Today I set a personal record at #NPSF PR-Wednesday. 33:55 — 2:07 faster.
I don’t remember feeling this miserable during a PR-Wednesday workout in a long time.
But first the times:
* 2:07 faster than my previous PR-Wednesday record 36:02 (2015-02-25) * 1:30 faster than my course record 35:25 (2015-01-13, before the course became our PR-Wednesday workout)
The previous two months I did both the 5:30 & 6:30 PR-Wednesday workouts as well as the “tweeners” in-between workout. Those times: tantek.com/2015/084/t1/npsf-double-pr-wednesday Feb: 36:02 & 36:15 Mar: 38:32 & 37:04
Since February of this year, the NPSF Alta Plaza PR-Wednesday workout has consisted of:
1. start at the bottom of the steps on Pierce. 2. run a clockwise lap around the park 3. run up steps to the flat area between the playground & tennis courts 4. 10 burpees 5. run back down the steps 6. repeat 2-5 two more times 7. repeat 2-3.
For a total of 4 laps, 30 burpees, ??? steps, as fast as you can.
Things I did differently beforehand for this morning:
* Last night: iced my knees — no pain, just a little swollen from Tuesday track (ttk.me/t4at1) * 5:49 put on my newer racing ASICs instead of old training pair or Nike Structure 18s. * 5:50 rungang (warmup run ~2 miles) to 6:30 @Nov_Project_SF instead of driving to doubling-up 5:30 & 6:30. * ~6:15 downed a Starbucks single espresso on the run to Alta Plaza (having had nothing to eat at home but a couple of chewable vitamin Cs).
During the PR workout this morning, there were three things that I distinctly remember doing differently, and feeling more mentally and physically miserable about.
1. Ran (no walking) up the entire West side hill (first time) on lap 1, legs shaking at the top, thinking, I'm not even half a lap in yet.
2. Second time up the steps, I raced them hard two at a time to the top (thanks to a serendipitous music boost), and then almost felt like throwing up while doing burpees after. Actually felt that during all subsequent burpees.
3. Third lap, on the North side downhill, sprinted to the point of losing my breath (was inspired to pass Gil and Jorge on the downhill, each on their fourth lap, who then passed me back on the East side downhill when I had trouble breathing & running at the same time).
4. Not what I did, but what a friend did for me: Fourth lap, my friend Matt Schaar ran with me (he’d finished his workout already), verbally encouraging me and anyone else nearby the whole way.
I’ve said it before (ttk.me/b/4Yy2) and I’ll say it again (ttk.me/b/4_n1), this is an incredibly positive, inspiring, and supportive group to run and workout with.
However, the entire workout I felt like I was going either slower or no faster than before. I felt like I was having an off day. A miserable off day. But stubbornly I wasn’t going to give up. Instead, I pushed harder to just get it over with. And ended up going faster.
I should emphasize, none of this involved any kind of pain threshold (as far as I remember). No knee pain nor ankle pain. (Well maybe a bit of suppressing a lingering sidecramp from my Sunday 7 mile trail run).
Apparently it was all about pushing myself further into both psychological and physical discomfort than I had before on a PR day.
It’s going to be interesting facing that next month, when I know that that’s what it’s going to take to both go that fast, and to have even a chance of PRing again.
Fortunately I have a different race focus before then:
Just 18 days til Bay to Breakers (2015-05-17) - where I’ll have a different mental challenge.
Last year I cut over 16 minutes (ttk.me/t4W81) from my B2B time (thanks to six months of NovemberProject). This year I've had twelve more months of NP and I honestly have no idea what is a reasonable expectation.
I’ve had some thoughts, like cut five minutes, get a sub-1:10 but I’m trying hard to focus and concentrate on just beating last year’s time and giving it all I’ve got, finishing with the knowledge of having done so.
#NPSF #trackattack plan: 400 800 2x1600 800 400 abs I did: 800 2x1600 800 400 abs 400 Woke up late at 5:40 without my alarm because its sound was fully muted, so I warmed up on the jog to the track, and missed the first 400 for a pit stop. Made up for it afterwards.
Also it was a much colder than expected morning. Like hurt your lungs cold when you inhale too deep. They didn’t feel warmed up until after the second 1600.
Still, made good times according to Nike+ Running so I’ll take it.
Another solid track workout in the books. I’m counting this as having done the whole thing even though I swapped the first 400 to after abs.
Balancing and breathing in that moment, I felt incredibly grateful for * Being able to actually run non-stop from home up to Twin Peaks (even if @thegreenk pulled over and shuttled me up the last little bit) and still breathe * The incredible @Nov_Project_SF community that #justshowup — the energy and inspiration everyone brings makes us all go farther faster longer stronger * Watching the sunrise on a beautiful San Francisco morning * Running/hiking for another 30 minutes (including all of what I skipped the first time up) - three repeats * Being able to hold myself up with just my hands — strong enough to balance a plank (improved mayurasana (yoga peacock pose) form, with more to improve) after all that.
You think you’re ok, at peace, and then a memory hits you.
Last time you drove through Vegas, stopping in artificially glowing darkness only for fuel, Starbucks, and to switch drivers to finish the last leg of a half-cross-country-road-trip before midnight.
You honestly thought, and felt, that despite twists and turns, like driving those roads, you were working together towards something, when actually you were just part of a transition, even if neither of you knew it at the time. Or you want to believe that at least, in good, honest intentions.
Things didn’t work out, and there's no one to blame because everyone was honest, with themselves, with their feelings, with each other. And respectful. No wrong was done so there is nothing to forgive, nothing to ask forgiveness for.
And yet the feelings linger. The feelings not of loss, no those were months ago, but the feelings of what could have been. Not expectations, but hopes. Not imagined, but actively worked.
Then you exhale, inhale, and keep going with your yoga class, figuring no one will notice a tear or two streaming down your face mixing with your sweat.
bicycled 30+ miles solo (incl. two ~10mi stints) today, more than ever. focusing on one thing (cheering), accomplished something else much harder that I would have otherwise not attempted directly.
#indieweb: “As writers, we don’t need companies like Medium to tell us how to use the web. Or define openness and democracy. Or tell us what’s a ‘waste of [our] time’ and what’s not. Or determine how and where readers experience our work. We need to decide those things for ourselves.”
#trackattack is back! did a 400 warmup 800 800 800 800 4x200, abs workout: warmup 800 1600 800 1600 4x200, abs
Reopening of Kezar Stadium has definitely brought a bigger crowd. We had 29 people today.
Though I need to build back up to doing the full track workout, I did have a couple of minor personal achievements this morning.
During part of the second 1600, when I was starting my 800, I managed to draft Jeff drafting Andy Cochrane for 200m (half a lap). Though Andy is still in recovery mode he's still ridiculously fast from my perspective. Being able to "keep up" with Andy, even for just a half a lap, even when he was "taking it easy", and in the middle of a 1600, felt like doing the impossible, and emboldened me to push harder on average in my other runs, including...
On the second 200 I made sure to take-off exactly when Kate said go. As I exited the turn onto the back straight, I started kicking farther back & up, and managed to pass & finish that 200 ahead of a couple of people who are usually much faster than me. I could barely breathe afterwards.
Thanks @SandHawke for hosting @IndieWebCamp, @dshanske for remote participation setup, and @dissolve333 especially for organizing the whole thing overall including getting sponsors for food, setting it all up, and keeping things running smoothly in general!
IndieWebCamp Cambridge 2015 is over. Having finished their ice cream and sorbet while sitting on a couch at Toscanini’s watching it snow, the topics of sameAs, reuse, and general semantics leads to a mention of Dublin Core Application Profiles.
Is Replaced By: Not applicable, wait, isn’t that supposed to be an inverse relationship?
A:
I’m used to this shit.
T:
(nods, clicks forward, starts scrolling, reading)
T:
We decide that the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) meet our needs. - I’m not sure the rest of the world would agree.
A:
No surprises there.
T:
The person has a name, but we want to record the forename and family name separately rather than as a single string. DCMI Metadata Terms has no such properties, so we will take the properties foaf:firstName and foaf:family_name
T:
Wait what? Not "given-name" and "family-name"? Nor "first-name" and "last-name" but "firstName" and "family_name"?!?
A:
Clearly it wasn’t proofread.
T:
But it’s in the following table too. foaf:firstName / foaf:family_name
A:
At least it’s internally consistent.
A:
Oh, this is really depressing.
A:
Did they even read the FOAF spec or did they just hear a rumour?
First day of Spring 2015 #IndieWebCamp@MIT wrapped. Snow in Cambridge. Free wifi & power @Tosci. And ice cream. But that’s not free. Except for the samples.
to MIT for @W3C Social Web WG, @IndieWebCamp! Let’s focus on live user-centric demos only, no architecture astronomy plumbing demos, no video playback. Live demos with real websites with real content (no Lorem Ipsum) and real URLs / permalinks that anyone can load, browse, verify for themselves.
A week ago I woke up at ~6:15 in Big Basin to @LaurBreu shouting “Time to get up for morning run!”. It was significantly colder than any recent morning in San Francisco. I put on three layers and joined about a half dozen other fellow #NPSF campers; I think we finally got going about 6:45. When I returned to camp I had completed my longest trail run to date, most of it solo.
We ran down to the park headquarters, checked out the trail options, and quickly decided on Berry Creek Falls, whick seemed about another 4.5 miles away. There was a brief debate about whether to do a full 9 mile loop or run back after a halfway point.
Everyone started down the trail at a fast clip. In less than half a mile I had lost sight of them. After about a mile, I saw one friend come back, she'd noted beforehand that she had to cut short for another engagement. Not long after I saw another friend walking back, apparently having twisted her ankle running. After that I didn’t see anyone else on the trail.
I kept running, stopping a few times to take photos. After making it about 3/4 of the way to Berry Creek Falls, I kept expecting to see the rest of the group running back. With just 1 mile to go I decided to keep going all the way to the falls. Made it to a bench with a beautiful view of the falls, yet it looked like I could get closer.
The trail meandered downhill closer to the creek eventually to a large fallen tree. To my right was a large boulder embedded in the ground that looked too slippery to descend down to the flowing water.
I crossed the creek with the fallen tree as bridge. On the other side I had to jump down to another fallen tree, then down to the creekbank where the path continued back towards the falls. Hiking up I finally got close enough for a better view.
At this point I had no idea where everyone else had gone. Last I had heard the plan was to run to the falls and run back. Since I was on my own, and after all the wandering about 5 miles away from the park headquarters, I decided the best option was to run back the way I came.
I ran back to the fallen tree. But this time I crossed the rocks in the stream to the large boulder on the other side. At about a 60 degree incline, with plenty of ridges to grab, and chips to dig my feet into, I climbed up the boulder without difficulty.
On the run back the layers came off until I was running in a tshirt and sweatpants, the rest tied around my waist.
I’d never run this far by myself, in a new place, miles away from help or other resources. No headphones, no network contact. A lot of time to just think, run, and focus. Focus on running, on keeping a good pace, and regular breathing.
It was good to see landmarks that I had passed on the way in. I’d counted three trail markers, and as I passed each one on the way back I sipped just that much from the remaining water bottle strapped to my waist.
About halfway back I finally started to see people coming the other way. Hikers. With jackets, backpacks, and hats.
As we exchanged good mornings and they stopped to stand back as I ran by, I couldn't help but think, I used to be you, now I'm this.
I reached the trail head at park headquarters, checked a map for the road back to the camp, and ran uphill the rest of the way.
The trail was estimated to take ~6 hours. I ran ~11 miles from camp to the waterfall and back in under 2.5 hours.
At some point in the last few months apparently I changed from a hiker to a trail runner. It felt more comfortable, and was more fun, to run the trail than walk it.
Pages that are empty without JS: dead to history (archive-org), unreliable for search results (despite any search engine claims of JS support, check it yourself), and thus ignorable. No need to waste time reading or responding.
Also known as, if it’s not curlable, it’s not on the web.
Because in 10 years nothing you built today that depends on JS for the content will be available, visible, or archived anywhere on the web.
All your fancy front-end-JS-required frameworks are dead to history, a mere evolutionary blip in web app development practices. Perhaps they provided interesting ephemeral prototypes, nothing more.
And @W3C needs a Security (#s6y) group that reviews all specs, like #i18n & #a11y (WAI) groups do. cc: @bcrypt @W3CAB
Which kicked off quite a conversation on Twitter (18 replies shown on load, 53 more dynamically upon scrolling if various scripts are able to load & execute).
Security & Privacy Reviews
Buried among those replies was one particularly constructive, if understated, reply from Mike West:
A good set of questions (even if incomplete) to answer in a self-review of a specification is an excellent start towards building a culture of reviewing security & privacy features of web standards.
While self-reviews are a good start, and will hopefully catch (or indicate the unsureness about) some security and/or privacy issues, I do still think we need a security group, made up of those more experienced in web security and privacy concerns, to review all specifications before they advance to being standards.
Such expert reviews could also be done continuously for "living" specifications, where a security review of a specification could be published as of a certain revision (snapshot) of a living specification, which then hopefully could be incrementally updated along with updates to the spec itself.
Specification Section for Security & Privacy Considerations
In follow-up email Mike asked for feedback on specifics regarding the questionnaire which I provided as a braindump email reply, and offered to also submit as a pull request as well. After checking with Yan, who was also on the email, I decided to go ahead and do so. After non-trivially expanding a section, very likely beyond its original intent and scope (meta-ironically so), it seemed more appropriate to at least blog it in addition to a pull request.
Does this specification have a "Security Considerations" and "Privacy Considerations" section?
Rather than the brief two sentence paragraph starting with Not every feature has security or privacy impacts, which I think deserves a better reframing, I've submitted the below replacement text (after the heading) as a pull request.
Reducing Security Surface Towards Minimum Viability
Unless proven otherwise, every feature has potential security and/or privacy impacts.
Documenting the various concerns that have cropped up in one form or another is a good way to help implementers and authors understand the risks that a feature presents, and ensure that adequate mitigations are in place.
If it seems like a feature does not have security or privacy impacts,
then say so inline in the spec section for that feature:
There are no known security or privacy impacts of this feature.
Saying so explicitly in the specification serves several purposes:
Shows that a spec author/editor has possibly considered
(hopefully not just copy/pasted) whether there are such impacts.
Provides some sense of confidence that there are no such impacts.
Challenges security and privacy minded individuals to
think of and find even the potential for such impacts.
Demonstrates the spec author/editor's receptivity to
feedback about such impacts.
The easiest way to mitigate potential negative security or privacy
impacts of a feature, and even discussing the possibility,
is to drop the feature.
Every feature in a spec should be considered guilty
(of harming security and/or privacy) until proven otherwise.
Every specification should seek to be as small as possible,
even if only for the reasons of reducing and minimizing
security/privacy attack surface(s).
By doing so we can reduce the overall security (and privacy) attack surface
of not only a particular feature, but of a module (related set of features),
a specification, and the overall web platform.
Ideally this is one of many motivations to reduce each of those to the minimum viable:
Minimum viable feature:
cut/drop values, options, or optional aspects.
Minimum viable web format/protocol/API:
cut/drop a module, or even just one feature.
Minimum viable web platform:
Cut/drop/obsolete entire specification(s).
Questions and Challenges
The above text expresses a specific opinion and perspective about not only web security, web standards, but goals and ideals for the web platform as whole. In some ways it raises more questions than answers.
How do you determine minimum viability?
How do you incentivize (beyond security & privacy) the simplification and minimizing of web platform features?
How do we confront the various counter-incentives?
Or rather:
How do we document and cope with the numerous incentives for complexity and obfuscation that come from so many sources (some mentioned in that Twitter thread) that seem in total insurmountable?
No easy answers here. Perhaps material for more posts on the subject.
Known Pro is here! https://withknown.com/pro/ Congrats @benwerd@erinjo! #indieweb @Withknown’s superior interoperability, mobile web support, user experience, and integration with existing silos, is far beyond any other content publishing system, independent or otherwise in existence. And it’s open source as well.
t
