Blog Down for Maintenance

January 5th, 2009

A few days ago, Richard Q pointed out to me that Google thought my blog was malicious. I looked into it and got really frustrated–Google’s security won’t tell you what they think is malicious (so if you’re a baddie, you can’t just immediately work around it), and I couldn’t find anything either.

As it turns out, it looks like my site got hacked. Not cool. Somebody added a mess of malicious code that popped up a trojan downloader to the end of a mess of my files.

Interestingly, Firefox couldn’t see it, which is why I thought Google was smoking crack.

But Chrome picked it up when I went to my Wordpress dashboard, which inspired me to look at the underlying code, which, sure enough, had some obfuscated javascript at the end of it.

So now, I’m re-uploading all the Wordpress files, hoping I’ll overwrite everything. The scary part will be my wp-content folder, whether or not I’ll find all the junk in it, and whether or not it’ll have executable code in it that will then re-apply the malicous code to my forward-facing files again.

Ugh. This could be really ugly. What worries me is not knowing how they made the changes: weak password? something fishy w/ 000webhost? wordpress security hole? no clue.

In any case, the security problems should be taken care of now. I just need to figure out how much of my wp-content folder is clean and how much is dirty. Till I do, a lot of the content I hosted here might be unavailable. Annoying…but that’s how it is.

Topics I Blog On

December 31st, 2008

I’ve been thinking for a while about redoing my blog, consolidating down to a few categories, and making my front page more category driven. Unfortunately, I have over 1000 uncategorized posts (mostly from Blogger, before categories existed) I’d need to sort through, which doesn’t sound like fun.

In any case, I got curious today and made this pie chart showing what I blog about. The only thing to note is that I’ve seperated out “tech” and “linux”, so it’s not quite as even as it looks:

blog-pie

The Aeropress - A Coffee Gadget Review

December 31st, 2008

I got an Aeropress for Christmas. The Aeropress bills itself as an espresso machine. As long as you don’t need/want crema, it is. If you think a lack of crema and espresso are mutually exculsive, think of the Aeropress as a way to make a deleciously strong tiny cup of coffee.

Here’s how it works: you put coffee in the main part, above a paper filter, which is, in turn, on top of the cup you’re going to drink out of. You pour in hot water the top, stir it a bit, then use a plunger to force the water through the coffee and filter. Besides heating up the water (which you can do in the microwave pretty quickly, since you’re only doing 2-4 shots worth), it takes less than 30 seconds.

There’s a lot to like about the Aeropress. First of all, the (pseudo) espresso it makes is really good. I mean, REALLY good. You get that tingly, sharp rich espresso taste in a really strong way. Compare $20 for an Aeropress to $100+ for a bearable espresso machine, and it’s not too hard a decision.

Second, it’s fast. If you add in the water heating time, we’re MAYBE talking about 2 minutes, although it’s probably more like 60-90 seconds. Compare that to a French press–it’s at least 10 minutes from when I start heating the water till when I’ve got coffee.

Third, clean-up is awesome. You can use the plunger to punch the puck right out. While it’s making the coffee, the pluger catches all the coffee along the walls of the carafe, so it’s mostly already clean. The pluger and carafe are made out of some fancy plastic, kind of feels like Lexan or something smoother, so not much coffee oil sits on them.

Take the pluger and carafe and lid apart, rinse them out, a little soap on the lid, rinse the paper filter out if you want to use it again, and you’re done. Unlike a real espresso machine, particularly my pump machine, you can make multiple shots right away–there’s nothing to cool down or dig out.

Fourth, it’s very portable. It’s hard, durable plastic, so it travels well, and it doesn’t plug in, so you can take it just about anywhere. You’ll need coffee, of course, but that’s about it. The instructions even say you can heat the water inside the plunger in the microwave (although that makes me nervous that I’ll ruin my pluger seal).

Fifth, it’s pretty versatile. You can make espresso, or water the espresso down for a nice cup of regular coffee. I did this with my dad over Christmas–I made two shots and drank one straight, while he watered his down into a big mug of coffee. We both loved it.

There’s only a couple bad things:

  1. It takes a little more coffee than a normal machine. The included scoop is about twice the size of a normal scoop (one scoop per shot). That means going through coffee faster.
  2. The filters are paper, and thus disposable. They said they did a lot of blind tasting and everybody preferred the paper filters, but I prefer my coffee gadgets to have no disposable parts, mostly b/c it means I have to buy something new down the road. The package came with over 200 new filters and a cute little holder for them, but I would have liked a metail filter, even if it meant more cleaning.
  3. I haven’t been able, yet, to stop the water from dripping into the cup before I start plunging it. I would think the more water pushed via pressurization through the coffee, the more taste I’d get. Right now, as soon as I pour water in, it starts to drip through the coffee into the cup. I’m not a fan of that–maybe I need to try a finer grind.

Overall, the Aeropress is a fantastic little device. I’ve been saying I was going to try to make a DIY espresso machine for a while, probably out of a caulk gun, but this works on exactly the same principle, is simpler and more elegant, and has substantially less chance of spraying boiling water in my face.

I don’t know if it’ll become the default for my morning coffee–I really do love the thickness of a French press (and the fact that it’s not a tiny shot, so it stays hot longer and is just overall more to drink). But it probably will replace the Nalgene press as my travel coffee maker, and maybe the moka pot as my default way to make espresso.

Breaking Our Spiritual Legs

December 30th, 2008

Jnthn has this great post about the dark night of the soul. I hate to quote the money quote, so just follow the link real quick and, at worst, read the quote he pulls in.

This is powerful stuff, mostly b/c I feel like it gets, in a lot of ways, at what I’ve been feeling for a while.

What troubles me about it, though, is that I’m not sure I know what do, or where it’s going. I mean, I’ve always said I’m not necessarily done with ministry, but the more I’ve thought about it recently (especially in light of Mike’s recent post, which really deserves a blog post in and of itself), I’m not sure that’s what I ought to be doing.

What SHOULD I be doing? I’m really not sure I know. I don’t really feel like I’ve been playing games, but at the same time, it’s awful easy to worry less about just about spiritual stuff when you’re not thinking about it every day for your job.

I want to be serious about my faith, and really make it an important part of my life. And for that matter, I’m not real satisfied spending 8 hours a day doing something unrelated to what I consider real life. I’d like to be spending my time on something that’s really important.

But thoughts like the ones Jnthn brings up make it awful hard to know what’s really real. Things just aren’t a simple as they used to be.

Making Coffee In A Siphon Coffee Maker

December 29th, 2008

My Christmas was a little out of control in the coffee department–I recieved 4 different coffee gadgets: a 3-shot moka pot, 2 siphon pots (one nice and brand new, another old, scary, and quite literally antique (and thus cool. but still kind of scary, wrt drinkability)), and an Aeropress.

In any case, here’s a great article about making coffee with the siphon pot.

I haven’t got a good cup of coffee out of one yet, but honestly, I haven’t spent much time with it, and (here’s the important part), I think the included instructions have the brew time a little short (that and I freak out, afraid that it’s boiling the coffee (yuck)).

The article recommends 90-120 seconds. I’ve barely ever gone over 1 minute.

And, as it turns out, the apparent boiling in the top isn’t boiling at all. It’s actually rising water vapor from the bottom.

From the article:

As the vapour bubbles pass through the top liquid, it may appear that the active brewing is “boiling” but in fact it isn’t under normal brewing conditions. If you leave the siphon coffee maker long enough, eventually the top vessel water temperatures will reach 100C, but this takes a very hot heat source and five or more minutes of brewing time in most cases.

.

In any case, it’s great fun to watch, particularly on the new glass one. The antique pot is metal, so while you can see the water rising in the top chamber, you don’t quite get the full effect.

Lots of fun for sure, and a more reports to come, particularly on the completely awesome Aeropress, which makes a killer shot of crema-less psuedo-espresso.

Find the Newness

December 24th, 2008

What you may or may not know is that if you shop wholesale from China, you can,

keep an eye on this website and you will find the newness.

Just to give you a little more information, “anyone who bought an MP3 Player is now going to be itching to get a MP4 video player”.

Just so you know.

Get ready to blog!

Danielson and The Inaccesbility of Good Art

December 23rd, 2008

Here’s the end of a Christianity Today review of Danielson’s greatest hits album, Trying Hartz.

I think it’s pretty instructive in what’s wrong w/ Christian subculture’s attitude about art. Take a look:

Danielson’s music remains an intriguing curiosity, especially nowadays during the highpoint of amateurish sounding indie folk. And there’s no question that Smith’s faith is evident throughout if you’re willing to look hard enough, and that remains the key to enjoying this music: effort. Trying Hartz is a great starting place for Christian music fans looking for something different, but is different necessarily a good thing?”

Is different necessarily good? Did Danielson lay the foundation for weird, homey art? Is he widely regarded, both in and outside Christian circles as a highly talented artist whose refusal to play accessible music gives him license to do and say things that other Christians could never get away with? Does he understand better as well or better than anyone how to integrate his faith into his art w/o one subverting the other?

Yes.

Danielson may not be easy to listen to. And he’s rarely initially comprehensible. But is his difference necessarily a good thing? As he paved the way for people like Sufjan Stevens, Welcome Wagon, and I would argue, Arcade Fire, Fleet Foxes, and any other number of bands, I’d say the answer is unequivocally yes.

Whether or not Christianity Today is willing to pass him off as just simply wierd.

The real problem here, I think, is the fact that the reviewer sees the requirement of effort on the listener’s part immediately calling into question whether or not Danielson’s musical art is a good or not.

Which seems to me to reveal more about the reviewer’s attitude toward art (which he’s obviously conflated with entertainment), than it does about Danielson–good art very often requires a lot of effort to understand (consider anything you read in English 101, or your Western Civ class. Or Shakespeare, or Milton, or Donne, or Bach–whether or not you like that stuff (and I don’t, really), it’s hard to argue that it’s not great art; but it’s not easy to understand, and it takes a lot of effort to appreciate.)

I’ve already made the argument that Danielson does make good art (although, I wouldn’t put him on the same level with Shakespeare and Bach). But even he didn’t, the fact that his music isn’t immediately accessible can’t be taken as a good sign one way or another for how good his art is.

Unfortunately, I don’t think the reviewer is alone in thinking that accsibility is a good guidepost. Which is why so little of our subculture’s ‘art’ is little more than glorified entertainment and why we don’t give our artists enough room to really make good art.

And that’s a problem we need to seriously consider.

Nintendo Power

December 22nd, 2008

After our flood, I was cleaning out of a box of my old stuff and found this letter from the Nintendo Fan Club. Circa 1989.

Pretty freakin’ awesome.

Obama and Rick Warren

December 19th, 2008

The Huffington Post has several stories about why Obama picked Rick Warren to give his inagural invocation.

Clearly, the writers at HP, and the members of the GLBT community who are complaining about this are hopelessly out of touch with the nearly half of America who didn’t vote for Obama, the half that are still partially convinced he’s secretly Muslim and will be banning all guns for good.

Obama, by his very nature, alienates traditional conservatives, partially b/c he IS pretty inclusive. That freaks a lot of people out.

Asking Rick Warren to pray at the inaguration is a good way to send a message to those people who are still freaking out, to communicate that Obama doesn’t secretly hate evangelicals and want them to curl up and die off or anything. It says ‘evangelicals are alright, and can be a part of what I’m doing, too.’

The ‘progressives’ who voted for Change are freaking out because Obama did something bi-partisan and inclusive. I’m calling for each one of them to turn in their Inclusivness Card–they clearly haven’t been reading the back of the card where it explained that ‘inclusive’ actually means including people you disagree with.

When the out of touch ‘progressives’ remember their inclusivness skills, I’ll be happy to reissue their title as ‘Actually Liberal.’ For now, though, they’re going to have to be content with ‘fundamentalist, but leftist about it.’

CSS Tools

December 17th, 2008

This is a bit old, but Smashing Magazine had a list of 50 useful CSS tools a little while back.

There’s some really cool stuff in there–here’s a couple highlights:

Ooo…looks like there’s a version of Tiday for CSS as well. I’ll have to look that crap up.