Sometimes, forgetfulness can be a good thing.
My wife was rummaging around in the pantry and found some jars of homemade pickles that have been back there for nearly 3 years. I remember opening some jars from that batch back then and being less than happy with the results. I should have been more patient! These just needed some time to age. The flavors, once sharp and unpleasant, have mellowed. The vinegar dominated everything; now the spices and garlic come through.
I put a few bottles of 2010 Sierra Nevada Celebration Ale in the back of the pantry now. I intend to forget those for a while and see what happens.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
BitTorrent hair pulling
I have been pulling my hair out trying to get my torrent client to make nice-nice with my ATT-UVerse supplied router. Long story short: It was just a bad torrent I was trying to download. (For the record, it wasn't that kind of torrent! I was trying to get a report on gun running, or the lack thereof, into Mexico.)
I don't know how, but the router had a program already using the default port for kTorrent. I just switched kTorrent to another randomly chosen port an we were off to the races.
I don't know how, but the router had a program already using the default port for kTorrent. I just switched kTorrent to another randomly chosen port an we were off to the races.
Friday, February 18, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Caught on tape: Mexican military incursion into the US
A Mexican military vehicle with about a dozen armed men crossed into Texas near Mission. The incursion was caught on tape.
Drunken tweets
Drinking and tweeting is ill advised. C'mon... we all know, even three sheets to the wind, that we're really not as clever drunk as we think at the time. You're just gonna end up deleting something anyway, so don't even bother hitting "post". But this is especially true when you're posting with the boss' Twitter account!
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Talk about confusing
Argentina Confiscates U.S. Air Force Cargo - WSJ.com: The Argentines are apparently POd because Obama won't be stopping to visit their country. I have thought they'd be thanking us for not sending Jughead to them!
Monday, February 14, 2011
This blog
I got to looking at the content of this blog and realized something. I started this as a place for mostly political rants. It's morphed into mostly a blog about beer!
I suppose that one can only take so much of American politics before requiring a drink. It's also important that those of us involved in the struggle to save our nation from the community organizers who would destroy it to occasionally get out and do something fun. We all need to decompress from time to time. If you try to keep your head in this game too long, you wind up on YouTube wearing gold lamé, a Hello Kitty tutu, and ranting about the World Bank stealing your socks. You don't want to be that guy! (Especially if you are a guy!)
What we conservative and libertarian activists do is important, but don't forget to stop and smell the hops.
I suppose that one can only take so much of American politics before requiring a drink. It's also important that those of us involved in the struggle to save our nation from the community organizers who would destroy it to occasionally get out and do something fun. We all need to decompress from time to time. If you try to keep your head in this game too long, you wind up on YouTube wearing gold lamé, a Hello Kitty tutu, and ranting about the World Bank stealing your socks. You don't want to be that guy! (Especially if you are a guy!)
What we conservative and libertarian activists do is important, but don't forget to stop and smell the hops.
C'mon America! We can do better!
This graphic from The Economist shows world drinking patterns...
As you can see, we Americans just don't booze it up as much as the rest of the world!
But seriously...
This actually reflects our heritage as a beer drinking culture as opposed to a wine or spirits drinking culture. 235 years ago, ours was a whisky drinking culture. The influx of German immigrants in the early 19th Century changed that. They brought with them a beer drinking culture that was soon adopted by their new American neighbors. Thus our culture, at least when it comes to alcohol, more closely resembles that of Germany than the Mother Country. (See WHO reports by nation)
As you can see, we Americans just don't booze it up as much as the rest of the world!
But seriously...
This actually reflects our heritage as a beer drinking culture as opposed to a wine or spirits drinking culture. 235 years ago, ours was a whisky drinking culture. The influx of German immigrants in the early 19th Century changed that. They brought with them a beer drinking culture that was soon adopted by their new American neighbors. Thus our culture, at least when it comes to alcohol, more closely resembles that of Germany than the Mother Country. (See WHO reports by nation)
Wednesday, February 09, 2011
A mess avoided
I'm glad that I rigged a blow-off tube...
That's yeast and sanitizing solution pooling in the plastic container. What's bubbling out smells of yeast (of course) and bananas. I'm hoping to pick up more clove and spice flavors as the yeast cools tonight.
That's yeast and sanitizing solution pooling in the plastic container. What's bubbling out smells of yeast (of course) and bananas. I'm hoping to pick up more clove and spice flavors as the yeast cools tonight.
Search Engine Madness!
OK... So perhaps I should have done a search before I named that last video. YouTube's search engine now believes that my beer is somehow related to a Korean pop group. It could be worse, I suppose. It could have mistaken "bubble" for "bobble" and put up links to McDonald's ads from Japan.
Cheesehead Hefeweizen
I was going to brew this up on Sunday, but the game was just too interesting!
But given how long this took to complete, Ale Interrupted may be a better name.
Recipe Specifications
--------------------------
Batch Size: 5.00 gal
Boil Size: 6.00 gal
Estimated OG: 1.051 SG
Estimated Color: 3.6 SRM
Estimated IBU: 8.1 IBU
Brewhouse Efficiency: 75.00 %
Boil Time: 60 Minutes
Ingredients:
------------
Amount Item Type % or IBU
4.50 lb Pale Malt (2 Row) US (2.0 SRM) Grain 50.00 %
4.50 lb Wheat Malt, Ger (2.0 SRM) Grain 50.00 %
0.38 oz Hallertauer [4.20 %] (65 min) Hops 5.9 IBU
0.25 oz Tettnang [4.80 %] (15 min) Hops 2.2 IBU
0.05 tsp Lactic Acid (Mash 60.0 min) Misc
2.50 gm Epsom Salt (MgSO4) (Mash 60.0 min) Misc
2.50 gm Gypsum (Calcium Sulfate) (Mash 60.0 min) Misc
4.00 gm Salt (Mash 60.0 min) Misc
6.50 gal Distilled Water Water
1 Pkgs Hefeweizen Ale (White Labs #WLP300) Yeast-Wheat
Mash Schedule: Decoction Mash, Single
Total Grain Weight: 9.00 lb
----------------------------
Decoction Mash, Single
Step Time Name Description Step Temp
35 min Protein Rest Add 18.00 qt of water at 126.6 F 122.0 F
45 min Saccharification Decoct 7.63 qt of mash and boil it 155.0 F
10 min Mash Out Heat to 168.0 F over 10 min 168.0 F
But given how long this took to complete, Ale Interrupted may be a better name.
Tuesday, February 08, 2011
Hefe Interrupted
I've been brewing all day.
Brewing, however, usually isn't an all day event. I was in the middle of mashing a Hefeweizen when I got called away to a lunch meeting. This is my first attempt at a decoction mash. I had to leave in the middle of the saccharification rest, so I figured "What's the harm?". A little extra time for those enzymes to get all happy in the mash can't be a bad thing.
Now I'm about to take off for another meeting. There will still be 20 minutes left in the boild, but my wife says she'll shut off the burners. I'd normally use an immersion chiller at this point, but it's a Hefe; what's the point!?
I'll post the recipe in a bit; though, it's pretty simple.
Brewing, however, usually isn't an all day event. I was in the middle of mashing a Hefeweizen when I got called away to a lunch meeting. This is my first attempt at a decoction mash. I had to leave in the middle of the saccharification rest, so I figured "What's the harm?". A little extra time for those enzymes to get all happy in the mash can't be a bad thing.
Now I'm about to take off for another meeting. There will still be 20 minutes left in the boild, but my wife says she'll shut off the burners. I'd normally use an immersion chiller at this point, but it's a Hefe; what's the point!?
I'll post the recipe in a bit; though, it's pretty simple.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Kegging time once again
Here's my stout about to go into the keg...
Did I ever mention what a lucky man I am? How many husbands get "keg the beer" as one of the items on the honey-do list?
Did I ever mention what a lucky man I am? How many husbands get "keg the beer" as one of the items on the honey-do list?
Thursday, January 27, 2011
A disturbing thought
I found a particular banner ad disturbing today. It's an ad from Monster.com and it asks the question "How many hours does the average American work per year?". The possible answers are 989, 1777, and 3148. I haven't clicked on the ad to find out. I'm afraid of what the answer might be.
To put a scale to this question, start by calculating what one's hours ought to be. There are 52 weeks in the year and 40 hours per week, assuming 8 hours worked per day and no holidays. That's a total of 2080 hours. If you throw in a holiday per month, which most people don't get, that cuts the hours worked down to 1984.
So let's get back to those answers. 1777 sounds about right for an average; but, only if we're at something approaching full employment. And for those who didn't take Econ 101, that's an unemployment rate of roughly 4%. The latest unemployment numbers put us at 9.4%. But that's the "official" number that doesn't take into account those who have stopped looking for work. Throw them in and the real rate is closer to 20%. So the reasonable sounding answer just can't be right.
How about 3148? That means two things: Those who have jobs are working their asses off and employers would rather pay a boatload of OT rather than take the risk of hiring new people. A company acts that way when it expects hard economic times over the long haul. Scary.
And 989 hours? Just as scary. Having 20% of the workforce out of action wouldn't drop our estimated count from 1984 hours down to an average of 989. If this number is correct, then few of those who have jobs aren't being called in for a full 40 hours per week. A company acts this way when it sees itself winding down. You cut your workers' hours when you're about to put the company into mothballs. Scarier still.
Some "state of the Union", eh?
So which is it? Well, if there were a large number of people making OT hand over fist, then they should be spending that money hand over fist. Do you see any such economic activity? I don't.
I still haven't clicked that ad.
To put a scale to this question, start by calculating what one's hours ought to be. There are 52 weeks in the year and 40 hours per week, assuming 8 hours worked per day and no holidays. That's a total of 2080 hours. If you throw in a holiday per month, which most people don't get, that cuts the hours worked down to 1984.
So let's get back to those answers. 1777 sounds about right for an average; but, only if we're at something approaching full employment. And for those who didn't take Econ 101, that's an unemployment rate of roughly 4%. The latest unemployment numbers put us at 9.4%. But that's the "official" number that doesn't take into account those who have stopped looking for work. Throw them in and the real rate is closer to 20%. So the reasonable sounding answer just can't be right.
How about 3148? That means two things: Those who have jobs are working their asses off and employers would rather pay a boatload of OT rather than take the risk of hiring new people. A company acts that way when it expects hard economic times over the long haul. Scary.
And 989 hours? Just as scary. Having 20% of the workforce out of action wouldn't drop our estimated count from 1984 hours down to an average of 989. If this number is correct, then few of those who have jobs aren't being called in for a full 40 hours per week. A company acts this way when it sees itself winding down. You cut your workers' hours when you're about to put the company into mothballs. Scarier still.
Some "state of the Union", eh?
So which is it? Well, if there were a large number of people making OT hand over fist, then they should be spending that money hand over fist. Do you see any such economic activity? I don't.
I still haven't clicked that ad.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Job security
I guess this kid just doesn't understand the concept of job security...
Border Patrol Agent Fired for Uttering Forbidden Truths - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine
Friday, January 21, 2011
RSS feed debugging
I had a problem on a WordPress-based blog that I maintain where the number of entries shown in the RSS feed had somehow been reduced to two. OK... So the feed loaded really fast, but it also made the blog look like it hadn't been updated in ages. I found this page that explained how to change the number of items shown...
(I'm posting this here so that others with the same problem will have at least one more possible search engine hit to find a solution.)
WordPress › Support » Amount of RSS Items in the feedI think that the problem started when I changed themes. The new theme may have had its own RSS setting. Updating the parameter as suggested at the link fixed the problem.
(I'm posting this here so that others with the same problem will have at least one more possible search engine hit to find a solution.)
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
On the folly of prohibition
The Cato Institute's Jeffery Miron has written Strict Gun Control Will Seem Like War on Drugs, an examination of the potential success of proposed gun controls,
It was contemplation of the gun grabbers' dream of total prohibition, and my probably reaction to it, that caused me to adopt a more libertarian attitude toward recreational narcotics. (That means "drugs", for those of you on drugs!) Miron argues that gun prohibition cannot work for the same reasons that drug prohibition, like alcohol before it, does not work. I came at the argument from the opposite direction. I realized that drug prohibition cannot work because gun prohibition would not work. How do I know that it wouldn't work? Because as a law-abiding citizen, I know that I would violate a law prohibiting gun ownership!
I will not accept disarmament. I will be armed, even if that requires me to break the law. "If guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns" isn't about criminals getting guns no matter what; it's about otherwise law-abiding citizens becoming criminals for doing something they see as morally upright.
The State cannot successfully ban possession of a commodity unless the people themselves have already decided that they do not want that commodity. The people, or at least a very large portion of them, want guns. They'll get them one way or another. In the 1920s, the people wanted alcohol and they got it. Now they want narcotics. Drug prohibition is doomed to failure because too many people do not accept the idea that drugs are inherently immoral. (By the way, I am not arguing their morality one way or the other; I'm simple stating a fact.) Because the people themselves have not rejected drugs and drug use, the State will have no success banning drugs. The Drug War will be lost.
Worse than that, the Drug War brings the same unintended consequences that a War on Guns would have. If possessing a .22 rifle was as illegal as owning a machine gun, and got you the same penalty, why wouldn't you want a machine gun instead of a .22? And if you were a gun runner, and if the penalty for smuggling a .22 was the same as for smuggling a machine gun, then you would quickly see that the same risk brings greater reward if you smuggle the machine gun instead. Drug traffickers already know this. The more potent the drug, the greater the payoff is for the risk. Thus more deadly drugs like cocaine or heroin are preferred by smugglers. Pound for pound they pay better and the risk is no greater than for smuggling marijuana. Before them, rum runners realized the same truth. Hard alcohol pays better than beer or wine for the same risk. For a gun runner, the machine gun, pound for pound, is a better investment of capital and effort than a .22 rifle. When I realized that gun prohibition would follow these economic rules, and fail because of them, I realized that drug prohibition cannot work.
It was contemplation of the gun grabbers' dream of total prohibition, and my probably reaction to it, that caused me to adopt a more libertarian attitude toward recreational narcotics. (That means "drugs", for those of you on drugs!) Miron argues that gun prohibition cannot work for the same reasons that drug prohibition, like alcohol before it, does not work. I came at the argument from the opposite direction. I realized that drug prohibition cannot work because gun prohibition would not work. How do I know that it wouldn't work? Because as a law-abiding citizen, I know that I would violate a law prohibiting gun ownership!
I will not accept disarmament. I will be armed, even if that requires me to break the law. "If guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns" isn't about criminals getting guns no matter what; it's about otherwise law-abiding citizens becoming criminals for doing something they see as morally upright.
The State cannot successfully ban possession of a commodity unless the people themselves have already decided that they do not want that commodity. The people, or at least a very large portion of them, want guns. They'll get them one way or another. In the 1920s, the people wanted alcohol and they got it. Now they want narcotics. Drug prohibition is doomed to failure because too many people do not accept the idea that drugs are inherently immoral. (By the way, I am not arguing their morality one way or the other; I'm simple stating a fact.) Because the people themselves have not rejected drugs and drug use, the State will have no success banning drugs. The Drug War will be lost.
Worse than that, the Drug War brings the same unintended consequences that a War on Guns would have. If possessing a .22 rifle was as illegal as owning a machine gun, and got you the same penalty, why wouldn't you want a machine gun instead of a .22? And if you were a gun runner, and if the penalty for smuggling a .22 was the same as for smuggling a machine gun, then you would quickly see that the same risk brings greater reward if you smuggle the machine gun instead. Drug traffickers already know this. The more potent the drug, the greater the payoff is for the risk. Thus more deadly drugs like cocaine or heroin are preferred by smugglers. Pound for pound they pay better and the risk is no greater than for smuggling marijuana. Before them, rum runners realized the same truth. Hard alcohol pays better than beer or wine for the same risk. For a gun runner, the machine gun, pound for pound, is a better investment of capital and effort than a .22 rifle. When I realized that gun prohibition would follow these economic rules, and fail because of them, I realized that drug prohibition cannot work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)