Comparing "Cloud"-y Ruby on Rails Hosting Options

Let's say you want to cheaply deploy a few Ruby on Rails projects (some Facebook applications, some not). Say they're all low traffic experiments now but you'd like to know you could scale easily if you had to. And let's say you're seeking minimal "stack" hassles -- i.e., you know in your geek heart you could install, configure, and maintain Apache, Mongrel, MySQL, etc. but you also know it's not much fun. So, you're probably interested in "cloud"-based options. Though, you also know that's ultimately a fuzzy marketing term -- what you really just want is convenient, cheap, scalable, low-maintenance rails hosting.

Below is what my experience has been so far. They are the most cutting edge options I could find as of now, June 2009 (important since this scene is changing rapidly), with various levels of cloud-iness. I'd be curious what others' experience has been and if I'm missing anything. FYI here is great post on more general issues with Rails and startups.

Heroku

• has the most buzz right now. based on some very advanced tech (uses Amazon EC2 but takes away all the pain with configuring and maintaining your own stack.)
  
• I first tried "heroku garden", their version with a nifty web-based IDE, but then went back to just normal heroku after finding out heroku garden is very limited and apparently not a priority for the company any longer (out of date Rails, etc.)
• + fairly easy, quick, slick to set up and deploy. integrated git. very easy to deploy - can avoid Capistrano hassles.
  
• + has a nice free option that doesn't expire ("Blossom"), and you can use a custom domain name with it. You only get 5MB of database storage, but you should be using something like S3 or external hosting for your big static assets.
• + you can have as many free "Blossoms" as you want, each with a custom domain pointed at it.
  
• + extremely easy scalability, in theory
  
• - no ssh or root access, therefore no ability to set up a tunnel for local testing of Facebook apps. (Though yes you could use any old public ssh host for this, or just develop on a seperate heroku instance.)
• - no writable local storage. Which is mostly OK but a showstopper for a) apps that write to files such as rsa_keys or .js files, or b) apps that require plugins which want to do local writes, such as ThinkingSphinx/Sphinx (needs local storage to build it's index. And I don't think ferret or solr are as good, though other opinions welcome). Of course, some would argue that writing apps that don't write to local storage is good practice for writing a scalable app...
• - no way that I can see to use ffmpeg (or any native non-Rails code)
  
• Is my current all around favorite.
  

Joyent

• + currently has FREE FOR A YEAR developer program, ostensibly only for Facebook apps, but I don't see any reason you couldn't host normal rails apps here.
• + Your "shared Facebook accelerator" comes with 10 reserved ports, so as far as I can tell you could have 10 seperate apps, each with their own Mongrel instance. You'd just have to live with ugly URLs and oddball ports.
• - fairly barebones - you have to set up your own git or Subversion, your own Capistrano infrastructure, etc.
  
• - no root access, so no doing things like setting up an ssh tunnel (since you can't edit /etc/ssh/ssh_config).
  

Aptana Cloud

• uses Joyent as back-end provider but different pricing model, brand, options, etc.
  
• + ssh & root acces
• + really sweet integration with Aptana Studio (based on Eclipse/Radrails, currently my favorite free IDE). One click-deployment in theory.
  
• - free for only 7 days, then $20/month
  

Others I don't know that much about:

• Morph
• GoGrid (no free options, pay as you go)
• EngineYard

Write me a comment if I missed anything or you found this helpful.

- T

Miscellanenous Ruby on Rails Experiments

Here are a few Ruby on Rails experiments that some might find interesting. They are all subject to change, downtime, or bugs at anytime, but anyone is welcome to poke around or comment. Source code upon request (am looking into getting a few things on gitub eventually). Most were done with Rails 2.3.2. They were all experiments done to test particular things and I put little effort into making them pretty or "useful". Gave them all custom domains just 'cause it was easy.

Authentication Demo

• http://tims-auth-demo.timlang.com
• Purpose: experiment with authlogic gem for authentication, which I had determined was a bit cleaner and more flexible than restful-authentication and some of the others.
  
• Other issues touched on: sessions, user accounts, cookies (permanent login).

Media Upload Demo

• http://tims-attachment-demo.timlang.com
  
• Purpose: experiment with Amazon S3 for data storage, try out the paperclip plug-in (verdict: better than attachment-fu)

Social Network Demo

• http://tims-social-network-demo.timlang.com
• Purpose: try out the Insoshi open source social network framework, see if I could host it on Heroku (verdict: success, but tricky to make search work since no local writeable storage on Heroku).

Feed Reader Demo

• http://tims-feed-reader-demo.timlang.com
• Purpose: experiment with a simple RSS feed reader, queuing techniques with Delayed Job and separate worker threads, and a little Ajax too. With thanks to Adam Wiggins at Heroku.
• Uses beta of Delayed Job on Heroku so may be unstable depending on what they're doing
  

Facebook Application Demo

• http://tims-facebook-demo-b.timlang.com
• Purpose: experiment with a simple Facebook App, the facebooker plugin vs rfacebook, verify Rails' suitability for FB apps vs PHP. (verdict: facebooker is better, Rails is better).

Facebook Connect Demo

• http://tims-connect-demo.timlang.com
• Purpose: experiment with the Facebook Connect mechanism for importing your FB login and friend info into a custom stand-alone app.
  
• This one might actually be useful (i.e., to keep track of bike rides and share with friends). Probably needs a few more features and bug fixes.
  

Milk is Cheap Alternative to Sports Drinks

Milk is as good or better than sports drinks for drinking after exercise. Think about it: protein, carbs, electrolytes -- and cheap. Sure it's not great if you're lactose intolerant. But otherwise...why not?

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23406513-details/Forget+sports+drinks,+milk+is+the+best+way+to+recover+from+exercise/article.do

http://www.poweringmuscles.com/Sports-Science-13,Researchers_Find_That_Milk_Is_An_Effective_Post-exercise_Rehydration_Drink.html

Or am I missing something? Always open to good double-blind/placebo studies...

- T

Bread best practices...

Bread recap - these are the two techniques got me really into bread:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/08/dining/08mini.html
http://www.motherearthnews.com/Real-Food/Artisan-Bread-In-Five-Minutes-A-Day.aspx
The first one basically says that you don't have to knead if you're willing to wait (and use a high-hydration dough), and the second one basically says that pre-risen dough will keep well in the fridge so you can just pull out a small chunk whenever you want. Both use interesting gimmicks to get high humidity early in the cooking process for a nice crust.

The latter technique, based on the book "Artisan Bread in Five Minutes", is really key. It has a fast growing movement behind it because it makes baking bread quite a bit more spontaneous and easy. More here, including lots of variations with the same dough like bagels and cinnamon rolls:
http://www.artisanbreadinfive.com/

Once you get the hang of making some new refrigerated dough every few weeks things get really fun. At any given moment you can take whatever random ingredients you have in your fridge and create, on short notice, something intensely yummy by combining it with some of your premade dough. Carmelized onion rolls, chicken calzones, cheese bread, bacon pizzas, cinnamon rolls, etc.

I've been working on my own 100% whole grain variation different than anything I've yet seen published, let me know if you want the details...

The Social Annotation Sweetspot

I just discovered my friend Brian's blog, and his entry on "temporal tagging", or tagging something based on when it might be relevant, has got me thinking in general about social annotation, collaborative filtering, and the Semantic Web. And about a key tradeoff.

For many types of annotation, there is often a tradeoff between local simplicity and global utility, among other things:

1. In the absence of other incentives, the more simple the annotation, the more likely people will annotate. I.e., for every del.icio.us or Digg or Flickr using simple tags or thumbs-up/thumbs-down, there are hundreds of startups that required complex annotation that didn't make it. GoogleBase has not been a smashing success. I was working for a collaborative filtering service started by my brother way back in 1997 that struggled with providing a sufficiently simple feedback system. Successful sites that demand even slightly more complex feedback than a single click - epinions, yelp, various "answers" sites - have had to provide various subtle or non-subtle incentives. The extreme of 'simple' social annotation, of course -- the low hanging fruit -- is annotation that requires no conscious effort at all. Log file analysis, click analysis, spending behavior, phone records, browser history, Google PageRank, datamining in general, etc. could all be considered as "free" social annotation.
2. The more "structured" the annotation, the more exciting the possibilites for usefulness to the system as a whole, at least as more and more companies gobble up the low-hanging fruit. The really huge quantum leaps in utility promised by the Semantic Web and the like require more structured and complex types of annotation, which usually requires more cognitive effort per user. Everybody is dying for higher quaility and more structured meta-data to improve search and artificial intelligence and a zillion other schemes but few have figured out how to sufficiently incentivize it.

So these principles pull in opposite directions. Brian's temporal tagging idea allows you to do some really cool things if people use it. But would people use it? Should del.icio.us look into it? Or does it run counter to the reason del.icio.us and folksonomies took off in the first place? Where is the threshold for when a new type of social annotation is a smart idea?

I am guessing there is material on this already, and I apologize if this whole post is just an amateurish rehash of any of it. Anybody care to point me towards the best of it?

I am particularly interested in any studies that make useful predictions and take into account incentives, user effort, and utility. Is there an "economic" analysis (incentive-aware) of what drives the success or failure of different types of social annotation -- and therefore sheds light on the most likely route(s) we will take to the Semantic Web and all it promises? I am thinking there's a lot of speculation and theory but it could be made more precise and empirically supported.

The ideal would be a magic formula that, for a given type of annotation, helps answer the question "Should company X explore adding it to their system?". That is, can we get more precise about predicting the sweet spot(s) in social annotation? Something like this but about social annotation rather than spam-prevention - plus more mathematical and less snarky?

Possible variables for such a "Fitness Function" for prioritizing social annotation ideas might include:

1. Added hassle for each user to provide the annotation
   
2. Incentives for each user to provide the annotation (money or "points", social or psychological pressure, UI cues or reminders, inherent utility before network effects, other incentives?)
3. Global utility or value created if everyone does it
   
4. Existing size, growth rate, engagement level, and demographic of existing and future user base. (If you're starting fresh vs., say, doing a Facebook app, you're at a disadvantage).
   
5. Virality - does it contribute or detract from the network effect and/or does it effect user base growth in some special way?
6. Other factors?

Perhaps such a formula should integrate "business factors":

1. Revenue - does the feature make (or loose) money in some direct or indirect way
   
2. Sensitivity to failure - how deep are the pockets and what is timeframe. If you're Google, with tons of resources, this will be different from a struggling start-up.
3. Cost. What are the man hours and opportunity cost to implement this. Scalability concerns?
4. Positioning and branding relative to competitors and partners, now and in the future
5. Legal or ethical concerns. How is your annotation effecting other people?
   
6. Other factors?
   

It would be very cool if we had a formula or at least rule of thumb, including proper weightings for each variable, that we could test against empirical data. Maybe use the history of existing social annotation systems (or Facebook apps) as data? Perform "experiments" on existing sites by carefully modifing variables? Maybe do statistical analysis to derive a formula in the first place? I'm not guessing any such formula will be perfect, but I think we can do better than we are now.

With some kind of slightly better framework, maybe companies involved with social annotation can avoid wasting time on hopeless features ideas or unwise feature creep. Or a way to settle arguments in product management meetings. Or a handy heuristic to generate new ideas and companies.

So does such a framework exist -- a formula or list of rules somewhere -- and I'm just not aware of it? A PhD thesis somewhere? A secret white paper inside Google? A spreadsheet from Pete Cashmore or other guru? If the thinking on this topic is, as I suspect, mostly speculation and anecdote spread across thousands of articles, blog posts, and individual minds, I say...it's time to make it more of a science: precise, supported by evidence, predictive, and public.

I have an intuition that many current social annotation startups are not just barking up the wrong tree but are doing so according to a pattern.

- Tim

********

UPDATE: Forgot to mention that I like what B.J. Fogg at Stanford has been doing in this area. This is a clip from a talk at PARC I attended back in 2007: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trdJGwJeA3M .

Also a related blog from PARC here: http://asc-parc.blogspot.com/

Too many choices = unhappiness? (Or Why Safeway Can Be A Drag)

So I watched these two awesome Ted Talks the other day and it got me thinking:
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauce.html
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html

Gladwell's talk, it seems to me, is a reminder that, for a given kind of decision, more choices maximize the chances that everyone can find a choice they "like". Hence there is an economic incentive in a free market for companies to provide lots and lots of choices.

But Schwartz's talk seems to say that, based on both empirical studies and plausible psychological principles, lots of choices make people unhappy and anxious, both during and after the decision. Here is another nice (geekier) analysis: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/12/harmful-options.html . And two related comics:

Schwartz's talk really resonated for me, not only in recognizing why picking out jeans can make someone anxious, but why choosing a career, lifestyle, partner, etc. can cause anxiety (even after the choice is made!), especially in a city like San Francisco where there are so many options and so few 'judgements'. Any why commitment is harder in a city full of single people. It also suggests to me that maybe one reason people (artists, writers, everyone really) often perform better with constraints is the removal of anxiety. And that maybe the degree to which someone is ADD could be a cause (or effect?) of the paradox of choice for that person. Both "maybes" could probably be studied empirically.

That said, how do we, in general, deal with the two contrasting principles from Gladwell and Schwartz to increase our happiness?

First, I think we should make sure we understand that the principles are in tension but not logically opposite. My interpretation is this: Gladwell says that more choices makes it more likely there will be some choice you "like", and that companies providing more choices will therefore often maximize profit. Schwartz, I think, is saying that while there may be a choice you really really like, your overall happiness (utility) can sometimes go down in a choice-rich environment. Perhaps you could say that one principle is measuring how good a "match" can be achieved between a person and a choice, while the other is measuring how good a person *feels* depending on the number of available choices.

That said, I think the possible "solutions" fall into one of the following four categories:

1) Change the system. Can we change the rules of society to reduce the number of excessive choices while preserving key values (i.e., prosperity and individual freedom)? To me the overall problem reminds me of the "tragedy of the commons": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons -- individual agents (people, companies) trying to maximize their individual utility at the expense of global average utility. And there are some "classic" ways to dealing with a tragedy of the commons, even while preserving basic capitalism. (Even though they all kind of suck in various ways or else we would have fixed pollution and political corruption by now). Do any of those ways apply here? Is there some government institution that can help? Who do we trust to "reduce" choices? Can we "privatize" choice-related anxiety and create an incentive to reduce excess choices? Maybe in the same way we have pollution credits or carbon credits? I am doubtful, but it's worth brainstorming...

2) Make better "meta-decisions". Can we change our "local" environment to reduce choice-related anxiety? We can choose to live in a certain type of community or country, hang out with a certain kind of subculture, shop in a certain kind of store -- each with different numbers of choices. Greater awareness of the paradox of choice may help with such meta-choices. We don't have to view people that choose to live in wilderness or rural areas as being irrational (mostly) -- or even the people that avoid superstore-type places. And we can all employ services (people, publications, products, software tools) that help us sift through choices without feeling guilty (mostly).

3) Nudge companies to do the right thing. Can we at raise awareness of the paradox of choice among companies and institutions (or people we work with or employ - wedding planners, say), and remind them that there are ways to maximize prosperity under current "rules" while not contributing to choice-anxiety? Many skilled retailers and product designers (hello Old Navy, hello Apple) will do this anyway, will attempt to maximize "the experience" rather than just the options, but it's worth nudging the others. All companies, if they're not paying attention, are vulnerable to "feature creep" or "choice creep", where lots of tiny additional choices gradually add up to a crappy, anxious (and often unprofitable) experience. I would also like to add that one reason I LOVE my CSA is less choice-anxiety over what to buy and cook. There is similar "hidden value" in things like Pandora in freeing people from choice anxiety regarding music. So, prediction #1: in a world of ever-increasing choices, companies with "filtering" business models, combining convenience and choice reduction with trustworthy "good taste" (or trustable algorithms) will thrive even more in the future. Wine clubs, book clubs, boutique stores, collaborative filtering and social search, some kinds of dating websites, Digg, Slashdot, etc. all fall into this category. Prediction #2: the value of staying trustworthy will therefore increase for many companies as they move to these business models. Prediction #3: there will be a market for companies that can find a way to sell "metrics" of other companies or individuals trustworthines or good taste. In the same way we have credit-rating companies, perhaps we will have more companies that explicitly keep track of trustworthiness, good taste, editorial judgement, etc.? There is already a market in this (Green/Heart-smart/Joe's "Stamp of Approval" etc. Also things like the mod system on Slashdot), but it's going to grow proportionally to the growth in choices. The internet will be playing a role both as the cause of the problem (the net exposes people to more choices) and a solution (the net accelerates "information" markets, which is what both choice-filtering and reputation-tracking are).

4) Change our brains. Can we change *ourselves* so that we are, on a psychological level, less prone to choice-anxiety? Brain or genetic modification will probably have to wait. But can we train ourselves to stay aware of the Paradox of Choice and some of the cognitive biases at the heart of it (grass is always greener, loss-sensitivity, sunk cost fallacy, etc)? Can we give renewed attention to effective therapies for anxiety and ADD such as Mindfulness Meditation?

I am thinking that 4) is probably the most likely and practical "solution", followed by 3), 2), and 1) in that order.

The problem kind of reminds me of society's problem with porn, TV, websurfing etc. New technologies and societal changes make ancient instincts (procreation, sociability, curiosity) pathological. In this case it's an old instinct that says "the more choices the better", which probably made sense in the choice-impoverished world of small tribes on the savanna.

So if we want to make ourselves happier, do we change the system, our local environment, the companies we deal with, or ourselves?

- Tim

How to Figure Out What's Going on in SF

Quick and dirty guide to figuring out cool things to do in SF:

• Great general purpose calendar and nightspot descriptions: http://www.sfstation.com/
• Also decent are http://sanfrancisco.going.com/ and http://www.metrowize.com/features/san-francisco
  
• Reviews: http://www.yelp.com/sf
• Oddball stuff (i.e., edgy, art-y, experimental, underground, Burning-Man-y): http://laughingsquid.com/squidlist/events/
  

RJDJ, Augmented Reality, and the Singularity

I read about RJDJ, a new spiffy iPhone app that uses ambient sounds and noises it "hears" to make music, on Boing Boing a few weeks back:
http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2008/10/15/rjdj-live-ambient-so.html
And then I got my buddy Clay's review a few days later:

I had a blast on my commute this AM with the iPhone App Rjdj, which
loops back ambient sounds with effects, etc. I was laughing out loud many times, which of course was picked up and looped back to me, making me laugh harder. One particularly fun thing for me was doing the ZZ Top "uh-how-how-how-how". Outside my car, when I have to try harder to pretend to be normal, walking around with my iPhone
earphones on and Rjdj takes reality on a complete trip. Mundane tasks
toasting and buttering a bagel -- or interactions take on a totally new luster. I think this was my first, real, practical, here-it-is augmented reality experience, and instead of giving me a practical tool like a heads-up display with people's names or directions while I drive, it's tripping me out and making me really think about what I'm experiencing. Yay! A total epiphany.

This got me thinking about what "Augmented Reality" really means. The traditional definition is something like "the experience of perceiving 'reality' but mediated by electronic assistance." I.e., not a totally artificial world like Virtual Reality, but "real-time reality" with useful labels or information tacked on.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augmented_reality
The archetypal vision, I think, has been that in the future you put on some kind of magic glasses that gives you context-sensitive help or info from the internet, like names or reviews or warnings, depending on what and who you look at. But I think it's interesting to consider things that could plausibly be considered Augmeted Reality but don't fit this standard vision. For instance...

• RJDJ involves audio and not vision, is only semi "realtime", and is for entertainment only.
  
• Google Street View on the Android phone shows (old) pictures of street views but changes the orientation in real-time depending on how you hold the phone. Would it be correct to say that the "sense" being mediated here in real-time is not vision but instead "orientation", i.e., equilibrioception and/or proprioception?
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprioception
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equilibrioception
  I am guessing not; it's still vision that is the mediated sense here, since the sense-data our brain is receiving about orientation is not being altered. We are looking at the phone.
  But, do we then we have to admit that Augmented Reality does NOT have to involve the display or manipulation of "real-time reality", since Street View is showing you "old" footage, not reality? Odd if you think about it, given the intuitive difference between Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality. But what, really, is the difference between Google Street View on Android and just "standard" Virtual Reality, where a helmet on your head reads its orientation and changes what it shows you in the artificial world? Perhaps just the fact that we can see, or are meant to see, "reality" behind the physical Android Phone as we use it, and the program is supposed to be "useful" for that reality? So...perhaps we need a notion of Augmented Reality that includes "useful for real-time reality"? But then what about apps like "RJDJ" - is that "useful"? And how does the existing Internet itself not fall into this definition?
  
• What about just standard eye glasses? Does Augmented Reality have to involve electronics? What about a hearing aid? Cochlear implant? Night vision? Pacemaker? The instruments or heads-up display in a car or plane cockpit? A wireless temperature probe for your BBQ? The Internet itself?

My point, I suppose, is that Augmented Reality, as is stands now, is a very fuzzy concept, overlapping with things like "tool", "computer", "instrument", and of course Virtual Reality. This is not on its face a devastating philosophical problem, though it's definitely interesting. Could be a branding problem eventually for products that want to call themselves Augmented Reality, but no biggie.

More interesting, this suggests some interesting fuzziness in the very definition of an "augmented" vs "normal" human. Discussions of the distinction between "self" and "other" have been going on for centuries, but I think as augmented reality technology accelerates the discussion becomes more relevant and more confusing. We've had clothes and tools for eons; prosthetic limbs for centuries; pacemakers for decades; smart phones for a few years, etc. And it's possible that in a few more years we'll have internet access and context sensitive Augmented Reality information in our very corneas or brains. So who is a cyborg and who isn't? And are cyborgs - let's say a person with artificial, augmented eyes - less in touch with reality, or more? Does your answer change if you know they were born without eyes to begin with? Do we give up on defining reality altogether?

Note that there is a school of thought that suggests our "minds" can not really be thought of independent from our perceptual systems or bodies, and that to change your senses or body changes who you are:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embodied_Embedded_Cognition
http://www.consciousentities.com/bats.htm
I happen to believe this school of thought (Sorry all you Hans Moravec "mind-uploading" fans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Moravec You might be able to upload something, someday, but it won't be you.)

So, a strange question is raised. If the "self" changes as we change and augment our senses, and we don't even have a handle on what counts as augmented vs not, who "we" are is going to be increasingly ambiguous in the years ahead! Methinks the approach to the "singularity" is going to be mighty confusing -- accompanied by increasing ambiguity in both what a person is and what reality is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

Prediction: at some point in the future, well before the "singularity", we will be so surrounded by and embedded in augmented reality devices that, cognitively, on every measurable brain level, we will not be able to distinguish "reality" from "augmented reality". And perhaps that point is already here! If we take away a person's electronic cochlear implant, are we bringing them "closer" to reality, or farther? And perhaps spiritually, too, there is or will be ambiguity as to what is "real": how long until some cult, subculture, or religion comes out with their own "window into the True World" device? Isn't this what drugs like peyote already are for some religions? And, as I've discussed, there is possibly inherent philosophical ambiguity. All perception (and therefore reality?) is constructed, from our "natural" senses to Augmented Reality - guided by assumptions and choices, interpreted through models and heuristics, augmented with "non-local" information.

So. Our minds create technology, which affects our perceptions and our reality, which redefines our minds, which creates new technology...and so on. This has always been the case, but this feedback loop is now accelerating exponentially! Hold on tight y'all!

Ok that may have been too many ideas for one blog post, but I gave it a shot :)

Cheers.

***

UPDATE: Perhaps we could define "Augmented Reality" as "technology that electronically augments or alters our perceptual experience in a context-sensitive way, where 'context-sensitivity' is being calculated in real-time by monitoring one or more of our senses"? Perhaps this would sufficiently distinguish our intuitive sense of Augmented Reality (Google Street View on Android, RJDJ, heads-up displays, etc) from just tools or the Internet?

Either way, though, it doesn't negate the points about the blurring of augmented vs. natural, self vs. other, mind vs. perceptions, and reality vs. virtual reality.

Daily Supplement Cocktail

This is my current supplement regimen, started two weeks ago:

• 1 600mg NAC capsules twice a day. See http://blog.timlang.com/2008/09/n-acetyl-cysteine-helps-depression-and.html
  
• 1 683mg Omega-3 capsule once a day
  
• 1 multivitamin once a day
• 1 200mg Co-Q10 tablet once a day
• 1 500mg Resveratrol (98% Trans-resveratrol) once a day

I must say, I feel great! Though, I don't really consider that foolproof evidence since I also boosted my exercise and cut out some bad habits at the same time. But no side effects detected at least.

My criteria were

• support mental health, physical health, longevity
• at least two double-blind placebo studies showing benefits, with plausible theory behind them
  
• when possible, approximate dosing schedule of relevant studies
• cheap! (I wish I could afford more than 500mg Resveratrol per day)
• easy to get a reliable and pure formulation
• near-zero side effects
• can take perpetually without "tolerance" of benefits building up, unwanted homeostasis effects, or long-term complications

Supplements that didn't make the cut include testosterone pro-hormones, various forms of stimulants, DHEA, St. John's Wort, and Ginkgo Baloba.

Am I missing anything?

One thing I'm not sure about is the Co-Q10, as the studies seem to show ambiguous benefit for healthy people my age.

(Fun addendum: one concrete effect I *can* point to is that approx 3 extra grams of NAC plus an ibuprofen taken the same night as drinking alcohol seems to completely eliminate any hangover! I've "tested" this a couple of times now, including my friend's wedding in New Orleans (pretty ideal testing situation if you know what I mean) and it's worked amazingly well. Some plausable science behind this too: http://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/9/791.htm )

What Not To Put In The Refrigerator

Sounds simple, but I'm embarrassed to admit I only learned some of these, um, pretty much now, age 34. Feel free to print this out and tape it to your fridge to help you remember, or to educate/annoy your roommates.

Not OK For Fridge (will degrade it):

• tomatoes
• bananas
• unripe fruits
  
• chocolate
• onions
  
• bread (though freezer is OK)
• potatoes and sweet potatoes
• canned Parmesan cheese
• honey
• oils (except nut oils)
• baked goods
  
• peanut butter
• cereals, crackers, chips
  

http://busycooks.about.com/library/lessons/blrefrig5.htm

Am I missing anything?

The Magic of Fish Sauce (instead of Anchovies)

Random tip: you can use "fish sauce" (Thai or Chinese section of grocery store) as a sub in most recipes that call for an anchovy for flavoring, such as braises. I made this last night with a dab of fish sauce because I didn't feel like running out for anchovies and it was TIGHT: http://www.cooksillustrated.com/recipe.asp?recipeids=1928

Naturally one of the main ingredients in fish sauce is anchovies. But fish sauce keeps longer and is more flexible. Even in recipes not calling for anchovies, a squirt of fish sauce can be great - especially braises, sauces, and soups. If you use it in moderation it won't register as fishy, just rich, nutty, savory, and yummy. Hence it's ubiquity in southeast Asia cuisine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_sauce

(Minced dried porcini mushrooms are also good for this purpose BTW - bestowing richness, "savory-ness", "heartiness", "meaty-ness", etc.)

Science-y background: it's all about that umami/glutamate/savory action. We crave glutamate in foods as a marker for protein, even if little protein is actually there - such as with mushrooms. This is why anything with MSG tastes so damn good, or any of the zillions of snack foods with stuff like "autolyzed yeast extract", which is basically another kind of MSG.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umami

Interestingly, glutamate is the same molecule I wrote about previously - it's a neurotransmitter whose misregulation in the reward center of the brain (the Nucleus Accumbus) exacerbates cravings in addicts.
http://blog.timlang.com/2008/09/n-acetyl-cysteine-helps-depression-and.html

That means - nice nerd fact circle here - that the same molecule we find delicious in food is also the same molecule that mediates cravings in the brain. Weirdness. (Though, just to be clear, brain glutamate depletion does not cause craving for dietary glutamate, nor will dietary glutamate increase brain glutamate - but that's what N-Acetyl Cystiene is for, yo.)

I hate Bikram yoga. (Or, being hot is bad.)

Why do people like Bikram yoga? I don't get it.

Myth #1: "The hot room is good for my muscles"
Sure, having your muscles warm can make them more flexible, but you can get them warmed up with 5 minutes of cardio. Say, jumping jacks. Or some Sun Salutations - that's what Sun Salutations are for, no? There is no evidence that having the entire body get hot, from the outside in, is good for you. In fact just the opposite from what I understand. All sorts of bad things happen to your body and cells from heat stress. In fact, there is more and more evidence that failure to dissipate body heat is one of the biggest bottlenecks for athletic performance; there is even a new gadget that gives athletes dramatic increases in performance by lowering the core temp a few degrees via a suction-ice-water-bath-for-your hand thingy.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/21/BAQU12UC28.DTL
Could it maybe, just maybe, be the case that most sane people find hot stuffy rooms uncomfortable to be in, much less do vigorous exercise in, because your body is telling it's not good for you? And isn't the whole point of yoga to be more in touch with your body? Personally I think it plays into the American masochistic/Puritanical/efficiency streak. "Exercise can be uncomfortable, so the form of it with the most discomfort possible per hour must be the best for me" Yick. For those who feel otherwise, who feel that the heat in Bikram makes them more flexible or gives them a better workout, I'd like to see any kind of empirical data for this.

Myth #2: "I'm sweating out the toxins/loosing more weight/burning more calories."
Excuse me? Show me any studies that show that massive sweating makes you loose anything other than water, salt, and electrolytes. The most weight you'll be loosing is water weight, and dehydration is definitely not good for you. And if anything you're burning less calories since your body can't work as hard under all that heat stress - see the link above about athletic performance and core temp. Besides, calories equal heat, remember?

Myth #3: "It's an ancient and respected tradition so it must be good".
Ok this is easily the most offensive of them all. Bikram - the guy - created Bikram yoga in the late 20th century by taking a bunch of existing yoga positions and taking out a U.S. copyright on their order. He has issued many cease-and-desist letters and lawsuits against studios and instructors that do "Bikram" yoga without having paid to go through his paid-for "certification" program. Bikram is a businessman who got rich praying on New Age naivete and being an intellectual property bully - he literally has a "garage stuffed with gleaming Bentleys and Rolls-Royces". Does that sound like the spirit of yoga to you?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bikram_Yoga#Controversy
http://www.denverpost.com/commented/ci_10284675?source=commented-lifestyle
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0967962/plotsummary

Ok, for anybody reading this (Bueller?), am I being too harsh or missing something here?

A new nephew!

My brother has a new baby! A BIG new baby.

"Jaxon" was born on 2:12am on Oct 5th. 9 POUNDS 11 OUNCES!

(For those of you needing a refresher on the Tim Niece-Nephew Situation, this is my brother's 4th child, and my sister has two.)

cheap easy DELICIOUS lemonade/limeade, plus a note on citrus juicers

Fresh homemade lemonade or limeade is super cheap, easy, and tastes like nothing else. The key is to use easy-to-make simple syrup instead of raw sugar, which won't dissolve properly in cold water. Here's my streamlined method:

Makes 1 large glass. (Double or quadruple as desired) Stays fresh tasting for only a day or two.

Ingredients:
* 2 lemons of limes
* 1/4 cup sugar (*)
* cold water to taste
* tiny pinch of salt (optional)
* mint leaves or crushed berries (optional)

1.) Add 1/4 cup or so sugar (*) to about 1/4 cup near-boiling water and stir until sugar is dissolved.  The goal is to achieve simple syrup: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrup#Simple_syrup Note that a large glass measuring cup (or wide-mouthed jar) works particularly well since it's heat-proof, microwave-safe, big enough to juice into, and you can drink/serve out of it. To streamline even more, get the hot water from your coffee maker (mine has a special "instant hot water" button), hot water tap, or microwave.

2) Juice two lemons (or limes) into jar

3.) Fill jar with tons of ice.

4) Add water to taste. Maybe a cup or two? Stir. Let sit a minute or two, stir again.

5) (Optional) Teeny pinch of salt.

6) (Optional) Add some mushed up mint leaves. Or berries.

7) Drink it. Rock out. Realize this awesomeness cost you less than $.50. Laugh at the suckers drinking Snapple and Soda.

(*) I'm really not sure of the exact amount of sugar. A little less for limeade. It will look like an obscene amount of sugar either way, but suck it up - it's still less than soda and will taste fricking awesome.

You'll want to use a citrus squeezer like this: http://www.amazon.com/Supreme-Housewares-Inc-70416-Squeezer/dp/B000BHIKTK/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=home-garden&qid=1217980707&sr=8-2
(metal, cheap, big enough for oranges, lemons, or limes. Note that you put the fruit in cut-side down. WAY BETTER and easier to clean than either the "reemer" type or expensive electric. Fresh orange/lemon/lime juice tastes WAY WAY WAY better in any cocktail or recipe. Bottled lemon or lime juice sucks, and it's so quick and cheap to use fresh.)

Enjoy.

fun with radiation...

When I was a kid I used to breed Netherland Dwarf rabbits in my backyard. An odd, messy and frustrating hobby to be sure. Though, one thing in its favor is that with breeding rabbits there are very very few issues with radiation poisoning, even if you screw up really really bad.

David Hahn did not let that tradeoff bother him. He built a backyard nuclear breeder reactor out of materials scavenged from smoke detectors, lantern mantles, and old glowing clock paint. Nice.
http://www.harpers.org/archive/1998/11/0059750
(Is a decade old but a classic.)

On the topic of glowing clock paint, another haunting story:
http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=660

And then I guess as long as we're doing favorite radiation stories, here is possibly the grand-daddy of them all, and possibly the most disturbing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Slotin#The_criticality_accident
I've used a screwdriver for some pretty inappropriate things in my time, but this...damn....FYI there's a fictionalized version here with John Cusack: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2851281198793552258&ei=iq7fSOvpCKXcqAP7poH4BQ&q=john+cusack+little+boy+fat+man&vt=lf

California Academy of Awesome

I can't WAIT to check out the new California Academy of Sciences. I miss the fish.

Fawning article on the architecture in the Times here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/24/arts/design/24acad.html

New Google Android Phone...

...is apparently capable but clunky, according to this (kind of funny) review:

http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2008/09/23/i-have-touched-the-g.html

Too bad, since Apple needs some pressure to stop mistreating their developers.

Fat is Phat

Probably old news to many people, but there's more and more evidence that dietary fat is not the enemy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieting#Low_carbohydrate_versus_low_fat
http://www.canada.com/topics/lifestyle/food/story.html?id=0a3a08ee-5364-479a-83ec-784b7102d8f8

I think the most evil food I can think of is "Non-Dairy Creamer" (with apologies to lactose intolerants). Non-dairy creamer is typically trans-fats, or, worse, corn-syrup solids. Corn = bad. A splash of milk ain't gonna kill ya!

Ah, but what if what I crave *is* N-Acetyl Cysteine?!

There are some amazing recent studies about N-Acetyl Cysteine showing it helps with cravings, depression, and all kinds of problems related to free radicals (cancer, inflammation, illness, diabetes complications, etc.). It's a cheap and safe amino acid (component of protein) that you can get at health food stores and all over online. Today I'm going to start taking 600mg twice a day and see how it goes. The only possible toxicity I could find was a study that said it causes high blood pressure in rats (via fooling the body into thinking it's not getting enough oxygen), but that was at ridiculously high dosages.

It's antioxidant properties have been known for a while. It is a precursor of glutathione, perhaps the most powerful antioxidant in the body, and one of the only ones (if I understand correctly) that penetrates the blood-brain barrier. NAC is routinely prescribed for Tylenol overdose since it can save the liver from the damage caused by the free radicals generated by the metabolizion of Tylenol (paracetamol). It's also long been used for heavy metal poisoing (it chelates metal ions) and, oddly enough, for loosening mucus (it breaks up the disulfide bonds).

But here's the cool part: there are new studies showing it helps with depression, OCD, schizophrenia, cocaine addiction, alcoholism, preventing hearing loss, easing hangovers, and more! Crazy stuff, especially considering it's a cheap, safe, OTC amino acid. These are mostly small and prelimary studies, but the science is good: double-blind placebo, etc. For the addiction studies, the hypothesis is that it eases cravings by regulating the levels of the neurotransmitter glutamate in a certain part of the brain (which is misregulated in addicts). Most of the other properties (including, intriguingly, the help with depression) are thought to be primarily from the antioxidant effects.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetylcysteine
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080902075218.htm
http://alcoholism.about.com/od/coke/a/nac_cocaine.htm

To quote from Wikipedia:

• NAC has been shown to reduce the symptoms of both schizophrenia and bipolar disorder in two placebo controlled trials (Berk et al., 2008)
• NAC is undergoing clinical trials in the United States for the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder.^[3] It is thought to counteract the glutamate hyperactivity in OCD.
• NAC has been shown to reduce cravings associated with chronic cocaine use in a study conducted at the Medical University of South Carolina (Mardikian et al, 2007; LaRowe et al, 2007)
• It may reduce the incidence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations (Pela et al., 1999)
• In the treatment of AIDS, NAC has been shown to cause a "marked increase in immunological functions and plasma albumin concentrations" (Breitkreutz & al, 2000). Albumin concentration are inversely correlated with muscle wasting (cachexia), a condition associated with AIDS.
• An animal study indicates that acetylcysteine may decrease mortality associated with influenza (Ungheri et al., 2000)
• Animal studies suggest that NAC may help prevent noise-induced hearing loss (Kopke et al., 2005). A clinical trial to determine efficacy in preventing noise-induced sensorineural hearing loss in humans is currently (2006) being jointly conducted by the US Army and US Navy.
• It has been suggested that NAC may help sufferers of Samter's triad by increasing levels of glutathione allowing faster breakdown of salicylates, though there is no evidence that it is of benefit (Bachert et al., 2003).
• There are claims that acetylcysteine taken together with vitamin C and B1 can be used to prevent and relieve symptoms of veisalgia (hangover following ethanol (alcohol) consumption). The claimed mechanism is through scavenging of acetaldehyde, a toxic intermediate in the metabolism of ethanol.^[4][5]
• It has been shown to help women with PCOS (polycystic ovary syndrome) to reduce insulin problems and possibly improve fertility. (Fulghesu, et al, 2002)
• Small studies have shown acetylcysteine to be of benefit to sufferers of blepharitis and has been shown to reduce ocular soreness caused by Sjoren's syndrome.

Note: I have observed that the capsules smell, um, like ass. Good times. But I realized that's because of the sulfur atom attached to the NAC molecule. (Q: What do NAC, cysteine, glutathione, thiols, skunk spray, hydrogen sulfide, the stuff they put in natural gas, and farts have in common? Answer: Sulfur, yo.)

Git your Mindfulness on

I am trying to get back into mindfulness meditation after getting out of practice the last year or so. Background and thoughts:

There is now good scientific evidence that mindfulness meditation is an effective therapy for stress, depression, addiction ADD, chronic pain, and a whole host of other conditions. Comparable or better in many cases than drugs, therapy, and almost everything else (other than exercise, still the best cure-all around). If you think it's all about sitting with a blank mind, or mantras, or new age fluff, or Buddhism, you're wrong. It IS, in a way, about awareness. And it's benefits are measurable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindfulness-based_Cognitive_Therapy

I'm no expert in it, but I have dabbled in it just enough to glimpse some fairly interesting benefits. Here are my recommendations based on the dabbling:

DO NOT:
* think that you know what meditation is or that "it's just not for me" based on just reading about it or trying it a time or two. It's fairly unintutive how to do it (it's NOT just sitting doing nothing), and it's benefits do not kick in until you've doing it regularly for several weeks or more.
* try it for more than 10 minutes or so at a time in the beginning. It is like exercise: it gets easier than you think with practice, but it's very easy to get discouraged with how difficult it is in the beginning.
* sign up for a big day-long or week long "retreat", a la Spirit Rock or the like, without having had some practice first. It's like doing a marathon before you know how to run. More is not better - at least not without practice.
* get discouraged by the fact that some of Jon Kabat-Zinn's writing is so-so. Don't get me wrong, Full Catastrophe Living and the like are a good introduction, I just found them a bit repetitive and flat, and just owning it and reading unlikely to push one into an effective and regular practice. (again, like reading about running)

DO:
* if possible, take one of the standard 8-week MBSR classes held around the world: http://www.umassmed.edu/cfm/mbsr/
* find friends to do it with you - schedule it. support eachother, compare experiences, etc.
* as a poor-man's version of the class, or to reinforce your practice, read (or listen on CD) to some introductory material on what meditaiton is, then use a guided-meditaiton CD to actually do it. This is much more likely to result in success then just "sitting in a room" by yourself with little experience trying to meditate
* bring the principles from MBSR into your every day life, and in particular reinforce them with other activities that nurture breathing awareness anyway, like yoga, swimming, scuba, exercise, walking, etc.

I took the class a year ago, loved it, and fell out of practice a few months later. Am about to try some of the aforementioned poor-man's techniques - wish me luck.

Ultimate Easy Healthy Frozen Yogurt

I tried this a few weeks ago and it was AMAZING. Much more creamy than I expected frozen yogurt to be - and TOTALLY NONFAT. (If you use nonfat Greek-style).

http://www.101cookbooks.com/archives/a-frozen-yogurt-recipe-to-rival-pinkberrys-recipe.html

The key is to find a reliable cheap source of Greek-style yogurt. I used nonfat Fage from Rainbow - not incredibly cheap, but not expensive either. It tastes astoundingly good for nonfat - only downside was that it was extremely hard after freezing overnight. Wondering if alcohol or gelatin or something would help.

I want to try this again with fruit.

Guerilla Vegetable Deliveries!

So during my research on CSAs I discovered an interesting variation: Mysterious Thursdays! Every other Thursday you meet a delivery truck at a designated location (usually a restaurant) and get a HUGE box of veggies for $25. Rave yelp reviews.

How it compares with a normal CSA, as far as I can tell:

• most bang for the buck - super giant box
• no subscription, cash only, you just email your order ahead of time
• superb quality (many restaurants use Mariquita I think)
• no fruit
• more fun. nice challenge to cook with unpredictable, delicious, oddball veggies. And a mischevious vibe to participating: "Hey dudes, I gotta go to Dogpatch to score my Mystery Box, see ya".
• probably less variety, more dependent on the farmer's (and nature's) whims.

So I signed up for Thursday Aug 21st. I have NO frickin idea what I'll do with ~20 pounds of veggies but this is the kind of underground SF + food nerd thing I can't resist.

Help: who wants a portion of my box? Email me.

UPDATE: Got the stash. HOLY COW THIS STUFF IS AMAZING. Easily the best produce I've ever tasted. A bit overwhelming to deal with so much (even splitting it with two other people), but educational too. It's kind of getting glasses after a lifetime of blurry vision - "Oh, THIS is what produce is supposed to taste like". Behold the bounty, as Will and I divide it up over a celebratory cocktail:

Big bathtub pimpin'

Witness my friend Will's ridiculously sick bathtub setup.

Custom concrete tub in a custom room. Custom fabricated ceiling mounted laminar flow fixture. That is, the water comes down from the ceiling in an eerily smooth and splash-free colum. Sick.

Productive brain-storming session

Tim's Easy Hard Cider (beta)

You can make your own hard cider, naturally carbonated, in about 10 days! Way tastier and cheaper than store-bought. Plus it's really fun to watch a living bubbling jug of liquid! Like a cross between a pet and a lava lamp, except it gets you buzzed in a week instead of bored!

Modified from these directions. A bit of sugar added for more kick - final product maybe 5% alcohol, not sure. It's still a young, "quick" cider, a touch sweet. (I.e., tasty but not as "sophisticated", or difficult, as the 3-6 month aged stuff.)

General principle here is that yeast metabolizes carbohydrate molecules (sugars) into alcohol and carbon dioxide. Same process for fermenting anything (beer, wine, any fruit juice, bread dough, etc.)

Tim's Easy Hard Cider (beta)
* 1 gallon apple cider or juice, still in original jug, room-temperature. Use the best tasting stuff you can find. Pasteurized is ok but preservatives are not (I used Twin Hill Ranch apple juice from the Alemany farmer's market, $6.25).
* 1/2 cup honey or sugar or brown sugar, dissolved in 1/2 cup hot water
* 1/2 tsp Premier Cuvee yeast. Or champagne yeast. NOT baker's yeast.

* fermentation lock of some kind. I bought a #6 stopper, bubbler lock, and yeast from San Francisco Brewcraft for about $3 total. You can find directions on the web for using plastic wrap or a condom instead of a bubbler. (Mmmmm, condom. But seriously, it works fine, never touches the cider.)
* 2 2-liter soda bottles. (or glass beer bottles with a capper if you wanna get fancy)
* (Optional) tubing to siphon the cider. Could omit if you can carefully poor it without getting the sediment (lees) on the bottom, but not recommended.

Day 0: Make sure fermentation lock, measuring cup, and tubing is sterilized (boiled). Open your jug of juice (room-temperature) and poor off about 2 cups to reserve and refrigerate. Add sugar liquid, stir by capping jar and shaking. Add yeast, stir. Put on fermentation lock. Put jug in dark, non-cold place. (I use a closet)

Day 2: things should be bubbling nicely (fermenting).

Day 8, 9, or 10: fermenting and bubbling should be very slow (more days = drier cider). Siphon a tiny amount into a glass and taste it. If it has not-enough kick, ferment for another day and/or add more sugar liquid. If it tastes vinegary, whoops, you've made apple cider vinegar (still useful - just remove lock and let it turn all the way into vinegar). If it just tastes real nasty, throw it out. If it tastes good, with a funky alcohol kick, YOU WIN...Siphon into 2 clean 2-liter soda bottles, leaving 1/4 inch and sediment (lees) behind. Save or throw away jug. Top each with 1/2 cup reserved juice - this additional sugar will aid in final carbonation, also tastes good. Make sure there is 1 or 2 inches of open space at top of bottle. Cap bottles tightly. Return to dark non-cold place. Check bottles every 12 hours or so.

approx 24 hours later: bottles should feel as stiff as unopened soda bottles. Careful - things could explode if you let it go too long! Put bottles into refrigerator. When cold...

Drink, enjoy, rock out! Remember that the liquid is still alive and may start to ferment again if you warm it up again, so keep in refrigerator.

Tim's 100% Whole Wheat Pizza

I liked Cook's Illustrated Pizza Margherita pizza recipe, but I wanted something that
* uses 100% whole wheat flour
* didn't require a pizza stone or pizza peel
* easier to handle and less messy - didn't get flour all over my kitchen
* didn't require adding cheese halfway through cooking (i.e., messing with an extremely hot oven and pizza)

The pizza stone provides something that stays dry and retains a lot of heat. I simulated this with an inverted Dutch Oven (cast iron pan might also work) and an inverted baking sheet on top of that, both preheated. Then I used parchment paper to make it easy to get the pizza in and out of the oven, instead of a pizza peel - and it keeps the pizza dry and crisp. (Parchment will singe in this heat but not burn...hopefully.) Had to increase hydration a bit because of the whole wheat flour. And instead of flouring hands and a work surface, I use hands and parchment paper lubed with olive oil - less messy and makes the pizza taste good. I use slices of mozzarella rather than shredded - this is cheaper and keeps better (and looks cool). And I solved the burning cheese problem by barely coating each cheese slice with a dab of sauce.

Tim's 100% Whole Wheat Pizza
- makes 2 12-inch thin-crust pizzas
- takes about 75 minutes start to finish

Dough:
* 1 1/4 t instant yeast
* 8 ounces warm water
* 12 ounces KA White Whole Wheat flour
* 1 T kosher salt
* 2 t sugar
* extra virgin olive oil for hands and parchment paper

Topping:
* 1 cup tomato/pasta sauce of your choice
* 8 ounces mozzarella, solid block of supermarket mozzarella is fine, cut into thin slices (1/8 inch?)
* 1/4 cup fresh chopped basil
* dried oregano
* salt and pepper
* extra virgin olive oil

* other toppings of your choice (meat, garlic, sliced tomato, pineapple, veggies, etc.)

Put inverted Dutch oven (no lid) on lowest rack of oven, topped with an inverted baking sheet, ASSUMING THIS CONFIGURATION IS STABLE with your oven. Crank oven to highest possible setting - mine goes to 575. Stir yeast into warm water. Combine all dry ingredients in Kitchenaid mixer bowl and briefly stir. With machine running, slowly add liquid and then mix for 1-2 minutes or until dough forms satiny, stick ball. With hands lubed with olive oil, divide dough into two smooth balls and place on parchment paper on top of a (not preheated) backing sheet, then loosely cover with plastic wrap. Place in very warm place (I use the top of my preheating oven-range) until doubled in size, about 45 minutes, sometimes less or more. You can also wrap one ball in plastic wrap and refrigerate it for a day - just make sure it's risen in a warm place before shaping and baking.

Using olive-oiled hands, put a dough ball onto another piece of lightly oiled parchment paper, maybe on top of a cutting board (this will useful in getting pizza in and out of the oven). Stretch dough ball into a very thin-crusted 12 inch disk - or maybe a slight oval, to make sure it fits on the cutting board. You want to gently stretch with flattened palms, not just press or roll, rotating as you go, to preserve those gluten strands. Leave a poofy rim on the outside about 1/3 inch wide for a good crust. With a spoon, cover with a little less than 1/2 cup sauce. Top with cheese slices. Smear top of each cheese slice with a tiny bit of sauce (or, easier, just invert each slice once it's been lying in sauce). Put on other toppings that can stand up to high heat (not basil).

With potholder, carefully pull parchment paper off cutting board into hot oven on top of hot inverted baking sheet. Bake for 8 minutes. (Give or take a minute or two depending on hot hot your oven is and thickness/wetness of your pizza and toppings). Goal is spotty brown on the bottom. When done pull parchment paper (singed but intact) back onto cutting board. Throw away parchment paper. Top pizza with salt, pepper, oregano, basil, a few drops of olive oil. Cut into slices and serve. Repeat with 2nd pizza if desired.

Can this possibly be real?

http://www.tiddybearcomfortstrap.com/index.html

ruts

AUTOBIOGRAPHY IN FIVE SHORT CHAPTERS
by Portia Nelson

I

I walk down the street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk
I fall in.
I am lost ... I am helpless.
It isn't my fault.
It takes me forever to find a way out.

II

I walk down the same street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.
I pretend I don't see it.
I fall in again.
I can't believe I am in the same place
but, it isn't my fault.
It still takes a long time to get out.

III

I walk down the same street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.
I see it is there.
I still fall in ... it's a habit.
my eyes are open
I know where I am.
It is my fault.
I get out immediately.

IV

I walk down the same street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.
I walk around it.

V

I walk down another street.

Hidden restaurant gems near me (beta)

Yats' New Orleans Original Po Boys. 24th & Utah, inside Jack's. Delicious Po Boys & Gumbo. Try the corn macque choux! Food served until 9:30.

Old Jerusalem. Delicious middle-eastern food. Amazing hummus, lentil soup, etc. Delivery!

Panchito's #3. Great $2 pupusas, great upscale dishes, great sangria!

Cooking Show with Beatbox

I freaking love this. No idea who this guy is, but combines two of my favorite things.