Thankfully, I came across a super-simple program called ToddlerTrap (via Lifehacker). Just run the program and all keyboard and mouse input is disabled. Your toddler can hit buttons and keys all day long, but they’re unlikely to bullseye the red X that exits the program. It even captures the last key entered, so you know whether or not your little rascal has been up to his or her old tricks.

I’m smart, frugal, and internet savvy, so you’d think this concept would have occurred to me before now. After all, you can buy nearly anything online nowadays, usually for much less than you’d pay at a store. Until very recently, though, I had it in my head that you simply couldn’t buy glasses online, that it took an expert to make them the perfect fit and prescription.

According to “Adventures in $40 eyeglasses” (via LifeHacker), though, I couldn’t be more wrong. All you really need are a few simple measurements (e.g., pupil distance, lense width, arm length, etc.), your prescription, and an understanding of what it all means. You only need an expert for the eye exam; after that, you apparently have everything you need to know.

I scanned through the article’s comments, and the author’s experience seems legitimate. As for where to buy glasses online, a lot of commenters spoke highly of Zenni Optical and Goggles4u. Not a single one mentioned any dissatisfaction, which is surprising. More importantly, nobody mentioned paying more than $100, and many said they paid less than $50. In several cases, people bought multiple pairs, all with the same quality that you’d pay $100s for at LensCrafters.

Granted, the jury is still out on laser eye surgery. I know my wife is too squeamish to go through with it, though, so we’ll probably be buying glasses online for her. I’ll be sure to give an update on the experience after we’ve given it a try. After reading the article, though, I am decidedly… opti-mistic.

I’ve had poor vision for most of my life. I know the cost would be significant, but it’s no longer prohibitive. The procedure itself is a little off-putting, but I think I could handle it. And I’m not particularly worried about any long-term risks. If I decide to go through with it, there’s really nothing standing in my way.

My real concern, however, is a loss of identity. As William James says in the Principles of Psychology, “The old saying that the human person is composed of three parts – soul, body and clothes – is more than a joke.” I’ve worn glasses since I was nine years old. They’re a part of who I am. I probably wouldn’t be the same shameless nerd I am today if I’d never needed them. If I don’t wear them anymore, will that diminish me? Will I see someone else when I look in the mirror?

Just as important as how I see myself, though, is how others will see me. I find that people with glasses are regarded as more intelligent. If I no longer wear glasses, will that make others regard me differently? Since I’m in a computer-centric field, will it hurt my career prospects?

I’m probably overreacting, but that’s my predicament in a nutshell. I know getting laser eye surgery won’t fundamentally change who I am. Still, I haven’t gone a day without glasses for the past decade and a half. If I stop wearing them, will it alter the identity that I’ve established? What do you think I should do?

It’s one of those oft-overlooked benefits of health insurance. My provider offers prize incentives to policy-holders who perform certain wellness activities, not the least of which being exercise. The more I exercise, the more points I accumulate. Once I reach a certain threshold, I get to choose a reward.

It’s obvious how this contributes to my health, but how does this tie into parenting? Simple. I just turn around and give the prize to my son. So far, I’ve qualified to get him a kite and a soccer ball for about two months of exercise. I do my rounds on the stationary bike five times a week; my son gets free toys and learns that regular exercise can be rewarding.

Sure, they’re not really “free” prizes when you consider the fact that I’m paying an insurance premium. Still, I’d be paying for the plan regardless of the rewards program. The way I see it, I’m getting added value out of an otherwise necessary expense.

If you’re interested in trying this approach, I suggest you check what sort of incentive programs your health insurance provider offers. Trust me, it makes exercising regularly much easier when you’re rewarded, especially when that reward is a happier child.

• We saved up an emergency fund. Our goal back in July was to have three months worth of expenses saved up by the end of the year. I’m proud to say that we’ve met that goal and then some. Now, even in the unlikely event that both of us got fired, my blogging income dried up, and we couldn’t draw unemployment, we’d still have a full three months before things got tight.
   
• We cut our expenses. Most notably, we cancelled our home phone service and negotiated a lower rate on our cable/internet bill. Considering how we use our cell phones almost exclusively anyway, we didn’t miss the service at all, and the net reduction ended saving us about $50 a month.
   
• We started saving for retirement. To be truthful, my fascination with personal finance started taking off when I opened my first retirement account this year. I’m already contributing 5%, and I plan to start contributing up to my employer’s match next year after our emergency fund is fully established.
   
• We started tracking our budget. If you’d asked me a year ago what we spend on gas in a week, I’d have shrugged. Now I can tell you down to the penny with little more than a moment’s notice. Knowledge like that really is worth the effort, because it lets you know exactly where your money is going.
   
• We set financial goals for the next few years. Now that the emergency fund is established, our next step is paying off my student loans by May 2008, followed by our car by February 2009, at which point we’ll be debt free. In the long term, we dream of buying a home, having another baby (or two), paying our son’s way through college, and maybe going back to school and getting my Master’s degree.
   
• We started tracking our credit. I monitor our credit score on a monthly basis now and check one of our three credit reports every four months for changes. More importantly, thanks to a little credit know-how, I know exactly when we should be ready to take on a mortgage.
   
• We’re moving into a new apartment. The rent will be considerably cheaper and we’ll be much closer to my work. We’re still in the process of picking an apartment, but we’re doing things smarter this time around. We’re starting early, we know exactly what we want, we’re doing thorough comparisons, and we’re not going to be afraid to haggle.

Thanks to these steps, my wife and I now have a positive net worth and are looking forward to a bright, financially secure future. Heck, I’m even considering the prospect of early retirement. The whole experience of taking control of our finances has been incredibly liberating.

On that note, I’d like to thank JD of Get Rich Slowly, Ramit Sethi of I Will Teach You to be Rich, Jonathan of My Money Blog, Trent Hamm of The Simple Dollar, and all the bloggers out there like them, without whose advice our success wouldn’t have been possible.

Obviously, this is a very inefficient system. News of a good gift idea may not spread past the first person it reaches, leaving us scratching our heads about what to get each other. Add to this the fact that several members of our family are chronically difficult to buy for (I’m looking at you, Dad) and it’s anyone’s guess what to buy. Gift cards, anyone?

Making on Online Family Christmas List

To combat this problem, I came up with a modern, web 2.0 solution using Google Docs. To those who’ve never used it, think of it as an online version of Microsoft Word. You can create and edit a document directly in your browser, then share this document with others and give them permission to edit it, too.

Here’s how to start your own online family Christmas list.

1. Go over to Google Docs. If you don’t have an account, you’ll have to create one. Don’t worry; it’s quick, easy, and completely free.
    
2. Create a new document and name it “{Last Name} Family Christmas List {Year}”, substituting your family’s last name and the year as appropriate. Mine, for example, is named “Ward Family Christmas List 2007″.
    
3. Write the rules at the top so everyone knows how to use it (see below). Then write every family member’s name on its own line.
    
4. Go to the “Share” tab. Click the “As collaborators” radio button and write every family member’s name in the box. Then click “Invite collaborators.” Everyone on the list will receive an email inviting them to view and edit the document.

How the Online Family Christmas List Works

The rules couldn’t be much simpler. Be sure to copy and paste them into your Christmas list so everyone knows what to do.

Rule #1. If you’d like something for Christmas, add it to the list under your name. Give as little or as much detail as you like.

Rule #2. If you have a good idea for a gift for someone else, add it under his or her name.

Rule #3. If you buy an item for someone else, highlight, strike through it, or otherwise mark it as bought so they don’t get it twice.

That’s it. The only real drawback is the slight reduction in surprise factor, but you’re always free to buy something not on the list, and keeping it from the children’s eyes is pretty easy. The important thing is that everyone can communicate exactly what they want to everyone else without relying on hint passing.

What are you waiting for? The sooner you start your own online family Christmas list, the sooner you can stop guessing about what to buy them!

P.S. Obviously, this method works great for any gift-giving holiday. Feel free to use it for birthdays, Hannukah, or whatever else you find useful.

To be honest, the really useful tidbits like this wouldn’t fill more than a one-hour lecture, and most of it would sound like common sense. Unsurprisingly, that’s because it is. Most of us know that too much sugar and salt in your diet will lead to diabetes and heart disease. We know that too many calories and saturated/trans fat will make us obese. Unfortunately, knowing is only the first step in doing, and most people don’t go any further than that.

I’d like to propose a different way of thinking about proper nutrition and fitness, one that many people would benefit from adopting. These two things aren’t just the oft-inconvenient requirements of good health that we consider them to be. Rather, they are survival skills, as indispensable to know and practice as hunting and gathering were to our ancestors.

Why do I take this stance? Isn’t calling diet and exercise “survival skills” a bit extreme?

Not… even… a little.

Consider, for a moment, the top 10 leading causes of death in the United States:

• Heart Disease
• Cancer
• Stroke (Cerebrovascular Diseases)
• Chronic Lower Respiratory Diseases
• Accidents (Unintentional Injuries)
• Diabetes
• Alzheimer’s Disease
• Influenza/Pneumonia
• Nephritis, Nephrotic Syndrome, and Nephrosis
• Septicemia

Notice the bold items on the list. Nutrition and fitness have very strong effects on these conditions. In the case of heart disease and diabetes, your long-term health is the most important factor in determining whether you contract them. In the case of infections, your general health and immune function determine your outcome. Sure, even if you’re the healthiest person on earth, it’s still possible to contract these conditions, but your chances are much lower, and you’re much more likely to survive them even if you do.

The point here is that poor diet and fitness can, and likely will, kill you. If you eat right and exercise, you are likely to live a longer, healthier life. Do it and you live; don’t do it and you die. I’d say that pretty much fits the definition of a survival skill, wouldn’t you?

So, next time you’re reevaluating your lifestyle choices, don’t throw diet and fitness by the wayside as annoyances. Embrace them as vital tools for your survival in a toxic food environment.

The question of whether to get married sooner or later is one a lot of young couples face. From the perspective of the couple, the question seems silly. After all, if you’re already committed to spending the rest of your life together, why shouldn’t you get married? Popular opinion, on the other hand, holds that you’re not yet mature enough to make such a life-altering decision. By your late teens and early 20’s, they say, you’ve only recently become an adult, so you have to give yourself time to “sew your wild oats” before committing.

As a young husband, this was the sort of attitude I had to face a lot. I’ll admit that I met it with skepticism. After all, despite everyone’s protests, my wife and I have turned out just fine. We’ve been married for four wonderful years, had one child, and plan on having another. We can’t imagine the rest of our lives without each other. We’ve had to deal with some rough times, for sure, but they’ve only made us grow closer.

Unfortunately, in doing the research to back up our anecdotal success, I’ve managed to convince myself that popular opinion may be right, at least partly. There is evidence to suggest that personality can and, in many cases, does shift considerably through your mid-20’s. I hate to admit it, but the, “You haven’t grown up yet,” mentality isn’t completely bogus.

More significant, however, are the divorce statistics. Of men and women who get divorced, over half of them got married in their late teens and early 20’s. The predictive value of this data cannot be denied; people who get married younger than 25 are at much greater risk of their marriage failing.

There are many factors that are likely involved in this trend. Young adults rarely have significant financial resources, and money troubles are a primary cause of divorce. Much as we like to romanticize things, love is not all you need. Young adults are also often involved in college settings, where irresponsibility and sexual promiscuity could damage a budding marriage.

However you look at it, most young couples are not well-prepared for married life. Mind you, I don’t want this to be the case. I’d rather tell young couples to follow their dreams, common wisdom be damned. It certainly worked for me and I wouldn’t change it for the world.

However, the fact is that I’d advise my son to wait if he were considering marriage before 25. Even if he and his girlfriend were unusually mature for their age, I would still tell them to wait. Am I a hypocrite? Certainly. The truth is, though, that my wife and I took a real risk by marrying young.

If you’re younger than 25 and considering marriage, stop and think about what you’re doing. Coming from someone who, until now, was an ardent defender of getting married young, it really isn’t a wise choice. You may end up happy like my wife and I, but you’re also very likely to regret your decision. Think long and hard about the facts before you make the leap.

Okay, hold that thought. Now imagine that these conferences are all “part of the deal” of being employed, and that those who choose to complain and/or not go have historically been fired. Notably, a predecessor in your department is one of them. Remember how you felt a second ago? How have your feelings changed?

Welcome to my world. I’m not really complaining; in fact, I’m quite fond of my job and hope to keep it for some time. I just thought I’d share the leap in attitude that a bit of employment uncertainty can bring.

Granted, I’m not at all enthusiastic about the conference. It’s going to be a lot of work and time away from my family for no additional pay or time off. However, I won’t be making a fuss. Considering my participation has been attached to my continued employment, however implicitly, I accept it as a regretable fact of life and will do my duty without complaint.

The situation makes me wonder about proper incentivism, though. Isn’t it much better for morale to offer a better incentive than, “You get to keep your job”? Sure, that’s a powerful motivator for most people, but it has a tendency to breed resentment. My company doesn’t use it in any other context, thankfully, but I can’t imagine it’s a good business practice to use to any degree. After all, especially in a larger company, malcontent can be the silent killer of your bottom line.

Whatever the case, the conference itself is still a few weeks off, so I don’t need to lament it just yet. Besides, I have a good supervisor, good pay, a bit of creative freedom, and job responsibilities that are both challenging and educating, all things that aren’t easy to come by. More importantly, everyone who knows me knows how much I hate job hunting. All things considered, going to the conference is definitely better than the alternative.

What do you think? How far would you be willing to go to keep a good job?

It’s because of the rampant ignorance of blogging that the practice occasionally comes under fire from elitists of traditional media like David Bullard. I found his rant against blogging (link condom applied) via a post on Bruce Clay and couldn’t help but laugh at the absurdity. To think that a self-proclaimed journalist who values quality and integrity could write something like this is simply tragic. David displays a profound ignorance of blogging to pass such harsh judgment. I’d like to piece apart his comments now and see how many of them actually apply.
 

“Most blog sites are the air guitars of journalism. They’re cobbled together by people who wouldn’t stand a hope in hell of getting a job in journalism, mainly because they have very little to say. It’s rather sad how many people think the tedious minutiae of their lives will be of any interest to anyone else.”

Here, David appears to be making the assumption that all blogs are intended to broadcast the news in the limited scope in which he defines it. No, most bloggers aren’t outstanding writers. Nor are many bloggers necessarily writing about anything of wide public interest.

But here’s a news flash: Most bloggers don’t blog because they want to be journalists. Most of us just want a soap box to stand on and talk to our friends. In fact, very few blogs are intended to have any sort of global appeal. We talk about what we care about. If you don’t want to hear it, then stop reading.
 

“Many bloggers prefer to remain anonymous…”

Hello, my name is Stephen Ward. That’s my real name. No anonymity here. Sure, I’m only one example, but I know dozens of other bloggers who don’t hide their identities.
 

“The content of their sites is so moronic that even their best friends would disown them if they knew they were the authors.”

Quite the contrary in my case. Most of my friends read my blog because I’m the author. In fact, friends and family are the main constituents of many bloggers’ target audiences. Whether or not the content of such sites is “moronic” is really a matter of opinion. Certainly they may seem trivial or uninteresting to casual readers. For the target audience, though, their content is quite valuable.
 

“Unlike the world of newsprint, there are no rules out there in the blogosphere and that makes it a very confusing place for the consumer.”

This one I’ll agree on. The blogosphere is downright chaotic and finding valuable information can often be difficult, even for the natives.
 

“I… object to some anonymous, scrofulous nerd…”

Again, not all of us are anonymous, although I’d say a lot of us are nerds (I know I am). Props to David on the use of “scrofulous,” though; that’s definitely my word of the day. For those of you who don’t care to look it up, it basically means amoral. Morality being a subjective thing, it’s impossible to say any blog is scrofulous except in one’s own opinion. Personally, I consider David’s column to be scrofulous, but that’s just me.
 

“…pumping meaningless drivel into cyberspace at all hours of the day and night…”

Like morality, meaning is also subjective. What may seem uninteresting to you could have profound interest to someone else. It’s all about intended audience. David should consider whether or not he qualifies as such before labeling a blog’s content to be “meaningless drivel.”
 

“…simply because he can’t find a girl to sleep with him.”

It’s a fact that, on the average, married individuals are more sexually satisfied than single individuals. That being said, I have been happily married for several years now. In fact, I’ve been married for the entirety of my blog’s existence. I won’t go into it any further for fear of my wife’s reprisal.
 

“These are the sort of w ackos who gun down their fellow students at university.”

I’ll echo Bruce Clay on this one. What could drive any reasonable person to make such a rude and politically incorrect statement? Statistically, I’ll concede there are enough bloggers out there that a few are bound to be psychotically antisocial. However, the vast majority of us are just average people who’d never dream of such a thing. David should be ashamed for such a grossly rude statement. Nice typo on “w ackos,” by the way. Very professional. What was that David was saying about journalistic standards?
 

“So what’s the difference? How come newspapers and magazines have to carry the names of their editors and publishers and watch their content and websites don’t?”

Because websites aren’t newspapers. Most blogs are a one-man show. There’s no editor standing between me and the “Post” button on my blog. Sure, that means objectionable content gets distributed along with the good stuff. Again, if you don’t want to hear it, then stop reading. Nobody’s forcing it on you.
 

“…maybe it’s time the print journalists named and shamed some of the more offensive anonymous bloggers and published their physical addresses.”

More power to you on that one. I’d like nothing better than to see people who spread hate get unmasked for all to see. Whether or not I agree with what they’re saying, though, I do believe in their right to say it (at least in the United States). Freedom of speech is both a blessing and a curse, after all.

The point I’m trying to make is simple. Bloggers are not journalists; some bloggers are certainly trying to compete with mainstream media, but that doesn’t mean all bloggers should be held to the same standards as professionals. It is not useful or accurate to put us all in the same category, because most of us are doing little more than practicing a hobby.

Furthermore, not all bloggers are bad bloggers. I’ve never posted anything that could be considered hate material. I’m not anonymous and I don’t post entirely useless content. I like to think I’m just an average blogger; I talk about the things I care about and I post to my own standards. I don’t think my blog is “meaningless drivel” and I don’t appreciate being lumped together with the lowest common denominator of the blogosphere.

I can only imagine that David is venting some personal vendetta against a blogger or some blog-inspired media legislation. I can’t imagine he really believes all blogs to be worthless. After all, anyone who spends time surfing the blogosphere without bias will find both the good and the bad.

Then again, maybe David just wanted to get a rise out of the blogging community. If that’s the case, it definitely worked on me. People like this need to take a good look in the mirror before going on self-righteous rants about the evils of blogging or the superiority of traditional media.