Wednesday, December 10, 2008

"Water Resistant 50 Meters" My Butt

As an unsupervised postdoctoral researcher, it can sometimes be tough to self-motivate. To help maintain a productive and efficient schedule, I decided to invest in a wristwatch. So when I was in West Marine last week I picked up a Timex 1440. I checked to make sure it was water resistant, and it was, to 50 meters depth, supposedly.
Well, I went windsurfing today and the dang thing got water in it. Now it's chirping like an epileptic sparrow and flashing nonsensical messages in an alien language.

Turns out "Water Resistant 50 M" watches can tolerate a static pressure equal to 50 m depth for 1 hour, but are actually not suitable for swimming at ANY depth, because the real-life forces experienced by a watch on a wrist are much worse than what it feels when motionless in a pressure chamber. Here's the the industry standards for water resistance, along with the real meaning, from wikipedia.

Water Resistant 30 m or 50 m - Ok for fishing, but not for swimming
Water Resistant 100 m - Ok for swimming, but not for "serious surface water sports", i.e. windsurfing
Water Resistant 200 m - Ok for anything besides scuba diving*

*There are other standards for scuba watches, but I'm not going to get into those.

Anyway, the point of my rant is that I think it's an evil marketing trick to display the misleading test rating (i.e. WR50M) on a watch, instead of its actual water resistance. I know they probably mention the practical usage recommendations in the fine print, but nobody reads that. It has to be something intuitive, right on the label. Any ideas?

Thursday, December 4, 2008

Wednesday, December 3, 2008

Death Race, Fort Lauderdale

**UPDATE - The death race has been postponed until next weekend, December 13-14.**

Original post-

Windsurf racing is fun because it involves individual, man-vs-wild type challenges in addition to the peer-to-peer competition you have in all sports. Sometimes just finishing a race is victory enough, even if you place last.

I think that will be the case in the 2008 Inlet to Inlet Race taking place next weekend in Fort Lauderdale.

It's a 23 mile round trip from Port Everglades Inlet to Hillsboro Inlet, as the seagull flies. As the windsurf tacks, it could be significantly farther, depending on the wind direction. Also, the sailing will be way the heck out in the ocean, in offshore winds, with the competitors perhaps not even within sight of one and other. We're all supposed to bring cell phones in waterproof cases in case we can't finish and have to be picked up from the beach somewhere in no-mans land, or worse, break down and can't even get to shore.
The forecast is for 5-10 knots NW on Saturday and 10-15 knots NW on Sunday, so the race will probably be held Sunday with Saturday as a practice. I'll ride my Kona ONE longboard with a 7.8 meter squared sail. I think most of the other competitors will be on formula boards, so if the wind holds up they will finish much sooner than me. The record course time, set by race organizer Ron Kern, is 1:12 - 21 mph average speed! This year it will probably take everyone a lot longer.

Saturday, November 29, 2008

Please Be Real

**UPDATE - It wasn't real. The actual wind was only around 15 mph and I was seriously underpowered on a 5.8. (Shoulda rigged the 6.6). Oh, well. At least I got wet and got some excercise before the long drive from SC back to FL.**

-Original post-

This is tomorrow's wind forecast for the Edisto Island, South Carolina area. Yellow is good, orange is great, red is radical, and maroon is EPIC:
I hope it comes true. I've had a wonderful time visiting relatives, walking on the beach, and eating good food here during this Thanksgiving vacation, but a sweet windsurf session would really cap things off. Stay tuned...

Monday, November 24, 2008

Dating Etiquette: Say "No" or Say Nothing?

**EDIT- I'm reading this in 2026 as go through my old posts to rehost photos. I don't think my rules adequately accounted for the serious and highly-asymmetrical personal safety risks involved in dating. Women face a high risk of stalking, violence, etc. in dating, and minimizing that risk is always more imporant than politeness.**
"If you've only been out with her once or twice, you're not really dating, so you don't have to break up. It's like, understood when you just don't call anymore."

That was the BAD ADVICE someone gave me in college. I followed it by ceasing to call a girl after our second so-so date. Then I happily went about my business, delighted with how simple and easy the not-breaking-up had been...

...until about a month later when I ended up seated near the girl at a play on campus. I was with another date. The original girl saw us and didn't say anything, but looked miserable. When the lights came on after the show her face was flushed with tears and she hustled out of the auditorium. All of a sudden I realized what a jerk I'd been to leave her hanging. Though my not-calling had eventually conveyed that I wasn't interested, it had needlessly put the the girl through a prolonged period of distress. I can imagine her initial hopefulness slowly tainted with the anxiety of waiting - "maybe he'll call tonight... maybe tomorrow...", then sinking into ugly disappointment and hurt with the realization she'd been rejected in the most callous way. :(

Perhaps through the mystical justice of karma, I have since been on the receiving end of the "left hanging" treatment innumerable times. I think I have paid my dues in disappointment enough now to be able to write the following guide:

When to Say "No" and When to Say Nothing

Situation #1: You are politely propositioned in person, over the phone, or in an email or text message.
Best solution: Say "no" in a clear and polite manner.
Risky solution: Make up a false excuse like "I'm already seeing someone". This is tempting for people averse to conflict because it can dodge or delay the social awkwardness of rejecting and being rejected. Unfortunately, it can lead to even greater awkwardness and angst later if more lies are required and / or the truth seeps out. So it's usually better to give a truthful "no" to begin with.
Rude solution: Ignore the person, or reply in a cruel or condescending way.
Fake-nice solution: Give out your number or email as if you are interested, but then make up excuses or don't answer back when they contact you later. This can seem nicer than saying no because it avoids the initial awkwardness, but it's actually much worse because it gets the person's hopes up then prolongs the disappointment / rejection / frustration period.

Situation #2: You are politely propositioned for a date or conversation by a previously unknown person via an Internet dating service.
Best solution: Say "no" in a clear and polite manner.
Ok solution: Ignore the request. This would be rude in real life, but it's acceptable on internet dating services, where attractive women tend to get too many requests to answer adequately, and men tend to mass-email requests to dozens of women with relatively little hope little hope riding on any particular individual.
Rude solution: Respond with a harsh evaluation of the person's flaws and deficiencies.

Situation #3: You are politely propositioned for a date by someone with whom you have previously conversed via an Internet dating service.
Solutions: Same as #2, except that ignoring the request is no longer "ok" because it violates the precedent of civil discourse set by your earlier exchanges. You are now obligated to say "no".

Situation #4: You are propositioned in a rude or vulgar way, in any venue.
Best solution: Ignore, escape, report.
Ok solution: Confront, denounce.
Rude solution: Assault.

Situation #5: You make a date with a person, but change your mind or find something else you'd rather do.
Best solution: Call the person asap and tell him or her in a nice way that you've decided to cancel the date and are no longer interested in pursuing a relationship.
Risky solution: Wait until the person contacts you before before giving your "no thanks". This is sketchy because the person you made the date with may think the date is firmly set and therefore not think they need to contact you again beforehand.
Rude solution: Don't do anything, and ignore all pre-date communication attempts.
Horrible solution: Imply during your last communication that the date is still on, but then don't show, leaving the person literally "stood up".

Situation #6: You've been on at least one date with someone, and decide you don't want to date him or her anymore. The person you've been dating hasn't done anything horribly wrong - he or she just isn't your type.
Best solution: Politely and clearly explain your intention to cease dating.
Risky solution: Maintain communication, but subtly move the person into the "friend zone". (Note- this only works in the early stages of a relationship, and you shouldn't try it unless you really do want a friendship with the person.)
Rude solution: Cease contact inexplicably, or break up in a nasty way.

Situation #7: You've already said no but the person keeps bugging you, or you've broken up with someone, but he or she keeps clinging to the hope of romantic reinstatement to the extent that platonic communication is awkward or impossible.
Best solution: In this case, ignoring may be the only solution that works, because too much discussion around "no" will just exacerbate an obsession.

Hope that clears things up.

Saturday, November 22, 2008

The Most Officious Nautical Authority Figures

Thanks to all who responded to the "Worst Company at the Beach" poll. The final results were...

1st Worst: Jetskiers - 42% of votes
2nd Worst: Kiteboarders - 33% of votes
3rd Worst: Fishermen - 16% of votes
4th Worst: Surfers - 9% of votes
5th Worst: Beach goers / Looky Loos - 3% of votes
Least Worst: Windsurfers - 1% of votes

I've just posted a new poll with a similar theme. This time, though, it's not evaluating the recreational users of the water, but rather the authority figures who supervise us. These folks are charged with protecting us from each other, the harsh environment, and our own stupidity. Yet sometimes it seems they are only protecting their own sense of self-imporance. Which group is the most "officious"?

It it Lifeguards? (Video Funnyness Grade = C+)


Park Rangers? (Video Funnyness Grade = B+)


Marine or Beach Police? (Video Funnyness Grade = D+)


Or is it the Coast Guard (aka the Coasties)? (Video Funnyness Grade = F+)


The poll is in the sidebar.

Friday, November 21, 2008

World's Longest Windsurfing Board

The excesses of the 1980s extended to the windsurfing arena, apparently...



Thanks to Clyde from the East Central Florida Windsurfing group for sharing the link.