cheap archiving for a data hoarder
Every now and then I check to see what's out there for cheap but good data storage. I'm not talking about the NAS stuff because that's complicated... although I will admit NAS is a lot easier to set up these days compared to years ago.
What I'm talking about is the easy stuff. USB stick, internal drive and external drive solutions.
USB sticks
The best deal going right now are SanDisk 128GB Ultra flash drives. These things are cheap, reliable, and I own several of them.
Generally speaking, you max out at 512GB with these before you start running into problems.
True, the 512GB is just 35 bucks now, but the beauty of the 128 is buying them in packs. There's a 5-pack right now for 50 bucks.
It is genuinely a good idea to have a handful of 128GB sticks. Definitely better than the old days of having a pile of DVDs.
Internal drives
A Seagate Barracuda 8TB is the best option right now. This is of the 5400 RPM flavor. Not good as a primary OS drive, but excellent for backups because the lower RPM means it won't run as hot.
Like with the flash drives, yes there are larger drives out there, but the 8TB in particular is widely available and "normal". No special drivers needed and no special setup needed. Install internally, or plug in to a USB hard drive enclosure and will work easily. Easy is good.
External drives
I'm not a fan of these, but it is a turnkey plug-in-and-use thing that does work.
Seagate once again has the best option with their 5TB offering...
...which brings up my biggest complaint with these. Yes, it's ready-to-use. Yes, it's convenient. But I get 3 more TB if I go with an 8TB internal drive + enclosure for roughly the same price.
However, I will admit that this is the best thing for plug-in-and-go and have somewhat large storage. Works with PCs, Macs and modern gaming consoles easily.
Get the 128GB sticks first
I trashed most of my USB 2.0 sticks since the USB 3.0 SanDisk ones are cheap and good. They're even cheap enough to where you can "manually mirror" by copying the same data to two sticks. It's just a nice thing to have.
mcdonald's AI drive-thru is a bad idea - or is it?
Back in the '90s when I watched Star Trek: The Next Generation, there was a thing on the Enterprise called a replicator. And I assume that was inspired by the Foodarackacycle in The Jetsons, as that predates Star Trek.
In Jetsons, the Foodarackacycle was a pushbutton device whereas in Star Trek: TNG you just spoke to it, and it magically created what you wanted. More often than not, a replicator was used to create food and drinks.
McDonald's just ended a test of two years with AI-powered drive-thru ordering.
The first thought I had when reading about AI drive-thru is that if the replicator actually existed, you know fast food giants would be the first to jump on that. In fact, we sort of have that now in a roundabout way. It technically is possible to create food using a 3D printer, a.k.a. food printing, and that technology would work towards McDonald's ultimate goal of having a 100% automated restaurant. If that's not their goal, I'd be genuinely surprised because it would cut operating costs by the millions if not billions. Absolutely no employees present except for maybe one IT guy in the back you never see that makes sure all the robots are working. No cash accepted. All transactions are electronic. Robots take the order, make the order, and it's delivered to you similar to how the fictional replicator worked.
In Star Trek, it was common to see people routinely complain about how inauthentic the food was that came from a replicator. The biggest complaint is that it didn't taste like the real thing. Given that some people believe fast food is fake food anyway, doesn't that sound like a perfect fit for 3D printed fast food? It sure does.
AI drive-thru - if McDonald's can actually make it work reliably - is something I think patrons of that store would accept with no complaints at all. No, I'm not trying to make a joke nor be sarcastic. I really do believe people want AI-everything with fast food. Once the drive-thru system is perfected, it's only a matter of time before all the food is computer-made as well. And once that is perfected, expect the zero-employee McDonald's store...
...well, almost zero. You need the IT guy in the back and a janitor to clean the tables and sweep up the floors periodically.
what watch am i wearing now?
There was a time when I seemed to be buying a new watch every month. What I bought was never anything expensive. The last one I bought was the Casio WV58A. I'd never owned a watch with atomic clock sync and wanted to experience that. The watch is fine, but I just don't like wearing it, so it's been repurposed as a small bathroom clock since it auto-sets itself every night.
After the WV58A, I said yeah, I'm done buying watches. That doesn't mean I stopped wearing one, so what am I wearing now?
What's on my wrist every day is the Casio W735H. I've owned this for a while now. For all intents and purposes, this is a G-SHOCK but with 100 meter water resistance instead of 200, and with a "10 year battery" which is just a CR2025.
The W735H has a single alarm, countdown timer, dual time feature, stopwatch, full weekday/date/time on the home screen, vibration feature and a very nice dual bulb white LED night light. The buttons are textured and very easy to press with just the right amount of give to them, which I very much appreciate. Yes, the watch is chunky but wears small. I have small wrists, so I appreciate that.
Ultimately, what made me go with the W735H full time is that it's actually the most comfortable watch I have, and it can "handle life". The raised bezel protects the crystal, and for any hit the crystal takes, Polywatch clears that right up with ease.
My favorite type of watch is something that tells me time, weekday, month and day all on one screen. The W735H does that. I mean, yeah, so does the W800H and W96H, but the W735H is more rugged, has a timer, better buttons and a vastly superior night light.
I tried wearing an analog watch a few times, and nope, not happening. I'm too used to digital and prefer it. And oh yes, I need that timer. I use it regularly when exercising or cooking. Quite handy.
The W735H has been on my wrist as my daily driver for months, so much to the point that wearing any other watch I have feels weird. Yes, I'm that used to it.
Does it keep good time? Yes. Mine loses maybe 1 to 2 seconds a week, which for quartz is fine.
The only thing I wish it had were multiple alarms and a timer auto-repeat feature. It doesn't have either of those things, but if I absolutely need that stuff, I have the F201WA. That little watch to date is still absolutely the way to get the most for the least. Full time/weekday/month/date on the home screen, five alarms with snooze on alarm 1, countdown timer with auto-repeat, easy-press buttons (again, much appreciated), stopwatch, dual time feature. Yeah, it's small and cheap, but again, absolutely nothing else for a cheap quartz digital offers the most for the least. Not even the storied AE1200. That one has a timer, but no auto-repeat like the F201WA has.
I like the W735H enough to where I'm okay living without the multiple alarms and timer auto-repeat.
The only thing I've seen come down the pike from Casio that might be the ultimate do-it-all for me is the WS1700H. Three alarms, timer with auto-repeat, easy-read display. Looks nice... but is probably to big for my wrist.
I'll most likely stick with my W735H.
yeah, safety razor blade brand actually matters
I switched over to DE shaving, which means shaving using a double-edge blade using a safety razor. This is something I started doing about six months ago, stopped using the cartridge razor (I used to use Gillette Sensor 5), committed to it, and have not used a cartridge razor on my face since.
Initially, I thought that blade brand wouldn't matter all that much and tried several just to be sure.
I was wrong. Blade brand does matter.
It is funny however which blade agrees best with my face.
Shark Super Chromes. These are decidedly on the lower end of the price spectrum, especially when compared to a highfalutin brand like Feather.
I did read many reviews of safety razor blades before buying Shark, and this is where the funny part comes in. A lot of guys say Shark blades are terrible. But for me, out of all the blades I tried, the Super Chromes worked best for two main reasons.
First, it is not as sharp nor as smooth as other blades like the BiC Chrome Platinum.
Second, it's the only blade I've used where I can get 3 to 4 shaves out of it without my face complaining.
There's a third reason that actually has nothing to do with the blade for the most part, and it's shaving technique. I've gotten better at it.
Over the course of many shaves, I now know the correct angles to use depending on what part of my face I'm shaving, and also understand that making two passes is totally normal for DE shaving. And I need to explain that a little bit further.
Cartridge razors have blades that are pre-angled. Regular safety razors have a blade that is mounted straight, so you have to angle the blade yourself when using the razor.
Two passes means applying shaving cream/gel, shaving your entire face, rinsing off, then repeat the whole process again. I was totally used to the one-pass way of shaving with a cartridge razor. With DE shaving, two passes makes things easier. The first pass removes most of the hair, and the second time is just a touch-up pass, at least for my face.
Once I figured out the correct angles to use, it was then I realized that I didn't need a "better" blade, and technique is what matters more. Regularly making two passes also improved things quite a bit.
The lessons I've learned is that a sharper blade doesn't automatically mean a better shave, and you can't truly get a good shave until you learn your angles.
Now that I've got a decent shaving technique and know my angles, shave time has been decreased dramatically. As fast as a one-pass with a cartridge razor? No, but darned close, and that's good enough for me.
weather tools i use that don't suck
It is usually true - other than just by looking outside - that the only thing you really need to get weather information is a weather station and/or a big 'ol outdoor thermometer.
What those tools can't do however is tell me a forecast, nor give me any information from a significant distance.
When I was a kid, there were only three ways to get a weather forecast. Television, radio, and newspaper. And no, I never once ever used the newspaper for this information. TV was the way I got the forecast unless the power was out, in which case a battery-powered AM/FM radio was used instead.
Speaking of radios, thankfully there are plenty of choices for emergency weather radios still for sale today.
The way I get my weather forecast info now is either on the computer or the phone.
I'll start with these two sites: radar.weather.gov and weather.gov. These two are bookmarked on both computer and phone because they load the fastest and give me the info I want quick.
Yes, there are other weather web sites and apps that are fancier. They suck. On the phone, every single weather app is slow to load, pesters me to buy some "premium" service I don't want and makes it REALLY difficult to scroll and zoom. The government run weather sites, while simpler, just work.
One that works directly in Terminal is wttr.in.
On the command line in Linux, I type this:
curl wttr.in/mytown
...where I replace mytown with the city I live in, and ta-da, current conditions and 3-day forecast. The information is pulled from wttr.in and shown directly in Terminal.
Yes, you can also get the same info just by typing in the address wttr.in/yourtown (replace yourtown with your city) in a browser.
If for whatever reason the town name you use doesn't work with wttr.in, replace with the nearest bigger city or an airport code. You'll eventually find something that works with it.
I've been running Linux for about a year now (I'll be writing about that soon), and yes I have the ability to use a weather widget in the taskbar just like Windows or MacOS. Heck, I remember seeing weather widgets even as far back as Windows 95...
...and I've never liked them because they always have a propensity to "get stuck".
I'll explain.
I install the widget, and it initially works. Okay, great. But then later on, the report doesn't change. It will still be showing information from 6 hours ago and it didn't auto-update itself. Now I have to either force-update the widget or outright restart it. That's annoying.
This is not a Windows, Linux or Mac thing. All the computer weather widgets do this. I've never known any one that didn't, so I just quit using them.
Weather widgets may look nice but I don't trust them. I've always found it better to load up weather sites manually, because I know the information will be current.