Log file analyzers Dec 27, 2007
For my future reference, here's a brief listing and comparison of server log file analyzers: 
  • AWStats - The one I currently use.  Written in Perl.  Not too ugly.  Unconfigurable.
  • Webalizer - Kinda ugly.  Looks to be configurable.
  • Analog - The one DreamHost uses.  Kinda ugly.  Looks to be configurable.
  • WebTrends - The one that costs money.
I might try Analog again.  DreamHost added a bunch of configuration options that seem to fix what I thought was wrong with it. #technology
Tell on me (1) Dec 19, 2007
Yesterday, I received an email at work that looked like this: 
Subject:  URGENT Safety Alert
To:  Everyone
Attachments:  Safety.doc

Please read, post and execute immediately. 
Thank you.
Like I've said before, if you don't take the time to write a good email, I won't take the time to read it.  If you tell me to read an attachment for some "urgent" or "important" information, I'll ignore it simply because it's in an attachment. 

Just for fun, I looked at the attachment.  It was about ice on the sidewalks and how we should be careful to not break our skulls open so nobody gets sued.  Appropriate, yet stupid.  The contents of the message could have been easily summarized in one line:  "Watch out for ice on the sidewalks."  Done.  Again just for fun, I replied to the email and said this: 
Subject:  RE: URGENT Safety Alert
To:  Original Sender

If it's that urgent, why put it in an attachment?  People are less likely to read an attachment than the actual body of an email message.
I phrased it in such a way as to come across as a semi-criticism while not sounding too mean (since I don't even know this person).  I also only replied to the original sender because it wasn't appropriate for a reply-all.  I sat back in my chair and snickered. 

About an hour later, I got a response: 
Subject:  RE: URGENT Safety Alert
To:  Me
Cc:  My boss; my boss's boss; her boss; her boss's boss

The reason for sending an attachment is that [some group] in [some department] wanted to accentuate the urgency of the matter with descriptive lettering.  Also, our e-mail system does not allow us to use anything other than Rich Text format. 

Since you have taken the time to ask the question, I've taken the time to answer it.
My heart stopped when I read the Cc line.  She told on me.  She replied to not only my boss, but to my boss's boss, a person I haven't even met because he's too important.  People lose their jobs for less than this.  I was a bit scared to say the least. 

But then I thought about it.  I hoped to get a reply from my boss's boss saying something like, "Yo lady, what's your problem?  You're telling on this guy for some petty little bullcrap?  Grow up."  I didn't get a response from anybody (yet).  Feeling proactive, I went to tell my boss to expect the email in his mail box, but he had already read it.  And he was laughing.  He said to not worry about it and proceeded to tell me a story about a guy who sent an angry email to the biggest boss in the place, and even he didn't lose his job.  I was relieved.  I said, "If I knew I was dealing with a child, I wouldn't have sent that email." 

In conclusion, a great way to get me to hate you is to tell on me. #technology
Read receipt Nov 21, 2007
Microsoft Outlook has the option of requesting a read receipt for emails you send.  If your recipient reads the email you sent, a message gets sent back to you, assuming the recipient allows the read receipt to be sent. 

People at my job send out stupid emails.  And they send a lot of them.  And they send them to about 2000 people at once.  Every time I receive a mass emailed message that asks if I want to send a read receipt, I consider clicking no because the sender likely doesn't even know me, let alone care if I read the message or not.  Instead, I click yes, hoping the stupid sender is overwhelmed by 2000 read receipts all at once.  Have I mentioned I hate mass emails? #technology
Private beta Nov 2, 2007
As a frequent reader of tech geekery websites like TechCrunch, I often stumble upon companies and services offering a "private beta" because they're not quite ready for prime time.  This seems like a good idea when you want people to try out your service but you know it's not perfect and don't want to disappoint the masses. 

However, I'm taking the official stance that private betas are a bad idea.  For people like me who either don't have any experience being a beta tester or don't have the credentials to get an invite, private betas equate to a road block.  If there's no simple way around it, I quickly lose interest, and you've forever lost me as a customer (since I can't remember the last time something was in private beta and eventually came out, still maintaining my interest).  In the off chance I put my email address in your "Tell me when you're out of private beta" mailing list, I likely won't remember why I was interested in your company in the first place, so again, you've lost me as a customer. #technology
ESPN websites Oct 30, 2007
I've noticed lately that ESPN's websites are, quite simply, great.  The one I have the most experience with is their Fantasy Football site, which is designed in such a way that it makes me feel like I'm paying money to use it, though I'm not.  It's a combination of the easy-to-read layout, the lack of obtrusive ads, the simple yet powerful functionality, and the cruft-free URLs (I have a thing for that).  I'm consistently surprised that they offer this stuff for free, and I'd like to shake the hands of the members of the web design department and say, "Thanks for not being someone like Yahoo or Weather.com, who treat me like a criminal trying to access their proprietary information." 

The same is true about their mobile site.  To be honest, there's an ad at the top of every page.  But for whatever reason, I find it incredibly easy to ignore.  Other than the ad, the site just has simple and to-the-point content.  Sports scores.  Team profiles.  Play by play. 

It seems like ESPN is providing a service out of their own good will, not running a website for profit.  I know they must make some amount of money from this, otherwise they would discontinue it.  But the simplicity and usability of their websites makes me feel I'm getting something for free, which is unusual these days.  Kudos, ESPN. #technology
RSS to email Oct 5, 2007
Of the different ways to forward RSS to email, I've found that simple systems like RssFwd and Rmail are easier to work with but less configurable, while full-featured systems like FeedBurner and FeedBlitz are more complicated because they're so configurable.  All in all, RssFwd did the best job of simply delivering RSS items via email in a relatively timely manner, though there were delays of several hours in some cases.  FeedBurner and FeedBlitz are too full of cruft and self-promotion, and they generally lack any useful configurable options (like when to send what, how it should look, etc.).  Of course, the internal, site-specific solutions like Subscribe2 for WordPress work the best because they email new things as soon as they're published, not as soon as a 3rd-party site's robots notice new material. #technology
Subscribe to updates via email Oct 4, 2007
I've implemented a new feature on this here website:  Updates via email.  If you don't like visiting my site (and/or don't know about RSS) but would like to be notified when I post something new, you can subscribe to updates via email.  It's easy to subscribe and unsubscribe, and I won't sell your email address to spammers or send you spam myself. 

Edit:  Never mind.  I got rid of it.  It's stupid. #technology
First comment Sep 28, 2007
There's this thing that happens on websites geared toward article discussion and comment:  For every single article that's published, some jerk announces that he (I'd say he/she but that's probably unrealistic) is the first commenter. 
[Image: firstcomment.png]
All websites have the ability to filter and delete comments.  My question is this:  Why do we, as a civilized human race, allow these idiots to clog up the internet with their worthless comments?  You might think I'm overreacting.  If so, you don't read enough geek websites.  This is a major problem, and I can't even fathom why website owners allow it to continue.  I personally think the offenders should be publicly mocked and beaten, preferably with a tube sock full of quarters or some sort of archaic torture device.  I think the general human populace is smarter than this.  We shouldn't need to be the first to comment on something, and that comment surely shouldn't be something as stupid as "First!" #technology
Site search Sep 28, 2007
I don't understand why websites have site searches like this: 
[Image: sitesearch.png]
If I go to a specific website, why would I want to search "the web"?  That's what Google is for! 

I remember reading the same complaint about CNN's site search, but they've apparently grown a brain and fixed it. #technology
Long passwords are less secure (6) Sep 4, 2007
Pick a random string of 10 letters, numbers, and symbols, making sure at least two of the letters are capitalized and the entire 10-character string doesn't spell any kind of recognizable word or phrase.  Now memorize that 10-character password and use it to log into important websites and things like that. 

That's the stupidest thing in the history of the universe.  Yet more and more, I'm forced to do exactly that.  I truly believe longer passwords are less secure than shorter, more memorable passwords.  What do I do with all my stupidly long passwords?  I write them down, thus committing the cardinal sin of passwording.  I keep all those passwords in a password-protected document, so there's at least some amount of security.  But honestly, it defeats the purpose of having a password in the first place.  There's no way I can remember these passwords, and it would be stupid to use the same password for everything.  I'm forced to write them down or click on that link that says "Forgot password?" every time I login to a website. 

I'll take a wild guess and assume my method for storing passwords is actually more secure than the method used by most other people.  I've seen passwords written on pieces of paper, stored in a desk drawer, or carried around in a wallet.  This obviously isn't a viable solution, but it has solid rationale:  What if you forget the password to the computer where your password-protected document of passwords is stored?  You can't argue with that. 

To you nameless, faceless people who invent password requirements:  I can assure you, longer passwords are less secure. #technology