Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Skinhacking: A DIY Guide to Facials, Laxatives, and Moisturizers

I have dry skin. Heating systems at home, school, and work all conspire with the general dryness of Zone 5 Winter to leave me with a flaky, sensitive epidermis that not only feels papery and prone but, in some areas, cracks or reddens. To combat this I began using, for the first time in my life, commercially available moisturizers like Aloe & Chamomile Advanced Therapy Lotion (St. Ives) and Norwegian Formula Body Moisturizer (Neutrogena). After becoming wary of their exotic additives and unpronounceables, I decided to try making my own in order to ascertain what's really responsible for rehydrating my skin.

The recipe below is simple and forms the basis of most DIY skin moisturizers; it functions by shielding the skin from dehydrating agents and both attracting and trapping moisture within the skin. I created it after a few tries from some recipes I found online and in a local anarchist hippie zine called Motha Earrrth.

  • 4 tbs. beeswax

  • 8 tbs. coco butter

  • 4 tbs. coconut oil

  • 2 tsp. distilled water

Use either a simple double boiler or a Pyrex dish either in a pot of boiling water or on top of a hot plate.

  1. Place beeswax in dish and allow it to melt to the consistency of water.

  2. Add the distilled water and mix thoroughly.

  3. Add the coconut oil and coco butter, stirring continuously until completely mixed with the beeswax and water.

  4. Pour into a container and allow it to cool for about an hour before use.

  5. Total time: Seven minutes.

The stark simplicity of this recipe contrasts quite obviously with commercial solutions as it lacks dyes, vitamins, and chemicals. The color of the finished product will be a light tan or beige color depending on the color of the products you used and it should smell vaguely tropical or like a legally-aged but still pubescent girl who just went tanning. I tried this recipe on my face, where it worked well as a lip balm too, and felt results in just a couple days.

After trying this recipe with other oils, I realized that skin moisturizers, lip balm, hair conditioner, and shoe polish all exist along a spectrum and tweaking the amounts and ingredients allow for products appropriate for many household and garden uses. For instance, adding a teaspoon of sesame oil and olive oil each and reducing the beeswax a bit results in an excellent hair care product that one can leave in and style with or rinse out in the shower. Women love to touch my hair.

Upon further experimentation with this basic recipe for skin care use, I decided to fancy it up so it was more like the expensive commercial brands, something I could gift and use to impress attractive lady-friends. This required the purchase of essential oils, which are about US $2-6 per 10mL; one adds just a few drops of the essential oil when mixing. The only guidelines here are the skinhacker's personal tastes and allergies. I would recommend using garlic or valerian oil in a batch meant for gifting, for example.

My favorites so far have been a catnip/chamomile/lavender/St. John's wort combo which is nice before bedtime, a chamomile/lemon/mint paste with honey which is an excellent pre-shower facial that leaves the skin full and smooth and smelling incredibly kissable, and a peppermint/ginger combo that mimics my preferred Tom's of Maine toothpaste flavor and so is excellent for post-shower application. A three-to-one frankincense/sandalwood combination smells of success and sinecure; wear it to interviews and meetings.

Alongside more obvious scents, many skin products contain vitamins; Vitamin E compounds are especially common. Vitamins are of obvious benefit, but few are actually effective when applied externally. Vitamin A, for instance, is a magnitude more effective when taken internally, while the B vitamin complex has absolutely no benefit when applied to the skin. In researching I found that only one Vitamin E compound, alpha tocopherol, is effective topically. I purchase gel cap preparation from discount stores and pop and squeeze it in when mixing the other ingredients. It adds no odor or other side effects but I do feel as if my skin feels tighter and more resilient to inclemency than without.

Another benefit of these natural ingredients is that the product is edible assuming one has not added poisonous ingredients. This means that, if one is bored, one can eat their homemade skin care products. This lends to treating constipation, since coconut oil, among others, induces bowel movements in humans. One can ingest a good amount of moisturizer orally and enjoy its soothing benefits hours later. A batch with some anise oil and high beeswax content can be inserted into the rectum for results much gentler than over-the-counter suppositories.

Taking responsibility for your skin health not only benefits your skin but shows the world that you have invested in yourself, a person just as bright as their expression. Knowing the process behind doing so allows for a subtle, personal tweaking that manufactured skin products just don't provide. Ordering a scent or cream for a looming romantic appointment is impractical and expensive, but making it at home takes only minutes and costs nothing after you've established a small cabinet of ingredients.

Eventually one will find novel uses for their personal products that will allow them to slowly wean themselves away from the horror of consumerist dependence, polishing their life—literally—in the process.

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

Demonology '08

In the new year the Berkeley Software Distribution family of Unix-like operating systems is growing at a phenomenal rate and excitement over the possibilities for this operating system family is in the air. After unprecedented development and adoption as well as major shifts in the marketplace, it's time to take a look at what's new with this demonic family of operating systems. Don't fear, the word demon means Unix goodness at just the right price.

FreeBSD

FreeBSD 5 was the darkest period in this operating system's history and morale and marketshare were at an all-time low. The problem originated from merging BSD/OS into FreeBSD; though the two systems shared a lot of code, the difference of just a couple years was staggering. FreeBSD's virtual memory and multi-processing code was immature, while BSD/OS's libraries were archaic. Mating the two was a mess that cost FreeBSD face and kept users on an older branch from the Nineties, 4.11.

After several years of struggle, Apple came to the rescue with Darwin — its FreeBSD-based server operating system — filling the holes where BSD/OS and FreeBSD didn't mesh. In just a few short months of code contribution, FreeBSD 6 began to take shape and even in development it looked miles ahead of the doomed 5 branch. Within months of release Hotmail and Yahoo! updated their mail servers and Apple developers began reincorporating the merged changes into Mac OS X Leopard. After years of tumult, Apple finally hit the switch that made FreeBSD "just work."

Now, with FreeBSD 7.0b on the horizon promising to wrap it all up, FreeBSD is once again taking the free Unix world by storm. It's a tight, efficient codebase leveraging the best of BSD/OS, Darwin, and FreeBSD that users have been clamoring for. FreeBSD users and sites now have a shining future ahead of them.

NetBSD

NetBSD is languishing. In supporting as many platforms as possible, development is a quagmire of obsolete hardware, spotty driver support, and developer infighting.

Where FreeBSD chooses to focus on a few platforms, NetBSD tinkers with obsolete hardware like z80, i386, 68k and C64 that draw away from putting new features into production. The drag is significant: NetBSD can't do many things that FreeBSD or Linux did years ago. It's gotten so bad, in fact, that the NetBSD Group voted to change version numbering to make it appear as if more was being done. There were eleven years between NetBSD 0.8 to 2.0; there have been just three years between NetBSD 2 and 4. You do the math.

That isn't to say that NetBSD is without its uses, however. Other operating systems often take code from NetBSD when they begin work on new drivers. There have also been occasions when developers borrowed or modeled NetBSD code to fix platform-specific bugs. But these are strictly developer applications, not end user, and GNOME and KDE won't run on NetBSD without liberal amounts of trouble. This is not something you pop on your PC when you get tired of Windows. In fact, NetBSD makes Vista look like utopia.

NetBSD's raison d'être is to crawl onto unsupported hardware, and for that we have them to thank for other operating systems' support for new platforms. But out of seventy-one supported platforms, NetBSD runs natively on just eight of them. Anything beyond development with NetBSD is a major investment of time and, if you're a company, money. Using NetBSD as a primary OS is neither a goal of the project nor practical. Caveat end user!

OpenBSD

Picking up where FreeBSD and NetBSD do rather poorly, OpenBSD focuses on security no matter the cost. For example, when several bugs in Athlon 64 came to light, OpenBSD leader Theo de Raadt pulled all AMD support from the kernel before ever consulting his development team or announcing his intentions to the public. It was only after AMD CEO Héctor Ruiz pledged better support that de Raadt slowly began replacing AMD support one microarchitecture at a time over the next several months.

If you think that's extreme, you must not be used to OpenBSD. In a line of work where one buffer overflow can mean your company's secret data, not to mention your job, every line of code counts. In OpenBSD, every line of code is passed around between developers and poked, probed, and teamed up on before it's even considered for inclusion. Theo de Raadt comes under fire for such harsh measures, but no other Unix comes close to OpenBSD's security.

The downside to this is that OpenBSD lags behind innovations that other operating systems implement, as it often ports them months or years after the developers have reengineered the code to OpenBSD's standards. This is another point of contention with the community, as the OpenBSD Foundation was forced to take code from FreeBSD to support Intel's cryptography module and had to rewrite NetBSD's firewall since it was so long in making its own. That's nothing, however, compared to the measures de Raadt himself takes.

In one highly publicized incident, a user who had questioned de Raadt's delay of porting CML2 was banned by de Raadt from the OpenBSD Foundation's mailing list. Later, he cracked the user's box and remapped their keyboard to prove that they hadn't configured their system properly, thus rendering their argument about CML2 support moot. Though rebuked by fellow developers and industry pundits, de Raadt never apologized and to this day has refused to include CML2.

If you plan on using OpenBSD, you'd better be prepared to deal with the consequences.

DragonFlyBSD

DragonFlyBSD aims to preserve the lightweight threading model of FreeBSD 4.8, of which it is a fork. Its developer, Matt Dillon, is a former Amiga and BeOS developer and began the project to keep the philosophy of those older operating systems alive. Users who favor or require FreeBSD 4, which is no longer supported, can use DragonFly.

Performance is also quite fast, but these benefits are at the cost of newer features and security. Dillon has begun syncing releases with subsequent FreeBSD 4 updates; DragonFlyBSD 1.10 was synced with FreeBSD 4.9 and DragonFly 1.14 will be synced with FreeBSD 4.11 in what Dillon has called "mirrored perfection."

Another gimmick of DragonFlyBSD is what Dillon calls netclustering, where users can anonymously cluster over the internet. DragonFly threads allow for just such clustering since they don't include security hooks and would facilitate fast multimedia crunching, all transparent to the user who would only see their work finish faster. In this way netclustering is akin to Apple's Xgrid but not quite as polished. Dillon has promised this for post-1.14 releases but, since he refuses to let others develop the project, that could be a while in coming.

While all of this sounds promising, nothing has been delivered yet. Installing DragonFly at the moment gives you a functioning FreeBSD 4 clone but not much more. Should Dillon deliver on his plans there might be compelling uses for this project, but that's a mighty big if for a guy coding a ten-year-old operating system alone in his parents' basement.

Darwin

Darwin is the pinnacle of Unix, let alone Berkeley Software Distributions.

Since Apple bought Next, Darwin has changed the Unix paradigm. It is now the most widely-used Unix in the world bar none. Not even Linux comes close to the installed userbase of Darwin, which is at the core of every Mac OS X install. It runs in both 32- and 64-bit flavors on the Intel and Power architectures and it transparently subsumes the previously separate ideas of terminal, desktop, workstation, and server.

Darwin has all the positives and none of the negatives that the previous BSD distributions have, and Apple's proprietary APIs seal the deal. QuickTime, WebKit, CoreData, et al offer the premium services no other operating system does on top of the stable, modern Unix underpinnings of Darwin. It's the best way to ensure the secure, stable environment Mac OS X is. That's just how Apple plays.

And it's all in one version for just $129.99.

Demonology

With all of these great improvements to the Berkeley operating system family in the last few years, BSD is clearly where it's at. Linux is a throwback to when Open Source was a hot buzzword and sharing code was a novel idea. Now, Apple and company use it as standard coding procedure to share and improve the tech they have and leverage their individual strengths.

Even when taking the few commercial Unices that still exist into account, like AIX and Solaris, BSD still owns the arena in its frantic steamroll to the top of the supercomputing mountain. Whether you want the general wholesomeness of FreeBSD, the KGB-like security of OpenBSD, the more experimental NetBSD or DragonFlyBSD, or the utter perfection of Mac OS X, BSD has your bases completely covered with room to grow in the future.

If you haven't converted, now's the time to become a demon worshipper.