Woohoo, workaround for Squarespace API issue, back blogging in Marsedit

I've been down from my writing because I haven't been able to use MarsEdit. 

“Nearly every word I write for Daring Fireball is published through MarsEdit.”John Gruber, Daring Fireball

MarsEdit 3

Desktop blog editing for the Mac.

The best way to write, preview, and publish your blog.

I've been trading e-mail with Daniel Jalkut, ex-Apple guy like me, but we didn't overlap our time in Cupertino to see if he sees the same problems as I do.  He just go a workaround that fixed the problem.

To get things back to normal for your Squarespace 5 blog in MarsEdit:

1. Open MarsEdit
2. Click the Squarespace blog icon in MarsEdit’s main window.
3. Select Blog -> Edit Settings from the menu bar at the top of the screen.
4. Change the API Endpoint URL to:

   http://five.squarespace.com/process/service/PostInterceptor

   Note that this is identical to the malfunctioning URL with the exception that the “www.” has changed to “five.”

5. Close the settings window and Refresh the blog to confirm it works.

This works and I am back using an Editor.  Yeh!!!

I like Squarespace, and I agree with Daniel, I don't think they understood the severity of the problem.

I have been in touch with Squarespace through their regular support channels, but they do not yet seem to appreciate the scope of the problem. In short: all Squarespace customers who rely upon 3rd party editors (not just MarsEdit) that use the API interface, were met with a sudden stoppage of functionality for those apps. The reason? The API through which the service is provided suddenly stopped working and instead redirects to a 404 landing page:

Finally an over current scenario identified as potential causes for 787 battery problem

The burned out batteries on the 787 have grounded the 787 fleet.

I've been waiting to write a blog entry on the 787 battery issue, and was amazed the amount of coverage discussing over voltage.

Japan transport-ministry investigator Hideyo Kosugi said the state of the battery indicated “voltage exceeding the design limit was applied” to it.

Eventually it was discovered over voltage was not an issue.

30 years ago I spent a lot of time working as a reliability engineer, tearing apart the insides of semiconductors to figure out why they failed.  Semiconductors failed for basically reasons of manufacturing defect (lifted bond), over voltage, or over current.  It was pretty cool milling the plastic down to create a trough down to the semiconductor, then using sulfuric acid to remove the remaining plastic to expose the semiconductor die and its wire bonds.  For over voltage you would look for where there was a break in a connection that was very small and hard to see.  But, when it was an over current problem, many times the plastic was cooked from the heat and the sulfuric acid would not remove the plastic.  These hard crusted plastic burned areas looked like the above picture.

Finally there is coverage for improperly wired batteries causing over current in the battery.

According to the AP, on the ANA flight, the Japanese Transport Ministry noted:

Flickering of the plane's tail and wing lights after it landed and the fact the main battery was switched off led the investigators to conclude there was an abnormal current traveling from the APU due to miswiring.

I am sure many of you have seen over current failures and you recognized as well that the 787 batteries were subjected to over current.

Boeing's mistakes are lessons to learn from, maybe SOX conflicts with Quality

Chris Crosby writes a post on Boeing's three bid process which meets SOX compliance contributed to the 787 problems.

The Folly of the Three-Bid Model: A Thesis on How SOX Grounded a Dream

I just read about about another emergency landing for a 787 Dreamliner in Japan. Apparently, they have grounded them all. I don’t know about you, but I will find it pretty hard to set foot on one of these flying Rube Goldberg contraptions. The Dreamliner name seems to be somewhat on track from a naming perspective; however, I think Nightmare-liner would have been a little more accurate. The product from Boeing has been horribly late to market, had an incredible amount of publicly reported issues through design to production (just imagine how many issues weren’t leaked to the public), encountered union issues during the build, was way over budget, etc.

In Chris's post he makes the point that a three bid process will show you meet SOX compliance, but this flies in the face of what Quality expert Deming recommends.

In the 1982 book Out of the Crisis, Dr. W. Edwards Deming highlighted point number 4 of his 14-principles of management is as follows: “End the practice of awarding business on the basis of a price tag. Instead, minimize total cost. Move towards a single supplier for any one item, on a long-term relationship of loyalty and trust.” Total Quality Management (as well as the supremacy of the Japanese car manufacturers in the late 70s, 80s and 90s) came from Dr. Deming. His principles are the foundation for programs like Total Quality Management and Six Sigma. He theories turned into reality helped to solve the paradox of Low Cost and High Quality. Here’s an example of the impact of Deming, courtesy of Wikipedia:

In the 1980s, Ford Motor Company was simultaneously manufacturing a car model with transmissions made in Japan and the United States. Soon after the car model was on the market, Ford customers were requesting the model with Japanese transmission over the US-made transmission, and they were willing to wait for the Japanese model. As both transmissions were made to the same specifications, Ford engineers could not understand the customer preference for the model with Japanese transmission. Finally, Ford engineers decided to take apart the two different transmissions. The American-made car parts were all within specified tolerance levels. On the other hand, the Japanese car parts were virtually identical to each other, and much closer to the nominal values for the parts – e.g., if a part was supposed to be one foot long, plus or minus 1/8 of an inch – then the Japanese parts were all within 1/16 of an inch. This made the Japanese cars run more smoothly and customers experienced fewer problems. Engineers at Ford could not understand how this was done until they met Deming.

Some things done the old way worked.  Here is post by an ex-Boeing Director of Quality Assurance.

Bob  Bogash,  retired after more than 30 years with the Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, spent the last 9 years of his career as  the  Director  of  Quality Assurance for the Materiel Division.  In this position, Bob was responsible for the on-time production and quality  of all the non-Boeing produced hardware and software used on Boeing commercial jetliners.  More than 3000 outside suppliers in more than 20 countries delivered more than one billion parts a year to Boeing  production lines.  Bob organized this function from a zero baseline, ultimately staffing more than 35 worldwide offices with over 330 highly skilled professionals.

A Lesson from why Art is Valuable, could explain human decisions on value

It is interesting watching the really smart people make their decisions on data center design and specific pieces of equipment they choose.

I was watching a TED video of Paul Bloom discuss the origins of pleasure.  And, he had this slide up.

This statement can be used to explain the data center experts perception of value.  Here is the above quote modified.

The value of a data center power/mechanical equipment is rooted in assumptions about the human performance underlying its creation. 

They have an assumption of the creation of the equipment built by humans.  They know the equipment design, and many times the specific engineers that were on the design team.  They know the past performance of the equipment.  The manufacturing and sourcing of material.  Even what service operations are like for the equipment.

The #1 thing that will cause a drop in value of the equipment is if assumptions are no longer valid.  Parts have been changed due to supply chain issues, quality has dropped due to manufacturing staff changes, designs are modified for cost reductions.  As most have learned, just because the equipment was good for you 2 years ago, it doesn't mean the latest versions are the same.

You can watch this complete video to get the full story.  The part I mention is at 11:05.

A Seth Godin post can on collision of code and humans can be applied to Data Centers

Seth Godin has a post on the collision of code and humans.

Thriving in a wet environment

If you've ever fixed any kind of machinery, you know that a device that's exposed to the elements is incredibly difficult to maintain. A washing machine or the underside of a car gets grungy, fast.

On the other hand, the dryest, cleanest environment of all is the digital one. Code stays code. If it works today, it's probably going to work tomorrow.

A Challenge for data centers comes to mind with his next paragraph.

Whatever we build gets misunderstood, corroded and chronic, and it happens quickly and in unpredictable ways. That's one reason why the web is so fascinating--it's a collision between the analytic world of code and wet world of people.