you too hard, at least for a one- or two-day experiment.

Doing an experiment like this should tell you something about your “non-work-at-work” habit. And knowing about it means you can take action, for example, striving harder to focus, or keeping better separation between your GTD contexts (not that I know anything about The GTD Way). How you use the information is, of course, up to you.

My desk - working at home: The wide screen on the left is...

Fri, 27 Jun 2008 11:36:59 +1000

My desk - working at home: The wide screen on the left is attached to my Linux box, which normally lives at home. The other two belong to my work box, running WinXP. Using Synergy means I can have 1 mouse and keyboard to operate both machines.

Never have I felt more “into” a piece of music than...

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:13:42 +1000

Never have I felt more “into” a piece of music than when this man was playing. Which is a bit sad when you think that I call myself a musician.

Doing the wrong thing can be a good development

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 10:59:21 +1000

I reached a significant point in my singing education recently.

My teacher told me I was oversinging - that is, pushing too hard, harder than my voice can really handle.

I should clarify: this was the good kind of “significant point”. This is kind of counter-intuitive, I know, because I was doing the wrong thing. But this was the marking of a boundary which I had not yet discovered, which is (for now) the upper limit of my vocal “power” (basically, the ability to be loud). I’m told this will change in the future, as my voice develops. But for now I have a known upper limit to this particular variable. That’s definitely a good thing for my programming self, which doesn’t like “known unknowns.”

This is one of the many ways in which we can benefit from “failure.” The way in which we benefit most often is by learning from our experience. I like to call this kind of occurrence “doing an Edison,” after Thomas Edison, inventor of the electric light globe. The story goes that it took him thousands of attempts to finally create a working light globe. When he finally succeeded, reporters asked him: “How did it feel to fail to many times?”

He replied with words to the effect of: “I didn’t fail. Each time I discovered a new way not to make a light globe.” So, he saw a benefit in each time he didn’t achieve his most desired outcome, and figured out what didn’t work.

It’s occurred to me since hearing that story that figuring out what doesn’t work is just as important as learning what does work. It’s this idea that keeps us trying new ways of doing things and improving our methods, our lives and ourselves. Many people say: “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” This old adage is a recipe for getting stuck in a rut. It’s in the same category as “Siddown, you’re rocking the boat” and “Don’t make waves.” Things need to change occasionally in order to keep life interesting, and to make sure that we don’t accept an imperfect status quo forever.

That said, we must accept that everything we do to address a problem will also be imperfect. Otherwise the status quo would remain forever. This is not the same as accepting every imperfect solution. We must be discerning and figure out which solutions will introduce worse problems than the one they solve, and when we can bear the consequences of which kinds of “failure”. We must recognise that our new solutions will create a new imperfect status quo, which we must then aim to improve on.

So to avoid getting stuck in ruts, and to escape the conviction that our solutions must be perfect, I give you the following pearl of wisdom:

Adopt any solution that improves the status quo, and seek out solutions that improve it further still.

Well, there is an upside...

Tue, 24 Jun 2008 09:56:38 +1000

The public transport system in Melbourne is getting worse and worse, and will continue to, from what I read in The Age this morning. The Victorian Government is planning to reduce penalties for late trains, which I can only see leading to more late trains.

Apparently Transport Minister Lynne Kosky wants to “make life easier” for potential transport providers, a move which I reckon is inspired by fear that if penalties are too harsh, nobody will tender for the contract.

The problem here is that the only way to force an increase in quality is to make it the less expensive option, and reducing penalties for a low-quality service definitely ain’t the way to do it.

The increase in public transport usage in recent times is a symptom of people voting with their feet (or wallets, whichever you prefer) and choosing public transport over the upward-spiralling expense of driving a car. So if the public transport system is crap, where will people go?

In all probability, back to their cars, which is unfortunate. Which brings me, counter-intuitively, to the upside mentioned in the title.

For a few people, the increased expense of a car commute over a train will be not just inconveniently expensive, but prohibitively so. What can these people do? Well, they can continue to use an awful public transport system. But those who find this idea intolerable will be forced to take yet another option, which in all likelihood will be at least a little “greener.” Examples that come to mind immediately include car pooling, or walking or cycling to work, even if this means working closer to home, or in some extreme cases, telecommuting or changing to a 100% work-from-home job (e.g. freelancing). Demands on an overstretched transport system (roads included) are reduced by a small percentage, the environment takes a slightly smaller pollution/greenhouse hit, and a lucky few waste less time getting from A to B every day.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not trying to be all Utopian here. We’re not going to reach transport perfection by any stretch. There will still be traffic jams, late trains, trams and buses and frustrated commuters all round, in increasing numbers as time goes on. What I hope is that the percentage of the population that suffers such frustrations will decrease, little by little, as we gradually realise the sense of reducing the demands we place on our transport system by reducing the distance we travel to work.

Comedian George Carlin dies at 71 - Celebrities- msnbc.com

Mon, 23 Jun 2008 18:41:29 +1000

Comedian George Carlin dies at 71 - Celebrities- msnbc.com

"One thing i do like about my workplace is that i can burst into song and 9 times out of 10 my..."

Thu, 19 Jun 2008 10:08:45 +1000

“One thing i do like about my workplace is that i can burst into song and 9 times out of 10 my coworkers will join in.”

- @Thommo
http://twitter.com/Thommo/statuses/838172828

My my, that’s unobtrusive…

Thu, 19 Jun 2008 08:45:25 +1000

My my, that’s unobtrusive…

This concept demo for Firefox Mobile looks pretty cool. My only...

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 12:51:52 +1000

This concept demo for Firefox Mobile looks pretty cool. My only worry is whether my phone will be able to keep up…

How to write unit tests that work

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:32:00 +1000

Mentor: Hey kid! How do you tell when your automated test is broken?

Protege: When it fails, of course! How stupid do you think I am?

Mentor: I think you’re pretty damn stupid!

Protege: WTF?!??! Why?

Mentor: Because you only got half of the answer. A test is broken if it behaves in either of 2 ways. The first one is obvious: if it fails when it should pass. The second is less obvious, but equally valid: a test is broken if it passes when it should fail!

Protege: Hold up a minute, old guy. So you’re saying that my tests could suck, even though they pass?

Mentor: Yep.

This was the realisation I came to a short while ago. And it’s a bugger. My tests could not only suck, they could suck invisibly. So, I thought, what’s the solution?

Back when I was first reading about Test-Driven Development (TDD), I thought, “OK. So I have to write my test so it fails, then rewrite it so it passes, then refactor it. Easy.”

Not so easy, in fact. Because you don’t have to do that just at the test level. You have to do it for every single assertion you make. Otherwise you don’t know whether you have a broken assertion.

Protege: But that’s a pain in the arse! It’s so inefficient! It will take me ages!

Mentor: That ain’t necessarily so. You just need to figure out a way to do it so that it doesn’t take a lot of effort.

Protege: Come on, sensei. I know you have answers. Give it up!

Unfortunately for me, I don’t have the kind of mentor that just gives me answers. So here’s what I came up with (by the way, I’m using a Test-After Development (TAD) methodology):

Write the code.
Write your test, but set it up to fail at every opportunity.
That is, where something should be true, assert that it’s false. If two data are meant to match, assert that they don’t. If it should be an “equal or greater than” (>=) comparison, make it a “less than” (<). This is how you make sure your test will fail when it’s supposed to.
Put a breakpoint on each “inverted” assertion.
This not only serves as a convenient marker (at least if you have an IDE), it means you don’t have to set one when your test screws up (i.e. when your “inverted” assertion passes instead of failing) and you have to debug to see what the problem is.
Run your test, and make sure it fails at the first “inverted” assertion.
That’s important. If it skips any, then something’s wrong.
Once you’re satisfied, “un-invert” the assertion.
Or invert it again, if you like. This will make it pass when it should.
Remove the breakpoint. You’re ready to move on to the next assertion.
Repeat steps 4-6 until all your assertions are “the right way up.”
Enjoy your solid, reliable test.

DISCLAIMER

I’m not an authority on unit testing, or any aspect of coding. Far from it. I’m just a guy. I’m writing down what I figure out, so that I don’t forget it. If this is useful to you, that’s fantastic. Please let me know so I can enjoy the warm fuzzy feeling (seriously). If it’s crap, please let me know, so I can be liberated from my ignorance (equally seriously).

I spotted a theatrical acquaintance in this ad who once played...

Wed, 28 May 2008 15:40:52 +1000

I spotted a theatrical acquaintance in this ad who once played my father!

A more helpful error page: Finally, Twitter’s replaced...

Wed, 28 May 2008 08:59:45 +1000

A more helpful error page: Finally, Twitter’s replaced it’s grammatically irritating “Something is technically wrong” page with an actual useful error message. Hoorays!

"actually had to pause and consider the ramifications of Rickroll’ing in a communication..."

Fri, 23 May 2008 09:52:05 +1000

“actually had to pause and consider the ramifications of Rickroll’ing in a communication I’m about to send to 2,000 people at work”

- @extraspecial
http://twitter.com/extraspecial/statuses/786572927

Finally, some word on Twitter outages

Fri, 23 May 2008 09:29:15 +1000

I just read an article about Twitter’s downtime problems on their blog. And here’s what I think:

Finally.

I’m really pleased that they’re talking about this. It gives me far more confidence that this is, if not a user friendly service (due to the aforementioned downtime problems), then at least a business with user friendly attitudes.

I’m as pissed as anyone else about not being able to use Twitter when I want to. That will remain the case as long as there’s downtime. But while I’m no more confident that the problem will be solved than I was before I read that post, I’m far more certain that I want to see Twitter succeed. And not just the “make a profit, get rich” kind of succeed. I mean the “make Google jealous” kind of succeed.

And that’s what acknowledging obvious problems can do for a business.

What I’d really love to see from here is the adoption of this attitude on their outage page. The current “we’re working on it, it’ll be back soon” message really doesn’t cut it with me. I’d rather just be told that the error’s been logged, to be honest. As long as there’s some follow-up about what the error was, so I can subscribe to a maintenance blog or whatever if I want. Unlikely as that is to happen, it would be an exemplary demonstration of transparency and honesty with users.

Please, Twitter. Don’t stop here. More of the same. Please.

"chown -R us base …. oh yea!!!"

Wed, 14 May 2008 10:46:29 +1000

“chown -R us base …. oh yea!!!”

- @funkycoda
http://twitter.com/funkycoda/statuses/770204192

"Gordon Ramsey Omelette. You will need: 2 fucking eggs, some fucking salt and pepper, fucking chives..."

Wed, 14 May 2008 10:46:09 +1000

“Gordon Ramsey Omelette. You will need: 2 fucking eggs, some fucking salt and pepper, fucking chives and a fucking teaspoon of fucking butter”

- @andrewsayer
http://twitter.com/andrewsayer/statuses/781775844

"Ugh. When addressing the African-American hotel staff member about your missing Mac plug,..."

Wed, 14 May 2008 10:45:57 +1000

“Ugh. When addressing the African-American hotel staff member about your missing Mac plug, don’t call it a white power adapter.”

- @AndrewCrow
http://twitter.com/AndrewCrow/statuses/788944461