I don't think you're out to get me. I think you're reciting the archetypal brogrammer whistle-in-the-dark litany of tragedy-befalls-the-incompetent. And I think you honestly have no idea why it's pissing me off, and I think that's what's wrong with the IT industry.

Are you ready?

Those of us who can't just whip out a "filesystem-level snapshotting system" (or worse: those of us who have one, have been forced to recover one multiple times and know how peril-fraught that endeavor tends to be) know we're incompetent. We know that tragedy will befall us. But when you live by this mantra of "those who are prepared suffer no slings and arrows" you are

A) accusing us of being unprepared

B) insinuating that the misfortune we know is just around the corner is something we DESERVE.

Here's what I know: for every needlessly open port in a corporate firewall, there's a pointy-haired boss whose golf buddy told him he could run a Minecraft server on DSM. That's the problem with insisting that proper hygiene will save the day: you have to enroll THE ENTIRE COMPANY in either

(1) understanding and conscientiously practicing IT pro-level hygiene or

(2) locking all your shit down to the point that nobody can accidentally let in the monster.

(1) is bullshit. You're arguing that strenuously. I keep pointing out that I shouldn't have to know this shit and you keep pointing out that there, there, I don't have to, this is a monster with bigger teeth than I need to worry about. So clearly, the idea that all of us need to be 100% on the IT tip is ludicrous.

But (2) is bullshit, too. Your users are going to make mistakes. Nerf up their world to the point where they can't and they'll resent the access control. They'll evade it. They'll defeat it. And then there'll be that pointy-haired boss, who needs you to blow a hole in the firewall so that he can install something tedious like a whatsapp desktop client so he can liason with his overseas paramour without his wife scanning his Facebook Messenger. And you have no power over that guy. He'll fire you. So now your perfect hygiene has been blown to shit. And now the port is open. And now the network is exposed. How compartmentalized is it? Compartmentalized enough? How deep can they get?

Worked with a guy. Not a bad drafter. Goofball. This was at a company, back in the early '00s, and our IT guy/AV consultant/My Boss determined that in order to avoid viruses, we wouldn't be allowed to use the Internet from our desktops. Draconian? Sure. Effective? Well... "Bob" managed to look up on his lunch break how to poke a hole in the Windows firewall so he could stream internet radio from this one station. And we all knew it. My boss knew it. But we let it go. Until we got a virus that ate half our work product and of course we were on LTO that didn't come back from the dead.

Bob got fired. Not because he was bad at CAD but because he'd poked a hole in the firewall. Two months later we figured out that Bob had fuckall to do with the virus; the head of the company had opened a .exe attachment (see, we were forced to run Pegasus Mail because it's invulnerable to AciveX... right? riiiight). Had the head of the company been told not to open .exe attachments? Yer damn skippy. Was our data still gone? Hell to the yes.

You think we hired "Bob" back?

And see, you don't even know what you're talking about. I've said more than a few times that it's my wife's medical office I care about. I've said more than a few times that ransomware fucked up a few hospitals because they were running DSM. I've pointed out that I'm running Synology at home. Know what advice we got when Synolocker hit?

"Turn off your Diskstations."

Let's hear it for high availability.

So here I am - in the medical field, providing IT, attempting to keep our noses HIPAA-clean, and being told - BY YOU - that you don't need to worry about ransomware because it only fucks with the unprepared and those of us small fry who are facing the exact same problems on the exact same scale as Sony shouldn't be offended when you excoriate companies for wanting a non-technical solution to a truly intractable problem. How big do you think Home Depot's network is? What does the topology look like? How many points of access are there? How many weaknesses, cloned across a million stores? And does any of that even matter? Every.Single.Phone.Hack has been the result of social engineering.

'nuther story. My father built the first network the Department of Energy ever had. Literally soldered comparators onto the Nixie sockets. And for all my memory he's always been arrogant about security. It's not like he's got the launch codes but he's got some shit. He's got monitors that still run CPM and he's got them on the network - there's a dual dialup setup with a ciphered timetable that pokes a hole in the firewall for 15 seconds at some point during the day and squirts his data in. It's as close to airgapped as you can get.

Some shit from his division got out anyway. How? One of his physicists had TS:SCI on a laptop at home and meth-heads broke in and stole it. They found it in a trailer park 30 miles away.

I'm escalating things into personal attacks because you don't get it. Your attitude is why, as a profession, nobody likes IT professionals. On the one hand, you insist that we need not be competent. On the other hand, you insist that competence is the only ward against tragedy. It's patronizing at best and delusional at worst.

For every massive hack there's an employee who thought he was doing the right thing... and an IT professional exasperated by the idiot lesser minions he's forced to interact with.

From the Bitcoin wiki:

Suppose Alice wants to send a bitcoin to Bob.

1) Bob sends his address to Alice.

2) Alice adds Bob’s address and the amount of bitcoins to transfer to a message: a 'transaction' message.

3) Alice signs the transaction with her private key, and announces her public key for signature verification.

4) Alice broadcasts the transaction on the Bitcoin network for all to see.

Some considerations for TinCan:

Step 1 could be done with TinCan, just like using e-mail or postcard or skywriter. Security is not important, since Bob sends his public address (e.g. something that looks like "1Krn7vC1kqmag8wbTbr1yZCJceHYVmpYse").

Steps 2-3 would normally be done using dedicated bitcoin software. Someone who has bitcoins to spend is likely to have an app or software to generate transaction messages. So there isn't a strong reason for TinCan to take on this task and try to convince users that it is reliable and trustworthy.

Step 4 requires access to the worldwide bitcoin network, and the transaction will not be verified until it is broadcast. So the selling point of TinCan -- that it works without Internet access -- would render this step impossible.

In other words, without modification TinCan could be used to share one's public address in order to receive funds later. This might be useful in the protest or concert or natural disaster scenarios for small purchases based on trust, or else to solicit later donations while passing out water bottles or gas masks.

-How is this measured? What's callous to one person may seem perfectly reasonable to another.

Ahhh, but Grasshopper - you write this from a lay perspective, that of one looking for wiggle room. A clinical diagnosis of Antisocial Personality Disorder (behavioral sociopathy, as opposed to personality sociopathy or psychopathy) is performed by trained, credentialed professionals who can expect their evaluations to be peer-reviewed. And, as criminal and civil law are tied into DSM/ICD10 definitions, "callous unconcern" becomes a legal definition, one subject to full legal review. As such, it isn't a "is he or isn't he" discussion, it's a "what stands up in court" discussion which varies state to state, city to city, country to country, etc. Eight months ago I served on that rarest of legal birds - I was foreman for a mental health jury. There are only about 200 in the world, and the one I was at - the only one in the world that allows for juries, they said - isn't in session more than a couple times a year. Me and eleven other people had to discuss whether or not the defendent was "grossly incapacitated" as defined by two sentences provided us in our jury instructions.

"How is this measured?"

Extensively.

Do you know any diagnosed sociopaths, or anyone you suspect of being one?

We were sitting down to dinner with Bob and Carol (not their names) for what was always an interesting, pyrotechnic meal. The appetizers were late and Bob and Carol were sniping at each other. At one point Carol said "well, my shrink back then said I was a sociopath but what the fuck does she know?" My wife and I mutually heard Ally McBeal record scratches across reality, but the meal continued unabated. My wife knew Carol because they were both in school together; when Bob came to me six months later to ask for marital advice I advised him to divorce her. We lost touch with Carol but Bob is still a friend. He's happily married with two kids in Maryland. So far as I know, Carol had no criminal history outside of a couple drug busts and charges of prostitution, which were dropped.

Of all the people I know or have known, three of them are killers. The only one I'm still Facebook friends with had extenuating circumstances; the deal went bad and they ended up chasing him across the desert in a pickup truck and shooting at him. He managed to get out of it by firing a 44 magnum through his rear window and hitting the driver in the face. The other two are bad dudes.

In fact, when households choose to save more money in bank accounts, those deposits come simply at the expense of deposits that would have otherwise gone to companies in payment for goods and services.

This is an extremely macro view. "All the money is in the system and can be assumed to be in the bank; the account doesn't matter; the bank is the institution through which all money flows, so regardless of where the money is, the money is in the bank."

This article explains how, rather than banks lending out deposits that are placed with them, the act of lending creates deposits

Commercial banks create money, in the form of bank deposits, by making new loans. When a bank makes a loan, for example to someone taking out a mortgage to buy a house, it does not typically do so by giving them thousands of pounds worth of banknotes. Instead, it credits their bank account with a bank deposit of the size of the mortgage. At that moment, new money is created. For this reason, some economists have referred to bank deposits as ‘fountain pen money’, created at the stroke of bankers’ pens when they approve loans.

I think this is silly.

At the end of the day, the bank has a balance sheet. The sheet must be balanced. If banks simply created loan after loan after loan without deposits and other income (fees) they would show marginal income on year-end reports based solely off of the interest made on the loans, assuming all borrowers repay. Deposits are necessary.

I think this article may be making the point that because banks act on such a macro level, they can afford to lend out more money on say, Tuesday, than they actually have in deposits - because they can count on the fact that by Friday, everyone gets paid by direct deposit, it'll even out.

A bank could not fountain pen money into existence if it did not have deposits. A bank can only seemingly "fountain pen" money into existence because these days they are so huge. If I am a small bank or a credit union and I really only have $10,000 of money - let's say some is start-up capital or whatever, but most is deposits - if that is all I have on my balance sheet, sure I can "lend out" $12,000 by simply fiddling numbers in the system, but then I am factually $2k in the hole, and either I have to make that money up somehow or I'm going to be in the red when I report my earnings for the year. I'm not ENRON and we'll assume I'm not ENRON-izing my report.

Sure, at the end of the day, I can lend way more money than I have - if I am a major bank with systems, ATMs, networks, and all the systems that would enable it to appear that that money is actually there. But that money has to come back to me. I can't count on a 100% rate of return on my loans so the interest on the good loans isn't going to be enough to turn a profit, plus not to mention all the people I have to pay in order to service these loans and run my Collections department. It'd be unwise to depend on investments to return that money because basically that's not reliable.

If we have a closed system and there is $100 in the system and Alice has $50 and Bob has $50, sure, Carol can go to the Bank of Ted and ask for $100. The Bank of Ted can even say "Sure! Here, have $100!" but unless Alice and Bob actually believe the Bank of Ted has $100 already, Carol doesn't have $100. Alice and Bob will not believe that the Bank of Ted has money simply because BoT says it has money; it needs to be an accepted fact that BoT is "the place where all the money is." If Alice and Bob know BoT has no money they will not accept BoT's notes.

I feel like I'm missing some sort of point here or something.

Yeah, rereading it, and just not getting it. They're basically saying that because banks use systems and not real money, banks can fudge the numbers and just make it look like there's money somewhere even when nothing happened to make that money appear wrt "real money" or physical money.

Some of these just seem downright bizarre. But the mind works in mysterious ways and some seem more like process or getting in the zone than just being quirky and weird.

I think forming habits that get your brain ready to do X task can be really helpful. They tell you not to do anything in bed except for sleep so your body knows when you are in bed it's sleep time. You can also apply the same with anything you force yourself to do.

When I was living in New York I was freelance shooting and editing these horrid product videos. They would send me a box of 20-40 products, usually little promo items that lit up or had audio chips or whatever. I'd set up my "lights", shoot them, and edit them together with some background music.

But before I got a system down and could knock them out, it was a pain in the ass. I'd shoot and then edit and have to reshoot because it was out of focus or the continuity was broken or I forgot a shot. It was an ordeal to get my ass motivated enough to do the goddamn boring work. Then one day I put on my Bob Dylan / Grateful Dead playlist and went at it. To anyone else these two artists mean nothing but I had 3 tapes when I was a kid and it was Bob Dylan, Bob Dylan and Grateful Dead. So when I hear those songs I get happy and nostalgic and can pretty much be motivated to do anything.

So the next time I needed to knock out some of these videos I did the same. Music on. Lights on. Shoot. Edit. Whiskey. Rinse. Repeat. Done. After a couple rounds of this, I could hear Bob Dylan or Grateful Dead and have the sudden bizarre desire to shoot and edit horrid product videos.

Eating, music, smelling - they are all the same sorts of things. Tricking your body into being solely focused on the task at hand. It's time to write, to be inspired, to knock it out. Do it long enough and your brain will connect these two things in your mind forever. If one part is missing you will surely feel off.

So after this

I found myself doubling down and did The Worst Hard Time, which has been in my list for a while. It's not the book I expected - it's the saga of the dumb fucking rednecks too stupid to leave the goddamn dustbowl after things turned utterly to shit. The book does a merry job of shitting on all the people who took free land in the '20s and then bailed when Hoover destroyed grain prices while also canonizing all the people who took free land in the '10s and were too stupid to leave. Nonetheless, I knew my peepz, who have always been white trash, were likely those dumb okies who bailed on shitsville in "no man's land" in what was called "the great american desert" before the marketers came.

Fortunately I have a long-ass lineage prepared by one of my grandfather's cousins that takes things way back. I got it when my grandfather, grandmother and uncle all croaked within three days of each other back in 2012. I didn't realize how far back it went until I started digging in last week, though - whoever did the lineage managed to trace things back to Texas in 1824. As in, born in Texas twelve years before the Republic of Texas. As in, born in Texas 23 years before it became a state. Which, when you look at family names, means I'm not meaningless white trash going back generations. It means I'm bloody Old 300. Speaking as someone who has long reviled those water-stealing, queso-eating, landyacht-driving cornfed rednecks known as Texans, this is difficult for me. Of course, as a buddy pointed out, Texas is where we went for fun, and the women were hot, and despite the fact that we had to traverse 12 hours of cows we fuckin' had a rippin' time and I should get over myself.

Kind of a weird experience when on the one hand, there are Wikipedia pages about your ancestors and on the other hand, there's also this:

Probably my great uncle. Hard to say. Died at 7. Apparently my grandfather paid for a tombstone for his little brother back in the '50s so this one might be misidentified.

Which gets you digging into the more recent ancestral home and how everyone got blown out of there by the drought in the '50s.

Billy Bob’s ranch used to be called Rancho Secate. But when a friend told him that secate was Spanish for “dry,” a dangerous name for a ranch, Billy Bob removed the letter E from the foot-high letters on his sign, cut off the prongs, and re-welded them into an A. Now the name of his spread, Rancho Sacate, means “grass ranch.”

“I don’t know if it’s going to help,” he laughs. “But it can’t hurt.”

If only someone had thought of that earlier. Driving across a field, Billy Bob points to a fence alongside the pasture. Several years back, he was digging a new fencepost hole there when he hit a metal wire. He dug further, only to uncover a whole other fence underneath his own, buried by dirt blown off the plowed fields that once surrounded Claunch.

And then you dig further and you realize that your ancestral home is a mere 40 miles downwind of the Trinity nuclear test site.

People from the region still talk of cows that turned white after the explosion and were then shown off at local fairs as curiosities to ponder over. But it’s cancer that may be the longest-lasting local legacy of Trinity, and while a group calling themselves the Tularosa Basin Downwinders Consortium has spent years fighting for recognition and compensation, it could be too late for Claunch, whose population is now under 10, the old-timers gone, their families scattered long ago. It's a strange and unsettling footnote in the history of the little town of pinto beans and singing conventions.

My dad's family were there back then. Didn't leave until '49 or so. And they're long-lived people and ain't nobody on that side have anything even vaguely resembling cancer, so that's interesting.

So I guess on the one hand I'm wrapping my head around blue-blood Texas heritage. And on the other hand, I'm wrapping my head around my daughter and I being mutants. I guess that's what getting old is - realizing that the geneology you've been avoiding all your goddamn life is actually pretty interesting.

Yes BUT

This is ex Microserfs saying "we wanted something whimsical and approachable for Microsoft Bob" without acknowledging that Microsoft Bob was an unflushed bowel movement of a program and that Microsoft included it in Win95 because they had it, not because they needed it. See also: Clippy.

There are fonts designed to be approachable and friendly that weren't mouse-traced by a dude attempting to give voice to Clippy the St. Bernard - Lint McCree and Chalkboard come to mind - that would have accomplished everything Microsoft wanted with Bob and, later, Win95. But Microsoft didn't include those. Comic Sans? Comic Sans MS is a fuckin' websafe font. Microsoft leveraged Comic Sans every bit as much as they leveraged Internet Explorer because if you're looking for something approachable in the pulldown of Word, your choices are serif formality, sans-serif formality or diapershit Comic Sans. Thus, the world gets covered in diapershit when, if they'd just shown a little more care and concern, we'd have something non-hideous.

The people who defend Comic Sans as approachable tend to be the ones who think this is a choice, not a cry for help:

I left out some good stuff like the agnostic who helped write the steps and the woman who got AA cozy with the medical community. I'm going to go back and expand and edit all of this later. This was maybe longer than I wanted it to be. I need to get to the practical application of all this stuff as it is today which is my larger goal.

____________

By 1938, membership in what would come to be known as Alcoholics Anonymous was around 100 people. In 1938, Bill Wilson began to codify his methods in a book that would be published the following year. The book was mostly written by Wilson but other members offered input.

At the point of the writing of the book the group did not have a name and was more of a sect of The Oxford Group. The Oxford Group had a tendency to recruit from higher classes of society and AA mythology claims that Bill and Dr. Bob chafed at the resistance to the inclusion of people who could not advance the goal of infiltrating churches across the globe in order to spread their message. Despite friction between the Bill W./Dr. Bob groups and the larger Oxford Group movement, the text of what came to be called the Big Book by members is heavily patterned after the teachings of the Oxford Group.

It’s fairly common knowledge that the 12 Steps are the basis of the Alcoholics Anonymous program. Although the Oxford Group did not have a similar step system, the steps are based on their principles. Included in the Oxford Group beliefs are the four absolutes: absolute truth, absolute unselfishness, absolute love and absolute purity. The closest they had to a step system were the four practices:

1. The sharing of our sins and temptations with another Christian.

2. Surrender our life past, present and future, into God's keeping and direction.

3. Restitution to all whom we have wronged directly or indirectly.

4. Listening for God's guidance, and carrying it out.

The Oxford Group also stressed that fear was one of the major contributors to all the ills of the world (the other being selfishness), a principle that worked its way into the common wisdom of the AA program. The group advised its member to surrender to God, follow God’s plan and trust that all events happen do to the will of God, beliefs which also worked their way into AA. As a side note, Frank Buchman, founder of the Oxford Group, would sometimes show up late to meetings or events claiming that he felt it was the will of God for him to be late.

The actual steps as they exist today went through several revisions. Here is one of the earliest:

1. We admitted that we were licked, that we were powerless over alcohol.

2. We made a moral inventory of our defects or sins.

3. We confessed or shared our shortcomings with another person in confidence.

4. We made restitution to all those we had harmed by our drinking.

5. We tried to help other alcoholics, with no thought of reward in money or prestige.

6. We prayed to whatever God we thought there was for power to practice these precepts.

Wilson settled on 12 steps because that is the number of apostles Jesus had. Here are the finialized steps which haven’t changed since 1939:

1. We admitted we were powerless over alcohol—that our lives had become unmanageable.

2. Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.

3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him.

4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.

5. Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.

6. Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.

7. Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.

8. Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.

9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.

10. Continued to take personal inventory, and when we were wrong, promptly admitted it.

11. Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.

12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.

The book Wilson and company wrote did not sell initially. 5000 copies sat in a warehouse until the group received some positive press coverage from a radio show and two popular magazines, one of which was the Saturday Evening Post. That Saturday Evening Post article is still distributor by AA as a pamphlet to this day. Interestingly, their first positive coverage was the radio interview I mentioned and, in order to keep the member interviewed sober, he was locked in a hotel for 24 hours under the supervision of other members.

The name of the book is Alcoholics Anonymous (it has a little used subtitle: The Story of How Many Thousands of Men and Women Have Recovered from Alcoholism). press It is generally referred to as The Big Book to avoid confusion with the larger group that took its name from the name of the book. The book is over four hundred pages long. It begins with introductory text numbered with Roman numerals. One chapter in this preface, “The Doctor’s Opinion,” was written by one William D. Silkworth, the doctor who ran the sanatorium where Bill Wilson had his religious vision. In the first edition of the book, Silkworth asked that his name not be used but subsequent editions have his contribution attributed to him.

In the 80 or so years since it was first published, The Big Book has had four editions, the last being in 2001. These revisions are incredibly minor and generally consist of adding or removing chapters from the last half of the book which consists entirely of member stories beginning with Dr. Bob Smith’s. The first 196 pages remain unchanged and are the basis of the program. The most notable change is a footnote added to the chapter called “To Wives,” explaining that at the time of its writing it was a majority male group and that the chapter will remain unchanged to preserve the history of the program. There are 12 chapters to the Big Book if one includes Dr. Silkworth’s letter as a chapter and some members assign each chapter to a step here are the name’s of the chapters:

The Doctor's Opinion - (pp. xxv-xxxii)

1 Bill's Story - (pp. 1-16)

2 There is a Solution - (pp. 17-29)

3 More About Alcoholism - (pp. 30-43)

4 We Agnostics - (pp. 44-57)

5 How It Works - (pp. 58-71)

6 Into Action - (pp. 72-88)

7 Working With Others - (pp. 89-103)

8 To Wives - (pp. 104-121)

9 The Family Afterward - (pp. 122-135)

10 To Employers - (pp. 136-150)

11 A Vision For You - (pp. 151-164)

After the personal stories, there is also an appendix in the back of the book that contains information such as an explanation of “the spiritual experience” that is at the heart of recovery through AA. The most important appendix to members is the outlining and listing of the 12 Traditions, an addition Wilson saw as important to holding together his organization as it grew. Here are the 12 Traditions in the short form presented in the book:

One – Our common welfare should come first; personal recovery depends upon A.A. unity.

Two – For our group purpose there is but one ultimate authority – a loving God as He may express Himself in our group conscience. Our leaders are but trusted servants, they do not govern.

Three – The only requirement for A.A. membership is a desire to stop drinking.

Four – Each group should be autonomous except in matters affecting other groups, or A.A. as a whole.

Five – Each group has but one primary purpose – to carry its message to the alcoholic who still suffers.

Six – An A.A. group ought never endorse, finance or lend the A.A. name to any related facility or outside enterprise, lest problems of money, property and prestige divert us from our primary purpose.

Seven – Every A.A. group ought to be fully self-supporting, declining outside contributions.

Eight – Alcoholics Anonymous should remain forever nonprofessional, but our service centers may employ special workers.

Nine – A.A., as such, ought never be organized, but we may create service boards or committees directly responsible to those they serve.

Ten – Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues, hence the A.A. name ought never be drawn into public controversy.

Eleven – Our public relations policy is based upon attraction rather than promotion; we need always maintain personal anonymity at the level of press, radio and films.

Twelve – Anonymity is the spiritual foundation of all our Traditions, ever reminding us to place principles before personalities.

Several of the Traditions (One, Four and Seven in particular) make AA less an organization than an idea. One Wired article I read compared it to open source software. While its defenders claim the chaos that results from a group with no leaders and with all interpretations of its guiding text essentially acceptable so long as you don’t drink, in practice it is just what I described it as: chaos. I will go into this further in the future but all groups are free to develop their own culture and a shared interpretation of the book and how the program should be worked which can make it incredibly difficult to find a group you fit in with. And this can be dangerous, especially for opiate addicts who often go through AA itself or one of its many 12 Step offspring. I say its dangerous because one relapse with heroin can kill someone and if they are in search of help and get none or get harmed by a toxic group, they can end up dead minutes after a bad meeting.

A few weeks ago, in Appalachia, I walked into a little shack where they served me up a hot dog before I went on the tourist-y white water rafting trip offered by the same little outfit. There were several of the place's employees (local kids, ~17 years old-ish) standing around. When I opened the door, their conversations gave way to all of them saying "city bob, city bob", over and over, like I wouldn't understand, or have never heard the tale of two Bobs, or whatever. Then, the four of them dissolve, the girl who takes my food order can't look me in the eye, and the rest of the 60 seconds spent getting a hot dog is super awkward for them. I decided that the culprit was my shirt, which has a lot of fine detail work on it, it's a pretty unique T.

But yeah, they must really hate people like me, y'know, for uhhhh... living in the city. It's funny, because I would wager a fair bit of money that I've spent more nights in a tent than they ever will.

I am/was recently on a trip for work to Boca Raton Florida. I just spent the bulk of my day beside a pool that overlooked the ocean. I swam in the pool and in the ocean and I enjoyed the Mojito's as I relaxed and let the ocean breeze sway me to slumber.

It was nice.

The overarching theme musically seemed to be Bob Marley. -This was not my choice, but rather the resorts. Still, there are times when nothing other than Marley seems appropriate.

As a kid, from the age of 16 on, we listened to Bob all summer long. In the off chance that there is someone on Hubski unfamiliar with Bob Marley, here is a link to his Greatest Hits.. LEGEND Enjoy.