Here's a list of somewhat unrelated multi-event sports: 

• biathlon - cross-country skiing, shooting
• duathlon - running, cycling, running
• triathlon - swimming, cycling, running
• pentathlon - fencing, swimming, riding, shooting, running
• heptathlon - short run, long run, hurdles, long jump, high jump, pole vault, shot put
• decathlon - short run, medium run, long run, hurdles, long jump, high jump, pole vault, shot put, discus, javelin
• tetradecathlon - shortest run, shorter run, short run, medium run, long run, longer run, short hurdles, medium hurdles, long hurdles, long jump, high jump, shot put, discus, javelin
• icosathlon - shortest run, shorter run, short run, medium run, long run, longer run, even longer run, longest run, short hurdles, medium hurdles, long hurdles, steeplechase, long jump, high jump, pole vault, triple jump, shot put, discus, javelin, hammer

Maybe it's just me, but it seems like track and field people are just dying for more ways to compete against each other. #sports

I was having a discussion with some friends the other day when the following sentence came up (paraphrased):  "I don't want to send my kids to that type of school because their curriculum is anti-[his profession]."  I thought that was an odd position to take, both because it's probably completely untrue, but also because I can't imagine identifying myself so strongly with my job.  I have a job, I'm somewhat proud of it, and I mostly like it.  But at the end of the day (literally), I stop doing my job and go home and don't think about it.  I think my job suits me well, but if I didn't have to do it anymore, I'd quit literally this second.  I'm defined by a lot of things, and one of those things is certainly my occupation.  But I would never say I'm primarily defined by my job.  If you or a school or anyone wants to criticize my profession or my industry, go for it.  It's certainly warranted.  The idea that a job is central to your identity and is above reproach is completely foreign to me. #business

Let me start by saying I'm not an expert and I didn't do any research for what I'm about to write, so I could be completely wrong. 

It's my understanding that humans spread germs to each other through their face holes.  People talk, whisper, laugh, sing, yell, cough, sneeze, and do a variety of other things to propel germs out of their bodies and into the bodies of the people around them.  It's disgusting. 

It seems to me that anything that can possibly prevent this from occurring is probably a decent way to reduce the spread of germs.  That could be

• physical separation, i.e. distance
• a solid barrier, like a wall or window
• a flexible barrier around each person, like a bubble suit
• a face shield like a welder's mask
• a mask covering the mouth and nose

Somewhat obviously, a wall is a better germ barrier than a face mask.  But a mask still does something, albeit less than some of the other options.  Some mask materials are probably better than others, but I would imagine any mask is better at preventing the spread of germs than no mask at all.  Doctors and nurses and dentists have known and practiced this for decades (at least). 

There was talk early on in the pandemic about whether or not masks are helpful at all.  And there's been talk more recently about which mask material is best.  The LA Times actually has a good writeup of the CDC's history of discouraging and then encouraging mask use throughout the pandemic (whoops).  I would estimate, again not an expert, that masks are and were probably helpful at reducing the spread of Covid. #science

I use Matlab a lot for my job, and I've come to understand that Matlab is two distinct yet inter-related things: 

1. It's a programming language
2. It's an integrated development environment

I was taught a bunch of different things about it in college, ranging from "it can solve equations" to "it can plot things".  But at a more fundamental level, it's simply a programming language.  Or more accurately (I think?), it's an uncompiled scripting language and a script interpreter.  And the Matlab window itself is a development environment which debugs the code, runs it, and stores outputs in memory. 

There are countless other tools that check one or all of these boxes.  But I think two things that set Matlab apart are

• it's good at array-based math (MATrix LABoratory), e.g; [1, 2, 3] + [4, 5, 6] is simple to do and built in
• it's a very simple language where a bunch of things work in ways that they probably shouldn't, which makes it attractive for engineers who didn't study computer programming

I have a friend who is an anti-vaxxer.  She didn't vaccinate her kids for the standard preventable childhood illnesses (measles, mumps, etc.) with the rationale that they would generate their own immunity (false) and that the vaccines had worse side effects than the diseases (also false).  Regrettably or not, she applied the same logic to the COVID-19 vaccine and didn't get herself or her family vaccinated.  Then she and her husband got sick with COVID.  It quickly turned into a pretty bad infection requiring time in the hospital.  After some tense moments, she changed her tune on vaccinations (the COVID one anyway) and is apparently getting vaccinated as soon as possible. 

People tend to go through three phases when confronted with new ideas: 

1. It's a lie.
2. It may not be a lie, but it's an exaggeration.
3. It may not be an exaggeration, but it's not my problem.

This might be a stretch, but I think it all boils down to empathy.  Empathy is typically about sharing another person's feelings, but I think in this case it's more about acknowledging the validity of a point of view that's unfamiliar or uncomfortable.  It's the same process people went through (hopefully long ago) with interracial marriage, or possibly more recently with gay marriage, or abortion, or trans people.  It starts out as a foreign idea that must be repelled and criticized, but when it suddenly affects a person directly, the tone changes. 

I'm absolutely not an expert on this, and I certainly don't know the solution.  Also, I'm probably the most un-empathetic person on earth.  But it's just something I've noticed.

I'll never forget being a 17-year-old kid visiting colleges with my mom, when we were invited to sit in on a random class to just get a sense of how things were.  The class was some sort of computer architecture class for computer science majors, which I didn't have any experience with and wasn't interested in at all, but it was the class that was happening at the time we were there.  I remember sitting there feeling a bit overwhelmed by the process of applying for colleges, feeling unsure of where I should go or what I should study or how I should know anything about any of that, and feeling completely dumbfounded by the class itself. 

But for whatever reason I had a moment of absolute crystal-clear clarity:  I would figure it out, and I'd be fine.  I don't know how I reached that conclusion or how that muddled series of experiences led to that idea, but I distinctly remember walking out of the class after a few minutes while the professor sort of joked about scaring us away, and realizing that those students in the class didn't just show up on their first day and dive into the most complicated topic imaginable.  There was some sort of process, some sort of series of steps that regular people took to wind up in that classroom at that school, all without having a mental breakdown (that came much later).  It was an absolutely pivotal moment for me. 

I ended up not going to that school, and instead went to a similar school that felt like a better fit for me.  But having that realization as a high school student helped me approach my time and challenges in college in a different way.  Instead of seeing complicated topics as unapproachable and unknowable, I tended to view everything as a problem I hadn't yet solved.  I wouldn't say I was self-confident, or even self-aware.  But I figured if I put in some work, I'd see if that produced results. 

No one graduates on their first day of college.  Being around other people who were in the same situation as me, with the same doubts and struggles as me, helped me cement the idea that I'd figure it out, and if not ... well I don't really know because I didn't think far enough ahead to have a backup plan.

The engineering community commonly uses the metric system, both because a lot of the early math and science was performed by Europeans, but also because it makes a bunch of calculations simpler.  English units have pounds of mass and pounds of force, which are both equivalent and not equivalent, depending on some criteria I have to look up every time I use them.  So it's common to scoff at people who use English units because it adds unnecessary complexity. 

But not all engineers use metric units.  Mechanical designers and metal machinists use English units, [I've heard] because the cutting tools use English units.  We don't have 6.4-mm screw holes; we have 1/4" screw holes because we have 1/4" drill bits.  Some raw materials come in thicknesses measured to the nearest 1/8" or 1/4". 

But at the same time, metal machining often specifies tolerances using a sort of semi-metric system, e.g. something is measured at 1/8" +/- 0.010" (spoken "ten thousandths").  Similarly some engineers use feet as a unit of distance, but if the magnitude of the values they deal with is greater than 10,000, they use the term "kilofeet", which is both beautiful and ugly at the same time. 

Electrical power is measured in Watts, but mechanical power is measured in horsepower.  [Hint:  they're the same thing, i.e. units of power.]  But it feels wrong to say I have a 147 kW engine in my car, or a 1.36 hp microwave in my kitchen.  It all comes down to what you're used to. 

The metric system is really just a standardized unit (m for length, kg for mass, etc.) plus a Latin or Greek prefix denoting the decimal point.  English units almost sort of use a crappy version of this with things like inches (10^0), feet (inches x 10^1.0792), yards (inches x 10^1.5563), miles (inches x 10^4.8018).  I don't know what the solution is, so I'm gonna go walk a few hundred mega-inches to de-stress. #science

I'm not an expert so I'm quite possibly wrong about this, but one way to think about the difference between a traditional (viral vector) vaccine and an mRNA vaccine is this:  A traditional vaccine is like if you took a partially-eaten cookie to a bakery and asked them to make you a similar cookie.  An mRNA vaccine is like if you went to a bakery and asked them to make you a cookie with the recipe you just handed them. #science

Peyton and Eli Manning have been hosting a show on ESPN2 during the broadcast of Monday Night Football on ESPN.  It it, these two future fall-of-fame quarterbacks casually chat about the game while making brotherly fun of each other, and they invite a series of guests to chat and joke with them.  All of it is done remotely, which adds some technical difficulties and audio hiccups.  It's not traditional sports coverage, with play-by-play and in-depth analysis.  It's more like watching a game with a friend you haven't seen in a few weeks.  You watch the game here and there, but it's not really the focal point. 

Here's my take:  This is the best sports show in the modern era.  This is must-see TV.  It's made even better by its haphazard schedule, which wasn't weekly and seemed to follow no pattern at all.  You have to look for it, or better yet, stumble upon it.  The guests are varied (athlete, coach, broadcaster, comedian, musician), and the remote nature of it means we're watching people in their homes, on their couches, wearing around-the-house clothes.  It's very intimate, but at the same time completely comfortable.  One guest did fake broadcaster commentary (he was a real broadcaster); another guest dropped an f-bomb.  I'm not sure what the censors thought of that, but I think it added to the casual nature of it all.  They interview current players and show old footage of their bloopers.  They bring up unflattering pictures of their guests as kids.  The comedians and musicians they interview are just there for fun; they're not promoting anything.  It's a breath of ridiculously fresh air. 

Monday Night Football, and really any primetime sporting event, is usually pretty boring.  It's an arbitrary matchup, it's late at night, it's slow-paced and full of commercials.  The ManningCast is the perfect antidote to that.  It's funny, it's simple, and it all happens directly alongside the traditional primetime broadcast.  Just brilliant. #sports

I was visiting someplace that had an analog clock on the wall, and it was working fine but it was set to the wrong time (which I figured out later).  A broken clock is one thing -- you notice the hands aren't moving, the time hasn't changed since the last time you looked at it (which you keep checking because you're a dumbass).  But a clock set to the wrong time?  It's actively bad.  It's not just "not working".  It's giving you wrong information.  It seems like it's right because it's giving you an actual real time.  But that time is a lie, and now you're in a strange place with no idea what time it is, and you're an idiot for believing that lying clock.