The outpouring of support from everyone who knew Drew, and even those who didn't, has been unbelievable. Drew made such an impact on so many people. He was far and away one of the most influential people in my entire life, and I just cannot believe that he's gone.

A few of his close friends have put together a website where friends and family can share their stories, photos, and awesome memories of Drew Lippolt.

Please visit goodbyedrew.com.

Drew, doing what he loved to do
1972-2006

I didn't really sleep last night, kept awake thinking of Drew. I cannot believe that he is gone. I feel devastated, and cannot begin to imagine what Sachi is going through. It seems impossible to think that life will go back to being normal. I think it won't.

I have so many great memories of Drew, but one of the most special was a little more than one month ago. It was the day our son was born.

I had been on the phone calling our closest friends and family, but I couldn't reach Drew. He changed his mobile number so many times that I stopped updating my phone long ago, opting instead to look him up on my computer (emails, etc.) if I needed to call him. We were both always online anyway, so instant messenger or email was the usual means of communication. But I really wanted to tell him that we were parents, and didn't have a way to do that from the hospital.

I don't know if it was luck, coincidence, or something else, but Drew decided to call me that evening. He had good news to share: we had been threatening to get out to Iron Rock Raceway to race go-karts, and he had stumbled upon an opportunity to get an old kart that we could fix up and race. We talked about that a little bit, and then I said I had good news too: we were parents, and had a beautiful baby boy. He was so excited, and wanted to come see us, but didn't think he could make it until after midnight. For anyone who knew Drew, you know he was not bound by practical things like time of day - if there was an opportunity in front of him, he would take it. It didn't matter if it was the middle of the night.

He stopped at the store to pick up some food for us, and came that night to the hospital. He stayed with us until about 2 am. He was so happy to see our child, taking him into his arms immediately. It was as though he had been a parent 100 times before. Seeing Drew hold our son just seemed right, and it was simply wonderful. I feel so lucky to have been a part of it. Drew was one of the most important people in my life, and it means so much that he met our son on his first day of life.

It feels a bit unfair that my wife and I could have this awesome memory and keep it to ourselves, so for all of you out there who knew and loved Drew, I wanted to share.

After 1 1/2 years of trials, appeals and waiting, the CAS has given their final ruling for doping charges against Tyler Hamilton: guilty of blood doping.

Given the circumstances involved, this result does not seem right. At the top of the suspicion list is the whole blackmail thing where some guy demanded 20,000 Swiss Francs from Phonak team manager Urs Freuler or he would make Phonak riders fail the doping tests. They caught the guy and charged him all kinds of stuff, including blackmail, but not before Tyler and another Phonak rider both failed doping tests.

I know there are arguments on both sides about Tyler's innocence, but I just think this whole thing is a big charade. Tyler is innocent.

More details in this newsflash from cyclingnews.com

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has upheld the doping charges against Tyler Hamilton. Hamilton was accused of receiving a homologous blood transfusion during the 2004 Vuelta a España and has been maintaining his innocence ever since. As the appeal was rejected, Hamilton will remain banned from pro cycling until September 22, 2006.

However, Hamilton is set on continuing his struggle to clear his name and make known alleged inconsistencies of the anti-doping system. "Based on my devastating personal experience over the last year and a half, I am committed to fighting for reform within the anti-doping mouvement," the Olympic champion said on his personal website. "I do support the anti-doping mission and USADA, however the current system has failed an innocent athlete and needs to change.

"Out of respect to fairness and the rights of all athletes, there should be clear separation between the agencies that develop new tests and those that adjudicate anti-doping cases. Credible, independent experts, not those who funded or developed the original methodology, should be charged with properly validating new tests," the statement continued.

"I don't believe any athlete should be subjected to a flawed test or charged with a doping violation through the use of a method that is not fully validated or generates fluctuating results. I will also continue to support the formation of unions to help protect the rights of athletes. My goal is to keep other athletes from experiencing the enormous pain and horrendous toll of being wrongly accused."

In a newsflash from cyclingnews.com, it was announced that Roberto Heras, the only cyclist to have ever won 4 Tours of Spain, including the 2005 Tour, has been officially banned due to a positive test taken during the 20th stage of the race. As a result, he is officially no longer the winner of the 2005 Vuelta (Denis Menchov is the new official winner).

I just found an interview with Stacy Peralta (Stacy Peralta Riding Giants Sundance Surfer). It's from 2004, right around when Riding Giants was coming out. I totally dig Stacy's movies. I can remember where I was when I first saw The Bones Brigade Video Show in the early 80s, and also The Search for Animal Chin. His films have come a long way since then, but they're all great. Much more enjoyable than most bullshit movies coming out of Hollywood.

As a somewhat related side story... I was driving around Los Angeles back in like 1994, trying to find something but ended up totally lost. We were going to a dinner party or something. After lots of "where the hell are we?", I said, "the next place we see, I'm pulling over to ask for directions". As it turns out, it was the Pink Motel that I knew from years earlier in Animal Chin. I was thinking, "could this be the same Pink Motel? Did it have the famous pool that the Bones Brigade skated?" I went to the main window and rang the buzzer, and in about two seconds I was floored to see the big, white pompador of Monty appear behind the glass. It was the same Pink Motel, and the pool was still there, and Monty was super cool. He talked with me for a little while, gave me directions to get where I needed to go, and left me happy with a tiny little connection to one of my favorite movies.

Here's a thought problem: An airplane taxies in one direction on a moving conveyor belt going the opposite direction. Can the plane take off?

I just heard about this today. Apparently, it consumed a bunch of people's time at work, resulting in a flurry of email throughout the day. But since I'm not on the "total time wasting email lists", I didn't hear about it until this evening. If you're not up to speed, a quick Google search will help: conveyor belt jet take-off problem.

Anyway, the idea is that a gigantic conveyor belt sits underneath an airplane, and you have to answer the questions of whether the plane can take off, and why.

Here's my take: people are inclined to think of the airplane's motion as they do car motion. That is, wheels are what propel a car forward, and wheel spin would cause the conveyor belt to spin, therefore keeping the car in a fixed position. But airplanes do not generate power through wheel motion. On an airplane, motion occurs as the result of thrust generated by the engines.

During take-off, wheels keep the plane off the ground so it does not drag along the runway. Wheels are not a means of propelling the plane, or applying forward motion, or anything other than keeping the plane off of the ground. That's all.

Back to the car analogy, the wheels are quite clearly related to the forward motion of the car. No wheel motion, no car movement. Everyone agrees on this. But for an airplane, you could theoretically remove the wheels altogether, and with enough engine force, drag the plane along the ground until it reached take-off speed. This is because the engine force is applied as thrust through the air, not as rotational motion applied to the wheels.

Whether the conveyor belt is there, or not, is irrelevant. Whether the conveyor belt can increase in speed is irrelevant, too.

The plane will take off.

Everyone probably knows by now that the Muslim world is really, really upset about the publication of insulting cartoons of the prophet Muhammad. Especially infuriating for Muslims is how many non-Muslims have dismissed their concerns with an attitude of, "It's not a big deal, sure it's offensive, but it's freedom of speech, get over it."

Well, an Iranian newspaper has decided to play the same game. The most popular newspaper in Iran, Hamshari daily, is launching an international competition to find the most offensive cartoons about the Holocaust.

This is the kind of thing they should have done from the start rather than destroying stuff. Unfortunately, any form of violence (such as burning the Danish embassy in Iran) isn't really going to win people over or make them see your point of view. Instead, it's going to make them mad. Not good for problem resolution.

But printing offensive cartoons about the Holocaust is perfect. The Muslims can use the exact same excuses and defenses that the non-Muslims used to dismiss their concerns in the first place.

From Iranian paper to run Holocaust cartoons:

Muslim protesters infuriated by cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad raised the diplomatic stakes last night as Iran's best-selling newspaper announced it would retaliate by running images satirising the Holocaust.

Just found an amusing website. Somebody registered the name "do" in the top-level domain "gs", thus making the full name do.gs. It's an odd website written by a guy in Germany.

A tiny excerpt from do.gs:

Do you let your dog shit in my garden? In front of my door? Why? Do you feel there should be dog free zones? Does your dog stink?

Umm.... "no"?

Here's something useless I learned today.

Chipped beef on toast (or creamed chipped beef on toast) is a foodstuff comprised of a creamy sauce and rehydrated slivers of dried beef, served on toasted bread. In military slang it is commonly referred to with the dysphemism "Shit On a Shingle".

Creamy sauce with rehydrated slivers of dried beef? Yuck.

Donald Rumsfeld and many others in the Bush administration have shown again and again that they are incapable of interacting with the rest of the world like mature adults. Look at Europe. Most of the European leaders demonstrate an attitude of "we'll do our thing, you do yours, just don't mess with me about it", while Bush and his staff are much more like bandits in the wild west. "Do what I say, or I'll shoot you in the nuts!", they seem to say.

Whether you agree with what they say or do is irrelevant to the point I'm making now. Doing the right thing is not related to the manner in which they do it. Doing anything in a brash, bullying, forceful way is usually not a good idea. Nobody likes a bully.

Rumsfeld just gave the best example of this attitude while giving the US citizens more "fear the terrorists!" hype earlier today (Terror threat is greater today).

"They [the terrorists] will either succeed in changing our way of life, or we will succeed in changing theirs."

That pretty much speaks for itself.

Of course, there wasn't really any doubt about this. But our "leaders" usually try to avoid directly associating themselves with anything negative. That is to say, they can act like jerks but tell us they're not acting like jerks. And for some reason, that seems to work. But they usually don't act like jerks and tell us they're acting like jerks. So that's the interesting thing, I think.

Surely, Rumsfeld isn't stupid enough to miss the obvoius 3rd option: America could stop pissing off the Middle East, and the terrorists would then have no reason to be angry with us. Or is he? He and the rest of the Bush drones have a history of being big, tough bullies. Maybe they're all too dumb to realize every conflict does not have to result in a fist fight.

I bought one of the "old" 4-blade razors last year. Over the following month or so, I tortured myself with some of the worst shaving experiences I've ever had. The head is too large to get in tight spots, and the blades clog very quickly. Every stroke left me swishing through the water trying to unclog the blades. It took much longer to shave, and the experience was extremely annoying.

Why do I need 4 blades? The shave is worse, and costs more. What's wrong with 2 blades? They work fine. I did eventually throw my fancy 4-blade razor out and replace it with an old skool 2-blade razor.

So now Gillette is spending $6 million (!) on two Super Bowl ads to build hype for a new, 5-blade razor called "Fusion" (Gillette's New Edge). What a crock! The only reason razor manufacturers keep releasing new stuff every few years is that their rights expire and generic models flood the market. So we get lower prices with more choice. Good for the consumer, bad for Gillette.

The only way that Gillette (and Schick, etc.) can keep us buying their brand exclusively is to offer a product that isn't available elsewhere. With each new product, Gillette will hold exclusive rights to it for a period of years. Then they spend millions on fancy ad campaigns, hoping they can convince a bunch of men that they've been wasting their time with 1, 2, 3, or even 4-blade shaving razors. You need FIVE blades! See?!

Morgan Stanley predicts the new Fusion razor will grab 15% of the U.S. market this year. That is absolutely depressing.

This is pretty wild. Honda UK has just announced a car that can drive itself on the freeway (Honda Builds Accord with 'Autopilot' Tech).

It's called the Honda Accord ADAS (Advanced Driver Assist System). Using a millimeter-wave radar sensor on the front of the car, it can scan ahead for other vehicles and slow down/speed up accordingly. It also handles turns in the road by using cameras to watch the white lines separating each lane. The auto-pilot system requires the driver to touch the steering wheel every 10 seconds, so you can't fall asleep or hop in the back without the car noticing. But the article makes no mention of what the car will actually do if the driver doesn't check in. Will it coast to a stop? Will it turn off the road? Possibly slam on the brakes? Who knows.

This new Accord will go on sale in the UK in March for $25,880 pounds (US$46,500). The price seems a bit steep for a feature that requires me to stay behind the wheel, but I guess that proves I'm not the target audience. Driving on a freeway is easy, and it just doesn't seem worth the extra US$20,000 (I don't know what a regular Accord goes for, but I'm guessing around $25,000).

Finally, it isn't clear how well this will work, or if people will actually feel comfortable using it. Regardless, all Hondas are due to have ADAS by 2016.

Here's a little more information from a Honda press release dated September 1, 2005:

New Civic Leads Quartet of Models Debuting at the Frankfurt Motor Show

New Accord for 2006

An enhanced version of Honda’s award-winning D-segment contender will also have its first public outing at the show. As well as receiving an interior and exterior facelift, the Accord range will also benefit from the first application in Europe of Honda’s ADAS (Advanced Driving Assist Systems) technologies.

The innovative suite of systems is aimed at making the driving experience relaxing and, above all, safer. Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC), which regulates the speed of the car and its distance to the vehicle in front, will be equipped. In addition, the European first Lane Keeping Assist System (LKAS), which detect lane markings on motorways and applies the appropriate amount of torque to the steering, will also be available (as a factory-equipped option on right-hand drive models only).

After 19 years, Alan Greenspan stepped down yesterday as chairman of the Federal Reserve. Today, the UK Treasury announced that Greenspan will become the only adviser to the Treasury (Greenspan signs up to UK Treasury), helping the UK with global economic policy. They're not paying him anything, and he will be the only adviser to the Treasury. He's also launched a new consulting firm named Greenspan Associates. It will be interesting to see how his influence changes over the coming years.