Bradley A. Swerdfeger

You may have noticed that I'm not posting on here anymore. Honestly, most of my energy goes into my work and being with the people who I care about. Sorry about this site being massively out of date -- I just don't have the time to take care of it anymore.

Take care! :D

My thesis pdf surpassed the 6 MB mark (6,683,114 bytes, to be exact). I feel like I hit some kind of milestone every time I get another megabyte.

I predict a 10 MB finish. I'll be taking bets until it's submitted.

If you're like me, then you understand the importance of software updates, but absolutely dread the process of performing them. Even though I fully understand the threats to security, stability and performance caused by not patching software, I still rarely ever bother.

Software companies should know that something is very wrong with their workflow if people who completely understand the risks don't update because it's annoying. I propose a potential solution.

First, I should review some of the update methods that I can think of off the top of my head:

1. On demand (Most applications): This is the best way to ensure that your users don't update their software. Updating software has nothing to do with their task, unless there's a new-fangled feature available. Usually there isn't, so, in an effort to get on with their lives and use an application for its intended purpose, users will ignore that 'updates are available!' window every time. Let's not even talk about the case where updates are hidden under a 'Check For Updates' menu selection... If users perceived the program as working fine before, then there's no incentive to update. This method never works at getting me to update; unless I dedicate a day to software updates or something...
2. Install on application load (Firefox): This works fine, but man is it annoying! How many times have you tried to quickly boot up your laptop to check the details of an email before rushing out the door, only to have Firefox take its sweet ass time to load since it's installing updates. Then it wants to tell you all about your addons that might need updating too. This is even worse when you're working remotely through an X Manager. If your application is going to update automatically anyways, why should it interrupt or delay your task?
3. I'm going to bug you until you update, but not too often (Adobe products): This turns into another window to close while you're opening a program. It becomes so knee-jerk to the point that you don't even notice the window popping up, and thus, you are never warned that there are updates.
4. I'll update when you shutdown, if you don't mind (Windows with a non-default setting): This is probably my favourite method from this list. It's unobtrusive, and doesn't take up any of your time. The only real downfall that I can see is in the case where someone wants to cut the power to their computer and peripherals in order to save zee planet -- it's pretty annoying to have to wait longer than you usually do. It's too bad that this doesn't work well for applications, since they may not be open while you shutdown. Also, it may get annoying if you can't predict the length of time that it takes for your computer to shutdown. I have to wait for my laptop to finish shutting down before putting it in my bag, otherwise it goes into standby. That's when I hate this method.
5. Taskbar process, warning you constantly from the corner of your eye (JRE): This one is less intrusive than most, but that's one of the problems: That little coffee cup icon in your taskbar becomes a fixture. This effectively gets turned into the 'on demand' method, and precious memory and CPU cycles are being eaten up for no good reason
6. Screw you, I'm going to update whether you like it or not. If you ignore me, then I'm going to keep popping up modal windows every 30 seconds until you do. Oh, and you'll have to reboot when I'm done too, so make sure that you can cope with the context switch that'll ruin your groove for the next hour (Windows with default settings): I don't know anyone that likes this mode. Most people revert to the 'on demand' method, which is effectively useless. Windows is full of security holes, so I understand the need for strong-armed methods, but do you have to be such an ass about it? I'm working here.
7. Software as a service (Gmail): Best method by far: Let the content provider handle updates, you won't even notice! Too bad, for the moment, it only works for web applications.

That doesn't cover all of them, but like I said, it was off the top of my head, and I haven't encountered an update process that I think is very brilliant and doesn't get in the way of a user's primary task.

But wait! Isn't that the solution?! Should users have to care about their update process? Should they even be able to perceive it unless they are very careful? Why require users to interrupt their primary task by worrying about updates? That kind of context switching is bad for attention and getting things done.

If people have already invented an update method that I haven't been able to perceive, then kudos to you. That's the way that it should be done. Keep on doing what you're doing.

I'm going to outline a method that I think will work well here. Feel free to tear it apart and make suggestions. That's what design is all about: If it can't stand up to criticism, then it shouldn't be implemented.

Install updates, in the background, at the lowest priority, while the user is working. If you need to restart before the changes can take effect, then just wait until the user decides to restart. If the user shuts down or closes the program before you finish, just do it over again or checkpoint it.

Let's go through that bit by bit:

1. Install updates: It's not 'on demand'. Eventually, the updates will get installed. It's better than never at all.
2. in the background: Why does installing updates need to interrupt the user's primary task? Do it in the background so that we don't have to worry about it.
3. at the lowest priority: This shouldn't take up vital processing power that'll annoy you during your task.
4. while the user is working: Starting up a program takes time, don't make it take any longer than it should. Users want to get working on their task as soon as possible. Wait until they're in the swing of things to install updates.
5. wait until the user decides to restart: Seriously, does it have to happen now? Is it worth interrupting the user and causing an expensive context switch? Just wait a little bit longer. It's better than not installing updates at all.
6. if the user closes the program, just do it again: Same explanation as above.

This won't always work.

It won't work when the update has to modify things that the user is currently writing on. It'll complicate things, but you could get around that by making shadow copies or having your program be a little more modular.

It won't work for people who read release notes and care about every little change that is made to their software. Richard Stallman would hate this. But not everyone is like him. Definitely not.

I've been writing for a while, and all day. I can't think of much else right now, though I'm sure that I could if I put more time into it.

Any thoughts?

Having problems with solving LaTeX compiler issues due to horribly unhelpful and cryptic error messages?

This page will help: http://www.tug.org/errors.html

I should have been keeping track of the solutions that I've discovered. I'll update this post as I find more :)

If you're looking for a great, free, online project management, source control and collaboration tool, check out Unfuddle.

I've been using it to manage the dying end of my thesis, and it's working really well. Previously, I'd lose track of all of the little things that I had to do. Now, I just submit a ticket whenever I discover that something needs to be done!

Jen Fernquist and I are using it to manage our project for the SMART Table Competition, along with a previous project. It works pretty well for collaboration :)

That's all I have to say for now. I suggest that you check it out and let the functionality do the talking. Busy busy busy.

Sorry if you experienced any problems accessing my website recently. My permissions somehow got changed without my intervention and that rendered the site inaccessible.

It's been fixed and I'm keeping a more vigilant eye out for this type of thing (third party hosts = unpredictable). I wish that I had time to write a script...

In February of this year (Friday the 13th, in fact), I was hit by a car while crossing the street. The fact that I came out of this event with only a broken nose, a giant gash on my nose (and ~7 stitches), and sore knees for a couple of days is pretty remarkable in and of itself. However, I've realized that the most remarkable thing about that event is the fact that I didn't fly rather than smashing my face into the ground.

Earlier I mentioned that I've been reading Douglas Adams' The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. In his books, Adams explains how to fly:

There is an art, it says, or rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.

The first part is easy. All it requires is simply the ability to throw yourself forward with all your weight, and the willingness not to mind that it's going to hurt.

That is, it's going to hurt if you fail to miss the ground. Most people fail to miss the ground, and if they are really trying properly, the likelihood is that they will fail to miss it fairly hard.

Clearly, it is the second part, the missing, which presents the difficulties.

One problem is that you have to miss the ground accidentally. It's no good deliberately intending to miss the ground because you won't. You have to have your attention suddenly distracted by something else when you're halfway there, so that you are no longer thinking about falling, or about the ground, or about how much it's going to hurt if you fail to miss it.

It is notoriously difficult to prize your attention away from these three things during the split second you have at your disposal. Hence most people's failure, and their eventual disillusionment with this exhilarating and spectacular sport.

If, however, you are lucky enough to have your attention momentarily distracted at the crucial moment by, say, a gorgeous pair of legs (tentacles, pseudopodia, according to phyllum and/or personal inclination) or a bomb going off in your vicinty, or by suddenly spotting an extremely rare species of beetle crawling along a nearby twig, then in your astonishment you will miss the ground completely and remain bobbing just a few inches above it in what might seem to be a slightly foolish manner.

While I was flying through the air after being hit by a car, I was lucky enough to experience such a rare event. While airborne, I distinctly remember seeing something plastic bounce across the ground, directly in my field of vision. At that moment, I thought to myself, "I wasn't wearing anything plastic...". I was even more surprised when the ground jumped up and hit me in the face because I was completely distracted by the plastic tumbleweed.

Despite satisfying all of the improbable requirements needed to fly, I didn't. I didn't miss the ground by accident, I smashed right into it, face first. An interesting thing about the whole ordeal was the fact that time seemed to slow down while I was distracted. Think bullet time from The Matrix Reloaded. Time slowed to an absolute crawl while I was thinking to myself, and then quickly accelerated into a rush when my world exploded in pain.

It turns out that the plastic thing was the driver's side mirror, which my body somehow ripped completely off. To this day I can't figure out where it hit me, because there was no evidence of any trauma on my body anywhere near the height of a side mirror.

Although that situation ended as well as it could have given the circumstances, it could have ended a lot better if it had resulted in me flying...

I recently joined Zipcar to help with a move. In case you haven't heard of it, it's a car sharing program where you can rent cars by the hour (which are parked around the city). It was about time, because I'd have to do other things that require a vehicle such as:

• Going to Costco.
• Getting furniture off of craigslist.
• Driving MINI Convertibles around Stanley Park.
• Moving again.
• Getting a big load of groceries.
• etc.

They seemed like the most convenient choice. Right now I have no real need for a vehicle except for fairly uncommon circumstances. You can even rent a truck by the hour, with minutes notice. You don't pay for gas or insurance. Plus, with UBC, I only pay $30 annually with no signup fee. Sounds like a deal to me.

Anyways, they have a 'Refer a Friend' program, where I've opted to split the driving credit $25/$25. That means you can get $25 in driving credit if you click the link that I've posted here.

Normally, I wouldn't post any kind of ad on my site, but Zipcar is a great program.

The link ---> Join Zipcar and get $25 in free driving!

Update: If you join on some kind of group discount (like UBC), you can't get the credit. Sucks for both of us, but I still encourage it -- It's a great service.

Update: The migration should be finished. Please let me know if you experience any broken links. Thanks!

Please bear with me while I migrate this website to a third-party web host.

Circumstances have arisen that will not allow me to run my own web server for a little while. It's pretty annoying that I have to migrate all of the services that I use every day to third party sources, but c'est la vie.

During this migration, you might experience some broken links, images, etc. I'm rectifying them as quickly as possible.

On a side note, why do hosting providers have to make everything so damned complicated with their web interfaces? Just give me shell access to my home directory, site-specific Apache settings and mySQL... I'll manage without your 'intuitive' interfaces... I understand that these things are easier for non-technical people, but to me it all just seems too clunky and annoying. Interfaces should be designed with all users in mind. Locking a user into beginner mode is terrible design.

I've recently started reading Douglas Adams' The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (and the rest of the novels) to occupy idle cycles when I'm in transit or trying to get some sleep. It definitely lives up to the hype.

Don't hate me, I was more of a fantasy jock growing up. The only sci-fi that I ever really read was William Gibson and Orson Scott Card.

There's one quote that gave me a very lengthy chortle, and I'd like to share. I think that it comes from somewhere near the end of the first book.

Pasted from Wikipedia:

After millennia of battle the surviving G'Gugvuntt and Vl'hurg realised what had actually happened, and joined forces to attack the Milky Way in retaliation. They crossed vast reaches of space in a journey lasting thousands of years before reaching their target where they attacked the first planet they encountered, Earth. Due to a terrible miscalculation of scale the entire battle fleet was swallowed by a small dog.

Oh man. Great stuff. The sheer futility of such a massive undertaking is pretty amusing.

In other news, I had an interview today. It gave me confidence that some companies have a sensible hiring process. I enjoyed it :)