Pumpkin Pics!

A week and a half or so ago, we went to a ward Halloween party. There was all sorts of good food (including my chili) and some games for the kids. And of course, there was a pumpkin carving contest.

Nancy and I both won prizes. (There were exactly as many entries as there were prizes to be awarded; I'm not sure what that means, really.) Nancy won the prize for Prettiest Pumpkin with this entry:



And I won the prize for Silliest Pumpkin with this little offering:



Yes, that's what you think it is: Pumpkin Pi.




What?

Return Of...Well, Me

After a few weeks away, here are the usual memes again. -M
--

Part I: Friday's Feast
Friday's Feast for Friday, 26 October 2007:

Appetizer Name a great website you would recommend to others.
I Can Has Cheezburger? Silly stuff, always good for a laugh. There are some really creative (and/or warped) people out there.

Soup On a scale of 1-10 (with 10 as highest), how often do you dream at night?
It varies from time to time, but recently, I've been dreaming more nights than not. So I'll say around 7.

Salad Did you have a pet as a child? If so, what kind and what was its name?
I had a black lab named Manfred, named after Mighty Manfred the Wonder Dog from the Captain Kangaroo show.

Obviously, my Manfred looked nothing like the one from the show.
She died when we were both 14. It was pretty traumatic at the time, but we had one of her puppies (Flop) for many years after that.

Main Course If you had the chance to star in a commercial, what would you choose to advertise?
There's already way too much advertising in the world; I wouldn't want any part of making more of it if I could help it. Sorry.
Edit: Lord Mhoram makes a good point. I'd be okay doing an ad for Firefox. And since it would likely decrease the number of people using Microsoft's Internet Exploder, you might even consider it a Public Service Announcement. :)

Dessert What is your favorite kind of hard candy?
Breath Savers Vanilla Mints. They've been notoriously hard to find, of late.

--

Part II: Top 5 On Friday
Top 5 On Friday - Week 147 from The Music Memoirs:

Top 5 non-typical songs that get you into the Halloween spirit.
(In other words, no "Monster Mash".)

» "Moon Over Bourbon Street" by Sting (from the album The Dream of the Blue Turtles)
Sting's take on the archetypical Reluctant Vampire story makes for good Halloween listening.

» "Frankenstein Unbound" by Lana Lane (from the album Queen of the Ocean)
Pretty obvious on this one, I guess.

» "Home By the Sea" by Genesis (from the album Genesis)
A ghost story set to music, the mood is reinforced by the instrumental "Second Home By the Sea" that immediately follows.

» "Desperation Samba" by Jimmy Buffett (from the album Last Mango in Paris)
Subtitled "Halloween in Tijuana", it tells of a mysterious night in Mexico. Fun music for an All Hallows' Eve party.

» "Limbo" by Rush (From the album Test for Echo)
It opens with clanking chains and a bubbling cauldron, it just has kind of a spooky mood to it. Plus, if you listen really closely at the 2:53 mark, you can hear the faint words, "What ever happened to my Transylvania Twist?"

Quote of the Day

From A.Word.A.Day for October 24th, 2007:

"They laughed when I said I was going to be a comedian. They're not laughing now." -Bob Monkhouse, comedian (1928-2003)

Wait, what?

Fraud!

One of my duties at work (since the other supervisors only rarely seem to do it) is to identify problems with the computers at the interviewing stations. Granted, these are not top-of-the-line models; most of them still run Windows 95, if that's any clue. Nevertheless, they work well enough for what we need. Except, of course, when they're not working properly.

When I see a computer with a problem, I first try to swap out components—mouses, keyboards, monitors, and such. But there are some problems I can't fix, like Windows refusing to boot. So in these cases, I leave a note for the I.T. guy describing the problem. I also leave a note taped to the monitor of the computer in question with a brief description of the problem, the date, and my initials. That way, when someone comes to fix it, they know what to look for, who diagnosed the problem, and when.

We have an interviewer—let's call her Eileen—who loves her privacy. She enjoys peace and quiet in the workplace. In fact, she gets annoyed when people sit too close to her. She has a special place staked out in one of the corners, where not too many other stations are located and there's not much traffic. And generally, people don't sit by her (because she gets cranky). When people do sit by her, it's a sure bet that by the end of the shift, she's going to make her way to one of the managers or supervisors—yours truly, more often than not—and complain about the noise level. Even if the people are only talking loud enough just to do their jobs, it's too loud for her.

Today's shift was small, and a lot of our regulars weren't in attendance, including Eileen. So as I was making my rounds about the call floor, I stayed a few moments longer in Eileen's corner than I usually would have. And I noticed something. The five computers nearest her favorite station all had notes on the monitors. I looked more closely, and found that four of the five notes included a brief description of the problem, the date, and my initials.

Only one of these four notes was in my handwriting, though.

Conclusion: Eileen had written and placed the other notes herself to make sure nobody else sat in 'her' area.

I first made Diesel120, one of my fellow managers, aware of the situation. Then I had Jason, the Field Director of the call center, come out and take a look. I'd like to say that we were surprised, but that was only half true. That she would try to discourage other interviewers from sitting near her, we all knew. But that she would, in essence, try to forge a manager's initials to do it, was a little more than we expected.

So Jason is going to have a little chat with her tomorrow. I hope that will be the end of it—but I know that it won't. She'll come to me and try either to deny or to justify what she did, probably the latter. And I'll have to tell her that I'm going to be watching her very, very carefully for the next few weeks. After all, if she's willing to lie to get her peace and quiet, I have to assume that she's also willing to lie in other aspects of her job: time management, productivity, and maybe even falsification of surveys. And I'll have to tell her that if I ever catch her trying to use my identity at work again, I won't bother with Diesel120 or Jason. I'll fire her myself.

Or maybe she'll finally just decide that our call center is just inherently too noisy for her tastes and resign, maybe seeking work at the local library or something.

I should be so fortunate.

Easy Kitchen Creations

I spent most of the morning in the kitchen today. I finished up the dishes from the past few days (it's my week to do the dishes), folded some laundry, and wiped down the stove and counters. I also did a little cooking.

We have a ward activity tonight, and they passed around a sign-up sheet for soup, chili, and deserts. So I signed up to bring my moderately famous white beach chicken chili. I also whipped up a batch of pumpkin chocolate chip cookies for us.

Now, before you get too impressed, let me assure you that neither of these recipes is particularly difficult. They're so easy, even a bachelor can make them. Observe:

--

White Bean Chicken Chili

Ingredients:
1 lb. chicken
2 cups chicken broth (or bouillon)
2 15 oz. cans diced tomatoes
1 15 oz. can white beans (Great Northern, cannellini, navy beans, etc.)
1 15 oz. can whole kernel corn
1 4 oz. can diced chiles
1 small to medium white or yellow onion
½ teaspoon chili powder
½ teaspoon cumin
¼ teaspoon coriander

Cook chicken until no longer pink in the middle; slice into small (½") pieces. While chicken is cooking, add broth, tomatoes, beans, corn, chiles, and spices to a Crock Pot set on low heat. Dice the onion and add to the broth/vegetable mixture. Add chicken as soon as it is ready. Cover and let cook on low for 6-8 hours, stirring occasionally. Serves 4-8, depending on portion size.

This produces a flavorful, very mild chili. Add black pepper and/or red pepper flakes to taste to make bolder chili. This chili is very good with either tortillas or cornbread.

--

Pumpkin Chocolate Chip Cookies

Ingredients:
1 29 oz. can pumpkin (NOT pumpkin pie mix!)
1 18 oz. spice cake mix
6 oz. milk chocolate chips (half a bag)

Preheat oven to 375° F. Mix pumpkin and spice cake mix together on low speed for 2 minutes or until completely mixed. Add chocolate chips. Use a small spoon to place batter on cookie sheet 1" apart (these cookies will not expand while baking). Bake for 25-30 minutes or until done. Let cool for 5 minutes before removing from cookie sheet. Serve with cold milk.

--

If anyone actually makes either of these, let me know what you think of them.

With Apologies to Harry Carey....

THE ROCKIES WIN THE PENNANT!
THE ROCKIES WIN THE PENNANT!
THE ROCKIES WIN THE PENNANT!

HOLY COW!

Oh, and here's the story, if you want it: Rockies Sweep D-Backs.

To Vouch, Or Not To Vouch?

In next month's election, one of the most hotly contested issues here in Utah will be school vouchers. I've been seeing and hearing advertisements both for and against the passage of Referendum 1. Both sides are saying lots of nasty things about the other. Surprise, surprise.

The issue is a little complicated. Earlier this year, the Utah Legislature passed, and Governor Huntsman signed, a law authorizing the use of public money to subsidize vouchers for private schools. Under the program, any student in Utah would be able to get a yearly stipend of between $500 and $3000, based on income, to be applied against tuition at any private elementary or secondary school. The law was written to try to assure that such stipends would not reduce the amount of money that public schools get from the state for at least five years. So families would get state assistance to send their kids to private schools if they wished, and public schools would continue to receive the same funding as if those students were still there. It was, supporters said, a win-win scenario.

The issue was hotly debated in the Legislature before it was finally passed by a narrow margin. Even then, both sides were running "Call your legislator and tell them to vote For (or Against) House Bill 148" ad campaigns. And almost immediately after the law was passed, legal challenges were raised and a petition drive was started to delay implementation of the law until it could be voted upon by the public. The petition was successful, and Citizens' State Referendum Number 1 was born.

School funding here has always been a hot topic. Among the states, Utah traditionally ranks at or near the bottom in annual per capita education spending. Because of our tradition of large families, we have a disproportionately high number of children compared to the number of adults paying the taxes necessary to educate them. Nonetheless, Utah students typically score above the national average on most standardized tests, including traditional college-entry exams like the ACT and SAT. So we seem to be doing more with less. It would sure be nice to have more resources available for teachers and classrooms, though.

Anyway, the text of the Referendum reads as follows:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Citizens' State Referendum Number 1
Ballot Title

In February 2007, the Utah Legislature passed H.B. 148, Education Vouchers. This bill will take effect only if approved by voters. The bill:

• establishes a scholarship program for:
  • qualifying school-age children who newly enroll in eligible private schools; and
    
  • lower income school-age children who continue their enrollment in eligible private schools;
• provides for scholarships within that program of $500 to $3,000, depending on family size and income, increasing those scholarship amounts in future years; and
  
• allows school districts to retain some per-student funding for scholarship students who transfer to private schools.

Are you for or against H.B. 148 taking effect?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The Lieutenant Governor's office has a web site with information on the Referendum, including a PDF version of the 2007 Voter Information Pamphlet, the arguments for and against the proposal (including rebuttals to the arguments), and the full text of the original House bill. I've spent about an hour at the site today, reading over everything and trying to get all the issues straight in my head.

I'm a little conflicted on this one. On the one hand, I'm not a big fan of the idea of vouchers to fund private schools. Public schools are the backbone of education in America. With dedicated teachers and community involvement—especially parents who take their children's education as seriously as the teachers do—public schools can meet the needs of the most diverse and demanding student population more than adequately. I've seen it happen. And without parental involvement, private schools wouldn't meet the needs of students any better than public schools do. (With private schools, of course, there is inherently an extra level of parental involvement: They're the ones paying the tuition.)

Traditionally, private schools are also supposed to have more and better teachers, smaller classes, and better resources than public schools. That may be true. But if we have money for vouchers, why don't we have money for improvements in the existing public school system? To me, it would make a lot more sense to put that voucher money into the public schools instead. That way, public schools could, at least in theory, also have more and better teachers, smaller classes, and better resources than they do now.

It should also be noted that many of the private schools these vouchers would go to fund are faith-based. Personally, that doesn't bother me too much. If a family's Catholic, it makes sense they'd want to send their child to Catholic school if they could afford it. Vouchers could help with that. But legally, it's hard to see it working. Of course, the money goes to the families and not to the schools directly, so the State isn't really paying the school. But ultimately, it comes down to public money going to religious schools. And that raises Separation of Church and State issues. There will be lawsuits. Bet on it.

So the voucher program is problematic for me, for several reasons. On the other hand, I'm also not a big fan of Ballot Initiatives and Referendums, generally speaking. In most cases, they strike me as an attempt by a special-interest group to circumvent the Legislature. The fact that the UEA and the NEA have made such a big deal about this makes me a little nervous. Yes, I know that sounds strange coming from a future educator. But I've never been entirely convinced that the teacher's unions genuinely have anyone's best interests at heart except their own—not the kids, not the communities, and not necessarily even the individual teachers. My observations have led me to conclude that the union exists to promulgate its own existence; all other concerns are secondary to that. So in many ways, this Referendum seems like a typical strategy to sidestep the Legislature and get what the unions want.

On yet another hand (You didn't know I had three hands, did you?), I wonder how much difference my vote is really going to make. The last polls I saw showed the "For" crowd with a comfortable lead. If the measure passes, I imagine there will be more legal maneuvering and injunctions and NEA/UEA lawsuits to follow. And if the measure fails, I guarantee it'll show up in next year's Legislative session—just like it has for the past six years. One way or another, I'm afraid this issue is going to be with us for a long, long time.

In the end, however, I think it comes down to one question for me: Will the use of public money to fund scholarships for private school students ultimately improve education in the state? At the present time, I'm not entirely convinced that it will. But I may be wrong.

What to do, what to do?

The Sounds of Science

Have you ever wondered how it's possible to fit 80 GB worth of tunes and/or data onto a device as small as an iPod?

For most people, the answer to that question is going to be "No". They don't care how it works, just that it does. Push the button and it plays music, that's the important thing.

But if you ever were curious, here's a brief description. It involves a scientific phenomenon called giant magnetoresistance (GMR). It works something like this. Microscopic areas on a hard drive can be given almost immeasurably different magnetic charges. But these small differences in charge cause much larger changes in electrical resistance, which the device can detect and interpret as digital data. By measuring the effects of magnetic charges rather than the charges themselves, the sensitivity of the instrument is increased and it becomes possible to store much more data in the same physical space.

How do I know all of this? Because I just read an article about the discoverers of this process:

Nobel prize for men who made iPod possible

You may have seen the old bumper sticker that says, "If you can read this, thank a teacher." So, if you can hear your iPod, thank a scientist. Two, actually: Albert Fert, a Frenchman, and Peter Grünberg, a German, are this year's recipients of the Nobel Prize in Physics for their 1988 discovery of GMR.

Oh, and they've just announced the recipient of the Nobel Prize for Chemistry, too.

German wins Nobel Prize in chemistry

Gerhard Ertl gets the Prize for his work in surface chemistry. His work helps to explain how certain reactions take place on surfaces (as opposed to, say, floating around in the air or in a solution). This is something I've actually studied a bit. Surface chemistry, for example, is what allows the catalytic converter in your car's exhaust system to reduce toxic emissions. It's also one of the few ways to add hydrogen to unsaturated hydrocarbons.

Let's hear it for better living through science!

I love reading about this kind of thing and having a pretty good idea what they're talking about. It makes all those years in college seem a little more worthwhile.

Standard Nerds!

If any of the following are true of you:

a) You are a computer geek,
b) You know and/or love a computer geek,
c) You are a geek of any kind, or
d) You are an aficionado of British comedy,

Then I'd like to recommend something you should find amusing.

The IT Crowd

Roy and Moss are two stereotypical IT guys working in the dismal, cluttered, dungeonlike basement of an otherwise spectacular office building. Jen is, for all practical purposes, technologically illiterate. But she puts on her résumé that she has "a lot of experience with computers". When her boss asks her to talk about her experience*, he decides to make her the new manager of the IT department. While initially antagonistic, Jen and Roy and Moss quickly learn to work with one another and hilarity ensues.

If you want my opinion**, this show is laugh-out-loud funny. So far, there are only 12 episodes available (two seasons of six episodes each), and naturally some of the episodes aren't as strong as others. But overall, this show has made me laugh...a lot.

It should be remembered that "The Seven Words You Can Never Say On TV" was written by an American (George Carlin). It appears that one can say at least some of those words on British television with no problems. Foul language is used somewhat sparsely, but it's there. Be warned if that sort of thing is troubling.

For a brief look at The IT Crowd, you can check out this Wikipedia article or this IMDb page. Enjoy.

That is all.

--
* It goes something like this:
"Sending e-mails, receiving e-mails...um, deleting e-mails. The computer screen, of course. The keyboard. The...that part that goes on the floor..."
"The hard drive?"
"Yes! That."

** And since you're still reading, I can only assume that you do....

Boy, Was I Mistaken

Over on his blog, Dilliwag is rejoicing that his beloved Chicago Cubs won the NL Central and are now playing for a shot at the World Series. You have to admire the man's loyalty. It takes a rare individual—part optimist, part cynic, and part masochist—to root for a team like the Cubs for almost three decades.

It's a little like being a fan of the Colorado Rockies.

Okay, the Rocks haven't had over a century's worth of losing to create that kind of desperation. It sure feels that way sometimes, though. In their fifteen years of existence, they've finished below .500 ten times and hadn't enjoyed a winning season since 1998. They'd finished fourth or fifth in their division (of five teams) every year since 1998 and own a lifetime won-lost record of 1104-1250 (.469).

This year started out looking like more of the same. On May 21st, the team was 18-27. Then they started winning. They hit the .500 mark on June 7th (30-30). By June 21st, they were four games over .500 at 38-34. Things were starting to look up—until they went on an eight-game losing streak.

In most years, that would have been the end of season, for all practical purposes. But this year's version of the Blake Street Bombers fought back again. They regained the .500 mark on July 6th (43-43). In the process, they became one of only three teams ever to sweep a series from two teams from New York (Yankees 6/19-6/21, Mets 7/2-7/4) in the same season. Nonetheless, in the very competitive NL West, they remained buried at 4th in the standings.

By the time September rolled around, it looked like the Rocks were on their way to their first winning season since 2000, but it also looked like they were going to miss the playoffs again. They were still behind Arizona, Los Angeles, and San Diego in the division standings. They'd need to overtake at least two of those three teams to gain only the second playoff invitation in their history. How could they do such a thing?

Well, going 20-8 in the month of September would certainly help. And that's precisely what they did. Their late-season drive included an 11-game winning streak—the longest in team history, and the longest in the NL this year—and wins in 13 of their last 14 games. And when the dust had settled, the Rockies were tied for second in the NL West with San Diego.

I'd been following the team with interest over the past couple of months, seeing each morning how they were doing. And I'll admit that I had begun to hope for great things—or at least, I'll admit to wanting to hope for great things. These were the Rockies, after all, and they've always seemed to have a knack for blowing it at the wrong time. So the cynic in me kept waiting for the collapse, the optimist in me delighted that it never came.

Last night was a one-game tiebreaker between the Rocks and the Padres, with Wild Card playoff invitation hanging in the balance. I arrived at work in my purple replica jersey and waited anxiously until 5:37 MDT for the game to start. My manager, who also happens to be a Cubs fan, was sympathetic to my plight and pulled up the MLB.com gamecast on one of the office computers. I checked the scores throughout the evening, rejoicing in the Rocks' early leads, cursing their pitching at giving up a grand slam in the third inning, and admiring their tenacity in fighting back to a 6-5 lead. The scoreboard watching continued at home, where, to my great dismay, San Diego scored in the eighth inning to tie it at 6-6. Manny Corpas pitched a tremendoud ninth inning, though, and the game headed into extra innings.

I checked to score almost obsessively between other things that I was doing (getting ready for tomorrow's week-long trip to Lexington, Kentucky, for example), lamenting the fact that the Rocks were getting plenty of runners on bas but couldn't bring them home. Then, in the top of the 13th, I saw that Sand Diego hit a two-run homer. And I knew it was over. Overcoming a two-run deficit in the 13th was too much to hope for. I left the game, joining Nancy (who had just arrived home) for a late dinner and an episode of Stargate SG-1. It had been a heck of a run, hadn't it?

So imagine my surprise and delight when I learned that the plucky, resourceful, never-say-die Rockies had scored three in the bottom of the 13th to win the tiebreaker 9-8.

Astonishment. Relief. Satisfaction. And joy.

Colorado starts a best-of-five playoff series with the Philadelphia Phillies tomorrow night in Philly. And win or lose, it's been one heck of a run.

On May 1st, I wrote the following:

So rookie shortstop Troy Tulowitzki of the Colorado Rockies had an unassisted triple play in a game against the Braves over the weekend. Click over to the page, watch the video clip and listen to the play by play. It's fun.

An unassisted triple play has only happened thirteen times in Major League Baseball history. And now Colorado is a part of that history.

It's sad, really. May 1st, and the best of the Rockies' season is already behind them. ::sigh::

I'm happy to admit that I was wrong.

Go Rockies!