buyAmerican's Xanga

You Really Should Turn On Gmail's SSL Right Now

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:20:29 GMT

Here's why: If you don't, all your information is exchanged as plain text for anyone sufficiently interested to read—including passwords.

Actually, no matter what Web site you are using to exchange personal or sensitive information—and especially for e-mail services like Gmail—you should check to make sure it has Secure Socket Layers (SSL) enabled. You can tell by looking for the https prefix to the URL, known as a URI scheme.

But if you use Gmail's Web interface, you really should turn on SSL right now, because according to the folks over at Hacking Truths, a reverse engineer in the Bay Area will be releasing to the public in two weeks a Gmail hacking tool that takes advantage of accounts that do not have SSL enabled.

Here are instructions to turn on Gmail's SSL feature, courtesy of Vincent Mo.

1. Click "Settings" in the top right corner of Gmail
2. Scroll to the bottom and select "Always use https"
3. Click "Save Changes"

Houston, we have knock-off...

Mon, 04 Aug 2008 20:05:26 GMT

The Chinese government has notoriously looked the other way while Chinese companies knock-off designs for all kinds of things from foreign companies. Everything from cars and trucks to clothes and accessories are copied and slightly modified for sale as a Chinese alternative to the genuine article. So somehow it's not all that surprising to find a certain familiarity to the Chinese National Space Administration's logo...

I don't suppose someone working for the CNSA watches Star Trek, do you? For the benefit of those who don't, here are the seal and emblem for the fictional United Federation of Planets, and Starfleet, the Federation's military and space exploration arm.

Top Tier Gas

Sat, 02 Aug 2008 22:45:05 GMT

You may have noticed this seal on the gas pump the last time you bought gas.

In a certain sense the fuel that you buy at the gas station is all pretty much the same. Whether it comes from Chevron, Shell, or 7-11, the fuel all originates from the same refineries. What is different between gasoline brands is not the gasoline, but the "additive package." Every gasoline is required to have additives. Among these additives are chemicals which help the gasoline burn cleaner to meet Federal and State emissions standards (e.g., Ethanol), and detergents which help reduce carbon deposits from your engine's fuel injectors and valves. This additive package changes from one season to another, and from one region of the country to another, because weather significantly affects how completely gasoline burns.

The type and amount of additives added to a particular mixture of gasoline varies significantly from one brand to another. And in that sense, the fuel you buy at the gas station is very different from one brand to another. In fact, in 2004, several major automakers decided that the minimum Federal detergency standards for gasoline were insufficient. They had noticed that fuel system warranty problems were clustered in certain regions and during certain times of the year, and they traced the problem back to fuel quality. You see, insufficient amounts of detergent in gasoline leads to carbon build-up on fuel injectors and valves, which in turn results in poor fuel economy and emissions. But too much detergent or poor quality additives lead to those chemicals sticking to the valves and injectors. So GM, BMW, Volkswagen, Honda and Toyota got together to define a new standard for gasoline detergency and additive quality. The standard they came up with is called TOP TIER Detergent Gasoline. They believe this standard for higher quality fuel will contribute to greater longevity and reliability. Unlike Federal and State standards for gasoline detergency, however, the TOP TIER standard is a voluntary one. Gas companies are free to conform to the standard or not. But those which do are required to certify all grades of gas that they sell (not just Premium) as meeting the standard.

Some gas stations which meet the standard will display the TOP TIER seal (above) on their gas pumps. Others may not. So how do you know which stations meet the TOP TIER standard? There is a list of certified retailers that is kept up to date on the TOP TIER Gas website. Here is the list as it stands today:

QuikTrip
Chevron
Texaco
MFA Oil Co.
Conoco
Phillips 66
Union 76
Entec Stations
Shell
The Somerset Refinery, Inc.
Kwik Trip / Kwik Star
Aloha Petroleum
Tri-Par Oil Co.
Turkey Hill Minit Markets
Mileage Stations

There are some Canadian counterparts to some of the brands that are also on the list. It's interesting that several small-name brands that you would not expect to be on the list, actually are. And several big-name brands, like Exxon and Mobil, which you would expect to be on the list actually are not. In the four years that I've been tracking this list, the list has grown significantly. But interestingly enough, some stations will be on the list for a while and then disappear. So check back every now and then. The most consistent brands have been Chevron, Texaco, Conoco, Phillips 66, Union 76, and Shell. Maybe it's coincidental, but those brands also happen to be the ones that stand-out in my mind as heavily advertising the detergency of their gasolines—Techron (Chevron-Texaco), PROclean (Conoco-Phillips), and V-Power (Royal Dutch Shell).

*Conoco-Phillips owns the Phillips 66 and Union 76 brands; and although Shell only labels its Premium and Diesel fuels as "V-Power," the detergency of all grades of Shell gasoline are the same.

For more information about TOP TIER Detergent Gasoline, check out the following articles:

Car and Driver
CarTalk Column

Toyota STEALS the show... again

Mon, 07 Jul 2008 20:36:07 GMT

Today, a Japanese newspaper is reporting Toyota will begin including solar panels on the roofs of some Prius models to run the A/C while the car is off and provide extra charging assist. That sounded suspiciously similar to a system that Aptera, a California based alternative-fuel-vehicle company, proposed a couple of years ago. But, of course, since Toyota is already on the market in volume, this is all most people will hear about. Toyota will once again get lauded, while Aptera will get no mention or credit at all. It frustrates me to no end that Toyota is perceived as the "green technology" leader when in reality their products are no more technologically advanced or "green" than anyone else's--and their product line includes as many gas-guzzling large trucks and SUVs as any American manufacturer. They are a "green tech" leader only in the sense that they know how to market a product better than anyone else.

The "green technology" saga has been this way since the beginning of the hybrid car, actually. GM, Ford, Honda, and Toyota all saw the need for hybrid vehicle development in the 1990's and all three began working on solutions.

Ford and Toyota ended up taking very similar approaches and producing very similar packages: the Ford Escape Hybrid and Toyota Prius. Unfortunately, Toyota was first to market, which means they got to build a reputation for being a hybrid leader. More important, Toyota was first to the Patent Office on about 20 key components to the series-parallel hybrid drivetrain (a.k.a. "full hybrid" or "strong hybrid"). Ford won a few important patents too, and to make sure everything was on the up-and-up Ford and Toyota paid each other for use of one another's patents, even though both companies developed their entire systems in-house and independently. The press got wind of this and painted it as "Ford Buys Toyota Hybrid Technology." This, of course, makes it seem like Toyota is a technological marvel, while Ford can't keep up and so it buys the technology from the competition instead. Despite a press release that tried to clear things up, people in the press (even folks like MotorTrend, Car and Driver, and Consumer Reports) still report that the hybrid system in the Ford Escape is "licensed" from Toyota. That may be technically correct, but completely fails to convey the true story behind the situation.

GM and Honda also took remarkably similar approaches to their hybrid systems, but with vastly different applications: GM's early large pick-up truck hybrids and Honda's Insight, Civic, and Accord hybrids. Both are parallel hybrid systems (a.k.a. "mild hybrids") which use a small electric motor to assist the gas engine and recharge the batteries. Because they use smaller electric motors and smaller battery packs, these systems cannot drive the car on electric power alone and do not return as high fuel mileage as series-parallel hybrids. However, since Honda's are installed in smaller, lighter cars, and because again they were first-to-market, Honda's hybrid systems are thought of as competitive with Toyotas despite the vast technological differences. Meanwhile, GM's hybrid systems are not seen as credible because they are installed on large SUVs and trucks, where the same percentage-increase in fuel economy yields much less impressive mileage numbers. I've even heard someone refer to them as "fake hybrids" refuse to drop the moniker even after I explained the situation. To make things even more frustrating, however, GM has actually been on the leading edge of "dual-mode" series-parallel hybrids for as long as Ford and Toyota have, and has better power control systems than either. The only problem is one of perception, since GM's "dual-mode" hybrids have been in operation mostly on municipal city buses (Seattle, Las Vegas, Dresden [Germany], and 33 other cities worldwide) and only recently have been installed in passenger vehicles (Chevy Tahoe, GMC Yukon).

If anything, GM's two pronged approach of making milder hybrids available to more people at lower price points, and to putting the strongest hybrid assistance into the largest vehicles first, is probably the more environmentally friendly. Just think about it. A parallel-series hybrid system will improve a vehicle's gas mileage by about 25-40%. Is it better for the environment for a small car like the Toyota Prius to go from roughly 35 MPG to 50 MPG, or for an SUV like the Chevy Tahoe to go from 17 MPG to 24 MPG? It may look more impressive to be getting 50 MPG, but in the long run savings resulting from improving the fuel mileage of the Tahoe will be nearly double that of the Prius (see below for calculations). The same can be said on an even larger scale with hybrid buses. Over the service life of King County Metro's 235 hybrid buses, they will reduces fuel consumption equivalent to over 500,000 small hybrid cars. (To put this into perspective, Toyota announced in November of 2007 that it had sold it's 510,000th Prius in the U.S., after 7 years on the market. In May of 2008 Toyota announced it had sold its 1 millionth Prius worldwide, after 11 years of worldwide availability. At about the same time, GM announced it had sold it's 1,000th hybrid bus after 5 years on the market... the equivalent in reduction of gas consumption of 2.1 million small hybrid cars.)

And all of that says nothing about technologies to reduce gas consumption on more widely available non-hybrid vehicles through things like gasoline direct injection technology; the availability of a wider range of alternative fuel options, like diesel and E85/ethanol; or the pioneering work that GM has done on hydrogen fuel cell technology. I will be sad and frustrated, but not the least bit surprised, if I discover in a few years that Honda gets all the credit for being a hydrogen fuel cell leader while GM gets little if any mention, despite the fact that today the two companies are neck and neck when it comes to the hydrogen front--each with different strengths and weaknesses. The Japanese risk very little and therefore invent very little. But they wait for others to shoulder the risk, then refine and market the new technologies, getting the credit for being technology leaders. It's frustrating to no end. If time permits, I may start a series of posts highlighting American green technology leadership... but even if I can't do that, I hope this post will cause some of you to take off the green-colored lenses when you look at Toyota.

[edit - 7/8/08 10:51 AM] I knew this had to be the case! Someone else has been offering solar panels on the roof of their cars since 1999! The Audi A8 Solar Panel Sunroof is an option that runs the interior fan while the car is parked to keep it cool. I wonder why no one bothered to mention this in their news articles touting Toyota's "greenness"? Incidentally, it is worth noting that a solar panel small enough to fit on the roof of a car would not provide more than about 10% of the energy needed to run an air conditioning compressor. So it seems like the best it can do is either run the fan or trickle-charge the battery while the car is parked.

Monday, July 07, 2008

Mon, 07 Jul 2008 20:24:00 GMT

In case you were doubtful about the claim in the above post that a hybrid SUV would save more fuel than a hybrid compact car, here are the numbers. This is based on the assumption that the driver will drive the same number of miles every year regardless of which vehicle he is driving. The calculations are based on 10,000 miles per year.

A Compact Car getting 35 MPG average will consume 285.7 gallons of gas.
A Prius Hybrid getting 50 MPG average will consumer 200.0 gallons of gas.

That's a total savings of 85.7 gallons of gas over 1 year. Not bad.

A normal Chevy Tahoe getting 17 MPG average will consume 588.2 gallons of gas.
A Chevy Tahoe Hybrid getting 24 MPG average will consume 416.7 gallons of gas.

That's a total savings of 171.5 gallons of gas over 1 year. More than double the savings of the compact hybrid.

Lest you be tempted to compare the Prius to a normal Tahoe, consider that a person who buys a Tahoe is very unlikely to buy a Prius and vice versa. If you could convince a large SUV driver to step down to a compact car, you could save tons of fuel even without a hybrid system.

Happy Independence Day!

Fri, 04 Jul 2008 17:40:30 GMT

Today we celebrate the most important American holiday: The Fourth of July. There will be parades, speeches, barbecue, apple pie, and fireworks. The city orchestras and military bands will be out playing patriotic medleys. It'll be a big deal and we'll have a lot of fun. Too often, however, I fear we fail to reflect on what it is that we are celebrating: Our Independence Day.

Independence from what? How you answer that question will determine whether or not you appreciate what is most important. Today we celebrate 232 years of independence from tyranny. We celebrate more than 2 centuries of the a great experiment in individual freedom, representative government, and the citizen accountability of the state. Our Founding Fathers believed freedom and right to vote were worth fighting for; worth sacrificing "our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor." I fear too few of us today would appreciate that. I shudder to think of how many would give up their freedom and their vote for estate, employment, or ease. I wonder if how many of us would really resonate with the words of Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty, or give me death."

I hope you'll spend some time today reflecting on what it is that we celebrate on the Fourth of July. The birth of the greatest nation... not because of her achievements, however impressive they might be, but because of the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. That's what we mean when we say, "God bless the United States of America."

The Declaration of Independence

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Occupational Hazard

Fri, 20 Jun 2008 03:10:40 GMT

People who work in cubicles and coal mining may share a similar occupational hazard: black lung disease. Apparently, some laser printers emit relatively large amounts of toner particles into the air when printing. These toner particles in turn get breathed in by nearby office workers and can stick to and damage their lungs in a manner similar to the way coal dust can stick to and damage coal miners' lungs. According to this article, some 40% of laser printers emit toner dust when printing. It should be noted, however, that historically laser printers have not been linked to any incidents of lung disease.

Here is the TIME Magazine article, "Is Your Printer Making You Sick?"

Think You Pay Too Much For Gas?

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 01:18:33 GMT

I came across this blog on the Los Angeles Times website noting that while Americans are paying a record $4.20/gallon for premium grade gasoline (that's national average; it's more like $4.10 here in Dallas, TX), our European friends are paying far more. Take a look...

Belgium: $9.20
France: $8.80
Germany: $8.93
Italy: $8.93
Netherlands: $9.89
United Kingdom: $8.74
United States: $4.20

Stats are for average Premium gasoline nationwide according to the Energy Information Administration. For average Regular grade gasoline prices, subtract about 25 cents/gallon.

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 01:39:12 GMT

Natalie: Alice is the solution to all ministry problems!

Phenotype Disadvantage

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 19:14:04 GMT

Genetic expression is interesting. One naturally expects a child to have similarities with his parents due to shared genetic information. But how and what part of a person's genetic code gets expressed is clearly influenced by both internal and external factors. Sometimes this can yield unexpected results. For example, consider the exchange between me and a fellow youth worker on Friday...

Nick: My mom was a math major in college.
Nick: Actually, she was a math and computer science double major.
Alice: What happened to you?!