Tom Geller's Journal

Username:	Password:
Forgot your password?	Remember Me

New usericon

You know the album cover to Blur: The Best of"? This site shows you how to make your own portrait in that style, originated by Julian Opie. Here's my first shot.

The original

Opified!

Cool, huh?

New urban technosport: Mapchasing!
I took a break from RE Bar Camp today to ride to the S.F. Public Library. On the way I saw this fabled car:

The Google Mapping car! To create the "Street View" feature of its maps, Google attaches cameras to car rooves and sends them out to photograph the streets of a given city.

Inspiration struck. I circled around and rode behind the Google car for a few blocks.

Here's the route.

In a few months, I'll check Google Maps for this stretch and see if I show up.

As long as we're here, I propose the following rules for those who spot a similar vehicle and decide to mapchase:

Ride behind the cameras. Riding alongside could limit the driver's ability to manoeuver; ride in front, and all we'll see is your butt.
Keep a safe distance. Actually, I suspect you won't appear in the photos if you follow too closely: As you can see, the cameras are mounted pretty high. While they have wide-angle lenses, they're designed not to photograph the car carrying them (obviously), and probably skip a few feet of space behind the car as well. (If you have more info, tell me!)
Don't harass the driver. They have a job to do. Having said that...
Remember you're in public space. On the one hand, that means you can do anything you want for the camera, as long as it's legal in public. The van driver has no right to compel you to stop following, or making faces, or flashing the bird, or whatever. But don't be stupid. If you do something illegal (like flash your privates), there will be photographic evidence on one of the largest Web sites in the world. Duh!

And if you have a successful mapchase, please let me know!

Drupal hosting guide
Because I attended WordCamp a year ago, I got a great deal for hosting at DreamHost -- free! But I decided to switch before the year was up: Much as I love DreamHost's features and staff, they've horribly oversold their services, so server response time is unacceptable.

In the meantime I started to get into Drupal based on

giza's wise recommendation. The software doesn't require much, but it does need PHP and MySQL. My other requirements were:

$10/month or under (if possible)
maximum commitment of 3 months
no setup fee
shell/SSH
unlimited domains
at least 10 MySQL databases
phpMyAdmin
unlimited email addresses

With thousands of hosting service providers online (most reselling services from the big corporations), I decided to make drupal.org's list of hosts a starting point.

The winner? WebFaction*, at $9.50/month. Their one downside is an AUP that forbids "adult material". If they have a problem with anything of mine (such as the currently unused sexparties101.com) then, well, I can go elsewhere when they bring it up.

Details of those I looked into are ( below this cut )

I'll let you know if anything causes me to drop them. Wish me luck!

* Affiliate link -- makes me money if you sign up through it.

FNMA and FHMC
The problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that are all up in your newsfeed? I discussed them four years ago.

I can't say I predicted the current situation, because I thought the problem would be malfeasance, not market panic. (Auditors found "$5 billion in misstated earnings between 2000 and 2002" at Freddie.) But it's gratifying to see current pundits echoing my doomsday analysis.

OMG. Just OMG.
While sitting around with Loren watching cartoons, a link on growabrain led me to this crazy "side-view generator". Of course I entered his name... to see "Loren" turn into "Loser".

Oh, ha ha, I get it. It engages you with a cool animation, then calls you a loser. Funny!

So I tried my own name, and saw it turn "Tom" into "Sex". What?

To make a long story short: Loren Bruton came out as "Loser Burden", while Tom Geller became "Sex Fondle".

HA!

Join me for "Bitter and Be Gay" on Friday, 18 July
Good friend and FABULOUS cabaret performer Carly Ozard is debuting her one-woman show, "Bitter and Be Gay!". It may well sell out: I've already reserved a table for six, and would like to invite you to join me. Tickets are $15 plus a two-drink minimum: I'm taking $30 to protect against no-shows, and will give you back $15 at the show.
WHEN: Friday, 18 July, 7pm.
WHERE: Octavia Lounge, 1772 Market, SF (near the LGBT Center). Parking's pretty easy around there.
WHAT: Song and stories about how all the men she dates turn out to be gay. I've read the script, and it's terrific. Some fat-positive stuff, too.

Everything she touches turns to gay!

It'll be a great evening -- jump in!

For some value of "news"...

Current Mood: amused

Want to own your own home? Part 2: Avoiding the down payment
Summary: I'm investigating a way for interested parties to join me in buying a multi-unit building without a down payment. Read on.

There were some interesting comments on my last post, which asked for partners to buy a multi-unit building. The scenario spelled out there required each party to put in a $30,000 down payment and about $950/month, but the down payment tripped up a lot of people.

Traditional financing of 100% of the purchase price is very unlikely these days due to recent changes in the mortgage market. But I had an idea. I've posted the full details in a forum for real-estate investors, and look forward to their comments.

But here's an example scenario in brief:

* 4-unit building, $400,000 purchase price.
* Three owner-occupants, one owner-investor. Each holds a 25% ownership interest.
* The owner-investor puts up $100,000 in cash, covering the down payment.
* In return, the owner-investor gets a guaranteed $800/month payment.
* The three owner-occupants manage rental of the fourth unit, using revenue from it to pay the $800/month to the owner-investor. This represents an attractive, guaranteed 9.6% return to the owner-investor.
* If the unit rents for more, the surplus goes into the house fund; if for less (or stays vacant), the owner-occupants have to pay it from their own pockets.

Again, see the full details for more info and (I hope!) an expert analysis.

Here's how that changes the financial picture for each of the owner-occupants.

* Monthly PITI payment: $849. (PI on $300K at 7.5% = $2,097/month. T=$400/month. I=$50/month. Divide by three.)
* Monthly HOA: $267 (maintenance, house fund @ $200/unit; owner-occupants cover cost of rental unit.)
* Expected monthly cost per owner-occupant: $1,116. No down payment needed.
* If the rental unit is vacant, each owner-occupant would need to pay in an extra $267 (to pay off the owner-investor).
* Monthly cost per owner-occupant when the rental unit is vacant: $1,383.

One good thing about this scenario is that rental income from that fourth unit will almost certainly go up over time, but payments to the owner-investor remain a flat $800/month. So the monthly surplus going into the house fund should increase from year to year, and therefore hedge against inflation.

If I'm right about this, I know people who may be interested in being the owner-investor.

What do you think?

Want to finally own your home? Me too.
I'm thinking of buying a home and am looking for partners. If you want in, and can swing $30K down and $950/month, let's talk.

Here's the whole story:

Prices in many areas surrounding San Francisco have dropped substantially. More importantly, interest rates are still low. (A 1% change in the interest rate is about the same as a 10% change in price.) So now it's time to start talking seriously about an idea several of my friends have mentioned at one time or another: Buying a home (or multiunit building) with friends.

Oakland appeals to me, and I was surprised to see a BIG selection of properties under $200,000 -- as in several hundred. Delete those in the high-crime and high-traffic areas below (say) 45th Avenue, limit it to those with at least 2BR and 1,400 square feet, and you still have several dozen to choose from. Some of those are duplexes (or more), and near a BART station.

They're starter homes to be sure: in questionable neighborhoods, fixers, or both. But they *are* affordable. Up the purchase price to $300,000 (and 3BR) and the choices are quite palatable.

But let's talk numbers.

ASSUMING: Purchase price of $300,000; some closing costs; some necessary initial repair; three people buying in; 20% down; loan at 7.5%.
Initial cost: $30,000 per person ($20K down, $5K closing costs, $5K repair fund)
Monthly cost: $934 per person ($559 PI + $125 T + $50 I + $200 HOA)

It may be a bit more than you're paying now, but it's certainly not hugely more. And there's a good chance it's less.

So why haven't we talked about it seriously before? Well... the numbers just didn't work as well. The latest Case-Shiller and OFHEO indices say that prices are now about what they were in 2004 and 2005, respectively. Having been priced out of the market for those intervening years has given me a taste for blood I didn't have back then. (I also gained insight and judgement from working in escrow offices throughout the state from 2004 to 2006.)

Many of you know that I expect to be forced out of my dear little rent-controlled Castro apartment within the next few years. I'll make the move before then if the cards are right. Until now I figured I'd just move back East, to upstate New York where languishing old buildings can be had for cheap. But I've lived in the Bay Area for over 15 years: It's my home. Last night's MLS reality check showed me I don't have to leave it.

My preferences: Multi-unit building; fixer O.K., as long as the bones and major systems are decent; near "downtown" (whatever town it is) and transit to SF; walkable; with at least 500sf for each purchaser, including a private bedroom; basement or utility room desired. TIC-form ownership. SF/peninsula welcome, but unlikely. South Bay and points beyond the Oakland hills are too far for my tastes. Nothing north of Albany.

How about you?

I have invented a new drink.
A shot of scotch in a chilled glass of diet root beer.

It's delicious. No, really!

I call it an "Angry Bisexual".

A note on progress, on this nuptial morning
Today, the legal institution of marriage will be extended to pairs of Californians in same-sex relationships.

That's not the same as "gay marriage", as my friends Lindasusan Ulrich and Emily Drennen know. Both are bisexual; and when they held a commitment ceremony in San Francisco's handsome and historic Stern Grove five years ago, they were piqued when their planner referred to it as a "gay wedding". Firstly, they didn't want to dishonor their feelings for men by letting people assume they were "gay". That meant a lot of explaining, all the time, that their monogamous relationship didn't suddenly make them gay. (If sex actions do indeed define sexuality, there are no straight virgins.) They no doubt had to explain that at least a few times a month: Couldn't they get a break on their wedding day?

They might also have taken exception to the term "marriage", for no kind or amount of affection would give them the legal benefits of marriage under California law. They chose each other over the objections of the state; to give their union the term of law "marriage" would be inaccurate at least, a sham at worst. They did get married -- legally -- in 2004. But as you know, that marriage was later invalidated.

Soon Lindasusan and Emily will walk down the aisle again. Third time's a charm!

We could look at the bright side and say they've been given the opportunity to show each other -- and the world -- the seriousness of their union three times now. (A mixed-sex couple who tried to have three such ceremonies in five years would seem icky-sweet, don't you think?) But as Mark Twain so aptly put it, "Work is anything a body is obliged to do; play is anything a body is not obliged to do". The obligation to try and try again makes the event less, well, playful. It has an urgency and meaning not found in legal, mixed-sex weddings. And I know they'll do it a fourth time if necessary.

I'm not going to rail against opponents of same-sex marriage. Like all of us, such people are working with the best information they have, and have concluded that mixed-sex marriages are best. Generalizations are always flawed, but here's my take on their central argument.

The state -- by which I mean its members -- legally supports heterosexual marriage because of the widespread belief that a closed family structure, related by blood, is more stable and beneficial to the community than other relationship forms. I don't blame people for believing this, because it follows reasonable logic backed by considerable tradition. They believe that the behavior of people with something to protect is comparatively moderate and predictable, and that instinct gives natural parents something to protect in their children. (California's Cardinal Roger Mahony affirmed this child-centric view of marriage in Time today: "Marriage... has a unique place in God's creation, joining a man and a woman in a committed relationship in order to nurture and support the new life for which [it] is intended.")

Personally, I don't share this belief. If it's so, we'd have no adoption; the elderly and the barren would have no claim to marriage; and child abuse would invoke a logical fallacy, instead of the fact of life it is on every block in every town in America. By giving benefits to this group, these potentially childbearing married couples, others are put at a disadvantage. It *is* a zero-sum game, where resources given to protect families are taken from those without them.

Clearly, we become invested in our communities for a variety of reasons. And I -- in no sort of relationship the state cares to endow with benefits -- have certainly found reasons to become invested in my neighborhood of 14 years, and my country of forty. But treat citizens like outcasts long enough, and they start to act out as them. (Viz. the Stanford Prison Experiment.) I'm tired of having to prove I belong here, with no wife's presence to back me up.

So I don't feel the state should be in the business of marriage.

But if it's going to be -- if the state means to support stable lifestyles -- it should look beyond the minority population of blood-related families. It should, in short, give benefits to all who commit to lives with stability that benefits the state. Child-bearing is one powerful sign of such commitment; cohabitation is another, as is the mixing of finances; a proclamation of partnership is yet another.

I started thinking of this tonight because I wanted something to watch while I worked on my bike, and popped in a tape I probably picked up for a dollar at a tag sale. It's from 1988, created by "Lifestyle Update Productions" (!), chronicling AIDS ceremonies and protests in Washington DC from October of that year. I cringed a bit at the talk of "gay rights", as I now cringe at "gay marriage". Because it's rights, and it's marriage. These are the benefits we give to community members who commit to benefit the state.

Regardless of their sex, gender, sexuality -- or age, race, or commitment to monogamy, for that matter -- I believe that Emily and Lindasusan's marriage benefits the state. The same goes for my friends "Salamander" and "Spunky", New Orleans refugees whose grace and warmth have allowed them to quickly build a new circle of friends in San Francisco; and John and Joshua, who at 21 have already set up housekeeping after an engagement of several years. Both couples will be married under City Hall's gilded dome this week.

So to them and all others who will enjoy California's legal blessings starting today, God bless.

The color of failure
Who knew "screens of death" came in so many colors?

Gig: Need Apple developers who can write well
Posted variously: Please pass this around as needed. It's for a project I'm managing. Thanks!

I need Apple-platform programmers who can write how-to articles that are engaging and engaged, informative and informed. This is for a short, part-time, well-paying contract that could recur.

MUSTS FOR PROGRAMMERS:

You actively develop for Apple platforms -- Mac OS, iPod, or iPhone. You have both working code samples and writing samples: Blog entries are O.K., technical materials are better, how-tos are best. You can thoroughly adapt your writing style to match existing materials. You cheerfully accept critiques and do revisions.

MUSTS FOR WRITERS:

All the above, with a special note: If you're not an active Apple-platform programmer, *you can not do this job*. It's not something you can fake.

WHAT TO SEND:

* Name, address, phone number, email address, relevant URLs
* Note that references this ad's details -- "firehosed" resumes will be deleted without response
* Writing samples (links or plain text preferred, Word or PDF accepted)
* Programming background; names or copies of apps you've worked on, published code, etc.
* Current work situation. (Will you be doing this on the weekend? For whom do you already work?)

Location unimportant, as long as I can pay you with a U.S. check. Let's get working!

Loren's fine (European title: "Waiting to Fart")
For weeks I've been enjoying the rare honor of being able to tell people, "My boyfriend's having a hysterectomy". Well, he had it on Wednesday, and is recuperating just fine at his parents' house near Santa Cruz.

(For those who don't know, Loren (

stoney_l) is a female-to-male transsexual. For about four years he's injected prescription testosterone twice a month, and these days passes as male pretty much without exception (as long as his clothes stay on ;) ). Feel free to ask me about it if you like, and don't worry about being impolitic. We're both open about it and have already heard every possible question at least once.)

Anyway, here's how it all went down. Tuesday night he stopped eating and took some laxative soda so he would, err, "run clear" in preparation for the surgery. He was allowed only "clear foods" like Jello and fruit juice. (He even gave up Bailey's for vodka! Ha ha ha, thank you, I'll be here all week.) Wednesday morning at about 10am his parents arrived and we all rode to Kaiser on Geary. He was admitted and went back to pre-surgery with his mother while his father and I sat in the waiting room. They were backed up, so he didn't actually go under the knife until 3pm or so.

We saw him again at about 9pm, drugged up but lucid. There was a minor complication that prevented them from doing it laproscopically, so the incision is larger than planned, and his recovery will likewise be a bit extended. Still, the incision's only about three or four inches long, and he should be mostly recovered within a month. One side effect of having his ovaries removed that none of us had considered: He had hot flashes! On the plus side, his regular "T" dose is now cut in half.

Thursday his parents stayed with him at the hospital pretty much all day (!), and he was released Friday around 1pm. There was some delay because, although most of his digestive functions returned gradually after the anaesthesia and morphine drip, he still hadn't passed gas by noon on Friday. But eventually he gave "the toot heard 'round the world". His parents drove him straight to the Santa Cruz area, where he'll probably be for the next 10 days or so.

The staff at Kaiser was WONDERFUL. The surgeons -- going against type -- were friendly and patient, able to listen to our concerns and explain everything properly. (Drs. Chan and Weiss, by the way.) The nurses on the 6th Floor were a fun yet attentive bunch, and all seemed to sincerely enjoy working there.

And they ALL accepted Loren as a man, and me as his partner, without even the slightest hesitation in their voice. Pretty amazing when you consider the nature of his surgery. I'm sure it helps that his parents (who are wonderful, by the way) and I are unambiguous in that regard. Plus, he's a good patient, and we were a fun family to be around. (Tip for equality: Make life enjoyable for those around you, with respect as the only ticket to enter your circle. That sure beats berating your opponents.)

Kaiser generally has been excellent about that. (I often go with him to his OB/GYN appointments and enjoy the puzzled looks of other patients when he's called in. ;) )

Thanks to all who have been supportive. The weeks leading up to this have been stressful... but it's all done, and will be nothing more than a memory in a couple of months.

My book for sale on... eBay?
Here's something weird. On my book's official release date (today), someone's apparently bought three copies to sell on eBay! Check it out:

Yes, they really are charging $6.99 shipping on a "$3.23" book. I'm sure you can all figure out why. :) That ends up being slightly cheaper than Amazon, assuming you're ordering nothing else. For the record, its cover price is $7.95.

Who's commented the most in my LJ?
Very interesting... the results aren't at all what I expected.

( Who's commented the most on this journal? )

Add your own verses
So now Craig's List is down and I'm wearing a frown
Instead of a pink negligee
For there's no-one I know I can call to score blow
Or a genderqueer bareback three-way.

(It really is, BTW.)

News on my "Save My Home" Book

My first radio interview will be by phone at 5:30 (!) tomorrow morning. What can I say? It's drive time in Naples, Florida.
I've started a blog on the Save My Home Web site; you can read it on your LJ Friends page by clicking here.
I made a new icon for the book. Purty, huh?

That's all.

I know I haven't been writing about my actual, you know, life -- soon, my pretties, soon!

I'm curious... do you read this journal?
Poll #1174804 Do you read this journal?
Open to: All, detailed results viewable to: All

Even if you never comment, please check here.

View Answers

I'm reading!
61 (100.0%)

Final solution to the STD testing saga: QuickHealth
Remember my long, difficult quest to get a reasonably priced set of tests for sexually transmitted diseases?

Well, I finally *did* get tested at Farmacia Remedios, as was mentioned in this post -- more specifically, at QuickHealth, which works out of the Farmacia Remedios storefront at Mission and 20th in SF. It was cheap, thorough, and exactly what I wanted. Win!

Of course, it would be MUCH BETTER if health care in the U.S. wasn't so screwed up, so I could just get it from my doctor without spending $500, or order the tests directly from the lab....