link

BarCamp Boston is this weekend at Monster Worldwide in Maynard. Over 150 people have registered to participate, and I'm sure it's going to be stimulating and fun. I've been so busy working on it as an organizer that I've hardly had a chance to write about it… but keep an eye on Geeks in Boston for updates.

Yesterday I went to a dinner at RSS Labs organized in part by my friend Pito Salas. As Bela Labovitch pointed out, Brian Del Vecchio took some photos. Am I supposed to look that asymmetrical when speaking?

A good time was had by all, or at least most.

I spent this evening in a big room full of geeks. The room belonged to Y Combinator, Paul Graham's venture/incubator firm, and the geeks were assembled for the Startup School reception. Startup School is a chance for amibitious geeks to get together and learn about business from a number of experienced folks in tech companies, venture capital firms, law firms, etc. It's also not-so-secretly a huge recruiting event for Y Combinator's upcoming Winter Founders Program, which hopes to continue on the success of the just-ended Summer Founders Program. Most of the younger geeks are at Startup School because they want to build and work in startups. Most people over 25 (there aren't lots) — excluding speakers — seem to be there to recruit partners and staff.

The conversations you have in a party filled with geeks are much more challenging than normal party talk. First of all, virtually everyone there is male (maybe 5 women among the crowd of ~150) so flirting doesn't get you by. Secondly, the protocol for meeting a new person is to inquire about what they're doing with the most insightful questions possible. Thirdly, they ask you the same thing and you have to have a spiel about who you are and what you do that keeps interesting people wanting to talk with you.

In case you're wondering, here's my spiel in condesnsed form: today was my last day at a 400-engineer software firm where I started 2 years ago after college. I'm taking a week off and then starting at Renesys, a company that tracks internet router activity around the globe and assembles a minute-by-minute map of how the internet is structured. I'm not a networking expert— at Renesys I'll be working on web application development, making the huge pile of interesting data into valuable visualizations and analyses. This continues to develop my focus on usable, responsive, and pleasant web applications; a focus I've first learned in making Voo2do, a web-based to-do list manager that has grown to 3800 users in 3 months. I'm excited about my new job and also hope to someday found a startup.

Most other people have spiels of comparable complexity and room for conversation. The goal is to listen to what they say, explore those parts that are interesting from a technological or business standpoint, and ask some questions or make suggestions that will twist their brains around. The most interesting people to talk to will not only tell you about a spiffy project, but will also listen when you suggest they automatically extract metadata from RSS feeds and work that into further discussion. The least interesting people tell you how smart they are, and then state that they're finally solving natural language processing without giving any comprehensibly specific examples of what their system actually does. But even those people can be somewhat interesting, if as nothing more than studies in the sort of hubris required to create a company out of nothing but ideas and sweat.

I had about 6 or 7 conversations like this tonight. I met some fun and smart people. I told Joel Spolsky about Voo2do (which is inspired by his technique). And Joel told me how freaking smart my soon-to-be-boss Jim Cowie is. That's a pretty fun little coincidence.

In his book Beyond Fear, security expert Bruce Schneier
writes:

“Slices of life with immediate visual impact get
magnified; those with no visual component, or that can't be immediately and
viscerally comprehended, get downplayed. Rarities and anomalies, like
terrorism, are endlessly discussed and debated, while common risks like
heart disease, lung cancer, diabetes, and suicide are minimized.

“The global reach of today's news further exacerbates this
problem. If a child is kidnapped in Salt Lake City during the summer,
mothers all over the country suddenly worry about the risk to their
children. If there are a few shark attacks in Florida — and a graphic movie
— suddenly every swimmer is worried. (More people are killed every year by
pigs than by sharks, which shows you how good we are at evaluating
risk.)”

One of the things I routinely tell people is that if it's in the news,
don't worry about it. By definition, “news” means that it hardly
ever happens. If a risk is in the news, then it's probably not worth
worrying about. When something is no longer reported — automobile deaths,
domestic violence — when it's so common that it's not news, then you should
start worrying.

(quoted in Crypto-Gram, May
2005)

Schneier points out that watching the news doesn't help us assess risk more
accurately. But this is just one case of our larger, erroneous assumption
that the news is important and relevant. Do you expect someone who reads
the New York Times every day to have a better grip on what's going on
around her? To be more engaged with society? If so, you don't realize quite
how irrelevant the news is.

The news is like broadcast sports: entertainment, not education.
Some people read the news and then debate other people who read similar news
about the meaning and implications of such news. The news serves as a
shared experience, something that is greatly useful in supporting
interaction between people and enabling them to socialize and learn. But
it's still entertainment. In fact, it functions much like professional
sports: for the players and coaches, knowing the range of teams, strategies,
and performance statistics is vital to doing their work; but for most people
it's just a prerequisite to sitting around at lunch, establishing an
allegiance around shared interests, and allowing us to explore our
connections with the people around us, an urge all humans have.

And that's what's really important: your connections with the people
around you. That's where you have power to effect change. Unless you're a
lobbyist or diplomat or close personal friend of Someone Very Important,
your influence over national policy is very, very tiny. Your influence on a
lover, friend, family member, coworker, or neighbor is much higher. Your
potential influence on a new friend, business partner, blog reader, or even
random passerby is also high. Knowledge that supports your relationships
with these people is relevant and important to you, but will never make it
onto TV because it's rarely thrilling, exotic, and novel.

This doesn't mean you're not allowed to care about what countries the US
invades. A lot of that far-away stuff will affect you and those you care
about, especially years and years down the line. But even in those cases,
having an impact requires a social force comprised of many individuals. And
the intimate bonds that foster loyalty and trust come from helping your
buddy fix his broken down car, or sharing a grill-out with friends, or
discussing an interesting book. Nothing fit to print, but damned
important.

I'm not a huge fan of fireworks. Although fire is cool, expanding smiley faces in the sky don't impress me anymore. But when my girlfriend Nicole proposed that we watch the world-class Boston fireworks from a two-person kayak on the Charles river, as close to the launching barge as police would allow, it seemed like the superlative fireworks experience. Besides, even if the fireworks sucked, I'd get to zip around the Charles on a kayak and take some pictures.

We started at Charles River Canoe and Kayak, whose Boston (Brighton) location is about 7 minutes away from my house. We got there kinda late, but not late enough. After waiting in line, indemnifying CRCK from responsibility for our certain deaths, and receiving a quick lesson on how to paddle, we set off into the Charles from their dock.

Kayaking requires a lot of arm and shoulder work. Unlike a canoe, your legs lie straight along the bottom of the kayak, and do nothing except anchor your butt to the plastic seat. But for these drawbacks, you get a fairly fast and maneuverable little boat. A two-person kayak sacrifices some of the speed and maneuverability of the singular variant, but in return you get help with paddling and, depending on where you sit, either the ability to hear your companion's voice or stare at the back of her head.

It's also important to paddle in a coordinated fashion. "Whoever can steer best should be in back, and the person in front sets the pace," they taught us after we selected a $1000 plastic pod to spend the next 5 hours in. After about hour 4.2, I think these lessons clicked in and we mostly went straight and didn't have any jarring paddle collisions. (It turns out the secret is to pay attention to what's going on right in front of you. That was never an issue on the single kayaks I've used before, because mostly you want to look away from the canoes you're ramming as their inhabitants may be tempted to splash you… while they still can.)

On our way to the fireworks barge, I got rather hungry and we came to a live-parking-only dock so I could get a hot dog. The dock was seething with young men and women, in little clusters mostly discernable by shared seating towels and spoken languages. I climbed over them, still wearing my silly little life vest (seriously, the water of the Charles is great stability control) and eventually found the sausage stand. I shuddered as the last tentacles of yuppiedom clasped around my neck, and paid seven dollars yes seven whole American dollars for a sausage with peppers on a bun. Oh well, at least it was a tasty sausage. And I could return to Nicole, who was sitting pretty on a kayak in front of hundreds of increasingly drunk folks ("does that thing have a V-8? heh heh heh"). On the way out, an hispanic guy offered us some seating space and vodka, and it seemed genuinely kind and friendly, harkening to a society and culture where young strangers don't need to be afraid of each other. Of course, we already had better seats planned.

Here's where we planted ourselves: video 1, 3.6MB .avi: In front of the barge.

The fireworks themselves were surreal. Closer than I'd ever been: the explosions filled my entire field of vision, and then some. Shockingly loud. And there we were, floating in the middle of hundreds of thousand of people, paddling backward so the current didn't draw us into the restricted zone. I don't have any more words for it, so instead see video 2, 14.5MB .avi: The most amazing fireworks I've ever seen.

How did it end? Two hours of strenous paddling, strapping a kayak on foam blocks to the roof of my coupe, and 5 hours of sleep before returning the boat and heading to work. In other words, a perfect urban adventure.

Brookline by Jonathan Coulton.

Listen to the mp3 and read the lyrics.

link

Here's a fascinating photo essay on "urban renewal" in Boston. It shows "Medieval Boston" (1920s) and the dramatic changes it has suffered in automobile-induced destruction projects since. It's heartbreaking to think what Boston, still one of America's most livable and walkable cities, could have been were it not for the wholesale demolition that allowed us to build things like… the evil, crushing new city hall.

Thanks to Ben for the pointer.

The choir I'm in, New Century Voices,
has a concert coming up this Sunday 6/19. It's at the Swedenborg Chapel
in Cambridge, MA. Swedenborg Chapel is located at the corner of Quincy
and Kirkland streets near Harvard Square. The suggested donation is $10.

New
Century Voices is dedicated to performing new works by local composers.
The performance will include the premier of Michael Veloso's "All
Natural Male Enhancement," a piece written on texts from e-mail Spam.
Other local composers represented will include Elizabeth Knight, who is
a student at Longy, Krishan Oberoi from Rhode Island and Jeremy
Jennings. We also include works of some better known composers, Randall
Thompson, Edward Elgar and Paul Hindemith; the "Six Chansons," on texts
by Rainer Maria Rilke.

If you like choral music, there is
definitely something here you'll like; if not, there are a few things
you'll at least laugh at. I hope to see many of you there.

A
reception will follow the concert. All proceeds go to the Swedenborg
Chapel. (The Swedenborg Chapel is the stone church on the corner of
Quincy and Kirkland streets, across the road from Memorial Hall and
Sanders Theatre.)

Ice cream in the Boston area, ordered roughly by quality.

Toscanini's: some of the most delicious ice cream available anywhere, period. This is serious, classy ice cream—well, as serious and classy as it gets. Their Belgian Chocolate is undeniably sumptuous, even for a chocolate non-addict like me. Other wonderful flavors include the buttery Cake Batter, a respectable interpretation of Indian Kulfi, and my personal favorite, Ginger Snap Molasses. Stores in hip city locations such as Harvard Sq and Central Sq.

Bedford Farms: what Tosci's is to hipster city ice cream, Bedford Farms is to candylike country goodness. My experience here is less comprehensive, but their White River Junction was so delicious that I rank it very highly. Sadly, their cookie dough was unremarkable except for its low dough nugget density, but I did sample their PB&J which was both authentic in flavor and delicious. Very generous portions, comparatively cheap; two stores (too far away!) in Bedford and Concord.

Herrell's: the ice cream of my youth, if by youth you mean the summers I spent at Williams College trying to convince my officemates to hold a "meeting" at Herrell's vendor Lickety Split on Spring St. Luckily, several Herrell's stores grace other parts of Massachusetts, including a convenient location in Harvard Square. Their flavors are generally excellent, and their peanut butter and, dear lord, Malted Vanilla is not to be missed.

Steve's Famous Ice Cream: legend has it that Steve Herrell founded this ice cream chain, had a quibble with his co-founders, and sold it to go off to found Herrell's (see history). The only Steve's location I know is downtown at Faneuil Hall. They sport the best waffle cones I've found locally; incredibly tall and with a softer texture than most. The ice cream is on par with Herrel's and perfect on a hot day in the city. Or a day when it barely gets to room temperature indoors. Whatever.

Brigham's: although their world headquarters and two retail stores are in Arlington, five minutes from my house, I'm ashamed to say I've never been to a Brigham's store. But I have sampled their flavors from the grocer's freezer with delight. Their Big Dig ice cream—vanilla with caramel, brownie chunks, and chocolate chunks, is one of the best things in Stop-n-Shop and goes wonderfully with almost any hot baked thing. They have a real, and utterly delicious Strawberry, and their Peppermint is also one of the finest examples of that flavor I've ever sampled.

Cabot's: this diner in Newton is the Boston area's best place to go for a greasy dinner and a sundae. Decor out of the 60s, and it's real: that place has been around a long time. Their sundaes come in two sizes, which should really be called "for two" and "y'all ain't ever gonna finish this." Surprisingly, you will eat a burger, fries, and a whole sundae at Cabot's, and come back for more after you spend several hundred years digesting. (I'm not sure whether Cabot's makes their ice cream, or if they order it from somewhere, but they definitely assemble a mean sundae.)

Lizzy's: this shop in Waltham gets pretty crowded at night, and with good reason. I've only been once, but it will definitely be on the plan for my next Waltham restaurant excursion.

J.P. Licks: I want to love this local chain of four stores, but when I go it's mostly for proximity rather than taste. JP has remarkable ability to recreate a flavor in ice cream form—the first time I went, I couldn't resist trying the Cucumber—but the results are uninspiring. You can get a tasty ice cream here, but there are usually only a couple of flavors I like on the menu. Locations in at least Arlington, Davis Sq, Newton Centre, and JP (Jamaica Plain).

Cold Stone Creamery: this national chain wants to be the Starbucks of ice cream. They have wide waffle cones that are more like bowls, and offer smoosh-in services so you can create your own flavor. Which you'll really want to do, because the ice cream base flavors are simply not that good. But if you've gotta have gummi bears and peanuts in white chocolate ice cream, try it. There's a store in the Fenway area near the AMC movie theatre.

Ben & Jerry's: outlandishly overrated. This is one step from the sort of ice cream you'd get out of a screw-drive vending machines in a polyethylene bag. Too much sugar, horrid texture, careless smooshing-in of whatever sounds good without sufficient attention to comprehensive flavor, and astroturfed grass-roots appeal when you're really buying from Unilever. Edible, but pretty much the best way to overpay for ice cream whether you get it from your grocer or one of their stores.

---

I am urged to try Christina's, Emack and Bolio, and probably several others in many lists. Sadly, I missed the Scooper Bowl downtown because it closes at 6 on workdays. Next year I'll schedule a vacation day.

Looking for directions between my house and the Boston airport shows a
surprising degree of variation between map services. Check this out:

Route	Google Maps	Yahoo Maps	Mapquest
home to BOS	7.6mi, 12min	7.5mi, 16min	10.5mi, 19min
verdict	optimal route, timing should be ~15min	same route as Google, fewere pointless "continue on" directions	ridiculous, and "avoid highways" option does not help
BOS to home	10mi, 16min	8.6mi, 19min	10.3mi, 18min
verdict	possibly silly use of highway	slow, stoplight-ridden trek through Cambridge	optimal until entering Somerville, then just as ridiculous

This is a tricky example. As the crow flies, the Boston airport is rather
close to my house— probably 6 miles. The airport is in East Boston,
which is accessible via underwater tunnels from downtown Boston (there is a
bridge from Chelsea but that's far out of the way). There are at least two
different possible tunnels to East Boston, each of which connects to a
different highway out of downtown (I-93 or I-90), neither of which is
especially convenient to my place. There is also the option of exiting the
tunnels onto a fast non-interstate road (Storrow Dr.), which is scenic but
not direct, or to drive on city streets, which is geographically direct but
involves slower traffic and more stoplights. On top of this, while I'm
fairly confident the Yahoo/Google route to the airport is optimal,
I'm not sure how reversible this route is because the tunnel away
from the airport is not exactly adjacent to the one coming in.

In other words, the mapping services disagree on the return path, but so
do I— I've taken at least 3 different, reasonable paths home as well
as getting lost a few times. Times have ranged from 18 minutes to over 30
(with a jaunt through the industrial areas of Medford; whoops).

I wonder, is the route to my house from Logan Airport just a damned
tricky route to optimize? Or are the different services needlessly stupid
and divergent?