One of the "core" baking recipes (at least in my opinion) is chocolate chip cookies. That melt-in-your-mouth, gooey chocolate, warm soft center yumminess brings a smile to my face. I can't be sad while munching on a freshly-made chocolate chip cookie (with a glass of milk!). I'm actually surprised that I haven't yet posted a recipe for this treat. It just seems like one of those recipes you can find in any general cookbook you pick up.
So I'll rectify that now. Since we are coming up on the holiday season--during which many of us bake and share sweets with friends and family--here's a great chocolate chip recipe to add to your goodie basket. I actually just made some this last weekend. The original recipe says that it will make about 60 cookies. I don't know what universe the original authors are living in, but those 60 cookies must have been made for mice (If You Give a Mouse a Cookie just popped in my head--great children's book). I would estimate that you'll more likely get between 2-3 dozen. If you make super big cookies, obviously you'll get less.
What you'll need:
3/4 c. butter, softened
1/4 c. shortening
1 c. brown sugar
1/2 c. granulated sugar
3/4 tsp. baking soda
1/2 tsp. salt
2 eggs
1 tsp. vanilla
2 1/2 c. flour
1 12-oz pkg semisweet chocolate chips
What you'll need to do:
1. Preheat your oven to 375.
2. In a large mixing bowl, beat together the butter and shortening with an electric mixer until creamy. Add the brown sugar, granulated sugar, baking soda, and salt. Continue beating with the electric mixer until thoroughly combined. Use a spatula to scrape the sides of the bowl as necessary.
3. Continue to use the electric mixer to beat in the eggs and vanilla until completely mixed. Add the flour and use the mixer to combine the batter as much as possible.*
4. Use a spoon to stir in the chocolate chips. You can also add 1 1/2 cups chopped nuts (walnuts, pecans, etc.) if you like nuts.
5. Use a teaspoon to drop dough onto an ungreased cookie sheet. I find that my cookies form better if I also smooth the dough into a rough ball shape. My cookies come out slightly fatter when I do this.
6. Bake for 8 to 10 minutes or until edges are a light brown. More time will be needed for larger cookies. It's ok for cookies to be soft in the center; personally, I like them better that way. Cool on a wire rack for 5 minutes or however long you can resist the smell of fresh-baked cookies (and be careful when handling/eating hot food!).
*Here the original recipe noted that you may not be able to use the mixer to mix in all the batter, however I didn't have a problem using my mixer the entire time. If you can't get it all combined with your electric mixer, just use a spoon to stir in any remaining flour.
Fear not if you're only making these for yourself and you think a full batch is too much. You can store the dough in the fridge in a sealed container for 1-2 days. Or, you can store extra cookie dough in the freezer in sealed air-tight containers until you want more (but use it within 1 month). Defrost in the fridge overnight.
Scooter and I are hosting our first ever Thanksgiving dinner next week. We're gearing up this weekend for all the cooking we need to do. I've been asked to take pictures, so I'll likely post some here after all the fun.
Friday, November 22, 2013
Friday, November 15, 2013
Libraries Should Help Your Information Stay a Little More Private
Yesterday I received my copy of the latest issue of a journal I subscribe to. On the front cover is an abstract image with the caption "under surveillance." As one might imagine, this is a nod to the ongoing government surveillance scandal (I think at this point, the term "scandal" is appropriate). So far, I've kept my discussions on this issue to verbal conversations with my fellow citizen, but the image on the cover of a scholarly journal about librarianship led me to wonder: "what role do libraries play to maintain patron privacy and what role should they play?"
To be sure, this is a topic that has been discussed at great length, and not just in the recent past. And for those that know and understand librarianship, this comes at no surprise; after all, as this ALA explanation of privacy shows, patrons have an right to privacy implied in the Library Bill of Rights (a document that defines policies all libraries should follow). However, in light of the recent revelations of the NSA's surveillance activities, one's actual level of privacy engaging in any activity is now suspect. This thought process is what spurred me to ask my question.
An interesting result of the NSA "revelations" has been seen in the consumer market. Products are now being evaluated and/or promoted based on their ability to protect consumers from NSA surveillance. The latest iPhone, for example, has a fingerprint reading security feature that stores the fingerprint information on the phone, not on Apple servers. This means that Apple will never have that data, so it would never be able to turn that data over to the government. John McAfee, a name known in the computer industry as the developer of a popular computer anti-virus software, has also announced a new product in the works that will supposedly protect people against NSA surveillance. Since libraries are big advocates for their patrons' privacy, what effort are they putting into keeping their patrons' information as private as possible?
For answers, I turned to the policies of three libraries I am familiar with. Two of the three are public libraries (Alameda County Library and MCFL), and one is an academic library (SJSU). I use all three fairly regularly. I was surprised to find no mention of patron confidentiality or privacy policies on the policy section of the Alameda County Library website (which is worrisome since this is the one I use the most). The MCFL policy was quite explicit in what information the library collected, how it was used, and in some cases how long it was kept. The SJSU library also has a confidentiality policy that outlines what information is collected, including what specific confidential information is collection, but no mention is made of how long the information is kept (which can imply it's kept indefinitely). What's interesting is that the MCFL and SJSU policies are years old; one was first instituted in 2003, the other in 2006. Existing library privacy/confidentiality policies are well-established.
So where does this information leave us? Well, we can assume that many libraries (but not all) are aware of and take pains to inform their patrons what information the library collects and how it can be used. Both available policies do explain that they will release information required by subpoena or court order, which put them in the same boat as many other law-abiding companies and organizations. In other words, there may not be a lot of "extra" protection that libraries give their patrons.
Except when they do. The MCFL policy notes the length of time that the library will keep certain kinds of information. On the list of information collected are materials that the patron has checked out, the information on who last checked out an item, transaction details for fines owed and late items, and transaction details on fines paid or waived. Each of these pieces of information is only kept for a limited amount of time, not indefinitely. If a patron returns an item on time and that item is checked out twice more (or up to six months pass before the item is checked out again), there is no record to link that patron to the item he or she borrowed; for a popular title, that information will disappear quite quickly. Because the library doesn't keep the information, the library would be unable to pass it on to, say, any government agency asking for it.
If we're going to talk about best practices, I would suggest that MCFL's policy become the ideal for libraries. I understand that libraries have to keep statistics on things like circulation, web usage, and other measures of use, but there are ways for the library to collect and maintain that information anonymously. Logically, MCFL has to be doing so to some extent since transaction details are deleted after a set amount of time, and if MCFL is managing other libraries probably are as well.
Libraries can be and should be the model for transparency and privacy. At the very least, all libraries should be openly providing access to their policies on what information is being collected from patrons. If such a policy does not exist, why not and how soon can that be recified? More libraries need to adopt of level of confidentiality and refrain from keeping patron information indefinitely. This will allow patrons to assume some anonymity and safeguard their privacy.
And now I will (temporarily) step down from my soap box.
To be sure, this is a topic that has been discussed at great length, and not just in the recent past. And for those that know and understand librarianship, this comes at no surprise; after all, as this ALA explanation of privacy shows, patrons have an right to privacy implied in the Library Bill of Rights (a document that defines policies all libraries should follow). However, in light of the recent revelations of the NSA's surveillance activities, one's actual level of privacy engaging in any activity is now suspect. This thought process is what spurred me to ask my question.
An interesting result of the NSA "revelations" has been seen in the consumer market. Products are now being evaluated and/or promoted based on their ability to protect consumers from NSA surveillance. The latest iPhone, for example, has a fingerprint reading security feature that stores the fingerprint information on the phone, not on Apple servers. This means that Apple will never have that data, so it would never be able to turn that data over to the government. John McAfee, a name known in the computer industry as the developer of a popular computer anti-virus software, has also announced a new product in the works that will supposedly protect people against NSA surveillance. Since libraries are big advocates for their patrons' privacy, what effort are they putting into keeping their patrons' information as private as possible?
For answers, I turned to the policies of three libraries I am familiar with. Two of the three are public libraries (Alameda County Library and MCFL), and one is an academic library (SJSU). I use all three fairly regularly. I was surprised to find no mention of patron confidentiality or privacy policies on the policy section of the Alameda County Library website (which is worrisome since this is the one I use the most). The MCFL policy was quite explicit in what information the library collected, how it was used, and in some cases how long it was kept. The SJSU library also has a confidentiality policy that outlines what information is collected, including what specific confidential information is collection, but no mention is made of how long the information is kept (which can imply it's kept indefinitely). What's interesting is that the MCFL and SJSU policies are years old; one was first instituted in 2003, the other in 2006. Existing library privacy/confidentiality policies are well-established.
So where does this information leave us? Well, we can assume that many libraries (but not all) are aware of and take pains to inform their patrons what information the library collects and how it can be used. Both available policies do explain that they will release information required by subpoena or court order, which put them in the same boat as many other law-abiding companies and organizations. In other words, there may not be a lot of "extra" protection that libraries give their patrons.
Except when they do. The MCFL policy notes the length of time that the library will keep certain kinds of information. On the list of information collected are materials that the patron has checked out, the information on who last checked out an item, transaction details for fines owed and late items, and transaction details on fines paid or waived. Each of these pieces of information is only kept for a limited amount of time, not indefinitely. If a patron returns an item on time and that item is checked out twice more (or up to six months pass before the item is checked out again), there is no record to link that patron to the item he or she borrowed; for a popular title, that information will disappear quite quickly. Because the library doesn't keep the information, the library would be unable to pass it on to, say, any government agency asking for it.
If we're going to talk about best practices, I would suggest that MCFL's policy become the ideal for libraries. I understand that libraries have to keep statistics on things like circulation, web usage, and other measures of use, but there are ways for the library to collect and maintain that information anonymously. Logically, MCFL has to be doing so to some extent since transaction details are deleted after a set amount of time, and if MCFL is managing other libraries probably are as well.
Libraries can be and should be the model for transparency and privacy. At the very least, all libraries should be openly providing access to their policies on what information is being collected from patrons. If such a policy does not exist, why not and how soon can that be recified? More libraries need to adopt of level of confidentiality and refrain from keeping patron information indefinitely. This will allow patrons to assume some anonymity and safeguard their privacy.
And now I will (temporarily) step down from my soap box.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)